|
Review No 76 March 2008
Homily on the Cross of Christ as revealed by the Holy Shroud - Fr Wilbur Boswell
Review No 75 December 2007
One Year on from the Bishops’ Conference
Advent
ACW Review No 74 September 2007
Pope speaks on Traditional Latin Mass
Mary's Virginity and its Significance for our Times
ACW resigns from the National Board of Catholic Women (NBCW).
Letter to ACW from the President of NBCW, Mrs Yogi Sutton
ACW Review No 73 June 2007
Gay Adoption - a Personal View Clare Anderson
ACW Review No 72 March 2007
The Church's Moral Standards are God's Dom Bernard Orchard OSB
ACW Review No 71 - December 2006
The God in the Cave - G K Chesterton
ACW Review No 70 September 2006
Ted Harvey assistant minority leader, Colorado House
Planned Parenthood Celebration Jolted by Abortion Survivor
Daphne McLeod
THE DA VINCI CODE Enid Blyton for Adults?
ACW Review No 69 June 2006
Jane Campbell
Stop trying to kill us off!
Eileen Hourihan
Religious Instruction for children
at the International School (Holland)
ACW Review No 68 March 2006
Margaret Nwamadi
Hot Water Bottle
Diogenes
The Problem of the Rigid Seminarian
ACW Review No 67 December 2005
ACW Review No 66 September 2005
Blown clean away by a brush with Benedict - Katie Grant
Josephine Robinson
Catholic Feminism v Equality Feminism
Prof. Janne Haaland Matlary
-------------------------------
Full Texts
Review No 76 March 2008
Homily on the Cross of Christ as revealed by the Holy Shroud - Fr Wilbur Boswell
The Gospel according to Our Lord Jesus Christ which is His Holy Shroud is a visual aid of another of His vital doctrines: the Cross of Christ.
Gazing at the Shroud we are struck by the sight that the whole image of Christ is covered from top to bottom by no fewer than 600 wounds, 120
of them caused by the flagrum - the Roman scourge, which itself is the torturer’s weaponry. The back and front of the Shroud are one mass of scourge wounds. They are so clear we can not only tell the ones that have been delivered from the right and from the left, but we can also tell they have been delivered in a fan-shaped fashion from the shoulder to the calves of the legs. They reach a climax on the vastly extended chest and remind us very clearly of the words of Isaiah: “He was a leper and no
man, an outcast cursed by God, who bore the sins of the world.”
The Shroud recreates for us the enormity of sin: that it is an offence not against our neighbour but an offence against God; only a person of equal rank can atone for sin. It brought the Son of God down from heaven. The image of Christ is as taut as whipcord; every muscle in the body is clearly visible. It is the appearance of rigor mortis.
Doctors tell us that when a man is crucified the lacerations of the nerve ends around the nails are continually aggravated by the movements of the body gasping for breath. This so irritates the muscles, that they
result in continuous compulsive spasms that rise to a peak while the victim is still fully conscious and end in a crescendo of demented pain. The complete exhaustion of the body, the extreme high temperature and the cramping of every muscle ends in the sudden expulsion of all air, death by suffocation and the immediate onset of rigor mortis.
Cicero, who lived about the time of Christ, called it, “The most cruel and horrible of deaths”. St Augustine tells us: “Nothing is worse than this death”. It is the visual aid of Christ carrying His Cross - His way of bringing home to us that it is only by embracing the Cross that we shall ever triumph over suffering and death. We need to sing again the St Patrick’s Day hymn: “His banner the Cross which we glory to bear. ”
There are two aspects of the Cross - the passive and the positive. The passive is expressed by the words of Christ: “Come to Me all you who labour and are overburdened and I will give you rest.” Pain and suffering need to be borne with the Spirit of God that brings fortitude and cheerfulness to all who pray for it. “The pathway of sorrow and that path alone, leads to the land where sorrow is unknown”. The positive side is expressed by the words: “If you seek to be a follower of Mine you must deny yourself, take up your cross and follow Me.” It points very clearly to our struggles to grow in virtue, to cultivate good habits, to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect; our response to the challenge of living the high ideals of Christianity. St Francis de Sales tells us: “About the only good thing we can do is suffer. An ounce of patience is worth a ton of action.” In nearly all our actions there is an element of self-love. And no-one can enter heaven till purified of selflove. Through the Cross alone are we sure of achieving this.
The Committee of ACW were invited to attend the Union of Catholic Mothers Annual Mass at Westminster Cathedral on 15 March 2008 with Bishop George Stack as Chief Celebrant. Mrs Josephine Robinson, our Chairman, along with another committee member attended and on arrival they were warmly greeted by UCM’s Diocesan President, Norrie Fox, and Diocesan Secretary, Brigid Hegarty. The procession to the High Altar was led by members of the various branches of the Diocese, each proudly carrying their own colourful banner, which was then placed at the bottom of the High Altar and remained there during the Mass.
The Mass was extremely joyful commemorating the Feast of St Joseph with the Kyrie and Agnus Dei sung in Latin and a rousing Gloria in English. At the end of the Mass Bishop George Stack presented certificates to individual members in appreciation of their years of commitment and service to the UCM. Four members received certificates for 50 years service and seven received certificates for 40 years service. We were all cordially invited to take refreshments afterwards in a nearby hall. The colourful banners were again taken up by individual members and all processed out of the cathedral singing a hymn to St Joseph. It was a truly joyous occasion.
Chrism Masses - thank you to our Priests
Members greeted priests as they arrived for the Chrism masses at the following locations:- Tuesday 18th March - Westminster at 10.30 ; Wednesday 19th March - Arundel at 10.30 ; Thursday 20th March - Southwark at 10.30.
Review No 75 December 2007
One Year on from the Bishops’ Conference on marriage and family spirituality - Catriona and Steve Herbert
A year ago we attended the Bishop's Conference international symposiumentitled Releasing Formidable Energy, to launch Home is a Holy Place and celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Papal Encyclical on marriage, Familiaris Consortio. To achieve:
1. ‘a wider understanding of home centred spirituality by inspiring,informing and inviting the collaboration of those in positions of leadership within the Church’
2. The development of ‘practical strategies by which the parish churchcan both nourish and harness the holiness of the home’.
We have never heard the exhortations on marriage given in Familiaris Consortio promoted within any parish church. And having experiencedthe difficulty of finding information on natural methods of fertility management we felt that any practical strategy should make the provisio of such information a priority (at the time we were expecting our seventh child).
The symposium was organised by the Marriage and Family Life Project Office run by Elizabeth Davies under the direction of Bishop Hine. The Project Office had orchestrated Listening 2004 in which one million questionnaires had been issued in an attempt to gauge the pastoral needs of Catholics. Only 15,000 were returned (1.5%). None of our friends throughout the country knew of Listening 2004 let alone received a questionnaire. So who did the 15,000 represent?
A debate on the validity of Listening 2004 to represent Catholic families appeared in the Tablet, after which Bishop Hine published a letter inviting married couples to join the theologians and pastoral leaders at the symposium to help determine the pastoral strategy of the Bishop’s Conference toward marriage.
Families were invited as an afterthought. The main intention was to accommodate delegates from the following organisations:
Anglican Mothers Union.
Association of Interchurch Families
Association of Separated & Divorced Catholics
Catholic Children’s Society
Catholic Education Service
Catholics for a Changing Church
Marriage Care
Rainbows (peer support group)
Retrouvaille (marriage counselling service)
The ecumenical associations and non-Catholic Christians voiced no concern over the condemnation made by Familiaris Consortio of artificial contraception. They don't need to. Over 500 Anglican clergy have joined the Catholic Church and many are parish priests. We know of two who have been married for over twenty years and each priest has two childre Neither priest has been known to support the teaching of the Church on contraception and the example they give of married life is quite different from the vocation which Familiaris Consortio urges married couples to live.
Other associations such as Catholics for a Changing Church openly despise Familiaris Consortio and campaign loudly in favour of artificial contraception and married priests.
The various children’s societies represented the needs of vulnerable children who are relatively rare in Catholic families. However, the Bishop’s Conference has pledged to support the campaign to outlaw smacking. This will result in the criminalisation of a great many good parents who realise that the physical relationship they have with their children plays as vital a part in discouraging bad behaviour as it does in rewarding good
behaviour.
We looked around at the delegates and couldn't’ see any couples actually holding hands; we held the only child present. The representative of the Anglican Mother’s Union, Fleur Dorrell, drew attention to this and asked the symposium why other married Catholic couples had not been invited.
The three speakers from the USA placed strong emphasis on inclusion of all people regardless of whether they lived by the teaching of the Church. This message was put across in an extremely emotive way by author Kathy Chesto and formulated academically by Dr Knieps-Port le Roi of the University of Leuven, Belgium who said that the theology of marriage promoted by Pope John Paul II was completely new and had no precedent in Catholic tradition. He called for a new theology of marriage in which we acknowledge:
a covenant spirituality for spouses and families, rooted in the notion that first of all we are brothers and sisters of Christ and thus brother and sister to each other, before we are husband and wife or son and daughter of our father and mother.
