Author Archives: Robert Fletcher

About Robert Fletcher

I am the Senior Web Developer at Crosby Marketing.

How To Take Young Children to Mass

Sometimes at the end of Mass a parishioner comes up to us and says “Your three children are SO well behaved!” Our standard response is either, “Thank you. We work at it” or “Thank you, some days are better than others.” The “better” days are the product of years of articles and brochures we read on taking children to Mass. Here is the distilled wisdom we rely upon.

Before Church

  • Make sure children are well-fed right before Mass. They do not need to fast, nor will fasting help them to be on their best behavior during Mass. We personally do not think it is appropriate to take snacks into the pew. Our exception to this is a non-spill drink cup that bought us enough time to hear the homily once in a while.
  • Beginning even with the smallest infants, dress them in some special clothing that they wear only for church or other special events. This does not have to be expensive and can be as simple as a nice pair of shoes. It helps them to identify what we do at Mass as different from everyday activity.
  • Check your diaper bag to make sure it is stocked for any possible needs. Consider including a small toy or book that your child sees only on Sunday at Mass. These should be quiet and made of soft material so that they do not distract those around you from their prayer while they are being played with or in case they are dropped.
  • Put on a fresh diaper or visit the bathroom right before walking out the door of your home or into the church.

For toddlers or older children

  • You might read the readings in the car on the way to church. This could even be the job of an older child. Then everyone hears them at least once in case someone has to step out during a portion of the Mass.
  • Before going into the church take a moment to remind children what you are about to do. Make sure they know what their job is at Mass. For us, we say that their job is to be quiet/still, to participate by sharing their voices and to pray. Their job is also not to distract those around them from praying.

At Church

  • Sit up front. Yes, sit even in the first pew if it is appropriate at your parish. It can feel scary and even a little out of control the first few times, but it makes a world of difference for little ones to be able to see the action. Over time it also helps them to understand what is most essential about Mass without the distraction of rows and rows of backsides between them and the altar.
  • We physically hold our children in our arms during Mass. In fact, we adopted the position that our children’s feet do not touch the ground during Mass until they are three years old. This helps in many ways. The children get a get a better view; as they grow and mature we can talk them through the stories and the actions; and we have a bit more control over their behavior. If an infant or toddler gets squirmy, often switching who is holding them is enough to calm them down. Otherwise we might play a quiet game of “point to the…candles, priest, altar, cross, etc.”
  • During their two-year-old year, we begin to let our children stand for a portion of Mass or try sitting next to us quietly, instead of on our laps. Then when they turn three it is a special milestone to be big enough to stand, sit and kneel all on their own (although if they can’t see over the pew we have them stand during the kneeling portions of the Eucharistic Prayer).
  • If an infant or toddler makes a little noise during Mass and settles down right away, try not to feel self-conscious. Most folks except for those closest to you do not even notice. And even if they do notice, give your fellow parishioners credit for being adults who can focus through a small distraction.
  • If a child cries or makes continual noise, it is best to calmly step out of the pew and take the child out of the main assembly until they have calmed down or are quiet. However, it is important to return to the worship space as soon as they are quiet, so that children do not begin to associate poor or disruptive behavior with a pass to get out of Mass. Just stand against the wall until it is appropriate to return to the pew. Our experience is that stepping out and returning even a few times is not nearly as disruptive as a crying baby and parishioners appreciate your consideration of their attempt to pray. Those that are parents understand completely.

After Mass

  • Praise your children abundantly for their good behavior.
  • If they need some improvement, mention briefly how they might do better next week and explain why. Let them know that you will help them by trying to remind them before the next Mass.
  • Answer questions children have about Mass and encourage them to understand the liturgy and its place in our lives.
  • For older children consider taking time to discuss the readings and the homily.

In taking our children to Mass we operate on the principle that we need to teach our children how to be in church as long as it does not distract others around us from their prayer. Some days are better than others, but the gift of passing on how we pray as Catholics is worth all of the challenges.

As parents, and leaders of our domestic church, we are responsible for forming our children in our Catholic faith. There is no more important experience to Catholics than the Mass, so it is crucial to help children understand and participate in liturgy as much as they are able. At times, it has seemed as though the only thing we accomplished at Mass was the exercise of standing and walking with a grumpy baby. But we also know that children do not remain little for long and they rise to our expectations. We will have plenty of opportunities to experience transcendent prayer at Mass when our children are teenagers or out of the house. For now, though, our primary job is to make sure they “get” what happens at Mass. We find that God has found ways to feed us, even on the most difficult of days with a teething toddler.

We acknowledge with immense gratitude Mary Ann Kuharski and Elizabeth A. Ficocelli for articles that made all the difference. Elizabeth Ficocelli’s article “Avoiding Mass Hysteria: Teaching Children to Behave in Church” was published in America Magazine. Her work can be found at www.elizabethficocelli.com.

Tinsel or Garland?

Tinsel or garland? Real or fake?

In our first year of marriage, that was our first major argument as a couple. We were looking forward to our first Christmas together, and each of us had our family traditions in mind when we imagined what that might look like. Paul had grown up with tinsel-covered artificial trees, put up over Thanksgiving weekend. Sarah’s family had real trees, wrapped in garland that they bought only a few days before Christmas.

So when the holiday season arrived in our house for the first time, we had to figure out what we would do. After some heated discussions and some false accusations (such as: “You don’t care about my family, do you?”), we finally came to a decision: garland on a fake tree, put up the first or second week of December.

Some might call this a merger, but in reality, it was something better. Merging traditions would mean we had a hodgepodge of this and that from each of our family rituals. And while we did some of that initially, it never truly satisfied.

What we discovered that first Christmas is that we needed to create our own traditions, some borrowed from our respective families, but most of it from ourselves.

