These are the reflections of a Secular Franciscan. I look not only at my own spiritual journey, but also at issues of life, economic and social justice, morality, the arts, and more through the lens of Franciscan Spirituality.
Born in Lucera, Francesco entered the Conventual Franciscans in 1695. After his ordination 10 years later, he taught philosophy to younger friars, served as guardian of his friary, and later became provincial minister. When his term of office ended, Francesco became master of novices and finally pastor in his hometown.
In his various ministries, he was loving, devout, and penitential. He was a sought-after confessor and preacher. One witness at the canonical hearings regarding Francesco’s holiness testified, “In his preaching he spoke in a familiar way, filled as he was with the love of God and neighbor; fired by the Spirit, he made use of the word and deed of holy Scripture, stirring his listeners and moving them to do penance.” Francesco showed himself a loyal friend of the poor, never hesitating to seek from benefactors what was needed.
At his death in Lucera, children ran through the streets crying out, “The saint is dead! The saint is dead!” Francesco was canonized in 1986.
One of my daily prayer devotions is reciting The Seven Sorrows of Mary As Given to St. Bridget.
The seven sorrows, according to the version I pray, are:
Simeon's prophecy that a sword will pierce Mary's soul
The Flight into Egypt
The loss of the Child Jesus in the Temple of Jerusalem
The meeting of Jesus and Mary on the Way of the Cross
Mary witnesses the Crucifixion and the death of Jesus on the Cross
The dead Body of Jesus is taken down and laid in the arms of His Holy Mother
The Burial of Jesus, with Mary's tears and loneliness
As I was meditating on these sorrows the other morning, I began thinking about other sorrows that Mary might have experience. Then it hit me: What about when Joseph died?
Surely that was a sorrow?
Yet it is not included.
Now it could be that Joseph suffered and his death was a release. Or maybe Mary really was celebrating his entrance into eternal life?
But it also struck me that it was just another example of Joseph, that holy carpenter, being in the background. He played prominent roles in the birth of Jesus - the Flight into Egypt - the search for Jesus in the Temple. He is spoken of in the Gospels as a good man, and a carpenter, but that's about it. His death is not recorded in the Gospels. According to various legends he married Mary later in life - some of the stories suggest he was in his early 90's - and so most painting depict him as an old man. According to the apocryphal "Story of Joseph the Carpenter," he dies at the age of 111!
Getting back to the sorrows of Mary - should this not be one of the counted sorrows? They had lived together chastely for a number of years, and he certainly protected her. She must have grieved his loss as a companion, as a bread winner, and as a father-figure for Jesus.
James was born in the Marche of Ancona, in central Italy along the Adriatic Sea. After earning doctorates in canon and civil law at the University of Perugia, he joined the Friars Minor and began a very austere life. He fasted nine months of the year; he slept three hours a night. Saint Bernardine of Siena told him to moderate his penances.
James studied theology with Saint John of Capistrano. Ordained in 1420, James began a preaching career that took him all over Italy and through 13 Central and Eastern European countries. This extremely popular preacher converted many people–250,000 at one estimate–and helped spread devotion to the Holy Name of Jesus. His sermons prompted numerous Catholics to reform their lives, and many men joined the Franciscans under his influence.
With John of Capistrano, Albert of Sarteano, and Bernardine of Siena, James is considered one of the “four pillars” of the Observant movement among the Franciscans. These friars became known especially for their preaching.
To combat extremely high interest rates, James established montes pietatis—literally, mountains of charity—nonprofit credit organizations that lent money on pawned objects at very low rates.
Not everyone was happy with the work James did. Twice assassins lost their nerve when they came face to face with him. James died in 1476, and was canonized in 1726.
Given the current climate in the U.S., over the last year or so I've read or reread a number of dystopian novels. Recently, I read an essay that described C.S. Lewis's That Hideous Strength as a dystopian novle. That had never occurred to me - but it made sense given what I remember of the book (having read it some 40 years ago).
So I reread it this past week.
Yes, with N.I.C.E. and the attempts to create a dictatorship and to reshape the human race, it does fit the genre.
But it also had a strong spiritual element that most of the books lacked - and had a hopeful ending. It was a celebration of what is good and natural.
Plus, it was a good read!
