Pro-Life | Blogger Priest

Mr. Sean Hannity vs. Fr. Thomas Euteneuer

Posted on January 17, 2011 by Father Joe

I wrote this commentary back in April of 2007. Given that we are coming up to the March for Life in a week’s time, I thought I would repost it.

Mr. Sean Hannity: “I have no problem with birth control. It’s a good thing.”

It was this statement and attitude that was to result in a sad spectacle of dissent on Church teaching and disrespect to a Catholic priest. It should be noted that Mr. Hannity claims to be pro-life, although he makes exceptions for abortions in cases or rape, incest, or for the life of the mother. A rule is only as strong as its exceptions, and thus this really reflects a moderated pro-abortion stance. A child conceived through rape is still innocent and cannot be understood as an unjust aggressor. A child of incest or sexual abuse is still a human being entitled to the right to life. A child’s life and that of the mother cannot be measured on a scale as to which one is more deserving to survive. All human life is incommensurate.

Mr. Sean Hannity invited Fr. Thomas Euteneuer of Human Life International to the television show, supposedly to discuss the matter of dissent on contraception by high profile Catholics, particularly in the media. It turned out to be a setup forum for Hannity to enact revenge against the priest for questioning his Catholicism and judging his dissent.

Regarding the recent public clash between Mr. Sean Hannity of FOX News and Fr. Thomas Euteneuer, I must come down on the side of the good priest. Compounding the matter, the “sometimes” FOX News analyst Fr. Jonathan Morris scolded Fr. Euteneuer and inadvertently aided dissenters on birth control. He said that Fr. Euteneuer “exercised, on this occasion, shockingly poor judgment,” and was mistakenly “brandishing law without palpable love.” However, the truth be said, Fr. Euteneuer hardly got a word in edgewise. I do not think undermining Church teaching was Fr. Morris’ intent, but it has been the result. As one purported Regnum Christi member said, “If a Legionary of Christ supports Hannity, then he must be in the right!” Personally, I think a general clarification from the Legionaries is required and Fr. Morris should be directed to terminate his formal association with FOX News. He was ordained to be a priest for Christ and the Catholic Church, not for Murdock’s neoconservative news propaganda machine. He has compromised himself.

Fr. Euteneuer reveals that he sought a private meeting about the subject with Hannity back in 2004. Nothing came of it.

Even a number of people who disagree about artificial contraception admitted to me that the priest was treated pretty shabbily after being invited upon the television show. There was no real discussion of the matter at hand. The priest was kept on the defensive and given no opportunity for a proper response. Mr. Hannity contended that the priest had no right to judge him and that he should worry about the outrageous cover-up of pedophile priests before coming after him. Of course, Mr. Hannity makes such judgments on his television and radio shows regularly. This was not the real problem, just that he disliked being under the gun, himself. Further, a priest is not any Christian. He is appointed by Christ as a minister of reconciliation. This role requires that he be a judge of souls and that he speak clearly about what is right and wrong.

Mr. Hannity argued falsely that Fr. Euteneuer had not spoken out forcibly about sexual abuse and the scandal of bishops who did not take it seriously. What Mr. Hannity did was to take the attention off him and to move it elsewhere, insinuating that Fr. Euteneuer was being hypocritical. Mr. Hannity also quickly appealed to the fact that not everyone is Catholic, as if that is an excuse for a Catholic in the public forum to renounce an important element of our moral teaching. Such an appeal to relativism is tragic from a figure who purports to be a political conservative. He had apologized for eating meat on a Friday of Lent. Fr. Euteneuer rightly observed that there is a big difference between the inadvertent violation of a Church discipline and the repudiation of a doctrinal or moral teaching, as here touching upon the Theology of the Body and the openness to human life that must be present in every instance of the marital act.

Mr. Hannity asked again and again, more in a rhetorical fashion than in actuality, “Do you know me?” He said he had been in seminary and had studied Latin. When I heard this I began to scratch my head, so what? The news anchor was becoming incoherent in his tirade against the priest. Were we suppose to give him a gold star for being an altar boy? Fr. Charles Curran, the great dissenter on contraception, abortion, homosexuality, etc. also went to seminary and studied Latin…such things did not make him right or insure that he had the mind of the Church about all matters.

NOTE: When challenged by Fr. Euteneuer, Hannity made a big deal out of being a former altar boy and “seminarian” who studied Latin. Actually, his “seminary” training consisted of attending a boys’ Catholic High School called St. Pius the X Preparatory Seminary in Uniondale, NY. Most of its graduates, like Hannity, were not headed for the priesthood. He was a college drop-out and his “theology” courses were nothing more than high-school and grammar school catechism.

