Straight talk and straight action in the defence of life

Bishop Robert Vasa ('VASHa') of Baker, Oregon, is a man who talks charitably but straight. He writes a weekly column in the Catholic Sentinel, His column for the 4 February printed edition was We're responsible for our failure to protect unborn life.

In the context of the trial of a Kansas man for the murder of an abortionist he writes of the duty of the State to defend every human life. He writes (my emphases):

There is no doubt that the Kansas man is singularly responsible for his actions and a jury determined, as prudently as possible, the extent of his guilt and culpability. But where does responsibility or true moral culpability rest? The Kansas man acted within the context of a specific American set of conditions and circumstances. He acted in the context of a culture that fails and even adamantly refuses to recognize something I read recently in a clinically oriented embryology textbook published in 2008. There I read; “Zygote: This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm during fertilization. A zygote or embryo is the beginning of a new human being.” In truth, this is something we all know. This is something legislators and judges know. This is something doctors know. This is something the abortionists know extremely well. It is thus perfectly legitimate to avow that abortion destroys an innocent human being. What it may not be legally correct to assert, in our culture, is that abortion is murder. It is correct to assert this as a moral conviction and that is a conviction I definitively hold — abortion is murder.


Bishop Vasa ends his column with these words: A Kansas man will undoubtedly be held accountable for what he has done. Every man and woman in America will be held accountable for what we have failed to do — for the little ones whom we have failed to recognize and protect.

He had to face a difficult decision in his own diocese, as he writes in Hospital decided it could not meet the Catholic standard, printed in the 18 February issue of Catholic Sentinel. St Charles Medical Center had been a Catholic hospital for many years, formerly run by religious Sisters but in 1992 the 'Association of the Christian Faithful was established with the specific goal of “preserving the unique Catholic character of St. Charles.”'

It seems they have failed to do so. They failed to follow the Ethical and Religious Directives (ERDs) for Catholic Health Care Services of the bishops of the USA. Bishop Vasa writes: In 2007 the diocese was presented with a report on the level of compliance with the ERDs and that report indicated that there were a couple of areas of grave concern. While the commitment to adhering to Catholic principles was clearly present the same could not be said about adherence to or avoidance of certain immoral medical practices.

He further writes: As bishop, I am responsible for attesting to the full Catholicity of the hospitals in my diocese, a responsibility I take very seriously, and I have reached the conclusion that I can no longer attest to the Catholicity of St. Charles. The board is responsible for the operation of the medical center and for its compliance with the ethical guidelines it deems suitable for St. Charles. The question the board faced was whether it could alter its present practices to the degree required for continued identification as “Catholic.” It was the board’s determination that it could not meet that standard.



I see before me two distressing options. I must either condone all that is being done at St. Charles and its affiliates by continuing a sponsorship relationship or I must recognize that those practices are absolutely contrary to the ERDs and distance myself from them. It would be misleading to the faithful for me to allow St. Charles to be acknowledged as Catholic in name while, at the same time, being morally certain that some significant tenets of the ERDs are no longer being observed there.


This is not a condemnation of St. Charles. It is a sadly acknowledged reality.


Bishop Vasa was not afraid to make a clear decision: St. Charles has gradually moved away from adherence to the requirements of the Church without recognizing a major possible consequence of doing so. That consequence is a loss of Catholic sponsorship. Since I see no possibility of St. Charles returning to full compliance with the ERDs and since such full compliance with the ERDs is essential to “Catholic Status,” St. Charles will now be considered solely as a community nonprofit organization, not a Catholic one.



In practical terms there should be very little change in how St. Charles presently functions. One major shift will be the absence of the Blessed Sacrament at the hospital. The chapel will no longer be a Catholic chapel and Mass will no longer be celebrated there. In our secular culture most do not recognize the extreme grace of our Lord’s Real Presence but I suspect his absence from the chapel will be deeply felt.

The bishop's decision to close the chapel and remove the Blessed Sacrament is a clear sign that there is a direct connection between the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass and the way we live our lives.

