 |
|
|
|
|
|
A Great Opportunity to Combat Culture of Death
President Obama’s administration has afforded the Catholic Church a great opportunity. I will often tell my people that our real enemies are not democrats nor republicans but rather powers and principalities. I know in the minds of most modern people this sounds awfully medieval, the fact remains that I believe it to be true, and one day it will be shown to be the case.
History of the Issue:
Cicero in about 40 BC berated the patricians (the elite of roman society…eg senators and politicians and ruling class) because they were not having children, they were in the position to teach the children virtue and the values of discipline, but sadly chose self indulgence over virtue. In ancient Rome one could let a child die of exposure without penalty and thus many did practice infanticide. Our current president, when a senator, voted twice to prevent a person from saving a life of a child if it survived an abortion. Cicero knew that if people chose not to reproduce that this anti-life mentality would ultimately doom the empire, and it did. People are our greatest natural resource. People are not the problem, they are the only ones who can find solutions.
The Confusion Today: Contraception does not protect women
It is totally believable that the majority of Catholics may not follow the Church’s teaching on contraception, by and large because many of the Church’s members have not heard the teaching explained in a coherent and understandable way. Contraception does not protect women; in fact it does expose them to risks. Contraception (against conception) is not good medicine. Let me illustrate the Church’s thinking with the following example.
A Little Story about Good Medicine
My father had a heart attack when he was 39, and died ten years later from a heart attack when he was 49. His brother died when he was about 49, and his father, my grandfather died when he was around 42, clearly this is very young to depart this earth. Chances are I may have the same genetics that they do. If technology develops an artificial heart, the Church would be totally for such an intervention. On the contrary, who in their right mind would go to a doctor and ask, “Doc, could you give me a pill to make my heart skip a beat, or make me short of breath, oh and by the way can you find a pill that also has potential side effects, one of which can potentially increase my chances for cancer?” That would be crazy would it not?
Bad Medicine
The pill is supposed to suppress ovulation, it is also to make it less likely for the ovum to be fertilized by the sperm, but if that does not work the imbalanced hormonal situation is to prevent the genetically complete human from attaching to the uterine wall and thus even “the pill” can act as an abortifacient. I believe Jerome Lejune, the geneticist who discovered the anomaly in the chromosome that causes Down Syndrome, suggested the pill may act this way every ten cycles or so. Human nature being what it is, when a women is “on the pill” she is more readily seen as an object to be used than a person to be loved. If women ponder this, they will agree that this is indeed the case. People will violently react to such facts, but facts are facts. I would challenge people to look at the studies and the correlation between women who have used the pill and have had to fight certain types of cancer in later years or had serious problems with fertility.
Responsible Parenthood
The Christian world had always opposed contraception from antiquity. One finds in the 1st or 2nd century document the Didache. In that document the Christians were to refrain from “potions that cause sterility” or having abortions. St. Paul in the scriptures warns people against “sorcery” the Greek word used was pharmacheia, in that period it meant potions. This word is the modern root of pharmaceuticals. The Church has no problem using drugs for treating a diseased organ or even taking medicine that can help regulate a woman’s period. It does have problems using drugs to impede or harm the normal functioning of a human being. It was not until the protestant Lambeth Council in 1931 that some mainline protestant churches began to even consider the possibility of birth control.
The Culture of Life
The Church has responded to this degradation in one’s respect for life in Church documents, clearly articulated in Humanae Vitae (Human Life), issued in 1969. There certainly are grounds for a couple to limit family size for a serious need. Namely If there are demographic reasons (the local population has a difficult time sustaining the humans it has, like densely populated regions of China or India or Africa for example), second would be a eugenic reason ( do the parents share a genetic combination that has proved to be difficult for any offspring that might be born, or does the mother have a medical condition that could endanger her life?), thirdly it may be that the family does not have the financial resources to provide the necessities of life for future children, and lastly would be psychological, (It could be the case that an addition child could cause such stress to the parents that the entire family may suffer undue burdens.) If any of these conditions exist, the parents are morally free to choose to avoid having children using Natural Family Planning, something that the Church’s healthcare plans would be more than happy to cover.
