Phoenix, Ariz., Nov 27, 2019 / 12:00 pm (CNA).- The Church must face the fallout of the abuse scandal with humility and courage, Bishop Thomas Olmstead of Phoenix has said, while predicting “very difficult” years ahead for the Church.
&ldq… […]
Baltimore, Md., Nov 27, 2019 / 11:30 am (CNA).- The United States Department of Justice on Tuesday filed a statement of interest in support of a Christian school in Maryland that says it was banned from a voucher program due to its religious beliefs.
The DOJ said it found no evidence that the school had discriminated against students or violated the rules for religious schools set forth by the voucher program.
Bethel Ministries, an ecclesial community that runs Bethel Christian Academy, filed a lawsuit in June against the Maryland Department of Education, after the department disqualified the academy from participating in the state’s Broadening Options and Opportunities for Students Today (BOOST) voucher program, which benefits low-income students.
The school claims it was disqualified from the program on account of its religious beliefs in Christian marriage and sexuality, stated in its handbook. The handbook was reviewed by the state’s department of education before the school was banned from the program.
Bethel is a kindergarten through eighth-grade academy with a diverse student population of 85% non-white students, according to the DOJ. It had participated in the BOOST program since the 2016-2017 school year.
Earlier this month, a federal district court judge denied Maryland’s motion to dismiss the school’s lawsuit.
In its Nov. 26 statement, the DOJ said, “The United States is resolutely committed to protecting the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. The First Amendment enshrines both the right to ‘the free exercise’ of religion and ‘the freedom of speech’ at the bedrock of the Nation’s constitutional system. These freedoms lie at the heart of a free society and are the ‘effectual guardian of every other right.’”
The DOJ also noted that it has an interest in enforcing Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “which allows the Attorney General to file suit when a school board deprives children of equal protection of the law, or when a public college excludes persons based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” The department stated that it found Bethel Christian Academy does not discriminate against its students and that the school’s lawsuit was likely to succeed on the grounds of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
“Bethel has introduced a declaration, made under penalty of perjury, stating that it ‘does not ask about, or consider’ sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression ‘in its student admission decisions,’” the DOJ stated.
“And Bethel has represented to the Court that it ‘has not, and will not, discriminate against any student based on sexual orientation, either in admissions or beyond,’ that ‘Bethel discriminates against no one,’ and that its ‘conduct policies apply equally to every student and only when at school.’”
The school requires all of its students to use facilities according to their biological sex and to refrain from discussions of a sexual nature or from public displays of affection. Its uniform policy has a unisex option with slacks, and an option with dresses or jumpers for girls, if they so choose.
According to the DOJ, beginning in 2019, the BOOST program has prohibited discrimination on the basis of “gender identity or expression,” as well as in “student admissions, retention, or expulsion or otherwise.” “The BOOST program’s nondiscrimination requirement states, however, that it does not ‘require any school or institution to adopt any rule, regulation, or policy that conflicts with its religious or moral teachings,’” the DOJ noted. The DOJ said that the statement of the school’s beliefs in a Christian view of marriage and sexuality in its handbook does not constitute discrimination, and that the program’s banning of the school constitutes “unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.”
“Although the government may prohibit discriminatory conduct, even when the discriminatory conduct involves some ancillary speech, Defendants have introduced no evidence of discriminatory conduct. Further, Bethel has repeatedly affirmed that it does not, and will not, discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity, and has squarely represented to the Court that it ‘discriminates against no one,’” the DOJ stated. “Supreme Court and lower court precedent make clear that penalizing Bethel for its beliefs goes beyond regulating conduct to regulating expression in violation of the Free Speech Clause, and coercing Bethel to renounce its religious character in violation of the Free Exercise Clause,” the statement added.
Furthermore, the defendants are violating the school’s right to free speech “by predicating government funds on the nature and expression of Bethel’s beliefs,” the DOJ noted. “For the foregoing reasons, the Court should hold that Bethel has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of its free speech and free exercise claims for purposes of its motion for a preliminary injunction,” the DOJ concluded.
