David Ancell / Friday, February 03, 2012 / Comments(0)
I saw a number of people on Facebook who were excited to hear that the Susan G. Komen Foundation had stopped funding Planned Parenthood. As much as I was all ready to send them an e-mail thanking them for doing this, something told me that I should approach with caution. I have a tendency to be pretty slow to react, and it comes in handy at times.
Surely enough, we now have this statement from the Foundation. They decided to “amend their criteria” to support organizations under investigation if the investigation is “political” and is not “conclusive.” So, I guess PP’s willingness to violate mandatory reporting for statutory rape doesn’t constitute a criminal act under Komen’s criteria. It must be just politics driving those investigations.
Under this “revision,” Planned Parenthood keeps its existing grants and may apply for new ones. While writing about how they don’t want their mission “marred by politics,” it is hard for me to interpret their statement as anything but either 1) bowing to political pressure from pro-aborts OR 2) ultimately wanting to maintain their ties with Planned Parenthood. For those who might think Komen hasn’t really reversed their earlier decision, note that Planned Parenthood is declaring victory on their web site.
Perhaps some people reading this wonder why I would be concerned as long as the money granted is being used for mammograms or other screenings. The answer is that money given for breast screenings means that more money from their general fund can then be used for their immoral activities like abortion and contraception. No matter what other services they provide, the fact remains that they are a MAJOR provider of abortions in this country. While breast cancer does kill many women, abortion is a directly intended killing of millions of unborn children.
So, as much as I’d like to support breast cancer research, I cannot and will not do it by supporting an organization that is helping to fund an organization such as Planned Parenthood. The great evil of abortion far outweighs any good that PP could possibly be doing. I will not take any chance on donating money to them.
Category: Catholic, Morality, Response
David Ancell / Wednesday, February 01, 2012 / Comments(0)
I would urge anyone who values freedom of religion in this country, especially Catholics, to please take a moment to sign this petition to the President. We need 25,000 signatures by February 27, 2012 to get an official response. The US Department of Health and Human Services, in an unprecedented attack on religious freedom in the United States, has issued a mandate that all employer health insurance plans provide coverage for contraception and abortifacients.
In short, this means that nearly all Catholic employers, whether they are agencies of the Church or businesses owned by devout Catholics, will be required to pay for people’s mortal sin. At best, the Obama administration is attacking freedom or religion. At worst, the administration wants to stop the Church from providing health care and other social services or even wants to destroy the Church. We cannot stand by and let this happen.
This is not about “the Church getting into people’s bedrooms.” If people employed by the Church choose to use contraception, we aren’t performing bed checks. God himself will do that, and those people will have to answer for having abused the gift by which God gave us to help him in bringing new life into the world. This is simply about not requiring the people of this world who are standing with Christ on this not to have to pay the bill for people to sin.
David Ancell / Wednesday, November 23, 2011 / Comments(0)
Ok, I admit it. Sometimes when I’m online, I read the National Catholic Reporter. Am I expecting something uplifting that will boost my faith? No. I’ve known for years that that won’t happen there. It’s mostly bitterness. One thing about my time in North Carolina is that I was able to learn the underlying current of thought that drives the thinking of these people. I went to programs that used their resources and knew people who thought like these people do.
It was very apparent in this article. The author, one of the “young voices,” is “longing for a new, unbroken church.” She describes the Eucharist as a time when they “listened to one another’s stories” and “shared our brokenness.” The people in this church want to “be a part of a community that is relevant” and share with “those we break bread with” and “want our experience of others to be affirmed.” In her church, she is “looking for meaning and authenticity from ourselves, our friends and family, and our institutions.” I could go on as there’s a lot more of this in the article.
Indeed, it’s what is left out that is telling. All of the phrases of what the author longs for are about the people with whom she is present. She even says they went to “uncover the wholeness found in ‘we’.” There is no mention of having an encounter with the living God.
After all, God will “meet us where we are,” but he loves us too much to leave us there. Far more than “sharing our brokenness,” God wants to give us life to the full. There, we can find healing for our “brokenness,” which ultimately has its root in sin. The article seems to imply that the people at this church are content to remain in their “brokenness” and possibly also in their sin. Naturally, they will keep longing for happiness because they will never find it that way.
