MONDAY DIARY: If you CAN make it here, you can make it ANYWHERE

What SNOPES has to say on the new bill in New York
What the New York State CATHOLIC CONFERENCE says.

WHERE YOUR TREASURE IS, THERE IS YOUR HEART

A friend of mine lives on a farm about a forty minute drive from the parish.  He is having a rough go of it lately and it is not because of the snow and cold.  It is because of woodpeckers.  He has a wood house and the woodpeckers have targeted it for their pecking of wood.  He has tried everything.  He put up fake owls, he started blasting “woodpeckers in distress” calls over loudspeakers, freshly painted his house (as was recommended by experts) but nothing works.  Every day there is a couple of more holes, about half an inch across, many of which are clean through the siding.  So he has to go out and fill in the holes almost every day.  He is not happy.

He can’t do anything to kill the woodpeckers.  They are federally protected and he could get into a hole basket full of trouble if he resorted to that.  Yet if he and his wife should conceive their child, they have a federally protected right to do to that child what it is illegal to do to that woodpecker.  With the woodpecker we say, “Well, it may greatly upset your life but you going to have to find a way to cope with it.  That’s life.”  When it comes to their child we say, “Well, if he is going to greatly upset your life, you can get rid of him.  That’s life.”

I am not for the overturning of the protection of woodpeckers.  Maybe we could extend the rights to humans in the womb (and extend to the parents more assistance than we do to woodpecker sufferers - which I know many of you do!)

Today is the national day of prayer for the legal protection of human life in the womb.  Please consider offering a prayer and engaging in some action, exercising the rights, privileges, dignity and power that you have on behalf of one who currently, legally has none of these in our country.

POPE FRANCIS, THE DEATH PENALTY & HERESY

When there was such a thing as institutional slavery, the Church recognized this as a fact of the world and gave teachings based on those given in Scripture on how those who “owned” slaves should treat their servants.  Over the course of time, the Church recognized that, because each human person has an inalienable dignity, nobody could possibly be “owned” by anybody and to be a person who “owned” slaves was inherently evil.  This happened at a time when the Christian world was sufficiently awakening to the evil of this practice it was possible to bring this abomination to an end.  

This was not a change in the teachings of the Church.  It was a development in the understanding of the inherent worth of each individual human soul.  It was a slow and painful path.  But the moment there was any recognition that the oppressed person was in fact a person with a soul, with dignity and worth, who was saved by the Passion of Jesus Christ, it was inevitable that slavery would be done away with.  The very idea of a “slave owner” was poisoned with the first drop of Christ’s blood and every subsequent teaching and recognition of the value of life brought it closer and closer to death.

In my opinion, the recent teaching of Pope Francis on the death penalty can be seen in the same light.  What he now says (though I understand the difficulty in the way he said it) does not negate the realities and teachings of the past.  By the time we get to St. John Paul II, because of the advancement of culture and our ability to detain and isolate persons who are a serious threat to society, he had difficulty imagining any scenario in which the death penalty could be used.  He stood at the precipice of the seamless garment of the respect of human life, unable to imagine the need for civilized Christians to resort to killing an otherwise detained person for the sake of the salvation of the world.

As there was a point in which slavery was no longer a tenable option for Christians, Pope Francis says such has the time come for the death penalty.  

Many will disagree.  Many will disagree with the way he said it.  Many will disagree with the format in which he said it.  Indeed, the reader of his article may think the pope was either premature in this declaration or a bit of a Pollyanna in his worldview or that he took one step too far, but, in my opinion, the one wagon that no one should jump on is that he has been speaking heresy.  It is not only unhelpful to the conversation it does not display an understanding of how the Church has operated for 2,000 years.  

GET RID OF "THEM"

A few years ago it was obvious that the Catholic Church should get rid of celibacy because it led to sexual abuse.  With the latest round of sexual abuse in news, sports, entertainment, and politics (and there are some other major areas that have yet to be tapped,) to what should we attribute it now?  Should we get rid of politics and entertainment?  Should we get rid of men?  Most of these people are married, should we rid ourselves of the obvious scourge of marriage?  Maybe we should level the playing field so that nobody has power.  (But of course, then who would have the power to enforce that?)  On to what bandwagon should we all jump this time?