The statement was submitted by Reed D. Rubinstein, Principal Deputy General Counsel for the DOJ, Riddhi Dasgupta and Christine Pratt, attorney advisors for the U.S. Department of Education, Eric S. Dreiband, Assistant Attorney General, Elliott M. Davis, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Eric W. Treene, Special Counsel for the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.
Vatican City, Nov 27, 2019 / 05:37 am (CNA).- Pope Francis Wednesday appointed an auditor and Italian banking consultant as president of the Financial Information Authority (AIF), the Vatican’s internal financial watchdog.
Carmelo Barbagallo, 63, is a consultant in the areas of banking, financial supervision, and the Single Supervisory Mechanism. He was previously head of the banking and financial supervision department of the Bank of Italy.
The appointment comes as the Vatican’s financial watchdog is struggling to assert its credibility. The previous president of the AIF, René Brüelhart, resigned his position Nov. 18.
Although the Vatican press office characterized the departure as the end of “a five year term,” Brüelhart had not been appointed for a fixed period, and he made it clear he had resigned.
Shortly thereafter, Marc Odendall, a member of the AIF board, resigned as well, saying that the Egmont Group, through which 164 financial intelligence authorities share information and coordinate their work, had suspended the AIF.
Odendall told the Associated Press that the AIF had been effectively rendered “an empty shell” and that there was “no point” in remaining involved in its work.
On Oct. 1, Vatican gendarmes raided the offices of the Secretariat of State and the AIF.
Subsequently, a total of five employees and officials were suspended and blocked from entering the Vatican, including Tommaso Di Ruzza, the director of the AIF.
Aboard the papal plane from Tokyo to Rome Nov. 26, Pope Francis confirmed that Di Ruzza is still suspended, despite a press release from the AIF last month that affirmed the agency’s full confidence in him and expressed hope that the matter would be “clarified soon.”
Di Ruzza was suspended because of suspected “bad administration,” the pope said, adding that “it was AIF that did not control, it seems, the crimes of others. And therefore [it failed] in its duty of controls. I hope that they prove it is not so. Because there is, still, the presumption of innocence.”
On the papal flight, the pope was also questioned about wider issues facing the AIF, which was recently suspended by the Egmont Group, through which 164 financial intelligence authorities share information and coordinate their work.
While the concerns of the Egmont Group were “a bit disturbing,” Francis said, the group is not an official international body and issues of sovereignty had to be considered.
Egmont is a “private group,” the pope noted, adding that “MONEYVAL will carry out the scheduled inspection for the first months of the next year, it will do it.”
Barbagallo, who was born in Catania in Sicily, has worked for the Bank of Italy since 1980.
During his military service he worked in Italy’s Guardia di Finanza (Finance Guard) before continuing to work in economics and financial security.
“I am honored to have received this appointment, aware of the full weight of the moral and professional responsibility it carries,” Barbagallo told Vatican News Nov. 27.
He said he will bring his 40 years of experience in the areas of banking, finance, and supervision of the European banking system, adding that he believes “the AIF will be able to give its own contribution in its role as a supervisory authority, so that the fundamental values of fairness and transparency of all the financial movements in which the Holy See is engaged may continue to be affirmed and recognized.”
“I intend to reassure the international system of financial information that all cooperation will be given in full respect of the best international standards,” he said.
The AIF was established by Benedict XVI in 2010 to oversee suspicious financial transactions; it is charged with ensuring that Vatican banking policies comply with international financial standards.
Tokyo, Japan, Nov 27, 2019 / 05:00 am (CNA).- On Sundays, Fr. Raniel Berdos can be found strolling the aisles of St. Mary’s Cathedral in Tokyo.
