NEWS

ARTICLES

LETTERS

FOLLOW ME

ROAMIN' CATHOLIC







Contents © 2004
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

NEWS
November 2004

---

FATHER MICHAEL LASTIRI, whom Bishop John Steinbock removed this summer from St. Patrick's parish in Merced after revelations surfaced that Lastiri engaged in internet homosexual pornography and solicitation, will not undergo therapy for his "compulsion." Bishop Steinbock in a July statement in the Modesto Bee said he was sending Lastiri to St. Luke's Institute in Maryland to treat his "compulsive and addictive" behavior [see "Fantasyland, September Faith]. But in a September 9 letter that appeared in the St. Patrick's bulletin, Bishop Steinbock tells parishioners, "Fr. Michael Lastiri, after returning from his evaluation at St. Luke's Institute, has asked me for a leave of absence from the active ministry rather than undergoing the program at St. Luke's at this time. He does not feel that he can abandon his mother and family who have suffered so much with the publicity of this case."

Steinbock then wrote that Lastiri may return to active ministry in the diocese if he continues with and is successful in his therapy.

THE DIOCESE OF FRESNO has filed two temporary restraining orders against St. Patrick's, Merced parishioner and corrections officer, Brian Kravec, barring him from attending St. Patrick's church and requiring him to relinquish his firearm. The restraining order, filed on behalf of St. Patrick's parish employees Jean Smith, administrative assistant, and Walter Szymusiak, parish accountant and outreach minister, states Kravec "made a credible threat of violence" against the employees and yelled in a "scary way" that "I [Kravec] will get all of you." Some say that the restraining order is in retaliation for Kravec's role in publicizing homosexual internet solicitations by St. Patrick's former pastor, Father Mike Lastiri.

According to ABC30 Action News, Kravec emphatically denies he made such a threat. The restraining order further alleges that Kravec stated he "had called Bill Lucido [diocesan spokesman] from the pastoral center on the previous day and had left his private telephone number and that same evening his [Kravec's] family received a threatening phone call." Kravec recorded the message: "now the fun begins, asshole." Another parishioner and fellow whistleblower, Dr. Robert Butler, has received similar harassing phone calls and claims the voice that Kravec recorded matches that of a St. Patrick's parishioner, who allegedly shouted out his car window at Butler in a Raley's parking lot, "F--- you, Butler!" Kravec and Butler both filed reports with the police immediately after the respective incidents.

A copy of an e-mail carbon-copied by him to Jean Smith was attached to the restraining order as evidence against Kravec's threatening behavior. In it Kravec asks what Jean Smith and former pastor, Father Mike Lastiri, were doing at the administration building after midnight on September 15; if their being there had anything to do with the audit conducted by the diocese on the parish accounts; and how a priest making a modest $1,200 a month can afford to take his family to Rome on a pilgrimage and then to a mountain chalet in Spain this coming November.

WHAT DOES MONTEREY'S BISHOP Sylvester Ryan say about denying communion to Catholic politicians who habitually vote in favor of "abortion rights"? In an article, "Faithful Citizenship: Catholics and the Political Process," published in the September issue of the diocese's newspaper, the Observer, Bishop Ryan does not give a direct answer. He does, however, without comment, cite a passage of the U.S. bishop's June meeting statement. Though, wrote the bishop, "the Observer printed the entire statement of the U.S. Bishops from their June meeting in Denver where the discussion took place regarding the Eucharist and some politicians who have voted consistently pro-choice, I think it fits well here to repeat the final paragraph: 'The polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practice can be misused for political ends. Respect for the holy Eucharist, in particular, demands that it be received worthily and that it be seen as the source for our common mission in the world.'" Reading Bishop Ryan's statement, one might suppose that he thinks the question of denying communion to pro-abortion politicians derives merely from "the polarizing tendencies of election year politics."

