Deception at Boston Marathon Bombing Interfaith Service?

In follow-up of our last post , Cardinal O’Malley Hosting Obama at Cathedral for Interfaith Prayer Service, and the 100+ public and private email comments it generated at BCI and at this Catholic forum, BCI has been prayerfully reconsidering that last post.  Some long-time readers and BCI supporters strongly disagreed with the post, and some were in agreement.  Even with the two bombing suspects no longer at large, many people are still feeling pain.  Should we blog even once more about the interfaith service?  We thought not, but something happened there that we feel needs to be reported, and we have some open questions from last post. The possibility of national deception by one of the speakers should not be overlooked.

First, just to clarify our perspective at BCI, we said multiple times that prayers were needed and we agree 100% with readers who said in the wake of the senseless evil bombing at the Marathon, Boston needed a strong spiritual moment. We still need prayers and to pray. The interfaith service on Thursday at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross appeared to have provided a strong spiritual moment to promote healing for the victims and the city.  Many churches have celebrated Masses or prayer programs/vigils in the days following the bombing and through the weekend.  In our opinion, it is a very good thing that the Catholic Church has been involved, and remains involved, in marking this tragedy in various ways and extending love and prayer for the community.

With that said, if you want to feel good about the interfaith service, we suggest that you stop reading here.  The questions of deception and scandal come next.

As reported in the Boston Globe and other publications, one of the speakers on Thursday, Nasser Weddady, director of civil rights outreach for the American Islamic Congress, read a verse from the Koran, from Surat Al-Maida verse 32, that he said brought him comfort in the past and may bring comfort today. Here is the exact text from his talk and passage he cited: “Whoever kills a soul, it is as if he killed mankind entirely, and whoever saves a life, it is as if he saved all of mankind.”

The problem is, the Quran does not exactly say this. And what it does say instead is rather troubling when you look closely–there is an exception and justification for murder that the speaker conveniently left out.  BCI merely Googled Surah 5:32. Here is one translation:

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.

Here is an explanation from WikiIslam:

This verse  is one of the most often-quoted verses purportedly taken from the Qur’an, thus proving the incompatibility of Islam with all forms of terrorism.

This verse has become so popular among Islam’s apologists that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, even quotes it in his speech delivered at Cairo University in June 4, 2009. Visiting the countless pro-Islamic websites, forums and blogs on the net, you are almost guaranteed to be confronted with this verse.

But try as you might, you will not find it in a Qur’an. The reason for this is quite simple: the verse in question does not exist.

What you are actually presented with by Muslims is a distorted, out-of-context paraphrasing of the following verse:

On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone slew a person – unless it be in retaliation for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew all mankind: and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all humanity.  Qur’an 5:32

Analysis of Verse 5:32 from WikiIslam

Firstly, this verse is written in past tense (Ordained, not Ordain) and does not apply to Muslims but to “the Children of Israel” i.e. the Jews who, according to Islam, received an earlier set of scriptures.

Secondly, when the clause which allows killing is reinserted and we read it in context with the following two verses directed at Muslims (notice the reference to Allah’s messenger and the switch to present tense), what first appeared on the surface to be a peaceful message, is in actual fact a chilling warning to non-believers:

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
Qur’an 5:33-34

Even if one allows that WikiIslam is a site critical of Islam, a rebuttal of that criticism at the site Islamic Life is still concerning. Here is how they explain what qualifies as “mischief through the land”:

In Surah Al-Qasas Allah has said that Fir’awn made mischief in the land. He oppressed the people and made life difficult for them, and he divided them into sections and groups. One of them he harassed very much.

BCI is not expert at Islam, so we could use some help from an Islam expert. Does this appear to say, if a person or entity does not accept Islam and “makes mischief” (along the lines of the above), it is permissible in Islam for them to be murdered or have their hands and feet cut off?  The passage from the Koran was offered as a source of comfort from the pulpit at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in the aftermath of the bombing that claimed innocent lives and left people with limbs gone. A more careful study of the passage suggests that instead, the passage could be condoning or calling for violence.

How does that make you feel about the Thursday service?

Beyond that, we also learn from this report that the imam of a mosque managed by the Muslim Brotherhood-founded Muslim American Society (MAS) was initially invited to speak at Thursday’s interfaith service,  but that invitation was later rescinded by Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick’s office:

The Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center’s (ISBCC) Imam Suhaib Webb, according to a series of Twitter posts, was replaced as the representative of Boston’s Muslim community at the service—whose keynote speaker was President Barack Obama—in favor of Nasser Wedaddy.Webb posted on his Twitter account Thursday, “Sorry, Muhammad Wedaddy from the American Islamic Congress will represent Boston Muslims.” Asked by another Twitter user who Wedaddy was, Webb wrote, “No idea. I was informed last night at 9pm that he was replacing me? lets focus on the service.” Webb later tweeted, “I was told the governor’s office made the call.”

