Posts Tagged ‘Abortion’
Was the Black Community Targeted by the Abortion Industry?
June is Abortion Awareness Month in the African American Community. It is a tragic and curious fact that just over 30% of the abortions in this country are performed on African American women. But the African American community is only 12% of the US population. This means of course that the Black population is strongly over-represented in terms of abortion deaths. Hence the need for an abortion awareness month in the Black Community. Recent statistics from the Guttmacher institute indicate that 1784 Black children are killed by abortion every day in the USA.
Why are African American children five times more likely to die by abortion than white children? Like all sociological phenomena, one simple explanation is not enough. Surely the breakdown of the Black family structure is a factor. High poverty rates must also be influential. Others explain that women in poverty often have less access to contraceptives and other “health-care” that might help prevent “unwanted” pregnancies. But others also note that the Black community was historically targeted by Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. Currently 78% of Planned parenthood clinics are located in minority neighborhoods. I would like to take a brief look at this historical phenomenon.
Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project” – I do not propose to give a complete description of the origins of Planned Parenthood. You can read a more through description of that history here: Margaret Sanger and the “Negro Project” and here: The Pivot of Civilization . But fundamentally Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger was a believer in Eugenics. This was a theory that held that certain races of the human family were inherently inferior and that they should be eliminated from the gene pool through the use of contraceptives, sterilization and even abortion. Doing this would help “purify” the human race of undesirable traits (negative eugenics).
Where were these undesirable traits found in the human gene pool that Eugenicists sought to minimize or remove? You guessed it, darker skinned peoples such as African Americans, Gypsies, and various indigenous peoples had these “undesirable” traits, tended to live in poverty and were targeted for reduction and elimination by the eugenics movement. The movement became quite widespread by the 1930s and influenced Adolf Hitler in his genocidal programs.
Here in America a chief proponent of eugenics was Margaret Sanger. In 1922 Sanger wrote against outreach to the poor since it caused them merely to become more numerous:
The most serious charge that can be brought against modern “benevolence” is that it encourages the perpetuation of defectives, delinquents and dependents. These are the most dangerous elements in the world community, the most devastating curse on human progress and expression (from page 108 of her book The Pivot of Civilization).
In 1926 she began to propose sterilization for those who were “unfit”:
It now remains for the U.S. government to set a sensible example to the world by offering a bonus or yearly pension to all obviously unfit parents who allow themselves to be sterilized by harmless and scientific means. In this way the moron and the diseased would have no posterity to inherit their unhappy condition. The number of the feeble-minded would decrease and a heavy burden would be lifted from the shoulders of the fit (in the Birth Control Review Oct. 1926).
The Eugenics movement used the word “moron” to describe those caught in the cycle of poverty and attributed their inability to escape that cycle as evidence of their inferior genes and poorer mental capacity. By 1929 she chose to target African Americans especially for her “benevolent” outreach establishing her first clinic in Harlem. By 1939 she began her “Negro Project” establishing clinics and locating them especially in poorer neighborhoods to “encourage” Blacks and other poor people to reproduce less. The distribution of contraceptives was her primary strategy. She saw Black ministers as “useful” in her campaign and rather infamously wrote to her Regional Director Dr. Clarence Gamble:
The minister’s work is also important and he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members (Letter to Gamble, Dec 10, 1939).
After World War II the Eugenics movement was discredited so Margaret Sanger adjusted her rhetoric and spoke of trying to “help the poor” and of “promoting better health” but the method, the plan and the targeted groups remained the same. Today it is instructive to note that the usual location of Planned Parenthood Clinics remains largely poor Black and Latino neighborhoods. After 1973 Planned Parenthood added to its arsenal by becoming the largest provider of abortions in this country.
Was Sanger successful? Well, as noted, African Americans are 12% of the American Population. But just over 30% of abortions are performed on Black women. Some conclude to moral problems in the Black Community. Others conclude that the Black Community has been targeted. You decide. Today as noted, 78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are located in minority neighborhoods.
