Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

It isn't rare, it isn't safe, but, c'mon, it's legal!

In the hit song, "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad" (#11 in 1977, if you're keeping track at home), Meat Loaf sang the following:

I want you (I want you)
I need you (I need you)
But-there ain't no way I'm ever gonna love you
Now don't be sad (Don't be sad)
'Cause two out of three ain't bad
Now don't be sad

We hear, repeatedly, that the happy, benevolent citizens of Pro-Choice Nation aren't really pro-abortion (remember Sen. Obama's statement of the same?), but actually want abortions to be "safe, legal, and rare". Right. Perhaps Meat Loaf can cut a new tune titled, "One Out of Three Ain't Bad", as more stories come out about women dying or being seriously injured during abortions, not to mention the vile, disgusting conditions found in many abortion mills—as if anyone should be surprised that a facility dedicated to killing the unborn would be vile and disgusting. 

And then there are the recently released numbers from Planned Parenthood (courtesy of The Washington Times):

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

Ex-atheist rips into architects of the Sexual Revolution: "we were wrong, wrong, wrong"

by Carl E. Olson | Catholic World Report blog

A. N. Wilson has been there, seen that, believed this, and rejected that. The British author, now in his sixties, has had an on, off, and on again relationship with Christianity. As a young man, he pursued theological training and potential ordination in the Church of England, but by the late 1980s he was openly atheist, writing a 50-page booklet, Against Religion (1991), that complained of the "intolerance", "authoritarianism" and "spiritual bullying" of the papacy. But, after three decades of skepticism, Wilson announced in 2009 that he had returned to Christianity, a decision that he discussed at length in this essay in The Mail.

For much of my life, I, too, have been one of those who did not believe. It was in my young manhood that I began to wonder how much of the Easter story I accepted, and in my 30s I lost any religious belief whatsoever.

Like many people who lost faith, I felt anger with myself for having been 'conned' by such a story. I began to rail against Christianity, and wrote a book, entitled Jesus, which endeavoured to establish that he had been no more than a messianic prophet who had well and truly failed, and died.

Why did I, along with so many others, become so dismissive of Christianity?

Like most educated people in Britain and Northern Europe (I was born in 1950), I have grown up in a culture that is overwhelmingly secular and anti-religious. The universities, broadcasters and media generally are not merely non-religious, they are positively anti.

To my shame, I believe it was this that made me lose faith and heart in my youth. It felt so uncool to be religious. With the mentality of a child in the playground, I felt at some visceral level that being religious was unsexy, like having spots or wearing specs.

This playground attitude accounts for much of the attitude towards Christianity that you pick up, say, from the alternative comedians, and the casual light blasphemy of jokes on TV or radio.

Now, in a long essay, "I’ve lived through the greatest revolution in sexual mores in our history. The damage it’s done appals me", published in The Mail this past Friday, Wilson takes up the topic of his youth once again as he tears into the sexual revolution that began, as he marks it (fairly accurately, I think), in 1963: 

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

Papal Nuncio to Join Walk for Life West Coast

From the good folks organizing the Walk for Life West Coast:

Organizers delighted with presence of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò at January 26 event
 
January 2, 2013 – The Walk for Life West Coast is honored to announce that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the Holy Father’s Ambassador to the United States, will be attending the 9th Annual Walk for Life West Coast in San Francisco, on January 26, 2013.
 
“What an honor! We are so excited—this is the next best thing to having the Holy Father himself with us!” said Eva Muntean, a co-founder of the Walk.  Archbishop Viganò, appointed on October 19, 2011, the Feast of the North American Martyrs, is the 14th Papal representative to the United States. The diplomatic post was established in 1893.

The 2013 event will begin at 12:30 PM in the city’s Civic Center Plaza. The rally and Walk will be preceded in the plaza by an Info Faire, beginning at 11:00 AM, and a “Silent No More” awareness campaign, featuring actress Jennifer O’Neill (www.jenniferoneill.com) beginning at 10:45 AM. Rally speakers include:

• Lacey Buchanan, a young mother whose YouTube video about her blind son went viral and has touched over 11 million viewers (her video was voted the #3 video of 2012 on Godvine.com);

• Elaine Riddick, a woman who was forcibly sterilized at age 14 under orders from North Carolina’s Eugenics Board, whose goal was to purify the state’s population by weeding out the mentally ill, diseased, feebleminded and others deemed undesirable;

• Rev. Clenard Childress, the founder and director of www.BlackGenocide.org , a website designed to reach the African-American Community with the truth about abortion;

• Kelly and Matthew Clinger, a post-abortive couple who share their story about the heartache and pain caused by life in the music industry, divorce, addiction, and abortion.

Following the rally, Walkers will march down Market Street to Justin Herman Plaza.
 
Founded in 2005 by a group of San Francisco Bay Area residents, the Walk for Life West Coast’s mission is to change the perceptions of a society that thinks abortion is an answer. Walk participants are expected from throughout the Bay Area and across the United States and Canada.
 
More details at: www.walkforlifewc.com. 

Pope's year-end address to curia: "Whoever defends God is defending man."

by Carl E. Olson on the CWR blog

If you've not read the entire address, you'll want to. Below is the section about family, marriage, and gender, a passage causing some hand-wringing among those who apparently haven't figured out that (gasp!) the Pope and the Catholic Church does and always will support and defend marriage as a life-long bond between a man and a woman. The Telegraph, for example, has the headline, "Pope says future of mankind at stake over gay marriage", and the subhead: "Pope Benedict XVI has weighed in on a heated debate over gay marriage, criticising new concepts of the traditional family and warning that mankind itself was at stake."