MAS-affiliated Web sites “have featured articles advocating jihad and suicide martyrdom.” ADL also cites individuals involved with MAS including radical Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader and terrorism supporter Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is the chairman of Islamic American University, an MAS subsidiary in Michigan, and the Islamic Society of Boston’s founding president Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is “serving a 23-year prison sentence for illegal dealings with Libya and his involvement in a plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah.”

Does the above raise enough questions?

We could stop there, but we return to a topic and questions raised in the comments on our last post: Exactly how far should Catholics go in welcoming certain individuals to speak from the pulpit in a Catholic Church, even if it is outside the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? This is an edited version of our response to comments by “Attaboy:

• Would someone who overtly called for murder of innocent people, or was affiliated with groups who supported the murder of innocent people be permitted to speak in a Catholic Church?
• In the 1940s, would a rabbi have been expected to welcome a figure such as Adolf Hitler into a temple, out of respect for the office of chancellor of Germany?
• If a featured speaker on Thursday was complicit in, supportive of, or actively involved in the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of six million Jews by the Nazi regime, would they be have been welcome to speak at the interfaith service at the Cathedral?
• If a featured speaker was complicit in or supportive of the systematic dismemberment and brutal murder of 5 million young children in the past 4 years alone, would they have been allowed to speak at the interfaith service?
• What if the person openly and proudly supported the sexual abuse of minors?
• What if the person proudly supported the Rwandan genocide in 1994 when more than 500,000 people were killed in 100 days?
• What is the person was driving moves that will require Catholics to act against our faith and morals, as described in this piece from CNS?

No doubt, good was done by people coming together in prayer as a community. But, specifically what sort of actions by a political leader would cause you (Attaboy), rank-and-file Catholics, or Cardinal O’Malley to conclude the person should not be a featured speaker at any Catholic Church or Catholic program? Exactly how bad must they be where we all say, “NO”?

Questions still remain for BCI with regard to the interfaith service. More importantly, we all have questions about the senseless evil of the bombing. In the absence of answers and amidst the pain of this tragedy, we pray that God bring hope and healing to all affected by the Boston Marathon bombing.

Cardinal O’Malley Hosting Obama at Cathedral for Interfaith Prayer Service

The Cathedral of the Holy Cross is hosting an interfaith prayer service on Thursday at 11am in memory of the victims of Monday’s horrific Boston Marathon bombing.  President Obama is headlining the event. Gov. Deval Patrick, and Boston Mayor Tom Menino will be there, along with Cardinal O’Malley.

We absolutely need to pray for the victims of this evil act. Within hours after the blast, Cardinal O’Malley issued a statement, “The Archdiocese of Boston joins all people of good will in expressing deep sorrow following the senseless acts of violence perpetrated at the Boston Marathon today.”  The 8-year-old boy who died in the blast was identified as Martin Richard, whose family belongs to St. Ann Catholic Parish in Dorchester. His mother and sister were seriously injured.

It also makes sense to promote a message of hope in response to the tragedy to those who are both Catholic and of other faiths. Cardinal O’Malley also said in his statement, “We stand in solidarity with our ecumenical and interfaith colleagues in the commitment to witness the greater power of good in our society and to work together for healing.” Hopefully, people across the country are praying in their own places of worship and according to their respective faiths.

It also is understandable that President Obama, Gov. Patrick, Mayor Menino, and Cardinal O’Malley would make public appearances in support of the victims, their families and all who are affected by the horror of what happened on Monday.

But this headline news is troubling: “Obama to Lead Interfaith Service in South End on Thursday.” Despite the good intentions, an “interfaith prayer service” headlined by President Obama at the Catholic Cathedral of the Holy Cross just feels bad for a number of reasons–practical, political and spiritual.

On a practical basis, one obvious concern as stated at The Tenth Crusade is that instead of looking for the murderer, police power and resources now shift to a Presidential appearance.

Politically, although it is appropriate for the President of the United States to make an appearance in Boston to offer condolences and support, the effect will likely be a political boost to his popularity. And he is doing so in a Catholic Church and the Mother Church of the Boston Archdiocese with the permission, support and imprimatur of Cardinal O’Malley.

We have Obama as no doubt the most anti-Catholic President in history–he is pro-abortion and favors the killing of children in the womb, and his HHS mandate threatens religious freedom for the Catholic Church, Catholic organizations, and any business or organization that operates with Catholic values. Under Obama, the U.S. Army Reserves recently published a training brief on “Extremism & Extremist Organization,” (covering militias, neo-Nazis, Islamic extremism, terrorism and gangs) which listed Catholicism and evangelical Christianity as examples of religious extremism, along with groups including al Qaeda, Hamas and the Ku Klux Klan.  His actions–and those of his administration–give the very clear message that he hates the Catholic Church and opposes our teachings and moral values.  Despite this, on Thursday, we will have the most pro-abortion anti-Catholic president in history, appearing with one of the most pro-abortion governors in the country and the pro-abortion Mayor of Boston, complemented nicely for photo opps by the chair of the USCCB pro-life committee, Cardinal O’Malley, all talking about the senseless loss of life. What message does this give? When it is the senseless murder of adults it is wrong, but we will forget about the senseless murder of the unborn for today’s photo opp?