May I suggest one?  How about the bandwagon that says all humans have inherent dignity, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.  It is when we start chipping away at the eternal worth of any human soul that all people’s worth is damaged.  If I am willing to put the child in the womb, the criminal, the sick and elderly to death, then I too have decreased in value as the bar for the worthy has been raised against me - I come closer to being the person to be used by others for their own end.

We need heroes and role models; saints and stars.  But we cannot place them on so high a pedestal (and the rest of us so low to the ground) that they can use that glory to dazzle the eyes of those who gaze up that them, blinding them of their own dignity and allowing themselves to be mistreated.

There is no lifestyle (married, single, divorced, celibate, etc) that causes someone to be an abuser.  There are people with power who are abusers regardless of their lifestyle.  These abuse scandals are an alarm that we all need help in becoming a healthier culture, not a bunch of irate and blind finger pointers.  It is the sin we will not tolerate from anyone.

GUEST BLOGGER: CAPITOL ERRER

1. Guest blogger:  Bernard A. Smith, of St. Sebastian Parish, Akron, recently retired after serving over  three decades as a federal prosecutor handling organized crime, public corruption, labor racketeering and appellate cases. He obtained a bachelor’s degree from the University of Dayton in 1979 and a law degree from the University of Michigan in 1982.   

When Pope Francis spoke before a joint session of Congress in September 2015, he urged that the death penalty be abolished throughout America, a request with which one might presume a career prosecutor would disagree. Such an assumption would be incorrect, however, for Pope Francis’ request of Congress did not merely express a personal policy preference but was firmly grounded in Church teaching. As the State of Ohio contemplates executing condemned criminals for the first time since 2014, understanding why capital punishment cannot be morally justified is of paramount importance. Indeed, rather than tolerating executions, the citizens of the State of Ohio should demand that the death penalty be abolished. 

American criminal law traditionally has recognized a necessity exception to the prohibition against intentionally killing another person, taking several forms: (1) self-defense when faced with imminent threat of deadly force, (2) defense of a third person faced with a similar threat, and (3) soldiers in combat facing an armed enemy. To this list during the colonial period of our nation’s history might be added capital punishment, because secure prison systems had not yet been invented.² As secure facilities to imprison the most dangerous offenders did not exist, public executions were thought necessary both to incapacitate dangerous criminals and to deter others.³ 

Today, any issue concerning lack of adequate prisons has disappeared, as both federal and State prison systems contain maximum security facilities to incapacitate murderers and other violent offenders. This fact makes a definitive moral difference, as articulated by Pope St. John Paul II in his encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae, which defended the inviolability of human life. Discussing capital punishment, Pope John Paul stated:  “It is clear that…the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity:  in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today, however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent” (emphasis supplied).⁴ The Pope then declared that “if bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means….” (emphasis supplied).⁵ The mandatory character of the latter statement is unmistakable. 

In short, according to Pope St. John Paul II, the moral test of strict necessity governs when even a murderer may be executed and, because of security enhancements in modern prison systems, the set of offenders who must be executed in order to protect society is functionally a null set. Under modern conditions, therefore, capital punishment cannot morally be justified under the strict necessity test, a standard which helps to protect the bedrock principle that a person’s right to life is inviolable.

After the publication of Evangelium Vitae, the discussion of capital punishment in the Catechism of the Catholic Church was revised. Now, paragraph 2267 of the Catechism says that the death penalty may be imposed, “if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.”⁶  It incorporates Pope St. John Paul II’s teaching that if “non-lethal means” suffice to protect society, then “authority will limit itself to such means” (emphasis supplied).⁷ Paragraph 2267 then concludes:  “…the cases in which the execution of the offender is absolutely necessary are very rare, if not practically non-existent” (emphasis supplied).⁸ In light of the Catechism’s teaching that, as a matter of practical reality,  circumstances in which capital punishment could be permissible do not exist, imposing the death penalty cannot morally be justified. To the extent that our legal system permits capital punishment, it is morally flawed. 

