INDEX
Articles: by title
THE SECRET OF PRO-LIFE VICTORY, by
Fr Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
A WITNESS TO LIFE: BESSIE O'MEARA,
by Fr Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
THE LAW OF PRO-LIFE , by Fr
Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
PROMISCUITY : A REJECTION OF TRUTH AND MORALITY ?, by Fr. Jim
Whalen, 2002, Issue 2
THE PASTORAL CARE
OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS, Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI, 2002, Issue 2
PORNOGRAPHY, by Fr Paul Burchat,
2002, Issue 2
WOMEN HAVE
A RIGHT TO BE WOMEN, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 3
ON RADICAL FEMINISM, by Corrie Haas, Priests for Life Canada - Member of the Board,
2002, Issue 3
FEMINISM AND EQUALITY -
IS IT PRO-LIFE?, by Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI,
2002, Issue 3
THE HOLY
INNOCENTS:
THE SANCTIFICATION OF SUFFERING, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
CARING AND LOVING PATIENTS, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
A CRY FOR HELP
?, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
Articles: by author
Fr. Jim Whalen, National
Director, Priests for Life Canada
THE SECRET OF PRO-LIFE VICTORY,
by Fr Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
A WITNESS TO LIFE: BESSIE O'MEARA,
by Fr Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
THE LAW OF PRO-LIFE , by Fr
Jim Whalen, 2002, Issue 1
PROMISCUITY : A REJECTION OF TRUTH AND MORALITY ?, by Fr. Jim
Whalen, 2002, Issue 2
WOMEN HAVE
A RIGHT TO BE WOMEN, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 3
THE HOLY
INNOCENTS:
THE SANCTIFICATION OF SUFFERING, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
CARING AND LOVING PATIENTS, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
A CRY FOR HELP
?, by Fr. Jim Whalen,
2002, Issue 4
Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI, a
Member of the Board of Priests for Life Canada
THE PASTORAL CARE
OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS, Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI, 2002, Issue 2
FEMINISM AND EQUALITY -
IS IT PRO-LIFE?, by Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI,
2002, Issue 3
Corrie Haas, Member of
the Board of Priests for Life Canada
ON RADICAL FEMINISM, by Corrie Haas, Priests for Life Canada - Member of the Board,
2002, Issue 3
Fr. Paul Burchat, a
Priests of Madonna House and President of the Board of Priests for
Life Canada
PORNOGRAPHY, by Fr Paul Burchat,
2002, Issue 2
THE SECRET OF
PRO-LIFE VICTORY
by Fr Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 1
There is no real pro-life victory without the Cross.
There is no real pro-life power without the Cross. There is no real
pro-life leadership without the Cross. There is no real pro-life
conquest without the Cross.
Self-sacrifice is the
foundation principle by which pro-life operates, by which we defend
life, by which we prepare for eternal life. Satan knew this. Satan
challenged Christ on the Cross, tempting Jesus, offering Him a crossless,
deathless conquest: a crown without a cross, power apart from suffering,
and elevation without humiliation.
The same temptation was
repeated again and again in His public ministry, before and during the
agony of the crucifixion: "If you are the Son of God, come down from the
Cross" (Mt 27:40). Christ reigned from the throne of the Cross. Christ
reigns today because he accepted the Cross and remained there until
death released His life into the world. It was the only way for Him to
save us. It is the only way for us to be His disciples - pro-life
disciples. "Anyone who does not take up his Cross and follow me cannot
be my disciple" (Lk 14:27). This is both an historical and a moral truth
as believers well know: "Our old man is crucified with Him, that the
body of sin might be destroyed, and we might be slaves to sin no longer"
(Rom 6:6).
Christianity is deprived
today largely because few live a crucified life and many opt to come
down from the cross. To live a sanctified pro-life
existence, increasing in Christ’s life, means nothing less than
embracing and binding ourselves to the sacrifice of the Cross,
increasing our participation in Christ's Death.
So many of us give in to
the temptation to come down from the Cross. Self-justification is coming
down from the Cross. Self-pity is coming down from the Cross.
Self-vindication is coming down from the Cross. Daily yielding to the
Cross is the secret of victory. Satan was defeated on the Cross.
The second death was overcome on the Cross. Evil was put to death on the
Cross. Satan cannot touch us when we are on the Cross. Satan overcomes
us when we come down from the Cross. The Cross is the place of safety.
The power of the enemy is defeated on the Cross. The spectacle of the
Cross helps us to discover the fulfilment and revelation of the pro-life
gospel. The glory of the Cross is not overcome by darkness. The glory of
the Cross shines more radiantly and is revealed as the centre, the
focus, the meaning and goal of all history and of every human life. In
the moment of His greatest weakness, the Son of God is revealed for who
He is. His glory is made manifest on the Cross. By His Cross, His death,
Jesus sheds light on the meaning of the life and death of every human
being. Through His life on earth, Jesus, through healing, and other
miracles, raising of the dead, and doing good, gave us signs of
salvation, which set man free from his greatest sickness, sin, and
raised him to live a pro-life, a sanctified life. By looking on the one
who was pierced, Jesus, the One who gave His body and blood, His very
life for us, every person who is threatened (the unborn, the invalid,
the handicapped, the elderly) discovers the daily hope of finding
freedom and redemption. Without the Cross, without the crucifixion,
there would not be a resurrection. With God we can overcome any
obstacle, and carry any cross. Divine Providence never fails in
matters undertaken for God's love
(St. Vincent de Paul). ¤
Back to index
A WITNESS TO LIFE:
BESSIE O'MEARA
by Fr Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 1
"The one who makes himself as little as this little
child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 18:14). We celebrate
the awesome life and death of Bessie O’Meara, one such little one, a
child of Mary, a woman of fervent faith, boundless hope and unlimited
charity. She was above all a witness to life.
When Bessie was born in
St Mary’s Parish, Ottawa, Ontario, in 1907, God knew this little one
would be close to Him and Mary, all her life - here on earth and for
eternity. She was very special. He used her again and again to witness
to life and teach others humility and simplicity of lifestyle and the
true meaning of faith. She would constantly amaze people by her love of
life and her wit and humour. She was the life of every party with her
cheerful jingles, hearty laughter and joyful impersonations. She used
her talents to put people at ease and bring them together, sharing her
life and experiences with us.
We never knew what she
would entertain us with next: a skit about Bridget O’Flynn who would not
come in, or a dream song that would conclude with a surprise ending,
which she would declare most forcefully: "I ate the baloney". In one
instance, Bessie was the supervisor of a young lady, Anita Pieko, who
was 17 years of age at the time. Bessie was always searching for others
to join her in serving Jesus through Mary, in the Legion of Mary
apostolate. She recruited her for the Legion of Mary although she had
only worked with her for one week. She was more concerned with her
willingness to work and join the Legion than how well she worked on the
job. She certainly taught many through her childlike demeanor about our
need for help from God, our dependency on God and on others outside
ourselves; about how we need a child’s simple faith to accept God’s
saving actions. We can be sure that it was her childlike qualities that
secured heaven for her. It was typical of Bessie’s wisdom to choose
passover at Epiphany, the ideal time to move on to her permanent home.
