This is a little update on some of the improvements and repairs that have been in progress on our parish property. Around the church our painters spent a lot of time cleaning and painting. Time and weather have had their toll on our church. One or two of the windows around the baptistry are not in good shape and will be replaced. At the rectory a lot of gutters have been replaced and cleaned out. The small octagonal roof on the top of the rectory will be repaired soon.

New curbing has been put in the exit driveway and throughout the parking lot some of the depressions in the ground will be repaired and cracks in the parking area will be filled in, hopefully, this coming week.

Re: 7 Eglatine Avenue. The property we bought three years ago has been sub-divided. The backyard of that house came far back and quite close to the baptisry and Gathering space. The subdivision now has a straight property line from E. Delaware Avenue to the Family Center. If you were to walk the dead end driveway off Elatine Avenue to the Church – look to your right and you will see a fence line. Imagine that fence line coming right up to the driveway and you will see how the property was divided.

The house is up for sale and some offers have been made. The Finance Committee chose a broker (we looked in our bulletin to see who had advertised in there over the past year and interviewed them).

I will have a financial report out within a week or two. The one that will be in the bulletin is a shortened version. A more detailed version is available and that will be in the back of the Gathering Area.

The report will show that we actually ran at a deficit this year. I spoke with the Finance Committee at our last meeting. Our parish is a responsible "Stewardship" parish that seeks to bring about the Kingdom of God through its Talents and Treasure. We alternate our emphasis on either one every other year. This year the emphasis would have fallen, and does, on Treasure. With the input and advice of the Finance Committee we will be having an Increased Giving Campaign. No one will be coming to your door or calling you up. I will do this by mail and perhaps one or two short announcements at Mass. It is simply a matter of expenses increasing but not the income (many of you face that reality often)… but I’ll go into more detail in the letter.

The community of St. James is rightfully proud of its property and the care that it receives. And you have been very generous when special needs were brought to your attention… such as your response to the need for new rugs and tiling in the church, little chapel and family center. You would remember that I wrote about the possibility of building a site with more classroom space (we have 800+ children in our programs). With the Finance Committee I will look over what we can do and what we cannot.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Baby Bottles: A warm and grateful thank you to those who picked up the baby bottles, filled, and returned them As of this date over $3,000 has been collected for Choice One and that will enable them to continue their work in helping mothers-to-be bring their children into the world.

This past week I spent a few days in Avalon, NJ at our Diocesan Convocation for priests. I was called upon to give a talk concerning future staffing of parishes… more specifically it was about staffing them with priests. There are just over 28,000 priests in the USA and 27% of them are retired. Around the late ‘60’s an article appeared in the NY Times that reported a unique event: it was a gathering of about forty or so priests of the diocese who were celebrating their 25^th anniversary of ordination. There were some marks of achievements that were apparent and noted (e.g. there were some monsignors in that class) – but what was unusual was the fact that not one of these priests had yet been appointed as pastor of a parish. It was not because they were unqualified – it was, simply, that as seniority went, they had not yet arrived! That was then – this is now: a priest might well be appointed pastor in his sixth or seventh year of priesthood.

The priests of the future (in our diocese) may find themselves as pastor of two or three parishes (it is already a fact) and splitting his time between them. It may be that several priests may live together and be responsible for several parishes. It may be that another person (Deacon? Nun? Pastoral Associate?) may be the hands-on leader of a parish with a priest as sort of a moderator. (Apart from the bishop and his secretary there is no priest who works at the Pastoral Center in a full-time capacity.)

If you were able to look at a church bulletin of thirty or forty years past it may have listed the Pastor, Associate(s), and School Principal on it’s cover. Look at almost any of today’s bulletins and you see it crammed with a large grouping of staff members. The word "staffing" is much more inclusive in today’s church.