According to the speakers a family was not confined to husband, wife and children. It was important to be inclusive of all variations.
However, this concept of inclusivity is in contrast to Familiaris Consortio which says ‘the fundamental task of the family is to serve life, to actualize in history the original blessing of the creator—that of transmitting by procreation the divine image from person to person’.
Putting our heads over the parapet we asked why the teaching of the Church on birth control was not being promoted at parish level. The answer from Elizabeth Davies was that this was an irrelevant question. This disregard of the spiritual consequences of contraceptive behaviour was reiterated by others. In Letters subsequently published in the Tablet, the Chief Executive of Marriage Care, Terry Prendergast, claimed that contraception had no bearing on the breakup of marriage. However Pope John Paul II encouraged the use of fertility awareness as a means of developing a holy life.
25 years ago Familiaris Consortio stated ‘The necessary conditions (for marriage) also include knowledge of the bodily aspect and the body’s rhythms of fertility. Accordingly, every effort must be made to render such knowledge accessible to all married people and also to young adults before marriage, through clear, timely and serious instruction and education given by married couples, doctors, and experts’.
None of this was presented at the symposium and Familiaris Consortio has not once been quoted in any of the e-mails sent to delegates in follow up correspondence. So where are the symposium's practical strategies through which Home can be made a Holy Place? Why is Familiaris Consortio not the basis of ministry to families? Has it been superseded by political concerns?
A year after the Nolan report on Child Abuse every parish in the country had child protection measures to ensure that the policy was implemented, protecting the reputation of the Bishops. Familiaris Consortio was published in 1981 for the spiritual benefit of families, the Church and society: we are no longer holding our breath waiting for the Bishops to implement it in our parish churches and schools.
ADVENT
The words of a priest Fr Alfons Wachsmann written on December 23rd 1943 can perhaps help us get things into perspective. He was writing to his sister from his prison cell. He had been arrested on June 23rd 1943 on a charge of undermining the morale of the armed forces.
Berlin-Tegel, December 23rd 1943
... For me the frame of the festival is clearly defined - the walls of my prison cell. Never have I knelt at the manger in such poverty as I do this year; everything has been taken away - my home, my honour, my life. So I want to kneel at the manger of Him who had no place on earth to lay his head, who as a friend of His people was condemned to death. who poured out his blood like a libation, in sacrifice for the salvation of His people and of the entire world.
As gifts I bear to the manger hunger and cold, loneliness and forlornness Shining chains are my only ornament. So I want to give my life, previously in the service of the King of Christmas, to him who saved me with his precious blood. With copious tears of penitence I want to wash away everything that has turned to guilt and remorse in me. It is in this spirit that I am going to make my pilgrimage to the manger.
I hope through grace to celebrate Christmas deep within my heart and mind as I never have before in my life. No gift, no festive meal will distract me, no candle will gleam, no fir tree will emit its fragrance; not even a holy Mass is granted me. But the Infant Jesus in the Eucharist will, as a glorious reality of Christmas, irradiate me with internal light and fill me with the warmth of compassionate love. I shall recite the breviary so slowly, so inwardly, that I shall taste the sweetness of every word; quietly I shall chant the Primo tempore. I shall say many prayers of the rosary and read in the Holy Scriptures. In this way, I hope, the peace of Christ will be my portion and his grace will be my glory. I am without any bitterness; I bear everything with the patience that only Christ gives. I hope that my prayer and the prayers of so many others will be heard. I hope that I may at some time intone the Gloria at the altar once more. I wish you the grace of Christ, so that you may with strength and love drink with me the myrrh that God’s love offers us this year.. Be assured that I am always with you and that I implore God hour by hour to reward you bounteously for everything that you have done and borne for me in loyalty and love. You are the only human being who never for one second has failed me. And so, rich blessings on your heart. The thorny crown of sorrows entwines our hearts inextricably.
Fr Wachsmann was executed on February 21, 1944, in Brandenburg-Görden
Taken from “Dying we Live” published by The Harvill Press Ltd, 1956.
Review No 74 September 2007
Pope speaks on Traditional Latin Mass
After months of confusion caused by the sometimes wild speculations of commentators in the media, the Holy Father issued on 7 July 2007 his apostolic letter Summorum Pontificum regarding the use of the classical Roman rite, as a Motu Proprio, a letter written on his own
initiative, together with a Letter to the Bishops. He was motivated to take this step by his earnest desire to avoid entrenched opinions causing divisions in the Church.
In his letter to the Bishops, the Holy Father says "Immediately after the Second Vatican Council it was presumed that requests for the use of the 1962 Missal would be limited to the older generation which had grown up with it, but in the meantime it has clearly been demonstrated that young persons too have discovered this liturgical form, felt its attraction and found in it a form of encounter with the Mystery of the Most Holy Eucharist, particularly suited to them. Thus it has become necessary for clearer juridical regulations."
He decrees that the older form of Mass in universal use before the liturgical changes that followed Vatican II was never abrogated. There are thus two approved forms of the Roman Missal identified as two expressions of the lex orandi (law of prayer) of the Roman Catholic
Church. The Roman Missal of Pope Paul VI as amended by Pope John Paul II is the `ordinary' expression and the Roman Missal promulgated by St Pius V and reissued by Bl John XXIII is to be considered as an `extraordinary' expression of that same lex orandi and "must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage". He hopes that these "two forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching".
Any priest of the Latin rite may celebrate according to the 1962 edition of the Roman Missal privately and with the possibility of faithful being present, for which permission from the priest's bishop is no longer required. In the case of public celebration according to the
1962 Missal, permission is required from the authority under whom the priest operates. In the case of a diocesan parish, that authority would be the parish priest, in the case of a religious community, the local superior, in the case of an oratory, the rector. People in authority are exhorted to accede willingly to the requests of those desiring to use the 1962 rite.
Celebrations according to the old rite may take place on weekdays while on Sundays and feast days there may be one such celebration. as well as in particular circumstances such as funerals and pilgrimages etc. Permission may also be granted for the administration of the sacraments of Baptism, Marriage, Penance and the anointing of the sick. Confirmation may also be celebrated using the 1962 Missal.
If the requests of a group of lay faithful for masses following the extraordinary rite, are not granted, they should inform the diocesan bishop. If it cannot be arranged for such celebrations to take place, they should refer the matter to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia
Dei.
In his letter to the Bishops the Holy Father says "There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and
it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered
harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church's faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place." The Holy Father orders that these Apostolic Letters issued as Motu Proprio be considered "established and decreed", and be observed from 14 September of this year, Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, whatever
there may be to the contrary.
Members have contacted us about Summorum Pontificum. The following is typical of their reaction: "Pope Benedict has spoken clearly, courageously and with the full force of his God-given papal authority (the use of "We" rather than "I" emphasising the solemnity of the utterance).The clarity of his expression couched in careful and diplomatic language
demonstrates his compassion for the flock entrusted to his care. Thus the introductory resume of the growth and development of both forms of the celebration of the eucharistic Sacrifice serve to reassure both those who follow the 1962 Roman Missal and those who follow the
Missal of Pope Paul VI 1970 that parochial unity is thus assured.
The ultimate aim of offering a worthy ritual to the praise and glory of God and "to the benefit of all His Holy Church" is thereby both guaranteed and maintained. Thanks are due to Pope Benedict for the promulgation of this long-awaited "Motu Proprio" from Feedback Section of ACW Review No 74.
Mary's Virginity and its Significance for our Times
Some time ago a firm producing detergents advertised a product with the slogan: "The strength of purity permeates everything." Listening to that advertisement, a Christian would not just think of clean clothes, but he might be reminded of a deeper meaning of purity. In a world often soiled with lies, sullied by greed, violence and licentiousness, a person of pure heart, honesty and unassuming character is a powerful force indeed. Our world is in need of purity. We Christians have the mission to open up our minds to truth and to be honest in everything, letting our passions be ruled by the Spirit of truth and love. There, the Virgin Mary is our model.
In the charism of the Spiritual Family The Work, virginity is of great importance—in the comprehensive sense, virginity of faith, of mind, of heart, and of body. Some members of the Body of Christ are chosen by the Lord to practice chastity in celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom. God's grace gives them the strength to renounce marriage and to give the full power of their love to Christ while devoting themselves to the Kingdom of Heaven in the world. All Christians, however, are called to live virginity of faith, of heart and of mind, and are to live the virtue of chastity in accordance with their own state of life. What does that mean? Does such a vocation have meaning in our world today? Looking to Mary, Mother of God and Ever-Virgin, we hope to answer these questions.
