PERTZ

Bishop Hermann will fill in until a new Archbishop is named for St. Louis.  There's always the chance the Pope would eventually keep  Bishop Hermann in that position but it is a long shot .

I do not know him personally but through the years I have met countless people who talk about his good deeds.   Bishop Hermann has helped them through the worst of times.  They say he is a kind, smart,  and most of all, a  People Person.    

Because this is an Archdiocese, Pope Benedict will most likely fill the position right away...

Here's his Bio:

Most Rev. Robert Hermann - Auxiliary Bishop of St. Louis.

Bishop Robert J. Hermann was born in Weingarten, Mo., on August 12, 1934, as one of 15 children. He attended Our Lady Help of Christians School in Weingarten. He went to high school at St. Louis Prep Seminary, graduated from Cardinal Glennon College, completed his theological studies at Kenrick Seminary, and was ordained a priest on March 30, 1963.

Bishop Hermann received a Masters Degree in English from Saint Louis University and taught at the following high schools for a total of 14 years: Mercy, DeAndreas, and Prep North. He also served as a part-time associate pastor in Our Lady Help of Christians, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Cronan, Holy Ghost, Holy Cross, and Most Holy Trinity parishes. He served as a full-time associate pastor at St. Piux X Parish for three years, as pastor of St. Andrew Parish for six years, and as pastor of Incarnate Word Parish for 14 years. During those years Incarnate Word became a regional hub parish for the International LIFE TEEN program.

He served as dean of the Northwest County Deanery for six years. In March, 2001, he was appointed to serve as chairman of the Agency Review Task Force. In July, 2002, he was appointed Vicar General of the Archdiocese with responsibilities for four deaneries and numerous Archdiocesan agencies.

Bishop Hermann was named an Auxiliary Bishop of St. Louis on October 16, 2002, and was ordained a bishop on December 12, 2002.

For senior, abortion a medium for art, political discourse Martine Powers Staff Reporter
Published Thursday, April 17, 2008

Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.

The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts' project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock . saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.

But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for "shock value."

"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."

The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.

Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.

Art major Juan Castillo '08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.

"I really loved the idea of this project, but a lot other people didn't," Castillo said. "I think that most people were very resistant to thinking about what the project was really about. [The senior-art-project forum] stopped being a conversation on the work itself."

Although Shvarts said she does not remember the class being quite as hostile as Castillo described, she said she believes it is the nature of her piece to "provoke inquiry."

"I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity," Shvarts said. "I think that I'm creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be."

The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.

School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, Schvarts' senior-project advisor, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.

Few people outside of Yale's undergraduate art department have heard about Shvarts' exhibition. Members of two campus abortion-activist groups . Choose Life at Yale, a pro-life group, and the Reproductive Rights Action League of Yale, a pro-choice group . said they were not previously aware of Schvarts' project.

Alice Buttrick '10, an officer of RALY, said the group was in no way involved with the art exhibition and had no official opinion on the matter.

Sara Rahman '09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.

"[Shvarts' exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism," Rahman said. "It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion."

CLAY member Jonathan Serrato '09 said he does not think CLAY has an official response to Schvarts' exhibition. But personally, Serrato said he found the concept of the senior art project "surprising" and unethical.

"I feel that she's manipulating life for the benefit of her art, and I definitely don't support it," Serrato said. "I think it's morally wrong."

Shvarts emphasized that she is not ashamed of her exhibition, and she has become increasingly comfortable discussing her miscarriage experiences with her peers.

"It was a private and personal endeavor, but also a transparent one for the most part," Shvarts said. "This isn't something I've been hiding."

The official reception for the Undergraduate Senior Art Show will be from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 25. The exhibition will be on public display from April 22 to May 1. The art exhibition is set to premiere alongside the projects of other art seniors this Tuesday, April 22 at the gallery of Holcombe T. Green Jr. Hall on Chapel Street.

Mein Gott!  Was passiert!

