The Divine Sower
Vol 8 Issue 6 ~ Editor: Rev. Fr. Courtney Edward Krier
February 7, 2015 ~ St. Romuald, opn!
1. Baptism: Means of Salvation (5)
2. Sexagesima Sunday
3. St Apollinaris
4. Marriage and Parenthood (6)
5. Articles and notices
Dear Reader:
Ash Wednesday falls on February 18. February is also the Month of the Passion, that is, the faith are encouraged to reflect on the Passion of Christ this month. Since it usually opens the Lenten Season, it is well to take the opportunity to choose readings that dwell on the Passion and Death of Christ, be it the Gospels of the Passion, St Alphonsus Ligouri’s book, The Passion and Death of Jesus Christ, Alban Goodier’s The Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ, or the visionaries Anna Catherine Emmerich’s or Mary of Agreda’s presentations (of course knowing the visions of these mystics are only subjective meditations). By spending some time reading these accounts will assist us in entering into the spirit of Lent by meditating upon the suffering Saviour, uniting ourselves to Him and His holy Mother as we strive to place ourselves at the foot of the Cross on Good Friday and ask to rise from our fallen, sinful nature on the Paschal festival.
As always, enjoy the readings and commentaries provided for your benefit. —The Editor
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Baptism
Means of Salvation
Before Original Sin
Adam and Eve in Paradise: God’s Gifts to Mankind (b)
As wonderful as this life was to be, it was intended to be even more wonderful. Adam’s life was not just to be a natural life, for his immortality wasn’t to live forever on earth, but to live forever with God in heaven. God bestowed His Spirit upon Adam at his creation: And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7) He made Adam a participant in His Divine nature by giving sanctifying grace, the Life of God. This relationship of Love for Adam is expressed in the words: They heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at the afternoon air. (Gen. 3:8) God communicated with Adam, giving him instructions such as, increase and multiply (ibid. 1:28f) and, in chapter 2, verse 16, commanding him not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. He was to be their Father and they were to be His children. Therefore God bestowed His gift of sanctifying grace, His Holy Spirit, the Love of the Father and the Son, upon Adam and, consequently, Eve. The inspired writer of Ecclesiastes states: Only this have I found that God made man right. (7:30) Righteousness, justification, and sanctification all have the same source:walking with God or union with God.
Whereas God walked with man before the Fall, afterwards it was man who had to walk with God, that is, had to choose this relationship, as expressed already in Genesis, Chapter 5, that Henoch walked with God: and lived after he begot Mathusala, three hundred years, and begot sons and daughters…and he walked with God, and was seen no more: because God took him. (v. 22, 24) and the same in Chapter 6: Noe was a just and perfect man in his generations, he walked with God. (v. 9)
Saint Paul equates death as life without God’s Spirit. That death entered by the sin of Adam: Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death. (Rom. 5:12) Christ’s death on the Cross was the restoration (cf. Eph. 1:10: In the dispensation of the fulness of times, to re-establish all things in Christ, that are in heaven and on earth, in him.) of sonship, obtained by having God’s Spirit:
For whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For you have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear; but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry: Abba (Father). For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God. And if sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ. (Rom. 8:14-17; also I Cor. 6:11: And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God.
This return to original justice, or living one’s relationship with the Father, is to put off, according to former conversation, the old man, who is corrupted according to the desire of error. And be renewed in the spirit of your mind: And put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth. (Eph. 4:22)
If then any be in Christ a new creature, the old things are passed away, behold all things are made new. But all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Christ; and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation. For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins; and he hath placed in us the word of reconciliation. (II Cor. 5:17-19)
It is in Adam’s relationship to the Father through the Spirit (sanctifying grace) that enabled Adam to have life everlasting. It is this same gift, not man himself or his works, that re-establishes the inheritance of life everlasting: For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. (Gal. 6:15)
St. Augustine declares that our renewal (Eph. 4, 23) consists in this that: “We have received justice from which man had fallen off through sin” (De Gen. ad Litt. VI 24, 35):
We do recover this [original state of man] in a certain sense, and in another sense we do not. We do not recover the immortality of a spiritual body, which man has not yet obtained; but we do recover the justice from which man fell through sin. We shall, therefore, be renewed from the old way of sin, not transformed into the original natural body in which Adam was made, but into a better one, that is, a spiritual body, when we shall enjoy equality with the angels of God, [86] when we are made ready to dwell in our heavenly home, . . .