Let us cut to the quick, Mr. Hannity is a neo-conservative in the political arena who leans toward liberalism in the area of Catholicism. It is fine and good that he has urged his children to be chaste and celibate until marriage. He might be anti-abortion, and about this we should all be pleased, but he is not consistent given his stance in favor of certain exceptions and artificial contraception. He even went so far as to mock the priest with what he saw as an inconsistency on Catholicism’s part, a so-called Church-approved birth control, i.e. contraception, Natural Family Planning. But, of course, NFP is not true contraception, it is simply periodic abstinence based upon a knowledge of the body and how it works. It is a way to regulate or space births. Further, unlike the pill or condom, NFP can be used to help couples get pregnant, since they know the times of maximum fertility. If one were to use NFP in a selfish way then it could also be turned into a sinful practice. One may space births but not turn against the meaning of the marital act.

The priest was able to squeeze in the truth, under the mantra of Hannity’s unending assault, that a majority of those who have abortions do so because of contraceptive failure. Artificial contraception is indeed the handmaid to abortion. This is what the priest knows and what Mr. Hannity refuses to admit. It creates a contraceptive mentality which fuels the holocaust of abortion. Nothing was said about the fact that certain forms of contraception are also abortifacient. But, as I said, the interview was not a civil exchange of ideas, but an opportunity to malign a priest who wanted to help Mr. Hannity to be consistent and to insure that Catholics know that contraception is a grievous matter not to be flippantly handled.

In writing to Fr. Jonathan Morris, who chastised a fellow priest and gave solace to Hannity, Fr. Euteneuer writes:

The question that comes to mind is an obvious one: if you are a Fox analyst on Catholic matters, wouldn’t you have been the one to have had those “private conversations” on birth control with Mr. Hannity? How about discussions on his abortion exceptions? When you told Sean “in person” that you “disagreed with him,” was it on the issue of birth control? If you had done that, I applaud you, but your powers of persuasion may need a little honing—Sean has only gotten more vocal on this issue over time. If you did not speak to him about his public dissent, then I ask you, “Why?” While we are on the subject, have you also analyzed and disagreed with Bill O’Reilly’s perfectly horrible disdain for the Holy Father and the Church that you represent?

The church sex abuse scandal was not just about homosexual and predatory priests. It was about clerical negligence and silence on issues that not only affect people’s souls but also ruin people’s lives. It is highly unusual that you or anyone else would want a priest to be silent on issues that affect the salvation of souls. We used to recognize “admonishing the sinner” as one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy, and I consider my admonishment of Mr. Hannity to have been done in that spirit. I might also add that in doing so I have fulfilled my duty as a priest which is a requirement for my salvation.

Further evidence that Mr. Hannity suffers from a poor faith formation as a Catholic is the following notation at the HLI site:

Mr. Hannity is not backing down, saying on Monday’s radio program that if he were excommunicated he would call the Rev. Jerry Falwell and ask to join his Thomas Road Baptist Church in Lynchburg, Va.

No one, of course, is talking about excommunication; that is just his continuing hysterics about this matter. But note that he would join a Baptist Church, no doubt because of their “political” conservatism, but one that is silent on a weighty moral matter like artificial contraception. Doctrinal differences between them and Catholics are enormous. He would reject the Pope, much of the deposit of faith, and the sacramental life, particularly the Eucharist, to maintain his dissent. He would embrace a Protestant sect and forever turn his back on the sacrifice of the Mass and the real presence of Jesus’ body and blood in the Blessed Sacrament in exchange for grape juice and loaf bread. Even a knowledgeable Catholic excommunicant, if his faith be real, would want to come home to the sacraments and to the true Church established by Jesus Christ.

ADDENDUM

Fr. Jonathan Morris

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258291,00.html

As I watched a fellow Catholic priest spar with you on the March 9 edition of Hannity and Colmes, I hung my head in shame and sadness. My colleague in religion (whom I’ve never met) used the public airways and Internet to call you a heretic and hypocrite. Because he chose to do this in a public forum, I want you and your viewers to know, publicly, that as an analyst of this television network, I believe this good priest, who does great work, exercised, on this occasion, shockingly poor judgment. I consider his willingness to give his personal opinion about your status within the Church inappropriate and ill-considered, to say the least.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258501,00.html

While Fr. Thomas Euteneuer and I may disagree on how best to attain this lofty goal in certain venues, like on a secular television network, we are of one heart and mind on substance.