Other considerations also undercut any moral basis for capital punishment. In the Supreme Court’s 1972 splintered decision in Furman v. Georgia,⁹ which temporarily invalidated the death penalty nationwide, the controlling three-Justice plurality variously found that capital punishment as then administered was being imposed in an arbitrary, capricious or discriminatory manner largely because a jury’s discretion to impose it was unfettered. The death penalty was revived, however, only four years later in Gregg v. Georgia,¹⁰ where the Court approved a capital sentencing scheme requiring a trial bifurcated between guilt and penalty phases, lesser included offense instructions where applicable, a jury’s finding of at least one aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt, the weighing of mitigating factors against any aggravating factor(s) and  appellate proportionality review in relation to similar cases. In sum, a jury’s discretion concerning the death penalty would be guided by legal standards. The implied premise underlying Gregg is that the courts are capable of ensuring that a capital sentencing system will function fairly.¹¹ 

Forty years later, however, the data demonstrates otherwise. A 2005 study conducted by the Associated Press found that, in Ohio, a defendant who kills a white person is twice as likely to receive the death penalty as a defendant who kills a black person.¹² The organization known as Ohioans To Stop Executions has reached the same conclusion.¹³ Even more sobering, the final report of the 2014 Joint Task Force to Review the Administration of Ohio’s Death Penalty cited an ABA Ohio Assessment Team study indicating that offenders who killed white persons were 3.8 times more likely to be sentenced to death in Ohio than those who killed black persons.¹⁴ Racial disparity in capital sentencing based upon the race of the victim has been found in numerous studies conducted in other death penalty states as well.¹⁵ And, Ohioans to Stop Executions has found that “two-thirds of all Ohio murder victims are people of color, yet in 2013 three out of four new death sentences were for the murder of white people.”¹⁶

Imposing the ultimate penalty—death—based upon the race of the victim is inconsistent with the concept of equality before the law. Nor can this practice be squared with the basic principle that all human beings are of equal, infinite value before God. When the death penalty is imposed far more often against killers of white persons than against killers of minority persons, then our society has concluded that it values the lives of white persons more than the lives of minority persons because it systematically imposes a harsher penalty when the right to life of a white person is transgressed. The statistics show that murdering a white person effectively is regarded as a more serious offense than murdering a minority person because the consequences of killing one versus the other systematically differ. Such systemic racial discrimination inherent in the capital sentencing system must be condemned as morally bankrupt. 

Adding further moral weight against using capital punishment is the reality that the death penalty is sometimes imposed upon innocent persons. According to criteria established by the Death Penalty Information Center, since 1976 there have been nine exonerations of defendants who were sentenced to death in Ohio alone.¹⁷ “Exoneration” means that all charges against the defendant ultimately were dismissed, that the defendant was acquitted at a re-trial or that the defendant was pardoned based upon substantial evidence of innocence. No system of justice worthy of the name can tolerate not only the possibility that innocent persons might be sentenced to death, but also the established fact that innocent defendants have actually been sentenced to die, including in Ohio. 

In sum, the death penalty does not satisfy the moral test of strict necessity and is imposed in discriminatory fashion despite four decades of judicial effort to render the system fair. The citizens of the State of Ohio should conclude that capital punishment can no longer be tolerated because it is fundamentally indefensible and should demand its abolition. 

