Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog

Cardinal Raymond Burke on Life, Truth, Mother Teresa, Islam, and Cardinal Sarah

U.S. Cardinal Raymond L. Burke, patron of the Knights and Dames of Malta, and Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Astana, Kazakhstan, walk in the 6th annual March for Life in Rome May 8, 2016. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

by Carl E. Olson | Catholic World Report

Speaking to reporters from Rome about his new book, the American prelate goes on record about Christians and Muslims (they don't worship the same God) and Cardinal Sarah (“I agree with him completely...").

In a wide-ranging international teleconference call on Monday with media members, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke spoke in detail about many timely topics, including the priority of standing up for life in addressing poverty and other social ills, the witness and message of Mother Teresa, essential differences between Christianity and Islam, and the recent controversy over remarks by Cardinal Robert Sarah about liturgical orientation. The occasion of the call was Cardinal Burke's recent book Hope For the World: To Unite All Things in Christ (Ignatius Press), an interview given to French author Guillaume d'Alançon in 2015, and translated by Michael J. Miller for Ignatius Press.

 

Since being named a bishop by Pope John Paul II in 1994, Cardinal Burke has become one of more well-known prelates in the English-speaking world, known for his willingness to address controversial topics forthrightly, despite often being criticized. Noted as a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burke was made a cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, and then called to Rome to become Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. During the two recent Synods on the Family, Cardinal Burke spoke out often about his concerns, telling CWR during the October 2014 gathering that he thought the Synod's mid-term report "lacks a solid foundation in the Sacred Scriptures and the Magisterium", a remark made a month after he was removed from his position as Prefect and named chaplain to the Order of Malta by Pope Francis.

Cardinal Burke, conversing from Rome, told reporters that his new book was motivated by a desire to reflect on his upbringing and how he discerned his vocation as priest, and also "to reflect as a pastor, as a bishop, on certain on certain critical issues of the day". As such, he noted, the book is a "kind of testimony of faith on my part", and the hope is that the book, in keeping with its title, will "give hope" to readers.

Asked about an apparent shifting of priorities among American bishops since the beginning of Francis' pontificate, Cardinal Burke pointed out that while the issues of abortion, poverty, immigration, and global warming all have "moral importance", the Church's tradition and philosophical reason both indicate that "the fundamental question has to be the question of human life itself, the respect for the inviolable dignity of human life and of its Creator, of its Source, and the union of a man and a woman in marriage, which according to God's plan is the place where new human life is welcomed and nurtured."

He expressed concern that the matter of human life and the issues of abortion, artificial insemination, contraception, and euthanasia be placed somehow on the same level as "questions regarding immigration and poverty." The first priority, he emphasized, must be given to proper respect for human life and for the family in order to have "the right orientations in addressing all of the other questions" and challenges faced by people in daily life. It makes no sense, he pointed out, to be concerned with immigration or poverty "if human life itself is not protected in society ... The first justice accorded to any human being is to respect life itself, which is received from God..." Cardinal Burke observed there are some who advocate an elimination of certain parts of the population in order to fight poverty, or who adhere to a "contraceptive mentality" in order to pursue a sort of "social engineering" harmful to society and to individuals.

The former Archbishop of St. Louis emphasized that bishops have a responsibility to proclaim the truth of Christ in love within the Church, following the example of Christ himself, knowing that the love that will "best serve society is the truth, a truth that respects God's plan for us from the moment of creation..." When he travels, the cardinal said, he finds that people want to hear "the truth of the faith" from priests, bishops, and cardinals—"they aren't interested in my personal opinions about things, which won't save their souls, and I am as aware of that as they are; they look to me to reflect very deeply on the truths of the Faith and their application on society today, and to speak to that truth with love and care for society." The fundamental mission of Catholics in the world is to be united to Christ and to "give witness to the truth", a witness that is "very much needed in our time".

Asked how it was that he, as a young seminarian in the Sixties, avoided falling into the "craziness" of that era, Cardinal Burke credited his parents and his upbringing. He acknowledged he was not unaffected by the "tumultuous" times, especially after going to Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, in 1968 to study philosophy. He credits the "stable and good" discipline, prayer life, and formation he experienced in minor seminary, which he entered at the age of fourteen. He lamented that so many seminarians, seminary professors, and priests at CUA abandoned their vocations and ministry during that time. But he "simply couldn't be convinced that this so-called 'new way', this 'new Church'" was a good and right path, as if what he had been taught growing up was now "wrong and needed to be abandoned". He expressed, however, "great sympathy" for many of those who lost their way, saying that it was a "very tumultuous time and we were young".

Reflecting on the upcoming canonization of Mother Teresa by Pope Francis on Sunday, September 4th, Cardinal Burke expressed his happiness that the famous nun will be named a saint, saying "she has been an inspiration to me from my years in the seminary when I first came to know her".

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

New: "The Walls Are Talking: Former Abortion Clinic Workers Tell Their Stories" by Abby Johnson

Now available from Ignatius Press:

The Walls Are Talking: Former Abortion Clinic Workers Tell Their Stories

by Abby Johnson, with Kristin Detrow

This book narrates the harrowing and life-changing experiences of former abortion clinic workers, including those of the author, who once directed abortion services at a large Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas. These individuals, whose names have been changed to protect their identities, left their jobs in the abortion industry after experiencing a change of heart. They have come forward with their stories, not for fame or notoriety, but to shed light on the reality of abortion. They want their stories to change the lives of others for the better.

These stories are difficult to read, because an abortion is an act of violence, harming not only the obvious victim—the unborn child-- but also the mother, the father, the doctor, and everyone else involved. But these stories also offer hope, for they show that anyone, no matter what part the person has played in an abortion, can start anew, can make amends for past mistakes. They demonstrate that the first step on that journey is telling the truth, as these courageous individuals do in these pages.

"Those of us that have worked in the abortion industry all live with a constant burden. We can't let our burden slide off of our shoulders; it is what keeps us on fire. It reminds us of why we fight so hard. We have seen death and evil in a way that most haven't—and we participated. But we are forgiven. He who has been forgiven much, loves much. And we love a lot. I am eagerly awaiting the day when we can call all abortionists and clinic workers former and repentant abortion providers."
— Abby Johnson, author

Abby Johnson holds a B.S. in psychology from Texas A&M University and an M.A. in counseling from Sam Houston State University. She was hired by Planned Parenthood in 2005 and progressed to the position of community services director and health educator, where she served as liason between the community and Planned Parenthood as media correspondent. Later promoted to heath center director, Johnson ran both the family planning and abortion programs. In 2009 she left Planned Parenthood and joined the local Coalition for Life as a volunteer. She continues her volunteer activities and now works on projects with the national 40 Days for Life campaign. She and her husband, Doug, have a young daughter and live in Texas.