Creating new traditions, unique to us as a couple, has been one of the most enjoyable aspects of each passing holiday season (and yes, we mean “holiday” because it encompasses new traditions at Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year’s).

In the past few years, we have created all kinds of new traditions at Christmas. On Christmas Eve, we often get a hotel room in downtown Chicago or one of the other suburbs (because hotels are really affordable on that particular day of the year), have a nice dinner, and head out to a Midnight Mass near the hotel. Another tradition we have is pulling out and watching our favorite Christmas movies by the fireplace, or finding a movie theatre that’s showing a classic like “White Christmas” or “It’s a Wonderful Life.” These and other moments are unique to the two of us, unlike anything Sarah’s or Paul’s families did when we were growing up.

The oddest thing that has come with creating our new traditions is the disorienting feeling we have had if and when we head “home” at Christmas. One year, we went to Philadelphia to visit Sarah’s family, and while it was wonderful to reconnect with everyone, it didn’t feel like “home” anymore. Instead, that warm, special feeling came when our plane touched down at O’Hare Airport. We had come “home” to the place where our new traditions were forged and nurtured.

It might be bittersweet to leave our old traditions, but it is even more exciting to create new ones (like garland on a fake tree) that are unique, special, and fitting just for us.

Questions for Discussion:

  • What will you do as a couple this holiday season that will focus on religious side of your partnership?
  • Why are traditions an important part of our lives?
  • What family traditions have you appreciated most?
  • Which traditions are you not willing to let go?
  • How can these be incorporated into your spouse’s desires?

About the authors
Sarah and Paul Jarzembowski were married at Holy Name Cathedral in Chicago in 2002. Sarah, who was born and raised in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, currently works as the national partner program coordinator for Charis Ministries, a Jesuit outreach and retreat ministry for young adults in their 20s and 30s. Paul, who originally hails from the Diocese of Gary in Indiana, serves on staff at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops as an assistant director for the Secretariat of Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth. They currently live in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C.

This article was originally published on the website of the Family Ministries Office of the Archdiocese of Chicago: www.familyministries.org. Reposted with permission.

A Special Family: Shaped by Down Syndrome, Grief and Grace

By the time our son Stephen turned seven, we were hoping to adopt another child. To our three birth children, Guy (8), Stephen (7), and Matthew (5), we had already added David (3) and Danny, whose Down syndrome no longer seemed remarkable. He had passed the ripe old age of one and, although he was developing more slowly than our four older boys, he was making strides at his own pace. Other than a small PDA (a patent ductus arteriosusa or small hole in his heart) and the croup which scared us all half to death, he was in good shape physically. (The hole eventually closed, and he outgrew the croup, thank God!) Except for the time I fed him too many carrots and turned his skin orange, we were doing a pretty good job of parenting. Danny had grown into being just another member of the family, and we felt that we could care for one more baby with special needs. Down syndrome did not seem like a disability. It was a challenge which early intervention services helped us to meet.

The following spring, we met John Francis in The New York Foundling Hospital. He was four months old. The first time I held him, he looked up at me and smiled. (I refuse to believe it was gas!) I was a sucker for cute babies, and his little face won me over. Like Danny, John Francis had a small PDA. This was not an issue, but the colostomy bag attached to his little abdomen did present some problems. I had to learn to care for it before The Foundling would release him to us, and that made me nervous. But he had that adorable little smile and I soon managed to clean out his bag, “like a pro,” one of the nurses said, as though his guardian angel was guiding my hands. Looking back now, I think perhaps he was!

Our first night at home, I had a slippery little mess on my unskilled hands. I think that was the only time I wondered about the wisdom of our decision! My sister, who was present for my struggles and frustrations, suggested that I use a meat baster to flush out his little bag. That solved my biggest problem and I continued to use that baster until his colostomy was reversed by the time he was two.

The other boys did not like the idea of the colostomy bag, although it was covered up and soon became a non-issue. They were also against us naming the baby “Francis.” They thought the kids in the neighborhood would make fun of him. I had to laugh at that. Here was this little Chinese baby with Down syndrome and a colostomy bag and they were worried about kids making fun of his name! But we compromised on that, and named him John Francis instead. To my knowledge no one has ever made fun of him or of his name!

After his slippery beginning, John Francis found himself the littlest child in a busy household. We had decided, even before adopting Danny, that our family life would not change because of the addition of children with special needs. We went to Church, took them all to McDonald’s, went shopping and on vacation. Other than toting more luggage, along with the usual baby paraphernalia plus that necessary baster, we managed. My husband took the older boys to their sporting practices and events. I stayed home with the little ones, and joined him when I could. We were a typical family, busy in the chaos of everyday life.

Russo 2 children

All of the boys got along, but Stephen took a special interest in John Francis. They were “roomies” and Stephen seemed happiest when he was holding the baby in the crook of his arm. I can still see the look of pure joy on his face as he went about the house toting John Francis with him. They went to bed and crib, as usual, on the night of February 12, 1990, but Stephen came out of his room about 10 p.m. in distress. He had a terrible headache and could not sleep. I gave him some pain reliever and put him back to bed. I could soon see that this was not an ordinary headache. We called for an ambulance and, by 3 a.m. the following morning, Stephen was dead. His undetected brain aneurism had burst suddenly, without any warning. That is what made us a “special family”: grief, not Down syndrome.

A family does not get over the death of a child. As time went on, we began to function again, but it was very difficult. The older boys mourned Stephen quietly, and my husband, Tony, sank into a deep depression. The laundry did not stop, the house did not stay clean, and the meals did not cook themselves. I managed to get through some very difficult days bearing the brunt of a loss which nearly paralyzed us all. Losing Stephen was the greatest challenge of our lives.

