“Norma McCorvey’s testimony is a incredible example of God’s redeeming grace. I commend Norma for her courage to speak out on the evils of abortion and pray that her redemptive story will touch hearts and change minds.”

Alan E. Sears
President, CEO and General Counsel
Alliance Defense Fund

Catholic News Agency and Jill Stanek both cover the release of McCorvey’s recent commercial. Since the 1973 ruling, McCorvey has truly turned her life around. She has become a devout Catholic who laments her role in the infamous case that brought about the documented killings of 50 million children in America.

McCorvey tells viewers, “back in 1973 I was a very confused twenty-one year old with one child and facing an unplanned pregnancy. At the time I fought to obtain a legal abortion, but truth be told, I have three daughters and never had an abortion.”

“Upon knowing God,” she continues, “I realize that my case, which legalized abortion on demand, was the biggest mistake of my life…You read about me in history books, but now I am dedicated to spreading the truth about preserving the dignity of all human life from natural conception to natural death.”

I hit the floor when I read this, so in all fairness please sit down before proceeding. Now take a deep breath because this one is a doozy!

Commonwealth Catholic Charities of Richmond (CCR) has decided that being ‘Catholic’ is too restrictive for them. Normally you would think this is something that the USCCB would, or if need be the Pope, could and would easily dispatch an entourage of priests and cannon lawyers to straighten out the matter. Unfortunately CCR has not just rejected the Church; they have broken some very serious laws - state and federal laws - and the entourage knocking at their door isn’t the Papal Swiss Guard, but the “federales.”

Here’s the scoop: On January 18, 2008 a Guatemalan female was under the “protection” of CCR because she was in the US illegally. As of this date, the unnamed girl was pregnant, sixteen years of age, was without guardian, and already had one child with her. Two months prior to the date in question, CCR paid for and had a doctor fit the young girl with a contraceptive device. No, not a Catholic organization.

Now we come back to the date in question, January 18. On this date CCR decided to procure an abortion for the young immigrant. Because she was underage, an employee of CCR signed the consent form in place of her guardian. This, by the way, is against Virginia law. Virginia notification law stipulates that at least one parent or legal guardian must give consent. Social workers cannot sign consent forms for an abortion. Again, not a Catholic organization.

On top of all of the Catholic violations and state violations, the young Guatemalan woman was a ward of the federal Office of Refugee Resettlement in the Department of Health and Human Services. This naturally pulls the federal government into the mix. HHS provides $7.6 million a year to the USCCB’s foster care of immigrant children programs, which are subcontracted to groups like CCR. HHS spokesman Kenneth Wolfe expressed extreme disappointment upon learning that CCR had procured an abortion for the young girl:

“These federal funds are awarded with the clear purpose of caring for unaccompanied minors here from other countries. To that end, we were surprised and disappointed to learn of a chapter of Catholic Charities using this funding to facilitate a minor procuring an abortion. We have also requested several corrective actions be taken by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops…in order to prevent this type of abuse from happening again. Our agency is one that supports human life, and we take that responsibility seriously.”

Mr. Wolfe added that the case has been referred to HHS Inspector General Timothy Menke because it might violate Virginia law and contradicts federal policy. According to federal sources, four employees of CCR have been fired and one supervisor with the bishops’ Migration and Refugee Services agency has been suspended.

You are probably asking what the bishops have done about this scandal and why you are just now hearing about it. The simple answer is because Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo of Richmond just got around to “releasing” his information - along with Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, chairman of the USCCB’s Committee on Migration; and Bishop Michael Driscoll, Episcopal liaison to Catholic Charities, USA - in a private letter to his brother bishops dated April 29, 2008. The letter was in response to the April 23 investigation by the federal authorities. Of course, this scandal and the surrounding information is just now becoming public knowledge. The Wanderer was the first to release quotations from Bishop DiLorenzo’s letter in the early online edition of their June 19 paper.

