The following is a list of U.S. Senators who voted in favor of harvesting babies currently frozen in order to get at their stem cells:
Now here is a list of those senators who voted to defend the babies against being harvested in order to steal their stem cells:
Kindly remember which individuals stood up for the babies and which voted to kill them for medical experimentation.
(CHT: Southern Appeal)
If you’d like to look up how your state’s two U.S. senators voted, CLICK HERE.
A reader writes:
It is my understanding that the Church tells us to pay taxes and obey our
civil government EXCEPT when the civil government is asking its citizens
to sin. I base this off CCC 2242:
"The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of
civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral
order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the
Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are
contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the
distinction between serving God and serving the political community.
"Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the
things that are God’s." "We must obey God rather than men":
When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which
oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do
what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is
legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow
citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the
natural law and the Law of the Gospel."
Now, with that stated, if I know that my money I pay to taxes is
supporting mass murder of innocent humans, should I pay taxes? By paying
taxes I am indirectly supporting the actions of the government in this
injustice. For example, I know that taxpayer money is supporting the
blood thirsty abortion mill Planned Parenthood:
"Finally, the Planned Parenthood empire has been built and sustained in
large part by money from the U.S. taxpayers. Planned Parenthood’s own
annual reports indicate that it received $2.2 billion of taxpayer money
between 1987 and 2001. Thirty percent ($202.7 million) of Planned
Parenthood’s income ($672.6 million) in its 2000/01 fiscal year came from
government grants or contracts. Incredibly, PPFA made $454 million of
profit from 1987 to 2001!" – American Life League
Thus, should I continue to pay taxes? Thanks.
The argument that you are making faces several hurdles.
The first is that the passage in the Catechism that you cite involves disobedience in matters in which you are directly being commanded to do evil (e.g., if you were being ordered to perform an abortion or abort one of your own children).
Catholic moral theology recognizes a distinction between different forms of cooperation with evil, ranging from immediate, personal action to what is known as remote material cooperation. This passage is dealing with things toward the former end of the spectrum: Things you are being personally ordered to do that are evil.
Giving money to the government is not evil. If the government then takes it–against your wishes–and does something evil with it then your cooperation is both material and–given the way the government works–remote. Thus if you pay taxes and your taxes go into a government fund and then the government takes some of the money from that fund and gives it to Planned Parenthood then your cooperation with the evil that Planned Parenthood does is (extremely) remote material cooperation.
Catholic moral theology acknowledges that remote material cooperation is morally justifiable when there is a proportionate reason. So: Is there a proportionate reason to pay your taxes, knowing that a tiny fraction of them may go toward Planned Parenthood?
It would seem that there is, and it may be articulated as follows:
1) The government will ruin your life if you don’t pay your taxes.
2) By ruining your life, the government will also gravely harm the lives of any who are financially dependent on you (e.g., your children).
3) You have a duty to protect yourself and those who are dependent on you from being needlessly ruined.
4) Failure to pay your taxes will not materially decrease the money that is given to Planned Parenthood. They’ll get their money anyway.
5) If you are convicted of a felony you may lose your right to vote, which is a tool you possess to bring about change within the system.
6) By refusing to pay your taxes, you deprive the government of money that would be used for good as well as evil, including the basic good of maintaining civil order that is the foundation of civic and economic life for the populace.
It thus seems to me that, in the American setting, the kind of tax protesting you are talking about would not be authorized by Catholic moral theology.
If we had an "opt-out" box on our tax forms that let us withold money from Planned Parenthood (or any other evil thing that is receiving government money) then we would be morally obliged to use it, but since we do not have such a box then–given our inability to disentangle money from going to bad as well as good causes and given the fact our cooperation would be (extremely) remote and material and given the existence of a proportionate reason (having our lives ruined, if nothing else) then it seems to me that Catholic moral theology requires the payment of taxes in the American context.
