Our Lady of Soccorso



 

End-Of-Life Decisions and Facts



Click to view video.
 
CA Senate Health Committee SB 24 hearing on April 3, 2019.


Click to view full-size.
 
The Star of Bethlehem shines brightly on the newborn child, Jesus.


Click to view full-size.
 
This child doesn’t need Government mandated Pre-K schooling. Young John is the grandchild of a very fine Pro Life Family.


Click to view full-size.
 
Four month and six month old human fetal skeletons, displayed At the Federal Civil War Medical and Military history Museum, in Silver Spring, MD. Display can be found in new more current segment of the museum’s historical displays.


Click to view full-size.
 
Mary Catherine was an abandoned new-born, found in Antioch and buried by Ca. Right to Life and Birthright of concord, at Queen of Heaven Cemetery in Lafayette, Ca. along with 24 other pre-born babies.


Click to view full-size.
 
Come Holy Spirit, enlighten the minds and hearts of your people!
July 4th, 2018






Legislative

Reports

StateFederal

The Loss of Moral Language

By Dr. Arthur Hippler

“The bigger problem is not that this language has been lost by some great cataclysm… Our moral language has been intentionally destroyed.”

Tsze-lu said, “The ruler of Wei has been waiting for you,
in order with you to administer the government.
What will you consider the first the to be done?
The Master replied, “What is necessary is to rectify names.”

(Analects of Confucius)


At the beginning of his now-classic work After Virtue, Alasdair Maclntyre asks us to imagine that future society in our civilization has collapsed. (Not too difficult to do.) The remnants of our scientific knowledge would perhaps remain in textbooks and other resources, and these would be carefully preserved and taught. At the same time, the whole scientific infrastructure that allowed the content of the sciences to have truth and coherent meaning would be gone. The scientific nomenclature would become a body of opinion which might correspond with reality, but might not. It would be what later generations could make of it.

Maclntyre’s thesis in After Virtue is that this imaginary post-apocalyptic view of the sciences serves as an accurate image of the present state of moral discourse: "The hypothesis which I wish to advance," he writes, "is that in the actual world which we inhabit the language of morality is in the same state of grave disorder as the language of natural science in the imaginary world which I described." The problem is not then that we know what is right but fail to do it, the timeless problem of men everywhere. Rather, we no longer know the words to express the moral dimension of our experience.

In the Catholic school where I teach, I never cease to be impressed at the impoverishment of my students’ moral vocabulary. Many, for example, do not know the word gluttony. For them, the only "eating disorders" they know are psychological, not moral e.g. bulimia, anorexia. Neither do they know fornication, having grown up with less judgmental terms like pre-marital sex or cohabitation. Correspondingly, few will know words such as woo or court. The whole language of courtship is a blank to them. One year, when I asked students for a synonym for "winning a woman’s love honorably," a boy guessed "seduce" - probably because it was the only educated sounding word for that kind of activity he knew.

Many students can simply forget these things, even after they have been taught. But this task is rendered vastly more difficult by the countervailing trends in the larger culture. Christian morality has long ceased to inform our shared moral discourse. My students must feel that they are learning a foreign dialect. But of course, the bigger problem is not that this language has been lost by some great cataclysm, as Maclntyre’s scenario suggests. Our moral language has been intentionally destroyed.

The words we use shape our perception of the things we experience. When I was a boy, only ecologists used words like wetlands and rainforest. Ordinary folks used words like swamp and jungle. The language was changed to change our views about those things. Saving a rainforest sounds lovely - but who wants to save a jungle? Likewise, saving wetlands sounds considerably nicer than saving a swamp. This revision of language is particularly evident in everything connected with the Sexual Revolution. Sodomy became homosexual and then gay. Prostitutes are mere sex workers. Living in sin is cohabitation and so on. Perhaps most notoriously, a baby is now a fetus, who is terminated in an abortion. Before Roe v Wade, only physicians used words like fetus or zygote. (It is hard to imagine someone asking a pregnant woman "Are you feeling your fetus kicking?")

