The Winter of Obama's Accomadation

It is a curious thing, I have observed, that winter generally follows on Fall and Summer, and it nearly always proceeds Spring. It is an even more curious thing to note that man, that ruler of nature, is also subject to its changes in season. Like all other creatures, man's work changes with the seasons. And while this change in man's work is witnessed to by a multitude of examples, the particular seasonal work of man that most concerns us at this moment is war, for we are surely now in a cultural war.

Though I am only an amateur historian, and an even more amateur soldier, I have noticed in all of the accounts of great wars that the changing of seasons brings changes in war-making. In ancient Greek and Roman times the coming of Winter often signaled a ceasing of hostilities. The same would hold true through much of medieval Europe, until Napoleon would learn what a mistake it is not to respect a winter, especially a Russian winter. Even into the 20th and 21st centuries with the introduction of mechanized warfare, Old Man Winter has forced military leaders to accommodate him. So, whether it was Washington at Valley Forge or Hitler at Stalingrad, all war-making men must pay their respects to Jack Frost.

To pay your respects to him as he passes, though, and to believe that he is a newly permanent resident of your home are two very different things. A great general will respect Winter, but he will also recognize its transience. In so doing, he will know how to keep his troops ready for fighting when the days are dark and silent. He will know how to keep both the fires in their camps and the fires in their hearts burning brightly. By doing so, he ensures victory in the Spring.

Now, as I mentioned, I am but an amateur historian and should not even be called an amateur soldier, so thoughts of military philosophy do not just pop into my mind. They only arrive there by being prompted, and what has prompted these considerations over the past several days has been Obama's "accommodation." Nothing in recent memory seems to have chilled a situation quite like our President's feigned compromise.

Before his announcement last Friday, Obama seemed to have no way out. It seemed, oddly enough, that for once almost everybody was on the side of the Catholic bishops. Even many Catholics in Congress found that they didn't have to be Catholics in only their private lives anymore; they could actually publicly support their Church. The roar from the media, bishops, lay people, and internet was growing louder and louder each day. You had Mike Huckabee proclaiming, "We're all Catholics now." You had articles being written that were titled "How the Catholic Church Became Cool Overnight." The battle seemed to be fully raging and then BAM! Obama Frost issued in a winter of accommodation.

Suddenly, the furor stopped. Yes, The Catholic blogosphere has still been in an uproar, but those of less orthodox persuasions have returned to their previous businesses like the soldiers of ancient Rome returning to their homes to harvest their crops. The likes of Tim Kaine and The Catholic Health Association had tired of the fight; they had tired of going against Obama. And this "accommodation," though nothing in substance, gave them just the cover they needed to flee the battle. Since then, the uproar has grown dimmer and dimmer. Slowly, the last articles regarding the mandate are slipping from the top headlines. Yes, we Catholics are still ready for battle, but for the rest of the country Winter has set.

The true test for us now is what we do during this Winter. Will we remain vigilant? Or will we too tire of the fight? Will we say, "Well, at least we got Obama to speak at a podium"? It seems to me that if we hope for victory in the Spring, we must be as vigilant as an army in Winter. The full emotions of battle have died down, and now we must stay focused on the details of war. Just as soldiers must keep their swords sharpened, and their guns clean, we must polish our arguments. We must learn the most effective ways to explain why this accommodation still violates our consciences. We must know how to best present this, in charity, to all those outside the Catholic church.

Similarly, just as an army in Winter must always call to mind memories of why it is fighting, we must keep our focus on the reasons for this fight. We must remember that we fight against this mandate because contraception is immoral, and it leads to the great unhappiness of our brothers and sisters. It separates them from God, their true end. We fight against this mandate because it forces Catholics to cooperate in work that is against our conscience, and if it stands our social service institutions will be absolutely crippled. And without these institutions of charity, the world will lose a great material and spiritual aid for those who are sick. We must keep our motivation, especially now when the outward appearances of the situation suggest that the war is over.

