Los Pequeños Pepper

Publication of Los Pequeños de Cristo

April 2016

Sisters of Mother Teresa Killed by ISIS

Page 4

It’s not an urban legend, it’s a LIE: Paul VI did NOT give permission to nuns to use contraceptives

Page 7

Ettore Gotti Tedeschi: “The Devil Has Retired”

Page 10

Cover: The four Missionaries of Charity martyred by ISIS militants in Yemen, early this March.

Los Pequeños Pepper

Newsletter of Los Pequeños de Cristo April 2016 Volume 18, Number 4 Sisters of Mother Teresa Killed by ISIS

Page 4

Dealers in Illusion By Camille Giglio

Page 5

It’s not an urban legend, it’s a LIE: Paul VI did NOT give permission to nuns to use contraceptives By Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Page 7

Ettore Gotti Tedeschi: “The Devil Has Retired” By Sandro Magister

Page 10

Bishop Rhoades: Notre Dame’s Scandal of Honoring “Pro-Choice” Catholics Page 13

Cecile Richards Campaigns for Hillary Clinton: We Must Force Americans to Fund Abortions By Steven Ertelt

Page 14

April Calendar Page 15

Newsletter of Los Pequeños de Cristo Stephanie Block-editor, Carol Suhr-copy editor

Correspondence to The Pequeños Pepper may be addressed to: P.O. Box 20428, Albuquerque, NM 87154-0428

Phone: 505-293-8006 or email: www.lospequenos.org The Pequeños Pepper is published monthly

We are an Archdiocesan-wide Catholic lay organization committed to a charitable defense of the Catholic Faith by means of education, communication, and prayer. We are devoted to the Roman Catholic Magiste-

rium, the Holy Father, and to the bishops and clergy in union with him. Our members believe what the Church believes and we promote what the Church teaches. To this end, we believe that no individual, whether

cleric or lay person, has the right to alter the substance of the gospel message or moral truths which have been inerrantly and infallibly held by the Catholic Church since Her founding.

Pequeños Pepper 4 April 2016

Sisters of Mother Teresa Killed ISIS

For Mgr Paul Hinder, the "signal is clear: it has something to do with religion". A clergyman who lived at the nuns’ convent was abducted. The facility’s superior saved herself by hiding. Four nuns and ten civilians were killed. For the Vicar, they "sacrificed their lives by following their own charism."

Sanaa (AsiaNews) – In a dramatic statement, Mgr Paul Hinder, apos-tolic vicar to Southern Arabia, spoke to AsiaNews about [the March 4, 2016] “religiously-motivated” attack against the convent of the Missionar-ies of Charity in Aden, in southern Yemen.

At 8:30 am, the prelate said, "People in uniform stormed the com-pound where the Missionaries of Charity live. After they killed the secu-rity guard and all the employees that stood in their way, they came for the nuns and opened fire, killing four [sisters]. One managed to hide and sur-vive. Now she is in a safe place.”

The victims are Sister Anselm from India, Sister Marguerite from Rwanda, Sister Judit from Kenya and Sister Reginette also from Rwanda. The superior was able to find a hiding place.

The attackers seized Fr Tom Uzhunnalil, a Salesian priest who lived at the facility. At the time of the attack, he "was in the chapel praying."

Overall, 14 people lost their life: four religious and ten lay people, em-ployees of the community that also housed senior citizens and disabled people.

"We knew that the situation was difficult and that the sisters were run-ning a certain risk,” Mgr Hinder said. In fact, the nuns had been attacked in the past. However, "they decided to stay no matter what because this was part of their spirituality.”

At the same time, “It was clear that the area was not safe, even if there had been no special signs [of trouble]. Getting information was hard." For the prelate though, the "signal is clear: it has something to do with relig-ion".

In July 1998, a gunman shot and killed three nuns of the Missionaries of Charity founded by Mother Teresa of Kolkata as they left a hospital in the city of Al Hudaydah.

Yemeni authorities said at the time that the assailant was an “unbalanced Saudi”. Two of the murdered nuns were from India – Sister Lilia and Sister Anneta – whilst the third, Sister Michelle, was from the Philippines. Since January 2015, Yemen has been the scene of a bloody civil war pitting the country’s Sunni leadership, backed by Saudi Arabia, against Shia Houthi rebels, close to Iran. In March 2015, a Saudi-led coalition launched air strikes against the rebels in an attempt to free the capital for Saudi Arabia, the Houthis, who are allied to forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, are militar-ily supported by Iran, a charge the latter angrily rejects. Groups linked to al Qaeda and jihadist militias linked to the Islamic State group are active in the country, which adds to the spiral of violence and terror.

Fr. Tom Uzhunnalil, who was abducted by the rebels in Yemen. Father Tom is East Indian.

Pequeños Pepper 5 April 2016

Dealers in Illusion

By Camille Giglio

On Sunday, 2/28/16, my local California newspaper, the Contra Costa Times (Bay Area News Group) carried a commentary by Arthur J. Bretschneider, owner and operator of several Bay Area managed care facilities called Seniorly. He was promoting managed care for everyone, declaring that everybody needs a caretaker, even the care-takers need caretakers and he had just the organization to provide that need. The article was basically a promo-tional piece for government funded and managed care but he was given space on the commentary page to make it look like he had something worthwhile to say.(1)

He did his best, in this article, to make you feel bad if you aren’t taking care of someone else. He also made you feel like a victim because the job of care-giving is burdensome, requiring a great deal of your time and energy.