Filed under: Anti-Catholicism, Catholic, Celebrities, Church, Contraception, Discipleship, Faith, God, Marriage, Morality, News, Politics, Priests, Pro-Life, Prophets, Sexuality, Sin | 6 Comments »

Reflection Upon the Holy Family

Posted on January 6, 2011 by Father Joe

Although I offered a reflection upon the Holy Family at the beginning of my book on prayer, I would like to return to this subject in this post. Reflecting upon the Holy Family, we are not only guided as to what a Christian family should be, but stand convicted in our lives over what it is not. While the modern concept of liberty is often moral license, theirs was responsibility and fidelity. We cater to individualism and a preoccupation with self that runs counter to the claims of familial bonds. The immediate family in the time of Christ was expanded to include aunts, uncles, cousins and others. (Indeed, the brethren of Christ were precisely these other relations.) Catholics realize, or at least should, that our relationship to God and to one another is in the context of family. We are not alone.

While these brief words can only offer a quick brush-stroke on the subject of “family,” a few thoughts might be beneficial. Something is wrong. No amount of beating around the bush or a pretense at greater enlightenment can take away this nagging perception in all segments of society. Determining what is wrong, and for that matter right, is where public debate becomes quickly frozen and polarized.

Politicians clamor about “family values” and then argue about what this means in a pluralistic society. Advocates of alternative lifestyles seek through the media and legislatures to socially engineer the family into something past generations would think unimaginable. It is in the midst of this confusion that we come to terms with that most central of human relationships. If it were not hard enough, even our traditional family units are plagued by communication that is absent or dysfunctional.

God sends his Son that repentant children might be added to his family and given eternal life. And yet, in our sinfulness, we can and often do offer a counter-witness to this truth. I know a couple whose girl ran away at seventeen. She eventually realized her foolishness and sought to return home. However, she discovered the locks changed. Her father had told her that if she went out the door she would not be welcome back. He gave away her clothes and personal things to charity. He would not allow his wife to display her picture. It was as if she had never been born. This couple, with their older daughter, were active in the parish and regularly at Sunday Mass. When their youngest returned to Mass, they refused to sit beside her. They even maligned her to neighbors. I overheard one of her father’s parish friends tell her, “You did it to yourself. You made your own mess, now you have to live with it! This is what tough love means!” Well, yes and no. Tough love means discouraging selfishness and nurturing self-reliance. This was not that at all; it was cruelty. The girl, as it turned out, was not only a foolish teenager, she suffered from bipolar disorder. When I first met her, she was just out of a mental institution and living with her boyfriend and his grandmother. It was either this or the streets. She had nowhere else to go. She had no job because employers did not want a “crazy” girl working for them. When informed of an upcoming family reunion, she decided to attend. Her mother dismissed her at the back door: “You will just embarrass us. I planned long and hard for this party and I will not have you ruin it. Go away.” When her boyfriend smacked her around, she again tried to go home. But they were gone to Europe. The wife confided that with the younger daughter gone, they had regained their freedom, and could finally live for themselves.

As a pastor of souls I have heard many variations of this story. The happy ending of the prodigal son parable is not always revisited in the lives of those who claim to be Christian, and yet, it is precisely the witness that our Lord gave us from the Cross. We read in Colossians, “Because you are God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with heartfelt mercy, with kindness, humility, meekness, and patience . . . Forgive as the Lord has forgiven you” (Colossians 3:12-13). This is the challenge and the transformation for those who would truly be Christian. Neglectful parents today might have astonished the worst sinners and unbelievers of yesterday. Our Lord says, “What father among you, if his son asks for a fish, will instead of a fish give him a serpent; or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:11-13; see also Matthew 7:9-11). A rhetorical question is now a frighteningly real one.

Among those who call upon the saving name of Jesus are those who engage in unlawful sexual activity and infidelity, destroy children in the womb, and discard those labeled defective. Instead of a forgiving love, they harden their hearts against those who share their blood and their name. This is the way it is, not the way it should be, and definitely not the way true believers should want it to remain.

Sirach 3:2-6,12-14 points, not to the parents’ obligations, but to those of children, particularly regarding the 4th commandment stipulation of honoring (obeying) one’s father and mother. But increasingly preachers are forced to confront parents. How can a child honor parents if they are dishonorable? When Jesus demanded, “Call no man your father,” (Matthew 23:9), he precisely meant that true fathers, indeed parents of either gender, are only worthy of the title when their role is reflective of the loving and merciful fatherhood of God. Parents have responsibilities toward those whom they give life. Many churches have to offer remedial instructions for uncatechized but baptized Catholics. Their parents failed to take them to Sunday Mass, to teach them their prayers, and to transmit to them our holy faith. This implies that parents themselves do not believe; nevertheless, they are still culpable for the damage to their children’s immortal souls. Such neglect is a form of child abuse and ranks with murder in the hierarchy of sins.

