Spanking: Under the Acacia, 6 October 2008

Fellow Negros Times columnist Richard M. Gelangre last Monday raised the dilemma he faces as a parent and as a teacher: To spank or not to spank? I’m not a parent but am a teacher and at various times over the last 40 years have taught and given retreats to students at first, second and third level.

As an adult I have never struck a child. I cannot recall my parents spanking me but I know that they did. I know that on those rare occasions they used the palm of their hand on my “behind”. They never used any kind of instrument and the punishment was more “symbolic” than physical. One time my brother, three years younger than me and then a toddler, ran out on a busy road but, thanks be to God, wasn’t hit by a car or truck. However, he was hit by my mother – her reaction of shock and relief – with her hand in a way that didn’t hurt him but that conveyed to him that he must never do such a dangerous thing again – and he didn’t.

My quick-tempered mother scolded us but never screamed or shouted at us. My father’s favorite threat – he never raised his voice at anyone - was “I’ll give you a good clip in the ear if you do that again”. As we got older we used to joke him about it because, at one level, it was an empty threat but, at another, a clear reminder to behave properly.

I remember when I was 13 I said some very hurtful words to my mother in front of a visitor. I didn’t realize at the time how hurtful they were until my father took me aside later and let me know clearly. He didn’t tell me what to do but I knew what he expected.

Around that time my parents gave me the key of our house. In Ireland the house-key was the symbol of adulthood. You legally became an adult at 21 – now it’s 18 – and 21st birthday cards all had a picture of a key on them. I didn’t know anyone else who was given one at 13. This gave me a great sense of being trusted and my response was to prove to be worthy of that trust. There was only one occasion when I failed to do that, through thoughtlessness rather than by design. I had permission to go to a dance on Saturday nights on the other side of the city. I went by bicycle with a classmate. Our parents told us to leave at 11. One night we were enjoying ourselves so much that we waited till the dance ended at 11:30. Then we went to the nearby house of another classmate for a late night snack.

I arrived home at around 1 A.M. feeling great because I had had such an enjoyable evening. I was surprised to find my parents waiting at the door and got a right good scolding from them. The word “killjoys” was running through my mind but I didn’t say anything. It was probably the following morning I realized that they had been worried sick, thinking I might have been in an accident and lying in a hospital ward – or morgue. We had no phone and that was decades before cell phones.

But my parents said no more about the matter nor did they confiscate my house-key.

My father and mother had a united front when it came to discipline. I don’t recall being able to play one off against the other.

In my time corporal punishment was legal in schools. In the local kindergarten run by the Irish Sisters of Charity the teachers occasionally used a ruler on the palm of a student’s hand, as far as I can recall. My use of that expression indicates that my childhood wasn’t blighted by the physical brutality of adults, at home or in school. In the boys’ primary and secondary schools I attended, run by the Congregation of Christian Brothers, some of whose Australian members now work in Kabankalan and Maasin, teachers – all men – were allowed to use a leather strap with which they could beat a student on the palm of his hand. “Six of the best” was for a serious misdemeanor, but I rarely saw it happening. The usual was two “biffs”, which would leave your hand tingling for a while, but which we took in our stride. Parents implicitly backed the teacher’s authority and unless there was excessive physical force used, something I never saw but know occasionally happened, none of us would report at home that we had been punished. I don’t remember any of my high school teachers using the “leather”.

Richard M. Gelangre’s story of the child left in the locker by the teacher seems to have the elements of an urban myth. But I have been horrified at stories of parents using a two-by-two, which he mentions. I’ve heard of parents leaving children hanging in sacks for a while. No adult has the right to treat a child with brutality and parents, while they have the primary responsibility for their children, don’t own them.

The society I grew up in 50 years ago in Ireland was far from permissive. It is somewhat more so now and it’s not unknown for teachers, who cannot any more use corporal punishment, to be sometimes treated with brutality by students.

I’m grateful to my parents for the “symbolic” spankings I know they gave me but can’t remember. I’m grateful for their example, for their united front, for their sense of fairness, for their inner discipline – genuine discipline - and for their trust. I’m grateful also to my teachers who used the “leather” sparingly.

My experience is quite different from that of a fourth-year girl in a Catholic high school retreat I gave in Mindanao more than 30 years ago. Small in stature and immature in her behavior, she came to me privately and cried for at least five minutes before telling me, “My parents give me everything I want. But they never ask me ‘How did you do in school today?’ And they never even scold me”. undertheacacia@gmail.com

Pro-life Days of Prayer, Australia, USA

On 26 September I posted the text of the pastoral letter of Archbishop Denis Hart of Melbourne to the Catholics of Victoria. He has called a Day of Intercession throughout the Archdiocese tomorrow, 5 October, dedicated to the defeat of the Abortion Law Reform Bill. He has invited all people of good will to join with him in an hour of prayer at St Patrick's Cathedral at 12.15pm on that day.

The Archdiocese of Sydney, New South Wales, is also observing tomorrow as a day of prayer for the same reason. The message of Auxiliary Bishop Julian Porteous of Sydney refers to Adelaide, but I can’t find anything on the website of that Archdiocese. Bishop Porteous is described, for some strange reason, as ‘Apostolic Administrator’, in the media release. But Cardinal George Pell, while out of the country at the moment, as far as I know, is still very much the Archbishop of Sydney.

