Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Lay-Run Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester

Posts Tagged ‘Pro-life’

Slavery, Abortion, and Our Lady of the Confederacy

September 21st, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

This has to be one of the most interesting articles I have read recently. It comes from the December 2001 issue of the New Oxford Review, and discusses the similarity in mindsets regarding slavery (when it was held as acceptable) and abortion (which, we can only pray, will be deemed unacceptable in coming years).

In the Confederate Museum at New Orleans is a crown of thorns made by Pope Pius IX expressly for Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America. In a side chapel at the Catholic cathedral in Charleston, S.C., is a statue of Our Lady of the Confederacy sent to the people of the South by the same pope. In many Southern homes to this day is the volume of verse by the “Poet Laureate of the Confederacy” — Fr. Abram Ryan, a Catholic priest of Nashville, whose brother, a Confederate soldier, was killed in combat with Union troops. The state song of Maryland, “Maryland, My Maryland!” which decries the “tyrant” Abraham Lincoln and calls upon Marylanders to rise to arms against the “Vandal invader,” was composed by the Catholic poet James Ryder Randall. And one of the most courageous and eloquent exponents of the justness of Southern civilization, and of the principles and purposes of secession and of the formation of the Confederate States of America, was the renowned missionary priest, Bishop of Savannah Augustin Verot.

So much for the suggestion of John L. Botti that “no explanation is needed” for his entirely fictional narrative “The ‘Catholic’ Politician of 2001 & the Southern ‘Gentleman’ of 1860.” To address even the issues that led, sadly enough for all concerned, to the War Between the States, requires a great deal of explanation, indeed. Further, to his query “Is there any difference?” between the Southerner of 1860 and the advocate or practitioner of abortion in 2001, the answer is yes — wholly, utterly, and completely — as a huge body of literature attests. Again, because Botti does not cite a single historical personage or a single historical text, the entirely fictional nature of his text cannot be overemphasized.

About 15 years ago, in an essay published in both National Review and Crisis, Lewis Lehrman also attempted to equate slavery in the Old South and abortion today. Among the respondents who attempted to correct that grievous misconception was Sheldon Vanauken, the late lamented Contributing Editor of the NOR, whose name well remains on your magazine’s masthead. Van contributed many articles to the NOR that made a similar case for Southern civilization and principles as the sole example available for Americans of our time who wish to redress any number of the ills of our society, abortion foremost among them. It is astonishing that the NOR has so soon forgotten his brave and eloquent reflections.

Significant works that explore for Catholics the theme reintroduced so ineptly by Botti, however admirable his intentions, include American Catholic Opinion in the Slavery Controversy by Madeleine Hooke Rice; Catholics and the Civil War by the Rev. Benjamin J. Blied of St. Francis Seminary; Rebel Bishop: A Life of Augustin Verot by Michael Gannon; and — most especially — The Slaveholders’ Dilemma and A Consuming Fire: The Fall of the Confederacy in the Mind of the White Christian South, both by the eminent historian Eugene Genovese, now a Catholic. Several biographies of the Catholic jurist Roger Taney, who, as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, strove in vain to inaugurate Northern support for compensated emancipation rather than inflammatory abolitionism, and who penned the hugely misunderstood Dred Scott decision, have appeared in recent years. Readers of The Wanderer have recently been given a learned series of columns on actual Southern history generally and the realpolitik of Abraham Lincoln specifically by Joseph Sobran, who in his own newsletter has expanded on the subject.

Southerners have for generations faced the necessary challenge of fending off simplistic condemnations of slavery while striving to call attention to the larger enveloping issues that led to secession, war, and defeat, and of which slavery was of course an inextricable part, but by no means the whole matter. As the foregoing studies demonstrate, most emphatically in the case of the Catholic bishops of both American and Europe, hugely important questions of the very nature of a Christian moral order in the fledgling modern era were the context in which the South resisted by arms the purported “coming of the Lord” announced in the Battle Hymn of the Republic. These questions included the very viability of a specifically Christian order in American society, of the increasing secularization and industrialization and therefore the explicit materialism of the states of the North, and of the proper means of ameliorating in the South the admitted shortcomings of slavery — while avoiding the revolutionary unrest that was arising everywhere in Western civilization, including in the American Northeast, in response to Enlightenment ideologies and the vast dislocations of peoples caused by the “modernization” of capitalistic economies.

Accordingly, the issue of the American War Between the States generally, and specifically the practice of slavery as it actually evolved in the U.S. between 1619 and 1861, is to be judged within a centuries-old tradition which, for reasons once held sound by the Church, affirmed the propriety of the ownership of one person by another, provided, of course, as St. Paul stressed to Philemon of Onesimus, the relationship affirmed the eternal moral worth of the bonded servant and fulfilled the obligations of Christian charity.