I knew that, in order for me to heal, I had to give myself over to something greater than my loss. It seems incredible to me now that my husband, Tony, went along with my desire to find another baby, but he did. We began to actively pursue another adoption and were led back to The New York Foundling Hospital the following year.

A baby girl with Down syndrome had been born in January of 1991. She had a large hole in her heart and lay, we were told, like a little blue doll. The agency did not want us to meet her until after her surgery. They were afraid she might not survive, and did not want us to face what would be another devastating loss. A lot of prayers were sent up to heaven during the next few months! After the surgery, we were finally called in to meet her.

Now this little bundle was a challenge of a different sort! She had not developed the ability to suck and swallow. On the positive side, her heart had healed well and her prognosis was good. I faced the daunting task of putting a tube down her nose into her tummy four times a day so that she would be able to get the nourishment she needed to thrive. I was to do that after I coaxed her to drink from a bottle, something she never quite mastered. I did not know if I was up to this task, this risk of giving our hearts to another child, at all.

After we met Maria Grace, I went to church. By then Stephen had been gone a year and a half. While sitting in the back of my parish church, I looked up at the altar, praying for guidance. There, my soul very clearly saw Stephen, holding a little baby out to me in his outstretched arms. It was as if he were offering me the gift of life. How could I reject it?

Again, angel hands seemed to guide my own as I learned to feed Maria Grace. We brought her home by the end of that week, another China doll, when she was seven months old and weighed less than eleven pounds. Matthew, our youngest birth son, had taken over Stephen’s place as “roomie” and chief holder of John Francis. I was able to devote my time to the baby’s careRusso 3 children resized

Our children are now grown. Our oldest son, Guy, works in a school with a boy who has Autism. He hopes to teach full time in September. Matthew worked in a Day Program with adults with special needs for three years and is looking forward to teaching Social Studies in the fall. David was a “Buddy” with United Cerebral Palsy and also “buddied” while he served in the army. He will graduate from college this May. Danny and John Francis both go to work daily in Hub Sites, gathering places from which adults with special needs go out to serve as volunteers in the community. Maria Grace also volunteers at a Hub Site. This only daughter of mine has grown into a confident 23-year-old who has the ability to keep us all in our places. Even the dogs! Down syndrome has not been a disability for us. It has been, instead, the lens through which we, my husband and I and all of our children, have learned to love each other. You can see our story on YouTube at “What to Expect When You’re Expecting a Baby with Down Syndrome”. I hope that the smiling faces it contains suggest that Down syndrome is a gift, like life itself.

How has it been raising a family in which three members have Down syndrome? It has been a gift to treasure – and to share!

Domestic Violence

What’s the difference between normal conflict and domestic violence? Conflict is part of every intimate relationship–that’s why conflict resolution skills are important. Domestic violence, however, has no place in a healthy relationship, whether the couple is dating, cohabiting, engaged, or married.

What is domestic violence?

Domestic violence is any kind of behavior that a person uses, or threatens to use, to control an intimate partner. The two key elements are threat and control. Domestic violence can take various forms:

Physical – Violent actions such as hitting, beating, pushing, and kicking. In many cases physical abuse becomes more frequent and severe over time.

Sexual – Includes any sexual acts that are forced on one partner by the other

Psychological – Includes a wide range of behaviors such as intimidation, isolating the victim from friends and family, controlling where the victim goes, making the victim feel guilty or crazy, and making unreasonable demands

Emotional – Undermining an individual’s self-esteem, constant criticism, insults, put-downs, and name-calling

Economic – Examples include limiting the victim’s access to family income, preventing the victim from working or forcing the victim to work, destroying the victim’s property, and making all the financial decisions

Both women and men can be victims of domestic abuse. According to the National Domestic Violence Hotline statistics, approximately 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men over the age of 18 have been the victim of physical domestic violence, and almost 50% of both sexes have experienced some form of domestic psychological aggression.

Characteristics of victims

  • Female, although men can also experience domestic violence
  • Younger, often in their 20’s and 30’s
  • More likely to be dating or cohabiting than married
  • Nearly half live in households with children

Why do women stay?

Women often stay with their abusers because of fear. They are afraid that the abuser will become more violent if they try to leave. Some fear that they will lose their children. Many believe that they cannot make it on their own.

Some abused women believe that the abuse is their fault. They think that they can stop the abuse if they just act differently. Some cannot admit that they are abused women. Others feel pressured to stay in the relationship. They may feel cut off from social support and resources. Abused women often feel that they are alone, and have no where to turn for help.

Why do men batter?

Abusive men come from all walks of life. They may be successful in their career and respected in their church and community. Abusive men often share some common characteristics. They tend to be jealous, possessive and easily angered.

Many abusive men believe that women are inferior. They believe that men are meant to dominate and control women.

Typically, abusive men deny that the abuse is happening or they minimize it. They may blame their partner for the abuse, saying, “You made me do this.”

Alcohol and drugs are often associated with domestic violence but they do not cause it. An abusive man who drinks or uses drugs has two different problems: substance abuse and violence. Both must be treated.

What the Catholic Church teaches about domestic violence

The U.S. Catholic Bishops have made clear that “violence against women, inside or outside the home, is never justified. Violence in any form- physical, sexual, psychological, or verbal is sinful; often it is a crime as well.” (When I Call for Help: A Pastoral Response to Domestic Violence Against Women)

WHERE TO FIND HELP

For abused persons

  • Believe that you are not alone. Help is available for you and your children.
  • Talk in confidence to someone you trust: a relative, friend, pastor or family doctor
  • If you choose to stay in the situation, set up a plan of action to ensure your safety. This includes hiding a car key, personal documents, and some money in a safe place and locating somewhere to go in an emergency. For more information about safety planning go to the National Domestic Violence Hotline.
  • The National Domestic Violence Hotline provides crisis intervention and referrals to local sources of help in all 50 states. Call 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or 1-800-787-3224 (TTY).