+++

Meanwhile, Bishop Joseph F. Martino of Scranton, Pennsylvania, has issued a very clear and forthright pastoral letter for Respect Life Weekend being observed today and tomorrow in the USA. (I’m not sure about other countries). Bishop Martino’s letter is written in the context of the elections in the USA in November when a new president and vice-president will be elected, along with the full House of Representatives, and part of the Senate. One of the reasons that abortion is such a major issue, apart from morality and justice, though related to those, is that the next president may well have to appoint new justices to the Supreme Court. They could help overturn Roe-v Wade, the decision of the Supreme Court in 1973 that struck down the laws of all 50 states that in any way restricted abortions. Many see the decision of the Supreme Court to have been arbitrary and unfaithful to the US Constitution.

Here is the full text, with introduction, of Bishop Martino’s letter. My highlights and (comments).

At the direction of the Most Reverend Bishop, this letter is to be read by the celebrant at all Masses of Obligation on Respect Life Weekend, Saturday, October 4, and Sunday, October 5, at the time of and instead of the homily.

Moreover, a copy of the letter should be circulated with all parish bulletins on this same weekend.

A PASTORAL LETTER FROM BISHOP MARTINO

Respect Life Sunday

My brothers and sisters in Christ,

The American Catholic bishops initiated Respect Life Sunday in 1972, the year before the Supreme Court legalized abortion in the United States. Since that time, Catholics across the country observe the month of October with devotions and pro-life activities in order to advance the culture of life. This October, our efforts have more significance than ever. Never have we seen such abusive criticism directed toward those who believe that life begins at conception and ends at natural death.

As Catholics, we should not be surprised by these developments. Forty years ago, Pope Paul VI predicted that widespread use of artificial contraceptives would lead to increased marital infidelity, lessened regard for women, and a general lowering of moral standards especially among the young. Forty years later, social scientists, not necessarily Catholics, attest to the accuracy of his predictions. As if following some bizarre script, the sexual revolution has produced widespread marital breakdown, weakened family ties, legalized abortion, sexually transmitted diseases, pornography, same-sex unions, euthanasia, destruction of human embryos for research purposes and a host of other ills.

It is impossible for me to answer all of the objections to the Church’s teaching on life that we hear every day in the media. Nevertheless, let me address a few. To begin, laws that protect abortion constitute injustice of the worst kind. They rest on several false claims including that there is no certainty regarding when life begins, that there is no certainty about when a fetus becomes a person, and that some human beings may be killed to advance the interests or convenience of others. With regard to the first, reason and science have answered the question. The life of a human being begins at conception. The Church has long taught this simple truth, and science confirms it. Biologists can now show you the delicate and beautiful development of the human embryo in its first days of existence. This is simply a fact that reasonable people accept.

Regarding the second, the embryo and the fetus have the potential to do all that an adult person does.

Finally, the claim that the human fetus may be sacrificed to the interests or convenience of his mother or someone else is grievously wrong. All three claims have the same result: the weakest and most vulnerable are denied, because of their age, the most basic protection that we demand for ourselves. This is discrimination at its worst, and no person of conscience should support it.

Another argument goes like this: “As wrong as abortion is, I don't think it is the only relevant ‘life’ issue that should be considered when deciding for whom to vote.” This reasoning is sound only if other issues carry the same moral weight as abortion does, such as in the case of euthanasia and destruction of embryos for research purposes. Health care, education, economic security, immigration, and taxes are very important concerns. Neglect of any one of them has dire consequences as the recent financial crisis demonstrates. However, the solutions to problems in these areas do not usually involve a rejection of the sanctity of human life in the way that abortion does. Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life. Consider this: the finest health and education systems, the fairest immigration laws, and the soundest economy do nothing for the child who never sees the light of day. It is a tragic irony that “pro-choice” candidates have come to support homicide – the gravest injustice a society can tolerate – in the name of “social justice.”

Even the Church’s just war theory has moral force because it is grounded in the principle that innocent human life must be protected and defended. Now, a person may, in good faith, misapply just war criteria leading him to mistakenly believe that an unjust war is just, but he or she still knows that innocent human life may not be harmed on purpose. A person who supports permissive abortion laws, however, rejects the truth that innocent human life may never be destroyed. This profound moral failure runs deeper and is more corrupting of the individual, and of the society, than any error in applying just war criteria to particular cases. (Bishop Martino highlights the corruption caused by the acceptance of abortion as if it didn’t really matter.)

Furthermore, National Right to Life reports that 48.5 million abortions have been performed since 1973. (In the USA). One would be too many. No war, no natural disaster, no illness or disability has claimed so great a price.

In saying these things in an election year, I am in very good company. My predecessor, Bishop Timlin, writing his pastoral letter on Respect Life Sunday 2000, stated the case eloquently:
Abortion is the issue this year and every year in every campaign. Catholics may not turn away from the moral challenge that abortion poses for those who seek to obey God’s commands. They are wrong when they assert that abortion does not concern them, or that it is only one of a multitude of issues of equal importance. No, the taking of innocent human life is so heinous, so horribly evil, and so absolutely opposite to the law of Almighty God that abortion must take precedence over every other issue. I repeat. It is the single most important issue confronting not only Catholics, but the entire electorate.

My fellow bishops, writing ten years ago, explained why some evils – abortion and euthanasia in particular – take precedence over other forms of violence and abuse.

The failure to protect life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community. If we understand the human person as ‘the temple of the Holy Spirit’ – the living house of God – then these latter issues fall logically into place as the crossbeams and walls of that house. All direct attacks on innocent human life, such as abortion and euthanasia, strike at the house’s foundation [emphasis in the original]. These directly and immediately violate the human person’s most fundamental right – the right to life. Neglect of these issues is the equivalent of building our house on sand. Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics, 23.