God does not ask us to be successful in this battle; He asks us to be faithful. If we are, the controversy will arise again, and we will be prepared. The rush of battle will come upon us only if we're faithful during this time of quiet. Unless we remain faithful, unless we continue our war-making even if the other side declares the war over, we will be victorious. Christ and His Church will be victorious. However, don't be fooled, it won't be easy to keep motivated; after all, it was very cold at Valley Forge.

The Church is evil - no, contraception is

With the contraceptive mandate receiving more and more national attention, the debate over contraception, religion, freedom, rights, and what constitutes women's health has taken center stage in the public's consciousness. Over and over again, these issues are being debated on TV, in the newspapers, on Facebook, and even in the most rare arena of conversation, in face to face dialogue. People are trying to wrap their minds around what they believe. Is the Obama administration stepping on religious freedom? Or are the rights of women being trampled on by an outdated religious institution?

Rarely do I delve into these issues over Facebook, but the severity of this attack caused me to do so last week. I happened to see a comment on somebody else's Facebook wall defending the Obama administration's decision, and, without knowing the person making these comments, I decided to engage him in conversation. Now, engaging another human being in conversation is always interesting. You're bound to learn a number of things that you did not previously know, and you are also required to take a look at yourself so as to determine what to say. Nowhere is this more true then when conversing with someone previously unknown who disagrees with you on matters of utmost importance. 

Now don't get me wrong; this wasn't my first encounter with someone who disagreed with me. However, it was my first encounter with someone who took all their thoughts to their logical conclusions and were willing to espouse those conclusions. For instance, he believed that rights were simply determined by the general will of the people, not by anything intrinsic in the nature of the thing. Thus, since the majority of people today have access to contraception, and view this as a good, it is necessary that everyone should have access to contraception. And, by access, he meant affordable access, because again, most insurance plans cover contraceptives. He also recognized that this requirement was indeed a violation of Catholics, religious liberties, but the rights established by a majority opinion trumped those religious liberties. This was also acceptable to him because the Catholic Church has done so many bad things throughout history that it deserves to have its religious liberties taken away. Further, the Catholic Church's teaching is just backwards.

Finding someone who actually believes all of these things at the same time was quite astonishing to me. Normally, someone only believes one or maybe two of these arguments, but to consciously acknowledge all of them  at the same time quite astounded me. I did not know someone could so thoroughly adhere to error. Indeed, in one sense it was frightening to realize how comfortable this person was at being anti-Catholic. He was totally comfortable trampling on the freedom of Catholics for seemingly three main reasons: 1) because women have a right to contraception due to the view of a majority of people, 2) this right of women trumps the right of religions that oppose contraception, and 3) it especially trumps the rights of a corrupt Catholic Church.

Now, what interests me the most are the first two arguments since I feel like they strike at the heart of this debate. The third point, while surprising, comes from a rather common misunderstanding of the nature of the Church. For instance, his third argument seems to imply that the Church is wrong and bad because it has wrong and bad people in some leadership positions. Indeed, he pointed to the usual accusations in this matter: the Inquisition, Pius XII, and the recent priest abuse scandals. He should have pointed to more, like the fact that over 90% of the first bishops of the Church abandoned Christ on the cross. His thesis seems to have been that due to the sins of the leaders, the religion is false. He didn't seem to understand that the Church exists for their salvation too, and that if it exists for their salvation they are indeed in need of salvation.

The first two points of his, though, I have seen repeated over and over again throughout the internet. They seem to me to be the main arguments for the opposition. Now, one can argue each point separately, or he can make one argument that negates both points. In the first instance he would argue that rights are determined by the nature of things, and the nature of man implies a right to the free practice of religion and not the right to contraception. And, indeed, it seems that many Catholics have taken to making this argument, in essence simply arguing that the right to religious freedom would trump any so-called right to contraception (if such a thing existed).