He wears a traditional black cassock and keeps his thick, black head of hair impeccable. He switches smoothly between Japanese and English, but maintains the same quiet enthusiasm through each conversation.
By the time the church is beginning to clear out, he’s been approached by no less than a dozen parishioners — many of them older “Church ladies,” eager to talk about this or that happening behind the scenes at the parish.
On his way back to his office, Berdos, 35, is handed a bag of bread by a parishioner, who reminds him to share with the other clergymen.
Berdos is a missionary to Japan, from the Philippines. The priest grew up in the Diocese of Tagum. He has been a priest for three years, and Japan is his first assignment since being ordained.
He was sent to Japan once before, for a break after his third year of theology studies. It wasn’t clear at the time whether he’d be sent back after his schooling was complete.
“It was ambiguous. They don’t want to preempt the decision of the general superior.”
Berdos is a member of the Missionaries of Saint Charles Borromeo, sometimes called the Scalabrinian Missionaries. The order was founded with the intention of providing aid and support to migrant Italians going out of Italy.
But since its foundation, the order has changed and morphed. It’s also tweaked its target missions to better fit the needs of the modern world — Italians leaving Italy no longer seem to require an entire order of clergy to oversee.
“What is relevant now is people going out for greener pastures and going abroad,” said Berdos. “We’re serving migrants, immigrants.
The Scalabrinians offer charitable assistance to migrants around the world. That can come in the form of medical help, as well as financial support.
“Even legal issues — we offer [help],” said Berdos.
At first, Berdos was disappointed with his assignment to Japan, or at least scared.
He had been expecting that as a new priest his first assignment would be somewhere where the order already had a sizable presence.
“My first desire was to go to Taiwan. Our congregation has two parishes in Taiwan, our mission is already stable in Taiwan,” Berdos said.
“But we are still young here,” he said.
“Here in Japan, we have to start from scratch.”
Berdos estimates that in his experience, there are two Japanese priests to every foreign priest serving the Archdiocese of Tokyo. But that number varies considerably across the country.
“Every diocese has its own situation.”
Despite the language gap and a steep learning curve, Berdos has managed to bond well with the other priests of St. Mary’s.
“My Japanese is still struggling, but I can get along in day to day conversation.”
Every month there is a meeting for the clergy of the parish. It is here that Berdos has opportunities to bond with priests he doesn’t usually work with directly.
“We bond through what makes us common. Maybe in small things, maybe in big things too.”
“I’m starting to feel at home here,” he said.
While begins to mesh into Japan, Berdos knows he might at any moment be plucked out of the country and sent elsewhere.
“We are moved according to the needs of the Church. This [parish] cannot be my kingdom,” he said, comparing a refusal to move elsewhere to staking a claim in a territory.
“Not forever, for sure,” he laughed.
For other priests or laity considering doing work in Japan, Berdos offered a simple piece of advice:
“The Japanese church is young in Tokyo. Perhaps here you’ll be able to integrate if you observe and be silent.
“In silence, you will be able to understand the words [between] the lines.”
Detroit, Mich., Nov 27, 2019 / 04:00 am (CNA).- A priest of the Archdiocese of Detroit is facing a lawsuit filed by the parents of a teenager who committed suicide last year.
The parents say Father Don LaCuesta homily at their son’s funeral Mass —during which the priest said multiple times that their son died by suicide, and urged prayers for his soul— caused them “irreparable harm and pain.”
Eighteen-year-old Maison Hullibarger committed suicide Dec. 4, 2018.
On Dec. 8, 2018, LaCuesta celebrated Hullibarger’s funeral Mass at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Parish in Temperance, Michigan.
Maison’s parents, Jeff and Linda Hullibarger, last week filed a lawsuit against LaCuesta, as well as against the Archdiocese of Detroit and Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Parish, seeking $25,000 in damages.
“No parent, no sibling, no family member should ever, ever have to sit through what we sat through,” the mother said in a Nov. 14 statement released by the family’s attorneys.