In return, just as we read in Sirach, children have a lasting obligation toward their parents. When parents grow older and need the support of grown children, it is not merely a matter of charity but of duty. However, such a turn-of-events is increasingly considered an unwarranted burden. I know of cases where the children fight each other, no one wanting to take the personal and immediate responsibility for an elderly parent. The children, in some cases, have learned from the example of their parents all too well. I also know good parents who did little or nothing wrong in raising their children; and yet their brood contains both the holy and the wicked.

Familial roles are not limited to a few years but have lasting consequences and obligations. Mary followed her Son and quietly emerges at various stages of the Gospel and in the public life of Jesus. She was his mother at the Annunciation, at the Nativity, indeed, all the way to the Cross. Love brings with it responsibility and often much worry. Jesus was disowned by many of those who knew him; Mary’s testimony of love and loyalty is one that needs to be ours. She always claimed him. Jesus claims her and gives her to us, his new family, on Calvary. As for good St. Joseph, tradition has it that he died in the loving arms of Jesus and Mary. Perhaps this was God’s greatest gift to this noble man? After all, as our Gospel relates, when an angel told him that Herod was seeking Jesus “to destroy him,” Joseph sought refuge for them in Egypt until it was safe to return. The aged guardian of Mary and Jesus might have found it impossible to remain passive when his adult Son underwent his betrayal and passion. When his earthly role was finished, the foster father to Christ was taken from this world to await his Son and Savior in the abode of the righteous dead.

We need to put on the mind of Christ regarding family life. Can we conceive of God being well pleased with parents who killed their children through abortion? Along with contraception that breeds distrust between spouses, the abortion holocaust has attacked the very nucleus of family life. Pregnancy, once called the “blessed state” is now considered a disease to be medicated away. There is no reconciling such a mentality with that in Psalm 128:1-5 where the psalmist praises the wife as “a fruitful vine.” The child, instead of being prized as a precious gift from God, is considered a tragic accident, a problem to be disposed of as quickly as possible. Freedom, or rather license, as well as economic and upward mobility, is all hindered by the presence of a child. We are forced to think of another’s needs and wants before our own. Some just do not want to do this. Sex is recreation, nothing more. Such a mentality is inherently opposed to the Gospel. When such is the point of view of believers in Jesus, one has to wonder if even their concept of God is counterfeit?

Can we suppose that God cares little about marriage vows made in his name “to death do us part?” No, and yet divorce is at an epidemic high. Alternative living arrangements, including polygamy and homosexual liaisons would dismiss it entirely. Some critics argue that the dilemma is not the loss of the traditional family but rather because we are trying to force old codes of behavior (like the commandments) and expectations upon new forms of familial relationships. This post-Christian group insists that transitory unions are ideal and most reflective of modern experience. Some actually say that people live too long for lasting relationships. Prenuptial agreements posit a theoretical doubt in the permanence of a marriage bond, already. Certain states are considering marriages with easy escape clauses and some have even suggested built-in term limits. Logically, if spouses can separate at will, it would seem that offspring might have similar rights? Several years ago a child attempted to divorce his parents.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Charity, Church, Discipleship, Faith, Family, Fatherhood, God, Incarnation, Jesus, Marriage, Mary, Pro-Life, Prophets, Providence, Reflection, Sexuality | Leave a comment »

The Message of Life

Posted on January 5, 2011 by Father Joe

Although the prophet Micah spoke about the future coming of the Messiah as a prince of peace, the remnant from Israel and Judah would come to largely anticipate a warrior savior (see Micah 5:1-4). They had been conquered and downtrodden. They had paid a heavy price for their infidelity but God had not utterly turned his face from them. Interestingly, they saw themselves punished for compromising their faith and trust in God while throughout the centuries they were mocked by the conquering peoples for their fidelity to the ancient faith and the God of Abraham.

“He himself will be peace” (Micah 5:4). It is true, but the peace of God in Jesus Christ is a gift with which we still struggle and misunderstand. Certainly, one dynamic of it is peace between peoples. But, this is not simply a lack of belligerence. The peace of the Good News is radical and all-embracive. We turn on our televisions and open our newspapers and there are almost daily reports of dead soldiers overseas. Everyone is on guard against terrorists and now it looks like North Korea has a nuke that can reach the West Coast. The new millennium is starting to look an awful lot like the old one. The problem remains the same; there can be no true and lasting peace until there is a change in our minds and hearts. Early Christians prided themselves on not resisting aggression. They turned the other cheek and they announced forgiveness to their murderers in imitation of Christ. They also suffered and died in droves. After about three centuries of facing the sword, fiery stake, cross, and wild beasts, believers took up armaments in the service of a would-be emperor, Constantine. Their bets proved fortuitous and Christianity would emerge as the privileged religion of the empire. However, as history shows us, such a victory would not guarantee perpetual peace and harmony.