IN COMMENTING ON A VOTER GUIDE issued by the United States bishops, Bishop Ryan seems to say that abortion by itself should not be the sine qua non issue in judging candidates and that in focusing on abortion, one is guilty of polarization. Bishop Ryan says protecting human life includes other issues besides abortion -- euthanasia, cloning, using embryos for experimentation, and the "intentional targeting of civilians in war or by terrorist attacks." While these issues would seem to form a first tier of gravity for the bishop, he adds, without further distinction or explanation, to the list of life issues the "removal or reduction of nuclear weapons, the removal of land mines, and the elimination of the continuous and scandalous trade in arms." In addition, life issues, according to Ryan, include avoiding war, a serious questioning of "this nation's 'increasing reliance on the death penalty,'" "agriculture and the environment as global concerns that affect the health and welfare of all human beings, discrimination, Aids/HIV and the insidious but growing trafficking in human beings."

Bishop Ryan points out that life issues "are hugely complex, multi-layered and inter-connected especially within the processes of making public policy in a democratic society. The 'what' of our moral norms are clear and compelling. The 'how' in the implementation of these values into public policy for the common good requires candidates of integrity, enduring convictions and consummate political skills." So it is that voters "will often find it difficult to locate one candidate that espouses all of these issues in a balanced manner." Their choices, therefore, "become prudential," based on whether the candidate in question "will work most effectively for the common good as envisioned in our values."

Bishop Ryan's Observer piece might leave the casual reader wondering how anyone who champions a woman's right to kill her child, or suicide, or medical experimentation on humans, or the murder of the innocent in war could ever work "effectively for the common good" -- especially the "common good as envisioned in our [Catholic?] values."

CALLING THE ORDINANCE "NONSENSICAL," on July 28 United States district court judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr. struck down a Sacramento city ordinance that ordered sidewalk counselors to stay 20 feet away from an abortion clinic entrance. The ordinance, which took effect in June, was modeled after a Sacramento County ordinance enacted last year. The county ordinance also demands that sidewalk counselors stay 20 feet away from the clinic entrance.

According to pro-life activists who are familiar with the Sacramento County abortion clinics, the Sacramento County sheriff's department has not harassed sidewalk counselors; so the ordinance is not currently being challenged. On the other hand, the city of Sacramento's police department has harassed sidewalk counselors such as Harry "Bud" Reeves and Peter Stillson, who pray in front of the Planned Parenthood B Street clinic in the city of Sacramento.

According to a July 29 account in the Sacramento Bee, the city police threatened to arrest Reeves and Stillson on July 9 while they were standing in front of the Planned Parenthood clinic passing out pro-life literature and carry their signs. Police said that the two were in the bubble zone. Reeves and Stillson then sued the police in federal court for violating their civil rights.

Dana Cody of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, who represents Reeves and Stillson in court, said that the judge issued a temporary restraining order against the police because the ordinance was so vague and the police were enforcing the ordinance in the most restrictive manner possible. Cody added that the judge was merely following the law in his ruling. "I hardly had to do anything," she said about how the judge handled the matter. Cody pointed out that the judge relied on the United States Supreme Court decision Hill v. Colorado to reach his conclusion. "In Hill you can go into the buffer zone, but you must stay away a reasonable distance." Cody said that the Supreme Court ruled that a reasonable distance (eight feet, according to Hill) includes the ability to communicate with the other person.

After a September hearing date was set to decide on the constitutionality of the ordinance, the city of Sacramento agreed to modify the ordinance. The hearing date has been rescheduled for December 3. City attorney Samuel Jackson did not return a call for comment.

"WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL" about the Scott Peterson trial? Life.News.com's Steven Ertelt gave this answer. The trial over whether Scott Peterson murdered his wife Laci and their unborn infant son is important, said Ertelt, in that it "highlight[s] the epidemic in our nation of women targeted for attack specifically because they are pregnant." Ertelt cites a 2001 study by the Journal of the American Medical Association that says about 20 percent of women who died during pregnancy were murdered. In Maryland, murder is the single greatest cause of death for pregnant women, said Ertelt.