The Church acknowledges that there are situations in which governments may be so horrible that they may be legitimately overthrown, and if you’re in a situation like that (e.g., Nazi Germany, Pol Pot’s Cambodia ,the Taliban’s Afghanistan) then it seems that you would be warranted in withholding taxes from the government as well as taking up arms against it. However, the conditions that have to be met for that are exceedingly high. The Catechism explains:
CCC 2243 Armed resistance to oppression by political authority is not legitimate, unless all the following conditions are met: 1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.
Here in the United States those conditions are simply not jointly fulfilled. Certainly the pope isn’t going to agree that they are.
Therefore, I would say that you are morally obliged to pay your taxes and do what you can within the democratic process to end government funding for evil programs and organizations.
You’ve got a vote and the ability to make your voice heard in the public square. Make the most of them.
Note for purposes of historical comparison: The basis of the "Render unto Caesar" passage was the question of tax protesting against the Roman Empire, which Jesus’ questioners recognized as an evil abomination (see Revelation chapter 13 if you’d like heaven’s perspective on it). Yet Jesus said that one should "render [taxes] unto Caesar"–despite the horrendous evil that the Roman Empire represented and inflicted on its subject nations.
Why?
Because he walked out of a disgusting Kevin Smith film in protest.
EXCERPTS:
DON’T joke about women, donkeys and bestiality if you expect Joel Siegel to watch your movie. That’s what director Kevin Smith found out when the pun-loving "Good Morning America" film critic stormed out of a press screening of Smith’s "Clerks II," which opens Friday – an act that’s sparked a vicious war of words between the two.
"Time to go!" roared Siegel to his fellow critics. "First movie I’ve walked out of in 30 [bleeping] years!" His tirade came 40 minutes into the long-awaited Weinstein Company sequel to Smith’s 1994 cult classic about two foul-mouthed Long Island convenience store clerks who razz customers and goof off.
GET THE STORY (WARNING: Disgusting subject matter clinically discussed.)
Shame on Kevin Smith, too, for his disgraceful and BLEEP-filled response to Mr. Siegel.
And for making such disgusting trash to begin with.
President Bush has used the first veto of his presidency to kill a stem cell bill that would have led to the death of many children.
EXCERPTS:
"It crosses a moral boundary that our decent
society needs to respect, so I vetoed it," Bush said at the White House.
"We must also remember that embryonic stem cells come from human embryos that are destroyed for their cells. Each of these human embryos is a unique human life with inherent dignity and matchless value," Bush said in his comments to specially invited families at the White House.
"Some people argue that finding new cures for disease requires the destruction of human embryos," Bush said, before adding: "I disagree.
"I believe that with the right techniques and the right policies we can achieve scientific progress while living up to our ethical responsibilities."
Shame on all those in the House and Senate–including members of the Republican majority in both houses–who voted in favor of the bill.
Just got these in the mail, and I can’t wait to watch them (though at the moment I’m still making my way through the new Doctor Who season that was just released).
For those of you who missed it, The Adventures of Brisco County Jr. was a 1993 TV series that blended two of my favorite things . . . the Old West and science-fiction. Two great things that go great together (sometimes . . . like this time . . . or Firefly).
(It also blended in some of my other favorite things, like humor and action and romance and whiskers on kittens and brown paper packages tied up with string . . . well, maybe not the last couple.)
I didn’t see the series when it was on the air (because Fox’s advertisements for it make it look a lot more salacious than it actually is), but I discovered it in reruns on TNT and really enjoyed it.
Unlike many of the series on the air back then, it had a definite story arc spanning the entire season (I just love big story arcs) with significant character evolution a surprises as the story evolves. In fact, the main character, Brisco County Jr. (played by Bruce Campbell) starts the series as an ex-Harvard law professor turned bounty hunter to being the agent of 19th century robber barons who want him to track down the gang that killed his father to being a secret agent for the government.
