Justice Articles - M. Keith LaBove

This weekend our nation marks another anniversary of the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision of the Supreme Court, legalizing abortion on demand. A memorial Mass will be held at our Cathedral this Sunday, at 11:00 a.m., with our Bishop as celebrant and homilist.

Especially since Pope John Paul’s encyclical “The Gospel of Life”, there has been a growing awareness in the Church about the importance of promoting the dignity and sanctity of each and every human life. The Holy Father’s eloquent call for a “Culture of Life”, as opposed to a “Culture of Death”, reminds us that when one life is at risk, so grows the danger to every human life.

Certainly abortion is the most grievous of these attacks against human life. There is something truly abhorrent about a medical professional (committed to first ‘doing no harm’) cooperating with the person a child depends on the most, his or her mother, to end that child’s life. The fact that it is does so frequently, so casually, and so often for convenience simply adds to the horror.

The rhetoric of the pro-abortion movement is certainly familiar to us all, as language and values are twisted and deformed. One rallying cry is “reproductive freedom”, which in reality is simply reproductive irresponsibility. It is a “freedom” which seeks to avoid the consequences of one’s actions, even at the cost of another human life.

Another bit of pro-abortion rhetoric is the claim that abortion supporters are in favor of, not abortion, but “choice”. Now this sounds very attractive, unless one pauses to think about this “choice”. The simple fact is that “choice” is meaningless, unless one chooses some particular action. If there were absolute value in choice itself, then my choosing to kill you, my choosing to abandon my family, my choosing to steal your possessions, would all be justified, because they are my “choice”. The idolizing of simple “choice” is a way to avoid a correct description of abortion: Yes, it is a choice: it is a choice to kill one’s unborn child.

I mentioned last Advent that we would be forming a Social Justice Commission in our parish. The first meeting of that group is this Thursday, at 7:00 p.m, and anyone interested in these issues is invited to attend. I see one aspect of the work of this commission to be the promotion of the sanctity of human life. For sadly, abortion is not the only attack on the dignity of human life that is being waged in our society. The sick, the elderly, and the handicapped are all at risk. Anything that lessens our respect for the dignity of human life contributes to the ongoing scourge of abortion.

The dignity of the human person is at the very heart of the Church’s teaching on Social Justice. This dignity is rooted in having been created in the image and likeness of God. This God-given dignity, while it can be overshadowed by sin at times, cannot be lost, and cannot be taken away by any human power.

This last century has been an amazing one in some ways, as we have come to a greater regard for many basic human rights. As we journey toward the next Millennium, it is clear that there is still much work to be done.

December 19, 1999 – Advent and Incarnation

As we mentioned at Mass last week, the Third Sunday of Advent is a day of special joy, in the course of our preparation for the joyful events of Christmas. In Rome last Sunday, the Holy Father had this to say:

“Today the liturgy invites us to joy, because "the Lord is near" (Phil 4,5). Now his birth is near, and the Great Jubilee is near, which will be like extending the feast of the mystery of the Incarnation throughout the year, two thousand years since the coming of the Son of God in the humility of our human nature.

“It is Christ himself, in the words of the prophet Isaiah, who explains the reasons for this joy: "The Spirit of the Lord," he proclaimed, "is upon me because the Lord has anointed me to preach good news to the poor" (Lk 4, 18; Cf, Is 61,1). On the eve of the new millennium, the Church makes this message of hope her own and proclaims "the year of the Lord's favor" (Is 61,2), inviting everyone to draw from the very source of grace, Jesus Christ, the Man-God, Redeemer of man and center of history.“

What I find striking here is the connection Pope John Paul is making between the Birth of Christ, and the Great Jubilee which begins this Christmas. In particular, he speaks of extending the feast of the Incarnation throughout the next year.

The fact is that the Christ who’s birth we celebrate is not an absent Christ. To the contrary, he is Christ who is alive and present in our midst. The Christ-child, born to Mary and Joseph that first Christmas day, is also given unto us. Here the example of Mary can guide us. Saying yes to God’s will in her life, she brought forth a savior. Saying yes to God, she cooperated in bringing Christ to a needy world. Saying yes to God, she made it possible for the entire world to know the love of God revealed in the only begotten Son of God.

We extend the feast of the Incarnation by continuing to rejoice in Christ’s presence in our midst. We do that in a special way at Mass, when Christ is real presence, in priest and people, Word and Sacrament. We do that when we pray before the reserved Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle, resting quietly in the presence of the Lord. We do that when we turn our hearts to prayer, to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and every other way that we rejoice in the presence of God in our midst.

At the end of the Mass, we hear the following words: ‘Go in peace, to love and serve the Lord’. These words remind us that the word ‘Mass’ itself means dismissal. At the conclusion of our time of worship, we are sent forth into the world.

And what is it we are sent forth to do? Recall the words of Isaiah which Jesus made his own: “To proclaim the good news to the poor, to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to captives.” It is precisely in doing these things that the year of the Lord’s favor is being made known.