I'll have to read the first two books in the trilogy at some point.
Years ago, I belonged to a parish called Corpus Christi. It was a thriving, growing parish with many outreach ministries. People from around the country came to visit it to learn what we were doing.
Alas, the charismatic pastor began to stray further and further from church teachings (as at least one of the lyrics below shows), and the parish became a center for all sorts of illicit activities, including homosexual weddings, women priests, and inter-communion. When the diocese finally began to crack down, the pastor and a number of parishioners split from the Catholic Church and created their own church.
Before that happened, the parish was also a center for music, theater, and lots of humor.
Four of us lay people who were active in the parish began to play pranks on the pastor (who had a sense of humor) and the staff. We kept our identities secret for a while, calling ourselves (forgive me) the Four Good Lays.
Finally, just before Christmas, we marched into the pastor's office and revealed ourselves, singing a parody song. (I recently found a copy of it while cleaning out some old files.)
The Twelve Days of Corpus Christmas.
by the Four Good Lays
On the first day of Christmas my parish gave to me
a free day to sit on the beach.
On the second day of Christmas my parish gave to me
two Roman collars, and a free day to sit on the beach.
On the third day of Christmas my parish gave to me
three Cuban stogies, two Roman collars, and a free day to sit on the beach.
On the fourth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
Four Good Lays, three Cuban stogies, two ...
On the fifth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
five telephone rings, Four Good Lays, three...
On the sixth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
six pack of Genny, five telephone rings, Four ...
On the seventh day of Christmas my parish gave to me
seven lay homilists, six pack of Genny, five ...
On the eighth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
eight heated Sundays, seven lay homilists, six ...
On the ninth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
nine committee meetings, eight heated Sundays, seven ...
On the tenth day of Christmas my parish gave to me
Ten Commandments broken, nine committee meetings, eight ...
On the eleventh day of Christmas my parish gave to me
eleven piano lessons, Ten Commandment broken, nine ...
On the twelfth of Christmas my parish gave to me
twelve letters to the bishop, eleven piano lessons, Ten ...
It seemed funny at the time. The pastor laughed. (Genny, by the way, is a local brand of beer.)
Of the four of us lay people, one later broke from the Church and got ordained as a woman priest, one joined a religious order, one was a lawyer who moved to Chicago where she was involved with the National Association for Lay Ministry and last I heard was still practicing civil rights law, and I remained active in Catholic parishes and music circles, and eventually became a Secular Franciscan.
Born Caterina Offreducia, Agnes was the younger sister of Saint Clare, and her first follower. When Caterina left home two weeks after Clare’s departure, their family attempted to bring her back by force. They tried to drag her out of the monastery, but her body suddenly became so heavy that several knights could not budge it. Her uncle Monaldo tried to strike her but was temporarily paralyzed. The knights then left Caterina and Clare in peace. Saint Francis himself gave Clare’s sister the name Agnes, because she was gentle like a young lamb.
Agnes matched her sister in devotion to prayer and in willingness to endure the strict penances that characterized the Poor Ladies’ lives at San Damiano. In 1221, a group of Benedictine nuns in Monticelli near Florence asked to become Poor Ladies. Saint Clare sent Agnes to become abbess of that monastery. Agnes soon wrote a rather sad letter about how much she missed Clare and the other nuns at San Damiano. After establishing other monasteries of Poor Ladies in northern Italy, Agnes was recalled to San Damiano in 1253, as Clare lay dying.
Three months later Agnes followed Clare in death, and was canonized in 1753.
As part of our discussion at a men's group, I mentioned the need for an independent local Catholic news source. The diocesan paper is limited by resources - and politics - in what it can cover. There are so many other Catholic-related stories out there. Just to name a few - St. John Bosco Schools, Chesterton Academy, the Chesterton Conference, the Irenaeus Center, Feminists for Life, Students for Life, the TLM Masses, the 40 Days for Life campaigns, the Good Friday Stations of the Cross for Life, the human trafficking march, the St. Alban community, Secular Franciscans and other lay groups, the St. Padre Pio Chapel, individual parish food pantries and soup kitchens, and so on.
One possibility is an online site - a webpage of some sort where we can run articles, columns, and pictures. While I do have the writing, photography, and editing skills for such a news outlet, I do not have the technical skills to create a one.