Naturally I pray that the bishops will do more than just fire those responsible for this atrocity. I am hoping beyond hope that Bishop DiLorenzo had no knowledge or compliance of the horrific acts that go on at the Catholic Charities within his Diocese, but more importantly I urge him to take swift action to help his flock back to Christ’s Church.

In a surprise appearance by one feisty egg during a routine hysterectomy, science once again has been proved terribly wrong. Recently Professor Jacques Donnez, MD, Head for the Department of Gynecology of the Catholic University of Louvain in Brussels, Belgium, discovered something astonishing.

While preparing to carry out a partial hysterectomy on a 45-year-old Belgian woman, Dr. Donnez literally stumbled upon and captured images of an egg being released from the woman’s ovary. For the first time in human history we have clear pictures of what actually happens during ovulation. All previous images have been fuzzy and inadequate in truly representing this aspect of a woman’s cycle, but Dr. Donnez has made a miraculous discovery, however accidental it may have been.

What is most amazing about these pictures is that they completely overturn all previous notions about ovulation. Scientists have believed for some time that the release of an egg was considered a sudden, explosive event, but Dr. Donnez’s pictures show the release of the egg taking place over a period of at least 15 minutes. “The release of the oocyte (egg) from the ovary is a crucial event in human reproduction,” said Dr. Donnez. “These pictures are clearly important to better understand the mechanism.”

However, Jill Stanek put it best:

“[I can't] believe scientists had such a basic human function as ovulation wrong. Just goes to show science has a lot still to learn about a woman’s reproductive cycle. (And if they had this wrong, how much do they not yet know about the birth control pill’s mode(s) of action?)”

Many people are wondering the same thing as Jill. If they got this wrong, what else are the MDs missing? Hopefully this discovery will give scientists pause to consider more positive possibilities for life and when life begins - say conception?

In the meantime, science will be pondering Dr. Donnez’s discovery in an upcoming issue of Fertility and Sterility, while the rest of us wait with baited breath in hope of positive, life-affirming repercussions.

“You young people have in a special way the task of witnessing today to the faith; the commitment to bring the Gospel of Christ - the Way, the Truth and the Life - into the third Christian Millennium, to build a new civilization - a civilization of love, of justice and of peace.”

- Pope John Paul II, Santiago de Compostela, August 1989

Inspired by John Paul II’s message of love and commitment from 1989, youth volunteers and several tech-savvy priests have come together for the incredible purpose of bringing “the Gospel of Christ…into the third Christian Millennium.” Under Archbishop George Pell’s blessing, Xt3.com was thoroughly thought out, volunteers were recruited to keep ‘faithbook‘ running, and even a priest was recruited to answer the predictable numerous Catholic questions.

What is Xt3? I spent several hours pondering this slightly cryptic URL. Xt3’s FAQ’s have a simple explanation for the short, but sweet call sign: “Xt3 represents Christ (Xt) in the 3rd Millennium.”

Some however, may benefit from a brief history lesson on Christian symbols. Several early Christian symbols came from when Greek was the language of the hour, including , ‘chi rho’ which one of the symbols for Christ; , ΙΧΘΥΕ or “icthus” which means fish and also contains the beginning letters for the phrase “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.” Both of these symbols contain the individual Greek letter Χ, “chi”, which begins the Greek word Christos (Χριστóς), “anointed.” It seems then that Xt is utilizing the “chi”, perhaps adding a cross and adding on the 3 to represent the third Millennium for good measure. Call me silly and round-about, but that is how I finally figured out the Xt3 URL.

Xt3, though, is more than just a cool name. It is a social network designed to link users around the world and provide them with the chance of a lifetime - World Youth Day. With WYD less than a month away, Xt3 administrators are helping users connect pilgrims around the world who are going to to Sydney. Site administrator James Van Schie hopes Xt3 connects people before the big event:

Somebody in Mexico could log on, create a profile, find there’s a group from the Sydney Archdiocese where they’ll be coming, connect with that group, start introducing themselves, exchange ideas and talk about what the event’s going to hold for them.

