Feeds:
Posts
Comments

by Deacon Keith Fournier

Catholic Online

On June 29, 2009 Pope Benedict XVI told the faithful, “The publication of my third encyclical is now near, which has the title Caritas in Veritate. Taking up the social themes contained in Populorum Progressio, written by the Servant of God Paul VI in 1967, this document — which is dated precisely today, June 29th, the Solemnity of the Apostles Saints Peter and Paul — aims to deepen a few aspects of integral development in our age in the light of charity in truth. I entrust to your prayers this new contribution that the Church offers to humanity in her commitment for sustainable progress, in full respect for human dignity and everyone’s real requirements.”

This long awaited encyclical letter has finally been released

Prior to 2004, the phrase “Social Teaching” or “Social Doctrine” of the Catholic Church referred to the teachings found in the Sacred Scriptures, expounded upon in the Christian tradition, developed in the documents of the Second Vatican Council, explained within a contemporary series of encyclical letters, apostolic letters and exhortations, and wonderfully summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, many people have not read many of these sources for any number of reasons. Thus, what claimed to be the “Social Teaching” of the Catholic Church was sometimes closer to being the “spin” self styled “experts”, some of whom have had their own political and/or economic theories and agendas.

Then on April 2, 2004, the Memorial of Saint Francis of Paola, Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, President of the “Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace” released the “Compendium of the Social Doctrine of Church.” It was exactly what had been lacking. It contains a very readable summary of centuries of teaching and sets forth the themes of that rich Social teaching of the Church for all men and women. The Compendium is one well written, beautifully sourced and highly readable book. It is a ready made Manual for the New Catholic Action which is so desperately needed in our age. I had sincerely hoped that it would be widely distributed and really studied by the faithful. I have done all I can to write, teach and use the Compendium in my own public policy and apologetics work.

Unfortunately, over five years have past since the release of the Compendium and the situation has not changed all that much. I have found that few Catholics even know the Compendium exists. This becomes obvious when one reads some of the comments and articles written in anticipation of the release on Tuesday July 7, 2009 of Pope Benedict XVI’s much anticipated “Charity in Truth.” Even some well intended Catholics used a “proof text” approach of quoting past encyclical letters in order to “prepare the ground” for this new encyclical. They were telling others how they should interpret it before it was even capable of being read! I ask all of our readers to take a very different approach. Prayerfully receive this encyclical letter from the Church as a gift, thoroughly read it yourself and then seek to give religious submission of mind and will to it.

The Social Teaching of the Catholic Church is precisely what is needed as western culture continues on its path of self destruction. It is not only for Catholics, other Christians or even just “religious people”. It is for all people and all Nations. It is offered by the Church to those who seek to build a truly just society and promote the real common good. This teaching is called “social” because it speaks to human society and to the formation, role and rightful place of social institutions. These truths and principles can be known by all men and women because they are revealed in the Natural law and then expounded upon in Revelation. The Social Teaching is neither “left” nor “right”, neither “liberal” nor “conservative” – within the contemporary politicized use of those words. The Church ‘walks the way of the person’ and is an “expert in humanity” because she continues the work of the Lord Himself in whom we find revealed the fullness of the human person.

The Social teaching maintains that there are unchangeable truths, such as the dignity of every human person at every age and stage, which provide a framework for viewing and structuring our social life together. We should recognize and follow them if we ever hope to build a truly just society. This human dignity is present in every person, at every age and stage, because it reflects the Image of God in all men and women. It is this foundational vision of the human person which informs the Catholic position concerning the respect for every human life whether that life be in the first home of the womb, a wheelchair, a jail cell, a hospital room, a hospice, a senior center or a soup kitchen. It does not propose any particular economic theory but insists that every economic order must first be at the service of the dignity of the human person and the family and further the common good.

Another example of such a truth is the insistence upon the primacy of authentic marriage as between one man and one woman, intended for life and the family founded upon it. Marriage is not some social construct which can be redefined by courts or legislatures. It is the foundation of the family which is the very path and vehicle to building a just social order. The family is the first society, first church, first school, first economy, first government and first mediating institution. In the words of the late servant of God John Paul II “the future of the world passes through the family.” The Church proclaims the truth that the human person is by nature – and grace – made for community and the first community which humanizes and civilizes us is the family.

These truths are not “religious” positions, in the sense that only religious people need assent to them. They are revealed by the Natural Law and are true for all people and for all time. The social teaching of the Catholic Church offers principles which are to be worked into the loaf of human culture in order to build a more just society. That includes principles meant to inform how we order our economies. Because they are “principles”, they leave room for the application of prudential judgment.

The Church challenges any notion of “freedom” which begins and ends with the isolated, atomistic, person as the measure of its application. She proclaims an authentic view of human freedom as having to always be exercised within a moral constitution. Freedom must be ordered toward choosing what is good, respecting the truth about the human person,human flourishing, the family and the real common good. Freedom must be exercised in deference toward our obligations in solidarity to one another. The Church calls us to a preferential option or love for the poor, a demonstrated concern for their well being and the development of a social and economic order which includes them within its embrace and promise of advancement. She upholds the dignity of all human work and the basic right to a living, just or family wage.

In recent encyclicals the market economy has been recognized as having a real potential for promoting all of these goods – when properly understood and morally structured. However, the Catholic Church does not take a position on which economic theory is the “best” among many. She properly and prophetically stood against the materialism of the atheistic Marxist system. She has also properly and prophetically cautions Nations which have adopted a form of liberal capitalism that there are dangers in any form of economism or materialism which promotes the use of persons as products and fails to recognize the value of being over acquiring. She reminds our consumerist western culture that the market economy must be at the service the person, the family and the common good, lest ‘capitalism’ conflate its claims to offering freedom and become “savage” in its application and practice devolving into greed.

“Charity in Truth” addresses, in part, economic issues. However, it does not contain anything ‘new’. With great wisdom it presents the truth within the context of our own time. It is also prophetic. The Church carries on the prophetic mission of Jesus Christ. Let us open our hearts, our minds, our lives and our lifestyles to the truths presented in this new encyclical letter by Pope Benedict XVI. The very term “encyclical” means circulating. The practice began in the first centuries of church history when Bishops would “circulate” their instructions among the faithful. Let us take this important encyclical letter and do the same. Read it for yourself before you take anyone’s word for what it says. Receive it in prayer with a heart filled with charity and hungry for the truth.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church

Caritas in Veritate

You’ve got to read this reflection by Abbot Joseph and for maximum effect, I’m directing you to Word Incarnate.

Dear Friends,

I am what is commonly referred to as a “sidewalk counselor”.  I’m not a big fan of that term, but it was devised for good reason and has since become identified with a specific ministry among the prolife community.