It is in this light that we have been reflecting upon justice and peace in recent weeks. As we go out the doors of the Church each Sunday, we are called to bring Christ with us, much as Mary bore Christ within herself. In bringing the justice and peace of Christ to a needy world, we rejoice in the Word made flesh, who dwells among us. He is our Jubilee!

December 5, 1999 – A Modern Teaching

In 1991, Pope John Paul II issued the letter, ‘Centesimus Annus’, or ‘One Hundred Years’. That same year, the U.S. Bishops also wrote a pastoral letter celebrating the last 100 years of social justice teaching in the Church. What does this mean? Had Church teaching about justice and peace only begun in 1891? Why was that an important year?

In 1891, Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical called ‘Rerum Novarum’, a title literally meaning ‘Of New Things’. The English title normally given to this document is ‘On the Condition of Labor’. And it is a landmark document in the history of our church. It was to mark the 100th anniversary of this document that the Pope and our Bishops wrote the documents mentioned above. In addition, Popes wrote documents on the 40th, 80th, and 90th anniversaries of Leo XIII’s encyclical. It was a letter that properly marked the beginning of ‘Modern Social Teaching’ in the Catholic Church.

Again, does that mean the Church hadn’t taught about justice and charity and peace before that date? Most certainly not. It is impossible to preach the Gospel and not be concerned about the conditions in which people live and work, as well as the structures, societies and governments that heavily impact people’s lives. What was new in 1891 was not so much the teaching itself, as the situation the Church was seeking to address.

The 19th century was a time of major changes in the world. The Industrial Revolution was sweeping through society. The modern state, following the revolutions of the late 18th century, was still developing. Socialism as an ideology and as an economic system was growing. Each and every one of these changes was having a tremendous impact on individuals, on families, on the economy, and on the relations within society.

It was this new situation which Pope Leo sought to address. As he looked at the world around him with eyes enlightened by the Gospel, he saw trends and situations that were threatening some very basic principles, principles that touch the very heart of human life and society in our world. It was the application of the Gospel to this new situation that made his teaching ‘modern’.

At the same time, Pope Leo did not have to start from scratch. He had the entire teaching tradition of the Catholic Church on which to draw. In the face of the rising conflicts between capital on the one hand, and labor on the other, he was able to draw on the Catholic genius to speak of the dignity of work and the worker, the importance of private property for individual well-being, the right to associate with other workers (unions), as well as the right to a just wage. His teaching was an application of basic fundamental truths to the society in which he lived.

Each of the anniversary documents mentioned above sought to continue this important task, as have many other teachings by Popes and Bishops. The Church continues to speak to the world about fundmental human rights, the dignity of the person and the sanctity of life, the importance of being good stewards of talents and property, as well as the government’s task of promoting the common good.

The Catholic Update inserted in this bulletin explains these basic principles. Please read it carefully. These teachings are at the heart of the Gospel. Our task as Catholics is to bring these truths to the world, and to work for a society where human dignity and human rights are respected, especially for the poor and the powerless. Jesus himself did no less!

October 3, 1999 Jubilee Justice

At the very heart of a Jubilee Year is a concern for Justice. The tradition of the Jubilee is rooted in Stewardship, recalling that all of creation is ultimately the property of God, to whom we will owe an accounting for our use of these created goods. As in this Sunday’s Gospel, we tenants of God’s earth will be responsible for our lives at the final harvest.

This week we heard in the news of progress in one element of the Jubilee initiative, the cancellation of at least a portion of the foreign debt owed by 36 poor countries. This debt has been one element in keeping so many people in dire poverty, denying them of the most basic necessities of life.

This concern about poverty flows from the Church’s basic understanding of fundamental human rights. Every person is entitled to those things which make life human, in order that she or he may live out their God-given vocation. Food, shelter, clothing, and religious freedom are just some of those necessities.

But what good are the necessities of life, if one is not alive to enjoy them??? This is why the fundamental right to life is the most basic of these rights. It is simply necessary to be alive in order to pursue the goals of life, and to seek to serve God, in the Church and in the world.

Attacks on human life continue throughout the world. War, ethnic cleansing, terrorist attacks, and massacres by demented individuals always make the news. But there are also the quieter, more subtle attacks. Euthanasia, via physician-assisted suicide, has been long practiced in Holland, and is now legal in Oregon. A professor at a prominent university has proposed that parents be allowed to kill their children in the first months of life, if that child does not measure up to their idea of perfection, if that child dares to be born disabled in some way. We continue to fail as a nation to adequately provide health care for the poor, especially the working poor. Attacks based on the grievous sin of racism abound, as hate groups spread their poisonous message.
The number of state-sanctioned executions grows. And of course, the scourge of abortion on demand continues unabated, as the unborn are slaughtered in the name of a ‘reproductive freedom’ that is in reality only reproductive irresponsibility.

Ironically, many of those involved in these attacks on life will claim to revere life. But they revere only some life. And it is precisely this willingness to make exceptions that puts the unborn, the handicapped, the elderly and the guilty at serious risk for extermination. If the life of that person makes my life inconvenient, or if I see them as some kind of threat, then this particular life is disposable. It is a bizarre and dangerous mindset.