Why are pregnant women so often subjected to violence? Abortion, answered Ertelt. If a woman gets pregnant, her husband or boyfriend tries to pressure her to get an abortion. (About 40 percent of women who abort, according to Ertelt, say they felt coerced to do so.) If the woman refuses, the husband or boyfriend demands an abortion. The demand, if refused, often leads to violence. For this reason, said Ertelt, both Congress and state legislatures have passed laws that make the killing of a pregnant woman a double murder.

ST. ROSE HOSPITAL in Hayward will cease operating as a Catholic hospital, said the September 6 Catholic Voice, the newspaper of the diocese of Oakland. The Via Crucis Health System, under which St. Rose has operated, said the hospital would transition over to a community-based hospital. Via Crucis, which runs hospitals in Kansas and Oklahoma, said it had decided several years ago that an organization more knowledgeable of California should run St. Rose. The health system, however, was unable to find a Catholic sponsor.

St. Rose was the last Catholic hospital in the diocese of Oakland. Sisters of St. Joseph of Wichita founded the hospital in 1962.

THINGS ARE PRETTY DANDY in the American Catholic Church, according to a commentary by Eugene Cullen Kennedy in the September 6 Catholic Voice. Kennedy cites a study by Joseph Claude Harris, a research analyst in Seattle, which shows, says Kennedy, that "the almost daily reports of the church's death ... are greatly exaggerated and, in fact, the church is functioning quite well."

But what of the vocations crisis? There really isn't one, according to Kennedy and Harris. According to Harris, "from 1995 to 2002 parish leaders hired an additional 6,674 professional parish ministers." But are these priests? No, but that's no problem, according to Kennedy, for "a staffing transition is happening with permanent deacons replacing priests and religious. Parish life continues, the sacraments are celebrated, and lay people have management responsibilities. If there were a crisis, you would have negative numbers."

And, anyhow, fixing the priest crisis is a cinch. "We have many ways to respond ... that have not been tried," Kennedy quotes Harris. "With a little imagination, the number of priests could easily be increased. Andrew Greeley proposes the institution of a Priests Corps on the model of the Peace Corps. And there is no canonical impediment to ordaining some of the 14,002 permanent deacons to the priesthood." Deftly left out is the fact that most of these deacons are married men.

Kennedy does not say whether Harris addresses the widespread ignorance of the Faith coupled with doctrinal dissent that many experience in the American Church. Kennedy does say, however, that Harris shows that "America is gradually becoming more Catholic." The proof? "The proportion of Catholics to the total population increased from 209 per thousand Americans to 218." And, better yet, donations have been on the rise. According to Harris: "donations to parishes increased by $259 million between 2000 and 2001 and $374 million between 2001 and 2002. That's a healthy sign."

According to Kennedy, "if you want to feel encouraged about your children and grandchildren, consult [Harris'] Web site: www.josephclaudeharris.com. His analysis of Catholic contributions is a book of revelation but it certainly isn't the Apocalypse."

A LETTER WRITER in the August 9 Catholic Voice revealed that Moreau Catholic High School in Hayward (in Oakland diocese) assigned the Da Vinci Code as part of its summer reading list for students. The book, which claims that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children by her, could be confusing to students, said the letter writer, whose name was withheld. "My niece, one of the Moreau students, on her own was not able to see the misinformation," the letter writer said. "Although I stressed with her that the work is fiction, she takes what she likes and holds it as truth. Fiction can be powerful ... especially if read with discrimination."

But an anonymous Moreau student, writing in the September 6 Voice, said she had found the Da Vinci Code "an enjoyable, yet controversial, piece of fiction." Unlike the niece of the previous letter writer, this student "delved deeper into the idea that Jesus was ever married or involved in sexual relations with any of his followers" and "developed a larger interest in my religion and researched the subject extensively." And what did all this study reveal? "All I have ever heard was the divine aspect of Jesus, and the idea that He was ever with someone emphasized his humanity -- an aspect I never thought about much before."