I may be able to work something out with the Irenaeus folks - young people with technical skills.
I want to move in this direction. There is such a need.
It’s Okay for Catholics to Judge When faced with the immoral behavior of loved ones, it's not just permitted, but crucial to judge—as long as you judge justly
JIM BLACKBURN • 11/19
As an apologist, I often get calls and e-mails from people dealing with the immoral behavior of others who are close to them. They are unsure of what, if any, action they can or should take in the matter.
Typical examples would be dealing with an adult child who’s living with her boyfriend or coping with an adult sibling who has announced that he is gay. The callers often struggle with whether to allow the child or sibling to practice the immoral lifestyle in their homes. Do I have to let them spend the night? What do I tell my kids? How do I deal with this in a loving way? Can I truly love my neighbor while rejecting his immoral lifestyle?
Often people in these situations have tried to take some action already, only to be shot down immediately with the accusation that they are being judgmental, that the Bible teaches us not to judge others, that they should just mind their own business. “After all,” they’re told, “I’m not judging you, and you shouldn’t be judging me. Read the Bible.” But is that really what the Bible teaches?
When pressed to show where the Bible supports this, those who can come up with any response at all usually point to Jesus’ words found in the Gospel of Matthew: “Judge not, that you not be judged.” Most people will stop there, with the clear conviction that the Bible teaches that we are not to pass any form of judgment on others. A closer look at this Bible verse and other related verses, however, uncovers a different understanding of Jesus’ teaching.
First, let’s look at the full context of Jesus’ words:
Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, “Let me take the speck out of your eye,” when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye (Matt. 7:1-5).
If we break this passage down line by line, it becomes clear that Jesus was not telling his disciples they could not ever judge the behavior of others. Rather, he was cautioning them to live righteous lives themselves so their judgment of others’ behavior would not be rash judgment, and their efforts in admonishing their neighbors would be effective.
“Judge not, that you be not judged.” By itself, this statement could be construed to mean that one may escape even God’s judgment simply by not judging the behavior of others. But everyone is judged by God, so this cannot be a proper understanding. Jesus goes on to reformulate his statement in a positive way: “With the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” Jesus indeed expects his disciples to judge, but he warns that they will be judged in a like manner.
This is reminiscent of the line in the Lord’s Prayer: “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us” (Matt. 6:12). Much more than a simple warning that God will treat us as we treat others, this is an appeal to each of us to be as much as we can like God in the way we treat others. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) explains, “There has to be a vital participation, coming from the depths of the heart, in the holiness and the mercy and the love of our God. Only the Spirit by whom we live can make ‘ours’ the same mind that was in Christ Jesus” (2842).
In the next two lines, Jesus cautions against hypocrisy: “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?” Judging hypocritically is not effective. A petty thief admonished by a bank robber only scoffs at his admonisher.
Jesus then explains how to judge rightly: “First take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” Much to the point of this article, there can be no doubt that those final words—”take the speck out of your brother’s eye”—are, indeed, permission to judge so long as it is done rightly.
Other Bible passages that seem on the surface to indicate a condemnation of judging others’ behavior may be treated similarly in their full context. The idea of rightly judging the behavior of others can be found throughout the New Testament.
Jesus told the Jews, “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment” (John 7:24).
He instructed his disciples what to do if someone sins against them:
Go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector (Matt. 18:15-17).
It is not possible to follow Jesus’ instructions without being “judgmental” of another’s behavior.
Paul, too, exhorted right judgment of other Christians: “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. Drive out the wicked person from among you” (1 Cor. 5:12-13).
Also, “Do you not know that the saints [i.e., Christians] will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life! . . . Shun immorality” (1 Cor. 6:2-18).
A look at the Old Testament reveals similar teaching: “You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor” (Lev. 19:15).
Clearly, contrary to what many would prefer to believe, the Bible exhorts us to rightly judge the behavior of others. The Catholic Church teaches likewise but cautions us just as Jesus did the disciples:
Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty: of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor; of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them; of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: “Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved” (CCC 2477-2478).
Having said all that, there is a big difference between judging another’s behavior and judging the eternal state of his soul. The latter judgment belongs only to God. Jesus addressed this type of judgment, too:
The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. Truly, truly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself, and has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment. I can do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me (John 5:22-30).