It is long past time to put an end to all these ‘exceptions’. Just as each and every life is created in God’s image and likeness, so is each and every life sacred, no matter the color of their skin, where they live, or even if they have yet managed to be born. Life is sacred. It’s that simple.

July 11, 1999 – Culture and Human Dignity

On June 1st of this year, the Pontifical Council for Culture released a document entitled ‘Towards a Pastoral Approach to Culture’. One part of that document reads as follows:

“The careful examination of the different fields of culture proposed in this document show the breadth of what is meant by culture, this particular way in which persons and peoples cultivate their relationship with nature and their brothers and sisters, with themselves and with God, so as to attain a fully human existence (cf. Gaudium et spes, n. 53). Culture only exists through man, by man and for man. It is the whole of human activity, human intelligence and emotions, the human quest for meaning, human customs and ethics. Culture is so natural to man that human nature can only be revealed through culture. In a pastoral approach to culture, what is at stake is for human beings to be restored in fullness to having been created "in the image and likeness of God" (Gn 1:26), tearing them away from the anthropocentric temptation of considering themselves independent from the Creator. Therefore, and this observation is crucial to a pastoral approach to culture, "it must certainly be admitted that man always exists in a particular culture, but it must also be admitted that man is not exhaustively defined by that same culture. Moreover, the very progress of cultures demonstrates that there is something in man which transcends those cultures. This 'something' is precisely human nature: this nature is itself the measure of culture and the condition of ensuring that man does not become prisoner of any of his cultures, but asserts his personal dignity by living in accordance with the profound truth of his being" (Veritatis splendor, n. 53). “

Note that the document recognizes how essential our various cultures are to our expression as human beings. Culture encompasses the multitude of ways in which people of different races and nations live our their relationships to one another, as well as how they understand themselves. We in Southwest Louisiana know how we have been enriched by the various cultures of our neighbors.

At the same time, culture must sometimes be critiqued and challenged. Not every aspect of culture (e.g., the materialism that surrounds us) is true to the Gospel.

Yet in the midst of the endless expressions of culture, the document makes clear that there exists a human nature that cuts across cultural lines, and is common to all. One difference is this: culture is a creation of mankind, whereas human nature is a creation of God. this nature bears a dignity that nothing can erase.

What happens when the differences apparent in culture blind us to that essential nature we all share, as daughters and sons of one Father? The results vary. Most common are prejudice, bigotry, racism, and discrimination, sometimes degenerating into violence. Kosovo, and the recent killings in the Midwest are clear examples of this.

Racism looks at culture, judges it, and determines that a particular race or nation is somehow inferior. That judgment is blind to the kinship we all share, is blind to the inherent dignity we bear because we are created in the image and likeness of God.

One might even consider racism an expression of culture. If so, it is an aspect of culture that must be soundly condemned as gravely sinful.

July 4, 1999 – Freedom and License

Someone borrows your car to drive to New Orleans. The next thing you know, they’re calling you from Atlanta. Therein lies the difference between freedom and license.

This weekend our nation celebrates Independence Day. In so doing we rightfully rejoice in any number of freedoms that are ours. In the main, these are freedoms because no one is allowed to stop us from doing certain things. Publicly practicing our faith should top the list for us as Catholics, a freedom that we usually take for granted.

At the heart of freedom is the ability to make choices. And at the heart of mature freedom is the acceptance of the consequences of our choices. We make choices every day, some insignificant, some which will impact us for the rest of our lives.

Our Catholic understanding of freedom makes clear that while some choices are acceptable, some are not. This distinction is rooted in the fact that we are created in the image and likeness of God, and that our freedom is a gift from our Creator. Therefore, we are called to make use of that freedom in the ways that please Him.

Several years ago, Pope John Paul II, in a pastoral letter on morality, spoke of ‘authentic freedom’. In his explanation, we practice this ‘authentic freedom’ when we make choices that are in accord with God’s will for us. Any other choice is actually an abuse of our freedom.

This is radically different from the concept of freedom usually found in our society, a concept of freedom we would call ‘license’. To many people, freedom means the ability to do whatever I want, without limits, without consequences, and usually without much thought. In the example with which we began, once our borrower had our car, he felt ‘free’ to do with it whatever he pleased, without regard for any agreements we had made, or limits we had imposed. Then he is surprised when he returns to a pledge never to loan him our car again!

The true, ‘authentic’ exercise of our freedom is something that must come from within, and is at essence an exercise of stewardship. We are responsible to God for the way in which we use all his gifts, including the freedom to choose. Only when we act in accord with who and what he calls us to be do we exercise ‘authentic freedom’.

And here’s the question that we must answer: Do I believe I can be happy, fulfilled, content, etc., by doing what God wants me to do? So often, we pursue happiness and pleasure outside the bounds of God’s will (which is sin), thinking this is the only way. When we see commandments and rules as limitations on my freedom, then breaking them seems to be the only way to ‘happiness’.

In reality, those rules and guidelines are the guideposts on the way to happiness. They point us toward using our freedom well, as God intended!

