All articles from June 12, 2018

Featured Image
K.V. Turley


Former London convent now an abortuary

K.V. Turley
A British abortion center was once a convent chapel where Mass was celebrated.

TWICKENHAM, England, June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) -- There is a large house on the southwestern outskirts of London. It is an impressive building set back from the road and towering over those who stand in front of it or those who enter.

Today, it is an abortion center run by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service.

This house, in a residential quarter of suburban London, is yet another monument to Britain’s culture of death.

It was not always so.

At one time, this building was a convent run by a Catholic order of nuns, the Daughters of the Immaculate.

In the 1960s, students from nearby St. Mary’s College at Strawberry Hill would come to this building to lodge there under the care of the nuns while they studied to be teachers. Within this Catholic hostel, there was, of course, a chapel where Holy Mass and Eucharistic Adoration took place.

Today, a different sacrifice takes place, however, one to a very different god.

How did this come about?

Some claim the sisters were unaware of the intended use of the former convent building when they came to sell it to buyers back in the late 1960s. In any event, by 1970, a forty-bed establishment had opened: The Richmond Private Clinic and Nursing Home.

Abortion in certain circumstances was permitted by legislation the British Parliament passed in 1967. By the following year, the 1967 Abortion Act had come into existence. In due course, this new private clinic at Twickenham obtained the necessary license to perform abortions, despite protest from the area’s Member of Parliament, Toby Jessel, and local church groups.

In April 1971, the Richmond Clinic placed an advertisement in The Times newspaper recruiting more office staff. In particular, the owner sought “a young lady” between 25-35 years old fluent in English, French, and German. The same paper also carried another advertisement from the center seeking nursing staff fluent in French. With the Richmond Clinic’s proximity to Heathrow airport, then London’s only major air terminal, the potential “market” for foreigners traveling to England to take advantage of its liberal abortion laws was not lost on those running the center.

In June 1971, one such woman was Odette Boutte. She came from France to England with her husband, intending to have an abortion at the Richmond Clinic. The 42 year-old Frenchwoman had four children between 7 and 23 years old, and she was almost five months’ pregnant. Her decision to come to Britain for an abortion -- for which her husband paid £450 -- was to cost her life.

Madame Boutte died at Richmond Clinic from a hemorrhage. An inquest into her death soon followed. The coroner’s verdict was one of misadventure. The verdict came with a recommendation for the abortion center, namely, that future operations were to be performed only during daytime, as emergencies were harder to deal with outside working hours. Despite the fatality, the center’s license to perform abortions was retained.

By the next year, however, the Richmond Clinic had closed. In June 1972, the center was ordered to produce certain records for a government inspection. These were not forthcoming, and so the place was closed.

The building on Rosslyn Road was to stand idle for seven years until occupied once more by a different provider of the same trade.

In March 1979, the Pregnancy Advisory Service (PAS) bought the premises, complete with the coveted license to operate the same business as had taken place there before. PAS made an application to the local health authority to reclassify the building as a maternity home under the name “Rosslyn.” Despite opposition from the local MP, Toby Jessel, along with certain members of the health authority, a cottage in the grounds of the former convent was refurbished and business once again seemingly flourished with lots of “visitors” coming from abroad.

In 1996, the premises changed owners once more.  PAS was absorbed into the British Pregnancy Advisory Services, which is now the current owner of the building.

To this day, their trade continues. According to a recent government inspection report, “between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2015, 5,492 surgical terminations and 1,973 medical terminations” were carried out at the Twickenham center, with 323 abortions being performed when the foetus was 21 weeks or over.

Today, there is, however, a daily peaceful vigil of prayer and witness by Good Counsel Network outside the Twickenham center.

The vigil started there in November 2013 after a 40 Days for Life campaign. Each week, the Good Counsel Network (GCN) maintains its presence at the abortion center. The GCN is a UK pro-life charity that works under the patronage of Our Lady of Good Counsel to be there for the women who are thinking of having an abortion to offer them alternatives: practical help, such as accommodation options, financial support and legal advice. They also offer each woman the moral support she needs so that she can, if she chooses, continue with her pregnancy.

Through the years, there have been two 40 Days for Life campaigns at the Twickenham center. At these vigils, like with the Good Counsel Network, volunteers pray for the unborn babies, their mothers and fathers, and everyone else who is involved in the abortion decision, including abortion center staff. Since 2013, during the course of these vigils, 20 women chose life for their babies.

In the past, when the building was run for a different purpose by the nuns, there was Holy Mass each day in the convent’s chapel. Then the priest would hold aloft the consecrated Host and say the words: This is my Body.

Those words still resonate inside that building today, even yet, for what is taking place still concerns His Body.

Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin

News, , , ,

Michigan bill requires informed consent for vaccines derived from abortions

Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

LANSING, Michigan, June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) -- Pro-life lawmakers in Michigan have introduced legislation that would require vaccines derived from aborted babies to be clearly identified so patients can make more informed choices and potentially pursue more ethical alternatives.

Senate Bill 1055, sponsored by state Sens. Tonya Schuitmaker, Mike Kowall, Patrick Colbeck, Judy Emmons, Joe Hune, and Mike Shirkey, calls on the state Department of Health and Human Services to maintain an internet-accessible list of which vaccines were developed using stem cells derived from the tissue of aborted babies, as well as alternative vaccines when available.

Doctors would have to present this information to patients before administering vaccines as well. The list would be updated every year, and the requirement would take effect 90 days after being signed into law.

“The existence of these vaccines requires patients and parents to make important ethical decisions,” Right to Life of Michigan president Barbara Listing said. “Sadly, many people are unaware of these facts, including many doctors and nurses. Patients need accurate information to make informed decisions, and many are not getting that now.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration currently approves a number of vaccines produced using two cell lines, MRC-5 and WI-38, obtained from 1960s-era elective abortions. Federal law gives vaccine manufacturers legal immunity from lawsuits or charges from injured patients, instead delegating such cases to the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. People injured by vaccines may be eligible to financial compensation from the government-run National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Right to Life of Michigan currently maintains its own list of abortion-derived vaccines and ethical alternatives but hopes the law would make awareness and avoidance of the moral conflict more widespread.

“We should all agree that the existence of alternative vaccines proves it’s unnecessary to take human life to create effective vaccines,” she said. “Vaccine manufacturers should only use ethical sources for future vaccine production.”

Some pro-lifers, and and even the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, accept abortion-derived vaccines as morally permissible in the absence of alternatives. Others argue that the vaccines are not only immoral but that their origins “taint” them with an increased threat of medical complications.

Dr. David Gorski, editor of the website Science-Based Medicine, attacked the bill, claiming it was “designed to use emotive language to dissuade parents from vaccinating.” Right to Life of Michigan responded by noting that the legislation’s language was “undeniably true,” and that state health officials, not political activists, will be the ones drafting the specific, finalized language doctors must give patients.

"How does giving people information control their choices?" the group asked. "Isn't it the opposite?"

Michigan is one of 18 states that allows exemptions to vaccine mandates based on religious or other objections. The state is also currently in the midst of the largest Hepatitis A outbreak in the United States, which has killed 27 people since 2016. State officials attribute the problem in part to a lack of supply, and there currently exists no approved, abortion-free alternative, but better tracking of the different options could help Michiganders with moral or religious concerns protect themselves and others from other diseases in the future.

Featured Image
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy


Law passes in Australia requiring priests to break seal of confession, bishop protests

Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

CANBERRA, Australia, June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A new law in Australia requires Catholic priests in Canberra to break the sacred seal of confession to report a child-sex abuser. The law, which has drawn fierce opposition from Archbishop Christopher Prowse of Canberra, could result in faithful priests being jailed who refuse to comply. 

A bill passed on June 7 by the Legislative Assembly of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) extends mandatory reporting of child abuse to cover churches and church activities, including the Catholic confessional. All the political parties in the Assembly supported the measure.

A Roman Catholic priest cannot violate the seal of the confessional, which means that he cannot repeat what he is told by a penitent confessing his or her sins, without incurring automatic excommunication. The Catholic Church teaches that confession is a sacrament, a place of encounter between the Christian and Jesus Christ. The priest who hears the confession is merely Christ’s instrument of forgiveness. 

Hitherto the confessional was exempt from ACT’s reporting laws; from March 31, 2019, priests who do not report confessions regarding child abuse to the police risk prosecution. 

Archbishop Prowse slammed the new law, saying "priests are bound by a sacred vow to maintain the seal of the confession. Without that vow, who would be willing to unburden themselves of their sins, seek the wise counsel of a priest and receive the merciful forgiveness of God?"

Prowse, the archbishop of Canberra and Goulburn, wrote an essay in the Canberra Times last week explaining why legislating against the seal of confession will do much harm and no good.

“First, what sexual abuser would confess to a priest if they thought they would be reported?” he asked.

Prouse explained that it is the common experience of pastors that child abusers don’t confess their crimes to either priests or police. If the seal was removed, the theoretical possibility abusers might  confess and be counselled to turn themselves in would be lost. 

