Tag: Faith & Current Events

Posted on

The Story of a Misunderstood Maritial Vow. A Necessary Rebuttal to a Washington Post Story

Playing on the heart-strings does not always (or even usually) produce a good or proper melody. Such is the case of a recently published Washington Post Article entitled: A Family Learns the True Meaning of the Vow: ‘In Sickness and in Health.’ Actually, they do not. In fact they demonstrate the exact antithesis of what that vow means.

I want to be careful here, since this is a story about real human beings who have lived through a tragic situation. And while they have made decisions that I think are wrong from a biblical and faith perspective, I do not lack sympathy for them. There’s is a human struggle here and not all of us hold up perfectly in such struggles.

Yet, they themselves have decided to go public, in a national newspaper about their decision and, as a pastor of many, I  am thus compelled to speak in a public way as well, lest others be misguided as to what a true Catholic and biblical response to this tragedy is.

The article and story is a very lengthy one. The full article is available above by click there in the title. I have also produced a summary here: A Story of Misguided Marital Vows. But the basic facts are these:

  1. Robert and Page Melton were married in 1995 and had two children.
  2. In 2003 Robert had a severe heart attack that left him with brain injuries. His motor skills were unimpaired but his memory was devastated. He remembered nothing of his wife and children and almost nothing of his earlier life.
  3. His behavior was also child-like and erratic which meant he needed to live in a nursing care facility.
  4. His wife visited him several times weekly and they developed a new sort of relationship. Though he came to know that he was her husband and the father of their daughters, he was not able to resume this role in any sort of substantial way.
  5. His wife Page was resigned to this, and still loved and cared for him as best as she was able.
  6. But then Page met an old friend, Allan who was divorced, and they fell in love.
  7. Allan also befriended Robert even as he was romancing Robert’s wife.
  8. Allan proposed marriage to Page.
  9. Page felt guilty, but wanted this new life. So she asked Robert.
  10. Robert said she should marry Allan, but wondered what would happen to himself.
  11. Page promised to continuing caring for Robert, but divorced him and married Allan.
  12. Robert continues today in her care and she is his legal guardian, but no longer his wife.
  13. The Post article assures us that everyone is blissfully happy, and will live happily ever after.

OK, a heart-wrencher to be sure. And the article is surely written to obtain our heartfelt consent by tugging at our heart-strings.

But be careful here, emotionally based reasoning is usually very blurry, and often quite wrong. And this is no exception. Lets look at some of the issues.

1. To begin with , there is the terrible title of the Post article: “A Family Learns the True Meaning of the Vow ‘In Sickness and In Health.'” Actually they do not. In fact they “learn” precisely the opposite of what this vow means. The vow does NOT mean that if one of the spouses gets sick, the other is free to leave the marriage and find love in the arms of another. It does not simply mean, as their “minister” falsely said to Page, that “so long as you make sure the other is cared for you have fulfilled this vow.”

Rather, the vow says that I will be true to our marriage even if you are sick and not able to live in a state that I would prefer. Sickness might mean that a spouse is no longer able to provide mutual support and companionship. It might mean that they are no longer able to be sexually intimate. It might mean that they can no longer provide financially or help in the raising of the children. There are any number of scenarios that the vow covers. It is open ended, and intentionally so.

In this case Robert was severely impaired from meeting most of his marital duties. Though he was not unconscious, his personality changed, he became more childlike and somewhat erratic. His memories were gone and, as the article implies, he was no longer interested in sexual intimacies.

Tragically this sometimes happens in marriages. But this is precisely why vows are made. And this leads us to a second point.

2. We do not make vows because life is going to be peachy and easy. Vows are not necessary to cover joyful and attractive things. Vows are necessary to cover less appealing scenarios, scenarios that are hard, and often unpleasant. And because they are such, we “vow” to remain true in spite of them.

Too many people today claim that vows are unreasonable when tough things come up. “Well if I had known that this would happen I would not have married.” But in fact this is the very reason you made vows, to cover the tough stuff. You did “know” in a general way, that difficult and painful things are possible and do occur. And this precise knowledge is why you made the vow: I take you to be my husband/wife, from this day forward, for better OR WORSE, for richer OR POORER, in SICKNESS and in health, till death do us part.

Nothing could be more clear, the vow says, “I will be at your side as your spouse no matter what.