Along the way we run across mysterious orbs from the future that give people superpowers (or kill them), evil robots, neurotic outlaws, a 19th century version of Elvis, Comet the Wonder Horse, and a bunch of anachronistic humor (before Hercules and Xena made it popular)–all of it fitting into a single, overarching Wild West saga.
And then there’s the show’s great theme music, which just makes you feel like it’s a warm, hopeful new day on the range, where anything can happen . . . and will.
Unfortunately, Fox aired the show in the Friday Night Death Slot and it didn’t get picked up for a second season.
Fortunately, the show’s creators did a rousing two-part season finale that tied up all the outstanding plot threads, so it works well as a season-long miniseries.
It took Warner Brothers FOREVER (13 years!) to release it on DVD, but now that it’s out you can
Sometimes I don’t know whether to smile or wince over the huckstering spirit of many American Christians. I used to think it was a mainly Evangelical thing, but I’ve had second thoughts lately. Exhibit A: The John Paul II Intercession Package. Yours today for the low, low price donation of $29.95 (not counting shipping and handling or applicable sales tax, no doubt):
"Financial needs, Health needs, Family needs … let us invoke Pope John Paul the Great!
"Claims of JP II"s interecession have poured in. As an article on www.Spiritdaily[.com] noted: ‘From lost son to cancer to headaches … claims of JP II’s intercession keep pouring in!’
"We can not ignore JP II as a POWERFUL intecessor for our needs!
"We believe he will prove to be one of the most powerful intercessors of this century!
"Let us INVOKE him to intercede for our needs … no matter if they be big or small! Financial needs, Health needs, Family needs … We all have something in our lives that we could use a little help with! I know I do!"
It looks like the vendors of the John Paul II Intercession Package "could use a little help with" rounding up some exclamation marks. They seem to have used up their supply in this ad. Perhaps JPII will put in a good word for them for that need.
What exactly do you get in your Intercession Pack? Let’s see. Among other things there’s a "New, Exclusive John Paul II Intercession Prayercloth"; a "Special St. Peter (the first Pope!) oxidized silver medal from Italy"; and "Exclusive ‘Pope John Paul II Intercession Chaplet Beads’ with Special OFFICIAL Prayer for His Intercession!" And much, much more!
As someone with a special devotion to John Paul the Great — in part because of his providential passing on the same day as my natural dad — this kind of crass exploitation of a saintly man’s intercession annoys me. Although American Evangelicals are no slouches when it comes to turning a buck on the gospel message, this is just the kind of thing that raises specters in non-Catholic minds of Johann Tetzel‘s "peddling" of indulgences.
From the current (July 2006) edition of the Bishops’ Committee on Liturgy Newsletter:
Among the most important recommendations offered to the Bishops is important advice which applies to all circumstances where the potential for the transmission of pathogens is a significant risk:
All parishioners should be encouraged to remain home at the first sign of illness, out of respect
for their brothers and sisters. During the time of the pandemic, even if schools and public
institutions are not closed, parishioners should be reminded of the importance of basic health
measures.Hand-washing is a necessary and effective means of preventing the delivery of infectious material
(e.g., nasal secretions, saliva or other body fluids that may contain viruses) from soiled hands to
the mouth, nose or eyes, where it can enter the body. Cleaning one’s hands with soap and water
removes potentially infectious material from one’s skin. Hands should be cleaned before
preparing food, eating, or touching one’s face and after handling soiled material (e.g., used
tissues, lavatory surfaces, and door knobs), shaking hands, coughing or sneezing, and using the
toilet. Waterless alcohol-based hand gels may be used when soap is not available and hands are
not visibly soiled.
A reader writes:
My brother and I were talking and he was asking if I knew why some of the popes in history have the name “Pope Pius” and then the number but no “name” to speak of and he was also wondering what that title meant. My answer was that the word pious means humble and that I would assume that they were trying to emulate that word into their being and how they worked within their pontificate.
However I am sure if this is the case it is only the tip of the iceberg. Can you give me any information on this?