We are renewed, therefore, in the spirit of our minds [Eph. 4, 23] according to the image of Him who created us, the image which Adam lost when he sinned.
St. John Damascene affirms the belief: the Creator made male, giving him to share in His own divine grace, and bringing him thus into communion with Himself. (De fide orth. II 30).
In light of this, the Council of Trent teaches: If anyone will not confess that when the first man Adam had transgressed the mandate of God in paradise he did not immediately lose the sanctity and justice in which he had been constituted, let him be anathema. (D 788)
In other words, it was this relationship that God had given and it was for Adam to maintain that relationship. If Adam continued in the relationship, God would bestow it upon his posterity. If Adam did not maintain the relationship, God would deprive that posterity of the relationship which He had freely given to Adam. Ludwig Ott states it as follows:
The Council of Trent teaches that Adam lost sanctity and justice (= sanctifying grace) not merely for himself, but also for us (D 789). It follows from this, that he received these not only for himself but also for us his descendants. This, according to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers and of the theologians, applies to the preternatural gifts of integrity (with the exception of the donum scientiae); for these were bestowed for the sake of sanctifying grace. Adam received the gifts of the original state, not as an individual person, but as head of the human race, and thus for the whole human race. They were a present to human nature (donum naturae) and, according to the positive ordinance of God, were to be transmitted with nature to all the heirs of that nature. Original justice was intended to be hereditary justice. (Ott, 105)
Taking Saint Anselm’s view, St. Thomas Aquinas writes:
On the contrary, Anselm says (De Concep. Virg. x): “As long as man did not sin, he would have begotten children endowed with righteousness together with the rational soul.”
I answer that, Man naturally begets a specific likeness to himself. Hence whatever accidental qualities result from the nature of the species, must be alike in parent and child, unless nature fails in its operation, which would not have occurred in the state of innocence. But individual accidents do not necessarily exist alike in parent and child. Now original righteousness, in which the first man was created, was an accident pertaining to the nature of the species, not as caused by the principles of the species, but as a gift conferred by God on the entire human nature. This is clear from the fact that opposites are of the same genus; and original sin, which is opposed to original righteousness, is called the sin of nature, wherefore it is transmitted from the parent to the offspring; and for this reason also, the children would have been assimilated to their parents as regards original righteousness.
This follows St. Basil, who writes: Let us return to the original grace, of which we were deprived by sin. (Sermo ascetic. 1.) In the faith are the words of St. Augustine:
Nor ought it to disturb us that the apostle described them as doing that which is contained in the law “by nature,”— not by the Spirit of God, not by faith, not by grace. For it is the Spirit of grace that does it, in order to restore in us the image of God, in which we were naturally created. Genesis 1:27 (De spir. et litt. 27, 47.)
Constituted in natural integrity, freely granted the Spirit of God, Adam dwelt in the terrestrial Garden of Eden with his wife, destined to eventually dwell in the celestial paradise of Heaven, where they would see the beatific vision of God as a reward for their faith, hope and charity. Why did they not listen to God?
(To be continued)
———————-
Sexagesima Sunday
Benedict Baur, O.S.B.
The Divine Sower
1.”The sower went out to sow his seed.” Three fourths of the seed will be unfruitful because it falls on barren soil. That which falls on fertile ground, however, will bring forth fruit thirtyfold, sixtyfold, and a hundredfold (Gospel).
- We are dependent on the divine sower. The soil of our hearts (our spirit, our thoughts, our will) can of itself produce nothing. Of ourselves we are incapable of the least good thought or resolution, or of the smallest act of Christian virtue. “Not that we are sufficient to think anything of ourselves as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is from Christ” (II Cor. 3:5). “For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish according to His good will” (Phil. 2:13). We are so entirely dependent on the sower that He assures us, “Without Me you can do nothing” (John 15:5). Without Him we are incapable of anything but sin, and we sink in our misery as a stone sinks in water. Without His help we are as abandoned as the victims of the Deluge, of whom Holy Scripture says: “And all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times” (Gen. 6:5). “Or what hast thou that thou hast not received? And if thou hast received, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?” (I Cor. 4:7.) We depend entirely on the divine sower to sow the seeds of good in our hearts.