Though an individual priest may tell you that the morale of priests is low he will most likely tell you that his is high. In fact, surveys of priests over the past twelve years or so constantly come up with the same findings: 80% and more of the priests are very happy in their work and would choose to do it again. 92% say that they feel fulfilled. In general if a priest leaves it is because he is unhappy (a marriage may or may not follow). A very small percentage leaves to get married to a specific person. No one has left the priesthood because of the sexual abuse scandal (they may be angry and disgusted – but they haven’t left because of it).

It seems we let the media and the disgruntled paint the picture of the life and journey of a priest. I don’t think you will find any higher percentages of any "work group" who can measure the satisfaction/happy rate to that of the priesthood. The divorce rate in the US is 50% - the rate of those who leave the priesthood does not even approach that percentage. Though celibacy certainly gets the general nod as cause for lack of vocations the studies simply do not bear this out.

"From the pew" we are informed that our preaching and our liturgies are our great shortcomings. We will need to develop new and more skills to guide the parishes of the future. In 25 or 30 years studies indicate that we will have less than 100 hundred parish priests in the diocese (we have 127 parishes) – though our number of ordinandi has increased over the past few years.

After one of our Sunday Masses a parishioner will say to me "you have the best job in the world"… what can I say? – I think he’s right!

 If you ever would have had the opportunity to interview church leaders who work with the youth in a parish you would ask "what the kids are (were) like?" It would not be unusual for the director to respond by saying some-thing such as: "they can be challenging" or "they will test you" or "they will push you to your limit!" But immediately after you get that answer the director will also say, "they are the best kids you would ever want to meet"… or "they are great kids."

In my short time here, our youth director and Deacon, Jim Palsir, has always put a lot of emphasized the second part of that question about youth and very, very little on the first part. As CRASH (Christian Recreation And Spiritual Harmony) celebrates its 25^th year at St. James Church, they will also be saying "good bye" to Jim – he is retiring from that part of youth work (he will remain as our Director of Religious Education).

Winter Weekends, Lock-Ins, Work Camps, and Good Friday Stations of the Cross have long been staple programs (among others) for the youth along with a dedicated adult staff to work in the program. Where many youth programs often have strong participation one year and almost none the next, Jim has kept a large number of youth coming year after year. For Jim, Monday evenings were for the youth – regardless of birthdays or anniversaries. He has fostered among the youth a spirit of hospitality – by the practice of acceptance for all who came to the meetings. The senior members of CRASH welcomed the newest members (the newly confirmed and visitors) and made them feel right at home – a mark of hospitality that is an especially appreciated practice and virtue. I have heard, several times, that families who are now members of St. James Church (people once from outside our parish) found their way here because their children heard of our CRASH club and wanted to join.

We can, with great assuredness, count these past years as years of great blessings. The greater measure of success is how those who have gone through the program have fared. How were they influenced? What good habits do they now carry with them as a result of the programs? Did they develop some lasting friendships? Did they get through some tough times (probably some of which are still known only to them) because of the presence of other youth and the adults? Did they realize and recognize the love of God in their midst? Do they know that St. James is still their home? The answers to those questions are now contained in the hearts of those who participated in the program.

I am sure they, as we, recognize the special gift and charism that the Lord has given him.

The future of the program now lies with new leaders: Quincy Walzer, Laura deSai and Kate Muessig. They can count on the support and guidance of Jim and the adult volunteers and our prayers.

God bless our Deacon Jim and his family. Ad mutos annos (to many more years) – and from this community – a heart-felt "thank you".

Last week my notes were about a father who discovered that his son was homosexual. The father was a straight-shooting Roman Catholic and this discovery was painful. He looked to "blame" someone – and turned up empty. Then his reading, the love for his son, and becoming acquainted with his son’s friends dramatically changed his thought and his life. With other parents the results are not always the same – often they are the opposite.

There is little doubt that homosexuality is one of the hottest issues in our midst. The Rev. Peter J. Gomes in his book The Good Book devotes a long chapter to this issue: The Bible and Homosexuality: The Last Prejudice. It is worth the read.

In the book: The Catechism of the Catholic Church the issue is dealt with in three paragraphs, #’s 2357 – 2359. In part it states: Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward people of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture,…, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible… Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided…(underlined emphasis is mine).