Now I'm really confused.  I thought Arch Bishop Burke said this wasn't suppose to happen!  Where's a Canon Lawyer when you need one!

Read on.....

Abortion-rights lawmakers to receive Communion Apr 16 06:08 PM US/Eastern
By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer 9 Comments

View larger image

WASHINGTON (AP) - Catholic members of Congress who publicly support the right to abortion will trek to Nationals Park Thursday for a Mass celebrated by a pope who has said such lawmakers should not receive Communion.

Leading these lawmakers, some of whom have repeatedly complained about remarks by Pope Benedict XVI and a few bishops on the subject, will be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the government's highest-ranking Catholic and a supporter of abortion rights. Nowhere in her remarks or her actions this week has she referred to strains with the new pontiff.

Instead, she bent to kiss his ring at the White House Wednesday as Benedict arrived in a blaze of pageantry, and later she spoke glowingly on the House floor about his commitment to truth, justice and freedom. A week before he arrived, the House passed a resolution welcoming him to Washington.

And yes, her spokesman said, she intends to receive Communion from one of the 300 priests and lay ministers who will offer it to the gathered flock of 45,000.

Benedict's stance on abortion and Communion has been painful for elected officials who inhabit the troubled zone where Catholicism and their political beliefs intersect.

Pelosi was one of 48 Catholic lawmakers—some who support and some who oppose abortion rights—who signed a letter in 2004 complaining about statements by "some members of the Catholic hierarchy."

"If Catholic legislators are scorned and held out for ridicule by Church leaders on the basis of a single issue, the Church will lose strong advocates on a wide range of issues that relate to the core of important Catholic social teaching," they wrote. "Moreover, criticism of us on a matter that is essentially one of personal morality will deter other Catholics from entering politics, and in the long run the Church will suffer."

None of the Catholic lawmakers interviewed Wednesday said they hesitated to attend Thursday's celebration of Mass. This event, they said, is about bigger themes and values, such as hope and compassion.

"Pope Benedict's historic visit is an important opportunity for Catholics and for all Americans to reflect on the ways we can contribute to the common good, address global issues of poverty, disease and despair," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., whose views in 2004 led several Midwestern bishops to say they would deny the Democratic presidential nominee Communion.

"In a nation and a world facing such extraordinary and daunting challenges, the pope's visit promises hope, inspiration and great wisdom," Kerry said in a statement.

Only a few of the more than 250 U.S. bishops have said they would withhold Communion from Catholic lawmakers who support abortion rights. Most American prelates say parishioners must search their own consciences to decide whether they should receive the sacrament.

During the 2004 U.S. presidential election, Benedict, who was at that time Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, said the sacrament could be withheld under some circumstances.

Last May, when a reporter pressed Benedict on whether he agreed that Catholic politicians who had recently legalized abortion in Mexico City should be considered excommunicated, his response was, "Yes."

Benedict's spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, later said the pope was not setting a new policy and did not intend to formally excommunicate anyone. But Lombardi added that politicians who vote in favor of abortion should refrain from receiving Holy Communion.

Not this time.

"There's a time for celebrating who we are as Catholics, and this is one of those times," said Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y.

"The leader of my church and a head of state is visiting my country, my city where I work, in a brand new ballpark," he added. "There is a great sense of excitement."

Poisson is French for FISH

Kruetz  is German for CROSS

Both of which are  symbols of LENT

Please respond only if you read this entire conversation February 1, 2008

Archbishop Burke addresses Catholic identity

---

St. Louis Review staff writer Jennifer Brinker recently met with Archbishop Raymond L. Burke to speak about events in the media concerning the archbishop and St. Louis University basketball coach Rick Majerus, who had recently spoken publicly in favor of abortion rights and embryonic stem-cell research.

ARCHBISHOP RAYMOND L. BURKE The conversation also provided the archbishop with an opportunity to speak about the importance of Catholic identity and how the faithful can best maintain that identity.

Why were you concerned about responding to the comments made by St. Louis University basketball coach Rick Majerus that he favors abortion rights and is pro-embryonic stem-cell research?