1. added above
2. Banner, The Death Penalty:  An American History, p. 23 (Harvard University Press, 2002). 
3. Ibid., pp. 10-13.
4. Evangelium Vitae, para. 56. 
5. Ibid.
6. Catechism of the Catholic Church, para. 2267.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
10. 428 U.S. 153 (1976).
11. Lazarus, Closed Chambers:  The Rise, Fall, and Future of the Modern Supreme Court, p. 117 (Penquin Books, 1999).
12. Akron Beacon Journal (May 7, 2005)(reporting the Associated Press study). 
13. www.otse.org.
14. Joint Task Force to Review the Administration of Ohio’s Death Penalty, Final Report and Recommendations, April 2014, Commentary to Recommendation 29.
15. Lazarus, Closed Chambers, p. 168 (summarizing the results of the famous Baldus study in Georgia); see generally, Bedau, The Death Penalty in America:  Current Controversies, pp. 29, 271 (Oxford University Press, 1997).
16. www.otse.org.
17. Details about Ohio’s exonerations are reported at www.otse.org.

IMAGINE A WORLD WITHOUT GOD

Imagine a world without God.

There is no Being to help guide the actions of man.

How are we going to establish right from wrong?

One might argue for Natural Law but that is a slippery slope.  Once you argue that there is inherent right way to live and wrong way to live in nature, then you start sneaking in an intelligence to nature and that will just ruin everything.

But wouldn’t it be good to not kill?  Could we not begin there?  Possibly.  But even there is a dangerous pin upon which to stand.  If this marvelous, complicated universe just happened, like snow flakes falling from the sky accidentally forming a snowman but WAY more intricate, then life really has no meaning except to the person who happens to have it.  Why should life be better than no life? Why should your life be important to me if you have something (land?) that I really want?  There can be no inalienable rights because that implies order, intelligence and meaning, which leads us to a discussion of God, which is something we want to avoid.

There can only be one answer in this type of universe:  The one with the most power decides what is right and wrong.  It could be an individual dictator, or committee, or even a whole voting nation.  We could vote in many of the dictates of any particular religion if we want.  And we could vote them right back out again.  It will, of course, lead to even greater meaninglessness with a thin covering of legitimacy.

Take, for example, marriage.  Back to the true pagans, it had to do with fertility and child raising.  In our modern age we have removed that definition completely so our brothers and sisters, or brothers and brothers could experience a type of permanent relationship, legaly binding, that we call marriage.  This particular route seems compassionate but this idea of marriage is destined to disintegrate.  If a desire to be married is the only requirement for being married and we have removed any ties to our history, then why stop at two people?  Why worry about a brother and sister who want to marry?  Why shouldn’t all the religious brothers of a monastery be recognized as one giant marriage to give them all of the protections that others have?  

The argument can’t be, “That just wouldn’t happen.”  What are you going to base a “This far and no further” law on other than right makes right?  (There are already legal attempts at similar scenarios of the above to this.)  In the end then, marriage will cease to mean anything unless the individuals want it to and have the freedom to do as they please by those in charge.

Now imagine we have formed a society that has bought into a meaningless universe.  Imagine further that you are frustrated young man who does not happen to be part of the society that makes decisions and has a voice.  You think culture is wrong and you see those you love and their ideas abused.  You have no power except to conform.

You are angry, powerless, and have no hope even in a next life.  What is to stop you from grabbing a gun or a knife and going on your college campus . . .

IS THERE ANYTHING GOOD TO COME OUT OF THE MURDER OF THE PRIEST IN FRANCE?

The murder of the priest in France is both sad and frightening.  It is difficult to find anything but tragedy in the whole situation.  Even the Pope made the statement, "Some might think it is war of religion. It is not. All religions want peace. Others want war.”  Is there even the slightest ray of hope or goodness in this situation or is it all just a horrible, black happening in a cold universe?

Today’s Gospel sheds light on this question.

In Matthew 13:47-53 it talks about the Kingdom of Heaven being like a giant net thrown into the water hauling up everything in its path.  This net would be about a quarter of a mile long and six to ten feet in depth with floating cork on the upper side and weights on the lower.  One team would keep an end on shore while the other team took the opposite end out into the water and then swing it around ending up a distance down the shore.  Then the two teams would haul it ashore and everything in the mouth of the net would be trapped.  The fishermen would then have to sort through that which was good and preserve it, and that which was bad and discard it.