In an interesting twist of fate, Whites and Northern Europeans (races that Sanger and the Eugenics movement would have considered most “fit”) bought into contraception in a big way after 1965 and now themselves face a kind of demographic implosion. Meanwhile many “Third World” races and nations (considered by Sanger and the Eugenics movement as “inferior”) are now set to demographically dominate the world. I have written of the demographic implosion of Europe here: Contraception is Suicide
As stated above, the high rate of abortion in the Black Community is likely complicated and surely cannot be reduced to one thing. But the targeting of the Black Community cannot be dismissed as a factor. The quotes from the distant past might be dismissed by some. But the current location of most Abortion “Clinics” in Black and Latino neighborhoods cannot be so easily dismissed.
The trailer is below and features a series of quotes from proponents of Eugenics (Sanger among them) in the early half of the 20th Century. Make sure you have a strong stomach before you watch since the quotes are ugly and horrible examples of racism that has thankfully and hopefully has abated to a large degree.
Here is another video that effectively addresses abortion using a hip hop format:
Abortion Awareness Month in the Black Community
What is the leading cause of death in the African American Community? Ask this question of most people or even post it in Google and answers like this come forth: Heart Disease, Diabetes, Cancer, Crime and so forth. But the leading cause by far is (you guessed it) Abortion. Look at this graph:
You can see it’s not even close. Abortion is huge killer for Black Americans as it is in any other ethnic group. Why is there a special month for awareness of abortion in the Black Community? African American women comprise about 12% of women in this country but over 30% of Abortions are performed on Black women. There are many reasons for this including poverty and the fact that the Black Community was targeted many decades ago by Margaret Sanger, founder of “Planned Parenthood” in her so-called “Negro Project.” Planned Parenthood clinics are especially present even to this day in Black and other Minority Neighborhoods. This month is therefore set aside in African American Catholic Parishes and some more sympathetic Protestant Denominations as a month to consider the huge toll abortion has taken in the African American community. Here on the blog I hope to provide a number of articles and insights as well. Pray to end abortion. Pray that people will want and find alternative to abortion.
On Fetal Pain and the Humanizing of the Abortion Debate
There was a good article in the Washington Post today By Marc Thiessen entitled Bringing Humanity Back to the Abortion Debate. The article is an op-ed piece reflecting on the recent action of Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska in signing into law the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
Obviously the Nebraska law will be challenged by pro-choice forces in this country and likely go all the way to the Supreme Court. But in the end as Mr. Thiessen also observes in his article, the increasing evidence that unborn children do feel pain early on in the pregnancy may be a significant factor in changing hearts across this land.
In the Church we have always held to the fact the unborn child is fully human from the moment of conception. Yet, outside pro-life circles it has always been necessary for them to dehumanize the “fetus” (in other words the baby) in order to make this heinous act more palatable. No amount of evidence for the humanity of the unborn child will ever convince hardened pro-choice advocates. But it remains true that not every one who is pro-choice is adamantly so. The evidence that unborn children feel pain may well move the hearts of the ambivalent toward deeper respect for life. If baby seals should not be clubbed to death because it is cruel, perhaps some will be convinced that abortion is cruel to the child as well if fetal pain can be clearly demonstrated.
It is clear that we face challenges even here. Some years ago the movie “Silent Scream” showed ultrasound images of an actual abortion. It was unmistakable to me that the unborn child was struggling to survive and frantically drawing away from the cutting instrument. But to many others it was not so clear. I thought at the time, “If this cannot convince people what will?” So even here I am aware that some hearts are very hardened. But it is that the middle ground where the ambivalent pro-choice Americans reside that there may be response to the increasing evidence of fetal pain. We can only hope and pray.
I would like to provide excerpts from Mr. Thiessen’s article and add some comments of my own in RED.
Can an unborn child feel pain? That question will dominate the abortion debate in America for the next several years thanks to Gov. Dave Heineman of Nebraska. Last week, Heineman signed the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act into law, banning abortions in Nebraska at and after 20 weeks based on growing scientific evidence that an unborn child at that age can feel pain.