“Second, the government itself has acknowledged [with] the [Catholic] church’s ‘Truth, Justice and Healing Council... that [...] it [was] difficult to see systematic abuse of the seal of confession,” Prowse wrote. “People who attend confession are sorry for their sins, indicate resolve not to sin again and seek God’s mercy. Pedophiles carry out evil and unspeakable criminal acts. They hide their crimes; they do not self-report.”

Third, he pointed out that priests do not necessarily know the identities of people who confess to them.  

Fourth, he said that such a law attacks the inviolate seal of the confessional.

Originally the ACT government invited the archbishop to meet with the Attorney General to discuss the importance of both the protection of children and the seal of the confessional. However, the legislature began to debate the new bill before this meeting could take place. The archbishop decried this loss of opportunity for dialogue, pointing out that the proposed new law threatened religious freedom. 

“Religious freedom is the freedom to hold a belief and, secondly, the freedom to manifest belief in community and in public, privately and individually in worship, observance, practice and teaching,” he explained.

“The government threatens religious freedom by appointing itself an expert on religious practises and by attempting to change the sacrament of confession while delivering not improvement in the safety of children,” he continued. 

The new reporting laws will require priests to report allegations or offenses related to children to the ACT Ombudsman within 30 days.

Two members of the ACT Legislative Assembly thought forcing priests to break the seal of the confessional was a step in the wrong direction.

Andrew Wall, a former student of  Marist College, a school notorious in Australia for child sex abuse allegations, said that while some of the child protection measures in the new law were “overdue”, he objected to its extension to the confessional. 

According to the Canberra Times, Wall said forcing priests to break the confessional seal “significantly impinges on an individual’s freedom of association, freedom of expression and freedom of individual rights.”

Vicki Dunne, the second member, pointed out that a priest who breaks the seal of confession incurs an excommunication that can be lifted only by the pope. In addition, it would undermine Catholics’ trust in the "sacred, sacramental and sacrosanct" rite. 

“We need to stop and think twice before we pass legislation that requires Catholic priest to break the seal of the confession,” she had warned.  

Note: The original headline "Australia passes law requiring priests to break seal of confession, bishop protests" has been changed July 30, 2018 to avoid the confusion that the law is country wide. The law passed only in the Australian Capital Territory. 

Featured Image
Fr. James Martin in a March 7, 2018 America Magazine Youtube video titled ‘Spiritual Insights for LGBT Catholics.’ America Magazine / Youtube
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire

News, , ,

Fr. James Martin’s LGBT talk at Vatican event promotes ‘confusion and dissent’: critics

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-life Catholics and pro-family leaders are outraged and disappointed that the 2018 World Meeting of Families will feature LGBT-pushing Jesuit Father James Martin and that the event’s agenda has so far made no mention of abortion, even though it’s taking place in a country that just voted to legalize the lethal practice.

The World Meeting of Families (WMF), not to be confused with the World Congress of Families, is a massive Vatican-sanctioned conference that takes place every few years. The last one was in 2015 in Philadelphia. Pope Francis attended.

The Pope will also attend this year’s WMF, which is in Dublin in August.

“It must sicken the heart of every faithful Catholic to learn that a keynote address will be given by the controversial priest Father James Martin,” Anthony Murphy of the Lumen Fidei Institute told LifeSiteNews. “With this choice of speaker the Archbishop of Dublin once again signals his support for the homosexual agenda and he assists the promotion of confusion and dissent in the Church.”

The Lumen Fidei Institute is hosting an alternative event, “A Conference of Catholic Families,” in Dublin as the WMF takes place. That conference will use Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Casti Connubii as its starting point. Casti Connubii is sometimes called the “original Humanae Vitae,” because it reaffirmed Church teaching on marriage and procreation, contraception, and sexuality decades before Pope Paul VI’s encyclical.

Father Martin “causes scandal wherever he goes,” said Austin Ruse, president of the Center for Family and Human Rights. “It is deeply disappointing but not at all surprising he was invited to this event.”

“Father Martin’s record is not a good one; rather than leading same-sex attracted people to Christ he encourages them to live out their disordered attraction by telling them that the Church approves of their lifestyles,” said Murphy. “Martin tells sexually confused or compromised men and women that there is nothing wrong with what they do. He tells them God made them same-sex attracted in defiance of the clear teaching of the Church that homosexuality’s origin is psychological.”

‘He’s either lying or he’s clueless’

Father Martin uses his large social media platform to promote homosexuality and lobby the Church to change its teachings on homosexuality. The Jesuit was appointed to be a Vatican communications consultant in 2017. Before that, he had already begun to rise to fame as one of the most vocal supporters of homosexuality in the Church.

His notoriety and praise from left-wing bishops has only increased since then. He uses speaking engagements, media appearances, and his book Building a Bridge (based off of a 2016 talk he gave to the dissident group New Ways Ministry) to suggest Catholics who agree with Church teaching on human sexuality are bigots.

He supports gay men kissing each other during the sign of peace at Mass, says that a Catholic attending a same-sex “wedding” is like attending a Jewish wedding, and suggests that his critics are secretly gay themselves.

Father Martin says homosexual priests should “come out” about their sexual proclivities, but has publicly declined to say whether he himself is gay.

Father Martin announced on Monday that the Vatican invited him to speak at the WMF. The title of his talk is “Exploring how Parishes can support those families with members who identify as LGBTI+.”

Archbishop Eamon Martin and Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, who are neither related to each other nor Father Martin, held a press conference Monday about the latest program updates.

When LifeSiteNews inquired with Archbishop Eamon Martin, the Primate of all Ireland, about Martin being invited to speak, his spokesman said, “The Pastoral Congress programme has been approved by the Dicastery for Laity[,] Family and Life.”

“In 2015, I was raked over the coals for suggesting that the WMF was being co-opted by the LGBT movement to push a homosexual agenda,” Michael Hichborn, President of the Lepanto Institute, told LifeSiteNews. “Now, they're not even hiding the football!”

LifeSiteNews spoke with Robert Oscar Lopez, who was raised by two lesbians and for a time lived as a gay man, but now identifies as ex-gay and is married to a woman, about the Jesuit’s planned speech and record of LGBT advocacy.

“I know what it was like to be a young man and to be misled by people who had that kind of authority and prestige,” said Lopez.

“I think that he needs to come clean about what his experience is,” Lopez said of Father Martin. “If he’s had gay sex and he’s telling people that that’s a happy life, then he’s lying. If he’s never had gay sex and this is all just abstract to him, then he’s clueless. It’s one or the other. He’s either lying or he’s clueless.”

“I’ve had enough gay sex to know that it is unhealthy, it’s painful, it does not bring joy to someone’s life,” he said. “There’s no way your body is designed to do that for your entire life.”

Church in Ireland approaching ‘rock bottom’?

The theme of the 2018 WMF is Amoris Laetitia, the controversial papal exhortation that has forced prominent prelates to issue statements affirming Catholic morality while some of their brother bishops promulgate guidelines allowing for what the Church has always taught is sacrilege.

Casti Connubii, the document upon which “A Conference for Catholic Families” will be centered, is crystal clear about sexual ethics and Catholic morality. Pope Pius XI blasted contraception, abortion, and divorce in that encyclical.

The below topics, including Father Martin’s, are listed as “highlights” of the WMF:

  • The future of marriage preparation in Parishes.
  • Finding new ways of the joy of commitment and sacramental marriage in today’s culture.
  • The challenges of handing on faith in the home today.
  • Finding new language to affirm the joy, beauty and goodness of sexual love within marriage.
  • The importance of solidarity between the generations in family.
  • Exploring the impact of technology on the family.
  • Exploring the key role of the family in caring for ‘our common home’, the earth.
  • Looking at the relationship between business and the family.
  • Exploring the relationship between sport and the family.
  • What does Pope Francis mean by the ‘Throwaway Culture?’ (Address by Cardinal Tagle).
  • The link between the family and the forthcoming Synod on Vocational Discernment.
  • Looking at key challenges faced by many families today, including:
    • Homelessness
    • Addiction
    • Domestic Violence
    • Displacement as Migrants and Refugees.
    • Disability.
    • Separation and Divorce.
  • Exploring how Parishes can support those families with members who identify as LGBTI+ (presentation by James Martin SJ)
  • The joy of belonging to a family reflect in contemporary interest in our genealogies.
  • The vocation of fatherhood in today’s world.
  • There will be fun cookery demonstrations with faith and family themes.

“It is extraordinary that no mention has been made of the recent abortion referendum especially because at the same time the World Meeting of Families is taking place our politicians will be pushing through legislation to kill the unborn,” said Murphy. “It is remarkable for an event which is supposed to be about the family that the most vulnerable, the most defenceless and the most marginalised is ignored – namely the aborted child.”

“There is no mention of [counseling] to assist women considering abortion nor is there any mention of post abortion [counseling] for those women suffering with the trauma of termination,” he continued. “If the Church in Ireland cannot speak up for the plight of the unborn child then we really have reached rock bottom. The Catholics who voted for the killing of babies by their mothers have scornfully rejected Pope St. John Paul [and] St. Teresa of Calcutta and the Archbishop of Dublin has betrayed these great saints by his silence and weakness in the face of evil.”