June 20, 1999 – Kosovo and Cultures

From today’s AP wire: ‘Gruesome accounts of almost routine torture and death emerged in Kosovo today, and a British official estimated that Serb forces killed more than 10,000 people during two months of war and ethnic violence.’

And later in the same article: ‘``Tragically, our estimates of the numbers of innocent men, women and children killed will almost certainly have to be revised upwards,'' Foreign Office Minister Geoff Hoon said in London.‘

‘``It is still hard to credit that our fellow human beings could be guilty of machine-gunning children, systematic rape of young women and girls, digging mass graves and burning bodies to try to conceal the evidence of murder,'' he said.

``But this all happened in Kosovo.'' ‘

As NATO troops move into the area, and Serbian troups depart, the stories are beginning to trickle out. It’s tempting to try to ignore them. No one likes to even think about such atrocities taking place, much less face the hard fact that they actually occurred. And none of us likes to believe, as mentioned by the AP, that human beings are even capable of such horrible actions against men and women and children. But it did.

What can we say about such evil? And evil it is. Some would resort to blaming the devil, Satan. And certainly the tempter takes delight in such hatred, bigotry, violence, racism and abuse. But it is not so easy to absolve those who were involved.

The sad fact is that human beings are capable of such atrocities. This is one reason we must never forget the Holocaust. And why we must not forget the unborn who are killed daily. And why we must always be alert to the temptations of stereotyping individuals and groups of people. For each of those instances, as well as the ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Kosovo have one thing in common.

That one thing is this: denying the humanity and intrinsic worth of another human person. We have done it legally with the unborn in this country by saying they are not ‘persons’ under the law, whatever the biological reality. We do it in war with the names we use for the enemy: They’re not really persons if we can call them krauts, japs, gooks or rag-heads. They’re not like us. They’re less than we are. From there, it’s only a short step to killing them off, by any means possible.

This attitude is so far removed from the Church’s teaching about the dignity of the human person as to be almost unbelievable. We teach that life is sacred. That every person has a value and worth prior to and apart from anything they may or may do or achieve. This is the foundation of the Culture of Life to which our Holy Father calls us.

One things we cannot do is give up. We are a people of hope. We continue to proclaim the sanctity of each and every human life, especially in the face of atrocities like Kosovo.

June 6, 1999 – Kosovo and Stem Cells

As I sit down to write this morning, the news articles are talking about progress being made in a settlement that may bring peace to Kosovo. Pray God that this comes to pass. The violence and the killing must stop.

The situation in Kosovo has been a difficult one from the start. And from the start, our Holy Father has called again and again for continued and determined pursuit of a peaceful resolution to the whole situation. Everyone seems agreed that we could not sit by and do nothing while the ethnic cleansing was going on. We continue to live in the shadow of the Holocaust, and we should not, must not, forget the horror that arises when massive killing is carried out because of the color of one’s skin or the race of one’s parents.

As we have watched the weeks and weeks of bombing that has gone on, many of us have been distressed by the innocent people being killed and maimed by our weapons of destruction. And even for those who survive, one must wonder about their lives after it’s all over, as power plants, factories, and other necessities of life and work are destroyed. We have been distressed by the fact that violence destroys, and unavoidably so. The plight of the refugees has also concerned us, as thousands are driven from their homes, into foreign places which do not always welcome them.

At some point, we must ask the question, Is there not a better way? Does war really lead to peace? Or is not peace a more certain way to peace? Can we not as a world community find better ways to protect the innocent, to intervene on behalf of the oppressed, and to help the poor and hungry? The flip side of these questions is of course, are we too quick to turn to violence as a ‘solution’ to our difficulties?

Another recent story may not seem related to the situation in Kosovo, at least at first glance. The U.S. Bishops’ representative testified recently before the Senate about research guidelines being developed at the National Institutes. He called for an ethical evaluation of the proposal to do more research on “human pluripotent stem cells”. The phrase means nothing to most of us. They are cells found only in human embryos. The research requires the destruction of the embryos. This research on “human pluripotent stem cells” involves nothing less than the killing of newly conceived babies. Once again, the human person is seen as disposable product, used as convenient, and dispensed with when no longer useful.

Both the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and this proposed research see the human person as a thing, an object, who exists for my benefit and convenience. When the person interferes with my well-being, it is disposable.

The Holy Father’s challenge to respect each and every human life - sick or well, innocent or guilty, friend or stranger, rings true once again.

May 2, 1999 – After Columbine-Part 2

The discussion continues regarding the recent tragedy at Columbine High School in Colorado, as well it should. In addition, we’ve seen misguided and warped actions in our own area, with bomb threats and other threats of violence providing a sad postscript to a terrible event. Unfortunately, some of the discussion has deteriorated into political posturing, as individuals use the tragedy to pursue their own agendas. Some has focused on finding someone to blame, so that our own consciences might rest easily. Thankfully, some of the discussion has focused on our nation’s love affair with violence and the lack of respect for life and human dignity that pervades our society.