In his homily, which the archdiocese released in full, the priest said that suicide is an act against God’s will, but he also emphasized the mercy of God in the face of suicide.
“Because we are Christians, we must say what we know is the truth—that taking your own life is against God who made us and against everyone who loves us,” the priest’s homily text said.
“Our lives are not our own. They are not ours to do with as we please. God gave us life, and we are to be good stewards of that gift for as long as God permits.”
The homily continued: “On most people’s mind, however, especially [those] of us who call ourselves Christians, on our minds as we sit in this place is: Can God forgive and heal this? Yes, God CAN forgive even the taking of one’s own life. In fact, God awaits us with his mercy, with ever open arms.”
“God wants nothing but our salvation but will never force himself on us, he will not save us without us. That’s how much he loves us. Because of the all embracing sacrifice of Christ on the cross God can have mercy on any sin. Yes, because of his mercy, God can forgive suicide and heal what has been broken.”
According to the lawsuit, the Hullibargers met with LaCuesta before the funeral Mass to discuss the service.
The couple says they told him that they wanted the funeral to be a celebration of their son’s life and his kindness, and that they did not tell the priest, or the general public, that their son had committed suicide.
Maison’s father, Jeff, says he approached the pulpit during the homily and asked LaCuesta to “please stop” talking about suicide, according to the lawsuit, but LaCuesta continued his homily.
Monsignor Robert Dempsey, a pastor in Lake Forest, IL and visiting professor of liturgical law at the Liturgical Institute at Mundelein Seminary, told CNA that determining the content of the homily for a funeral Mass is the sole responsibility of the homilist, who must always be a bishop, priest, or deacon.
“Although the homilist is solely responsible for the content of his homily, he is obliged to follow the liturgical norms,” Dempsey told CNA in an email.
The Order of Christian Funerals, the Church’s liturgical norms for funerals, states that the homilist at a funeral Mass ought to be “attentive to the grief of those present.”
“The homilist should dwell on God’s compassionate love and on the paschal mystery of the Lord, as proclaimed in the Scripture readings. The homilist should also help the members of the assembly to understand that the mystery of God’s love and the mystery of Jesus’ victorious death and resurrection were present in the life and death of the deceased and that those mysteries are active in their own lives as well,” the General Introduction to the norms reads.
Dempsey pointed out that the celebrant, “whenever possible…should involve the family in planning the funeral rites” (Order of Christian Funerals, 17), but the content of the homily is ultimately his responsibility, he said.
“Reasonable requests from a family for privacy and sensitivity should be honored; requests that are contrary to the Church’s belief or liturgical discipline should not,” Dempsey said, adding that “no one has a right to hear only those aspects of God’s word they agree with or to receive the sacraments according to their own preference or understanding.”
However, Dempsey said that compassion is important for a preacher.
“In the [Detroit] case, a modicum of common sense and human compassion could have avoided a multitude of woes for all concerned. Weddings are not the appropriate time to preach on the immorality of the contraceptive pill; funerals are not a suitable occasion for preaching about the objective immorality of suicide or uncertainty about final perseverance,” Dempsey said.
The Order of Christian Funerals reads in paragraph 16: “In planning and carrying out the funeral rites the pastor and all other ministers should keep in mind the life of the deceased and the circumstances of death.”
“They should also take into consideration the spiritual and psychological needs of the family and friends of the deceased to express grief and their sense of loss, to accept the reality of death, and to comfort one another.”
Dempsey emphasized that the Church’s norms direct the priest to confer with the family in planning a funeral Mass, and “gives specific indications about the nature of the homily to be preached.”
“Moreover, natural justice and pastoral charity suggest that the priest should respect the family’s wishes for confidentiality about specific facts regarding the deceased’s life and manner [of] death. In cases of suicide, overdose, addiction, the less said the better— even if the family doesn’t specifically request confidentiality,” Dempsey said.