An advisor to a bishop in that part of the world told LifeSiteNews he doesn’t understand why the WMF didn’t invite someone from the Courage apostolate or the creator of the documentary The Third Way.

Similarly, Ruse said Father Martin “undermines the great work of groups like Courage and he confuses young men who may be same-sex attracted.” The international pro-life leader said he hopes “that faithful Catholics in Ireland will strenuously object to [Fr. Martin’s] appearance.”

“The papal visit to Ireland will be [partly] funded by the State,” noted Murphy. In light of the WMF’s ignoring of the pro-life issue and invitation to Father Martin, “also with the deafening silence from the Vatican on the abortion referendum, it must be asked what price has been paid for the thirty pieces of silver from the Irish government,” he said.

“In short is it so important for the Church to have photographs of the Pope shaking hands and smiling with Irish politicians even if this means remaining silent on the defence of the unborn and refusing to speak about the Catholic Church’s beautiful teachings about the goodness and inherent purpose of human sexuality?” asked Murphy. “If so, then the WMOF is little more than a meaningless cosmetic exercise which will do nothing to stop the downward trajectory of the Church in Ireland.”

Featured Image
Monsignor Carlo Alberto Capella
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Follow Matthew

News, , ,

Vatican to prosecute high-ranking priest on child porn charges

Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Follow Matthew
By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

ROME, June 12, 2018 ( – The Holy See has announced that it will prosecute a priest and Vatican diplomat on child pornography charges later this month, following his arrest by Vatican police in April.

Msgr. Carlo Alberto Capella was recalled from his diplomatic post in the United States last year after Vatican authorities were informed by the U.S. State Department in August that he was under investigation for having committed “a possible violation of laws relating to child pornography images,” in the words of the Holy See Press Office.

Canadian police then announced in September that they had issued an arrest warrant for Capella for accessing, possessing, and distributing child pornography, while spending time at a place of worship in Windsor, Ontario, according to the Catholic News Service. 

The Holy See announced that same month that it had begun “international collaboration to obtain elements relative to the case.” 

Capella will be prosecuted under a Vatican City law created in 2013 by Pope Francis that establishes that those who “distribute, divulge, transmit, import, export, offer, sell, or possess” child pornography or “distribute or divulge news or information with the purpose of the sexual exploitation of minors” may be penalized with up to 5 years in prison and tens of thousands of Euros in fines, although the penalties may be increased if there are aggravating circumstances.

The Vatican has stated that the charges against Capella do include the “aggravating circumstance” of “a large quantity” of pornography involved, which could increase the penalty to up to 12 years of imprisonment if the priest is convicted. 

Capella is currently being held in a prison cell under the supervision of the Vatican Gendarmerie, the Holy See’s police force. His indictment was made on May 30 following his arrest, and his trial is scheduled to begin on June 22, according to the Holy See. 

Before his post in the United States, the career diplomat was involved with Vatican relations with Italy, and was cited for his work in establishing an agreement for fiscal cooperation between the Holy See and the Italian government. 

The charges against Capella come in the wake of severe criticism of Pope Francis for defending a bishop accused of permitting the sexual abuse of minors in Chile and for failing to respond to witness testimony against the bishop. Francis recently reversed his stance and is now stating that bishops should be careful to exclude homosexuals from seminaries. 

Featured Image
Aura Pon, developer of the 'Womba.' CTV News / video screen grab
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin


Preborn babies can now create music in mother’s womb thanks to new invention

Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

CALGARY, June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A pair of music researchers have invented a musical instrument designed to be played by a preborn child in the womb.

Aura Pon, a mother who holds a music technology PhD from the University of Calgary, has teamed up with Johnty Wang to invent the “world’s first prenatal musical instrument,” CTV News reports.

The device, dubbed the Womba, is strapped to a pregnant woman’s belly and creates music in response to the kicks and other movements of the baby growing inside her. Users can choose a variety of different sounds, and speakers enable both mother and child to hear the results. Its creators also hope to adapt the device for the baby to continue using after birth.

The device’s function and evolution can be seen in the following video:

“I thought it would be kind of fun to have him make sound,” Pon said, explaining that she first got the idea while pregnant with her first child in 2013. “I'm always interested in different ways you can interact with sound and music.”

“The first version of the Womba was, essentially, just sensors taped to my belly which were set up to trigger sounds on a church organ. The location of certain kicks would set off certain chords,” she elaborated to the university’s news website UToday. “As far as being a bonding tool, I’ll tell you that it was pretty amazing to be able to hear my baby making these sounds. It was magical.”

Pon and Wang, whose own wife was pregnant as well, spent the next few years evolving the concept from a hobby into a serious project to take advantage of the “Mozart effect,” the developmental benefit believed to come with playing music for children during pregnancy.

“It's also about bonding,” Pon added, stressing that the Womba also serves as an innovative way to convey the personhood of the being in the womb. “Those that can't feel the kicks all the time, you know, they can now see it and hear it and start to be like, 'That's a person in there.'”

Pon and Wang have applied for a U.S. patent for the Womba, and say a company has already expressed interest in helping develop it.

Featured Image
In a video funded by Canadian taxpayers, Jessi Cruickshank talks to young children about same-sex parenting, lesbian fantasies, and what it means to be a 'gay icon.'
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin

News, , ,

CBC host rips LifeSite for criticizing twisted LGBT propaganda video

Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A Canadian media personality has fired back at LifeSiteNews for a critical article about a recent video proselytizing LGBT “pride” to children.

On June 5, LifeSiteNews reported on a video produced by the taxpayer-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), released during what LGBT activists and media have declared to be “Pride Month.”

READ: Kids learn about ‘sexual diversity’ in twisted video promoting LGBT ‘pride’

Styled like a kids’ TV show, it featured Jessi Cruickshank asking young boys and girls whether it would be “cool to have two moms,” telling them how actress Jodie Foster “made me question my sexuality” with a nude scene, urging them to “aspire to be a gay icon,” and more.

“To use young children to push the gay agenda is monstrous and manipulative,” Media Research Center Vice President of Business and Culture Dan Gainor told LifeSiteNews. “That this appeared on public media makes it even worse.”

On Monday, Cruickshank responded to LifeSiteNews’ article on Instagram, claiming her work on “the beauty of acceptance” instead started an “ugly controversy.”

“I believe in promoting education over intolerance. I believe people are born to love and taught to hate,” she continued, ending by claiming that the video demonstrated the next generation’s receptiveness to homosexuality.

“All of the ‘ugliness’ here comes from the original video, not the fact that we noticed it,” John-Henry Westen, co-founder and editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews, said. “These children are all still years away from puberty, yet the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation apparently thinks nothing of introducing them to sexual fantasies or suggesting they look for nude videos.

“Sexualizing such young children and drafting them into the LGBT activist ranks is indefensible,” Westen continued. “Apparently even Jessi Cruickshank knows that deep down, considering she didn’t even try to defend it.”

Cruickshank’s post featured the article’s title and cover photo, but neither quoted from the piece nor addressed the specific objections it raised.

Among the criticisms she ignored was the near-certainty that an adult discussing heterosexual fantasies with small children would be universally condemned in any other setting, while a special exception is apparently made in the name of homosexuality.

Another was how the video glosses over the fact that having “two dads” necessarily means having no mother (or vice-versa). 

“I dare the makers of this film to re-shoot the video,” said Katy Faust, a children’s rights activist who was raised by two lesbians, in a previous interview about the CBC video with LifeSiteNews. 

Instead, she said, they should ask the kids, “do you think it would be cool to have no dad?”  

“The response would go from ‘yes!’ to ‘that would be terrible,’” she said. “Because for most kids, it is.”

“If you doubt it, just ask any kid who lost their dad to divorce, abandonment, donor-conception or death,” she added. “Having ‘two moms’ or ‘two dads’ always means losing one parent that the child longs for, and has a right to. And that's an injustice.”

Featured Image
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy


Confessions of a Sex & the City addict: It destroyed my life

Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

NEW YORK, June 11, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A woman who based her life on the 1990s most influential television sex comedy has lived to regret it. 

Julia Allison, the star of Bravo’s short-lived “Miss Advised” reality show, wrote a sad confession in the New York Post last week to mark the 20th anniversary of HBO’s “Sex & the City”.

Based on a book by Candice Bushnell, “Sex and the City” followed the amorous adventures of three 30-somethings and one 40-something in 1990s Manhattan. The show, which ran for 6 seasons and inspired two films, starred Sarah Jessica Parker (Carrie), Cynthia Nixon (Miranda), Kim Cattrall (Samantha), Kristin Davis (Charlotte), and Chris Noth (Mr. Big). It combined clever dialogue and stunning sets with soft-core pornography.

Allison fell in love--with the show. 

“I was a rising high school senior when ‘Sex and the City’ debuted in 1998,” she wrote, “and I was instantly enthralled. I wanted to be like Carrie and her friends: I wanted to be glamorous and beautiful and dress well and have lots of dates.”

When she went to Georgetown University, a Catholic college in Washington, D.C., she dolled up and revelled in male attention. Mimicking Carrie Bradshaw’s career as a sex columnist, she wrote her own dating column for the college paper. It was called “Sex on the Hilltop.” And, naturally, after university she rushed to New York City, envisioning Carrie’s life of “nonstop brunching and shopping.” 