For those who cannot attend, Xt3 is an amazing opportunity to connect with pilgrims who have attended past WYDs or who are attending the 2008 event and “virtually attend.” Pilgrims can connect with online friends who are unable to attend and communicate their experiences via videos and pictures. One site volunteer hopes Xt3 will be able to provide footage of various talks and events for individuals unable to attend.

Personally, I was introduced to Xt3 just a few days ago, but obviously I am hooked. Much like Facebook in the social network sense, Xt3 allows you to meet new people around the world, share photos and videos, join groups and basically “hang-out” online. What is vastly different about Xt3 - what has drawn me and and keeps me coming back - is the purpose of Xt3 as well as the feeling of wellbeing and safety. Now, I’m not trying to make Xt3 sound “granny” or anything. What I mean is Xt3 is safe for people of all ages, traditions and religions. Just look at the beginning of their ‘Terms and Conditions’ policy to grasp the idea:

As a Catholic site we encourage debate and dialogue from all traditions, while requesting that you respect our Catholic ethos. We would ask you to treat all members with charity and respect, and for this reason personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please do not join this site to promote beliefs or practices that oppose the Catholic faith.

Any content that is vulgar, sexually-explicit, discriminatory, blasphemous, hateful, threatening, satanic or violating any laws will be removed. Similarly any messages that harass, insult, belittle, bully or threaten another member will be removed.

The point of Xt3 is to meet “safe” people, people you can trust! Many of these people are attending WYD; they are looking to meet people prior to their journey to Sydney. Naturally they want to meet people they feel comfortable sharing their personal stories and pilgrimage experiences with. The internet can be a terribly frightening place, but Xt3 offers a safe-haven for Catholics as well as peoples of differing faiths and traditions to come together and share their hopes and prayers as they “build a new civilization.”

Others are joining so they can utilize the “Ask a Priest” feature on the site. This section offers a dedicated priest, Father John Flynn, who is there to answer questions ranging from Sacraments to sex, science to social justice, and everything in between. Father gives clear, concrete answers with ample textual backup. Many times he also gives extra sources for his answers that are also extremely helpful to the questioner.

“Ask a Priest” is also a group discussion that is open to the floor. From the discussions I have read have it is clear that different views are not quashed, which should allay any fears that the site only allows the most devout Catholics to participate. Father Flynn is present to answer questions and offer the Church guidance along the way, but many of the discussions are lay driven.

Perhaps JPII may not have envisioned the mammoth, smooth-running social network that is Xt3.com, but I wouldn’t doubt that our beloved “Extreme Papa” - God rest his soul - is smiling down on this awesome achievement!

As a Catholic, I hold dear the life of Christ, the life of Mary and the lives of all the Saints. I firmly believe that we should seek to live like all those who have entered into heaven before us, especially Christ, because to seek the summum bonum (highest good) is to lead a life in communion with God according to His precepts.

Unfortunately there is one “tiny” problem with trying to follow the lives of Christ and the saints - I’m not one. Of course the ‘Confessions of St. Augustin,’ the Biblical story of the Prodigal Son and a fair number of priests have told me that some of our most devout members of heaven weren’t always on God’s “A” list. That, however, is not always as comforting to me as you may think. What I find more encouraging in my daily quest to lead a more Christian-centered life is to seek out other Catholics and Christians who are clearly on the path of good works and righteousness in today’s world.

I love seeking out people and groups who have found ways to express the Christian, specifically the Catholic faith. Finding these people and groups and how they have personally experienced Christ in their lives renews my own faith. One such couple that has recently peeked my interest is Joey Kerlin and Britt Shankle. Brought to my attention by none other than my dear friend, Cranky Catholic, this duo has created a stunningly blunt, but hilarious look into their marriage preparation. With less than a year to go until their January 2009 wedding, this Catholic couple decided to create a weekly podcast explaining ever aspect of their experiences on the road down the aisle.