While the Church assists the State in the promotion of a just society, its primary concern is to assist men and women in achieving salvation. For this reason, it is incumbent upon bishops to correct Catholics who are in error regarding these matters. Furthermore, public officials who are Catholic and who persist in public support for abortion and other intrinsic evils should not partake in or be admitted to the sacrament of Holy Communion. As I have said before, I will be vigilant on this subject. (No pussy-footing here.)

It is the Church’s role now to be a prophet in our own country, reminding all citizens of what our founders meant when they said that “. . . all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Church’s teaching that all life from conception to natural death should be protected by law is founded on religious belief to be sure, but it is also a profoundly American principle founded on reason. Whenever a society asks its citizens to violate its own foundational principles – as well as their moral consciences – citizens have a right, indeed an obligation, to refuse.

In 1941, Bishop Gustave von Galen gave a homily condemning Nazi officials for murdering mentally ill people in his diocese of Muenster, Germany. (This is a reference to Blessed Clemens August Cardinal Graf von Galen of Münster, Germany, in Hitler’s time. ‘Gustave’ is a mistake.He was known as ‘The Lion of Münster.)

The bishop said:

“Thou shalt not kill!” God wrote this commandment in the conscience of man long before any penal code laid down the penalty for murder, long before there was any prosecutor or any court to investigate and avenge a murder. Cain, who killed his brother Abel, was a murderer long before there were any states or any courts or law. And he confessed his deed, driven by his accusing conscience: “My punishment is greater than I can bear. . . and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me the murderer shall slay me” (Genesis 4:13-14)”

Should he have opposed the war and remained silent about the murder of the mentally ill? No person of conscience can fail to understand why Bishop von Galen spoke as he did.

My dear friends, I beg you not to be misled by confusion and lies. Our Lord, Jesus Christ, does not ask us to follow him to Calvary only for us to be afraid of contradicting a few bystanders along the way. He does not ask us to take up his Cross only to have us leave it at the voting booth door. Recently, Pope Benedict XVI said that “God is so humble that he uses us to spread his Word.” The gospel of life, which we have the privilege of proclaiming, resonates in the heart of every person – believer and non-believer – because it fulfills the heart’s most profound desire. Let us with one voice continue to speak the language of love and affirm the right of every human being to have the value of his or her life, from conception to natural death, respected to the highest degree.

October is traditionally the month of the Rosary. Let us pray the Rosary for the strength and fortitude to uphold the truths of our faith and the requirements of our law to all who deny them. And, let us ask Our Lady to bless our nation and the weakest among us.

May Mary, the mother of Jesus, the Lord of Life, pray for us.

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Joseph F. Martino, D.D., Hist. E.D.Bishop of Scranton

The online version ends with a link to Humanae Vitae, the encyclical written by Pope paul VI 40 years ago.

I can't 'bear' to look!

When I saw this photo and story in today's Daily Telegraph I immediately thought of my late mother. No, she didn't look like a bear. However, her variation of the English idiom 'Like a bull in a china shop', meaning very clumsy, was 'Like a bear in a delph shop'.

I've googled both expressions but only the first comes up. So my mother's expression was her own. I don't know if she got it from my grandmother or grandfather. She had many expressions that I never heard anyone else using, not even her sisters or brothers.

The bear in this amusing story that happened in British Columbia is not in a delph or china shop but in a sandwich shop. Nobody was hurt - except for the poor bear who was later put down.

The animal in the photo is a real bear, not a 'counter feet' one!

Special Friends: Under the Acacia, 29-30 September 2008

I just got back from Manila this morning where I had a number of Columban meetings. It's also six years today since I started as editor of Misyon. I chose to begin on the Feast of St Therese. Although today is a holiday in the Philippines for the end of Ramadan, my staff chose to come in as they want to get on top of their work. (About five percent of Filipinos are Muslims, mostly in Mindanao where they form twenty percent of the population.)

Because of it being my sixth anniversary as editor we went out to lunch to Aboy's, one of the most popular native restaurants in Bacolod. 'Native' as in 'native restaurant' means a place where Filipino dishes are served Filipino-style. You order dishes that are shared by the group, similar to Chinese restaurants. You wouldn't go to one on your own.

I don't know about the readers of Negros Times, the new paper I've begun writing for but the editor has asked me to write not only for the Monday edition but for Friday also. It comes Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Here' my column for last Monday.

I met Bololoy again on September 14 in Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary, Makati City. We hadn’t met for a year. I first got to know him in the mid-1990s when we belonged to a group that met every month in Mandaluyong in the house of the Little Sisters of Jesus, contemplatives who live among the poor and support themselves by manual work. A typical community has three or four sisters, with one staying at home and the others working in factories or as labanderas. Central to their way of life is adoration of the Blessed Sacrament in their simple chapels that welcome their neighbors.

The Sisters’ welcome Bololoy for the joy he brings. He doesn’t work. He can’t read or write. He says very little. But a smile is seldom far from his lips and if he hears a lively piece of music he starts dancing. He often joins the Sisters for lunch. One day he was late and found Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales of Manila, who knows him well, sitting in his place. But Bololoy was quick to act. “Monsignor”, he said, “your driver wants to talk to you outside.” When Cardinal Rosales came back he laughed when he saw that Bololoy had taken his place.

It’s hard to know Bololoy’s age. I would guess that he’s in his 50s. For the minority he belongs to that is quite an age. In the USA persons like him have a life expectancy of 49 years as they are at high risk for congenital heart defects.