However, I honestly find this argument weak. It simply leads in a circle, because it pits right against right, and nobody will really ever be able to win this battle. Those who believe in a right to contraception often believe in religious freedom as well, just not when that religion is wrong. Similarly, those who are fighingt for religious liberty believe in the right of women to have healthcare, they just don't believe that contraception is healthcare. And this is where the real sticking point is: contraception. This debate centers around the issue of contraception. Indeed, religious liberty is a key issue, but the other side will never believe they are trampling on religious liberty when they view that religion to be wrong. Like the inquisition, they believe that heresy, or error, does not deserve to be welcomed into society.

Thus, if we're ultimately going to win the culture wars, we can't just try to hold on to our ability to speak freely. We must do this, of course, but then we must actually speak. We must ask the questions nobody wants to hear: how is contraception healthy for women? How is it healthy to suppress a natural function of the body? Why must sex be only about pleasure, and not about creation and unity? Is casual sex really good for society, or does it cause untold emotional and physical damage? These issues are at the heart of the matter, and these are the issues we should be talking about. What is sex? What is man? What is society and the family? The answers to these issues will determine what is contraception, and these are the issues we need to be fighting. We need to be able to speak and practice our beliefs freely, but then we actually need to speak and practice them. Let's take this opportunity to do so.

Discipleship and Complacency: Part 2

What complacency looks like, according to
Google Images.

There's a lot that's been happening over the past couple of days. Of course, the media has been flooded with stories and opinions regarding Susan G. Komen for the Cure's decision or non-decision to cease funding Planned Parenthood. Where it will end seems to still be up in the air.The Obama administration's mandate that Catholic institutions have to start covering contraceptives is also receiving a strong back lash. If you haven't yet, sign this petition on the White House's website. If it get's over 25,000 signatures (which it looks set to get) then the White House has to issue an official response. It'd be interesting to see what they say.

Personally, there's been a bunch happening too. People seem to be having babies left and right (a very good thing), my own personal to-do list seems to be growing each day, and Alan is learning how to "wave" (a very humorous process, especially when you catch him practicing waving alone in his crib). Liz and I have full weekend ahead, with many things to get done but also many opportunities for some relaxation. All in all, it's a lot to keep track of.

But as the week has gone on, and the details have become increasingly loud, my mind has been continually drawn back to the thoughts I wrote about on Wednesday: discipleship and complacency. Indeed, though life seems rather hectic right now, the themes of discipleship and complacency seem right at the forefront. I'm not sure why, but it truly has struck me how  few times in my life I have woken up and said to myself, "Today I want to love God more than I did yesterday." This sentiment has always been underlying all of my thoughts and my words, but in the past week it's really struck me how important it is that this sentiment not remain just a mere sentiment, and most important, that it not remain in the "underlying" part of my life. There a lot of things in life that can remain unconscious, like the habit of going to the gym or the proper form for washing the dishes. Increasing my love for God, for Jesus, is not one of those things though.

And oddly enough, the busyness of this time period has only seemed to strengthen this conviction. This is especially odd because it is normally busyness that frightens the desire to love God back into its hole in the consciousness. As things become busier, as the details become increasingly complex, we naturally (or, more precisely, unnaturally) start to focus on them. Being human beings of limited strength and capacity, we move our priorities around so that we can tackle the different tasks at hand. When we do so, the conscious desire to love God more and more becomes unconscious, and once it becomes unconscious it slowly begins to become non-existent. Instead, we become satisfied with being "good" or at least "good enough".

But as I said, the busyness of this week has only seemed to add to my conviction to consciously remember, each and every day, that I have the opportunity to know God more, love Him more, and most important, allow Him to love me more. By consciously bringing this to mind, the busyness seems to just fall into place. It is no longer a huge burden that must be focused on, but the tasks at hand become like simple gestures done in the presence of a loved one.The to-do list no longer becomes something that "has to get done" but becomes something that "gets to be done", even the more burdensome things like work and chores.

Of course, it may just be this week for some reason. Next week, I may begin to become over focused on the details of life once again. I hope not, but I know I am fallen. If I do, though, I know God will bring me back to the desire to love Him more and more. In His patience, He always does.