For those who abuse

  • Admit that the abuse is your problem, not your partner’s. Begin to believe that you can change your behavior if you choose to do so.
  • Be willing to reach out for help. Talk to someone you trust who can help you to evaluate the situation. Contact Catholic Charities or other church or community agencies for the name of a program for offenders.
  • Call the National Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-7233) for information about where to find help.

 

Domestic violence and the permanence of marriage

Some abused women believe that Catholic Church teaching on the permanence of marriage requires them to stay in an abusive relationship. They may hesitate to seek a separation or divorce. They may fear that they cannot re-marry in the Catholic Church.

In When I Call for Help: A Pastoral Response to Domestic Violence Against Women, the Catholic bishops emphasize that “no person is expected to stay in an abusive marriage.” Violence and abuse, not divorce, break up a marriage. The abuser has already broken the marriage covenant through his or her abusive behavior. Abused persons who have divorced may want to investigate the possibility of seeking an annulment.

What the Bible says

Abusive men may take a text from the Bible and distort it to support their right to batter. They often use Ephesians 5:22 (“Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord”) to justify their behavior. This passage (v. 21-33), however, refers to the mutual submission of husband and wife out of love for Christ. It means that husbands should love their wives as they love their own body, as Christ loves the Church.

The Catholic bishops condemn the use of the Bible to support abusive behavior in any form. Men and women are created in God’s image. They are to treat each other with dignity and respect.

Forgiveness

Men who batter also cite the Bible to insist that their victims forgive them (see, for example, Matthew 6:9-15). A victim then feels guilty if she cannot do so. Forgiveness, however, does not mean forgetting the abuse or pretending that it didn’t happen. Neither is possible.

Forgiveness is not permission to repeat the abuse. Rather, forgiveness means that the victim decides to let go of the experience, to move on with life and not to tolerate abuse of any kind again.

Resources

For Further Reading:

October: Domestic Violence Awareness Month

The month of October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. The statistics on domestic violence are heartbreaking. According to a 2010 survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one in four women, and one in seven men, have been the victims of severe physical violence by an “intimate partner” (boyfriend/girlfriend or spouse) at some point in their life. Nearly half of all men and women have experienced psychological aggression by an intimate partner. Domestic violence starts early: over half of women and men who have experienced some form of domestic violence were victimized for the first time before they were 25 years old.

Domestic violence shatters the peace that should reside in relationships and especially in the family, the domestic church. St. John Paul II described the family as the “cradle of life and love.” Domestic violence replaces life with harm and even death; it replaces love with anger and fear. It breaks down trust between husband and wife, parents and children. And sadly, it is a cycle that tends to be repeated in the next generation as boys imitate their abusive fathers and girls learn to expect abuse from men

The Catholic Church’s Response: “When I Call for Help”

Behind the sad statistics about domestic abuse are individual persons, men and women made in the image of God. What has been the Catholic Church’s response to such a tragic experience for so many people?

In their statement “When I Call for Help,” which was published in 1992 and reaffirmed in 2002, the U.S. bishops unequivocally rejected domestic violence:

As pastors of the Catholic Church in the United States, we state as clearly and strongly as we can that violence against women, inside or outside the home, is never justified. Violence in any form – physical, sexual, psychological, verbal – is sinful; often it is a crime as well. We have called for a moral revolution to replace a culture of violence (p. 1).

“When I Call for Help” remains the touchstone of the Church’s response to domestic violence. In it, the bishops address four audiences: victims of domestic violence (predominately, though not exclusively, women), clergy and Church employees, abusers (predominately, though not exclusively, men), and society at large.

The statement first provides an overview of domestic violence, defining it as “any kind of behavior that a person uses to control an intimate partner through fear and intimidation” (p. 4). Abuse is not just physical (hitting, punching, etc.), but includes sexual, psychological, verbal, and economic abuse. The bishops also identify forced sterilization or abortion as a form of abuse.

The bishops say very clearly that domestic violence can never be justified by Scripture or Church teaching. “A correct reading of Scripture leads people to an understanding of the equal dignity of men and women and to relationships based on mutuality and love” (p. 9). They remind victims of abuse that they are not to blame.

And to victims who are abused by their spouse, the bishops state clearly that “no person is expected to stay in an abusive marriage” (p. 9). In this, they echo the Code of Canon Law, which states, “If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too difficult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving [i.e. separation]” (canon 1153.1).

In the last section of “When I Call for Help,” the bishops provide suggestions for action for abused women, men who abuse, and pastors and pastoral staff, who are often “first responders” to a situation of abuse. The statement concludes with a prayer drawn from Psalm 55.

Available Resources

  • “When I Call for Help” is available online here or for purchase here. Also available are Resource Cards that give warning signs of abuse and a hotline number.
  • Catholics for Family Peace provides a media toolkit with tips for engaging with media during October to raise awareness about domestic violence. Find the toolkit here.
  • Bishop Richard Malone wrote about domestic violence as the chairman of the USCCB Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth: “Saying ‘No’ to Violence in the Home” (USCCB Media blog)

Why Did the Risen Jesus Cook Breakfast for the Disciples?

I love food. My parents tell me that, as a little child, I was a mostly calm, happy-go-lucky kid—unless I was hungry. Then I turned into a monster. But once I found something to eat—serenity returned. Some of my family members say that little has changed with me in the many intervening years! I grew up working in my family’s food business. Stories about food get my attention.