The sower comes to us to sow good seed in our hearts. First of all He plants the seed of virtue by baptism, incorporating us in His mystical body, the Church. How often He has planted and replanted these seeds in our hearts! He has planted it through the word of God, which is given to us through the Church and her priesthood. In the sacrament of baptism our soul was bathed in the redeeming blood of the Savior and cleansed from all stain of original sin, so that we might arise as new men reborn to a new life and the sonship of God. In the sacrament of confirmation Christ renewed His grace in us and gave us the power to grow to our full stature as children of God and heirs to the kingdom of heaven. In the sacrament of the Eucharist, He gives us his very self; His flesh and blood become our daily bread. He now no longer merely helps and strengthens us, He Himself lives within us by a true physical union of His flesh and blood with ours. He has become as close to us as a vine is to its branches. At every crucial turning point in our lives, at the moment of our greatest successes and failures, from our youth to our old age, from the moment of our baptism to our last illness, Christ is near, concealed in the Blessed Sacrament, but ever ready to sow the seed of His grace in our hearts. Oh, that we had the eyes of faith to see Him sowing His seed by whispering His divine counsel into our ear, and that we had the wisdom to profit by His advice and to heed His warnings! Would that we had the gracefulness to thank Him for His help and the wisdom to open our hearts so that the seed He sows might take deep root!
3.”At that time, when a very great multitude was gathered together and hastened out of the cities unto Jesus” (Gospel). The people mentioned in the Gospel today are these people who are assembled here today to offer up the Holy Sacrifice. We have the sower in our midst; today He will sow this good seed in our hearts through the lessons taught by the Epistle and Gospel of the Mass, through the edifying example set for us by St. Paul in the Epistle, through the example He Himself gave us by His death on the cross, and by the unbloody renewal of that death in the Mass today. He became “obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8).
“The sower went out to sow his seed.” The seed which Christ today sows in the Mass is, in the mind of the sacred liturgy, especially the Holy Eucharist, Holy Communion. This seed cannot fail to reproduce itself sixtyfold if it falls on fertile soil. Yet in the soil of our soul it so often fails to bear fruit at all. The soil has not been properly prepared. We are too preoccupied by worldly cares and burdens of our life. We are too concerned about that which is worldly and transitory and too little interested in that which is divine and eternal. Thus the soil of our soul becomes rocky ground, so hard and forbidding that the seed can strike no roots. The holy sacraments produce fruit, the Council of Trent tells us, according to our preparation and dispositions.
PRAYER
Perfect Thou my goings in Thy paths, that my footsteps be not moved; incline Thy ear and hear my words; show forth Thy wonderful mercies, Thou who savest them that trust in Thee, O Lord. (Offertory.)
The ground and the seed
- Lent, the spring and seeding time of the soul, is near at hand. In the Mass and in the Holy Eucharist good seed will be sown in our soul. The divine sower strews His seed with a prodigal hand. Is the soil of our soul prepared to receive it?
- “Some fell by the wayside; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. . . . And they by the wayside are they that hear; then the devil cometh and taketh the word out of their heart” (Gospel). These are the souls which are dissipated and unmortified. They no longer have taste for anything but that which is superficial and worldly; they have abandoned the practice of recollection; they preserve no watch over their senses and over the desires and movements of their heart. They are they who hear the word of God; “then the devil cometh and taketh the word out of their heart.”
“And other some fell upon a rock. And as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away because it had no moisture.” This seed sprang up, but it soon withered because it could not fix its roots in the soil. These are the souls who receive the seed with good will, but as soon as they are subject to temptation or are required to make sacrifices, they weaken and submit. “In time of temptation they fall away.”
“And other some fell among thorns. . . . And that which fell among thorns are they who have heard and, going their way, are choked with the cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and yield no fruit.” The soul tends naturally toward God and earnestly receives His grace. But at the same time it is troubled by various illicit desires and the cares of its station in life; it is troubled about its past and worried about its future. It is concerned about its health, frightened by the prospect of humiliation, depressed by the injuries it has suffered, terrified by uncertainties and hardships; and amid all these trials the seed can neither strike roots nor bring forth fruit.