A question I find myself asking is why do lay Catholics so often put aside their faith when given public responsibilities? There have been similar problems in at least one Catholic hospital in England. And in the USA, Canada and Britain 'Catholic' politicians seem to lead the way in opposing what Vatican II teaches, eg:

Furthermore, whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia or willful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where men are treated as mere tools for profit, rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others of their like are infamies indeed. They poison human society, but they do more harm to those who practice them than those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are a supreme dishonor to the Creator (Gaudium et Spes No 27).

One of the great graces the Holy Spirit gave the whole Church through Vatican II was the call to holiness for all and the call for lay persons to live out that call in their family life, in their professional life and in public life. It seems that to a large extent we have rejected that grace, while so many line up to be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, in many cases not needed, lectors and what not.

May the Holy Spirit raise up more bishops like Robert Vasa.

'Concessions on abortion are no cause for rejoicing' - Bishop Robert Vasa

The Adoration of the Shepherds, El Greco

When I was young and still living in Ireland many were advocating a change in the law that labelled children born outside of marriage as 'illegitimate'. Some coined the slogan 'There are no illegitimate children, only illegitimate parents'. The law was eventually changed.

Those advocating the change rightly pointed out that children should not be punished or stigmatized because of the sins or their parents. Nobody would advocate going back to the old days on this particular issue.

But at a more basic level many do want to regress to the past in a more radical way. They want to prevent 'unwanted' children from being born. Even in the old days nobody advocated that 'illegitimate' children should be killed. Not only are many advocating that 'unwanted' children should not be born, but they are advocating that the mother has the 'right' to have her pre-born child killed.

Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, USA, faces this in his weekly column in Catholic Sentinel, the Catholic weekly in the state of Oregon, dated 21 January. He writes in the context of the ongoing debate in the USA about the Health Care Reform Bill. Here is Bishop Vasa's article. I have highlighted some parts of it and made some [comments].

Concessions on abortion are no cause for rejoicing

By Bishop Robert Vasa

BEND — There has been a bit of jubilation over the claim that the Health Care Reform Bill would not use federal dollars to pay for abortion except in those very rare cases of a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when the life of the mother is in danger. Whether abortion funding will be limited to these remains to be seen. While including restrictions on federal funding for abortion except in these cases sounds very much like a Pro-Life victory it is important for us to recognize that it is not a victory at all. In truth, these exceptions are concessions which deserve no rejoicing at all. I am a realist and I recognize that the concession of these more difficult situations may be deemed necessary in order to gain a law which protects at least some of the pre-born community but such a concession is no cause for rejoicing.

Consider the cases of the following women. Woman A is with child, she is married but she and her husband find the timing for the child to be inconvenient. Woman B is with child, she is not married and she and her boyfriend never intended the child. Woman C is with child and the child’s father is also the child’s grandfather. Woman D is with child and the child’s father is her rapist. Woman E is with child and she is very ill with a pregnancy-related illness. Woman F is with child and her husband has unexpectedly become critically ill.

Which of these children can we sacrifice on the altar of political expediency?

It is common and expected to focus on the plight and anxiety of the women in these cases and the situations are undeniably heart-rending. The key question, however, is: “How are these children different from one another?” All of these children, without exception and in all that essentially matters, are identical. Each of these children is a human being. Each of these children is vulnerable. Each of these children is entirely dependent. Each of these children is completely innocent. Each of these children is beloved of God. Each of these children, without exception, possesses a human dignity. Each of these children has a God-given right to live. Each of these children has a soul. Each of these children is an entirely unique and irreplaceable member of the human family. The external circumstances under which these children were conceived certainly vary but those circumstances do not, in any way, touch the dignity or worth of the child. No one of these children should be viewed or treated any differently from any other of them. There is no justifiable reason to view the children conceived by rape or incest as somehow less worthy of protection than any other child. The Church, with its preferential option for the poor, cannot ever give even the slightest appearance of having abandoned or neglected these poorest of the poor.

The late Stephen Cardinal Kim Sou-Hwan of Korea with a young friend. The cardinal's paternal grandparents were sentenced to death during a persecution in Korea. His grandfather was killed but the persecutors spared his grandmother because she was pregnant. The child in her womb was the Cardinal's father.