In a contrast to slavery in the American South as total as it is stark, abortion-on-demand today is the practice of a people bereft of tradition, disinterested in even social — let alone biblical — constraint, and committed to the very notion of unrestrained individualism made inevitable by the political and social consequences of the Yankee conquest in 1865.

Ironically for Botti, then, it was the very principle of Federal power in the name of “Union,” which in 1861-1865 destroyed Southern civilization and overwhelmed the sovereignty of the states, that more recently, in Roe v. Wade, struck down states’ laws against abortion. Contrary to his glib assertions, those who resisted Federal force in 1861, however imperfect their quest of Christian civilization, waged with arms the war he espouses only with words. Thus it was that, in 1866, a year after Appomattox, the eminent English historian Lord Acton wrote to Robert E. Lee, the defeated former commander of the Confederate armies of Virginia: “I believed that the example of that great [Confederate] reform would have blessed all the races of mankind by establishing true freedom purged of the native dangers and disorders of Republics. Therefore I deemed that you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization; and I mourn for the stake which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo.” Lord Acton, as so many “Southern sympathizers,” was a Catholic.

Not ’til Christians of all sections, whether Catholic or Protestant, and whether white or black — or Hispanic or Asian — rediscover the virtues of Southern life and conviction as they actually, historically, existed will there be possible the unity of historical understanding and Christian brotherhood necessary for adequately addressing the grave questions of a proper moral order in our national life. For only in this unity would it be possible to discredit the ideologies to which Botti no doubt means to allude, ideologies that, victorious in 1865 and triumphant through all realms of American life in the decades since, are nowhere more manifest — as the might of a national regime that will countenance no dissent on the part of the people or the states — than in the various abortion-related rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.
David A. Bovenizer
Lynchburg, Virginia

40 Days for Life Update

September 16th, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

From the Rochester 40DFL campaign:

Hello pro-lifers. There’s less than two weeks to go before the Fall 2011 40 Days for Life campaign begins. Here are some important points to be aware of:

  1. If you belong to any kind of group (prayer group, bible study, parish council, youth group, etc.) suggest that your group participate in the 40 DFL vigil for at least one hour – preferably an hour each week. Having groups of people present on the sidewalk is a great way to make a strong impression.
  2. The on-line schedule is open ready to accept sign-ups for particular time slots. Just go to 40daysforlife.com/rochester and click on the “Vigil Schedule” tab at the top of the page. Please note that if you registered in any of the previous campaigns you are still registered and do not need to re-register. Simply input your email address and password in the first two fields.
  3. The Kick-off Rally is Tuesday September 27 from 6:30 to 8:30 at the Focus Pregnancy Help Center, 86 University Ave. Please note that there will be no pot luck dinner this year. Instead of bringing a dish to pass we’re encouraging everyone to bring one non-perishable food item to help stock the shelves of the Focus Pregnancy Center as they strive to serve the poor of the community. Desserts and refreshments will be served. The agenda for the rally is as follows:

    6:30 – 6:45………Meet and greet
    6:45 – 7:00………Opening remarks and video
    7:00 – 7:20………Fr. Brian Carpenter speaks
    7:20 – 7:40………Carol Crossed speaks
    7:40 – 8:00………Dr. Katherine Lammers speaks
    8:00 – 8:15………Lee Strong sings
    8:15 – 8:30………Candlelight vigil on the sidewalk

For more information about the campaign,the Kick-off rally, or how to donate to this effort, visit our website at 40daysforlife.com/rochester.

PSA for Life

September 6th, 2011, Promulgated by Nerina

I’ve been informed that there will be a Mass offered at the Focus Pregnancy Center by newly ordained Fr. Scott Caton on Wednesday, October 5th at 6:00PM.  The center is located at 86 University Avenue in Rochester.  Mass will be followed by a pot luck supper and attendees are invited to bring a dish to pass.

Mary Jost, director of Focus said the following:

This Mass is another blessing for us at Focus. The intentions for this Mass will be:
In Thanksgiving to God for all His blessings & for our clients, benefactors & staff & for the end
to abortion & for the conversion of sinners & for all priests & for the Holy Father & for your
intentions too, for what is in your heart. God bless!

Also, October is “Respect Life” month and a National Life Chain will take place on Sunday, October 2nd.  Interested parties can meet at the Focus Pregnancy Center at 2PM to receive signs and instructions.

As always, pray for an end to abortion.

Upcoming Lecture

June 6th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Dr. Janet E. Smith will deliver a pro-life lecture at Our Lady of Mercy high school entitled “The Right to Privacy?” The presentation will take place Thursday, June 16th at 7 PM.

Here is a description:

“Based on her new book, Dr. Smith’s talk will address the way in which a distorted view of freedom dominates various U.S. Supreme Court decisions on life issues under the guise of “the right to privacy.” Pope John Paul II, in The Gospel of Life, identified how this distorted view is one of the roots of the “Culture of Death.” Learn about some surprising connections between contraception, abortion, assisted suicide and same-sex unions.”