- “I will go in to the altar of God; to God who giveth joy to my youth” (Communion). I will go to the altar of God and obtain the good seed, Holy Communion, and plant it today in the good soil of my heart. I will open wide the furrows of my soul and prepare in my heart good ground, free of stones and thorns, so that the seed may take root and bear fruit a hundredfold.
In Holy Communion, Christ gives us His flesh and blood, and with them and through them His spirit. His spirit operates in our soul and performs the same service for it that the blood performs for the body. His spirit fills us completely, and He lives in us. If we listen to His inspirations. He will soon bring us to a perfect union with Himself. Then we shall see all through the eyes of Christ and shall will what He wills. Then we shall desire only what He desires, love only what He loves. Then our heart will be one with the heart of Christ, and we shall be able to say with St. Paul, “And I live, now not I, but Christ liveth in me” (Gal. 2:20). Christ then will completely occupy our heart, and we may then truly be said to be “another Christ,” because of the union of His heart and soul with ours. Then we shall have lost our own life, but we shall have acquired the life of Christ. Then the prophecy of Christ will be fulfilled in us: “And I live by the Father, so he that eateth Me, the same also shall live by Me” (John 6:58). This is the hundredfold fruit of Holy Communion.
In order that our soul may reap this fruit, the Lord has “moved the earth” (our soul) “and hast troubled it” (Gradual) through humiliation, trials, and sufferings of all sorts. The “power [of God] is made perfect in [our] infirmity” (Epistle).
PRAYER
We humbly beseech Thee, O almighty God, to grant that we who have been refreshed by Thy sacraments may so live as to do Thee worthy and acceptable service. Through Christ our Lord. Amen. (Postcommunion.)
__________________________________________________
8: ST APOLLINARIS, BISHOP OF HIERAPOLIS (c. A.D. 179)
CLAUDIUS APOLLINARIS, Bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, called “the Apologist”, was a famous Christian teacher in the second century. Notwithstanding the encomiums bestowed on him by Eusebius, St Jerome, Theodoret and others, we know but little of his life, and his writings, which then were held in great esteem, seem now to be all lost. Photius, who had read them and who was a very good judge, commends them both for their style and matter. He wrote against the Encratites and other heretics, and pointed out, as St Jerome testifies, from what philosophical sect each heresy derived its errors. His last work was directed against the Montanists and their pretended prophets, who began to appear in Phrygia about the year 17I. But nothing rendered his name so illustrious as his apology for the Christian religion, which he addressed to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius soon after the victory that prince had obtained over the Quadi by the prayers, it is alleged, of the Christians, of which the saint made mention.
Marcus Aurelius having long attempted without success to subdue the Germans by his generals, resolved in A.D. 174 to take the field against them himself. He was beyond the Danube when the Quadi, a people inhabiting that territory later called Moravia, surrounded him in a very disadvantageous situation: so that there was no possibility that either he or his army could escape out of their hands or maintain themselves long where they were for want of water. The twelfth legion was chiefly composed of Christians. When the army was drawn up, exhausted with thirst, the Christians fell upon their knees, “as we are accustomed to do at prayer”, says Eusebius, and earnestly besought God’s aid. Then on a sudden the sky was darkened with clouds, and a heavy rain poured down just as the barbarians began their attack. The Romans fought and drank at the same time, catching the rain as it fell in their helmets, and often swallowing it mingled with blood. Their assailants would still have been too strong for them, but that the storm being driven by a violent wind into their faces, and accompanied with flashes of lightning and loud thunder, the Germans, unable to see, were terrified to such a degree that they took to flight. Both heathen and Christian writers give this account of the victory. /50/
The heathens ascribed it, some to the power of magic, others to their gods, but the Christians accounted it a miracle obtained by the prayers of this legion. St Apollinaris apparently referred to it in his apology to this very emperor, and added that as an acknowledgement the emperor gave it the name of the “Thundering Legion”. From him it is so called by Eusebius, Tertullian, St Jerome and St Gregory of Nyssa.
The Quadi surrendered the prisoners whom they had taken, and begged for peace on whatever conditions it should please the emperor to grant it them. Marcus Aurelius hereupon, out of gratitude to his Christian soldiers, published an edict, in which he confessed himself indebted for his delivery “to the shower obtained, perhaps, by the prayers of the Christians”. In it he forbade, under pain of death, anyone to accuse a Christian on account of his religion; yet by a strange inconsistency, being overawed by the opposition of the senate, he had not the courage to abolish the laws already in force against Christians. Hence, even after this, in the same reign, many suffered martyrdom, though their accusers, it is asserted, were also put to death.