Thus I’m a fan of the resurrection stories. They often involve food. In Luke, the risen Jesus walks unrecognized with two of his disciples. It was only after they arrived at the village of Emmaus, and Jesus broke the bread at the dinner table, that they finally recognized him. The story continues with Jesus appearing to a group of disciples and asking them, “Do you have anything to eat here?” They gave him a piece of baked fish. (Luke 24:13-48) Then there is the scene with Peter and other disciples after a long day of fishing. They see the risen Lord calling them from the shore. When they arrive, they find that he has cooked a breakfast of bread and fish for them and invites them to “Come, have breakfast.” (John 21:1-14) I’ll bet there were some eggs and pancakes on the side too!

All this talk about food makes me hungry. But it also makes me wonder why Jesus put such emphasis on eating. Maybe he was just hungry. Jesus did some other curious things right after the resurrection: like breathing on his disciples and inviting Thomas to actually touch his nail wounds and feel the sword gash in his side. Jesus seems to be going out of his way to assure his friends that it was really he who was present; not a ghost or vision. It was he, fully alive and in the flesh.

“‘The flesh is the hinge of salvation.’ We believe in God who is creator of the flesh; we believe in the Word made flesh in order to redeem the flesh; we believe in the resurrection of the flesh, the fulfilment of both the creation and the redemption of the flesh.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 1015.)

These resurrection scenes drive home to us the importance of the flesh, that is, the human body. For Jesus, his physical body wasn’t just something that he “wore” while on earth, but part of his very being. And for us, our bodies are not something solely for this life which we forever discard at the time of death. As human beings, we are a beautifully mysterious combination of body and spirit. Just as in the Ascension, Jesus took his resurrected body with him back to the Father, we, too, at the end of time, will receive back our glorified body for entrance into heaven. The body is a profoundly good part of how God created us. The body is holy—thus what we do with our bodies really matters.

The newly canonized Saint John Paul II spent many years of his life reflecting on the meaning of the body. Drawing from the Bible and theology, he composed a work called the Theology of the Body. He explains that it is through the body, and the experiences of the body, that we most completely come to know ourselves and God. St. John Paul II makes this bold assertion:

“The body, in fact, and it alone, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and divine.” (Feb. 20, 1980)

Over these next few months, I invite you to join me in exploring how our bodies help us to better understand ourselves, and the God who made us.

In May, spring takes hold and our senses are heightened. Our senses, working through our body, allow us to feel a warm breeze, enjoy a sunset, listen to music, share a handshake and give a hug. They also allow us to enjoy a burger off the backyard grill. And that makes someone like me quite happy about the Theology of the Body!

About the author
Fr. Chris Singer is chancellor of the Diocese of Erie and presented a lecture series on the Theology of the Body in the Fall of 2014. Reprinted with permission from FAITH magazine in the Diocese of Erie (Last Word column).

Be Her Joseph!

When we first married, my wife, Misty, and I were the typical secular couple. We relied on hormonal contraception. Due to bad side effects, that didn’t last long. Misty found out about Natural Family Planning (NFP) through a Catholic friend. Admittedly, I was suspicious of all the “hocus pocus” involving thermometers at o’ dark-thirty in the morning and observations written down in cryptic symbols on the NFP chart. That would all change in surprising ways once we got into living the NFP lifestyle.

Before having children, Misty had been an atheist and I had been an agnostic. With our first child, the miracle of life spurred a spiritual awakening in us. We realized the Holy Spirit had already led us into a Catholic life. Even after our conversion, however, NFP grew our relationship with each other and with God in ways we never expected.

We studied Pope John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body” and became excited about living out our faith and sharing it. It was thrilling to learn the compelling reasons behind the Church’s beautiful teachings on sex and marriage.

Much to my surprise, I also learned how grateful my wife was that I was willing to learn how her body worked. Sharing the family planning responsibility, as well as finding non-sexual ways of expressing affection and intimacy when we had good reasons to postpone pregnancy, strengthened our marriage and made me a better husband and father. When we became Catholic, I knew I wanted to be the spiritual leader of our family, but I didn’t understand what that entailed besides herding our children to church on Sundays. Through NFP and Scripture, I discovered that I had a choice in the kind of man— the kind of husband — I was going to be.

We often blame Eve for eating the forbidden fruit. But in Genesis, we learn that after taking a bite, she turned and offered the fruit to Adam, who was with her. Adam didn’t stop her and say, “This is a bad idea, let’s go.” He did not protect his wife, but stood by silently while the serpent convinced her to surrender her holiness and damage her relationship with God.

Then there was St. Joseph. When Joseph obeyed the angel who told him to bring Mary into his home, he was accepting the public shame and embarrassment of a pregnant fiancé. He sacrificed his personal honor and reputation to obey God and protect Mary and Jesus.

The choice for a husband is clear: he can be his wife’s Adam or he can be her Joseph. A man can stand by silently and allow his wife to suffer the physical and spiritual consequences of contraception. Or he can defend her virtue, body, and soul by using NFP. Today, contraception is accepted and expected. Any man who forgoes it for NFP will likely be exposed to ridicule and criticism. But as St. Joseph taught us, there are some things more important than the opinion of others. May we husbands choose to be Joseph to our wives!

About the authors
Tom and Misty Mealey have four children and live in the Diocese of Richmond.

Natural Family Planning Awareness Week is celebrated each July, to mark the anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. Learn more here.

Reading Laudato Si in Light of Sexuality, Marriage, and Family Life

On Thursday, June 18, 2015, Pope Francis released his second encyclical, Laudato Si, “On care for our common home.” The encyclical addresses humanity’s responsibility to protect and conscientiously cultivate the earth. Ultimately, the Holy Father advocates an integral ecology as the best response to the environmental crisis. This response, illuminated by the Christian faith, is integral because it addresses not only the environmental issues of today, but also various economic, social, cultural and moral ones. In fact, three major themes emerge in the encyclical that relate to human sexuality, marriage, and family life, which are the main topics of the Pope Francis Corner: human ecology, the objectification of creation, and today’s “throwaway culture.”

