The Heart of the Matter

On the Front Lines for Life

I came across Archbishop Timothy Dolan’s column reflecting on October as Respect Life Month.  It’s worth spreading:

I wish I could tell you that Church leaders were brave, countercultural and prophetic," I can still hear him say, "but that would not be the truth."

"With very few exceptions," he went on, "Catholics in the United States did little or nothing to condemn the dramatically moral evil of slavery, and demand its end. And that is to our shame to this day."

Those words came from my mentor, friend and teacher, Msgr. John Tracy Ellis, the legendary professor of the history of the Catholic Church in the United States, during his sobering lecture on the Church and slavery, when I was a graduate student at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.

Perhaps we have learned our lesson, for Catholic leaders—committed laity, religious sisters and brothers, clergy, bishops—have been on the front lines of the premier civil rights issue today, the right to life. And that is to our credit. And that's good to ponder during October, Respect Life Month.

The comparison of abortion to slavery is an apt one. The right of a citizen to "own" another human being as property—to control him/her, use him/her, sell him or decide her fate—was, prior to 1865, constitutional, sad to say.

That "right" to own a slave was even upheld by a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court (whose Chief Justice at the time, Roger Brooke Taney, was a Catholic, "personally opposed" to slavery!) in the infamous 1857 Dred Scott Decision, declaring that a slave who had escaped and claimed freedom had to be returned to his "master," because he had no rights at all.

Tragically, in 1973, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court also strangely found in the constitution the right to abortion, thus declaring an entire class of human beings— now not African-Americans, but pre-born infants—to be slaves, whose futures, whose destinies, whose very right to life —can be decided by another "master." These fragile, frail babies have no civil rights at all.

Our faces blush with shame as we Catholics admit we did so little to end slavery; but we can smile and thank God that the Church has indeed been prophetic, courageous and counter cultural in the right to life movement. As an evangelical pastor recently commented to me, "We may criticize you Catholics for some things, but we have sure been inspired by your early and courageous leadership in the pro-life movement."

A few years ago, I met with a prominent philanthropist, who described himself—and I always know I'm in for trouble when I hear this—as a "former Catholic." Now, he went on to say, he was a "progressive," and would consider a large gift to the Catholic Church "if you changed your position on abortion."

I must admit I'm afraid I made no headway at all when I patiently tried to explain to him that this was hardly a "position" of the Church that could change, but a conviction grounded in natural law, shared by most other world religions, and, for that matter, dramatically obvious in our American normative principles, which hold that certain rights are "inalienable"—part of the inherent human makeup—the first being the right to life itself.

Many issues and concerns in addition to protecting the baby in the womb fall under the rubric of the right to life—child care, poverty, racism, war and peace, capital punishment, health care, the environment, euthanasia—in what has come to be called the consistent ethic of life. All those issues, and even more, demand our careful attention and promotion.

But the most pressing life issue today is abortion. If we're wrong on that one, we're just plain wrong.

When our critics—and their name is legion—criticize us for being passionate, stubborn, almost obsessed with protecting the human rights of the baby in the womb, they intend it as an insult. I take it as a compliment.

I'd give anything if I could claim that Catholics in America prior to the Civil War were "passionate, stubborn, almost obsessed" with protecting the human rights of the slave. To claim such would be a fib. But, decades from now, at least our children and grandchildren can look back with pride and gratitude for the conviction of those who courageously defend the life of the pre-born baby.

I well remember being in Baltimore two years ago for the installation of their new archbishop, Edwin F. O'Brien, a native son of this archdiocese in whom we are very proud. He gave a stirring homily, recounting how his predecessors had often been on the forefront of promoting issues of justice in our country: Cardinal James Gibbons came up, of course, for his defense of the rights of labor back in the 1880s; Cardinal Lawrence Sheehan, who was jeered at a City Council meeting in 1965 for speaking on behalf of open housing for African-Americans; Cardinal William Keeler, criticized for advocating the rights of immigrants. And now, the new archbishop concluded, the tradition has to continue, as the Church must be on the front lines of the premier justice issue of the day: the protection of the right to life of the baby in the womb.

It's October, Respect Life Month.

 

Dignitas Personae - New Vatican Document on Bioethical Issues

On the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, December 12, 2008 the Vatican issued a formal teaching on bioethical issues, including a restatement of, and rationale for, the Catholic Church's opposition to in vitro fertilization, human cloning, genetic testing on embryos before implantation and embryonic stem cell research.

