|
D r a g n e t
We Wish We Had Heard This Homily
|
|
|
|
Despite exhortations from the clergy and pro-life groups-even a 30-second television spot by Fr. Lawrence Battle warning that it is a sin to vote for pro-abortion candidates-American Catholics were a critical factor in reelecting President Bill Clinton last month. On a percentage basis, more Catholics voted for him than any other religious group, leading media analysts to declare that the once-solid "Catholic vote" no longer exists.
It's a shame that more Catholics didn't hear Fr. Dominick Fullam's homily on the Sunday before election day. Fr. Fullam used sound apologetics techniques to explain to his parishioners at St. James Catholic Church in Gulfport, Mississippi, how Catholics ought to exercise their constitutional rights:
"Did you know that the United States' government pays churches not to talk about politics? Well, actually the IRS threatens to levy taxes on any church that endorses one candidate or one party over another. If you try to influence voters in favor of a particular candidate or party, you can lose your tax-exempt status.
"This fear of churches being taxed by the government has the net effect of paying priests and ministers to shut up around election time. The government says: You can keep what you'd otherwise pay in taxes, but only if you play by our rules.
"Now some people think the Church ought to stay out of politics. That's not the case at all. The First Amendment to the Constitution forbids the government from interfering with religion or setting up a State church. That's all it does when it comes to religion. But the Church- I'm talking about all of us-can't be shut out of influencing the government. You, members of the Church, are also voters and potential candidates for office. Your faith must make a difference in the way you vote and in the way you act. We live in a democracy with freedom of religion and freedom of speech. The Constitution didn't give us those rights; God gave us those rights, and we reserved them to ourselves. To try to shut out the voices of people of faith or to tax our freedoms makes these rights meaningless.
"In the first reading today, God is speaking to the priests of the Old Testament, and he tells them that they've caused many to falter by their teaching. And in the Gospel, Jesus tells the Pharisees that they don't practice what they preach. He says that the Pharisees would rather be popular, have places of honor and marks of respect in public.
"A lot of Christian ministers cause their people to falter because they fear being unpopular. The bottom line is, if you follow Jesus, then you can expect to be as popular as he was. He was so popular they erected a monument to him on a hill called Calvary. In fact they liked him so much, they used a few nails to make him a part of that monument.
"So no one who claims to speak for Christ should expect to be popular. What's important is to both teach and do the right thing. That's the message of today's readings.
"My conscience will not allow me to be silent at election time. I don't wish to cause anyone to falter because I was silent when I should have spoken up. I would rather teach what is right and be unpopular than bite my tongue because I like being comfortable.
"Last Wednesday, retired Archbishop Philip Hannan of New Orleans took such a stand. He said in a press conference that if a person believes in Catholic doctrine, he doesn't see how he can avoid it being a sin to vote for Bill Clinton. The archbishop was referring to the President's and other candidates' stand on abortion and specifically Mr. Clinton's position on partial-birth abortions.
"Let me explain to you what a partial-birth abortion is. This is not going to be pretty. It's abhorrent, and you're not going to like what you hear. A partial-birth abortion is a form of abortion most often used in late term pregnancies, after 18 weeks-in other words after the halfway point of a pregnancy, when a baby might otherwise be able to survive outside his or her mother's womb.
"The baby is rotated within the mother's womb to be delivered feet first. The little boy or little girl is then delivered face down, except for the head. The abortionist looks down on a little naked bottom, sees the legs and feet, the arms, hands, and shoulders. Then the abortionist takes a pair of surgical scissors and stabs the baby in the back of the neck, and twists and opens the scissors to create a hole. Into that hole the abortionist inserts a suction catheter, and sucks out the baby's brains causing his or her skull to collapse.
"The only reason this is done is so a dead baby can be delivered. After all, in a lot less time and by just pulling the baby a few more inches, the baby could have been delivered alive.
"Some people have said this can't really be taking place. Actually, hundreds of these abortions took place in the U.S. last year. When the U.S. Congress tried to outlaw this procedure, President Clinton vetoed the ban. The Congress had made an exception for the life of the mother, but Clinton wanted an exception for health reasons as well.