Human Ecology

Drawing on the teachings of the two previous popes, Benedict XVI and St. John Paul II, Pope Francis uses the concept of “human ecology” to denote the interconnectedness of the natural environment and human culture [i]. For example, when humanity respects itself, the earth rejoices, but when humanity degrades itself, the earth suffers, too. The Holy Father uses the biblical story of Cain and Abel to illustrate this point. After Cain kills his brother Abel, God cries, “What have you done! Listen: Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the soil! Therefore you shall be banned from the soil…If you till the soil, it shall no longer give you its produce” (Gen 4:10-12a). Pope Francis says, “Disregard for the duty to cultivate and maintain a proper relationship with my neighbor, for whose care and custody I am responsible, ruins my relationship with my own self, with others, with God, and with the earth” (LS, 70). Because the “book of nature is one and indivisible,” including men and women, all creatures on the earth and the earth itself, “[t]here can be no renewal of our relationship with nature without a renewal of humanity itself” (LS 6, 118). An authentic human ecology recognizes that human beings are an integral part of the environment which we are trying to protect and promote. We need to respect “our unique place as human beings in this world and our relationship to our surroundings” (LS, 15).

Another aspect of human ecology is basic Christian anthropology: humans are moral creatures, created in the image of God with inherent meaning and purpose inscribed in their very bodies. Pope Francis quotes St. John Paul II on this point: “Not only has God given the earth to man, who must use it with respect for the original good purpose for which it was given, but, man too is God’s gift to man. He must therefore respect the natural and moral structure with which he has been endowed” (LS, 115, emphasis added). Part of this natural and moral structure is the sexual difference between women and men, which God has created in us, and indeed, in many other creatures. Pope Francis writes, “Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology. Also, valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different” (LS, 155). Sexual difference allows men and women to enter into fulfilling, self-giving relationships, particularly marriage, which is rooted in our human nature as men and women (Catechism, no. 1603). Respecting and protecting the environment, then, includes respecting and protecting ourselves as a part of creation, and specifically our unique gender differences and all they entail: marriage between a man and a woman, fertility, the need for fathers and mothers, etc. The Pope maintains that seeking to eliminate gender difference is “not a healthy attitude” because it rejects the God-given gift of our sexuality (LS, 155).

The Objectification of Creation

Another theme in Laudato Si is the objectification of creation, which Pope Francis treats as a grave issue. He notes that creatures are not “merely…potential ‘resources’ to be exploited…they have value in themselves” (33). In other words, creation is not just an object to be used. The objectification of creation leads to mass consumerism on the part of humanity, damaging the earth and her resources as well as doing harm to the poor and to future generations. Consumerism is a result of “no longer speak[ing] the language of fraternity and beauty in our relationship with the world,” of ceasing to relate to the world as a subject and instead choosing to manipulate and possess it as an object (LS, 11).

Objectification and consumerism can also take place in the human realm. There can be a consumeristic approach to persons when we stop relating to each other with love and respect, and instead seek to possess each other. This is particularly an issue when sexuality is involved, as we see in the story of the Fall of Adam and Eve. In his reflections on the theology of the body, St. John Paul II wrote that after sin enters the world, man dominates woman and their previous relationship of unity and mutual self-gift “is replaced by a different mutual relationship, namely by a relationship of possession of the other as an object of one’s desire” (TOB 31:3). Possession and domination of a person mirrors the possession and domination of the earth that Pope Francis seeks to challenge in this encyclical.

At its root, the sin of possession– and indeed all sin – results from humanity’s assuming the place and actions of God. The Pope writes that “our presuming to take the place of God and refusing to acknowledge our creaturely limitations…distorted our mandate to ‘have dominion’ over the earth (cf. Gen 1:28), to ‘till it and keep it’ (Gen 2:15)” (LS, 66). Pope Francis calls for us instead to relate to the earth in a brotherly and sisterly way. He includes the text of St. Francis of Assisi’s hymn, which speaks of “Brother Sun” and “Sister Moon.” Our fellow human beings, especially our spouses, are truly our brothers and sisters of one Father; we should accompany them through life, relate to them as fellow children of God, and refuse to treat them in a consumeristic way, as objects.

The “Throwaway Culture”

Lastly, Pope Francis criticizes the “throwaway culture,” which is fueled by a vicious cycle of using and trashing precious environmental resources (LS, 16, 20-22, 43). His criticism also extends to a culture that throws away people. He notes that “it is clearly inconsistent to combat trafficking in endangered species while remaining completely indifferent to human trafficking, unconcerned about the poor, or undertaking to destroy another human being deemed unwanted” (LS, 91). And in his first apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, the Pope described a “throwaway” culture as one wherein “human beings are themselves considered consumer goods to be used and then discarded” (EG, 53).

There are many victims of the “throwaway” mentality – the unborn, the elderly, the poor, the disabled, the lonely, and the orphan. Abandoned spouses and children also suffer from the effects of a culture where divorce and separation are prevalent. Francis’ plea to reduce waste should resound also as a plea to reduce the harms incurred by divorce and by treating marriage as a temporary arrangement, a theme the Pope has addressed before. The Pope has also previously spoken strongly about protecting children, whom he considers the “first victims” of the harms of divorce and separation. And he has affirmed that children’s lives are never mistakes and thus can never be thrown away; “every marginalized, abandoned child…is a cry that goes up to God.” A renewed respect for marriage as an inviolable sacrament, and a commitment to caring for separated and divorced couples and their children, can help reverse the discarding of people.

