Notes: Wednesday, January 1-Monday, February 10, 2014 (part 2 of 2)

12. "Pope Francis assured mothers that breast-feeding their babies in public, even during a papal Mass in the Sistine Chapel, is OK."

The quotation in that headline comes from the article "Pope to moms: It's OK to breast-feed in public, even in Sistine Chapel", by Carol Glatz, dated January 13, 2014, downloaded from the Catholic News Service's (C.N.S.'s) website:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1400120.htm

(A version of that article is also available at the Sydney Catholic Weekly's website, under the headline "Pope to mums: It’s OK to breast-feed in public, even in Sistine Chapel", with the same author, dated January 14, 2014:

http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=1&subclassID=99&articleID=13161&class=Copyright&subclass=Vatican

and it came to my attention via the version printed under the headline "Breastfeeding in Mass is OK, says Pope", with the same author, on p. 13 of The Catholic Weekly, January 19, 2014, Vol. 73, No. 4708, published by The Catholic Press Newspaper Company Pty. Ltd.) For another report on the same event, see the article "Pope tells mothers to breastfeed in church", by Philip Pullella, dated January 13, 2014, downloaded from The Sydney Morning Herald's website:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/pope-tells-mothers-to-breastfeed-in-church-20140113-hv85w.html?skin=text-only

For translations of the relevant portion of the Papal homily in question (that of January 12, 2014, for the New-calendar Feast of the Baptism of the Lord), see here:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/homilies/2014/documents/papa-francesco_20140112_omelia-battesimo_en.html

and the Vatican Information Service item "TO BE PART OF THE CHAIN OF FAITH IS THE MOST BEAUTIFUL INHERITANCE A CHILD CAN RECEIVE", dated January 12, 2014, downloaded from the NEWS.VA website:

http://www.news.va/en/news/to-be-part-of-the-chain-of-faith-is-the-most-beaut

(The latter came to my attention via the version with same headline and date in the Holy See Press Office's Vatican Information Service e-mail bulletin of January 13, 2014, Year XXII, No. 7.)

Labels: breastfeeding, Francis Bergoglio, morals

13. "Few British Catholics agree with Church on abortion, gay ‘marriage’ and euthanasia: poll"

The quotation in that headline is the headline of an article by Hilary White, dated Wednesday, December 4, 2013, downloaded from LifeSiteNews.com:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/few-british-catholics-agree-with-church-on-abortion-gay-marriage-and-euthan

(That article came to my attention via this AQ thread.)

Labels: U.K.

14. Some information on the health risks involved in the Gay/Lesbian lifestyle

See the article "HOMOSEXUALITY UNMASKED", dated January 2011, downloaded from Christian Order's website:

http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2011/features_jan11_bonus.html

(That article came to my attention via the comment by Rory Donnellan on January 29, 2014 at 1:01 pm in the comments section of this blog post/press release by Mr. Gaynor.)

Labels: G.L.B.T., health, medicine

15. "Two to three days a week at work is the best job/home lifestyle balance for career mums"

The quotation in that headline is the headline of an article by Laura Chalmers, dated January 10, 2014, downloaded from couriermail.com.au:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/two-to-three-days-a-week-at-work-is-the-best-jobhome-lifestyle-balance-for-career-mums/story-fnihsrf2-1226798530510

(That article came to my attention via the similar article "Making family life work", also by Laura Chalmers, p. 03, the Sydney Daily Telegraph, Friday, January 10, 2014, ISSN 1038-8745, published by Nationwide News Pty. Ltd.)

Labels: economics, families, work

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Scholastica, Virgin, A.D. 2014

Notes: Tuesday, September 6-Wednesday, September 14, 2011 (part 1 of 2)

1. A couple of recent posts from Mr. Muehlenberg:

1.1 On the latest initiative for propagating multiculturalism

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/09/05/force-fed-multiculturalism/

Labels: education, multiculturalism

1.2 On his new book, on the challenge of homosexuality

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/09/04/strained-relations/

Labels: G.L.B.T.