This is the “true meaning” of the vow “in sickness and in health” no matter what the Washington Post says. Page, the wife, though sorely distressed and understandably desirous of an ordinary marriage, and “adult male compansionship” (as the article describes), has made a vow to her first husband that she must honor. That is the true meaning. A vow is a vow, a promise to act accordingly when the conditions are tough and warrant it.

3. But Father, but Father, she asked Robert and he said it was OK for here to marry Allan! Two responses must be made here.

First, as the article indicates, Robert has been affected mentally in a severe and substantial way. He is child-like in his reasoning, and not able to act on his own accord. He is in no position to be asked for a divorce or legally to grant one. The article indicates that Page was his legal guardian and, in order to procure the divorce, had to get Robert’s brother to act as his legal guardian.  Even secular law accepts that Robert could not simply answer for himself in his condition. Hence his “consent” to the legal divorce is not valid from an interpersonal point of view.

Secondly, and more importantly there is the standpoint of biblical and sacramental marriage. Jesus says, They are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one divide (Mark 10:9; Matt 19:5 inter al).  The “no one” here includes the spouses themselves. Thus, even if Robert was mentally competent and  strangely happy that his wife was dating another man and wanted to marry that man, Robert could not give this consent for divorce from the perspective of faith. Perhaps the civil authorities could accept this, but no one who holds to biblical and sacramental marriage could.

4. There is a notion today that everyone is entitled to be happy and that we should gleefully accept whatever they do to find that happiness. Well, happiness is not promised here in the valley of tears. And life has a way of dishing out both its pleasures and sorrows. True and lasting happiness must wait for the heavenly realms.

Jesus spoke very clearly of the need to accept and carry the cross in this life if we would be truly his disciples.

Page, in this story, received a difficult cross, one that was unexpected (they usually are) and long lasting. We cannot glibly dismiss her struggle, but neither can we exempt her from what God has permitted and gives her the grace to accept. Life is not always what we wish, but God can grant us a serenity and a courage to face life’s trials with faith and fidelity to the vows and commitments we have made.

I know many spouses who have cared for years for an incapacitated or difficult spouse. They are heroic in their virtue and steadfast to their vows. My own father stood faithfully by my mother in her 15 year decline into alcoholism, just she had stood by him in his earlier struggle with the same. It wasn’t easy but it made them both holy. In the cross is our salvation.

And this leads to the final point.

5. Too many Christians are ashamed of the cross. Scripture says was are to glory in the cross (cf Gal 6:14 inter al) and proclaim its magnificent, though often painful power.

Many are able to glory in the cross when it is an abstraction. But when the cross gets real, many Christians collapse and seek a way out. Sometimes it is a way out for themselves, sometimes it is for others.

And the world of course sees the cross as an absurdity and will often call the Church and true Christians harsh, unloving and uncaring, for our insistence that, only by the way of the Cross, will we reach our heavenly goal. To the world’s strident and rhetorical questions, (meant to illustrate the absurdity of the cross) we must often answer a simple yes:

  1. Are you saying that people who are suffering at the the end of life cannot be put out of their misery by euthanasia?! – Yes
  2. Are you saying that two loving homosexuals cannot marry and must live celibacy?! – Yes
  3. Are you saying that people who are unhappy in a marriage  should not be able to divorce?!? – Yes
  4. Are you saying that Page, who finally found love, after her years of suffering, cannot realize that love in a new marriage?!  –  Yes.

Sometimes the answer has to simply be yes and we cannot be ashamed to hold up the Cross of Christ who said, Anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me (Matt 10:38). And again, If anyone is ashamed of me and my teaching in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels. (Mk 8:38), And yet again, In this world you will have tribulation. But take courage! I have overcome the world. (Jn 16:33).

Yes, this world will often rail against the Cross and call Christians who point to its demands hateful, inseneitive, heartless and so forth. Scripture says, For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ (Phil 3:18). And to a world that often regards the Cross with sneering indignation, we must insistently hold it up, for it alone, by God’s grace, is our salvation.

In this tragic story of a family, our hearts may well go out and understand the difficulties faced by Page. But that cannot make what she did right. I do not hold that she is per se, an enemy of the Cross of Christ. She obviously received bad advice from her “minister” and lives in a world wherein the Cross makes no sense.