PORK BARREL. The declining years of Pete Wilson's governorship of California and the first two years of Gray Davis' saw lawmakers in the state assembly lavishly spending money on pet projects, said the September 9 Los Angeles Times. Those were the years when the high-tech industry's stock bubble enriched the state's budget surplus. The money, funneled through the state's parks department, went to a variety of purposes -- a Jewish Community Center in San Francisco, preservation of historic Camarillo Ranch, a food bank in Lancaster, repair and construction of amusements at Fresno's Playland Storyland, among numerous others -- including the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Historical Society of Northern California. San Francisco assembly members Mark Leno and Carole Migden secured $250,000 for the Historical Society's archive of the "gay rights" movement.

Defending this allocation, Leno said it was to preserve history. "It is not our place to judge historical material," the assemblyman said. "It is our job to preserve historical material." Indeed, said the Historical Society's executive director, Terence Kissack, "the controversy over sexuality is part of the history of California." Kissack defended the archive's inclusion of printed materials from the North American Man Boy Love Association. "By collecting material that some -- even most -- would find offensive," he said, "we're not meaning to enter into the debate."

LAWYERS FOR THE CITY of San Francisco in early September revealed the strategies by which they hope to strike down California law protecting marriage as an institution between one man and one woman, said the September 4 San Francisco Chronicle. In a case brought before a San Francisco superior court, San Francisco officials said that in denying homosexual couples the right to marry, California law is intruding on homosexuals' "rights to liberty, privacy and equality" under the state constitution. The state's laws, says San Francisco, restrict the rights of an entire class and so must, under California law, meet a tough constitutional test -- "strict scrutiny." Under strict scrutiny, said the Chronicle, "the burden is on the government to show that the regulation is needed and narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest."

But even if the courts do not recognize homosexuals as a distinct class, the state's marriage laws have no rational basis. "Neither a tradition of exclusion nor a naked desire to continue excluding suffices as a legitimate state interest at any level of scrutiny," lawyers for San Francisco have argued. "The burden is square on the state to show why it thinks the Constitution permits it to limit access to one of the most vital legal and social institutions on the basis of sex and sexual orientation.... Nothing the state can say and nothing the state can do will meet this burden."

State attorney general Bill Lockyer, the defendant in the case, had not as of early September revealed how he would fight San Francisco's challenge. Though Lockyer has vowed to defend state law, he has said he supports homosexual marriage. Currently, Lockyer is defending a state law giving domestic partners the rights of married couples. According to Lockyer's office, it is in the state's interest to ensure stable homosexual families.

The case may reach the state supreme court within two years.

GOVERNOR ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER "enhance[d] his standing as a moderate within the Republican Party" on September 14 by signing a pro-homosexual bill into law, said an Associated Press story. The new law, which goes into effect January 2, 2005, requires insurance companies to offer domestic partners the same benefits accorded to married couples. Currently state law required insurers to offer a domestic partner of an employee coverage equal to that of a dependent, not a spouse. The September 15 San Francisco Chronicle noted that not only was this Governor Schwarzenegger's "first stand on gay and lesbian rights legislation," but that the new law is "the first of its kind in the nation." Geoffrey Kors, executive director of the homosexual advocacy group Equality California, told the Chronicle, "the governor has demonstrated his commitment to moving lesbian and gay couples and their families closer to equality under California law."

THE GOVERNOR FURTHER demonstrated his support for homosexual rights on September 22 by signing into law a bill that would extend the definition of "hate crimes" to include "gender," said a September 23 press release from the Campaign for California Families. The bill, sponsored by Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Los Angeles), defines gender in state law as a "person's gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth." The bill penalizes a person or persons who, "whether or not acting under color of law, interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion," or who "attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state."