More important than the practical and political concerns are the spiritual ones of such an interfaith gathering. As we all know, our church teaches us that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church. This is the dogma of extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which literally means, “outside the church there is no salvation.”  This dogma and its infallibility have been reaffirmed on many occasions. Pope Pius IX said in 1854: “We must hold as of the faith, that out of the Apostolic Roman Church there is no salvation; that she is the only ark of safety, and whosoever is not in her perishes in the deluge.”

Given that reality, how it that Cardinal O’Malley can be comfortable with any “common language for us to pray together” representing the breadth of religious traditions in the city that those organizing the service hope to find–and that happening in the Mother Church of the archdiocese ?  Those involved as of now include the Massachusetts Council of Churches, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, the Greater Boston Interfaith Organization, the Jewish Community Relations Council, the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, and clergy from First Church Cambridge, Old South Church, Trinity Church, Arlington Street Church and First Church Boston.

How can there be a “common language” for prayer amongst Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Protestantism and other faiths?

Is it at any time appropriate for there to be an “interfaith service” in a Catholic Church, let alone the Cathedral? Will the Body of Christ still be reserved in the Sanctuary too?

In this interfaith service, will there be any mention that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Our Lord, and it is necessary to be in it for eternal salvation?

Will there be any mention that the Protestants and people of other faiths in attendance are in error, which could condemn their souls to Hell?

One could argue that gathering people together of all faiths to mourn and pray together is a good thing, and that in this time of tragedy, non-Catholics would not take well to being evangelized by the Catholic Church.  Both are valid points and reasons to criticize BCI for this post. But those arguments ignore the fundamental error of the interfaith gathering in a Catholic Church.

To not oppose error, and not instruct people in a charitable and pastorally kind way that they are in error would be to support that error and/or be an accessory to that error. For Catholics who participate, it also risks giving the appearance we are okay with polytheism.

People of all faiths should pray for the victims of the Monday tragedy and for the conversion of the soul of the murderer. If folks want an interfaith gathering to pray for the victims of the horrible tragedy of Monday, that should simply not be in a Catholic Church. And since dialogue with Obama (ie. Notre Dame commencement, the Al Smith Dinner, private negotiations over the HHS mandate) has not moderated his anti-Catholic positions, BCI believes we should not create scandal by having him speak as a featured guest and publicly-acknowledged “leader” of the interfaith service at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross with the imprimatur of the Archbishop of Boston.

Prayer in Wake of Boston Marathon Tragedy

In the wake of the horrifying attack on innocent people today, we offer our prayers and turn to the Lord for comfort and hope.

Psalm 27

The LORD is my light and my salvation;
whom should I fear?
The LORD is my life’s refuge;
of whom should I be afraid?

When evildoers come at me
to devour my flesh,
These my enemies and foes
themselves stumble and fall.

Though an army encamp against me,
my heart does not fear;
Though war be waged against me,
even then do I trust.

One thing I ask of the LORD;
this I seek:
To dwell in the LORD’s house
all the days of my life,
To gaze on the LORD’s beauty,
to visit his temple.

For God will hide me in his shelter
in time of trouble,
He will conceal me in the cover of his tent;
and set me high upon a rock.

Even now my head is held high
above my enemies on every side!
I will offer in his tent
sacrifices with shouts of joy;
I will sing and chant praise to the LORD.

Hear my voice, LORD, when I call;
have mercy on me and answer me.

“Come,” says my heart, “seek his face”;
your face, LORD, do I seek!^e

Do not hide your face from me;
do not repel your servant in anger.

You are my salvation; do not cast me off;
do not forsake me, God my savior!

Even if my father and mother forsake me,
the LORD will take me in.

LORD, show me your way;
lead me on a level path
because of my enemies.

Do not abandon me to the desire of my foes;
malicious and lying witnesses have risen against me.

I believe I shall see the LORD’s goodness
in the land of the living.

Wait for the LORD, take courage;
be stouthearted, wait for the LORD!

NEWSFLASH: Cardinal O’Malley named to Vatican Reform Committee

Today, the Vatican announced that Pope Francis has set up a committee of eight cardinals from around the world to advise him on how to reform the Roman Curia. Cardinal Sean O’Malley is one of the eight.  Here is the Vatican statement:

The Holy Father Francis, taking up a suggestion that emerged during the General Congregations preceding the Conclave, has established a group of cardinals to advise him in the government of the universal Church and to study a plan for revising the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia, ‘Pastor Bonus’.

The group consists of:

- Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, president of the Governorate of Vatican City State;
- Cardinal Francisco Javier Errázuriz Ossa, archbishop emeritus of Santiago de Chile, Chile;
- Cardinal Oswald Gracias, archbishop of Bombay, India;
- Cardinal Reinhard Marx, archbishop of Munich and Freising, Germany;
- Cardinal Laurent Monsengwo Pasinya, archbishop of Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo;
- Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley O.F.M. Cap., archbishop of Boston, USA;
- Cardinal George Pell, archbishop of Sydney, Australia;
- Cardinal Oscar Andrés Rodríguez Maradiaga, S.D.B., archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, in the role of coordinator; and
- Bishop Marcello Semeraro of Albano, Italy, in the role of secretary.