And, yes, providing care for home-bound persons is one of today’s workforce development programs. The gov-ernment has realized that it must demonstrate to the taxpaying public that it seeks to economize somewhere and also recognizes that it is less expensive to provide low-level, government trained assistance that will keep the pa-tient at home rather than in an expensive facility or in and out of emergency rooms.

In other words, you shouldn’t really be the one caring for your family member because that takes you out of the taxpaying category if you remain at home providing care. You should be bringing in a caregiver for Mom and taking advantage of the respite services that the government has provided for you, at taxpayer expense, of course. Regarding Mr. Bretschneider, this isn’t concern for you or your family member’s wel-fare; it’s workforce development and extra money in his pocket and extra money going to the state in the form of taxes that these insurers are going to have to pay now.(2) From where, you ask, will this extra money come? The state’s legislators just voted, in special session and which the Governor signed, a huge new health care bill, SB2b, by Ed Hernandez (D-L.A.) and AB1b by Asm Tony Thurmond, (D-Richmond).changing the method of and amount of taxes Managed Care Organizations, (think Metlife, Kaiser, Blue Shield, Blue Cross, or any HMO) will have to begin paying retroactively to the govern-ment. This requires every Managed Care Organization (MCO) in the state to be taxed at a rate of 8.84%, a figure used by the state Department of Health Care, rather than the 3.9% charged under the Knox-Keene Act. Currently MCO’s that accepted Medi-Cal patients were taxed on their profits at the higher rate and those which did not were taxed at the lower rate. However, those that paid

the higher rate also got reimbursed from the feds at a higher rate thereby making the other MCO’s somewhat jeal-ous. Now, thanks to a 2004 court case, Myers v State Board of Equalization, brought by a public interest non-profit called Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, they will all be taxed at the higher rate but will also be re-quired to pay this higher rate retroactively in the amount of $10.5 billion. Also, the tax to be paid by all the MCO’s will be based on number of clients rather than on profits. The more clients, the more taxes collected. (3)

Some Republicans voted, in the recent and still active special session on health care, for the expanded taxation required by both the Hernandez bill SB2b and the Thurmond bill AB1b, thereby allowing the state to realize a new source of funds – $1.3 billion yearly in federal matching funds which will go into the General Fund.

If the state had not created this new taxing schedule, Republicans whimpered, the feds, through this lawsuit, would have been able to keep $1.3 billion of Califor-nia taxpayer dollars to itself rather than returning it to the state. In other words, by framing it as a benefit to the taxpayer, the feds were able to get the state to agree to collect more taxes for the feds and themselves while the taxpayers foot the bill for everything. (4)

For the sake of public appearance the Republicans negotiated a spending plan for this $1.3 billion: paying down the unfunded mandates, some disability pay-ments, nursing home reimbursement, and salary increases. Already some Democrats are considering bills to raise salaries for their special interest pals.

This article was titled Dealers in Illusion to make a point. Next time you read an article about health care and

Arthur Bretschneider Founder & CEO at Seniorly

Pequeños Pepper 6 April 2016

the government struggling to find ways to contain costs, remember that it is probably you, the taxpayer, who is actually paying more in taxes for a reduced amount of care or concern about patients. It’s all about finances and how the government can get more of your money without disturbing your tranquility or realization that you are being had, once again.

Fox TV news played a clip from a campaign talk given by Bernie Sanders recently. He was, apparently, asked by a member of the audience why everybody needed (government provided) health care. Bernie’s answer was: “because we are all human beings.” Behind that nice sounding statement lurks the hard reality of who is going to pay for all the things that Bernie and friends think are due to us (or forced upon us) simply because we are all hu-man beings? That’s pure socialism.

Bernie and Hillary and even Donald all want us to also have access to abortions and euthanasia which we are paying for ourselves with increased taxes. And they want your money to pay for everybody else to have these things as well...just because we are human beings. And, they want social workers appointed to everybody from birth to death. They want children under government scrutiny, along with their parents, from birth. They want the government to use education to plan everyone’s life path, job placement and housing placement...just because we are human beings. And, they have to find ways to sell us these ideas so that we will quietly accept and pay for our own enslavement.