Clearly, in this context, Jesus was speaking of judgment as condemnation or eternal damnation. Such judgment is reserved to him alone.
So, when faced with the immoral behavior of loved ones, how can we be sure to rightly judge behavior? In Jesus’ own words, we must start by taking the logs out of our own eyes—by making sure we are doing the best we can to live lives of good example. We must also strive to form our consciences correctly so we know sin when we see it. Finally, we must not jump to conclusions about another’s culpability in sin. Doing all this will help to ensure that our admonitions are seen as the loving actions we intend them to be—meant to help our loved ones live their lives in ways that are pleasing to God. Only then can our efforts be effective in helping to take these ugly specks out of our brothers’ eyes.
This article was originally published in Catholic Answers Magazine. It’s slightly adapted for publication here at Catholic Answers Magazine Online.
Pease porridge hot, Pease porridge cold, Pease porridge in the pot Nine days old. Some like it hot, Some like it cold, I like to leave it in the pot And watch it turn to mold.
Earlier this year I set a goal of reading by the end of 2022 all of Shakespeare's credited 38 plays that I had not yet read. I'm now up to 26 of them read, so I have 12 to go over the next 13 months.
The list of unread plays:
The Comedy of Errors Titus Andronicus The Two Gentlemen of Verona Love’s Labour’s Lost As You Like It The Merry Wives of Windsor All’s Well That Ends Well Measure for Measure Coriolanus Timon of Athens Pericles The Two Noble Kinsmen
Not sure if I will read one before Christmas. If I do, the next up is The Comedy of Errors.
I've now finished Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part III. That means I've read the 12 Shakespeare plays I had set as a goal for the year, and thus have also completed all my reading goals for 2021.
I've always liked Shakespeare, but I have to admit the three Henry VI plays were a slog. For me, there were only two interesting characters - la Pucelle (St. Joan of Arc) in Part I, and Gloucester (the future Richard III) in Part III.
Politically, Joan had to be made a "villain" in English history - which, of course she was not - but I get the sense Shakespeare thought well of her. Indeed, she seems quite heroic until just before her death. Then, given his audience, Shakespeare had to give her a dark side.
As for Gloucester, his violent ruthlessness and ambition particularly come to dominate the last part of Part II - getting us ready for Richard III.
Otherwise, the character development, the writing, the poetry, were not up to the quality I've seen in Shakespeare's later and more mature plays - though I did like seeing the famous line about killing all the lawyers in context! The characters tended to run together. Many did not have a distinct enough personality; indeed, in some cases the lines could easily have been switched to other characters. Part of the problem, admittedly, is that I'm not as familiar with the intricacies of English history, so the many of the secondary characters were unfamiliar to me.
Basically, I read these three plays because I needed to to meet my goal. In other circumstances, I might not have finished them.
Twelve more Shakespeare plays to read to read them all. My goal is to finish them all before the end of 2022.
In her short life, Elizabeth manifested such great love for the poor and suffering that she has become the patroness of Catholic charities and of the Secular Franciscan Order. The daughter of the King of Hungary, Elizabeth chose a life of penance and asceticism when a life of leisure and luxury could easily have been hers. This choice endeared her in the hearts of the common people throughout Europe.
At the age of 14, Elizabeth was married to Louis of Thuringia, whom she deeply loved. She bore three children. Under the spiritual direction of a Franciscan friar, she led a life of prayer, sacrifice, and service to the poor and sick. Seeking to become one with the poor, she wore simple clothing. Daily she would take bread to hundreds of the poorest in the land who came to her gate.
After six years of marriage, her husband died in the Crusades, and Elizabeth was grief-stricken. Her husband’s family looked upon her as squandering the royal purse, and mistreated her, finally throwing her out of the palace. The return of her husband’s allies from the Crusades resulted in her being reinstated, since her son was legal heir to the throne.
In 1228, Elizabeth joined the Secular Franciscan Order, spending the remaining few years of her life caring for the poor in a hospital which she founded in honor of Saint Francis of Assisi. Elizabeth’s health declined, and she died before her 24th birthday in 1231. Her great popularity resulted in her canonization four years later.