A number of years ago the Bishops of the USA put out a fine and pastoral approach to this issue Always Our Children.

Some of our parish members certainly have knowledge of this issue not from books or magazine articles but from lived experiences: either they are gay, a good friend or a son/daughter are gay. They can assure us that they have a very different understanding and they do not have the "luxury" to be uninvolved or to excuse themselves. The Catechism noted that "its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained." Does that leave it open to ask that if it were explained we might have a different perspective and thus a different answer? Is there a significant difference between the person who is truly homosexual and the person who is not but engages in homosexual acts? The Catechism states that "the number of homosexuals is not a negligible number (some estimates seem to hover around ten per cent). Are all homosexuals called by the church (or by God) to live a celibate life? Recall that love is not synonymous with sex… an insight we so often ignore or lack.

Various Christian Churches are struggling mightily with these questions. In many parts of the world the question is open and shut… is other parts people, because of their experiences, are asking more questions. All the priests are faced with these questions because they are so personal to so many people – and the people want to know how they stand with God? Is it a curse or, as Mr. Nelson noted in last week’s article, is it a gift?

I may have gotten myself into more hot water than I can stand here – but I don’t think we cannot at least reflect on it. We are One, Holy, Catholic (universal) and Apostolic Church. That is pure gift to us and we do not want to lose it – and we want all to be with us! Certainly God loves us all --- and our desire is that all will love God in return and walk in the path of the Lord.

The summer issue of Notre Dame Magazine has on the bottom of its front cover the words "The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name". Of course, it refers to homosexuality and this issue has six articles these alternative life styles. For many it is an uncomfortable subject. The editors noted that they write about what’s happening at ND – and this is what’s happening. Rather than ignore "the elephant in the room" - below is a severely shortened precis of one of the articles.

Thomas A. Nelson (in his 70’s?), a member of the class of 1953, wrote an article entitled: "God Gave Me a Gay Son… and I did not always think it a blessing".

Thomas had a thorough Catholic education and possessed a certitude about religion (Catholicism) and morality. He was always ready to defend his faith. He had six children (the perfect family). He did not know that his son was gay until his son, while at college, attempted suicide. His son was on the edge of despair because of his sexual orientation – and he could talk to no one about it. Through the years he had come to understand that his father did not approve of such a thing. Once, while at a family dinner, the father was asked what he thought about homosexuality. "…I knew the words of the magisterium (teaching of the church): ‘An abomination. Sex is reserved for marriage. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Natural law. Et cetera.’ Concluding with a short lecture on the virtue of chastity, I clearly conveyed, ‘End of discussion… next topic."

Though Mark exhibited none of the signs we assume are sure signs of homosexuality – he kept his secret to himself. After the attempted suicide, father and son were in a car – going home. The father asked Mark if he were gay and Mark said "I don’t want to talk about it." – the father had his answer and neither father nor son spoke for the rest of the trip.

"I realized today how little I knew. My level of understanding homosexuality encompassed little more than a now-defunct Freudian theory that a homosexual child is the result of a weak father and a domineering mother. As part of my selfishness, it gave me some immediate solace to place the blame for this tragedy on my wife. Of course, it’s her fault. A dominant woman! I thought. But I quickly found this strategy neither right nor helpful. It simply added stress to our marriage. Still, there was this weak father thing. I just couldn’t accept that idea. Maybe there was something I could do. I realized I needed more information."

The father read a lot and began to realize that this issue "was about my son and not so much about me."

The father learned that the suicide rate for gay people is three times that of others. "The risks of violence, discrimination, harassment and ostracism are all too common for the gay community…. Otherwise decent people often oppose with self-righteous moralistic railing, some of the most fundamental human rights for gays that the rest of us take for granted."

