|
|
|
|
|
saint Anthony, abbot
Hebrews, Chapter 6, Verse 11-12
11 We earnestly desire each of you to demonstrate the
same eagerness for the fulfillment of HOPE until the end, 12 so that you may not become
sluggish, but imitators of those who, through faith and patience, are
inheriting the promises.
Do
not give up hope. Do all you can to preserve life from conception to natural
death. Do not sway from the truth that we are all sons of God and cherished
children, but we are free to choose, without choice there is no love. Love life
love others liberty and work hard to build a kingdom for our God.
Sons of
Liberty[1]
Today,
Benjamin Franklin was born in 1706. As a founding father of this nation, one
wonders would he question if Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are
Still Self-Evident Rights? Whether it is self-evident or not, it is the
philosophical belief in the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness that helped make America both great and good. Thomas Jefferson
stated: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Jefferson’s
argument is not that the right to life, the right to liberty, and the right to
pursue happiness originate in government, but that these rights have a divine
origin. Jefferson argued that the job of all governments was to “secure”
rights that God had already granted. In other words, the rights to life
and liberty do not come into being with the force of government fiat; life and
liberty are pre-political rights already granted by God. Today, we have
lost that concept. Almost a quarter-millennia later, these rights are no
longer considered self-evident, and neither is a Creator. Once God and the
natural law are disassociated from rights—once the idea of justice and goodness
are separated from rights—we are left with a political environment in
which anything could be considered a right, or nothing could
be considered a right.
As
Pope John Paul II said in Denver, Colorado at World Youth Day in 1993: When the
Founding Fathers of this great nation enshrined certain inalienable rights in
the Constitution…they did so because they recognized the existence of a ‘law’ –
a series of rights and duties – engraved by the Creator on each person’s heart
and conscience. In much of contemporary thinking, any reference to a ‘law’
guaranteed by the Creator is absent. There remains only each individual’s
choice of this or that objective as convenient or useful in a given set of
circumstances. No longer is anything considered intrinsically "good"
and "universally binding". Rights are affirmed but, because they are
without any reference to an objective truth, they are deprived of any solid
basis. Vast sectors of society are confused about what is right and what is
wrong, and are at the mercy of those with the power to "create"
opinion and impose it on others.
Pope
John Paul II saw and foresaw, once rights are viewed as mere arbitrary
constructs with no relation or reference to our Creator, rights become a mere
matter of whimsy—subject no longer to God, but to the fickle winds of public
opinion. Today, we are often told that it is not life and liberty, but
their opposites that are self-evident. We are told that the right to abortion
and euthanasia are self-evident, and that religious liberties and liberties of
conscience have no validation in law. The founding fathers generally
recognized that human laws and rights should reflect each other, largely
because they have the same origin. Just as human law must come from
divine law, so do rights ultimately come from God and from justice.
Rights flow from justice, and if a right cannot be traced to justice, it is no
right at all. Once a right, however, is traced to justice—the right to
life, for instance—it has the “solid basis” about which Pope Saint John Paul II
spoke.
Indeed,
as Jefferson noted all those July 4th’s ago, men “are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights.” Whether it is self-evident or not, it
is the philosophical belief in the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness that helped make America both great and good. Let’s continue to
promote and defend all three.
The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever; the ordinances of the
LORD are true, all of them just. (Ps. 19:10)
Let the words of my mouth and the
thought of my heart find favor before you, O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.
(Ps. 19:15)
Catholic Recipe: Saint Antony of
the Desert Soup[2]
Saint
Antony, called the Great, lived in Egypt between A.D. 251 and 356. At age 18,
the gospel text "If you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have
and then follow me" so moved him that he left everything behind and
retired to an inaccessible place in the wilderness where he dedicated his life
to God in manual work and continual prayer. In his old age, he imparted wisdom
to his disciples and encouraged them to lead a monastic life. Because he was
the first Christian to retire to a monastic life, he is considered to be the
first monk and also the father of all monks. His feast is celebrated on January
17. Try this simple, healthy recipe in honor of Saint Antony the hermit.
INGREDIENTS
3
tablespoons oil of choice
1 cup
barley
1 carrot,
finely grated
2 leeks,
sliced
1 bay leaf
1/3 cup
fresh parsley, minced
Salt to
taste
7 cups
water
1 bouillon
cube, if desired
Chopped
mushrooms, if desired
DIRECTIONS
1.