What do we mean by “peace?” Despite the collapse of European Stalinism, the Asian communists understand it in two ways. First, it is a ploy used with enemies to insure time and resources in building up an arsenal to wage war. Second, it is the integration of each person as an instrument of the state and such an amalgamation is not complete until the whole world is part of the Marxist mechanism. While there is diversity in Islam, the business about the very word for their religion meaning “peace” is somewhat inexact. Before entering Afghanistan and Iraq, Western leaders almost fell over each other in explaining that our actions were against a few terrorists and dictators, not against Islam. There was no new crusade. Such clarifications were appropriate, even if they did over stress a point. Interviews with Islamic moderates in the U.S. do not reflect the positions of many fundamentalists worldwide. Islam is not all the same. Would we ask an average member of a Baptist congregation about Roman Catholicism? No. A cursory reading of the Koran makes it evident that peace is understood as the submission of all to Islam, if need be with force. Unless it is rejected or mitigated, such a mindset will never acknowledge religious freedom and always stand in opposition to the West. After all, how can one have true peace with the “Great Satan,” a widespread label for the United States? As for ourselves, how do we understand peace? Lack of aggression is certainly part of it, as in our desire for security; and justice is a theme we hear much about as well, but how far do we go to achieve the peace we crave? Pearl Harbor and 9-11 have fueled our mistrust of much of the world. Apart from the politics of late, there is the danger of creating a mentality that perverts a command of Christ, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (see Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12). It becomes, rather, “Do unto others before they can do unto you.” This is not purely a global strategy, but how many people live their lives.

The Jewish understanding of SHALOM or peace is a salutation and benediction of friendship and cooperation. It is an invocation of divine blessing, for health, prosperity, and good standing with God. At Mass, Catholics extend the sign of peace to one another. We are one in the Lord. We are all brothers and sisters who should love and care about one another. Peace is the realization of divine love in our lives. At least these understandings are what should be present; however, enmity, a lust for revenge, and various forms of racism can get in the way. Here is the tragedy. Peace is not simply an enemy staying on his side of the fence. It is about the removal of walls and fences. It is about mutual good will and cooperation.

The peace among nations must also reflect a peace among fellow citizens, in the Church, in our neighborhoods, in our families, and in us as individuals. Should it surprise us that when the world is at war that our small part of it should also suffer unrest? Are there people with whom we refuse to associate? Are there family members who have not spoken for years? Did we get mad at someone and deliberately hurt them? Did someone do this to us? Do we pray for our enemies and try to forgive? Do we look for forgiveness from God so as to live in peace with him?

The martyrs of the Church knew the peace of God even when there was nothing left for them to do in defense of their lives. They knew that no matter what the world should strip away from them, they had an imperishable treasure in heaven. They knew that God loved them and that they were friends of Jesus. May we learn this lesson too and know the peace that the world cannot give.

Hebrews 10:5-10 stresses that had there been no Christmas there would have been no Good Friday and Easter. God, himself, took on our humanity that we might share in his divinity (see the prayer for mixing water into the wine at Mass). Jesus enters the human family so that he could offer up his life as an oblation for all the sins of the world. Jesus is the faithful servant who makes his flesh the sign of the new covenant with God. The New Law builds upon and replaces the Old.

It begins very simply. There is a message from an angel. Then there is the visitation. Mary greets Elizabeth and the unborn John the Baptist leaps in the womb (see Luke 1:39-45). Elizabeth is filled with the Holy Spirit and echoes the Hail Mary prayer, “blessed is the fruit of your womb.” Next she says, “Why should I be honored with a visit from the mother of my Lord?” Elizabeth’s words are very telling and they are affirmed as from the Spirit of God. John’s actions here parallel his activity thirty some years later in the Jordan River when he baptizes Christ. The unborn prophet cannot speak but he moves his mother to speak for him. She affirms that the unborn Christ is already her Lord. Jesus is Lord from the womb. Since he is the Prince of Peace, this gives credence to the late Mother Teresa’s contention that there can be no peace in the world while we are at war with the child in the womb. Every child is a reflection of the Christ-child.