The father goes on to acknowledge that he met some of the finest people in the gay community. He also regrets the promiscuous immorality displayed by some in the gay community. At the end of the article he writes:

"Now, late in my journey, I find myself with more questions than when I started. Answers that I once was so sure of have fallen far short… Most of the answers have given me joy; a few have made me sad…"

If you were rummaging through some family memorabilia (no doubt stored in a closet, basement or shed) and you came across letters written by a great, great, grandparent who served in the Civil War or a grandparent who survived the Great Depression would you not be excited? Would it not be even more exciting if in that letter they described the times, or family life, or even some element of their faith?

We have something like that in a document entitled "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles." In it we have a description of how believers ought to celebrate (yes, that is the word they used) the Eucharist. It goes as follows:

Celebrate the Eucharist as follows: Say over the cup: "We give you thanks, Father, for the holy vine of David, your servant, which you made known to us through Jesus your servant. To you be glory forever."

 If there is anything that can get people all riled-up it would be a discussion of politics. When I get together with my family, my brothers and I are forbidden to discuss politics at dinner. I have found that to be a rule in many households.

Before professional sports, politics was the subject of most gatherings. There are many more distractions now – but the art of working for the common good and the protection of its citizens ought to take a high priority. The fact that throughout history people used its government for selfish and personal gain (corruption) ought to spur us to become more aware of what is happening and deciding what we need to do.

This being said, I urge you to be sure that you are registered to vote and that you do get out and vote. If you are registered then encourage those who are not to do so… especially our younger citizens: those in their late teens and twenties.

A state may vote in favor of one candidate by a few hundred thousand votes. That may actually discourage some someone voting. The argument, of course, is why bother? My vote would change nothing.

In Europe there are now twenty-five countries in the European Union. When each country voted to decide whether or not they should join the union the voting percentage was often 90%+. In a recent vote as to whether or not to approve a '‘constitution" for the European Union the turnout was approximately 20%! Besides the obvious conclusion that so few people have decided such an important matter the other difficulty is that there is no clear reading on the mind of the people. Does the constitution really reflect the mind of the people? Are the people caught in a great wave of apathy? Do they have a basic understanding as to what is at stake? What sort of support does such a constitution have?

In our land, since the election of 1960 (JFK was elected) and with one exception (Ronald Reagan) most of our presidential elections have been almost evenly divided. The percentage eligible voters who do go out to vote is not encouraging… and we are a country that has been at it for over two centuries! A much more inclusive voting percentage might give our politicians a better sense of the mind of its citizens. It would send out a message that all citizens are willing to hold them accountable for their actions. It may even change the outcome!

The bishops of the USA, in its publication Faithful Citizenship urges all Catholics to act responsibly and to vote. They support neither party nor endorse any particular candidate. They do not tell you how to vote… but they do encourage you to view the issues from a moral perspective and (as best you can) from the mind of the Lord. Register – vote!

 I don’t have a count of the many marriages I was privileged to witness over the years but I do remember that the first marriage I performed as a newly-ordained ended up in divorce within a year. As a young priest I was somewhat devastated for the couple seemed to have everything going for them. Where was the "they lived happily ever after"? Why wasn’t the grace of the sacrament sufficient to not just hold it together but to make it flourish? It’s not that I was unaware of divorce (it was at a much lower rate in that time) – but it was so close. Of course, over the upcoming years I would see a dramatic increase in divorces. In this age I read that the rate is about 50%.

If you took a look at the forms the couples are asked to complete, whether from the church or from the state, the question "Do you love one another?" has never been asked. It might be assumed that it is so, it might be reflected in the vows -–but it's not put down on paper. Perhaps the church and state know something here… but I’ll not go into that.

Here is some good news about marriage. If both husband and wife are of the same faith and practice their faith the odds of having a divorce drop dramatically. The University of Chicago analysts looked at the National Survey of Family and Households and found some interesting things. The survey measured both the personal and marital happiness of 5,232 married adults during the late 1980’s and they were interviewed again in the mid-1990’s.

Spouses in really unhappy marriage tend to separate. But among those unhappy marriages in which the spouses stayed together, two out of three reported that their marriages were "happy" five years later.