And, now, we learn of a House Resolution, HR 552, asking approval for funding the training of Health Coaches. Now the Government has succeeded in raising the ridiculous to the heights of honor. We can all become busy bodies. (5)

FOOTNOTES. 1. www.contracostatimes.com/opinion /ci_29563106/guestcommentary-taking-care-yourself-when-youre-taking; From the Seniorly website: “We strongly believe that there is a community out there for everyone at every step in life. www.seniorly.com/about# 2. The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, according to its website, changed its name to Consumer Watchdog.org. This group’s main objective, it would seem, is suing the government regarding health care insurance and other issues. In 2004 it provided its legal ser-vices to a group suing the Los Angeles Dept of Education on the grounds that it failed to pro-vide sufficient services to school children with Autism: www.consumerwatchdog.org/about 3. SB2b, Ed Hernandez, Medi-Cal managed care organization tax: SUMMARY: Imposes a three-year managed care organization provider tax (MCO tax) on health plans, with different taxing tiers and based on enrollment assessed during a base year period of October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2015. Continuously appropriates funds from the MCO tax for purposes of funding the nonfederal share of Medi-Cal managed care rates. Reduces the amount of the Corporate or Gross Premium taxes that specified health plans and insurers are required to pay for the three years of the MCO tax assessment. Sunsets these provisions June 30, 2020. If the state would not cooperate with the federal mandate to change its MCO taxing schedule the feds would retain $1.3 billion in matching funds, funds which California taxpayers had paid. It would simply be divided up amongst other states. The Myers v Brd of Equalization Decision declared that the state owed the federal government $10.5 billion retroactively because they had been taxing Medi-Cal insurers at the lower Knox-Keene rate of 3.9% on total revenue. Under the new ruling all insurers will be charged the same rate of 8.84% based on number of insured, not on profits. Senate Committee On Public Health and Developmental Services, 2/10/2016. 4. Laws Relating to Health Care Plan in California, Department of Managed Health Care: www.dmhc.ca.gov/LawsRegulations.aspx 5. Dr. Sears Wellness Institute: WHAT IS A HEALTH COACH? A Certified Health Coach helps others achieve their health and wellness goals by providing science-based, trusted information, positive encouragement, and continued motivation. In 2007 world-renowned Dr. Sears and a team of experts developed a Health Coach Training that provides the education and tools to help make a positive difference in the lives of oth-ers. The training is based on the four pillars of health: Lifestyle, Exercise, Attitude and Nutrition. www.drsearswellnessinstitute.org/health-coach-certification/?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=2012%2520Health %2520Coach&utm_term=health%2520coaching&utm_content=Health%2520Coach

Camille Giglio is a legislative analyst who works for California Right to Life. The article was first published at: NOISECoali-tion.wordpress.com (No to Irresponsible Sex Education blog)

Pequeños Pepper 7 April 2016

It’s not an urban legend, it’s a LIE: Paul VI did NOT give permission to nuns to use contraceptives By Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The other day Pope Francis, in the infamous post-Mexico airplane presser, said:

Paolo VI – il grande! – in una situazione difficile, in Africa, ha per-messo alle suore di usare gli anticoncezionali per i casi di violenza. … Paul VI – the great one! – in a difficult situation in Africa, permit-ted sisters to use contraceptives for cases of violenze.

I’ve heard this before. I never believed it. Years ago on the COL Forum (Catholic Online – which I ran) we had a discussion about this. One of the staffers tried to dig up the old files. In the meantime he – The Great Roman™ – sent this information. It was not origi-nally written in English, so I touched it up here and there… but not very much. This reads like a soap opera, on the one hand. It reads like a vicious cam-paign of lies and disinformation designed to confuse the faithful and under-mine the Church, on the other. The urban legend (lie) is now so common that even high-ranking church-men cite it as if it happened. They aren’t lying, per se. They are passing on something that isn’t true but that they think is true… even if it really doesn’t pass the smell test.

This whopper doesn’t pass the smell test. Paul VI told nuns they could use contraceptives… riiiiight. You decide. My emphases and comments: So far, I was unable to retrieve the COL Forum thread on this urban legend

about Bl. Paul VI and contraception for nuns in Africa, but I had some notes stored and then idiocies about our Holy Faith have the ability to switch on my memory neurons to combat mode like yelling Saracens would do to a Templar knight who had been fasting and praying for a good fight the whole Quattuor Tempora of Lent.

You can search any archive, google any keyword, ask any historian or moralist, all you will be served with is old articles of pro-contraception authors repeating this story either with no supporting references or with no other evidence than references to older articles saying that “Rome” had OK’d contraception for endangered nuns in Af-rica at some point.

Notice, the more you go back in time, the more “Paul VI” becomes, more vaguely, “Rome”. Dig deep enough and you will find that “Rome” turns out to be just an article published, you guessed it, in Rome, pre-cisely by the magazine Studi Cattolici, n° 27, in the year of our Salvation 1961. Title: “Una donna domanda: come negarsi alla violenza? Morale esemplificata. Un dibattito” (A woman asks, how to subtract oneself from violence? Exemplified morals. A debate).

Yes, I can hear you yelling at the monitor. Paul VI ascended to the Throne of Peter only in 1963. And now I want somebody to tell me, with a straight face, that St. John XXIII allowed contraception. Above

all, I want them to show me where and when he did it. Back to the article. The authors were 1) Msgr. Pietro Palazzini, later a bishop and a Cardinal but back then a

respected moral theologian and the Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for the Council, 2) Professor Francis Xa-

Blessed Paul VI

Pequeños Pepper 8 April 2016

vier Hurth, S.J., of the Pontifical Gregorian University, and 3) Msgr. Ferdinando Lambruschini of the Pontifical Lateran University (later Archbishop of Perugia).