The deliverance of the emperor is represented on the Columna Antoniniana in Rome by the figure of a Jupiter Pluvius, being that of an old man flying in the air with his arms extended, and a long beard which seems to waste away in rain. The soldiers are there represented as relieved by this sudden tempest, and in a posture partly drinking of the rain water and partly fighting against the enemy, who, on the contrary, are represented as stretched out on the ground with their horses, and the dreadful part of the storm descending upon them only. The credibility of the story, which Eusebius apparently derived from the Apology of St Apollinaris, still remains a matter of discussion. On the one hand, it is certain that the” Thundering Legion” (legio fulminata) did not obtain this title from Marcus Aurelius, for it belonged to them from the time of Augustus; on the other, there is nothing violently incredible in the facts themselves. Contemporary Christians might easily attribute such a surprising victory to the prayers of their fellow believers. There is no confirmation among pagan authorities for the text of the supposed edict of toleration. Those scholars who defend the general accuracy of the facts believe it to be at least interpolated.
St Apollinaris may have penned his apology to the emperor about the year 175 to remind him of the benefit he had received from God by the prayers of the Christians, and to implore his protection. We have no account of the time of this holy man’s death, which probably happened before that of Marcus Aurelius.
(Butler’s Lives of the Saints)
MARRIAGE AND PARENTHOOD
The Catholic Ideal
By the Rev. Thomas J. Gerrard
(1911)
CHAPTER III
CHOICE OF A STATE
How is it that nearly the whole of the creative literature of the world has been made to center round the young girl? How is it that love stories about married people, widows, and widowers, have such a prosaic savor and so often tend towards degeneracy? It is because there is something mysterious in virginity. There is a power hidden in the virgin mind which can change the destinies of men, of nations, of the race. Shall this power be divided, ministering to the procreation of body and education of soul? Or shall it renounce the carnal part and be devoted exclusively to the care of the spirit?
These questions are very old, perhaps as old as the human race itself; for there is some reason to believe that the sins of our first parents had something to do with the vow of virginity. At any rate we know that in the earliest Roman times the problem faced the maidens of the family. Vesta was the goddess of the hearth. But family worship was not enough. A special sanctuary was needed where all the citizens of the State could worship as one great family. The goddess was there represented by an eternal fire burning on her hearth or altar. And virgins were set aside to keep alive this fire. The goddess was chaste and pure, as the fire symbolized. The virginity of the priestesses both figured and realized that purity. Thus, even in natural religion virginity was regarded as a higher type of spirit life.
When God became incarnate He added a higher sanctity to virginity by choosing to be born of a Virgin. By the same act too he raised the dignity of motherhood. Both states of life were needed for the perfection of His plans. Some would be called to one state, others to the other. Christ Himself declared that renunciation of marriage was more blessed than fruition, provided it was done for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. Not everyone could receive that word, but he who could, let him.
St. Paul applied this doctrine when he said: “He that giveth his virgin in marriage doeth well, and he that giveth her not doeth better.”
In biblical language the term” virgin” includes men as well as women. Thus St. John in the Apocalypse says: “These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins.” In modern language we speak of the men as celibates. The Council of Trent uses both words in defining that single blessedness is the higher gift. “If any one says that the married state is to be placed before that of virginity or celibacy, and that it is not a better and more blessed thing to remain in virginity or celibacy than to be joined in matrimony, let him be anathema.”
The virginity or celibacy here spoken of is not necessarily that of the ecclesiastical or religious life. The Church recognizes three normal states of life: marriage, which is good; single blessedness in the world, which is better; single blessedness in religion, which is best.
This does not mean however that the single life is better for everybody, nor that the religious life is the best for everybody. These states are only good, better, and best, when regarded in themselves. If we look at them with regard to particular people, the order of good, better, and best may be reversed. Indeed, for the vast majority of people marriage is by far the best thing. The single life in the world would maim them, and perhaps life in religion would ruin them. Everything depends on the individual’s circumstances, his temperament, his health, his ability, his desires, above all his graces. This then is the problem with which all young people are confronted: To what state of life am I called?