Praise for The Walls Are Talking: Former Abortion Clinic Workers Tell Their Stories:

"Abby Johnson has done a phenomenal job of gathering the experiences of those who have worked in the abortion industry. The movement of grace that brings them out of the industry is profound. The wounds that they carry remind us that the abortion debate is not a moral and philosophical discussion, but a heart issue! The walking wounded are everywhere and, as Abby concludes, it is love and respect that heals the heart."
— Vicki Thorn, Founder, Project Rachel

"In this riveting, compelling book, Abby Johnson tenderly holds out a loving hand of compassion to those millions of Americans who've participated in an abortion and takes a giant step toward healing our abortion-wounded nation."
— Sue Ellen Browder, Author, Subverted: How I Helped the Sexual Revolution Hijack the Women's Movement

"I've seen Abby's transformational story inspire people around the world, and I've witnessed the experiences of many other workers who are also now abandoning the abortion industry. Read and share the testimonies in this important book. It's time to let the world know what really goes on behind the closed doors of the abortion industry."
— David Bereit, Founder, 40 Days for Life

"This is such an important book right now. At a time when Planned Parenthood is under so much scrutiny and pressure, these stories of former abortion clinic workers could make a huge difference when it comes to shutting down abortion providers and ending abortion all together. "
— Teresa Tomeo, Radio Host, Author, Extreme Makeover

"It is not a trivial thing to heed the call of one's conscience, especially when the cost is one's livelihood. I know. Years ago, I walked away from a Stanford Ph.D. and an academic position when I told the truth about forced abortions in China. The women in this book did the same thing. They walked away from the security of their jobs in the abortion industry when they realized the murderous truth about what actually goes on there. Read their stories, and pray that hundreds more abortion clinic workers will follow them out the door, with the last one turning out the lights as she leaves."
— Steven Mosher, President, Population Research Institute

"The Walls Are Talking, and they're urging us to listen. The voices of Abby Johnson and other former abortion workers are loud and clear. Their real life accounts describing the inner workings of the abortion industry can no longer be ignored. And despite the stark madness of this gruesome environment, these stories of grace remind us that no one is beyond the reach of Christ."
— Ramona Trevino, Author, Redeemed by Grace: A Catholic Woman's Journey to Planned Parenthood and Back

"Abby Johnson is one of the bravest women I know. Once she realized the truth about abortion, Abby had the courage to leave the abortion industry and become a powerful voice for the defenseless. She challenges us to face the truth about the abortion industry and its many victims."
— Lila Rose, President, Live Action

"My friend, Abby Johnson, has been teaching us for several years what it means to leave the abortion industry and feel free of the murder, the heartache and the misery that accompany abortion.

Abby's latest book, The Walls Are Talking, is another remarkable journey down the path that she, and so many others, have travelled on their way out the torment of the abortion industry and into the light of truth.

I encourage everyone to read The Walls Are Talking and share it with family and friends. Heroic women like Abby inspire all of us."
— Judie Brown, President, American Life League

Msgr. William Smith on Catholic teaching about "emergency contraception"

Editor's note: The following is from Monsignor William Smith's Modern Moral Problems: Trustworthy Answers to Your Tough Questions (Ignatius Press, 2015). Monsignor Smith, who died in 2009, for many years wrote a regular column for Homiletic & Pastoral Review. This particular question-and-answer appeared in the March 2004 edition of HPR; it appears on pages 147-151 of Modern Moral Problems.

Emergency Contraception

Question: Various bills and regulations propose to mandate “emergency contraception”. Not all Catholic responses to this movement seem to say the same thing. How does this stand?

Answer: I agree with your uncertainty: not all Catholic responses are the same response to this challenge. What I take to be the clearest and best response is that of Dr. Eugene F. Diamond: “The Ovulation or Pregnancy Approach in Cases of Rape?” [18] Indeed, Dr. Diamond writes in response to and presents a critique of Drs. Ronald Hamel and Michael Panicola’s “Emergency Contraception and Sexual Assault”. [19]

A first problem is terminology, i.e., the very expression “emergency contraception” seems to beg the question that needs to be answered. Is this simply a question of contraception or does it risk abortion and is called “emergency contraception” to distract attention away from the abortion problem? Once this is called “contraception”, the public relations effort is probably lost.

Some of the general public will give some space for Catholic institutions and Catholic individuals to distance themselves from any participation in abortion procedures and abortifacients. However, the same general public is not so willing to allow or acknowledge Catholic reluctance about contraception. Thus, by calling this “emergency contraception”, the impression is given and taken that the only point at issue is “contraception” when, of course, the crucial point at issue is the risk of abortion and abortion consequences.

In the conventional terms of the 1950s, when the term contraception meant diaphragms, the case for self-defense against rape was and remained a defensible opinion. This was the reported advice of the German bishops to German women in post-war Berlin, then occupied by the Red Army, an army not known for good manners. However, during the “Nuns in the Congo” case in the early ’60s and the rapes in Bosnia in the early ’90s, the contraceptive in question was no longer a simple barrier method to prevent conception, but rather the birth control pill—at first called an anti-ovulant or anovulant.

This is and remains the problem. The pill is not simply or only a chemical method of preventing ovulation. All commercially available birth control pills marketed in the United States have some abortifacient properties. This element raises some moral questions that simply did not exist in the post-war Berlin context.

To approach this dilemma today, some Catholic authors speak of a “Pregnancy Approach” while others speak of an “Ovulation Approach” in the aftercare of rape victims. An example of the former is the Hamel and Panicola article in Health Progress cited above; an example of the latter is Peter Cataldo in Catholic Health Care Ethics. [20]

In the pregnancy approach, only a pregnancy test is given. If a woman has been raped while pregnant, the need for post-rape hormone therapy is moot, indeed counterproductive. If she is not pregnant, this approach presumes the emergency contraceptives will only prevent ovulation, sperm migration, or sperm conception—these are seen as selfdefensive contraceptives in this context. However, multiple-dose oral contraceptives can also have the effect of disturbing the receptivity of the endometrium, which does not prevent conception but prevents implantation and is thus in effect abortifacient.

Continue reading on CWR's The Dispatch.

Is it up to the Supreme Court to save religious liberty?

A woman stands in front of flowers outside the Supreme Court building in Washington Feb. 14, the day after the death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. (CNS photo/Carlos Barria, Reuters)

Is it up to the Supreme Court to save religious liberty? | Erasmus More | CWR's The Dispatch

Such is the state of American society and of religious liberty in American society that the US government is not not embarrassed to persecute the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Following the death of Justice Scalia, will the Supreme Court reverse what has been its recent record of protecting religious liberty? After its two gay-marriage decisions in the last three years, with their deepening implications for religious freedom, many Americans of faith may not sufficiently appreciate that in the last five years, the Supreme Court has issued two decisions, one unanimous, that have turned back the Obama administration’s attempts to undercut the ability of religious people to live according to their convictions. Now, however, with the Court having set March 23rd as the date to hear oral arguments in the case of the Obama administration versus the Little Sisters of the Poor, everything could change.