It may be politically expedient and even necessary to recognize that we may not be able to exclude rape, incest or the life of the mother from an insurance plan but we must never concede these or broker a deal with the children in these situations as the pawns. I am not suggesting that we adopt an all or nothing modality, only that we never rejoice over sacrificing one to save more. It is especially important that we never glibly dismiss the children with less than desirable beginnings or still worse, rejoice that we had to sacrifice only these unfortunates in order to save others. The politically expedient decision to carve out these exceptions belies the foundation of our Pro-Life stand. We are not Pro-Life because the circumstances surrounding a child’s conception are voluntary or societally acceptable. We are Pro-Life because every child has a right to life and the circumstances of his or her conception are irrelevant. [When people worked to get rid of the category of 'illegitimate children' they did not make any exceptions, recognising the dignity of each child.]

I want to repeat that: In terms of a child’s right to life, the circumstances of his or her conception are irrelevant!

This in no way implies that the woman’s distress or confusion are irrelevant in themselves. They are only irrelevant in that they in no way affect the humanity of the child.

There is also a danger in seeming to accept the exceptions. When these exceptions are incorporated into law, seemingly with ecclesial approval, then the impression is given that a woman’s individual circumstances determine whether abortion is morally justifiable or not. Each woman is then, in effect, given permission to determine if her circumstances are difficult enough to justify an abortion because abortion then is focused on the woman’s circumstances rather than on the individuality and personal right to life of her child. The circumstances of rape, incest and life of the mother are certainly factors which tend to cloud the ability to see and recognize the child as a unique “other” but these circumstances change nothing about that unique otherness of the child.

Baby born after Haiti earthquake

There is an ongoing educational initiative known as “No child left behind.” This same commitment certainly under girds the thoughts and efforts of all in the Pro-Life Community. Abortion is a tremendous source of and cause for extreme grief in our country. Recent efforts to improve the nature of health care in the United States shows a certain degree of appropriate concern for the underserved, the uninsured and those with compromised health. The pre-born children in every one of the examples I cited above need and deserve good pre-natal care. It is unconscionable that some of them are deemed worthy of health care while others of them, due solely to a circumstance entirely beyond their control, should be marked for death. Insult is added to injury when we consider that these left behind children are not only marked for death but marked for death at government, translated our, expense. [In what way is the policy of using state money to kill children different from that of the Third Reich where the taxes of the German people were used to exterminate Jews and other 'undesirable'? One difference is that the scale of killing is far worse in the USA and in some other countries that it was under Hitler. Close to 50,000,000 pre-born Americans have been legally killed since Roe v Wade in 1973, many of them during the process of birth.]

Anyone who rejoices that a health care bill may be achieved and that its achievement may only cost the lives of the pre-born children conceived in rape or incest fails to properly value human life. I hope that some good can come from this massive health care reform work but I have great reservations for a number of reasons the major of which is that, at its very foundation, the effort fails to take full account of human worth and dignity. It was intended to cover every abortion as a right and Pro-Life efforts got that reduced but the lack of reverence for life has not changed. Any law which excludes, intentionally leaves behind or, God forbid, pays for the killing of any child, is not a cause for rejoicing.

We are all in need of conversion - via head and heart

Ananias Restores the Sight of Paul, Jean Restout II, 1719.

Acts 9:10-19 and 22:10-16.

The Year for Priests begins today, the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and will continue until the same feast next year. It briefly coincides with the Year of St Paul, which began on the somentiy of Sts Peter and Paul last year, and ends on the same day htis year, 29 June.

I must confess that the Year of St Paul didn't impinge on my life too much though I hope that the Year for Priests will be one with which I will be fully engaged. I was happy to discover that I wasn't the only one not to have paid too much special attention to St Paul. Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, in his weekly column in the Catholic Sentinel, a column I get by email every week, acknowledges the same. However, he makes up for it with a very fine column, We are all in need of conversion - via head and heart.

BEND — This past year has been dedicated by the Holy Father as the Year of Saint Paul. I must acknowledge that I have been most negligent in not focusing on this theme more effectively throughout this year. I do know that there has been a significant amount of “Pauline” activity in the diocese in response to this theme and I commend the pastors and directors of religious education for their efforts in bringing Saint Paul, his life and his writings into clearer view this year. Before this year comes to a conclusion on the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, I want to offer a few reflections on the Conversion of Saul.