Let us say at the outset that the solution is love. But what is love? Its mystic nature defies an exhaustive description. There is, however, a simple definition which may be applied to every kind of love. It is: To will good for some one. This is the essence of love, whether of father, mother, husband, wife, child, friend, or enemy. It may be accompanied by the passion of affection or by the passion of aversion. If I love my mother, affection is also present. If I love my enemy, aversion is probably present. I may feel a dislike to a man, yet at the same time will to do him good.
Further, love may be devoid, or almost devoid, of passion. I may have a love for the religious life, for instance, without having any affection for it. I may see that only by entering religion shall I be able to do the greatest good to my fellow men. Even though I have an aversion for common life and loss of liberty, yet I may see in those things my best chance of salvation and love them accordingly.
In the choice of a state of life then the leading question will be: Which state do I really love?
Do I want to be married? Do I want to live singly in the world and devote myself to a special profession? Do I want to be a priest? Do I want to be a nun? Above all, is my desire constant, or do I waver between one thing and another, never knowing my own mind?
Marriage will be the choice of most. It is the state for which they are by nature fitted, and for them the highest and most perfect life which they can live.
In most cases the choice is settled by a chance meeting and by the accident known as falling in love. Mutual passion for each other is the predominant attractive force. If this passion is consonant with reason and revelation then it is all good and beautiful. If there are impediments to the proposed marriage then the passion is out of place and must be checked. Passion cannot be good if it has for its object that which tends to the ruin of the end of marriage. But the impediments placed by God and by the Church are all arranged to protect the end of marriage, and therefore passion must never seek to override them.
The case, however, often arises in which only one of the pair feels the passion. What is the other to do? Suppose it to be the girl, and suppose her mind to be expressed by some such saying as this: “I like him, you know, but I cannot say that I am in love with him.”
There is need here to distinguish between love and passion. Love is essentially an act of the will; passion is essentially a mere sensation. Let us repeat, though, that the most perfect love for married people is that in which the will is fired by passion and in which the passion is controlled by the will. But let us never forget that the lasting element in such love is that of the will. Passion burns out in time.
The girl then who is in every way fitted for marriage receives an offer from a young man who is in many ways suitable. She feels that she can honor and respect him, but hesitates about accepting him because she does not feel in love. If she is young and likely to have other chances she may wait. But if she is likely to become an old maid then she may fortify herself with the philosophical distinction between love and passion. If she believes that the man will do all he can to make her happy, and she is determined to do all she can to make him happy, she will be well advised to marry him. Good will is the real stuff of which love is made, passion is but an added perfection. Moreover, the good will in such cases invariably rouses the passion before the days of courtship are ended.
(To be continued)
The following is here to solidify the fact that many contraceptives are, in reality, abortifacients and the users are actually killing a person God gave life to. The Editor does not agree with the author of the article that other contraceptives are acceptable as this is in opposition to God’s Divine Will and His institution of matrimony (natural and sacramental). Therefore, the whole article is not included. There is a link to it for those needing to reference the article.—The Editor
THURSDAY, 29 JANUARY 2015
Does the Pill cause an abortion?
BY GERARD MIGEON
http://www.mercatornet.com/family_edge/view/15508#sthash.HOjoopxS.dpuf
Even during the wildest times of my youth, I would never have wanted to be the cause of an abortion. Yet, there is a possibility that I have been responsible for one, unaware. How? Because of contraceptive methods that my wife and I used before we knew about the natural methods.
While women’s positions on the legal and moral question of abortion vary, most would agree that full disclosure of the risk of abortion is a basic right of women using contraceptive drugs.
However, studies conducted among women 18-49 in the US[i] and in six European countries[ii] showed that about 8 out of 10 women do not know about the potential of some contraceptives to cause abortion.
The same studies shows that 75 percent of them would want to be informed about any reasonable possibility of this happening, and 3 out of 10 women would choose not to use a contraceptive that would risk causing an abortion.
Let’s look at the facts.
The right to informed consent
Being fully informed by the provider about a drug as potent as hormonal contraceptives is a basic and well recognized right of patients. The World Health Organization recommends that patient information about birth control methods include effectiveness, mechanisms of action, side effects, health risks and benefits, correct use and reversibility. In practice, it doesn’t happen. In general, physicians frequently don’t take the time to inform patients even of the side effects of medication they prescribe[iii], let alone the mechanisms of these powerful drugs.