Back in 2015, St. Pius Church in Chili was heavily damaged by a fire, and ultimately had to be torn down and a new church built. Some of the damage is pictured below.
For the new church, they salvaged two statues (above) that still show signs of the fire.
Pro-abortionists sometimes claim that there is nothing forbidding abortion in the Bible. For example:
Ex-priest Daniel C. Maguire says, “There has been no systematic thinking in Jewish Christian tradition on abortion. There is nothing in the Bible on it.”1
Roy Bowen Ward, Professor Emeritus of Comparative Religion at Miami University of Ohio, writes, “One thing the Bible does not say is ‘Thou shalt not abort.’”2
Mark Bigelow, a member of Planned Parenthood’s Clergy Advisory Board, writes, “One thing I know from the Bible is that Jesus was not against women having a choice in continuing a pregnancy. He never said a word about abortion (nor did anyone else in the Bible) even though abortion was available and in use in his time.”3
What are pro-life Christians to make of the “Bible and abortion” argument?
The Argument Doesn’t Hold
The statement that abortion is not explicitly mentioned in the Bible is technically correct. However, this allegation falls prey to the logical fallacy of assuming that because an act is not mentioned in Scripture, the Bible therefore approves of that act. After all, Scripture does not specifically condemn many other evils, such as pyramid schemes, terrorism, carjacking and kidnapping. Does this mean that Christians should not oppose these evil acts either?
The “Bible and abortion” argument is a mere diversion, like all of the other pro-abortion slogans. Some people mock Christians who look to the Bible for moral direction, claiming that people should not need the Bible in order to know that certain acts, such as murder and stealing, are wrong. Of course they are half-right ― these sins are against the law of nature and nature’s God, so they are unjustified by any means. But we can also extend such reasoning to include abortion. Christians do not need the Bible to tell us that abortion is wrong, because science concludes without a shadow of a doubt that the preborn child is a human being and reasonable people can agree that it is wrong to kill innocent human beings.
Yes, it is true that the Bible does not mention abortion. So what?
Abortion has always been more of a scientific question than a religious one.
It would not occur to many pro-abortionists that Christians might oppose abortion for other than Biblical reasons. They frequently allege that Christians have no use for science, yet they utterly ignore science themselves in their mad rush to defend abortion at any time in pregnancy (and beyond, in some cases). They ignore all evidence proving the existence of fetal pain, they are profoundly and willfully ignorant of fetal development, and they simply ridicule post-abortion syndrome and the abortion-breast cancer link. This is why pro-abortionists have such difficulties when they are confronted with atheist or agnostic pro-lifers who argue solely from the scientific point of view.4
Pro-abortionists generally base their opinions on neither science nor religion, but mere feelings. As MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry said: “When does life begin? I submit the answer depends an awful lot on the feeling of the parents.”5 And, when asked what a preborn baby feels when it is being killed by abortion, abortionist Michael Ballard replied, “Oh, I think that depends on your philosophy.”5
In other words, abortion advocates only use both theology and science as weapons, not in a genuine and honest search for the truth. Their appeals to the Bible are irrelevant to an honest, scientific discussion of the case against abortion.
The Bible and Abortion
Even so, pro-lifers can easily point to the Bible to support their position.
There are many sins that the Bible condemns implicitly, or indirectly. For instance, the commandment “thou shalt not kill” certainly applies to sins such as serial killing, terrorism and the indiscriminate bombing of civilians during warfare, though these are not specifically mentioned in the Bible. How, then, may we know that the Bible indirectly condemns abortion?
To begin with, the Bible repeatedly condemns the killing of the innocent, i.e., the sinless (Jeremiah 7:6 and 22:17, Psalm 106:37-38, Proverbs 6:16-19, Isaiah 53:6, Luke 17:2 and Matthew 18:10,14).6 A preborn child is obviously innocent of any crime or actual sin, because he or she cannot possess the intent of doing evil. Pro-abortionists sometimes justify abortion by casting the preborn child in the role of an “aggressor.” This is illogical, because aggression requires conscious intent.
Second, the Bible teaches that human life, created and nurtured by God, is present in the womb of the woman from the very beginning.
