January 12, 2016

Happy New Year everyone!  I’m doing fine, a bit tired and a lot busy with regular life, which finds me offline more than usual lately.  I’m looking forward to getting back to more blogging in the weeks ahead.  Meanwhile, as often happens in winter, I’ve been writing fiction.  It’s a hobby, and addictive enough I probably need a National Don’t Write A Novel Month.  First drafts are my specialty, thanks.

In a rare bit of online reading today I came across Brandon Watson’s well-timed post at Siris, “Fictional Characters and Political Boundaries.”  He talks about the debate among philosophers about the real-ness of fictional characters.  On the one hand sometimes I want to slap all the philosophers, and on the other hand, I understand the angst: They are in the job of defining things, and they find themselves unable to define something that they know is, in some way, a real thing.

In what way?

This past weekend I was out of town, and I had to resist the urge to walk up to a guy, a total stranger, to whom I wanted to say, “You remind me of a friend of mine.”  The difficulty being that the person he reminded me of was one of my characters.  Luckily I’m shy enough it was an easy temptation to overcome, and no innocent bystanders were harmed by an encounter with a crazy-writer person.

A criticism leveled at certain types of bad writers is the error of creating a “character” who isn’t a real person so much as a symbol or a mouthpiece.  Bad writing (mine) or bad religion (the reader’s) could cause someone to accuse me of that, but it’s not my besetting literary sin.

On the contrary, I find my character’s lives inform me — not the other way around.  They educate me.  They do things and think things that open my eyes to reality.  Sometimes I sit in church and find I can pray better because I’ve absorbed a bit of one of my character’s spirituality and it makes me better able to love God.

So that’s a thing.  The philosophers are bumbling their efforts to describe and define, but they have indeed tripped over a real thing.

***

Father Longenecker has an article up called “Ten Tricks of the Devil.”  I particularly like this article because I’m keenly aware of my own wretchedness, and thus it was a great pleasure to read a list of dire spiritual problems that belong to other people for a change.  Ha.  It’s worth a read, and at the bottom of his post he links to his two Lenten-esque works of fiction, The Gargoyle Code and Slubgrip Instructs, both of which I heartily recommend.  Excellent fun.   We know it is a fallen world because Fr. L. doesn’t have time to publish more fiction than he does.

garcode  SLUBGRIP-Front Cover promo

***

Meanwhile, in a change of pace for this blog, sometime in the next few days I’ll be running a guest post from Timothy Scott Reeves.  His thoughts are prompted in part by a talk this fall by Sister Simone Campbell, during which she related her perception of the miracle of loaves and fishes.  Scott’s going to write about completely different things, but for this minute I want to talk more about fiction and reality.

You can read Sr. Simone’s understanding of the miracle in this interview transcript, scroll down to the very bottom.  When I first read this account, I was astounded by the blatant sexism of it all:

The — OK. This is “Loaves and Fish.” And remember the story in Matthew — in the Gospel, and they’re out in the countryside, and the Apostles say, “Send them back to town, they’re going to get grumpy.” And Jesus says, “Feed them yourselves.” And the Apostles say, “we don’t have it.” Well, at the end of Matthew’s account, he says, “5,000 men were fed to say nothing of the women and children.” Well, now that made me mad.

[laughter]

So I meditated about that. As you can tell, I have an odd spiritual life. So I thought about it, and I realized they only counted the ones who thought it was a miracle. Because the women had brought food from home. They shared it.

[laughter]

But the guys — I mean, don’t you have this — don’t you experience this all the time? Guys will show up. There’s food on the table. “Wow, food. What a miracle. Isn’t that great? It was like elves produced it.”

Because men are so dumb they don’t even know where their lunch comes from?  Really?  You said that on the radio?

But I had a second thought on deeper reflection: I think this woman hasn’t spent enough time with men.  I married one twenty years ago, I gave birth to another one, and I get to compare notes with other women similarly credentialed. I’ve got an awful lot of lived experience on how men look for food.

And this is the thing:  When you go someplace with your husband, or go nowhere at all, he will eventually get hungry.  And then he will turn to you, his wife, and he will say: “What’s for lunch?”

This is the very first thing he will do.

You might then direct him to the bounty that can be had in the refrigerator, the lunch box, or the drive-through restaurant, places he is well able to look for food in your absence.  But if you are there, he will ask you first.