The legislation was enacted as a defensive measure. After the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller, a physician named LeRoy Carhart declared his intention to carry on Tiller’s work at his Bellevue, Neb., clinic. State legislators did not want Nebraska to become the country’s late-term abortion capital — so they voted 44-5 to stop him. Good for them and look at the size of the vote!. God bless the people of Nebraska.
The new law will probably spark a Supreme Court showdown, because it directly challenges one of the key tenets of Roe v. Wade — that “viability” (the point at which an unborn child can survive outside the womb, generally held to be at 22 to 24 weeks) is the threshold at which states can ban abortion. In defending the law, Nebraska will ask the high court to take into account scientific research since Roe and push the legal threshold back further. That’s the idea, moving the ball down field. We may not be able to score a touchdown just now but moving the ball, moving the threshold back wherein a State can legally ban abortion is important. If we cannot completely end abortion right now we can possibly erode its legality.
In 1973, when Roe was decided, it was believed that the nervous systems of even newborn babies were too immature to feel pain– so doctors generally did not provide anesthesia to infants before surgery. But 25 years ago, a young doctor at Oxford University named Kanwaljeet Anand noticed that babies coming to his neonatal intensive care unit from surgery suffered a massive stress response — indicating they had been through extreme pain. His research into this phenomenon shifted medical opinion, and today even the most premature newborns are given anesthesia to alleviate pain during surgery. It is incredible we would ever think that newborns couldn’t feel pain. Obviously they do. I remember being able to see that in my newborn baby brother. Once his hand got pinched in the stroller. He howled. Another time a little the corner of the car door nicked his head. Again he screamed and cried for quite some time, so much so we were getting ready to take him to the hospital. Of course newborns feel pain. They also experience anxiety. This is obvious. What were we thinking to presume they did not? Luckily common sense and research have prevailed and we now use anesthesia.
Anand — now a professor at the University of Arkansas and a pediatrician at the Arkansas Children’s Hospital — continued his research into infant pain, which has led him to conclude that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks, and possibly as early as 17 weeks when a portion of the brain called the “subplate zone” is formed. Indeed, according to a New York Times Magazine story on Anand’s research, a fetus’s “immature physiology may well make it more sensitive to pain, not less: The body’s mechanisms for inhibiting pain and making it more bearable do not become active until after birth.” Anand clearly has credibility here and a track record of turning medical opinion. This is very good news, not that infants feel pain but, that we are finally paying attention to the evidence and demonstrating what we should have presumed all along. That there was even the possibility that unborn children feel pain and expereince anxiety should have been enough for us. But at least now we have a solid researcher and doctor on the job who is widely respected and and affirming a pro-life premise.
Mr. Theissen goes on to give some more good news on the pro-life front and reasons for hope. You are encouraged to read the remainder of his article here: Bringing Humanity Back to the Abortion Debate.
We must continue to pray mightly for conversion of hearts in the matter of abortion. We must also not neglect to to pray for women who often face difficult circumstances in preganancy.
Pray too for those who have procured abortion (whether men or women) and who now suffer the emotional and psychological trauma that often comes from such a choice. As a Church we must be prophetic and speak clearly against abortion but we must also be a place where healing and mercy are found. As evidence for fetal pain grows there may be increasing need for the Church to help post abortive women and men find healing and reconcilation as what they have done becomes more clear to them. The less abstract abortion becomes all the better for rolling back the numbers of those who claim to be pro-choice but all the more the need for the Church to continue to be that place where grace and mercy can be found.
A Life Like Yours
There are many ways to describe my teen-age niece, Anna. She is a cell phone carrying, iPod wearing, High School Musical -crazed girl who loves going to the movies. In her more serious moments she’s a hard-working student who speaks two languages, likes photography and serves as an altar server at her parish. To those who first meet Anna, she is described as a person with Down Syndrome. Her sister describes her as the only person she knows who does not know the meaning of jealousy and who is an experience of pure love.