As the last of eleven children, she wanted to make sure all the others
made it to heaven before her.
Her life pointed to and
manifested Jesus as her Lord and Saviour, and Mary as the way to Jesus,
following St. Louis de Montfort’s True Devotion. She honoured Mary and
witnessed to Jesus in an extraordinary life of service and intense
personal friendship, acquiring personal holiness through the
sanctification of others, the Legion of Mary way.
In 1937, she joined the
Legion of Mary Praesidium, Mary, Comforter of the Afflicted, taking part
in weekly visitation to women in prison and the handicapped. She
continued to visit the women when they were released from prison,
helping them by bringing them to retreats. She was the heart of many a
pilgrimage for the handicapped to Cap-de-la-Madeleine or St-Anne-de-Beaupré.
She worked on the
Senatus, the governing body of the Legion for Northern Ontario, with
Mary Brennan as secretary, for six years. Their travel experiences, as
legionaries, were many and legendary. On one occasion Mary got left
behind when the train pulled out of the subway station in London, with
Bessie being separated from her. We were later told that Mary prayed to
St. Anthony and promised him increasing amounts of donations for the
poor if he would bring Bessie back. Bessie came back twenty minutes
later and it cost Mary one dollar.
Her other great service
to life was her apostolate to the native missions. She was a missionary
par excellence, devoting hundred of hours to gathering handmade mittens
and other items to raise money for the needy. This yearly event at St.
George’s would gather in legionaries and Catholic Women’s League members
from all over the city and countryside. No one could refuse to help
Bessie as she would not take no for an answer. This was not surprising,
as she never refused to help anyone in need.
Two other passages in
Scripture really spoke to me about her: "In life and death we are the
Lord’s" (Rom 14:9) and "God will bring those who have died in Jesus with
Him" (1Thess 4:14).
Bessie belonged to a
generation that had a great respect for life and a sense of death, both
of which we are in danger of losing today. She had a sense of the
all-pervading presence of God in good times and in bad. Her life was
spent in the shadow of God’s presence. This came from a wisdom of long
years lived well and a sense of what was right, true and good, from a
sense that nothing could come between her and the love of God made
visible in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:39) and from a sense that those who live
a virtuous life are in the hands of God. No torment will ever touch them
(Wis 3:1). She had a sharp sense of God’s presence that flowed into the
values around which she organized her life, into the faith, hope and
love she planted in the souls of her family members, friends, and many,
many godchildren. This is expressed in their loyalty to the virtues she
cultivated in them, faithfulness to Mass, Confession and family life.
Her goodness was evident
in the everyday bits and pieces, little acts of charity and little acts
of prayerful silence and her sense of the wonder of God that many of us
would like to have. We thank her for her ‘witness to life’,
teaching us how to live well and die well, in service to God and life,
to neighbour, to the neediest, and to aboriginal people. Pro-lifers
would do well to imitate her commitment.¤
Back to index
THE LAW OF PRO-LIFE
by Fr Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 1
The central principle of
Christianity, of pro-life living is expendability – death to self.
Battles of the cross are won by teaching pro-lifers how to live and die
well, not how to avoid living or dying.
On Calvary, Christ was
the model for us all. He showed us all how to live the law of life. He
showed us that to die is to gain. "For me, life means Christ, hence
dying is so much gain" (Phil 1:21). "The man who loves his life shall
lose it; and the man who hates his life in this world preserves it to
life eternal" (Jn. 12:25).
When the early
Christians faced the constant threat of martyrdom, the leaders, the
elders in the church, were asked the same basic question that Jesus put
to His apostles: "Can you drink of the cup I am to drink of?" (Mt
20:22). This meant imprisonment. This meant torture. This meant
scourging. This meant persecution.
The truth of the matter
is that sometimes death, as in the case of the Son of God, Christ’s
death, may serve God’s ends even better than life. Stephen, the first
martyr, was stoned to death and through his death Paul was changed from
a persecutor of Christians into a believer and great apostle. The blood
of the apostles and the martyrs is the seed of the Church. Christ lost
His life, gave His life. His gift of self-sacrifice became the seed of
the world’s hope and joy. His death was gain. It meant victory over the
second death, over evil, over Satan. It means eternal life for all who
believe.
The universal eternal
law is clear. It is either life through death or death in life. If we
wish to have the same destiny as Christ we must choose the same road.
Every step we take to follow Christ means bloody footprints from our
wounds. Not many pro-lifers are willing to take Christ's way - to go all
the way. Many draw back from lack of a moral backbone and give in to
this or that compromise. It is easier to withdraw than to stand up for
Christ. They refuse to challenge Christians about their acceptance of
contraception for they might lose memberships or supporters. It is safer
to go along to get along. Some do so to keep their so called careers.
Some do so to avoid challenging the status quo of laws without morality,
living in fear of being outcasts or labelled as loose cannons.
Grapes must be crushed
before there can be wine to drink. Wheat must be bruised before it can
become bread to feed the hungry. A candle must burn to give off light. A
seed must die to bear fruit. Pro-lifers must be willing to be changed
and transformed by Christ at the altar of sacrifice so they may empty
their lives in loving service and become lasting blessings for the
innocent, the invalid, the handicapped and the elderly.
Pope John Paul II states
clearly that we have an "inescapable responsibility of choosing to be
unconditionally pro-life" (Evangelium Vitae, # 28). Nothing helps us so
much to face positively the conflict between death and life, in which we
are engaged, as faith in the Son of God who became man and dwelt among
men so that "they may have life, and have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). It
is basically a matter of faith in the risen Christ, who has conquered
death. It is faith in the blood of Christ, that was shed to cleanse and
save us. Christ sacrificed Himself freely out of love for the Church and
for us. Are we willing to do the same out of love for the most
vulnerable of our neighbours? ¤
Back to index
TRUTH AND MORALITY ?
by Fr. Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 2
Far too many
of our youth and young adults have lost their basic moral foundations, due
to everyday erosion of their belief in truth and morality. The Judeo-Christian
tradition, which explained and gave purpose to life, humanity and the world,
has been bombarded by a culture that perceives truth as a matter of subjective
taste or convenience, and morality as a matter of individual preference
(e.g.: pre-marital sex, cohabitation, same-sex unions). Youth and young
adults are inundated by mass media propaganda that seeks to manipulate and
control them by glamorizing immorality, promoting pornography and maliciously
mocking biblical and church values (e.g.: contraception, sexual abuse, perversion).
The Playboy philosophy and false creeds of ‘if it feels good to you, do it’
and ‘go along to get along’ have deceived a whole generation into living
a relativism of self-gratification and self-indulgence that places pleasure
before person, appetite before love, selfishness before generosity and man
before God. Too many of our school systems claim to offer value-free or morally-neutral
education, leaving options to individual consciences that have not been informed
or formed with the basic truths of real life and real love. Today, secular
education systems reject or deny the existence of ultimate standards of truth,
or the possibility of knowing anything objectively.