Long and verbose story short, in that article Palazzini and Lambruschini explore a possible application of the “principle of the double effect” to the case of rape, where a legitimate end is pursued and the probable evil conse-quence is unintended. [NB: Double-effect!]

Fr. Hurth attempts an elaboration of Aquinas’ concept of genus moris and genus naturae where the moral status of an act can be different depending on its spiritual and physical characteristics. In fairness, I’ll note that, back then, chemical contraception was relatively new a subject. Tonsured moralists were unlikely to be all that familiar with the science and the physiology involved and it will take 1968 to hear an au-thoritative pronouncement on this specific sub-ject, the reviled Humanae Vitae. And it came from that same Paul VI who is said to have al-lowed contraception, if only by way of excep-tion.

That’s all. No, really, there is nothing else. The opinion of three moralists on a maga-

zine, attempting to offer, I repeat, an opinion on a complex matter, gets quoted loosely and ad nauseam by other moralists and journalists and becomes “Rome” and later “Paul VI”.

They will tell you that that article legiti-mized the concept of “lesser evil”. Leaving aside the fact that we can never choose evil, no matter the scale of it, the fact is that in 1957 Palazzini had co-edited a widely used manual where the following is said (I quote a 1962 Eng-lish edition of this manual):

“To choose the lesser of two evils is permis-sible [NB] if the lesser evil is not in itself a moral evil (sin), but a purely physical evil or the omission of something good or indifferent, from which in a specific case an accidental bad effect will follow, less serious, however, than that which another course would provoke” (Ludovico Bender OP, in Dictionary of Moral Theology, Ed. Roberti, Francesco, Palazzini Pietro. Transl. by H. Yannone. Westminster, MD: Newman, 1962).

Now, I am no moral theologian but contraception is in fact a moral evil in itself (see Humanae Vitae 16) and not a “purely physical evil”, much less “something good or indifferent”. Case closed.

Not many outside Italy know, however, that Cardinal Palazzini, was asked about this matter years later, and precisely in the ‘90s when another such myth was concocted, seen that the Paul VI-Congo nuns version was losing credibility. I am talking about the John Paul II-Bosnia nuns myth.

Those of us old enough will remember, during the Balkan wars articles begun to be published about “the Pope” or “Rome” authorizing nuns in Bosnia to take the pill in war zones. Palazzini is quoted in an article on that paper sewer some call La Repubblica which seems to have taken the place once occupied by the Osservatore Romano lately (OTOH, natura abhorret vacuum). The article was published on March 5, 1993. [http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/1993/03/05/la-pillola-proibita-anche-per-le.html]

Translated title: “The pill? Forbidden also for missionary nuns at risk of rape”. Palazzini explains that all they were trying to do was to explore the possibility of actions aimed at preventing a

pregnancy after a rape and before conception, supposing that possibility existed, in ways that have nothing to do with taking the pill for weeks for fear of a potential rape. So “Rome” (read: the author of an old article) denies having ever said that contraceptives are OK in certain circumstances.

[QUAERITUR] But what was this new article about and why were they interviewing Palazzini after 30 years? Bear with me. There had been stories of women raped in Bosnia (nihil sub sole novi). Fr. Bergamaschi, a Franciscan friar,

had accused St. John Paul II of hypocrisy because the Great Pole had reaffirmed the constant teaching of the Church on contraception to the point of exhorting raped women to keep their babies but, according to Ber-gamaschi, had also authorized nuns to take the pill. So journalists began to ask questions. [Agere sequitur esse.]

Pequeños Pepper 9 April 2016

With the typically half-horrified and half-snarky tone, the reporterette of La Repubblica has to write that the Vatican is in fact unwavering in its position on contraceptives, even in the case of rape. The inhumanity! She quotes the then vice-director of the Press Office of the Holy See, Fr. Piero Pennacchini. His words:

“The Holy See never issued texts authorizing women religious to make use of contraceptives, even if they run the risk of being raped”. “I know of no official document by the Holy See on this”.

Disappointed, the journalist evokes Fr. Efrem Tresoldi, a missionary who says that he doesn’t know the extent of the phenomenon. “Surely” there is “talk” of contraceptives among missionaries. “Certainly” some nuns have been told to make use of contraceptives, says Tresoldi. So, there are disloyal confessors or superiors of religious orders who tell nuns to act contrary to the doctrine of the Church.

OK Father, and what else is new? [Not much.] Above all, since when disloyal members of religious orders are “the Pope”, or “Rome”? [When it fits.] Unsatisfied, the reporterette turns to a missionary nun (she couldn’t find one from Bosnia so she asks one who

had been in Africa for 12 years. Says the missionary nun: “Personally I have never heard of contraceptive pills”, “but there has been certainly the risk of (sexual) violence for many of us who lived though the great African up-heavals. I don’t know if other sisters have been advised to take precautions”.

Back to Tresoldi, we are told that, of course, there is no official pronouncement, but that’s because John Paul II and his merciless minions are hypocrites who tell nuns to take the pill in secret even while they tell lay women to accept their fate and keep the baby.