Discipleship and Complacency

The story of the disciples in the New Testament is one that has always captivated my imagination. It's an amazing tale to envision: twelve men being taken from various lives and being drawn close to this one man. They see Him heal the sick, hear Him preach to the crowds, witness him multiplying loaves and fishes. They look on in awe when He walks on water, and three of them see Him speak with Moses and Elijah. Then they walk with Him into Jerusalem as people lay palms beneath His feet. Just a few days later, these twelve men share a meal with Him that will be shared with millions of people throughout the ages. Then, they leave Him. They abandon Him. One of them directly betrays Him, ten other flee out of fear, and only one, the youngest, remains to stand at the foot of His cross. But after He has died, they come back. They seek forgiveness; they can only wander so far away before being drawn back to Him. And three days later, they receive the news that He is alive.

As if these events weren't extraordinary enough, their lives become even more extraordinary from here on out. These eleven men, soon to be twelve again, receive blessings and powers that they never could have imagined. Through the power of the One they followed, they begin to work miracles and healings. They speak in different tongues and proclaim Him to authorities they so recently feared. As the years go on, they will scatter across the globe to tell more people about Him. All of them will suffer for Him, and ten of them will die for Him. The only one who won't directly shed His blood will be the last of the disciples alive, the one who stood at the Cross, and he will suffer a white martyrdom of exile.

All in all, the disciples had pretty amazing lives. And yet, these stories are not the stories of their whole lives. These stories are the parts that we know. However, what were their lives like before they met Him, before they met Jesus? In all likelihood they were normal. Their lives were filled with their faith, friends, family, and work. In many ways, they were unremarkable. And this fact, the fact they they went from unremarkable to surely remarkable, attests to the heart of the Incarnation, and thus to discipleship. It is the transformation of the ordinary into the extraordinary. It is sharing in divinity, because Christ shared in our humanity. It is the exaltation and transformation of the normal.

To be a disciple of Christ is to truly experience this in our lives. Through our baptism we are remade; our whole lives are remade. No longer is their such thing as simply ordinary. Every moment, every action becomes possibly an extraordinary moment or action that will hopefully be remembered in eternity. Every moment and action becomes an opportunity to love Christ and to know Him better, and each moment that we do will bring great joy to us forever when this life is over.

And yet, because every moment is extraordinary, we often let the extraordinary become ordinary. It must be an effect of original sin that we let the life of grace become ordinary simply because we are continually living it. It is an absurdity of fallen man that the extraordinary becomes ordinary simply by repetition. Really, the extraordinary should become more extraordinary if it happens all the time. Had Jesus continually multiplied loaves and fishes, it would not have been any less of a miracle, though perhaps man would have stopped to wonder at as much. Similarly, had Jesus walked on the water every day He would still be defying laws of physics on a daily basis, though man would have simply grown to call it His daily walk.

But in order to live the life of a disciple, we can never allow ourselves to forget the extraordinary workings of God in our lives, even if our lives do not change as drastically as the disciples. What made the disciples saints, though, was not that they continually remembered how Jesus had freed them from the lives of fishermen, tax collectors, zealots, etc. Rather, it was the fact that they continually remembered that Jesus had freed them from the lives of sinners. In remembering the true miracle of Jesus's effect on their lives, the disciples did not become complacent, as we so often do. They recognized, and gave thanksgiving for the extraordinary workings of God.

We, on the other hand, often fail in this area of discipleship. At least, I know I do. Too often I become complacent. I take the blessings of God, the mercy of God for granted. I'm happy to take His mercy and live as a good man, even though He is calling me to be a holy man. I look at my life and I say to myself "there are plenty of days, hours, and minutes left to experience the mercy of God." Every time I do say this, I have missed an opportunity. I have forgotten that all I have is right now, this day, this hour, this moment. I become complacent because I don't truly believe this. I think of being a disciple of Christ, the commitment that goes along with this, and I think "I cannot really do that for so many days, hours, and minutes. I will be good today, and perhaps tomorrow I will give my all to God." And yet, that is not what God asks of us. He does not ask us to commit ourselves to Him for the rest of our lives. He only asks us to give everything to Him right now. If I only focus on right now, giving myself to Him this moment, then I can do it. Being small, we cannot bear much more than this, and He knows that.