All too frequently, sexual instruction is inadequate,
limited by serious omission of the teaching magisterium of the Catholic
Church in terms of chastity, abstinence and natural family planning. Catholic
ambivalence toward Humanae Vitae and dogmatic foot-dragging by those in
leadership have exacerbated the crisis of faith in our society and have
led to serious doubts about belief in God’s goodness and mercy as well as
the sanctity and dignity of human life. Dissenting professors in Catholic
institutes of higher learning have misled and misinformed teachers-in-training,
by presenting them with personal opinions or private interpretations rather
than actual Church teachings, either by watering down the facts, or by simply
twisting or compromising the truth to suit secular or relativistic agendas.
Pope John Paul II has been succinct and explicit in his direction that contraception
is never justifiable: “No personal or social circumstances have ever, or
can ever, justify such an (contraceptive) act” (Nov. 12, 1988). He has made
it clear that the Church’s teaching on contraception does not belong to
matter open to free discussion. The hard core malcontents, nonetheless,
reject or even prefer to remain ignorant rather than accept the truth, for
it would mean changing their life styles. Compromise is not the answer.
Adherence to the Gospel of Life is.
All too often, selective group instruction uses
age inappropriate programs that do not take into account latency growth stages,
varying degrees of psychological maturity, presenting too much information
too soon, or force-feeding of politically correct but inaccurate content
(e.g.: anti-family bias, moral and medical aspects regarding homosexuality).
This has often been the reason that some parents have removed their children
from government-subsidized schools and opted for Catholic private education
systems that adhere to the Church magisterium, or home schooling, where they
are once again taking the responsibility of being the primary teachers of
their children in the ways of faith and morals. The tragedy is that, increasingly,
parents are, for the most part, no longer in charge of their children. They
have abdicated this primary responsibility and assume that the Church, the
school or others are doing the job. Concerned teachers are struggling to
do their best but are hindered by hidden agendas and politically correct
guidelines. Marginalized parents must become once again involved in the spiritual
education of their children and youth and challenge the status quo where
necessary, insisting on a Christ-centered system that identifies sin for
what it is and promotes charity, courage, chastity and abstinence. An inadequate
system weakens the faith, leads to deformation of consciences and becomes
meaningless if it does not present the truth or if it does not follow the
teachings of the Church on family life education. Formation and education
in a Catholic school must be based on the principles of Catholic doctrine.
Young adults must be informed that natural family
planning is not contraception. It is a method of fertility awareness and
appreciation. It is a discipline, which is proper to the purity of married
couples that confers a higher human value on marriage. Parents must exert
a more efficacious influence in training their offspring (Humanae Vitae,
Pope Paul VI; #21; Familiaris Consortio, Pope John Paul II, #33). Pope John
Paul II has made it clear that all parishes should have natural family planning
teaching teams. He has put the spotlight on the Blessed Sacrament stating
that “the solution to all of the confusion and promiscuity in the world is
intimacy with Jesus in Eucharistic adoration”.
Negotiability of everything in life seems to be
the pattern for this generation. Personal experience is the measure used
for defining the certainty of anything by most of our deceived youth, for
they believe that truth is relative. Personal choice and tolerance have been
emphasized by our ‘culture of death society’ when it comes to respect for
the sanctity and dignity of life. Ambivalence and confusion reign, with biblical
values being interpreted subjectively. What is wrong for one person is not
perceived as being wrong for another. People decide for themselves what is
wrong or right for them. The transcendent has been removed from the core
or heart of western culture. Francis Schaeffer gets to the root of the problem
when he explains how the finite is defined by the infinite, how God defines
truth as objective and absolute: “If there is no absolute moral standard,
then one cannot say, in a final sense, that anything is right or wrong.
By absolute we mean that which always applies, that which provides a final
or ultimate standard” (How Should We Then Live, Fleming H. Revell Co., 1976,
p. 145). There must be an absolute if there are to be morals or real values.
We are left, merely, with conflicting opinions if there is no final
arbiter between individuals and groups whose moral judgements conflict.
Advertising on radio, TV and the Internet, which
advocate ‘safe sex’ (which is not safe) promulgates promiscuous sexual activity
(e.g.: use of condoms). We live in a world in which over 60 million people
use birth control pills, a world in which there are 55 million surgical
abortions as well as 250 million chemical abortions in the course of one
year. In North America, over 50% of marriages end in divorce and 80-90%
of Catholics practise contraception. There has been an increase of 310%
in the birth-rate among unmarried women from 1950 to 1990. There have been
over two million abortions in Canada since 1969, with 55 Planned Parenthood
Federation of Canada Centres having opened in that time. World Health Organization
statistics report that an epidemic of sexually-transmitted diseases has
grown into a plague - 22 million people have already died of HIV/AIDS. In
1998 there were 62 million cases of Gonorrhea in the world, 89 million cases
of Chlamydia and 170 million cases of Trichomoniasis. In Canada there were
45,534 people who were infected with HIV in 1999. There were 4,200 new infections
in Canada in the same year. The cost in taxes to Canadian provincial health
budgets was $4 billion a year for AIDS carriers (Health Canada - http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb/lcdc/bah/epi/ahcan_e;
The Safer Sex Illusion, by Dr. John Shea, Life Ethics Center, Toronto, p.
4, p. 10, Maclean’s Magazine, July 9, 2001).
Our young people have largely lost their moral underpinnings
and have difficulty distinguishing right from wrong and good from evil.
They are caught up in moral and spiritual bankruptcy, which ends up forming
one-dimensional people. Leadership is seriously lacking in vision to the
point where it is not about doing the right thing, but mainly about power.
This deliberate devaluation is characterized by checking or casting out conscience
and morality at the door with integrity, freedom, hard work and life values
being degraded to have little or no meaning.
Today’s generation is being raised in many cases without the influence
of a closely extended family unit and have, for the most part, not known
want or deprivation. We are experiencing a shift away from dependence on
God and from biblical values and standards. There is a need to place a high
priority on establishing strong family and community networks, on the relationships
between actions and consequences and on commitment and personal responsibility.
Parents must express their love for children and youth by spending more
time with them, by showing them how to work well and how to value and respect
life rather than by emphasizing things as the be-all or
end-all of living .
Humanae Vitae, with its crucial teaching that the
conjugal love act must be reserved for marriage and be always open to new
life, has been relegated to obsolete book shelves or totally disregarded
along with its warnings about the consequences for those who choose not to
follow God’s plans, and opt for a contraceptive mentality, the result of
which is increased immorality, promiscuity, family breakdowns and divorce.
Youth and young adults perceive sex as a recreational rather than a procreational
love relationship.
Dr. Janet Smith outlines two cornerstones for sexual
responsibility: “Sexual intercourse is meant to be the expression
of a deep love for another individual of the opposite sex. If you are not
ready for babies, you are not ready for sexual intercourse and you are not
ready for babies until you are married” (Contraception: Why not?). Recent
research indicates that youth “who lack a truth are four times more likely
to approve pre-marital sexual intercourse as a ‘moral choice’ (Right from
Wrong, Josh McDowell, & Bob Hostler, Word Publishing, 1994, p. 276).