Great Results and Good Medicine
Natural Family Planning technologies have been greatly enhanced in recent years. This method takes communication by the spouses at the deepest level. It is open to life and there are no deleterious medical side effects. The technologies, come to be known as NaPro, have also helped many families achieve pregnancy at a higher success rate that the morally illicit invitro-fertilation techniques. There are clear indicators for a woman’s fertility, body temperature, and the viscosity of the cervical mucus. Even women with irregular periods can successfully determine the few days out of the month when they can become pregnant with a high degree of certitude. No one will die if they do not have sex for a period of 3 to five days. I know for a fact that a person will not die early if they choose to never have sex.
The Church’s position is one that takes education, deep communication, mutual respect, discipline and self-control and is ultimately open to life.
The Culture of Death
The worlds position advocates an opportunity for drug companies to realize huge profits, it increases the danger of cancer and other side effects, it is usually something that burdens the woman to make sure she is “safe” and tends to reduce people to be objects to be used for personal gratification rather than people to be loved and create the condition for the possibility for another human life, the world’s most precious natural resource.
The New Evangelization and New Oportunities
The Church has an opportunity to educate the nation as to why her teaching is about what is good for humanity and what is in accord with God’s design for the human person. Let us seize the day! Individual Catholics who fail to live up to the ideal will be judged by God, and those in the Church who have failed to educate those to whom they have been entrusted to educate will also be judged. I believe God is merciful and is always willing to forgive and invite those who have failed to get up and try again. Jesus never failed, but he did fall and He got up again and again to deliver us from our own selfishness and sin.
Let us pray for that which is good, may we overcome those who fail to grasp that which is true! What the Church teaches is not true because the Bible says so, the Bible says so, because it is true. Truth is the real problem here, many are driven by a dictatorship of relativism. The Church wants everyone to be driven by that which is true. The Church not only wants women to be healthy, but children, families and the whole of society as well!
The World We Live In
The world is an amazing place. C.S. Lewis’ reflection about the difference regarding the potential of creatures is worth recalling here. A worm is a worm, there really is not a good worm and a bad worm, but if we reflect on the higher order of beings, distinctions are more easily drawn. We can say in a meaningful way that there is a good dog and a bad dog, but in the end much of that quality results from how they were trained. Humans therefore can be really good, e.g. Mother Theresa, or really bad, e.g. Adolf Hitler. It is safe to say in our gut that the difference is discernable, but in our culture and the way the most academics seemed to be formed these days such distinctions are challenged.
Nietzsche wrote his work that have negatively influenced many, Beyond Good and Evil. He made the claim that good and evil were merely convention, in other words things determined by the human person. He proposed that there are no absolutes (of course except that there are no absolutes) and therefore humanity is free to make its own rules. This philosophy led Nietzsche to an insane asylum. It is arguably the philosophy that influence Hitler in his madness. This philosophical system poisoned our world and profoundly contributed to the Dictatorship of Relativism that Pope Benedict references.
The everyday man knows that there is right and wrong, If a spouse commits adultery, or a child is abused it is evident that this is a bad thing. This is not convention.
There are things that cut across cultures that are self evident for any normal thoughtful person. If we allow ourselves to live like animals, than those dominant animals will abuse freedom and reign by terror and oppression.
Our modern technological advances quite incredible, and on one level the advancement of the Ancient Roman Empire had its own impressive achievements. If such advancements are not properly directed they will not serve to strengthen the society but may in fact rapidly lead to its decline. Rome had advanced military equipment that they abandoned because in was uncomfortable and inconvenient.
In the outer regions of the Empire those indigenous to the region were trained and instructed with Roman tactics and equipment, ultimately it gave those local inhabitants an advantage when they ultimately wanted to rebel against Roman rule. The Romans became complacent and maybe even soft while their enemies were willing to make the sacrifices. The Imperial Government became blighted and wasteful and ultimately put crushing tax burdens on the inhabitants of the empire.
We have been formed now for a couple of generations to “look out for number one, namely me, myself and I”. The level of Narsacism is staggering. According to Gibbon, in his book, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, the elites in Rome became insulated from the suffering around them while they lived in extreme luxury and comfort. Many in our world do not realize the suffering that is in their midst as well.