This might be learned-helplessness, but it can also be respect.  One doesn’t just dig through the stash and grab what one wants, lest one accidentally eat what was being saved for someone or sometime else.*

–> A hungry man will never be out someplace with his wife and friends, get hungry, and fail to remember his wife is present and therefore first ask the other men if they brought him lunch.  This is not what men do.

The Gospels aren’t fiction, and for that reason alone they pose mysteries.  Things happen that we do not understand completely, because our real life is not crafted out of cutesy just-so morality tales.

Sexism is a kind of divorce from reality.  Bad fiction, untrue fiction, is a divorce from reality.  And hence the struggle to explain what we instinctively know:  Good fiction, no matter how fanciful, is always inextricably wed to reality.

*Thus in situations where the common-but-not-exhaustively-universal gender-roles are reversed, the question is asked to the man who is providing the food.  My son does most of the cooking at our house lately.  So we all ask him, “What’s for dinner?”

Cover art courtesy of DwightLongenecker.com.

December 20, 2015

Years ago my husband had a business trip to Milan, and he went to church while he was there.  A local colleague tried to puzzle out this behavior, for it wasn’t mere tourism.  “But nothing is wrong with you,” he protested.  “You are young, healthy, intelligent, educated, successful. Why would you go to church?”  Church was where the old and the poor and the disabled went — people who were desperate.  People who needed consolation.

He wasn’t entirely wrong.

The “Holiday Season,” as we call the period between Thanksgiving and New Year’s Day, has become our annual tribute to the god of good fortune.  If you’ve got prosperity, or dear family, loyal friends, or even just a very optimistic outlook on life, you’re in.  Gifts, parties, good deeds — these are all ways to celebrate the blessings of the god of I’m Not Desperate.

It is a lonely season for those who’ve been passed over by wand of the giftmas fairy, those can frankly look around and notice that life is terrible.  The secular holidays are a celebration of all that is good in the world.  When the mandatory joyfulness exceeds the real levels of what’s actual worth celebrating, the disparity creates a gap.  Those who notice the gap aren’t unreasonable in reacting with sorrow.

***

Meanwhile, the Advent scripture readings are a bit over the top for the reader who has it all.  When everything’s fine, a reading like this passage (December 5th- typical of the season) seems overkill:

The lowly will ever find joy in the LORD,
and the poor rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.
For the tyrant will be no more
and the arrogant will have gone;
All who are alert to do evil will be cut off,
those whose mere word condemns a man,
Who ensnare his defender at the gate,
and leave the just man with an empty claim.

For goodness sake, Lord, let me go shopping in peace!  It’s not that you don’t see where some people would find that kind of scripture enormously helpful.  But you’ve got to be pretty far into the hole before you’re hungry for some good old fashioned messianic promises.

Hence the contrast between secular holiday tunes and Christmas carols.  The secular songs celebrate the things of this world — good things.  Friends, family, snowy weather, gifts, sleigh rides, camaraderie.  Things worth appreciating, certainly.  A good Christmas carol, in contrast, picks up on the desperation.  It finds everything that’s lacking even after you’ve counted your earthly blessings.

Consider “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen,” which wishes tidings of comfort and joy not because all is well at home, but because Christ our Savior came to save us from Satan’s power.  “What Child is This?” isn’t content to sit around the manger with gurgling baby Jesus, but reminds us “nails, spear, shall pierce Him through, the cross be borne for me for you.”  When you need to wake up your Lent, any proper Christmas song will do the trick, and vice versa.  Mall traffic or no mall traffic, you can’t go so very wrong with “O Sacred Head Surrounded” for all your elfin-overload recovery needs.

Related Links for Having Yourself a Desperately Magnificent Christmas:

File:Ansdell Richard Lost In The Storm.jpg

Artwork: Richard Ansdell, Lost in the Storm [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

March 10, 2015

When I answered Tom McDonald’s How I Pray series, one of the pile of question marks in the black hole that is my prayer life concerned spiritual reading.  Two answers of late:

1. The book I’m carrying around town and reading in snatches is Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist: Unlocking the Secrets of the Last Supper, by Brant Pitre.  So far, it’s excellent. Recommended if you have a general understanding of the significance of the Mass and the Last Supper, and are looking for something to add depth to your Holy Week (or just your every Sunday morning).

2. What I’m keeping by the easy chair is Butler’s Lives.  No particular plan to my reading, other than if I’m looking for something to occupy me for a couple minutes, there it is, I’m making a point of having the current volume readily at hand.

I’m living in a time warp, which caused me to scurry to my computer to excitedly tell you it’s the feast of St. Frances of Rome, only to realize that nope, that was yesterday.  If you don’t know her, you should.  Here’s the seminal post from Erin Arlinghaus for your edification.