Truth must be affirmed for all people, for all time, for all places. Strong
conviction of the existence of objective truth is essential if our youth
are to know which choice is right. This will enable them to make moral choices
in an immoral world and to decide not to accept counterfeit as a means to
fulfill their desires. ¤
Back to index
HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS
Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI
2002, Issue 2
The purpose of this short article is to communicate
to the reader some of the underlying principles and facts that give direction
to the teachings of the Church on the pastoral care of homosexuals. This
teaching is found particularly in the 1986 letter sent to the bishops of
the world from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on “The Pastoral
Care of Homosexual Persons”.
The basis for the Church’s pastoral care is the objective
fact that the homosexual, seeking pastoral care, is a person, male or female,
made in God’s image and likeness. A person whose rights that flow from being
made in God’s image and likeness should always be respected, and treated
with charity. But it must be recognized that that person is one who, for
whatever reason, has ‘a disordered sexual inclination’. Good pastoral care
also respects the very important moral distinction that neither the orientation
nor the person is sinful, but homosexual acts flowing from that disordered
inclination are morally disordered.
The goal of pastoral care by the Church is directed
towards helping the homosexual to live a healthy, spiritual life, ever more
faithful to Christ and the teaching of His Church. The pastoral care, therefore,
encourages the person to develop a personal relationship with Christ and
His Church. It also encourages him or her to develop a deeper prayer life
and to benefit from frequent reception of the Sacraments of Reconciliation
and of Holy Communion.
One of the central themes of the letter is that pastoral care should seek
to help the homosexual person in every possible way. This does not mean
encouraging the person to act out homosexual impulses. The Church-sponsored
organization known as COURAGE is a very effective support group for those
who want to live their sexuality in harmony with the teachings of the Church.
This kind of support is very important spiritually since, as is recognized
in the letter, they have their own special need for encouragement to carry
their own special cross and unite their suffering with Christ’s ( cf. letter,
# 12).
Good pastoral care also supports the person as he or
she seeks and uses the spiritual, psychological and/or psychiatric help that
is available to help the homosexual overcome the disordered inclination.
Good pastoral care, as well as professional help, should aim to help the
homosexual overcome his or her problem, not to accept it as normal. To encourage
the latter is neither charitable nor wise. It is neither charitable nor
wise because it would be like encouraging the alcoholic to think that his
condition is normal, and that it was all right to continue drinking. Good
pastoral care aims at helping the homosexual to “live by the truth and in
love” (Eph 4-15). To live by the truth, homosexuals often need the support
of the Christian community in order to resist the temptation to define their
identity exclusively in terms of their sexual orientation” (cf. Letter,
# 15). Therefore, they should be discouraged from joining support groups
that are against the teachings of the Church on homosexuality.
Good pastoral care and growth in the spiritual life must be built on the
recognition of objective reality. For homosexuals, that means acceptance
of the objective reality of their “disordered sexual inclination”, its impact
on their lives and on their spiritual and emotional development. They are
encouraged to seek the help needed to understand its origin, from which
point some healing can begin. The Church thus warns them not
to accept the relativist’s moral position that states: what makes something
right is that you satisfy your subjective emotional needs. Such a position
does not help people face the truth that can set them free. It follows,
therefore, that they should not seek help from professionals who hold the
position of moral relativism.
Good pastoral care, therefore, will encourage homosexuals
to seek counseling from professionals who consider homosexuality, both in
motivation and behaviour, to be an objective disorder, “more precisely,
as being a strategy or mechanism of defense which the person uses against
deeper problems which have resulted from his or her developmental history.”
(cf. C. W. Socarides, The Sexual Deviations and the Diagnostic Manual, American
Journal of Psychotherapy, 32 (1978), pp. 414-426). Therapists who accept
objective reality and call a spade a spade, do help many homosexuals to look
at and understand the objective basis of their own motivation and behaviour.
Then they can begin to work on the healing process indicated by what has
happened in the person’s spiritual growth history.
Good pastoral care also encourages forgiveness. As one
author has expressed it so well, “Resentments are really ways of punishing
ourselves for others’ failings”. In therapy, a homosexual will begin to
discover how others, whether from within his family or from outside, have
negatively impacted his or her spiritual development by what they have done
or failed to do. With these discoveries, there will be a certain amount
of resentment that must be let go through forgiveness, leaving the justice
part to God. In this way the path to further growth will be cleared of a
major obstacle. Also it often opens the path to the forgiveness that comes
through the Church in and through the Sacrament of Reconciliation.
David Morrison, in his excellent book, “Beyond Gay”
(Our Sunday Visitor. 1999), makes another excellent point: that good pastoral
care involves preaching not only on same-sex sins, but also on adultery
and pre-marital sex.
I hope that this short article has communicated to the
reader some of the important principles and facts that give direction
to the teachings of the Church on the pastoral care of homosexuals.
¤
by Fr Paul Burchat
2002, Issue 2
Among the many factors which have led to contempt for new life, pornography
is certainly a leading one. It has degraded human decency, human sexuality
and the human personality to such an extent that the most intimate form
of human communication (i.e.: the conjugal act), is now marketed and sold
as if it were just another commercial commodity. The mystique and sacredness
which God intends for the sexual act vanishes once the participants begin
performing and the cameras start rolling. Claiming that such activity has
no effect on the performers, the producers or the consumers is untrue and
dangerous.
How pervasive is the problem? Extensive, to say the least! In the March
l8, 2002 edition of ‘The Report Newsmagazine’, on page 37, the following statistics
were reported:
- Pornographic images, erotic paraphernalia and raunchy sexual talk
are reaching a near-saturation point in the daily lives of Americans, through
television, movies, magazines and the internet.
- Nine of every ten movies made in the U.S. last year were pornographic.
- Americans spend up to $10 billion U.S. a year on pornography.
- The combined circulation of Penthouse and Playboy exceeds that
of Time and Newsweek.
This, of course, says nothing of what the rest of the world spends on it
in a year. There are two major reasons for this: the loss of sound moral
values pertaining to sexuality (which stems from a loss of faith and a compromised
understanding of the human person) and the advances made in communication
technology. Illicit pursuits, which until recent times, were for the most
part available only to the wealthier classes, are now accessible to just
about anyone, regardless of their means. “A problem which at one time
was confined mainly to wealthy countries has now begun, via the communications
media, to corrupt moral values in developing nations” (Pornography and Violence
in the Communications Media: A Pastoral Response (PV), Pontifical Council
for Social Communications, May 7, 1989, #6. Never before in the history
of the human race has such sexually explicit, immoral material been so available
to so many people. What will be the effects of it all? We know the answer
in the short term, but only God knows what the long-term results will be.
Definition
Before we look at the consequences, let us first consider some definitions
in order to know what it is we are discussing. Hardon’s Modern Catholic
Dictionary says pornography is “a description or portrayal of any person
or activity that is consciously intended to stimulate immoral sexual feelings”.
“Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the
intimacy of partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties.
It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate
giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of
its participants (actors, vendors and the public) since each one becomes
an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all
who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense”
(CCC #2354).