In the Hosanna Tabor case (2012), a Lutheran elementary church and its school fired a teacher of religion and other classes because she had narcolepsy. The teacher had been on disability leave and had wanted to return to teaching, but the school decided that she was not ready to return. Invoking the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Obama administration’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued. The school defended itself by arguing that the teacher was one of its trained and designated “ministers,” and, therefore, its decision to terminate the teacher was protected under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court unanimously held for the school. The decision is the first time in our history that our highest court has ever recognized a “ministerial exception” in employment law. That exception had been the basis of rulings in lower federal court for decades. It took the Obama administration to attempt to extinguish it by overturning those rulings and law. The argument of the Obama administration was that the religion clauses of the First Amendment did not even apply! Instead, it argued that the case should have been addressed under freedom of association, a derivative right not mentioned in the text of the First Amendment but recognized by the Supreme Court. Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice Roberts rebuked the Obama administration for its “extreme position” and for “the remarkable view that the Religion Clauses have nothing to say about a religious organization’s freedom to select its own ministers.”

For a religious issue of comparable gravity, one would almost have to go back to American colonial times when some colonies prohibited Catholic priests altogether. If the federal government can prescribe who is and who is not a minister, it is difficult to imagine what the free exercise of religion might mean in this country. For, religion does not exist aside from its ministers. “How are they to hear without a preacher?” (Rom 10:14).

The issues and the arguments in the Hobby Lobby case (2014) were more complicated, but the decision of the Supreme Court upheld religious liberty again. Under Obamacare, the Obama administration had sought to force the arts and crafts store, Hobby Lobby, owned by Evangelical Christians, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a woodworking business owned by Mennonites, to provide contraceptive services to its employees. Both businesses, facing enormous and daily fines from the federal government, objected that such coercion violated their religious beliefs because certain contraceptives are abortifacients.

The Obama administration invoked federal jurisdiction pursuant to its own executive “mandate” issued by the Department of HHS pursuant to Obamacare that required all health plans nationwide to include contraceptive services.

Continue reading on the CWR site.

The Doritos Commercial and the Revival of Voluntarism

Bishop Robert Barron | The Dispatch at CWR

Though the commercial is, of course, playful, it exaggerates something quite real—but NARAL insists the child in the womb should not be "humanized".

I'm sure by now you've heard about the absurd reaction of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) to the lighthearted Super Bowl commercial produced to advertise Doritos. In the thirty-second clip, a pregnant mother, undergoing an ultra-sound, is annoyed by her husband who is absent-mindedly munching Doritos while their baby's image is displayed on the screen. But as the father moves the corn chip, the baby in the womb moves with it; and when the mother throws the bag across the room, the child reacts so keenly and purposively that he decides this is the moment to be born.

Cute, funny, harmless, right? Oh not according to NARAL, who complained (and one is compelled here to stifle laughter) that the commercial dangerously "humanized" the fetus. We are tempted to ask, "What do you think was gestating in the womb? A monkey? A rabbit?"

It has, of course, long been established scientifically that even a conceptus (a fertilized ovum) is already in full possession of human DNA distinct from that of his parents. Moreover, the developing embryo has a heartbeat and her own circulatory system 22 days after conception; at 20 weeks, the baby in the womb is capable of hearing his mother's voice, and responding to light, music, and other external stimuli. So though the Doritos commercial is, of course, playful, it exaggerates something quite real.
Yet according to NARAL, the child in the womb should not be "humanized," lest the absolute right to murder that child at any stage of its pre-natal development should be denied. And mind you, that right, in our country, extends even to the moment when the baby is emerging from the womb (partial birth abortion), indeed to the time after his birth, since many states place no restrictions on the killing of a newborn who has miraculously survived the abortion procedure (cf. born alive legislation). For many people, the bottom line is this: all objective evidence to the contrary, the unborn are not human because defenders of abortion don't want them to be.

And here, philosophically speaking, is the rub.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Tens of thousands rally at Walk for Life West Coast in San Francisco

David Daleiden speaking at the Walk for Life West Coast at the Civic Center Plaza in San Francisco on Saturday, January 23rd. (Photo: Credit: Darwin Sayo, Walk for Life West Coast Media Team; www.walkforlifewc.com)

Speakers at the event included David Daleiden, the citizen journalist whose undercover videos recorded Planned Parenthood officials trafficking in the parts of aborted babies

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 25, 2016 – A Nigerian pro-life activist and the man whose undercover videos of Planned Parenthood have roiled Congress and redefined the abortion battleground rallied tens of thousands of people at the 12th annual Walk for Life West Coast Jan. 23.
 
“They tell us the lie that women—in order to have opportunities and in order  for us be successful—we must have abortion rights,” said Obianuju Ekeocha, founder and president of Culture of Life Africa which rejects international aid tied to anti-life initiatives. “I stand here before you not just as a black person or an African person. I stand here before you as a woman to say we should never have to buy success with the blood of our babies.”
 
David Daleiden, the citizen journalist whose undercover videos recorded Planned Parenthood officials trafficking in the parts of aborted babies, was the first speaker at the one-hour rally at Civic Center Plaza in San Francisco. The videos led Congress to vote to defund Planned Parenthood in January.
 
“The videos raise the biggest question that Planned Parenthood and their allies cannot answer,” Daleiden said. “That is how on the one hand in our country the humanity of the baby fetus is not considered to be equal enough to our own in order to be totally protected by law. But at the same time it is precisely their equal and identical humanity to our own that makes them so valuable for sale.”
 
At the Walk for Life Mass earlier at St. Mary’s Cathedral, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, referred to the videos and to California’s new assisted suicide law saying, “The big question is, what does this say about us as a society. How can we do this to ourselves?”  The archbishop called upon pro-life supporters to be Jesus’ “light shining in the darkness.”
 
Intermittent rain and a wholesale shutdown of traffic in the financial district for construction of Super Bowl City did not daunt supporters, who filled the plaza, which shortly before the rally was a sea of umbrellas. The sun came out for most of the rally.
 
Other speakers included Rev. Clenard Childress who has spoken at almost every Walk, beginning with the first in 2005. The New Jersey Baptist minister is a national African American voice for the unborn, marriage and family. The rally concluded with testimony by Emmanuel-- Jesús Emmanuel Arturo Acha Martínez--a musical icon in the Latin world. “We are here in defense of life. We have to do it. We all have to do it,” Emmanuel said before speaking in Spanish to those gathered.
 
Walk for Life was founded in 2005 by a group of Bay Area residents with the mission of changing the perception that abortion is the answer.