Unbelievably, 9 out of 10 ten times women and men make the choice to abort a life that could one day, look a lot like Anna’s. In fact, the conversation with the doctor when my sister received the diagnosis of Downs went something like this:
The doctor: “The test results have a strong indication that the child will be born with Down Syndrome, when would you like to schedule an appointment to terminate the pregnancy.”
My sister: “There will be no termination of the pregnancy.”
The doctor: “I don’t think you understand, the test indicates that there is a high probability that the child will be mentally retarded.”
My sister: “I understand that, but I would like to know what we can do to make sure the baby is born safe and healthy.”
The doctor: “I don’t’ think you understand fully what I am saying; you need to go home and think this over.”
My sister went on to say that the doctor also shared that he had never had parents, when faced with this diagnosis, choose to keep the baby. At the time she shared this it did not surprise me because my sister lives in Stockholm, Sweden and Sweden is one of the most secular countries with very liberal abortion laws. What does surprise me are the statistics here in the U.S. Not only because of the high rate of active practice of religion as compared to other countries, but also because in the course of our daily lives we see adults with Down Syndrome working in retail stores, attending classes at vocational schools and colleges, serving as liturgical ministers and active in lots of community activities. For example meet Maddie. www.adw.org and click on news and events.
Sunday was World Down Syndrome Day and there was an ad in the Washington Post that seeks to educate people that “Babies with Down’s grow and develop just like other children…perhaps more slowly, but just as surely.”
My sister often shares that what was most critical for her and my brother-in-law was the support they received from family and friends as they worried through so much of the unknown during the pregnancy and the support they receive from other families raising special needs kids.
The Archdiocese through its Department for Ministry to People with Special Needs and its Department for Life Issues is working in a number of different areas to educate, provide support, and build environments to help children and families thrive. On Saturday, March 27 there will be a workshop at Blessed Sacrament parish to explore all this and more. If you are interested click here
Are Congressman Stupak’s Assurances are Without Merit?
I have commented little on the healthcare debate in DC since the focus of this blog is meant to be Church life and culture not partisan politics. And yet, the USCCB had asked us to stand against the bill due to its legal wording that permitted the Federal funding of abortion. Abortion is a moral issue, not political one and I feel free to comment on that.
A man who hours ago had my admiration for his principled stance against the funding of abortion was Congressman Bart Stupak. He and the a number of other pro-life Democrats stood courageously against the bill on the grounds that it funded abortion.
Today Mr. Stupak and the principled stance of other pro-life democrats gave way to political pressure. Mr Stupak et al. were given a political fig leaf and they took it. Mr Stupak has to know that the executive order of the President carries no weight because it cannot over-rule the Law that is going into effect upon the President’s signature. Both Democrat and Republican leaders I saw interviewed fully admit this. The Healthcare Bill, when signed into law permits Federal funding of Abortion. Anyone denied such funding on the the basis of an executive order can sue and will win because the law is clear and an executive order cannot set aside the law.
The reassurances that Mr. Stupak declares the executive order gives are without merit. He must know better than this. A fig leaf could not take away Adam and Eve’s shame. And the same remains true here as well: no fig leaf of some executive order can take away the shame of voting to fund abortion. It is shameful.
You can read the statement by the National Right to Life Committee here: http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/Release032110.html
I am interested in your understanding of this deal and if you think that the reassurances of Mr. Stupak are with or without merit. Since this is not a political blog I am grateful if you can avoid partisan jabs and comments that are more political than focused on the issue of abortion and how it relates to this bill.
In this video Congressman Stupak defends his decision
Update: Statement by Richard Doerflingerof the USCCB:
We’ve consulted with legal experts on the specific idea of resolving the abortion funding problems in the Senate bill through executive order. We know Members have been looking into this in good faith, in the hope of limiting the damage done by abortion provisions in the bill. We believe, however, that it would not be fair to withhold what our conclusion was, as it may help members in assessing the options before them:
“One proposal to address the serious problem in the Senate health care bill on abortion funding, specifically the direct appropriating of new funds that bypass the Hyde amendment, is to have the President issue an executive order against using these funds for abortion. Unfortunately, this proposal does not begin to address the problem, which arises from decades of federal appellate rulings that apply the principles of Roe v. Wade to federal health legislation. According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation. This is the unanimous view of our legal advisors and of the experts we have consulted on abortion jurisprudence. Only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation.”