These distortions are not so subtle, but others are, Sex has been replaced by the word gender. Many might feel that gender in fact might be better to use, since it does not carry the possible innuendo that sex does. But "gender" was a word that formerly was only used in grammar to describe nouns, e.g. masculine, feminine or neither. Gender is cultural. The word for "sun", for example, in some languages is masculine, while in others is feminine. These are cultural perceptions, not facts. Sexual differences on the other hand are natural. Male and female are biological realities that have a natural basis. By replacing sex with gender we have turned human sexuality into a cultural construct. (As I write, Facebook lists 58 possible "genders" for its users’ profiles, including gender questioning, gender fluid and non binary1).

Closely allied with the word gender are the words role and norm. People once considered the respective duties or tasks of men and women, especially as husbands and wives, mothers and fathers. If gender is a cultural construct, all these duties no longer have a natural basis - they are created. Hence, our modern age borrows from the language of theatre to describe the roles of spouses and parents. No actor is naturally related to his role _ he may play many characters, good or bad, young or old. Similarly, men and women are not then seen as living out natural differences, but interpreting, even inventing, a culturally derived script.

Norm is a term borrowed from the realm of sociology. Norms are standards derived primarily from common practice. They are not prescriptive, establishing what people ought to do, but descriptive, stating what in fact most people choose to do. Hence, normal is not synonym for natural; indeed, cultures may create all manner of practices contrary to nature. And certainly, normal is not a synonym for moral, unless one believes that morality is mere opinion, free from a natural basis. Together, gender, role and norm collectively undermine any natural basis for family life as various arrangements contrary to nature are considered equally choice-worthy.

Another important shift, again subtle in its effect, has been the replacement of specific words such as love and friendship with generic words like relationship, Relationship fuzzes over the distinct ways in which people relate for the sake of making these relationships a purely creative project. Unlike "love" which makes demands, relationships become whatever those involved want them to be.2 Similarly, the word partner is used where, once upon a time, wife or spouse or mistress or lover would have been more appropriate. Again, the goal is to have a generic word that puts a multitude of moral conditions all on the same level. As Allan Bloom succinctly remarks, "All relationships have been homogenized in their indeterminacy."3

Without doubt, the most pernicious word in our contemporary moral discourse is value. Just as norm is taken from sociology and role from drama, value is a word borrowed from economics. Value expresses the comparative worth of a good or service in a system of free exchanges. Value may imply some objective basis for this worth, as in the "labor theory of value," which insisted that the value of a commodity was related to the amount of exertion that someone would give to obtain it. Even so, this basis still demanded a market, that is, a group of people who were willing to exchange and so validate this "value." Market values are not simple statements of fact, and they certainly do not tell us what things should be worth more than others. "Values" state rather what most people believe the worth of things to be, expressed in terms of free exchange.

One of the first, if not the first philosopher to import the language of values into moral discourse was Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche denied an objective moral law based on human nature. Rather, Nietzsche insisted that morality is created from different elements within society. In The Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche describes this process: "the noble, powerful, higher-ranking, and higher-thinking people who felt and set themselves and their actions up as good, that is to say, of the first rank, in opposition to everything low, low-minded, common, and vulgar. From this pathos of distance they first arrogated to themselves the right to create values, to stamp out the names for values." (chap.2)4 Simply put, the nobler elements of society see themselves as good, and hence their moral language is first and foremost self-affirming.

On the contrary, those who were ruled and dominated, the slaves of this aristocratic society create different "values." On the bottom of the social ladder, they could only resent their place, and create a form of morality in which that lowliness has its own "goodness." As Nietzsche explains, "The slave revolt in morality begins when the ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values: the ressentiment of those beings who are prevented from a genuine reaction, that is, something active, and who compensate for that with a merely imaginary vengeance." (chap.l0) For Nietzsche, the Biblical morality of the Jews is the very paradigm of "slave morality." Dominated by the empires around them, the Jews turn their very victimhood into a virtue - the weak are "beloved of God," the powerful are "evil."

