When the Canadian Catholic Register Speaks Out About D+P Making Mistakes

A few days ago I put up a post about Archbishop Prendergast's cancelling a D+P sponsored speaker (Fr. Luis Arriaga) undermined claims by the CCCB & Development & Peace aka D+P (their equivalent of the USCCB's Campaign for Human Development) that D+P was not funding pro-abortion groups. I also said that it pretty much exhonorated LifeSiteNews as well.

Since then the spin by D+P has begun.

CCCB announced that they are reopening the investigation into the Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Human Rights Center that Fr. Arriaga is executive director of. But that hasn't detered D+P from defending Fr. Arriaga or their support of his Center. on 1 April D&P executive director Michael Casey wrote that Centre PRODH is “one of the foremost human rights organizations in Latin America.” The group is “highly respected for its outstanding work in defending the lives of the most vulnerable in Mexican society.”

Casey went on to claim that the real reason for the cancellation was that he had expressed concern for Fr. Arriaga to Archbishop Prendergast because of a scheduled “prayer and protest” rally organized by pro-life Catholics. This statement makes no sense at all given the facts. It sounds like pure spin to coverup the truth. It also sounds like Casey is trying to demonize the pro-lifers implying that they were a threat to Fr. Ariaga's safety.

Nevermind that the original statement made it clear that the appearances were cancelled because of the Centre's "support of groups in favour of abortion rights in Mexico." It sure sounds to me like safety had nothing to do with it, nor that it was Casey's idea.

D+P not happy because a can of worms they thought was closed has been ropenned. The Centre was 1 of 5 groups that was cleared by a delegation of Bishops of the CCCB. Now the question is, why was it cleared when there is clear evidence that it shouldn't have been?

Last November at the CCCB's Fall gathering the committee they set up to look into D+P came out with a statement that included the promise that D+P had developed an “exit strategy” to end “controversial” partnerships. It also pretty much denied that D+P was funding any At the time I said that the statement sounded more like spin than a serious attempt by D+P to clean things up. Well it looks like I was right.

This time it may not be so hard for D+P & their supporters in the CCCB to spin things & cover up the truth. The committee is now being forced to go back & reopen the investigation. It will be interesting to see how they explain not seeing the truth in the 1st place. I have my suspicions. I am willing to bet they relied on D+P to provide the evidence & didn't do a seperate investigation. Part of the reason I say that is because this time the CCCB said they are “requesting clarifications” from the Archdiocese of Mexico City regarding the “allegations” about the Centre.

But the real sign that things have gone too far for D+P to spin or coverup any more is that The Catholic Register in Canada has come out with an editorial questioning D+P's recent actions. In addition they ran an op-ed piece by Fr. Raymond de Souza entitled Does D&P not get it? . While I am not as familiar with the Catholic Register as I am with US Catholic publications, everything I have seen tells me that they are more like the liberal, leftist dissident Non-Catholic Reporter that the orthodox National Catholic Register. So if D+P has lost them, then it may be time to fold up.

Fr. de Souza's op-ed is definitely the stronger of the 2. But the Register doesn't sugar coat things. It says that the D+P actions they say are the result "of either appallingly poor judgment or blatant incompetence" raises the question "how many questionable agencies are still endorsed by D&P?” OUCH!!!!!

The editorial doesn't make the majority of the CCCB Bishops look good either. Talking about the position D+P put Archbishop Prendergast in, it says "The archbishop must be wondering how in heaven's name this could have happened. How could D&P, his own staff, fellow bishops and the priest himself, Fr. Luis Arriaga, put the Archbishop in such an awkward position."

It goes on to add "Prendergast is one bishop unreservedly on the front line in the anti-abortion crusade, whether it be in his public statements, joining the annual March for Life or, last year as Quebec bishops were noticeably absent, standing with Cardinal Marc Ouellet when Canada's then-primate was under attack for unequivocally defending life."

So in those few lines we see the majority of Bishops painted as failing to be as strongly Pro-life as they should. & when it goes on to question how the investigation was operated, as well as the follow up report & implimentation of the stronger safeguards, that doesn't have the CCCB or D+P come off looking to good either.

It does point out how LifeSiteNews raised concerns about the Centre 2 years ago. (As close as it gets to admitting they were right. & it does say the Centre should have been among those involved in the follow up investigation. It goes on to say "Given how fast Prendergast dismissed Arriaga, it seems clear the priest's organization was either on the "exit" list or deserved to be so."

But compared to Fr. de Souza's op-ed, they let D+P off easy.