Discipleship requires this extraordinary living in every moment. A simple thing to do, and yet so hard because of our fallen natures. Perhaps if we just forgot tomorrow, and lived for Him today. "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." Mt 6:34.

Where will we take a stand?

For years and years now the secular war on religion has become more and more clear. Day after day, month after month, being Catholic in today's world is becoming harder. Each day there seems to be a new story about Christians being forced to violate their consciences in one way or another. Most of the time, the assault on Christian values is centered around the Christian idea of sexual morality. Whether the issue be gay marriage, contraception, or abortion, secularism seems to detest the idea that sex is for a man and a woman who are married to each other, and it naturally results in children. Such a simple idea, and yet so detestable to a large majority of people in power today.

The recent hard-line decision by the Obama administration regarding mandatory contraception coverage in employer healthcare plans is no different, though it is more direct and open. As Cardinal DiNardo pointed out back in October, the religious exemption clause in this mandate is so narrow that it seems to show a disdain for religion. The secular definition of religion as being a purely "private" thing is being taken to it's logical conclusion: religious institutions are now only those that serve and employee members of their own religion. In other words, if an institution seeks to aid or employ anybody outside their own religion, i.e. step out into the public sphere, their religious beliefs are left behind and they must submit to the ideologies of prevailing thought, even if these ideologies conflict with their "private" beliefs.

In response to the Obama administration's effort to impose the contraceptive mentality on Catholic institutions, the Catholic bishops have responded with vows of a fight. Indeed, it always does the sheep good to see the shepherds go to battle against the wolves. It is encouraging as a lay Catholic to see bishops sticking up for our values, not willing to acquiesce to the attacks of secularism. The next year, during which Catholic institutions are  supposed to figure out how to violate their consciences, as Archbishop Dolan put it, I hope and pray the bishops will use every measure available to them to stop this mandate from going into effect. I hope and pray that they will stay strong, and not weary of the long fight ahead. 

Unfortunately, though, in the last 50 years we have witnessed many bishops growing weary of this fight. Many became silent on the issues of sexual morality and allowed secularist sexuality to take root in the hearts of so many in our country. A few bishops stood up, and they became beacons of light to faithful Catholics. But many chose popularity with the masses over faithfulness to the Truth. This coming fight, though, represents a new challenge. This fight no longer asks the bishops and the Church to be silent while secularists do their thing; this fight now asks the bishops and the Church to directly take part in the secularist view of sex. It directly asks Catholic charities, hospitals, and schools to fund contraceptives. This directness cannot be met with silence, it requires either an assent or dissent from the bishops.

But the bishops cannot, and must not be alone in this fight. Though the bishops are the leaders, and they must stand up for the truth, they cannot stand on their own. The Church is made up of clergy and laity alike, and now more than ever we the laity must be members of that Church. We must fight against the secularist encroachment on our morals as well. As laity, it is easy for us to complain and moan about the lack of strength amongst the bishops. It is easy for us to sit back and say "This is what should be done," but like the scholars of the law in the bible not lift a finger to bear the burdens ourselves (Lk 11:46). 

Our role during these times, though, is different from the bishops. The most important aspect of the laity's role during these times is prayer. We must be praying, we must be fasting, we must be begging God for a vistory. We should ask in trust that He give strength to His bishops, that He guide them in what to say. We should pray that our enemies be forgiven, and we should beseech that they too will come to Jesus. And we should ask this in trust, believing that God will give us good gifts out of His love for us. The biggest obstacle to this prayer, though, is often our own weakness! I for one know that I forget to pray for these situations. I forget to beseech God on behalf of our shepherds, and this forgetfulness is a sign that I do not feel as passionately about the issues as I should. I get worked up for a few minutes, but then move on with my life. For this fight, though, we cannot grow comfortable. We cannot lose our own stamina. It will be long, and it will be tiring, but we must persevere with our prayers. We must continue to pray. We must offer up our little sufferings for our Church and our world: for all those souls who do not yet know Christ. We can't forget to pray.