Allison discovered, however, that becoming a real-life Carrie Bradshaw would be difficult, especially as budding columnists don’t earn enough to buy Carrie’s snazzy wardrobe. Until her big break in 2006, when she got a job writing for “Star” magazine, Allison depended on the men she dated for both food and the designer accessories she craved: 

“I lived on food bought for me on dates and the occasional bodega tuna sandwich,” she wrote. “Different men I dated gave me [Yves St Laurent] shoes and status purses, just like [billionaire boyfriend] Big did for Carrie on “SATC”.

But most tragically, Allison adopted Carrie Bradshaw’s sexual philosophy, which can be summed up as “Why should women feel any attachment to the men they sleep with?” Carrie recorded her sexual adventures in her fictional column; Allison did the same in real life. 

“There was no such thing as a bad date,” she wrote, “only a good date or a good brunch story.” 

Her social life and attempts to make it as a real-life Carrie Bradshaw brought her the attention of the satirical gossip website Gawker, whose attacks “devastated” her.  And her career ambitions led her to film pilot after pilot of shows inspired by the popularity of “Sex and the City”, always with “Allison” in the “Carrie” role. When one of the shows finally “made it”, she discovered that she was tired of having cameras around all the time. 

Now she regrets swallowing the worldly and cynical message of the television show.

“I do wonder what my life would have looked like if “Sex and the City” had never come across my consciousness,” she said. “Perhaps I’d be married with children now?”

“Truth be told, I wish I had never heard of “SATC.” I’m sure there are worse role models but, for me, it did permanent and measurable damage to my psyche that I’m still cleaning up,” she wrote.

“Sure, I could have been a dating columnist for the rest of my life but, honestly, I gave really bad dating advice — and so did Carrie Bradshaw,” she added.

Featured Image
Alana Newman
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug


Former pro-abortion militant feminist makes film on why sexual revolution was wrong

Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring
Alana Newman Springtime Productions / Youtube screen grab

June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Seven years ago, Alana and Rickard Newman set out to make a movie chronicling Alana’s very personal quest to find her biological father – an anonymous sperm donor.  

The duo ended up producing something quite different – a sprawling, visually and intellectually engaging documentary to benefit the entire world.  

Alana, a talented secular musician who gave up her musical career for life, family, and love, remains at the heart of the final product, sharing how through desperation to know her father she finds herself discovering the treasures of St. John Paul II’s Theology of the Body and Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae, both on the topics of love and marriage.  

And perhaps not surprisingly, Alana and Rickard’s search for truth led them to a place neither anticipated at the outset of their quest:  Both experienced a dramatic conversion to Catholicism.

Sexual Revolution seeks to examine the effects of the free-love experiment of the hippie generation and the prophetic encyclical, Humanae Vitae, while closely examining the history of the parallel developments of the Pill and modern Natural Family Planning (NFP).

Brought to life in collaboration with director and producer Daniel DiSilva, the film features interviews with leading thinkers Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, Dr. Janet Smith, Dr. Peter Kreeft, Dr. Robert P. George, Dr. Mark Regnerus, Steven Mosher, Mary Eberstadt and many more who are important voices reckoning the ongoing damage of the sexual revolution with the timeless wisdom of Church teaching.

The movie captures the mood of the era with its lush musical soundtrack featuring artists such as Joni Mitchell, The Byrds, Eric Clapton, Neil Diamond, Paul McCartney, and Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young.  

LifeSiteNews reached out to Alana Newman in order to better understand how and why she and husband, Rickard, devoted seven years of their lives to this project.

LifeSiteNews:  Alana, most of our readers don’t know your personal story regarding third party reproduction.  Can you speak a little about that so our readers understand the deep yearning that compelled you to launch this project? 

Alana: I have never met my biological father. And actually, neither has my mother. This is because my mother's first husband was infertile and they decided to use an anonymous donor to conceive me. 

My husband started filming me soon after we met and the original thought behind this film was that we were going to search for, discover and meet my father.  The only thing I knew about this man who makes up half my genes is that he was ethnically Polish and raised Catholic—so in my efforts to learn more about my long lost Polish and Catholic heritage I picked up an interest in the most famous Polish Catholic man I was aware of, Pope John Paul II.

So in the more important sense, I did come to know and embrace my father during the making of this film—God, the Father. I am continually blown away by the wisdom the Church offers—it's like discovering a well when you've been wandering in the desert by yourself for years.

LifeSiteNews:  How did the movie take shape?  The idea of pairing the sexual revolution with the Humanae Vitae, while also pairing the parallel developments of the Pill and modern Natural Family Planning (NFP) by telling the stories of Dr. Pincus and the Drs. Billings is awesome.  How did that come together?

Alana: My husband began filming shortly after we met. It was going to be about my donor-conception story. Then at some point we became very interested in finding solutions to infertility.  I realized that two major causes of infertility could be generalized as our toxic environment and our toxic behaviors. Hormonal contraceptives make massive, negative contributions to both our toxic environment (via synthetic estrogens) as well as our toxic behaviors (STD induced infertility, delayed childbearing, mistrust between genders, etc.). So I developed a passionate conviction that hormonal contraceptives were evil. 

But as a woman in my 20's and now early 30's, I truly understand the fears and responsibilities associated with pregnancy and childrearing. It is very important to me to be able to enjoy intimacy, while confidently being able to manage and space my children. That is where my interest in Natural Family Planning took root.  

Luckily, my husband stumbled upon The Billings Ovulation Method at a conference for Family Life Directors and we felt like God really loved us by revealing to us an NFP method that is so simple and intuitive. He bought a couple of books, one called The Billings Enigma, and previously having read The Birth of The Pill by Jonathan Eig he realized that there was an intense spiritual battle going on during the 50's and 60's.  It was only a small group of people responsible for the invention of The Pill, and only a small group of people involved in discovering modern NFP—and if you examine their stories and the timeline you can really see God's hand at work, His mercy, and creativity.

I think viewers of this film will be struck with the level of investigative journalism that went into it—and when they learn about the differences in how these two different forms of family planning were developed, I imagine many people might have their faith strengthened significantly.

LifeSiteNews:  You say that the experts you interviewed were not only instrumental in making the movie, but also helped you and Rickard on the way to your conversion to the Catholic Church.  What happened?

Alana:  People will see me in the film and think that I'm a regular conservative Catholic white lady with some kids living in the suburbs. What they don't realize is that I used to be a militant feminist volunteer for NARAL that dated women and went to atheist club meetings at a German bar in San Francisco. 

I discovered the marriage and family work of Elizabeth Marquardt and David Blankenhorn at The Institute for American Values. Then through them I met some incredible Catholic thinkers like Professor Robert George, Mark Regnerus, Mary Eberstadt, Jennifer Roback Morse, and others. Reading these people's work, I was struck first by how well they seemed to articulate human nature. Secondly, they didn't back off or back down when peer pressure became too intense. 

It was the hardcore Catholics that showed backbone and courage under fire. Clear language and good ideas regarding marriage and family were the tools I needed to cultivate a family of my own. Thank you to all of you who stand fiercely behind Church wisdom on these topics. Your steadfastness matters.

LifeSiteNews:  Our readers are highly engaged in pro-life, pro-marriage, and pro-family issues, often as local activists.  How will your movie aid them in promoting a culture of life in their parishes and local communities?

Alana:  Films are the preferred way of communicating ideas for most people today. With film you get the opportunity to communicate through not only words, but also body language, iconography, fashion, and music. 

Film is communal.  It starts conversations. And it can be an event—an excuse to gather. 500 people can sit side by side and watch a film and discuss it immediately afterwards. 

Films are also difficult to make. A well done film that promotes Church teaching on human ecology is rare—so this is a great opportunity for parishes and pro-family organizations to share the wisdom the Church has revealed to us, in a popular and easy-to-digest format.

LifeSiteNews:  What do you hope people will take away from your movie?  What role do you think it can play to advance a culture of life?

Alana:  I want people to see this film and want to learn NFP, or make the move to become an NFP instructor. 

Natural Family Planning is the practical application of Theology of The Body.  Learning how to chart is like learning how to read music, and it eventually offers total bliss from being able to take those notes on a page and make real music with your body.

NFP advances a culture of life because it reconnects sex and babies in people's imagination. It means that every time a man approaches a woman for sex, he can't help but recognize the power of her body to make new human beings. That recognition of power is the beginning of respect.

Arrange a Screening of Sexual Revolution 

Sexual Revolution is available for screenings at churches, schools, and other organizations and events for a small licensing fee.  To bring this groundbreaking documentary to your parish, school, or organization, visit

Featured Image
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike


Papal advisor claims Francis would not give ‘strict no’ to women’s ordination

Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The new preparatory document for the 2019 Pan-Amazon Synod of Bishops is calling for the Church to open an “official ministry” to women, and seeking “courageous” and inculturated proposals for an “inclusive ministerial action.” Bishop Erwin Kräutler, one of the organizers of this forthcoming October 2019 Synod, is promoting the idea of ordaining married men to the priesthood for that Amazon region, and even women. He carefully claims that Pope Francis would also be open to that larger idea of the ordination of women.