There are two levels of concern that I had in addressing the issue. Here is someone who makes a point to identify himself as a Catholic and then takes positions that are contrary to some of the most sacred teachings of the Church — teachings with regard to the inviolable dignity of every human life from the moment of its beginning. It gives scandal to other people, Catholics and nonCatholics alike, if they hear a Catholic give an interview to the media, saying that I am proud to be a Catholic but at the same time I hold these views. Then there is a second level, which is that (Majerus) represents a Catholic institution. He is a very prominent member of the St. Louis University community. Whatever his personal positions may be in regard to procured abortion or embryonic stem-cell research, he’s obliged as a public figure from a Catholic university to show respect for the teachings of the Church. For him to say these things brought my concern to a new level.

If he had been of another faith, would this have been different for you?

No, in a certain sense it would not have been different. He still represents a Catholic institution, and so even though he might belong to some faith or belief that accepts procured abortion, he would be obliged to respect the fact that the Catholic Church — and really, this pertains to the natural moral law — teaches that abortion is an intrinsic evil; and therefore he would not publicly espouse such positions.

So it comes down to the fact that he made these public statements. But let’s say for example he was of another faith and he said, "I’m for abortion rights," but he was talking among his friends and family. That would be a different scenario, right?

Of course it would. But take for example, what would you think as Catholic parents who have a son or daughter who goes to a Catholic university, and one of the real personalities of the university, a person who is seen to represent the university, is publicly espousing abortion rights? You’d say to yourself, well, this isn’t just.

There are some other things that have come up in the media about you and Mr. Majerus. The Review wanted to provide you the opportunity to set the record straight on this issue. The first issue was whether he should be denied Communion or even excommunicated. Did you bring up any of those things with the members of the media?

I did not raise the questions of denying him Holy Communion or excommunication, but representatives of the media raised them with me. When it was brought up to me, I said that is a matter that first has to be dealt with pastorally with the individual.

So are you suggesting he should speak with you or another priest about the matter? Would you be open to meeting with him?

Oh, of course. The question was asked, "This person who is a prominent figure at a local Catholic university has made these declarations. What do you think?" And I simply said it’s not possible to hold these positions, and I’m deeply concerned about it. But I also said I was confident that the university would address the situation and correct it. I also did not mix myself into the administration of the university. I expressed confidence that the university would do the right thing.

Comments have been made that you were angry or spoke out strongly about what Mr. Majerus had to say. What were you feeling when you heard what he said to a reporter while attending a political rally?

What I felt most of all was just a profound sadness. At a time when in the Church we need to give such a strong witness to the dignity of human life and the Respect Life Apostolate, this counter witness is being given. I was very sad. Did it upset me? Yes, it did. And my main concern was to correct any perception that it’s acceptable for Catholics to be in favor of procured abortion or embryonic stem-cell research. And above all, no Catholic institution could have its representatives espousing such positions. When people take a position at a Catholic institution, there’s a certain sacred trust involved there.

People say it’s a matter of freedom of speech. It’s not a question of freedom of speech. Academic freedom is something quite different. It gives you a freedom to make declarations within your particular area of competence, and according to the canons (laws) for investigation of the truth. It doesn’t give you a kind of heightened freedom to make declarations that are contrary to the truth.

I’d like to use this situation with Mr. Majerus as a springboard to talk about Catholic identity in general. We hear it in other scenarios, like, "I don’t want to be told how to vote." Or, "Why is it so important that we speak out against abortion?" What do you think a Catholic should have done in this kind of a situation, where a Catholic was presented with an opportunity to say something publicly?

First of all, it can be a wonderful occasion for someone from the media to ask you to give a witness to the truth about the inviolable dignity of unborn human life and the dignity of the infant in the womb. If there is a Catholic who for some reason is struggling with his or her adherence to this, then the correct thing to do is to be silent — certainly not to expound error or to air doubts that you’re trying to resolve in your own mind. But to seek the help of a spiritual director to clarify these things.