You may find helpful the following statement from Cardinal Roger Mahoney, Chairman of our Bishops’ Domestic Policy Committee. Entitled, ‘Our Hearts Cry, Not Again’, it reads as follows:

“Our hearts all said the same thing: "Not again!" Not another horrendous school shooting. The terrible events of Littleton, Colorado, have claimed the lives of 1 teacher and 14 of our young people, including the two young men who killed them. On behalf of the U.S. Catholic Bishops, I would like to express to the families of the dead and injured and all of those touched by this tragedy our heartfelt sympathy and promise our continuing prayers. We stand with Archbishop Charles Chaput and the church of Denver in their sorrow at this terrible time.

“We must resist the temptation to look for easy answers to this tragedy. There are no simple solutions. This violence that haunts our nation reflects the breakdown of family and community life, the absence of spiritual roots, the loss of respect for life, the pervasiveness of violent images from the media, and the easy accessibility of guns and other weapons. We live in a society where violence is too often seen as a solution to our most intractable problems. Violence is not the solution: it is the most clear sign of our failures.

“But we can turn away from a culture of violence—a culture of death—and towards life: a culture of life to shape how we treat one another, how we live together, and the messages that we send to our young people.

“We pray that God's mercy and love will help heal the physical, spiritual, and emotional wounds and bring hope to a grieving nation.”

Some have asked the question, ‘How do we make our schools safe?’ While an essential question, if our focus remains on only on the area within schoolyard fences, we will probably fail. We will make our schools safe by making our society safe. We will teach our children to reject violence as a solution only when our broader society ceases to glorify violence in entertainment, when we recognize the contradiction of revenge to protect life, when we abandon the violence of discrimination, abuse, hatred and lack of respect for persons.

We must ask where our children are learning such a callous disregard for the dignity of each and every human life. Promoting a culture of life, in public policy and in individual action is the only way to true safety, for anyone.

April 25, 1999 – After Columbine –Part 1

This week, I had the opportunity to celebrate Mass at St. Thomas More High School. Coming only two days after the horrifying massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, it seemed imperative to speak to that event in light of Church teaching, even though just thinking about such a tragic event is unpleasant at best.

While horrifying in the extreme, we have to ask whether we should be so completely surprised by this mass murder. It was in 1995 that Pope John Paul II challenged the Church and the world to abandon its embrace of a culture of death, evident in the practice of abortion and euthanasia, racism and discrimination, a quick recourse to the weapons of war and the legalized revenge of capital punishment. In calling us to instead build up a culture of life, the Holy Father reiterated the teaching of the Church that each and every human life, without exception, is sacred, and precious in the eyes of God. In contrast to this, the frequent recourse to violence in our society shows that there are all too many exceptions.

One of the core insights of the encyclical, “The Gospel of Life” is that the failure to respect the dignity and sanctity of this or that human life (the unborn, the handicapped, the elderly or the guilty) weakens respect for the dignity of every other human life. Perhaps the best example of this slippery slope into the cesspool of the culture of death can be seen in the case of abortion.

It was in 1973 that we stripped away from the unborn human being the rights to which every human person is entitled, most fundamentally the right to life. Since that time, abortion for convenience has risen to epidemic proportions in our society, numbering in the millions. Even as the child is being born, it is not too late to suck out the baby’s brains in the procedure euphemistically called ‘partial birth abortion’. If this is not infanticide, it is morally indistinguishable from it. And despite all their ‘pro-life’ posturing, our Congress has failed to outlaw this procedure.

Why then are we surprised when a teenage girl goes to her prom, gives birth in the bathroom, and drowns her newborn baby? When personhood becomes a matter of minutes or inches, the lines are easily blurred. And now, we have a professor hired at Princeton University (to teach ethics, no less), who advocates the right of parents to kill a handicapped child up to 28 days after the baby’s birth. It is accepted practice to abort a baby who shown by amniocentesis to be handicapped. If now, why not later? The respect for the sanctity of human life is swallowed up by the violence of the culture of death.

Closer to home, our state embraces the practice of capital punishment. A law allowing physician-assisted suicide has been introduced in the legislature. The sin of racism is alive and well in our midst. All this while the bombs are dropping on Kosovo. Our president, who says regarding Columbine High School that people should use words rather than violence, should heed his own advice.

We are right to be horrified, shocked, and frightened by a massacre in a high school. But we have no right to be surprised.

January 17, 1999 – Life Precious and Threatened

Each year, on Christmas day, the Holy Father offers a message called ‘Urbi et Orbi’, to the City (of Rome) and to the World. In this year’s message, Pope John Paul II echoed the joy of Christmas, as the promises of Advent were fulfilled in the Word becoming Flesh. He spoke of the joy which this feast brings to so many cultures throughout the world, reflected in the celebrations and the music and carols of the season.