MORE THAN 50 SCHOLARSHIPS are earmarked for homosexual college and graduate school students, said a September 13 Associated Press story. The story featured one Alyn Libman, whose unusual moniker is explained by the fact that in the 11th grade she decided to become a boy. The 19-year-old Libman received a $15,000 scholarship to attend the University of California at Berkeley from Chicago's Point Foundation, a non-profit that has, since 2002, given over $1 million in scholarships to homosexuals. Among other organizations giving out such scholarships are homosexual advocacy groups and the United Church of Christ.

Though the scholarships target homosexual students, they look for more than mere sexual orientation. Some want to help students that can "make a difference" (Libman wants to be a civil rights lawyer), others look to see that students have fought against the odds (application essays often contain accounts of how students have suffered for their orientation). Some scholarships consider scholastic aptitude.

THE "STIGMA" AGAINST "GAY parenting is eroding, said a September 6 San Francisco Chronicle story. The article featured a three-way "family" -- Denny Smith, a homosexual, the father, and Marie Wadman and Julie Ginsburg, a lesbian couple, the mothers. Smith met the Lesbian couple through a San Francisco co-parenting matchmaking group, Prospective Queer Parents. Since then, through artificial means, Smith fathered a daughter, Lucy (three-years old) on Wadman and a son, Callum (age one-year) on Ginsburg. The threesome have a contract -- though, says the article, they never refer to it. Smith has his "daddy days" on Wednesdays and Saturdays, while Wadman and Ginsburg perform most of the parental duties. But all three make decisions together about the children's welfare.

Co-parenting arrangements among homosexuals, like those of Smith, Wadman, and Ginsburg are "increasing by the week," Stephanie Brill, an author of two homosexual parenting books, told the Chronicle. Brill, who runs an East Bay midwifery center, said that12 years ago, potential co-parents came to her for help roughly once a month. Recently, in one week, she said she dealt with six sets of co-parents. According to Kate Kendell of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, "ten years ago such family arrangements were very rare, largely because parenting by lesbians or gay men was really just starting to be a very serious and widely practiced option." But times are changing.

DEADBEAT CO-PARENTS. On September 1, the California supreme court agreed to rule on cases involving homosexual co-parents who had split, said the September 2 San Francisco Chronicle. One case involves a couple, Elisa Maria B. and Emily B., who had conceived children by the same sperm donor -- Elisa, a son; and Emily, a set of twins. Emily played the part of the mother for all three children, while Elisa brought home the bacon -- and allegedly claimed the three children as dependents on her income tax returns. The couple's six-year affair ended in 1999, with Elisa and her son moving to San Francisco and promising (allegedly) to support Emily and the twins. But when Elisa turned deadbeat, Emily sued her; but the court of appeal in Sacramento ruled that Elisa could not claim child support since Emily was not the twins' mother (or father?) Emily had argued that she should not have to pay child support since she did not have visitation rights.

The supreme court will consider this and two similar cases to determine what, if any, parental rights and duties belong to the co-parents who have -- divorced?

THREE BILLS THAT CRITICS SAY would have led eventually to compulsory pre-school have died in the California state legislature, said a September 8 Home School Legal Defense news alert. Though the bills, if passed, would have established universal pre-school as a voluntary option for parents, Roy Hanson and Jim Davis of Family Protection Ministries noted that they were a step to lowering the compulsory school age to three years. Of the three California bills, one died in the senate appropriations committee last January, the second died in committee in late August, while the third had the provision calling for universal pre-school deleted on August 27. The state legislature adjourned the next day.

In 2002, Washington, D.C. attempted to pass a bill to lower the compulsory education age to three years. According to an April 11, 2002 Home School Legal Defense report, the bill would have required children who turned two-years, eight months in the month before school opened to attend pre-school. In 2003, the bill was replaced with one that gave parents the option of state-funded pre-school but did not require it.