Richard Doerflinger
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
The “Pro-Choice” Bluff Has Been Called
Focus on the Family will run an Ad during the Superbowl which speaks of a decision for life by the mother of Tim Tebow. I hesitate to comment on an Ad that I have not seen. But since others have felt free to do so, so will I. Mrs. Tebow, faced with doctor’s warnings of possible deformity in her unborn infant, chose to carry Tim to term. Clearly he was just fine. Mrs Tebow and Time are mighty glad she chose life. This seems to be the gist of the Ad.
Enter planned Parenthood and other abortion rights advocates such as Women’s Media Center who protest the Ad which shows “choice” in action. But evidently it is not the sort of choice they want to see publicized. It seems clear that this is more evidence that Planned Parenthood et al. are not pro-choice as they claim to be but rather, pro-abortion. They seem to be pro-choice as long as the choice is abortion. When the choice is not abortion they seek to muzzle and silence the celebration of a choice for life.
I think it is possible for us to admit that Focus on the Family’s sponsorship of this Ad is an understandable factor in their aversion to the Ad. However if the really are pro-choice as they say not only should they support such an ad but they ought to sponsor spots themselves that show women choosing life. Then a nemesis of theirs like Focus on the Family wouldn’t have to sponsor such an Ad.
It seems to me that Focus on the Family has called Planned Parenthood’s bluff. No one doubts that Focus on the Family is Pro-Life. Their cards are in plain sight. But now Planned Parenthood et al. have been foced to show their cards. The bluff has been called and Planned Parenthood is pro-choice alright. But only if the choice is abortion.
Here is a Youtube video they are running to counter the Focus on the Family, Tim Tebow Ad.
I will display the Focus on the Family Ad and update this post when the video becomes available on the internet. Also embedded beow is an excellent and. I think, fair interview by Bill O’Reilly with Jehmu Greene of the Women’s Media Center, a pro-”choice” group.
The Ponderings and Proclamations of a Pro-Life Pilgrim
I just returned from the March for Life which takes place right in my own neighborhood and had the opportunity to ponder once again the mystery and dignity of Human life. I spent the last 20 minutes of the march interacting with the “pro-Choice” demonstrators on the steps of the Supreme Court and I gave them the “come to Jesus” talk. 
More on that at the end. But for now, just a few thoughts on the mystery of our existence.
It is a true fact that from our point of view life begins at conception. That is when we can “measure” life’s existence and when we begin to interact with human life and must respect it. But, in a way I want to be more radical with you and say that life begins “before” conception. We are rather materialistic, mechanistic, and scientific at times and thus we miss the glorious fact that our lives cannot simply be assessed or measured in a test tube or “seen” with earthly eyes, or even measured by time.
Why do I say that life begins “before” conception and why do I use quotes around “before”? Well, first of all, the Scriptures attest to fact that God knew of us before he made us: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.”(Jer 1:4). And psalm 139 attests; “Every one of my days was written in your book before one of them ever came to be.” (Psalm 139:16). What this means pure and simple is that no human person is an accident or a surprise to God. No one, even those born under less than ideal circumstances, is inconvenient or unwanted by God. Every human person is sacred for they are willed by God, loved by God, created intentionally by God not as a whim but as part of a plan stretching back before the foundation of the world. Every human person (even my enemy) is God’s “yes” to the world.
When I say life begins “before” conception why do I put “before” in quotes? I do not mean to say that we existed in heaven or someplace else before we were conceived here. But what I mean is that there really is no “before” with God. God dwells outside time and transcends it. Past and future are equally present to God who lives in the fullness of time where everything is now, every thing, every age is present. For us, time unfolds in chronological sequence. For God everything just IS. God is not waiting for your tomorrow. your tomorrow has always been present to him. This is why God can say “Before I formed you I knew you.” This is why all our days are written in his book before they come to be for us.