The hijacking of the women’s movement, and the resurgence of pro-life feminism

Young people hold signs outside the U.S. Supreme Court building during the March for Life in Washington Jan. 22, 2015. (CNS photo/Leslie Kossoff)

The hijacking of the women’s movement, and the resurgence of pro-life feminism | CWR

Sue Ellen Browder was there when the women’s movement bound itself to pro-abortion politics. Today she sees hope in a new generation of pro-life feminists.

Sue Ellen Browder has worked as a journalist for more than 40 years, writing for several decades for Cosmopolitan and other women’s magazines. Her articles from that period were calculated to “soft sell” the Cosmo lifestyle and all that it entailed—including casual sex, contraception, and abortion. Her new book Subverted (Ignatius Press) tells the story of how the women’s movement—which in the beginning was primarily concerned about equal rights and opportunities for women, and mothers in particular—was hijacked by the sexual revolution and how abortion became enshrined as the movement’s primary political issue.

Browder will be on the stage at the rally kicking off the 2016 March for Life in Washington, DC on January 22, speaking on “Why the Pro-Life Movement is the Authentic Women’s Movement of the 21st Century.”

She recently corresponded with CWR about her book, her perspective on pro-abortion politics as someone who witnessed firsthand their fusing with the women’s movement, and the hope she sees for a pro-life future in the United States.

CWR: Why did you write Subverted?

Sue Ellen Browder: We can’t correct the errors of the past until we know the errors of the past. This book tells for the first time how two men used some very crafty propaganda to convince women’s movement founder Betty Friedan to insert abortion and contraception into the women’s movement “Bill of Rights.” They convinced her she wouldn’t be able to achieve equity—not equality, equity—for women in education and the workplace if she didn’t include abortion in her package of political demands. 

The women’s movement in the beginning was very united around issues of equal access to education and opportunities in the work force. Abortion split the women’s movement in two. The pro-life movement has not declared a “war on women.” The pro-life movement represents an authentic branch of feminism that walked out the door the very night abortion was inserted into the women’s movement by a mere 57 people under some very diabolic influences.

CWR: Why has this story been buried for nearly 50 years?  

Browder: It’s been reported here and there in bits and pieces. But it’s never been pulled together in one place before. This book, Subverted, is the first time anyone has told the whole story. 

Early suffragists like Susan B. Anthony, Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were adamantly prolife. Alice Paul, mother of the 19th Amendment, which guaranteed women the right to vote, called abortion “the ultimate exploitation of women.” Although Betty Friedan eventually did succumb to abortion’s siren song, she didn’t even mention abortion in 1963 when she launched second wave feminism with The Feminine Mystique.  

Having once been fired for being pregnant, Friedan wrote in 2000, “Ideologically, I was never for abortion.  Motherhood is a value to me, and even today abortion is not. … For me, the matter of choice has never been primarily the choice of abortion, but that you can choose to be a mother. That’s as important as any right written into the Constitution.” 

CWR: What was the bedrock motivation for the promotion of abortion in the 1960s? And to what degree was it pushed by men who saw it as a means of liberation for themselves rather than by women? 

Continue reading on the Catholic World Report site...

"Born to Win": Students for Life of America at Walk for Life West Coast

"Born to Win": Students for Life of America at Walk for Life West Coast | Gibbons J. Cooney | Catholic World Report

“We want to make abortion unthinkable and this is the pro-life generation that is going to make that happen.”

Each year, San Francisco’s Walk for Life West Coast, which began in 2005, has attracted more attendees. The Walk has been defined since its inception by the participation of young people, not only at the Walk itself, but at the ancillary events that have grown up around the Walk. It has become the largest weekend of Catholic and pro-life activism on the West Coast, with special Masses, prayer services, eucharistic adoration, youth rallies and conferences.

One major activist presence at the Walk is the Students for Life of America. On January 23, following the Walk, Students for Life will host a Youth Rally and movie screening of Voiceless at 5:00 pm at San Francisco’s St. Mary’s Cathedral. On Sunday, January 24, beginning at 9:30 am, Students for Life will host their Third Annual Students for Life of America West Coast National Conference “Born to Win”, also at St. Mary’s Cathedral.

Catholic World Report spoke with Tina Whittington, Executive Vice President of Students for Life of America.

CWR: One of the most important things that has happened in the pro-life movement over the last year has been the series of videos by the Center for Medical Progress exposing the trafficking in the body parts of aborted babies by Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses. David Daleiden, the founder of the Center for Medical Progress, will be one of the speakers at this year’s Walk. Can you tell us what you think these videos have meant to the pro-life movement?

Tina Whittington: The Center for Medical Progress videos were a game-changer because while many pro-lifers suspected the abortion industry of selling baby body parts, David proved it and proved it dramatically. This time, it wasn’t a pro-lifer saying that Planned Parenthood betrays women – it was the abortionists themselves by admitting they don’t always get full consent from the mother and change up the abortion procedure to get the best organs, which can cause complications for the mother.

This time it wasn’t a pro-lifer holding up graphic images of aborted babies – it was Planned Parenthood themselves holding the tiny, identifiable parts of aborted babies. This time it wasn’t  pro-lifers telling the world that the abortion industry finds any way to make a profit – it was Planned Parenthood high-level executives themselves negotiating the best price for the body parts of aborted babies.

CWR: Students for Life have become a regular presence at the Walk. Two years ago you had the first annual Students for Life of America West Coast Conference. This year will be the third annual confcerence—and a pro-life Youth Rally as well. What results do you hope to see from the Rally and Conference?

Continue reading on the CWR site.

New: "Subverted: How I Helped the Sexual Revolution Hijack the Women's Movement"

Now available from Ignatius Press:

Subverted: How I Helped the Sexual Revolution Hijack the Women's Movement

by Sue Ellen Browder

Contraception and abortion were not originally part of the 1960s women’s movement. How did the women’s movement, which fought for equal opportunity for women in education and the workplace, and the sexual revolution, which reduced women to ambitious sex objects, become so united?

In Subverted, Sue Ellen Browder documents for the first time how it all happened, in her own life and in the life of an entire country. Trained at the University of Missouri School of Journalism to be an investigative journalist, Browder unwittingly betrayed her true calling and became a propagandist for sexual liberation. As a long-time freelance writer for Cosmopolitan magazine, she wrote pieces meant to soft-sell unmarried sex, contraception, and abortion as the single woman’s path to personal fulfillment. She did not realize until much later that propagandists higher and cleverer than herself were influencing her thinking and her personal choices as they subverted the women’s movement.

The thirst for truth, integrity, and justice for women that led Browder into journalism in the first place eventually led her to find forgiveness and freedom in the place she least expected to find them. Her in-depth research, her probing analysis, and her honest self-reflection set the record straight and illumine a way forward for others who have suffered from the unholy alliance between the women’s movement and the sexual revolution.