Psalm 139:13,15 praises God: “For thou didst form my inward parts, thou didst knit me together in my mother’s womb….my frame was not hidden from thee, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.”
Furthermore, God personally named and honored seven men before they were even born. Only persons merit names. These seven are Ishmael (Genesis 16:11); Isaac (Genesis 17:19); Josiah (1 Kings 13:2); Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9); Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5); John the Baptist (Luke 1:13); and Jesus Himself (Matthew 1:21).7
Third, all authentically religious people agree that God opens and shuts the womb and infuses the human body with a soul. There are more than a dozen Biblical references referring to this.8 This means that God certainly intended to create a human life, and we have no right to interfere with His will regarding its creation. God does not act randomly or without reason, despite what some abortion advocates allege.9 He creates every child for a purpose. Psalm 127 specifically refers to children as a “gift of the Lord” and as a “reward.” We do not have the right to disrupt or destroy His plans. Abortion is a supremely arrogant act because it imposes a creature’s will over God’s. Is this not the definition of all sin ― stubbornly refusing to do God’s will for our lives?
Finally, God is not inconsistent. He has loved us all with an infinite love for all eternity ― long before we were even conceived. He has said to us, “I have loved thee with an everlasting love” (Jeremiah 31:3). If He values men He named, He values all of his created preborn human beings.
The conclusion is inescapable. The Bible condemns the killing of the innocent; preborn children are innocent; and human life is present from fertilization, as willed by God. Therefore the Bible also condemns the killing of preborn children.
No other honest or logical conclusion is possible.
The Hypocrisy of Pro-Abortionists
Pro-abortion “Christians” do not really believe in the Bible, and there is an easy way to demonstrate this.
Pro-lifers can admit that the Bible does not mention abortion. But then we can ask the pro-abortionists what they think about divorce, which is condemned in the Bible many times. Our Lord Himself said, “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery” (Matthew 5:31-32, see also Matthew 19:3 9, Luke 16:18 and 1 Corinthians 7:10 15).
And what about fornication? The Gospels and the New Testament condemn fornication more than a dozen times (see Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, John 8:41, Acts 15:20,29 and 21:25, Romans 1:29, 1 Corinthians 5:1, 6:13,18, 7:2 and 10:8, 2 Corinthians 12:21, Galatians 5:19, Ephesians 5:3, Colossians 3:5, 1 Thessalonians 4:3, Jude 1:7, and Revelation 2:14,20-21, 9:21, 14:8, 17:2,4, 18:3,9, and 19:2). Ask the pro-abortionist what the Bible says about premarital sex and watch them squirm. If they try to explain these many verses away (which always requires spectacular and entertaining theological gymnastics), then you can press them to say that they do not really care what the Bible says unless it supports their viewpoint.
The Bible repeatedly and forcefully condemns other sexual sins such as homosexual activity and adultery, yet pro-abortionists tolerate and even embrace these as “basic human rights.”10 For example, in spite of more than fifty Biblical passages denouncing these sins, Frances Kissling casually stated, “I really think God cares very little about the sexual rules, about who is sleeping with whom, other than to wish that we treat each other well and with respect.”11
This is a Biblical proof that they are acting in a hypocritical manner by trying to give the impression that they are believing Christians when they really are not.
Conclusion
Evidently, even if Our Lord Himself had specifically condemned abortion in the strongest possible terms, it would make not the slightest particle of difference to so-called “religious” pro-abortionists, which means in turn that the “Bible and abortion” argument is a mere diversion, not a serious theological discussion.
In conclusion, there is no phrase in the Bible remotely approaching the phrases “freedom of choice,” “woman’s body, woman’s choice,” “plan your family,” “use your conscience,” or any of the other popular pro-abortion slogans.
There is, however, the phrase “choose life, therefore, that you and your descendants may live” (Deuteronomy 30:19).
Endnotes
[1] Daniel C. Maguire, quoted in Janice Hughes. “The Catholic Constituency: What Church Leaders Don’t Tell Congress.” Conscience, May/June 1988, pages 2 and 10.
[2] Roy Bowen Ward. “Is the Fetus a Person? The Bible’s View.” Mission Journal, January 1986.
[3] Mark Bigelow, letter to Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, November 22, 2002.