Among those who rated their marriage "very unhappy," 80% of those who stayed together reported that their marriages were "happy," five years later.

Those spouses who separated, divorced, and remarried were, on average, no happier than those who stayed married.

The analysts conducted focus groups interviews with 55 formerly unhappy spouses. The subjects reported that:

They overcame their problems simply by reorganizing their schedules to spend more time together and by seeking help from relatives or from counseling.

They resigned themselves to lower expectations from their marriages and sought companionship instead of intense romantic feelings and the "happily ever after" image of marriage.

They were able to avoid divorce by developing "a strong commitment to staying married." When they banished the idea of divorce, their marriages became happier.

If you want to make a good marriage better one of the great, unheralded and spiritual programs the church offers is Marriage Encounter. You can get info on M.E. 1-800-828-3351 or at www.marriage-encounter.org or family@dioceseoftrenton.org

Retrouvaille has an extraordinary success rate for healing severely troubled marriages. 1-800-470-2230, www.retrouvaille.cor and The Family Life Bureau.

If, at this time, you would rather just read: Faith and Family Magazine – www.faithandfamilymag.org

  Our "American Ancestors" – men and women of the 18^th century took on a great risk in forming a country that would be independent of England and establishing the protection of freedom(s). How that is interpreted and lived out over that past 228 years is for us to reflect upon, improve and preserve - future generations will be our judges.

  Recently, in California, the Catholic Church had to go to court to defend a policy by which they lived for years. The Supreme Court, in trying to resolve the issue defined what was a religious employer. They stated that it was: "Those organizations for which the inculcation of religious values is the sole purpose of the entity, that primarily employ only adherents of their own faith tradition, that primarily serve only people who share their religious tenets, and that qualify as nonprofit organizations."

To apply that definition to Catholic Charities, to Martin House, almost any Catholic school in an inner-city, St. Francis Hospital, to the Salvation Army (and others) would lead you to conclude that these organizations are not religious employers (reread the underlined passages). And recently the Salvation Army in NY has been sued for religious discrimination for "injecting religion into the workplace" (does that mean they were trying to direct derelicts to the Good News of Jesus?). Back to California: U.S. District Court did rule that the Boy Scouts’ organizational tenet of a belief in God makes them a "religious" organization. It would be a very interesting battle should the California Supreme Court clash with the U.S. District court over this… but I would be afraid of what they might come up with.

A friend of mine went down to Washington D.C. to see the WWII memorial. She writes that she is a baby boomer and one of the younger people in the crowd. Most of those at the memorial were WWII veterans and their wives. She wrote: "On the Pacific side of the memorial, a group of us gathered to read the words President Roosevelt used to announce the attack on Pearl Harbor: "Yesterday, December 7, 1941-- a date which will live in infamy-- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked." One woman read the words aloud: " With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph." But as she read, she was suddenly angry. "Wait a minute," she said. "They left out the end of the quote. They left out the most important part. Roosevelt said 'so help us God."

"You're probably right," her husband said. "We're not supposed to say things like that now." "I know I'm right," she insisted. "I remember the speech." The two shook their heads sadly and walked away. Listening to their conversation, I thought to myself, "Well, it has been 50 years. She's probably forgotten." But she was right. --- She went home and found the quote in James Bradley’s "Flags of Our Fathers" page 58.

Well, it’s in the history books and it’s on paper and it’s on movie film – maybe they ran out of room on the granite?

* * * * * Just a thought: Almost every night on the news we see horrible kidnappings and, in some cases, the murder of these people. With the reports we hear the words "Islamic extremists". I think we ought not to be so quick to judge these actions as extreme religious actions though that is what we hear. It is more likely to be extreme cultural actions. Religion has often been enlisted in defense of a culture and oftentimes it is a major part of a culture. I suspect it is more of a ploy to defend or preserve a way of life – not a way of religion. This is far too complex for easy answers. One does not look forward to a new series of "religious wars".