For a concise description of the 32 page document, Dignitas Personae (The Dignity of the Person), read the article in the 12/13/08 edition of the New York Times.  To read the entire document, click here.

Here are some snippets from the NYT article:

[Dignitas Personae] bans the morning-after pill, the intrauterine device and the pill RU-486, saying these can result in what amount to abortions.

The Vatican document reiterates that the church is opposed to research on stem cells derived from embryos. But it does not oppose research on stem cells derived from adults; blood from umbilical cords; or fetuses “who have died of natural causes.”

The document does not prohibit the use of vaccines developed using “cell lines of illicit origin” if children’s health is at stake. But it says that “everyone has the duty” to inform health care providers of personal objections to such vaccines.

The church also objects to freezing embryos, arguing that doing so exposes them to potential damage and manipulation, and that it raises the problem of what to do with frozen embryos that are not implanted. There are at least 400,000 of these in the United States alone.

Flawed moral reasoning

Our own Archbishop Charles Chaput and his auxiliary, Bishop James Conley, have responded to this weekend's interview with Senator Joe Biden on NBC's newsprogram, Meet the Press.  Here's the text of their comments, pointing out that, "although NBC probably didn't intend it,". . . "Meet the Press has become a national window on the flawed moral reasoning of some Catholic public servants":

Sen. Biden is a man of distinguished public service. That doesn't excuse poor logic or bad facts. Asked when life begins, Sen. Biden said that, "it's a personal and private issue." But in reality, modern biology knows exactly when human life begins: at the moment of conception. Religion has nothing to do with it. People might argue when human "personhood" begins - though that leads public policy in very dangerous directions - but no one can any longer claim that the beginning of life is a matter of religious opinion.

Sen. Biden also confused the nature of pluralism. Real pluralism thrives on healthy, non-violent disagreement; it requires an environment where people of conviction will struggle respectfully but vigorously to advance their beliefs. In his interview, the senator observed that other people with strong religious views disagree with the Catholic approach to abortion. It's certainly true that we need to acknowledge the views of other people and compromise whenever possible - but not at the expense of a developing child's right to life. Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, "I'm prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception," then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there.

As the senator said in his interview, he has opposed public funding for abortions. To his great credit, he also backed a successful ban on partial-birth abortions. But his strong support for the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and the false "right" to abortion it enshrines, can't be excused by any serious Catholic. Support for Roe and the "right to choose" an abortion simply masks what abortion is, and what abortion does. Roe is bad law. As long as it stands, it prevents returning the abortion issue to the states where it belongs, so that the American people can decide its future through fair debate and legislation.

In his Meet the Press interview, Sen. Biden used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can't "impose" their religiously based views on the rest of the country. But resistance to abortion is a matter of human rights, not religious opinion. And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people's convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law. American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year. Other people have imposed their "pro-choice" beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades.

If we claim to be Catholic, then American Catholics, including public officials who describe themselves as Catholic, need to act accordingly. We need to put an end to Roe and the industry of permissive abortion it enables. Otherwise all of us - from senators and members of Congress, to Catholic laypeople in the pews - fail not only as believers and disciples, but also as citizens.

"No matter what you do, I will always love you."

I had lunch today with a friend of over 20 years. It has been quite a while since we've had time to bring each other up to date on our relatives and our work and on the dynamics going on in our souls.  It was a wonderful lunch.  In telling me about each of his 6 children I stopped him to ask, Wasn't [that one] in prison the last time we talked?  He had just been telling me how his life had turned out so wonderfully, so I asked, How did he do it (turn his life around)?   Well, he said, the Lord really got through to him.  I used to go down to Canon City (where the prison is) every week to visit him and I always told him, "No matter what you've done I will always love you."

The same theme came though when he talked about one of his daughters being pregnant by artificial insemination.  We're good enough friends so I was able to ask him who the donor was.  Unknown.  She is a lesbian living with another woman.  When my friend and his wife first found out about her being a lesbian, my friend said that he told her what he thought about that (in accord with the teaching of the Church) and that he would say this only one time.  Then, to repeat his fatherly theme, he told her, "No matter what you do, I will always love you."  And the same is true for the baby who is on the way.

Hegemony or Conversion?