Prayer is the most essential aspect of what we can do as laity, but there is more for us to do as well. We need to encourage our bishops. We can write them letters, strengthening them when they stand for the truth, letting them know that the sheep are behind them and relying on them. We have to let our elected representatives know what we think. We cannot remain silent. I know I have remained silent for too long. It's so easy to not take the time to write a letter. It's easy to assume that somebody else is going to do it. But what if everybody was writing to their bishops and congressmen? What if we all stood up and shouted, "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Joshua 24:15)? This will, and can have an effect.

Similarly, we must witness to our views to those around us. Social media has made this easier than ever. We can share stories about the issue, write out our thoughts about it and how it would effect us as followers of Christ to have to fund something so evil. It's not only the leaders of our Church and our nation that need to hear from us, it's all our fellow men. We all have people we're friends with on Facebook who don't think the same we do - we need to show them the pain this would cause! We need to show them that we don't actually hate women, but rather we are following God's call to us. We are following His path.

Finally, we need to discern where we will make our own stand. If the battle is lost on a national level, what will constitute a victory on the personal level? When will it be necessary to sacrifice a job or career so that we can remain faithful to the Truth? If we lose this battle, what then? These are questions that we must wrestle with and find answers to. When will I enter the fray? We should always be asking these questions, but especially now. "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

Being a father at the March for Life

It is worthy of note that for all of man's incredible intellectual abilities, most of his life goes by forgotten not only by the outside world, but even by himself. Going about our day to day duties, it is often only the exceptional times in life that we remember with any lasting effect. There are many days on the calendar that I cannot tell you what I was doing, or what happened that day. I do not remember clearly October 22, 2011, or for that matter I do not remember exactly what I was doing on January 17, 2012. In order to remember what I was doing on either of these days I would need to go back in my calendar, or through my e-mails, to try to remind myself what was on my mind, who I was talking with, or what I was doing.

However, while the majority of my life flashes by in a blur of blessing and suffering, there are specific dates that stick out in mind. The days of April 23 and April 24, 2011 are both still with me, in vivid memory. Those two days stand out amongst the cloud of days before and after. April 23, Liz and I drove into the hospital in Winchester, arriving at a little before 9 o'clock in the morning. We had been to see the doctor on Wednesday, April 20 and Liz's blood pressure had been high, so they allowed us a few more days to see if she would go into labor naturally. Despite high volumes of walking and pineapple juice being consumed, she did not go into labor, so we drove to the hospital so that she could be induced.

For the next 24 hours I stood in awe of my wife as I could only try to help her through this experience. I could try to take her mind off the pain, and I could try to encourage her the best I could, but I could not take away the work she had to go through. Those 24 hours were marked by a series of highs a lows. She would progress in labor and then stall, progress and then stall. Despite hoping to have a natural labor, we had to make the tough decisions to put her on Pitocin, and then later on an epidural. However, neither of these helped her to progress any more, and towards the end we were finally ready for a C-Section.

However, right when we thought it would all be over, it turned out that Liz was ready to push. Just when we thought the work was done, it truly began. During the next hour, Liz showed strength that I could not imagine and that I unfortunately did not suspect she had. She gave everything she had in her. And, at about 9:45 in the morning, April 24, Easter Sunday 2011 Alan was born. For those of you who might not have experienced this blessing for yourselves, I can assure you there is no more joyful moment, no more powerful memory then the first time you see your child's face. For nine months you have waited to meet this person, wondering what they will look like and whose features they will possess. In an instant, you know. In an instant, you see the face of a baby you could not love more, the face of a human being who you will love until death takes one of you. At the moment, Liz and I wept tears of joy that we had never experienced before. We wept because God had entrusted us with another human life. He had given us an immense gift, one that requires sacrifice on our parts, but one that pays a thousand fold back in joy and laughter.