What if a Catholic were to say, "Archbishop Burke, I’m not struggling with it. I think abortion rights are important." How do you respond to that?

My response to that is you are in a very serious state of error and that you need to get the help to rectify your conscience. Your conscience is wrongly formed. And you need to get whatever help it takes to form your conscience properly in accord with the Church’s teaching, and in this case, with the natural moral law.

What do we need to believe in order to be Catholic? For example, when we recite the Nicene Creed at Mass, that’s something fundamental to our faith. But beyond that, are there other elements of our faith that we are bound to believe in?

We are held to believe whatever has been taught by the Church and declared by the Church to be a doctrine of the faith. All of those doctrines are connected in some way with the fundamental articles of the faith, which we profess in the Profession of Faith. Of course, the Nicene Creed doesn’t contain any of the moral teaching of the Church. Those are all things handed down either in the natural moral law or divine revelation, and further defined by the Church.

Can you give some examples of some of those teachings that go beyond the Creed?

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception for instance; the moral teaching on the intrinsic evil of procured abortion; or the intrinsic evil of homosexual acts.

Catholics who seem to hold beliefs that go against the Church’s teachings often say that they are "doing the right thing," or "following their conscience." Does this come down to an issue of free speech?

Sometimes the primacy of the conscience is misunderstood. If you mean that the conscience has primacy — in the sense that whatever I feel or think becomes then the right thing to do — that’s false. The primacy of the conscience is related essentially to the primacy of the truth. In other words, your conscience has primacy in as much as it is conformed to the truth, and as much as it is properly informed.

For example, let’s say there is someone who espouses a position on procured abortion — that isn’t right. He can’t say that it is right simply because he holds it in his conscience. He has a duty to inform his conscience about the fact that here we are speaking about a human life. And, therefore, the only response we can make to that human life is to safeguard it and protect it. The primacy of the conscience is strictly correlated to the primacy of the truth.

Should Catholics make public statements against Church teachings, such as speaking at a rally?

When you make a public statement at a rally for instance, or any other kind of public forum, you lead other people astray with regard to what the Church teaches. You can lead astray Catholics, and you also can lead nonCatholics into error about what the Church teaches. And you even can influence them to do things that are gravely wrong. And this is what we call scandal: when you do something which leads other people into error or even into committing a sin. This is a very serious matter when a Catholic publicly espouses a position contrary to the faith.

And how does that differ from private statements made to friends and family?

With regard to conversations with family and friends, there, too, one must be careful if a person is having doubts or questions about something and is discussing this privately with another family member whom he trusts and can help him to deal with this doubt. But if you’re in a family gathering, and say there are young people there for example, and you espouse a teaching or a moral doctrine contrary to the Church, you can lead other people astray — either influence them to think wrongly about either a doctrine or a moral issue, or even lead them to do something wrong. We have to be very attentive in all of our conversations — that our words give glory to God and express our love of God and neighbor at all times. And if something we are saying is not giving glory to God and not expressing the love of God and our neighbor, then it shouldn’t pass our lips.

What do you think about the responsibility of Catholic public figures when speaking in the public arena?

Public figures, they really have so much more possibility to give a strong witness and an effective witness to the truth of the faith. I think for instance during the battle to defeat Amendment 2, those (Major League) baseball players took out an ad to say this isn’t fair to treat human embryos in this way. It had a terrific impact. Or the physicians who went around the state and talked to people, explaining to them what’s involved in embryonic stem-cell research. This is so important, because we look up to our public figures.

It seems now, more than ever, it’s difficult to be a Catholic. I think people are now starting to see that, especially with your presence here. Do you want to speak on that?

Oftentimes, members of the faithful have commented to me that it’s really a challenge these days to be a Catholic. For instance, they’ll be in social settings, even settings where a greater part of the people are Catholic, where there’s some discussion that is contrary to the Church’s teaching. And it isn’t easy for them to speak up and to defend the Church’s teaching. And yet, that’s what they’re called to do. I have had doctors, lawyers, workers of all kinds who say in their workplaces that people come in and say, ‘What is this about the Catholic Church?’ They might be the only person in the conversation who is upholding the Church’s teaching. And it isn’t easy.