But in this sad and poignant story is a lesson for us all and a reminder that vows really do matter, even when “stuff” happens later, that the Cross is not just and abstraction that we sings hymns about, it is about real difficulties that we are asked to face with courage and faith; faith in the utter and absolute power of the Cross of Christ to save us.

Here’s a Video of a happier outcome rooted in the Cross and vows:

Posted on

You’ve Got it Bad and that Ain’t Good – But the Doctor is In

Alright, I got some news for you. It’s difficult news, but I’m sure you can take it! Here it is: your condition is grave, so is mine. We’ve got some serious stuff wrong with us! You might say we’ve got a few issues!

Yes, I’ve got your spiritual “medical chart” and mine open too, and I’m looking at the test results and the numbers don’t look good. We’ve tested positive for a number of things:

  1. It says we tend toward being dishonest, egotistical, undisciplined, weak, immature, arrogant, self-centered, pompous, insincere, unchaste, grasping, judgmental, inpatient, and shallow.
  2. It looks like we’ve tested positive for being inconsistent, unfaithful, immoral, ungrateful, disobedient, selfish, lukewarm, slothful, unloving, uncommitted, and just plain sinful.
  3. Further tests indicate the presence of fear, indifference, contempt, impurity, hatred, laziness, cowardice, and anger.
  4. Likewise, poor test results indicate the presence of greed, jealousy, revenge fullness, disobedience, hardheartedness, pride, envy, stinginess, selfishness, pettiness, spite, self-indulgence, lust, careless neglect, and prejudice.
  5. Our “spiritual” medical history indicates that we have sinned against justice, modesty, purity, and the truth. We have committed sins against the human person, the children and the young, innocent and the trusting, the frail and elderly, the unborn in infants, weak and powerless, immigrants and strangers, and those who are disadvantaged.
  6. A set of further test results indicates the absence of important key indicators, for we have failed to give witness to Christ, we have failed to join our will to God or give good example to others. We have failed to seek God above all things, to act justly you show mercy, and to repent of our sins. We’ve failed to obey the commandments and curb our earthly desires. We have failed to lead a holy life and to speak the truth. We have failed to pray for others and assist those in need; neither have we consoled the grieving.

Well, you can see that we’re kind of in bad shape. And though you might say that I’m exaggerating,  yet I suspect, if you’re honest, that you have committed many of these sins if not most of them.

Without a lot of grace and mercy, we are in very bad shape! Indeed, I will say more simply that we are doomed!

But here’s the good news: the doctor is in! Jesus! Likewise, the doctor has a cure:

  1. Daily Prayer
  2. Daily reading of scripture
  3. Holy Communion EVERY Sunday
  4. Frequent Confession, at least 4 times a year, more if mortal sin is a problem!
  5. Frequent doses of the Catechism, the lives of the saints and devotions such as the rosary, and novenas.
  6. Good company
  7. And custody of the eyes and ears.

Yes, we need help; we’ve got some stuff going on that will kill us eternally. But Jesus has a hospital: the Church, and Medicine: the Sacraments. Likewise there is spiritual “medical” advice available, the Word of God, sermons, the teachings of the Church and the presence of encouraging doctors and nurses such as the priests, religious, and fellow Catholics.

Whether you and like to admit it or not we need regular check-ups and serious medicine. And Jesus is guiding his Church to give skillful advice and distribute powerful medicine.

Do you think of the sacraments as medicine? Many simply think of them as rituals.  But the truth is they are powerful medicine. I’m a witness. After more than twenty-five years of seeing the doctor, Jesus, and letting him minister to me through Sacraments, the Word, and his Church, a wonderful change has come over me. I’m not what I want to be but I’m not what I used to be.

We got it bad and that ain’t good. But the doctor is in and you know you need him! Reach out for him, what ever your struggles. He’s waiting to minister to you especially in the liturgy and the sacraments. You can’t do it alone. Join us every Sunday at the “holy hospital”, the Church. The Doctor is in!

Here’s a little video humor I put together indicating that sometimes Jesus the Doctor gives a diagnosis that may surprise us. For it is often the case that we say everyone else has a problem, but in fact, the problem is inside us, and so is the solution. Please pardon my video, I have a face for radio.