We know well that Saul was blinded by a bright light as he was on his way to Damascus to arrest disciples of Jesus, known as followers of the Way. At the same time he heard a voice which asked why he was persecuting the speaker. In response to Saul’s question about who was speaking, he heard: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” Then he was given instructions about what to do next. Someone else was also given instructions. A message came to Ananias, a follower of the Way in Damascus, who was very likely one of those whom Saul would have arrested and brought back to Jerusalem in chains. He was instructed to go to Saul and lay hands on him. Ananias shows his humanity by questioning the wisdom of such an action. He informs the Lord in his vision that Saul was the one who was persecuting the Church, as if the Lord did not already know this. So the Lord instructs Ananias that Saul was to be his chosen instrument. Imagine the faith, the charity, the forgiveness, the courage it would have taken for Ananias to approach this powerful, murderous man with a message of healing. But Ananias went because he had been sent.

What I find to be absolutely remarkable is the manner of approach taken by Ananias. We know that Ananias must have gone to the house on Straight Street with a bit of reluctance and trepidation and yet when he comes to that house he greets Saul saying, “Saul, my brother.” He does not come to him and say, “Saul, you murderous so-and-so ...” but rather “my brother.” I believe this welcome word has a profound effect upon Saul. During his days of blindness Saul had to be puzzling about many things, particularly his own previous blindness and his past excessive self-righteousness. He had to be asking himself how he could have been so sure of his theological positions just a few days ago and so confused now. He had to have had some fear that those whom he was intent upon arresting, and in whose complete power he now was, could easily do him great harm. Thus, to be received by a representative of the Christian community, a follower of the Way, with these welcoming words, without any indication of repentance on his part, had to have been a most powerful experience of mercy, acceptance and forgiveness. Simply, Saul, my brother.

It is important also to evaluate Saul’s blind passion against the Way. He approached the task of ridding adherents to the Way from the face of the earth with a raging, fuming anger muttering murderous threats. Why? Certainly there is pride but pride usually generates a different kind of hatred. The hatred of pride is more usually a cold disdain. There is a possibility of envy but Saul does not seem at all envious of those who were rejoicing in the Way. The passion that seems to explain Saul’s actions is fear. He sees in the Way the possibility that his world will be turned upside down and he happens to like his world very much. There was a strong possibility that he would be a great leader among the Jews. He was already endearing himself to the chief priests and there was promise of great religious fame. The adherents to the Way showed every sign that they were going to interfere with his plans for the future, interfere with his life, interfere with a promising career, disrupt his world. His fear, it seems to me, is not dissimilar from the fear expressed in our secular society. The degree of raging, vituperative anger expressed against the teachings of the Church, particularly relative to abortion and homosexuality, is a sign of this same fear. Being greeted in the midst of that confusion with the consoling and welcoming title of brother dissipates a lot of fear. Saul, my brother.

I see in Saul’s conversion a two-fold movement. He is moved by the theological consideration, presented to him in most dramatic fashion, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.” This is material for thought, for the head. This is something with which Saul would have been very familiar and even comfortable. This is perhaps likened to pure catechesis. But Saul is also moved by the fraternal, communal consideration, “Saul, my brother.” This is an experience of community and fraternity which touches his heart. It is in this context that Saul can make a personal application of what he had heard on the road to Damascus, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” because it is now linked with, “Saul, my brother.” In being addressed by Ananias, a member of the Way, in this familiar, warm and accepting fashion he must have heard, “Saul, my brother, why are you persecuting me?”

Saul needed conversion. He was absolutely, unshakably certain that he was seeing matters clearly. He was certain that he was just and righteous. He categorically refused to call his view of the matter into question. He was incapable of asking himself, “What if I am wrong?” After meeting with Ananias he must have asked himself, “What was it in me that precluded me from seeing before what I see so clearly now?” Conversion entails both head and heart.

We are all in need of ongoing, even Pauline, conversion. Perhaps the issue is abortion or contraception or homosexuality or immigration or fidelity or alcohol abuse or pornography or physical abuse or liturgical renewal or Mass attendance or drugs or promiscuity or self righteousness or harboring resentments or a host of other possibilities.