As is so typical of his teachings, however, the Holy Father did not stop there. He went on to proclaim a prophetic message, concerning the task of justice and peace, of respecting life and human dignity. He challenged the city and the world in these words:

“How can we fail to notice the strident contrast between the serenity of the Christmas carols and the many problems of the present hour? We know the disturbing developments from the reports coming each day from television and the newspapers, sweeping from one hemisphere to the other of the globe: tragic situations, which often involve human guilt and even malice, soaked in fratricidal hate and senseless violence. May the light coming from Bethlehem save us from the danger of becoming resigned to so tormented and distressing a scenario. May the proclamation of Christmas be a source of encouragement to all those who work to bring relief to the tormented situation in the Middle East by respecting international commitments. May Christmas help to strengthen and renew, throughout the world, the consensus concerning the need for urgent and adequate measures to halt the production and sale of arms, to defend human life, to end the death penalty, to free children and adolescents from all forms of exploitation, to restrain the bloodied hand of those responsible for genocide and crimes of war, to give environmental issues, especially after the recent natural catastrophes, the indispensable attention which they deserve for the protection of creation and of human dignity!“

This week, we in the U.S. will mark the 26th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, legalizing abortion. This is the most terrible example of the culture of death described above by the Pope. In listing the variety of attacks against life and human dignity, the Holy Father reminds us that as long as any life is threatened, then no life is safe.

At the heart of this teaching is our belief that each and every life, without exception, is sacred, precisely because each and every person, without exception, is created in the image and likeness of God. As long as we continue to judge some lives as ‘not worth living’ or ‘deserving to die’, and choose the violent attacks of abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment, spouse and child abuse, and the ravaging of our environment, the culture of life will escape us. We as Catholics have a special responsibility to speak this truth about mankind to the world.

October 4, 1998 – The Right to Life

On this pro-life Sunday, it seems appropriate to return to some of the basic sources of our understanding of the dignity and sanctity of each and every human life. If we turn to the documents of Vatican II, ‘The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World’, we find that the respect for life, and for fundamental human rights is rooted in what is necessary for our life together in society. In section 26, we read:

“Every day human interdependence grows more tightly drawn and spreads by degrees over the whole world. As a result the common good, that is, the sum of those conditions of social life which allow social groups and their individual members relatively thorough and ready access to their own fulfillment, today takes on an increasingly universal complexion and consequently involves rights and duties with respect to the whole human race. Every social group must take account of the needs and legitimate aspirations of other groups, and even of the general welfare of the entire human family.[5]

“At the same time, however, there is a growing awareness of the exalted dignity proper to the human person, since he stands above all things, and his rights and duties are universal and inviolable. Therefore, there must be made available to all men everything necessary for leading a life truly human, such as food, clothing, and shelter; the right to choose a state of life freely and to found a family, the right to education, to employment, to a good reputation, to respect, to appropriate information, to activity in accord with the upright norm of one's own conscience, to protection of privacy and to rightful freedom, even in matters religious.”

What is obvious here is that while the common good is at the heart of our life together, it depends on the respect for basic human rights. The right to life goes far beyond just being alive, and includes those things necessary to live a truly human life.

Lest some might think that this respect for each and every human life is just some nice idea, the Holy Father says the following in his letter, ‘The Gospel of Life’, section 2:

“In a special way, believers in Christ must defend and promote this right, aware as they are of the wonderful truth recalled by the Second Vatican Council: "By his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every human being". This saving event reveals to humanity not only the boundless love of God who "so loved the world that he gave his only Son" (Jn 3:16), but also the incomparable value of every human person.

“The Church, faithfully contemplating the mystery of the Redemption, acknowledges this value with ever new wonder. She feels called to proclaim to the people of all times this "Gospel", the source of invincible hope and true joy for every period of history. The Gospel of God's love for man, the Gospel of the dignity of the person and the Gospel of life are a single and indivisible Gospel.”

The unborn and the elderly. The abused and the neglected. The innocent and the guilty. Each has a right to life.

July 19, 1998 – Organ Donation Part 2

Last weekend, thinking about our recent blood drive, I wrote in this space about organ and tissue donation (of which donating blood is one option). We saw that this is a practice encouraged by the Catholic Church, as an act of charity. This includes donations from living donors (blood, kidney, bone marrow), as well as donating after death.

There is some confusion about organ donation after one dies, and understandably so. It’s not something any of us thinks about often, nor is it a pleasant thing to talk about. Yet when we are faced with the situation, it helps tremendously to have discussed these issues with loved ones. And every one of us will one day reach that point in our journey.

One reason that the Church is able to support organ donation (as does almost every other religion in the world) is that it is a free gift. It is against the law, and immoral, to purchase or sell human organs. While organ transplants are very expensive, this is payment for the actual process of recovery and surgery.

The transplants that make the news are the ones that are literally life-saving: heart, lungs, kidney, liver, etc. Yet most people are not candidates for this kind of donation.

Normally we think of death as occurring when one’s heart stops, and breathing ends. That is the way in which most people die. In this situation, the organs of the body begin to deteriorate, and become unusable due to lack of blood and oxygen. The exceptions to this are bone and tissue, as well as corneas, as we mentioned last week. Bone and tissue transplants are used in a variety of situations, where there has been damage from injury or disease. Donated bone, for example, might be used to reconstruct a badly broken hip, and can be preserved for months.