Bololoy was born with Down Syndrome or Trisomy 21. The latter name, used more and more now, comes from the discovery by Dr Jerome Lejeune, a Frenchman, in 1958, that a person with Down Syndrome had an extra chromosome at the 21st pair. He spent 40 years as a doctor turned research scientist looking for a way to serve such persons.

Each year around 55,000 persons in the USA start out life but never make it to birth: they are aborted. Ninety percent of women in the USA who discover that the child they are carrying has the 21st chromosome decided to abort their child.

Dr. Lejeune, the cause of whose beatification has been introduced in the Archdiocese of Paris, wrote of persons with Trisomy 21: “With their slightly slanting eyes, their little nose in a round face and their unfinished features, trisomic children are more child-like than other children. All children have short hands and short fingers; theirs are shorter. Their entire anatomy is more rounded, without any asperities or stiffness. Their ligaments, their muscles, are so supple that it adds a tender languor to their way of being. And this sweetness extends to their character: they are communicative and affectionate, they have a special charm which is easier to cherish than to describe. This is not to say that Trisomy 21 is a desirable condition. It is an implacable disease which deprives the child of that most precious gift handed down to us through genetic heredity: the full power of rational thought. This combination of a tragic chromosomic error and a naturally endearing nature, immediately shows what medicine is all about: hatred of disease and love of the diseased.”

Some time ago Bololoy disappeared for about a month, leaving his family frantic with worry. But a neighbor happened to make the Wednesday novena to Our Mother of Perpetual Help in the Redemporist church in Baclaren and ran into him there. Probably the “special charm which is easier to cherish than to describe” had brought out the best in those who met him during the time he was lost. He was none the worse for the experience.

Leah is another friend of mine who has Trisomy 21. She is usually present at the weekday Masses I celebrate and is a high school graduate. Another is Vincent from Cebu, now recovering from a horrific experience while visiting family members in the USA when he had a severe reaction to a medicine he was taking. It caused much of his skin to burn and made it difficult for him to breathe. Thank God, he has come through this episode where he spent quite a few days in the ICU. Vincent has been working as a teacher’s aide in a school for special children.

I met Bololoy and Vincent through Faith and Light, a movement that grew out of an international pilgrimage to Lourdes in 1971 for persons with learning disabilities. This sprung from the experience of families being refused by groups of “normal” pilgrims. Every ten years members of the movement from all over the world gather in Lourdes from Holy Thursday to Easter Sunday. I was blessed to be there in 2001, traveling with a group from the north of England but chaplain to the small contingent from the Philippines. I was based in Britain at the time.

In each area where there are Faith and Light communities they hold a yearly pilgrimage around the feast of the Birthday of Our Blessed Mother. That’s why I was in Makati on September 14. At present there are communities only in the Manila area. A community consists of the “VIPs” – those with Trisomy 21 and other learning disabilities - parents and friends, usually young adults. They hold a celebration every month that includes time for parents to be together while the VIPs and friends have their own activity. Then there is time for prayer and the celebration ends with something to eat, usually a snack.

It’s not always easy for parents with a child who has a disability, whether a learning or a physical one. Many are born with both. But the thinking that Bololoy, Leah and Vincent are useless and that the world would be better had they not been born is utterly abhorrent. Some have described the awful reality in the USA that only ten percent of children with Trisomy 21 are allowed to be born as a form of eugenics. They are right.

There is no Faith and Light community in Bacolod. Anyone interested may contact me at undertheacacia@gmail.com.

Ancient Martyrs in Syria and Contemporary Threatened Persecution in Australia

Basilica of Sts Cosmas and Damian, Rome

Today is the feast of Sts Cosmas and Damian, said to have been twin brothers from Syria and to have been physicians, who were martyred in 303 during the persecution of the Emperor Diocletian, along with their three brothers Anthimus, Leontius, and Euprepius and their widowed mother. I came across this item about them

Saints Cosmas and Damien were twin brothers born in Arabia (modern day Syria) around 270 A.D. They had three younger brothers; their father died, so their mother, Theodota, was left to raise all five of them herself. Cosmas and Damien were educated in science and medicine, and became physicians that were quite skilled and enthusiastic about their work. They offered their services primarily in the seaport Aegea (between Tarsus and Antioch), on the Gulf of Iskenderun in the Roman Province of Cilicia (modern day Turkey, south central coast). The following story of their work provides a meditation for our own lives:

Cosmas and Damien saw in every patient a brother or sister in Christ. For this reason, they showed great charity to all and treated their patients to the best of their ability. Yet no matter how much care a patient required, neither Cosmas nor Damien ever accepted any money for their services. For this reason, they were called anargyroi in Greek, which means "the penniless ones."

Every chance they had, the two saints told their patients about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Because the people all loved these twin doctors, they listened to them willingly. Cosmas and Damien often brought health back to both the bodies and the souls of those who came to them for help.

When Diocletian's persecution of Christians began in their city, the saints were arrested at once. They had never tried to hide their great love for their Christian faith. They were tortured, but nothing could make them give up their belief in Christ. They had lived for him and had brought so many people to his love. So at last, they were put to death in the year 303.

Diocletian's edict in 303 demanded religious uniformity and the elimination of the Christian sacred literature. Christians who refused to cooperate could face death. It was said that Cosmas and Damien, after refusing to worship the Roman idols, had survived several devious means of torture and death, and were finally beheaded. These martyrs are named in the First Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass and in the Litany of the Saints.