2. The latest evidence for a link between abortion and mental health problems

http://www.angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38771

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/study-links-abortion-to-mental-health-problems/story-e6freuy9-1226127657384

Originally I wasn't going to bother logging that AQ post, since anyone who opposes abortion--myself and, presumably, my readers among them--would regard the findings as unsurprising, but then I saw the print-edition version of the article to whose on-line version I link above here taking up about a quarter of page twenty-five of the Sydney Daily Telegraph of Friday, September 2, 2011, and so I thought that I'd better log it, since it's so rare for one of the mainstream media to highlight the adverse consequences of abortion (needless to say, the mainstream media tend not to regard the death of an unborn baby as a necessarily adverse consequence) that the findings must be important. Here are the key excerpts from that Tele article:

The research by American academic Priscilla Coleman, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, said abortion was linked with a 34 per cent greater chance of anxiety disorders and a 37 per cent higher possibility of depression.

This was more than double the risk of alcohol abuse, three times greater risk of cannabis use at 220 per cent and 155 per cent greater risk of attempted suicide.

[...] "Overall, the results revealed that women who had undergone an abortion experienced an 81 per cent increased risk of mental health problems, and nearly 10 per cent of the incidence of mental health problems were shown to be directly attributable to abortion."

The study was based on an analysis of 22 separate projects, which together analysed the experiences of 877,000 women, of whom 163,831 had had an abortion.

Labels: abortion, mental health

3. Dr. Sammut on, among other things, "the disturbing significance of the controversial [recent] NSW birth certificate decision"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/womens-rights-push-dads-aside/story-e6frgd0x-1226128389989

Worth reading in full, but the final paragraph is what I want to log here:

This is the disturbing significance of the controversial NSW birth certificate decision. That no gay spokesperson has expressed concern for the father and child stolen from each other speaks volumes about their priorities. Traditionalists have long argued in defence of marriage that the institution is fundamentally about the rights of children and that advocates of gay marriage just don't get this. Based on the "sperm donor dad" case, they appear to have a point.

Labels: birth certificates, child-rearing, families, G.L.B.T., marriage, parenthood, youngsters

4. "THE well-being of Australia's children and young adults has declined sharply in the past decade - and sliding marriage rates are partly to blame"; "marriage makes a difference, not just the characteristics of a child's parents, because of the commitment involved"

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/falling-marriage-rates-hurting-children-report-20110905-1jubf.html?skin=text-only

Labels: child-rearing, families, marriage, parenthood, youngsters

5. "A member of U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron’s government is calling for a ban on marriages at Christian churches if they refuse to also perform same-sex unions"

http://members7.boardhost.com/CathPews/thread/1315540178.html

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38865

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/09/uk-mp-pushes-to-force-church-to-have-contrary-to-nature-marriages-or-no-marriages-at-all/

Apparently, such a ban would involve adopting the system, which is used in some Continental countries, in which prospective spouses who intend to wed in a religious ceremony have to get a 'civil marriage' as well.

Labels: G.L.B.T., marriage, U.K.

6. "Irish government backs down on confessional bill"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38855

Labels: Alan Shatter, Ireland, sexual abuse

7. "Lesbian foster couple put six year old boy in girl's clothes and post photos on Facebook"

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/lesbian-foster-couple-put-six-year-old-boy-in-girls-clothes-and-post-photos-on-facebook/story-e6freuzr-1226134422557

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/09/12/more-outrages-from-the-rainbow-warriors/

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/same-sex-parents-should-foster-not-play-politics/story-fn6b3v4f-1226135313446

I wonder whether there has been any scholarly research into the phenomenon of one of the members of a same-sex couple undergoing a 'sex change'?

Labels: child-rearing, families, G.L.B.T., parenthood

8. "MEN'S bodies hardwire them to become caring fathers by dropping their testosterone levels after a child is born, a landmark investigation has found"

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/fathers-give-up-mojo-after-children/story-fn6b3v4f-1226135425389

Labels: families, medicine, parenthood

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, A.D. 2011

Notes: Tuesday, June 7-Tuesday, June 14, 2011

1. "Private prestige university on the way"--"reportedly being funded by millions of pounds from private investors secured by the eminent British philosopher A. C. Grayling"; "[f]ourteen leading academics are backing the project and will teach at the university, including evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins"

http://www.smh.com.au/world/private-prestige-university-on-the-way-20110605-1fnb2.html?skin=text-only

Labels: education, N.C.H.