Posted on

To Love God is a Gift that is Received, not Acheived

More often than not, the average Catholic thinks of the Commandments and the Christian moral life, as well as the spiritual life as a task, or list of tasks they must accomplish out of their own flesh power, or else they will face some negative consequence. Hence the moral life is seen by many as a drudgery and is carried out with little enthusiasm. Hence many will hear that they must be less angry, more generous, less vengeful, more chaste etc., and they think rules, and rules though necessary are uninspiring.

Few see the moral life as a magnificent vision of transformation in Christ and a portrait of a soul set on fire with love. More see the moral and spiritual life as a painful prescription more than a delightful description of what happens to the human person when Jesus Christ begins to live his life in them. Most see the most life as something thy must achieve rather than receive.

Of course “achievement” is neither grace, nor the gospel. And if salvation, transformation and perfection can be achieved, then who needs Christ?

Therefore, we must come to see the moral vision of the New Testament, with all its lofty and seemingly impossible demands as a description of what God will do for us, rather than a prescription of what we must do by our unaided flesh.

Consider the first and greatest commandment that we should Love God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (Deut 6:5). Frankly most people, (in their flesh), have a hard time loving God. They find prayer tedious, and are lukewarm at best in their affection for God. Mass, Scripture, prayer and so forth seem boring endeavors to them and, though they find time for everything else, God often gets no time, or, at best, the leftovers of the day.

On hearing that they should love God, some will attempt to rouse themselves to “do better.” But the results are usually pretty discouraging, since they are usually attempts made out of the flesh which is inimical to God (cf Rom 8:7).

How then shall we get there? How does the human person attain to the normal Christian life which is to have a tender and intense love for God?

Consider the following passage from one of the lesser known Eastern Fathers of the Church:

Anyone who loves God in the depths of his heart has already been loved by God. In fact, the measure of a man’s love for God depends upon how deeply aware he is of God’s love for him. When this awareness is keen it makes whoever possesses it long to be enlightened by the divine light, and this longing is so intense that it seems to penetrate his very bones. He loses all consciousness of himself and is entirely transformed by the love of God.

Such a man lives in this life and at the same time does not live in it, for although he still inhabits his body, he is constantly leaving it in spirit because of the love that draws him toward God. Once the love of God has released him from self-love, the flame of divine love never ceases to burn in his heart and he remains united to God by an irresistible longing.

From the treatise On Spiritual Perfection by St. Diadochus of Photice, bishop
(Cap. 12. 13. 14: PG 65, 1171-1172)

What St. Diadochus is describing here is the normal Christian life. Here the word “normal” is not used in the numerary sense that “most people attain this,” but in the sense of “what is to be expected.” How could it be that if Jesus Christ is living his life in us we would have anything less than a tender and longing love for God?

And note how Diadochus says this love begins in our experience of God’s love for us. Experience here means more than intellectual assent to the statement that “God loves me.” Rather, experience means just that, experience, to actually know, in a first hand way, and to witness the power and tenderness of God’s love for me. As it finally begins to dawn on us that the Son of God died for us, our hearts are steeped in God’s love. Yes, it finally begins to dawn on us that the Father’s providential love for us is unlimited and magnificent. Being filled with that love we now gain a joy, an affection, a serenity and an tender love of growing intensity for God.

More and more we delight to think of him, speak with him and simply sit quietly in contemplative union with God. And thus we journey, by stages to the normal Christian life, which is to have a deep affection and tender love and abiding desire for God.

Go to the Cross of Christ and ask this gift. Ask for the desire for this gift, if you don’t even have that. But ask, seek, knock. Our love for God is not, and cannot be our work. It is God’s work in us. And all He needs to get started is your “yes.” The door to your heart must be opened from the inside. Let God enter, and let him go to work filling you with his love.

Posted on

On the Indefectibility and Infallibility of the Church – As Seen on T.V.

There are very few certainties in this world about anything. But one thing is for sure: The Church will prevail, the Church will be here to infallibly lead us to the end of days.

“How arrogant!” you might say. And yet, say it I did! Why? Not because of any human guarantee, but based rather on the firm promise of Jesus himself.

The place is Ceasarea Phillipi, and Jesus is speaking to Simon Peter who had just confessed him to be the Christ and the Son of the Living God. Now Jesus speaks and says, You are Peter (Rock), and upon this rock I will build my church,and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matt 16:18) The Church will surely be hated, attacked and persecuted, but Hell will never prevail, never defeat the Church Jesus founded.