Most people who speak of "moral values" are completely unaware of this Nietzschean background. Yet it is important to note the implicit consequences of the word "values," namely 1) morality is not based on a natural law which is universal for all men; 2) rather, morality is a free creation in response to natural drives and social circumstances; and finally 3) moral judgments therefore only provide psychological information about the people who hold them, but do not tell us how people should act.

By contrast, philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle, and the Christian tradition that appropriated their moral insights along with biblical revelation, know nothing of "values." They speak rather of virtues, habits of the soul that perfect man’s nature, raised further by the gifts of sanctifying grace. Virtues are grounded in human nature, while values arise from human creativity. Yet so pervasive is the language of values that even Church documents today will speak of "authentic values" or the "proper hierarchy of values." As Allan Bloom observes, "Even those who deplore our current moral condition do so in the very language that exemplifies that condition."5

The replacement of virtues by "values" is the root and foundation of the confusions that pervade our modern language. The various ways in which the Sexual Revolution has sent words like fornication and sodomy into oblivion, and made family arrangements a matter of social invention by terms like gender and role would be unthinkable if not for the previous uncoupling of morality from nature. Centuries ago, Confucius insisted on the rectification of names. "If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success." Our language no longer reflects the moral realities of human life, but rather the revolutionary aspirations of the post-Christian world. If we are to recover the moral understanding we once had, we must recover the language that embodied that understanding. C. S. Lewis put it best when he observed "Men do not long continue to think what they have forgotten to say."6


ENDNOTES

1. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/02/heres-a-list-of-58-gender-options-for-facebook-users/

2. The tendency toward abstraction in language in democratic societies was well explained by De Tocqueville: "Men living in democratic countries are, then, apt to entertain unsettled ideas, and they require loose expressions to convey them. As they never know whether the idea they express to-day with be appropriate to the new position they may occupy to-morrow, they naturally acquire a liking for abstract terms. An abstract term is like a box with a false bottom: you may put in it what ideas you please, and take them out again without being observed. (Democracy in America, pt.II, chap.16, "The Effect of Democracy on Language").

3. Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind, Simon & Shuster, New York, 1987, p.132.

4. The relation between "language" and "power" has never been better illustrated than by Lewis Carroll in Alice’s exchange with Humpty Dumpty:

‘I don’t know what you mean by "glory",’ Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t - till I tell you. I meant "there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!"’

‘But "glory" doesn’t mean "a nice knock-down argument",’ Alice objected.

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.’

‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master - that’s all.’ (Through the Looking Glass, chap.6 "Humpty Dumpty")

5. The Closing of the American Mind, p,141.

6. "The Death of Words" from On Stories, p,107.



DR. ARTHUR HIPPLER is the former director of the Office of Justice and Peace for the Diocese of La Crosse. He is currently teaching at Providence Academy in Plymouth, Minnesota. He is the author of Citizens of the Heavenly City: A Catechism of Catholic Social Teaching (published by Borromeo Books) and has written for The Wanderer newspaper and the Bellarmine Forum website and magazine. Dr. Hippler received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Boston College.

Dr. Arthur Hippler at CCSC 2015 — “In Search of The Whole Child”

 


INFANTICIDE

California Right to Life Committee, Inc
2977 Ygnacio Valley Rd. #243
Walnut Creek, Ca 94598
callifeadvocates.org/blog
(925) 899-3064

INFANTICIDE

2-7-2019, Walnut Creek, Ca. THANK YOU President Donald Trump for using your air time during the State Of the Union address’ closing remarks to urge the Congress to pass legislation prohibiting third trimester abortion. Please take the time to Thank him here.

The bill to accomplish this objective is US Senate bill 311 by Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, the Abortion Survivor Bill of 2019. See below for more information on this important bill.

