Have you any doubt that this is a human being?

Just Look

Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York


The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.

Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.

But you might protest that all of this is too easy. Why, you might inquire, have I not delved into the opinion of philosophers and theologians about the matter? And even worse: Why have I not raised the usual questions about what a "human being" is, what a "person" is, what it means to be "living," and such? People who write books and articles about abortion always concern themselves with these kinds of things. Even the justices of the Supreme Court who gave us "Roe v. Wade" address them. Why do I neglect philosophers and theologians? Why do I not get into defining "human being," defining "person," defining "living," and the rest? Because, I respond, I am sound of mind and endowed with a fine set of eyes, into which I do not believe it is well to cast sand. I looked at the photograph, and I have no doubt about what I saw and what are the duties of a civilized society if what I saw is in danger of being killed by someone who wishes to kill it or, if you prefer, someone who "chooses" to kill it. In brief: I looked, and I know what I saw.

But what about the being that has been in its mother for only 15 weeks or only 10? Have you photographs of that too? Yes, I do. However, I hardly think it necessary to show them. For if we agree that the being in the photograph printed on this page is an innocent human being, you have no choice but to admit that it may not be legitimately killed even before 20 weeks unless you can indicate with scientific proof the point in the development of the being before which it was other than an innocent human being and, therefore, available to be legitimately killed. Nor have Aristotle, Aquinas or even the most brilliant embryologists of our era or any other era been able to do so. If there is a time when something less than a human being in a mother morphs into a human being, it is not a time that anyone has ever been able to identify, though many have made guesses. However, guesses are of no help. A man with a shotgun who decides to shoot a being that he believes may be a human being is properly hauled before a judge. And hopefully, the judge in question knows what a "human being" is and what the implications of someone's wishing to kill it are. The word "incarceration" comes to mind.

However, we must not stop here. The matter becomes even clearer and simpler if you obtain from the National Geographic Society two extraordinary DVDs. One is entitled "In the Womb" and illustrates in color and in motion the development of one innocent human being within its mother. The other is entitled "In the Womb—Multiples" and in color and motion shows the development of two innocent human beings—twin boys—within their mother. If you have ever allowed yourself to wonder, for example, what "living" means, these two DVDs will be a great help. The one innocent human being squirms about, waves its arms, sucks its thumb, smiles broadly and even yawns; and the two innocent human beings do all of that and more: They fight each other. One gives his brother a kick, and the other responds with a sock to the jaw. If you can convince yourself that these beings are something other than living and innocent human beings, something, for example, such as "mere clusters of tissues," you have a problem far more basic than merely not appreciating the wrongness of abortion. And that problem is—forgive me—self-deceit in a most extreme form.

Adolf Hitler convinced himself and his subjects that Jews and homosexuals were other than human beings. Joseph Stalin did the same as regards Cossacks and Russian aristocrats. And this despite the fact that Hitler and his subjects had seen both Jews and homosexuals with their own eyes, and Stalin and his subjects had seen both Cossacks and Russian aristocrats with theirs. Happily, there are few today who would hesitate to condemn in the roundest terms the self-deceit of Hitler, Stalin or even their subjects to the extent that the subjects could have done something to end the madness and protect living, innocent human beings.

It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets. Nor can we honorably cover our shame (1) by appealing to the thoughts of Aristotle or Aquinas on the subject, inasmuch as we are all well aware that their understanding of matters embryological was hopelessly mistaken, (2) by suggesting that "killing" and "choosing to kill" are somehow distinct ethically, morally or criminally, (3) by feigning ignorance of the meaning of "human being," "person," "living," and such, (4) by maintaining that among the acts covered by the right to privacy is the act of killing an innocent human being, and (5) by claiming that the being within the mother is "part" of the mother, so as to sustain the oft-repeated slogan that a mother may kill or authorize the killing of the being within her "because she is free to do as she wishes with her own body."

One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the "Dred Scott Case" in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.

Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.

Thanks to the priest-friend in LA who emailed this to me.

Dublin's Fair City as seen by the Cardinal-archbishop of New York

Dublin’s Fair City as seen by the Cardinal-Archbishop of New York.

I hope that Cardinal Egan of New York won’t mind my using his column of 14 August in Catholic New York in which he responded to the gentle rebuke of a member of his diocese for not having written anything about a recent visit to my native city. As a ‘Dub’ I am very encouraged by the Cardinal’s observations. I’ll highlight parts of the article and (add some notes).