Of course, the Holy Father never mentions "gay marriage", or even the word "marriage", for his criticisms are aimed at something deeper and broader than the frivilous narcissism and flawed understanding of equality found throughout the "gay marriage" movement. They are focused on what might be called a secularist form of neo-gnosticism, which seeks to remake human nature according to the destructive whims and passions of the age. "Man and woman as created realities, as the nature of the human being, no longer exist," Benedict XVI says about this anti-human approach, "Man calls his nature into question. From now on he is merely spirit and will. The manipulation of nature, which we deplore today where our environment is concerned, now becomes man’s fundamental choice where he himself is concerned. From now on there is only the abstract human being, who chooses for himself what his nature is to be." 

The attacks on marriage throughout the West are serious and significant, but are one big battle in an even bigger war, which is ultimately about God himself, as the Pope makes clear.

Continue reading...

Six Days, Eight Funerals, Countless Tears

Six Days, Eight Funerals, Countless Tears | John Burger | Catholic World Report

St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church in Newtown, Conn., concludes a grief-filled week burying 8 children

During the frenzied response to the devastating Newtown, Conn., school shooting last week, a policeman picked up one of the first-graders who had been shot. She was still alive, but not for long. The six-year-old lived long enough for the officer to say to her, “I love you.” And then the life slipped from her small body.

Deacon Don Naiman elicited gasps and cries from mourners as he related that story during the funeral Dec. 21 of Olivia Rose Engel.

“That officer was the voice of Jesus Christ” to the girl, Deacon Naiman said during his homily at St. Rose of Lima Catholic Church in Newtown. “And I am convinced that he gently passed Olivia to the hands of the Blessed Mother.”

He urged members of a large congregation that filled the church to likewise “be the hand of Christ…to these beautiful parents” and to others in the world.

It’s been an emotion-filled week in this bucolic New England town, and Olivia’s funeral was one of eight at the church — all for children who had not even made their first Communion. The final one was to take place Saturday, just days before Christmas.

Earlier in the day, at 9:30, Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy presided over a moment of silence at town hall to mark one week since 20-year-old Adam Lanza allegedly shot and killed 20 first-graders and six educators at nearby Sandy Hook Elementary School. The bell at an Episcopal church slowly tolled 26 times as heavy rain and strong winds ushered in the first day of winter.

An hour later, hundreds of mourners filled St. Rose’s to reflect on the life of 6-year-old Grace Audrey McDonnell and to hear the pastor call for change.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

The Real Social Justice Issue: Taking Care of the Violent Mentally Ill

The Real Social Justice Issue: Taking Care of the Violent Mentally Ill | Anne Hendershott | Catholic World Report

Seriously troubled people and their families need help—to protect themselves and others.

In the aftermath of the heartbreaking school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, the editors at the National Catholic Reporter have joined with the leaders of the Soros-supported advocacy organization Catholics United to demand further restrictions on gun ownership. Ignoring the fact that Connecticut has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, they have declared that a commitment to social justice demands that we “face up to intransigent special interests and engage in a serious discussion of how to end—permanently—the cycle of gun violence in America. 

Gun control advocates continue to believe that if we just outlaw guns, we will end these acts of senseless violence. Claiming that gun control will “prevent yet another American family from having to go through Christmas without the loved ones they lost to gun violence,” the progressive Catholics at the National Catholic Reporter have joined President Obama in what the president now promises will be “meaningful action” on gun control.

The debate on gun control may be a good one if it reminds us once again exactly who these shooters are. Rather than focusing exclusively on guns themselves, the debate will be fruitful if we begin to pay closer attention to those who are committing these violent acts. A true commitment to social justice demands that we begin to take notice of the real health and safety needs of the mentally ill living among us. While progressives claim the moral high ground in their calls for gun control, they tend to ignore the fact that progressive policies on mental illness may have contributed to this dark day in Newtown.

For more than 40 years, we have been defining down the risks posed by the violent mentally ill.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

America Still Has Half a Soul. For Now.

America Still Has Half a Soul. For Now. | Carl E. Olson | Editorial | Catholic World Report

The recent shootings in Connecticut and Oregon reveal the good, the bad, and the unspoken in our nation.

I got a late start yesterday morning and didn't hear the news until a few hours after it broke. My wife had an appointment, and so I made breakfast for our three (home schooled) children, ages four, eight, and twelve. When I first read of the assault and massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, I felt ill. It was gut wrenching. I thought for a bit about our three children: “What if…?” I couldn't fathom the horrible news, and yet, honestly, it didn't shock me. Just a few days ago, a young man opened fire in the Clackamas Town Center in Portland, Oregon, just two hours north of us, where years ago my wife worked when we were first married. Three people were shot, two of them fatally; the 22-year-old murderer then took his own life.

I also thought back to May 1998, when a fifteen-year-old boy, Kip Kinkel, opened fire at Thurston High School, just a few short miles from where I lived and worked. Two students were killed, and many more injured, before Kinkel was subdued by seven of his fellow students. The evening prior, Kinkel had murdered his parents—both of them teachers—with guns his father had purchased for him, along with a stolen gun he had bought from a friend.

And then I thought back to another young boy, who had been raised around guns—lots of them. His father was a gunsmith, and there were numerous guns in his father's shop, as well as guns—mostly hunting rifles—in the house. The boy assumed everyone had guns and used them for hunting and target practice, in large part because nearly everyone he knew did exactly that. There were two fatal shootings in his hometown during his childhood, both of them suicides by men overwhelmed by alcoholism and other problems. He was never tempted to shoot anyone with a gun; in fact, the very thought was as revolting and it was ridiculous, as he and his friends took seriously the privilege of having and shooting a gun, just as they took seriously the injunction, “Thou shalt not murder.”

Yes, I was that young boy. And I thought of my childhood again when, just a few hours after the shootings in Connecticut, I received an e-mail from the lefty group, Catholics United, containing the following:

Catholics United Executive Director James Salt released the following statement in reaction to this morning’s mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.:

"Today’s shooting is yet another horrific marker in a seemingly endless cycle of gun violence in America. As we mourn the dead and send thoughts and prayers to the families of the victims of this senseless act, we know prayer alone is not enough.