The two saints are patrons of physicians, surgeons and pharmacists. At Mass this morning I told the people that while persecution of the Church similar to the time of the saints we honour today continues in places, there’s a different kind of persecution going on, for example, in the State of Victoria, Australia, where legislation passed recently by the lower house, the Legislative Assembly, but yet to be ratified by the upper house, the Legislative Council. If passed, this would try to force doctors, nurses and pharmacists to be involved directly in abortions. There is no attempt whatever to recognise the rights of conscience. We find similar movements in other parts of the Western world.

Archbishop Denis Hart of Melbourne has issued a very strong and clear pastoral letter and has called for a day of prayer on Sunday, 5 October. Here is the letter, with my emphases (and comments).

A PASTORAL LETTER OF THE

ARCHBISHOP OF MELBOURNE TO TO THE CATHOLIC PEOPLE OF VICTORIA AND ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL

19 September 2008

Dear Friends,

Early this year, my brother bishops and I issued a Pastoral Statement on the proposed ‘decriminalisation of abortion’ and made the following key points.

A human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception and all living human individuals are entitled to the equal protection of the law.

Every living human individual, including those imperfect physically or mentally, is equal to every other individual in respect of the right not to be directly or intentionally killed.

The Church does not condemn women who have had abortions and encourages them to find hope, forgiveness and healing in the mercy of God. Together with their children, they are the principal victims of this new culture of death. Often women resort to abortion for complex reasons, abandoned or under pressure, or led on by false information.

The motivation to decriminalise abortion seems to be to remove the “unlawful” stigma currently attached to “medical” abortion in virtue of the fact that it is named as an offence in the Crimes Act. But the Law is a great educator and if the Law approves something then people gradually accept a new understanding of what is right and what is wrong. People begin to think: “Abortion is lawful now, so it’s right.” This would betray the majority view in the community that the incidence of abortion should be reduced. (As a young priest I was studying in New York when the state passed a law allowing abortion on demand up to 24 weeks. I remember hearing a female student in the college where I was studying - in the process of rejecting its Catholic identity at the time - say, 'We now have another way to solve our problems'.)

Recent developments

In late August, when the Abortion Law Reform Bill was introduced into the Legislative Assembly, I again spoke out against the proposal in similar terms.

Sadly, the Bill passed the Legislative Assembly on 11 September 2008 without amendment despite courageous attempts by many to have the Bill defeated or to have its effects minimised. It will soon be introduced into the Legislative Council and, if passed, could be become law as early as 15 October 2008.

I write now with a deep sadness for mothers-to-be and children yet to be born, and with a profound sense of anguish at the draconian clauses in the Bill which attack long held religious beliefs and practice.

Make no mistake about it, the Bill goes beyond codifying current clinical practice, as its proponents claim, and will set an unfortunate precedent which other states may follow.

This Bill is a breach of fundamental human rights with some particularly disturbing features.

Abortion Law Reform Bill

The Bill if enacted:

applies to females of child bearing age;

allows a female to have an abortion up to 24 weeks gestation performed by any doctor, regardless of their expertise;

allows a pharmacist or nurse, without involvement of a doctor to supply or administer a drug to cause an abortion to a female up to 24 weeks gestation;

permits abortions from 24 weeks up to childbirth for a female if two doctors reasonably believe the abortion is appropriate having regard to the woman’s relevant medical and current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances;

repeals the offence of “child destruction”;

compels a pharmacist or nurse employed or engaged in a public or private hospital or day-procedure centre, if directed in writing by a doctor, to administer or to supply a drug to cause an abortion to a female who is more than 24 weeks pregnant; (Wouldn't Hitler and Stalin be proud?)

imposes a legal obligation on doctors, nurses, pharmacists and psychologists who have a conscientious objection to abortion to refer a woman requesting an abortion to another practitioner in the same profession whom the practitioner knows does not have a conscientious objection to abortion; (To use the Hitler context again, a German or Italian sheltering Jews because of their objection to the Nazi genocide policy would be compelled to hand over the Jews to those who agreed with it.)

and imposes a legal obligation on doctors and nurses, notwithstanding their conscientious objection, to perform an abortion on a female in an emergency where it is deemed that the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant woman. (How depraved can you get? Jewish musicians being forced to play while their fellow-Jews were being hanged.)

Protection of mothers and unborn children

The Bill is seriously flawed as much by what it omits as by what it contains.

Notable flaws include:

the failure to provide any protection for unborn children right up to 40 weeks gestation;

the failure to ban partial birth abortions;

the failure to safeguard the health of women by permitting abortions to be performed by doctors who have no qualifications or training in obstetrics; ('backstreet' abortionists with 'MD' after their names).

and the failure to include informed consent provisions.

Many of the so called “safeguards” in the Bill fail to protect either the expectant mother or the unborn child. For example, an abortion will be possible from 24 weeks up to childbirth provided the doctor consults one other doctor who agrees it is appropriate.

The Bill does not require a consultation with the woman by the doctor to form a second opinion nor does it specify whether this colleague need have any expertise in the area or any specialist training or qualifications. In this way, it would not be difficult to gain the consent of one other colleague particularly if both worked in an abortion clinic. It would not matter that 5, 10 or more colleagues previously did not concur that the abortion would be appropriate.

Nor does the Bill offer any provision for professional counselling to women with unplanned or difficult pregnancies, provide them with accurate information about the likely effect of an abortion, protect women in vulnerable positions from coercion, or contain any other provision likely to reduce the number of abortions carried out in this state each year. On the contrary, the Bill is most likely to lead to an increase in the number of abortions, including so-called “social” abortions.