Admission is $25 per family, $10 per person, or $5 per student. All money raised will benefit St. John Bosco schools.

Please let the organizers know if you plan to attend by e-mailing them at: channa@johnboscoschools.org

or calling 585-678-4655.

Click here to view the flyer.

Pro-Life March: June 18th @ 1:00

June 2nd, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

From 40 Days For Life:

Hello pro-lifers. There will be a pro-life march on Saturday, June 18th at 1:00 PM starting in the parking lot of Our Lady of Victory Church, 210 Pleasant St. (There is a 12:10 Mass at Our Lady of Victory for those interested.) The march will proceed to Planned Parenthood, 114 University Ave. There will be refreshments served at the Focus Pregnancy Help Center after the march. Attached is a flyer that you can distribute or post where appropriate. Please spread the word. Hope to see you there – God bless.

Rick Paoletti

June 2011 March

Rosary for the Unborn

May 16th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

A living rosary for the unborn will be prayed at St. Mary’s cemetery in Corning. The rosary will take place Friday, May 20th at 8 PM. All are welcome to participate, so please stop by if you are in the area or can make the trip. The event is being organized by parishioners of the Southern Tier parishes.

St. Mary’s cemetery is located at 375 Park Ave, Corning NY.

See here for more details.

Annual Good Friday Stations of the Cross

April 6th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

The annual Stations of the Cross in reparation for abortion will take place once again this year on Good Friday. Instead of wasting your time at the “ecumenical stations” like our diocesan leaders, come and pray for an end to abortion in our world and the right to life for countless infants slaughtered each year.

The event will begin at McQuaid Jesuit high school, located at 1800 South Clinton Ave, on Good Friday (April 22nd) at 9 AM. Following the prayer service, those participating will march to a local abortion facility and pray the Stations of the Cross and Divine Mercy chaplet.

Please consider attending. Feel free to invite your local bishop.

New South Dakota Law Aims to Reduce Abortions

March 23rd, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

From the Associated Press, with some emphasis:

“PIERRE, S.D. (AP) — South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard signed a law Tuesday requiring women to wait three days after meeting with a doctor to have an abortion, the longest waiting period in the nation.

Abortion rights groups immediately said they plan to file a lawsuit challenging the measure, which also requires women to undergo counseling at pregnancy help centers that discourage abortions.

Daugaard, who gave no interviews after signing the bill, said in a written statement that he has conferred with state attorneys who will defend the law in court and a sponsor who has pledged private money to finance the state’s legal costs.

“I think everyone agrees with the goal of reducing abortion by encouraging consideration of other alternatives,” the Republican governor said the statement. “I hope that women who are considering an abortion will use this three-day period to make good choices.”

About half the states, including South Dakota, now have 24-hour waiting periods, but the state’s new law is the first of its kind in having a three-day waiting period and requiring women to seek counseling at pregnancy help centers, said Elizabeth Nash of the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights.”

Pro-Life Conf. @UR 04/09

February 26th, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

This notice comes via the local 40 DFL chapter:

Break for Life – A Student Oriented Pro-Life Conference
Saturday, April 9, 2011, 12PM-5PM at the University of Rochester.

This conference is open to everyone, but will be primarily oriented towards high school and college students.  The conference will include speakers, workshops, hands on projects, and social time.  Participants will be coming from Buffalo, Syracuse, and all points in between.  Topics will include “The Scientific Proof of Life Beginning at Conception,” “Making the Case for Being Pro-Life,” “What Can I Do If I Find Out a Friend Is Pregnant,” and “A Personal Account of Post Abortion Trauma.”  Pizza and snacks will be provided.  There will be a t-shirt design contest, a button design station, and a table for writing advocacy letters.  Multiple organizations will be promoting volunteer opportunities as well.  For more information about the conference and the essay contest visit the website,http://www.mcquaid.org/page.cfm?p=1342 follow on Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=182935845075487 contact Chris Hood, the Director of Christian Service at McQuaid Jesuit High School, at 585-256-6169 chood@mcquaid.org.

North Dakota House Passes Pro-Life Law

February 14th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

From LifeSiteNews:

“BISMARCK, North Dakota, February 11, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A strong majority of lawmakers in the North Dakota House of Representatives on Friday afternoon passed a law that would make it illegal to murder any human being from the moment of their conception.

The Defense of Human Life Act, HB 1450, recognizes every human being at any stage of development as a person under state law with a right to protection.

“The overwhelming community and legislative support for HB 1450 proves that North Dakota could be the first state to recognize the value and dignity of every living human being,” stated Representative Dan Ruby. “The Defense of Human Life Act is just common sense. Of course every human being is a person, and every innocent person should receive legal protection. I am motivated to see women and children protected by HB 1450, and I look forward to its passage in the Senate in the near future.”