That’s when the Repubblica hack turns to Card. Palazzini hoping to save the day with the lies of 30 years ago. A few months after this article and others of the same kind, in July 1993 the Jesuit magazine Civiltà Cattolica

(surprise!) [NOT] published what to this day remains the “doctrinal” foundation to the John Paul II- Bosnia nuns version of the myth: G. Perico, Stupro, Aborto e Anticoncezionali, volume III, Quaderno 3433, 3 luglio 1993.

Search all you want, this stream of the myth always goes back to this article. [It sounds almost like the way all myths about Pius XII and the Jews go back to one source, a play in 1963, and that source was cobbled up by the KGB in a campaign of disinformation.]

No need to summarize it. Go read it if you want. I did. He harkens back to the 1961 article and moves from there. [Surprise.] As happened with the Palazzini, Hurth

and Lambruschini article, and even more given the firepower of the media of 30 years later, Perico’s piece sparked lively discussions among moral theologians on the subject of contraception. Fine. But that’s not the point. That point is that they have nothing, not one thing they can come up with to support the notion that Paul VI or John Paul II ever allowed contraception, when the facts, the known and easily accessible, official, constant and binding pronouncements of the Church show the exact contrary.

Discussions are NOT the teaching of the Church. Off-the cuff-remarks are NOT the teaching of the Church. This is why on my bended knees I beg you all, Fathers, check your facts and, in John Wayne’s immortal words:

“Talk low, talk slow, and don’t talk too much”.

Fr. John Zuhlsdorf writes the Fr Z Blog: wdtprs.com

Pequeños Pepper 10 April 2016

Ettore Gotti Tedeschi: “The Devil Has Retired” By Sandro Magister

ROME, February 1, 2016 - Right from the title, the latest book-length interview with Ettore Gotti Tedeschi has at least one thing in common with the preaching of Pope Francis: the centrality of a figure that also has a leading role in the Bible, that of the “prince of lies" (Satan): Paolo Gambi intervista Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, "Un mestiere del diavolo", Giubilei Regnani, Cesena, 2015, pp. 260, euro 15.00.

Gotti Tedeschi is very much a banker “sui generis,” a fervent Catholic and a humanist. A bit of a loner, reluctant to join the team. When he was called to the Vatican in 2009 to head the In-stitute for Works of Religion (IOR), he espoused the post with the absolute dedication of one who “becomes a eunuch for the kingdom of heaven,” in this case to lead the dissolute quasi-bank back to virtue.

And they drove him out in short order, in 2012 (speculation has it that he was driven out by the Freemasons in the Vatican Curia). He doesn't say who did it, in the book because ultimately this is a secondary matter. What is not at all marginal is the stone guest that looms over every page, the devil, whom Gotti Tedeschi calls “the great pensioner,” because now he is so besieged by fans that he doesn’t even need to exert himself anymore to fill up hell.

The true roots of global disorder - Gotti Tedeschi says - are moral and ultimately theological. The disasters of the economy and environment are not causes, but effects. But there is nothing sad or resigned in his words because, if the devil is taking it easy, there is always someone who continues to work and illuminate and in the end to win, and this is Divine Provi-dence, thanks to which mysteriously but infallibly all things “cooperantur in bonum.”

The dialogue between Gotti Tedeschi and the interviewer is interwoven with reflections that are unconven-tional, ironic, surprising. But the material is substantial: economy, environment, Church, Catholic faith with disso-nant points in terms of the narrative - often unfaithful - that universally envelops Pope Francis to whom he pays tribute of filial respect and obedience, without concealing, however, that at the summit of the Church today the “spiritual figures” he most admires are cardinals Robert Sarah, Carlo Caffarra, Gerhard Müller, Raymond Burke, George Pell, this last - he emphasizes - “as a theologian.”

Below are two excerpts from the book, on two delicate points: expulsion from the IOR and the encyclical Lau-dato si’.

__________ From “A devil’s trade” Interview with Ettore Gotti Tedeschi

ON HIS OUSTER AS PRESIDENT OF THE IOR Q: What would make you happy? A: A conversation with Thomas More, with Antonio Rosmini. . . Saint Thomas More is a saint of reference for

my life. I would have been happy to end up in as transparent a manner as he did, on the scaffold for my convic-tions, rather than ending up defamed and exposed to the defamation of churchmen without so much as a trial, which Saint Thomas More at least had the privilege of having (even enjoying himself, as I would have enjoyed myself).

Another is Blessed Antonio Rosmini, recognized as a man of faith and full of love for the Church only 120 years after his humiliation. I, certainly without wanting to compare myself and my travails with those Rosmini underwent for having written “The five wounds of the Church,” have to wait another 117 years. . . Even Blessed Toniolo was discredited and persecuted, in spite of the fact that he had served the Church with faith, competency, and passion.

Q: Yet bitterness can be read in your words. Is it truly possible to forgive those who do evil to us? And, if I

Gotti Tedeschi

Pequeños Pepper 11 April 2016

may ask, have you always forgiven? A: Of course we can forgive those who do evil to us: we must imitate Christ, or better, seek to imitate him. I

cannot say if it is easy or not, I know only that we must struggle our whole life to do it. Of course, on our own it is rather difficult: I suggest making use of the help of a spiritual director who knows how to conduct confession, lead meditation, teach prayer. I suggest returning to the practice of constant recourse to our (forgotten) guardian angel, asking him for suggestions. The grace will come.