There is a temptation for homilists or preachers during Advent and Christmas to sidestep the pro-life message. Such Scripture readings as this make it hard to do so. Advent speaks against abortion as Christmas is a condemnation of infanticide and partial-birth abortion. Why are priests and deacons silent? Let me relate a personal experience from a few years ago. I mentioned the seasonal pro-life themes at a Christmas Mass. A couple of people stood up during the homily and remained standing throughout the liturgy. Several days later the bishop called in response to a letter. A woman wrote, “My daughter only comes to Mass a couple times a year and this priest ruined it for us! He had no business talking about abortion or saying how anyone guilty of it should go to Confession before receiving communion. My daughter cried all night. She swears that she will never go to Mass again and I will find another church! By the way, this will cost you all our very generous donations!” I think the money element is why I got in trouble. But my conscience was bothered because the purpose of every homily is to promote continued conversion and not the alienation of God’s people. I think I was right, and there was no particular condemnation of anyone, just a proclamation of the Gospel of Life; but, while my head understood, my heart has never stopped grieving for the strayed lost lamb. No names were given and I could not follow up the message, except in prayer.

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Advent, Bible, Catholic, Christmas, Discipleship, God, Incarnation, Jesus, Mary, Pro-Life, Prophets, Redemption, Reflection | Leave a comment »

Realizing the Love of God

Posted on December 3, 2010 by Father Joe

Read Matthew 7:7-12 and you will find a line which should never fail to touch us with the absurdity of being harsh to those whom we love. “Would one of you hand his son a stone when he asks for a loaf, or a poisonous snake when he asks for a fish?” Jesus goes on to tell us that if we who are a sinful people know how to give that which is good to our children, just imagine what our Heavenly Father has in store for us.

I wonder though, whether or not Jesus would use this analogy today? It seems that the depravity among men and women has reached such a monstrous point that even the children are no longer safe. Abortion in our society is well into its fourth decade, so commonplace that most of us hardly give it a thought. The papers and television are filled with the news of children being abused both by their parents and by those in whose care they are placed. Recently there was a story about a woman who hired a hit man to kill her husband. Another story told about children placed into animal cages. We are not talking about minor squabbles in families. All these concerns involve murder and abuse. This does not make matters easy for us who try our best in living out Christianity. Jesus taught his friends how to call God, our Father, in the Lord’s Prayer. How do we teach children about a loving Father with situations so bad, with divorce plaguing half of all marriages, or where the mother gives her favors to a different man on any given night? It is not easy.

I would encourage you all, as parents and grandparents, as uncles and aunts, as brothers and sisters, and as friends in Christ, to give the kind of witness which will make the Father’s love believable. Allow that love to shine out and to touch others through you. Do this especially for the children. God knows it is a tough enough world. We can help make it easier for them. They are the future of our nation and Church. We have to invest in them. Jesus understood this well when he said, “Treat others the way you would have them treat you: this sums up the law and the prophets” (Matthew 7:12).

For more such reflections, contact me about getting my book, CHRISTIAN REFLECTIONS.

Filed under: Bible, Discipleship, God, Morality, Pro-Life, Prophets, Reflection, Sexuality | Leave a comment »

Our Pro-Life Commitment

Posted on August 28, 2010 by Father Joe

The Cemetery of the Innocents

Here is a picture of me and the Knights of Columbus who set up 721 crosses that represent the children lost to abortion in one hour of one work day. This MEMORIAL OF THE INNOCENTS was set up at Holy Family Church in Mitchellville in 2009 and every year since then. We often have it up until the annual March for Life in Washington, DC. We received a lot of support although there were a few complaints. One lady argued against putting such a thing up at Christmas time. I explained that Advent and Christmas was the perfect time. During Advent we recall the Christ-child in the womb and on Christmas he is born. We are reminded that every child is a reflection of the Christ-child. Another person argued that it was insensitive as she was a pro-choice Catholic. I told her that she was deceived. There is no such thing as a pro-abortion Christian; abortion attacks the central mystery of the Incarnation. Abortion is murder and as such it is a repudiation of Christ’s Gospel of Life.

One of my favorite memories is working with the American Life League back in 2005 and the CRUSADERS FOR LIFE. Here is a reposting of the news around that event at my old parish, Holy Spirit Church:

A.L.L. Crusaders Come to Washington 2005

A dozen young people from colleges across the country walked from Augusta, Maine to Washington, DC in “Defense of the Catholic Church” and to spread the message that you cannot be Catholic and pro-abortion. Nevertheless, while many have applauded young people for taking up the “right to life” cause, this group of remarkable crusaders was purportedly banned from speaking in churches by several dioceses like Philadelphia and Baltimore.