Meanwhile, from the life of St. Pacian, bishop of Barcelona, who died circa AD 390:

Amongst St. Pacian’s lost writings was one entitled Cervulus, directed against an obscene heathen pageant which took place annually at the new year and in which, apparently, Christians sometimes participated. . . . Like many a modern censor the bishop found that his strictures acted rather as an advertisement, and at the beginning of his treatise on penance he deplores that the chief effect of his censure was to make more people curious to witness the objectionable revels.

(Read the whole story here.)

There’s a trend among Catholics today — enthusiastic, church-going, Gospel-spreading Catholics — to want to be sophisticated.  To want, like a desperate gaggle of tweenage schoolgirls, to show that we aren’t backwards Bible-thumpers getting our bonnets in a ruffle over the scruples that plague our provincial cousins.  We’re Catholic. We’re in the world, being the leaven.

A desire to engage the culture is fine as far as it goes, but it’s a relative (albeit vocal) minority who’s erring on the scrupulous side.  The bulk of us are so terrified of being found fools for Christ, or so unwilling to bend our necks, that, like the 4th Century Christians in Barcelona, we’d rather run around dressed like wild animals than be caught too pious at home.

 

File:White Tiger in Touroparc.jpg

Artwork: Clément Bardot (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons

 

December 23, 2014

You’ve no doubt seen Saturday Night Live’s chillingly (hilariously) accurate tour of what you can expect at Mass this Christmas, but you might still be thinking, Hmmn.  Is it really a good idea for someone like me to go to place like that?  With Jesus in it and stuff?

The answer is yes.  Here are my top ten reasons why:

10. It really is the Church for anybody at all.  There might be other religions where you’re expected to have your act together from day one.  Catholics, on the other hand, have not just one but three sacraments ordered towards the fact that we’re all total screw ups, and four others that certainly hint hard in that direction.

9. Those in the know will be grateful and appreciative if you just do the respectful-visitor thing.  If you’re just visiting, no problem.  Come in, find a seat where you can see, and participate as much or as little as you like.  (Don’t go up for communion; if you need to let others out of the pew, just step out of the pew, wait for them to pass, then sit back down.)

8. It’s safer than going to the grocery store.  People who are sick should stay home.  Friends don’t let friends kill each other at Mass.

7. If you’re out sick for Christmas, there’s an endless supply of make-up days. Even through the holidays, there will be a Mass nearly every day of the week.  Jan 1 is a feast day, so look for services both New Year’s Eve and New Year’s day.  You can check Masstimes.org for contact info, but phone and listen to the recording to find out the Mass schedule through the holidays.

6. You’ll be reminded that no one’s doing this for entertainment.  Okay, so there’s a chance that you’ll show up someplace that’s got movingly beautiful music and an amazing sermon to boot.  More likely you’ll end up at one of the bazillions of parishes run by people who must really love God, because they sure aren’t there for the show.   Wherever the parish you attend falls on the spectrum, it’s a good way to spend an hour of your life.

5. If you have to read along with the prayer card in the pews, it’ll make you look like a pro.  A few years ago the English translation of the Roman Catholic Mass was updated.  What this means is that all the old-timers, the ones who go to Mass whenever they possibly can and have been doing so for decades, still don’t know the new words.  So you’ll see all these people pick up their cheat sheets when it’s time for this or that prayer.  You can too, and you’ll blend right in.

4. Real live Catholics goof up the Mass too.  Some people worry that when they visit a Catholic Church they’ll look funny, because they don’t know when to sit-stand-kneel-shake-rollover.  The truth is that many regular Mass-goers still don’t have it all down straight, to the point that some priests give hand signals to the congregation with such clarity and firmness it impresses the Dog Whisperer.  And then there’s a whole contingent that get so lost in prayer, or something, that the autopilot picks up the wrong cues.  Plus there’s the people with bad knees who couldn’t do the up-down-over routine even if they wanted to.  Sit in the second row or beyond, follow along as best you can, and don’t sweat it.

3. God will be happy you came, and no one else’s opinion matters that much, does it? Just come.  When you can and how you are.  People who have a problem with that can take it up with the Almighty.

2. You’ll be helping the pastor conduct a massive experiment on his congregation. All year long, the people who attend Mass every Sunday do this routine where they pass themselves off as holy, pious people.  And then, twice a year, the Church runs a test.  All these visitors show up, and the regulars lose their regular parking space and their favorite pew, and they have to see these people they don’t even know!  And then the pastor looks out and sees who remains smiling and prayerful, and who is maybe not so holy after all.   Since repeatable results are the gold standard of scientific proof, you’ll want to inflict your presence on the regulars as often as you can.