Who can be donors of other organs (heart, lungs, etc.)? First the cause of death must be from a terminal head injury (trauma, stroke, etc.), or lack of oxygen to the brain, and death must occur while the person is in the hospital, on artificial life support. Because the machines and drugs keep the heart and lungs going, death is diagnosed in a different way: the determination that all brain activity has ceased. The legal definition is ‘total and irreversible cessation of all brain function’. When death is diagnosed in this way, while machines keep heart and lungs working, then the other organs can be kept viable for transplant. Why is this considered death, while the heart is still beating? Just as we cannot live without a beating heart, we cannot live without a functioning brain. It is not two kinds of death, but rather two different methods of determining that a person has died.

This method of determining death is called ‘brain death’, and is not the same as being in a coma. Unfortunately, the term ‘brain death’ is sometimes used to describe coma or other kinds of unconsciousness. This is misleading. Because brain tissue cannot be repaired, no one properly diagnosed as brain dead has, or ever will, wake up. The tragic reality behind the miracle of life-saving transplants is that there is a shortage of donated organs. People die every day, because not enough people choose to donate when they can. Choosing to donate a loved ones organs is difficult, and the decision must be made immediately. Countless people are alive today because someone said yes to that. It’s something to think about.

July 12, 1998 – Organ Donation Part 1

Last weekend, United Blood Services came to us here at St. Joseph. Out about 21 possible donors, 18 people were able to give blood. In this way, they were able to contribute to the health of other persons whose names they will never know. They may even save someone’s life. While it’s not the kind of act that makes the papers, it’s an amazing possibility.

Every day, throughout our country, people are making this kind of generous donation, greatly benefiting strangers they will never meet. Sometimes it is blood that is given. Other times, it is a heart, a liver, or kidneys, or bone or corneas. All of it, including donation of blood, falls under the area of organ donation.

Oftentimes, people wonder if it’s okay to do this, especially when it comes to donations other than blood. The Catholic Church has offered support for this practice, seeing it as an act of charity. In some cases, the gift is much more precious than any charitable gift of money, since lives are literally saved.

Most organ donation takes place after death. The exceptions are blood donors, of course, as well as donors of kidneys (because we have two), and things like bone marrow, which our bodies can replace. While donating a kidney, for example, involves all the normal risks of surgery, it is judged an acceptable risk because of the greater benefit to the kidney recipient. Of course, the decision is always up to the individual.

Things can get a bit more complicated with organ donation which occurs after death. Many of us have become more aware of this possibility because of the question on our driver’s licenses. If someone wants to be a donor of their organs (heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, etc.) or tissue (bone, ligaments, corneas), the most important thing to do is to speak to one’s family. The normal process after death is to seek consent from the next of kin of the deceased person. For example, the Louisiana Organ Procurement Association (LOPA) which handles most organ and tissue recovery in our state, will not recover organs without the family’s consent, no matter what the individual said during their life. Even with a signed consent form from the person, LOPA will not go against the family’s wishes. The reason is to avoid adding to the family’s grief at that moment. The decision to respect the wishes of their loved one is left to the next of kin.

It is also true that not every person who dies is a potential donor, depending on their age, medical history, etc. Probably the most common potential donors are cornea donors. Even people who have had cancer can often donate their corneas, since research shows the disease is not transmitted in this way. A gift of one’s corneas after death costs nothing, and can actually restore sight to another human person.

Next week, I’ll talk more about organ and tissue donation after death. Stay tuned!

July 5, 1998 – Authentic Freedom

It’s been several years now since the Berlin Wall came tumbling down. While turmoil still afflicts many of the countries that formerly made up the Soviet block, including the ongoing violence in Yugoslavia, there has at least been some progress toward more democratic rule. Of course there is much more to be done.

We sometimes forget that our current Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, lived most of his life under that oppressive rule in Poland. Many credit him with contributing to the increase of freedom in that part of the world.

Periodically, in his writings, one runs across reflections upon freedom from this man who knew well what it meant to live under oppression. He has remained an unflagging champion for the dignity of the human person, and for the respect of human rights throughout the world.

This aspect of freedom is sometimes called ‘freedom from’ something. It is absence of laws, force or violence which prevents the individual person from living out their God-given freedom. It is this kind of freedom which we as a nation celebrate this weekend. Our Independence Day marks our beginnings as a separate country rather than a set of colonies, with its own constitution and laws, rooted in the conviction that all are created equal.

While our way of life, our laws, and even the Constitution itself have changed and grown over the years, that freedom still lies at the core of our nation. We have struggled as a nation with extending freedom to every person, finally abolishing the abomination of slavery from our midst. We still continue to struggle against poverty, racism and injustice in its various forms. In all this we prize our freedom

There is another perspective on freedom, however, which our Holy Father makes very clear in his writings. He speaks of an ‘authentic freedom’, which is rooted in our recognition of God as the ultimate source of both freedom and law. Since God made each of us, He knows what is best for us, and has revealed his law, through the Scriptures and Tradition, writing that law upon our hearts.