While the bill prohibits chemical abortifiacients such as RU-486, it does not apply to emergency contraception, or other “contraception administered before a clinically diagnosable pregnancy.” The bill also exempts legitimate medical procedures that may lead to the death of children in the womb when a woman’s life is in danger. The bill also exempts pregnant women seeking abortions from criminal prosecution.

While pro-lifers are optimistic about the bill’s survival in the Senate, Woodard said that supporters would “be taking no chances” and continue to lobby for its passage. A vote in the Senate is expected around March 10.

North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple has not stated whether or not he plans to sign the bill.”

Very interesting news. Please pray that this bill will pass its next two tests, which include the approval of the state Senate and the governor. A Supreme Court challenge could take place if the law is passed.

A Reading From Hell’s Bible to the Progressives

January 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Various excerpts from a New York Times editorial written by Nicholas  D. Kristof about the Catholic hospital and nun who recommended a woman get an abortion, with commentary:

“Yet the person giving Jesus the heave-ho in this case was not a Bethlehem innkeeper. Nor was it an overzealous mayor angering conservatives by pulling down Christmas decorations. Rather, it was a prominent bishop, Thomas Olmsted, stripping St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix of its affiliation with the Roman Catholic diocese.

The hospital’s offense? It had terminated a pregnancy to save the life of the mother. The hospital says the 27-year-old woman, a mother of four children, would almost certainly have died otherwise.”

In this passage, the writer is trivializing the seriousness of abortion. Regardless of the reasons for engaging in this evil action, a willful act of infanticide is always infanticide. The Church’s teaching on this matter is clear, and has been reaffirmed throughout the centuries, from the Lord’s commandment not to kill, to the writings of the early Church Fathers, to the words of the modern Holy Fathers and bishops of today.  Obviously this was a very delicate and difficult situation for anyone to be faced with. However, it is not for us to play God and take it upon ourselves to decide whether the life of the mother or the child is more important. Every effort should be made to save both, but we must ultimately put our faith in God when all options have been exhausted, and not take the place of God by killing one life because we think one or both may be in danger. When there are no other options, we must rely upon the divine mercy of God as to what will transpire. A difficult situation like this does not give one free reign to murder.

“Now the bishop, in effect, is excommunicating the entire hospital — all because it saved a woman’s life.”

This is not correct. The bishop has stripped the hospital of its Catholic title and no longer permits Mass to be celebrated on its premises not because it “saved a woman’s life,” but because the hospital was an accomplice to murder. I don’t believe the “entire hospital” was excommunicated, as this writer suggests, but only those who had a significant hand in the abortion. Additionally, the excommunication was incurred latae sententiae, which means that it happened automatically when the event took place. This is detailed in Canon 1398. It was not by the bishop’s hand that the excommunication took place, but by the hands of the parties involved with the abortion.

“The main consequence is that Mass can no longer be said in the hospital chapel. Thomas C. Fox, the editor of National Catholic Reporter, noted regretfully that a hospital with deep Catholic roots like St. Joseph’s now cannot celebrate Mass, while airport chapels can.”

I am not aware of airports procuring abortions.

“To me, this battle illuminates two rival religious approaches, within the Catholic church and any spiritual tradition. One approach focuses upon dogma, sanctity, rules and the punishment of sinners. The other exalts compassion for the needy and mercy for sinners — and, perhaps, above all, inclusiveness.”

I hardly consider it compassionate for a person to put anther’s immortal soul in danger by encouraging them to commit murder. Where is the compassion in that? We too often think about making others feel good in this life that we neglect what affect this desire to placate may have on our neighbor’s eternal life. If we have a friend who is engaging in sodomy and wishes to enter into a homosexual “marriage”, do we remain silent or even support these actions in the spirit of inclusion and wanting the other person to be happy? Rather, shouldn’t we demonstrate true compassion, and inform the person that they are putting their soul in peril by engaging in sinful behavior?

“The thought that keeps nagging at me is this: If you look at Bishop Olmsted and Sister Margaret as the protagonists in this battle, one of them truly seems to me to have emulated the life of Jesus. And it’s not the bishop, who has spent much of his adult life as a Vatican bureaucrat climbing the career ladder. It’s Sister Margaret, who like so many nuns has toiled for decades on behalf of the neediest and sickest among us.

Then along comes Bishop Olmsted to excommunicate the Christ-like figure in our story. If Jesus were around today, he might sue the bishop for defamation.”

If Jesus were around today, he might sue this New York Times writer for defamation! The progressives (Catholic or otherwise) are constantly manipulating the true Jesus Christ so as to make Him into who they want Him to be; an amalgamation of Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony, and Martin Luther King. The fact of the matter is that this is/was not Christ! A careful reading of the Bible will reveal that our Lord was a fiery preacher who admonished sinners, called all peoples to repentance regardless of how much they had sinned and to what nation they belonged, and reproved hypocrites who manipulated the law and failed to follow their own manipulations. Jesus was warm, fuzzy, and loving, make no mistake, but He was also firm, truthful, and faithful.

Sr. Margaret deserves no comparison to Christ because Christ did not, and would not condone murder. I am also struck by how the author seems to suggest that the Sister has done good for others while the bishop has done nothing but enforce Church laws. Does this writer know every detail of the bishop’s life which would enable him to prove that Bishop Olmstead never cared for the “neediest and sickest among us”? Let us not be so quick to exalt those who flaunt their good works (think Callan) while condemning those who chose to help others quietly (think Pope Pius XII).

Feel free to read the entire article. There is plenty of nonsense to be found.

New York City – 41% of Pregnancies End in Abortion

January 25th, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

A masterful piece by Fr. Barron:

Pro-Life Gathering: Rochester 1/22

January 20th, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

Please come and pray at this pro choice event here in Rochester this Saturday. Please try to get to the First Unitarian Church, 220 S. Winton Rd. around 12:30pm, if you can. Flier here

“Safe, legal and rare”

January 19th, 2011, Promulgated by Nerina

I know not all of our readers share the Church’s view of abortion, but this story is repulsive.

Lord, have mercy!

March for Life in 12 Days

January 12th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

The 38th annual March for Life in Washington D.C. will soon be getting underway. Various parishes across the Diocese of Rochester are assembling buses for parishioners, as well as all those who support life, to travel to Washington and participate in this important rally.

Here is a list of participating parishes, cost for transportation, and pertinent contact information (c/o the Catholic Courier):

  • St. Mary Our Mother, 816 W. Broad St., Horseheads; and All Saints, 222 Dodge Ave., Corning. Cost is $45. All Saints is expected to send a sizable youth contingent. Contact Steve at 607-739-9282 or Sharon at 607-734-2680.
  • St. Mary, 90 N. Main St., Canandaigua. $60 adults, $30 students. Contact Fran at 585-924-7051 or faflugel@frontiernet.net.
  • St. Thomas the Apostle, 4536 St. Paul Blvd., Irondequoit. $60 adults, $30 students. Contact Mary Jo at 585-771-0084.
  • St. Pius Tenth, 3010 Chili Ave., Chili. Contact Jan at 585-203-1717.
  • St. John of Rochester, 8 Wickford Way, Fairport. $50 adults, $25 students. Contact Debbie at 585-248-4647.
  • Holy Spirit, 1355 Hatch Road, Penfield. $60 adults, $30 students. Contact Sandy at 585-387-0993.

Of course one is more than welcome to make the trip on their own if they so choose. The March for Life will take place on Monday, January 24th. The buses in the above list will depart the evening of the 23rd and return the following night. Please show your support for innocent unborn children. The ghastly evil of abortion must end, and we should all find some peaceful way to work toward that goal. God bless everyone who participates in this cause.

A Sane Chapter in Hell’s Bible

January 4th, 2011, Promulgated by Abaccio

Rare indeed are the times I utter positive statements about the New York Times.  This is one of them.

On their opinion pages on January 2, we see an editorial by Ross Douthat that is, to some extent, pro-life.  At the time of this posting, there are 418 comments on Mr. Douthat’s op-ed.  The extraordinarily vast majority of them are anti-life (and not entirely coherent.)

Some highlights from the article:

Rare it isn’t: not when one in five pregnancies ends at the abortion clinic. So it was a victory for realism, at least, when MTV decided to supplement its hit reality shows “16 and Pregnant” and “Teen Mom” with last week’s special, “No Easy Decision,” which followed Markai Durham, a teen mother who got pregnant a second time and chose abortion. (I hate to be the voice of reason here, but did she learn nothing from the first go-round?)

MTV being MTV, the special’s attitude was resolutely pro-choice. (Shock! Awe!) But it was a heartbreaking spectacle, whatever your perspective. Durham and her boyfriend are the kind of young people our culture sets adrift — working-class and undereducated, with weak support networks, few authority figures, and no script for sexual maturity beyond the easily neglected admonition to always use a condom. (An admonition that, while immoral, is also relatively ineffective.  Better idea: keep on thine pants)

Some of this shift reflects the growing acceptance of single parenting. But some of it reflects the impact of Roe v. Wade. Since 1973, countless lives that might have been welcomed into families like Thernstrom’s — which looked into adoption, and gave it up as hopeless — have been cut short in utero instead.

And lives are what they are. (The New York Times!  This was said in the New York Times!) On the MTV special, the people around Durham swaddle abortion in euphemism. The being inside her is just “pregnancy tissue.” After the abortion, she recalls being warned not to humanize it: “If you think of it like [a person], you’re going to make yourself depressed.” Instead, “think of it as what it is: nothing but a little ball of cells.” (a distorted view of reality makes the truth no less real.)

It’s left to Durham herself to cut through the evasion. Sitting with her boyfriend afterward, she begins to cry when he calls the embryo a “thing.” Gesturing to their infant daughter, she says, “A ‘thing’ can turn out like that. That’s what I remember … ‘Nothing but a bunch of cells’ can be her.” (And yet, she killed her child.  Knowing this.  Pray for her.  Pray for her child.)

To read the rest, see here.

I read into this special a bit more, and came across this which mentions the same incident.

She said that at the clinic it was suggested that she “think of it as a little ball of cells.” But afterward, she became angry — at James, and at herself — and racked with remorse. “Nothing but a bunch of cells can turn out to be her,” she said to James, pointing to their child Za’karia. No Easy Decision, in the space of a half hour, did a striking job of showing viewers a full range of thoughts and emotions, without a trace of MTV flash or, at the other extreme, timid solemnity. (Nor did they bury their dead, or have a funeral…it was all about the mother’s CONVENIENCE, rather than the child’s LIFE.)

“No one is pro-abortion … but you have to do what’s right,” (by “right” she means “easier”) she concluded.

“I wouldn’t choose abortion as a first option for anyone, but it was the best decision for me,” she said. “I know I’ll make it through.” (unfortunately, your child did not “make it through.”   Her words are telling…”it was the best decision for ME.” )

The first comment under that article from a woman named “Jessica” states,

i was 22 yrs old when i had an abortion, during the summer before i was about to start my senior year of college before I headed into medical school. it broke my heart to decide my decision and i praise you for being brave enough to show your’s on tv. i still regret my decision but realize that it was best, not only for me, but my future baby. it just wasn’t the right time for me and my boyfriend of 5 years.

Whomever it was best for, Jessica, I assure you that it was NOT best for your “future baby.”  I’d bet my life that, given the choice, your child would rather have lived than have you murder him or her.

Pray for an end to abortion.

More thoughts on marriage

January 3rd, 2011, Promulgated by Nerina

photo credit: TIME 11/18/2010

WARNING: a long, but information-filled post.

Piggybacking on Ben’s earlier post about defending conjugal marriage, I thought I’d add my own thoughts about the current state of the marriage as an institution in society and as a Sacrament of the Church.  Unfortunately, the landscape is changing rapidly and I believe the Church, especially at the local level, is not prepared to defend marriage either as a societal  institution or as a Sacrament.  I’m not saying that the official teaching of the Church is somehow deficient, but, rather, that no one seems willing to proclaim the teaching in full.   I am also, at this time, personally affected by a divorce in my immediate family, so I find myself particularly concerned about the state of marriage.

Marriage is “Obsolete”

About a month back, TIME Magazine offered a hit piece on marriage entitled: “Who Needs Marriage? A Changing Institution.”  In it, the author informs the reader:

The Pew survey reveals that nearly 40% of us think marriage is obsolete. This doesn’t mean, though, that we’re pessimistic about the future of the American family; we have more faith in the family than we do in the nation’s education system or its economy. We’re just more flexible about how family gets defined. (emphasis mine)

I’d say that’s just about right given the simultaneous attacks on marriage and the traditional family carried out by a persistent and aggressive homosexual lobby and entertainment industry.  Consider this story applauding the new birth of a child to Elton John and his partner in which a surrogate was used to produce a baby boy for the couple.  Popular television shows, too,  portray almost every family situation imaginable from traditional to two-daddy to polygamous as do movies (see here and here – please note, my references here are not necessarily recommendations.  The movie, “American Beauty,” is especially offensive on many levels).  Simply put, more and more people are willing to define “family” very loosely with the traditional family becoming almost anathema.

In a similar vein, People Magazine abounds with celebratory stories of couples newly engaged over the Christmas holiday even though many of them recently left marriages.  Now,  I understand that we are talking about Hollywood here, and that the moral rules are different, but Hollywood elites are not the only people leaving marriages only to enter into new ones.

An article in the New York Times highlighting the new marriage of a middle age couple where both people left former spouses and their families because “they were deeply in love”  caused quite a stir.   It didn’t matter that their spouses and children were “devastated,”  they had found their “soulmates” and the consequences be damned.

Enter the “Soul Mate”

In the report, “When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America” issued by the University of Virginia National Marriage Project and the Institute of American Values, the authors describe an emerging marriage model called “the Soul Mate” model.  They describe the model as such:

Over the last four decades, many Americans have moved away from identifying with an “institutional” model of marriage, which seeks to integrate sex, parenthood, economic cooperation, and emotional intimacy in a permanent union. This model has been overwritten by the “soul mate” model, which sees marriage as primarily a couple-centered vehicle for personal growth, emotional intimacy, and shared consumption that depends for its survival on the happiness of both spouses.