These claims stand in contrast to Pope Francis' own public statement during his flight from Sweden to Rome on November 1, 2016, namely that Pope John Paul II had closed the door to female priests with his 1994 Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis. Pope Francis said: “As for the ordination of women in the Catholic Church, the last clear word was given by Saint John Paul II, and this holds.” Moreover, on May 30, 2018, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, the Pope's Doctrine chief, restated this truth and insisted that the ban of female priests is part of the Church's infallible teaching. Those Catholics in favor of female ordination, however, have now interpreted this recent May 30 statement as a possible opening toward at least female deacons since Ladaria did not explicitly mention them in his text and also since Pope Francis himself had appointed Ladaria in 2016 to lead a study commission on the issue of women deacons.

Bishop Kräutler is a retired Brazilian bishop who is a member of the pre-synodal council that met with Pope Francis in April for a two-day preparational meeting. He has spoken and written amply about the idea of ordaining women to the priesthood, since, as he also insists, in the Pan-Amazon region women are often the leaders of the local communities. As LifeSiteNews recently reported, Kräutler said in a 2016 interview that he is “skeptical” about ordaining merely the so-called viri probati (morally proven married men) to the priesthood, because then “there would be half of humanity excluded! At the Xingu [a river in Brazil], there are two thirds of the communities that are now being led by women.” Here, the prelate makes it clear that he wishes for both female and male (married) priests. In another 2017 interview, he expressed his hope that the Pan-Amazon region at least could receive married priests and female deacons.

What now comes added to this statement is that Kräutler claims Pope Francis would be somehow open to such an idea.

As presented in greater detail in a OnePeterFive report, Kräutler published in 2016 a book in Austria which is entitled Habt Mut! (“Be Courageous!” – Tyrolia Verlag). In it, the Austrian-born bishop candidly sums up his private audience with Pope Francis on April 4, 2014. In that meeting he spoke with the Pope on the ecological problems of the Amazon region (in preparation for the papal encyclical Laudato si') and then about the lack of priests in his Diocese of Xingu, Brazil. In this context, the Pope asked Kräutler and his fellow bishops in Brazil to make “bold proposals” for mitigating the shortage of priests. (Reportedly, there are parishes in that part of Brazil where a visiting priest is able celebrate Mass only a few times a year.)

Kräutler himself favors for the Pan-Amazon region the ordination of local women to the priesthood. He discusses in his 2016 book the fact that Pope John Paul II, in 1994, ruled out female priests in his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. The bishop insists that “this is not a doctrine de fide.” He makes it clear that he believes Pope Francis would, nevertheless, be open to ordaining women.

“It is true that Pope Francis has his background in Argentina. Nevertheless, I do not believe that he would say a strict 'no' to the ordination of women, a quod non,” Kräutler explains. “I do not believe that he thinks in the logic of 'either – or',” he adds. “Of course he would not come and say 'everything that the popes said before me is checked off.'”

But in Kräutler's eyes, the Pope well knows that sometimes in the Church's history, there were decisions made “which a few decades earlier, nobody could have imagined.” Here, the bishop mentions as an example how the Church changed her positions with regard to the themes of separation of Church and State, as well as of democracy. Additionally, the bishop refers to Vatican II's text Dignitatis Humanae, “which did away for good with” the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX, especially with regard to religious liberty. “Certain convictions and interpretations,” adds the prelate, “which once were presented with vehemence, and even defended as being unchangeable, have often, nevertheless, completely changed during the course of history.” Kräutler claims that this is also how Pope Francis looks upon changes in the Church's teaching: “I am convinced that Francis stands in this tradition which is finally open for the dialogue and for changes.”

Bishop Kräutler continues, saying that, since Pope John Paul II's statement on the question of female priests “is very determined,” Pope Francis “will not do anything alone in the question of priesthood, celibacy and female ordination, but, if so, then it will be together with the bishops.” Any decision in that regard “certainly” should not be “immediately implemented world-wide,” but only regionally at first (for example in the Pan-Amazon region?). Kräutler's own proposal is that there should first be some “regional solutions.”

Referring back to Pope Francis, Kräutler adds that such a regional solution with regard to the priesthood “is not about a 'yes' or 'no' to celibacy.” He continues, saying: “Sometimes, people accuse me of wishing to abolish celibacy. No, I do not wish it at all, and the Pope does not wish it, either.”

Kräutler also details in his 2016 book the idea that those women who are already preparing and leading the liturgy of the word on Sunday in certain regions in the Pan-Amazon region could be further prepared “so that they could preside over the Eucharist for their parish. For their parish! This limitation seems to me important.” The Austrian bishop thinks that this group of people are men and women who are ordained only for their own parish. “Ideally, this could be even two or three people, in the sense of the Teams of Elders, as proposed by Bishop Lobinger.” In this regard,  Kräutler insists upon the ordination of these persons.

The name of Bishop Lobinger had been mentioned by Pope Francis during the 2016 private audience with Bishop Kräutler. Kräutler reports in his book that Pope Francis himself brought up two topics that came to his mind when considering this problem of a lack of priests. First, he spoke about an experiment as conducted by a Mexican Bishop, Samuel Ruiz García. In the words of Kräutler, Pope Francis spoke about “a diocese in Mexico, where the bishop mitigated and softened, in part, the problem of the lack of priests by ordaining 300 married leaders of his parishes as deacons.” Here, the Pope was referring to Samuel Ruiz García, Bishop of San Cristóbal de las Casas (in Chiapas).

The German journalist Giuseppe Nardi has shown that this bishop had an “indigenous priesthood” in mind when ordaining those 300 indigenous deacons in the 1990s. Being mindful of the important role of women in this Mexican culture, he included some of the wives in a strange way in the ordination of these deacons. In 2001, after the bishop had retired the year before, the Vatican stopped this novel endeavor. (However, in 2014, under Pope Francis, the Vatican gave permission to resume that earlier practice.) Pope Francis himself gave honor to Bishop García (who died in 2011) when visiting his grave in Mexico in 2015.

Next to Pope Francis' reference to the unusual practice of ordaining many married men to the diaconate and also somehow including their wives in the ordination rite, the Pope then brought up the ideas of a controversial bishop from South Africa (Aliwal), Bishop Fritz Lobinger, also an Austrian by birth. Kräutler says: “The Pope also brought up the proposal of a bishop in South Africa – it is Bishop Fritz Lobinger – according to whom parishes without priests could be led by a 'Team of Elders.'” This  Team of Elders, in Bishop Lobinger's view,  should be ordained, so that they can also celebrate the Eucharist with their parishes. Important to know is that Bishop Lobinger propagates the idea of having women among that ordained “Team of Elders” who are persons respected by their own local community. It was in the context of considering Bishop Lobinger and his ideas that Pope Francis told Bishop Kräutler to make some “bold proposals.” As Bishop Kräutler explains in his own book, the pope used here the incisive word “corajudos,”  which means boldness, fearlessness, and openness.

A year later, in 2015, Pope Francis himself discussed with the German bishops also the books of Bishop Lobinger. At that time, the Pope told the German bishops on their Ad Limina visit to Rome that he had read the three major books of Lobinger which deal with the shortage of priests and with possible solutions.

After this consequential 2014 papal audience, in September of that year, Kräutler helped found the Panamazonian Ecclesial Network REPAM (a network of nine Churches of the Pan-Amazon region) which is currently working together with the General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops in order to organize the Pan-Amazon Synod in Rome. Kräutler himself is now the coordinator of the Brazilian branch of REPAM. Pope Francis appointed both REPAM's President – Cardinal Cláudio Hummes –  and its Vice President – cardinal-elect Pedro Ricardo Barreto Jimeno, S.J. – as well as REPAM's executive secretary as members of the small pre-synodal council. As Kräutler recently said in an interview: “REPAM will play a key role at the Synod,” since the pope “is really counting on our [REPAM's] contributions to the Synod.” Cardinal Hummes is a close friend of Pope Francis and he is said to have inspired the pope to take the name Francis for his papacy.

It will be seen how many of Bishop Kräutler's ideas as he presented them in his 2016 book will be picked up at the 2019 Synod. On June 8, the Vatican presented at a press conference its new preparatory document, the so-called Instrumentum Laboris, for this synod in Rome. This document indirectly quotes the 2014 discussion between Pope Francis and Bishop Kräutler when it asks synod participants to make “'courageous' proposals, that is, the 'daring' and fearless attitudes that Pope Francis asks of us.” This text also proposes to “evaluate and rethink the ministries” and to develop “methods, and attitudes necessary for an inculturated pastoral ministry” that would assist and suit the Pan-Amazon regions' needs in light of a strong lack of priests. It is in this context that the document brings up the idea of fostering “indigenous and local-born clergy” and of identifying “the type of official ministry that can be conferred on women, taking into account the central role which women play today in the Amazonian Church.”