The recent demand for post-birth abortion, i.e. infanticide, created such outrage following the passage of the New York legislation, the Reproductive Health Act, followed closely with an equally egregious,

but defeated abortion bill in Virginia by Delegate Kathy Tran, (D) awakened the public to the truth about abortion.

It was Va. Governor Ralph Northam’s cold and calculating delineation of the procedure for premie or born-alive abortion intended babies that shocked the general public into raising a loud protest against the bill. Northam, a neonatal intensive care doctor, didn’t even bother with the often used phrase: it’s for the health-of-the-mother. He said it was good economics.

Contact your state and Congressional representatives, request meetings with your pastors and ministers. Firmly encourage them to lead the way, to begin speaking directly to the legislators and to the faithful in the pews about the Constitutional, economic and cultural dangers of continuing to exterminate populations in this country. Specifically, speak to the Catholic Bishops of America, including your own Diocesan Bishop. Remind him that he has been called to lead and shepherd his people, not sit back and make excuses for the Governors’ and legislators’ beliefs and actions.

PROTECT THE INFANT SURVIVOR OF ABORTION.

During President Trump’s State of the Union address he asked the Congress to vote out Senator Ben Sasse’s USS 311, Care of a Child Who Survivors Abortion, submitted to the Senate on 1/31/19. Sasse is requesting that the bill be fast-tracked.

He had previously on 1//15/19 submitted USS 130, Abortion Survivors Act, prior to the annual Washington, D.C. March for Life, but the Congressional Democrats tabled that bill.

We urge you, our readers, to call your US Senators and state your support for this latest bill.

We also request that you call our California Senators even though they are hardcore pro aborts, they need to hear from us.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, (D)
D.C. Office: 202/224/3841
NorCal District office: 415/393/0707
SoCal: 310/914/7318
Sen. Kamala Harris, (D)
D.C. office: 202/224/2200
NorCal: 916/448/2787
SoCal: 619/239/3884

In reality, the practice of aborting babies throughout the third trimester of abortion is not new.

California skirts around the truth of abortion up to an including post birth abortion. Two California legislators, Cristina Garcia, (D) and Monique Limon both submitted Resolutions acknowledging California’s position on late term abortion and even post birth abortion. These Resolutions both passed quickly following opening of the 2019 term.

Here is the important paragraph within the bill:

[]…Urges the President of the United States and the United States Congress to express their support for a woman’s fundamental right to control her own reproductive decisions, as well as their support for access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare, including the services provided by Planned Parenthood.

There is little to no difference in the phrase “right to control” one’s own reproductive decisions to the statement by Va. Governor Northam when he claimed that the live aborted baby’s right to live was up to the mother and the doctor in consultation.

Further, saying that the services to be obtained included those of Planned Parenthood, clearly shows that the legislature and the Governor (Gavin Newsom) acknowledge abortion on demand in California throughout the full nine months of pregnancy and beyond.

CODE WORDS:

California gets around the reality of abortion by using code words. CRLC believes that the reworking of the two words health care into one word – healthcare, is code for the involvement of Planned Parenthood and all its services.

Palliative care, i.e. Keeping the patient comfortable , meaning the removal of food and water and medicines is CODE for a slow form of assisted suicide In which a patient receives only pain killers, thereby losing their appetite and desire to be active. This is a form of so-called patient care promoted by a doctor Ira Byock who is supported by many within the USCCB – United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Another Code is the phrase concerning any medical need to deliberately birth a child prior to approximately 24 or less weeks because of a need to protect the “health of the mother” which may or may not have any real connection to the specific mother’s actual pregnancy-caused health condition is another reference to stepping back from direct active care of a patient and letting it die from attrition or natural causes.

That phrase, mother’s health issues is often followed immediately by the hospital offering the parents Pediatric palliative care especially for a baby suspected of having any level of life threatening or disabling health care needs.