REAFFIRMING ITS COMMITMENT to parental rights, on September 16 the board of Rocklin Unified School district voted 5-0 in favor of continuing a policy that does not allow students to leave campus without their parents' knowledge or consent. Many parents are concerned about school policies that allow students to leave campus in order to obtain medical services, such as abortions, sexually transmitted disease treatments, and birth control -- all without parental consent or knowledge.

In the past, some in the Rocklin Unified School district have pushed to reverse the policy that the board upheld. Proponents of allowing students to leave campus to obtain confidential medical services point out the risk of a lawsuit if the board does not reverse its policy. Rocklin superintendent Kevin Brown is an ardent supporter of parental rights and urged the board to uphold its current policy.

Karen England of Capitol Resource Institute testified at the September meeting, urging the school board to uphold the policy. "Kudos to Superintendent Kevin Brown for his staunch efforts to protect the interests of parents in his district," England said in a statement. "Superintendent Brown has wisely observed that there is no need to seek additional legal advice for adopting this policy when other school districts have banned confidential release without problems. It's refreshing to see a superintendent with so much common sense, who is not afraid to come out and do what is best for families."

MONTY PATTERSON, whose daughter Holly died after taking the abortion drug RU-486, spent the first anniversary of her death, September 17, in Washington, D.C., trying to convince Congress to suspend Food and Drug Administration approval for RU-486, the abortion drug. Holly Patterson was given the drug, along with misoprostol to expel the baby, at a Hayward Planned Parenthood clinic on September 10 of last year. On September 14, cramping and bleeding induced Patterson to go to ValleyCare Medical Center in Pleasanton, which sent her home with painkillers. Three days later, after again visiting ValleyCare's emergency room, Holly Patterson died.

According to the September 12 Contra Costa Times, a bill sponsored in Congress by South Carolina Republican representative Jim DeMint, called "Holly's Bill," would suspend FDA approval of RU-486 while a congressional office looks into the process by which it was approved. Proponents of the bill say the FDA approved RU-486 under pressure from the Clinton administration. The bill is co-sponsored by 84 members of Congress.

Monty Patterson says the adverse affects of both RU-486 and misoprostol are underreported. He thinks families need to have the option of discussing options when an unplanned pregnancy occurs. However, Patterson does not want to be co-opted by either the pro-life or the pro-abortion movements. "I'm just trying to tell the truth about what happened to Holly so parents will not be pro-life or pro-choice, but proactive," he said. "There is no debate when it comes to a woman's safety and health."

PHARMACISTS WHO FACE being fired from their jobs because they refused to fill prescriptions for abortifacients may get some help from the United States Congress, said a September 15 Associated Press story. "A little-noticed provision," said Associated Press, that would forbid federal, state, and local governments from forcing healthcare professionals or institutions to provide or pay for abortions or even make referrals for abortions is before the House of Representatives. The House passed a similar bill last year, but it failed in the Senate. The latest bill will be part of an appropriations bill and will go to a House-Senate conference committee.

Mississippi passed a similar bill in July that grants healthcare workers the right to refuse to perform almost any task that violates their consciences. But, said Planned Parenthood president, Gloria Feldt, such laws do not happen only in the Bible Belt. "It's part of the anti-choice arrogance," she said, "in which they believe they have the right to impose their ideology on everyone else." Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for Free Choice, finds the proposed federal law "outrageous" and "callous," since it "affects only poor women in the most extreme circumstances." Kissling told Associated Press that she was heartened by the California Supreme Court's decision forcing Catholic Charities of Sacramento to provide options for birth control in employee health plans.