Virginity of Faith
Saint Luke, the Evangelist, tells us of a woman, who was fascinated by Jesus Christ. Struck by what he said and moved by the miracles he worked, she spontaneously thought of his mother, exclaiming: "Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you!" (Lk 11:27). She admired his mother for having given birth to such a son, for having nurtured him and for having brought him up. The Lord, however, pointed out to her the true greatness of Mary, when he answered, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it" (Lk 11: 28). It was certainly an honour for Mary, that the Son of God took flesh in her womb. Yet her true greatness lay in that she opened her heart to the Word of God. Mary is the first one to whom that beatitude applies. She, more than any other human being, listened to God, bringing His word to fruition in her life. Therefore Saint Augustine says of her: "Mary is more blessed because she embraces faith in Christ than because she conceives the flesh of Christ." (De virg. 3). Mary's faith was "unadulterated by any doubt" (LG 63). In her heart there were no mental reservation, no fear, and no inner proviso towards God.
All of us should desire to be open to God like Mary. To have virginity of faith means to accept the message of the Gospel unconditionally as it is proclaimed by the Church and ought to be practised in our lives. There may be moments in our lives, in which we might want to say: "I do not understand that. The Church just demands too much. I think differently in that matter." But if in those moments we remain open hearted, in conscience, to the truth, we will come closer to God and find peace in our hearts. Truth makes us free and is the warrant of true happiness. Many today seem to think that you can be a good Catholic, even if you do not accept certain doctrines of faith and of moral law. They claim that their own understanding and their own conscience is the last resort in making moral decisions. Virginal faith, however, listens to God. It is a faith that has become loving trust in God, knowing that He cannot deceive us.
There will always be truths of faith, which cannot be reconciled with the spirit of the age. Many believers in today's pluralistic society, for instance, have difficulties in acknowledging that Christ Jesus is uniquely different from the founders of other religions, and accepting that our faith is not just one of the many ways to God, but the only true way. Others, for example, take offence at the teaching of the Church, that artificial insemination and fertilization outside the womb of the mother are to be considered morally unacceptable, as these are not in agreement with the order of love and of procreation willed by God and therefore not permissible. To love the Lord implies to be ready to accept in gratitude the teaching of the Church in its undiluted entirety. Virginal faith has the strength to say with St Paul: "For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for the truth" (2 Cor 13:8).
Virginity of the Mind
The dialogue between the archangel Gabriel and the virgin from Nazareth gives us a glimpse of Mary’s thinking. We recognize how in her, reason and faith worked together. When God's messenger announced that she should give birth to a son whom she was to name Jesus (see Lk 1:30-33) she asked: "How can this be, since I am a virgin?" (Lk 1:34).(Jerusalem. New Revised Standard Edition) Her question shows first of all that Mary did not merely accept passively the message of the angel. Faith does not replace human thinking, but challenges it, widening its scope, and opening it to the mind and plans of God. Believing Christians use their reason to serve in the work of salvation. When Mary heard the words of the angel, she was confronted with the seemingly contradictory difficulty of a twofold vocation. She felt the inner call to a virginal life, yet the angel informed her that she would give birth to a son. Her pure and believing mind is manifested by her reaction. She did not reject the announcement of the archangel, she did not say, this is impossible, she only asked:
"How shall this be, since I have no husband?" (RSV Catholic Edition) This how, gives us a glimpse of her virginal thinking. She did not react with the no of disbelief, but in her believing request: how she opened up to the work of God in her. The angel met her difficulty by pointing out that, beyond any human expectation, Elisabeth had in her old age conceived a child. This reminder of the fact that God can do what seems humanly impossible was enough for the humble handmaid in Nazareth. She offered herself unreservedly to God and to His plan for mankind.
Mary's thinking was simple and deep. Her mind was neither naive nor complicated. She was not caught up in thinking about herself, but her self was fully open towards God's plan with her. Mother Julia writes about her: "Mary is completely free from that conceitedness, which manifests itself in constant self-analysis and tends to produce a split personality and mental confusion. There is nothing in her, which does not bring forth life, nothing that has not come to maturity; on the contrary: the whole of her wonderful and immensely great vocation to be the Mother of God, as well as all her co-operation as bride and mother in God's plan of Redemption, is based on the inviolate and virginal fidelity of her pure and immaculate heart, on her lifelong attitude of being in all simplicity a child of God."
From Mary we can learn to unmask the "father of lies" (Jn 8:44). She helps us to avoid lame excuses, pretensions or half-truths, not to let pride or jealousy rule us and not to fall into a lack of trust in God. To have a virginal mind implies that we watch what we think, not permitting our thoughts to run wild. St Paul invites us to "destroy arguments and every proud obstacle raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to obey Christ" (2 Cor 10:4-5). There are true and good thoughts opening up new worlds for us and keeping us orientated towards God, our highest good. But there are also dangerous thoughts, which undermine our faith and loyalty to the Church, or endanger our love for our spouse or for the vocation to priesthood or to consecrated life. As St Paul feared that the thoughts of the Christians in Corinth "will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ"
(2 Cor 11:3).
Virginity of mind requires one humbly to fix one's mind continually upon God and His truth. Persons of such a mind are open to every inspiration of truth touching them. They are honest and pure in their intentions, in their words and in their deeds. They listen to the voice of their conscience and use their intellect, will and feeling in the service of the kingdom of God. If we are such persons, we receive God's wisdom and may count on His help and His blessing.
Virginity of the Heart
Ever since the first sin of Eve and Adam, the heart of man has been divided. Sin disrupts our inner harmony, our being one with God, with ourselves, and with others. With Mary it was different, she was free from original sin and from any personal sin. Her whole life belonged to God. When the Lord called her, she offered herself to Him unconditionally. At no moment in her life would she have revised her assent or not have lived it to the full. She helps us to attain to a pure and full self-surrender to God.
Jesus tells us in the Gospel: "No slave can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth" (Lk 16:13). Thus the Lord warns us against any kind of idol-worship, of compromise and of dishonesty. The world needs men and women, who let the light of the Gospel illuminate and govern their lives, and not half-hearted Christians. The world today needs true and trustworthy witnesses. We are dishonest, if we expect others to live a virtuous life but do not strive for virtue ourselves; if we criticise the faults of others but do not work continuously at our own character; if we accuse others of wrongdoing but find excuses for our own sins. If parents pray that their children will be graced with a strong faith, they must not put obstacles in their paths, should God call them to the priesthood or religious life.
To guard the virginity of our hearts, we have to struggle against the desires of the flesh and senses. Here clear eyes and a healthy discipline of our emotions, feelings and imaginations help us, as does our rejecting of any pleasure in unclean thoughts, which would lead us astray from God's commandments (cf. CCC 2520). Also important is a healthy modesty which protects the intimate centre of the person and her/his mystery. It encourages "patience and moderation in loving relationships", and invites the choice of decent clothing and of appropriate discretion and reserve (cf. CCC 2521/2). Mother Julia writes in a prayer to Mary: "You have accomplished everything God expected of you." This should be our desire: to accomplish what God expects of us-with joy and the full self-giving of a virginal heart.
Virginity of the Body
From the beginning the Church confessed that Mary conceived in her womb the Son of God by the working of the Holy Spirit, and without the involvement of any man. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church confirms "Mary's virginity manifests God's absolute initiative in the Incarnation" (CCC 503) and "Jesus is the new Adam, who inaugurates the new creation"
(CCC 504). The Son of the Virgin Mary comes from God and all, who want to become his brothers and sisters, have to be born anew, from above. "Participation in the divine life arises ‘not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God' (Jn 1:13)"
(CCC 505).
In our society we are widely confronted today with a strong and even unhealthy over-stress on sexuality. The alleged hostility of earlier times against the body is to be overcome and the ecstasy of love, especially in its sexual dimension, is to be fully tested and consumed. But in this way the human body is not respected in its God-willed dignity. Pope Benedict XVI writes in his encyclical letter Deus Caritas est: "the contemporary way of exalting the body is deceptive. Eros, reduced to pure `sex' has become a commodity, a mere `thing' to be bought and sold, or rather, man himself becomes a commodity. This is hardly man's great `yes' to the body" (5). The human person who is body and soul can only then attain true happiness and genuine love, if he is ready to go on "a path of ascent, renunciation, purification and healing" (5). The virtue leading us along this path is chastity. It helps us so that we do not let sexual passions rule us, but integrate sexuality into our lives in a mature way, as a precious gift of the Creator which belongs to our being man or being woman. What does this mean in practical life?
Every baptised person is called to chastity. For a married couple this implies that they remain united with one another in genuine love and keep faithful to one another, until death separates them. They are called to give themselves to one another "in holiness and honour, not with lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God" (1 Thes 4:4). This implies that in responsible parenthood they may make use of the natural methods of fertility management towards the possible conception of a child and even against it, should they have serious reasons within God's commands. However, they deliberately renounce contraceptives, as demanded in the encyclical Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI. When acting in this way, they will become aware how their love for one another becomes stronger and more sincere. Such couples are a true encouragement for young, single people, be they unmarried or widowed, to live continent lives. By their example and by their witness they can help couples preparing for matrimony with God's grace to remain chaste until they marry. Young people may find help in groups and movements like True Love Waits, which encourage them to develop an intimate friendship with Jesus and to pledge virginity before marriage. Consecration to Mary, a custom maintained or re-awakened in some places, is also a great help for the young who want to live up joyfully to the virtue of virginity. Nowadays, when the media, school and even kindergarten are flooded with often one-sided information on sexuality, parents need to be vigilant in the formation of their (even young) children to help them at the right time.