"As Catholics who support the social justice achievements of this President, we are disappointed in his lack of action in working to prevent these heinous acts of violence. We call on President Obama to find the courage to lead our nation and help bring a true and lasting end to gun violence.

"We need an immediate national dialogue on preventing yet another American family from having to go through Christmas without the loved ones they lost to gun violence. When will we stop setting the price of our freedoms at the blood of innocent children? We pray our elected leaders have the courage to face up to intransigent special interests and engage in a serious discussion of how to end--permanently--the cycle of gun violence in America."

Yes, indeed—when we will have a serious discussion about the blood of innocent children? When will we face up to the violence that takes place on a regular basis against the youngest and most vulnerable among us? When will the cycle of daily violence against young boys and girls cease? When?

Continue reading on the CWR site.

R.I.P.: American's demographic "exceptionalism"

Jonathan V. Last, editor of the Weekly Standard and author of the forthcoming book, What to Expect When No One's Expecting (Encounter, 2013), comments in his e-letter today about the recent report from the Pew Research Center about falling fertility rates in the U.S.:

Last week the general public had a momentary freak-out when it was reported that U.S. fertility rates had hit their lowest point since 1920. The news made it into the front pages of the Washington Post and USA Today and it was as if, for a moment, mainstream America awoke to the fact that our demographics are terrible. And getting worse.

But then the moment passed and everyone went back to worrying about the fiscal cliff and the royal pregnancy. Such is the nature of media.

It's worth looking into the new numbers in a little more depth, though, because they give you a reasonably good sense as to what's happening in our society.

So here's the top-line: Between 2007 and 2010, the U.S. birthrate dropped 8 percent, to the level of 64 births for every 1,000 women. The preliminary data for 2011 shows it sliding still more, to 63.2. This is as barren as America has ever been. For some contrast: During the Great Depression—when it really collapsed—the birth rate bottomed out in the high 70s. In the 1970s—when fertility rates all across the Western world entered a death spiral—the birth rate never dipped much lower than 65. Our birth rate is now lower than it was both during the greatest economic calamity, and the greatest social upheaval, in modern American history.

One striking (and sobering) aspect, Last notes, is that the birth rates among immigrants are not just falling, but are plummeting:

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

A Tale from the Front Lines of the Abortion Wars

A Tale from the Front Lines of the Abortion Wars | Mark Sullivan | Catholic World Report

A new book tells the story of a life lived fighting abortion.

“The time may come when we date the beginning of the collapse of the Soviet system from the appearance of Gulag,” wrote a German reviewer of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s masterpiece, The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation. It may sound crazy, but the time may also come when we date the end of legalized abortion in the United States from the publication of Abandoned: The Untold Story of the Abortion Wars by Monica Migliorino Miller (Saint Benedict Press, 2012).

I recently began reading the abridged version of Gulag, and I was stuck by Solzhenitsyn’s descriptions of the injustice and the powerlessness of the people in communist Russia—in particular, by how fittingly his descriptions of the power structures of the Soviet system could be applied to the institutions that promote and protect legalized abortion in this country. I thought it would make an interesting story, so I requested a review copy of Abandoned. I thought it would make a good point of departure to talk about Solzhenitsyn.

I’ve never read a whole book about abortion. I’m a “good” pro-lifer who will on occasion pass out pro-life voting guides to his friends. I have a pro-life bumper sticker on my car, and I’ve been to the March for Life in Washington, D.C. a few times. I thought I knew all I needed to know about abortion, and that if I learned anything more, I’d just get more upset and frustrated. At least that is what I thought until I read Abandoned.

I couldn’t put it down. It wasn’t what I expected. It is not an abstract book of philosophy, biology, ethics, politics, or theology—even though Miller has her doctorate in theology and teaches at Madonna University in Michigan. It’s not a rehash of the same old pro-life rhetoric or arguments. This is the story of Miller’s involvement in the pro-life movement in Chicago and Milwaukee from 1976 to 1993. Her activities were controversial and sometimes shocking, but she never tells the reader what to do or think. The reader is forced to face the ugly truth of abortion and then decide what he is going to do about it.

Miller has her undergraduate degree in theater. She knows drama. She knows how to build scenes and hold the reader’s attention. She kept a journal during her years of pro-life work, so in writing this book, she was able to recreate scenes and conversations that give you the “you are there” feel.

I keep thinking, “This book would make a great movie.” It is the classic story of the underdog fighting the big bad bureaucracy to save the innocent. It would be America’s version of Schindler’s List, or Erin Brockovich with more modest clothing. It may be a tough sell, but I’m hoping a pro-life movie director will give it a try.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Pornography, Masturbation, and the Confessor

Pornography, Masturbation, and the Confessor | John M. Grondelski | Homiletic & Pastoral Review

The spread of pornography is a new pastoral challenge for confessors, but I want to suggest that there is another moral issue which is often overlooked in the discussion over pornography.

Confessors today undoubtedly note an increase in a phenomenon that other social observers have also noticed: a growth in use of, as well as addiction to, pornography.  Two factors are particularly responsible for that spread of pornography: ever easier access, and a growing cultural toleration.

The former is primarily a result of the internet.  Whereas once upon a time, pornography had to be sought out in seedy neighborhoods, or bought furtively—both social conditions which helped tamp down on its spread. Today, pornography is universally available with just a few clicks on a computer.

The latter is a more complex phenomenon.  While undoubtedly the greater availability of pornography is, in some measure, responsible for its social toleration, social acquiescence in pornography is more complex than that.  A progressive corrosion of public morality owes its roots to the so-called “sexual revolution” of the 1960s/1970s, which attacked the notion of public morality itself, as well as ingraining the message that personal pleasure and “fulfillment” is the be-all, and end-all, of sex.  The spread of pornography is, like abortion, also an instance where sexual ethics have been “dumbed down” to general male standards rather than raised to general female standards.