We can learn a lot from observation. Anthropologists tell us that the human person is a herd animal. We like to travel in packs. We like our factions and groups. Within such groups there typically is a leader or head of that pack. In the animal kingdom such a position of dominance is achieved by brute force. Dogs will tear and claw at each other to gain the “top dog” position. If we look at the many despots and corrupt government throughout our world we see this dominance playing itself out every day. In my mind instinctual drive accounts for our “Dog eat dog” world.
The reality is that we are more than animals. We have all our natural instincts, but we are supernatural beings. This is certainly something I cannot prove, but I would argue it is the only reasonable explanation for the world in which we find ourselves.
Fuerbach, another destructive philosophical force critiqued Christianity and charged that its greatest problem stemmed from the fact that it placed infinite worth on the human person. He accurately understood Christianity, but failed to grasp that this is not Christianity’s problem, it is its glory, it also happens to be the truth. A tyrant or a despot can’t be troubled with those who don’t support them, they need legitimacy to destroy or irradiate the threat. Why is it that one is not allowed to leave Communist countries freely(the extreme form of Socialism) while free societies struggle to limit immigrants? What is wrong with this picture? If communism is the utopia they claim it to be, no one would want to leave and they too would have serious immigration challenges.
The reason is simple, their system is flawed, it does not respect natural law and tries to fashion a system from a few “central planners”. Ultimately the system is an affront to human nature and not rooted in that which is true.
There is dignity in work, but work is hard, and when the benefits of hard work are not personally discernable, people by their nature will not work hard. Education is at the heart of any thriving future. Sadly in many of our colleges and universities students are not encouraged to think critically but are rather indoctrinated or taught what to think. Whether it be about over population or global warming, the are powerful forces that benefit by keeping the populace uneducated or not being critical thinkers. The founders of the United States understood the power of education, but now it is seen as an instrument to indoctrinate or to propagandize.
The founding fathers of the United States I am sure had their own self interest at heart to some degree, that is only natural, but they were able to propose a system that for the first time in human history was not merely a system governed by some favored or elite class. In theory it was to be a government truly for the people and by the people.
Often times there is a reference to the Establishment clause. This was included because of the history of state religious. The early forms of some state governments in this country were actually religiously based, but the law was intended to limit a “federal” religion. Many believe that the founders wanted a separation between the state and God. This is not the case, the very next line after no establishment of a federal religion, states that there should be NO interference in the practice of one’s religion. In other words the government is never to limit the practice of one’s particular religious tradition. This clearly was a thoughtful attempt to prevent the religious disputes that plagued Europe since the reformation. They also presumed a predominantly Christian Culture. With all the differences between the Catholic Church and the Christian denominations each Christian Church were still driven by ideals of charity and love for their fellow human being. Jefferson understood that a culture can never hope to thrive unless its people have strong moral foundations.
If people fail to recognize the ultimate purpose of their existence or the value of their neighbor and future generations, the culture is doomed for decay and become more corrupt. It is easy to whine and complain about governments and leaders, the problems are complex and difficult, what we need is a deepened sense of personal responsibility and an understanding of true and eternal values. Nothing less than conversion of heart is demanded. It is conversion to a desire to know all that is true and good. We need sound principles that profoundly respect human nature and the way things are. I would argue by nature we hate to be told what to do and what to think. The harsh realities is that you can’t do physics or mathematics unless you are willing to be open and learn what reality is. Not all things are equal, some systems respect human dignity, while others are designed to serve the leaders of the government. Pope Benedict notes in his encyclical, Veritates in Caritatis, that sometimes people will use aid not as charity but a coercive tool.
It seems that the stage is set in our country for class warfare. Some want to encourage those with less to see it merely as the result of being intentionally exploited by those who have more. The is certainly corporate greed in some circumstances, some dishonest business men and government officials that are more concerned about thier own comfort than what will serve the common good. We must help people to fight such tempations. Our real enemies are not the Republicans or the Democrats, but rather powers and principalities, Dominions and Thrones who have given thier service to the enemy. Any person who encourages another to hate is an enemby of Christ, and dare I say an enemy of th human person.
I was formed first as an engineer, then as a theologian.