The group’s first meeting has been scheduled for 1-3 October 2013. His Holiness is, however, currently in contact with the aforementioned cardinals.

News reports say that the committee will advise Pope Francis on how to reform the Catholic Church’s “troubled central administration.”  Reports say, “The basic failings of the Curia were aired, sometimes passionately, at closed-door meetings of cardinals before they retired into the conclave that elected Francis.”

BCI finds it ironic that Cardinal O’Malley has been appointed to a committee to reform the Roman Curia, when his own central administration is troubled and he has failed to effectively govern and reform it for the past decade.  Someone just suggested to BCI that Cardinal O’Malley serving on a committee to help reform the Roman Curia would be kind of like Hillary Clinton serving on a committee to help reform international embassy security.

In Boston, for nearly 3 years we have been documenting the ongoing problems of:

• Nearly $4M annually in excessive six-figure salaries paid to lay executives
• Moving around of funds from originally designated purposes to someplace else
• Skyrocketing administrative expenses
• Cronyism in hiring
• Deception in communications and in policy making
• Retention of Finance Council members and key advisers to the Cardinal who work against Catholic Church teachings
• Routine violations of the archdiocesan Code of Conduct
• Incompetence by high paid cabinet members
• Draining of capital reserves to pay operating expenses
• $140M in unpaid debt, with no plan to be able to repay the debt
• 34% decline in Mass attendance between 2000 and 2012
• 40-50% of parishes operating in the red
• Abdication of leadership by Cardinal O’Malley and a failure by him to teach through his actions and words.

Other than those minor matters, everything is just great in Boston.  Just a few of these problems are described in this recent blog post.

As Cardinal O’Malley embarks on this new assignment, we humbly put forward the Gospel of Matthew 7:3-5:

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye? You hypocrite,remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.

We hope and pray that Cardinal O’Malley takes time during the next 5-6 months before the Vatican committee meets to first clean up the house in Boston and remove some of the largest wooden beams here.

The Politics of Fr. Bryan Hehir

Fr. Bryan Hehir, Secretary for Social Services and Healthcare, is off to Washington DC April 9-10 for a conference on “peacebuilding.”  In view of this conference and a piece that appeared during the time of the papal conclave, “Another American pope candidate embraces the far-left”, we are highlighting some aspects of Fr. Hehir’s political leanings. Given these leanings and publicly expressed views–as well as the lack of any real job for Fr. Hehir do any more–one might reasonably ask Cardinal O’Malley and Vicar General Bishop Deeley why they keep Fr. Hehir around.

At a high level, there is no real job that requires Fr. Hehir in the Cabinet at the Boston Archdiocese. Catholic Charities of Boston (“social services”) has a full-time paid president who runs the organization. And there is no longer Catholic “healthcare” because Caritas Christi was sold off to Cerberus/Steward. Yet Fr. Hehir remains the most important advisor to Cardinal O’Malley and involved in almost every major decision. Since he spends part of his time in his roughly $200K/year job at Harvard and associating with people and organizations that support left-leaning Democratic politicians and causes, why should this archdiocese keep Fr. Hehir as a cabinet secretary?  After you read the piece, you will probably ask the same question.

Now, here are excerpts from the piece, published in the run-up to the conclave, It was also published with the title, “Is God a Marxist? Top American Catholics and the far left“:

A top aide to a left-wing American Catholic Cardinal, reportedly in the running for the job of pope, taught a course called “Matthew, Marx, Luke, and John” at a pro-Marxist think tank in Washington, D.C. The course included a discussion of “the future of the Christian alliance with Marxism” and the “theology of the oppressed.”

The aide, Fr. J. Bryan Hehir, is described in the book Religious Leaders and Faith-based Politics: Ten Profiles as “one of the most important and influential voices in U.S. Catholicism.” A professor at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Hehir spent 20 years working for the Catholic Bishops and crafting policy positions on a wide range of domestic and foreign policy matters.

Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley of Boston, who hired Hehir as the Archdiocese of Boston’s Secretary for Social Services in 2003, has been “generating buzz in Rome as a possible contender to be the next pope,” says a recent report from NBC News.

If Hehir follows O’Malley to Rome, he could be in a position to exercise considerable power from the Vatican over global affairs, such as by promoting President Obama’s vision of a world free of U.S. nuclear weapons. But even if O’Malley doesn’t get the nod, Hehir could be a force in the Vatican. He has connections to Cardinal Peter Turkson, another candidate for the papacy, and played a role in formulating a Vatican document calling for creation of a “central world bank.” One of Hehir’s Harvard courses is “The Politics and Ethics of the Use of Force,” reflecting his desire to be taken seriously as a global affairs expert.