Setting aside whether one believes in “soul mates,” I have heard this concept invoked to justify divorce.  In fact, my sister is claiming the “soul mate” defense for separating from her husband.  Now, my sister is hardly cognizant of Christian theology or the Church’s view of marriage, but even those who should know better fall in this trap.  Popular culture does little to dissuade the idea that 1) soul mates exist and 2)a person should settle for nothing less.  My 40 year old sister, married for 12 years with two small children is breaking up her marriage because she feels that “maybe my soul mate is still out there.”

The Rejection of Marriage by Middle America

Marriage is not only suffering among the barely educated (no high school degree) and poor, but also among the formerly socially conservative “working class” of  middle America.  The above mentioned report from the UVA National Marriage Project offers a sobering prediction about the future of America if marriage is further eroded in Middle America (defined as moderately educated, working middle-class):

The retreat from marriage in Middle America cuts deeply into the nation’s hopes and dreams as well. For if marriage is increasingly unachievable for our moderately educated citizens—a group that represents 58 percent of the adult population (age 25–60)[4]—then it is likely that we will witness the emergence of a new society. For a substantial share of the United States, economic mobility will be out of reach, their children’s life chances will diminish, and large numbers of young men will live apart from the civilizing power of married life.

Interestingly, like the TIME article referenced above, this report notes that a large percentage of the population values marriage and believes it is a desirable thing.  Unfortunately, cultural factors are powerfully changing the reality of marriage especially among the less educated and working class.  The authors argue:

In their attitudes as well as in their behavior, Middle Americans are shifting toward a culture that still honors the ideal of marriage but increasingly accepts departures from that ideal.

Enter the Church

And it seems even within the Church we are willing to accept “departures” from the ideal.  People in positions of leadership and authority publicly suggest that the Church is “out of step” with the times and that there is a need for recognizing long-term, committed homosexual relationships.  These same people suggest that divorce and remarriage should not be a hindrance to full participation in the Church and Her Sacraments (I am thinking specifically of Sr. Patricia Schoelles, Fr. Charles Curran and Fr. Richard McBride among others.  Our own Bishop is very sympathetic to homosexuals and is a something of a hero in the gay community).  In 1997 at a New Ways Ministry celebration, Bishop Clark remarked:

I do think with growing conviction, based on my own pastoral experience that the Church really needs to engage in an intentional, corporate and systemic reflection on human sexuality.

He responded to a question about public blessings for homosexuals in this way:

My concern with the practice is not so much a concern with the practice, but the practice as it communicates to the wider community, that that issue is settled, that it is in exactly the same place as the Sacrament of Marriage is in the faith and understanding of the people at large.  And I simply ask that any practice of blessing or validation, whatever it is called – and I know it’s called different things in different places -my concern is that it’s carried out in such a fashion that there is visible equation made to the Sacrament of Marriage in the sense that I just described, as that is understood and commonly held by the Christian assembly. (see the book AmChurch Comes Out, p. 55-66 by Paul Likoudis)

His statement is a bit convoluted, but if I’m understanding it correctly, it appears that Bishop Clark is hoping for homosexual unions to be on par with traditional marriage.  I find it unsettling, to say the least.

I must admit to a certain sympathy when I hear the argument that gay marriage won’t erode marriage because heterosexuals have done a fantastic job already.  No-fault divorce laws and even the annulment process in the Church sends the message that marriage is temporary.  Last year, in fact, Pope Benedict cautioned church tribunals against allowing the growing civil divorce rate to dictate the number of annulments they grant (Did you know that while US Catholics comprise 6% of the total global Catholic population, 60% of annulments are granted to Americans?).  Recognizing that many divorced Catholics seek annulments so as to pursue a second marriage within the Church, our Holy Father argued that the desire to be married and receive the Eucharist should not come at the expense of marriage, adding:

Both justice and charity require love for truth, and essentially involve the search for what is true.  Without truth, charity slides into sentimentalism. Love becomes an empty shell to be filled arbitrarily. This is the fatal risk of love in a culture without truth. (As Fr. Z would say, can I get an “AMEN”?!)

Of course the fact that straight couples are unable to keep vows doesn’t change the reality of marriage nor take away from its basic purpose as so well stated by the authors Ben mentions in his recent post.  They define marriage as thus:

marriage is the union of a man and a woman who make a permanent and exclusive commitment to each other of the type that is naturally fulfilled by bearing and rearing children together, and renewed by acts that constitute the behavioral part of the process of reproduction.

I think it really is that simple.

Local Prayer Vigils for the Unborn

November 22nd, 2010, Promulgated by Dr. K

A number of area parishes will be holding prayer vigils on Saturday, November 27th at the request of Pope Benedict to pray for “All Nascent Human Life” (the innocent unborn children). We will outline a few of these below. If your parish is going to be holding a vigil on the 27th, and it isn’t listed here, please send us an e-mail with details to: contact@cleansingfiredor.com

All events are Saturday, November 27th.