1. You’ve got a God-given right to come check it out.  The Catholic Church isn’t just for people like you, it’s for you.  Come to Mass.

File:Anbetung der Könige im Schnee.jpg
Pieter Brueghel the Elder (1526/1530–1569) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

 

August 5, 2014

 

It’s the time of year when mothers start to get excited about school.  Before you actually start the work is the ideal to time to share school plans, because once you’re underway the enthusiasm can wear off a bit.  So here are my plans for the coming school year, starting with Mr. Boy.  I’ll cover the girls’ plans in two or three subsequent posts.

High School. Oh My.

The boy starts 9th grade, which means the college-prep clock is ticking and the transcript is officially turned on.  We’ve been working up to this, gradually getting less relaxed and more rigorous over the past several years.  At the start of this summer I took a look at our plans for the new year, took a deep breath, and resigned myself to studying Greek literature.  We’ve been using Kolbe’s homeschool course plans for 60-80% of his school work since the boy was in 6th grade, and I’ve been very happy with them.  I knew we wanted to stick with Kolbe for high school, knew their curriculum was about right for our boy, but wow, what a lot of work for a certain highly-distractible mother.

Still, I resolved to do it.  Must. educate. child.

And then I found the third way.

Someone Else Could Teach My Kid

“So, um, darling, I know it’s expensive, but what if we enrolled the boy in online courses?”  Much to my relief, the spouse was open to the idea of investing in some sanity-saving delegation of responsibility.  Our choices for the boy were:

  • Local public school.  Not bad, but not our first choice.
  • “Local” Catholic school.  Pricey, but financial aid happens, so it was not out of the question.  It was the commute that made it the option of last resort.  We didn’t forsee having hours to spend in the car twice a day.
  • Closer evangelical-run homeschool hybrid school.  Similar cost to Catholic school, minus the Catholic.  Advantage of being able to take classes by-the-course and cut down on costs that way.
  • Teach the kid ourselves.  Always a possibility. We are homeschoolers, after all.
  • Wait . . . there’s another way?? Yes?

Once we stacked up the financial downside of Catholic school or hybrid school, and the time investment of getting the not-yet-driving child to some physical location, online classes came out as the obvious middle way.  The boy is very much at home online, and since he’s a good kid, he responds well to high expectations from the adults in his life.  (Of course his parents have not “high” but IMPOSSIBLE expectations, as we are frequently informed. Hence the interest in outsourcing a little of the teaching load.)

I’m risk-averse, however, so it was a tad nerve-wracking making the upfront investment.

Summer Trial Run

It is as if the brilliant people at Kolbe Academy had installed a web cam in my brain.  They offered summer school classes, both of the fun type (Lord of the Rings something or another) and of the, “Oh my goodness is my kid ready for high school?!!” type.  We decided to try out the summer program as a trial-run to see whether this whole online-learning thing would work or not.  Having experienced the jolt that comes from changing school systems, I thought it best to pick classes that would prepare the boy for the new school’s expectations.  Thus we skipped the fun stuff and enrolled him for the summer term in Composition Boot Camp & Algebra 1 Readiness.

It went great.  He was vocally skeptical until about 24 hours into the first class session, and then he got serious about his work.  Quit making goofy complaints about the instructor, and got good about claiming the PC aggressively so he could get his work done.   (“It’s a middle-aged lady sitting at her computer,” he said the first day.   I chuckled and pointed out that regardless of where he attended school, he was getting exactly that.  Who do you think teaches high school students, son?  Super models?)

What I loved most about online classes: The class keeps meeting no matter what else happens in regular life.  We needed this.  I’m sold.

The One Weird Thing: Foreign Language

So that’s the plan for most of the boy’s education: He’s taking Theology 9, History 9, Literature 9, English 9, Algebra 1, and Biology 1 with the online classes.  The one thing he isn’t taking with Kolbe, though it was tempting,  is Latin.