Ah, the mystery of human life caught up in the mystery of God! We cannot grasp our dignity fully but only seem small facets of it. Too wonderful for us this knowledge, this mystery is too deep to express. As I saw thousands upon thousands at the march today I pondered that the mystery of their life is caught up in eternity and that God knows them each through and through, not a hair of their head was un-numbered. There too were the police guarding us and preserving good order. They too, known by God through and through, before they were ever formed in their mother’s womb.
I praise you Lord because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. …For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. .. your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. (Ps 139, selected verses).
And then I came to our opponents on the steps of the Supreme Court. They were small in number but with that distinctive blue and white sign: “Keep Abortion legal.” These too, I thouhgt are known and loved by God from before the foundation of the world. Sadly misled but loved.
And then it occurred to me that at the heart of their dignity was to hear the truth, the truth that would set them free. “Why not?” I thought. “Am I not here to influence, to change hearts? At least plant seeds?” One by one I went to each of them I could get to. I look them in the eye and appealed to their conscience. They were chanting “Ho, Ho! Hey, Hey! Roe v. Wade is Here to Stay!” I stood before each an looked in their eyes and said in a clear but low voice that they could hear: “But you know it’s wrong. Deep in your heart you know it is wrong. You know.” It was interesting. In years past I tried to debate the issue with them and all we did was argue. But this year the Lord said, “Speak only to their conscience.”
Some of the looks I got back were powerful. Some were troubled looks, some neutral, one gave me a knowing look as if I (no not I, the Lord) had connected. It was brief with each but powerful. I didn’t have to win. All I had to do was to respect their dignity to hear the truth and let God speak to their conscience. He made them to know the truth and I pray that even one of them really heard the Lord. It was a moment in time that was written in God’s book before it ever came to be. Your prayers will make it fruitful.
Pondering Abortion on the Feast of the Holy Innocents
We know well that Holy Innocents continue to be killed in our world through abortion. The Feast of the Holy Innocents is an often over-looked feast on the Church’s Calendar coming is the busy week of the Christmas Octave. And yet there is something very astonishing and even dangerous to consider on this feast.
I’ll explain what I mean by dangerous in a moment. But for now consider some biblical facts with me.
- When God was drawing close to liberating his chosen people from slavery in Egypt there occurred the order to murder of the all the baby boys among the Hebrews. It is almost as though Satan sensed that God was up to something good and Satan raged through Pharaoh in murderous anger and fear. Thankfully the actual numbers were reduced since the Egyptian midwives engaged in civil disobedience, refusing to allow the practice to continue.
- At the time of Jesus, when God was preparing to liberate his People from sin, there also occured the murder of innocent baby boys. Here too it was almost as though the Devil sensed that God was up to something good and he once again raged, this time through Herod in murderous anger and fear. Thankfully too this infanticide also ended at some point.
- Notice the pattern. When God prepared a great liberation the Devil went after the babies. In our time, on a scale as never before, the Devil is going after our babies in murderous anger and fear. What is he afraid of? Is God planning something big in the near future? Is there a great liberation at hand? Is there a great advancement of evangelization and conversion in the offing? We can only speculate. But patterns are patterns and Scripture has a way of repeating its patterns and echoing down through the centuries.
Why is this a dangerous reflection? Because I want to make it clear that abortion, the killing of the innocents in our age, is NOT and never can be considered something good, or a “positive sign.” Such a speculation as this might cause some to wrongly conclude that abortion is part of God’s plan or something we should see “positively.” We should not. It must be fought. It is of Satan. I want to conclude by reminding you that the great liberation that followed the past infanticides did not occur until AFTER those murderous rages were stopped. Hence, to follow the pattern established in Scripture and to see a potentially great and liberating act of God we must first see an end to the slaughter. Work and pray to end abortion. May the Holy Innocents pray for us!