Freedom of religious belief in the 21st century

The Bill is an unprecedented attack on the freedom to hold and exercise fundamental religious beliefs. It makes a mockery of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and the Equal Opportunity Act in that it requires health professionals with a conscientious objection to abortion to refer patients seeking an abortion to other health professionals who do not have such objections. It also requires health professionals with a conscientious objection to abortion to perform an abortion in whatever is deemed an emergency.

The Bill is clearly intended to require Catholic hospitals to permit the referral of women for abortions.

As one commentator has put it, it is an insidious irony that this coercion of conscience is being carried out in the name of choice. Parliamentarians are being afforded the opportunity to exercise their consciences to remove the right of health professionals to exercise theirs.

Nurses are in a particularly vulnerable position, since many would be under a duty to assist in an abortion if a doctor so requires, and determines that it is an “emergency”. I do not believe that our community wants to force nurses, many of whom have a conscientious objection, to assist in late term abortions. I do not believe that the community wants to force them and other health professionals to act contrary to the law, leave their professions or leave Victoria.

Catholic hospitals and the large number of Victorians they serve are also in a vulnerable position. Catholic hospitals will not perform abortions and will not provide referrals for the purpose of abortion. (Archbishop Hart is taking a very firm line here, unlike some bishops in the USA on abortion, and some in England on the matter of adoption by same-sex couples.)

If this provision is passed it will be an outrageous attack on our service to the community and contrary to Catholic ethical codes. It will leave Catholic hospitals and doctors with a conscientious objection to abortion in a position where they will be acting contrary to the law if they act in accordance with their deeply held moral convictions. This Bill poses a real threat to the continued existence of Catholic hospitals. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to foresee how Catholic hospitals could continue to operate maternity or emergency departments in this state in their current form. (This may be a form of 'institutional martyrdom'. 'If your right eye etc. . .)

This is a significant issue for the community at large having regard to the fact that Catholic hospitals account for approximately one third of all births and are seen by many as their hospitals of choice. In its report on Abortion Law Reform, the Victorian Law Reform Commission created a false dichotomy in relation to conscientious objections, a dichotomy between “adequate justification” and “mere prejudice”. This was subsequently relied upon in debate in the Legislative Assembly. The position of the Church is postulated as “mere prejudice” and without “adequate justification”.

The Church’s position which it has held ever since the first century is clear. The procurement of and complicity in abortion in every circumstance is a moral evil. (Calling Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden.)

It is an affront to logic to suggest that a belief held over the life of the Church’s existence and which has been subject to rigorous examination by theologians over the centuries can be dismissed as a “mere prejudice”. If this argument were to prevail, the beliefs of all religious faiths could be similarly dismissed. The argument itself smacks of prejudice, is a direct attack on religious expression and unworthy of a place in a contemporary mature state which values diversity of thought.

Call to prayer and action

The time has come for all those who support life to rally in prayer and action to defeat the Bill. The challenge is daunting and every effort must be made.

I have declared Sunday 5th October 2008 as a Day of Intercession throughout the Archdiocese dedicated to the defeat of this Bill. I urge as many of you as possible to join me in an hour of prayer at St Patrick’s Cathedral at 12:15 pm on that day immediately following the 11:00 am Mass and stand in solidarity with women and the unborn who are directly at risk from this Bill.

I also urge you, as I have done, to make your concerns known to your representatives in the Legislative Council and when doing so, to act respectfully and argue from a position of reason. The addresses of Members of the Legislative Council are attached. Previous statements can be located on the diocesan web site together with more comprehensive information on the Bill.

Yours sincerely in Christ

+ Denis J. Hart

ARCHBISHOP OF MELBOURNE

Let us join Archbishop and the people of Victoria, especially its doctors, nurses and pharmacists in prayer, through the intercession of Sts Cosmas and Damian. What is being proposed is the persecution of persons whose conscience does not allow them to participate in the killing of an unborn child. Not all of them are Catholics, not all are Christians.

Our Lady of Ransom, Muslims and Mary

Our Lady of Ransom, Muslims and Mary

Today is observed in some countries as the memorial of Our Lady of Ransom. Under that tile Mary is especially venerated in Aragon and Catalonia in Spain and in parts of Latin America. However, it is a very old feast in England.

I came across a very interesting item by English writer and blogger Joanna Bogle. Her article appeared on 3 April this year but I came across it only last night while doing some research on Our Lady of Ransom. The last few paragraphs really caught my attention:

I find myself wondering. Should we not -- while recognising the delicacy of what we are discussing -- see in Our Lady of Ransom something tender, merciful, and important for today? We need her to ransom the West from its secular mindset; ransom us all from fear; ransom Christians under pressure from Islam (those suffering in Sudan today, for example).

We need to invoke her aid in giving back to Christians, especially in Europe, a sense of the truth that is at the core of Christianity -- God who became man, who took human flesh and became one of us, dying for us on the Cross -- and a recognition that we need to live this faith fully and be prepared to pass it on. And whether this is fashionable or not, we ought to understand that Christ died for everyone, including people born into Islam, and that Our Lady of Ransom might have something to say to us about that, too.

Millions of Muslims now live in Britain, and entire sections of our towns and cities are now culturally Islamic. Churches are closing and mosques are taking their places. Visit Bradford, or Preston, or Leeds, and see the minarets and walk among the veiled women in the shopping centers. Are we to assume that they are never to know the truth about Christ and what He won for them on the Cross? Evangelism is difficult, but prayer is not, and Our Lady of Ransom may achieve what seems impossible. We should invoke her aid, in our homes and in our parishes.