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA BISHOPS won an important victory on the litigation end of the priest sexual molestation crisis, said the September 3 San Francisco Chronicle. Alameda County superior court judge Ronald Sabraw threw out several lawsuits involving a Concord priest, Father Arthur Ribeiro, who is accused of molesting schoolboys in the early 1960s. Ribeiro died in 2000. Sabraw ruled that plaintiffs' attorneys had not presented enough evidence that the dioceses could have known that Ribeiro was a child molester before he committed acts of molestation. Plaintiffs have to prove, said Sabraw, that the dioceses "were on notice that a specific alleged perpetrator had engaged in unlawful sexual conduct. According to Sabraw, "general notice that priests or church employees have molested children in the past and are likely to do so in the future is not notice of unlawful sexual conduct by a specific employee, volunteer, representative or agent."

An attorney for the archdiocese of San Francisco, Paul Gaspari, said Sabraw' s ruling would lead to the exclusion of about one-third of the cases against Northern California dioceses filed since the state of California lifted the statute of limitations on civil cases dealing with sexual molestation in January 2002. But Rick Simons of Hayward, a plaintiffs' lawyer, said that only 10 to 20 percent of cases are weaker than Ribeiro's in light of Sabraw's ruling.

BUT LAWYERS FOR ALLEGED victims of sexual molestation by priests claimed a victory on September 16 when Judge Sabraw ruled against the diocesan argument that the 2002 California law that removed for a year the statute of limitations in civil cases was unconstitutional and violated religious freedom. Paul Gaspari argued that the Church has the constitutional right "to ordain a known child molester that it felt had truly repented.... The government may not second-guess that choice." Sabraw however ruled that "the state has a strong interest in preventing childhood sexual abuse" and that "there is minimal imposition on religion by permitting the claims for child sexual abuse against the church defendants." But more important than this unsurprising decision was the judge's judgment that dioceses "may have ratified sexual abuse by their employees by retaining and/or promoting those employees after knowledge of sexual abuse." According to Rick Simons, a plaintiffs' lawyer, Sabraw's opinion suggests the judges believe there is "evidence of widespread institutional involvement in hiding these priests and keeping them in service" and that "these are not just isolated, weirdo acts." Simons said this decision could double the pay out to alleged victims in any settlement.

PARISHIONERS OF SACRED HEART Church in San Francisco's Western Addition neighborhood are hoping to stop the closing of their parish by the archdiocese, said the September 20 San Francisco Chronicle. The archdiocese has decided to close the parish, citing the shortage of priests and a city-required $8 million retrofitting of the church, built in 1885. Though the parish only draws about 100 worshippers on Sunday, 25 on Saturdays, and five on weekdays, parishioners say it is an important witness in a crime-filled neighborhood. Others say closing the mostly black parish is a sign that the archdiocese is neglecting black Catholics. Still others have long memories attached to the church. Said one parishioner, "It hurts real bad. I've been coming here since I was about 7. My mom got married here. A lot of my family history is here. I can't believe we're going to lose it."

One parishioner told the Chronicle that she thought the archdiocese wasn't interested in helping them find some way to keep Sacred Heart open. But archdiocesan spokesman Maurice Healy said that the archdiocese could have closed down the parish 15 years ago. "We made a valiant effort to save the church," Healy said. "But it's just not going to happen." Healy said the archdiocese had looked into turning the church and the school into low-income housing with a small parish in the back. But even if enough money were found to build a new church in the neighborhood, Healy said it would not matter; the parish is just too small.

THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT on October 4 refused an appeal by Catholic Charities of Sacramento to review a state law that requires religious employers to offer contraceptive health coverage in their health plans, said an October 5 Reuters news report. The California supreme court did not exempt Catholic Charities from the provisions of the law because the organization does not primarily employ and serve Catholics. Kevin Baine, a lawyer representing Catholic charities, presented the appeal to the federal Supreme Court. "The specific issues in this case as well as the broader principles at stake are of interest to religious institutions across the country," Baine said. The California law, he said, is an "unprecedented intrusion upon the religious freedom of Catholic Charities." The Supreme Court, apparently, did not think so, and without comment refused to consider the appeal.

California attorney general Bill Lockyer opposed the Supreme Court appeal, saying there was no grounds for it.

TOP