The fish are all of humanity.  The fishermen are God’s angels.  The net is the final judgment that all must face.  Notice that both good and bad alike are caught in the net.  That means that the Kingdom of Heaven exists in the this world right along side the kingdoms of earth.  There is goodness and grace in the world right now.  The Kingdom exists whenever and wherever you live it.  

At the moment the story in France was taking place, both kingdoms were present and in action.  To many people, it appears that the kingdom of this world prevailed.  But we know that the matter was settled about 2,000 years ago.  It is not unlike the Japanese soldiers that were found still fighting WWII on islands years after they lost and the war over.  They may still fight and appear to win a battle on some island, but the matter is already settled.

As we all are, both the priest and his attacker are to face death.  When the final net is dragged in, that is when the victory of that particular battle will finally be revealed, not earlier this week.  So we do not fear.  We love life and are not afraid to die.  Death for the Christian is an entrance into true life where there will not longer be a mixing of the two kingdoms.

We mourn for the priest and that community.  We also know that there is still hope there and goodness to be expressed.  We pray for his attacker because he chose a path destined for loss. We have no need to answer with anger and hate.  

YOU ARE BEAUTIFUL

Before you declare, “Nyope,  Not me.  This is ridiculous.” let me make my case.  If, at the end, you still don’t agree with me, you’ll still be wrong, but at least you read to the end.

Your life is amazing.  It is not supposed to be exciting all the time.  In fact, it is rarely exciting except to the most attentive and, for the others for whom it actually is, . . . well . . . they are just odd.  They are the exception that proves the rule.

You are living a fairy tale.  An incredible story is playing out in the living of your life.  The problem (if you are not buying this) is that you are used to it.  Somewhere (I forget where) Pope Benedict talked about how terrible it is to grow accustomed to the miraculous.  But we do.  Jesus Christ suffered and died for you, opened up paradise, made you a child of God, and gives Himself to you, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity in the Eucharist!  And we yawn and say, “Yeah.  I know.  What’s on T.V. tonight?”

In his essay, “Baby Worship,” Chesterton writes, “The supreme adventure is being born.  There we do walk suddenly into a splendid startling trap.  There we do see something of which we have not dreamed before.  Our father and mother do lie in wait for us, like brigands from a bush.  Our uncle is a surprise.  Our aunt is, in the beautiful common expression, a bolt from the blue.  When we step into the family, b the act of being born, we do step into a world which is incalculable, into a world which had its own strange laws, into a world which could do without us not a world that we have not made.  In other words, when we step into a family, we step into a fairy-tale.”

“Perhaps I’ll grant you that,” you might think.  “But after that?  Blah!”

Poppycock!

Think of your average fairy tale or movie.  One distills to a short book or two hours out of a life time to make it interesting.  As for drudgery, as beautiful as the story of Cinderella is, she spent A LOT of time in mourning for her parents, being treated as slave labor, and having no means of hope.  The people in Frozen spend most of their lives being miserable.  “Inside Out,” “Bring Him Home,” “Bridge of Spies,” “Revenant” all have incredible amounts of boring, monotonous, what seems to be life wasting time glossed over or slashed out entirely to present a movie that keeps you on the edge of your seat.

During the parts that were exciting, the people that lived them did not necessarily like it, think it special, or want it.  Those who were in trouble wanted to sit on the porch and drink lemonade.  Those trapped at home dream of flying to Mars.  Those with curly hair want straight hair and those with no hair would be happy with chia pet hair.  The point is, there needs to be tension and or loss in this life for the greatness to make itself truly felt and not lost among the mundane. 

Often in these stories, the realization that they were in a great story line was not until it was over and somebody points it out to them.  Sometimes it takes an outsider to say, “Wow!  What a life!”

St. Francis spent A LOT of time in angst, worry, and controversy.  So did Blessed Mother Theresa.  Outsiders say, “Wow, what a life!  I wish I could have that excitement or peace.”  We review their lives as they do us and think, “What an adventure.  What a unique and exciting life compared to boring old me.”

Stop it.