With uproariously funny anecdotes that lighten the loving, but naturally intense feelings surrounding marriage preparation Joey and Britt create a basic down to earth marriage guide. Naturally Joey and Britt highlight their experiences as a Catholic couple, but after listening to their podcasts, I found that many of their stories benefited all Christians and indeed all people preparing for marriage, even people already married. One personal story with joking overtones that caught my attention was of their sponsor family:

“He and his wife and and his eight children are sort of our sponsor family for our engagement. They have been married about 15 years…and they have been kind enough to take us under their wing…and show us the loops of marriage…not loopholes, mind you, there’s no getting out of it!”

Even better is their story of how they met. Their story, as they themselves admit, is a bit long, but is well worth the ear-full. I won’t spill the rice; you just have to listen to it yourself. Their story is in the April 1st podcast with a continuation in the April 5th edition. The fact that they can joke and play openly in such a loving way shows that they are preparing themselves for a lasting relationship long past the day of “I do.” There is no mistake that Joey and Britt absolutely take the Sacrament of Marriage very seriously, which is why their advice is so pure of heart.

They have gone above and beyond their duties as Catholics in preparing for marriage and are gracious in sharing their experiences with us. It is truly a blessing to see couples taking marriage so seriously, but also with the ability to laugh at themselves. So often couples today take the easy route of divorce when marriage and life does not work the way they wanted it to. It is obvious that Joey and Britt have absolutely no intention of ever letting that idea take a foothold in their marriage.

For those of you who think you are already married and don’t need their advice? Think again! My darling Andrew and I will be celebrating year four of our marriage on June 26, and we are desperately listening to each podcast to make sure we didn’t miss any of Joey and Britt’s golden kernels.

Marriage is for life and we love that this beautiful young couple is starting early on their long, loving journey. My only prayer, other than Joey and Britt are blessed each and every day of their lives, is that the podcasts keep coming after January 24, 2009 - their wedding date - with many, many more years of excellent Christian advice for married couples!

Many of my readers have noticed my recent tiff online. Thankfully I have left that battle where it stands, although my counterpart tells me that I am to expect a “slam” of an article on Monday. Oh well!

However, as a follow up to my own thoughts on the subject, I recently received a delightful and honest question. I believe it should be shared with you all because the answer is terribly important in light of recent events: “Where do you look when you are examining questions of ethics in writing?”

Naturally the Internet is a medium in which almost every person on earth can enter out their thoughts without much regard for who they hurt or what rules they break. However, many bloggers are taking up the metaphorical pen and urging all online writers to follow some decorum online.

Personally, I follow the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics as my model for writing and journalism. For everything online - questions about blogs, comments, flaming, and more - I defer to the excellent advice of The Original Mud Puppy and Lisa Williams’ weblog.

Armed with these three advisers, it is difficult to err in your quest for a decent, ethical article. I encourage all writers, especially those holding themselves out to be experts on a topic, or even those holding themselves out to be commentators on a given topic, to follow the codes of ethics. Doing so will not only reflect well on them as a writer, but it will also create a sense of decency and politesse around the web.

Not often do I get to say these words: Lawyers are fabulously funny people!

Okay, I am saying this with a touch of sarcasm. Surely I should have realized that the tide would come into port again sooner or later. Once Andrew’s article, ‘How to handle legal issues like a man,’ and my article, ‘Gender Crisis: handling issues like a gentlePERSON,’ had finally been picked to death, I should have bet that some lone wolf would write. What I didn’t expect was to be so poorly represented as to be completely silenced.

You would think that lawyers, especially left-leaning lawyers, would be careful about protecting their twisted misunderstanding about the First Amendment, what is widely known today as “free speech.” Most liberals pride themselves on tolerance of differing viewpoints. Unfortunately I found neither of these qualities in our trite responder.