This 2016 book as written by Bishop Kräutler has been in the public for 2 years now, and there has been no denial of his presentation of his private conversation with the Pope who still works with him closely. (Kräutler also co-authored Laudato si'.) LifeSiteNews reached out to the Vatican Press Office, asking for comment. LifeSiteNews also reached out to Bishop Kräutler and requested a statement from him as to whether he has changed his position, now that Archbishop Luis Ladaria has stated publicly that the interdict against female priests is part of the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.

Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry


Help us continue shining a light on stories like Alfie Evans’

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

Let’s face it: the mainstream media is a tidal wave of liberal ideologies that either takes the majority along with it, or leaves many in its wake. With these continuous attacks on life, family, and faith, it often seems impossible to swim upstream.

But swimming upstream is exactly what’s needed. Today, your support allows pro-life and pro-family news coverage to be shared with the world - an absolutely essential requirement if we are going to affirm the traditional family and life-affirming values we stand for!

This summer, to continue our mission we must raise a minimum of $225,000 by July 1st to keep our pro-life and pro-family news-reporting running at its current high levels in the U.S., Canada, and around the world.

Your gift of as little as $35.00, or a recurring donation of $10/month, helps us reach thousands with pro-life and pro-family news reporting.


The truth is, your support of our mission turns the tide and helps change the narrative on life and family issues so that the world may experience this Truth - and this is why LifeSite exists!

Your support is needed to spread the truth across the world, at a time when it is most desperately needed.

Let me give you a concrete example: 

Despite the growing tidal wave of biased anti-life news, most recently our staff swam upstream in order to report on Alfie Evans. That beautiful young child in the UK was forced to fight for his life because the Liverpool hospital decided he was no longer worthy of being offered basic palliative care or any alternative diagnoses or care at other hospitals. 

In other words - his undiagnosed brain condition was deemed to make him unworthy to have a chance at life!!!

Your support allowed Alfie and his parents, and many others undergoing similar deadly discrimination, to have a voice through on-the-ground reporting from a news source operating from a Christian worldview. 

Because of our lead reporting on this crucial story, other news outlets later followed our lead. International awareness of the frightening medical and judicial tyranny in Britain exploded.

Sadly, the hospital removed ventilation, despite his parents’ desperate pleas and the pleas of prominent leaders and thousands upon thousands of the public. And yet, Alfie continued to live for days.

While sad stories like Alfie’s make us want to throw our hands up and walk away - we must continue to fight! 

Your support today ensures stories like Alfie’s are heard – and that LifeSite, not the extremely biased, untrustworthy mainstream media, is the leading news source on stories like his! 

Will you continue to give a voice to the voiceless and help us turn the tide? Alfie’s and his parents’ pleas for help were ignored by the mainstream media. LifeSite’s coverage helped turn the spotlight on their situation.

We have become aware that there are many more stories like Alfie’s around the world. Many find themselves feeling totally helpless, vulnerable, alone and not knowing where to turn to against seemingly impossible odds and a culture that does not respect life, marriage, family, faith and freedom.

Your gift is a concrete way to ensure that millions receive the news and information they need to swim against the tide of a growing culture of death that also seems determined to destroy the natural family, the source and nurturer of new life.

I hope you will prayerfully consider the crisis of our culture and how you can personally play a part in countering its effects. 

Your support for our Summer campaign means that we can continue to be the trusted pro-life and pro-family media voice in North America and around the world.

Featured Image
Katie Franklin

News, ,

YouTube apologizes to Abortion Pill Reversal group, reinstates video account

Katie Franklin

June 12, 2018 (Pregnancy Help News) – Following a temporary suspension for allegedly "harmful or dangerous content," Abortion Pill Reversal's YouTube channel is once again up and running after YouTube admitted the suspension was a mistake.

At the end of April, YouTube suspended the account for "repeated or severe violations of [the] Community Guidelines." The "offending" videos included one webinar explaining Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) in scientific and medical terms. Another three told the stories of women who chose life for their babies using the APR protocol.

Following the suspension, Danielle M. White, J.D., legal counsel for Heartbeat International, initiated the appeal process with YouTube, and enlisted the support of Susan B. Anthony List to make their case to the company.

Upon reviewing the APR channel, YouTube reinstated the account, notifying SBA List that the suspension had been a mistake.

"We commend YouTube for acknowledging their mistake and promptly resolving it," said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. "No woman should ever be censored for sharing her testimony simply because she chose life – even at the last minute. Nor should vital life-saving information be censored from the public."

Mallory Quigley, Vice President of Communications for SBA List, says censorship of pro-life views has become far too common.

"Big social media companies have a track record of arbitrarily banning content from pro-life groups who then have to jump through hoops to have it reinstated, while organizations like Planned Parenthood are allowed to promote abortion on demand," said Quigley. "Social media is a great equalizer for pro-lifers standing up to the well-funded abortion lobby and its massive PR machine. We will continue to assert our rights and fight the censorship of pro-life views."

Citing its policies on "harmful or dangerous content," YouTube's original suspension notice stated that it "doesn't allow content that encourages or promotes violent or dangerous acts that have an inherent risk of serious physical harm or death." Examples of videos that violate this policy are videos about "instructional bomb making, choking games, hard drug use, or other acts where serious injury may result."

Since the Abortion Pill Reversal's inception in 2007, abortion advocates have derided it as "junk science," "scientifically unproven" and "appalling." 

But in April, a new study was released to the public, affirming that the Abortion Pill Reversal protocol is both safe and effective for women who change their mind after beginning a chemical abortion. 

The study, which followed 754 women who wanted to stop their in-progress chemical abortion, reported a 68 percent success rate in reversing the effects of mifepristone, the first pill in the two-part chemical abortion process. 

The APR protocol involves administering progesterone to counteract the first abortion pill. Progesterone is FDA-approved and has been used to prevent miscarriage since the 1950s. Today, the APR protocol is backed by a network of 350 medical providers and a 24/7 hotline (1-877-558-0333), now operated by Heartbeat International through OptionLine. Since 2007, over 500 women have used the APR protocol to save their babies from abortion.

Rebecca, one of the hundreds of women who chose life after taking the abortion pill, bravely allowed her heartfelt testimony to be shared on the Abortion Pill Reversal YouTube channel.

The video, which has been viewed over 7,000 times, features her son Elijah, a healthy toddler with curly sandy blonde hair and smiling brown eyes.

"It sounds cliche and trite that my baby Elijah's everything that has ever happened to me but he is," says Rebecca. "He is God's true gift to me and he gives me more love than I deserve."

"I can't even almost picture life without my baby," she says.

Thanks to the reinstatement of the APR YouTube account, testimonies like Rebecca's will be heard once more, reaching more hearts and minds in the service of saving still more women and babies from the harm of abortion.

Published with permission from Pregnancy Help News.

Featured Image
JStone /
Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.

News, ,

Abortion orgs complain at UN: Trump admin ruining global abortion access

Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.
By Rebecca Oas Ph.D.

June 12, 2018 (C-Fam) – For decades, the global abortion lobby has worked hard to embed abortion advocacy within a wide array of projects and agendas, from maternal health to global peace and security to humanitarian relief. During that time, one policy has worked to mute the spread of abortion, Mexico City Policy.

On Tuesday, the Center for Health and Gender Equity (CHANGE) released a report detailing what they charge are the harms of the Mexico City Policy, enacted by Republican administrations since President Ronald Reagan. The policy blocks U.S. funding for foreign organizations that advocate for or provide abortions. Under President Donald Trump, the policy was expanded from family planning to all global health funding and rebranded as Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA).

CHANGE refers to the policy as the "global gag rule" and acknowledges that most of those interviewed for the report would never refer to it by its official name, "finding the mere mention of it objectionable."

The report launch featured several African speakers, including a representative of a Mozambique-based International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) affiliate that refused to comply with the new guidelines, costing them $2 million, or 60% of their budget.

Helene Chiquele, a gender program officer for Oxfam in Mozambique, spoke about how the country had relaxed its abortion restrictions in 2014, but the issue remains highly contentious among Mozambican people. According to Chiquele, the expanded Mexico City Policy has negatively impacted abortion advocacy. She says some in her country are asking, "Why are we considering losing [U.S. health assistance] money for the sake of abortion?"

All the speakers agreed that the loss of U.S. funding to abortion advocacy groups was having an impact on local politics, echoing previous admissions by the policy's detractors that it is, in fact, effective.

While the expansion of Mexico City Policy under Trump may have caught them off guard, abortion advocates were not surprised by the reinstatement of the policy, nor the speed with which it was done.

Nevertheless, as representatives of CHANGE pointed out, a key strategy under President Barack Obama was to integrate abortion into other global health programs. Since abortion has infiltrated these others areas, such as the provision of clean water and HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, expanded Mexico City provides a powerful incentive to keep abortion out. What's more, it clearly identifies those whose commitment to abortion exceeds their dedication to other more pressing issues.

Tell Congress to keep their promise and defund Planned Parenthood. Sign the petition here!

The report mentions in passing the European-led "She Decides" campaign, but acknowledges that it has not been able to replace the lost U.S. funding to abortion-promoting groups.