No, I have not always forgiven. In the specific case to which you refer without citing it, the problem is com-plex. Very complex. I can say, however, that I have forgiven some, others not yet. But what is true forgiveness? It is the remission, the absolution of an offense, of a sin: this is the Church’s purview. The forgiveness that an of-fended person is able to give to those who have stained themselves with an offense is something different. It can mean seeking to excuse their behavior, not to bear rancor, hatred. True forgiveness may lie in knowing how to pray for those who have offended, for their good. Now this I have been able to do, but not without constantly striving to bring the truth out. [. . .]

Q: You worked with a person as unique and extraordinary as Pope Benedict. Is there anything you would like to say with regard to the events related to your presidency of the IOR and your leaving it? What Christian testi-mony have you received from it?

A: My testimony is twofold. First: where there is great good there is always great evil as well. But the saints are always with us, just like the cloistered sisters who pray for the Church, and they are the ones who give us hope. So I have followed the advice of one holy sister, a Benedictine mother abbess, who once told me: “Your desire for truth and justice is legitimate, but there is greater merit in mortifying it and offering it to God for his Church.” I have chosen this second alternative.

Second: one reflection that I still make today is that within the Church it can be easier to do evil than good [Wow! That is quite a statement. It says a lot about the current state of the Vatican]. Now, this is a reflection that I would have liked to have proposed to Pope Francis, if he had been willing to see me. Something that never hap-pened.

Benedict wanted an exemplary Church. If it had not been for events and persons that I would rather forget, his pontificate would have been defined as that of Benedict XVI “the Great.” But this will happen anyway: the Holy Spirit is a great publisher, even if he publishes when He wants, without taking his cues from the secular-progressive press.

ON THE ENCYCLICAL LAUDATO SI’ Q: What do you think of the encyclical of Pope Francis Laudato si’? A: I think that it is not easy to understand who is supposed to be responsible for the environmental degradation

depicted in it. I hope to have the opportunity in the near future to comment on this encyclical in clerical-academic circles. I will begin with this question: “In your view, who is responsible?” It will be fun. Q: Let’s start the fun right now: who is responsible? A: I realize that what I say will seem paradoxical to the reader who is poorly informed or insensitive to these problems, but I’ll try. What is responsible is the gnos-tic, neo-Malthusian and environmentalist culture that now presumes to ask the pope to get involved. [Malthusianism is a school of ideas derived from the political/economic thought of the Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus, as laid out in his 1798 writings, An

Essay on the Principle of Population, which describes how unchecked population growth is exponential while the growth of the food supply was expected to be arithmetical. Malthus believed there were two types of "checks" that could then reduce the population, returning it to a more sustainable level. He believed there were "preventive checks" such as moral restraints (abstinence, delayed marriage until finances become bal-anced), and restricting marriage against persons suffering poverty and/or defects. Malthus believed in "positive checks", which lead to 'premature' death: disease, starvation, war, resulting in what is called a

Pequeños Pepper 12 April 2016

Malthusian catastrophe. The catastrophe would return population to a lower, more "sustainable", level.[1][2] The term has been applied in different ways over the last two hundred years, and has been linked to a variety of other political and social movements, but almost always refers to advocates of population control.[3]

[Neo-Malthusianism generally refers to people with the same basic concerns as Malthus, who advocate population control programs, to ensure resources for current and future populations.[2] In Britain the term Malthusian can also refer more specifically to arguments made in favour of preventive birth control, hence organizations such as the Malthusian League.[4] Neo-Malthusians seem to differ from Malthus's theories mainly in their enthusiasm for contraception. Malthus, a devout Christian, believed that "self-control" (abstinence) was preferable to artificial birth control. In some editions of his essay, Malthus did allow that abstinence was unlikely to be effective on a wide scale, thus advocating the use of artificial means of birth control as a solution to population "pressure".[5] Modern "neo-Malthusians" are generally more concerned than Malthus was, with environmental degradation and catastrophic famine than with poverty.]

By environmentalist culture I mean that which, with a naturalist and pantheist vision, considers man the cancer

of nature who damages it with his unrestrained consumption and his indifference to the pollution that he himself produces, above all if he gets married (to a woman) and has children. And the more children he has, the more he pro-duces causes of environmental degradation. ["Breeding like rabbits!"]

This environmentalist culture makes a cozy couple with the neo-Malthusian culture that in the 1970’s and ’80’s, in the wealthy Western world, produced that sentiment of anti-procreation whose consequences we are enduring today.

But why do I blame this environmentalism? Because by discouraging procreation without bringing about a collapse in the growth of GDP, it automatically spurred individual consumption. In order to satisfy this, however, the West out-sourced production to Asian countries in order to keep prices down, increase the purchasing power of consumers, and therefore bring about more and more consumption. These Asian countries were, let’s say, much less sensitive to and technologically [less] prepared for environmental problems; as a result, with the excuse of protecting the environment its degradation was worsened. In order not to pollute by having children, more pollution was produced by increasing con-sumption to compensate for the collapse of birth rates.