2. Jewish-to-Catholic convert and State-of-Israel citizen named as a Prelate Auditor of the Roman Rota ("the Holy See’s highest appellate court")

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37641

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2011/06/pope-appoints-fanatical-zionist-to.html

http://www.ucanews.com/2011/06/03/jewish-convert-named-to-top-vatican-role/

(The last of those three web-pages came to my attention via this CathNews page.)

Labels: David Jaeger, Roman Curia, State of Israel

3. Fr. Zuhlsdorf on, among other things, the myth of the origin of 'vernacular' Catholic liturgy

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2011/06/critics-of-the-new-corrected-translation-would-have-back-in-the-day-resisted-also-the-king-james-bible/

Labels: Latin, liturgy, vernacular

4. "Remarks [from a "Deputy Assistant Secretary" of the U.S. Department of State] for LGBT Pride"

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/rm/2011/165264.htm

(That web-page came to my attention via this comment at AQ.)

Labels: G.L.B.T., pride, U.S.A.

5. "[In The State of Israel,] there are more than 20 individual laws that discriminate between the Jewish and non-Jewish population"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/mandela-factor/story-fn558imw-1226073258456

Labels: discrimination, Jews, State of Israel

6. An article on evolution which (article) contains some interesting points from a Creationist perspective

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/a-grey-matter-of-size-brains-arent-what-they-used-to-be/story-e6frg8y6-1226073980121

Labels: evolution, neuroscience

7. Four viewpoints on whether "people [should] be able to use the sperm or eggs of their dead partner"

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/should-people-be-able-to-use-the-sperm-or-eggs-of-their-dead-partner-20110603-1fkir.html?skin=text-only

Labels: I.V.F., medicine, morality

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Pentecost Tuesday, A.D. 2011

Notes: Saturday-Monday, October 9-11, 2010

"Attitudes harden towards the lot of a working mother"

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/attitudes-harden-towards-the-lot-of-a-working-mother-20101010-16e39.html?skin=text-only

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/takes-two-to-bake-and-make-the-bread-20101010-16e3s.html?skin=text-only

"Russian Orthodox patriarch lauds Putin’s leadership" and "Moscow Patriarchate thanks Catholics for support to Orthodox abroad"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34137

http://www.angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=382540&sid=f93e38554ba45bb2dc83ab52c5fef176

Mr. Muehlenberg with some statistics on Australian doctors and euthanasia

The situation in Australia appears to be no better. In South Australia, for example, where voluntary euthanasia is illegal, a recent survey of doctors who had taken active steps to end a patient’s life found that 49 per cent of them had never received a request from the patient to do so.

And a more recent survey of nearly 1000 Australian surgeons found that more than one third had intentionally hastened the death of a patient by administering more medication than was necessary to treat the patient’s symptoms. Of this group, more than half said they did so without an explicit request from the patient.

Another survey of 683 general surgeons, conducted a year later by the University of Newcastle, found similar results: over a third had sped up the death of terminally ill patients, and over half of the patients had not explicitly asked for a lethal dose of drugs. Only a few of the patients had clearly asked for euthanasia.
[http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/10/09/euthanasia-%e2%80%9csafeguards%e2%80%9d-and-the-slippery-slope/]

Mr. Coyne on "the "essential message" of Jesus"

http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=57547

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, A.D. 2010

Notes: Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Mr. Kelly on euthanasia

Excerpt:

The entire key to the euthanasia debate lies in its great paradox: consistent polls showing a majority in favour. But what, exactly, are people supporting? The 1996-97 debate provides the answer: most people think that turning off life-support machines and discontinuing life-preserving treatment is euthanasia. In fact, this is nothing to do with euthanasia. Indeed, it is the precise opposite of euthanasia. If a family turns off a life-support machine, the patient dies because of their illness, not because of the doctor. But if the doctor gives a lethal injection, then the patient is killed. This is a fine yet critical distinction.