Sad to say even in my theological studies there was an effort to diminish the value of what ancient Christian tradition revered as natural law. Natural law is a respect for how things operate as constrained by laws of nature. This is where one can hope to forge sound principles for society. I truly believe that one cannot effectively legislate morality, by the same token a good moral society must not legislate or pass laws that encourage behavior that is detrimental to one’s personal health or our society’s future. Harmful drugs should not be legal, if the populous was educated drugs would not be a problem because people would know how devastating they are, and avoid such stupid behavior. If people choose poorly then they should be compelled to make restitution for the harm they caused to the common good. Prostitutes could make no living if their patrons were virtuous moral beings.
Freedom must never be understood as a license to do what ever one wants, but rather the freedom to choose what is good mark I can imagine people rolling their eyes at such idealistic concepts, but the fact does remain as a fact, if there is no market one cannot peddle their goods.
When a person practices virtue, they become a virtuous being, when one practices the vices, the person becomes vicious. It should be obvious how virtuous our politicians are as we view their campaigns. Sad to say much of it is marked by viciousness. Our political process seems to be designed for the media to profit enormously. The primary process would be much better served by having all the primaries on the same day. This way people would not be influenced by popularism, but would be compelled to do their homework and choose well. Again this is ridiculously idealistic, because the media would lose so much advertizing revenue and they would not have the 6 month news cycle which is often much about nothing.
The founding fathers envisioned the leaders to be normal citizens who were to be compensated on a minimal level. There service was to be motivated by the ideal of the country, not personal gain or power. Sadly we have stayed greatly from such ideals. I am hardly a Cicero, but my lament is like his, we are doomed unless we can find in our hearts the capacity to adopt a real culture of life!
Vince Lombardi, who had at the very least a deep cultural Catholicism, he had the practice I believe of frequent daily mass, and proved to be one of the very successful coaches in the NFL. He is said to have stated at his first team meeting with the then struggling Green Bay Packers something to the effect, “Gentlemen, on that practice field we will pursue perfection. Knowing full well we will not achieve it this side of heaven, but if we pursue perfection, We will achieve excellence!” And that they did, he lead them to two National Titles and then the first Superbowl. This is the attitude that we must adopt in our pursuit of our relationship with God and each other.
We are called to see the face of God in every human being, especially our enemies. Those who are enemies of Christ are in the greatest danger of losing their immortal souls for all eternity. For this reason Christians have an obligation to try and win them over by there compassion, love, understanding and patience.
I believe it was Leo the Great who stated that we know we are beginning to understand Christianity when the Christian is more concerned about the soul of those who attack them than any harm or assault they themselves suffer. Again this is not the natural response for a human being, this is a supernatural response.
The system of Government that we have been entrusted with could be in peril, but if we can return to a sound understanding of natural law, we should be able to recover. Humility is downplayed today, and was even presented as a vice in one moral textbook I had been given when being an adjunct faculty at Ancilla College. Humility is not the opposite of self esteem as the book seemed to misrepresent, but true humility rests in recognizing that the truth does not rest in oneself, but truth is something that is discovered.
Humility is Key!
Humility is necessary for progress and peace in any system of Government.
Leaders who lack humility think that by the very strength of their will they can enact policies that will work even when sound economic analysis points to its folly. Government entities are intrinsically wasteful and inefficient. When excessive resources are extorted from the people by confiscatory taxes from the productive members of society, incentive is lost to be productive and society is damaged on all levels except for the politicians who still get paid and take care of the constituents while the rest of the country languishes.
Four Pillars
People must before all else respect human dignity, without this the path is laid for tyrant and despot to abuse the freedom ot the weaker persons in society. Every person from the first moment of conception till natural death has and intrinsic and fundamental right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. No one has the right to take this away from another innocent human being. Great evil has the ability to deaden the conscience, whether it be evidenced by
Next there must be a profound and deep respect for religious liberty, so long as the person of faith is willing to respect the human dignity of others. Only then should governments have the ability to limit a person’s liberty as the result of religious beliefs. If a person thinks their religion demands that they kill others who do not share their faith, the person who act on this, or intends to act on this is a threat to society and therefore society must be protected from such an individual.
We are all part of the human family and all share in a certain solidarity with the entire human race. On the operating table we are all the same. We are all members of the human family and therefore should try and live in peace and share common concerns and responsibilities.
Lastly we need to put into practice subsidiarity, in other words we need to try and empower people to deal with their own difficulties at the most local level possible. By doing this we help people discover their worth and their capacity to solve problems and contribute to society and provide them with a sense of accomplishment and value.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