Sidewalk counseling is reaching out to mothers and fathers, who are contemplating or planning abortion, to offer them information and assistance. It is conducted on public sidewalks outside abortion facilities on days that abortions are being committed and/or days when pre-abortion evaluations or pregnancy tests are provided.

I haven’t come up with a better term, but I think of the work more as “outreach” and would like to encourage you to engage in a complementary type of work from the comfort of your particular Church in your community.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if each of us could help reduce the number of mothers who make their way to abortion facilities to “solve” their problem? Well we can, not only individually, but also as a community of Christians – as a parish. And it isn’t at all difficult to do. All it takes is love and you have that.

If you live in or nearby the San Francisco Bay Area, please plan to attend the San Francisco Archdiocesan Respect Life Conference on September 12 at the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption to learn how you and your parish, by participating in the Gabriel Project, can help eliminate the very thought of a child being unwanted.  Show your community that your parish cares and that there is no reason for any mom within it to contemplate abortion.

Cathy McConn, Founder of the Gabriel Project in Houston, will train us in every aspect of this important ministry and instruct us on how to best implement it in our parishes based on her vast experience.

More, including a printable flyer, here.

If you live outside the area, find out more about the Gabriel Project and how to bring it to your area.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Fredi D’Alessio

Saturday, September 12, 2009:

The Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption,  San Francisco, CA.

Learn practical techniques for a parish-wide assistance ministry for pregnant women, helping them eliminate the very thought of the word “crisis” when becoming the mother of an unplanned child.  

Cathy McConn, Founder of the Gabriel Project in Houston, will train us in every aspect of this important ministry and instruct us on how to best implement it in our parishes based on her vast experience.

Gabriel Project parishes embrace each pregnant woman who comes to them as their daughter, sister, friend. Using signs, pamphlets, bumper stickers and a toll free hotline, we make it known that help is available. When a woman calls for help, the phone-line volunteer contacts the Gabriel Project Coordinator, who is a parishioner of the Church closest to where she lives. A trained mentor, one of the parish’s Gabriel Angels, is assigned responsibility for ongoing contact with the mother throughout her pregnancy and somewhat beyond.  The parish community assists with unconditional love. Through them, mothers receive the spiritual, material and emotional support needed during pregnancy.

Click here for full Conference details.

LifeSiteNews.com

by Hilary White and Steve Jalsevac

When is abortion not really “abortion”? When it is promoted as “therapeutic” by UN-supported international health organisations trying to make a “strategic alliance” with the Catholic Church in Latin America. The Population Research Institute (PRI) has just posted a 6-minute video of highlights from interviews conducted by its Latin American Director that reveal the slick language tactics used by UN agents to manipulate Catholics to cooperate with its anti-life, anti-family agendas.

Dr. Oscar Suriel, International Consultant on Family, Health and Community, for the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), a member organization of the World Health Organization (WHO), told PRI’s Carlos Polo in March, that it is not “abortion per se” that they support, but only “therapeutic abortion.”

Dr. Manuel Manrique Castro from UNICEF said that his organization’s dedication to the use of condoms to prevent AIDS was fully supported by many Latin American bishops.

Drs. Suriel and Manrique spoke to Polo at a meeting in Quito, Ecuador organised by the Latin American Catholic Bishops Conferences (CELAM). The two UN officials said they were at the “Pastoral Meeting about Children and Adolescents at Risk, at CELAM’s invitation, and both spoke of organising a “strategic alliance” with the Church.

When asked in the videotaped interview whether PAHO’s support of abortion does not put it into conflict with the Church, Dr. Suriel flatly denied that his organisation supported abortion “per se” but only promoted “therapeutic abortion.”

“It is not correct that we promote abortion,” Suriel said. “That is a poor assessment because it is not so. If it were so, then we are like you said, in opposition to you, and that is not correct.”

“You are referring to therapeutic abortion. And therapeutic abortion is not promoting abortion. Therapeutic abortion is an important thing. So what we are promoting is therapeutic abortion. But we do not promote under any circumstances or in any way abortion per se. It is very different from what you are saying.”

However, when confronted with the fact that PAHO had supported the Mexico City legalization of abortion on demand, a situation that even PAHO does not believe constitutes “therapeutic” abortion, Suriel backtracked and said it was about what a woman wants. “We promote that if a teenager wants … if they have a pregnancy and they must keep it, we promote that,” he said.

PAHO and UNICEF both promote “reproductive health” that is an acknowledged euphemism at the United Nations for the promotion of abortion, abortifacient drugs, artificial contraception and sterilization. UN groups, while stating that their reproductive health policies are in conformity with local laws, also engage in heavy pressure tactics, particularly through committees such as that of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), to change national laws to allow abortion on demand. Earlier this year, UNICEF published a 168-page report that called for massive increases in “reproductive health services,” in developing countries.

Several years ago the Vatican withdrew its support for UNICEF and later Renato Cardinal Martino, then Vatican representative at the UN, asked Catholics to cease donating to the organization.

Asked if UNICEF would be willing to give up promotion of their anti-life policies in order to form a partnership with the Catholic Church, Dr. Manrique said that it is only “radicals” in the Catholic Church who oppose those things, not the Church as a whole.

“Well, that may be the recommendation of the Cardinal, but along with the recommendation of the Cardinal there are many other opinions,” he said. “There are radicals that do not help the advancement of organizations.”

Asked if the promotion of condoms for AIDS prevention, the “reproductive right” of abortion and contraception, and “gender ideology” are in conflict with the Church, Manrique responded, “These three issues … are perfectly in tune with the Catholic Church.”

The Church, he said, has not “promoted” contraceptives, “but it has accepted the use of condoms specifically in the case of AIDS. It accepts it. I can bring if you like, many cases of bishops who agree and say ‘If people need it, you can use it’.”

Confronted with Pope Benedict’s recently restated opposition to the use of condoms, however, Manrique agreed that the pope is the highest moral authority in the Church, but said, “Since this is a recent event, it does not overturn the multiple statements of many Latin American bishops, including the Secretary General of the Colombian Bishops’ Conference. Or what even the Brazilian bishops have said in this regard.”

Both Suriel and Manrique later asked the Population Research Institute (PRI) not to publish the interviews, which were videotaped and are now posted to the internet on PRI’s YouTube channel. They said they feared that their comments would result in their loss of access to Latin American Catholic medical clinics and volunteers.

On the PRI website Carlos Polo sums up the UN agencies’ attitude in the interviews. He states, “They believe that they are simply recruiting social workers – who work cheaply or simply for free – into the service of a secular health organization. As far as the Church’s position on abortion is concerned, they apparently believe that if they co-opt enough of the Church’s workers, priests, and bishops, that they can use it as an instrument for their own ends.”