But what surprises me the most is to see that neo-Malthusian environmentalists were called to work on the encyclical itself. Fortunately the spirit of the magisterium remained intact, even if it took no little effort for most ob-servers to find it, or rather, to give the benefit of the doubt that it was there.

______________ The last lines presented above revive Ettore Gotti Tedeschi’s dispute with the neo-Malthusian environmentalist

Jeffrey Sachs, who in fact was repeatedly brought to the Vatican during the months in which the encyclical Lau-dato si’ was being written.

For details on the dispute: Contro i presunti ispiratori della "Laudato si'" __________ English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.

The pollution of children

Pequeños Pepper 13 April 2016

Bishop Rhoades: Notre Dame’s Scandal of Honoring “Pro-Choice” Catholics Concerning the decision of Notre Dame to honor Vice-President Biden and former Speaker Boehner with the Laetare Medal

In response to many inquiries, Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, the diocese where the University of Notre Dame is located, offers the following statement about the granting of the Laetare Medal by the University of Notre Dame to Vice-President Joseph Biden and former Speaker of the House John Boehner:

STATEMENT OF BISHOP RHOADES The Laetare Medal is given by the University of Notre Dame in recognition of outstanding service to the Church and society. Several months ago, Father John Jenkins, C.S.C., the president of the university, discussed with me his considera-tion of conferring the Laetare Medal upon Vice-President Joseph Biden and for-mer House Speaker John Boehner, two Catholics who have served in public of-fice for many years, elected officials of different political parties. Father Jenkins made it clear to me that in recognizing Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner, Notre Dame would not be endorsing the policy positions of either, but rather, would be honoring them for their public service in politics. I know that this honor is also an attempt to recognize two Catholics from different political parties at a time when our national politics is often mired in acrimonious partisan-ship. I appreciate Notre Dame’s efforts to encourage civility, dialogue, mutual respect and cooperation in political life. While I understand Notre Dame’s intentions in conferring the Laetare Medal upon Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner, I disagree with the decision. In dialogue with Father Jenkins about this matter some months ago, I shared with him my concerns with honoring the Vice-President. I believe it is wrong for Notre Dame to honor any “pro-choice” public official with the Laetare Medal, even if he/she has other positive accomplishments in public service, since direct abortion is gravely contrary to the natural law and violates a very fundamental principle of Catholic moral and social teaching: the inalienable right to life of every innocent human being from the moment of conception. I also question the propriety of honoring a public official who was a major spokesman for the re-definition of marriage. The Church has continually urged public officials, espe-

cially Catholics, of the grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that supports or facilitates abortion or that undermines the authentic meaning of marriage. I disagree with awarding someone for ‘outstanding service to the Church and society’ who has not been faithful to this obligation. Scandal

I realize that Notre Dame is trying to separate or distinguish the conferral of the Laetare Medal upon the recipi-ents from their positions on public policies. I do not think this is realistically possible or intellectually coherent. To accomplish the goal of promoting cooperation, civility, and dialogue in American politics, I think it would have been better if Notre Dame had invited Vice-President Biden and Speaker Boehner to speak at Notre Dame on this topic rather than bestow an honor that can provoke scandal. My principal concern about this whole matter is scan-dal. In honoring a “pro-choice” Catholic who also has supported the redefinition of marriage, which the Church considers harmful to the common good of society, it can give the impression to people, including Catholics in po-litical office, that one can be “a good Catholic” while also supporting or advocating for positions that contradict our fundamental moral and social principles and teachings.

Notre Dame serves the Church and my diocese in many exemplary ways and I strive to serve the community of

Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend

Pequeños Pepper 14 April 2016

Don’t forget to give us your change of address information!

Notre Dame through my active presence and involvement on campus. For the sake of the unity of the Church and the Church’s witness in society, I wish we could overcome disagreements which, at least in the public eye, can overshadow the good collaboration that goes on in other areas of Catholic life and mission.

We need to reflect more deeply on the meaning and significance of the bestowal of honors in relation to the Catholic identity and mission of our institutions. I would encourage Notre Dame and other Catholic colleges and universities to “raise the bar” in considering the granting of honors. I believe a higher standard is needed. There are many important values which we seek to teach, uphold, and live in our Catholic colleges and universities. These are the values we should look for in the lives of those we wish to honor. We should seek to honor those who act to protect human life and dignity from conception to natural death, who respect true marriage and the family, who promote peace, justice, religious freedom, solidarity, the integral development of the poor, the just treatment of immigrants, and care for creation. We should not honor those who may be exemplary in one area but gravely irre-sponsible in another.

If we honor Catholic politicians or public officials, we should make sure there is a basic consistency between their political decisions and sound Catholic moral and social teaching. We should not honor those who claim to personally accept Church teaching, but act contrary to that teaching in their political choices. We should choose for honors those whose lives and work are exemplary in witnessing to the Gospel and disqualify those who dissent from the truths and values we profess and hold dear. When we do so, when we “raise the bar,” so to speak, we not only avoid scandal, but we also have an opportunity to recognize and thank authentic witnesses to the Catholic faith for their fidelity. We also lift them up in a way that may inspire others to imitate their example.