"Health reasons, even if defined as serious health reasons, can become an excuse for anything. Do you know who would decide if it were for health reasons? The woman and her doctor- doctor meaning the abortionist, that's who. How often do you think an abortionist would say an abortion is not needed?
"A panel of respected physicians said that this procedure would never be necessary to preserve a woman's health. How could they know this? First of all the baby is delivered breech, upside down, which makes delivery more difficult.
"Second of all, the baby could be delivered completely in much less time than it takes to stab it and suck its brains out. So none of these abortions that took place last year were really for health reasons. Yet Clinton insisted on this exception that would make the law meaningless. Even if these kind of abortions never took place, do we want a leader who is such an extremist? Good grief, if the word extreme applies to anything, it applies to this barbaric procedure.
"What about all the other issues that we must consider in a presidential election? What about Medicare, Medicaid, Education and the Environment? What about housing, the arms race, welfare reform, and immigration? My sisters and brothers, these don't mean a thing if the right to life is not protected by our laws.
"Dead babies who've had their brains sucked out legally don't need Medicare or Medicaid. Dead babies can't get an education. Dead babies will never see the environment. Dead babies don't need a place to live. Dead babies can't be hurt by weapons. Dead babies don't need welfare. Dead babies will never meet an immigrant.
"Abortion is the defining moral issue of our time. Every other right depends upon a right to life. Opposition to abortion is more important than other national concerns, and don't let anyone try to hide it in a smokescreen of issues.
"Suppose there was a candidate who was in favor of removing the legal protection of life from Catholics in the United States, or from Protestants, or Jews, or African-Americans, or Hispanics, or the elderly-would you vote for that candidate if you thought the rest of his platform was really good? I hope not.
"So, was the Archbishop right in saying it's a sin to vote for Bill Clinton? What he said was, if you believe what the Church teaches about abortion, he doesn't see how you can avoid it being a sin to cast a vote for an individual who advocates it-and advocates it as radically as Bill Clinton does. I don't see how either.
"Our votes are a way of saying, 'Yes, this is what I want. This is the kind of lawmaker, the kind of laws, I approve of.' We must all practice what we preach, as Jesus pointed out to the Pharisees."
Julie Green writes from Pennsylvania about a dilemma which Catholics increasingly confront: "I went to Mass one Sunday recently and left in shock. The opening and closing prayers of the Mass had been changed. I pray the Eucharistic prayers as the priest prays them, but had to pick up a missalette to see where we were.
"It turned out that the priest was using the Third Canon as a sort of guide, a reference to what to pray about. I wondered whether I should receive Communion; so much of the Mass was altered that I honestly didn't know if it was valid. It wasn't irreverent by any means; the priest had simply altered it according to his taste in worship.
"Similarly, I see changes in the Mass elsewhere: we're told to stand or sit when we are supposed to kneel. We hear 'God' or 'Jesus' instead of 'Father' or 'him.' The Per Ipsum is sung 'almighty Ga-ahd,' or not at all. We pray to the 'Creator, Redeemer, Sanctifier.' The order of prayers is changed because it is 'more convenient.' New little rituals are introduced because someone thinks they're a good idea.
"It's frightening, it's violent, and it's disruptive.
"We are Catholic, each worshiper in community with each other, each parish in unity with all others worldwide through and in the liturgy of the Church, the celebration of the Eucharist. Sacrosanctum Concilium, the General Instructions, and the Priest's Directory are specific: The rubrics- the directions on how the Mass is to be celebrated-are not allowed to be changed.
"There are purposes in this. They provide continuity with our heritage as Catholics; some of the prayers date back as far as the second century, and as we pray them, we pray with all of those who have ever prayed them. They also maintain our unity from parish to parish as well as worldwide; no matter our home parish or language, we can participate fully in the divine liturgy.