The witness of Christians, who live lives of celibacy and virginal love, is needed more than ever. In every age the Lord has chosen men and women who have voluntarily renounced, "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 19:12) the great good of marriage to give their love fully to Christ committing themselves to spiritual fatherhood and motherhood for the good of their fellowmen. Their life is a gift of God for the Church and a strong, sign for the world, that cannot be overlooked. If priests and religious live their vocation in joy, then they have great influence on the people around them and give evidence, as it were, that in Christ true and lasting happiness are to be found.
Growing in Love
Our Lady encourages us in whatever vocation we have. The beatitude "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God" (Mt 5:8) came to fulfilment in the Virgin and Mother of God: In the Catechism of the Catholic Church we find this explained: "`Pure in heart' refers to those who have attuned their intellects and wills to the demands of God's holiness, chiefly in three areas: charity; chastity or sexual rectitude; love of truth and orthodoxy of faith. There is a connexion between the purity of heart, of body and of faith" (CCC 2518).
Mary can and will help us as we strive to emain pure in heart or to regain that purity. We shall then be able to adore God in spirit and in truth and to see His goodness on the face of Jesus Christ. To see God forever we will need a pure heart. Already here and now it enables us to see the world in the light of God, to recognize the image of the Creator in others, and "to perceive the human body-ours and our neighbours- as a temple of the Holy Spirit, a manifestation of divine beauty" (CCC 2519).
Mary wants to help to transform us into people who love. The virginity of her faith, her mind, her heart and her body invite us to surrender fully to God's love as she has done, always growing in love until we breathe our last. Mary's life is a gift of God's mercy to mankind. With Mother Julia we want to ask her: "Make my soul ever more thirsty for your love."
The Holy Father writes in his encyclical letter on Christian love, that we should look to Mary and ask her to help us: "Mary has truly become the Mother of all believers. Men and women of every time and place have recourse to her motherly kindness and her virginal purity and grace, in all their needs and aspirations, their joys and sorrows, their moments of loneliness and their common endeavours. They constantly experience the gift of her goodness and the unfailing love which she pours out from the depths of her heart. .Holy Mary, Mother of God, you have given the world its true light, Jesus your Son-the Son of God. You abandoned yourself completely to God's call and thus became a wellspring of the goodness which flows forth from him. Show us Jesus. Lead us to him. Teach us to know and to love him, so that we can become capable of true love and be fountains of living water in the midst of a thirsting world" (Deus Caritas est, No. 42).
Article by members of The Spiritual Family The Work,
Copies available from Ambrose Cottage, 9 College Lane, Littlemore,
Oxford OX4 4LQ 01865 779743 www.thework-fso.org
Reproduced with permission
ACW Review No 73 June 2007
Gay Adoption - a Personal View Clare Anderson
Among the controversy about gay adoption and the Catholic agencies, one aspect seems to have received little attention; the rights of the women giving up their children. It has never been easy to part with one's biological child, however difficult the circumstances. I have often wondered how I would feel if I had had to do it; if I would worry that the home was not a happy one, that the child would be loved less because that couple hadn't produced it themselves. I admire the selflessness and courage of all women who hand their children over to strangers, in the trust that it will be better off with them.
In the past, Catholic adoption agencies were a means whereby mothers could place their babies in the knowledge that their children would be brought up in Christian homes, taken to Mass, taught Godly values, etc. What now of the rights of these women, their hopes and dreams? Does a mother not have the right to request a certain lifestyle of the people who wish to adopt her child? Does her right not override the social theories of a clique of government ministers? And are we really to live in a society where a childless married couple is denied the chance to adopt because a gay couple is higher up in the queue?
What has been known for some time is that homosexual relationships, `married' or not, tend to lack the permanency of heterosexual unions. It's true that more marriages end in divorce today but same-sex unions are notorious for breaking up even more frequently. One can produce contrary instances - Benjamin Britten seems to be the one more quoted, but it's hard to go against the weight of evidence. In divorce cases the children almost always stay with their mother, unless she is a drug addict or proven unfit, but when gay couples split, who will have the child? Or is it now superfluous to requirements?
With the increasing use of abortion as a form of contraception, there are fewer babies for adoption and more childless couples desperate for a family. I would never join those who seek to victimise homosexuals or to see them humiliated, but in the history of human development, there has never been an example of two men or two women making a baby. If everyone were homosexual, there would be no babies anywhere, let alone available for adoption. In fact, the human race would have died out before it had the chance to invent the wheel. But I digress. Homosexual people, celibate or not, are entitled to human rights the way all people are, but it is quite another thing for legislators to insist that two men, or two women, can provide the same kind of parenting as a man and wife. There are surely cases where a gay household is happier and more loving than many married ones - I don't doubt that, but the law cannot make equal what is not equal in nature. What the government has done is to legalise a social experiment, and one which risks tragic consequences in the next twenty years.
Even if the Guardian-reading enclaves of Islington consider that there is no intrinsic differences between men and women that cannot be explained away by anatomy alone, I doubt that the average woman with a surprise pregnancy would agree. Pregnancy, as any woman who has had a child will know, can greatly affect a mother's emotions and fears. A woman who is carrying a child she had not wished for will have plenty of fears anyway, and her vulnerability deserves understanding and support. I am aware that not all homosexuals are interested in the young, but some are, and if popular perception is that a child is potentially at greater risk in a homosexual household, what of the fears of a biological mother? We know that in many schools, playground bullying is rife and that any suggestion of homosexuality, whether direct or indirect, is a subject for torment and cruelty. Yes, this should be stopped and punished, but in truth how often is it? No government minister would be seen dead sending a child of theirs to the sort of school where this kind of bullying is common but many people have no choice.
Maybe I am being unduly pessimistic here, but could this 'one size fits all' legislative sledgehammer cause a rise in abortions among the more vulnerable? If a pregnant woman were to worry that her child might be taken into a home where it would not be safe, would face playground bullying then, yes, I can imagine that some of these desperate women might reject adoption and struggle to raise the child alone, or consider abortion as a better 'option'. There is already a great dearth of children available for adoption, will this legislation now make the numbers even fewer?
In the past, Catholic agencies have specialised in `difficult cases' - finding loving families for the more hard to place children. It's hard to see how shutting down these agencies will help these needy children, and given that gay couples are not likely to seek help via the Catholic Church anyway, what other motive can there be than spite? We are constantly told that we are a society which values `diversity' - but not in faith and morals, it seems.
ACW Review No 72 March 2007
The Church's Moral Standards are God's Dom Bernard Orchard OSB
The headline of the leading article in The Times of 11 July, 1992
under the name of a leading Catholic journalist reads as follows:
The Church should not set such high standards for our sexual behaviour.
Now this headline certainly represents accurately the main tenor of the article. I find it shocking. Why?
Because of its forthright demand that our Church, the one true Church of Christ, should lower its moral standards. The pretext of course is that they are impossible to keep in this present age, at least with respect to sexual behaviour, i.e. that the standards laid down in the Old Testament and subsequently confirmed and strengthened by Jesus Himself should be lowered arbitrarily in the specious hope ofmaking life easier.
It is not the Church that sets the standard of Christian morality, but the Lord Jesus Himself. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ and its function is to carry out the commands of its Head; it has no authority to change any of His commands. If it were to do so, it would be betraying its trust; the Body would be acting contrary to the dictates of its head. In matters of Faith and Morals our Church is infallible and it is gravely wrong to try to water down its teaching.
The Church only teaches what it has received from Christ Himself. Furthermore, there can only be one standard, the true standard, which is indivisible, namely what we ought to do. For example, the deliberate taking of an innocent life is murder, and this is the real wickedness of abortion. Again, a lie is a lie, whether it is a big one or a small one; theft is wrong whether it is a big theft or a small one. Fornication and adultery are always wrong and so is pre-marriage cohabitation.
Contraception is also grievously wrong, though many people practise it today, as indeed they have done throughout history; it is just made easier nowadays by modern devices. There are of course often extenuating circumstances that minimise guilt, and the good confessor makes full allowance for the weakness of human nature. But the objective badness of these sins always remains. How can the modern Christian resist the easy way out and practise chastity consistently? For chastity and abstinence are the only certain ways of overcoming sexual sin, not condoms. (I say this though I am aware of the problem of AIDS) The practice of chastity is the only true way of reforming and overcoming the weakness of human nature. Unless we Christians keep the ideal in mind always, we shall be lost. It is of course the same in every discipline in both work and study and sport. Unless we have an ideal to aim at, we shall be sunk in the mire and unable to get out and will be drowned. Unless the Church were seriously to proclaim the ideal of perfect chastity for all lay people, and also-for those who can take it-of perfect virginity and celibacy, the world would soon become another Sodom and Gomorrha. I think it is true to say that many other Christians besides Catholics are shocked at the very suggestion that the Church should lower its standards. On the contrary it must shout them out still louder from the house-tops and point out how the top standard can be achieved by very ordinary people with the help of God's grace and proper previous training. For we must never forget that we cannot enter into Heaven until we have fully regained the perfect control over our bodies and minds that was enjoyed by Adam and Eve before the Fall. And of course what applies to the Sixth Commandment applies to our behaviour towards all the other Commandments.
