Mallon's Media Watch

Mallon's Media Watch

Saturday, February 01, 2003
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Friday, January 31, 2003

Ideological Judge

Institute Condemns Abuse of Power by Washington, DC Judge:
Actions Are Direct Attack on First Amendment and Rights of Religious

Washington, D.C. - The Institute on Religion and Public Policy emphatically
denounces the actions and statements of Washington, D.C. Judge Mildred
Edwards for attacking the rights of religious believers and denominations to
practice their faith without government interference.

Judge Edwards declined to sentence three gay activists for disrupting a
meeting of the US bishops' conference last November, saying that the Church
had done "tremendous violence" to them by denying them the Eucharist.

In the nonjury trial, Judge Mildred Edwards, who identified herself as
Catholic, agreed that the activists had broken the law by refusing to leave
the hotel's lobby when requested by police and hotel officials. Although
prosecutors had requested a sentence of time served-- the 30 hours they
spend in jail-- Edwards said even that sentence was too harsh and did
something she said hadn't done in 15 years on the bench: she dispensed with
a sentence.

"Tremendous violence was done to you . . . when the Body of Christ was
denied to you," Edwards said, referring to the contention of the three that
refusal of Communion had prompted their actions. "As a member of your
Church, I ask you to forgive the Church."

"Judge Edwards took it upon herself to interpret religious law and to speak
from the bench on behalf of a religion," fumed Institute on Religion and
Public Policy President Joseph K. Grieboski. "Her actions are the very
reason our Founding Fathers incorporated in the Constitution the
'establishment clause:' so that government officials cannot interfere in the
beliefs and practices of a faith system. Judge Edwards in her decision
directly and categorically violated the First Amendment and attacked the
very rights of the Roman Catholic Church to function according to its own
doctrine and canons. To endorse the idea that the Catholic Church must
apply equal opportunity access to the core of the faith - even to those who
are in direct violation of the Church's teachings - is an abuse of power and
the worst demonstration of judicial activism."

All three defendants, Ken Einhaus of Arlington, Virginia, Mike Perez of
Seattle, and Kara Speltz of Oakland, California, said they were emotionally
shattered by the refusal of Communion at Mass and went to the hotel to "find
healing among the people who caused me so much suffering," Einhaus said.

Einhaus claimed that withholding the Eucharist was an abuse of power.
However, Susan Gibbs, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Washington, said
under canon law priests have a right to deny Communion when they think
someone might use it as a political tool.

"Judge Edwards attack on religious freedom is unconscionable," continued Mr.
Grieboski. "Her ignorance of tenets of faith and her abuse of judicial
power are spellbinding. As her past actions prove as well, Judge Edwards
should be dismissed from the bench."

Institute on Religion and Public Policy
1101 15th Street, NW, Suite 115
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: 202-835-8760/Fax: 202-835-8764

53 Rue Archimede
1000 Brussels
Phone: 32-2-742-1575/Fax: 32-2-742-1576

Institute on Religion and Public Policy:


Thursday, January 30, 2003

Another Friday Fax

Dear Colleague,

We report today on the most contentious $34 million dollars in the history
of the American republic, the $34 million President Bush took away from
the UN Population Fund. Pro-abortion senators seem willing to shut down
the entire budget process in order to give this money back to the agency
that supports forced abortions in China. Shame on them.

Spread the Word.

Yours sincerely,

Austin Ruse

Action Item: e-mail Senator Leahy of Vermont and demand that he stop
funding coerced abortion in Chian. Everybody do this now, no matter where
in the world you live. You can reach him at


January 31, 2003
Volume 6, Number 6

Pro-Abortion Democrats Block Aid to Women in Afghanistan

Supporters of UNFPA on Capitol Hill have refused to concede
defeat, and are now hoping to restore 2002 funding and establish 2003
funding for the troubled UN population-control agency, even if it means
rewriting US law and precipitating a federal budget crisis in the process.
Michael Schwartz, vice president for government relations for Concerned
Women for America and a veteran Washington lobbyist, told the Friday Fax
that "I don't think there is any single issue more contentious than UNFPA
funding in the entire appropriations process. The question of UNFPA may
make it impossible to agree on an Omnibus appropriations bill for the
remainder of 2003."

In a decision that has been widely reported, the Bush
administration declined to release $34 million dollars earmarked for UNFPA
in the 2002 federal budget after a US investigation determined that UNFPA
continued to support forced abortions in China. The administration then
transferred the money to the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund of
the US Agency for International Development (USAID). On January 16, USAID
informed Congress that it intended to use the money on programs to improve
the health of children and mothers in Afghanistan and Pakistan. However,
congressional Democrats blocked this initiative, hoping to keep open the
possibility of shifting the money back to UNFPA.

This move was made in conjunction with Democratic strategies
concerning the US federal budget for 2003. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
introduced an amendment intended to undermine a US law, called the
Kemp-Kasten Amendment, that prohibits US funding for any "organization or
program that supports or participates in the management of a program of
coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization." The goal, it seems, would
be to render UNFPA eligible for US support regardless of its involvement
in coercion. According to Schwartz, such maneuvering is a „tacit
admission," at least, "that it would currently be illegal to give UNFPA
even one cent, and Leahy knows it."

When this initial attempt failed, Leahy introduced another
amendment into the 2003 budget, one that would allocate $35 million for
UNFPA for 2003 and retroactively grant UNFPA the original $34 million from
2002, if the State Department certified that UNFPA had ended its
involvement in coercive Chinese population-control programs.

Schwartz believes that it will prove extremely difficult to
resolve this issue, and time is running out for this budget cycle. "We
have burned up four months of this fiscal year fighting over UNFPA, and we
only have until the end of next week to resolve all of the differences in
the budget." He is doubtful that UNFPA supporters will back down, stating
that "the politicians intent on imposing coercive population control
programs on the developing world are so fanatical that they would appear
to be willing to shut down the entire US federal government rather than
insist that UNFPA respects human rights."

Copyright © C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute). Permission
granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute
866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 427
New York, New York 10017
Phone: (212) 754-5948 Fax: (212) 754-9291
E-mail: Website:


Wednesday, January 29, 2003

Friday Fax from C-Fam:

Dear Colleague,

I am writing to ask you to contact the White House today to thank
President Bush for his new African AIDS initiative. (Contact information

Last night in his State of the Union address, President Bush announced a
new and massive US effort to combat AIDS in Africa. The US effort would
total a whopping $15 billion over five years.

As you know, Africa is dying from AIDS. Millions have died already with
millions more infected. This is leaving millions of orphans and is
destroying an already struggling and insufficient economy. Things are so
dire in Africa that life expectancy in some countries has dropped to 41
years old.

The new US program will target education, information, avoidance and

The very good news is that the US intends to treat two million infected
Africans with these new wonder drugs that do not cure but still extend

The other good news to social conservatives is that the President's
program will make abstinence a priority. Last night, sitting in the
gallery with the President's wife was a Uganda bureaucrat who has been
responsible for the abstinence program that has worked wonders in his
country. The President is committed to avoidance of the hated disease
through teaching and encouragement of abstinence.

I am sorry to say that some of the President's plan will include condoms.
As most of us know, condoms do not work. Even according to the UN, when
used 100% of the time --- and they never are --- condoms are only 80%
effective in combating the spread of AIDS. Even so, the political reality
is that the condom lobby is very strong and in order to get a big boost to
abstinence, some tribute must be paid to the condom.

But make no mistake; the President and his administration are committed to
abstinence as both the moral and practical response to the AIDS epidemic.
Such a large-scale program to promote abstinence has never been tried
before. Nothing like this could possibly emerge from the United Nations,
the European Union, or the mainstream AIDS community, which are all
compromised by a radical safe-sex, homosexual agenda. This program marks a
seismic shift in emphasis and ideology.

As this program moves through the Congress, we will watch very closely to
insist that pro-abortion groups and abortion providers do not get any of
this money. Not even a nickel. Moreover, we will insist that African
parents be involved in all AIDs education programs. And we will watch
closely to see the programs aimed at young people are age-appropriate.

In the meantime, friends, let us praise the President for this bold new
initiative to assist our brothers and sisters in Africa. This program is
the right thing to do.

Please write the President and tell him this:

"Thank you, Mr. President, for your bold new initiative to help African
families combat the scourge of AIDS. Thank you especially for your
commitment to abstinence, which is the only way to truly stop this dread

Please write to this to the President at Write
from all countries in the world.

Friday Fax readers have been instrumental in helping to defeat CEDAW and
in defudning UNFPA and you have done this by e-mailing the President.
Write him today. Do it now.

Yours sincerely,

Austin Ruse

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Tuesday, January 28, 2003
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Monday, January 27, 2003

Excommunication of 7 Women for Mock Ordination Is Confirmed
Move Necessary to Protect Doctrine and Guide Consciences, Says Vatican

VATICAN CITY, JAN. 27, 2003 ( .- The Holy See published a decree confirming the excommunication of a group of women who participated in a mock priestly ordination last June.

The document of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announces that the Holy See has rejected the appeal made by the women to the decree of excommunication published by the Vatican dicastery last Aug. 5.

Moreover, the Holy See considers that the "refusal to comply with the penal precept established by the Church" is "further aggravated by the fact that some of the above-mentioned women have been gathering round them members of the faithful, in open and divisive disobedience to the Roman Pontiff and diocesan bishops."

It adds: "In view of the gravity of this contumacy (cf. can. 1347 CIC), the penalty imposed is not only just, but also necessary, in order to protect true doctrine, to safeguard the communion and unity of the Church, and to guide consciences of the faithful."

The decree, dated Dec. 21 and published today, is signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, president and then secretary, respectively, of the doctrinal congregation.

The decree has been approved by 13 cardinals and two bishops who reside in Rome and are members of the Vatican congregation.

John Paul II approved the decree expressly and requested its publication.

The mock ordination was conducted by Argentine Romulo Antonio Braschi, a schismatic bishop and founder of a schismatic community.

The decree indicates that the women, of German, Austrian and U.S. nationality, who participated in the simulated ordination are Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger, Adelinde Theresia Roitinger, Gisela Forster, Iris Müller, Ida Raming, Pia Brunner and Dagmar Braun Celeste. The latter used the name Angela White for the occasion.

In the 1994 apostolic letter "Ordinatio Sacerdotalis ," John Paul II said "that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women."


Decree on Attempted Ordination of Some Catholic Women
From Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

VATICAN CITY, JAN. 27, 2003 ( .- Here is the decree of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the attempted ordination to the priesthood of some Catholic women, last June 29.

* * *


On June 29, 2002, Romulo Antonio Braschi, founder of a schismatic community, attempted to ordain the following Catholic women to the priesthood: Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger, Adelinde Roitinger, Gisela Forster, Iris Müller, Ida Raming, Pia Brunner and Dagmar Braun Celeste, who on that occasion identified herself as Angela White.

Citing the previous interventions of the Bishop of Linz and of the Austrian Episcopal Conference, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published a statement on July 10, 2002, warning the above-mentioned persons that they would be punished with excommunication if by July 22, 2002, they had not acknowledged the nullity of their "ordination" and asked forgiveness for the scandal caused to the faithful. As they gave no indication of amendment, this Congregation punished the aforementioned persons with excommunication, reserved to the Apostolic See, in the Decree dated August 5, 2002, expressing the hope that they might be moved to conversion. The Decree also confirmed that the "ordaining" bishop was already excommunicated insofar as he is a schismatic.

They subsequently published letters and granted interviews, in which they expressed their conviction regarding the validity of the "ordination" they received, calling for a change of the definitive doctrine according to which ordination to the priesthood is reserved to males, and reaffirming that they celebrate "Mass" and other "sacraments" for small groups. In a letter dated August 14, 2002, they asked that the Decree of Excommunication be revoked, and then, on September 27, 2002, with reference to canons 1732-1739 CIC, they made recourse against the Decree. On October 21, 2002, they were informed that their request would be submitted to the competent authority.

The request for revocation and the recourse were examined by the Sessione Ordinaria of the Congregation on the 4th and 18th of December 2002. The Members of the Congregation who participated -- those resident in Rome -- were Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger, Alfonso López Trujillo, Ignace Moussa I. Daoud, Giovanni Battista Re, Francis Arinze, Jozef Tomko, Achille Silvestrini, Jorge Medina Estévez, James Francis Stafford, Zenon Grocholewski, Walter Kasper, Crescenzio Sepe, Mario Francesco Pompedda, and Bishops Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B., and Rino Fisichella. In the course of these meetings the Members arrived at the collegial decision to confirm the Decree of Excommunication. In the case under consideration, in fact, hierarchical recourse is not possible, as it concerns a Decree of Excommunication issued by a Dicastery of the Holy See acting in the name of the Supreme Pontiff (cf. can. 360 CIC). So as to remove any doubt in the matter, the Members thought it necessary to underline certain fundamental points.

1. It is necessary above all to state precisely that the case under consideration does not involve a latae sententiae penalty, which is incurred ipso facto when a delict expressly established by the law is committed. It concerns instead a ferendae sententiae penalty, imposed after the guilty party has been duly warned (cf. cann. 1314; 1347 §1 CIC). As provided by can. 1319 §1 CIC, this Congregation has the power to threaten determinate penalties by precept.

2. The particular gravity of the offenses committed is evident, which can be seen from various aspects.

a) There is first of all the issue of schism: the above-mentioned women were "ordained" by a schismatic bishop and -- even though not formally adhering to his schism -- thereby made themselves accomplices in schism.

b) In addition there is the doctrinal aspect, namely, that they formally and obstinately reject a doctrine which the Church has always taught and lived, and which was definitively proposed by Pope John Paul II, namely, "that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women" (Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis, n. 4). The denial of this doctrine is rightly considered the denial of a truth that pertains to the Catholic faith and therefore deserves a just penalty (cf. cann. 750 §2; 1372, n. 1 CIC; John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Ad tuendam fidem, n. 4A).

Moreover, by denying this doctrine, the persons in question maintain that the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff would be binding only if it were based on a decision of the College of Bishops, supported by the sensus fidelium and received by the major theologians. In such a way they are at odds with the doctrine on the Magisterium of the Successor of Peter, put forward by both the First and Second Vatican Councils, and they thereby fail to recognize that the teachings of the Supreme Pontiff on doctrines to be held definitively by all the faithful are irreformable.

3. The refusal to comply with the penal precept established by this Congregation is further aggravated by the fact that some of the above-mentioned women have been gathering round them members of the faithful, in open and divisive disobedience to the Roman Pontiff and diocesan bishops. In view of the gravity of this contumacy (cf. can. 1347 CIC), the penalty imposed is not only just, but also necessary, in order to protect true doctrine, to safeguard the communion and unity of the Church and to guide the consciences of the faithful.

4. The above-mentioned Members of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith therefore confirm the Decree of Excommunication issued on August 5, 2002, specifying once again that the attempted priestly ordination of the aforementioned women is null and invalid (cf. can. 1024 CIC) and therefore all those actions proper to the Order of Priesthood performed by them are also null and invalid (cf. cann. 124; 841 CIC). In consequence of the excommunication, they are forbidden to celebrate sacraments or sacramentals, to receive the sacraments and to exercise any function in an ecclesiastical office, ministry or assignment (cf. can. 1331 §1 CIC).

5. At the same time, it is hoped that, sustained by the grace of the Holy Spirit, they might discover the path to conversion and so return to the unity of faith and to communion with the Church, a communion broken by their action.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect on December 20, 2002, approved this Decree, adopted in the Sessione Ordinaria of this Congregation, approving at the same time in forma specifica n. 4, and ordered its publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, December 21, 2002.

+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger

+ Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B.
Archbishop-elect of Genoa

[Original text: Italian. Translation issued by Vatican Press Office]

Catholics Could Lose Seal of Confession
(Actually, no, we couldn't...) Inside Cover Story

Imagine if this was done unanomously by all bishops 30 years ago...

WorldNetDaily: Bishop challenges Davis on abortion