I think many people are beginning to reflect on the fact that these are precisely the moments to give witness to Christ and his teaching. And maybe the people at the time ridicule you or simply reject what you say or even say that your position is medieval, but nevertheless you have given a witness. And that witness remains.

People sometimes say to me, ‘I’m not very eloquent,’ or, ‘I never studied theology,’ and these people are talking about things like the ordination of women for example. I say to them to use whatever words you have, but defend what you understand to be the Catholic faith. That’s what you’re called to do. That’s how witness is given to Christ, and that’s how people hear the truth and are led to change their thinking. It isn’t easy, and I understand that.

People laugh when I say this, but basically, I’m a quiet person. I’m not a person who likes to be making all kinds of public declarations; and yet I know that as archbishop that’s my responsibility. If I, who am supposed to be a sentinel for the faithful and to guard them against error, don’t give a warning when gravely wrong things are being said in public, I have a lot for which to answer. All of us, we have occasions in our homes, in social settings, in our work, to give this witness. It’s critical today, because the world is so confused about so many of the most fundamental truths. And if we as Catholics remain silent, we’re failing at a service we’re called to give the world — to speak the truth with love.

Finally, you mentioned it’s your responsibility as the shepherd of your flock to guide situations where there’s some kind of confusion about the teachings of the Church. We don’t always see that with all of our bishops. I know a number of people who have said, "Why is our archbishop saying this, but another bishop somewhere else isn’t doing anything at all?" What do you say to that?

I don’t know what all those other situations are (personally), and that’s strictly speaking not my business. I think what we ought to do in the archdiocese and I have to do as archbishop is say, ‘Are these situations that need to be addressed in our archdiocese?’ If they are, the archbishop better be addressing them, or he’s failing in his duty. And he shouldn’t worry about whether he appears to be different from some other bishops. We don’t know what all those situations are and what judgments those bishops are making. But sometimes people say to me, you seem to be unusual, and I’m not. I don’t think I am. I say to myself, let’s look at the situation. Is there something unusual about a bishop saying that it’s wrong to be in favor of procured abortion? I’m a Roman Catholic priest and bishop. What else would you expect me to say?

In going after Rick Majerus, Arch Bishop Burke is now going after one of the Jesuit's employees.  The Jesuits( Society of Jesus) are the intellectuals of the Catholic Church.

This might be a stretch, but I liken this to a lawyer going after philosopher.

This is a rift that has long existed in the church as you can see in the article below from last week.  

 

 

Published on National Catholic Reporter Conversation Cafe (http://ncrcafe.org) Vatican to Jesuits: 'Think with the Church' By John L Allen Jr Daily Created Jan 7 2008 - 04:35

By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
New York

Speaking out of what he called “sadness and anxiety,” the Vatican’s top official for religious life has called upon the Jesuit order to obey the hierarchy, to defend church teaching and to deepen its commitment to “think with the church.”

Slovenian Cardinal Franc Rodé specifically urged the Jesuits to greater fidelity in theological work as well as in “your magazines and publications,” both areas of tension between the Jesuits and the Vatican in recent years.

The comments came in Rodé’s homily for the opening Mass this morning in Rome of the 35th General Congregation of the Jesuits. The gathering of 225 Jesuits representing the entire order, which is expected to last at least a month, will elect a new leader to replace Dutch Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach and set policy for the next couple of decades.

In effect, Rodé’s homily represents the Vatican’s attempt to help frame the agenda for the Jesuits’ deliberations.

Noting that the Jesuits exercise wide influence through their seminaries, colleges and universities, Rodé said he wanted to share both his “joys and hopes” and his “sorrows and anguishes” as the General Congregation gets underway.