Hehir led the bishops in writing a 1983 letter titled “The Challenge of Peace – God’s Promise and Our Response,” which called the building of nuclear weapons “a folly which does not provide the security it promises.” Hehir was a member of a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) task force which produced a 2009 report on “U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy” saying that while “the geopolitical conditions that would permit the global elimination of nuclear weapons do not currently exist,” steps could be taken “to diminish the danger of nuclear proliferation and nuclear use.”

But Cardinal O’Malley is not without controversy himself. He had to personally explain and defend himself after presiding at the funeral Mass for Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the liberal Catholic who undermined church teachings on social matters such as abortion and homosexuality and lived a personal life characterized by debauchery.

A controversial figure in the American Catholic Church, Hehir has been the subject of fawning coverage in the liberal press. But blogs run by conservative Catholics in Boston have targeted him for years, with the Catholic paper The Wanderer once urging his ouster from church affairs because of his “relentless advocacy of left-wing politics.”

It was the “Bryan Hehir Exposed” blog which noted that his left-wing activities included lecturing for “a Socialist, pro-Communist think-tank back in the 1980′s.”

That think tank, the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), is where Hehir taught his course on “Matthew, Marx, Luke, and John.” Hehir was then the director of the Office of International Justice and Peace of the U.S. Catholic Conference.

The IPS came under strong criticism in the 1980s, even from a New York Times Magazine article “Think Tank of the Left,” for being a mouthpiece for anti-American and communist regimes from Cuba to North Vietnam. It conducted joint conferences with Moscow entities considered conduits for Russian KGB propaganda.

At the same time IPS was sponsoring the “Matthew, Marx, Luke, and John” course, it was featuring a “Liberation Theology Lecture Series” with Gustavo Gutierrez, author of A Theology of Liberation.

Hehir’s history of involvement in Marxist causes includes not only lecturing at the IPS on several occasions but receiving its 7th Annual Letelier-Moffitt Memorial Award in Washington D.C. in 1983. It was named for Orlando Letelier, a Marxist IPS fellow who was assassinated in 1976 in Washington by the Chilean government’s secret police. Letelier was exposed as a Cuban agent in briefcase papers found by law enforcement authorities after his death.

Hehir was known as a critic of U.S. foreign policy in the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan was preventing a Communist takeover of Central America and countering the Soviet Union’s nuclear buildup by deploying U.S. nuclear missiles in Western Europe. The IPS was then the center of much of the opposition to the Reagan agenda.

For example, in Nicaragua, where a Marxist regime that included Catholic advocates of “liberation theology” had seized power, Reagan armed freedom fighters to take back their country. Hehir and the U.S. Catholic Bishops opposed the use of military force to stop the Communists in Central America or anywhere else.

Even without an O’Malley appointment as pope, Hehir has exercised considerable influence in the Vatican and can be expected to do so in the future. He participated in a symposium hosted by the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace at the Vatican in October 2010.

This is significant because the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace is the arm of the Vatican run by Cardinal Peter Turkson, another possible candidate for pope. In the 2011 document, “Towards reforming the international financial and monetary systems in the context of global public authority,” Turkson endorsed a “central world bank” that “regulates the flow and system of monetary exchanges, as do the national central banks.” It spoke of “the need for a minimum, shared body of rules to manage the global financial market which has grown much more rapidly than the real economy.”

A “world political authority,” a euphemism for a world government, was endorsed in Caritas in Veritate (“Charity in Truth”), a papal encyclical issued by Pope Benedict, who was considered “conservative” by some. The new global structure is supposed to “manage the economy,” bring about “timely disarmament,” and ensure “food, security and peace,” his document said.

The Turkson document expanded on this concept, saying, “In a world on its way to rapid globalization, orientation towards a world Authority becomes the only horizon compatible with the new realities of our time and the needs of humankind. However, it should not be forgotten that this development, given wounded human nature, will not come about without anguish and suffering.”

Hehir and Turkson are scheduled to participate in a major “Catholic peacebuilding” conference in April to commemorate the 50th anniversary of another paper encyclical, Pacem in Terris (“Peace on Earth”), and promote a “just world order.” More than a dozen Catholic universities and agencies are involved in the event.

Pacem in Terris called for world disarmament under the auspices of the United Nations and other global institutions. It said, “Nuclear weapons must be banned. A general agreement must be reached on a suitable disarmament program, with an effective system of mutual control.”

It also declared “[o]ur earnest wish that the United Nations Organization may be able progressively to adapt its structure and methods of operation to the magnitude and nobility of its tasks.”

All of this fits in perfectly with the global approach of the Obama Administration. Obama himself talked of a “world without nuclear weapons,” while his new Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, was involved in the “Global Zero” approach that would eventually dismantle the U.S. nuclear deterrent.

Not surprisingly, another scheduled speaker at the upcoming “peacebuilding” conference is Stephen Schneck, the “Catholics for Obama” operative who serves as director of the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at the Catholic University of America. He had invited Cardinal Turkson and former AFL-CIO boss John Sweeney to one of his own left-wing conferences at CUA.

