In November of 2015, Newsmax published what it considers the 100 Most Influential Pro-life Advocates. The first Catholic bishop on the list (coming in at number 28) was Bishop Thomas Olmsted of the Phoenix.
This, I suspect, came as little surprise to the broader pro-life community as he has long been considered one of the most dependably pro-life voices in the American episcopate.
While other bishops may be solidly anti-abortion, many give a veritable nod to contraception through their silence on the subject. Not Bishop Olmsted.
In a 2005 column for the Catholic Sun, the newspaper of the Diocese of Phoenix, he wrote:
When a wedge is driven between marital love and the procreation of children (which contraception does), countless other evils inevitably follow, evils such as sex being portrayed as a commodity for recreation with no relation to marriage and children, attempts to justify homosexual acts, and the proliferation of pornography.
Five years later, when Bishop Olmsted faced criticism in 2010 for stripping the Catholic name from a Phoenix hospital that approved an abortion, Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro-Carámbula, President of Human Life International, lauded him, saying:
This is what heroic, faithful leadership looks like. It does not take its cues from prevailing mores, but from the unchangeable teaching of the Church…
Fast forward to the present…
During his Mexico to Rome in-flight press conference given one week ago, Pope Francis suggested that contraception in order to avoid pregnancy for fear of birth anomalies resulting from the Zika virus may be acceptable.
One day later, Papal Spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi, S.J. confirmed it:
The contraceptive or condom, in particular cases of emergency or gravity, could be the object of discernment in a serious case of conscience. This is what the Pope said.
According to Lombardi, the pope was referring to “the possibility of taking recourse to contraception or condoms in cases of emergency or special situations.”
Remember, this is the same “recourse to contraception or condoms” that Bishop Olmsted decried as the gateway to “countless other evils.”
That was then, however.
Today, Bishop Olmsted appears to be rather content taking his cues from the prevailing mores such as they come to us courtesy of the Bergoglian pontificate, and this in spite of every grave departure from the unchangeable teaching of the Church they happen to represent.
As far as I can tell as of this writing, Bishop Olmsted – Newsmax’s 28th Most Influential Pro-life Bishop , the man hailed by Human Life International as “heroic,” hasn’t made a public peep about Francis’ assault on immutable Catholic doctrine concerning the objectively evil nature of contraception.
This, as you may recall, is the same Bishop Olmsted who recently issued a clarion call for Catholic men to go “Into the Breach” to do battle in defense of the truth.
Perhaps in the coming days or weeks he will stand up in defense of his children, like a man, plainly denouncing the Pope’s endorsement of contraception and condoms.
As things stand at this moment, however; like I said in the video below, I wouldn’t follow Bishop Olmsted into a card game, much less a battle.
I think you have it right, Louie. Perhaps the problem is men can’t clearly identify the enemy. Why they should fight is a good question, but WHAT they need to fight is another.
Who is the enemy? The missus? The boss? The neighbours? Men are fighting a marshmallow, foggy mass – feminism? too broad, (pardon the pun!) so just what is it? If it’s Satan how does he manifest himself in men’s lives so they can grab hold of this?
Is the teaching on contraception being evil a “doctrine” or moral teaching that falls under violation of 5th commandment? Any body understand why Pope Francis said there is a conflict between 5th and 6th commandment.
Men cant clearly identify the enemy? Are modern men really that stupid? With due diligence any person who isnt mentally deficient is more than capable of identifying the “enemy”, speaking in a Catholic sense. Once again you try to find and/or make excuses for wrongdoing….you did the same thing in the last article with Scalia. Thats’s the FSSP in you.
Archbishop Lefebvre on religious liberty, collegiality, and ecumenism:
“Those are the three capital ideas from the Council. It is they which make the spirit of the Council. They are what the progressives wanted and what in practice they obtained – watered down perhaps, but they got them, and they will not loosen their hold on them! Study those ideas, and see how serious they are!
1. Collegiality: that means number against person, the law of number against the authority of the person. It is no longer the person who has authority, but number! It is democracy, or at least the democratic principle. It is no longer Our Lord Who commands through the authorities (it is Our Lord Who is the Authority, and in the Church all those who have authority – Pope, Bishops, Priests – share in the authority of Our Lord). By the very fact that number is put in the place of the person, that authority is given to number, authority is in the people, in the rank and file, in the group. That is absolutely contrary to what Our Lord wanted, to the personal authority which He always wanted to give: the Pope has a personal authority; the Bishop has a personal authority by his consecration; the Priest has a personal authority by his sacramental character, his ordination; in the Church authority is personal. The subject of authority (he who is going to exercise it) may be designated democratically, but the authority cannot be so given. That is an important principle. On a false principle Our Lord could lose His crown.
2. Ecumenism: Fraternity. That is not directly contrary to Our Lord, but ecumenism is, for it is a fraternity which destroys paternity. Who makes the unity of brothers? It is the father. Ecumenism makes us all brothers in a sentimental communion but no longer in the faith, no longer in the faith taught us by Our Lord, no longer in the “Father” we have in the Creed. That unity is not in the Father but in a vague feeling of subjectivism, of religious sentiment : it is Modernism.
3. Religious Liberty: that is conscience in place of law. Once more something subjective in place of law, which is objective. And what is this law? It is the Word of God. The Word of God is the Law: Our Savior Himself is our Law. You can see how all that is directly opposed to the authority of Our Lord!
On Those Three Principles the Church Cannot Survive.
That, for the Church, is a catastrophe. The Church cannot live in an atmosphere directly opposed to Our Lord, its Founder, opposed to what makes the unity of the Church, her truth and her law.”
“It is primarily the priest’s obligation to lead us in the battle to defend the Faith. Saint Thomas Aquinas did not leave it to the laity to combat the Manichees. St. Francis de Sales did not leave it the laity to combat Protestantism. We laity have our part, but it belongs to the nature of the priesthood to publicly defend the Faith.
This is why we loved Archbishop Lefebvre. He led us in the battle.”
Thank you, rich, once again for your demonstration of fraternal charity. And for showing me the difference between aggression and manliness.
“Perhaps in the coming days or weeks he will stand up in defense of his children, like a man, plainly denouncing the Pope’s endorsement of contraception and condoms”
In the meantime, PERHAPS he’s discerning his response through prayer.
The truest charity is doing one’s best to show another the error of their ways.
I think “perhaps” we need to stop giving vatican 2 heretics any benefit of the doubt and denounce them for who they are.
If we had relied solely on prayer centuries ago and never fought in the crusades, and just let the muslims do as they wanted, where would the Catholic Church be right now?
You’re right Rich, but as you can see from some of these comments, there are those that just don’t want to or can’t face reality.The vII virus has infected so many and crippled their ability to discern.
Think like a freemason and you will understand all Francis says.
You arent kidding…..too many excuse-makers.
Hi Louie, speaking of heroes, Mr Voris and company have put together a viewer list of top 20 heroes/good guys of the past century. A couple of weeks ago they had their top 20 bad guys, the ones who have wrought the most destruction to the Church/faith of late. Now this new top 20 short-list is interesting for three reasons. First it contains some heroes who in my view have question marks next to them (of varying degrees of course). Second, if the top 20 bad guys was made up of the most destructive, then the top 20 good guys ought to be those who did the most to preserve, protect and promote the deposit of faith, right? Hmmm. Third, it’s who they do not have on their list, or more accurately, who they refuse to add to their list. When you look at it its a typical list that only neo-Caths could have put together. They have D. V. Hilderbrand but I suspect only because they interviewed his widow Alice recently. Its says a lot about where CMTV is at at the moment. For those who are curious, check out the Feb 24th Vortex to see what I mean.
Could someone please explain what’s with the rainbow coloured stoles in the picture?
There is an amazing blog site out there called Return To Fatima, their latest post http://www.returntofatima.org/2016/02/the-fifth-trumpet/ may be of particular interest to those who frequent Louis’s site. What we are experiencing in real time as I’m sure you all know has been foretold and the individual who writes this blog certainly confirms from Scripture and other sources what Louie is breaking down for us here and can possibly be a complimentary source of reference to anyone interested.
Thank you, Theresa. Looks like a most interesting website. I will check it often. I have read The Book of Destiny by Father Kramer and highly recommend it. Everything that is happening in the Church and beyond has been foretold. Knowledge is Power. Our Lord has said that the Powers of Darkness will have their hour—-but, it will be shortened for our sake. I believe we are living through this “hour” now and must persevere through faith in Our Lord. His “Hour” gave us redemption!
Bishop Olmstead was our bishop in Kansas for only a short time before he was moved to Phoenix to clean up the dissident mess there. In that short time, we loved him dearly. He mandated that mass at the Cathedral be celebrated according to rubrics (this was 2001). I watched him give a pro-life talk where many protestants were present, and his words against contraception were profound, despite the probable bewilderment of some of the audience (protestants see contraception as part of their Christian stewardship of resources). I could give many examples of his quiet and holy leadership, but the real issue for me is this: I love this man like a father, and the fact that this site denigrates him simply hurts me. If Bishop Olmstead is imperfect or lacking in some qualities that readers of this site deem necessary, I guess I can accept your right to air them. However, I feel it is right for me to defend him simply out of love.
Thank you for your witness Briggs. You’ve given us a great example of how emotion clouds judgment. If someone your children trusted and admired and loved told them that it’s ok to do heroin, would you speak up? There’s nothing “quiet and holy” about a father who sits silent while his children are endangered like that. What Pope Francis said is far worse.
I do not believe that love is an emotion clouding my judgement. Last I recall, love is one of the theological virtues. My love for a bishop is totally within the bounds of Christian charity. I do not approve lock-step all things that all bishops say or do. (You could ask my husband to confirm this, who has told me to quit complaining about them.) I think that there are plenty of bishops to “go after” in this forum, but from what I know about Bishop Olmstead, both from personal observation and from reports in his position in Phoenix, he is not one of them.
I’m too hapless to make excuses. Thanks for covering me buddy.
So what? You keep going to Bishop Lori’s churches and priests despite sodomite ‘baptisms’ …
‘Abdication’, from the New Order video, is an interesting word. VII abdicated Christ, as such all its communicants, from ‘pope’ down to lay-minister or reluctant pew warmer, belong to the world through their communion with lies. The strength of the ‘right arm of God’ is not with them. They are afraid of Truth and His ‘requirements’.
Here is a Catholic Father – a holy priest – who is not afraid of the truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqgcCujfQF0
PS. If you are a Novus Ordo ‘priest’ or Novus Ordo family-maker, you have refused or thrown off ‘bruce’ and are ‘caitlyn’. Burke is just another ‘caitlyn’ of the Novus Ordo travesty. And everyone who pays homage to him, is cheering ‘caitlyn’ on.