After praising the order for “thousands of religious who generously respond to the Lord’s call,” Rodé cited several areas of concern.

First, he warned of a waning sense of sentire cum ecclesia, meaning “to think with the church.” Love for the church, Rodé argued, was central to the vision of St. Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuits in the 16th century.

“It is with sorrow and anxiety that I see that the sentire cum ecclesia of which your founder frequently spoke is diminishing even in some members of religious families,” Rodé said. “The Church is waiting for a light from you to restore the sensus ecclesiae.”

Rodé also bluntly called for greater obedience to the hierarchy.

“With sadness and anxiety, I also see a growing distancing from the hierarchy,” he told the Jesuits. “The Ignatian spirituality of apostolic service ‘under the Roman Pontiff’ does not allow for this separation.”

“The fundamental nucleus of Ignatian spirituality consists in uniting the love for God with love for the hierarchical Church,” Rodé said.

Uniquely among Catholic religious orders, Jesuits have traditionally taken a fourth vow alongside poverty, chastity and obedience, promising special obedience to the pope in missionary matters.

Rodé also asked the Jesuits to defend church teaching, saying contemporary culture creates the “need to present to the faithful and to the world the authentic truth revealed in Scripture and Tradition.”

Rodé appeared to suggest that the wide variety of theological positions espoused by Jesuits can feed what Pope Benedict XVI has called a “dictatorship of relativism.”

“The doctrinal diversity of those who, at all levels, by vocation and mission, are called to announce the Kingdom of truth and love, disorients the faithful and leads to a relativism without limits,” Rodé said.

In that regard, he said, the official teaching authority of the church is “the voucher for revealed truth.”

“May those who, according to your legislation, have to oversee the doctrine of your magazines and publications do so in the light of and according to the ‘rules for sentire cum ecclesia’, with love and respect,” Rodé said.

He also urged the Jesuits to place themselves “at the crossroads between Church and society, between faith and culture, between religion and secularism.”

Finally, Rodé urged contemporary Jesuits to follow “the same path trodden by Ignatius from Loyola to Rome, a path of generosity, of penance, of discernment, of prayer, of apostolic zeal of obedience, of charity, of fidelity to and love for the hierarchical Church.”

Rodé’s emphasis on relations with the hierarchy reflects a troubled recent history between the Jesuits and the Vatican.

Several theologians censured under both John Paul II and Benedict XVI have been Jesuits, including writers on religious pluralism such as the late Belgian Fr. Jacques Dupuis and American Fr. Roger Haight, in addition to the El Salvadoran liberation theologian Fr. Jon Sobrino.

Jesuit-run media have likewise been a source of tension. American Jesuit Fr. Thomas Reese was forced to step down as editor of America magazine in 2005 under pressure from the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The Vatican has expressed similar concerns about the German Jesuit journal, Stimmen der Zeit.

Rodé, 73, is a Vincentian appointed as Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life under John Paul II, and made a cardinal by Benedict XVI in March 2006.

---

Source URL:
http://ncrcafe.org/node/1521

Majerus Is Criticized for Pro-Choice Stance By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: January 23, 2008

A Roman Catholic archbishop said Tuesday that he would ask officials of St. Lou

is University to take “appropriate action” against its basketball coach, who said in a television interview that he supports abortion rights. Men

 

Rick Majerus, one of the game’s winningest coaches, made the comment at a weekend rally for the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke declined to say what the action against Majerus should be, saying it was a decision for officials at St. Louis, a Jesuit university.

“I’m concerned that a leader at a Catholic university made these comments,” Burke said by telephone as he attended March for Life anti-abortion events in Washington. “It can lead Catholics astray. I just believe that it’s of the essence for people to understand as a Catholic you just cannot hold these beliefs.”

In an interview at Saturday’s Clinton rally in suburban St. Louis, Majerus identified himself as a Catholic and called himself pro-choice. The St. Louis University spokesman Clayton Berry said Majerus was at the rally as an individual, not as a representative of the college.