Late spring a year ago, in anticipation of an upcoming used book sale, I asked the boy what he’d like to do for high school foreign language.  (I needed to know so I could start scouting out books in the language of his choice.)  The tricky bit is this: Whatever he picked, he had to stick with for three years of high school level work, because that’s what colleges tend to want.  We’d been studying Latin with modest but not amazing success, and I wasn’t convinced that he’d be enthusiastic about three more years of intensive Latin.  Still, it was on the table as a possibility, and I’d be game for learning with him.  The other choices I offered:

  • Spanish, which I don’t speak but would willingly commit to studying with the kid.  A practical choice, and one for which we could find ample opportunity to practice our budding skills locally.
  • French, which is not very practical but is much easier for me to teach, since I know the language fluently.  In terms of sheer easiness, this was the the top pick.
  • Whatever else he wanted.  We’d invest the $ in textbooks or software, but he’d be on his own.  Still, if he’d always fantasized about mastering Tagalog or Old Ukrainian, fine with me.  Or whatever.
  • Actually if he picked Italian or something else that struck my fancy, I’d learn that one along with him, sure.

After a certain amount of discussion, he opted for simplicity.  French it would be.

Luckily for us, we have another family locally that has a French connection and three kids at about French 1 age.  I proposed we form a weekly class, and they took the bait.  So what we’ve got on the table is a once-a-week hourly class, and then an estimated four hours a week of homework outside of class.  One hour of that is “immersion practice” which for the core group of kids means “go talk to your relative who speaks this language and practice that way.”

Scalable Textbooks

If one kid’s learning French, that means all kids are learning French.  That’s how it works around here.  I did some hunting around, and picked Memoria Press’s First Start French as our house textbook.    For high school, I have to flesh out the program with a modest amount of additional vocabulary and a handful of grammatical constructions that are usually included in French 1.  Years ago I built a French 1 program from the ground up, so I know the drill.  I think this approach will be much simpler than trying to pick a high school text that’s suited to our unusual situation — neither a regular classroom nor a regular independent-study course.  Meanwhile, my middle school student can use it as-is, and the little guys will follow along with the curriculum from Memoria, but with assignments better suited to younger students.

So that’s high school.  Pretty simple.  The boy also has some fun hands-on mini-electives, all low key science-y stuff that his friend’s mom proposed.   Should be good.

 

 

Photo copyright Jon Fitz, all rights reserved.

February 27, 2024

What does the Catholic Church have to say about the recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling on embryos and wrongful death of minors lawsuits? Today I want to run through several aspects of the case that touch on the Catholic faith, from legal questions to very personal family planning decisions.

Every aspect of this case is highly emotionally charged, and my goal here is to sort out truth from hyperbole.  You may not be comfortable with the Church’s stance on a given aspect of the case (even if you’re Catholic), but the only way to know where you agree and disagree is to start by understanding correctly what the Church actually teaches.

What are the key aspects of this ruling?

The two cases being considered involve three families whose frozen embryos were destroyed due to negligence by their IVF clinic. The parents have attempted to get compensation for their loss under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.

Click here for the link to the full text of the decision, which is fairly readable.  Here’s a summary of Justice Mitchell’s key points:

  1. The Supreme Court of Alabama can only rule on questions or concepts that it has been specifically asked to treat.
  2. The Supreme Court is limited in its decisions to interpreting what the law of the State of Alabama actually is, according to the plain meaning of the legislative texts.
  3. Even if the justices themselves might prefer the law to say something other than what it does, they can’t create interpretations to conform to their wishes; it’s the job of the legislature to reform the law.
  4. The plain meaning of Alabama law as currently written includes stored embryos in the definition of “minor children” for the purposes of the specific civil law statute in question in this pair of cases.

This last point is important, because the decision specifically explores the differences between civil and criminal law, and explains why it’s often (rightly) possible to get compensation for damages in a civil case even if the situation doesn’t rise to the level of bringing about a conviction for related criminal charges.

This makes sense! There are many situations where we might accidentally or carelessly bring about some harm that in justice we should try to make amends and restore our neighbor as much as possible, but in which a criminal charge would be going too far — it would be an injustice to send someone to jail (or worse) given the circumstances and/or level of evidence.

This distinction is very important in wading through reactions. This ruling treats civil law, so anyone saying that “IVF has been criminalized!” is just not being honest.  This ruling does say that the law as written allows parents of frozen embryos to sue for civil compensation under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.

Who is affected by this ruling?

This ruling concerns Alabama state law. Other states may have similar laws but which either explicitly carve out exceptions for IVF, or which create exceptions indirectly.

And, narrowing it down further, what this ruling did was send the case back down to a lower court for trial.  Justice Mitchell’s opinion laid out multiple aspects of the case that the Supreme Court was unable to rule on because it was not asked by either party to do so.  Thus while the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act could apply in this case, it did not make any decision about whether the IVF clinic actually owed damages.