No, sadly Andrew and I were stunned today when we learned that JHS - she does not reveal her identity online - verbally slapped my husband and implied that he sexually harassed every woman on earth by writing that men should be gentlemen. Oh yes, you heard correct. Apparently Ms. J believes that a man telling other men to behave like gentlemen and not like little boys or pigs is a terrible thing. A tragedy of society that mocks women and will cause the degradation of us all!

I still don’t follow this logic of Ms. J, though she probably considers the mere fact of my common courtesy of “Ms.” to be derogatory. Pardon your years of etiquette, Mother and Grandmother, I am sure you meant well when you were teaching me!

On top of this huge reputation blow for Andrew, we also learned that Ms. J has little need for those pesky ethics. Rather than attribute quotations to their appropriate writer, she took the worst sentences she could find on the comments section below Andrew’s article, found ones made by other writers and attributed them directly to Andrew. Of course when I say the “worst” comments, they really are not that terrible, but they certainly were not made by Andrew.

Naturally Andrew and I both pointed these errors out to our California counterpart, but to no avail. Andrew originally posted this on Ms. J’s site, but she later cut out the tidbit about the quotations being from Mark:

I am the author of the post linked to above: How to Handle Legal Issues Like a Man. I respectfully ask that you please correct your article. The two quotes that you attribute to me were actually posted by a commenter named Mark in this comment. Please correct this error. Finally, please note the very first sentence of the article that I wrote: “Unfortunately many males in our society do not handle their problems like true men.” The article was solely intended to encourage people of the male gender to conduct themselves in a well-mannered, civilized fashion.

Thank you for promptly correcting the mistakes in your article. Andrew

All of the top blog etiquette writers agree that standards of journalism should be kept in blogging as well as every effort of writers to correct erroneous errors in posts, and many of them agree that editing or deleting comments simply because they disagree with you is poor etiquette indeed. In a second attempt to ask Ms. J to correct her errors, Andrew politely emailed her the same information above. Regretfully he was met with a hostile email and has yet to see any corrections to the post copy:

From:
Date: Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Inquiry from a Colloquium Reader: Your article that mentions me

I am at work and do not have time to double-check that now. If you had simply emailed me in the first place, I would not have had to edit your comment. I will deal with your issue later tonight. My recollection is that I quoted your response to a comment. If necessary, I will clarify.

By this time I began writing my own response to the day’s events. Here is what I left for Ms. JHS in her comment box:

Dear J,

I am taken aback by your post, especially in lieu of your atrocious misuse of Andrew’s character. Andrew’s article never directly said nor indirectly implied that women should “take it like a man.” Your carte blanche implication that he is sexually harassing every woman on the planet simply by asking men to be a little more decent in their daily dealings is out of line. Perhaps you read the wrong article of his, but when is a little politesse - on the part of a male, female or any other person - such a bad thing? Sorry, but it isn’t.

On a journalistic note, your post admonishes writers to be mindful that they “have a responsibility to treat our readers with respect.” Certainly you lacked that decorum in this post. You not only attributed quotations from another individual to Andrew, you also edited his commentary asking you to correct this error. Twice the journalistic no-no. Please be more careful of serious errors such as these before you attempt to ruin someone’s professional reputation. It simply does not fit with your espousal of civility, integrity, honesty and competence.

Admittedly a bit stern, but sometimes a touch of firmness is needed when boundaries are crossed; even more so when professional reputations and ethical standards are at stake. Sadly my comment was deleted without even a brief, contrite, derogatory, or ‘other’ explanation. I received no email from Ms. J as to why she rejected my comments. I do not actually care what the substance of her response is, but etiquette is just so darn polite!

I know it is simply impossible to talk to walls, but it is always fun to try. Thankfully Andrew and I are good humored about today. We have done a fair amount of laughing and eye rolling, but if a small town lawyer from Lodi, California truly desires to come across the U.S. and challenge my husband to a man-eating contest, well she better have a big mouth because he happens to be 6′3″!