Father Pius Pietrzyk, OP, chair of pastoral studies at St. Patrick’s Seminary in Menlo Park, California, told CNA that in his view, the immorality of suicide is not preached about enough at funeral Masses.
“I tend to be one who thinks, contrary to the current of public thought, that we don’t preach enough about the immorality of suicide,” he told CNA.
“It is not merciful to tell someone that it’s okay to commit suicide. It’s never merciful to do that. And yet, I think we indirectly do that when we don’t preach strong enough, we don’t make clear enough, the grave immorality of suicide, and the culpability that can be associated with it.”
Father Pietrzyk stressed that we cannot know for certain the state of any deceased person’s soul.
“A priest at a funeral is not preaching to the dead. He’s preaching to the living. And while one ought not in a sermon condemn the soul of the person being buried— no one wants that— a priest shouldn’t dance around the immorality of the issue at stake.”
Father Pietrzyk acknowledged the complicating factor that the manner of the young man’s death was, according to the couple, not widely known before the funeral.
“If this were not widely known in the community, and the couple wanted to keep the details of this less public, I do think a priest should respect that,” he said.
“But if this was widely known in the community that he committed suicide, I think the priest has a moral obligation to touch on the subject. So it just depends on the circumstances of how widely known it was.”
He said he always teaches his students that when preaching a funeral, the priest ought to respect the wishes of the family as much as possible.
The family of a deceased person has no strict civil or canonical rights to compel a priest to preach on a certain topic or not to preach on others, he stressed.
“One doesn’t preach the truth that the family gives; one preaches the truth of the Church,” he said.
“That can involve taking into account the desires and wishes of the family, but it always requires taking on, first and foremost, the mind of Christ and the teachings of the Church.”
Father Pietrzyk said he observes many priests, and even some bishops, fostering a sense of the laity having the right to “control” the liturgy, especially in the context of wedding and funeral Masses. But, he said, the Mass does not belong to “the people,” but to the Church.
“It’s the Church’s expression of prayer and grief for the couple,” he said.
“It doesn’t mean that one ignores the family…one should listen to them attentively. But the wishes of the family cannot supersede the mind of the Church with regards to these matters.”
The Archdiocese of Detroit released a statement on the matter Dec. 17, 2018.
“Our hope is always to bring comfort to situations of great pain, through funeral services centered on the love and healing power of Christ. Unfortunately, that did not happen in this case. We understand that an unbearable situation was made even more difficult, and we are sorry,” the statement read.
“We…know the family was hurt further by Father’s choice to share Church teaching on suicide, when the emphasis should have been placed more on God’s closeness to those who mourn.”
The archdiocese also announced that for the “foreseeable future,” LaCuesta will not be preaching at funerals and he will have all other homilies reviewed by a priest mentor. In addition, the archdiocese said, he has agreed to “pursue the assistance he needs in order to become a more effective minister in these difficult situations.”
The Hullibarger family has said that LaCuesta tried to keep Maison’s parents from giving a eulogy for their son during the Mass, even though “that had been agreed on well in advance,” according to the Detroit Free Press.
The archdiocese has not commented on the allegation that LaCuesta agreed to allow the Hullibargers to eulogize their son, and then changed his mind.
The Church’s norms officially prohibit the practice of giving eulogies during a funeral Mass, but Monsignor Dempsey said the Church’s liturgical norms offer the possibility of a member or a friend of the family to speak in remembrance of the deceased following the prayer after communion and before the final commendation begins.
He said the possibility of offering a “remembrance” is often determined by diocesan statute.
“The Catholic funeral is not a ‘celebration of life’ of the deceased, but a celebration of the baptized believer’s participation in the life and resurrection of Jesus Christ,” Dempsey explained.
“The words of ‘remembrance’ should be brief and should focus on how the deceased bore witness in his [or] her life to what we profess in the paschal mystery.”