A Dublin Tour



Each week I join Mr. Rob Astorino for a one-hour program on the Catholic Channel, No. 159, of Sirius Satellite Radio. Rob is the program director of the channel and acts as my interlocutor for the show, which is aired on Thursdays at 1 p.m., Saturdays at 6 a.m., Sundays at 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. and Mondays at midnight. The format of what we have come to call "A Conversation With the Cardinal" includes a different theme each week having to do with Theology, Sacred Scripture, Church History or even Canon Law; a discussion of liturgies and events in which I have been involved as Archbishop of New York; and the answering of questions that listeners pose in letters, telephone calls and especially e-mail.


Some weeks ago I reported that I had been in Rome for meetings at the Vatican and later in Dublin for some days of prayer and reflection. Shortly thereafter I received a letter from a man living in one of the upper counties of the Archdiocese with a very courteously expressed complaint. He reminded me that, when I go away from New York for whatever reason, I usually describe on "A Conversation With the Cardinal" what I have seen and heard. "You were in Rome and you told of your visit to the church where St. Paul had been held prisoner, and you told it both on Sirius Satellite Radio and in an article in Catholic New York. But not a word about your days in Dublin. How about an article about 'Dublin's Fair City' in Catholic New York? With a name like 'Egan' you have to have Irish blood in your veins."


I examined my conscience and concluded that my correspondent was 100 percent correct. Here is an effort to make amends.


The doctor who replaced my left knee some years ago told me that I should try to take a walk each day to keep the legs in shape and the knee in operation. In New York this is not easy to do because of an overcrowded calendar. In Dublin, however, I followed the doctor's orders, made my way on foot to a church or shrine each day, and came away from all of them both informed and inspired.
< /div>One Sunday, having celebrated Mass very early in the morning, I walked over to St. Mary's Pro-Cathedral for Mass there at 8 o'clock. The two historic cathedrals of Dublin—St. Patrick's and Christ Church—were taken over by the Established Anglican Church in the 1500s; and it was not until early in the 1800s that the Catholics were permitted to build another for themselves. (This was after the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 in the UK, which at the time included the whole of Ireland.) It was to be on O'Connell Street, one of the principal thoroughfares of the City. This, however, was disallowed by the Protestant establishment. Hence, it is located on Marlborough Street in a less elegant area known as "Monto." (Note: Marlborough St is just behind O’Connell St, the main thoroughfare in Dublin.)

As the Mass was about to conclude, a priest approached the podium to announce that the Pro-Cathedral's celebrated Palestrina Choir, which once included the great Irish tenor, John McCormack, was on vacation. Its place at the 10:30 Mass would be taken, he said, by the Chorus of the City of Dublin. I decided to stay for yet another liturgy.

The pews of the imposing edifice were two-thirds full for the 8 o'clock Mass and packed for the 10:30. I was deeply taken by every element of the celebration. The ceremonies were dignified, the homily was insightful and the choir was a delight. Indeed, the music was so outstanding that, at the conclusion of the final chorus, the congregation broke into applause. (I think we should try to avoid applause in church, though in this case it was when everything was over.) What impressed me most, however, was the age of the congregation. I had been led to expect only gray heads. Such, however, was not the case. Men and women in their 20s, 30s and 40s were the majority, many with children in tow. When I returned to where I was staying, the morning newspaper featured the priestly ordination of three young men in the Pro-Cathedral the day before. I could not imagine a more encouraging climax to my visit to St. Mary's.

The Carmelite Church known as Whitefriar St was another destination of my daily walks. It is immense and most deserving of a visit from anyone coming to Dublin. In the 16th century, it was seized by King Henry VIII and closed until 1827, when the Carmelite Fathers, the "Whitefriars," reopened and renovated it. I attended a noon Mass there one weekday. Well over 200 men and women were at prayer in a lovely liturgy made doubly moving by a homily that focused on St. Benedict of Norcia, the founder of Western monasticism and the saint of the day.

On the right aisle as I entered, I discovered with delight a mammoth shrine, the centerpiece of which is a tall, carved-oak statue of the Madonna that is alleged to be the only such image to have escaped the onslaughts of King Henry and his successors. As I was about to move into a pew, however, my attention was caught by another less impressive shrine on the opposite wall, the centerpiece of which is a stand into which a relic of St. Valentine given to the church by Pope Gregory XVI in 1837 has been inserted and above which one finds a brightly painted statue of the saint. (See my blog entry for 7 February.) Next to the stand is a table on which is placed a large, open book, bound in leather and accompanied by a sign inviting the faithful to write a prayer to St. Valentine in the book. There were several such prayers written on the page before me. One, however, that was printed on a scrap of paper and inserted into the book's binding was of particular note. It read: "Holy Saint, help me thank the Lord for my wonderful wife." When the Mass was over, I passed a long line of men and women waiting to go to Confession and moved out into the street. The sun was shining, the prayer to St. Valentine was still ringing in my mind's ear, and all seemed right with the world.