Unfortunately, as has been reported regarding social justice organizations funded by Canada’s Development and Peace and other Catholic groups, these tactics by international anti-life groups are proving to be successful.

>More on the United Nations & Abortion

Abbot Joseph: I call this blog “Word Incarnate” not only in honor of my Lord, but as an acknowledgement that words have the ability to “take flesh” in people’s lives, to make a difference, to help lead them, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, to the whole truth. I pray that this will in fact happen, that my words will not be mere dust in the wind, but seeds of the Spirt.

The Lord is with Abbot Joseph Homick and He blesses me through these marvelous reflections. You too will be blessed if you read them.

Click here for an alpabetical listing of links to Abbot Joseph’s reflections posted on his weblog, Word Incarnate. I have listed them in alphabetical order because they are of timeless value. However, you can also access them in order of descending or ascending date posted by clicking here or via the monthly archives at Word Incarnate.

I will update these listings frequently, but not daily. So for reflections posted later than the noted UPDATED date, go directly to Word Incarnate.

I recommend visiting Word Incarnate directly on a regular basis to read the RECENT POSTS. Whenever you happen to be visiting this site, you can access the most recent reflection posted at Word Incarnate via the RSS feed located at the top of the sidebar on all pages.

I also enthusiastically recommend Abbot Joseph’s books

 Let’s Get our Facts Straight about Tiller and Anti-Abortion Violence

 by Brian Clowes, PhD – Human Life International, Research Manager

June 3, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Along with everyone else at Human Life International and throughout the legitimate pro-life movement, I strongly condemn the murder of abortionist George Tiller in Kansas. The Fifth Commandment does not read “Thou shalt not kill, except for abortionists.”

Not only is it wrong to respond to people like Tiller with the ultimate anti-life act of murder, it also sets the entire pro-life movement back as good, committed leaders have to scramble to distance themselves from an act that they never called for and which is obviously antithetical to their philosophy and work.  Pro-abortion legislators seize on the opportunity to call for laws restricting legitimate pro-life activities such as sidewalk counseling and picketing, knowing the whole time that such legislation will do nothing to hinder a maniac with a gun. And, worst of all, thousands of people who would otherwise have joined the pro-life movement will continue to sit on the sidelines, believing the media lie that we are violent.

Pro-lifers should indeed condemn the murder of George Tiller.  But we should not play permanent defense as the nonsense snowballs and the unfair attacks against the pro-life movement multiply.  Here are some facts that should be taken into consideration by all people of good will, especially those whose responsibility it is to report on this story.

1)       George Tiller is the first abortionist to be killed in eleven years.  If you think that’s a “trend,” or an “epidemic” as some have said, you’re just not a serious person.

2)       All of the posturing going on in the pro-abortion movement over the safety of abortionists is a ruse.  There are four times as many hairdressers and 150 times as many convenience store clerks murdered as there are abortionists. Where is the “pro-choice” grieving over them?

3)       George Tiller made his money performing late-term abortions, which often involves the killing of a viable human being. According to Kansas state statistics, he killed 395 viable third-trimester babies in one year – 2001 – all for “mental health” reasons (which, as we know, is the category for all elective abortions). Not one of those abortions was for a mother’s physical health or for a medical emergency. Americans overwhelmingly believe this disgusting practice should not be legal.  If any objective journalist were to look into his practice they would see that most people, and all sane people, are appalled by what happened in his clinic every day.

4)       Tiller has been tried on criminal indictments for multiple abuses of his practice, including breaking state laws requiring another medical doctor to verify that certain patients’ lives were at risk before performing late-term abortions.  This man was no hero or saint, and his being held up as a martyr says more about pro-abortionists than it does about those they are trying to condemn.

5)       Abortionists are not only widely considered an embarrassment to the medical profession, but they are much more likely to commit violence than to suffer violence.  You may be surprised to learn that more than a dozen abortionists have been convicted of murder and manslaughter ― of their wives, of their patients, and even of other abortionists. Yet you never hear about these killings in the press (see http://www.abortionviolence.com/ for documentation). Abortionists are more likely to kill than to be killed.

6)       Whenever an abortionist mutilates, kills or molests a woman, the “pro-choice” movement always rushes to his defense, as they did for Brian Finkel, the Arizona abortionist who was sent to prison for 35 years for 22 counts of sexual abuse. So much for caring for women!

7)       The pro-life movement is the most peaceful social movement in the history of this country. Most other social movements, including the unionization movement, the pro-abortion movement, the homosexualist movement, the animal rights movement, and the environmental movement have all demonstrated much greater violence. So where is the outcry over the violence committed by these movements?

During the predictable surge of publicity over Tiller’s murder, we must remember that abortion itself is the most cowardly form of murder, committed against the most helpless and innocent of all of God’s people, the unborn. We must also remember those who have died, but who are ignored by the media and the pro-abortionists ― the hundreds of women who have died of so-called “safe and legal” abortion, and the hundreds of other women who have been murdered by their boyfriends or husbands because they would not abort their children (see http://www.abortionviolence.com/ for documentation).

Let’s not be bullied or silenced by those who are trying to tar the whole pro-life movement by cynically exploiting the murder of George Tiller.  Let’s instead reply with facts which add context to the “abortionists are heroes, pro-lifers are violent” narrative that the “mainstream” media seems too willing to parrot.

Not that I expect the media to suddenly start reporting the truth of abortion.  If they did that, there would be no legal abortion in the first place.  But we can try, and the facts are on our side.  Let’s pray, too, for the soul of George Tiller, his family, and his murderer, as well as for the conversion of all pro-aborts that they see how destructive abortion is for all human life, not just the child who is killed and the mother who is wounded.

One thing you can do is forward this information and the address of the abortion violence Web site to your friends so that we can reach those of good will ― those who aren’t just mindlessly screaming bloody murder but who can actually think and listen to reason ― and show them that the story they’ve been told about supposedly “violent” pro-life activists is just that ― a story.

[According to UNFPA executive director Thoraya Obaid, obtaining a “reproductive health” target under the maternal health MDG 5 is essential to increasing global legitimacy and funding for the reproductive rights agenda.]

New Approach to Abortion Rights at UN: “Motherhood and Apple Pie”

by Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D

(C-FAM)  Abortion rights advocates at the United Nations (UN) are pursuing a new approach – one that avoids mention of abortion, promotes a right to maternal health, and seeks to enforce “reproductive rights” norms among UN member States. 

     The reason for the shift seems to be an increased confidence among activists and UN officials that they have secured or are close to securing a new international right to abortion. According to statements by Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and others, their confidence has been boosted by winning legal cases, most notably in Colombia where the 2006 constitutional court’s decision to liberalize abortion was based upon the activist’s interpretation of UN treaties. 