Because euthanasia involves one person being sanctioned to kill another, it cannot be seen just within a human rights framework. It is an ethical and intellectual failure to pretend that euthanasia is merely a human right awaiting recognition. It is about society and its norms and values. There is no escaping the chasm that euthanasia crosses. Creation of a legal framework to permit killing must affect the way all people perceive their lives and the expectations that friends, family and doctors have of patients.

This issue was best put by former NSW politician Tony Burke, now Minister for Sustainability and Environment in the Gillard government, when he led the 1996 campaign from Labor's side: "There is a maxim often used in the capital punishment debate which applies perfectly to legalised euthanasia: whether you support it or oppose it in principle, if one innocent person is going to be killed, that is too high a price." Exactly.

Former Labor MP Lindsay Tanner, on October 28, 1996, tore to shreds the logic of the Northern Territory law. Asking where the line should be drawn, Tanner asked rhetorically: "Why is it that it is only the terminally ill? Why shouldn't it also be the severely disabled? Why not somebody with an incurable mental illness? Why not children who are terminally ill?"

Tanner's point is that lines cannot be firm or fixed. Reinforcing his argument is that many euthanasia advocates, such as Peter Singer, actively promote its extension more widely.

Tanner also dismissed the furphy about territory rights, saying it was absurd to let the Northern Territory, representing 1 per cent of the people, make such a decision affecting all Australians. Finally, he asked: What about the terminally ill who do not want to die? Good question. It was the question hammered by Burke and Andrews. Once the killing culture is established, the aged, sick and disabled will have to consider whether to put up their hands. They will feel obligated. Financial pressures, healthcare costs and expectations of family will assume new dimensions.

The old joke for the sick is that euthanasia is "putting us out of your misery".

Yes, some people in pain want to die and it is hard to deny their claim. Yet there are many others glad to be alive today who would have volunteered for euthanasia if it had been legal five years ago. As Andrews said in 1996, a well person who is suicidal is offered counselling, but under euthanasia an ill person who is suicidal becomes an option for death.
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/browns-euthanasia-bill-a-perilous-test-for-gillard/story-e6frgd0x-1225931193178]

"Nitschke says GP poll shows euthanasia support"

Body of the CathNews article:

One in three GPs in major cities believe people older than 70 who feel "tired of life" should have the right to professional help in ending it, a poll conducted by Philip Nitschke's Exit International has found.

More than 33 percent of 500 doctors surveyed in Sydney (35 percent), Melbourne (36 percent) and Adelaide (43 percent) agreed with the provocative question. In Perth, 28 percent endorsed it, according to a report in The Australian.

Dr Nitschke said he was surprised by the support for a proposition that sits at the radical end of the euthanasia spectrum. He conducted the poll during weekend workshops convened by Sydney-based Elixir Healthcare Education on "clinical controversies" that GPs attended in July and last month, the news report said.

People feeling "tired of life" are a potentially enormous group of elderly citizens who may not be suffering from chronic health problems.

"My feeling is, and not everyone agrees, is that this opens up a much broader debate around the fundamental idea of control towards the end of life," Dr Nitschke said. "Baby boomers want control."

About half the GPS surveyed from the four capital cities agreed that they want legislative reform to allow euthanasia for the terminally ill, said the report.
[http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=23483]

Some figures on the knowledge (or agreement?) Catholics have of (with?) Catholic teaching

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/atheists-beat-the-faithful-in-knowledge-of-religion-20100928-15vru.html?skin=text-only

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=23481

See also here:

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=381416#381416

"Catholic-Orthodox talks: officials optimistic but ... [sic, but no breakthroughs]"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33932

Mr. Robertson on, among other things, the Vatican City State and Pius XI.

Excerpt:

This is perpetuated, Mr Robertson writes, by the ''pseudo state'' of the Holy See that was created in 1929 in a deal between Mussolini and the pro-fascist Pope Pius XI, and which the Vatican describes as an ''absolute monarchy''. As its head of state, the Pope is immune from prosecution, to which Mr Robertson says he has no rightful claim.
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/holding-pope-responsible-for-abuses-is-not-too-dangerous-20100928-15vun.html?skin=text-only]