Consequences
From this we can immediately note a couple of things. The first is that
everyone involved with pornography is injured, not just the actors. Those
who purchase and use pornography objectify and depersonalize themselves as
well as those who are portrayed in it. The second is that a person’s ideas
about sexuality and intimacy become increasingly unreal the longer they are
immersed in this fantasy world. The possibility of relating to other people
as persons and not just as a means to the attainment of sexual pleasure becomes
more remote each time one participates in the world of illusion which pornography
creates.
The following are some of the effects mentioned by the Vatican document
(PV, #9-18): “Specialists may disagree among themselves about how and to what
degree particular individuals and groups are affected by these phenomena,
but the broad outlines of the problem are stark, clear and frightening”
(#9). “Pornography and sadistic violence debase sexuality, corrode
human relationships, exploit individuals, (especially women and young people),
undermine marriage and family life, foster anti-social behaviour and weaken
the moral fibre of society itself”(#10). “Thus, one of the clear effects
of pornography is sin...those who use such materials not only do moral harm
to themselves but contribute to the continuation of a nefarious trade” (#11).
“Even so-called ‘soft core’ pornography can have a progressively desensitizing
effect. The likelihood of anti-social behaviour can grow as this process
continues” (#14). “In the worst cases, pornography can act as an inciting
or reinforcing agent, a kind of accomplice, in the behaviour of dangerous
sex offenders (child molesters, rapists and killers)” (# 17).
This last scenario is well-documented in an interview which Dr. James Dobson
conducted with convicted serial killer, Ted Bundy, just before his execution.
Mr. Bundy described how his involvement with pornography and its desensitizing
effects ultimately led him to seek more intense and perverted sexual encounters
with his victims, which eventually ended with some of them being murdered.
Finally, we must mention the possibility of addiction, which may happen
with repeated exposure to pornography.
Further Factors
Here are some further factors which contribute to the problem: One,
of course, is money. Pornography is a very lucrative business and those
who become addicted may end up spending a small or a large fortune on it.
With so much money to be made, the producers of pornography can be very
aggressive in their marketing strategies, especially on the internet. People’s
lack of appreciation of the gravity of the problem contributes to its spread.
So do ineffective laws and lack of enforcement. A false notion of ‘artistic
freedom’ is also used to justify the production of pornography. Genuine art
has to do with truth, goodness and beauty, among other things. Pornography
possesses none of these qualities and inevitably leads not to freedom but
to enslavement, manifested in the extreme by full-blown addiction, severe
anti-social behaviour and incarceration.
Some Solutions
In closing, I will mention a few of the solutions proposed by the Vatican
response (PV): “Effective self-control is always the best control”, coupled
with, “self-regulation by the media” (#23). “Parents must re-double their
efforts to provide for the sound moral formation of children and youth...to
discuss matters of concern to their children in a loving and gentle manner.
It must not be forgotten that, in matters of human formation, more is obtained
by reasoned explanation than by prohibition” (#24). Legislators and law
enforcement agencies need to respond adequately to this growing problem
(#28). Finally, the Church at all levels needs to clearly promote sound
teaching and formation with regards to faith and sexual morality (#29).
This problem is by no means insurmountable but it will take a determined
and coordinated effort by various organizations, and most especially, by
individuals if we are to deal with it effectively, largely because “production
and dissemination of these materials could not continue if there were not
a market for them” (#11). The best way to combat the influences of pornography
is to refuse to have anything to do with it! ¤
Back to index
by Fr. Jim Whalen
2004, Issue 3
Strange as it may
seem, the greatest opposition to the right of women to be women appears to
come from women. Some women have confused false feminism with true feminism.
Their gender agenda, built on the liberal or equity feminism of the early
1960s, resulted in many women suffering needlessly at the hands of other
women.
The importance of the family was ignored as the
basic cell or social unit of society. Motherhood was under attack by mothers.
In this process of so-called equal treatment, interesting enough, the oppressed
and the oppressors were one and the same gender in many instances. The denial
of the differences between the sexes de-emphasized the family and found many
unfortunately depending on big government solutions to the problems of women.
The limitations of this liberal feminism became
easily apparent to real women – fulltime mothers did not see themselves deprived
of opportunities for full or equal partnership in society. They did not accept
the label of second-class citizens, trapped in subordinate or subservient
roles that the confused feminists assigned to them. Many women want to be
home - engaged in full-time motherhood. This gives the freedom to control
their time and energy. A real partnership in marriage does not require equal
employment or housework. True feminists advocate freedom to decide what works
for them. They do not agree with the ‘gender agenda feminists’, who use the
legislative process to enforce their agenda, which advocates that women should
have to work outside the home. This actively promotes a radical feminist
ideology to restructure society as a whole. True Feminists reject the hidden
gender agenda that every woman should work outside the home today. They maintain
that families and life must be supported and protected, and that all women
have the right to choose motherhood as their primary vocation.
The following is the Motherhood Manifesto, which
states clearly the case for true feminism. It was circulated by Genevieve
Kineke, editor of ‘Hearth Magazine’ to delegates as lobbying materials for
the Cairo and Beijing conferences. She is a full-time mother who homeschools
two of her children (The Gender Agenda, Dale O’Leary, Vital Issues Press,
1997, pp. 142-144). ¤
Back to index
by Corrie Haas, Priests for Life Canada - Member of the Board
2002, Issue 3
“Oh why can’t a woman be more like a man” (Prof. Higgins in My Fair
Lady).
In my opinion, that just about sums up what militant
feminists have been aiming for all along! To be more like a man, in fact
to be just like a man, denying biological, psychological and emotional differences
between the genders. At least those differences had to be wilfully ignored.
And, that is precisely why radical feminism has failed women. Right from
the start, women’s options were not to include sensible solutions such as
shared jobs, part time jobs or more financial help to stay at home to raise
a young family. Instead the “Just Like A Man” faction dictated that in order
for women to realize themselves as fully integrated personalities they had
to go out into the workplace just like the men. Children became a hindrance
and detrimental to personal fulfilment. Pregnancy became an obstacle to achieving
career objectives. In order to change the mindset of women toward a new life
growing in them, age-old taboos had to be broken down. Elaborate deception
was accomplished by blatant lies and biological untruths. A whole new language
was developed, masking what was really happening inside the womb. The unborn
were called a “blob of tissue” or “product of conception”, and abortion became
“terminating a pregnancy”. Slogans abounded. “My body to do with what I want”.
In Germany that slogan became “My belly is my own”. Dutch feminists topped
that one by proclaiming “I will be boss in my own belly!” - thereby completely
ignoring and dehumanizing the new life in the womb. Regrettably a lot of
women swallowed and still believe these untruths. The shift in thinking,
of course, could not have come about without the advent of “the Pill”. Women
were finally able to control their fertility, with the pill “liberated”,
and thus separate womanhood from motherhood, thereby proclaiming complete
autonomy to do as they wished with their lives.
The honour of being the intellectual “mother” of
the movement is usually bestowed on Simone de Beauvoir who titled her feminist
manifesto “The second sex”, implying thereby that things would work out better
for women if they were more like the first sex, men! Subjugation of women
was its’ analysis. Women as “private property of men”. Margaret Sanger, another
feminist who made a huge impact, was the founder of the birth control movement.