Justice Mitchell’s decisions pointed out one very important aspect of the case that, in the new trial, may have a strong bearing on whether new precedents will be set concerning civil liability for IVF clinics:

During oral argument in these cases, the defendants suggested that the plaintiffs may be either contractually or equitably barred from pursuing wrongful-death claims.

In particular, the defendants pointed out that all the plaintiffs signed contracts with the Center in which their embryonic children were, in many respects, treated as nonhuman property: the Fondes elected in their contract to automatically “destroy” any embryos that had remained frozen longer than five years; the LePages chose to donate similar embryos to medical researchers whose projects would “result in the destruction of the embryos”; and the Aysennes agreed to allow any “abnormal embryos” created through IVF to be experimented on for “research” purposes and then “discarded.”

The defendants contended at oral argument that these provisions are fundamentally incompatible with the plaintiffs’ wrongful-death claims.  . . .  The trial court remains free to consider these and any other outstanding issues on remand.

In what ways is this ruling “Catholic”?

Here are two aspects of Catholic teaching that are consistent with this ruling:

Subsidiarity.  In sticking strictly within the bounds of what the state Supreme Court has the right to decide, this ruling respects the principle of not overreaching in authority.

Dignity of human life from conception. As it happens (whether the judges agree with the law or not — their job isn’t to approve the law but to rule according to the law as written), Alabama state law is in many ways in accord with Catholic teaching on the reality that human life is sacred, that our lives begin at conception, and that our worth as a person isn’t determined by our age, ability, or usefulness.

–> To better understand the philosophical underpinnings of this belief, whether from a religious or secular point of view, the book you want is Embryo: A Defense of Human Life by Robert P. George and Christopher Tollefsen.

All that said, there are details of this case that bring to light some areas where Catholic teaching is quite distinctive. Let’s look at that next.

What is the Catholic position on embryonic human life?

The Catholic position is rooted in biological fact: The defining moment when a human being comes into existence is at conception. That would be fertilization of the ovum (not a human being) by the sperm cell (also not a human being).

The Church takes an interest in this scientific question because the implications are so far-reaching. Unlike a utilitarian philosophy, which judges the worth of a person based on his or her usefulness, Catholicism holds that all human beings have equal rights and dignity.

Thus, for example, genetically screening embryos to select a child who doesn’t have an undesired trait, and in the process killing those who don’t meet spec, is morally abhorrent.

This position is in no way unique to Catholicism — many religions, as well as many non-religious people — agree that we shouldn’t kill people just because they have a particular illness or disability.

Likewise, it is absolutely unacceptable to participate in any way in discarding frozen embryos just because they are no longer wanted, nor to use stored embryos for scientific research or technological developments that knowingly, intentionally involve killing the embryo.

–> In contrast, we could imagine a scenario where an embryo from an ectopic pregnancy, which is certain to die if it remains implanted in the mother, might morally be transferred to an experimental artificial womb, if the hope is that the child will survive — perhaps to be experimentally re-implanted into the mother’s uterus. Even though there’s high likelihood the procedure would not succeed, the intention is not to kill the child; it is an attempt, however long the odds, to save the child’s life.

And remember that in all cases, it is morally acceptable to remove the embryo or fetus from the mother’s body if indeed necessary to save the mother’s life. We can’t actively kill the baby as in abortion, but surgical or vaginal delivery of the intact child is morally acceptable, even if the baby is far too young (such as in ectopic pregnancy) to survive outside the womb.

Is IVF okay as long as no embryos are destroyed?

This is a completely different question, and one on which Catholicism has far less company.  Many Christians (and others) who recognize the embryo’s inherent dignity as a human being do, nonetheless, allow IVF as long as a sincere attempt is made to implant and bring to term all embryos conceived in this way.

Here’s the Catholic position on IVF in a nutshell:

Most important: Every child conceived by IVF is a gift of God, precious and equal in dignity to all other humans.

More difficult to understand: Nonetheless, the sexual act itself has a sacredness that needs to be respected.  Conception should occur within an act of intercourse between faithfully, lovingly married husband and wife.

This second point is a hard teaching. We can point to many cases where IVF is attempted by loving, faithfully married husband and wife who are only trying to solve their fertility problem.

These cases are fundamentally different from surrogacy or donor cases where the right of the child to know and be reared by its own parents is intentionally denied by design, and which in some cases even amount to full-on trafficking. We need to acknowledge that.

We need to recognize that not every instance of IVF has the same level of moral problems.

Nonetheless, Catholicism does teach that couples should not use IVF.

We should also recognize that even though in many cases couples will be able to conceive by seeking alternate forms of fertility treatment, that won’t always be true.

Isn’t the strict rule against IVF counter to the pro-life ethic?

To be pro-life is to respect the dignity of all human beings.  Often (not always) our respect for the sacredness of the gift of human life leads married couples to have another child, even when doing so involves a certain amount of sacrifice or hardship.

(And there is no denying that IVF involves sacrifice and hardship!)

Likewise, respect for human life means that when a child is conceived in a way that isn’t ideal, such as an out-of-wedlock pregnancy, or even in a way that is overwhelmingly and entirely evil, such as rape, we nonetheless treasure the child. The child might be the only good thing in the whole horrible situation, but the child is good.

We seek to help the mother through the serious hardships her pregnancy involves, and we seek to support her in whatever choice she makes about whether to rear the child herself or to seek a good adoptive family for her child.

When appropriate (such as an ordinary out-of-wedlock pregnancy), we seek to help the father to also foster a right relationship with his child. The best way to do that will depend on the unique circumstances of the situation.

All that said, being pro-life is not about maximizing human population via any means available. For couples suffering from infertility, the pro-life choices are to:

  1. Help them conceive using morally acceptable means if possible. If that is not possible then to . . .
  2. Provide support and accompaniment as they find other ways to live out their God-given vocation, whether that be through adoption, fostering, or some completely different ministry.

What if a Catholic has used IVF anyway?

Well, that’s in the past.  You can’t change the past.

Furthermore, even though few people can understand the pain of infertility, any honest Catholic will admit that frankly we’ve been tempted by far less, and have frequently fallen short of the mark.

That doesn’t mean IVF is no big deal. What it means is that you move on.  Your past makes its mark on your life, but it doesn’t define who you are now, nor who you will become.

If you knew it was wrong when you did it? Take it to Confession. You chose to do something you knew not to do, and you’re sorry, and you want to live differently going forward. Receive God’s forgiveness and healing.

If you didn’t even know it was wrong when you did it? Then you didn’t know. In order to be culpable of a sin you have to know it’s a sin! Now you do know, and your life will be different as a result.

If you aren’t clear in your mind about where you were, mentally, at the time? Just bring it up in Confession.  God knows your heart, and He is ready to embrace you, and love you, and welcome you into a relationship of peace and joy.

God bless.

January 24, 2024

Question that’s been generating some unnecessary panic: Is it okay for a Catholic to celebrate Valentine’s day, birthdays, anniversaries, or other special events that happen to fall on Ash Wednesday or Good Friday?

Short answer: In the United States, at present yes in fact you can, though with some restrictions.

Here are the details.

Period promo poster for "The Ashes of My Heart" starring Barbara Castleton, 1917.
Poster: Top result on Wikimedia when I searched for “heart with ashes.” I had no idea they were making films about opioid addiction back in 1917. (Image is public domain.)

 

#1 It’s always better to fast as fully as possible.

If your health and state in life allow it? Nothing but prayer, water, and works of mercy for you. (And the Eucharist of course!)  That’s not a requirement, but it’s an ideal worth approaching.  For some of you with a history of eating disorders or perfectionism-related mental health issues, your correct approach is to simply follow the rules set forth by your bishops’ conference and offer up your genuine sorrow that a stricter fast simply is not the prudent course.

#2 Your state in life makes a difference.

If you are clergy or religious, you have an obligation to immerse yourself in the liturgical life of the Church with a totality prescribed by whatever rule of life you are bound to follow.

If you are a lay person, your vocation is lived out in the context of family and community life, and you have wider room for discernment on what exactly that should look like on a holy day.  There may be good, serious reasons that a celebration on-the-day is in fact a work of mercy on your part.

#3 Is it possible to reschedule?

Still, the goal is not to play “What can I get away with here?”  If you can move an important life or work event to another day, do that.

As much as possible, we want to set aside Ash Wednesday and Good Friday as the sacred days that they are, leaving behind as many of our worldly attachments as we can.  The kids will be *just fine* if you hand out the pink cupcakes a day early. Talk about a perfect teaching moment!

Likewise, in most dating and marriage relationships, your simply expressing a preference to move the celebration to a slightly different date will be a non-issue. The mere fact that you request it is all your loved one needs to hear, just like you are always quick to accommodate the preferences of those around you whenever possible.

#4 Can you do the thing without doing the thing?

If it’s just a little bit of a cake being passed around the office, you can hover during the brief festivities sipping water from your Yeti cup, and then gratefully accept your slice of cake and carefully wrap it up and put it in the fridge to save for later.

Not every celebration requires actually eating and drinking the celebratory foods.  It’s fine to just watch and make merry on an empty stomach.

#5 What’s my real intention?

Nonetheless, we can think of situations where you might rightly discern that going along with a given celebration is the right thing to do. Examples:

  • Your spouse is very uncomfortable with your deepening practice of the faith, and would be saddened and alarmed if you moved Valentine’s dinner, which you two have always celebrated on the 14th for reasons that go way back to some important traditions and memories in your marriage.  Out of love for your spouse and a desire to not create a stumbling block to the faith, you resolve to celebrate your special day together cheerfully and without hang-ups.
  • You forgot to check the calendar last fall before setting the date for your Baptist great-grandma’s 99th birthday party.  There is no way on earth you’d cancel on the biggest event the senior center is going to see all year.
  • Your employees have been through a rough time lately, and everyone is (genuinely!) looking forward to that big thing the facilities team put together to honor some colleagues who really went the extra mile. You didn’t pick the date, and you wouldn’t dream of letting these guys down after everything they put into it.

You can think of other situations. The decision to go ahead with the celebration isn’t about you wanting to slack off on your spiritual discipline, it’s about respecting the real emotional needs of others around you.

If we lived in a totally-Catholic society this wouldn’t be a factor. But we don’t. Perhaps the fact of our nation’s cultural and religious pluralism is one reason the US bishops have set their fasting guidelines as they have.

#6 There are still limits.

Your celebratory meal needs to meet two requirements:

  • No overeating.
  • No meat.

That’s it.  By the US bishop’s guidelines for fasting, you are permitted one full (normal) meal on the fast day. Alternately, if you are joining your loved ones for just that slice of cake or a few chocolates, it can be part of one (or both) of your two allowed snacks that together make less than a complete second meal.

Yes, you could have dessert, if you eat less of the dinner so that you aren’t over-stuffing yourself.  Yes you could drink that glass of wine or mocktail, ditto. If you go to one of those restaurants where the portions are huge, you need to either leave the extra on your plate or else request a to-go box and eat the remainder tomorrow.

And yes, you need to skip the meat and go with the fish or the vegetarian option. At Great-Grandma’s barbecue birthday luncheon, you will need to discretely manage to eat only the rice and the vegetables, no pork or chicken or brisket, and yeah even pick out the obvious lumps of bacon in those collards, so maybe it would be smart to call the caterers and get a tray of catfish added to the menu.

And you don’t get to pout about it, either. Man up, eat your greens without drawing attention to yourself, and silently thank God that at least the bishops haven’t outlawed banana pudding.

On the other hand, you do not need to scruple over sauces or soup stock made from animal products, but which aren’t meat themselves.  It’s legal.  (Hash, my friends, is not legal. Sorry. But you knew that.)

Finally, it is essential to remember that it is still a day of prayer and fasting.  Be joyful and fully present to those you love during your time together, but during those hours of the day that are yours to do with as you please, dedicate your holy day to prayer and penance.

#7 You set your own rules for your personal Lenten penance.

So does all this mean you can have cake and chocolate candy and brownies on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday? What??

Well, that’s up to you.  It’s your job to discern what specific penances you wish to take on above and beyond what is strictly required, and it is your job to decide if you should make exceptions to those penances.

It’s quite possible you shouldn’t have cake ever, because you know that it’s terrible for your (personal) health, and the people who love you wish you wouldn’t.  Nothing celebrates 99 years, or the lifelong marital commitment, or appreciation for the people who spend large parts of their lives working alongside you, like doing your best to be there, healthy as possible, for those you love.

It’s also possible that everyone’s just happy you could come, and nobody cares whether you have the cake. So skip it.

Likewise, consider that people around you might be genuinely inspired by your example if you are able to share their joy while also (without drawing attention) denying yourself in accordance with the spirit of the sacred season.  Your act of self-denial may evangelize people you had no idea were noticing.

But if that chocolate candy or that cake are in fact not a problem for you physically, and it would be really meaningful to your loved ones to share that moment of celebration with you? Yes, you are in charge.

You decide what your personal Lenten penances will be, and then you decide when it’s best to stay the course without exception, and when, in contrast, setting aside your planned penance is in fact a work of mercy.

 

Related:

 


Browse Our Archives