     By creating a new “right” to maternal health over the next several years, advocates can consolidate gains while avoiding scrutiny by opponents. Then, once they are confident the new right is established, they can assert the claim that abortion is part of the new international obligation. A blueprint for the legal dimension of the approach is the “International Initiative on Maternal Mortality and Human Rights.” The initiative was launched in 2007 at a UN conference sponsored by the UN Partnership for Maternal, Newborn and Child Health, which includes the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and various abortion rights organizations. 

     Indicative of the new approach is a recent “shadow report” on Brazil submitted to the committee that monitors the International Convention on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights (ICESCR). Prepared by the abortion rights law firm Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), the report focuses on basic maternal health care such as skilled birth attendants. One UN delegate described the new effort as “the motherhood and apple pie approach to abortion rights.” CRR recently backed its first model “case” in Brazil, sponsoring a complaint brought to the committee that oversees the Women’s Convention (CEDAW) by the family of a woman who died in childbirth which was unrelated to abortion. 
 
     In adopting the maternal health approach to abortion rights, advocates rejected more open approaches, such as the pursuit of a new UN treaty. A 2003 internal memo outlining CRR’s legal strategy for the next 5 years stated that, “If, at the end of 2007, we determine that the existing norms are proving inadequate (as evidenced by the interpretations we seek) then we would reconsider whether to undertake a concerted effort to secure a new international treaty or addendum to address this gap.” The memo, obtained by the Friday Fax and published in the U.S. Congressional Record, also stated that this should signal a shift from creating new norms on abortion rights to focusing on “enforcement mechanisms” at the international, regional and national level. 

     An important part of enforcement is linking reproductive rights to maternal health in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), a link UNICEF and UNFPA claim already exists but which UN member states refute. According to UNFPA executive director Thoraya Obaid, obtaining a “reproductive health” target under the maternal health MDG 5 is essential to increasing global legitimacy and funding for the reproductive rights agenda.

[Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D. writes for C-FAM. This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (www.c-fam.org). This article appears with permission.]

:::

PREVIOUS POST – *Tying Abortion to Millennium Development Goal #5 – UPDATE:

New Report Details Fudged WHO Numbers on Maternal Morality

(C-FAM) A newly released research paper identifies structural flaws in United Nations (UN) data collection and analysis of global maternal health, finding that UN maternal heath policies based on the bad data are jeopardizing women’s health in the developing world. The paper, “Removing the Roadblocks from Achieving MDG 5 by Improving the Data on Maternal Mortality,” by Donna Harrison, M.D., was published by the International Organizations Research Group (IORG) [IORG is a division of C-FAM, publisher of the Friday Fax]. The paper shows how the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines to UN member states require nations to collect faulty data while at the same time pressuring them to enact UN policies such as liberalizing abortion laws based on that data. Read more.

:::

PREVIOUS POST – Tying Abortion to Millennium Development Goal #5:

by Fredi D’Alessio

Here we go again.

Yet another report (Induced abortion: estimated rates and trends worldwide) crafted to promote “reproductive health” (a term that is frequently used by UN agencies to promote legal abortion) and tying that goal to Millennium Development Goal #5, Improve Maternal Health.

Although it is true that the MDGs do not include the controversial issue of “reproductive health”, after having done research for my commentary on the Millennium Development Goals, I am no less concerned about the underlying goal of many UN agencies and NGO. I believe the pro-life community should be made fully aware of their agenda and their perspective of MDG #5. If you haven’t yet read my exposé and all of the documents referenced therein, I urge you to do so. As an addendum to the commentary I believe we need to advocate for a new MDG and renumber the others making the new one the first and fundamental goal. That MDG should emphatically charge the worldwide community to respect and protect every human being’s right to life from conception to natural death. Let’s face it, the agenda to promote legal abortion and contraception worldwide will not cease.

Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, secretary for Relations with States, said in the general debate of the recent 62nd session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, “We must work to stop and reverse the culture of death embraced by some social and legal structures that try to make the suppression of life acceptable by disguising it as a medical or social service.” Thus, the MDG I proposed above should be the foundation for all the others.

The Archbishop added, “In this sense, the abolition of the death penalty should also be seen as a consequence of full respect for the right to life.” The proponents of population control desire to invoke the sentence of death upon all unwanted (by them) children in their mothers’ wombs and suppress the lives of those as yet not conceived.

I implore you to read The Millennium Development Goals and the Critical Next Step for the Catholic Church and all of the resources referenced therein to learn for yourself how serious this issue is and share this information with others.

Below are three articles. Be sure to read the last one that exposes the fallacy of reports on the numbers of abortions. Regardless of what the actual numbers are, the consequences of this holocaust are immeasurable.

More on the United Nations & Abortion

After Notre Dame: No ‘abortion rights’ only Human Rights

by Deacon Keith Fournier

Catholic Online

 I cannot listen to that phrase any longer, “abortion rights”, without responding. I just watched Norah O’Donnell on MSNBC characterize President Obama’s opposition to the fundamental human right, the Right to Life, as being a position which supports what she called “abortion rights.” She then proceeded to give a lame analysis of the reasons so many oppose his being honored with a “Doctor of Law” by the University of Notre Dame this weekend. 

The claim of a “right” to abort an innocent child is heinous enough when it is described as a woman’s “Right to Choose” an abortion. Yet, that is the current state of the positive law in America since the horrendous decisions in Roe and Doe. Women can choose to take the life of our first neighbors, the ones who live where we all once lived, in the womb. That “choice”, which is always and everywhere wrong because it is the taking of innocent human life, is currently protected by the Police Power of the State. 

Abortion is the only example of taking innocent human life which is protected by the Police Power of the State. It has been given a special status as some sort of “super right” in the American culture these days! The current approach is no different than recognizing a so called “right” to kill three week old babies – if the Supreme Court said it was OK. Abortion is simply feticide in a new language intended to make what is evil sound acceptable. On top of this lie its’ advocates have also fashioned a “rights language” around it to make it even sound noble. It does not matter. Intentional abortion is evil, plain and simple. 

The notion that this particular method of the intentional killing of an entire class of human beings should be called an “abortion right” is despicable. Only human persons can have “rights.” The shorthand phrase “abortion rights” has become the linguistic tool of some journalists who have themselves become tools of the abortion deception. This is evident in much of the reporting concerning the upcoming Commencement address and conferral of an honorary Doctor of Law degree by the University of Notre Dame upon President Barack Obama. 

Opposition to giving a platform at a Catholic University to the most anti-Right to Life President in modern history is rooted in that President’s denial of the first right, the Right to Life, and the first freedom, the freedom to be born. The Right to Life is revealed in the Natural Law and confirmed by Medical Science. It is also therefore binding on all men and women, not just “religious” people. Children in the womb are our first neighbors and it is always wrong to kill our neighbors. We all know it and simply pretend otherwise. This President who campaigned on our being our brother/sister’s keepers has a serious blind spot! 