Heat the oil in a soup pot and add the barley, stirring continuously for one
minute. Immediately add the carrot, leeks, bay leaf, parsley, salt, and water.
2.
Cook the soup over low to medium heat, covered, for 40 to 45 minutes, until the
barley is tender. Add more water if needed. For extra taste, add the bouillon
and the mushrooms during the last 20 minutes of simmering. Remove the bay leaf.
Serve hot.
Recipe Source: From a Monastery Kitchen: The Classic Natural Foods Cookbook by Brother Victor-Antoine d'Avila-Latourrette, Gramercy Books, 1997
Catechism of the Catholic Church
IV.
OFFENSES AGAINST THE DIGNITY OF MARRIAGE
Other offenses against the dignity of
marriage
2387
The predicament of a man who, desiring to
convert to the Gospel, is obliged to repudiate one or more wives with whom he
has shared years of conjugal life, is understandable. However, polygamy is
not in accord with the moral law." [Conjugal] communion is radically
contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God which
was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal
dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is
total and therefore unique and exclusive." The Christian who has
previously lived in polygamy has a grave duty in justice to honor the
obligations contracted in regard to his former wives and his children.
2388
Incest designates intimate relations between relatives or in-laws within a degree that
prohibits marriage between them. St. Paul stigmatizes this especially grave
offense: "It is actually reported that there is immorality among you for a
man is living with his father's wife. In the name of the Lord Jesus you are to
deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh." Incest
corrupts family relationships and marks a regression toward animality.
2389
Connected to incest is any sexual abuse
perpetrated by adults on children or adolescents entrusted to their care.
The offense is compounded by the scandalous harm done to the physical and moral
integrity of the young, who will remain scarred by it all their lives; and the
violation of responsibility for their upbringing.
2390
In a so-called free union, a man and a
woman refuse to give juridical and public form to a liaison involving sexual
intimacy. The expression "free union" is fallacious: what can
"union" mean when the partners make no commitment to one another,
each exhibiting a lack of trust in the other, in himself, or in the future? The
expression covers a number of different situations: concubinage, rejection of marriage
as such, or inability to make long-term commitments. All these situations
offend against the dignity of marriage; they destroy the very idea of the
family; they weaken the sense of fidelity. They are contrary to the moral law.
The sexual act must take place exclusively within marriage. Outside of marriage
it always constitutes a grave sin and excludes one from sacramental communion.
2391 Some today claim a "right to a trial marriage" where there is an intention of getting married later. However firm the purpose of those who engage in premature sexual relations may be, "the fact is that such liaisons can scarcely ensure mutual sincerity and fidelity in a relationship between a man and a woman, nor, especially, can they protect it from inconstancy of desires or whim." Carnal union is morally legitimate only when a definitive community of life between a man and woman has been established. Human love does not tolerate "trial marriages." It demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another.
Daily Devotions
· Unite
in the work of the Porters of St.
Joseph by joining them in fasting: Today's Fast: Individuals
with Mental Illness
Day 3
·
Make
reparations to the Holy Face-Tuesday
Devotion
·
Pray Day 8 of
the Novena for our Pope and Bishops
·
The
Week of Prayer for Christian Unity-Day 1
·
Tuesday:
Litany of St. Michael the Archangel
·
Offering to
the sacred heart of Jesus
·
Plan
winter fun:
o
Soak in hot
springs
o
Hit the snow slopes
o
Ride a
snowmobile
o
Go for a
dog sled ride
o Ride a hot air
balloon
[1]http://www.ncregister.com/blog/johnclark/are-life-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-happiness-still-self-evident-rights
[2]http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/calendar/day.cfm?date=2017-01-17
Comments
Post a Comment