At the time of the (needless to say, illegitimate) overthrow of Papal civic sovereignty over the States of the Church, the Pope's title to that sovereignty was the strongest of the respective titles of all the European rulers (they (the Popes) had held that title for a good thousand years or more). Given this, it's hard to begrudge the Popes the tiny concession of the present-day Vatican City State. And as for Pius XI. being "pro-fascist", well that's just ridiculous, though I don't have the time to do a proper rebuttal of it.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Michaelmas, A.D. 2010

Notes: Thursday, September 23, 2010

"Angelus [magazine] Now Online"

http://www.angelusonline.org/
(Link added at the right of this screen too. I discovered that link here: http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33803)

A letter in The Australian on palliative care and euthanasia advocacy:

I WONDER whether your readers are aware of the appalling state of palliative care and pain management services in this country? If any of them have attempted to find palliative care services for a terminally ill relative or friend who wants to die at their appointed time in their own home with their family and friends around them, they will know what I mean.

It's a struggle to find someone to monitor pain relief and nutrition and help with nursing care to enable this most precious of times to proceed with dignity and love. Good end-of-life care is expensive and time-consuming, and doesn't win votes.

I will not accept that Bob Brown, Marshall Perron, Philip Nitschke or any other euthanasia campaigner has anything other than economics and convenience in mind until they lobby as noisily for good and accessible palliative care services as they do for so-called "mercy-killing".

Sally Parnis, North Adelaide, SA
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/the-logic-of-euthanasia-lacks-moral-foundation/story-fn558imw-1225927525841]

Mr. Muehlenberg on euthanasia

http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/09/22/clear-thinking-on-euthanasia/

A timely piece, citing various authors who explain some of the concepts involved in discussion of euthanasia. Some excerpts:

Monique David puts it this way: “Currently, there is much confusion; many accept euthanasia because they do not want their lives to be maintained artificially nor to become victims of excessive treatment. However, these practices can be legitimately refused by the patient or their family through the ethical perspective of the right to die within the limits of natural death. Euthanasia and assisted suicide advocates claim something else: the right to terminate life at the moment and in the way that the individual chooses – or that someone chooses for them.

“Therefore, we should not use these terms to refer to the right to die (because this right is intrinsic), but rather to the right to be killed. This desire, expressed as a personal right, demands the intervention of a third party and a legal system that authorizes it. In other words, euthanasia and assisted suicide imply that doctors become agents of death and that society legally recognizes a criminal act to be lawful; or even more pernicious, a medical act.”

[...] Margaret Somerville points out the differences between euthanasia and pain-relief treatment: “In both cases there is an effort to relieve suffering. The difference is that the primary aim of euthanasia is to do so by inflicting death, whereas the primary aim of pain-relief treatment is simply to relieve pain – not to shorten life or cause death (although either might be a secondary effect).”

Euthanasia, then, is about one thing only: the killing of another person. The intent is to kill someone. It does not matter whether this is done with a gun or a lethal injection – the effect is the same. No civilised society can permit the legalised killing of its own citizens, even if done in the name of compassion.

One point which Mr. Meuhlenberg does not make in there is the problem of consequentialism. If one judges the morality of an act by, and only by, the consequences which it produces, so that an evil act is an act whose evil consequences outweigh its good consequences (and vice versa for a good act), then there is no reason intrinsic to euthanasia for opposing it. Influenced by this kind of thinking, someone like Prof. Mirko Bagaric, who has written that

The doctrine of double effect has been discredited in philosophy schools for decades. In the end, there is no inherent distinction between consequences that are intended and those which are foreseen. The fact civilians will be killed is often just as certain as the killing of combatants. We are responsible for all the consequences which we foresee, but nevertheless elect to bring about. Whether we also "intend" them is largely irrelevant.
[http://cardinalpole.blogspot.com/2010/05/notes-wednesday-may-19-2009.html]

will also write, as I mentioned the other day, that "from the perspective of the parties directly involved in euthanasia (the patient and health worker), the practice is not inherently objectionable" (http://cardinalpole.blogspot.com/2010/09/notes-saturday-tuesday-september-18-21.html), though as I also mentioned, Prof. Bagaric opposes, for other reasons, moves to legalise euthanasia.