St. Mark in Greece (54 Kuhn Rd):

2 PM – Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament and adoration
3 PM- Sung Divine Mercy Chaplet and quiet prayer
4-5 PM- Confessions
4:45- Rosary and Benediction

St. Mary in Canandaigua (95 N. Main St.):

1:30-4:30 PM- Prayer and exposition of the Blessed Sacrament

St. Rose in Lima (1985 Lake Ave):

5-7 PM- Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament and Evening Prayer

Holy Spirit in Penfield (1355 Hatch Road):

3 PM- Rosary for life

St. Michael in Lyons (3 Holley St.):

1 PM- Prayer vigil

St. John of Rochester in Perinton (8 Wickford Way):

3 PM- Prayer vigil

Holy Apostles  in Rochester’s west side (530 Lyell Ave):

3 PM- Prayer vigil

St. Mary in Waterloo (25 Center St):

4 PM- Prayer vigil

Cardinal Arinze on Pro-Choice “Catholics”

October 16th, 2010, Promulgated by Gen

In his own words, “You don’t need a cardinal to answer that.”

And just a refresher: comments which show a blatant and zealous disregard for Church teaching will be deleted. If you don’t like that, tough. There’s a difference between celebrating diversity and being just plain argumentative.

Regarding the Rights to Bear Arms and Kill Babies

October 4th, 2010, Promulgated by Gen

When you visualize a typical liberal donning his/her/its war-paint, you think to yourself: pro-choice, pro-gun-control, etc. Well, leave it to a Tennessee abortion-providing doctor to destroy our pre-conceived notions.

CHARLESTON – For the past 11 days, anti-abortion demonstrators have gathered at the Charleston Women’s Medical Center in West Ashley as part of the annual “40 Days for Life” movement against abortion, each of them signing a “statement of peace” before participating.

Police say the protest met a threat Saturday morning when an out-of-state abortion doctor flashed a gun at them.

photo

Police arrested Gary Boyle, 62, a Blountville, Tenn., physician, on charges of pointing a firearm.

Boyle drove into the parking lot of the clinic on Ashley River Road near Fuseler Road at around 8:30 a.m. When three protesters, including a 17-year-old boy, approached him, Boyle brandished a black handgun loaded with 15 rounds, according to a police report. (Now that’s an honest reaction. I know whenever a stranger comes up to me, I greet him with a hearty “hello” and pull a gun on him. Quite logical, really.)

Boyle then stepped out of his SUV and walked into the clinic without further incident, the report says. One of the three protesters, 50-year-old John Karafa, called 911.

“We were like, ‘Well, that was a gun,’ ” Karafa said. “You can’t do that.”

Boyle appeared by video conference at a bond hearing Saturday afternoon dressed in a light yellow button-down shirt. Charleston County Magistrate Priscilla Baldwin set his bail at $25,000, which he posted later Saturday.

Whether Boyle performed abortions locally is not known. He and another physician operate the Bristol Regional Women’s Center near his Tennessee home.

A woman who came to the courtroom on Boyle’s behalf declined to speak during the proceedings and ignored requests for comment after the hearing.

More than a half-dozen anti- abortion demonstrators also attended the proceedings, many wearing light blue “40 Days for Life” wrist bands.

Protesters began gathering outside the West Ashley clinic on Sept. 22 and will hold a prayer vigil against abortion there 24 hours a day, every day, until Oct. 31.

Charleston Women’s Medical Center representatives could not be reached for comment through the after-hours phone line.

Tom Barber, local director of “40 Days for Life,” said Saturday marked the first disturbance in its three-year history locally, which he said includes holding hands and lighting candles but not harassing doctors or patients.

Barber said participants must sign a “statement of peace” before joining. (I’d imagine that doctors must have something like that, something which prevents them from killing their patients, from doing harm against them. I’ve heard stories of a mystical “Hippocratic Oath,” but it’s obvious it’s just a fantasy for many doctors, seeing as how a genuine and competent doctor doesn’t murder his patients. How’s that for a “statement of peace”?)

Barber’s sister, Sandra Rochester, said members of the vigil hand out literature to women who engage them. The pamphlets direct those patients to the Lowcountry Pregnancy Center, a Christian organization that counsels women and encourages alternatives to abortion.

“We’ve saved four babies so far,” Rochester said. (And they did that without guns. Just prayer, diligence, and home-made signs.)

Of the three protesters who approached Boyle, only Karafa represented the “40 Days” movement. The Charleston Women’s Medical Center attracts anti-abortion demonstrators every Saturday, and about 15 people had come out to protest when Boyle allegedly brandished the gun.

The incident wasn’t the doctor’s first legal snag. (What a surprise.)

He and his partner operated their clinic without a required certificate of need from the Tennessee Health Department for several years in the 1990s, and the health department tried to shut them down, according to court filings.

The dispute dragged on for years until 2002, when an appeals judge ruled that the state statute requiring the certificate had violated a woman’s right to privacy.