Experiencing Signs of the Mystical Body

Jennifer in her Blog "Conversion Diary" tells of an experience she had recently involving an orphan from South America who has come to spend some time with an American family. Maria, a social worker, had accompanied Rita on her trip to the US. Here is a brief quote from their first conversation with their hostess.

"Then Maria started to say something, hesitating to make sure she chose the right words. "I hate to trouble you," she said apologetically, "but it's very important that Rita and I go to Mass on Sunday."

When I told her that we are Catholic too, everything changed.

In one moment we went from having nothing in common to having everything in common."


Following Mass the first Sunday of Rita's visit Jennifer had these thoughts on what they had in common.

"I've read stacks and stacks of books with high-minded treatises on Catholicism and the Church as the mystical Body of Christ, but it wasn't until that moment that I really got just what a gift Jesus gave us when he established a Church. I got it because, seeing Rita at Mass that day, I saw what a gift it was for her. "

Read Jennifer's Entire Posting on her blog.

Living, as I do, in a location where the population may well double during the summer vacation season her insight gives me cause to appreciate all those strangers at Mass each Sunday in the same light. Thank you, Jennifer, for your clear vision.

A Life Well Spent

Here is a portion of Deacon Greg Kandra's sermon for the Seventeenth Sunday of Ordinary Time.

"In 1994, when Amy was three months pregnant with her first child, her doctor told her that the baby had anencephaly, a neural defect. As a result, part of the baby’s brain, and skull, would never be formed. It happens in about one out of every 200-thousand pregnancies. There was nothing medical science could do.

Amy was told the baby would die soon after birth.

She had the option of terminating the pregnancy, having an abortion. But Amy McNamara chose not to. She carried the child for another six months and then, finally, gave birth.

The baby died just four hours later, cradled in his mother’s arms.

A few days later, friends and relatives received the following notice in the mail.


Patrick and Amy McNamara
proudly announce the birth of their son
Adam Christopher McNamara
June 15, 1994
5 lbs. 9oz., 19 in.


Amy and Patrick enclosed a note:

"Adam was our son for nine months and four hours on this earth,” they wrote. “Four hours was enough time to baptize and confirm Adam, to appreciate his perfectly formed body, to shower parental affection on him, and four hours was enough time for Adam to touch our hearts in a way that we would have never dreamed of only a few months before.”

The note concluded:

'Our son brought an immeasurable amount of joy into our lives. When we miss Adam and sadness begins to descend, we recall this joy and pray that the strength of this memory will sustain us.' "

Read Deacon Greg's entire sermon including a poem Amy wrote about Patrick's role as Adam's father. Amy, Patrick and Adam's life experience provide a shining contrast to the culture of death.

Abortion Funding Under Cover of Healthcare

There is much discussion in our media of health care reform. It is every where. It on TV,newspapers, the Internet and in our day to day conversations. Just this past weekend at a family gathering health care discussions were heard from time to time, some heated.

This evening I listened in on part of a huge Internet Pro Life meeting that featured speakers from a great diversity of organizations. Religious, non religious, men, women, liberals, conservatives were all heard expressing their concern that the human rights of the unborn will be further violated if abortion is mandated in the health care reform being considered in congress.

Recently in a meeting with Catholic Media Mr Obama said that he had more or less put the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) on the back burner. However, if abortion were to become a mandated benefit under national health care reform a major portion of FOCA would be accomplished.

Despite the opposition of a majority of Americans to abortion and even larger opposition to forced funding of abortions by those who oppose such human rights violations (see my earlier postings about polls concerning abortion) many in Congress appear willing to do just that. We would be forced to do this through taxes for government plans (existing and proposed) and through premiums for open market insurance plans.

We need to urge our Representatives and Senators to keep abortion out of health care.

An action plan to help keep FOCA out of health care can be found here. Its first suggestion can and should be implemented by all, PRAY. Then get to your representative and Senators about your concern using your preferred means (mail, phone, Email).