Union and university write "gender neutral" industrial agreement

In The Australian today:

Modern transition

THERE are times in the troubled history of industrial relations when the populace can only stand still and marvel. One such moment is upon us: the Community and Public Sector Union and the University of NSW have reached an enterprise agreement that is completely gender neutral. Take it away, CPSU secretary John Cahill: "This is an important start in making a safe and welcoming environment for . . . staff who may be trans or intersex workers who may not identify as either male or female, or who are transitioning."
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/someone-has-to/story-e6frgdk6-1225928036349]

"POPE CALLS FOR PRAYER FOR CATHOLIC-ORTHODOX UNITY"

Full text of an item from the Vatican Information Service daily e-mail bulletin:

POPE CALLS FOR PRAYER FOR CATHOLIC-ORTHODOX UNITY

VATICAN CITY, 22 SEP 2010 (VIS) - At the end of his catechesis during this morning's general audience, and before greeting those present in various languages, the Holy Father invited people to pray for the success of the work of the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, which is currently meeting in plenary session in the Austrian capital, Vienna.

"The theme of the current phase", he said, "is the role of the Bishop of Rome in the communion of the Universal Church, with particular reference to the first millennium of Christian history. Obedience to the will of the Lord Jesus and consideration for the great challenges facing Christianity today, oblige us to commit ourselves seriously to the cause of re-establishing full communion among the Churches. I exhort everyone to intense prayer for the work of the commission and for the ongoing development and consolidation of peace and harmony among the baptised, that we may show the world an increasingly authentic evangelical witness".
AG/ VIS 20100922 (180)

Which is a reminder that one can still pray for the Consecration of Russia. See also the discussion on this in the combox to this post at Fr. Zuhlsdorf's blog, in which combox we read of the interesting story of St. Sergius of Radonezh, or of Moscow, in the first comment there.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Ember Wednesday, and, feast of St. Linus, Pope, Martyr, and of St. Thecla, Virgin, A.D. 2010

Notes: Wednesday-Thursday, September 15-16, 2010

Herald article on increasing enrolments in religious schools

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/islamic-and-christian-schools-on-the-rise-despite-decline-in-religion-20100915-15crv.html?skin=text-only

Particularly interesting excerpt:

Graduates of independent schools were more likely to hold socially liberal views on gay marriage, abortion, IVF and foreign aid than graduates of public or Catholic schools. Non-government school graduates were more likely to be tolerant of free speech by religious extremists, while government school graduates were more likely to be in favour of reducing immigration.

Graduates of independent schools were more likely to have participated in a demonstration, attended a political rally, and donated money or raised funds for a social or political activity than graduates of government or Catholic schools. Graduates of independent schools were also more likely to be members of environmental groups and aid organisations.

Madness: Moves to end the banning of practising male homosexuals and practising male bisexuals from donating blood

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/gay-blood-donor-ban-harks-back-to-days-of-myth-20100914-15a8y.html?skin=text-only

That brings to mind an opinion piece by Mr. Piers Akerman some years ago, unfortunately apparently not available on-line, on why they were banned in the first place; the success of 'gay rights' activists in initially keeping sodomites eligible to give blood back in, if I'm not mistaken, the early '80s on the grounds of 'equal rights' had disastrous consequences.

Msgr. Williamson on doctrine and the possible regularisation of the S.S.P.X.

Copied and pasted from the e-mail:

ELEISON COMMENTS CLXV (Sept.11, 2010) : DOCTRINE -- WHY ?

Why is doctrine in general so important to Catholics ? And why in particular does the Society of St. Pius X, following Archbishop Lefebvre and now Bishop Fellay, insist that agreement on doctrine must precede any other kind of agreement with Conciliar Rome ? Why can the SSPX not accept to be regularized by Rome now, and leave the doctrinal differences to be worked out later ? Here are two connected but different questions. Let us start with the general question.

The word "doctrine" comes from the Latin doceo, docere, meaning, to teach. Doctrine is a teaching. In our liberal world where everybody wants to think and talk just as he likes, the word "indoctrination" has become a dirty word. Yet to put an end to indoctrination, one would have to close down all schools, because wherever a school is open, indoctrination is going on. Even if a teacher is teaching that all doctrine is nonsense, that is still a doctrine !