What do I mean?  In the case of abortion, justification for “a woman’s right to choose,” when most abortions occur for reasons of convenience, means that society acquiesces to a general male promiscuity, while providing a utilitarian solution for women to avoid having to bear the consequences, and the child.  In the case of pornography, its spread is also in some measure an acquiescence in general male promiscuity: men want sex, so women need to match male images and expectations.  Men shouldn’t become more chaste; women should become more provocative.  Pamela Paul identified this trend in 2005, rightly coining a term to describe it: we are being “pornified.” 1

The spread of pornography is, indeed, a new pastoral challenge for confessors, but I want to suggest that there is another moral issue, lurking here in the background, which also deserves to be taken seriously, and which is often overlooked in the discussion over pornography.  That issue is masturbation.  Masturbation is typically the “silent partner” in pornography use and addiction.  Its powerful erotic experience plays no small part in cementing an attraction to pornography.  When addressing the issue of pornography, masturbation is often overshadowed and, indeed, overlooked. But this essay aims to lay out a more explicit connection between pornography and masturbation, providing some ways for this vicious relationship to be addressed in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Catholic teaching on masturbation was among the second tier casualties in the rebellion against Catholic sexual ethics, unleashed by contraception and the dissent against Humanae Vitae.  While the immediate bone of contention against the encyclical was an effort to justify contraception, at least in certain instances, the rejection of Humanae Vitae targeted its central moral teaching, i.e., that there is an “inseparable connection, established by God, which man, on his own initiative, may not break, between the unitive significance, and the procreative significance, which are both inherent to the marriage act.” 2

Continue reading at HPRweb.com.

“Where Are The Catholics?”

“Where Are The Catholics?” | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | Catholic World Report

Is Christianity the measure of modernity or is modernity the measure of Christianity?

On the morning after Thanksgiving, I was driving over to Frederick, Maryland with one of my nephews. On the car radio, he was listening to a talk radio program from WMAL in Washington. The host of the program was a man who described himself as a conservative Jew. He was talking of the increasing religious persecution within the United States. Several times throughout the program he pointed out that it was the Catholics who are more and more being singled out and discriminated against. The First Amendment on religious freedom seems almost a dead letter when it comes to Christians in general and Catholics in particular.

The host noted that if any similar criticism is directed toward other religious groups and religions, especially Islam, the whole world knows about it. And in some cases the world is threatened. Churches are burned in Islamic countries, Christians killed, and nothing much is said either by our government or in the press. Almost the only voice that seems systematically to defend a Catholic position, he remarked, is that of Bill Donohue of the Catholic League. The host went on to wonder why this silence is the case. Part of it, he thought, is because Catholics themselves do not seem to care too much, or else they are not aware of the dimensions of the issue. They think it will just go away.

Many writers and voices have pointed out that the present administration is by all odds the most anti-Catholic regime in this country’s history. That did not prevent some 50 percent of Catholics from voting for it. But that may be a clue about the problem. Often the leaders of those measures and decrees most against officially stated Catholic positions are formulated and carried out by those who are Catholics. Several other writers have argued that so long as these high-profile Catholics carry out anti-Catholic policies and remain in apparently good standing in the Church, many Catholics will conclude that, whatever the noise about these issues, it must be all right to be a Catholic and take positions contrary to what the bishops and Church seem to hold.

Why Catholics do not defend themselves against such attacks on their religion and their place in public life has long puzzled many sympathetic citizens.

Continue reading on the CWR site.

The Vampire State

The Vampire State | Anthony Esolen | Catholic World Report

Just loosen your collar—this will all be over in a moment.

“They live in the northernmost community in Canada,” said the fellow at the hamburger joint. “They’re Inuit, and have been living there for more than 2,000 years. They used to follow the caribou herds from place to place, but the government has settled them down, and now they have a permanent village, with the houses built up high, above the permafrost.”

He then told me that the government had given them a quota for fishing turbot, and if they fell short of the quota, the government would make up for the shortfall by a cash grant. Until recently, they’ve attached themselves to international fishing expeditions, but now they have purchased a ship of their own. That was why they had flown the 4,000 miles from the 15th parallel to our island on the 46th—to take possession of the ship. The cost of the ship was borne by the government. I don’t know whether the $20,000 for four round-trip plane tickets was also borne by the government—that is to say, by other people, with the government middlemen taking their substantial cut—but it wouldn’t surprise me.

“I suppose,” I said, “that living in such a forbidding place, they don’t have the social problems they have in, say, Yellowknife,” the capital of the Northwest Territories, notorious for alcoholism and family breakdown. My reasoning was simple. You can’t survive from one year to the next unless you preserve moral order.

“No, they have the same problems there that they have all over the Territories,” he replied, and he put the blame squarely on Ottawa. “Paternalistic” was the word he used.

The conversation caused me to consider what a place like Yellowknife has in common with, say, Detroit. Yellowknife is a small town on the Great Slave Lake, in the midst of the richest mineral deposits on Earth. It is, for all that, a deeply dysfunctional place. Detroit used to be the jewel of the Great Lakes, the auto capital of the world. It is now a pit of crime. Whole neighborhoods have been abandoned. The current mayor, Dave Bing, has ordered some of them to be plowed under, to turn them back to grasslands, perhaps for pasturing sheep.

It’s not just Detroit, and money alone is not the problem.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

On Faithful Citizenship

By Father Augustine Hoa T. Tran | Catholic World Report

[Editor's note: The following is a homily given by Fr. Tran on Sunday, October 28th. It is posted here as part of Catholic World Report's desire to contribute to the discussion regarding principles of responsible citizenship among Catholics.]

For the past 41 years, the Catholic Church in America has celebrated October as Respect Life Month. This is a month in which our bishops have asked us to reflect upon, pray about, and renew our commitment to the defense of all human life. Today, I should like to address this issue vis-à-vis our civic duties as Catholic Americans.