No Human Power – Now I want to emphasize that this power of the Church to endure to the end is no human power. It is not based on brilliant or perfect human leaders. It is based solely on Jesus’ promise. So it is not arrogant to make this claim, it is simply Biblical and a matter of faith in Jesus.

This prevailing power of the Church can be understood in a couple of ways.

First it means that the Church will be here to the end. Count on it since Jesus promised it. This is what is meant by the “indefectibility” of Church.

Second, this promise means that the Church cannot mislead us or teach falsely in a matter of faith and morals. Herein lies the infallibility of the Church. Of this the Catechism teaches:

In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the Apostles, Christ who is the Truth, willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility…The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms: “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful – who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium, above all in an Ecumenical Council. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 889-891)

Therefore note that the teaching is not simplistically applied. There are rather specific conditions set forth for the invocation of infallibility. But the bottom line is that when the Church formally teaches on matters of faith and morals (as described above), the promise of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit save us from doubt and error.

Now some object to claim. But reason with me for a minute. Jesus promised that the gates of Hell could not prevail against the Church. But if the Church could formally teach error about faith and morals, if the Church could mislead people about what was necessary for their eternal salvation, then it would be a fact that the gates of Hell HAD prevailed. But since Jesus promised it could never happen, then, by God’s grace, the Church is protected from formally teaching falsely on matters of faith and morals.

Do you trust Jesus and believe his word? Then the Church is unsinkable and infallible regarding faith and morals.

Here is a video that humorously depicts the indefectibility of the Church. Though sabotaged by this world, cast down, stoned, struck and hit by this world from all sides, though the world unleash all its power against us, the Church remains ever the same, and to every blow replies, “Still I rise!” Death is detained by the “Spirit.”

Posted on

How Should We See Unbelievers?

There is a remarkable reading that comes up every year in the Breviary attributed to Saint Macarius, a bishop of the early Church. I marvel at its vivid and pictorial quality. And yet at the same time, I find questions that arise in my mind as to the general application of the text. For the text states, in effect, that if the soul does not have Christ living within, it falls into utter disrepair and a contemptible state.

Allow me to have Bishop Macarius speak for himself and then I would like to pose a couple questions.

When a house has no master living in it, it becomes dark, vile and contemptible, choked with filth and disgusting refuse. So too is a soul which has lost its master, who once rejoiced there with his angels. This soul is darkened with sin, its desires are degraded, and it knows nothing but shame.

Woe to the path that is not walked on, or along which the voices of men are not heard, for then it becomes the haunt of wild animals. Woe to the soul if the Lord does not walk within it to banish with his voice the spiritual beasts of sin. Woe to the house where no master dwells, to the field where no farmer works, to the pilotless ship, storm-tossed and sinking. Woe to the soul without Christ as its true pilot; drifting in the darkness, buffeted by the waves of passion, storm-tossed at the mercy of evil spirits, its end is destruction. Woe to the soul that does not have Christ to cultivate it with care to produce the good fruit of the Holy Spirit. Left to itself, it is choked with thorns and thistles; instead of fruit it produces only what is fit for burning. Woe to the soul that does not have Christ dwelling in it; deserted and foul with the filth of the passions, it becomes a haven for all the vices.

From a homily attributed to Saint Macarius, bishop
(Hom. 28: PG 34, 710-711)

Again, a remarkably vivid and creative description of the Soul without Christ.

But herein lies my question: Is this obviously the condition of all non-believers, or of those who stray from the faith? I have occasionally had an agnostic or atheist write in to insist that they are very happy and fulfilled. I have also known non-believers in my own life who were seemingly happy and did not live reprobated lives. They had married and raised children, they were not horribly lacking in natural moral virtue. Conversely I, like you have met sworn believers who were very lacking in moral virtue or kindness.

Yet to read St Macarius, it would seem that the condition of the soul without Christ is to head straight downhill into a moral morass.

I suppose my own answer to my question is that St Macarius speaks in a general sort of way and that each person’s personal journey will be affected by any number of variables and factors.

But I would like to know what you think.