She was the practical one. She was motivated to a certain extent by the suffering
of poor immigrant families in New York City. Aiming to emancipate women she
pushed for birth control. She also was an advocate of free sex without consequences.
However her prime motivation was eugenic cleansing of the gene pool. She
was firmly convinced that the poor were poor because of their inferior genes
and she feared the outcome for society if these “undesirable breeders” were
unchecked in their reproductive habits. Her own family, however, were never
included in that observation, even though her parents were poverty stricken
Irish immigrants who had eleven children. She considered her “white” blood
to be pure, unlike that of what she termed “the Slavs, Latins and Hebrews”
who came flocking to America’s shores in the early part of the twentieth
century. She set up her first clinic in Brownsville, New York, if not to
eliminate, then at least curb these “dysgenic hordes”, where most of the
immigrants resided. The push for contraception, sterilization and abortion
was now imminent. Thanks to her clever use of wealthy patrons and corporations,
Margaret Sanger succeeded beyond her wildest dreams and she would be pleased
to know that so many years after she founded Planned Parenthood, the organization
still flourishes and is still fuelled by big money and power, now on a world
wide scale, thanks to the population controllers in the U. N. Sanger’s main
opponent, it should be noted, was Father John Ryan, the champion promoter
of the papal encyclical Rerum Novarum. Msg. Ryan saw through the clever rhetoric
and exposed Sanger’s real objectives, showing how racist her motives really
were. He himself fought for twenty years for more social justice and a more
just distribution of wealth. The Eugenics Movement itself was eventually
silenced because of the Nazi regime in Germany. Its horrible excesses made
short shrift of Margaret Sanger’s vision for a cleansed gene pool. People
no longer had the stomach for that kind of social engineering.
The women’s movement was more or less on hold until
the early sixties when Betty Friedan, a brilliant but bored housewife, stuck
in the suburbs, published her book “The Feminine Mystique”. Ready to grab
and run with it were the militant feminists. Some of Friedan’s aims and objectives
were distorted in the process to the point that Friedan herself became uneasy.
She tried to defuse the growing enmity towards men, but it was too late.
Here in Canada the radical faction quickly took control thanks to publicly
funded lobby groups, the main one being the National Action Committee for
Women. Militant feminists set the agenda and stifled all dissent. NAC claimed,
untruthfully, that it represented the majority of women in Canada. Nobody
in Government challenged them on that claim. Due to the fact that Canadians
in general are so much more docile than their American neighbours, combined
with the successful brainwashing that tended to intimidate men and put them
on a guilt trip, the radical spokespersons for the movement quickly achieved
more legislation and in a much shorter time than their American counterparts.
Hate and vengeance against the “Patriarchy” became the predominant sentiment
of the movement. Patriarchy, the absolute bane of the liberation seekers!
All the injustices, the sexism, the male dominance in all aspects of society
were blamed on patriarchy - hence it had to be pulled out at the roots!
Patriarchy, as we know, became a dirty word in the Church. Feminists among
the women religious enthusiastically jumped on the bandwagon and were determined
to change the Church from within. The ultimate aim: Priesthood for women
and abolishing the male Hierarchy. Inclusive language became a focal point
for change for those who felt women were short-changed by the male images
of God in the bible and the liturgy. In order to accommodate this craving
for inclusivity, the radical faction resorted to the most ridiculous changes
in the language, which produced tortured sentences. An example of this can
be found in the Lectionary that was produced by the United States National
Council of Churches and which goes like this: “ For God so loved the world
that God gave God’s only Child, that whoever believes in that Child should
not perish but have eternal life”. Unfortunately the Catholic Church is now
also saddled with lectionairies that have a dumbed down pedestrian approach
to the language of the bible. It is of course ludicrous to try and change
all references to God and make them gender neutral. The occasional effort
is nothing but a token gesture to the “inclusivity” seekers and is, in fact,
demeaning to women, because it is assumed that women cannot discern the universal
meaning of certain generic words as in “What is man, that you notice him;
the son of man that you take thought of him?”(Ps 144: 3) .
So what is the status of the feminist movement at in this point in time?
We cannot call it a revolution anymore, although many who were shaped by
radical feminism are now in influential positions in academia, in politics,
in the print media and on the airwaves, where they have the power to shape
young and not so young minds. “Women’s studies” are especially a source of
indoctrination but on the whole there seems to be a drawing back from too
much extremism. Funding for special interest groups has been reduced to a
certain extent and the women’s movement is feeling the pinch. Some introspection
has started as a result. Slowly but surely they are beginning to realize
that “women are equal, but different”. This is the approach used by a group
called ‘Real Women’ which was formed as an antidote to the militant ideology
of the feminist movement. Women who tried to be “just like men” have found
out that the cost to themselves and to their families has more often than
not been too great. Never have there been so many stressed out and burned
out women because they tried to do it all and found out they were not super-human
after all.
The conclusion one has to come to is that the feminist
movement has failed women in a number of aspects. Paradoxically by wanting
to be “just like men” they have consistently tried to exclude men in their
“sisterhoods”, which fostered hatred and resentment toward all males. This
in turn has soured the relationships between men and women in our society
to the detriment of the family. No wonder there is a sense of “enough already!”
It is time to make peace and try new ways in a spirit of co-operation between
the two genders. ¤
Back to index
by Fr. Joseph Hattie, OMI
2002, Issue 3
A recent court case in British Columbia illustrates
how far the pendulum has swung since the feminist movement went into the
streets in the 1900s, to demand equality before the Law for women. Their
battle cry was “Equal rights for women”, especially in the political field.
In the BC case, the mother of triplets had registered her newborn children
in her name alone, without the father’s knowledge or consent. When he petitioned
the court to have his surname follow the mother’s, in hyphenated form, he
was denied the right commonly associated with parenthood. The 2-1 majority
decision concluded that BC law gives biological mothers complete rights over
their children, including the sole right to name them. The GC Supreme Court
judge concluded, “The legislature has left no ‘gap’ in this question of a
child’s name and surname,” she said. “It has decreed that fathers have no
rights”. Many rejoiced over this decision.
Why has the pendulum swung so far? Why is it that the
law of the land is now being used to deny men some of their basic rights?
It is because many have forgotten the distinction between equality and sameness,
a vital distinction which protects the true equality of men and women and
promotes their ability to benefit from and enjoy the complementarily of their
differences.
What we need to remember is that human beings have been
created equal without being created the same, for sameness implies a lack
of uniqueness. Each human being is created unique and equal. What is true
for all human beings is particularly true for men and women. This needs to
be emphasized because the differences between men and women are more visible
than is the equality. We are equal without being the same.
To better understand how we are equal but not the same let us go back to
the beginning of the bible. In its first two chapters we are given the creation
account, which reveals that when God created human beings he created them
male and female, thus He created them different, but at the same time He
created them equal in origin, dignity and destiny and complementary in their
differences.
Men and women are equal in origin because God Himself
personally creates each.
They are equal in dignity because God created both of them in His image and
likeness. Some may not respect another’s personal dignity, but that does
not change the truth of that dignity. Some may ignore it, but they can never
take it away.
Women and men are equal in destiny because they are each
called to a life of intimacy with God, now and for eternity.