The Mass gives us our greatest opportunity to encounter Christ and be transformed. It gets better; he is wanting to give us eternal life with him in Heaven where there will be no more “brokenness.” We don’t need to make it “relevant” or “meaningful,” it must change us and make us “relevant” and “meaningful” to it.
We need not simply share our story. We need to know Christ’s. Let him transform our story into something beautiful and joyful for him.
David Ancell / Sunday, June 19, 2011 / Comments(0)
Right now, you can find truckloads of articles and blog posts offering commentary on the recent news about Fr. Corapi, a priest who was once known as a great defender of orthodox Catholic teaching. He has announced that he is leaving active ministry as a priest but will minister under another title. Other people have written far too much about his situation, and I’m not going to pretend that I can add much to the discussion. Besides, there are a few people who accept the possibility that the whole thing may be a hack job. It’s not out of the question to me because the video doesn’t show him actually speaking, and the audio doesn’t sound quite right to me.
The more troubling part to me is that he isn’t the first on-fire, orthodox priest to do this. Over the last few years I’ve seen a number of priests who appeared to be holy, orthodox, and happy priests leave their ministry. Some just picked up and left; others were caught in scandal. It has left me wondering what is going on.
I have to remind myself that there are a lot still standing, and they really need our prayers. They have an indelible mark on their souls and a target on their backs, as Fr. Z explains very well. Perseverance to the end in service to Christ is difficult for any of us. All of us who wish to attain eternal salvation much support each other and especially our priests. There are just so many traps set by the enemy for all of us that I can’t name all of them in this post. We can easily grow tired of fighting the good fight, especially in today’s world. Our priests are often on the front end of this battle, and their perseverance is often what brings the salvation of many.
Category: Catholic, News, Response
David Ancell / Sunday, June 05, 2011 / Comments(0)
This weekend, the news has come out that Dr. Jack Kevorkian has died. We know full well that he was a man who did much to bring about the Culture of Death. It would be easy to be glad that he is gone, but be careful. The same goes for any man who has done great evil. One who comes to mind for me now is George Tiller.
It’s one thing to be glad that they cannot do their evil deeds anymore. However, to actually desire or rejoice their demise is quite another. To desire their damnation is even worse. There is a point at which we can desire the justice of God, but often the line between that and desiring their damnation is a very fine one that is difficult to walk. It would be very dangerous for our souls to end up on the wrong side of that line.
Simply put, we know that God would much rather have had their repentance. Can you imagine what a powerful witness either Kevorkian or Tiller would have been had they repented? Let’s not forget that the rejoicing in Heaven would have been tremendous.
Even now, we can still hope and pray, as I always do men like these die, that they repented at the last minute. You and I may never have done anything like what these men did, but we are sinners. By hoping in the mercy of God for them, we realize that we, too, are in need of his mercy. If they did repent because of our prayers, they could become a powerful intercessor for us. By being merciful, we have hope of receiving God’s mercy.
Category: Catholic, News, Response
David Ancell / Wednesday, June 01, 2011 / Comments(0)
File this one in the “I wish I had this a long time ago” category. I got an e-mail from Ascension Press, whose works I really like, about a new book named Disorientation. It’s about the “-isms” (ideologies) that college students are bombarded with from the very beginning. The site itself is worth seeing even if you don’t plan to buy the book because it gives a short description of each “-ism.” Even though I’m twelve years past college and my son isn’t born yet, I just might go for a copy of this book.
Several years ago, I can remember someone saying that the best defense against false teaching is to know the true Catholic faith. Well, this has a lot of truth to it. Still, I do believe that it sharpens ones knowledge of the faith to learn about ideas that are opposed to it and what is wrong with those ideas. This is why books like this provide great resources that I wish I had just before I entered college.
David Ancell / Saturday, May 14, 2011 / Comments(0)
This week, I got the news that a new letter of instruction was released on the celebration of the Mass in the Extraordinary Form from the Ecclesia Dei commission and approved by Pope Benedict. This came as kind of a clarification on Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict’s letter authorizing wider use of the rite. In both texts, the Holy Father is asking for wider availability of the older form for those who request it.