Myself, Dr. Grier & a Crusader

The American Life League ran a series of stinging ads challenging the American bishops to enforce canon law and to protect the Eucharist from sacrilege when pro-abortion politicians and others (who have made such “public” stands) take it upon themselves to receive Holy Communion. The young people have shown no spite or anger, only sadness that some of the nation’s shepherds have chosen to remain on the sidelines. One priest remarked that the ads in protest were so severe that the American Life League owed the leaders of the Church an apology. However, others thought that these good men should at least have shown the same respect and hospitality to the young marchers for life as they have in the past to the high profile anti-life politicians. While they were able to find lodging in the city, they attended 9:00 AM Mass at Holy Spirit Church on Friday, July 30 and were invited to say a few words afterwards. I contacted the archdiocese’s Pro-Life Office several weeks earlier about the matter to insure a level of approbation and to insure proper discretion. (Although the ads pained him, to his credit, Cardinal McCarrick did not formally forbid the young people to speak in his churches. Throughout, nothing the young people said violated the archdiocese’s rules against participation in partisan politics– they did not name politicians by name, did not tell people for whom they should vote, and spoke with respect in regard to the Church’s shepherds.) Following the celebration, a reception was held in the Parish House were the young people had a hearty breakfast and got to meet parishioners. Also in attendance was SK Reginald Grier, a parishioner, a fourth degree Knight of Columbus and volunteer member of the archdiocesan Office for Black Catholics. John Stakem, a Knight of Columbus from St. Pius X Council, and past parishioner was present, too. John Stakem and Joseph Markauskas were long-time pro-life volunteers and were involved with the local pregnancy center. Joe and Betty Markauskas had even offered to give the young people housing while in town. We were very pleased that the director for the Forestville Pregnancy Center was present, Chyllene McLaughlin, along with her assistant. We wanted to communicate to these young people that they were not alone. Holy Spirit Parish, the Knights of Columbus, and the Pregnancy Center in the larger pro-life community, was very much behind them.

ALL Crusaders at Holy Spirit Parish

May God bless them for their sacrifices and may their witness bear fruit.

DISCUSSION

FRANK: News releases indicate that the Church after Vatican II had converted the Kennedys and other Catholic politicians into believing that the liberal backing of the culture of death is acceptable.

FATHER JOE: What news releases were these? Cite them; I would like to read further. As far as I recall, John Kennedy was chastised by churchmen for his liberal response about how little his faith would inform his work as president. As for the other Kennedys and the issue of abortion, I fail to see how Vatican II can be blamed for their pro-abortion stances. I have read and studied all the Vatican II documents and post-conciliar documents. Nothing comes to mind that would condone such thinking against the Gospel of Life. Are we throwing mud again? Give me specifics, please.

FRANK: Having attended the seminaries after Vatican II where the divinity of Christ was challenged, as well as the papacy, and all that was to be infallible before the “Catholic reformation” of 1962-1965; what is your take on recent developments and the continued blasphemies to this day condoned by the Church where the USCCB still can’t come to a consensus to deny our Lord to baby-killing Catholic politicians?

FATHER JOE:

Certainly there was a heightened stress upon the humanity of Christ in many theological schools after Vatican II. However, I do not recall ever being taught that Jesus was not a divine Person.

Fr. Patrick Granfield taught my class on the papacy at Catholic University and his lectures defended the Holy Father’s authority with a great deal of explanation.

Those things that were changed were not deemed infallible but rather mutable accidentals. This thinking was even shared by Pope Pius XII prior to Vatican II on matters like the prehistoric generation of human beings and the liturgy.

A revision of the liturgy was in the working stages going back to the 1930′s and 40′s. The reformed liturgy we have now has lasted a few decades and will probably remain for many more, although with the old liturgy alongside and with continuing adaptations by the Holy See. We have had to suffer the experimental phase, but Pope Benedict XVI said that such has come to an end.

As for the passivity of churchmen in reference to Holy Communion and the standing of pro-abortion politicians, such is also not attributable to Vatican II. The Church has gone through periods in the past where it was the lackey for parliaments, kings and queens. The Popes made clear statements from the 1600′s onward that slavery was detestable and should be abandoned. However, Catholics owned slaves in the colonies and later in the United States of America. The Jesuit landowners of Maryland had slaves. Bishops were often mute on the subject, except for admonishing their baptism in the faith. Dissent is not something new but something very old.