Sue Ellen Browder is a freelance writer who has appeared on Oprah, the Today Show, and hundreds of radio talk shows. Her work forCosmopolitan, New Woman, Woman’s Day, and other magazines has given her a lifetime of experience with the women’s movement as it unfolded in the media, both on the public stage and behind the scenes.

"Subverted offers a window into our uniquely disturbed historical era. Generations of readers will turn to Subverted when they want to know what turned the tide." 
— Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., Founder and President, the Ruth Institute

"Browder combines a compelling personal narrative with piercing observations from her work in women’s media, resulting in a book you can’t put down."
— Jennifer Fulwiler, Author, Something Other Than God

"Subverted is a game changer for our culture, and in particular, for women."
— Abby Johnson, Author, Unplanned

"What a romp—through the offices, the backrooms, and even the personal lives that brought you the sexual revolution!"
— Helen Alvaré, Professor of Family Law, George Mason University

"Here are two books, two stories in one. The first opens your heart, the second opens your eyes."
— Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Boston College

"Here is the eye-opening account of how the feminist movement got hopelessly off track, and how a one-time Cosmo writer managed to find her way back to God’s reality."
— Steven Mosher, President, Population Research Institute

"This is a courageous book!"
— Vicki Thorn, Founder, Project Rachel

"A gripping story that uncovers the dirty secrets behind the women’s movement. A must-read for Millennials." 
— Kristan Hawkins, President, Students for Life of America 

"Browder’s understanding of the human person, the intrinsic need for relationship, is beautiful and deep." 
— Jeanne Mancini, Director, March for Life

"Sue Ellen Browder is silent no more about her role in promoting a distorted feminism; you will be refreshed by her courage." 
— Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director, Priests for Life

Interview with Sue Ellen Browder:

Here's why Planned Parenthood's "only 3%" claim is so diabolical

by Carl E. Olson | CWR blog

I rarely watch "The O'Reilly Factor" (which too often comes off as an hour-long infomercial for books titled Killing So-and-So), but I just caught a few minutes of a segment on the Planned Parenthood videos. And, once again, some morally-challenged hack—pretty, tough, and wearing a red power dress—trotted out the tired "97% of what Planned Parenthood does has nothing to do with abortion", which is the more positive way of claiming that abortions make up only 3% of what that vile cabal does behind closed doors.

Those numbers, of course, have been challenged. Rich Lowry of National Review recently wrote, in a New York Post opinion piece:

Practically every defender of the organization, fighting to preserve its federal funding, reverts to the 3 percent figure. How could you possibly, they ask, defund a group that devotes itself overwhelmingly to uncontroversial procedures and services for women?

The 3 percent figure is an artifice and a dodge, but even taking it on its own terms, it’s not much of a defense. Only Planned Parenthood would think saying that they only kill babies 3 percent of the time is something to brag about.

The group performs about 330,000 abortions a year, or roughly 30 percent of all the abortions in the country. By its own accounting in its 2013-2014 annual report, it provides about as many abortions as Pap tests (380,000). The group does more breast exams and provides more breast-care services (490,000), but not by that much. The 3 percent figure is derived by counting abortion as just another service like much less consequential services. So abortion is considered a service no different than a pregnancy test (1.1 million), even though a box with two pregnancy tests can be procured from the local drugstore for less than $10.

Lowry likens this to Major League Baseball teams saying "that they sell about 20 million hot dogs and play 2,430 games in a season, so baseball is only .012 percent of what they do." But in doing so, he pushes aside the key issue at hand: the morality of the action involved.

What if Jared Bogle, who recently plummeted from Subway sandwich fame to child porn infamy, were to make the argument, "I only photographed and touched 3% of the children I was around"? How would that fly? Do you think it might sway people to think he really isn't that bad of a guy?

Or, what if sadistic serial killer, kidnapper, rapist, and necrophile Ted Bundy had made the statement:

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

What Kind of Evil?

(us.fotolia.com | fresnel6)

What Kind of Evil? | Thomas S. Hibbs | CWR

Planned Parenthood supporters are progressive, instrumentalist rationalists, intent on implementing enlightenment policies of science and freedom

"The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid 'dens of crime' that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered… in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern.” — C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

Theologian Stanley Hauerwas once posed the following question concerning fetal tissue to a medical researcher: If it were a delicacy, could you eat it? Beyond the horrifying “medical” practices described in the Planned Parenthood videos, their most disgusting feature is not the nonchalant tone, for which Planned Parenthood issued an apology, but the fact that at least some conversations took place over a meal. Aside from calling to mind Hannibal Lecter’s predilection for liver, fava beans and a nice chianti, the setting of the videos makes clear that however refined may have been the upbringing of the Planned Parenthood employees, they apparently did not have parents who said of this or that topic, “Not at the dinner table!”

Disgusting? Disturbing? How about barbaric and evil? Even some who reject the pro-life cause describe the content of these videos in dark terms indeed. But what kind of barbarism?

A number of commentators have made analogies to the Nazis. Some of it is darkly humorous twitter commentary. Riffing on Molly Ivans’ comment about a Pat Buchanan speech, National Review’s Kevin Williamson tweeted: “I thought Planned Parenthood's explanation sounded a lot more convincing in the original German”. Some have noted the connection between Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s support of eugenics and that of the Nazis. Others have cited interesting historical facts such as Mengele's post-Holocaust employment as an abortionist. Perhaps the most telling similarity is a shared philosophy of what the Nazis called "life and unworthy of life."

And yet, I’m not sure the Nazis analogy is entirely apt. There are broadly two dominant strains to modernity. There is the original myth of modernity, which is that of an enlightenment liberation from the evils of tradition; this strain is progressive, universalist, technocratic, and rationalist. The Nazis come from the other side of modernity, the romantic-nationalist reaction against progressive, universalist enlightenment.

Whatever might have been the historical roots of the organization, contemporary Planned Parenthood supporters are not nationalists; they are not reacting against modernity; they are not asserting the superiority of one race over another.  They are implementing enlightenment goals. They are progressive, instrumentalist rationalists, intent on implementing enlightenment policies of science and freedom.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

The Consistent—and Not So Seamless—Ethic of Life

Abp. Blase Joseph Cupich (left) was installed as head of the Archdiocese of Chicago on Nov. 18, 2014 (CNS); Joseph Cardinal Bernardin (right) was Archbishop of Chicago from 1982 until his death in 1996 (Wikipedia).