We surgically operate regularly on our first neighbors in the womb. We then allow them to continue to grow in their first home and join us healthier upon their birth. We know that they are members of our human family. Our 4D sonogram technology has made it possible to take baby’s first picture now much younger – and how we marvel at the image of those little babies. When one of these little ones dies due to a “miscarriage” we all say that the grieving woman “lost her baby.” When one of those little ones dies due to surgical dismemberment, chemical weapons or suction some say that intentional killing was the exercise of a “right.” We all know the truth. 

Yes, the truth concerning the dignity of every human person from conception to natural death is also taught without equivocation by the teaching office of the Catholic Church. It is also confirmed in Revelation. The Catholics who try to deny this infallibly proclaimed teaching of the Church that every procured abortion is the intentional taking of an innocent human life are either poorly catechized, lying, or completely deceived. 

Worse yet are those who try to sweep it all away as being some sort of “religious” position, thereby somehow implying it cannot be “imposed” in the naked public square. The Scriptures and the teaching office of the Catholic Church oppose the taking of the lives of born children, adults, and old people as well. Every murder is wrong! So is all of that also a “religious” position as well? Should we discard those prohibitions in the positive law as well? 

The prohibition against the intentional taking of any human life unless it is done in an act of self defense is the very ground upon which our claims to being a civilized society must rest. Every procured abortion is the taking of innocent human life. So why are children in the womb being treated differently than one year old children? There is no difference in any honest moral analysis. There should be no difference in the positive law. 

The entire body of teaching referred to as Catholic Social Doctrine rests upon this recognition of the inviolable dignity of every human person at every age and stage of life. We Catholics call on our Government, at every level starting with the first government of the family, to demonstrate a love of preference for the poor precisely because of their human dignity. Blessed Teresa of Calcutta was right when she called our neighbors in the womb the “poorest of the poor.” We oppose racial discrimination and all other unjust discrimination because of that same human dignity. 

We oppose unjust wars because of our recognition of that human dignity, present even in our “enemies.” We oppose Capital Punishment because of that human dignity, present even in a guilty man or woman. On that latter front, our opposition to Capital Punishment is a very different kind of opposition. The Church does NOT say that Capital Punishment is intrinsically evil. Rather, that it is no longer justified because it is no longer needed to protect society. Bloodless means of punishing the malefactor are readily available and reflect mercy’s triumph over strict justice. 

Opposition to procured abortion as always wrong is not about “single issue” politics. The Right to Life is the foundation of every other human right. Only human persons can have rights because such rights are goods of the human person. We must insist upon a political, legal, social and cultural infrastructure which recognizes the existence of such human rights in every just society. Every person, no matter how small or tall, young or old has a right to live. Every procured abortion kills them and takes away all of their other rights. 

The conferral of an honorary Doctor of Law Degree on our President by a Catholic University is a scandal. 75 Bishops (so far) have spoken out with a consistency and courage unparalleled since the heyday of the Civil Rights movement. The outcry among Catholics, other Christians, other people of faith and other people of good will is promising. This outcry should make sense to an honest observer. It flows from the same truth that was the impetus behind opposition to the evil of racial discrimination; the dignity of every human person and the absolute rejection of any effort to treat persons as property to be used, abused and discarded by those more powerful. 

The President of the United States will soon become an Alumni of Notre Dame. This misguided action by the leadership of Notre Dame has set into motion a new Human Rights movement which will have long term implications in the Church and in our Nation. There is no such thing as ‘abortion rights’, there are only Human Rights, and the Right to Life is the foundation upon which they all depend.

More from Deacon Fournier here


New Report Details Fudged WHO Numbers on Maternal Morality

(C-FAM) A newly released research paper identifies structural flaws in United Nations (UN) data collection and analysis of global maternal health, finding that UN maternal heath policies based on the bad data are jeopardizing women’s health in the developing world. The paper, “Removing the Roadblocks from Achieving MDG 5 by Improving the Data on Maternal Mortality,” by Donna Harrison, M.D., was published by the International Organizations Research Group (IORG) [IORG is a division of C-FAM, publisher of the Friday Fax]. The paper shows how the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines to UN member states require nations to collect faulty data while at the same time pressuring them to enact UN policies such as liberalizing abortion laws based on that data. Read more.

:::

PREVIOUS POST – Tying Abortion to Millennium Development Goal #5:

by Fredi D’Alessio

Here we go again.

Yet another report (Induced abortion: estimated rates and trends worldwide) crafted to promote “reproductive health” (a term that is frequently used by UN agencies to promote legal abortion) and tying that goal to Millennium Development Goal #5, Improve Maternal Health.

Although it is true that the MDGs do not include the controversial issue of “reproductive health”, after having done research for my commentary on the Millennium Development Goals, I am no less concerned about the underlying goal of many UN agencies and NGO. I believe the pro-life community should be made fully aware of their agenda and their perspective of MDG #5. If you haven’t yet read my exposé and all of the documents referenced therein, I urge you to do so. As an addendum to the commentary I believe we need to advocate for a new MDG and renumber the others making the new one the first and fundamental goal. That MDG should emphatically charge the worldwide community to respect and protect every human being’s right to life from conception to natural death. Let’s face it, the agenda to promote legal abortion and contraception worldwide will not cease.

Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, secretary for Relations with States, said in the general debate of the recent 62nd session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, “We must work to stop and reverse the culture of death embraced by some social and legal structures that try to make the suppression of life acceptable by disguising it as a medical or social service.” Thus, the MDG I proposed above should be the foundation for all the others.

The Archbishop added, “In this sense, the abolition of the death penalty should also be seen as a consequence of full respect for the right to life.” The proponents of population control desire to invoke the sentence of death upon all unwanted (by them) children in their mothers’ wombs and suppress the lives of those as yet not conceived.

I implore you to read The Millennium Development Goals and the Critical Next Step for the Catholic Church and all of the resources referenced therein to learn for yourself how serious this issue is and share this information with others.

Below are three articles. Be sure to read the last one that exposes the fallacy of reports on the numbers of abortions. Regardless of what the actual numbers are, the consequences of this holocaust are immeasurable.

More on the United Nations & Abortion

That Little Hand from the Womb: Samuel Armas still Reaching Out for Life

by Deacon Keith Fournier

This remarkable boy told the reporter interviewing him that he knew that photograph gave countless babies their ‘right to live’.

Catholic Online

“Pictures speak louder than words” goes the old adage. And, there is no doubt it is true. Most of us who are called “boomers”, and this writer is included among them, remember the extraordinary photo of 9 year old Phan Thị Kim Phúc, a little Vietnamese girl fleeing a napalm bomb attack on her village in South Vietnam. It was taken by AP photographer Nick Út and became a visual rallying cry during the Vietnam years. 