Preventing implantation of an embryo
In order to reach high effectiveness rates, hormonal contraceptives rely on two main mechanisms: prevention of the fertilization of a woman’s egg (prefertilization effect), and prevention of the implantation of an embryo by the modification of the lining of the uterus (postfertilization effect). The second mechanism is what we’re concerned with here. If ovulation occurs and if the egg is fertilized by a sperm, which sometimes happens, especially with today’s low-dose pills[iv], the resulting embryo will travel to the uterus and attempt implantation. However, scientific literature shows that oral contraceptives, implants, the shot, the patch[v] and IUDs make the lining of the uterus inhospitable to it. It is also clearly stated in the labels of these contraceptive methods[vi].
Is this an abortion?
You may not agree that human life starts at conception, but rather at implantation, when the embryo attaches to the lining of the uterus about six days after conception. In which case, you wouldn’t consider the process described above an abortion. Some studies show that a majority of people believe it does start at conception. But it’s not actually a matter of opinion or belief. In a remarkable scientific paper[vii], Maureen L. Condic, Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine, writes:
The scientific evidence supports the conclusion that a zygote is a human organism and that the life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well defined ‘moment of conception.’ This conclusion is objective, consistent with the factual evidence, and independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos.
Because abortion is legal, this conclusion leaves the user of contraceptives with a personal moral choice about what may happen to the embryo once it is created as a result of the relatively small, yet real, possibility of the failure of a contraceptive’s first mechanism, the prevention of fertilization. But in order to freely exercise this moral choice, a woman has to be informed.
Lack of information
Full disclosure to all women about this possibility seems essential to ensure proper informed consent. Yet women don’t know about these risks, as the table below tells us[viii]. Women in the US are the most informed and only 22 percent of them know. In France (my homeland), it’s only 7 percent. Yet, 72 percent of US women want to know, as in most other countries. And the reality is that if women knew, not all, but a large number of them would not use methods that have a risk of postfertilization effect or abortion.….
Footnotes:
[i] Clinical sample in Utah and Oklahoma: Dye et al. BMC Womens Health 2005;5:11.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1325031/
[ii] European national representative samples: Lopez-del Burgo et al, Contraception 2012;85:69-77 and Lopez-del Burgo et al, J Clinical Nursing 2013 http://dadun.unav.edu/handle/10171/34346 Spain: Lopez-del Burgo et al, Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;15:56-61.http://dadun.unav.edu/handle/10171/19107
[iii] SOURCES: Tarn, D.M. Archives of Internal Medicine, Sept. 25, 2006; vol 166: pp 1855-1862. Derjung M. Tarn, MD, PhD, assistant professor of medicine, department of family medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles.http://www.webmd.com/news/20060925/study-doctors-dont-explain-rx-drugs
[iv] http://www.stacommunications.com/journals/cme/2009/09-Sep-09/WNiCRCME.pdf
[v] Hormonal contraception is available in oral contraceptive pills and in newer formulations, including the transdermal patch, the vaginal ring, subcutaneous implants, and IM injections. Prevention of pregnancy is achieved by inhibiting ovulation, fertilization, and/or implantation of an egg. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16567739
[vi] http://www.consciencelaws.org/background/procedures/birth014-002.aspx
[vii] When does human life begin, A Scientific Perspective, Maureen L. Condic, http://bdfund.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf
– See more at: http://www.mercatornet.com/family_edge/view/15508#sthash.HOjoopxS.dpuf
————————
For those who purchase through Amazon, please help support the work here at Saint Joseph’s by going through this link:
http://smile.amazon.com/ch/94-2855162
———————–
Father Courtney Edward will be in Eureka, Nevada, February 12.
_________________________
The topics of Faith and Morals will correspond to the Roman Catholic Faith in Tradition and the Magisterium. The News will be of interest. The commentaries are for the reader to ponder and consider. The e-mail address will be for you to provide thought for consideration. The donations will be to support the continuation of this undertaking.
While the Newsletter is free of charge it is not free of cost. Please consider supporting St Joseph’s Catholic Church with a tax – deductible donation by clicking the secure link below