"And that consistency is also a personal gift to each one: It frees us from ourselves to focus wholly on God's word and the Eucharist that is being offered. The familiarity of the words invites us to pray the Mass. Freed from having to find our places in the book or focus on what the priest is doing, we can enter it. We become one with the priest as salvation history is retold in the preface; we are one with Jesus as the sacrifice is offered. Our lives on the paten, our hearts in the chalice, are lifted and transformed into Jesus' Body and Blood, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. That gentle flow allows us to lose ourselves and be formed in that holy sacrifice, in pure worship.
"So, each alteration of the order, each change in the words, each violation of the rubrics, separates us from others. Those 'improvements' jar us out of the prayer we are called to enter. They force our attention to the priest or deacon or reader. Each one disrupts the very community that is to be joined in that most holy celebration. And each one is a disobedience to the laws of the Church, and thus to God.
"'Oh, but Julie,' I hear, 'don't be so stuffy. It's nice to be creative with the Mass. We should have the freedom to make it relevant. Local customs are good. And we don't want to offend people with our language or posture, so it's right to change it. This really does make sense. This is better.'
"Nice? Creative? Relevant? Better? Have we lost our minds? And where are we being led? As separations from the order and prayers of the Mass are forced upon us, we are forced into separation from its prayer, from worshiping in community, from other parishes, and from the larger Church. In that effort to be politically correct or relevant or creative or nice, we are acting on our agendas, not God's. But the Church and the Mass are not political arenas, with each of us there to make personal little statements for or against one another, the NCCB, and Rome.
"We become, in actuality, very similar to the Protestant churches where the attention is on the preaching and the preacher, and where each is 'unique.' So unique, in fact, that there are tens of thousands of non-Catholic denominations and bodies, each being creative, each an individual expression, each in disunity with one another. We have a name for them; they are called the 'separated brethren.'
"Is that where we are being led?"
Pairing of Parishes is an aid program for churches in Russia and Eastern Europe. Like a similar "adopt-a-parish" program which has operated for years in Haiti, POP matches U.S. Catholic parishes and organizations with Catholic communities.
After decades of persecution, most Catholic groups in former Communist countries are poor and discouraged. Sponsoring parishes are asked to offer spiritual support, encouragement, and, as possible, direct material aid.
Such help might take the form of clothing donations, corresponding with parishioners, teaching needed skills, food drives, teaching English, buying radio time, working in the U.S. offices, or providing medical care and substance abuse education.
Fr. Austin Mohrbacher has returned from a five-year mission in Magadan (which was minus 45 degrees when he left) and is coordinating the POP program. When he arrived in Russia, he says, hardly anyone admitted to believing in God. "Their biggest question was, 'Does God really exist?' Now 70 percent believe in God," he says.
There is a tremendous hunger for spiritual truth, he adds, and many Christian groups are attempting to fill it. One program he cooperated with was CoMission, an ecumenical educational organization co-sponsored by a number of religious bodies, including some (such as The Navigators) with a history of anti-Catholic and anti-Orthodox bias. We expressed concern about working with such groups.
"I would encourage Catholics to get involved with them-prudently," Mohrbacher says. CoMission has well-produced materials on the Bible. The content of the curriculum "is a little bit slanted," he acknowledges. "It's on the Book-but we Catholics also like the Book."
Rather than delay ministering to the former Soviets, he says, we should seize the opportunities that present themselves. "I can't think of anything better than a hundred Catholics getting involved in [CoMission]." Use what is good in the program, he advises, and flesh it out with the Catholic faith.
For information about Pairing of Parishes, write to 6801 N. 10th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19126-2906 or call (215) 548-2837.
Among the most venomous of enemies of the faith are former Catholics, especially former priests. Catholic Answers was originally begun to counter the disinformation spread by a failed priest. Now anti-Catholic Fundamentalists have an entire book of such propaganda in their arsenal: Far from Rome, Near to God, which assembles the "testimonies" of fifty apostate priests. (To find fifty they are forced to dig up renegades from past centuries, including arch-apostate Charles Chiniquy, author of such gems as The Priest, the Woman, and the Confessional.)
Co-edited by former priest Richard Peter Bennett, the book is distributed by groups such as Christians Evangelizing Catholics, Bart Brewer's Mission to Catholics International, and Mike Gendron's Bold Truth.