Three months ago, I preached on our moral obligation “to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend [our] country” (CCC 2240). In that homily, I said that we are Catholic Americans; we are not American Catholics. In the term American Catholic, American is the adjective, which means that it qualifies the noun Catholic. To qualify our Catholicism is to qualify our faith, to qualify our allegiance to our Creator, to qualify our love for our heavenly Father. Those things we do not qualify, hence, we are not American Catholics.

In the term Catholic American, Catholic is the adjective, which means that it qualifies the noun American. As Catholics, our patriotism is tempered by our faith, our love of country is subordinated to our love of God, our decisions in the body politic and our actions in the public square are all determined by a conscience informed by faith. That is what it means to be a Catholic American.

As Catholic Americans, our Church teaches us that responsible citizenship is a virtue, and participation in political life is a moral obligation (cf. Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship). If a Catholic conscience obliges us to participate in political life, then it stands to reason that we must participate in a way that is consistent with our Catholic faith. When it comes to matters that are purely political, then there is a great deal of latitude in our prudential judgments. This is the purpose of political dialogue. How much should people be taxed? What should the speed limit be? Should there be a minimum wage, and if so, what should it be? What are just immigration laws? There are many sides to these issues and men of good will differ in their opinions. Healthy political debate will hash out these issues for any particular country. The Church only gives us moral guidelines to form our Catholic conscience when engaging in these debates. She gives us the pale, if you will, that we should not step beyond in our political discourse. Within the pale, however, there is much room for disagreement and political discourse. After all, human governments are human institutions, hence, they cannot be perfect. There is usually not one correct answer.

The fundamental principle that under girds our political discourse, however, is respect for the dignity of the human person. Governments exist to protect the common good—to protect people because of our inherent dignity as beings created in the imago Dei, the image and likeness of God. 6. In 1998, the American bishops stated this principle thus: “Any politics of human dignity must seriously address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, education, housing, and health care. Therefore, Catholics should eagerly involve themselves as advocates for the weak and marginalized in all these areas.

Catholic public officials are obliged to address each of these issues as they seek to build consistent policies which promote respect for the human person at all stages of life. But being ‘right’ in such matters can never excuse a wrong choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life. Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community” (Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics, 23). In other words, since the issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, etc., are fundamentally issues of respect for human dignity, it is logically inconsistent that one could be right on those issues while wrong on respecting the dignity of the most innocent and vulnerable human life, the unborn and the elderly. “You believe I have a right to an education, but I don’t have a right to life?” “You believe I have a right to housing, but I don’t have a right to life?” “You believe I have a right to health care, but I don’t have a right to life?” “Well, how do I get those things if I’m not alive?” This is what the bishops meant when they said, “the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community.” 

Continue reading an the CWR blog.

As empathy dies and narcissism thrives, will culture survive?

I know it's shocking and unexpected, but the evidence—both data-driven and anecdotal—indicates that people increasingly care less about others and more about themselves.

In fact, in a survey that has so far tested 14,000 volunteers, Sara Konrath and her team at the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research has found that college students' self-reported empathy levels (as measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, a standardized questionnaire containing such items as "I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me" and "I try to look at everybody's side of a disagreement before I make a decision") have been in steady decline over the past three decades—since the inauguration of the scale, in fact, back in 1979. A particularly pronounced slump has been observed over the past 10 years. "College kids today are about 40 percent lower in empathy than their counterparts of 20 or 30 years ago," Konrath reports.

More worrisome still, according to Jean Twenge, a professor of psychology at San Diego State University, is that, during this same period, students' self-reported narcissism levels have shot through the roof. "Many people see the current group of college students, sometimes called 'Generation Me,' " Konrath continues, "as one of the most self-centered, narcissistic, competitive, confident, and individualistic in recent history."

That is from Kevin Dutton's article, "Psychopathy's Double Edge" (ht: C.F.), published in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Dutton writes, "Precisely why this downturn in social values has come about is not entirely clear. A complex concatenation of environment, role models, and education is, as usual, under suspicion." He then goes on to point to new studies of the brain, neural pathways, and such. Interesting. And I'm quite sympathetic to the argument that new technologies, the drop in literacy levels, and social upheaval are major factors in the demise of empathy and the steady growth of "self-centered, narcissistic, competitive, confident, and individualistic" attitudes and behaviors.

But, in the end, it won't suffice.

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

The Beginning of the End of the Abortion Industry?

The Beginning of the End of the Abortion Industry? | Tim Drake | Catholic World Report

Over the past five years, growing numbers of US abortion workers have left the industry.

For former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson, the turning point came when she was asked to assist with an ultrasound-guided abortion.

“Abortions are typically performed blind,” explained Johnson, who served as health director for Planned Parenthood in College Station, Texas. “The doctor takes the suction instrument and probes until he thinks he’s gotten everything.”

On this particular day in the fall of 2009, “the visiting physician wanted to use an ultrasound as a teaching tool to show us what an abortion looked like,” recalled Johnson. “I was excited about the prospect of learning something new. My job, during the procedure, was to hold the ultrasound probe on the patient’s abdomen.”

What Johnson saw on-screen would forever change her life.

“I saw a 13-week-old child struggle and fight for its life during the procedure,” said Johnson. “It was shocking for me because the most common question we were asked in the counseling room was, ‘Will my baby feel this?’”

“Planned Parenthood had come up with a scripted answer that we were to give women,” said Johnson.

“Our answer: No, the fetus has no sensory development until 28 weeks,” said Johnson. “I wholeheartedly believed that.”

So Johnson was stunned when she saw the child on the ultrasound screen trying to get away from the intrusive instruments bent on its destruction.

“I went back to my office, and for the first time during my eight years at Planned Parenthood, I wondered if this was where I wanted to be for the rest of my life,” said Johnson. “I sat down and prayed for the first time in many years. All I knew was that I couldn’t do this anymore.”