In conclusion, Laudato Si addresses more than environmental concerns; it also informs how human beings can most naturally and healthily relate to one another. The frequent mentions of “human ecology” in the encyclical reveal Francis’ concern that men and women not forget that they are an important part of the natural world, and that they too have inherent meaning and purpose. Laudato Si’s warning against objectifying creation encourages us to consider whether we are “possessors” or “relators” to the loved ones in our lives. Finally, the criticism of the “throwaway” culture extends not only to the trashing of natural resources, but also to the discarding of people. One of the spiritual messages of the encyclical is to cultivate a profound sense of humility before the wonder of God and his creation. If we remember our limitations as created beings, we find that we cannot “substitute an irreplaceable and irretrievable beauty with something which we have created ourselves” (LS, 34). The earth and the relationships that are formed with it and on it are sources of great beauty that deserve protection.

About the author
Juliana Vossenberg is the Summer 2015 intern for the Secretariat of Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

[i] See Centesimus Annus (St. John Paul II, 1991), Evangelium Vitae (St. John Paul II, 1995), Caritas in Veritate (Pope Benedict XVI, 2009), If You Want to Cultivate Peace, Protect Creation (Pope Benedict XVI, 2010)

Hope for Married Couples Who Want to Have a Child

Alone in the bathroom, staring blankly at the negative test, you tearfully ask yourself, “Why am I not pregnant yet?” Later, you may find yourself talking to your doctor about a “take-home baby” and come face to face with the costly, invasive and sometimes morally questionable reality of fertility treatments. You wonder, “Is there any hope for me?” As a Catholic gynecologist working with a team of pro-life physicians, I want to tell you, there is hope.

You may have tried to conceive for a year, the minimal duration to be considered infertile. However, you are a person, not a statistic. Your desire to be pregnant is real and is screaming, “Now!” As a physician, I agree. Now is the time to find out why you are not conceiving. You are not alone, and there is help.

More and more couples find themselves childless after “trying” for a period of time. After being married for six years, Jen and Bob were still childless. Sadly, Jen was diagnosed with Chlamydia as a younger woman, and she always thought that it might prevent her from having children. Although she had quit smoking and improved her nutrition to optimize her fertility, she also sought medical help due to worsening pain at the time of her periods. Through laparoscopy, we found mild adhesions from her Chlamydia infection long ago, and many manifestations of endometriosis. The problems corrected, six months later Jen came into our office carrying her positive pregnancy test, with a smile and a tear of joy after many years of trying to conceive.

Diagnosed with irregular cycles since she was a teenager, Hillary knew she had a hormonal imbalance. Starting abruptly after college, Hillary gained weight, became constipated, noticed the drying of her skin and began to feel cold all the time. She and her husband of one year, LeVar, came into the office to talk—not only about their desire to have a child but more importantly about the riddle of her hormonal health. A good health history and physical exam complemented the Natural Family Planning (NFP) charts Hillary had done for the last six months. Blood tests done on particular cycle days and the finding of low temperatures during the first half of her cycle, led to a diagnosis of polycystic ovaries. Hillary also had low thyroid function. Once her thyroid function was regulated and her insulin resistance addressed, Hillary began to have more regular cycles, and she showed signs of increasing fertility. Recognizing her suboptimal ovulation, she was given medications to help her ovulate more efficiently. After several months, Hillary walked into our office with that same smile Jen had shown us. She said she appreciated both the help with conceiving and the attention to her underlying hormonal problems.

But what happens when no underlying problems are found? That is the story of Miriam and Cole. In their early thirties and after being married two years, they came to the office to see why they were not yet pregnant. Both worked in high-stress jobs, and time was at a premium. Though meticulous and thorough, their history and physicals didn’t reveal the “why” behind their infertility. Laboratory tests showed no chronic diseases. Cole was given a collecting kit, enabling us to test a semen sample after marital intercourse and determine that it was normal. Dye studies and ultrasound tests showed that Miriam had a normal womb and Fallopian tubes indicating no physical blockage. Sequential hormonal testing throughout Miriam’s cycle indicated healthy female hormones in the right ratios, peaking and valleying at the correct times. Her laparoscopy showed neither endometriosis nor adhesions. Multiple cycles of attempting to tweak her ovulation with medications did not produce a pregnancy.

Stressed beyond their tolerance and depressed at not yet being parents, Miriam and her husband wanted a second opinion from a local, highly successful clinic specializing in in vitro fertilization (IVF). That procedure involves removing mature eggs from the mother’s ovaries, fertilizing them in a glass dish (in vitro is Latin for “in glass”), and then inserting the resulting embryonic children into the mother’s womb in the hope that one (but not multiple children) will implant and develop normally. As Christian physicians, we had to counsel them: “The central question you and your husband must answer before you go is this: Are the embryos made at the clinic your children or your property? If they are children, which your faith says they are, you ought not to experiment on or freeze them, or miscarry three to get one “take-home baby.”1 We lost contact, but several years later, Miriam and Cole were back in the office with two children, Jason and Jackie. Both were adopted. Smiles and tears were shared along with hugs. Miriam said they never found out why they could not conceive, but it no longer mattered. They were a family, and they had peace: “Adoption grew on Cole and me. It became a real option for us.” At a defining moment, her faith helped her see the humanity of any embryonic children she may help produce and the dangers to which she’d be exposing them through IVF. And she was thankful for the guidance.

Restorative, holistic, integrative, respectful, and effective—these words describe how our faith wants us to approach the misery, agony and challenge of infertility. There are scientifically sound, as well as surgically and medically effective ways to treat the causes of infertility in a thoroughly compassionate manner. There are doctors across the nation who have learned the art and science of looking into the causes of infertility and, as appropriate, addressing a couple’s condition medically, surgically, psychologically, and spiritually.

Many successful options exist for Christians who want a morally sound way to treat infertility, and who need help combating the sadness, frustration, and even anger that can come from the inability to “have a child.” We all need to discern the course God has for us—physicians as well as couples. Sound science based on the dignity of the human person is available to help couples to cooperate with our Heavenly Father and conceive a child. Some may be called to adopt a child whom God has sent via another set of birth parents. Or perhaps some couples have a unique vocation that does not involve raising children. It is our challenge as believers of the living God to know that he loves all of us profoundly and that he knows us better than we know ourselves. When we align our will with his will, and respect his great gift of human life, there is hope for us all!

