This week on Faith On Trial -- all about Religious Liberty

You can listen now at: https://faith-on-trial.simplecast.com/episodes/andrea-picciotti-bayer-lance-linzer-6-29-2024-x5XE47nV

Majority of US Jesuit universities promoted ‘pride’ month

Over half of Jesuit universities in the U.S. promoted “pride month” this year, despite their claim to historic Catholic identities. The College Fix reported that 15 of the 27 American Jesuit universities posted pro-LGBT messages on social media this month. While several other Jesuit schools did not promote “pride” on social media, they still actively host pro-LGBT events. READ

GOP pushes legislation to secure elections

Republican members of Congress are urging support for the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, legislation designed to protect the integrity of federal elections. The renewed GOP effort comes in the wake of a blockbuster report that thousands of non-citizens are obtaining voter registration forms at welfare agencies that fail to require proof of citizenship.  READ

SCOTUS TO HEAR BIDEN’S CHALLENGE OF LAW PROTECTING KIDS

The U.S. Supreme Court decided on Monday to hear the Biden administration’s challenge to Tennessee’s law against subjecting children to “transgender” procedures and medications. Tennessee is one of two dozen states that have restricted so-called “gender-affirming” care to protect children. READ

Report from the Iowa Catholic Conference

 

State immigration law blocked

A federal judge has blocked enforcement of Iowa’s "illegal reentry" law, saying that the federal government holds exclusive authority over immigration law. The state of Iowa is appealing the ruling. The law would make it a crime for a person who has been previously denied admission or deported from the U.S. to be present in the state, even if they subsequently have received legal status. 

At the federal level, the U.S. bishops welcomed the announcement by the Biden Administration of a new program for the undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens. The program allows select individuals who have resided in the country for at least ten years to apply for parole in place, which offers access to legal work authorization and protection from removal if granted, as well as the potential to apply for permanent legal status in certain cases. A similar program has been available to military service members and their families for several years.

U.S. Supreme Court rejects challenge to abortion drug

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on procedural grounds against health professionals who brought a lawsuit challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s actions that have now made the abortion drug, mifepristone (previously known as RU-486), widely available.

That ruling does not change the facts about the abortion pills. “(T)he U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] repeatedly and unlawfully cut corners to put chemical abortion pills on the market and then to reduce the safety protocols around them – putting the health of women and girls at risk,” Bishop Michael F. Burbidge of Arlington, Chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

For more information on chemical abortion (sometimes called “medical abortion” or “medication abortion” by its proponents), the USCCB has multiple fact sheets available online.

A decision from the Iowa Supreme Court on the “heartbeat” abortion law is expected to be made public on Friday, June 28.

Catholic leaders urge Congress to support critical food programs 

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have joined leaders from Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Charities USA, and Catholic Rural Life in urging Congress to protect the critical programs and efforts supporting the basic right to food. 

Food insecurity is on the rise around the world, including in the United States where 12.8% of households reported difficulty providing food for their families over the course of the year and 3.3 million households reported they were not able to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children at some point during the year. 

This week on Faith On Trial

Two members of the attorney general’s staff discuss human trafficking and crime victim’s assistance. Listen now: https://faith-on-trial.simplecast.com/episodes/jaqueline-white-tracy-bearden-6-21-2024-sukt7Q4N

Catholic senator launches pro-abortion AD

Self-professed Catholic U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, D-PA, launched a TV ad against his Republican opponent suggesting that Casey’s once-pro-life stance has shifted more fully in favor of abortion. Casey’s new ad alleges that Republican candidate David McCormick wants to “make abortion illegal even in cases of rape and incest.” McCormick denies the claim.  READ

JPMorgan Chase walks back ‘debanking’ of religious groups

JPMorgan Chase has committed to honoring the free speech rights and religious freedom of its customers after the legal nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom (ADP) spearheaded a campaign to protect bank accounts from politically motivated de-banking. Over the last few years, the banking giant has on several occasions closed the accounts of religious organizations without warning. READ

Minneapolis schools adopt pro-‘trans’ policy

The Minneapolis Public School Board last week passed a new “Gender Inclusion” policy mandating conformity with the practice of labeling children as “transgender.” The new policy allows “trans-identifying” students to use bathrooms and other designated spaces for members of the opposite sex and further allows students to share hotel rooms on school trips with students who are not the same sex.  READ

Benedictine president on Butker and cancel culture

Benedictine College President Stephen Minnis reflected on his decision to host Kansas City Chiefs Kicker Harrison Butker last month. “[W]e didn’t expect one commencement address to put us in the center of our country’s current culture wars,” Minnis wrote in USA Today. “The experience, though, is a good reminder that the mission we have is more important than ever.”  READ

Judge blocks Iowa immigration law, state attorney general to appeal

Iowa Capital Dispatch

A federal judge on Monday issued a preliminary injunction for Iowa’s law on illegal immigration, blocking it before enforcement was set to begin July 1.

The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of civil rights groups argued in court a week ago that Senate File 2340 should not be allowed to take effect.

Signed earlier this year, the measure gives law enforcement officials the power to charge undocumented immigrants with an aggravated misdemeanor for being found in Iowa after having been previously deported, denied admission or removed from the U.S., or if they have an order to leave the country.

The law was challenged by the DOJ, with officials arguing that the new state law infringes on the federal government’s authority over immigration law and enforcement, and that state enforcement of the measure would create conflicts with federal immigration laws. But Iowa deputy solicitor general Patrick Valencia argued the state law does not conflict with federal immigration statutes or enforcement, as it does not contain new rules on immigration. He said the state measure only gives Iowa law enforcement the ability to enforce existing federal law.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Stephen Locher sided with the DOJ, citing the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution that states the constitution, federal laws and treaties take precedent over conflicting state laws. The Iowa immigration measure is “preempted in its entirety by federal law” and invalid, he wrote.

“As a matter of politics, the new legislation might be defensible,” Locher wrote. “As a matter of constitutional law, it is not.”

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said in a statement that her office will appeal the decision. Bird said she was “disappointed” in the court’s decision and said it was a needed measure for “keeping our communities safe” due to President Joe Biden’s border policies.

“Iowa never would have had to pass this law to begin with if it weren’t for Biden’s open borders,” Bird said. “Rather than suing Iowa for enforcing immigration laws, he should do his duty to secure the border.”

Gov. Kim Reynolds said she supported Bird’s choice to appeal the decision, repeating the state attorney general’s criticisms of the Biden administration.

“With this injunction states are left defenseless to the ongoing crisis at our southern border,” Reynolds said in a statement. “Plainly, the Biden administration is failing to do their job and enforce federal immigration laws allowing millions to enter and re-enter without any consequence or delay. I signed this bill into law to protect Iowans and our communities from the results of this border crisis: rising crime, overdose deaths, and human trafficking.”

Emma Winger, deputy legal director at the American Immigration Council, who represented the coalition of civil rights groups and Iowa plaintiffs also challenging the law, said state immigration enforcement laws “create absolute chaos and human suffering and have no place in our legal system.” The Iowa law was modeled after a 2023 Texas measure also under a preliminary injunction, and the DOJ is challenging a similar law in Oklahoma.

“The court was right to block this cruel and blatantly unconstitutional law,” Winger said in a statement. “If it had been allowed to go into effect, it would have meant that even people currently living in the U.S. lawfully could have been arrested, imprisoned, and forced to leave the country.”

Leaders with immigrant advocacy groups like Guillermo Trevino Jr, a priest and advocate with Escucha Mi Voz Iowa, celebrated the injunction

“The judge’s ruling gives us more time to keep fighting,” Trevino, Jr said in a statement. “I pray Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird has a change of heart and does not appeal the judge’s decision.”

Judges Block Title IX Changes for Erasing Biological Women

 

MONROE, LA – The Biden administration’s rewrite of Title IX rules that infuses gender identity protections into federal law has been blocked by three federal judges across 11 states. These new rules attempt to force biological women to share private spaces with gender-confused biological males in schools and colleges receiving federal dollars. Today, a Kentucky judge granted a preliminary injunction to Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, Virginia, and West Virginia which temporarily freezes in those states the U.S. Department of Education’s (DOE) redefinition of “sex discrimination,” prohibition of single-sex spaces, such as restrooms and locker rooms, and a requirement to use preferred pronouns on campuses. Last week, a judge in Louisiana granted a similar injunction to Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Idaho while a Texas judge ruled that Texas public schools do not have to implement the rules.  These injunctions prevent the updated rules from taking effect in these 11 states while litigation continues in each case to determine permanent decisions. The move responsible for the multitude of lawsuits came April 29 when the DOE published the Title IX Final Rule on the Federal Register, which expanded the definition of “sex” and “sex discrimination” to include “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” as protected categories against discrimination. The revamped Title IX is supposed to take effect nationwide August 1, 2024. U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty in Louisiana stated in his four-state injunction order that the new Title IX Final Rule framework violates free speech, free exercise of religion, the spending clause, and “is arbitrary and capricious.” “…by allowing biological men who identify as a female into locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms, biological females risk invasion of privacy, embarrassment, and sexual assault,” wrote Judge Doughty. He further noted that the new rules allow a person to gain access to opposite sex spaces through a simple declaration that they have “changed gender identities,” which ultimately “places biological females at risk.” Judge Doughty noted that the Title IX Final Rule only focuses on students with gender confusion while failing to address the rule’s effect on other students.  “Title IX was intended to prevent biological women from discrimination,” wrote Judge Doughty. “However, the Final Rule may likely cause biological females more discrimination than they had before Title IX was enacted.”  Even though Title IX was established in 1972 to create equal educational opportunities for men and women, the Biden administration argued the law’s language implies gender identity has always been protected. According to Judge Doughty’s injunction, the Biden administration believes the word “sex” has always included “gender identity” in its meaning. Therefore, the new Title IX directs federally funded schools to allow gender-confused individuals to use spaces that correspond with their gender identity, join sex-specific organizations, construe “harassment” as a person not using someone’s preferred pronouns, and imposes additional mandates likely to result in substantial monetary costs. Failure to comply with the new regulations could result in the federal government withholding taxpayer dollars from educational institutions.  Judge Doughty determined Biden’s interpretation of “sex” would “reverse the entire premise of Title IX.”  “Here, the Final Rule would render meaningless…traditionally one-sex colleges, social fraternities and sororities, voluntary youth organizations, one-sex youth service organizations, beauty pageants, and the exemption that allows educational facilities to maintain separate living facilities,” wrote Judge Doughty. “Allowing this would allow decades of triumphs for women and men alike to go down the drain, and this Court finds that Defendants’ [interpretation of ‘sex’] is meritless.”  Judge Doughty emphasized the “ordinary meaning” of “sex discrimination” at the time of the Title IX law’s enactment “included only biological males or females.”  Ultimately, Judge Doughty’s injunction stops executive branch overreach. The injunction states decisions of “vast economic and political significance,” such as the Title IX changes, are reserved only for Congress under the “Major Questions Doctrine.”  “The Final Rule is not a clarification of existing laws – it is a new law enacted by an administrative agency,” wrote Judge Doughty. “Essentially, [the Final Rule] allows for one political ideology to dominate the educational landscape while either silencing the other or calling the other ‘harassment’ under these standards.” The government has “no authority to rewrite Title IX and decide major questions as the Final Rule does,” and it causes biological women “immediate irreparable harm,” Judge Doughty concluded.  Chief Judge Danny Reeves in Kentucky, who barred the Title IX update in six states, wrote that the result of inserting “subjective gender identity” into the educational environment is “not only impossible to square with Title IX” but also with “the broader protection of all students.” Additionally, District Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas determined public schools in Texas do not have to comply with the new rules because the DOE failed to use proper constitutional procedure in interpreting Title IX. He stated the framework of the new rules is an attempt to advance “an agenda wholly divorced from the text, structure, and contemporary context of Title IX.” So far, other officials in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and South Carolina are also involved in lawsuits against Title IX or have directed their state departments not to comply with the new federal rules. Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The radical rewrite of Title IX regulations eradicates privacy, safety, and fairness for biological women and girls. The lawsuits against forcing gender ideology in education have merit and the Biden administration’s obsession with erasing women must stop.” For more information about state laws protecting against gender ideology, visit Liberty Counsel’s website here.

 

In case you missed this week’s FOT

 Listen Now: https://faith-on-trial.simplecast.com/episodes/raimundo-rojas-lisa-bourne-6-15-2024

ADF’s score system fights against religiously or politically motivated de-banking

CV NEWS FEED // Legal nonprofit Alliance Defending Freedom recently launched a score index to assess large businesses’ commitment to free speech and religious freedom, fighting against religiously or politically motivated de-banking.

The measure, called the “Viewpoint Diversity Score Business Index,” was largely a response to banking companies closing several organizations’ bank accounts without notice or reason,  a practice known as “de-banking.” 

According to an article from Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), Bank of America suddenly closed an account in 2023 belonging to a Tennessee-based Christian charity in Uganda. The only reason that the bank provided for the closure was that the ministry exceeded the “bank’s risk tolerance” and that it no longer wanted to serve the ministry’s “business type.”

A similar instance occurred in 2022, when JPMorgan Chase de-banked the National Committee for Religious Freedom (NCRF), closing its checking account. According to ADF, the Committee was told that Chase might reopen the account if NCRF provided the bank with internal information. 

The requested information included a list of donors who contributed more than 10% of its operating budget, a list of political candidates that NCRF intended to support, and the criteria NCRF uses to choose those political candidates.

ADF’s business index ranked tech and financial giants on a percentage scale of 0% to 100%, with 100% being the score given to companies that respect free speech and religious freedom rights.

In both 2023 and 2024, Chase only received a ranking of 9%. Bank of America received an 8% score in 2023 but increased its score to 13% in 2024.

“In 2023, ADF’s Viewpoint Diversity Score Business Index found that over 60 percent of the 75 largest tech and financial companies—including seven of the nation’s 10 largest commercial banks—have expansive ‘reputational risk’ or ‘hate speech’ policies that threaten their customers with cancelation or punishment,” ADF reported. “These vaguely worded policies are a threat to everyone—and allow for censorship against Americans of every political and religious stripe.”

ADF added:

This pattern of de-banking cannot continue unchallenged. Our nation’s Founders understood that the primary function of government is to protect God-given, pre-political rights. That means threats to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness don’t need to come from the government to cause real harm.

Powerful financial institutions like Bank of America, Chase, and Fidelity Charitable can threaten freedom just as easily as any government actor.

Along with ADF, 20 state treasurers and financial officers, 24 attorneys general, and financial professionals with over $250 billion in assets are calling on large financial businesses and holding them accountable, asking them “to investigate claims of religious and politically motivated de-banking.”

“Banks that are too big to fail are too big for bias,” ADF reported, continuing:

At this fractured time in our national history, business leaders have a vital role to play—and that includes (perhaps most prominently) those in C-suite positions at banks and other financial institutions.

It’s time for these leaders to step up, and to use their considerable influence to reject de-banking once and for all.

Doctors Call for Immediate “Stop” to Gender Ideology on Children

WASHINGTON D.C. – Last week, a group of more than 100 health care professionals issued a declaration calling on America’s major medical associations to “immediately stop” promoting the “social affirmation” of gender ideology and denounced the use of “harmful” puberty blockers, hormones treatments and medically mutilating surgeries for children. 

The declaration, issued by Doctors Protecting Children in association with the American College of Pediatricians, presented a bulk of scientific evidence that gender procedures “harm healthy bodies” and strongly urged the medical industry to “respect biological reality.” The declaration, signed by physicians, therapists, medical researchers, medical ethics advocates, and more from around the nation, called on the medical community to shift its focus from “harmful interventions” to treating the “underlying mental health issues” often associated with gender confusion. The declaration noted that psychotherapy for underlying conditions such as depression, anxiety, autism, emotional trauma, and abuse should be “the first line of treatment” for “vulnerable children” rather than “irreversible” interventions. 

In the declaration, the doctors affirm scientific reality that biological sex is “dimorphic” (exists in just two forms) while a person’s genetic makeup “is not altered by drugs or surgical interventions.” They further declared the agenda of gender ideology seeks to affirm thoughts, feelings and beliefs through removing healthy body parts, which is wholly “inadequate” as it “does not accommodate the reality” of “innate sexual differences.” 

The declaration is aimed at countering the proliferation of gender ideology in the mainstream medical industry – an industry expected to grow to $5 billion by 2030. Doctors Protecting Children specifically called on the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry to stop the proliferation of the false idea that “children can be born in the wrong body.” However, these organizations have all recently reaffirmed their belief that people can change their gender and expressed support for mutilating procedures. 

Doctors Protecting Children also use the declaration to confront a group called the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH), an international “nonprofit” group responsible for developing the “Standards of Care” that recommend puberty blockers, hormones and mutilating surgeries to treat gender confusion in children. They stated that WPATH’s guidelines are “demonstrably flawed” considering the April 2024 Cass Review. The four-year, 388-page report examined much of the research to date on gender procedures finding “remarkably weak evidence” that these procedures help children due to may studies lacking “any positive measurable outcomes.” 

In fact, as the declaration notes, leaked WPATH files revealed “widespread medical malpractice” due to doctors “improvising treatments as they go along” while knowing that children cannot give informed consent to these procedures. 

The declaration states, “informed consent is not possible” because an adolescent’s brain is too immature to “strategize, problem solve and make emotionally laden decisions that have life-long consequences.” 

“Despite all the above evidence that gender affirming treatments are not only unhelpful, but are harmful, and despite the knowledge that the adolescent brain is immature, professional medical organizations in the United States continue to promote these interventions,” stated Doctors Protecting Children. 

Doctor Protecting Children ultimately recommended that the rest of the American medical community “follow the science” and that health care professionals urge their leadership to “adhere to the evidence-based research now available.” 

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Gender ideology has led to horrible atrocities on children. Counseling, not mutilating surgeries, is the only rational and medically sound option. The American medical community needs return to sound science and recommit to ‘do no harm.’”

CAITLIN CLARK LEFT OFF OLYMPIC TEAM

Sources reported Saturday that 22-year-old WNBA superstar Caitlin Clark, a Catholic, will not be included on Team USA women’s basketball roster for this summer’s Olympics in Paris. The news came days after an opponent shoved Clark during a game.  READ

Two More States Enact Laws Defining “Man” and “Woman”

OKLAHOMA CITY – In a clear pushback against harmful and destructive gender ideology, Oklahoma and Louisiana officials recently codified biology-based definitions into state law, including “man,” “woman,” and “sex,” to uphold the “biological distinctions” between the two genders and protect the “safety and privacy” of females in the public arena.

Last week, Governor Kevin Stitt signed into law Oklahoma’s “Women’s Bill of Rights,” while earlier this week Governor Jeff Landry signed Louisiana’s “Women’s Safety and Protection Act.” Both laws establish legal definitions for man, woman, male, female, boy, girl, mother, and father by recognizing the natural differences of the sexes “at birth.” The laws acknowledge simple biological reality to dispel any ambiguity so the two states can intentionally differentiate between the sexes to protect women’s spaces and competitions from the intrusion of gender-confused males. 

Oklahoma’s “Women’s Bill of Rights” (HB 1449) overwhelmingly passed the state’s Senate and House 35-7 and 79-17, respectively. The law states its “purpose” is to provide “clarity, certainty, and uniformity” as to how “both biological sexes” are treated in the state.

“Any policy, program, or statute that prohibits sex discrimination shall be construed to forbid unfair treatment of females or males in relation to similarly situated members of the opposite sex,” the law reads. “The state or its political subdivisions shall not be prohibited from establishing distinctions between sexes when such distinctions are substantially related to an important government objective, including, but not limited to, biology, privacy, safety, or fairness.”

In other words, the law requires state authorities to respect the differences between males and females as traditionally applied in public keeping sex-designated public spaces, education, and sports reserved for those specific biological genders.

The law also clarifies that the word “equal” in the context of the sexes doesn’t mean “same or identical,” and that “to differentiate between the sexes” also doesn’t mean to treat them “unequally.” Rather, the language indicates the biology of the sexes should be recognized separately when appropriate.

Oklahoma’s “Women’s Bill of Rights” solidifies a nearly identical executive order Gov. Stitt signed in 2023 to defend what he called “out of control gender ideology” that is eroding society. The law will take effect November 1, 2024.

Louisiana’s “Women’s Safety and Protection Act” (HB 608) comfortably cleared the state Senate 29-10 and the House 80-17. The law explicitly defines “sex” as “either male or female, as observed or clinically verified at birth,” and then stipulates that “gender identity and other subjective terms” shall not be used as “synonyms or substitutes.” According to the text, the law protects women and girls against “sexual assault, harassment and violence” in places where they have been “traditionally afforded safety and protection.”

The measure, which will become effective August 1, 2024, requires public schools, restrooms, correctional facilities, domestic violence shelters, and juvenile detention centers designate restrooms, sleeping quarters, and changing areas for the “exclusive use” of males and females. The measure also provides a means of legal action to seek judicial relief or damages for violations of the law.

At least 13 states now have laws protecting women and girls in public facilities, while at least six other states also codify into law the definitions of “sex,” “male,” and “female,” such as Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, and Tennessee.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “We commend Governors Kevin Stitt and Jeff Landry and state legislators for protecting women and girls against a false and destructive ideology. These laws protect both men and women while maintaining a grip on reality. Biology is fixed at birth and more states need to reject gender ideology and keep women and girls safe.”

For more information about state laws protecting against gender ideology, visit Liberty Counsel’s website here.

Suit against Catholic charter school proceeds

A lawsuit seeking to prevent the opening of the first state-funded Catholic charter school in the nation will move forward, following a decision by an Oklahoma district judge this week. The plaintiffs claim the school’s religious founding “will lead to discrimination against LGBTQ+ students and staff.”  READ

Biden Admin indicts whistleblower who exposed ‘trans’ clinic

Biden’s Department of Justice arraigned whistleblower Dr. Eithan Haim in June 2023, the morning he was supposed to graduate from his medical residency, after he blew the whistle on an illegal child “transgender” medicine clinic. Haim has now been indicted with four felony counts of HIPAA violations by Assistant U.S. Attorney Tina Ansari.  READ

The TLM is not a cult

By Deacon Mike Manno

          After a three-week vacation from writing – more about that later – I’m having a hard time getting my writing sea-legs under me. However, I have been aided by several things that I took note of during that period.

          The main one was an outgrowth of the story about the Kansas City Chiefs’ kicker Harrison Butker, a devout Catholic who gave the commencement address at the graduation ceremony for Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas. He said a lot of things in that speech and I’ll cut to the quick on that: I heartily agree with all he said. It is nice to see someone who is not afraid to speak the truth when all around him will not.

          But the message of his talk is not what concerns me, nor is the reaction of the general public. Let’s face it, in today’s society you either agree with common sense and the traditional values, both civic and religious, upon which our great nation was founded, or you don’t. The truth of his message was laid out for all to see, even if many are blind to it.

          My concern was a comment made by a host on ABC’s daytime television program The View. While discussing the pros and cons of Butker’s message, they noted that he was a traditional Catholic who worships at and participates in the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). Then one of the ladies opined that TLM participants were members of a cult.

          Members of a cult? Apparently the geniuses at ABC are willing to use the network to classify traditional Catholics as cultists. What an insult, but it is much more than that, it is a gross ignorance that is being used today to undermine traditional Catholic beliefs, and ABC ought to be condemned for allowing itself to be used to spread such trash by bigoted simpletons who know no better.

          As a deacon who participates in both the Novus Ordo and the TLM Masses each week at my parish, let me make it perfectly clear that the TLM folks are not members of a cult. Our TLM parishioners are overwhelmingly decent honest people who wish to worship our creator as our fathers and grandfathers for generations did.

          Back in June of 2022 I wrote of my admiration for the Latin Mass and those who took part in it, especially the number of younger persons who attended, husband, wife, and children, all attended as a family. No one was dressed down, that is no baseball shirts and blue jeans; all were dressed as if they were going to be in the presence of someone special, not as if they were taking in a Mass just before a Little League practice.

          And the kids: boys were in good clothing, many wore ties and the girls were dressed like young women aspiring to be ladies. Many of the younger girls were dressed as if ready to receive their First Communion.

          The Communion ritual was more formal than used currently in most Novus Ordo Masses. All knelt at the Communion Rail to accept the host on the tongue. No simple “Body of Christ” announcement, the priest or deacon says “Corpus Domini nostri Iesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen.” Translated, “May the body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul for life everlasting. Amen.” 

          I asked back in that June 2022 column: So why was an agnostic [a friend I was writing about] so attracted to the Latin Mass that his deepest desire is to become Catholic? I think it is for the same reason men showed up with ties, little girls in dresses, and little boys clamoring to serve as acolytes, and young families making the Latin parish its parish of choice.”

          And I answered: “It is that for 2,000 years the Church has brought people to God by using all their senses. Everything that is done is clearly done for the glory of the Almighty, from the architecture to the music, stained glass, Gregorian chant, and incense. It is not that a lot of folks understand Latin, it is that the whole package combines to bring, as my friend noted, the presence of God to any with an open heart.”

          Of course in the intervening time from that column to this one several prominent attacks on the Latin Mass have been initiated, as if the view of the ABC executives is taking hold in high places. First is the ongoing effort within the Church itself to curb, and apparently to eliminate, the TLM. The second has been the attack on the TLM by the federal government, through the FBI to characterize it as The View did, as a cult.

          The initial report by the FBI suggested that TLM adherents are prone to right-wing white-supremacist views which are easily coopted to the advantage of domestic terrorists. Why? It’s because those traditional Catholic faithful won’t be bought off by society’s progressive left-wing and insist on a traditionally pure form of liturturgal worship as befits their religious views. And that is a threat to those who have spent the better part of their lives and careers trying to undermine the Word of God and their use of government assistance in trying to achieve a more socialistic society.

          But that won’t work. This may be a hard slog but we’ve read the end of the book and we know who wins.

***

          Now I did want to mention my unexpected three-week vacation. Truthfully it wasn’t much of a vacation: no travel, no recreation, and no relaxation. It was work.

          Several months ago my wife and I decided to redo the flooring in the first floor of our house. We chose a nice wood laminate flooring to replace the old carpet which had seen better days. To our surprise the materials we ordered came in rather quickly and we didn’t have the luxury to gradually move our stuff.

          So we spent the first week moving out all the small things to other areas of the house. Then all the furniture had to be moved to the garage, and we needed to purchase new items. Finally came the installation and the process of reversing everything and putting all back which, at this writing, is almost done.

          Nice vacation, huh?   

          (You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

FOT this week: D-Day + 80 & Christ Our Life Conference

 Listen now: https://faith-on-trial.simplecast.com/episodes/jerome-richardson-marilyn-lane-6-08-2024-ZKemI9Um

Legal expert slams NYC as ‘Venezuela’ after trump verdict

“It’s hard to adequately describe what happened to Donald Trump in Venezuela-on-the-Hudson,” writes attorney Hans von Spakovsky. “A travesty of justice? A devasting blow to the sanctity of our justice system … An American repetition of the Soviet show trials of the 1930s? It’s all of those things. And you don’t have to be a Trump supporter to understand that.”  READ

Note: Hans von Spakovsky has been a guest on our program many times.

Judge makes shocking comment about elderly pro-lifer

After sentencing 75-year-old Paulette Harlow to two years in jail, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly quipped about concerns that the elderly pro-lifer might die in prison. Harlow, targeted for protesting at an infamous late-term abortion facility, has been under house arrest rather than in custody because of her medical needs. Kollar-Kotelly commented that she hopes Harlow will “make an effort to remain alive” because that is a “tenet of her religion.” READ

Report from the Iowa Catholic Conference

 

Political parties choose their candidates on Iowa’s primary election day, Tuesday, June 4. You will need to bring an ID. You can also register to vote at the polls. 

The Iowa Catholic Conference has a new Election Center where you can put in your ZIP code and address to view your candidates and contact your elected officials. 

Let’s also remember the importance of participating in public life with a well-informed conscience. Take a moment to read the bulletin insert from the U.S. bishops with a new Introductory Note for “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.” 

Prayer vigil that justice be done

A prayer vigil with Bishop William Joensen, board chair of the Iowa Catholic Conference, is set for Sunday, June 9 at 7:30 p.m. in front of St. Ambrose Cathedral in Des Moines (607 High Street). You are encouraged to pray the rosary at the same time if you can’t attend the prayer vigil in person. 

The vigil is being held in advance of a hearing on June 10 on lawsuits challenging the new state law on “illegal reentry by certain aliens.” The lawsuits aim to block the law's implementation on July 1st and have it declared unconstitutional. Traditionally, the federal government has held exclusive authority over immigration law. 

Letter to delegation on religious visas

The Catholic bishops of Iowa have contacted our congressional delegation about visas for religious workers. As you know, many priests and sisters working here come from other countries, and the process for receiving a visa has slowed down. Take action here. 

USCCB files suit on abortion rule

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has filed suit against EEOC on its effort to impose a nationwide abortion-accommodation mandate on the workplaces of hundreds of millions of Americans. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a new Final Rule requiring employers to knowingly accommodate abortions and imposing a speech code creating substantial liability on employers who express opposition to abortion and refuse to support it in their policies. 

EEOC, in an attempt to support abortion, claims this authority from the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a recent bipartisan law meant to help protect pregnant women in the workplace so that they may have a healthy pregnancy and a healthy baby. 

The PWFA fills a gap in federal employment law by ensuring pregnant women receive workplace accommodations to protect their pregnancies and their preborn children. 

And finally

Thanks to those of you who participated in our recent webinar on the 2024 legislative session. Keep an eye on our news updates for other ways to connect!

Pedophilia And Homosexuality Revisited

By Bill Donohue, Catholic League president

 

Bill Maher’s HBO show on May 31 featured a discussion between the host and filmmaker John Waters on the subject of Pope Francis and clergy sexual abuse. Waters, who is a homosexual and former drug addict, addressed molesting priests, saying, “They’re not all gay—they’re  pedophiles. That’s different.” Maher replied, “They’re not all pedophiles.” Waters answered, “Most are.”

 

So who’s right? Waters or Maher? Maher.