[5] Interview of abortionist Michael Ballard by Mike Levy. Triumph Magazine, March 1972, pages 20 to 23 and 44. Quoted in Donald DeMarco. Abortion in Perspective. Hayes Publishing Company, 1974.
[6] The Bible specifically condemns child sacrifice in Leviticus 20:2‑5; Leviticus 18:21; 2 Kings 23:10; and Jeremiah 32:35. Also see Deuteronomy 27:25 and 30:19; Amos 1:13; Jeremiah 7:6 and 22:17; Psalm 106:37‑38; Proverbs 6:16‑19; Isaiah 53:6; Luke 17:2; and Matthew 18:10,14.
[7] See especially Psalm 139:13‑16; Isaiah 44:24 and 64:8; and Jeremiah 1:5. Additionally, St. Paul rejoices that God “set me apart before I was born” (Galatians 1:15).
[8] See specifically Genesis 29:31; 30:2,22; 49:25; 1 Samuel 1:5; Job 31:15; Psalm 139:13; Isaiah 44:2,24; 49:1,5; 66:9; Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:15;41‑44; Wisdom 7:1; and Sirach 49:7.
[9] A CFFC pamphlet entitled “Did You Know that Most Catholics Believe in Reproductive Freedom?” states, “We believe that women should not be the victims of random fertility” [as if pregnancy bears no relation whatever to sexual activity]. “The Catholic hierarchy is trapped in an outdated authoritarianism which denies full equality to women and regards sex as evil.”
Marjorie Reiley Maguire has said, “The voice of the officers of the Catholic Church on reproductive matters speaks to me of a materialistic God…whose greatest joy comes from playing cruel reproductive tricks on women and watching them squirm” (Marjorie Maguire, quoted in Phyllis Zagano. “The Limits of Choice.” National Catholic Register, October 12, 1986).
[10] Homosexual activity: See Deuteronomy 23:17; 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46; and 2 Kings 23:7.
Divorce: See Matthew 5:31‑32, 19:3‑9; Luke 16:18; and 1 Corinthians 7:10‑15.
Fornication: See 2 Chronicles 21:11; Isaiah 23:17; Ezekiel 16:26,29; Matthew 5:32, 19:9; John 8:41; Acts 15:20,29, 21:25; Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1, 6:13,18, 7:2, 10:8; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3; Colossians 3:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Jude 1:7; and Revelation 2:14,20‑21, 9:21, 14:8, 17:2,4, 18:3,9, and 19:2.
Adultery: See Exodus 20:14; Leviticus 18:20, 19:20, 20:10‑12; Deuteronomy 5:18, 22:13‑29, 27:20, 27:23; Proverbs 6:26, 6:29, 6:32; Matthew 5:27,28,32, 15:19, 19:9,18; Mark 7:21, 10:11‑12,19; Luke 16:18, 18:20; John 8:4‑11, Romans 7:3, 13:9, 1 Corinthians 6:9; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:5; and Hebrews 13:4.
[11] Frances Kissling. “Divine Ecstasy: Sin, Asceticism and Sexuality in the Catholic Tradition.” Nerve.com’s March 30, 1999 interview of cultural critic Camille Paglia, ex‑priests Robert Francouer and Thomas Moore, religion professor Elaine Pagels, and Frances Kissling.
At church on Sunday they had a representative from Unbound, which used to be known as theChristian Foundation for Children and Aging. Unbound is a sponsorship organization that provides basic necessities such as food, education, clothing and access to medical care to children and elderly individuals in poor communities in some 19 countries.
I have sponsored two children in the past - one in Africa, and one in Central America. The boy in Africa, unfortunately, dropped out of school a few years into my sponsorship, and apparently began hanging around with an unsavory group, so he was dropped from the program. I then transferred my sponsorship to the girl. Sadly, after a couple of years the government of her country stopped supporting the the program with which Unbound had ties, and so that sponsorship ended back in 2015.
I was saddened by the loss of both of them. I had exchanged letters with both of them, and even sent the boy a soccer ball for Christmas one year. I was particularly upset with the way the sponsorship of the girl had ended. I felt a real loss, and worried about what had become of her. The whole situation left a bad tastes in my mouth, so I did not pick up another child at that time.