"For God will render to every man (and woman) according to his works" (Rom.2:6).
How do we aim to reach this state of perfection? As in ordinary human affairs, if we want to attain a certain goal we must consciously aim for it. For if we do not aim for it, we shall never attain it. That is certain. Therefore, in the first place, we must ask for an increase in our Faith both in Jesus Christ and in the infallible teaching of His Church. For without Faith we shall not make any progress and we need proper motivation. Our God is not only the God of Love, but also the God of Justice; and a little fear of the Omnipotent is also required to stimulate us. We are all too often inclined to gloss over His words in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt.7:13):
"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy,that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and feware those who find it."
At the same time Jesus teaches that His "yoke is easy" and His "burden light" (Mt.11:30). But there is no real contradiction. It is simply that the practice of discipline is always hard at the beginning, as we all know from experience. But provided that we have the ideal in mind, i.e. the ultimate goal, we are able to persevere in faith and hope of all success. Secondly, the practice of asceticism is essential for all Christians-as it is for the athletes who compete in the Olympic Games. By asceticism I mean the prudent exercise of control over allour faculties, over our imagination, over our five senses, sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell, and over our thoughts. All parents have the duty of practising asceticism in their married life- a practice that, experience proves, brings the deepest and most lasting joy to the couple-and also the duty of instructing their children from their earliest years in self-control and obedience and self-denial. Parents will have no difficulty in imparting such ideals to their children if they first practise them themselves and also apply them with love and compassion to their children from their earliest years. Thirdly, we have to convince ourselves that heaven is the only important goal-the only prize worth striving for, the pearl of great price, a thing worth selling up everything to obtain-as much for you laity as for the clergy and monks and nuns. St Benedict, in the Prologue to the Holy Rule points this out beautifully when he says:
"If a little strictness is required for the correction of faults...do not at once take fright and fly the way of salvation which can be begun only through a narrow entrance... Then as we progress... the heart expands and we run along the way of God's commandments with a delight of love that cannot be described." In this St Benedict is only quoting the Gospel, where Jesus said:
"If you then who are evil, know how to give your children what is good, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" (Lk.11:13).
Let us then thank God that we are members of His Church which points out to us uncompromisingly the struggle we have to face to win the heavenly reward, and tells us in no uncertain terms not what we would like to hear but what we ought to do.
(A homily preached at Ealing Abbey on 26 July 1992. It was reproduced in Sceptre Bulletin February 1993. Reproduced here by permission of Ealing Abbey and Sceptre Bulletin.)
ACW Review No 71 - December 2006
The God in the Cave - G K Chesterton
This sketch of the human story began in a cave; the cave which popular science associates with the caveman and in which practical discovery has really found archaic drawings of
animals. The second half of human history, which was like a new creation of the world, also begins in a cave. There is even a shadow of such a fancy in the fact that animals were again present; for it was a cave used as a stable by the mountaineers of the uplands about Bethlehem; who still drive their cattle into such holes and caverns at night. It was here that a homeless couple had crept underground with the cattle when the doors of the crowded
caravanserai had been shut in their faces; and it was here beneath the very feet of the passersby, in a cellar under the very floor of the world, that Jesus Christ was born. But in that second creation there was indeed something symbolical in the roots of the primeval
rock or the horns of the prehistoric herd. God also was a Cave-Man, and had also traced strange shapes of creatures, curiously coloured, upon the wall of the world; but the pictures that he made had come to life.
A mass of legend and literature, which increases and will never end, has repeated and rung the changes on that single paradox; that the hands that had made the sun and stars were too small to reach the huge heads of the cattle. Upon this paradox, we might almost say upon
this jest, all the literature of our faith is founded. It is at least like a jest in this, that it is something which the scientific critic cannot see. He laboriously explains the difficulty which we have always defiantly and almost derisively exaggerated; and mildly condemns as
improbable something that we have almost madly exalted as incredible; as something that would be much too good to be true, except that it is true. When that contrast between the cosmic creation and the little local infancy has been repeated, reiterated, underlined, emphasised, exulted in, sung, shouted, roared, not to say howled, in a hundred thousand hymns, carols, rhymes, rituals, pictures, poems, and popular sermons, it may be suggested that we hardly need a higher critic to draw our attention to something a little odd about it; especially one of the sort that seems to take a long time to see a joke, even his own joke.
But about this contrast and combination of ideas one thing may be said here, because it is relevant to the whole thesis of this book. The sort of modern critic of whom I speak is generally much impressed with the importance of education in life and the importance of psychology in education. That sort of man is never tired of telling us that first impressions fix character by the law of causation; and he will become quite nervous if a child's visual sense is poisoned by the wrong colours on a golliwog or his nervous system prematurely shaken by a cacophonous rattle. Yet he will think us very narrow-minded if we say that this is exactly why there really is a difference between being brought up as a Christian and being brought up as a Jew or a Moslem or an atheist. The difference is that every Catholic child has learned from pictures, and even every Protestant child from stories, this incredible combination of contrasted ideas as one of the very first impressions on his mind. It is not merely a theological difference. It is a psychological difference which can outlast any theologies. It really is, as that sort of scientist loves to say about anything, incurable. Any agnostic or atheist whose childhood has known a real Christmas has ever afterwards, whether he likes it or not, an association in his mind between two ideas that most of mankind must regard as remote from each other; the idea of a baby and the idea of unknown strength that sustains the stars. His instincts and imagination can still connect them, when his reason can no longer see the need of the connection; for him there will always be some savour of religion about the mere picture of a mother and a baby; some hint of mercy and softening about the mere mention of the dreadful name of God.
But the two ideas are not naturally or necessarily combined. They would not be necessarily combined for an ancient Greek or a Chinaman, even for Aristotle or Confucius. It is no more inevitable to connect God with an infant than to connect gravitation with a kitten. It has
been created in our minds by Christmas because we are Christians; because we are psychological Christians even when we are not theological ones. In other words, this combination of ideas has emphatically, in the much disputed phrase, altered human nature. There is really a difference between the man who knows it and the man who does not.
It may not be a difference of moral worth, for the Moslem or the Jew might be worthier according to his lights; but it is a plain fact about the crossing of two particular lights, the conjunction of two stars in our particular horoscope. Omnipotence and impotence, or divinity
and infancy, do definitely make a sort of epigram which a million repetitions cannot turn into a platitude. It is not unreasonable to call it unique. Bethlehem is emphatically a place where extremes meet.
Here begins, it is needless to say, another mighty influence for the humanisation of Christendom. If the world wanted what is called a non-controversial aspect of Christianity, it would probably select Christmas. Yet it is obviously bound up with what is supposed to be
a controversial aspect (I could never at any stage of my opinions imagine why); the respect paid to the Blessed Virgin. When I was a boy a more Puritan generation objected to a statue upon a parish church representing the Virgin and Child. After much controversy, they compromised by taking away the Child. One would think that this was even more corrupted with Mariolatry, unless the mother was counted less dangerous when deprived of a sort of weapon. But the practical difficulty is also a parable. You cannot chip away the statue of a mother from all round that of a new-born child. You cannot suspend the new-born child
in mid-air; indeed you cannot really have a statue of a new-born child at all. Similarly, you cannot suspend the idea of a new-born child in the void or think of him without thinking of his mother. You cannot visit the child without visiting the mother; you cannot in common
human life approach the child except through the mother. If we are to think of Christ in this aspect at all, the other idea follows as it is followed in history. We must either leave Christ out of Christmas, or Christmas out of Christ, or we must admit, if only as we admit
it in an old picture, that those holy heads are too near together for the haloes not to mingle and cross.
Living Lent 2007
Everywhere we look in our world we see sadness, division, hunger, sickness, cruelty, war. In our own land, we experience an increasingly materialistic view of life, coupled with hostility to the Catholic Church.
This Lent, let us pray together for our own country and for all countries of Europe that the teaching of Christ will come to be accepted, so that we are all moved to love and help others in their needs, remembering that prayer is a way of helping those who do the work that we are unable to do. When we pray, Lord hear us.
Let us not forget other lands where the people endure terrible sufferings. When we pray for them, Lord hear us.
We pray that all people will come to cherish lives from conception to natural death. Lord hear us.
We pray for all married couples and their families, that they may grow in the love that is God’s plan. Lord hear us.
We pray for children looking for a family, that they may find husbands and wives who will nurture them as their own. Lord hear us.