When Summorum Pontificum was published in 2007, it generated a variety of reactions. Bishop Burbidge of Raleigh, NC welcomed it. Meanwhile, in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, a strange list of “norms” was published regarding its use that seem to defeat the purpose of the Holy Father’s decree. In fact, what I’ve read about this past week’s new letter seem to have been written to specifically counter what they are saying in Cincinnati.
Here’s my question: Why are there people so afraid of allowing the celebration of the Extraordinary Form? Pope Benedict is only asking for it to be made available for those who desire it. What is the problem that a bishop or an office of worship in a diocese would need to set up such barriers?
Well, there is one legitimate concern. Some people who favor the old rite do so because they don’t respect the validity of the Ordinary Form of the Mass. This is a form of dissent against the Church that cannot be supported. The new instruction addresses this by saying that groups such as these should not be accommodated. The purpose of Summorum Pontificum was to promote reconciliation, not schism.
Do people (whether laity, priests, or the local bishop) worry that priests, especially younger ones, will just up and decide that they aren’t going to offer the Ordinary Form anymore? This is highly unlikely. The greater availability of the Extraordinary Form is for people who request it. If there is not a group of people requesting it, it’s difficult to imagine priests eager to impose it on them. Are people going to want the Extraordinary Form in such numbers that priests everywhere will be compelled to offer it? I doubt this. Too many people (out of ignorance, mostly) believe that the Extraordinary Form is a relic of the Dark Ages.
Do people have some problem with the Extraordinary Form? If so, what? It had been the only form of the Roman Rite for centuries, and it is a very beautiful rite. Whenever I have been, I see people who truly want to be at Mass and give worship to God. So, I ask (please feel free to comment), what are we afraid of?
Category: Catholic, Liturgy, Response
David Ancell / Saturday, April 02, 2011 / Comments(0)
Earlier this week, I decided to join the discussion in the comment box of Matthew Warner’s article on church bulletins. For me, I must admit that it’s something that people may not think much about. However, I think he has done a good job stirring up discussions.
For the most part, the bulletin for me has been the means by which I remember what day and time a certain event will be held. It isn’t much more than that. I may have learned about the meeting or event somewhere else. However, I’ve reached a point where I don’t even want to pick up a copy of a paper bulletin. It’s just something that will get tossed in a pile somewhere. If I want to read the bulletin, I’m going to download it, even if we have a paper copy at home. It’s easier for me to look online than to try to find where we put our copy of the bulletin.
I’d love to see some parish have their bulletin online only. I am willing to bet that there are very few, if any, people who wouldn’t be able to access it today. Maybe a few copies could be printed for them. It just seems that it would save a lot of expense and could even be updated if an error were found.
David Ancell / Sunday, October 31, 2010 / Comments(0)
Somehow, I don’t think this one will surprise many people who read my blog, but I received this article entitled Health Overhaul May Bring Free Birth Control from Prolifepharmacy.com on my Facebook. It came from NPR, but I was hoping that it was actually from The Onion. Like I said, I’m not surprised that this is on someone’s agenda. The most telling quote was from Dr. David Grimes at UNC:
Contraception rivals immunization in dollars saved for every dollar invested. Spacing out children allows for optimal pregnancies and optimal child rearing. Contraception is a prototype of preventive medicine.
This guy is an Ob/Gyn. Does he think pregnancy is an illness? We might, as a society, save money, but for what purpose. Fortunately, the USCCB has weighed in on this. Hopefully, our upcoming election will boot the promoters of this nonsense out of office.
Category: Catholic, Morality, Pharmacy, Response
David Ancell / Wednesday, October 06, 2010 / Comments(0)
Recently, I got an e-mail advertisement about a study on Scripture taking place at a parish in North Carolina where we used to live. I’m not sure whether to laugh or cry. It said in the description that modern scholars seek to distinguish religious truth from historical or scientific truth. After spending a lot of time in Memphis hanging around orthodox Catholics who used good study materials, I really thought that this kind of thinking was passe. Then again, this particular parish had a way of bursting my bubble which ultimately resulted in my refusing to go back.
If, for example, the resurrection of Our Lord isn’t historically true, then there is no need to believe in him. In fact, there’s really not much point in studying Scripture. While it’s true that there are truths that can be known in different ways, there isn’t a contradiction between them. Something is either true or not, and what’s true is true.