Homeward tug for Catholics

The Diocese of Trenton New Jersey has a video web site known as DOTTUBE that has many ineresting videos. This diocese is of fond memory since my wife and I served as Assistant diectors of the Family Life Bureau here for a couple of years in the 70s. Here is one produced by Catholics Come Home.



Goto the DOTTUBE web site or the Catholics Come Home Web site.

Pope and President Meeting Reviewed

Carl Anderson, the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus, reviewed Friday's meeting between President Barack Obama and Pope Benedict XVI. Here is part of his introduction.

'The speculation over what the pope and president would discuss, and whether or not abortion would be center stage has been answered affirmatively. As the Vatican's statement makes clear "the conversation turned first of all" to issues "such as the defense and promotion of life, and the right to abide by one's conscience."

We also know that President Obama told the pope of his desire to "reduce the number of abortions," and of his "respect for the positions of the Church." '

Read the entire review on the Blog of the Diocese of Kansas City/St Joseph.

Review of Pope Benedict's New Encyclical

Carl Anderson, Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus, has provided an introduction to Pope Benedict's new Encyclical, "Caritas in Veritate" (Love in Truth). Here is a short quote from his article entitled "It's a Moral Document, Not a Political One".

"Long before there was a "left wing," or a "right wing," there was the Gospel, and long after these political labels have faded into oblivion, the Gospel will remain. In light of this, it is incredibly important that we come to Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical, "Caritas in Veritate," as a document that should inform our outlook.

We might sum up the Pope's thinking on the economy this way: Each of us must answer Christ’s question, "Who do you say that I am?" If we, with Peter, answer "The Messiah," then that should direct the axis of our life. Our most important reality must be the truth of our relationships. In this way, we can understand how the law and prophets could be summed up in Christ's two commandments: That we love God totally, and love our neighbors as ourselves. Thus we are able to speak of "caritas in veritate."
Once we accept Christ and these two commandments, we can no longer ask Cain's question: "Am I my brother’s keeper?" Instead, we must realize that our exercise of freedom cannot take the form of simply amassing the most wealth that we can. Rather, all that we do in freedom must reflect that reality and all our actions must take into account the effects of those actions on others. We need look no further than the first two words of the "Our Father," which Pope Benedict XVI quotes at the end of this document to see the common human family to which we belong."

Read Carl Anderson's entire article.

Read "Caritas In Veritate" in english.

When Does Human Life Begin?

I often hear Catholic Politicians claim that they cannot be politically pro-life because it would be an imposition of their religious belief on others to do so. This view is not limited to Catholics or Democrats. I have heard it also in day to day conversations about abortion with pro-choice persons of every political persuasion. When I ask my friend to describe the belief that I am forcing him or her to accept I usually am told it is the belief that human life begins at conception.

Faith or belief is the acceptance of something that cannot be established by science. The fact that human life begins at conception is not a matter of faith but of established scientific fact. This kind of kicks the stool from under those Catholic politicians using this excuse. Here is a review of one man's reaction to this reality.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson was one of the founders of the National Association for the Repeal of the Abortion Laws (NARAL) in the U.S. in 1968. In 1973 he took a job involving Fetal Science. This eventually led to his becoming pro-life. Here is a quote from his explanation of his change on this issue.

"I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a prenatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the foetus in the womb.

A favourite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Foetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of foetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic at $300 a time, 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence.

One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma, but to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

AS A SCIENTIST I KNOW, NOT BELIEVE, KNOW THAT HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION "

Read Dr. Nathanson's entire statement.

Left-Right confusion promoted

In a posting on Pajama Media David Steinberg, in critiquing Judge Sotomayor, makes the claim that "leftists" are actually not charitable or empathetic. He starts the confusion by mixing nouns from different categories.