Even if you don’t see a payoff coming (which would ruin it anyway) know that your heavenly Father has something tremendous waiting for you who loved Him in this life.  “Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has it so much as dawned on man” what God has waiting.  It will blow whatever expectations you have out of the water and make it all worth it.

Here is my challenge to you today.  See your life anew.  When you look outside, SEE the tree that you don’t notice anymore because it is always there.  It is different today than it was yesterday.  Appreciate today the place where you live.  No, it is not ideal.  But you have much for which to be grateful.  It is home base for your fair tale.  It will loom large in the telling of your story some day (even if it is just to God.  But I doubt it.)  Put on your least favorite clothes, go to your least favorite room, look at the least favorite thing in the room, see it, recognize it, and challenge it to play a role in your fairy tale.  Then let it sit and stew and worry about it and you go live.

And decide to be happy.  When you are bored, remember a time you were so crazy that you wish you had more time to be bored.  When you are crazy busy, remember the time you were bored and wish you had something to do.  

And pray.  

DON'T BELEIVE THE SCARECROW

Over time things can become skewed.  We pay attention to the paintings at the Stations of the Cross and over time give more attention to them so that we forget that they are completely unnecessary.  The indulgence is connected to the wooden crosses.  And sometimes we see the stations without the crosses because we forgot which was the important piece.  

The candles on the sides of a consecrated church are supposed to light up the crosses on the walls where the oil was placed to bless the church.  Sometimes we forget this and put giant candles in the stands so that the cross is obscured.

Sometimes we are so immersed in the Protestant work ethic that we feel we have to produce, be useful, and have talent in order to be beloved.  Now, it is true that Paul said, "He who does not work should not eat."  That is about fair play, not the worth of the individual.  And it's good for the non-worker too.  Have him learn some valuable life lessons and whatnot.  But that doesn't make him any more of a person.  It doesn't make him have any more dignity.  So it is with the man in the insane asylum (I'm sure there is a more politically correct way of saying that) or on death row, or in the womb, or in the nursing home, or in an unresponsive state, or begging on the street corner.  They are no less cherished and loved by God.  And neither are you when you are feeling unproductive, unconnected, and unmotivated.  Maybe God is calling you to STOP and just BE.  "Be still," he tells us, "and know that I am God."  What you can produce is not what is special, YOU are what makes you special.  He did create you after all.    

And it does not matter how much you are loved.  "A heart is not measured by how much you love," says the Scarecrow, "but by how much you are loved by others."  Horse pucky.  Do you know who some of the most difficult people on the face of the earth were to live with?  Saints.  St. Jerome was so irascible there was an effort to get him kicked out of the league of saints.  True love can be a very difficult thing with which to live in this world.

Stop rating.

Stop comparing yourself.

How much you can produce.  How much you are loved.  These are things the world cares about.  These measures help the world determine who doesn't matter that much, who we can throw away, who's life we can extinguish.  All these things don't work if you have inherit dignity and worth and are loved by the only One who really matters and Who promises the healing of hearts when you finally come to Him.

Every hurt is an opportunity for healing.  Every lonely minute will make ultimate love all the more blissful.  Every ounce of feeling worthless will make the revealing of your dignity all the more mind-blowing.  Every tear, every rejection, every anguish, every humiliation is, for those who love Him, a stored blessing.

TOLLERANCE - BUT ONLY A CERTAIN AMOUNT AND ONLY ON THE TOPICS THAT I CHOOSE

Here’s an interesting statistic for you:  Approximately 300 persons per year are killed in the state of California in hit and run accidents.  That means most days a Californian will kill another Californian with his car and then drive away to avoid responsibility.  Yesterday on NPR an official of the state said (and this is an approximate quote since I was driving and unable to write down what I heard) that this is a horrible situation – near four times the national average – and that “a cultural change must take place.”  His concern is California’s lack of concern for accidents in which human lives are effected.  You cannot simply hit a human being with your car and then drive away.