Dan, I have something to confess 

 

 

 

Thanks for listening Dan

I need your help!

 

 

UW-Madison scientists at Pertzborn's Alma Mater, guide human skin cells to embryonic state 

 

Nov. 20, 2007

by Terry Devitt

In a paper to be published Nov. 22 in the online edition of the journal Science, a team of University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers reports the genetic reprogramming of human skin cells to create cells indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells.

“The induced cells do all the things embryonic stem cells do. It’s going to completely change the field.”

James Thomson, professor of anatomy and the scientist who first coaxed stem cells from human embryos in 1998

The finding is not only a critical scientific accomplishment, but potentially remakes the tumultuous political and ethical landscape of stem cell biology as human embryos may no longer be needed to obtain the blank slate stem cells capable of becoming any of the 220 types of cells in the human body. Perfected, the new technique would bring stem cells within easy reach of many more scientists as they could be easily made in labs of moderate sophistication, and without the ethical and legal constraints that now hamper their use by scientists.

The new study was conducted in the laboratory of UW-Madison biologist James Thomson, the scientist who first coaxed stem cells from human embryos in 1998. It was led by Junying Yu of the Genome Center of Wisconsin and the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center.

Related audio

Listen to James Thomson's opening statement at the Nov. 21 press briefing.

Related story 

Reprogramming the debate: stem-cell finding alters ethical controversy

When UW-Madison researchers succeeded in reprogramming skin cells to behave like embryonic stem cells, they also began to redefine the political and ethical dynamics of the stem-cell debate, a leading bioethicist says.
Read more

"The induced cells do all the things embryonic stem cells do," explains Thomson, a professor of anatomy in the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. "It's going to completely change the field."

In addition to exorcising the ethical and political dimensions of the stem cell debate, the advantage of using reprogrammed skin cells is that any cells developed for therapeutic purposes can be customized to the patient.

"They are probably more clinically relevant than embryonic stem cells," Thomson explains. "Immune rejection should not be a problem using these cells."

An important caveat, Thomson notes, is that more study of the newly-made cells is required to ensure that the "cells do not differ from embryonic stem cells in a clinically significant or unexpected way, so it is hardly time to discontinue embryonic stem cell research."

The successful isolation and culturing of human embryonic stem cells in 1998 sparked a huge amount of scientific and public interest, as stem cells are capable of becoming any of the cells or tissues that make up the human body.

The scientific team from the University of Wisconsin-Madison created genetic modifications in skin cells to induce the cells into what scientists call a pluripotent state — a condition that is essentially the same as that of embryonic stem cells. Junying Yu, James Thomson and their colleagues introduced a set of four genes into human fibroblasts, skin cells that are easy to obtain and grow in culture.

High-resultion images related to this story 

The potential for transplant medicine was immediately recognized, as was their promise as a window to the earliest stages of human development, and for novel drug discovery schemes. The capacity to generate cells that could be used to treat diseases such as Parkinson's, diabetes and spinal cord injuries, among others, garnered much interest by patients and patient advocacy groups.

But embryonic stem cells also sparked significant controversy as embryos were destroyed in the process of obtaining them, and they became a potent national political issue beginning with the 2000 presidential campaign. Since 2001, a national policy has permitted only limited use of some embryonic stem cell lines by scientists receiving public funding.

In the new study, to induce the skin cells to what scientists call a pluripotent state, a condition that is essentially the same as that of embryonic stem cells, Yu, Thomson and their colleagues introduced a set of four genes into human fibroblasts, skin cells that are easy to obtain and grow in culture.

Finding a combination of genes capable of transforming differentiated skin cells to undifferentiated stem cells helps resolve a critical question posed by Dolly, the famous sheep cloned in 1996. Dolly was the result of the nucleus of an adult cell transferred to an oocyte, an unfertilized egg. An unknown combination of factors in the egg caused the adult cell nucleus to be reprogrammed and, when implanted in a surrogate mother, develop into a fully formed animal.