Abby Johnson

On October 6, 2009, one week and two days after participating in the abortion, Johnson left Planned Parenthood and approached those gathered outside the business who were in the midst of a 40 Days for Life campaign—volunteers devoted to a prayerful, peaceful presence outside abortion businesses.

“I broke down and told them, ‘I know what I’ve been doing is wrong, and I want out,’” said Johnson.

Damascus Road

Johnson isn’t the first to have experienced a Saul-to-Paul-like moment leading to a departure from the abortion industry. In the decades since abortion’s legalization, abortionists and abortion workers such as Dr. Bernard Nathanson, Carol Everett, Anthony Levatino, and others were convicted by what they were doing and experienced profound conversions. Some went on to publicly share their testimony, such as Nathanson did in his 2001 book The Hand of God: A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind.

Johnson’s story is eerily similar to that of the late Joan Appleton’s 1989 departure as head nurse of the Commonwealth Women’s Clinic in Washington, DC.  Appleton, too, had witnessed an ultrasound-guided abortion.     

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

"Eberstadt is at her best in highlighting both the ironies and tragedies of sexual liberation."

Janice Shaw Crouse, an Evangelical, positively reviews Mary Eberstadt's book Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution (Ignatius, 2012) for The Family in America: A Journal of Public Policy:

Eberstadt is at her best in highlighting both the ironies and tragedies of sexual liberation. She laments the “sexual doublespeak” of popular women’s fashion magazines, a la Cosmopolitan, as they reveal “a widely contradictory mix of chatter about how wonderful it is that women are now all liberated for sexual fun—and how mysteriously impossible it has become to find a good, steady, committed boyfriend at the same time.” Children and young people, too, have suffered. A major legacy of the sexual revolution, she laments, “is the assault unleashed from the 1960s onward on the taboo against sexual seduction or exploitation of the young.” Young people imbibe a “toxic collegiate social brew made possible by the sexual revolution,” a revolution that now includes date rapes, hook-ups, binge drinking, and pervasive pornography. The toxic brew of today’s permissive culture, portrayed by Tom Wolfe in his 2004 novel I am Charlotte Simmons: A Novel, also features what Eberstadt calls contraception’s “permanent backup plan”: abortion. Instead of “liberating women from the slavery of their fertility” as some adversarial feminists claim, the Pill empowered a sexual revolution by absolving men of responsibility and, as Kay Hymowitz documents in Manning Up, left far too many in permanent adolescence. The net effect is a climate of “sexual obesity”—a phrase that Eberstadt borrows from University of Pennsylvania psychiatrist Mary Ann Layden—a perfect storm that includes pervasive pornography and attempts to mainstream pedophilia.

An unexpected dimension of the poisoned culture is the imposition of ersatz morals, evident in new obsessions with so-called safe sex and healthy eating, which have filled the vacuum left by the rejection of common-sense morality. Citing shifts that took place in public attitudes toward tobacco and pornography, Eberstadt believes these developments reveal a great deal about our current situation. In the 1950s, pornography was morally repugnant and tobacco smoking was entrenched in the culture. At that time, family-centered morality governed sexual behavior while food choices were morally neutral. Today, the moral valences have been reversed: anything goes sexually, but food choices carry moral significance. Borrowing from Friedrich Nietzsche, Eberstadt terms these shifts “the trans-valuation of values,” meaning “the ways in which the existing moral code would become transformed in a social order no longer centered on Judeo-Christianity.” We can only hope that by continuing to shine the spotlight of truth on the sexual-revolution juggernaut, we can halt and then reverse the cultural pollution, the widespread discontent, and the collateral damage.

Read the entire review.

The Mystery of Creation and the Sacrament of Marriage

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for Sunday, Oct 7, 2012 | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Gen 2:18-24
• Ps 128:1-2, 3, 4-5, 6
• Heb 2:9-11
• Mk 10:2-16

“No human institution,” writes Jorge Cardinal Medina Estévez in Male and Female He Created Them (Ignatius Press, 2003), “is so deeply rooted in nature and in the heart of man and of woman as marriage and the family.” And yet, as Estévez goes on to demonstrate, marriage has so many enemies and is assailed from every side by forces—both internal and external—seeking to pervert and destroy it.

Divorce is rampant, adultery is common, and “same-sex marriage” appears to be an inevitable social and cultural reality. It is not surprising, then, to sometimes hear that marriage is doomed, soon an artifact of a different era, rapidly becoming a victim of politics, apathy, selfishness, and a disregard for tradition and religion.

But, however dark the horizon, we shouldn’t forget that marriage is not the artificial construct of a particular culture, nor a transitory institution aimed at repressing this or that special interest group. Marriage pre-dates cultures, civilizations, political parties, and ideologies.

In today’s first reading, taken from the creation account in Genesis 2, the first man is put into a deep sleep and the woman is “fashioned” from the rib taken out of his side. “For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).

What exactly did that mean? This passage and question were the focus of much of Pope John Paul II’s famous “theology of the body,” given as general audiences early in his pontificate. He saw an “integral” connection between the mystery of creation and the sacrament of marriage.

He wrote: “The words of Genesis 2:24, ‘A man . . . cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh,’ spoken in the context of this original reality in a theological sense, constitute marriage as an integral part and, in a certain sense, a central part of the ‘sacrament of creation.’ They constitute, or perhaps rather they simply confirm the character of its origin. According to these words, marriage is a sacrament inasmuch as it is an integral part and, I would say, the central point of ‘the sacrament of creation.’ In this sense it is the primordial sacrament.”

This is part of the point made by Jesus in his conversation with the Pharisees. Divorce was allowed within Judaism, even being common among some Jews. The Pharisees, of course, focused on the Law of Moses. But Jesus indicated that the allowance given by Moses for divorce was a nod to man’s weakness, “the hardness of your hearts.” He insisted on going back to “the beginning of creation” and restoring the original meaning of marriage.