Perhaps we should not assume that all will be antagonistic. Mary is honored in Islam, and is a point of contact. Islamic women, raising families in modern Britain, have their own worries about the pressures on their young, and about their own hopes and fears for the future. A string of rosary beads, an image of Mary, a hymn invoking her aid in prayer, may not be as offensive as we think.

Perhaps it is time, gently but with courage, to pray with renewed fervor the prayer I remember in the rather different England of my youth: Our Lady of Ransom, pray for us.

Joanna Bogle writes her blog as Auntie Joanna. andyou can read her latest post here .

Fr Nicholas Schofield, archivist of the Archdiocese of Westminster, laments on his blog, Roman Miscellany, that the feast has been replaced in the liturgical calendar in England by the feast of Our Lady of Walsingham:

Today is the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom. It has a special relevance to England and Wales and used to be in our national calendar, until she was replaced by Our Lady of Walsingham in 2000. A pity that we couldn't celebrate both titles since the idea behind Our Lady of Ransom was praying for the 'ransom' of England as 'Our Lady's Dowry.' The Guild of Our Lady of Ransom continues to promote the work of England's conversion, which is today as necessary as ever.

Jackie Parkes writes about Our Lady of Walsingham in her blog today.

Two days ago the website of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines carried a story http://www.cbcpnews.com/?q=node/4805 with the headline MUSLIM ‘DATU’ EXPRESSES PERSONAL DEVOTION TO MARY. ‘Datu’ means ‘chief’ or something close to that and is probably the same as ‘Ratu’, the Fijian title for a man of chiefly rank.

The article reminded me of a broadcast I heard on BBC World Service in December 1993 when I was parish priest of Lianga, Surigao del Sur, a relatively remote town on the east coast of Mindanao. The speaker was a young English woman and a Muslim. She was speaking especially to Christians because Christmas was coming up. I remember two things in particular that the speaker said. She told us that Muslims believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary and in the Immaculate Conception of Jesus. She also told a story about Muhammad when he and his followers were destroying images. But when they came across an image of Jesus and Mary he forbade them from destroying it.

Many Muslims, especially women, go to Lourdes (p.16). Tina Beattie wrote in The Tablet on 13 September of discovering that the British woman she was on duty with at the baths didn’t belong to a parish:

Afterwards, as we were putting on our outdoor clothes, I spoke to the woman I'd been on duty with. I asked her what parish she came from in the UK. She smiled. "I don't have a parish. I'm a Muslim," she said. She had visited Lourdes when her son was ill, and she had been going back ever since. She explained that Mary is honoured by Muslims, and she had no difficulty taking part in the ritual of the baths.

Here is the article by Datu Zamzamin Ampatuan.

Muslim ‘datu’ expresses personal devotion to Mary

DAVAO CITY, September 22, 2008—A well known Muslim “datu” in Mindanao has expressed his personal Muslim devotion to Mary Immaculate even as he suggested to make the Blessed Mother as national patron for Muslim-Christian unity.

Datu Zamzamin Ampatuan wrote in an article which was furnished to CBCPNews his great reverence to Mary, the Blessed Mother of Jesus.

Ampatuan recounted that his special devotion to Mary dawned upon him when he was traveling in Palawan from Brooke’s Point to Puerto Princesa. His driver, obviously tired and exhausted, seem to have failed to notice a mother with a baby crossing the street while they were entering the city center.

The pick-up vehicle of Ampatuan definitely headed to hit the two but he shouted out aloud the Muslim prayer for intervention, invoking “God Bless Muhammad and his progeny.” It was less than an inch that the woman and the baby were saved from being hit.
Ampatuan continued that when his driver asked him what was it that he shouted, he subconsciously answered, “It is the same as you say Hail Mary.”

From then on, Ampatuan said, “I realized that I am building a deeper sense of the Virgin Mary. I now feel a closer attachment to her. As time pass by, I get to feel that she is my subconscious patron.”

“My devotion to Mary compliments my attachment to the Prophet Muhammad and his progeny. I believe in the power of intercession. ….The divinely purified person such as Mary has the power to intercede,” added Ampatuan.

Ampatuan also said that he also believes that if the Virgin Mary is being invoked to intercede can be a source of great blessings like charisma, abundance in life, calmness of disposition, and safety from accident.

“My personal devotion to the Virgin Mary is closely attached to my love of the Prophet Muhammad and his household and progeny. I consider Virgin Mary and the persons I revere in Islam as one single continuum of God’s blessings—they are mercy to humankind,” he said.

Ampatuan even said that he is also following the Hail Mary prayer but with a slight change to suit his Islamic faith.

“To be very sure I am not misunderstood by my fellow Muslims, I wish to emphasize that my personal devotion to the Virgin Mary does not imply necessity for her picture or sculpture even as I do respect Catholics using these icons as expression of deep affection to this great and wonderful woman,” he said.

Ampatuan is currently the undersecretary of Department of Agrarian Reform’s Central Office here and of the Office of Muslim Affairs. (Mark S. Ventura).

This morning at Mass of Our Lady of Ransom, including the readings, from the Collection of Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It’s No 43 and is from the Missal of the Mercedarian order .

Here is the Opening Prayer (Collect) :

God, the Father of mercies,
you sent your Son into the world
as Redeemer of the human race;
grant that we who honor his mother as Our Lady of Ransom may faithfully protect
and seek to spread to all peoples
the true liberty of your children,
which Christ the Lord merited by his sacrifice.

We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.

The National Proper for England has a most unusual alternative opening prayer for the Mass of our Lady of Ransom:

Times and seasons change,
centuries and ages pass;
you seem above them, Lord,
untouched and unmoved.

But
your Son entered in,
born of a woman,
crushed and crucified,
to ransom us.

Will you be deaf to our cries?
Can you ignore the appeals
of the creatures your Son embraced?
Can you refuse the prayer
of Mary, his Mother?

Let us know the freedom of your kingdom
where you live with your Son
and with the Holy Spirit,
one infinite Freedom,
for ever and ever.

Two Catholic politicians in the news - in Japan and the UK

Catholic politicians in Britain and in Japan are in the news today – and not for negative reasons.

Miss Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary in Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s cabinet, has informed him that she’s resigning. The report of James Kirkup and Jon Swaine in The Daily Telegraph speculates on the possible reasons for her decision:

She is understood to have had serious doubts about Mr Brown's leadership, and her decision to quit has reignited speculation about the Prime Minister's future.

However a source close to Miss Kelly inisted her decision was made on purely personal grounds, telling reporters she "thought the time had come to spend more time with her four young children."

In an attempt to minimise damage from the move, No 10 linked her departure to her religious objections to Government plans to liberalise stem cell research.

It was said that Miss Kelly, who is a Catholic, told Gordon Brown she could not reconcile her strict faith with the Government's Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill.

The minister has been linked to Opus Dei, the devout Catholic group featured in the novel The Da Vinci Code.

I find that last sentence rather inane, though not quite as inane as Jon Swaine’s statement in his profile of Ruth Kelly in today’s Telegraph:

Miss Kelly has also come under close scrutiny for her links to Opus Dei, the devout Roman Catholic group made famous by Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code.

I haven’t read that novel or seen the movie, having gathered from reviews of both that they completely distorted Opus Dei. But I know that Opus Dei are grateful to Dan Brown for bringing many to inquire of the movement itself what it is about.

Whether Miss Kelly is resigning to take care of her children – she will continue as a backbench Member of Parliament, with a considerably smaller salary – or for reasons of conscience, or both, she is to be commended.

Ruth Kelly with Derek Gadd, her husband.

The other Catholic politician in the news is Taro Aso, the newly-elected head of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party in Japan who will replace Yasuo Fukoda who has resigned as prime minister. Mr Aso will be the first Catholic head of government in Japan, a country of 128,000,000 people of whom about 509,000, or 0.40 percent only, are Catholic.

The Vatican-based Agenzia Fides carried this report about Mr Aso two days ago.

ASIA/JAPAN - Taro Aso, Catholic, running for Premier

Tokyo (Agenzia Fides) – Taro Aso’s decision to run for Premier has sparked the curiosity and attention of Japanese citizens, the Christian churches, and the international press. Aso is currently serving as Secretary General of the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan. Elections are scheduled to take place at the end of October. Interest has arisen from the candidate’s personality, and most of all, from the well-known fact that he is a member of the Catholic Church, which in the city of Sol Levante has 1 million faithful, out of 128 million inhabitants. (This figure for the number of Catholics is twice as high as shown in the statistics for the dioceses of Japan here.)

As he goes campaigning, in the aftermath of the political crisis that the country has suffered, Aso has not given much importance to his religious affiliation, focusing on the fact that today the priority for Japan is economic growth and in its foreign policy, form a close alliance with the United States.

However, analysts have not ignored the fact that the Aso family, related to the royal family, has ancient Catholic traditions that date back to the island of Kyushu, site of the first Christian evangelization effort in the 16th century and later, in the 19th. (It would seem that Mr Aso's Catholic roots are very deep).

Aso’s Christian name is “Francis,” named after the great missionary St. Francis Xavier, the Jesuit who evangelized Eastern Asia and is one of the Patrons of the Missions.

The presence of a Catholic in the country’s governing could shed new light on the Catholic community, offering it the chance to be better known and to better fulfill its mission. The Church in Japan continues to bear witness in a society now marked by consumerism and new technology (see Fides 13/5/2008 and 26/7/2008). However, as several media sources have indicated, Aso will not be the first Catholic to occupy this position. Former Prime Minister Masayoshi Ohira (1979-80) was also Catholic. (PA) (Agenzia Fides 22/9/2008).

I would dispute that last statement. I am relying on my memory here but backed up by this item from a blog, posted yesterday:

The Western media has focused on Mr. Aso’s Roman Catholic faith. In fact, he will be the third Christian Prime Minister in post-WW II Japan, after Tetsu Katayama (1947-48) and Masayoshi Ohira (1978-80), non-Catholics both. That’s three Christians out of 29 PMs, not bad when you consider that only 2 million out of 130 million Japanese are Christians. Sokagakkai has what, 16 million members? And all they get is one measly Minister per Cabinet. I’m pretty sure that you won’t find any Christians among the pre-WW II PMs though.
I wasn't aware of Tetsu Katayama but I remember reading about Masayoshi Ohira and of his being a Christian. As I recall, he didn't belong to any particular denomination. But this is only my memory speaking.

Let us pray for Mr Aso that he will do a good job and that while he won't be working as an agnet for the Church that his decisions will be informed by his Catholic faith. And may his very presence in the country's highest political position make more Japanese aware of Jesus Christ and of the Catholic faith, as the Fides report above suggests it may do.