The IPPF and Marie Stopes International are the two largest groups among the four who have reportedly refused to comply with expanded Mexico City Policy and lost U.S. foreign aid funding. As IPPF has positioned itself as a leading global provider of LGBT-centric services, its affiliates are quick to point out that the loss of U.S. funding due to their abortion advocacy is harming marginalized communities, including people who identify as LGBT.

According to one of CHANGE's interviewees, "In many countries, it is the reproductive health community that is often one of the biggest allies of LGBT issues."

The IPPF affiliate in Mozambique reportedly closed 20 clinics offering LGBT services, indicating the degree to which PLGHA is uniquely effective at impacting both abortion and the broader "sexual rights" agenda.

Published with permission from C-Fam.

Featured Image
Stefano Gennarini, J.D.

News, , ,

EU Court of Justice: All EU nations must welcome same-sex ‘spouses’

Stefano Gennarini, J.D.
By Stefano Gennarini J.D.

June 12, 2018 (C-Fam) – Homosexual rights got a boost from a groundbreaking judgment of the European Court of Justice that forces all EU member states to welcome the same-sex "spouses" of EU citizens, even when they are not EU nationals.

The European Court of Justice fell short of imposing an obligation on EU member states to recognize homosexual marriages but opened another avenue for homosexual marriage in Europe by declaring a "derived right of residence" in EU states for same-sex spouses of EU nationals who are non-EU citizen.

The Court recognized that homosexual marriage may not be a human right but held that homosexual couples can still claim a right of residence in EU countries based on the right to free movement in the EU treaty.

The Court reasoned that for purposes of EU law the term 'spouse' "is gender-neutral and may therefore cover the same-sex spouse of the Union citizen concerned." The EU directive to which the court referred was a 2004 directive on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States.

This is a breakthrough for homosexual rights in Europe following several years of setbacks, particularly at the European Court of Human Rights, another European court with exclusive jurisdiction on human rights matters, which repeatedly and explicitly stated that homosexual marriage is not a human right under European human rights law because European law only recognizes traditional marriage as a human right. Some 12 EU member states do not recognize homosexual marriage and will be affected by the judgment.

The European Court of Justice cited the human rights court to rule that the "relationship of a homosexual couple may fall within the notion of 'private life' and that of 'family life' in the same way as the relationship of a heterosexual couple in the same situation."

But the Court was careful to state this did not establish a right to homosexual marriage. This "does not undermine the institution of marriage," the judgment of the Court opined, because marriage remained "defined by national law" and "falls within the competence of the Member States."

TELL DISNEY: Don’t make Elsa a lesbian in Frozen 2! Sign the petition here.

The judgment further clarified, "Such recognition does not require that Member State to provide, in its national law, for the institution of marriage between persons of the same sex. It is confined to the obligation to recognize such marriages, concluded in another Member State in accordance with the law of that state, for the sole purpose of enabling such persons to exercise the rights they enjoy under EU law."

The Court therefore concluded that "an obligation to recognize such marriages for the sole purpose of granting a derived right of residence to a third-country national does not undermine the national identity or pose a threat to the public policy of the Member State concerned."

The judgment will likely have repercussions on cases at the European Court of Human Rights. In the last judgment on this issue it left open the possibility of imposing homosexual marriage in based on non-discrimination. Having been granted a right of residence in EU member states same-sex spouses will likely claim they are being discriminated against by not receiving full legal recognition of their homosexual marriage.

Published with permission from C-Fam.

Featured Image
Ryan Bomberger Ryan Bomberger Follow Ryan

Opinion, ,

Amazing: Gun control protest becomes productive, civil conversation

Ryan Bomberger Ryan Bomberger Follow Ryan
By Ryan Bomberger

June 12, 2018 (Radiance Foundation) – Sometimes we're not as different as we think we are. Sometimes we're not as polarized as mainstream media would like us to be. Sometimes we just need to stop labeling and start listening.

This past weekend the Western Conservative Summit (WSC) held a powerful conference exploring and extolling ways of fortifying freedom. I was invited to speak to hundreds of youth at Colorado Christian University and had an amazing time navigating through some of today's toughest social issues. I encouraged students to be factivists, not activists. I also keynoted at the main conference and was honored to receive a standing ovation when I shared my story of being conceived in rape, yet adopted and loved.

But sometimes we don't have a captive audience willing to listen to what we have to say. Trust me. I know from many personal experiences as a public speaker. I'll never forget a lecture at Harvard where I "debated" with a professor who knew nothing about the topic being discussed (abortion's disproportionate impact in the black community). Student activists in the auditorium would rather curse than converse. Too often, hostility and venom convince some that their cause and their tactics are unassailable. 

Then, there are times, when reason breaks through as clarity and civility prevail.

That happened right outside of the Colorado Convention Center where the WCS was being held (see video here). Throngs of demonstrators gathered to protest the Summit and some of the keynote speakers. They were marching against the NRA, school shootings, President Trump, and some GOP legislators. 

It seemed it was going to be just another one-sided exercise of free speech. Don't get me wrong, I'm a staunch defender of the First Amendment and people being able to express their singular point of view (especially after being sued by the NAACP for simply parodying their name). But something even better happened

Conference attendees came out to peacefully engage the protesters. Charlie Kirk, Candace Owens and a group of Turning Point USA student leaders appeared on the scene…and everything changed. Candace and Charlie immediately, and calmly, engaged the young man in charge of the demonstration. Tay Anderson, President of #NeverAgain Colorado, was welcoming. He and Turning Point USA are definitely on opposite sides of the political spectrum on gun issues. But they talked. They listened to each other. Candace and Charlie praised him for engaging with them in such civil dialogue.

Tay Anderson of #NeverAgain Colorado and Candace Owens of Turning Point USA engaged in conversation.

Some of the marchers tried to shout down their conversation. I watched in amazement as I witnessed a rare act ofcourage and leadership during protests like this. Tay challenged the marchers to engage in conversations instead of shouting chants. He invited people to listen, to watch, to hear what the other side has to say. I was so impressed by Tay's calm confidence. I may not agree with him on Second Amendment issues, the roots and remedies of school shootings and police brutality, but we can agree on the most important thing. We're all just human, and we need to connect.

The gun protest immediately transformed into civil group discussions all along the marching route. It was a beautiful thing. People began to see each other as fellow human beings instead of abstract objects of opposition. "Dialogue is what keeps democracy going," one of the protesters exclaimed. And the dialogue was civil and powerful and personal.

At one point, one of the more vocal protesters asked me about my shirt, which declared "Life Has Purpose" with an outline image of a child in utero in the 'O'. She shared her heartbreaking story of being raped multiple times and how painful it was that she was called a 'murderer' when she left the abortion facility. (I turned off the camera at that point out of respect for her privacy). I told her although abortion kills an innocent human life and is violence against both mother and child, it's not my approach to call her a 'murderer'. I asked her if she had received counseling. I told her she deserves healing, which can't come from abortion. She cried as she described how she felt punished by rape and condemned for her actions. I explained that I am the other side of the story. I'm not the rapist's child and that I prayed that my life could be proof that something beautiful can still arise from the horror and violence of rape. I told her she is precious and expressed hope that her abuse has ended. She said she went to Planned Parenthood for an abortion, but her assaults were never reported. (See Live Action's incredible docuseries on how Planned Parenthood repeatedly fails to report rape and aids abusers). I explained that Planned Parenthood refuses to protect young women like her when they fail to report rape, ensuring that the rapist never gets punished. She agreed. I talked about how rape is always exploited to justify all other abortions. She agreed. I showed her compassion, listened to her story, and didn't dismiss her with a mantra or label. She felt like someone cared enough to listen and thanked me for being willing to talk.

I was moved by those moments outside that convention center. I was reminded that, as passionately as we fight for what is right, we can never stop being willing to listen to others' stories, others' hurts, others' motivations. Those experiences don't change truths that are immutable, but they can change the way we view others with whom we adamantly disagree. Sometimes speaking the truth in love also requires truly listening with love.

Published with permission from the Radiance Foundation.

Featured Image
Remains of 140 children between the ages of 5 and 14 who were sacrificed about 550 years ago were found recently by archaeologists. Guardian News / Youtube screen grab
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Blogs, ,

Child sacrifice still exists among some tribes…but Western elites see no problem

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

June 12, 2018 ( – In April of 2018, archaeologists in Peru announced a horrifying discovery: Evidence of what appears to be the largest single mass child sacrifice in the world. Researchers uncovered the skeletons of 140 children between the age of five and fourteen years old, many with dislocated and twisted rib cages, indicating that their killers may have been attempting to pull out their hearts. From what they can tell, archaeology experts believe the children were sacrificed just over five centuries ago to appease the gods as a result of mass flooding.

That same month, an article appeared in the publication Foreign Policy, grappling with an eerily related question: “Should Brazil keep its Amazon tribes from taking the lives of their children?” For centuries, the article noted, a few indigenous tribes in Brazil have committed the ritual murder of infants and some children, specifically those who were considered to be a “bad omen”—disabled children, children born to single mothers, and twins. This question was raised by events unfolding in Brazil. As John Daniel Davidson explained over at The Federalist:

At issue is a law under consideration in Brazil that would outlaw ritual infanticide and child killings by native groups, known as “Muwaji’s Law,” named after an indigenous woman who rejected her tribe’s expectation that she kill her disabled daughter in 2005.