The Consistent—and Not So Seamless—Ethic of Life | Dr. Samuel Gregg | CWR

Archbishop Blaise Cupich's appeal to Cardinal Bernardin's "seamless garment" approach to ethics is flawed on several counts, including a failure to acknowledge the primacy of the laity in pursuing good public policy

In an August 3^rd Chicago Tribune article, Archbishop Blaise Cupich of Chicago suggested that the widespread outrage ignited by the revelations that Planned Parenthood was selling body-parts extracted from aborted children represented an opportunity for Americans

to reaffirm our commitment as a nation to a consistent ethic of life. While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.

Archbishop Cupich was quite right to underscore the classical Christian insight that good can be drawn out from evil, just as the Fall leads to Redemption. Much attention, however, was directed to the Archbishop’s use of the expression “a consistent ethic of life”: a phrase which has been used by members of the American Catholic episcopate as far back as a 1971 speech delivered by then-Archbishop Humberto Medeiros of Boston.

The term itself was brought to prominence by another Chicago archbishop, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. In approximately 15 addresses delivered between 1983 and 1986, Bernardin called for the development of such an ethic and outlined how it might inform the way in which Catholics—lay and clerical—approached public policy issues.

Right from the beginning, forceful criticisms were made of the consistent ethic position (often described as the “seamless garment”). One was that it would inadvertently help provide “cover” for Catholic politicians who supported legalized abortion. Cardinal Bernardin himself lamented in a 1988 National Catholic Register interview that

I know that some people on the left, if I may use that term, have used the consistent ethic to give the impression that the abortion issue is not all that important any more, that you should be against abortion in a general way but that there are more important issues, so don’t hold anyone’s feet to the fire just on abortion. That is a misuse of the consistent ethic, and I deplore it.

Ten years later, the United States Catholic Conference’s document Living the Gospel of Life also criticized those who had used the consistent ethic to relativize the killing of unborn human beings by making it just one of a laundry list of concerns.

In a way, however, the political fallout from the consistent ethic distracted attention from significant ambiguities that characterized important aspects of the seamless garment’s theological and philosophical apparatus. In light of what seem to be efforts to revive this approach as a way for Catholics and, more particularly, Catholic bishops to engage in public policy debates, it’s worth revisiting these problems.

Continue reading on the CWR site. 

The Divinization of the Earth: A “Religion” Without a “God”

(us.fotolia.com | Elena Ray)

The Divinization of the Earth: A “Religion” Without a “God” | Fr. James V. Schall, SJ | CWR

The direct connection between theories of earth primacy and brutal control of human beings through abortion, sterilization, and euthanasia simply cannot be avoided

"With cries that pierce me to the heart, / my enemies revile me, / saying to me all the day long: / ‘Where is your God?’” — Psalm 42.

"In paganism, the Divine is that to which sacrifices must be offered. This is almost a definition. In this recent movement, Man is something that should be sacrificed on behalf of the Earth. The divinization of the Earth is an extremely consequential move, since it is supposed to be higher than Man.” — Rêmi Brague, “Are There as Many Gods as Religions?” (Modern Age, Summer 2015)

I.

With so much current discussion in panic mode of “earth warming” and “environmental” issues, along with the selling of fetal parts and massive abortions, we need to ask ourselves: “What is going on here?” The popular view is that man, by his very presence on it, is “abusing” the earth. Earth is said to be “greater” than man. In the context of so many billion human beings, each life is insignificant and can be replaced. Thus, morality starts, not with man, but with the earth. Man is second, not first. This human “earth-exploitation” thesis seems to be in conflict with the biblical view that man has “dominion” over the goods of the earth. Those goods are there for man’s use to achieve his purposes, which are not primarily “earth” centered, even though they take place on this planet.

The earth itself, however, has no inner consciousness of itself. It does not behold itself. Unlike man, it has no possibility of being other than it is. There are those who want to hold both sides of this issue. That is, they do not want to “abuse” the earth, whatever that means, but they also want to use the goods available for human needs. This usage seems to be what they are for (that same approach seems also to be Aristotle’s position). But this view brings up the controverted issue: “Just what cohort of mankind are these given resources designed to support?” The current one? All those of past and future? The future but not the present? The entire human race is constantly replicating itself; this steady reproducing of itself is how mankind stays in existence on this planet. One way, no doubt unpopular, to stop human “pollution” would simply be to stop reproducing—a kind of universal vow of chastity. This is not a widely heard view!

The human race has already lived on this planet for thousands upon thousands of years. Man himself appears on the earth as a late-comer but still as both properly belonging to it and yet, because of his intelligence, transcendent to it. If we assume that some ninety to a hundred billion human beings have already lived on the earth, we see that they have been “sustained” more or less well by the earth’s abundance. Contrary to expectations, individual members of the species are generally much better off the later they appear on the planet, at least as far as their physical conditions. Few past eons realized how richly the earth was endowed from its beginning by whatever caused it to be rather than not be. And even today this abundance cannot be understood and used except by insightful human intelligence.

Thus, it is increasingly realized that what is available to man is itself a function of man’s knowledge and craft. When we piously talk of “preserving” resources for “future” generations, we encounter something of an enigma.

Continue reading on the Catholic World Report site.

Extremists execute the unborn, Christians seek truth and justice

(us.fotolia.com | @ivan kmit)

CWR Editorial | Carl E. Olson

The White House says David Daleiden and the CMP are "extremists on the right"; Daleiden, a 26-year-old Catholic, says he's inspired by Pope Francis

Yesterday, White House press secretary Josh Earnest, when asked about President Obama's reaction to the series of undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress in which Planned Parenthood officials discuss selling fetal organs for profit, "said the videos were released in a 'fraudulent way' with 'not a lot of evidence' behind them." (The entire press conference can be viewed on the C-SPAN site.) Earnest stated:

There is ample reason to think that this is merely the tried and true tactic that we’ve seen from extremists on the right to edit this video and selectively release this edited version of the video that grossly distorts the position of the person that’s actually speaking...

Earnest clearly indicated that his talking points were coming from Planned Parenthood, admitting, "I’m merely repeating what I’ve seen that they [Planned Parenthood] have said..." He then offered the defense that "any review of the policy that Planned Parenthood says they implement indicates that the views expressed in the videos is—or at least the way they are depicted on the videos—is entirely inaccurate. ... But for those policies and for the way that Planned Parenthood implements them, I'd encourage you to contact Planned Parenthood." In other words, there's nothing to see here—move along!

"The President," he added in a defiant shout out to pro-abortion supporters, "certainly will not support another effort by Republicans to try to defund an organization that offers important and needed healthcare services to women across the country." I wonder: is there any institution in the U.S., at this very moment, that enjoys greater support and cover from the President of the United States than does Planned Parenthood? While Obama has wavered and flopped on many issues during his time office, he has held fast to the pro-abortion faith, even if he has long insisted that no one is really pro-abortion.