Creation and marriage are intimately connected, as marriage is a co-creation between the cleaving man and woman and the Triune God. In accepting the gift of the “other,” man and woman are given a profound wholeness. The very creative nature of marriage acknowledges God’s act of creation, his overflowing love, and his plan for humanity—a plan modeled in the sacrament of marriage.

Thus, the primordial sacrament is a sign revealing a mystery of infinite value: the gift of divine life. God invites man to partake in his divine nature and enter into full communion with the Trinitarian mystery. Marriage, the deepest and most profound of human communions, is a sign of that divine communion.

The primordial sacrament, wrote John Paul II, is “understood as a sign which effectively transmits in the visible world the invisible mystery hidden from eternity in God. This is the mystery of truth and love, the mystery of the divine life in which man really shares …”

Marriage, then, was at the heart of God’s plan for man even before Creation. The Son was the author of this sacrament, for “all things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being” (Jn. 1:1,3). In becoming flesh and wedding himself to humanity, he revived the roots and revealed the meaning of marriage.

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the October 4, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

Also see:

• “But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’" | Adrienne von Speyr
• Marital and Family Commitment: A Personalist View | Monsignor Cormac Burke
• The Challenge of Marriage Preparation | Dr. Janet E. Smith
• Focus Groups and Marriage: A Match Made for Heartache | Mary Beth Bonacci
• Entering Marriage with Eyes Wide Open | Edward Peters
• Human Sexuality and the Catholic Church | Donald P. Asci | Introduction to The Conjugal Act as a Personal Act
• Who Is Married? | Edward Peters
• Marriage and the Family in Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae | Reverend Michael Hull, S.T.D.
• Male and Female He Created Them | Cardinal Estevez

Dr. Christopher Kaczor on myths, media, and misinformation

Dr. Christopher Kaczor is a professor of philosophy at Loyola Marymount University and the author of several books, including The Ethics of Abortion: Women's Rights, Human Life, and the Question of Justice; Thomas Aquinas on the Cardinal Virtues; Life Issues - Medical Choices; and How to Stay Catholic in College. His most recent book is The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church: Distinguishing Fact from Fiction about Catholicism (Ignatius Press). He spoke recently with Catholic World Report about his reasons for writing the book, the challenge of communicating what the Catholic Church really teaches, and which myths about the Church are most difficult to address and dispel.

CWR: What is the primary audience for your book? Both Catholics and non-Catholics?

Dr. Christopher Kaczor: It is for both Catholics and non-Catholics, ideally. But, more realistically, active Catholics would get and read the book in order to have better conversations and discussions with non-Catholics, especially people who are very secular. There are many myths about the Catholic Church that come from Protestant-Catholic debates, but my book is focused on secularists and non-Catholics who do not hold religious views, but who do, for example, adhere to myths about the Catholic Church that come from the media and Hollywood, among other sources.

CWR: What are some of the key reasons people are so misinformed about the Catholic Church?

Dr. Kaczor: One of the main reasons is that the mainstream media—through television, radio, movies, the internet—misrepresents the Church on the key issues. Take movies, for instance: priests are constantly presented and portrayed in a stereotypical way, especially as drunks or molesters or hypocrites. This informs the imagination and views of people. Another huge factor is that Catholic generally do a poor job of explaining the the history, beliefs, and practices of the Catholic Church. Catholics are apologetic in the wrong way, sometimes even saying, "Yeah, we're behind the times, but we'll eventually catch up!" So Catholics contribute to the malaise and misinformation when hey do not stand up for the Faith and state the truth. They need to be firm in what they believe, but they first need to know what they believe, and why.

CWR: How did you select these seven myths?

Dr. Kaczor: My process of selection was not necessarily scientific, but neither was it random. I've been teaching since 1997, and have often asked myself, "What are the issues that my students are struggling with and wrestling with the most?" It also comes from my experiences of talking with many other people over the past twenty years. All of these myths involved key issues that people really wrestle with; I chose the ones that think are the most malicious and the most widespread when it comes to the Catholic Church.

CWR: What myth is most deeply ingrained in the dominant culture?

Dr. Kaczor: That's hard to say. Myth #7 might be one ["Priestly Celibacy Caused the Crisis of Sexual Abuse of Minors: The Myth of Priestly Pedophilia"]. Lots of people hold that view, and it is very damaging. People rightly expect priests to be holy and upright, and so when a priest is found to have committed abuse, it discredits the priesthood for many people. But what most of these people don't realize is that children are more likely to be molested by a school teacher or a coach than a priest. That's the reality. But people won't stop sending their kids to school or having them in sports programs. However, they will stop going to Church and they will reject Catholicism because a bad priest committed a malicious act. This is particularly bad because it removes them from the life of the Church and undermines, or ends, their participation in the Church.

Part of the issue here is that teachers and coaches are so deeply trusted that many people cannot face up to the evidence, and so we don't see a movement to reform the teaching profession or the football coaching profession. Yet, again, teachers and coaches are more likely to abuse kids than a priest, as studies show and my book demonstrates. And when we look at the horrible situation with [former Penn State coach] Jerry Sandusky, we see that being married does not magically cure the problem.

CWR: Which of these myths is most difficult to address? Does that depend on the situation and people involved?

Dr. Kaczor: I think it does depend on the situation. Perhaps # 4 ["Indifferent to Love, the Church Banned Contraception: The Myth of Opposition between Love and Procreation"] because addressing contraception requires knowing that procreation is a good thing, but that takes a lot of time and background information about sexuality, marriage, and so forth. The same is true when it comes to defending marriage and addressing "same-sex marriage": a quick sound bit doesn't work easily. It really does require time and effort. 

• For more about The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, visit the book's website.