Sure thing!
This is a natural thing to wonder about since in the English-speaking world we don’t hear the name "Pius" very often, but it actually is a name, so popes who have the name Pius actually do have a name–just not one that we’re used to hearing in English.
The Italian version of this name is Pio. You may have heard, for example, of the famous Italian priest (now a saint) who in life was called Padre Pio ("Father Pius").
What we English-speakers tend to think of when we hear the name Pius, though, is not a name but the adjective pious, which we get from the Latin adjective pius (spelled the same as the name, but being used as an adjective).
In Latin, the adjective pius means things like "conscientious; upright; faithful; patriotic/dutiful, respectful; rightous; good affectionate, tender, devoted, loyal (to family); pious, devout; holy, godly."
Latin-speaking parents who wanted their children to be these things might thus name him Pius (or, if she was a girl, they might name her Pia, the feminine equivalent of pius), the same way that we might name a baby "Christian," hoping that he will grow up to fulfill his name.
The first pope to be named Pius was . . . well, Pius I (big surprise), who was the tenth pope and reigned between A.D. 140 and 155. In his day, popes didn’t take new names when they were elected, so Pius seems to have been his birth name.
That had changed by the time of the next pope named Pius (Pius II–again, big surprise) who was the 211th pope and who reigned between 1458 and 1464.
Presumably, he picked the name Pius partly in memory of the first Pope Pius but also because he wanted to display the virtue of being pious (i.e., piety) during his reign as pope.
Although in Latin Pius and pius are spelled the same (which could lead to confusion in some contexts), we have a handy way of distinguishing the name from the adjective in English. If you see Pius (capitalized and no O), it’s the name, but if you see pious (with an O, whether it’s capitalized or not) then it’s the adjetive.
Hope this helps!
Like many, I’ve been following the current events in the Middle East with significant concern.
I don’t know where this is all going. I just hope we can avoid a major war breaking out.
If you know less about the current situation than you’d like,
AMERICAN PAPIST HAS A GOOD OVERVIEW OF THE SITUATION WITH LINKS TO FURTHER RESOURCES.
There have been a lot of sightings lately of the recently-deceased Johnny Cash. No, he hasn’t been backing-up Elvis at Memphis honky-tonks. His music has been selling like hotcakes.
"In life, Johnny Cash was merely a legend. In death, he is proving immortal.
"Almost three years after he died at the age of 71 after a decade of poor health, the country outlaw is the most popular artist in the United States, currently at No. 1 on the pop and country charts with an album of new material.
"The album, ‘American V: A Hundred Highways,’ recorded in Cash’s final months as he looked forward to reuniting with his late wife, June Carter Cash, sold 88,000 copies in the week ended July 9. It’s his first chart-topper since 1969’s live prison album ‘Johnny Cash at San Quentin.’"
I suppose most of the Cash fans these days hopped on the bandwagon with the success of the bio-flick Walk the Line. Having grown up in a family of country-music lovers, I liked Johnny Cash before it was cool to like Johnny Cash. Some of my favorites are A Boy Named Sue, Ring of Fire, and One Piece at a Time.
[JIMMY ADDS: Those are three of my favorites, along with Folsom Prison Blues.]
The only thing that ever really annoyed me about Cash was not Cash himself but the idealization by many people of his marriage to June Carter Cash … a relationship that began when at least one of them was married to someone else. I forget the full details of their "love story" but my repulsion at the popular idealization of adultery is one of the reasons I skipped Walk the Line when it was in theaters. (To be perfectly clear, I’m not saying anything here about Johnny and June Carter Cash. My disgust is with those who seemed to think their marriage one of the Greatest Love Stories of All Time.)
As a side note, reporters can be a real hoot sometimes:
"Almost three years after he [Cash] died at the age of 71 after a decade of poor health…"
Wow, whoever heard of dying after a bout with "poor health"? And here I thought that only the healthy died.