An Urgent Message from Fr. Owen Kearns LC, Publisher
What we deliver with our journalism, we cannot deliver without your generosity.
The National Catholic Register needs your help. Revenue from subscriptions and advertising can't keep up with the rising cost of payroll, printing, postage and other expenses. We must rely on donations to make up the difference. To continue our hard-hitting investigative reporting, we need your financial support. Please donate today.
...or click here to learn about donating to specific projects.
Donations to Circle Media are tax-deductible. (Photo credits/CNS)
August 31- September 6, 2008 Issue |
Posted 8/26/08 at 1:58 PM
Offended by Obama
I
write to express my commendation of Archbishop Chaput’s courage in withstanding
the deception of the group calling itself Roman Catholics for Obama
(“Archbishop Challenges ‘Roman Catholics for Obama,’” June 8). In spite of
their protests to the contrary, the archbishop is quite correct in reprimanding
them for their inaccurate presentation of the Catholic teaching on life issues.
In
reality, the group is neither more nor less than a front organization for NARAL
Pro-Choice America. In a desperate attempt to ensnare Reagan Democrats, many of
whom are Catholics, this organization was formed as an exercise in propaganda.
Its ineptness is only exceeded by its dishonesty.
No
true Catholic can give support to those who ardently champion abortion. For
abortion is not one issue among many. It is the defining issue of our time.
Those who defend the killing of innocent children in the womb can be trusted in
nothing — least of all the general welfare.
Let
us have no dishonesty here. Those who work to elect pro-abortion politicians
are entirely cooperating with evil. And evil — let there be no mistake about it
— is no plaything. It consumes those who trifle with it.
Father Gary Sumpter
St. Patrick’s Church
Scotia, California
As Sen. McCain pointed out recently,
Sen. Obama voted against the appointment of John Roberts as the chief justice
of the United States, fearing Roberts might put restrictions on abortion. The National Journalnamed Obama
“the most liberal” of all U.S. senators. He has a 100% voting record with
Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.
In
the Illinois Senate, Obama chaired the committee that killed the 2003
version of a bill that would save the lives
of babies born alive after a failed abortion. He also opposed the ban on
partial-birth abortion.
During
a New Hampshire debate, Obama said it was okay for a second grade teacher to
read a story about two princes falling in love, adding that he had talked about
same-sex “marriage” with his own young daughters.
All
this is how he votes. But the media is delighted by him — and doesn’t mention
his far-left record. The debates indicated that he is not very smart, and that,
as president, he would be a weapon of our worst radicals.
Dan Lyons
Bloomsbury, New Jersey
Obama? Absolutely Not
I was astonished at the response of
Michael O’Neill (“Obama? Why Not?” July 27). Not the fact that he is supporting
Obama, but the fact that he calls himself Catholic is what startles me. Mr.
O’Neill speaks of “justice, liberty and equality” making greater claims on his
conscience “than homosexual ‘marriage,’ abortion, artificial contraception, and
any other of the sexually obsessed issues that so exercise a celibate clergy.”
First of all, how can he not see
that abortion is the greatest abuse of “justice, liberty and equality” that our
nation has ever seen — even worse than slavery is the murder of countless
unborn children. Justice would demand that the unborn future generation is
given birth before being put to death; liberty demands that the unborn have the
freedom to live and equality certainly demands that unborn people have the same
right to life as those human beings who are allowing or promoting their murder.
Putting abortion down as something opposed by “an authoritarian proclamation of
specious logic” seems to be desperate and contradictory on the part of Mr.
O’Neill.
The other issues of homosexual
“marriage” and contraception appear to be, sadly, only the griping of a
discontented, dissentive “Catholic.” Catholics should defend their priests who
give up (yes, “natural”) pleasures of this world to serve a mission and calling
of a higher good spoken of by Christ and by the great apostle Paul.
I hope that Mr. O’Neill can come to
understand the falsehood of his proclamations concerning the celibate clergy,
and also, that he will see the real danger of an adamantly anti-“justice,
liberty and equality” (passed off as “pro-choice”) candidate such as Obama.
Amy Waddle
Lincoln, Nebraska
The Real Presence
Many
of us have read various opinions about professor PZ Myers’ desecration of a
consecrated host (“Remember the Real Enemy,” Aug. 17). If we truly believe that
Jesus is present in the form of bread, how does that make us feel when someone
desecrates the Eucharist? Most often, I think, we would react with anger and
shock.
But
if we step back and think about Mr. Myers’ action, we realize that he cannot
harm Our Lord. He only demonstrates his anger and frustration about something
he cannot grasp or understand. Herein is the challenge for us to face. Ask
yourself, “Do I really understand what is taking place when I receive the holy
Eucharist?” We profess to truly believe that Jesus is before us in that
consecrated host. He has told us, “I am the bread of life,” and by this truth,
is reaching out to embrace us and draw us into his mystical body. His embrace
is so joyful and overwhelming that it defies description. Only our spirit can
truly feel the holy presence of the Lord. We are not robots following the crowd
to receive a wafer of just bread — but are devout believers of Jesus’ real
presence in the holy Eucharist.