It looks like Stephen Schneck may have since dropped off the conference program , but a look at just a few other speakers confirms the concerns:

• Scott Appleby (Notre Dame): said the Nobel committee chose “brilliantly” in selecting Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize.. He said, “consider a president who acknowledges human dignity based not on color, faith or citizenship, but inherent in our common humanity. Decidedly not a man who closes his eyes and ears to evil.”  How about the dignity of human life and the evil of abortion? Appleby also supported the decision of Notre Dame to have Obama as their commencement speaker in 2009.
• John Carr (former Executive Director, USCCB Dept. of Justice, Peace & Human Development, now at Harvard’s Kennedy School): This piece, “The Scandal of John Carr at the USCCB” reports, “Mr. Carr has, while serving the USCCB, also chaired the board of the Center for Community Change, not to mention other leadership positions with this progressive, pro-abortion political group. During this time, the USCCB awarded $150,000 to the Center for Community Change through a 2001 Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) grant, promotes the group on its website, and has exchanged speakers at various events. Furthermore, at least 31 other CCHD grantees have worked with the Center, giving the Center’s political work unofficial but very substantial support from a powerful Catholic body.”
• Fr. Drew Christiansen (editor of America magazine): This article describes how USCCB leaders clashed with America magazine over America’s criticism of the bishops’ strategy forcefully opposing the HHS contraception mandate.  America magazine apparently thinks the HHS mandate, though imperfect, fulfills Catholic social teaching and preserves the common good, and that the U.S. bishops were overreaching and being too political by threatening lawsuits and demanding the mandate be rescinded. Bishop William E. Lori of the Diocese of Bridgeport, Conn., chairman of the USCCB’s Ad-Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty, complained that the magazine’s editorial board believes the bishops are at their best when they speak in generalities and “go along to get along…Maybe Moses wasn’t at his best when he confronted Pharaoh. Maybe the Good Shepherd was a bit off his game when he confronted the rulers of his day.”

Not to be forgotten is this overview of Fr. Hehir’s history from “The Eminence Grise“, summarized with this passage:

 “At a moment when the Church is striving to launch a “new evangelization” in this Year of Faith, the Archdiocese of Boston under Fr. Hehir’s leadership is more concerned with conforming to the secular culture, appeasing a hostile liberal media, and protecting renegade pro-abortion Catholic politicians and their apologists in the Catholic community. Hehir calls this “rebuilding trust” with civil society, but that is a ruse for enabling dissent, as Fr. Hehir’s record over 40 years illustrates.

Many people have told Cardinal O’Malley he should remove Hehir. Yet he remains–with more power and influence than the Vicar General, Bishop Deeley. Hehir helps consolidate power in the Terry Donilon/Rasky Baerlein/Jack Connors coalition, does his best to thwart efforts around spreading the authentic truths and moral teachings of the Catholic faith, and ensures the continued inefficacy of the Mass Catholic Conference and or any efforts to communicate Catholic moral views in the public square and political process. And unlike diocesan priests who are paid about $42K/year with limited benefits, Hehir is paid an estimated $200K/year as a professor at Harvard (average full professor salary is $203K) with full pension and medical benefits.

BCI thinks Fr. Hehir should at last be set loose from his official Cabinet secretary role and duties. He can continue to collect his big paycheck from Harvard, but not sully the name of the Boston Archdiocese with his public excursions into left-leaning politics. We further suggest he be assigned as a parish parochial vicar in an inner city area such as Roxbury, Lawrence, or Chelsea where he can practice social justice much more effectively than living in the rectory at St. John’s in the affluent town of Wellesley.  Email this post to Vicar General Bishop Deeley at vicar_general@rcab.org.

Help Wanted: Evangelization Trainer

The Boston Archdiocese is looking for an Evangelization Trainer in the Office of the Episcopal Vicar for the New Evangelization.  A lot is going on around parish pastoral planning and grouping the Boston Archdiocese into multi-parish collaboratives. If this is an important role, we are glad to help promote the position.

That said, first one might question why this role is needed. That is a discussion in and of itself.  Then, if it is indeed important, we wonder why the job descriptions from the Boston Archdiocese so often sound like the archdiocese does not care if they actually hire Catholics for these jobs. And job qualifications like, “Willingness to support the mission of the Catholic Church” make it sound like the diocese is embarrassed to be Catholic and desperate for anyone who would put themselves out and be “willing” to support the mission of the Catholic Church for the sake of a paycheck.

Here is the job description:

SUMMARY:
The Evangelization Trainer, working closely with the other members of the EVNE team and in collaboration with the other offices involved in the implementation of the Archdiocesan Pastoral Plan, Disciples in Mission, is responsible for the development and implementation of the training and support necessary in assisting parish collaboratives in becoming centers for the New Evangelization.

Other responsibilities may include involvement in other initiatives associated with supporting parishes in learning about and engaging in the mission of the New Evangelization.
The Evangelization Trainer reports to the Senior Associate to the Episcopal Vicar for the New Evangelization.

ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
• Assist in developing the curriculum for the various stages of training for the pastoral plan.
• Facilitate stages of training.
• Engage pastors, pastoral service teams, pastoral and finance councils, and school boards in consultative service.
• Research and help parishes implement best practices for the New Evangelization that are relevant to their current needs and demographics.
• Other duties as may be assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS:
• Bachelor’s degree in Theology, Religious Studies or a related field. Master’s degree preferred
• Minimum 3-5 years of experience in a diocesan, parish, school, apostolate or similar setting.
• Must have experience and knowledge of the Catholic faith and the Church’s mission for the New Evangelization and a demonstrated ability to lead others to embrace this mission in their own lives.
• Knowledge of Church documents, teachings and writings on evangelization, new evangelization and catechesis.
• Ability to articulate authentic Catholic teaching, advise on pastoral needs and program responses.
• Proficient in Microsoft Office as well as social networking tools.
• Experience working with the public and handling issues/complaints in a diplomatic manner.
• Ability to anticipate needs, establish priorities, maintain confidentiality, demonstrate discretion, project a positive attitude and exercise a high level of professionalism.
• Strong skills in organizing, multi-tasking and following through in a busy, changing environment.
• Excellent relationship-building skills with a focus on service to others.  A high level of energy, creativity and humor.  Ability to establish trust and work collaboratively.
• Ability to communicate effectively through e-mail and/or telephone.
• Must possess strong communication skills (both oral and written).
• Strong interpersonal, leadership and presentation skills.
• Ability and willingness to travel throughout the Archdiocese of Boston.
• Willingness to support the mission of the Catholic Church.

We have said it before and will say it again. This archdiocese already has had experience with people like the current Exec. Director of Benefits (and former Director of HR), a proud ex-Catholic, who introduced yoga classes to the Pastoral Center last year among other concerns BCI has documented in the past. We have Jack Connors, Jr, supposedly supporting Catholic Schools while he works against the Catholic Church by raising money for pro-abortion, anti-Catholic politicians who want to take away our religious freedoms. Why is it not possible for the Boston Archdiocese to explicitly require that the person in this job be a practicing Catholic who believes what the Catholic Church believes and wants to advance the saving ministry of Jesus Christ?

Were we to ask so-called “practicing Catholics ” such as Jack Connors, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen.  John Kerry, and VP Joe Biden, about whether they have “experience and knowledge” of the Catholic faith, they would likely say “yes.”  In public comments, they claim to be “practicing Catholics.” But do they accept and agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church as handed down by the Magisterium of the Church, and actually embrace, accept, and believe them?

A reasonable person should first ask why this role is necessary at all. Are there not other ways to train people in evangelization? Then one might ask why a layer of bureaucracy is  needed such that it reports to the “Senior Associate to the Episcopal Vicar for the New Evangelization.”  Lastly, it seems to BCI that the job requirements for a role like this should say explicitly that a candidate must be a practicing Catholic in good standing who enthusiastically accepts and embraces authentic Catholic doctrine as entrusted and handed down by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. Think of it like a version of a mandatum for key diocesan executives or employees, where the candidate is asked to affirm that they agree with and will not dissent from Church teachings on the Holy Trinity, sin, salvation, celibate male priesthood, non-negotiable moral issues (eg. abortion, homosexual acts, marriage, euthanasia), role of the Pope as head of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Immaculate Conception. Candidates for the job should agree to refrain from representing in actions or words as Catholic teaching anything that is contrary to the Magisterium of the Church, and they should also agree to not give their support (e.g. jobs, hiring, endorsements, donations) to any individuals or organizations that advance positions contrary to the Magisterium of the Church.

Our prayer for Cardinal O’Malley, Vicar General Bishop Deeley, and Bishop Kennedy is that if the position is filled, the final hire be a practicing Catholic who enthusiastically embraces authentic Catholic doctrine as entrusted and handed down by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. The pastoral planning effort will be a difficult one in the years ahead, and it would be a tremendous grace for the whole archdiocese to have faithful Catholics in that office who believe what the Catholic Church believes and want to evangelize the truths of our Catholic faith. Is that too much to ask?

More Moral Problems at Boston Parish

Here at BCI you often read about either of two types of corruption in the Boston Archdiocese–governance-related or moral. (We wish there was neither). Today, we feel obliged to expose a situation of moral and spiritual corruption at St. Cecilia Church in Boston.

Many people may be familiar with St. Cecilia for their pastor and “Rainbow Ministry” having planned a scandalous “Gay Pride” Mass back in the summer of 2011. The original Mass to mark Gay Pride month was cancelled after an outcry by faithful Catholics, then rescheduled to several weeks later.  About a year ago, BCI wrote about how St. Cecilia removed a publicly viewable statue of Jesus Christ crucified on the cross during their $18-20M renovation and never replaced it.  Now, we see that the parish just ran a “Lenten Speaker” series where the first topic was, “On Being Liked: LGBT Catholics.” And their “Rainbow Ministry,” which had no public signs of being active for nearly two years, was involved with the talk and now appears publicly active again.