Saul, Saul, my brother, why do you reject and oppose the teachings of the Church in these areas? Why do you persecute me?

Pro-abortion legislators abandoning the Catholic faith

At the same time, I do not see how any Catholic senator or representative could vote for the passage of FOCA without recognizing that such a vote would constitute a direct and intentional declaration of their disdain for Catholic teaching. Such a vote would be tantamount to a public declaration of their intention to abandon the Catholic faith. It would be imperative that the faith consequences of such a declaration be allowed to fall fully on the heads of those who would make it.

So writes Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, in his current weekly in the Catholic Sentinel. He’s writing in the context of President-elect Obama’s commitment to the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which, if approved, would eliminate practically every law in the 50 states of the USA that restrict abortion, including so called ‘partial-birth abortion’ and trample on people’s consciences.

Traditionally Christian countries and regions in the West such as Australia, Canada, Europe and the USA are more and more becoming militantly anti-Christian and anti-human rights in their legislation or attempts at legislation. For example, the Abortion Law Reform Bill, passed in Victoria, Australia, last year, contains the following words:

Despite any conscientious objection to abortion, a registered medical practitioner is under a duty to perform an abortion in an emergency where the
abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant woman.

Despite any conscientious objection to abortion, a registered nurse is under a duty to assist a registered medical practitioner in performing an abortion in an emergency where the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant woman.

Australian bishops appealed for prayers before the vote in the Victoria parliament.

LifeSiteNews reports that on 14 January the European Parliament passed a resolution – not a law – ‘that proposes to standardise among all member states the legal status of same-sex relationships’. The resolution also ‘calls upon EU member-states to guarantee access to “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” terms universally accepted as including abortion and sterilisation as well as the recognition of same-sex unions’.

Mercatornet has a report about what is happening in the schools of Quebec, the predominantly French-speaking province in Canada that, until the 1960s, was one of the most staunchly Catholic societies in the world. It seems that the rights of parents are being trampled upon:

Quebec kids to learn Orwellian spirituality

All school children in Quebec are being forced to study moral relativism.

An often-quoted Jesuit maxim boasts, "Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man."

Only seven? Amateurs! Since September all Quebec students from primary school entry to high school graduation, whether enrolled in public or non-funded private schools, must attend Quebec's new Ethics and Religious Culture course (ERC). And teachers, regardless of their beliefs, must teach it. Read the full story here.

We surely need to waken up and take our faith seriously.

Purgatory and the Scenic Joys of Oregon

Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon, writes a weekly column in Catholic Sentinel, the papers that serves the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon and the Diocese of Baker, which cover the state between them. Bishop Vasa has to travel vast distances as his diocese is nearly twice as big as Mindanao and more than twice the area of Ireland. He often writes about his trips and the people he meets on his pastoral visits. He can tantalize his readers with his descriptions of the scenery along the way, such as that in Wallowa County (above) where he spent the weekend of All Saints' and All Souls' Days.

More importantly, he uses his columns to give the Church's teaching very clearly and in a truly pastoral manner. Sometimes the word 'pastoral' is used when the language used is that of 'fudge' rather than of hard truth. He writes in the second part of his latest column about praying for the souls in purgatory and I've highlighted part of his message. I've been present at too many premature 'canonizations' and, while trying to point out the goodness of persons at their funerals, without eulogizing them, I try to stress the importance of praying for them.

I have used Bishop Vasa's columns on occasion in Misyon and he has given me permission to use his material.

Catholic Sentinel 11/20/2008

Trips to Diocese of Baker parishes filled with scenic joys

By Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon

BEND — It seems like a long time since I have written about a recent travel experience within the Diocese. While there have been occasions of travel within the diocese other matters have been a bit more pre-occupying and have precluded any kind of detailed travel account. This week, however, even though there is an abundance of other matters to make comment upon, I need to make a couple of observations about a recent trip to Wallowa County. The two parishes I visited are the furthermost parishes of the diocese, Saint Katherine at Enterprise and Saint Pius X at Wallowa. While I did try to watch the odometer I can only guess that the actual one-way mileage is something in the neighborhood of 340 to 350 miles. Thus I spent a good portion of a Saturday traveling there and a good portion of Sunday traveling back. It was a most enjoyable trip.

The fall colors along Highway 97, through the Columbia Gorge, over the Blue Mountains and into the Wallowa Mountains were just short of spectacular. Low-hanging, wintry clouds portended rain or even snow and softened the otherwise harsh light of the sun. Clearly it is fall. There were any number of occasions when, rounding a curve or cresting a rise a brand new fall-rewritten scene began to present itself in such a way that I tended to strain upward or right or left to get just a little more of an advance view of what was coming. Both the trip there and the return were filled with these kinds of scenic joys. The most memorable for me, however, was the area between Enterprise and Wallowa on the return trip. The clouds were a bit heavier, just a little more foreboding of the coming winter, and yet so brightly lit that they were not the least bit unwelcome. The magnificent composition of clouds and sun and mountains and river and colorful trees and intervening river valley was wonderfully refreshing.

That portion of the trip was reminiscent for me of the wonderful spirit and attitude of the people with whom I had the opportunity to celebrate Mass, share meals and swap stories. Confirmation was held on Saturday evening for the seven children of the parish of confirmation age. The number seven made it possible for me to ask one gift of the Holy Spirit from each child which proved to be easy for the first several children and a bit more difficult as memories strained both to remember the seven gifts as well as to remember which had already been claimed. It also allowed the same process for the seven sacraments with a comparable two-fold memory strain. As usual, I think I enjoyed the questioning more than the children did.

I was very pleased that, at the end of Mass on Sunday morning, a parish representative at Enterprise stood and announced the support of the parish for the Powell Butte Retreat Center. Though the parishes at Enterprise and Wallowa are located in one of the most beautiful and retreat-like parts of the state and though they are the most distant from the retreat site they recognize that we are building something for the future which serves the whole diocese and they wanted to assure that I knew of their support. I commend them for their faith.

Since my visit coincided with the celebration of All Saints Day and All Souls Day it was not possible to avoid the topic of purgatory. It often happens at funerals that the consoling hope that the dearly departed is in heaven with God leads to an over-exaggerated statement that the newly departed is in heaven already. This, of course, is merely conjectured and not known. It is hoped for but not certain. Nonetheless these compassionate sermons can generate within us a profound sense of peace and even joy at the thought that our loved ones are with God. This does sound wonderful but we do not know if it is true or not. Imagine yourself having just died and having discovered that all of your past attachments to sin, which were never completely denounced, have trailed you into eternity. Imagine your shock as you discover that you must now spend (by analogy) one hundred years in purgatory. Imagine your hope as you recognize that the assiduous prayers and Masses offered by your friends and relatives on earth will greatly reduce your purgatorial sentence. Finally, imagine your shock and dismay as you see your family and friends still on earth “canonizing” you and rejoicing that you have no need of their prayers because you are already enjoying the beatific vision, already seeing God face-to-face. These are the ones whom we in the Church refer to as the Poor Souls.

Undoubtedly, it is consoling for us on earth to envision our loved ones as already united with God in heaven but it is much more consoling for the poor souls in purgatory for us to presume that they are not yet fully reconciled with God. There is no harm done in praying for someone as if they were still in purgatory even if they are, in fact, in heaven. There is, by contrast, great harm done in not praying for someone because of a conviction that they are in heaven when they are, in fact, among the Poor and forgotten souls in purgatory. Put yourself in their shoes and pray for them as you will want your children and grandchildren to pray for you. A simple test. Call to mind those whom you know and love who have died in the past year. While you will certainly have recalled them many times in memory, have you also remembered on those occasions to say a decade of the rosary for them, have a Mass offered for them or gathered the family together to pray a rosary for the happy repose of the soul of that loved one? It is good to be remembered, it is better to be remembered in prayer.

All Souls Day this year was particularly poignant for me because one year ago my family and I were keeping vigil with Mom during her last days. She died on November 3 and so the approach of that one year anniversary made this year’s liturgical passage through All Saints Day and All Souls’ Day very memorable. Eternal rest grant unto her, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon her. May her soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen. Let us remember to pray throughout the year for the poor souls in purgatory.