Good photos have a way of saying much more than words alone can ever express. They also become associated with human rights movements becoming a catalyst for major social change. So it is with the photograph of a little hand from a little boy. It was extending from the first home of his mothers womb and grasping the hand of a surgeon who was performing surgery upon him at the age of 21 weeks to correct spina bifida. It has become one of the most powerful images in the human rights struggle of our age, the struggle to stop the killing of innocent children in the womb through intentional abortion. 

In the midst of the verbal engineering which has sought to convince people that such an evil can ever be a “right” it exposes the lie without the need for words. In the propaganda war which has sadly convinced many that dismembering children in the womb – or killing them through chemical strikes – is some form of “health care”; it communicates the truth by exposing the evil behind every procured abortion. 

This incredible photograph was taken on Aug. 19, 1999 by a man named Michael Clancy. He styled it “Fetal Hand Grasp”. It appeared for the first time on Sept. 7, 1999 in U.S.A. Today. The amazing little boy was born on December 2, 1999 and his loving family named him Samuel Armas. His somewhat unusual first baby picture has become the most popular photograph in the great human rights movement of our age, the Pro-Life movement. 

It has been used repeatedly to accomplish what spoken words have not been able to. It was, for example, used during the hearings in the US Congress on the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act” which finally passed after years of struggle against the forces of the culture of death. Many people believe that what could not be accomplished by truth and the facts of medical science was finally accomplished through this extraordinary photograph. The story of how this photograph changed the life of the photographer who took it can be found on the web page of Michael Clancy (http://www.michaelclancy.com). He recounts that “… in the hushed but crowded operating room where outsiders have gathered to watch a rare medical event – spinal surgery on a child still in his mother’s womb – a stool falls with a loud bang. ‘Shh’, says, Joseph Bruner, the surgeon leading the operation. “You’ll wake the baby.” 

The little boy whose hand continues to be the reminder of the ugly truth concerning legal abortion is still awake and he is trying to wake up the Nation. He is reaching out again through photographs – and in his own simple words. Samuel Armas told Fox news “When I see that picture, the first thing I think of is how special and lucky I am to have God use me that way… I feel very thankful that I was in that picture.” 

He is 9 years old now and living with his family in Georgia. This remarkable boy told the reporter interviewing him that he knew that photograph gave countless “babies their right to live” and brought about a debate on abortion has helped to save many babies from its fate. “It’s very important to me,” Samuel said of the photograph. “A lot of babies would’ve lost their lives if that didn’t happen.” 

His mother’s name is Julie and, like most mothers, she is proud of her son. As she prepares to celebrate Mothers day this weekend she knows that her eldest son has a “very strong sense of right and wrong”. She proudly told the interviewer from Fox “He identifies it more in terms of a pro-life message more than anything… This photo happened and God used it to show people that this baby in mom’s tummy is alive. He’s pleased that his photo conveyed that message.” 

The kind of surgery that helped Samuel is occurring fairly regularly now. We reach inside the first home of the whole human race to assist our youngest neighbors by operating on them the way we do all human persons. Then Doctors place them back in what used to be the safest place on the earth, their mothers’ womb. Yet, we reach into the womb with surgical instruments to dismember other children. We rain down the equivalent of Napalm upon them as well. That is, if they are not wanted for any reason. They cannot escape like Phan Thị Kim Phúc did in South Vietnam. They die because no-one listened to their cry. 

Abortion is protected by the positive law in the United States. It is called a “right” even though every induced abortion is against the Natural Law which can be known by all and is morally binding on all. Abortion is actually an egregious violation of the true Right, the Right to Life. Archbishop Chaput once aptly called abortion a “little murder”. He used the term “little” to refer not to the gravity of the evil but to the size of the victim. 

As we enter into Mothers Day weekend we need to remember the women who were lied to concerning what really occurred in the Abortion they had. These mothers continue to suffer and are also victims. These little boys and girls wanted to be our neighbors. A Nation which prides itself on the Rule of Law and claims to have a commitment to fundamental human rights should not kill them. We now know what happens in every procured abortion and are without excuse. The shrill rhetoric of “choice” should not be allowed to hide the evil any longer. Medical science gives us clear graphic evidence that the child in the womb being killed is our neighbor. The 4D images of the baby boy or baby girl which new parents and grandparents cherish also show us their faces. 

In the last Presidential campaign our President asked us all to remember that we are our brother and sisters keepers. He used the language of solidarity to remind us of our obligations to our neighbors. The question we must ask is the biblical one “Who is my Neighbor? Samuel is speaking with extraordinary moral authority once again; this time with words. What he is asking of us is very simple, give “babies their right to live”.

More from Deacon Fournier here

Also See:  

May 13, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com

Fr. John Jenkins, President of Notre Dame University, sits on the board of directors of Millennium Promise, an organization dedicated to fighting poverty in Africa that promotes contraceptives and abortion, it has been revealed. 

The finding comes as the controversy over President Obama’s award and speech at the University reaches a fever pitch in the last week before the event.  As the president of Notre Dame, Fr. Jenkins has received the majority of the heat for the scandal. However, despite the criticism of over 70 U.S. bishops and over 350,000 petitioners, Jenkins has steadfastly continued to defend the university’s honoring of the president. In a letter to graduating students dated this past Monday, Jenkins said that Obama is “a remarkable figure in American history and I look forward to welcoming him to Notre Dame.”

Fr. Jenkins’ involvement on the board of the Millennium Promise was first reported by the Drew Mariani Show and PewSitter.com.  (See the list of board members here: http://www.millenniumpromise.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_bod) Patrick Reilly, president of the Cardinal Newman Society, a Catholic education watchdog organization, responded to the news of Fr. Jenkins’ involvement in Millennium Promise, saying in an interview with LSN, “One has to wonder what Fr. Jenkins’ opinion is of the Church’s teaching on contraception.” 

Millennium Promise’s mission is to enact the eight so-called Millennium Development Goals by 2015. However, the Millennium Development Goals have been widely promoted by pro-contraception and pro-abortion organizations, such as Millennium Promise, as including the goal of increasing access to contraception and abortion globally.

Millennium Promise raises funds from the private sector for what it calls its “flagship initiative,” Millennium Villages, a group that works with small villages in Africa.

A Millennium Villages handbook explains that “family planning and contraception services are critical to allow women to choose family size and birth spacing, to combat sexually transmitted infections, including HIV infection, and contribute to the reduction of maternal morbidity and mortality.”

It continues to explain that, “Services include: (1) Counseling; (2) Male and female condoms; (3) Pharmacologic contraceptives including oral, transdermal, intramuscular, and implanted methods; and (4) IUDs.”

The handbook continues with an encouragement for “safe” abortion: “In countries where abortion is legal, safe abortion services in controlled settings by skilled practitioners should be established.” (http://www.millenniumvillages.org/docs/MVP_Handbook_complete_18jun08.pdf  page 92).

Fr. Jenkins has stated in the past that Notre Dame participates in the Millennium Villages Project via the Notre Dame Millennium Development Initiative (NDMDI).  The efforts of the NDMDI focus on Uganda “where Notre Dame, through the Congregation of Holy Cross, has strong ties.”

Interestingly, Uganda is known for its unprecedented success in reducing its HIV rate over the past several decades, using the so-called ABC approach, which emphasizes abstinence and faithfulness as the surest means of avoiding infection. In the last few years, however, anti-HIV leaders in Uganda have complained about an increasing effort by large Western aid organizations to pressure the country to vastly increase its promotion of condoms.

Patrick Reilly of the Cardinal Newman Society said that in his research into Millennium Promise he was extremely concerned to find that “not only condom distribution, but distribution of the pill, injectible contraception, and even abortion are part of the Millennium project’s efforts.”

“Any Catholic university that supports a program to reduce poverty by eliminating poor children has a serious problem,” he said, adding that no Catholic “should be taking a leadership role in an effort that distributes contraception or promotes abortion.”

Also See:  

by Abbot Joseph

[You can read this at Word Incarnate or continue below.]

I’ve begun reading In the World, of the Church, an anthology of some of the writings of the late Orthodox theologian Paul Evdokimov.  His voice was both prophetic and ecumenical, but most of all profoundly Christian.  I would like to reproduce here some passages from his article “A Message to the Churches,” written over a half-century ago, but quite relevant to the state of the Church in the world today.  When I read this prophetic critique, I can’t help but think of the Gospel passage: “the sons of this world are wiser in their own generation than the sons of light” (Lk. 16:8).  That’s an obscure saying, but the way I see it in light of what follows here is that those promoting the agenda of the world have a sharper vision of their goals, and a clearer grasp of the means necessary to implement them, than the Church has of her own mission.  For in recent decades the Church, in significant ways, has turned to the world for guidance and example, instead of being the Spirit-animated Light to the world.

“We are faced with a brutal historical reality.  For various reasons the Church now appears to be thrown back to the pre-Constantinian era.  The Church is a remnant, a tiny minority in a world quite hostile to her message and without a grasp of history…  [The world] listens to other gospels and to other prophets.  Dynamic forces are at play, seeking to establish a new integration of the world with realities incompatible with the Christian ethic… This is a treacherous and offensive era.  In the throbbing daily scene of life, God cannot find a voice sufficiently pure and detached to be his herald.  All is horribly compromised to the point where roles have become reversed: now the Church is being judged by the world.

“Christians have done just about everything to sterilize the Gospel.  One can say that it has been plunged into a neutralizing solution.  Everything that is striking in it, all that transcends and turns things upside down, has been moderated, sterilized to death.  Religion, having become inoffensive, is now flat, shrewd, and above all, reasonable, and remains simply to be vomited out [the allusion here is to Rev. 3:16].  ‘God does not demand much of us’—such a conviction makes the salt of the Gospel insipid and tasteless, that salt which is God’s terrible jealousy, his insistence on the impossible… Today the Gospel meets total indifference…

“The Church is no longer, as in the first centuries, the triumphal march of Life through the graveyards of the world.  In all the recent theological definitions of her nature, the Church is conceived of in an astonishingly static manner, as essentially a self-serving, self-preserving institution.  She has settled on maintaining the subsistence of her own membership… Christian faith has thus strangely lost its character of ferment, of disrupting everything.  She is no longer the leaven which raises the dough… After two millennia of Christian history, the worst judgment that the world can pass upon the Church is that she has become a faithful reflection of the world itself…

“The average Christian today testifies to a striking phenomenon.  Christianity is not at all a ‘new people,’ but just one typical sociological group among many, and it is here that we come to the heart of Christianity’s failure.  Faith is no longer the source but has become an imposition, something merely added to the structures of the world in which the faithful engage… The Church, mystery on the march, the Bride awaiting her King, has become a ‘religious association,’ dependent upon the laws of natural evolution.  And the consequences are disastrous…

“The Incarnation has been accommodated to this age.  The Temple of God has become a huge ‘insurance company’ for eternal life with minimal risk (for Pascal, ‘the wager’), with techniques of consolation and ‘strategies’ for every imaginable situation.  The Christian faith is preached as the healthiest, happiest, most effective arrangement for human life… The Gospel, however, is not adaptable functionally.  It is explosive.  The Gospel is the demand of metamorphosis, transformation… In the behavior and thinking of the average Christian, however, there is no place for the further, other Reality which transcends, which by its existence announcesthe wholly Other.  Faith here appears as one of the elements of a functional sort, a sociological category, and thus the Christian message is emptied of all its transforming power…

“Having been tossed on the sociological trash heap, is it at all possible for Christianity to become once more the place where the presence of the God-Man shines forth?  Can the face of Christ again ‘radiate in the faces of those who belong to him,’ as an ancient liturgical text puts it?  Here lies the entire matter.  The only message which is powerful any longer is not the one which simply repeats the words of Christ, the Word, but the one which makes him present.  Only his presence will make the message, as the Gospel says, light and salt for the world.

“The Gospel is an explosive seed.  It is revolutionary.  It overturns not the structures of the world but those of the human spirit.  What is important here is the manifestation of God in us, the coming of Christ in humanity… Now is not the time for Christian spirituality to reflect the age.  Rather in every aspect our spiritual life must point to the Other… By one’s interior attitude, each Christian can make everything around him beautiful and light, can turn them into icons, images of their true nature.  Such an authentically spiritual life would accomplish much, much more than many sermons… Christ is so often kept from us by theological and religious mumbo-jumbo.  You don’t worry about adjusting the furnace when the house is on fire, nor do you wallow in secondary, unimportant things while the world is going to pieces.  All of our creativity ought to focus on lifting the generation before us into the immense joy of freedom, the joy of serving others, into the joy (as St John the Baptist) of being the friend of Christ, the Bridegroom…

“The historical task, however, is not the search for the forms of primitive Christianity, but for her cry: Marana tha—‘Come, Lord,’ for union with the Church in the final hour.  This hour makes all the other hours real.  This last hour makes the Christian message real again, for us.”