Fr. de Souza starts off by raising some questions about how committed to being Pro-life D+P really is. "Is the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (D&P) indisputably committed to the Gospel of life? Is the pro-life cause as important as, say, their campaign against bottled water?" He goes on to point out why these are valid questions. "Recent events in Ottawa have brought into question D&P’s pro-life commitment, and therefore the prudence of contributing money to its annual Share Lent campaign." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

Father doesn't let up from this point either. "Its vision and mission statements say nothing about God, Jesus Christ, the Gospel, Christianity, evangelization, salvation or the proclamation of the kingdom. In its own self-presentation it is indistinguishable from a secular humanitarian organization, save for its official fundraising activities in Catholic dioceses."

At this point he has painted the picture of a group that is not pro-life & not even Catholic. & even after the firestorm unleashed by LifeSiteNews' investigation & the CCCB report etc "D&P moved along with no great evidence of significant change." But it did claim to be pro-life, a claim Father doesn't buy. He says "If D&P was deeply convinced that abortion is an “abominable crime,” to use the words of Vatican II, it would not consider pro-abortion agencies to be partners in the struggle for justice, which always begins with the right to life."

& Father isn't buying Casey's response to Archbishop Prendergast's actions any more than I am. "In response, D&P executive director Michael Casey released a most unworthy statement, obscuring rather than addressing the main point of the archbishop’s decision. Defiantly, it went on to defend the centre’s “outstanding work in defending the lives of the most vulnerable in Mexican society, including migrants, women and indigenous people.” The unborn notably did not make that list." After warning that D+P better show some real effort to clean up its act. & if it doesn't "it will be clear that D&P considers support for groups in favour of abortion rights to be consistent with its mission. In that case, the very Catholic identity of D&P, already greatly attenuated, would definitively be in jeopardy."

His final statement makes it very clear what he thinks about the current status of D+P. "Does the actual work of D&P advance the Gospel of Christ, including the Gospel of life? The answer should be clear. The events of the last week demonstrate that it is not."

He does come down favorably on the side of LifeSiteNews & their reporting. "Two years ago, LifeSitenews.com — an agency that prides itself on being a watchdog for orthodoxy among Catholics, including bishops — reported that among D&P’s partners and alliances were groups that support abortion rights. Given that LifeSite is massively unpopular among many Catholic leaders, including bishops, its charges against D&P caused an enormous firestorm about the news agency’s tactics and professionalism. Yet the reports were sufficiently credible that a bishops’ fact-finding mission was dispatched to Mexico to assure Catholics that D&P was not undermining the Church’s pro-life witness." A definite compliment to LSN.

It also makes the attacks on LSN by those Catholic leaders look more like those attacking had something to hide & didn't like what LSN was uncovering, not how they were reporting etc. For me this confirms my suspicions there is more to the Fr. Gravel lawsuit against LSN that meest the eye. As I said in my post on the suit "Why is his Bishop even allowing this lawsuit to take place? I may be wrong, but I thing the Bishop is more than a little sympathetic to Gravel's positions & may not be too happy about what LSN has done either. IMHO this may be the Bishop's way of getting back while keeping his fingerprints off of it."

It is clear to me that Casey & D+P are still hoping to bluff their way through this latest firestorm. & they may be able to for a while. But it is getting harder & harder for them to get away with it. & harder for the CCCB to look away or offer "cosmetic changes".

Bishop Michael Mulhall of the diocese of Pembroke & Toronto Archbishop Thomas Collins have put restrictions on how D+P can use their funds. & while moneys are fungable, the fact that over 10% of D&P’s annual funding is from Toronto's parishes makes it harder for D+P to simply move funds arround. & if D+P doesn't clean up its act, Archbishop Collins has made it clear they won't get a cent. “It is vital that this coming year be one in which Development and Peace experiences profound renewal, and the depth of that renewal will determine its future,” he said. “Future ShareLife funding for Development and Peace will depend upon our assessment of the degree to which the issues that concern us have been resolved.” Since Toronto gives over $1.125 million (Canadian) to D+P that loss would be devestating.

Again, I honestly think D+P & their buddies at the CCCB will think they can go on as they have with an occasional bit of spin or "cosmetic change" despite what has happenned. The smart thing would be to simply scrap D+P & start over with a truly pro-life organization. But I doubt they will. Instead, what we will see is an escalating list of scandals that could easily have been avoided. & the CCCB will have no one but themselves to blame.

Sources: Canada’s Bishops decide to re-investigate D&P partner over latest scandal Ontario bishops maintain funding restrictions on Development & Peace Catholic Register: D&P ‘guilty of either appallingly poor judgment or blatant incompetence’