At one level we ought to be careful to not simplify the lives of unbelievers. They come in many forms and degrees. I am not unsympathetic to the complaints that, at times, we Christians simply presume that all unbelievers are unhappy and must, somehow be depressed. I for my part, am also annoyed when non believers oversimplify the faith, the scriptures and we who believe.

To be clear, I do not accuse St Macarius of over-simplifying. As I have said, I think he speaks in a general sort of way and the dangers he announces are often the case.

I especially think he is right when the “person” in question is a culture or nation. We have clearly seen how our own Western culture has suffered gravely as it has “kicked God to the Curb.” It is not outlandish to describe the Western world as a house that has no master living in it….dark, vile and contemptible, choked with filth and disgusting refuse…darkened with sin, its desires are degraded, and it knows nothing but shame.. Increasingly this is our lot in the West.

But individuals are more complicated. The effects of unbelief are often more subtle in them, and even without faith it is possible to have natural virtues.

At some level this provides hope that no one is beyond remedy or reach. And while natural virtue can never be sufficient to save any soul, it can, at least open a person to God and provide fertile ground for grace, and even prevenient graces.

I’d like to get some of your thoughts on this. What are some important distinctions to make? How do you understand the words of the Bishop St. Macarius? How should we regard the state of soul of unbelievers and those who have relapsed from or renounced the faith?

Please understand, I do not ask these questions rhetorically. I ask them genuinely and do indeed seek your thoughts of St. Macarius’ vivid description and how it may or may not apply today.

Posted on

To March for Life is to Experience Life

If you have ever had the exciting privilege of being in Washington for the Pro-Life March you how true it is that you always leave exhausted, but more alive than you came. The Pro-life March, for a Catholic especially, is really more than just the March, it is a series of activities. In the days immediately before the March there are usually seminars and other focused gatherings around life and bio-ethical issues. Then there is the great Vigil Mass for Life, at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, the night before the March. The Great Upper Church of the Basilica can comfortably seat about 4,000 people. But the Vigil Mass for Life brings often 8,000 or more. People are standing in the aisles, the side chapels, in every nook and cranny. The Sanctuary around the High Altar is packed with Bishops, priests, deacons, and seminarians from all over the country. Visible in the Church are Religious men and women in consecrated life showing a magnificent display of diversity in their habits. The congregation is filled with men an women and young people of every age group, and every ethnic and racial diversity imaginable. If you want to know how catholic (universal) the Catholic Church really is, just come to the Basilica for the Vigil Mass for Life!

The bigger picture – There are some who want to describe the Church as aging and of declining numbers. Some want to describe the Church as not being able to connect with the young, or with peoples of non-European descent. Some say her clergy and religious are aging. But come to the pro-life vigil Mass and behold the youthful diversity of the Church! And even if you can’t go, watch, as the EWTN cameras pan the congregation. Most of the religious in traditional habits are young. And there are hundreds and hundreds of them! Watch as the seemingly endless procession of clergy and seminarians enter, again, by the hundreds. And there too, youthful vigor is in strong display! So many are the priests and seminarians that they overflow the sanctuary into the side chapel for the Blessed Sacrament and into the ambulatory behind and around the High Altar. Here is a Basilica, one of the ten largest churches in the world, filled to overflowing with life, joy and worship! Yes, the Church is a bride, she is not a widow! Indeed, she is the joyful mother of multitudes.

Rally Riches – And this is just the Vigil Mass. The next day, of your pro-life pilgrimage features a youth Rally at the Verizon Center. The doors open early for music and praise. 18,000, mostly young people, pack the place. Music, inspired talks, the wave and ten trillion watts of youthful energy fill the center in one of its largest functions of the year. A reverent but energetic Mass follows, celebrated by Cardinal Wuerl. One of the younger priests of the Archdiocese usually preaches an energetic and youth oriented homily. And then, after the reception of Holy Communion, concluding prayer and praise, the youthful congregation bursts forth onto the streets of Downtown Washington to head for the March line-up on the Mall.

Overflow! The number of young people vastly outsizes the capacity of the Verizon Center. Last year an alternative overflow site at the DC Armory hosted an additional 10,000 young people. There too, after prayer and praise and the celebration of the Holy Mass the young people and their adult chaperons headed for the Mall to begin the March.