PADRE XYZ:

Father Joe, Your welcome to the pro-life young people did not go unnoticed. I know it cost you personally. I think you can be rude and you definitely lack tact, but it did take some nerve to stand virtually alone and make the challenge against silence or business as usual. You honestly shared your heart to the bishops and your brother priests.

You asked…

Would you give communion to Nazis who promoted the murder of Jews?

Would you give communion to White Supremacists who incited the lynching of Blacks?

Why should we prize the life in the womb any less or their murders as somehow less grievous?

Silence befell all the big guns. You lost a lot of friends that day. If you had career hopes in the church, they were suddenly shattered. Hushed and whispered voices were the only response, “How do we shut this priest up?”

You became an embarrassment. I could not do what you did. You angered a lot of people. You took a promise of obedience and you were reprimanded for your slight as an act of betrayal. Some of us witnessed it, although you were left unnamed.

You changed after that, became quiet, even sullen. It was as if something died in you. You gained weight.

I know you were disappointed in me. But to be frank, I was afraid. Who are we to question the shepherds over us? What happens if we tell the majority of Catholic politicians they are no longer welcome at the altar?

Take care of yourself.

FATHER JOE: I was going to erase this comment. I still might. If you are who I think you are, email me. Peace!

(I am not really brave. I speak my mind and I love the Church. When all is said and done, I do as I am told. I am the Church’s man. Some would contend that I am too conservative or right wing. But how can we be too committed to the Gospel of Life? Every day I work to control my temper. As long as I can remember, I have been very passionate about our faith and its values. Am I ambitious? Like most priests, it is nice to know that one is appreciated and that one’s talents are acknowledged. However, by comparison to most priests that I know, my rating would be very low. It is not false humility but the truth when I say that I count myself as the least of my brothers. As for the bishops, it must be a frightful responsibility they carry. Who would want it? They are criticized from every side. It is easy for us to judge, but we do not walk in their shoes. Pray for priests and pray, especially for our bishops. They are Christ’s apostles in the world today.)

DR: I nominated you for a pro-life blog award (FATHER JOE Blog).

JOHN: Fr. Joe, abortion is murder. These babies can’t speak for themselves. Other bishops have stood up and said priests should not give communion to pro-choice politicians as they have the power to stop the murder (Bishop Burke-former bishop of St. Louis archdiocese and Bishop Finn of Kansas City diocese, for instance.) I’m glad priests like you and Fr. Frank Pavone speak out on this issue. It’s a serious matter and it should be treated as such. Thanks for all you do.

LENBER:

“President Bush has had a very cozy relationship with the Vatican, and set a presidential record by meeting with the Pope six times.”

Very cozy indeed, sometimes for the good, and at other times for utterly and criminally contra-productive [things], such as siding with Bush in Criminal Wars (for the Vatican just Abortion is a Crime) or siding with Israel on their Criminal Occupation of Palestine.

All Thanks to Vatican II Double Crossers.

FATHER JOE: I am not sure I would coin the Bush Doctrine or International efforts in such negative terms. However, as for the Pope, you seem to be terribly deceived. The Vatican opposed the invasion of Iraq. Tarek Aziz (the former president) was a Catholic. He made a retreat in Rome and saw the Pope (John Paul II) the week prior to the invasion. The state of Israel is also not entirely happy that the Vatican, again and again, sides with Palestinians (who are largely Islamic but include an ancient Christian community). Formal recognition and diplomatic ties were held up because of Vatican concerns for the Palestinian people. The late Arafat, at the end of his life, remarked that he saw the Vatican as his ally in the conflict for Palestinian rights. Zionism was condemned by both the UN and by the Church. Arafat used to attend the Christmas Mass in Bethlehem with his wife (who is a Christian). The Catholic Church is no one’s stooge, not for Bush and not for Israel. The Holy Father (both JPII and BXVI) has spoken to President Bush, (he meets a lot of people) and they share much in regard to the unborn, however on matters like the Middle East and capital punishment, there is a great divide.

MICHAEL:

Tomorrow marks the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Think of the millions of lives that were snuffed out in this “free” country.

May God have mercy on us!

GENUS LILIUM:

I am completely against abortions. I have children and I have learned that some vaccinations are grown off of human diploid cells from aborted fetal tissue, not to mention all the other chemicals, heavy metals, and animal products. That seems like it might be a problem to me. Now that I know this, would it be wrong for me to continue to vaccinate my children? Is it just a money scheme? I really don’t want that stuff in my kids.

Filed under: Bishops, Catholic, Church, Conscience, Discipleship, Eucharist, Morality, Politics, Priests, Pro-Life, Right to Life, Sacraments, Sexuality, Sin, Social Justice, Youth | Leave a comment »