The Brazilian Association of Anthropology staunchly opposes Muwaji’s Law, and compared it to “the most repressive and lethal actions ever perpetrated against the indigenous peoples of the Americas, which were unfailingly justified through appeals to noble causes, humanitarian values and universal principles.” The association also called the law an attempt to put indigenous peoples “in the permanent condition of defendants before a tribunal tasked with determining their degree of savagery.”

That sentiment is shared by Brazil’s National Indian Foundation, known as Funai, which refuses to collect data on child-killing among indigenous tribes, resists even acknowledging its existence in public, and said in a 2016 press release that raising the issue at all “is in many cases an attempt to incriminate and express prejudice against indigenous peoples.”

Those statements, Davidson explains, are actually intended to refer to two key proponents of the law, the founders of an organization to protect the rights of indigenous children called Atini, Marcia and Edson Suziki. The Suzukis, who are also evangelical missionaries, lived among the various indigenous peoples of Brazil for decades, and have witnessed for themselves some of the horrible child-killing practices that still exist among certain tribes. The Suruwaha, for example, believe that children with physical disabilities as well as twins and triplets have no souls, are cursed, and must be killed, usually by being buried alive. As Davidson recounted:

In 1995, the Suzukis were living among the Suruwaha when tribal leaders decided that a two-year-old girl named Hakani, who still could not walk or talk, should be killed, and ordered her parents to do it.

The harrowing story of what ensued was recounted in a 2007 report in The Telegraph:

They committed suicide—eating a poison root—rather than obey the order. Hakani’s 15-year-old brother was then told he had to kill her. He dug a hole to bury her next to the village hut, which is where the tribe usually buries animals, and hit her over the head with a machete to knock her out.

However, she woke up as she was being placed in the hole and the boy found he could not go through with the killing. Hakani’s grandfather then shot her with an arrow. He was so upset he tried to commit suicide, too. But Hakani survived, although her wound became infected and she was left to live like an animal in the forest for three years. At the age of five she was very undersized, still unable to walk and abused by other Indians. She survived only because a brother smuggled food to her.

The Suzukis eventually got Hakani the medical care she needed—she was diagnosed with a treatable condition, hypothyroidism—and nursed her back to health. They tried to bring her back to the tribe, “to show them she was not cursed,” Márcia Suzuki said. “But nobody wanted her.” So the Suzukis adopted Hakani as their own.

Instead of bringing attention to the plight of disabled and unwanted indigenous children, the Hakani affair prompted the public prosecutor’s office in the state of Amazonia to recommend in 2003 that all nonindigenous people be banned from lands occupied by the Suruwaha. 

And why was this recommendation made? Because a prominent anthropologist accused the Suzukis of “advocating for Western values” (in this case, condemning the murder of children), and that by doing this they were standing “in the way of the realization of a cultural practice filled with meaning.” In short: The Suzuki’s opposition to the ritual killing of children like their adopted daughter was viewed, by some experts, as an inexcusable form of cultural colonialism. Western publications like Foreign Policy, devoid of any real moral compass, are very sensitive to these sorts of accusations, and are now forced to grapple with whether or not ritual child-killing should be allowed—after all, no one culture is superior to another, and who are we to judge?

There may be some readers who scoff here, believing that surely the folks over at Foreign Policy are an outlier being utilized by an anti-abortion writer with an axe to grind. I wish that were the case. The truth is that I have talked to dozens of moral relativists on university campuses right across North America who also refuse to condemn infanticide for similar reasons—if not because of cultural relativism, then simply the firm belief that each person can create morality for his or herself, and if that involves infanticide, then so be it. And they have some heavy-hitting Western intellectuals in their corner: Dr. Peter Singer of Princeton openly advocates for the legalization of infanticide on the basis of infant children being “non-persons,” and the Journal of Medical Ethics also published a lengthy paper advocating the same thing, posing the chilling question, “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”

The Suzukis not guilty of attempting to spread “Western values,” because those values now include the destruction of children—and often the same children that are being destroyed by indigenous peoples, and for the same reasons. Children with disabilities are aborted in the womb at a staggering rate—one fellow I met canvassing in Dublin prior to Ireland’s abortion referendum last month was voting against abortion because he was worried that people like his two beautiful sons with disabilities would cease to exist. Statistics in other Western nations indicate that he is correct—journalists talk about countries having “eliminated Down Syndrome,” for example, while rarely mentioning that it is children with Down Syndrome who are actually being eliminated. In fact, cultural colonialism now takes a different form entirely: Nigerian pro-life activist Obianuju Ekeocha told me in a recent interview that Western nations are relentless in their attempts to bring abortion to African countries that often resist these unwanted intrusions.

This all reminded me of a book I was reading last week by a German journalist who spent several years interviewing the children of prominent Nazis. One fellow he met, a close colleague of Albert Speer, remained unrepentant in his beliefs, stating that society was coming around to much of what the Nazis preached in the first place. “He wanted someone to explain to him,” journalist Stephan Lebert recounted uncomfortably, “the difference ‘between our [Nazi] euthanasia policy’ and the current practice of allowing the termination of pregnancy on the basis of testing positive for certain handicaps. ‘I don’t see any great difference between the two,’” the old Nazi noted. Lebert ignored the pointed question, and instead writes that he listened to smooth jazz music to “distance himself” from such questions.

There is little difference between the Western practice of culling the disabled and the imperfect in the womb, the Nazi practice of euthanizing those same people outside the womb, and infanticide of the disabled by a few indigenous tribes. At the end of the day, each society decided to remove human rights from a group of human persons for arbitrary reasons, and to deny them their right not to be killed. There are differences in practice and implementation, but those differences mean little to the victims, and only serve to soothe the consciences of the perpetrators. 

Those who sacrificed their children to the gods centuries ago in Peru may have had a more advanced view than we do—after all, one archaeologist stated that the children were sacrificed because the Peruvians recognized that children were the most precious gift they had. Here in the West, we have aborted our children in their tens of millions because many think they are worth nothing at all. 

Featured Image
Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter


Why using contraception is similar to receiving Holy Communion sacrilegiously

Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter
By Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

June 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Adam spoke “up” when he spoke with God, and “down” in the naming of the animals, but it was not until the creation of Eve, “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” (Gen 2:23), that he had a dialogue with an equal. 

Adam and Eve had no proper names of their own before they met each other (cf. Gen 3:20). The animals were altogether other; he was himself; but Eve was, in a way, himself and yet other—formed from him and for him by God, just as the Father and Son, though distinct, are not separated from each other, the One ever proceeding from the Other and turned towards Him, from and for Him. The unity of the Father and Son in the Love of the Holy Spirit is the source of our dialogue, communion, and fruitfulness. 

For Adam and Eve, their awakening was an ecstasy, a going-out-of-oneself in love; their state not the monism of manipulative autonomy but the oneness of unashamed communion (cf. Gen 2:21–25). This is the nuptial state to which husbands and wives are striving to return, just as the Church on earth is striving for it with her Bridegroom: “that they may be one, even as We are One” (Jn 17:22). 

Consecrated life is eschatological in its very essence as sacramental sign and anticipated reality of the future state here and now, but marriage, too, is eschatological, foreshadowing the ultimate rest of the beatific vision and the ultimate perfection of the Church in her embrace of Christ.

Just as the love “until the end” manifested in the Last Supper (cf. Jn 13:1) presupposed the Cross yet to come, so the fleshly union of husband and wife presupposes sacrifice through children yet to be received—later in time but already present in intention, present in eternity (cf. Eph 1:4). From this we can see the perversity of the intentionally barren union. He who partakes of the flesh unworthily partakes of his own damnation (cf. 1 Cor 11:29). The communicant must be willing to bear the Cross of Christ, for that is the meaning of the gift of which he partakes. Spouses, too, must be open to the crown and cross of children, for that is inherent in the gift they give to each other; the child is excluded or thwarted only by doing violence to the gift.

Would we receive Holy Communion as casually as some receive their partner into bed? There are those who do one or the other or both. But neither of these should be done casually. When we come into contact with God, we are touching fire. When we come into contact with the other person, we are touching God’s property, God’s image, God’s sacrament, and in this way, we are handling fire. It is no mere recreation for the sake of pleasure, it is a self-revelation and a self-emptying, the most intimate in its immediacy and the most cosmic in its implications. 

The Church does not “intrude” into this sphere (as her enemies say). Rather, she shows how this sphere extends to the depths and opens to the heights. Spousal friendship is the only vehicle great enough, stable enough, strong enough, to sustain the full impact of this communion, which is meant to increase the life of God within us. 

The dwelling together of spouses is a sacramental domain. The Holy Spirit moves over the face of these waters and, according to His inscrutable mercies, takes away their formlessness, the reproach of their emptiness, even as bread and wine in the divine liturgy are transformed by the power of the same Spirit into the flesh and blood of Christ. The child is the gift that consecrates and completes the nuptial mystery, making it come alive in the astonishing wonder of new life.

Print All Articles
View specific date