Bennett tells his own story in "From Tradition to Truth." It isn't difficult to understand how Bennett, who sounds like a sincere man, came to leave the Church. Describing his "conversion," he says, "I suffered for fourteen years, no one ever having the courage to speak the truth to me. . . . I pray that the Father will give you grace that you may accept that Christ died in your place on the cross, and know that his atonement is sufficient to make you a new creature in him."
Bennett trots out the worn canards: He was disturbed by the "outward pomp" and "inner emptiness" of Rome. He was taught only "rote, set prayer" and discovered "direct personal prayer" by accident. "I did not know my way through the Bible," he acknowledges.
One is baffled by the notion that any Catholic, much less a priest, could have so failed to g.asp the essentials of the faith. But Bennett's most serious gaffe, in the opinion of our resident observer of religious life, is his remark that he spent eight years in the Dominican Order "studying what it is to be a monk."
Dominicans aren't monks. They are friars. Monks live in monasteries, usually in the same monastery for life. Their chief work is prayer. Friars are apostolic religious who are sent on mission as needed, to preach, teach, and give other service.
A small distinction? Maybe. But one to which any Benedictine or Carmelite-or Dominican-would be keenly sensitive. The problem with these "converted" priests is that one never knows the full story. Were they dismissed from the ministry for misconduct? Were they even really priests? A little investigation revealed that Jack Chick's "Alberto" was never a Jesuit. We wonder what we'd find if we explored the histories of the contributors to Near to God, Far from Rome.
A heartfelt "Way to go!" to Bishop Robert J. Carlson of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, who boldly promised that no woman in that diocese need ever consider abortion because of financial hardship or inability to raise a child.
"I will pay the costs of pregnancy and delivery," he announced at a Respect Life Mass in St. Joseph Cathedral October 18. He added that one woman has already taken him up on the offer. If a woman feels she cannot care for a child, he said, "We will take that child, and find a loving family to raise him or her."
The bishop's proclamation has received zero news coverage, even from local media.
One of our friends and volunteers, Michelle Arnold, sent us a "survey" she received from Planned Parenthood ("I have no idea how I got on their mailing list.")
One question in the section"Anti-Choice Violence" asks, "In your opinion, which of the following activities would be most effective in combating violence against doctors, staff, and patients at reproductive health centers?"
The possible answers: "(1) severely prosecuting those convicted of violence against reproductive health centers; (2) increasing federal law enforcement protections at reproductive health centers; (3) constructing health care centers with greater security measures and barricades to entry; (4) training volunteers to defend health care centers against intruders; (5) conducting intelligence investigations to thwart extremists' operations."
Under "Information About Your State," the survey asks, "Are you aware of any anti-choice activities in your area?" If you are, it wants to know "what types of anti-choice activities are most prevalent in your area?"
Possible answers: "(1) right-wing demonstrations and rallies; (2) barricades of health care centers that provide abortions; (3) dissemination of misleading information about abortion and contraception; (4) consistent picketing and vigils outside clinics; (5) violence, including but not limited to bombings, shootings, or burglary."
One of our staff passes a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic each day on the route to the Catholic Answers office. Once she saw two elderly men praying the rosary on the public sidewalk near the building. Other than that, nada. As for shootings, there have been two incidents in the nation; one killer is now in prison, and the other, a mentally ill young man, took his own life while serving his sentence.
Nothing can justify criminal violence, but, given the butchery of millions of babies and the natural outrage and horror it provokes, the restraint shown by prolife groups has been miraculous. Yet Planned Parenthood writes as if "bombings, shootings, and burglary" are commonplace.
This is nothing new. Planned Parenthood routinely waves the violence flag; it conveniently diverts people's attention from the real atrocities going on. And it sells. It's no accident that the scare tactics appear just before the "membership acceptance form" and a request for money.
If you find yourself on the mailing list, too, how about sending a contribution to Catholic Answers instead? Help us set the record straight about "pro-abortion distortion." Ultimately, the truth will save lives
|
Catholic Answers