Going forward from that moment, calling myself "pro-life" took on a whole new meaning. There has never been a time in my life where I have not been pro-life. In high school, I attended the March for Life in Washington D.C. every year. During college I continued this practice, and since graduating I have always found myself in Washington D.C. around January 22 so as to witness to my beliefs. However, this year the March for Life took on a whole new meaning for me. Externally, the March was very similar to what it had been in the past couple of years. Many church groups were there, and the overwhelming majority of the tens of thousands of protesters were youth. The pro-choice protesters were also there, as were the graphic images of babies that had been aborted. 

Going through all this for the 9th year in a row, my mind couldn't help going back to the moment of my son's birth. The moment he was born, I knew him as my son. I saw him as a human being, alive and moving, his face in a little scowl from being taken from his nice warm home in his mother's womb. What was different from that baby I saw and those babies on the graphic billboards? Why was one a human, and the other not? Why did one deserve to live, and the other deserve to die? Why is it that our laws say that my son was a baby human being at 9:45 a.m, April 24, but not at 9:30 a.m., April 24?

The abortion of a human baby does not logically make sense. Science has not found a defining moment when a baby goes from being a "blob of tissue" to being a baby. Indeed, science is slowly starting to move toward recognizing that a baby always has the same identity from the moment of conception. It is always a living organism, not just a blob of tissue. 

But the reason there is any debate over this is because there are two persons primarily involved in the 9 month development of the baby (well four, including the God and the father). The pro-choice side is pro-choice largely because they emphasize the mother at the expense of the baby. They argue that women who do not want a baby for whatever reason (financial difficulties, emotional difficulties, or inconvenience) should not be forced to deliver this baby into the world. They should not be forced to go through the suffering of pregnancy, and thus abortion should be readily available so that they do not have to be forced to choose an unsafe back alley abortion. Their empathy is with the mother. They believe that a woman who for one reason or another is not ready to be a mother, shouldn't have to be.

However, because they have such a strong emphasis on what they perceive to be the well-being of the mother, they in turn believe that pro-lifers are just the opposite of them. Namely, they believe that pro-lifers have an over emphasis on the well-being of the baby at the expense of the mother. In truth, though, nothing could be further from the truth. There may be segments of the pro-life movement that care only for the well being of the baby, but by and large the pro-life movement wants both the mother and the baby to be happy. This is why so many pro-life organizations offer financial and emotional assistance to mothers in a crisis pregnancy. Many crisis pregnancy centers have strong ties with adoption agencies, so that if a mother is not ready to be a mother, she can give the baby to somebody who is. There are even houses that care for mothers in crisis pregnancies during the nine months they are carrying the baby, and up to a year afterwards so that they can help the women learn how to be mothers, find a job, and find an apartment for themselves and their new babies.

These organizations witness to what it means to be pro-life. To be pro-life is to genuinely want whats best for the mother and the baby. We do not want to see mothers forced into situations where they cannot support a child. The pro-life solution to this problem though is not to remove the child, its to remove the situation that is hostile to children. The solution is to help these women, so that each child has a moment of birth, as my son did.

During the March for Life this year, I was overwhelmed by what it means to be pro-life. Ultimately, it means that we must be a person who loves everyone. We must love the baby and the mother. We must teach others to love everyone. Recognizing the value of human life in our lives, we must love the value of human life in others'. 

Regarding "Why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus"

For the past week or so, there has been a lot of talk and debate over a video on YouTube entitled "Why I hate Religion But Love Jesus." If you haven't watched it, here it is:

Now, many, many, many Catholic bloggers have already commented on this video and sought to refute it. Most of them have even done a good job at it. But since I am a sheep, I must follow along blindly and do as my peers are doing and attempt to add something to this debate. And indeed, there is one angle of the debate that I think has been missing so far (thought I may be wrong, and somebody much more intelligent than I may have already thought of this and written about it. In which case, you should probably read their article.)

The point I think needs to be made is one that comes out of the very existence of the debate itself. For several days now, which unfortunately is an eternity in internet time, different bloggers have been trying to refute the main claims of the video. Primarily, this video seems to be emphasizing a personal encounter with Jesus, through the intellect, will, and passions, over any sort of "organized" religion. Mr. Bethke, the young gentleman who made the video, equates institutional religion with self-righteousness and hypocrisy. His definition of religion seems to be a method of acting in order to look holy. However, as he rightly points out, only looking holy without knowing Jesus can lead to war and greed.