‘In the beginning’ this equality was recognized and acknowledged
by both Adam and Eve. Adam expressed this truth for both himself and Eve,
when he awoke from the deep sleep and saw Eve for the first time. Saying,
“This at last is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. She was taken from
man and will be called woman” (Gen 2:24). They then rejoiced in the truth
of their equality and in complementarily of their differences, as male and
female, and in how their complementarily could be put at the service of life.
The true equality of men and women, when recognized and
lived, provides the foundation and context for accepting, respecting, and
rejoicing in the complementary differences with which God created them male
and female.
Unfortunately, the ‘Original Sin’ distorted their ability
to see and to live their true equality and also make it easier to focus and
thus exploit their differences. They experience shame because of their focus
on their differences.
When these truths are not understood and lived, in a society,
the exploiting (thus considering the other as not equal) is easily enshrined
in Civil Law by those who have the power to do so. Those who are exploited
see changes to the Civil Law as the way to be freed from this exploitation.
Their efforts are usually directed to changes in the Civil Law that would
bring about what is called “sexual” equality. this is, in effect, asking
he law to declare that men and women are the sae, instead of truly equal
and complementary. Seeking “sexual” equality leads people to use the courts
to bring about this kind of juridical equality, which has no basis in reality
and will lead to further misunderstanding of what it means to be a human
being, male or female. In turn this will damage relationships between men
and women. When the initial changes to Civil Law do not bring about the desired
“sexual” equality, the temptation is to think that all that is needed is
to make more changes to get men to do what the feminist want. The power of
the law is thus used against men even to the extent of using it to deprive
them of some of their basic rights, as we have seen in the example used at
he beginning of his article. All of this creates a lack of trust between
men and women, which certainly affects their relationships and adversely
affects both the procreation and the education of children. It adversely
affects their ability to put their complementary differences at the service
of life, and encourages them to exploit these differences for sexual pleasure.
Such an orientation is not pro-life, because it denies the true equality
of human beings, exalts the pleasure of sexual activity as an end in itself,
and gradually convinces both individual consciences and the social conscience
of a society that pursuit of sexual pleasure as an end in itself is morally
justified. Therefore the thought is that Civil Law should provide men and
women the means needed to pursue this pleasure (i.e.: contraception, abortion,
etc.). The sociological evidence alone, from the past 50 years verifies this
conclusion.
If the goal of feminism is not true equality, lived between
men and women, then the energies of feminism and its supports will move in
the direction of promoting “sexual” equality which of its nature cannot serve
life, but attacks life. For “sexual” equality comes out of an ideology which
says that the end justifies the means. This is a recipe for disaster.
A feminism which respects the true basis and nature of
the equality of women and men, and recognizes and respects their complementary
differences, and works to have our Civil Law support and protect these truths
is a feminism that will truly serve women and men, marriage and family, and
thus serve life itself. In this way feminism would promote a true pro-life
equality. Let us encourage and promote such feminism. ¤
Back to index
by Fr. Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 4
Realistically,
humanity cannot escape suffering, despite all efforts. In this Advent time,
in preparation for Christmas, the need for the sanctification of suffering
directs us to reflect on the Holy Innocents, innocent children who were put
to death in place of Christ, giving witness to God by a martyr’s death. F.
J. Sheed helps us to focus on the mystery of suffering of the Innocents:
“There is anguish for us in thinking of the slain babies and parents. For
the babies the agony was soon over; in the next world they would come to know
whom they had died to save and for all eternity would have that glory. For
the parents, the pain would have lasted longer; but at death they too must
have found that there was a special sense in which God was in their debt,
as he had never been indebted to any. They and their children were the only
ones who ever agonized in order to save God’s life…” (To Know Christ Jesus,
pp. 45-46).
They gave their lives for a Person - for a Truth
whom they did not even know. It is through faith that a Christian can discover
in his suffering and other people’s suffering the loving and provident hand
of God the Father. “We know that in everything God works for good with
those who love him” (Rom 8: 28). Faith transforms the meaning of suffering.
By uniting our suffering with Christ’s suffering, it is changed into a sign
of God’s love, something of great value, something fruitful and beneficial.
“These have been redeemed from among the human race as the first fruits
of God and for the Lamb of God; they follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (Feast
of the Holy Innocents, Communion antiphon).
The Hedonists saw pleasure as the goal of life and
attempted to avoid suffering at all costs. Jewish people, chosen by God, saw
any suffering as a punishment for sin. Jesus Christ changed this belief. The
entire world changed after His birth. He became our brother by the Incarnation.
He became our Saviour by His suffering on the Cross. Christ’s answer to suffering
is explained by St Peter: “If you do wrong and get beaten for it, what credit
can you claim? But if you put up with suffering for doing what is right, this
is acceptable in God’s eyes. It was for this you were called, for Christ suffered
for you in just this way and left you an example to have you follow in His
steps” (1 Pet 2:20-21).
The Cross, pain, and suffering are the means Jesus
used to redeem us. Since then suffering has a new meaning when it is united
to Him. Our Lord changed the laws of creation for our benefit. He chose to
take on our humanity in all things except sin. He never used His power to
avoid suffering. He suffered from hunger, exhaustion, and pain. He experienced
ingratitude, betrayal, indifference, and abandonment. He took upon himself
excruciating moral agonies by burdening Himself with the sins of the world,
and His humiliating death on the Cross. Christ wanted us to understand that
there would be suffering that we could not change. In accepting such suffering
united to Him, it could have redemptive meaning and lead to personal purification.
St Paul explains this doctrine: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake
and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the
sake of His Body, that is the Church” (Col 1:24).
Today, suffering finds no place in our society, which
for the most part is pagan, but this is true even for many who call themselves
Christians. The Cross is rejected in public life, banned from many churches,
schools and offices. Suffering is necessary to obtain real happiness and
abundant graces. If we live our lives as Christ commanded us, there will
be suffering at all ages, of all kinds, but if we suffer with Christ, we
will also be glorified with Him.
“I consider the sufferings of the present to be as nothing compared with
the glory to be revealed in us” (Rom 8: 17-18).
The evils of the world are traceable to original
sin, personal sin, and ultimately Satan. God does not cause evil and suffering.
He permits evil and suffering in order to draw some good out of them. Joining
our sufferings to those of Christ gives them value and brings us closer to
Him. “Suffering is present in the world in order to release love, in order
to give birth to works of love toward neighbour, in order to transform the
whole of human civilization into a ‘Civilization of Love’” (Salvifici Doloris,
Pope John Paul II, #30). Suffering is an invitation to be more like Jesus.
Let our gifts of love this Christmas give birth to pro-life works of mercy
and peace. ¤
Back to index
by Fr. Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 4
Preparing for
the birthday of Jesus, we recognize as human persons, and as human patients,
that we have human rights and human responsibilities. From conception, the
first moment of existence, until natural death, we as persons have a need
and capacity for intelligent freedom. Let there be room in our hearts
and homes to experience life as a gift from God. Let us reach out to all and
cultivate mutual support and respect, and build a civilization of love.