But I was thinking lately it was time to sponsor another child - so the presence of the the representative Sunday was fortuitous.
Having sponsored children in Africa and Central America, I decided this time to sponsor a boy in the Philippines. He's 11. Barring unforeseen circumstances, we will be connected for at least the next seven years.
This time, I will do some things a little differently.
Although I had exchanged some letters with my previous sponsored children, I had not been as regular as I should have been. I will keep more in contact this time around.
Something hit me at morning Mass today as well: I did not pray for my previous sponsored children. That was a real failure on my part. I will pray for my new young man on a regular basis. I will also offer prayers for my previous sponsored children. I hope they are well.
At the the beginning of the year I set some reading goals - and added a few others along the way.
I planned to read at least 80 books - at least 12 of which would be mysteries, and 12 of which would be Shakespeare plays.
As of today, November 7, I hit the 80 mark finishing two works: Henry VI, Part II by Shakespeare, and What to Say by Shawn D. Carney and Steve Karlen.
Yay!
How appropriate that a Shakespeare play and a pro-life book were the two that helped me make the overall number goal.
The Shakespeare play was the 11th of the year - so I need to get at least one more in, and plan to start Henry VI, Part III. Once I have read that I will have met all my reading goals for the year.
As for the mystery goal of 12 read, I long ago passed that goal and am now up to 23. I later set a mini goal of eventually reading all of Tony Hillerman's Navajo mysteries, though I didn't set a number goal for the year. But I did read 10 of them. I also decided along the way I would read at least one Charles Dickens, which I did with The Pickwick Papers. And I'm planning to work my way through all of Robert Frost's published books of poetry. I did read two - New
Hampshire and Mountain
Interval.
I will likely finish more books this year - at my current rate I may hit 90 before the end of the year.
I know that others read far more many books each year. But I'm not in competition with them.
Meanwhile, I'm already refocusing my reading. Next year I won't have a number goal. I'll still read more Shakespeare with the goal of finishing all the plays I have not yet read. And I'll continue with Hillerman and Frost, and at least another Dickens. Beyond that, I want to tackle some more serious and spiritual works - like a number of papal encyclicals, and the works of some saints.
For several years I have been part of Fishers of Men, a Men's Group based at St. Pius X Church. The group consists largely of men from St. Pius, but does allow outsiders like me to join them.
When the group was created, the leaders decided to meet each month the first and third Saturday mornings at a time when the meeting would not interfere with family activities. At first, they met from 7-8:30 a.m. Post Covid, the time shifted to 7:30-8:45.
The standard format is eating a light breakfast and conversation, then we watch a video, and have a discussion based on what we saw. Currently we are working through Father Pivonka's Metanoia.
The numbers pre-Covid were in the 20's. There are down for now; we have only begun to meet in person since September.
The group is an important part of my spiritual life. I missed them during Covid when we could not meet in person.
Didacus is living proof that God “chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong.”
As a young man in Spain, Didacus joined the Secular Franciscan Order and lived for some time as a hermit. After Didacus became a Franciscan brother, he developed a reputation for great insight into God’s ways. His penances were heroic. He was so generous with the poor that the friars sometimes grew uneasy about his charity.
Didacus volunteered for the missions in the Canary Islands and labored there energetically and profitably. He was also the superior of a friary there.
In 1450, he was sent to Rome to attend the canonization of Saint Bernardine of Siena. When many of the friars gathered for that celebration fell ill, Didacus stayed in Rome for three months to nurse them. After he returned to Spain, he pursued a life of contemplation full-time. He showed the friars the wisdom of God’s ways.
As he was dying, Didacus looked at a crucifix and said: “O faithful wood, O precious nails! You have borne an exceedingly sweet burden, for you have been judged worthy to bear the Lord and King of heaven” (Marion A. Habig, OFM, The Franciscan Book of Saints, p. 834).
San Diego, California, is named for this Franciscan, who was canonized in 1588.
Every Saturday, a group of Catholics gather outside Rochester's Planned Parenthood headquarters to say a Rosary, a Divine Mercy Chaplet, and various other prayers.
Some of the members of the group began praying outside Planned Parenthoods in the Rochester area more than 20 years ago - including the now closed Greece office. They shifted their efforts to the headquarters when the Greece office closed.