We give thanks and pray for the Church, for the Holy Father, and for our bishops and priests who give themselves as generous and loving shepherds to us all. Lord we thank you for their labours and we pray for them.
ACW Review No 70 - September 2006
Planned Parenthood Celebration Jolted by Abortion Survivor
Ted Harvey assistant minority leader, Colorado House
She sings the anthem to applause, then her secret is revealed to stunned silence.
I want to share with you an awesome experience I had in the Colorado House of Representatives on May 8. It is a humbling experience to look back and realize that God used me to play a role in His divine orchestration.
I was leaving the House chambers for the weekend when our Democrat speaker of the House announced that the coming Monday would be the final day of this year’s General Assembly. He went on to state that there were still numerous resolutions on the calendar which we would need to be addressed prior to the summer adjournment. Interestingly, he specifically mentioned that one of the resolutions we would be hearing was being carried by the House Majority Leader Alice Madden, honouring the 90th anniversary of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains.
As a strong pro-life legislator I was disgusted by the idea that we would pass a resolution honouring this 90-year legacy of genocide.
I drove home that night wondering what I could say that might pierce the darkness during the debate on this heinous resolution.
On Saturday morning, I took my 8-year-old son up to the mountains to go white-water rafting. The trip lasted all day. As we were driving home, exhausted and hungry, I remembered that I had accepted an invitation to attend a fundraising dinner that night for a local pro-life organization.
One of my most respected mentors had personally called me several weeks earlier and asked me to attend, so I knew I’d have to clean up and head over.
After our meal, the executive director of the organization introduced the keynote speaker. I looked up and saw walking to the stage a handicapped young lady being assisted to the microphone by a young man holding a guitar.
Her name was Gianna Jessen.
Gianna said “Hello,” welcomed everyone, and then sang three of the most beautiful Christian songs I have ever heard.
She then began to give her testimony. When her biological mother was 17 years old and seven and a half months pregnant, she went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to have an abortion. As God would have it, the abortion failed and a beautiful 2-pound baby girl was brought into the world. Unfortunately, she was born with cerebral palsy and the doctors thought that she would never survive. The doctors were wrong.
Imagine the timing! A survivor of a Planned Parenthood abortion arrived in town just days before the Colorado House of Representatives was to celebrate Planned Parenthood’s “wonderful” work.
As I listened to Gianna’s amazing testimony, the Lord inspired me to ask her if she could stay in Denver until Monday morning so that I could introduce her on the floor of the House and tell her story.
Perhaps she could even begin the final day’s session by singing our country’s national anthem!
To my surprise she said she would seriously consider it. If she were to agree, she wanted her accompanying guitarist to stay as well. A lady standing in line behind me waiting to meet Gianna overheard our conversation and said that she would be willing to pay for the guitarist’s room. Gianna then said that she would think about it.
As I was driving home from the banquet, my cell phone rang. It was Gianna, and she immediately said, “I’m in, let’s ruin this celebration.”Praise God!
When Monday morning came, I awoke at 6 a.m. to write my speech before heading to the Capitol. As I wrote down the words, I could sense God’s help and I knew that this was going to be a powerful moment for the pro-life movement.
Following a committee hearing, I rushed into the House chambers just as the opening morning prayer was about to be given.
Between the prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, I wrote a quick note to the speaker of the House explaining that Gianna is an advocate for cerebral palsy. I took the note to the speaker and asked if I could have my friend open the last day of session by singing the national anthem.
Without any hesitation the speaker took the microphone and said, “Before we begin, Representative Harvey has made available for us Gianna Jessen to sing the national anthem.”
Gianna sang the most amazing rendition of The Star Spangled Banner that you could possibly imagine. Every person in the entire chamber was completely still, quiet and in awe of this frail young lady’s voice.
Due to her cerebral palsy, Gianna often loses her balance, and shortly after starting to sing she grabbed my arm to stabilize herself, and I could tell that she was shaking. Suddenly, midway through the song, she forgot the words and began to hum and then said, “Please
forgive me; I am so nervous.” She then immediately began singing again and every House member and every guest throughout the chambers began to sing along with her to give her encouragement and to lift her up.
As I looked around the huge hall I listened to the unbelievable melody of Gianna’s voice being accompanied by a choir of over 100 voices. I had chills running all over my body, and I knew that I had just witnessed an act of God.
As the song concluded the speaker of the House explained that Gianna has cerebral palsy and is an activist to bring awareness to the disease.
“Let us give her a hand not only for her performance today, but also for her advocacy work,” he said. The chamber immediately exploded into applause—she had them all in the palm of her hand.
The speaker then called the House to order, and we proceeded as usual to allow members to make any announcements or introductions of guests. For dramatic effect, I waited until I was the last person remaining before I introduced Gianna.
As I waited for my turn, I nervously paced back and forth praying to God that he would give me the peace, confidence and the courage necessary to pull off what I knew would be one of the most dramatic and controversial moments of my political career.
While I waited, a prominent reporter from one of the major Denver newspapers walked over to Gianna and told her that her rendition captured the spirit of the national anthem more powerfully than any she had ever heard before.
Finally, I was the last person remaining. So, I proceeded to the microphone and began my speech.
Members, I would like to introduce you to a new friend and hero of mine—her name is Gianna Jessen. She is visiting us today from Nashville, Tennessee, where she is an accomplished recording artist. She has cerebral palsy and was raised in foster homes before being adopted at the age of four.
She was born prematurely and weighed only 2 pounds at birth. She remained in the hospital for almost three months. A doctor once said she had a great will to live and that she fought for her life. Eventually she was able to leave the hospital and be placed in foster care.
Because of her cerebral palsy, her foster mother was told that it was doubtful that she would ever crawl or walk. She could not sit up independently.
Through the prayers and dedication of her foster mother, she eventually learned to sit up, crawl, then stand. Shortly before her fourth birthday, she began to walk with leg braces and a walker.
She continued in physical therapy and after a total of four surgeries,she was able to walk without assistance.
She still falls sometimes, but she says she has learned how to fall gracefully after falling for 29 years.
Two years ago, she walked into a local health club and said she wanted a private trainer. At the time her legs could not lift 30 pounds.
Today she can leg press 200 pounds.
She became so physically fit that she began running marathons to raise money and awareness for cerebral palsy. She just returned last week from England where she ran in the London Marathon. It took her more than eight-and-a-half hours to complete. They were taking down the course by the time she made it to the finish line. But she made it nonetheless. With bloody feet and aching joints, she finished the race.
Members would you help me recognize a modern-day hero—Gianna Jessen?
At this point the chamber exploded into applause which lasted for 15-to-20 seconds. Gianna had touched their souls.
Ironically, Alice Madden, the majority leader and sponsor of the Planned Parenthood resolution, walked over to Gianna and congratulated her.
As the applause began to die down, I raised my hand to be recognized one more time.
Mr. Speaker, members, if you would allow me just a few more moments I would appreciate your time.
My name is Ted Harvey, not Paul Harvey, but, please, let me tell you the rest of the story.
The cause of Gianna’s cerebral palsy is not because of some biological freak of nature, but rather the choice of her mother.
You see when her biological mother was 17-years-old and 7-and-a-half months pregnant, she went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to seek a late-term abortion. The abortionist performed a saline abortion on this 17-year-old girl. This procedure requires the injection of a high concentration of saline into the mother’s womb, which the fetus is then bathed in and swallows, which results in the fetus being burned to death, inside and out. Within 24 hours the results are normally an induced, still-born abortion.
As Gianna can testify, the procedure is not always 100 percent effective.
Gianna is an aborted late-term fetus who was born alive. The high concentration of saline in the womb for 24 hours resulted in a lack of oxygen to her brain and is the cause of her cerebral palsy.
Members, today, we are going to recognize the 90th anniversary of Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood...”
BANG! The gavel came down.
Just as I was finishing the last sentence of my speech—the climax of the morning—the speaker of the House gaveled me down and said, “Representative Harvey, I will allow you to continue your introduction, but not for the purposes of debating a measure now pending before the House.”
At which point I said, “Mr. Speaker, I understand. I just wanted to put a face to what we are celebrating today.”
Silence.
Deafening silence.
I then walked back to my chair shaking like a leaf. The Democrats wouldn’t look at me. They were fuming. It was beautiful. I have been in the Legislature for five tough years, and this made it all worthwhile.
The House majority leader wouldn’t talk to me the rest of the day.
Was it because I introduced an abortion survivor, or was it because we touched her soul? She could congratulate an inspirational cerebral palsy victim and advocate, but was outraged when she discovered that the person she congratulated was also an abortion survivor.
The headline in The Denver Post the next day read “Abortion Jab Earns Rebuke.” The majority leader is quoted as saying, “I think it was amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics.”
Yes, Representative Madden, Gianna Jessen is a human being. She was when she was in her mother’s womb, and she was when she sang the national anthem on the floor of the Colorado House of Representatives.