However, everyone in fact agrees on the need for doctrine. For instance, who ever would climb into an aeroplane about which he was told beforehand that its designer had defied the classic doctrine of aerodynamics, and turned the wings upside down ? Nobody ! Aerodynamic doctrine which is true, for instance, that wings must taper downwards at the back and not upwards, is not just words being spoken or written out of the blue, it is life and death reality. If a plane is to fly and not to crash, true aerodynamic doctrine, in fine detail, is essential to its design.

Similarly if a soul is to fly to Heaven and not crash into Hell, Catholic doctrine, teaching it what to believe and how to act, is essential. "God exists", "All human beings have an immortal soul", "Heaven and Hell are eternal", "I must be baptized to be saved", are not just words being imposed on souls to believe, they are life and death realities, but of eternal life and eternal death. St. Paul tells Timothy to teach these truths of salvation in or out of season (II Tim. IV, 2), and for himself he says, "Woe to me if I do not teach the Gospel" (I Cor. IX, 16). Woe to the Catholic priest who does not indoctrinate souls with the Church's infallible doctrine !

But the question remains: surely the SSPX, to obtain from Rome that precious regularization which Rome alone has the authority to grant, could come to a practical agreement by which no Catholic doctrine would be denied, but by which the doctrinal differences between Rome and the SSPX would merely be bracketed out for the moment ? Surely there need be here no betrayal of those great truths of salvation mentioned above ? Bishop Fellay himself answered that question briefly in an interview which he gave to Brian Mershon in May of this year, published in the "Remnant". Here are his words: "It is very clear that whatever practical solution would happen without a sound doctrinal foundation would lead directly to disaster... We have all these examples in front of us - the Fraternity of St. Peter, the Institute of Christ the King and all of the others are totally blocked on the level of doctrine because they first accepted the practical agreement." But need that be so ? Interesting question...

Kyrie eleison.

"Russian Orthodox official blasts liberal developments in Anglicanism" (and does so in the very presence of the pretender Archbishop of Canterbury)

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33685

See also

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/09/orthodox-bishop-to-anglicans-you-are-doomed-if-you-dont-stop/

Particularly interesting was that Russian official's talk of "the possibility of establishing an Orthodox-Catholic alliance in Europe for defending the traditional values of Christianity". When the Consecration of Russia is done there will be something much better than a mere strategic alliance between us and them.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Cornelius, Pope, Martyr, and St. Cyprian, Bishop, Martyr, and of St. Euphemia and Companions, Martyrs, A.D. 2010

Notes: Friday, August 20, 2010

A letter reminding us of one of the benefits of voting for a minor party, even if one doesn't expect that party to win

From yesterday's Herald (I forgot to post this in yesterday's edition of Notes):

Value for $2.31

Voters who are disappointed at the lacklustre performance of the main parties (Letters, August 18) must realise their vote is valuable. Each time you give a primary vote to any party that gets more than 4 per cent of the vote, it gets $2.31 of taxpayers' money. For those who feel the urge to lodge a protest vote, don't waste your $2.31. The answer is simple: vote first for one of the many minor parties.

It needn't be the Liberal Democrats (although it would be appreciated). Any minor party would be grateful for your "donation" if it gets above 4 per cent of the primary vote. The added benefit is that voters then starve the larger parties of electoral funding and send a clear message that they need to lift their game.

Peter Whelan Liberal Democratic Party candidate for Macquarie
[http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters/honest-footballer-puts-slippery-pollies-to-shame-20100818-12f11.html?skin=text-only]

At the Australian Electoral Commission website: Group Voting Tickets (Senate preference flows) for New South Wales (NSW) Tickets Q to AF (of Tickets A to AF), 2010 federal election

This might be useful for you as you work out how you're going to vote in the Senate ballot (see elsewhere on the A.E.C.'s website for the preference flow arrangements in other States):

http://www.aec.gov.au/election/nsw/gvt2.htm

Excerpt from a lecture by then-Cardinal Ratzinger on the Mass and Christ's Sacrifice:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2010/08/quaeritur-where-did-mass-facing-the-people-come-from/#comment-219410

"Expert: Prop 8 Trial Based on False or Dubious Statements about Homosexuality"

http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33279

"Medical Journal Confirms Abortion Associated With Increased Premature Birth"