In the quote below you will note that his bullet points are "Conservatives", "Independents" and "leftist". Each item from a different set or category. "Conservative" is an ideology (in the USA). "Independent" is a political party (in the USA). "leftist" is a relative adjective that only has meaning in relationship to some fixed political position or public person's political view. See my earlier rant about the use of "leftist".

"Conservatives give more — much more — to charity, both in terms of total dollar amount and in terms of percentage of income. Conservatives also give much more of their time to volunteerism.

Independents give less and leftists give the least. This is true for both religious and non-religious causes.

But leftists believe in government redistribution as the best form of charity — that’s what leftist empathy is, correct?"

Despite the sloppiness of turning an adjective into a noun, "leftist" does not loose its relative meaning. Just what is meant by "leftist" can only be known relative to a reference point that is identified or defined. Giving Mr Steinberg the benefit of the doubt, lets take his first bullet as the reference point.

If a conservative who is charitable with his time and money is the reference then a "leftist" is anyone who is not charitable with his time and money. If this assumption is good then uncharitable people are to the "left" of this charitable conservative. I have my doubts since "left", "right" , "rightist" and "leftist" are usually used in a political context, particularly in modern "bloggism". (Oops, got sloppy myself.) The problem may not be Mr Steinberg's but the reference he has been quoting. If so, then we can only fault him for using someone else's fuzziness without challenge.

The challenge I would bring to the conclusions of his posting is based on my experience of being classified as "Liberal" (note, from same category as "conservative')precisely due my dedication of time and money on behalf of others. Most often the labelling was being done by self identified conservatives. Occasionally politically uncommitted folks offered the same labelling.

In fact I personally know some self identified liberals who, as far as I can tell, are not charitable. Likewise I know many conservatives who are charitable and some who are not. In any case, short of actual knowledge of individuals, the charitable (religious or non religious) are almost universally classified as "liberal" by strangers.

Just to put things into right-left perspective, lets remember that since the early 1990s the Democratic Party has been in the control of conservatives who are politically to the right of us charitable people who are labelled as liberal and, yes, politically to the left of Mr. Steinberg's charitable conservative.

Abortion Survivor - Witness to Life

As a young married man I decided that I needed to compete my college education. When I qualified for my employer's tuition aid program we lived in Sioux City, Iowa. The city had a Catholic College, Briar Cliff, which, at that time, did not accept male students so I signed up at Morningside College, a Methodist school, a few block from our home. Both colleges are still alive and educating but Briar Cliff has long since become coeducational.

Thus my interest was peaked when I saw a link to an article on the Briar Cliff web Site on the Cardinal Newman Society's blog. The story is about a speaker who is truely an abortion survivor. Here is a portion of the her story.

"In 2008, Melissa Ohden gave birth to her daughter Olivia at St. Luke’s hospital in Sioux City – the same hospital in which she was supposed to have died 31 years before.

“The child who was not meant to live had a child who is so full of life,” said Ohden, who spoke in front of more than 60 people Monday night in the Stark Student Center.

In August 1977, Ohden survived a saline-infusion abortion attempt, a process intended to scald the infant to death with a caustic saline solution so that it would be delivered dead days later.

Ohden’s mother was an unmarried, 19-year-old college student, and her father was 21. She said to this day, she doesn’t know any of the motives that drove her biological parents to abort.

“If God ever intends for me to know what drove them to go to the hospital, I’ll find out in good time,” she said.

At first, the nurse who delivered her thought she was dead. But after it was revealed she was still alive, the 2-pound, 14-ounce Ohden received life support and treatment for severe respiratory distress and jaundice. As an infant, Ohden said doctors believed she would suffer from any one of a number of physical or emotional disabilities. She didn’t.

“I am truly one of the lucky ones; I stand before you blessed to be alive and blessed to not be handicapped,” Ohden said.

Her parents chose to put her up for adoption, without ever telling anyone else."

Her story also triggers my own memories in another way. Our youngest daughter was born in the Sioux City about a decade before Melissa's birth.

Read the entire story of Melissa's talk at Briar Cliff.