There are endless examples of how the Church has allowed the ways of the world to diminish her vital energy and to silence her prophetic witness in the world.  There’s one I just read, though, that is symptomatic.  A former Archbishop of San Francisco (Quinn) has just written an article defending President Obama’s speaking and receiving an honorary degree at a (once) prestigious Catholic University.  After his ridiculous statement to the effect that not allowing a pro-abortion president to speak at a Catholic University manifests “racial hatred” simply because he is black (everyone knows that has nothing to do with the abortion issue), he asks: “If the president is forced to withdraw, how will it impact the image of the Church? Will it enhance the mission of the Church? Will it create a more positive attitude toward the Catholic Church?”  The whole point of his article is that it will negatively affect the image and mission of the Church.  Why does he think that the Church (or any organization, for that matter) will be negatively affected when it simply stands up for what it believes in?  His approach (and hence his understanding of the Church) completely contradicts the prophetic force and mission of true Christianity and exemplifies the eviscerated sociological entity that Evdokimov criticizes above.

The former bishop shows his true colors toward the end of the article.  This is the bottom line; this is what many American bishops are all too often worried about: “the consequences if the American bishops are seen as the agents of the public embarrassment of the newly elected president by forcing him to withdraw from an appearance at a distinguished Catholic university.”  It doesn’t matter that Obama is a promoter of evil and will be publicly honored by a Catholic institution.  The bishops don’t want to be agents of public embarrassment for proclaiming the Gospel to secular powers as a witness to the nation.  They want to be good citizens (i.e., they want to look good in the eyes of the media).  They don’t want to be embarrassed by making it known that they are uncompromised followers of Christ.  Crucify Him, then, and give them Barabbas.

More from Abbot Joseph here and here.

Excerpt from Bishop Wenski’s sermon at a Mass of Reparation for the sins and transgressions committed against the dignity and sacredness of human life in our world today.

We live in a nation where abortion laws are among the most liberal among the Western democracies. We Catholics have become too complacent about the legal killing of unborn children in America and elsewhere.  This complacency contributed to the climate that led Notre-Dame’s president to think that it would be no big deal to defy the bishops in granting this honorary degree to President Obama. And, as the world’s lone superpower, with President Obama’s setting aside the Mexico City policy, we as a nation are once again using our wealth and influence to export abortion to nation’s weaker and poorer than ourselves.  Before the completion of his first 100 days in office, President Obama has already expanded federal funding for abortion, directed tax payer funded support for embryonic stem cell research which requires the destruction of living human beings, and has challenged conscience protection provisions that allow health care workers and institutions to refuse to participate in abortions and other procedures that violate their ethical or religious views.

I hope you will read the entire sermon here

[TFS Ed: Click here to contact your elected officials to voice your support.]

by Deacon Keith Fournier

The Pregnant Women Support Act reaches out to women with a helping hand when they are most vulnerable.

Catholic Online

In the encyclical letter “The Gospel of Life”, the Servant of God John Paul II not only set forth the definitive reaffirmation of the Christian rejection of every act against the fundamental Right to Life as being intrinsically evil, but also presented important directions regarding the pragmatic application of this clear teaching by those charged with governance. At the end of Paragraph 73 we read the following words:

“A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive law already passed or ready to be voted on. Such cases are not infrequent. It is a fact that while in some parts of the world there continue to be campaigns to introduce laws favoring abortion, often supported by powerful international organizations, in other nations-particularly those which have already experienced the bitter fruits of such permissive legislation-there are growing signs of a rethinking in this matter.

“In a case like the one just mentioned, when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.”

Justin Cardinal Rigali, though not in elective office, recently demonstrated the application of this essential direction for those who are. He issued a letter encouraging support for the Pregnant Women Support Act. In it he gives every Catholic in elective office a good example of how to apply the absolute commitment to the Right to Life as infallibly taught in that same Encyclical letter. Sadly, currently in the United States, a majority of those in Public Office continue to reject the inalienable, fundamental and preeminent Right to Life as revealed in the Natural Law, confirmed by medical science, affirmed in the Sacred Scripture and taught infallibly by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.Truly Pro-Life political leaders must not compromise but can find ways to limit the evil effects of the current law.

We offer the good Cardinal’s letter to encourage support for the Pregnant Women Support Act. as well as to demonstrate to all Catholics, other Christians, and all people of good will in public office how to proceed while they work without compromise to bring an end to the reign of the Culture of Death in the current positive law in the United States:

April 24, 2009

Dear Representative:

In a society where disagreements on abortion and the rights of the unborn child seem persistent and intractable, there are some statements that almost everyone can endorse. First, the fact that over a million abortions take place every year in this country is a tragedy, and we should at least take steps to reduce abortions. Second, no woman should ever have to undergo an abortion because she feels she has no other choice or because alternatives were unavailable or not made known to her. An abortion performed under such social and economic duress meets no one’s standard for “freedom of choice.”

If you agree with these statements, I hope you will support and co-sponsor the Pregnant Women Support Act recently reintroduced by Representative Lincoln Davis (D- TN).

This Act will provide many kinds of life-affirming support for pregnant women and their unborn children. These include: Eliminating pregnancy as a “preexisting condition” that can be used to deny health coverage for women; grants to support centers providing alternatives to abortion; assistance encouraging colleges and universities to provide support for pregnant and parenting students; increased support for the WIC program, and for adoption programs; allowing states to cover unborn children and their mothers under the Children’s Health Insurance Program, providing prenatal care for especially needy pregnant women who may not otherwise be eligible; and improving services for pregnant women who are at risk from domestic violence. The bill also improves the means for informing women about supportive services available to them during and after pregnancy, through a public awareness program as well as a basic requirement that abortion facilities provide informed consent (including information about alternatives to abortion).

The Pregnant Women Support Act reaches out to women with a helping hand when they are most vulnerable, and most engaged in making a decision about life or death for their unborn children. It provides an authentic common ground, an approach that people can embrace regardless of their position on other issues. For example, it does not raise the entirely separate issue of seeking to reduce pregnancies through government promotion of contraceptives, which recently created so much controversy when it was inappropriately proposed for inclusion in an economic stimulus package. That issue raises serious questions regarding priorities in health care as well as the conscience rights of patients and health care providers, which demand a serious debate of their own. In any case, low-income women already have guaranteed coverage for family planning through Medicaid, with the Federal government assuring States that it will pay 90% of this coverage – yet it is precisely among these women that abortion rates are highest. Many studies have concluded that programs for ensuring access to contraception do not reduce abortion rates (see www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/contraception/index.shtml).    

Discussion of pregnancy prevention and related issues will surely continue inside and outside Congress. In the meantime, pregnant women need our assistance now so that abortion is not promoted to them as their only choice. Regardless of your stance on other issues related to abortion or family planning, I hope you will join Representative Davis in ensuring that the Pregnant Women Support Act will be considered and enacted by this Congress.        

Cardinal Justin Rigali

Archbishop of Philadelphia
Chairman, Committee for Pro-Life Activities
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

[TFS Ed: Click here to contact your elected officials to voice your support.]

Older Posts »