For faithful Christians, Lent is a time of prayer, penance, repentance, almsgiving, and self-denial. As we know, Jesus prayed, fasted, and overcame temptation in the desert, and “By the solemn forty days of Lent the Church unites herself each year to the mystery of Jesus in the desert.” (CCC). Catholic Encyclopedia says, “The purpose of Lent is to provide that purification by weaning men from sin and selfishness through self-denial and prayer, by creating in them the desire to do God’s will and to make His kingdom come by making it come first of all in their hearts.”

Given that, and what you are about to read, we find it difficult to understand how this program is even remotely “Catholic” or how it relates to the purpose of Lent. In one word, the program is BAD.

Here it a link to the bulletin listing for the “Lenten Speaker” series:

The parish’s annual Lenten Speaker Series will begin on Wednesday evening, March 13 at seven o’clock. The theme of this year’s series is “All Who Love, Live in God.” Our first speaker is Fr. George Piggford, CSC. Fr. Piggford was born, raised, and educated in Pennsylvania until he moved to Montreal to pursue his doctorate in English literature and French theory at the University of Montreal. He spent two years teaching at Tufts before entering formation for the Congregation of Holy Cross, which included theological study at the University of Notre Dame and led to his ordination in 2005. In 2004,he joined the English faculty of Stonehill College. His research and teaching interests include modernism and post-modernism, gender, and questions of transcendence in literature. Father Piggford directs the Moreau Honors Program and is involved in the “It Needs to Get Better” movement at Stonehill. His topic on March 13 will be “On Being Liked: LGBT Catholics.” The Saint Cecilia Rainbow Ministry will host a reception after the event.

Problem 1: “modernism”

Problem 2: the speaker

Just Google George Piggford and here is a sample of what you will find.

• Edited book “Queer Forster“, described as a “radical revision of gay criticism.” 
• Attended and supported recent talk at Stonehill College co-sponsored by the campus PRIDE group, where the speaker was Vatican-censured nun, Sr. Jeannine Gramick, co-founder of New Ways Ministry. (New Ways Ministry does not support Catholic Church teachings on chastity). As recently reported by the Cardinal Newman Society, Gramick was censured by the Vatican for her heretical ministry and ordered to not speak publicly about homosexuality due to “grave doctrinal errors” in her work.  Yet in this New Ways Ministry report on the February 12 event, Fr. Piggford was quoted as saying, ““I think that Sister Jeannine Gramick’s witness and her ministry is incredibly powerful…I have a great deal of respect for her willingness to live according to her conscience…”.   [Note: Stonehill College is in the Diocese of Fall River].
• Involved in the “It Needs to Get Better” movement at Stonehill College.
• Taught course at Tufts “Queer Theory” before becoming a priest. A reader brought this 1999 course listing to our attention in comments:
  ENGLISH 192B QUEER THEORY
  “Queer”: strange, odd, perverse, eccentric, bent, spinsterly, deviant.  This course will trace the rise of queer studies from two principal disciplines: feminism and lesbian and gay studies. Read more here, but be forewarned it’s not good.
  PROFESSOR:  PIGGFORD

All VERY BAD.

Across the archdiocese, pastors and parishes have been offering Catholic Lenten programs including weekly Stations of the Cross, a discussion group about the writings of St. Therese of Lisieux, a seminar on “Living the Moral Life Today,” talks on penance, repentance, worshiping God in the Eucharist and Holy Mass and many other programs appropriate for Lent.

Why could St. Cecilia’s not offer something similar in Lent that would call their parishioners to penance, repentance, almsgiving, and self-denial? What is wrong with the pastoral leadership at St. Cecilia in Boston? What is wrong that the Archdiocese allows this to continue?

When the “Gay Pride” Mass flap hit local and national news in 2011, Cardinal O’Malley responded saying, ““[T]he Church exists to announce the Gospel and invite people to conversion, to greater discipline in their lives as they seek to follow Christ’s teachings, which apply to everyone.”  That is the message that needs to be delivered at St. Cecilia.

To ensure the salvation of souls, it seems clear that Cardinal O’Malley and Vicar General Bishop Deeley need to intervene at St. Cecilia and teach the message of repentance from sin and conversion. Pray for Cardinal O’Malley and Bishop Deeley that they have the courage to take action, and forward a copy of this blog post to vicar_general@rcab.org.  Also pray for the protection of marriage, as arguments are made today before the U.S. Supreme Court on  California’s Prop 8. We pray that the court will uphold California’s ban on “gay marriage.”  Here is part of the USCCB prayer in defense of marriage:

God our Father, we give you thanks

for the gift of marriage: the bond of life and love,
and the font of the family.

May your Holy Spirit enlighten our society
to treasure the heroic love of husband and wife,
and guide our leaders to sustain and protect
the singular place of mothers and fathers
in the lives of their children.

Father, we ask that our prayers
be joined to those of the Virgin Mary,
that your Word may transform our service
so as to safeguard the incomparable splendor of marriage.
We ask all these things through Christ our Lord,
Amen.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Have a blessed Holy Week.