Pope Francis is calling all of us to embrace the challenge of a missionary spirituality. He refers to “a sort of inferiority complex which leads to relativizing or concealing our Christian identity and convictions.” He also warns against a “spiritual worldliness that consists in seeking not the Lord’s glory but human glory.” I think this counsel is also relevant in decisions about conferring honors.

I recommend to all the document of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. Though it does not directly address the issue of awards to public officials, I believe it gives important principles relevant to this matter and can be a helpful guide in discerning criteria for bestowing honors.

Cecile Richards Campaigns for Hillary Clinton: We Must Force Americans to Fund Abortions By Steven Ertelt

Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards campaigned for pro-abortion Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over the weekend. Richards had a message for voters that points to what Clinton will try to do as president: force Americans to fund abortions with their tax dollars.

Missouri pro-life legislators voted last week to take tax dollars from abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and use them for public education and comprehensive health care providers instead. The Missouri House passed a proposed 2017 budget amendment on Tuesday that would cut about $380,000 in Medicaid funds from Planned Parenthood, according to the Joplin Globe. About $55,000 of that money would be transferred to the budget for public education, the report states.

At the campaign stop, Richards bashed that effort. Here’s more:

While in St. Louis campaigning for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over the week-end, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said the measure would deny women on Medicaid the choice to go to Planned Parenthood for those services.

“We provide family planning services to tens of thousands of women here in Missouri and that’s what

Pequeños Pepper 15 April 2016

April Calendar

Los Pequeños Monthly Meeting April 22, 2016

Call (505) 293-8006 for information.

Pro-life Prayer: Planned Parenthood Abortuary

701 San Mateo Blvd. Holy Innocents Chapel:

(505) 266-4100 Times: Monday-Friday 8 AM – 3 PM

Helpers of God’s Precious Infants

Planned Parenthood Abortuary 701 San Mateo Blvd.

Tuesdays, Thursdays, Fridays: 8 AM – 11:30 AM Wednesdays: 12 Noon – 3:00 PM

For more information, call Phil Leahy: (505) 440-3040

Mass at the Holy Innocents Chapel Tuesdays, Thursdays: noon, including

Eucharistic Procession to Planned Parenthood,

Rosary, and Prayers of Exorcism.

For more information, call (505) 266-4100

A Los Pequeños Pepper subscription is only $10. (Free for email subscriptions)

Back issues of The Pepper

are archived at: www.lospequenos.org

Check out Project Defending Life’s radio show, Lifetalk,

which airs on 1050 AM KTBL every Saturday at 2:00 pm till 3:00 pm.

Please Note

New Post Office Address for all Los Pequeños de Cristo correspondence:

P.O. Box 20428

Albuquerque, NM 87154-0428

they’re trying to end,” Richards said. “It won’t hold up in court, and they’re wasting both taxpay-ers’ money and the voters’ time.”

On Sunday, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards attended a brunch co-hosted by state Rep. Stacey Newman and other pro-abortion rights supporters.

Newman said some of her fellow state legisla-tors are conducting a “witch hunt” this legislative session against Planned Parenthood.

Last month, Hillary vocally applauded her husband Bill

Clinton vetoing a bill to ban the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure. That’s the abortion method where an unborn baby is part of the way outside her mother’s womb and the abortionist jams medical scissors into the base of the baby’s skull. Hillary Clinton has no problem with that.

In fact, as LifeNews reported in February, Hillary Clin-ton is still defending partial-birth abortions!

“My husband vetoed a very restrictive legislation on late-term abortions, and he vetoed it at an event in the White House where we invited a lot of women who had faced this very difficult decision, that ought to be made based on their own conscience, their family, their faith, in consultation with doctors. Those stories left a searing im-pression on me,” she said.

Last week, Clinton has admitted again that she doesn’t think unborn babies should have ANY legal rights before birth.

As LifeNews.com reported, Clinton received a ques-tion from host Bret Baier about abortion and whether or not unborn children should have any rights before birth. Her answer was exactly what LifeNews readers would expect. Although Clinton hemmed and hawed and did her best to avoid the question, knowing it would paint her as a pro-abortion extremist, Clinton essentially admitted un-born babies should have no legal rights before birth.

Host Bret Bair caught on and asked Hillary a follow-up question: “Just to be clear. No exceptions?”

Hillary made it clear – admitting she opposes a modest pro-life bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks. No exceptions indeed.

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

You courageously rebuked the pious king who had formerly sinned, just as Nathan rebuked David, O all-blessed Ambrose. You publicly excluded him from communion. After sub-mitting himself to penance and correction, he was numbered again in your fold.

- Byzantine Catholic stichera from the feast of St. Ambrose Vespers

You courageously rebuked the pious king who had formerly sinned, just as Nathan rebuked David, O all-blessed Ambrose. You publicly excluded him from communion. After sub-mitting himself to penance and correction, he was numbered again in your fold.

- Byzantine Catholic stichera from the feast of St. Ambrose Vespers