I put the following video together to honor these young martyrs. The musical setting is by Michael Haydn of the hymn for the Feast of the Holy Innocents: Salvete Flores Martyrum – It is from his Vesperae In F for Equal Voices, Soli and Orchestra. The singers are the The Group singing is Collegium Instrumentale Brugense. This music is available at iTunes. The Latin text of this ancient hymn is quite beautiful. I produce here the Latin text followed by a fairly literal translation. I would like to call your attention to the second verse and a very charming detail. That verse described these young, two year old martyrs and holding palm branches (the symbol of martyrdom) but as they hold them they play with them, in the way a young child will often fiddle with palm branches in Church. Beautiful and so very human!
Salvete flores martyrum, - Hail Martyr Flowers
quos lucis ipso in limine – On the very threshold of the dawn (of life)
Christi insecutor sustulit - Christ’s persecutor destroyed (you)
ceu turbo nascentes rosas. - like the whirlwind does the budding roses.
Vos prima Christi victima, - You Christ’s firstfruits
grex immolatorum tener, – A flock of tender sacrificial victims
aram sub ipsam simplices – right up by the very altar
palma et coronis luditis. – now play with your palms and crowns
Iesu, tibi sit gloria, - Jesus to you be glory
qui natus es de Virgine, – who were born of the Virgin
cum Patre et almo Spiritu, - with the Father and loving Spirit
in sempiterna saecula. Amen. - unto to eternal ages. Amen.
Follow-up: Bishop Tobin interviewed on Kennedy Case
In the video below, Bishop Thomas Tobin speaks well enough for himself on the decision to advise Congressman Patrick Kennedy not to receive Holy Communion. My remarks are thus brief. I want only to call your attention to a powerful reminder given by Bishop Tobin. About mid way through the interview he states simply but clearly that if a person’s career, job or position conflicts with their faith they should leave that career, job or position. In a world that esteems such things above almost anything else, this is an earth-shaking summons: faith is more important than any worldly blessing. This insistence comports well with what Jesus says clearly in Scripture:
No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. (Matt 6:24)
Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (Matt 10:37-39)
Life in this world and faith are often in conflict and difficult choices are required of us. If Mr. Kennedy asserts (wrongly I think) that he cannot reconcile his faith in the matter of abortion to public policy, then he should choose his faith and leave the Congress. What is he first? A congressman or a Christian? It seems clear enough to me that he could remain a congressman if he simply refused to promote abortion rights and fund them. But since he (not the Church) says that as congressman he CANNOT vote pro-life, then Bishop Tobin, accepting the conflict that Kennedy insists he has, has invited him to choose.
Now the interview.
A Strange Sort of Logic – The Kennedy Case
There is news today the Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence RI, and the Bishop of Patrick Kennedy has advised him to refrain from receiving Holy Communion. This was announced by the Congressman himself. What is the reason that someone in Mr. Kennedy’s situation might be instructed to to refrain? As you may be aware, Holy Communion is not just communion with Jesus Christ in a personalised sense, it is communion with the Body of Christ the Church. A Catholic who receives communion is is not just saying in an abstract sort of way, ”I believe in Jesus.” They are also saying, I share communion with his mystical Body on earth, the Church. I believe in one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. I believe that when the Church speaks solemnly and authoritatively that it is Jesus Christ who speaks. For Scripture records that Jesus said to the apostles and their successors, “He who hears you hears me.” Hence, our communion with Christ is not just an abstract Christ, a Christ of our own making, it is communion with the Christ defined in the Scriptures who also has a Body, the Church which actually speaks in his name. Holy Communion is thus communion with Christ and his body the Church, which speaks in his name. In recent months Congressman Kennedy has made declarations that it is possible for him to vote for abortion rights and to vote to fund abortion and still be a Catholic in good standing. He has repeated this claim over the objections of his own Bishop and he has done this publicly. His Bishop has instructed that he cannot consider his communion with the Church to be intact by such actions. Hence Holy Communion cannot rightfully be celebrated when such a lack of communion on a serious matter is lacking. If communion means something, and it does: communion with Christ and communion ALSO with his Body the Church, then it is not possible to celebrate a communion that is severely lacking.