A college age fellow came by to visit recently and in the course of the conversation it became clear to me that his outlook was deeply influenced by a very common phenomenon of rejecting anything that smacks of our Western civilization. He's a practicing Catholic but he didn't think we should have tried to convert the Native Americans to Catholicism, or any other people, for that matter.

So, a few questions seemed in order.

Why would it be OK to presuade other people on the planet that they should want democracy, but not want them to know that at the heart of the universe is a God of love?

Why would it be OK to want all of humanity to embrace a willingness to reduce their carbon footprint, but not embrace a faith that seeks all of humanity to come to a knowledge of the mercy, love, joy and peace God offers us in Christ?

Why would it be OK to spread all over the world our American taste in music, films, technology and values, but not spread the Good News of Jesus Christ?

Why is it now OK to disrespect the enormous accomplishments of Western Civilization but at the same time find something good in every other outlook on life except for a Christian outlook?

Let's not be swept away from reasoned thinking by political correctness.

The Meaning of Good Friday

One of the greatest preachers of the 20th century in America was Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.  In these videos below he have his last sermon at 83 years of age on the Seven Last Words of Jesus from the Cross.  After a lifetime of reflecting on the Passion of the Lord, this sermon still stands the test of time for the insight into the meaning of Good Friday.   If you are not able to go to your parish church for the Good Friday service, then listen to Bishop Sheen and let the Lord speak to you through him.  This one sermon is in 5 short videos, to be viewed one after the other, or to be viewed over the course of the day we call Good Friday.  Here they are:

We now enter the 3 holiest days of the year

Holy Thursday, Good Friday and the Easter Vigil.  We call these three days the Triduum.  I'll explain them over the next three days as if the reader had never heard about them.  And now: Holy Thursday.

The Master of the universe, ever gentle and ever loving and ever patient, chooses to lead us, not force us, to understand the unimaginable degree of God's love for all of us.  Whenever Jesus met disorder outside of Himself, He never became disordered within Himself.  “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth. When he was insulted, he returned no insult; when he suffered, he did not threaten; instead, he handed himself over to the one who judges justly.” (1 Peter 2:22-23)

Hostility to Him increased because He dared to show that the way to God is forgiveness, and because He dared to say that "The Father and I are One."  So to counter the hostility He gathered His disciples for what has come to be called the Last Supper.  During this supper, which He gave to us to be the premier way we would be united with Him, He gave them and us the meaning behind His upcoming death: "so that sins may be forgiven." 

It is not that God the Father is an angry God who wants to smite human beings for their offenses, but Jesus does show us that God's love includes the awareness of what harm we do to each other by our unloving deeds and attitudes.  So He gave this meaning to His crucifixion: See how serious evil is! And see that the way to conquer evil is by forgiveness.  The Eucharist is the time we hear it said every Sunday, and every day if we want to, "This is My body which is given up for you."  "This is My blood which is shed for you."  Why?  "So that sins may be forgiven." 

The Last Supper, then, is our entering into union with God so that in time we become like God; and in time we become, by His grace, His presence of forgiveness in each generation that needs forgiveness so badly.  In every Eucharist we are drawn ever more into the very heart of God.

The most noble human act is joy

"The most noble human act is joy," so saith St. Thomas Aquinas.  I've also heard, but I know not from where, that "joy is the surest sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit."  What is joy?  Is it a giddy happiness more typified by a passing moment that is truly exhilarating?  Is it not more a state one abides in?  Is it not coming home from a day's work and delighting in life, even with its ups and downs?  Is not joy the relishing of the people in your life, even if they are at times difficult, burdensome and occasions for learning the virtue of patience?  Is not joy connected to faith, hope and love? 

Joy for me is living here in Boulder, Colorado, serving my parishioners whom God has given me.  Joy is seeing some progress in coming to see more clearly the areas of my life where I need the Savior to save me from being my worst self, which every now and then blossoms into some ugly plant, instead of the garden of virtues the Lord ever so gently moves us towards. 

Joy for me is being here for people as they come out of nowhere with the burden of their sins, or sufferings or complex situations, and being some small reflection of love and encouragement and challenge to walk in the presence of the Lord.  Joy for me is the celebration of the Eucharist and the other sacraments.  Joy is finding a way to cope with a life's worth of physical pain so that my joy is not cheated.  Joy is . . . well, simply being grateful to God -- for everything.

A Teaser of the Pope's New Encyclical, "Spe Salvi"

Pope Benedict XVI has just published his second encyclical, "Spe Salvi," ("In hope we were saved").  It is so rich, so readable, so profound that I encourage everyone to read it and drink in its adrenaline to recover more deeply the hope to which we are called.  Here is a sampling of one section of the encyclical that points to prayer being a school by which to learn to live in hope:

A first essential setting for learning hope is prayer. When no one listens to me any more, God still listens to me. When I can no longer talk to anyone or call upon anyone, I can always talk to God. When there is no longer anyone to help me deal with a need or expectation that goes beyond the human capacity for hope, he can help me.  When I have been plunged into complete solitude; if I pray I am never totally alone. The late Cardinal Nguyen Van Thuan, a prisoner for thirteen years, nine of them spent in solitary confinement, has left us a precious little book: Prayers of Hope. During thirteen years in jail, in a situation of seemingly utter hopelessness, the fact that he could listen and speak to God became for him an increasing power of hope, which enabled him, after his release, to become for people all over the world a witness to hope—to that great hope which does not wane even in the nights of solitude.

When we pray properly we undergo a process of inner purification which opens us up to God and thus to our fellow human beings as well. In prayer we must learn what we can truly ask of God—what is worthy of God. We must learn that we cannot pray against others. We must learn that we cannot ask for the superficial and comfortable things that we desire at this moment—that meager, misplaced hope that leads us away from God. We must learn to purify our desires and our hopes. We must free ourselves from the hidden lies with which we deceive ourselves. God sees through them, and when we come before God, we too are forced to recognize them. “But who can discern his errors? Clear me from hidden faults” prays the Psalmist (Ps 19:12 ). Failure to recognize my guilt, the illusion of my innocence, does not justify me and does not save me, because I am culpable for the numbness of my conscience and my incapacity to recognize the evil in me for what it is. If God does not exist, perhaps I have to seek refuge in these lies, because there is no one who can forgive me; no one who is the true criterion. Yet my encounter with God awakens my conscience in such a way that it no longer aims at self-justification, and is no longer a mere reflection of me and those of my contemporaries who shape my thinking, but it becomes a capacity for listening to the Good itself.

For prayer to develop this power of purification, it must on the one hand be something very personal, an encounter between my intimate self and God, the living God. On the other hand it must be constantly guided and enlightened by the great prayers of the Church and of the saints, by liturgical prayer, in which the Lord teaches us again and again how to pray properly. Cardinal Nguyen Van Thuan, in his book of spiritual exercises, tells us that during his life there were long periods when he was unable to pray and that he would hold fast to the texts of the Church's prayer: the Our Father, the Hail Mary and the prayers of the liturgy. Praying must always involve this intermingling of public and personal prayer. This is how we can speak to God and how God speaks to us. In this way we undergo those purifications by which we become open to God and are prepared for the service of our fellow human beings. We become capable of the great hope, and thus we become ministers of hope for others. Hope in a Christian sense is always hope for others as well. It is an active hope, in which we struggle to prevent things moving towards the “perverse end”. It is an active hope also in the sense that we keep the world open to God. Only in this way does it continue to be a truly human hope.

Pope to Portuguese bishops: focus on Christ, not the Church

At a recent meeting between some Portuguese bishops and Pope Benedict XVI, a dialog took place that is very instructive on how this pope is pointing out the need for changing old attitudes. He told the bishops that the Church "should not, above all, speak of itself, but of God.”

There will always be the need to deal with Church issues such as organization and who tends to what responsibilities, but he said these issues "should not distract us from the authentic mission of the Church."

"One doesn't begin to be a Christian because of an ethical decision or a great idea, but rather because of an encounter with an event, with a Person, who gives new horizons to life, and with that, a decisive orientation. The evangelization of the person and of human communities depends totally on this encounter with Jesus Christ." 

According to Benedict XVI, "the most frequent confession on the lips of Christians has been the lack of participation in community life."  And the result of less community life is “the growing wave of Christians that are not practicing.”  The need now is to evaluate the initiation processes preparing people to be Church members so that they can “take on in their lives an authentically Eucharistic stamp that makes them capable of giving reason for their hope in an adequate way for our times."

"It is necessary," he said, "to change the organizational style of the Portuguese Church community and the mentality of its members, to have a Church in tune with Vatican II, in which the function of clergy and laypeople is well-defined, taking into account the fact that we are all one, since we were baptized and integrated into the family of the children of God, and all of us have a common responsibility for the growth of the Church."

Don't you think the same could be said to us?