Mr.
Myers has unwittingly awakened us to the greatest treasure we have in our
faith: the holy Eucharist. Now, we can receive Communion with a new vitality
and reverence for Our Lord Jesus Christ.
James B. Muir
Sequim, Washington
Cohabitation Consequences
I’d
like to add a thought to Father John Flynn’s article, “Recent Studies Reveal
Perils of Cohabitation” (July 20).
There
may be a new “inbreeding,” and it is relevant to the divorce rate in couples
who cohabitate before marriage. There is, in all of us, a group of genes
designated the MHC (major histocompatability complex). The MHC is the control
center of our immune system and also appears to play a major role in the
release of pheromones, subtle odors that differ in every person.
In
a 1995 study conducted by Swiss biologist Claus Wedekind, a group of female
college students smelled T-shirts that had been worn by male students for two
nights without deodorant, cologne or scented soap. Overwhelmingly, the women
preferred the odors of men with MHCs dissimilar to their own. But there was a
significant exception: Women taking oral contraceptives chose MHCs that were
like their own. Studies by P.S. Santos in 2005 and Christine Garver-Apgar in
2006 showed similar results.
The
attraction of women, via olfaction, to men with different MHCs, has different
survival benefits. The more diverse the MHC of parents, the broader and
stronger will be the immune system of the offspring.
In
today’s society, when couples meet and cohabitate, the women are generally
taking oral contraceptives. If a couple marries, the woman will generally
discontinue her contraceptives to become pregnant. It is then that she may come
to awareness, consciously or unconsciously, that something is wrong. A
diminishment in the pheromone-based attraction to her husband may even bring
estrangement and possibly divorce. Meanwhile, the children, who have inbred
MHCs, may have increased susceptibility to infection and perhaps other
disorders from a constricted MHC.
The
fallout from MHC “inbreeding” is considerable and merits more research. Herd
immunity can be lost by a narrowing of the MHC, making whole populations prone
to epidemics. There is even a remote possibility that the narrowed MHC
contributes to autism, a disorder that has grown apace with our cohabitation
and oral contraceptive culture. The MHC, besides ordering our immune system,
provides a “signature,” an identity on all our cells, which is important for
their interactions. This signature will be less varied in children of parents
with closely related MHCs. As the major deficit in autism is in social
interaction, it is tempting to connect the diminished capacity of the child’s
cells to interact to the diminished capacity of the child to interact.
More
research is needed to determine more clearly the effects of cohabitation
combined with the suppression of a woman’s fertility.
Hugh McGrath Jr., MD
Metairie, Louisiana
Detrimental Divorce
The prevalence of divorce among
Catholics is a serious problem. Many Catholics feel that, in cases of extreme
unhappiness, divorce is an acceptable solution (“Kids First, Always,” May 11).
However, there is no such thing as a
Catholic divorce. Catholics, as a whole, seem to be quite ignorant of the
Church’s teaching on divorce or separation. If it is necessary that a couple
live separately, they should realize that the marriage is still valid — and
must be open to the possibility of reconciliation. Many Catholics who separate
or divorce do not even consider this possibility, and often, hope to find
another person to fill the void. But divorced Catholics are not free to date as
if they might remarry.
The effects of divorce are very
cruel to the children and other family members. Marriage is a difficult
vocation, but making it too easy to revoke one’s sacred promises causes more
problems. If a study was conducted on the root causes of the social ills of
depression, dishonesty, crime, poverty and addiction, I believe divorce would
be discovered to be the prime culprit.
Connie Derrick
Fairview, Tennessee
I note that you have adopted a policy of putting the word
“marriage” in quotes whenever the topic is same-sex “marriage.”
When can we expect you to extend this
policy to “marriages” before justices of the peace, “marriages” by
non-Christian ministers (such as the neo-pagans who recreate the Celtic
“handfasting” ceremony), and “marriages” by purported Christians who have
obtained a civil divorce and re-“married” illicitly? All of these “marriages”
are nonsacramental and unrecognized by the Church.
As
a child survivor of a civil divorce, re-“marriage” by both parents, an abusive
stepmother worthy of “Cinderella” and a thermonuclear DEFCON 1 child custody
battle in which we four children were used as pawns, I can assure you that
divorces rend the fabric of society every bit as much as you say same-sex
“marriage” will.
Matt Leachman
Iowa Park, Texas
Advertisement
Advertisement
Make a Donation now!
Insightful. Informative. Uncompromisingly faithful. The National Catholic Register is more than a newspaper. It’s a cause. Your support for the Register funds important journalism that helps to build a Culture of Life in our nation, and throughout the world. Help us promote the Church’s New Evangelization by donating to the National Catholic Register right now.