Demons, Sin, Death, and Damnation

A Scriptural Reflection on the Readings for September 30, 2012 | Carl E. Olson

Readings:
• Num 11:25-29
• Ps 19:8, 10, 12-13, 14
• Jas 5:1-6
• Mk 9:38-43, 45, 47-48

What do demons, sin, death, and damnation have in common? An obvious (and correct) answer is that all of them are, put bluntly, bad. They have a certain, even close, relationship to one another. Another answer is that each is a topic usually avoided in conversations around the water cooler and over morning coffee. In fact, they are sometimes given short shrift in homilies and sermons.

But today’s Gospel prominently mentions all four. Needless to say, it is a challenging and difficult reading. Yet it is the sort of passage too often ignored or downplayed, resulting in a skewed understanding of both the mission and message of Christ.

Jesus and his disciples took the existence of demons for granted; they also took them seriously. The discussion in Mark 9 about driving out demons is just one of about seventy references to demons in the New Testament. What is unusual, however, is the context: the disciples were complaining because someone who “does not follow us,” they told Jesus, was performing exorcisms. Jesus reminds them that such a deed can only be performed in his name, and such faith could not come from a foe. Since men can only be for or against him, the benefit of any doubt should go to those who exhibit love for and faith in Christ. In the words of St. Gregory of Nyssa, “None of those seeking to be saved will be lacking in this ability,” since salvation is a free gift from God.

That expansive explanation of how good done in the name of Christ should be acknowledged is followed by some of the strongest language in the Gospels about avoiding sin. Two terms stand out: scandal and Gehenna. “If your hand causes you to sin”—literally, scandalizes you, “cut it off.” Scandal, the Catechism explains, “is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil.” Those who give scandal by words or actions can destroy spiritual life. “Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense” (par. 2284). It is, G. K. Chesterton summarized nicely, “the tripping up of somebody else when he is trying to be good.”

Momentary physical pain cannot be compared to the eternal spiritual torment awaiting those who continue unrepentant in their sins. Gehenna symbolized such torment. It was a steep ravine southwest of Jerusalem where, many centuries before Christ, some Israelites had sacrificed “their sons and daughters to Molech” (Jer. 32:35), a pagan god long associated with such horrors. Gehenna was desecrated eventually by the righteous King Josiah (2 Kngs. 23:10), and became a smoldering garbage dump filled with trash and animal carcasses. Needless to say, it offered a powerful image of an eternal hell filled with undying worms and unquenchable fire.

Speaking of hell is never fashionable or enjoyable. St. John Chrysostom said of this passage: “Ordained as we have been to the ministry of the word, we must cause our hearers discomfort when it is necessary for them to hear. We do this not arbitrarily but under command.”

One of the great sins of our time is the deliberate and self-serving destruction of human life, especially what Pope John Paul II described as “the scandal of abortion.” Such a grave scandal exists because men—even those living in Western democracies—have “lost the ability to make decisions aimed at the common good” (Centesimus annus, 47). Pope Benedict XVI, in his recent encyclical on social doctrine, wrote, “To desire the common good and strive towards it is a requirement of justice and charity” (Caritas in veritate, 7).

Justice requires every man be held responsible for his sins; it rightly asks each pay for his moral deficits. Yet we are unable. As today’s reading from the Epistle of James makes clear, wealth cannot save us. Nor can power or fame. Salvation from demons, sin, death, and damnation is found only in the name of Jesus Christ, the author of life (Acts 3:15).

(This "Opening the Word" column originally appeared in the September 27, 2009, edition of Our Sunday Visitor newspaper.)

"This book is a must-have" for arguing against those "who think the sexual revolution a grand thing."

From David Deavel's review of Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution on the Unique For a Reason—Why Marriage Matters site:

G. K. Chesterton wrote in his 1908 classic Orthodoxy, “The unpopular parts of Christianity turn out when examined to be the very props of the people.” The outer crust of Christian reality is a moral sternness that seems ugly, but makes possible “pagan freedom.”  Neo-pagans wishing to excise those outer morals have brought on themselves “despair within.”

This is one of the central paradoxes of Mary Eberstadt’s new book “Adam and Eve After the Pill: Paradoxes of the Sexual Revolution.” The sexual revolution made possible by modern, more reliable contraception came with promises of a world that was emancipated, free-spirited, and happy. Instead, everywhere embraced, the revolution has brought a shrinking, aging general population, scores of abused, abandoned, and aborted children, and unhappiness for men and—most strikingly—for women.  The despair is within, but its ugly fruits are everywhere to be seen in anecdotal form and even in the hard data of thoroughly secular social scientists.

What does the data say?  In contrast to scholars who argued in the Sixties that contraception would reduce abortion and child abuse, stabilize marriages and be a barrier to poverty, Eberstadt cites the work of Lionel Tiger, which linked contraception to “the breakdown of families, female impoverishment, trouble in the relationship between the sexes, and single motherhood.”  Tiger, who views all religion as “toxic,” also explicitly argues that “contraception causes abortion.”

Even Pope Paul VI did not make that last argument in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, reiterating Catholic teaching on contraception. But he did make four specific predictions: lower moral standards in society, more infidelity, less respect by men for women, and coercion by governments to get people to use reproductive technologies. In all four cases, the Church was right. ...

Eberstadt brings to this book not only a comprehensive knowledge of social scientific research and a discerning eye for popular culture, but a wicked sense of humor that helps one laugh a bit at the data that would otherwise brings tears. She also brings an eye of sanity that is surely connected to her experience as a wife and mother of four (her husband, demographer Nicholas Eberstadt, is also a serious Catholic scholar). This book is a must-have for those who want arguments to use against people who think the sexual revolution a grand thing. It is also useful to give to Catholics and other Christians who want to reject the more outlandish aspects of the revolution but keep contraception. Eberstadt shows it is, after all, a bitter pill.  And she has the data of social scientists—who don’t necessarily like the Church that teaches this truth—to back her up.

Read the entire review. Also:

• The Introduction to Adam and Eve after the Pill
• Visit the website for Adam and Eve after the Pill
• "The Party's Over": A Catholic World Report interview with Mary Eberstadt