The paper went on to quote Gianna, stating she was glad I told her story.
“We need to discuss the humanity of it. I’m glad to be able to speak up for children in the womb,” she said. “If abortion is about women’s rights, where were my rights?”
All I can say is, “Glory to God!” He orchestrated it all, every minute of it, and I was so honoured to have been chosen to play a part. May we all continue to be filled with and to fight for the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ!
If you’d like to contact Ted Harvey, you may e-mail him at ted@tedharvey.com.
He would welcome your comments
ACW Review No 70 - September 2006
THE DA VINCI CODE” Enid Blyton for Adults?
Daphne McLeod
Many of you will remember the enormous popularity of the books Enid Blyton wrote for children and how they were nearly all about an elitist group who discovered a Secret by cracking a Code, so far unrecognised by anyone else. I couldn’t help thinking of Miss Blyton, who also made a vast fortune from the sale of her books, when I came across The Da Vinci Code.
There are two important differences of course. Miss Blyton never tried to pretend her books were factual and she had no hidden agenda to discredit anybody. Unfortunately, Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code, does try to pretend that his fiction is fact, (unsuccessfully, as I hope to demonstrate below,) and he also has a very definite agenda, which is to attack both the Person of Jesus Christ and the Church He founded. However, both authors offer an enticing escape from the real world and this led, eventually, to Enid Blyton’s books being removed from most of our libraries. Responsible adults decided that it was not good for children to wallow in this make-believe world because truth keeps us in touch with reality. Truth is just as important for adults which is why fiction dressed up as fact in The Da Vinci Code should be shown to be the fraud it is.
Some of Mr Brown’s ‘economies with truth.’
Remember that Dan Brown prefaces his book with a “Fact Page” which claims that the astonishing and totally unsubstantiated assertions in his book are based on detailed research so let’s look at some of these assertions.
1. The Dead Sea Scrolls are ‘early Christian documents’ but they are not. They are Jewish documents which don’t mention Christ or Christianity.
2. The Divinity of Christ was only established by the Emperor Constantine in the fourth century but this fundamental Truth is firmly established in the Gospels (John 1, 1; 8,57; 20,28); the Acts (17,23); the Epistles (2 Peter l); the early Church Fathers’ writings (St Ignatius of Antioch, martyred 110 A.D. constantly refers in his letters which are still extant to “Jesus our God” also St Irenaeus 2nd century martyr names Christ as God in Against the heresies). These are just a few examples, but perhaps even more compelling is the evidence of the first century historian Pliny the Younger who was not a Christian. He wrote in response to a query from the Emperor Trajan that “The Christians worship their leader Christ as God”. The fact that Jesus is definitely God made Man is too important to us all to allow it’s denial to go unchallenged.
3. The Council of Nicea 325 was called to “make” Jesus Divine. Actually it was called not to decide Jesus’ Divinity, already well established for nearly three centuries, but to decide how to articulate it in the storm caused by Arius’ heresies. Its findings are in the Nicene Constantine Creed still recited by most Christians every Sunday.
4. Silas, the book’s assassin is an Opus Dei monk. But Opus Dei is an association of lay Catholics who dedicate their everyday work to God. It has no monks though it does have some priests and bishops. Neither does it have any Cardinals though Dan Brown mistakenly describes its founder, St Josemaria Escriva, as a Cardinal. Also Opus Dei, which is meant to have guarded the secret from the beginning was only founded in 1928. The caricature of Opus Dei in the book and the film is not only utterly false it is very offensive.
5. Mona Lisa the title of the famous painting by Leonardo Da Vinci is an anagram for the two pagan gods Anam and Isis but this title was never used by Leonardo Da Vinci who called his painting La Giaconda because it was of a Mrs Lisa Giaconda, whose husband, Francesco da Giacondo, a wealthy Florentine business man, commissioned it. The nickname Mona Lisa was given to it hundreds of years after Leonardo’s death.
6. The Priory of Sion is shown as a secret society dating from 1099 and numbering several well known historical characters among its members but the Priory of Sion was only registered in Paris in 1956 by Andre Bonhomme and Pierre Plantal, who is a convicted con-man. Later M. Bonhomme admitted it was all a forgery and described it as “only a bit of fun”.
7. The Vatican guarded this secret from the 3rd century but the Vatican, the Catholic Church’s ‘civil service’ only came into existence in the 12th century.
There are more anomalies but these seven are enough to show how
totally unreliable Mr Brown’s ‘detailed research’ is. When we remember that Mr Brown is no historian or theologian but an ex-prep school English teacher we will treat his assertions with the contempt they deserve, even when he tries to lend them credibility by putting them in the mouth of his, fictional, wise man, Sir Leigh Teabing. This character, played in the film by Sir Ian McKellan, tells two younger characters that everything they have been told about Jesus Christ is false! This astonishing assertion is never substantiated in any way and is therefore worthless for, as St Thomas Aquinas pointed out long ago, “That asserted without proof can be denied without proof’. Mr Brown’s picture of Christ’s Church as an organisation containing secret information only given to an elitist few is obstensibly false. Christ’s Church is for everyone for, as St John shows us in his Gospel Ch 18.37, Christ declared before Pontius Pilate, “For this was I born, for this came I into the world, that men might know the truth”—
the truth he commissioned His Apostles “to go and teach to the whole world.”,(Matt 28). Mr Brown’s picture resembles not Christ’s Church but the first century heresy Gnosticism which, as its name meaning knowledge suggests, teaches about elitists who pass on secrets. Although this heresy has been condemned, it recurs frequently through history.
A word about St Mary Magdalen, alleged by Mr Brown to be seated next to Jesus at the Last Supper because St John, who was next to Him according to the Gospel, looks rather effeminate. No art historian has ever suggested this before because, being better informed than Mr Brown, they know that at that time very young men, and St John was very young were depicted in this way. A mere glance at contemporary pictures of the Crucifixion will show St John looking much the same and St Mary Magdalen who was also there, looking quite
different. Mr Brown is no art historian as his constant use of the words “Da Vinci” show. These words only mean ‘from Vinci’ and they no more describe Leonardo da Vinci than `from Calcutta’ would describe Mother Teresa! Genuine historians always say ‘Leonardo’ even if they omit ‘da Vinci’. As to the blasphemous and totally unsubstantiated assertion that Jesus Christ was married to St Mary Magdalen, who was expecting His child—well, where’s the evidence? All the evidence shows the contrary. For instance, when He was dying on the Cross, Jesus gives his Mother into St John’s care. St Mary Magdalen was also present but He made no provision for her as anyone who was dying would for their wife and child. Finally, all down the centuries thousands of people have recognised the Truth of the Gospels and died as martyrs rather than deny it.
Would any of those who profess to believe the wild allegations in The Da Vinci Code die as martyrs for them? Or is their belief merely based on the desire to believe them because it releases them from accepting Christ, His Church and His teaching?
ACW Review No 69 - June 2006
Stop trying to kill us off! Jane Campbell
Assisted dying is not a simple question of increasing choice for those of us who live our lives close to death. It raises deep concerns about how we are viewed by society and by ourselves. I have a severe form of spinal muscular atrophy, and require 24-hour assistance. Many people who do not know me believe I would be "better off dead". Even more argue: "I couldn't live like that." And some suggest that advances in genetic screening should be used to enable parents to choose whether to have a child with disabilities. Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill, Lord Joffe's private member's bill, which was debated in the House of Lords, feeds into that lack of knowledge (some might call it ignorance, others prejudice) by endorsing such views and legalising the killing of terminally ill and disabled people. The bill has the backing of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (recently renamed Dignity in Dying) and, according to their polls, the support of the British public.
Yet it has failed to get the endorsement of a single organisation of disabled people. Three major national charities have condemned it, and leading campaigners have united under the banner of ‘Not Dead Yet UK’ to make the voice of disabled people heard. The very people the bill is intended to help, the terminally ill and disabled, are frightened by what it seeks to achieve.
Proponents of the bill claim that such criticisms are nonsense: the bill is only intended to help that small minority who, in a similar situation to me, do not think as I do but want to die. While conceding my right to choose life, Lord Joffe deliberately ignores the factors that contribute to my choice. I benefit from excellent medical care. I live in an adapted bungalow, and my local authority provides proper care support that enables me to choose my own personal assistants. I am not dependent on family and loved ones. I love my good life. Lord
Joffe, it appears, does not. In 1999, as a member of the royal commission on long-term care for the elderly, he issued a minority report with one other member, saying that social care support should not be free at the point of delivery.
When I think about this, I shudder. To get an image of what it might be like, one has only to think of Diane Pretty. Her life was very different from mine and I would have liked to know the reasons for that. Did she choose to live confined in a downstairs room rather than have adaptations to her home or be rehoused? Did she want her husband to be her full-time carer rather than accept more support from social services? Why was she not fully confident about how her medical team would take care of her as her illness progressed?