Trinity College is neither a church nor a shrine. It is, however, built on land once owned by Augustinian monks and in 1592 confiscated by order of Queen Elizabeth I. What no Catholic visitor to this institution of learning, whose students are now largely Catholic, will want to miss is to be found in the building known as the "Old Library." It is the "Book of Kells," one of the oldest books in the world, dated around 800 and containing the four Gospels, Prefaces for Masses and other assorted prayers—all in Latin and embellished with some of the most intricate decorations anyone could imagine. I went to see it, first and foremost, for reasons spiritual, since one cannot look at its pages without sensing that they are prayers in art and a testament to a most profound love for the Word of God. (The photo shows the opening of St John's Gospel.)

The volume is made up of 680 pages and was produced in the Monastery of St. Columcille on the Island of Iona. Early in the 800s it was taken to County Meath in Ireland, where it was stolen in 1007. Found buried three months later, it was restored and finally brought to Trinity College in 1654. Two pages were open for me to see. The most elaborately decorated was the title page of the Gospel of St. Matthew, containing three Greek letters for "Christos," that is, "Christ." They are painted in bright orange, yellow and red and are so full of details that the eye does not know where to settle. Embellished with images of angels, animals and flowers of various kinds, they powerfully proclaim an indomitable reverence for what our God has shared with us in the Scriptures and in the prayers of His Church.

Shortly before leaving Dublin, a priest friend told me that I absolutely had to visit the Kilmainham Gaol (Jail), the infamous institution in which so many Irish men and women were held and killed because of love of and loyalty to their land and their faith. "Take the tour," he said, "and at the first stop you will see why this place is a 'must' for a Catholic, and especially a Catholic priest."

He was right on target. For the first room to which our group was taken by the very articulate and very Catholic guide was a windowless chapel whose altar and other liturgical appurtenances had been fashioned out of wood by prisoners who were being ferociously mistreated and in not a few instances slowly starved to death.

Two young men from the United States in jackets announcing the university they were attending or had attended went down on their knees when the guide finished her description of the place, made the Sign of the Cross and remained kneeling with their heads bowed. Three others followed suit, as did I. In all frankness, I must confess that I listened to the rest of the tour with a certain indifference. For I did not want to lose the sense of deep-down holiness that had suddenly taken hold. Thankfully, it remained with me as we left the last stop of the tour, an exercise yard where, after the Easter Rising of 1916, a host of Ireland's most beloved heroes were executed. There was nothing in the yard apart from two black crosses, one of which marked where 12 rebel commanders were killed leaning against a pile of sacks and the second marking where the celebrated James Connolly, sick unto death, was killed while strapped to a chair. They spoke volumes about so much pain borne by so many for so long.

I left the Gaol in haste so as to visit one of the non-Catholic Cathedrals, Christ Church. The reason was my desire to say a prayer near the reliquary that is said to contain the heart of St. Lawrence O'Toole, who became the first Archbishop of Dublin in 1162, attended the Third Lateran Ecumenical Council in Rome, and gallantly defended the rights and interests of the Church against the intrusions of King Henry II. As I waited to pay for a book about the saint that I was purchasing for the pastor of St. Lawrence O'Toole parish in Brewster, New York, I caught sight of a rather large area for the sale of religious goods on my right. Hanging on the longest wall were dozens upon dozens of rosaries of all colors and sizes. I could not help but suspect that St. Lawrence was often amused by the spectacle from his place in heaven. Certainly, I was, from my place in "Dublin's Fair—and Holy—City."


Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

Thank you, Cardinal Egan!

Aechbishop of New York confronts House Speaker

The bishops of the USA seem to be finding their voice in speaking the truth about abortion. Here is a statement by Edward Cardinal Egan, Archbishop of New York Though the message is politce, 'the gloves are off'. Speaker Pelosi passes herself off as a Catholic, like the Democrat VP candidate, Senator Joseph Biden.

I've highlighted parts of the Cardinal's statement.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 26, 2008

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York

The Church is often criticized as being 'anti-science' etc. It's good to see Church leaders show up the pro-abortion 'liberals' as the neanderthals that they are when it comes to knowledge of science.