 

But I thought, “Why not?”  Is change what California really wants?  Are they prepared to do what would be required in order to effect a “cultural change?”  Or do they have exactly what they want?

 

Consider this about the Golden State:  They are on the verge of allowing physician assisted suicide.  They are a death penalty state.  Abortion rights are vigorously upheld.  The state self-funded embryonic stem cell research.  And these are just some of the issues that over a period of time teach a people that when life inconveniences you, you may do away with it. 

 

If you teach a rectory dog to bark whenever someone rings the doorbell, you can’t expect him not to do so on the occasion that this time it is the bishop that is ringing the bell.  In a similar way, when you teach a body of people that when your life might be change in a way that you don’t like you have a right to ask for death, you can’t expect that people to keep such a belief in tight little boxes.  Why is it Okay to kill a child in the womb that will take away my college career or Okay to allow grandma to do away with herself before she eats up my time or inheritance, but it is not Okay from me walk away from an accident (after all, it was only an accident right?) since it will simply eat up my time, attention, and resources and not really solve anything?

 

So California, are you really ready for a “cultural change?”  My prayers are with you.

"PERSON"AL

I wrote a letter to the editor recently and it hasn't appeared so I thought I would share it with you.

 

 

Dear Editor,

 

In her letter, Maria Miranda (Resist Campaign to Restrict Abortion) states that “the decision to terminate a pregnancy is intensely personal and private. . .”  Unfortunately she does not tell us why this is so.  This statement is the same that has been used throughout history to shut down interference and conversation concerning the way husbands have treated their wives, how parents disciplined their children, and how persons have treated their slaves.  The only way Maria’s statement could make sense at all is if the being within the mother’s womb, that has all of the chromosomes and DNA of a unique human individual, is not a person at all.  That such a large percentage of citizens of the United States do recognize the humanity of the person within her womb makes the argument that this is a private matter as untenable in this case as it had at one time in those others mentioned above.

 

To quote Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a pioneer of the American Women’s Rights Movement, on her views on abortion, “When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit."

 

Rev. John A. Valencheck

UPDATE:  I spoke about this letter in my homily this past weekend at it started some interesting philosophical debates after Mass.  One of the most interesting was a distinction between a personal and private belief and that of action.  Our government has always been involved when actions start effecting other people, but personally held beliefs and thoughts of the individual we hold sacrosanct.  So that a person believes that abortion is a good that should be available to anyone at anytime is a right in our nation, but what we focus on is when that belief is put into action (and in this case, an unique human person's rights are destroyed.)  To have it any other way would have our nation act as thought police.  Nice distinction. 

GET SMART

When I was in college I was eligible for Social Security benefits because the government felt that my father did not make enough money.  But, don’t you know, just as I was entering college they raised the threshold just enough that I would not receive any benefits.  Go figure.

 

But that was Okay, for the very next year my father was retired for half of the year and his income was less and therefore I was once again eligible for benefits!  Except that they had changed the standards again and I was out of the group.

 

But that was Okay, because the next year my father would have been retired the entire year, making substantially less than he did just two year ago and once again I was eligible.  Except, of course, that they changed the requirements once again and once again I was left out of the group.

 

This is not about a social security check.  The fact is that I didn’t need it although it might have been fun.  But it is an example on how slight changes in law can leave you out in the cold if you are on the margin.  One slight change and you can go from favored status to non-favored status.

 

That is what the pro-life movement is about.  When any person is considered Okay to put to death, the pool of what it is to be human with dignity and rights grows smaller and those not at the center of the pool see the edge move closer toward them. 

 

The scary thing is that it doesn’t take much to be moved from the center of the pool to the edge.  An accident, a false accusation, a disease, old age, loss of a job, an incident that can take place in the twinkling of an eye can move you from the center of the pool to the edge.  (Look at the minister from Hudson in jail in a foreign country accused of human trafficking.  Though seemingly innocent, things could go terribly wrong very quickly.)  I remember being shocked at a Pro-Life march in Washington D. C. seeing people in wheel chairs holding signs that asked the question, “Am I next?”  That they could even think that a possibility says something about where we are going as a people.