Accepting the call of God to act like persons means that all persons, including
patients, have control over their lives and take part in forming relationships
and communities. All have a right to live as persons and be treated as such,
with respect for God, the other and for self. It means, furthermore, a special
reverence for each person irregardless of the individual’s state, whether
handicapped or not. For a patient, this means being in possession of one’s
own life, while at the same time, cultivating relationships in a community
of persons, in a caring and loving manner. A patient has a primary
right and responsibility to reach these goals with help from health care professionals.
The patient’s responsibility and right to make intelligent
decisions cannot be delegated to others at either the health care level or
community level. When a proxy must necessarily speak for a patient, he or
she must strive to present as accurately as possible what the patient would
decide to do, if he or she was able. Health care resources are available to
help patients to make use of whatever intelligent freedom is possible for
them, to help persons to be persons. Catholic patient’s transcendent spiritual
beliefs concerning life, suffering, and death are not negotiable. Hospital
policies must protect the patient’s right to receive ethically ordinary treatment
and preserve the option to reject ethically extraordinary treatment.
Each person or patient has a law inscribed in their
heart by God, a voice calling out to all to love and do what is good and avoid
evil. Each person will be judged by how this law is observed. The conscience
must be formed and informed by objective truths, guided by objective moral
standards, in order to make correct decisions for life, in order to be people
of life and for life. This means a patient must make the best possible effort
to discover the right choice, and turn aside from blind choices.
A patient, in forming his conscience, has the responsibility
to speak to the physician(s) about his present condition, the medication,
surgery, or other proposed intervention. At the same time, he has a right
to be listened to and to be believed.
The Catholic patient is blessed with standards of
morality that are clearly outlined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
A Catholic patient can easily obtain the teachings of the magisterium as well
as various encyclicals, which explain and develop pro-life morality (e.g.:
Humanae Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, Veritatis Splendor). Contraception, sterilization,
abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are evil acts to be rejected.
The Catholic patient has a responsibility to know and judge his or her life
by the standards of Jesus Christ; to maintain his or her life with respect,
reverence and gratitude; to love life, and cultivate a pro-life attitude;
to stay alive to assist in recovery of his or her health; to be rehabilitated
if necessary; and to strive for optimal health.
Patients have a right to be helped by physicians, family, friends, society
and hospitals, because of the human values of each human being, created in
the image of God as unique individuals. Society has the moral obligation to
protect individuals from risk to their lives, especially if it involves the
benefit of others (as in experimentation). A patient has a right to know the
competency and ethical integrity of a recommended physician or hospital to
which he or she is allocated. Hospital records, physician’s information, or
other personal data, must be guarded to protect the patient’s right to privacy
and legal obligations. There are exceptions to the rule as in the case
of a moral obligation of a physician to inform parents that their teenage
daughter is pregnant and planning to have an abortion.
Catholic patients are expected to strive to live a lifestyle which responds
with thankfulness to God’s gift of life and meets the requirements for good
health, simplicity and regularity. This would include daily prayer, daily
physical and spiritual exercises, healthy eating habits, rest, and a practical,
human timetable. A certain personal, spiritual, and emotional maturity is
the responsibility of patients in relating to others as persons rather than
objects. This means following competent advice, cooperating with therapy,
accepting prescribed treatments and medications, and respecting caregivers
and health professionals. A patient’s rights comes from his or her basic responsibilities
as a person and should incorporate freedoms to choose intelligently. ¤
Back to index
by Fr. Jim Whalen
2002, Issue 4
Suicide and assisted suicide, both take away life.
It is usually an act committed compulsively by an emotionally disturbed person.
Often the attempt at suicide is really a cry for help. When people suffer
from terminal illnesses, they sometimes resort to ending life by these means,
and promote a pro-death, anti-life culture. For some, the progress made in
providing a life of human comfort has made pain and suffering less tolerable,
and a quick death more attractive and acceptable.
Suicide usually is an act by which one brings about one’s
death. It is an act in which death is chosen as a means to an end that a person
sets out to accomplish. It is contrary to the human instinct for self-preservation.
For Catholics, Jews and Moslems, suicide is morally unacceptable
as human life is considered to be a gift from God. Suicide in many religions
is viewed as self-destruction as it violates stewardship of bodily life, is
opposed to human personhood, and is irreversibly evil. It contradicts the
natural inclination to preserve and perpetuate life. It is contrary to moral
law. It is contrary to love for the living God. “It is contrary to the love
of self and offends love of neighbour because it unjustly breaks the ties
of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we
continue to have obligations” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #2281, p.
467). The responsibility for committing suicide is diminished by extreme
fear of hardship, severe psychological disturbances, suffering, and torture.
This does not mean it is sometimes a licit act due to excusing circumstances.
Catholics pray for those who have committed suicide, for God can provide opportunity
for a change of heart, for sorrow, repentance and forgiveness.
The Catholic position on suicide is clear and unequivocal: “Intentionally
causing one’s own death, or suicide, is therefore equally as wrong as murder:
such an action on the part of a person is to be considered as a rejection
of God’s sovereignty and loving plan. Furthermore, suicide is also often a
refusal of love for self, the denial of the natural instinct to live, a flight
from the duties of justice and charity owed to one’s neighbour, to various
communities, or to the whole of society. Although, it is generally recognized,
at times there are psychological factors present that can diminish responsibility
or even completely remove it” (Declaration on Euthanasia, Congregation for
the Doctrine of Faith, 1980, June 26).
Assisted suicide is the act of assisting someone to bring
about his or her death. It is sometimes called mercy killing or euthanasia.
The correct terminology is murder, doctors killing patients, or people killing
people. In the case of mercy killing with animals, they are “put to
sleep” when further treatment would be useless or too costly. There is a great
difference between animals and humans evident in human dignity and human
caring. Euthanasia is an infringement upon the sovereign rights of God(i.e.:
to date, Oregon has legally permitted 92 assisted suicides).
God alone has dominion over our lives. “I confirm that euthanasia
is a grave violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally
unacceptable killing of a human person. This doctrine is based upon the natural
law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition
and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. Depending on the circumstances,
this practice involves the malice proper to suicide or murder” (Evangelium
Vitae, #65).
Catholic teaching in regard to prolonging or terminating life can be helpful:
- We are the recipients, the stewards of the gift of life from God
and we have no right to play God.
- Euthanasia is an action or an omission, which of itself, or by
intention, causes the death of a human person. The act is objectively evil.
Suffering in human existence can be an opportunity to
share in Christ’s redemptive suffering. It is permissible to use medication
to relieve pain in the case of terminal illness, despite the risk of shortening
life, providing the intent is to alleviate pain rather than cause death.
Obtaining necessary medical care is a duty we all have,
but one is not obliged to use extraordinary means. Ordinary means refers to
nutrition and hydration, except where they are an unreasonable burden to
the patient (e.g.: as in the case of an unconscious imminently dying patient).
Such ordinary care should be provided even if it requires medical technology
unless the benefits are outweighed by a definite danger or burden, or are
clearly useless in sustaining life.
Let us be among those who hear and recognize the cries
for help and respond with God’s loving plan for life. ¤
Back to index
|