Also posted at AQ:

Washington, DC -- A new report in a prestigious medical journal confirms what previous studies have shown: abortion is associated with an increased risk of premature birth in subsequent pregnancies. Although the link is well-established, women are not normally informed of the risk when they are counseled at abortion centers.
[http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33271]

Reginaldvs Cantvar

Feast of St. Bernard, Abbot, Doctor of the Church, A.D. 2010

Prof. Savulescu on the morality of menopause prediction and ovum freezing

Occasionally one sees references in the mainstream media to medical ethics expert Professor Julian Savulescu, so I wish to keep for future reference the following excerpts from an article entitled "Welcome to the new ice age" and which appeared in the Health section of one of the supplements in The Weekend Australian two Saturdays ago (the relevant page was unnumbered, apparently page ten of that supplement) (I also include the article's first paragraph as background):

SEX for fun. Technology for procreation. Judging by findings presented this week in Rome, this sci-fi scenario is not only plausible, it would be welcomed by women keen to sidestep the dictates of biology.

[...] Julian Savulescu, a medical ethics expert based at the universities of Oxford and Melbourne, reflects the meeting's tone: "I believe we have a moral imperative to offer women egg freezing to achieve equality."

[...] Healy is also sceptical about claims Iranian doctors made at the conference that they can predict menopause from a simple blood test. "Other studies at this conference have found menopause testing was no better predictor of menopause than the women's age alone."

But if such tests are developed, Savulescu welcomes them. "With this information, you can plan pregnancy, your family and possibly freezing eggs for later use. Both egg freezing and menopause predictions are liberty and autonomy enhancing."

Savulescu adds that many concerns raised about freezing eggs for use by older women -- such as risks for the mother and implications for the child -- also apply to IVF treatment, which is routinely offered to older women.

He argues that preventing women using their eggs when older is sexual discrimination since men have no time limit on when they can father children.

Savulescu cites British IVF pioneer Robert Edwards's assessment: "If a man of 60 fathers a baby, then we buy him a drink and toast his health at the pub. But it's totally different with a woman of the same age."

Yet older women may be in a much better position financially and emotionally to care for their child, says Savulescu, noting that the arguments for egg freezing go beyond biology, as Nekkebroeck's and Gorthis's findings suggest.

"We should proactively seek to change this situation to ensure women have the opportunity to pursue a career as they choose, rather than having to fit into a model designed without them in mind."
[http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/welcome-to-the-new-ice-age/story-e6frg8y6-1225886898434]

Reginaldvs Cantvar

13.VII.2010

'Separating faith from medicine' ... and from basic humanity

The Sydney Morning Herod had a profile on Saturday of Dr. Rosanna Capolingua, the A.M.A. (doctors' union) boss. In a little side-column entitled 'Separating faith from medicine' Dr. Capolingua, purportedly a Catholic, offered the usual hand-wringing over abortion. The reporter asked what Dr. Capolingua would do if a patient requested referral to an abortionist, and she answered

"I would assist the patient and appropriately counsel them in making the right decision." Later [adds the reporter], she admits she would help a woman obtain an abortion, if that was the "right decision"."

That's a nice, weaselly little way to put it, a disclaimer worthy of the craven 'as far as God's Law allows' that the English Lords Spiritual appended to their cave-in to Henry VIII's usurping of ecclesial headship.

Dr. Capolingua goes on to say that:

"You learn to understand how people end up in situations, how life evolves for them. Life is just life. When someone comes to me, they are looking for help, non-judgmental help. I would rather we used better contraception. I advocate condoms and all of the other options, rather than put a woman in that terrible situation."

"Life is just life"!!! "how life evolves for them"!!! What is this?! How bewildering! Surely abortion is either the self-interested murder of a totally defenceless human being, and therefore one of the most monstrous crimes imaginable, or it is not, and is just an optional medical procedure, to be evaluated on its medical merits, and not a 'terrible situation' at all. So which is it, Dr. Capolingua? Are you an accomplice to this 'terrible situation', or merely a technician providing a morally neutral service? Until you decide, please, don't call yourself a Catholic.

Reginaldvs Cantvar