And march itself is also a remarkable display in diversity. The balance is wonderfully tipped toward a youthful appearance. Here, Catholics join non-Catholics, fellow believers and even non-believers to march in six-figure numbers. The joy, the prayer, the hope and the experience of how right and just it is to support life all fill the air. It is usually cold, but the warmth within the crowd is tangible. And again, it is the youth who so often set the tone. They have zeal and zest as they lead chants and celebrate life.

The only angry people I meet at the March are usually the pro-choice counter demonstrators I speak with. There are about a dozen of them in front of the Supreme Court and I go to each one of them and individually, if I can and say, as I look into their eyes, “In your heart you know better, you know abortion is terribly wrong.” I speak as softly as I could in the outdoor environment with a lot of background noise. I am trying to go right for their conscience, which, though suppressed, is still there. For the voice of God ultimately echoes in every human person according to the Catechism (cf CCC # 1776). Deep down they DO know that abortion is wrong.

Last year, I only got about half way through the group before they surrounded me and began to engage me. Their primary accusation against me seemed to be that I was not a woman. Of this I am guilty, but suggested to them that to determine the wrongness of abortion did not require a womb but, rather, a mind and a heart, something both men and women have! 🙂 They grew angrier with me as I didn’t easily go away but continued down the line suggesting to each one that they knew, deep down, that it was wrong to abort babies. I wanted to speak this to each one personally. I wanted to try and reach their conscience. Difficult, but worth trying.

In the end they chose to serenade me! And here was the song they sang:

  • Hey Hey, Ho, Ho! Pro-life men have got to go!
  • Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho! If YOU got pregnant then you’d know!

Even here, Life! Well, I just smiled and prayed, and the ladies in the rosary group behind me redoubled their prayers and I stood there and waited for the counter-protesters to grow tired of singing. I was grateful to suffer for the sake of the Name and to be a “fool for Christ” in their eyes (1 Cor 4:10). Yes, even this was life giving for me. Dr. King had once said, “If you find a good fight, get in it!” And here I was on the front line, in the forward trench.

In the end, to stand up for life is to experience life and to experience it to the top! The March for Life shows the Church fully alive, youthful, joyful, numerous and diverse. We have discussed before on this blog with sobriety some alarming trends and numbers in the western branch of the Church. But this weekend shows once again that the Church is a bride, not a widow. That she remains alive and strong, prophetic and enthusiastic. It shows that her young are still numerous, that vocations are rebounding. It shows that zeal for the truth is still deep in a faithful remnant that is glad to be alive, glad to celebrate life, glad to be Catholic and experience that the Church is catholic (universal). To stand up for life is to experience life. Come next year to Washington.

This video shows some glimpses of the Pro-Life Youth Rally at the Verizon Center. The footage is from Catholic.tv

Posted on

Don’t. It’s a Trap! – A Recent Commercial With a Moral Lesson

Here’s a little commercial that requires very little decoding. A woman enters an office, and spying a very nice pen, has thoughts of petty theft. Just as she is about to depart, stolen pen in hand, a voice from above says, “Don’t! It’s a trap!” She looks up to see a co-worker swinging in a net that has swooped him up.

And so too for us, when temptation comes our way, we often hear that voice “from above” saying “Don’t It’s a trap!” But the voice we hear is not of some fellow sinner, but is that of God.

For Scripture says,

Whether you turn to the right or to the left, your ears will hear a voice behind you, saying, “This is the way; walk in it.” Isaiah 30:21

And the Catechism says,

Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) # 1776)

Yes, there is that small, still voice of God, who in the midst of our temptations, reminds us that the sinful pleasures the world, the flesh and devil propose are ultimately traps and lies. And whatever good we may imagine in, them through vain reasoning, is ultimately a deception.

Don’t, it is a trap.

Posted on

"Like a Foolish Man Who Built His House on Sand:" A Reflection on Federal Outlays to Protect Beach-Front Property

I am taking a few days of solitude at the Delaware Shore and I want to ponder with you one of our American spending priorities that irks me just a bit, especially on account of it’s direct violation of a Biblical axiom.

The practice is building on sand which Jesus uses as an image for foolishness:

But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” (Mat 7:26-27)

Now here I am, mind you, sitting in a dwelling built on a sandbar as I write this! Hence, I am somehow partaking, albeit in a temporary, rent paying manner, in the very foolishness imaged by Jesus’ parable.