 

Researchers at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice issued the two most authoritative studies on priestly sexual abuse; most of the abuse took place between 1965 and 1985. They found that 81 percent of the victims were male and that 78 percent were postpubescent. When adult men have sex with adolescent males that is called homosexuality. As for prepubescent victims, they accounted for 3.8 percent of the abuse. That’s called pedophilia.

 

In short, there never was a pedophile problem in the Catholic Church—most of the molestation was done by homosexuals. For more detail on this subject see my book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes. As I have said many times, most gay priests are not molesters but most of the molesters were gay.

 

The media, of course, as well as gay activists and liberal Catholics, continue to lie about this issue. They mouth the refrain issued by Waters, hoping to exculpate homosexuals. But blaming pedophiles for homosexual-driven offenses is simply dishonest.

 

It’s worse than this. The fact is that some of the most prominent gay leaders have been supportive of adults having sex with minors, and some even justify man-boy rape. Moreover, while there are heterosexual pedophiles as well, the only ones who have an organization dedicated to pedophilia are gays. See our report on this issue.

 

June is Gay Pride Month. It’s time that gay leaders spoke to this issue with clarity. If everyone can’t agree that the sexual abuse of children is an abomination, we will never get rid of this problem. 

Texas Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Expanding Abortion

AUSTIN, TX – In a 9-0 ruling, the Texas Supreme Court rejected a pro-abortion challenge to expand the state’s near-total abortion ban beyond its narrow exception for preserving the life of the mother. 

The case centers around about 20 women who say they were denied emergency abortions when their doctors were uncertain about what the state’s “Human Life Protection Act” allowed them to do in certain medical cases. The plaintiffs, which includes women and their doctors, complained the exception was “confusing,” as well as “unconstitutional” if the law did not allow abortion under a broader set of pregnancy complications. A lower trial court issued an order replacing the law’s life-threating requirement allowing abortion for “any ‘unsafe’ pregnancy” and for fatal fetal anomalies. At the behest of the plaintiffs, the trial court also changed the standard of how doctors determine when abortion is necessary from a “reasonable medical judgment” standard to a “good faith belief” standard, which would give doctors more discretion to abort unborn babies. 

However, the Texas High Court struck down that lower court order and concluded the law already gives doctors the “legal authority” to perform an abortion when necessary. 

“Texas law permits a life-saving abortion,” stated the state High Court. “The law permits a physician to intervene to address a woman’s life-threatening physical condition before death or serious physical impairment are imminent.” 

The state High Court also expressly addressed the challengers’ confusion about what is allowed under the law. The Court stated that any physician who tells a pregnant patient they “may die” or suffer “substantial physical impairment” without an abortion, and “in the same breath,” says the law will not allow it “is simply wrong in that legal assessment.” The Court emphasized a mother need not be in “imminent peril” or “first suffer” impairment for doctors to intervene. 

While the challengers argued that Texas abortion law should allow for abortion when the unborn child is unlikely to survive outside the womb even when the mother’s life is not a risk, the state High Court flatly rejected that argument. 

“The current law, however, plainly does not permit abortion based solely on a diagnosis that an unborn child has an abnormal condition, even a life-limiting one,” the Court stated. “An unborn child’s diagnosis must be coupled with reasonable medical judgment that the mother has a life-threatening physical condition…or serious physical impairment.” 

Next, the Texas Supreme Court held that the lower court erred in creating a good faith standard in place of the law’s “reasonable medical judgment” standard. The plaintiffs argued that “not every doctor might reach the same medical judgment” creating a potential “battle of the experts” over certain pregnancy cases. The Court wrote that “a subjective standard” focuses on a doctor’s “intent” rather than “medical facts.” Therefore, the state High Court held that “reasonable medical judgment” did not mean that every doctor need not reach the same conclusion and “can turn to peer-reviewed best practices” for how best to treat their patient. 

Finally, the Texas High Court recognized the state’s historical commitment to protecting unborn life. 

“The history of abortion regulation in Texas demonstrates the Legislature’s unmistakable commitment to protecting the lives of pregnant women experiencing life-threatening complications while also valuing and protecting unborn life,” wrote the Court. 

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the state’s constitution and abortion law protect both a mother and her unborn child. The pro-abortion industry is sowing confusion where the law is clear. Doctors can use their ‘reasonable medical judgment’ based on best practices to treat pregnant women experiencing a life-threatening condition. Texas law is on the side of life.”