There can be a further reason for a Bishop, or any pastor for that matter, to advise someone to refrain from communion and that is the matter of serious sin. One of the first Pastors of the Church, St. Paul instructed the faithful to receive Communion worthily:
Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. (1 Cor 11:27-32)
Notice therefore that since we recognize the Eucharist as the Body and Blood of the Lord, to receive communion unworthily, that is in serious sin, is to sin against the Body and Blood of the Lord and to bring judgment upon oneself. Any good Pastor ought to warn the faithful who seem to be in objectively sinful situations to carefully examine themselves and confess lest they come under further judgment by unworthy reception. Notice too that St. Paul sees this being disciplined as a kind of medicine. Hence if we accept the judgement of the Church and the disciplining of the Lord we may well be saved when the world is condemned on Judgment Day. Discipline at the time it is administered seems obnoxious (cf Heb 12) but if it is accepted it can lead to a change of heart and ultimately to salvation on the Day of Judgement. It is an objectively serious sin to promote abortion and even more serious to vote to fund it. It is to be hoped that Congressman Kennedy and others might think seriously about what they are doing and come to a whole hearted acceptance of the Lord’s teaching on Life.
Thus we have the background issues as to why a Bishop might instruct a member of his flock to refrain from Communion.
Patrick Kennedy unfortunately is not alone. He speaks for a lot of Catholics who think they can invent their own Church and establish communion with that Church. Further, that they can call the Church that they invent the “Catholic Church” and claim that they are in union with a this fictional Catholic Church and ultimately with Christ, who is supposedly the head of this fictional Church. Bishop Tobin has warned Mr. Kennedy and others like him that they cannot simply invent their own Church and call it Catholic. There is an actual Church, founded by Christ, that is defined by him. It is not a Church of our own invention. It is rooted in the teachings of Christ and cannot simply be refashioned according to the whim or recipe of anyone other than what Jesus Christ has given. Even the bishops and the Pope cannot recast the Church. We have clear tradition and the Scriptures which must serve as the basis of the of how we understand ourselves. The Church is the servant of the Word of God, not its master. We must interpret and understand the Word of God but we cannot and must not over ride it.
Bishop Tobin has asked Congressman Kennedy to be honest and understand that he is not in communion with the real Catholic Church. Communion with the real Church has real parameters. There are just some things not compatible with being a Catholic and in communion with the real Catholic Church. There is a “bridge too far” that cannot be crossed for me to claim I am still in my homeland. At some point I have left the motherland , at some point I no longer speak my mother-tongue, the language of faith.
In the video below Congressman Kennedy has indicated that the bishops and the Church are simply guilty of being divisive and “fanning the flames of dissent and discord.” But Mr, Kennedy you have it exactly backwards. In the Catholic Church the bishops in union with the Pope ARE unity and accord! It is those who break union with the Bishop and Pope who are guilty of dissent and discord. If you claim to be Catholic you cannot also claim to be working for unity when you oppose the Pope and bishops in union with him. They ARE the source of our unity. This is not new idea. St Ignatius of Antioch stated it all pretty clearly when he said:
It is therefore fitting that you should, after no hypocritical fashion, obey [your bishop], in honour of God who has willed us [so to do], since he that does not so deceives not [by such conduct] the bishop that is visible, but seeks to mock Him that is invisible….I exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly of the apostles, along with your deacons, who are most dear to me, and are entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ,… As therefore the Lord did nothing without the Father, being united to Him, neither by Himself nor by the apostles, so neither do anything without the bishop and presbyters…. let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one hope, in love and in joy undefiled. (Ignatius to the Church at Magnesia 3,6-7)
It is simply impossible to speak of unity in the Catholic Church apart from the Pope and the bishops in union with him. Congressman Kennedy, you are the one guilty of disunity and discord if you walk away from the Pope and the Bishops in union with him on important moral issues of our day. It is a strange sort of logic to break union union with the Pope and bishops and then accuse them of breaking union and sowing disunity and discord. The bishops in union with the pope are not the source of disunity, they are the STANDARD of unity and the source of union for every Catholic.