Consider too, as most of you know, the “beach” is not often where the mainland reaches the ocean. The beach, if it is of sand, is often  a barrier island, a sand bar really, with a back bay, and its front toward the ocean. These barrier islands can be as wide as a mile or two, and as narrow as a few hundred feet in places. (See photo upper right).

Always Changing – It is also the nature of these barrier islands, and even of mainland beaches, to shift and shape differently over the decades and centuries. They are dynamic systems, if you will, interacting with the sea currents and wave actions which form, deform and reform them. They are powerfully affected by hurricanes and “Noreasters” here on the east coast. Even beaches directly connected to a mainland shift and shape differently over the years.

So in the end it seems pretty clear why building on sand and especially on sand close to the ocean is a euphemism for foolishness.

And yet we do it in abundance. Here on the Delaware and Maryland shores, just about all barrier islands, whole cities and resorts have sprung up in recent decades. Ocean City Maryland really is a city, with condo buildings as high as 25 stories right along the edge of the water.

So here comes the spending question. I was out on the boardwalk and saw that the beach is much wider than last summer. In fact it now extends almost 300 feet out from the boardwalk. Lots of expensive equipment is still up at the north end of the beach continuing a “beach replenishment project.”  They pump sand from way out in the sea (about a mile away) up on to the beach. The cost for the Bethany Beach area alone (about 5 miles in length) is over 5 million dollars, spent over 3 three years. And most of the money comes from the Federal Government. I have no idea what the whole Delaware coast project costs but am sure it must be in the hundreds of millions.

Is this an appropriate use of Federal money? Is it even an appropriate use of State money? Frankly it is none of my business if someone wants to build a home or business out on a sandbar. But should I be asked to pay for this “foolishness?”

Now I realize the rhetorical tone of my question may disclose what is ultimately a more complicated question. For indeed, these beech front towns and cities are little economic engines, and sometimes not so little. And where there is an economic engine there is also a tax base.

So I can hear the local mayors, and state governors and federal senators and congressmen saying, “You gotta spend money to get money.” Hence to their mind, these beach front properties are worth protecting and restoring to the tune of many millions (and billions Federally) each decade. Indeed, this is about the third major project I have seen out at Bethany Delaware in the 25 years I have visited here.

This argument to spend works better for me at the State level.

But why is most of the money in these mega-projects federal?

And so I still must say we spend Federal money on the craziest things. Any owner of beach proximate property is by definition, a wealthy person. It’s just not possible to buy near the shore and not be prepare and able to lay out lots of bucks. Now it just seems to me that if someone (almost always wealthy) wants to build their house on a sand bar, I shouldn’t be asked to help foot the expenses.

If they want to replenish the beach as the ocean erodes their property (as oceans have always done in the waxing and waning of the beach front), then let them pay for it. Perhaps beach front owners, and all whole build homes and businesses out on barrier islands could contribute to a common fund (let’s call it the “fools fund” in honor of the Biblical text). Beach goers like me might also be expected to contribute to a local tax during our stay.

But in the end,  the Federal Government should not be asked to pay lots of money to protect the property of people who are already quite well healed.

And as we consider  this question consider the horrible condition of the federal debt. And before we too quickly ask the poor and the more urgently needy to take a hit, as we balance the federal budget, maybe its time to look at what and why we are spending huge amounts to protect the properties where we really shouldn’t be building any way.

Sand bars and barrier islands naturally shift about, eroding here, growing there. The way I figure is that the Federal Government ought just as well post a sign: Build at your own risk.

Disclaimer: I like the beach. I especially like Bethany Beech, and there are a lot of great people who live out here. But if you live in Nebraska, I’m not sure your federal tax dollars should have to go to build up my little corner of paradise. I, and those who come here, should enjoy the beach at our own cost. And if the beach and island shift about (as beeches do) we have to adjust without asking you, (or the poor), to pay for what is a biblical euphemism for foolishness, building on sand.

Somehow, in the last hundred years in America we’ve gotten into a bad and expensive habit of building cities and communities (too big to fail?) on sandbars and on land far too close to the ocean (littoral).

Photo Source:

http://www.geosci.unc.edu/faculty/glazner/Images/Coastlines/BarrierIslands/BogueBanks.jpg

Here is a video that shows the kind of storm damage that can afflict these parts, especially in winter storms called “Noreasters”