The new study by Yu and Thomson reveal some of those genetic factors. The ability to reprogram human cells through well defined factors would permit the generation of patient-specific stem cell lines without use of the cloning techniques employed by the creators of Dolly.

"These are embryonic stem cell-specific genes which we identified through a combinatorial screen," Thomson says. "Getting rid of the oocyte means that any lab with standard molecular biology can do reprogramming without difficulty to obtain oocytes."

Although Thomson is encouraged that the new cells will speed new cell-based therapies to treat disease, more work is required, he says, to refine the techniques through which the cells were generated to prevent the incorporation of the introduced genes into the genome of the cells. In addition, to ensure their safety for therapy, methods to remove the vectors, the viruses used to ferry the genes into the skin cells, need to be developed.

Using the new reprogramming techniques, the Wisconsin group has developed eight new stem cell lines. As of the writing of the new Science paper, which will appear in the Dec. 21, 2007 print edition of the journal Science, some of the new cell lines have been growing continuously in culture for as long as 22 weeks.

The new work was funded by grants from the Charlotte Geyer Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. In addition to Yu and Thomson, authors of the new study include Maxim A. Vodyanik, Kim Smuga-Otto, Jessica Antosiewicz-Bourget, Jennifer L. Frane and Igor I. Slukvin, all of UW-Madison; and Shulan Tian, Jeff Nie, Gudrun A. Jonsdottir, Victor Ruotti and Ron Stewart, all of the WiCell Research Institute.

St. Louis Archbishop warns of excommunication over women's ordination The Associated Press Published: November 7, 2007   E-Mail Article   Listen to Article   Printer-Friendly   3-Column Format   Translate   Share Article      Text Size

ST. LOUIS: St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke has warned two Roman Catholic women that they will be excommunicated if they proceed with a planned ordination Sunday.

Rose Marie Dunn Hudson and Elsie Hainz McGrath say they are set to be ordained as part of the Roman Catholic Womenpriests movement that began in 2002.

A Roman Catholic canon says only baptized men may be ordained, and Pope Benedict XVI's has maintained the Vatican's firm opposition to women priests. Hwoever, a majority of Catholic respondents to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll taken just after the death of Pope John Paul II in 2005 said they favored ordination of women.

The Womenpriests and the advocacy group, the Women's Ordination Conference, are among Catholics pressing to change the tradition.

Both women said they will ignore Burke's warning.

Today in Americas Mexican floods push families to last islands of home Gunmen attack opponents of Chávez's bid to extend power U.S. Congress warms to France's new president

"It's a typically hierarchical form of intimidation, and we will not be intimidated," McGrath said.

In letters delivered by courier to the women's homes Monday evening, Burke warned the women they would be committing a "grave error" and "act of schism" by trying to receive priestly ordination.

He reminded them that the pope has stated infallibly that only men can receive a valid ordination.

"Should you refuse to comply ... in order to protect the faithful from grave spiritual deception ... you will incur automatically ... the censure of excommunication," wrote Burke, who is also a church lawyer.

He said "additional disciplinary measures will also have to be imposed."

The archdiocese declined to comment on the letters.

Both women have graduate degrees in theology or pastoral studies and have been active in ministry for years.

McGrath, 69, is the widow of a Roman Catholic deacon. She has worked for the archdiocese, for the theology department at Saint Louis University, has been a campus minister and edited for a religious publisher. She and her late husband were part of a national leadership team for marriage preparation and enrichment programs.

Hudson, 67, is a retired teacher who has been active in parish life. She has done prison ministry for the last 15 years.

Of the roughly 100 women who have been ordained as priests or deacons worldwide in the Womenpriests movement, including 37 in the U.S., only the first seven were officially excommunicated by the Vatican, said spokeswoman Bridget Mary Meehan. Others have received letters from their bishop such as those sent by Burke, she said.

"It means you are no longer a Catholic in good standing, that by your very own decision you have chosen to separate yourself from the church," Meehan said. "But we are disobeying an unjust law that discriminates against women.