If you do a search for "Obama" and "extremists" you'll find that the POTUS often uses the term "extremists" to identify terrorists who have apparently "twisted" and distorted the teachings of true Islam. For example, in a February 17, 2015 op-ed in the LA Times, Obama wrote:

Groups like al Qaeda and ISIL promote a twisted interpretation of religion that is rejected by the overwhelming majority of the world's Muslims. The world must continue to lift up the voices of Muslim clerics and scholars who teach the true peaceful nature of Islam. We can echo the testimonies of former extremists who know how terrorists betray Islam. We can help Muslim entrepreneurs and youths work with the private sector to develop social media tools to counter extremist narratives on the Internet.

He even stated that such "violent extremists"—who, again, have nothing to do, he says, with "the true peaceful nature of Islam"—have authentic, legitimate gripes:

Continue reading on the CWR site.

Planned Parenthood, Cecil the Lion, and the Wisdom of Serpents

(us.fotolia.com | crazycolors)

Planned Parenthood, Cecil the Lion, and the Wisdom of Serpents | Mary Jo Anderson | CWR

The juxtaposition of these shocking videos and the disgust over the killing of Cecil should provide a public relations coup for the pro-life message. Instead, it appears we are about to sabotage ourselves.

The just released fourth video of a Planned Parenthood official haggling over aborted baby organs could be cataclysmic for the abortion crowd. The revelation of what Planned Parenthood is really about should be the golden opportunity for pro-life movement.

But will it be? Will we pro-life advocates squander this perfect storm?

Immediately after viewing Savita Ginde, M.D., Vice President and medical director of Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, negotiate pricing strategies for infant organs, I had a conversation with one of my sisters regarding the controversy surrounding the killing of the "beloved lion" known as Cecil.  She remarked with dismay that pro-life voices were blundering badly with their sneering tone toward those who were enraged by the death of Cecil, but who seemed unmoved by the callous slaughter of babies in utero. "Their tone is critical of all who love animals, who see the beauty and worth in that lion. Don't they realize that you can care for innocent babies and for animals?"

I was quick to defend the pro-life comments; they were meant to indict the culture—not individuals—that spares few tears for babies but weeps publicly for lion. But as she expanded on her own reaction to recent negative pro-life comments I realized there is a very real disconnect. The juxtaposition of these shocking videos and the disgust over the killing of Cecil should provide a public relations coup for the pro-life message.  Instead, it appears we are about to sabotage ourselves.

The message that adversely compares the public reactions to Cecil's death ("Cat lives matter!") and the grizzly butchery (yawn) of Planned Parenthood may be true, but it is not effective. Worse, it may be squandering a rare opportunity.

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

From Lambeth to the Land of Nod

"Cain flying before Jehovah's Curse" by Fernand-Anne Piestre Cormon, c. 1880, Musée d'Orsay, Paris (Wikipedia)

From Lambeth to the Land of Nod | John S. Hamlon | CWR

Catholic teaching on contraception will always be a "sign of contradiction" and it will always point to an inconvenient, counter-cultural truth: more contraception means more divorce and more abortion.

In his preface to A Man for All Seasons, playwright Robert Bolt describes protagonist Thomas More as

a man with an adamantine sense of his own self. He knew where he began and left off… but at length he was asked to retreat from that final area where he located his self. And there this supple, humorous, unassuming and sophisticated person… was overtaken by an absolutely primitive rigor, and could no more be budged than a cliff.

“Adamantine”—unyielding, impervious, diamond-like—befits the real Thomas More who, as councilor to King Henry VIII, was convicted of treason and beheaded in 1535. He would not sign the First Succession Act, which was anti-papal authority, anti-Catherine of Aragon (including daughter Mary—fathered by Henry VIII), and pro-Princess Elizabeth (still in Anne Boleyn’s womb).

At the formal Catholic level, More is the patron of statesmen and politicians; in the pews, he is a defender of marriage and family.

The Beauty of Marriage and Family—Anglican Style

The Anglican bishops at the Lambeth Conference of 1920 were also diamond-like. Compared to the grimy, banal, all-purpose language used today, they spoke of marriage with an eloquence and directness that is, in a word, lustrous:

The fellowship between man and woman in marriage was the earliest which God gave to the human race…. What our Lord adds about marriage is not given as new legislation, but as a declaration of God's original purpose. The man and his wife are no longer twain, but one flesh: and those whom God has joined together, man is not to put asunder…. [God] will work, as those who wait for Him well know, the miracle by which the two lives become one, yet so that each life becomes greater and better than it could have been alone. (Lambeth Conferences—1867-1930; [SPCK, 1948], 29)

By contrast, the Catholic world—up until the watershed-year 1968—saw few lines about the unifying woof in the warp and woof of marriage. In Pius XI’s Casti Connubii (1930), for example, love’s primary purpose is to help husband and wife form and perfect their interior life so “they may advance ever more and more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in true love toward God and their neighbor” (23). In order of emphasis, Pius XI puts procreation first, conjugal honor (based on mutual fidelity) second, and spousal love third.

But the Anglican bishops, having set the stage with the “oneness” of marriage, continue with the importance of procreation:

Continue reading on the CWR site. 

Clueless protesters in San Francisco prove Archbishop Cordileone's point

Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone of San Francisco, right, with Jesuit Father Paul J. Fitzgerald, in an October 2014 photo. (CNS photo/Shawn P. Calhoun, courtesy University of San Francisco)

Clueless protesters in San Francisco prove Archbishop Cordileone's point

The fact is, there is no contradiction or conflict between Jesus Christ, His Church, the teachings of Pope Francis, and the actions of Abp. Cordileone

A wise woman, commenting on the increasingly irrational ways of the post-Christian world, notes:

It is worse than useless for Christians to talk about the importance of Christian morality, unless they are prepared to take their stand upon the fundamentals of Christian theology. It is a lie to say that dogma does not matter; it matters enormously. It is fatal to let people suppose that Christianity is only a mode of feeling; it is vitally necessary to insist that it is first and foremost a rational explanation of the universe. It is hopeless to offer Christianity as a vaguely idealistic aspiration of a simple and consoling kind; it is, on the contrary, a hard, tough, exacting, and complex doctrine, steeped in a drastic and uncompromising realism. And it is fatal to imagine that everybody knows quite well what Christianity is and needs only a little encouragement to practice it. The brutal fact is that in this Christian country not one person in a hundred has the faintest notion what the Church teaches about God or man or society or the person of Jesus Christ. ... Theologically this country is at present is in a state of utter chaos established in the name of religious toleration and rapidly degenerating into flight from reason and the death of hope.

Considering the events of just the past few days here in the United States, it's hard to argue with her. However, the essayist, novelist, playwright, and translator Dorothy L. Sayers wrote those words in 1949, in England, and with an eye toward the Anglican Communion, to which she belonged. But, if anything, her essay, "Creed or Chaos?" (see The Whimsical Christian: 18 Essays), is more timely than ever—a searing (and often sarcastic) indictment of a Christianity that is ignorant, sentimental, and thoroughly secularized. I have in mind here those who protested yesterday in San Francisco, demanding that Abp. Salvatore Cordileone cease being a Catholic bishop and instead become a capitulating sentimentalist, like those in the emotional, moralizing crowd:

Continue reading on the CWR blog.

Feminist "Logic": Misogyny’s Ironic Ally

[Photos: Wikipedia and us.fotolia.com | © igor]

Feminist "Logic": Misogyny’s Ironic Ally | Carrie Gress, Ph.D. | CWR blog

When feminists sacrifice common sense for "reproductive choice," they deform the feminine genius and destroy the most vulnerable among us

A “deformed male”—that was Aristotle’s definition of women nearly 2400 years ago. For centuries, women have tried to conquer the misconception that they were mis-conceived, as Aristotle described it, and to prove they are as good as men. The feminist movement was suppose to finally drive that point home into the hearts of women who doubted themselves and of the men who had long propped up the lie that women weren’t smart enough to compete with them.

Somewhere during their hasty effort to prove men wrong, modern-day feminists allowed a misconception to guide them: that children ensnare women and keep them from realizing their dreams, therefore women alone can determine when their very small children should live or die. As a result, it has never been harder to be a child. Feminists have encumbered children with so many restrictions and loopholes that it makes the head spin.

A brief look at feminist arguments (which, unfortunately, far too many men also accept) to justify which of their tiny children live or die does little to highlight women’s intellectual dexterity. Instead, we encounter head-scratching realities that will—hopefully—cause people decades from now, when common sense has returned to this issue, to wonder what (or if) we were thinking. Feminist arguments, ironically, lend credence to much of the misogynist argument about the overly-emotional irrationality of the weaker sex.

Take, for example, last week’s brutal attack on Michelle Wilkins, the young mother in Longmont, Colorado, who was lured to a home through a CraigsList advertisement for children’s clothing.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

“War in Heaven”: A review of "The Drop Box"

“War in Heaven”: A review of "The Drop Box" | Nick Olszyk | CWR

I adopt others because God adopted me,” says pastor Lee Jong-rak, whose work on behalf of abandoned babies in Seoul is depicted in this powerful film

MPAA Rating: NR
USCCB Rating: NR
Reel Rating: (5 out of 5)

In the last few years, there have been numerous movies dealing with pro-life topics that have ranged in quality from okay (October Baby, Bella) to pretty good (Juno, Gimmie Shelter), but all failing to hit the bulls-eye directly. The Drop Box hits it dead center, and it does so by simply showing the truth. The Drop Box is a documentary that follows a Korean pastor who builds a sort-of “mailbox” with an alarm for desperate women to anonymously drop off infants instead of abandoning them in the streets, a not uncommon practice.

Director Brian Ivie takes what could have been a rather dreary topic and makes it infinitely accessible, forceful enough to demand change but lighthearted enough to be enjoyable on a Saturday night date with popcorn and soda. The Drop Box is, I think, one of the best films of the decade so far.

In the 1970s, Lee Jong-rak was a Protestant seminary student in South Korea, so skinny he earned the nickname “fish bones.” He freely admits learning the guitar simply to attract girls and soon earned the reputation of being a ladies’ man despite no actual experience. After school, he married and started a small church in the capital city of Seoul. His life changed dramaticaly when his first son Eun was born with several serious deformities. Eun would spend the next fourteen years in the hospital, and Lee eventually sold his house to pay for the medical bills.

Several years later, Lee discovered an abandoned baby girl outside the church gate; she had been exposed to the cold for several hours and almost froze to death. He began to search for a way to help those poor souls, especially ones with disabilities. He came up with the idea for his Drop Box after seeing similar devices in the Czech Republic, based in part on medieval monasteries which cared for infants left on the doorstep. The documentary not only looks at Lee’s solution but examines the serious social injustices that lead to such an inhumane practice as abandonment. One factor is the serious stigma surrounding unwed mothers. For example, girls in school who are discovered to be pregnant are often expelled or beaten by their relatives. One woman tells Lee over the phone that she is planning to “poison herself and the baby.” Fortunately, he talks her out of it.     

Every frame of this film radiates human dignity.

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

New: "Redeemed by Grace: A Catholic Woman's Journey to Planned Parenthood and Back"

Now available from Ignatius Press:

Redeemed by Grace: A Catholic Woman's Journey to Planned Parenthood and Back

by Ramona Treviño with Roxane Salonen

At age eight, Ramona Treviño climbed to the top of a roof and begged God to let her know he was real. After receiving a sign, she made a pact with herself to follow him always. But family difficulties and growing pains made it hard for her to continue on that path.

Pregnant at 16, she dropped out of high school and entered an abusive marriage, which ended in divorce. Wanting to make a difference and to help girls in similar tough situations, she accepted a job as the manager of a Planned Parenthood facility in Sherman, Texas. Over time, however, Ramona began to grapple with whether she was doing women more harm than good, setting her on a path to seek the truth, no matter where it might lead.

Realizing she could no longer refer women for abortions or provide them with false assurances of risk-free sex, Ramona took a leap of faith and left the financial security of her job. Her ultimate conversion involved a full return to the Catholic faith of her childhood and a new role as a pro-life advocate and speaker.

This compelling story tells of Ramona’s struggle to reconcile her identity as a daughter of God with a world that sends conflicting messages concerning the source of our dignity and happiness. It is the honest and heartfelt account of a woman who, with the help of grace, strove to overcome the wounds of her own past while becoming an agent of healing for others.

Ramona Treviño, devoted wife and mother, is a lifelong resident of Trenton, TX. After her exodus from Planned Parenthood, Ramona became an international public speaker and prolife advocate, speaking for the dignity and sanctity of life. She is proud to be called prolife, pro-woman, and pro-family.

Roxane Salonen has worked in professional communications for more than twenty years, including as an award-winning columnist, reporter, children’s author, and freelance writer. The wife and mother has also been a radio host, a communications director, and an editor for the Diocese of Fargo, North Dakota. Her blog posts on faith and family appear regularly at Catholicmom.com and Peace Garden Mama.

Praise for Redeemed by Grace:

"A riveting story! Offers important insights on the fight for life in the modern age."
- Jennifer Fulwiler, Author, Something Other Than God

"An enthralling, page-turning memoir. You won't want to put this book down!"
- Donna-Marie Cooper O'Boyle, EWTN TV Host

"A must-read book! It shows us that no matter how far we stray from God, his mercy can always bring us back."
- Shawn Carney, National Director, 40 Days for Life

"Stark, challenging and yet filled with hope. The work can and will save lives!"
- Lisa Hendey, Founder, CatholicMom.com