The funeral norms for the Archdiocese of Detroit acknowledge the possibility of a ‘remembrance’ at Mass in keeping with the OCF norms, but emphasizes that “those words should not be a eulogy.” The Detroit norms also state that the Vigil for the Deceased, or the memorial luncheon or reception that often follows the funeral, is an appropriate place for family and friends to offer their own words or stories.
Whether or not it was a ‘remembrance’ at the Mass that LaCuesta promised the family rather than a eulogy, and whether or not LaCuesta later tried to prevent them from doing so, remains unclear.
Following the funeral, the Hullibargers had complained to the Archdiocese of Detroit, asking that LaCuesta be removed.
The Hullibargers said in the lawsuit that they were granted a meeting with Archbishop Allen Vigneron after the funeral, but claim that the archbishop cut the meeting short when the mother began discussing Father LaCuesta.
Father Pietrzyk also said that in his view, the civil lawsuit should is not likely to succeed because “no court, not in Michigan, not in federal court, and certainly not the Supreme Court, is going to sustain this kind of tort action, and they’re certainly never going to require the Church to remove a particular priest.”
“The couple might have legitimate disagreements with the homily and the way the funeral was treated, but the idea that this is a legal matter, the idea that the courts should be getting involved in this, is just contrary to all of the Constitutional precedence of the US. It’s not going to go anywhere, and nor should it,” he commented.
“Even if one is sympathetic to [the couple’s] plight, as one should be sympathetic to the plight of any parent who’s lost a child, the question of the civil, legal rights is another matter. So I do think one can and must criticize the civil lawsuit, even if one has a great deal of sorrow and sympathy for the couple.”
Father LaCuesta declined to comment to CNA on the ongoing case, referring questions to the archdiocese.
Vatican City, Nov 27, 2019 / 03:51 am (CNA).- Pope Francis expressed his condolences Wednesday for those who have been affected by or who have died in a devastating earthquake which struck Albania Nov. 26.
At least 25 people have been confirmed dead a… […]
Vatican City, Nov 27, 2019 / 02:54 am (CNA).- On Wednesday, Pope Francis reflected on his recent trip to Thailand and Japan, stating that economic and technological success are not what gives someone a good life, but the love he or she has received fro… […]
Guanajuato, Mexico, Nov 27, 2019 / 12:05 am (CNA).- More than 10,000 lay Catholics in Mexico renewed their consecration to Christ the King at a special Mass and ceremony over the weekend.
The event was held at the foot of the Christ the King monument … […]
Bridgeport, Conn., Nov 26, 2019 / 06:01 pm (CNA).- Papal honors for Father Phillip Bochanski have been announced, and the priest says they are a recognition of the Courage apostolate’s ministry for people with same-sex attraction at a time when the world and even parts of the Catholic Church are unsupportive, confusing, or hostile to their desire to live the Catholic faith in its fullness.
“In this apostolate I’ve met some of the most dedicated people I know. People who at great personal sacrifice are following Jesus with what I would say is heroic virtue,” Bochanski told CNA Nov. 26. “For me it’s been a real blessing to be able to a spiritual father to them.”
Since 2017, Bochanski has been executive director of the Bridgeport, Conn.-based Courage International. The Courage apostolate provides pastoral support, prayer support, and fellowship for people with same-sex attraction who want to live chaste lives according to Catholic teaching.
On Nov. 25, the Philadelphia archdiocese announced that Bochanski was among four people honored with the Cross Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, an honor given to Catholics over age 45 with a history of long and distinguished service to the Church and to the office of the pope.
“The thought that the Holy Father is willing to extend the award, knowing that my nomination must have had a lot to do with my work at Courage, means a great deal to me,” Bochanski told CNA.
The Courage apostolate has grown since its founding in New York in 1980. It is currently present in more than 15 countries, with about 110 chapters in the U.S. alone. It also has an outreach to parents and spouses, called EnCourage.