About the author
John T. Bruchalski, MD, FACOG (Fellow, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology), a practicing obstetrician- gynecologist, is chairman of Divine Mercy Care and founder of the Tepeyac Family Center in Fairfax, Virginia.

Notes

1 IVF raises many grave moral issues. These are explained in the USCCB statement Life-Giving Love in an Age of Technology (Washington, DC: USCCB, 2009).

Addressing Infertility with Kindness and Compassion

What do infertility specialists tell couples?

Hoping to find out firsthand, I called the number in a newspaper ad and joined an open house at a fertility clinic. I am sure that I was the only Roman Catholic priest there, although street clothes gave no clue to my identity.

My experience that evening could not be the same as the others in the room. They were yearning for a child. They were hoping that the doctors would make it possible. They were deciding whether they should entrust their hopes to this clinic. I was there only to observe.

The clinic staff explained infertility as a medical problem, and the couple as patients with a treatable condition. Testing was part of specialized medical diagnosis; the use of donor eggs, freezing embryos, and in vitro fertilization were therapies to overcome infertility; and having a baby would be a successful treatment of the parents. The presentation was not unlike a sales pitch.

The staff laid out treatment options. These may include corrective surgery and hormone therapy, but also in vitro fertilization, and even donor sperm or eggs. Quality control was highlighted. Doctors, we were told, select only the healthiest embryos for implantation. In the case of donor eggs or sperm, care would be taken to provide for the best “outcome.” Problematic multiple pregnancies could be dealt with, although no one clarified that this generally will involve killing one or more of their children in the womb. Clinical staff admitted that sometimes infertility is hard to treat. Patients are encouraged not to “give up.” Sometimes, they said, the most effective treatment is in vitro fertilization, and as part of that treatment, some embryos can be frozen for later use. Sometimes, they continued, the quality of the egg (ovum) is such that the best treatment is to use donor eggs.

It was striking that these “treatment options” were explained without any acknowledgement that these procedures are contrary to the dignity and exclusivity of marriage, that they most often result in the death of innocent human lives. They were not treatments that assist marital intercourse to be fruitful, but substitutions which violate the dignity of marriage and subject the unborn to mistreatment and death.

These clinics do not and cannot provide spiritual support to couples suffering from infertility, nor appropriate moral guidance about the options under consideration. Pastoral care is indispensable and irreplaceable. Consider the needs. Couples experiencing infertility may find it hard to cope with this challenge to their natural desire to be parents and establish a family. Well-meaning family and friends may add to this burden with questions or expectations. Cultural expectations can be very high.

Some couples experience painful isolation as their peers or other family members are caught up with the responsibility for infants and toddlers. Spouses with a history of contraception or even abortion may feel overwhelmed with regret and even believe mistakenly that God is punishing them. Some may feel similar remorse after having tried in vitro fertilization and other morally illicit treatments. Some may be coping with pregnancy loss or the loss of a child after birth. Some may be losing faith or hope as they face a prolonged challenge of infertility. Some need spiritual and ethical guidance while they continue to hope for a child, others may need help as they carry the cross of incurable infertility. Some need the ministry of Church organizations as they consider adoption or other ways of nurturing and caring for children. The need for compassionate pastoral care and support is great.

Working with infertile couples is a pro-life and pro-marriage ministry. As the Vatican Instruction Donum Vitae explained, marriage promotes respect for the dignity of the child and vice versa: “The fidelity of the spouses in the unity of marriage involves reciprocal respect of their right to become a father and a mother only through each other. The child has the right to be conceived, carried in the womb, brought into the world and brought up within marriage: it is through the secure and recognized relationship to his own parents that the child can discover his own identity and achieve his own proper human development” (DV, part II). The Church supports morally sound treatment to help married couples have children, rejoicing that “many researchers are engaged in the fight against sterility. While fully safeguarding the dignity of human procreation some have achieved results which previously seemed unattainable” (DV, 8).

Simply presenting couples seeking a child with a list of prohibited procedures is far from a holistic and supportive pastoral approach. Pastoral care is more than the moral evaluation of treatment alternatives. At the clinic, infertile couples will hear a scientist or doctor offering them hope for a child, and at church they must receive much more than a priest telling them no. In Dignitas Personae the Church reminds us that “behind every ‘no’ in the difficult task of discerning between good and evil, there shines a great ‘yes’ to the recognition of the dignity and inalienable value of every single and unique human being called into existence” (37). That “yes” must be apparent in our message to infertile couples.

“You send them away with theology, but the clinic sends them home with a baby,” one person told me recently. Aside from the fact that clinics send many couples home without a baby, this protest misses a great deal of the role of the Church. She should stand with the infertile couple in solidarity, and stand up for basic human rights whenever challenged by a culture that seeks to overcome infertility at any cost, viewing children as a product or a right. There are indeed methods for treating the infertile couple with full respect for the dignity of the spouses and for the life to be born. A pastoral approach to the infertile couple supports their faith, their dignity, their marriage, and their vocation. It recognizes the fruitfulness that all marriages are called to share, including marriages without the blessing of children. It offers compassion and clarity. When needed, it offers reconciliation and healing.

My visit to the clinic convinced me more than ever of the need for the Church to respond to the challenges of couples who struggle with infertility. Let us offer the light of the Gospel and the warmth of the heart of the Church to all couples who yearn for a child.

About the author
Rev. J. Daniel Mindling, OFM Cap. is Academic Dean at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary, Emmitsburg, Maryland, and is a consultant to the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities.