The Word Who Is Life

Something which has existed since the beginning,
that we have heard,
and we have seen with our own eyes;
that we have watched
and touched with our hands:
the Word, who is life –
this is our subject.
That life was made visible:
we saw it and we are giving our testimony,
telling you of the eternal life
which was with the Father and has been made visible to us.
What we have seen and heard
we are telling you
so that you too may be in union with us,
as we are in union
with the Father
and with his Son Jesus Christ.

The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church

A commenter in a discussion at Patrick Madrid's blog gave a wonderful explanation of how to speak the truth in charity. I want to remember this and thought I'd share it too.

The issue isn't whether abortion is murder or not. That's a given: yes.

The issue is whether, in the context of a discussion, this truth is the paramount one in the hierarchy of truths. The Code of Canon Law, which is an invaluable resource for instruction about the heart and mind of the Church, gives us an interesting clue on this point. The very last canon, which deals with the transfer of pastors, says this:

"In cases of transfer, the prescripts of can. 1747 are to be applied, canonical equity is to be observed, and the salvation of souls, which must always be the supreme law of the Church, is to be kept before one's eyes," (CIC 1752).

The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church, and if I might add, its primary mission. In fact, I need not, because the Catechism says it better (CCC 849-51). Salvation, and thus missionary work, must be grounded in truth. The fundamental truth of all human affairs is that God's great love for us wills to save all men, and we must order our presentation of subordinate truths in a manner that will make them most credible. Missionary work, our proactive, evangelical share in this saving plan, requires patience, the Catechism tells us (CCC 854). That is because people are all coming from different places and experiences and will respond to different individual true statements in different ways; this also largely depends upon the person by whom they hear the truth proclaimed.

When dealing with someone on an issue, particularly a thorny one, I ask myself a few questions, since the salvation of souls - and not the simple proclamation of truth - is the highest law of the Church. The questions include: "Will this person listen to me? I am a 32 year old man with such-and-such a personality, this sort of relationship to the person, and this sort of reasons and experience to fall back on. Will he listen to me? Can I express the truth clearly and charitably? Are my motivations pure - that is, about my love for this person - or are my motivations tainted by anger, spiritual ambition, or what have you? Is it a truth that I need to proclaim? Can the person wait to hear it, or must it be spoken now, with dire consequences otherwise? Am I well disposed to help the person cope with any emotional fallout that might arise, to really care about the PERSON and not just the argument?"

If it sounds like I am making a very complicated issue of a simple debate, that's because it's not about an issue, but about souls. The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church. For my part, I try to make the supreme law of my conduct to be faith, hope, and charity. These three alleviate the burden of having to win debates, do it myself, and cater to my own interior motivations. I am free - when tuned into these divinely given virtues - to say, "Hey, maybe I don't win this today, but Jesus wins in the end, so I am free just to pray for the person and trust God, if that's all I can do now." BAM! Pressure gone.

It is no lie, if a post-abortive woman asks, "Am I a murderer?" to respond, "You are a beloved daughter of God, who wants you only to know his love, to repent of the sins of your past, and live new life with him - just like everybody else." It is no lie, nor is it an evasion. It is defering one truth in favor of a much more important one.

Christmas Picture Perfect

I really wanted to post all 23 pictures here because they tell such a story; but Dom says that's too many. So here's the 'short' version.

It's a good thing I already gave upon sending Christmas cards this year. How would I ever pick just one?


Trying to get Sophie to sit down.

The top three contenders:


I love Sophie's smile here. Bella and Ben look contemplative.


Chaos erupts. Ben grabs at Sophie. Bella reaches for her stocking.


The girls have great smiles. Ben looks handsome.


Bella gets distracted by a piece of chocolate. Mama thinks it's cute anyway.















The secret to not getting stressed during a photoshoot: Thinking about how funny the outtakes are. Who cares about a perfectly posed picture anyway? Not me!


Hard to beat Ben's smile here.


The girls' beautiful dresses are courtesy of my generous sister-in-law, Carol. Ben's adorable sweater was made by my dear blog-friend Jenn.

Elijah and Elisha, a reflection on St Thomas Becket

I really liked this meditation from today's Universalis:

The prophets Elijah and Elisha are a bit of an embarrassment. Not only are the names similar but some of their miracles resemble one another so closely that some scholars have argued that Elijah and Elisha are the same person, with narratives from two different sources of the prophet’s life having been accidentally included one after the other.

Today’s feast reminds us of another historical coincidence:

A learned and worldly man called Thomas, a close and trusted friend of King Henry, is appointed by the king to a high office where he is expected to be loyal and take the king’s part against all others, even the Church. Conscious of his unworthiness for the office he has been given, Thomas suffers an interior conversion and resolves to follow his conscience, God’s voice within him. His upholding of truth and the Church’s rights leads to a conflict with the king, who feels betrayed by his trusted friend. Eventually Thomas is killed; subsequently he is canonised.

Are we talking about Henry II of England and Thomas à Becket? Or Henry VIII of England and Thomas More? The same description applies equally to both.

We can imagine a wise scholar of the 30th century arguing that there was only one Henry and only one Thomas, and that early sources accidentally split them into two. But the wise scholar would be wrong. Whatever doubts we hold about the history and transmission of Scripture, we should never quite forget that what we read about may be what really happened.