Jim Wallis is a person I have heard speak only once in my life but get a chance to hear his thoughts in his magazine Sojourners. His concerns focus on poverty, banning of nuclear weapons, the homeless: in short, on the social justice issues. He writes:

"…the conventional liberal political wisdom that people who are conservative on abortion are conservative on everything else is just wrong. Christians who are economic populists, peacemaking internationalists, and committed feminists can also be "pro-life." the roots of this conviction are deeply biblical and, for many, consistent with a commitment to nonviolence as a gospel way of life.

"…Virtually everywhere I go, I encounter moderate and progressive Christians who find it painfully difficult to vote Democratic given the party’s rigid, ideological stance on this critical moral issue, a stance they regard as "pro-abortion." Except for this major and, in some cases, insurmountable obstacle, these voters would be casting Democratic ballots.

"Ironically, the Republicans, who actively and successfully court the votes of Christians on abortion, are much more ecumenical in their own toleration of a variety of views within their own party. For example, fellow Republicans have not enforced anti-abortion orthodoxies on their rising new star, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose pro-choice views seem not to be a problem. Indeed, there is now a long list of pro-choice Republicans whose support the party seems to regard as crucial to its success. The Republican Party takes a very strong anti-abortion stance in its party platforms but then allows for a wide variety of opinions based on either conscience or pragmatic political calculations.

"…but to be a "pro-life" Democrat is to be a very lonely political creature in America, as U.S. Catholic’s Heidi Schlumpf explains… Former Pennsylvania Gov. Robert Casey, a pro-life Catholic, was denied the opportunity to speak at the 1992 and 1996 Democratic conventions. It didn’t matter that Casey was progressive on economic and foreign policy questions and an outspoken supporter of women’s rights; he didn’t have the right position on abortion. Former Ohio Rep. Tony Hall, an evangelical Christian, experienced similar discrimination as a pro-life Democrat despite being perhaps the most courageous congressional champion on issues of hunger and poverty."

Mr. Wallis then goes on to say what a political party could say "…what most Americans believe: that the abortion rate in America is much too high for a good, healthy society that respects both women and children. They could make a serious public commitment to actually do something about significantly reducing the abortion rate. Abortion is historically used as a symbolic issue in campaign, and then forgotten when the election is over…"

"But beneath the strong convictions felt by many Christians on abortion is something deeper than politics. The most thoughtful ones speak of "a consistent ethic of life" that derives from the heart of Catholic social teaching. It was Chicago Cardinal Joseph Bernadin who coined the phrase "a seamless garment of life" which clearly linked the "life issues of abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, nuclear weapons, poverty, and racism all as critical components. The Catholic bishops themselves teach against single-issue voting that focuses on only once concern, such as abortion, to the neglect of all the rest" Sojourners June ’04

America magazine noted that when J. F. Kennedy ran for the presidency a large number of people were against a Catholic as a candidate for presidency. Now that John Kerry is running for office the only people who seem to be against a Catholic running for the presidency are other Catholics.

Before Constantine was emperor of the Roman Empire the church was wary of politicians. Lists of professions that would bar a person from making gifts to the church, becoming a priest, or even being baptized included pimps, makers of idols, wrestlers, flute and zither players – and magistrates who "wear the purple" or do not deal justly. (I wonder how the flute and zither player got in there.) One document declares: "Anyone who is raised to a prefect’s authority or to the majistracy (sic) and who does not put on the justice of the gospel, let him be cut off from the flock and let the bishop not pray with him." Church leaders have been admonishing politicians ever since (but not always so wisely).

On the issue of abortion and politics, the range of responses from the bishops is wide indeed. Bishop Sheridan of Colorado believes that Catholics who even vote pro-choice should not receive the Eucharist while Bishop Mahoney of Los Angeles thinks that we need to continue to inform and educate but not deny the Eucharist.

I am against abortion not primarily because I am a priest, or because I am a Catholic – but first because I think (and believe) it is wrong. I agree that life begins at conception and my faith and vocation hold & teach that position. (That, by the way, makes my position somewhat opposed to that of St. Thomas Aquinas – but that’s another story.)

The nation/world/people has never come to a consensus or common agreement that life begins at conception. The church believes and teaches that life begins at conception. Others cannot make up their mind when life begins and they certainly have not presented any reasons or arguments why life does not begin in the womb. When does human life begin? Many believe abortion not to be wrong because in some manner or fashion they say life begins at another time – but they can’t say when. Because they believe it is other than at conception they see no evil. This is why Cardinal Mahoney (Los Angeles) says we need to inform and teach and convince.

The fact is that most people are against abortion on demand. It does not really fare well with a large majority of American people. Pro-choice advocates see problems so easily dispensed with by abortion (e.g. endangerment of a woman’s life, stress and psychological problems, poverty, etc.). In truth these are problems which neither political party has truly addressed (cf. next week’s bulletin).

If one believes firmly that life begins at conception it is logical that they stand against abortion. To see 2 or 3 million abortions a year being performed cannot be ignored. Logic would demand that.

Pro-choice people do not want to see abortion become, by law, a criminal act. They argue that if a person believes that there is not a human life in the womb then how can you force your will upon them? (Would there be any doubt that women will still seek out abortions even if it against the law? History definitely says "yes".)

Pro-life advocates ask how people cannot see what is so obvious to them. Pro-choice advocates argue fairly much in the same manner. There has not been much movement from one side to the other over the past ten or fifteen years.

Just as you cannot go into a store and buy almost any product that is not in some manner tainted by some unjust labor practice it is also difficult to give easy answers to complex situations… and we have some complex problems here. I’ve only touched on a small number here.

I think that the former cardinal of Chicago, Cardinal Bernadin, gave us a path to follow. He talked about a "seamless garment of life" as a way to look at our world. Abortion is not disconnected to concerns for poverty, homelessness, fair trade practices, health issues, etc. This vision can lead to practical steps of bringing down the abortion rate dramatically. More on that next week.

Within the past year I buried one of our parishioners who was a long-time resident of St. James Church. He was in Morris Hall in Lawrenceville for the last few years of his life – but came to church every Sunday he could. At the end of the liturgy and when his coffin was brought to the back of the church – they placed an American flag on it – a familiar gesture done for those who served their country in the armed forces. I went over to one of the nephews to ask what branch of service he had been in and he said his uncle was in the army. While in the army he served during WWII. I asked where and was told it was in the European theatre. I went on to ask if his uncle told him any war stories. He said yes. His uncle fought in the battle of the Bulge (this was truly high drama). He asked his uncle about it and his uncle said something to the effect "…I was a green and scared nineteen-old kid, holding a rifle and told to be on the watch…" He served well and he came home – as far as I am aware, in good health and unhurt.

• Joseph T. Nolan

Please remember the Bishop’s Annual Appeal and make your pledge/contribution. Information is in the Gathering Area. (To say "We are the Church" goes beyond parish boundaries – as so many of you are aware and live as such.)

 Fr. Munachi E. Ezeogu, cssp provides the following notes this day.

Paul Gustav Dore was a renowned artist of the 19^th century. He lost his passport while traveling in Europe and so when he came to a border crossing he explained his situation to the guard. He hoped that he would have been recognized by the guard and be allowed to pass. However, the guard said that lots of people try "to pull that trick" by claiming to be someone they were not. When Dore insisted he was the man he claimed to be the guard said "All right, we’ll give you a test, and if you pass it we’ll allow you to go through." The guard then handed him a pencil and a sheet of paper and was told to sketch several peasants standing nearby. Dore did it so quickly and skillfully that the guard was convinced he was indeed who he claimed to be. His action confirmed his identity and he was allowed to pass.

Christians have always had the problem to how to tell the world who they are. Sometimes uniforms have played a large part - such as women religious wearing special clothing, priests and bishops with their unique dress code, etc. However, at least in mainline churches, uniforms have become less popular. "Cucullus non facit monachum" ("the hood does not make a monk") has been taken seriously.

Of course, Jesus noted the mark of distinction of his followers: "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

…The great Mahatma Gandhi was asked about his view of Christianity. What he said could show us what probably is keeping two-thirds of the world away from the Good News of Christianity:

The greatest homage we can pay to the Christian faith is to live in such a way that through us people begin to have a glimpse of the unbounded and unconditional love that God has shown us in Christ.

Bishop’s Annual Appeal: The time to contribute or make a pledge for this year’s appeal is coming to a close. I invite you to consider making a pledge or a contribution to the Appeal. Each year a part of the appeal has come back to the parish and much of that money has gone for educational programs for staff (e.g. Spirituality Days at St. Elizabeth College) and for members of different ministries (e.g. we sent, and will send, people to workshops for Separated and Divorce ministry, RCIA, etc), for work camps for youth, and to meet some parish financial obligations. Information and envelopes are available in the Gathering Area of the Church.

Throughout the centuries the idea of "natural law" was often discussed and advanced as a way to proper living, i.e. "do this is because it is right and avoid that because it is wrong". In general, a "natural law" is something that is sensed or seen as obviously being "good" or "bad" and all people are in agreement about it. However, there is no common agreement as to what the "natural law" actually is – for there are at least 19 different "natural laws" proposed over the centuries.

No society can function without law (written, assumed, or unspoken). Add to this the element of religion and deeply-held beliefs and law takes on new dimensions in society. In some societies religion is the law or part of the law. In others, religion has been a reliable guide to the good order of the individual and society. And sometimes, religion has not served well.

In our local and diocesan newspapers there is an on-going debate about such things. First, know this: the bishop (any bishop) is not an ordinary citizen. He is a religious leader charged with proclaiming and defending the faith and values of Jesus and His Church – no easy task. He lives from a particular perspective and vision of life. And the politician is no ordinary citizen. He/she must, in the USA, meet with, know and understand, listen to the people and try to work for the common good of all his/her constituents – no easy task. Oftentimes almost ½ of the people they represent disagree with his/her visions and ideals. If a person wins an election with 55% of the vote or more it is (almost) considered a landslide. How could we not expect some conflict?

When it comes to religious values – when do they apply to the law of the land? I am relatively sure that, as a whole, I would not want Islamic law, or Hindu law, etc to be applied to my life. But there are times when some of their laws are applicable to my life. Such laws might be "do not steal," "do not kill," or "do not bear false witness." If a Muslim or a Hindi would demand "you must not do such things" I would find it most appropriate. If a bishop says "all people, regardless of their faith, must be at church on Sunday" - that is not in the same category or value as if he taught "thou shall not kill." "Thou shall not kill is a Catholic religious value – but is it not also a universally recognized value?

I think a good politician accepts or rejects a law not because the Church says they must but because he/she is convinced of the value of the principle in which he/she believes. (The bishop, along with many others, cannot understand how a person could personally hold a universal value and yet not stand up for it.) Any position one takes brings with it the responsibility of not just stating the case but also of explaining, clarifying and convincing the other. Bishop George Ahr (bishop of Trenton many years ago) taught his students and his priests to make judgements not on the basis of "who said it" or "how you feel" – but on the basis of the strength of its merits.

It is no easy task to be elected. It is an impossible task to please all. No one lives in a society that upholds all that one holds dear. The Lord Jesus Himself taught that weeds grow with the wheat – and it won’t be settled until at a later time. It is almost impossible to buy anything that does not bear the taint of some injustice. But it does not mean that we do not continue the struggle for justice and equity. It does not mean that we stop trying to protect the innocent or upholding the rights even of the criminal.

Of course everything of which I write in this article is more complex than how it may appear on this page… I just wanted to get you thinking about things.

Why did God not give you some other mother? A: We’re related.

A: My mom has always been my mom and none of that other stuff.

A: My grandma says that mom didn’t have her thinking cap on.

What’s the difference between moms and dads? A: Moms know how to talk to teachers without scaring them.

A: Mothers don’t do spare time.

A: Just her children.

HAPPY MOTHERS’ DAY!!!