Bochanski said the work of Courage includes pastoral care to people who have same-sex attraction and providing formation to clergy and others in ministry “to understand and appreciate the teachings of the Church… and to be able to explain them well.”
Bochanski reflected on the present-day difficulties in ministry related to sexual morality and same-sex attraction.
“There’s a significant amount of opposition that the Church’s teaching receives from the secular world, of course, but even in recent years it’s not always clear that everyone within the Church acknowledges and accepts the goodness and the truth of those teachings,” he said.
The priest, who was ordained in 1999 for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, said he was nominated for the papal honors by his archbishop, Charles Chaput of Philadelphia. He received a letter from Chaput informing him of the honors.
“It caught me completely by surprise,” he said. “It meant a great deal to me of course to receive it.”
A Nov. 25 statement from the Philadelphia archdiocese said Bochanski “has worked tirelessly, with compassion and great sensitivity, to advance Church teaching on human sexuality, and gained national respect for the Courage apostolate in the process.”
Bochanski voiced gratitude both to Pope Francis and to Chaput, who will bestow the Cross on the priest on the pope’s behalf at a Dec. 9 Vespers at the Cathedral Basilica of Saints Peter and Paul in Philadelphia .
“To know that (Chaput) notices the work I’m doing here at Courage means a great deal to me,” said Bochanski, who added that Archbishop Chaput has “always been very supportive of my participation in the apostolate.”
The Cross Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, Bochanski said, is a reminder that the Courage apostolate is living and teaching in harmony with the Church and with the Church’s expectations for pastoral care and ministry.
He hoped the honors will provide clarity, both for Courage members and for others who “may be confused by some of the ambiguities and the controversies in the world and in the Church with regard to those teachings.”
Bochanski said the main difficulty for the Catholics in Courage is is that the secular world and some parts of the Church “don’t value the sacrifices that our members are making in terms of living chaste lives and starting to pursue holiness according to the mind of the Church.”
“Some of our members, in coming back to the Church and embracing a chaste life, lost a lot of friends they had before,” he said. “People don’t understand why they would follow a Catholic teaching that requires so much sacrifice.” For many, this means choosing a celibate life that “certainly requires a new way of looking at themselves and relationships.”
“They’ve had that experience of being misunderstood or even pushed aside because of the commitments that they are making to the Church,” said Bochanski. Such attitudes can provide obstacles for those who “don’t feel support from people around them and sometimes from people in the hierarchy of the Church.”
Bochanski also praised the Christian witness of Courage members, whether in public or private.
”Many want to be private about their experience but an increasing number are willing to speak about how participating in Courage and living according to Church teaching have changed their lives,” he told CNA. “A number of them talk about how they feel much more free to be themselves, to have strong friendships, to live fully alive because they are embracing this invitation to chastity.”
Some members have reported that people who tried to affirm them in their attractions and desires only increased their unhappiness.
“The fact that people weren’t giving them the truth about their identity and morality was making that much worse.” said Bochanski.
“When they hear the teaching of the Church that our identity is not in our sexual orientation but in our identity as sons and daughters of God, and that God’s plan for chaste relationships is meant to build this up and lead us to fulfillment, it’s a real liberation. They experience a great real freedom by embracing their Church’s teachings.”
Others can learn from Courage members, he said.
“Whether people themselves are experiencing same-sex attraction, just to see the witness of our members who are living in such a heroic way inspires all of us to take our own commitment to holiness more seriously and to be always growing in our ongoing conversion, our ongoing acceptance of God’s plan for each our lives,” said the priest.
“People who are living that in a radical way, which many of our Courage members are doing at real personal sacrifice, can become a real inspiration and encouragement to pursue our universal call to holiness,” he added.
Church teaching on sexual morality is “really coming from a great love and desire that people live an authentic, happy and holy life,” the priest explained. “That would be a counter-witness to people who would suggest that the Church teaching is harmful or hateful.”
After his ordination, Bochanski was a pastoral associate in several Philadelphia parishes and a chaplain for the Holy Spirit Adoration Sisters, the Catholic Medical Association’s Philadelphia guild, and the Courage apostolate’s Philadelphia chapter.
He joined Courage International in 2016 as associate director.
Courage and EnCourage will host its next Truth and Love Conference, intended for those in Catholic ministry, in Sterling, Va., April 27-29. The Courage and EnCourage annual conference will be held in Mundelein, Ill.,, July 23-26.
In 2020 the Courage apostolate will mark the 40th anniversary of its first meeting on Sept. 26, 1980 with an anniversary Mass at the Church of St. Joseph in New York. Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York is scheduled to celebrate the anniversary Mass, Bochanski told CNA.
Baton Rouge, La., Nov 26, 2019 / 04:19 pm (CNA).- The Louisiana Department of Justice is asking an appeals court to unseal documents from abortion provider June Medical Services (Hope Medical Group) in order to report evidence of criminal and professional misconduct against a staff member of the group that the department says was hidden from the Supreme Court.
Attorneys for the Louisiana Department of Justice filed the writ of mandamus with the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Nov. 18, according to the department’s website. The staff member in question worked at a Shreveport abortion clinic.
Hope Medical Group filed three lawsuits against abortion restriction laws in Louisiana, including a pending suit before the Supreme Court challenging a law requiring abortion doctors to have hospital admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their clinic.
“I am deeply concerned about the basic health and safety of Louisiana women. And Hope’s continued efforts to hide this information from the Supreme Court and to block reporting to proper authorities casts serious doubt on Hope and its abortion providers’ claims that it represents the interests of Louisiana women,” Louisiana Solicitor General Liz Murrill said in a statement on the state’s DOJ website.
“As DOJ officers, if we learn of potentially criminal activity during litigation, we have a legal obligation to report it to criminal investigators and licensing authorities. We also have a basic legal duty to protect the public from dangerous behavior when we learn of it. Shockingly, Hope Medical Group is refusing to unseal this evidence and permit us to carry out our legal duties,” Murrill added.
The Louisiana DOJ added in the statement that ordinarily, the evidence they uncovered against the staff member would have resulted in a criminal referral, but that referral has thus far been impeded by the sealing of documents by a federal judge in the case.
The law being challenged at the Supreme Court by Hope Medical Group in Gee v. June Medical Services, LLC is Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion Protection Act.
When then-Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) signed the bill into law in 2014, it was promptly challenged in court by pro-choice groups and activists. Texas had passed similar regulations in the name of protecting women’s health, but the Texas law was eventually struck down in the Supreme Court’s 2016 Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt decision.
In Hellerstedt, the court ruled that the Texas law created an “undue burden” on abortion access in the state, as it had decided in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that state abortion laws could not pose such an obstacle.
The court said in 2016 that for Texas abortion clinics, such a “working arrangement” was already in place with hospitals in the state, and that the provision forced the closure of around half the clinics in the state.
After Hellerstedt, a district court barred the Louisiana law from going into effect.
That decision was reversed by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court in June Medical Services, L.L.C. v. Gee, which ruled that the Louisiana case sufficiently differed from the Texas case so that the Supreme Court decision was not applicable on a like-for-like basis. The court in January denied a motion for a rehearing of the case.
The Circuit Court noted in its decision that the Louisiana law varied from the Texas law because of differing requirements between the states for doctors to obtain hospital admitting privileges.
“Few Louisiana hospitals” required a doctor to see a minimum number of patients in order to have admitting privileges, unlike in Texas where “almost all” hospitals had such requirements, the court said. While most clinics in Texas closed because of its law, “only one doctor at one clinic is currently unable to obtain privileges” in Louisiana, the court noted, though this claim has been disputed by Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice groups.
In February, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked Louisiana’s law from going into effect, after a petition from abortion providers and activists. The Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case in early 2020.
© Catholic World Report