 

Today, in particular, we are encouraged to pray for the legal protection of unborn children.  Masses for Peace and Justice are being celebrated.  Thousands of people are weathering the bitter, bitter cold on the Life March in Washington today.  You are encouraged to pray and fast.  It doesn’t even have to be a full fast.  Give up the last cup of coffee.  Leave the last cookie on the plate.  Don’t grab that handful of nuts.  And every time you have the urge and wish that the beautiful, steaming, yummy mug of coffee was at your hand, offer it up with a prayer for those whose lives are not held as dear and worthy as yours.

TRUST ME - THIS IS A KILLER

Yes . . . It’s a guilty pleasure . . .

 

I will admit that I watch “Dexter.”  For those unfamiliar with this show: it is the story of a mass murderer trying to live a normal life – except for those pesky murders.

 

For those familiar with the show: Don’t worry.  I will not be giving anything away.  I’m only on season three. 

 

Now, let me say from the start that much of the show is reprehensible.  That is the great thing about Netflicks: the “ff” button.  I do not recommend the show.  That being said if one pays attention carefully (at least in the three seasons that I have seen) they do grapple with lots of hot button issues concerning life, love, the role of faith, the dignity (or lack thereof) of the human person and so forth.  I rarely agree with the title character no matter how sympathetic they try to make him with swelling music, kind words, and someone saying to him, “This is the right thing.”

 

Dexter supposedly is unable to have feelings; particularly complicated feelings such as love.  He works hard then trying to figure what to do to express love to those close to him and make them feel love.  It is a radical decision for the other with little consolation to himself.  Inside his head he is saying, “This is all fake.  If they only knew I don’t know a thing about love.”  From a spiritual standpoint he is in the deepest throws of love.  If he acted lovingly toward those for whom he had great feelings of love, big whoop.  As Scriptures says, “even the pagans do the same.”  But he overcomes his deficit to love mightily.  His is probably the purest love in the show. 

 

Well, except for those murders.

 

That is the part of the show that peaks my interested.  The producers go through great lengths to make Dexter a lovable character.  And he had a code by which he lives; he will only kill those who kill and have escaped responsibility for their murders and who will most likely kill again.  So if you would become friends with Dexter, you most likely would never experience the dark side of him that “needs” to kill.  You would only know this great guy.

 

Think of that for a moment.  Allow Dexter to not be safely on the other side of the screen.  Suppose he was a true friend of yours and you know about his propensity for snuffing out life.  Could you be his friend and allow him to live his life as he allows you to live yours?  Though a bit odd and maybe a tich distant, he is thoughtful, friendly, pleasant, helpful, and fiercely loyal.  And really, he only takes the life of those many would say “deserve to die.”  Some would day that he is making the world a better place.

 

But he is in your living room having a beer with you and you can sense that you about to have a severe disagreement about something.  Though he says he would never turn his butchery on you, do you completely trust him?  Can you?  Would you not have some fear that the line that separates the “worthies” from the “worthless” might slip – maybe even for just a moment – and in a moment of passion you would become a victim instead of one of the protected class?

 

I submit that this is a wonderful analogy for our modern state which Pope Benedict calls a throw away culture.  The list grows of people we can discard – that are on the wrong side of the line.  This week was a story that there are more people on death row in Ohio than in a long time.  There is physician assisted suicides, euthanasia, abortion, and now we are on the verge of federal mandates forcing churches to be direct agents in actions they believe to be violations of human dignity.  There are questions about how we treat the poor, the insane, the refugee, the addict, the ignorant, the disenfranchised, and even the criminal. 

 

For every person added to this list of undeserving of life, the line that separates each of us from the undesirables creeps up.  It may seem a far distance away, but it is only an accident, a false accusation, or change in government away.  Many priests talk about the future and wonder if we will now end up in jail some day for teaching something that has been a part of our core beliefs for 2,000 years.

 

It’s the Dexter effect.

 

And it makes me wonder.