This is the third time that Lord Joffe has tried to get doctors to turn their backs on the Hippocratic oath that requires them to "do no harm". Following each rejection, he has returned with a more restrictive bill. This time, we are told, the bill contains two important safeguards.
First, it will apply only to the "terminally ill"- the "disabled" are excluded, so have nothing to fear. Second, the doctor will only be permitted to prescribe the lethal dose. The patient must self-administer, so protecting anyone who requests assistance to die but then has a change of heart.
A moment's thought will show that these are not safeguards but devices to silence objectors. The more restrictive the bill, the easier it is to argue for its scope to be expanded once it has passed into law.None of us will be safe. Consider two patients lying side by side in hospital: both ask their doctor to prescribe lethal medication. Although their symptoms and prognosis are similar, one has a terminal illness whereas the other is classed as disabled. One gets the drugs; the other does not. Or will the second patient be reclassified?
Consider the two patients again: one has the strength to swallow the poison; the other does not, so it remains by the bed. The message: "die now-before it's too late."
Legalising premature death as a treatment option will place pressures on people near the end of their lives. It will be the cheapest, quickest and simplest option-all more attractive to health and social care services than developing and providing expensive, and potentially
long-term, services. The relationship between care givers and receiver will be irrevocably damaged.
Fortunately, disabled and terminally ill people aren't going to let that happen without a fight. Lord Ashley, the life-long campaigner for disabled people, is introducing a bill on the right to independent living later this year to guarantee the services that people like me need to participate fully in society. If Lord Joffe really wants to help, he should start listening and stop trying to kill us off.
Jane Campbell MBE, chair of the Social Care Institute for Excellence from 2000 to 2006, is a Disability Rights commissioner and Not Dead Yet UK convener.
Her website is Livingwithdignity.info
"Living with dignity is what we ask for ourselves and for others. We all deserve to achieve it and not to have it taken from us." It requires us to both take control of our lives and to enable others to do the same by offering and receiving the right support when needed.
Life presents many problems, solutions are seldom easy but they are always there when we are willing to look hard enough. This web site is dedicated to making that process a reality.
Religious Instruction for children at the International School in
Eindhoven ( Holland ) Eileen Hourihan
The priest was in Heaven for an hour.
A very good Irish friend of mine looked around for a Dutch priest willing to celebrate Holy Mass in English at least twice a month in Eindhoven. So many families come over here because of the husband's work. She wanted to have a guarantee that there would be no problems when the time came for First Confession for the children.
To cut a long story short I was a volunteer for the religious instruction of eight children from America, Mexico, Spain, Poland and Ireland. These children were gems and are seeds for the future. Maybe it's nice to hear the depth of some of these children's comments now and then.
Pope John Paul II had just died so I suggested: What if the new Pope, no matter who he is, finds a store of little sacrifices which we could all do this week as a gift for him when he is elected.
The following week we had already the joy of Pope Benedict XVI and I asked: "Well, Mark, did you have a chance to do something for the new Holy Father?" "Yes, I cleared up the dog's mess every day without moaning."
"And you Diane, did you also have a chance?" "Yes, you see my Mum loves to wear slippers after dinner and I went upstairs every day to get them for her without her having to ask me."
"And you, Julia, were you lucky.did you remember?" "Yes, I tried not to shout at my younger sister when she was about to break my toy."
I myself thought: how very beautiful at such a young age to live a little sacrifice and only God knowing about it during the week. First Confession Day was approaching rapidly.
During the year I had an extra book (a real gem) called Guidebook for Confession for Children (from Sinag-Tala Publishers, Manila). I have never seen such a good examination of conscience as the one here with very practical photos. So for the whole year my little ones
had seen the child on the cover kneeling on one side of the confessional with the priest on the other side. About two weeks before the planned day I heard from another Mum that the priest had mentioned that all his confessionals were used for storage but that he would have to see if he could clean up one for the children.
In the meantime I prayed a lot to Saint Josemaria Escriva begging him that the children would not be confused and that they could have personal confession. The day came. Mums were outside the church with their children and then something very beautiful happened. The priest
led the children to the confessional and told them that today was a special feast day for him that from this moment on he represented Jesus for the children in Confession. The children went to confession without any trouble whatsoever and afterwards this very holy priest
said to me and my Irish friend: `Today I can honestly say I "lived" my priesthood. It has been a special experience for me. It's as if I were in Heaven for an hour. Thank you very much for this opportunity'.
But the story doesn't end here. The priest told all his parishioners at the next Mass that `the storage' was going to continue as a normal confessional. I could imagine the devil prancing as he missed the goal this time thanks to the little ones. I thanked St Josemaria also as I know he, as a young priest, heard thousands of children's confessions.
ACW Review No 68 - March 2006
Hot Water Bottle Margaret Nwamadi
The story was written by a doctor who worked in South Africa.
One night I had worked hard to help a mother in the labour ward; but in spite of all we could do, she died leaving us with a tiny premature baby and a crying two-year-old daughter. We would have difficulty keeping the baby alive, as we had no incubator (we had no electricity to run an incubator). We also had no special feeding facilities. Although we lived on the equator, nights were often chilly with treacherous draughts.
One student midwife went for the box we had for such babies and the cotton wool that the baby would be wrapped in. Another went to stoke up the fire and fill a hot water bottle. She came back shortly in distress to tell me that in filling the bottle, it had burst (rubber perishes easily in tropical climates). “And it is our last hot water bottle!” she exclaimed. As in the West, it is no good crying over spilled milk so in Central Africa it might be considered no good crying over burst water bottles. They do not grow on trees, and there are no drugstores down forest pathways.
“All right,” I said, “put the baby as near the fire as you safely can, and sleep between the baby and the door to keep it free from draughts. Your job is to keep the baby warm.”
The following noon, as I did most days, I went to say prayers with many of the orphanage children. I gave the youngsters various suggestions of things to pray about and told them about the tiny baby. I explained our problem about keeping the baby warm enough, mentioning the hot water bottle, and that the baby could so easily die if it got chills. I also told them of the two-year-old sister, crying because her mother had died. During prayer time, one ten-year old girl, Ruth, prayed with the usual blunt conciseness of our African children. “Please, God” she prayed, “send us a water bottle. It’ll be no good tomorrow, God, as the baby will be dead so please send it this afternoon.”
While I gasped inwardly at the audacity of the prayer, she added, “And while you are about it, would you please send a dolly for the little girl so she’ll know you really love her?” Often with children’s prayers, I was put on the spot. Could I honestly say, “Amen”. I just did not believe that God could do this. Oh, yes, I know that He can do everything, the Bible says so. But there are limits, aren’t there? The only way God could answer this particular prayer would be by sending me a parcel from my homeland. I had been in Africa for almost four years at that time, and I had never, ever received a parcel from home. Anyway, if anyone did send me a parcel, who would put in a hot water bottle? I lived on the equator!
Halfway through the afternoon, while I was teaching in the nurses’ training school, a message was sent that there was a car at my front door! By the time I reached home, the car had gone, but there, on the veranda, was a large twenty-two pound parcel. I felt tears pricking my eyes. I could not open the parcel alone, so I sent for the orphanage children.
Together we pulled off the string, carefully undoing each knot. We folded the paper, taking care not to tear it unduly. Excitement was mounting. Some thirty or forty pairs of eyes were focused on the large cardboard box. From the top, I lifted out brightly coloured, knitted jerseys. Eyes sparkled as I gave them out. Then there were the knitted bandages for the leprosy patients, and the children looked a little bored. Then came a box of mixed raisins and sultanas —that would make a batch of buns for the weekend. Then, as I put my hand in again, I felt the…could it really be? I grasped it and pulled it out—yes, a brand-new, rubber hot water bottle. I cried. I had not asked God to send it; I had not truly believed that He could. Ruth was in the front row of the children. She rushed forward, crying out, “If God has sent the bottle, He must have sent the dolly too!”
Rummaging down to the bottom of the box, she pulled out the small, beautifully dressed dolly. Her eyes shone! She had never doubted! Looking up at me, she asked: “Can I go over with you and give this dolly to that little girl, so she’ll know that Jesus really loves her?”
That parcel had been on the way for five whole months. Packed up by my former Sunday school class, whose leader had heard and obeyed God’s prompting to send a hot water bottle, even to the equator. And one of the girls had put in a dolly for an African child—five months before, in answer to the believing prayer of a ten-year-old to bring it “that afternoon.”
The Problem of the Rigid Seminarian DIOGENES
In their zeal to find seminarians who aren’t rigid, the seminary gatekeepers are weeding out the positive attribute of tenacity.
Over the past thirty years or so we’ve often heard concern expressed by bishops, theologians, seminary rectors and vocation directors that many candidates for the priesthood are unsuitable on account of their rigidity. In these circles it goes without saying that rigid is bad.
However, suppose that in place of the word rigidity we substituted the word tenacity. Immediately we see that tenacity can be a positive quality, something martyrs and confessors had, something laudable in any believer and eminently desirable in a priest. Whereas rigidity is kind of a directionless term, negatively descriptiv | 