The key point which Pope John Paul makes is that when we use our freedom to act against that eternal law, we abuse our freedom, perverting it into something else entirely. We are free, but only to do the good, the right, that which is set out by God. Any other action, which we call sin, is a use of freedom that is not authentic, not true, not what God made it to be.

Many in our nation see freedom as the right to simply do as I please, selfishly and self-centeredly, without regard for God, church, community or nation. This is not freedom, but license. Rather than respecting human dignity, it clouds it over, as we become less than God made us to be.

As we celebrate freedom this weekend, let it be authentic freedom, as sons and daughters of God.

June 28, 1998 – Freedom, Rights & Responsibilities

This coming weekend, our nation will celebrate our Independence Day, the 4th of July. It marks the beginning of the United States of America as a nation, separate and apart from other nations, rather than a loose group of colonies, dependent on Mother England. Unfortunately, that independence had to be won through a war, with all the waste and destruction that occurs anytime nations set out to do violence to one another.

When we think about independence today, probably is not so much independence from other countries that comes to mind, but rather independence within our own nation. At it’s very beginning, our nation adopted a Bill of Rights, securing certain liberties, for all. Or at least for some. Over the years, those rights have needed interpreting and adjusting, to outlaw the ownership of human persons through slavery, to secure the right to vote for all adults, and in many other ways. It was not a perfect document, is not today, but overall has served us well.

If we look at the landscape of human rights in our country today, we will see a growth in individual rights, such as the misguided absolute interpretation of the right to privacy with regard to abortion. In other areas, these questions remain confused and conflicted as we struggle in areas such as privacy of personal information, the right to health care, environmental justice for the poor (Shintech, Grand Bois, etc.) and other areas. While religious freedom remains a priority for us as Catholics, exactly what that means is fought over again and again.

One general flaw in the consideration of rights in the public debates in our nation could be corrected by some Catholic insight. The Church is a devoted supporter of basic human rights, in her struggle to promote the dignity of the human person. We see this dignity not rooted in any social contract, or governmental decree, but rather in the very nature of the human person, created in the image and likeness of God.

But the Church almost never speaks of rights without also giving proper attention to the responsibilities that flow from those rights. It is this element of responsibility, to myself, and in society, that is sorely lacking in our public discourse. The U.S. discussion of basic rights has become so narrowly individualistic as to exclude all consideration of what the Church calls the ‘common good’. Too often, the only question that is asked is ‘What is best for me?’, without regard for the rights, needs, and aspirations of others, or of my responsibilities in exercising my rights. A good example is the prevalence of the ‘NIMBY’ attitude: Yes we need this (housing, prisons, jobs), but Not In My Back Yard!

As we celebrate the 4th next weekend, perhaps we can consider not only our precious freedom, but also our responsibilities, to others, and to God.

May 3, 1998 – St. Stephen & Bishop Gerardi

Last week at daily Mass, we read that section of the Acts of the Apostles which describes the stoning of St. Stephen. Stephen was to be the first in a long line of those we know as martyrs in the Church, those who would lose their lives because of their faith in Jesus.

Even as those readings were being proclaimed in Churches throughout the world, the people of Guatemala City, Guatemala, were mourning the death of their Bishop, Juan Jose Gerardi. Sunday evening, as he exited his car at his residence, he was beaten to death. The ring he wore as a mark of his office of Bishop was used to identify him, since his face was so smashed by the concrete block used to kill him.

Until a December of 1996 peace agreement, Guatemala had been torn by 35 years of civil war. Even before that agreement, a study had been started of human rights abuses during that time. The study sought to discover the truth about the violence that had shattered so many, and through that truth, come to some sort of healing of deep and lasting wounds. That report found that the army and its paramilitaries were responsible for nearly 80 percent of the killings during that war. Bishop Gerardi was the person who released the report, two days before he was murdered.

The Bishop was no stranger to the struggle for human rights in his country. During the late 1970’s, he was bishop of Quiche province, where most of the 422 massacres were committed during the war. Entire villages were often wiped out. He was forced to shut down diocesan offices in the 80’s, when military patrols attacked priests and other church workers. After an assassination attempt, he sought exile in Costa Rica, returning in 1984. Bishop Gerardi founded the Guatemala Archdiocese’s Human Rights Office in 1989, and participated in talks that led to the 1996 peace accords.

At his funeral last Wednesday, Bishop Gerardo Flores spoke these words to a crowd of 10,000 mourners: “He struggled for reconciliation, for a true peace not based on lies, for peace based on justice and truth. His struggle for life could not satisfy those who did not mind killing in order to maintain the positions they attained dishonestly, and for that they killed him.”

In the face of this outrage, one cannot help but recall the shooting of Archbishop Oscar Romero while saying Mass in San Salvador, during that country’s civil war. Archbishop Romero, too, was a strong supporter of human rights.

Stephen was the first martyr. Tragically, he was not the last. How we take for granted the right to practice our faith, and to speak out for justice, without soldiers coming in and wiping out everyone in our town.

The struggle for human rights, and for respect for the dignity and sanctity of each and every human life is far from over. Please pray.