This is the reference used by Va. Governor Northam, meaning that the mother and/or father can discuss if the child’s life should be saved. If the parent(s) should be for providing only comfort – wrapping the baby in a nice warm blanket – the baby will not be resuscitated or have it airway, cleared. The baby will suffocate.

With this disrespect for life by elected officials, coupled with an attitude of apathy on the part of the citizenry for continuing the lives of the “unwanted” babies and elderly what do you suppose is going to be offered by legislators In the way of healthcare legislation? Who or what is going to stand up for life?

Here’s what New York’s Cardinal Dolan thinks:

This links to a Cardinal Dolan YouTube interview dated 1/28/19. This was after NY announced its latest abortion legislative vote. And was aired prior to Virginia’s dastardly vote. See how Dolan treds water trying to save himself from public criticism for unwillingness to confront the powerful NY politicians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVi0FYPtRQg&t=97s

This second link is to a WSJ commentary page containing what we are invited to believe was actually written by Cardinal Timothy Dolan on 2/7/19 entitled Abortion’s Dred Scott Moment. This was also printed in our local East Bay Times on 2/8/19,

https://www.wsj.com/articles/abortions-dred-scott-moment-11549583717

In the YouTube video Dolan deflects criticism from his failure to conduct himself as the shepherd of his flock and tosses the blame to the faithful flock. That’s like the shepherd telling the sheep to go form a partnership with the wolves; working together to feed the hungry.

Cardinal Dolan’s suggestion that we, not the Bishops, should be the ones to confront our elected officials is the same poor excuse for doing nothing that the church has been offering for decades.

The faithful in California alone would amount to a huge advocacy for life. Instead we are subjected to once a year Walks down city streets blocked off from the public and on which no public official is confronted. Yet, every year there are planned activities by religiously affiliated groups to walk the halls of the capitol for sanctuary cities, mandated government provided vaccinations of all children, Early release for some prisoners and so on. Not that these are bad things. they are good. But if the church would lead its faithful on the truly basic moral issues of marriage, family and life, there might not be so much need for all these other financially wasteful trips. All they do is give legislators the opportunity to say, well, we listened when the citizens came here to speak to us, so we are giving them what they want which, apparently legislators are interpreting to be that we want some form of Socialism which contains abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and palliative care.

I, personally don’t know if its good that the media is now talking about the advancing idea of accepting Socialism or not. I do know it’s scary. With the deliberate denial of a moral basis for laws, only science, it’s no wonder schools, parents and quickly created non-profits are beginning to advocate for schools becoming mental health clinics rather than academic laboratories. Do we really want the government to set the standards for what is mental health? I hope not.

Please share this report with friends, family and social groups. WE so appreciate your continued adherence to the life issues. We are all tempted to just let it all go, it’s getting too big. But, the children are important, We love our children no matter their age. Your voices, your enthusiasm, your prayers and actions remain the one protection we can offer to humanity.

SPEAK UP FOR LIFE.

PS: We had a phone call from an Oklahoma woman on this year’s Roe v Wade Anniversary. She was desperately looking for help in trying to save her brother’s life from being terminated by doctors who insisted they had done all they could for him and it was time to let him die. The brother, age 64 was a patient in Mercy Hospital in Redding, Ca.

Unfortunately the call came too late. The doctors, despite the patient’s requests to be kept alive, removed his life support, moved him out of ICU and into a private room where he died the next morning.

 

California right to life Committee, Inc. 2977 Ygnacio Valley Rd #243, Walnut Creek, Ca 94598.
www.callifeadvocates.org/blog. Click on this link to our website and follow us throughout the year.


 
 
Take away God, all respect for civil laws, all regard for even the most necessary institutions disappears; justice is scouted; the very liberty that belongs to the law of nature is trodden underfoot; and men go so far as to destroy the very structure of the family, which is the first and firmest foundation of the social structure.
- St. Pius X, Jucunda Sane, March 12, 1904