In refuting Mr. Bethke, many bloggers have taken to refuting his individual claims, and especially his definition of religion. For instance, in this video Fr. Pontifex points out that hypocrisy in the members of an organized religion cannot be blamed on the religion. Rather, it is an unwillingness of the people in the pews to listen to the message that is being preached. They do not take to heart the message preached by organized religions that you DO have to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Or, Mr. Marc Barnes over at Bad Catholic takes to defending religion by attacking the specific claims made by Mr. Bethke. Indeed, Mr. Barnes does an admirable job of this, laying out the scriptural passages where Jesus does establish an organized religion and also pointing to the truth regarding the Church's charitable actions.

These men have done incredibly well defending the Catholic faith (for, as Mr. Barnes points out, Mr. Bethke's attacks do seem to mostly reflect on the Catholic faith) but they have not made the point I felt needs to be made. Fr. Pontifex alludes to the issue when he says, "See this had to be addressed, this use of illogical terms and definitions." However, he doesn't quite take this emphasis on terms and definitions where I hoped he would, so I will. The main point I want to make is this: this debate revolves around how someone defines religion, and the ambiguity over such a central term implies a need for an organized central authority that lays down definitions. In other words, unorganized religion is a strong argument for organized religion.

Unorganized religion, as it is understood by Mr. Bethke, seems to mean a gathering of people who come together in order to have an experience of Jesus. Indeed, Mr. Bethke does himself say that people should go to churches, it's just the highly organized churches he has a problem with. His definition of religion, as expressed in his video, seems to imply a state of organization that goes beyond the local community. And yet, Mr. Bethke himself defines religion here by saying, "You have to get back to my definition of religion... (Jesus) was coming to abolish self righteousness, justification, and hypocrisy." His definition equates religion with hypocrisy, and yet his video seems to equate it with organization. So the question is, what is religion? Do organized institutions of worship imply self righteousness, justification, and hypocrisy? Is religion simply a checklist of actions that our done so as to appear holy? Or, as Mr. Bethke believes, is true religion simply the personal, individual belief  in Jesus Christ without reference to actions or dogmas concerning that same Jesus?

Unfortunately for Mr. Bethke, unorganized religion cannot answer these questions for the simple reason that if it were to answer them, it would cease to be unorganized. The movement away from organized churches to small personal groups is a movement away from the concrete to the vague. Unorganized religion thrives on the fact that it does not enforce definitions and moral standards on its members. It has abandoned defined dogma for undefined experience. It has thrown out clarity so as to be casual, and this is its main appeal.

But unorganized religion cannot stay unorganized for long. Man longs for definitions and moral standards, for these come as natural to him as does breathing and sleeping. Definitions and moral codes feed his intellect and will, and he always needs them. Eventually, those in a small unorganized religious group will have to ask themselves "What do we mean by this?" or "Is this action in line with what Jesus taught?" They will have to find definitive answers so as to continue in their ongoing relationship with Jesus, and when they do find these definitive answers, whatever they may be, they will have taken a step away from chaotic experience and moved towards organized religion.

In fact, looking at man, it would seem that his need for answers and definitions, his thirst for moral codes and ethical knowledge would be something the Creator has put in him. And indeed, if the Creator did endow man with this desire to know, then in saving man He would have kept this in mind. He would have instituted a religion that could give many answers. He would have created an organization that could feed man's need for knowledge, so that man could come closer to God. For how can a man come to know Jesus and be one with Him in every thought and action if he does not definitively know what Jesus would think or do? How can he be united to the Savior in mind and heart if he only has a vague idea of what made the Savior a Savior? Man needs definitions and clarity so as to know God, otherwise man's finitude would get in the way of his relationship with the Infinite. So, the Infinite would have to find a way to go beyond's man's limits. He would need to provide a source of clarity to man's ever clouded mind. And lucky for us, He did: "Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam."