Leaderboard

You'll recall that I posted in this thread about Sister Charlotte Walby, IHM, who was 106 years old. Well, dear Charlotte died last Thursday, after experiencing nearly 88 years of religious life (more, if you count her postulancy). She died peacefully, after a wonderful life.

I think it might help you to read Lumen Gentium https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html and know that lay people participate in the fullness of the priesthood given by Christ and that this, in itself, is a beautiful gift and a vocation and call. You will be closest to God in whatever your vocation is. Aquinas describes religious life as a more 'perfect' state, but the reality is: if the Lord is calling you to marriage, it is in THIS way that you will have greatest intimacy with him. If you decide to be a Sister/Nun just because it's traditionally viewed as the way of perfection to Divine love, and not because God is calling you, you will just be... well, bitter and angry and unhappy and probably not loving of God at all! Whatever God is asking of you is what He made you for and is how you will love Him best. If that's as a wife and mother, then that's where your intimacy with Him lies. That's where your complete gift of self will be. I've heard Catholic couples speak of how in the Eucharist, it's said 'This is my body, given up for you' and how for them, this is true in their spousal union. They each give of themselves constantly, to each other, to their children- but ultimately to God. The gift of themselves does not stop at the human person to whom they are giving, it goes further and transcends as a gift to God. God is still their first love and in many ways, marriage is a miracle! Graced by Christ. It's a sacrament. Then though, if the idea of marriage is unattractive to you, that might be God's way of showing you that you ARE called to Religious life. He often makes us more attracted to whatever we are called to. He shapes the desires of our hearts. But both the lay vocation and the Religious vocation, lived well and with love of the Church, are real and true paths to sanctity if they are lived in union with God.

⭐ ... and our inmost desires are often an indication of where our vocations lay.

They aren't cloistered. They have "little monasteries". Yes, in France and other places they still go out and beg, hitch a ride, etc. It is so secular in France that this is a way to engage the other person and bring Christ to them. They will get flights from Air France for free if on standby. I believe it is different for the men and women. Also, in Kansas the Bishop told them it is too dangerous to hitch hike, etc. so they aren't allowed to do it. Yes, most of our monasteries pretty much depend on the donations of others although we do buy some food. We really do rely and trust on Divine Providence. He always provides for his Spouses!

Her Sister is a Sister at the Monastery of the Infant Jesus in Lufkin, TX.

NOBODY receives the leftovers of God's love, or is "not as loved", because God does not love in measures, or unequally. There are no leftovers, or back burners. He does not love me more or less than he loves you. He doesn't ignore me because he's too besotted by someone else. His love for each of us is equally immense, equally unlimited and unconditional. If there's any doling out or leftovers of love, they come from us, not God! (unfortunately)

In light of what so many have said here--there would be nothing more contrary to God's will, or your call to holiness, if you attempted to live religious life if you were not called to it! In fact, no responsible community would accept you if they thought that you were not truly called. If you feel called to marriage, then that is probably where you belong; find a spouse who will be a loving and wise and prayerful companion on your mutual journey to God. What would be more beautiful than that?

Coffee

I am far from being any expert on human sexuality, and certainly am not a moral theologian. I hope no-one will be offended (...oh, can you pick up on the 1970s nun?) by my saying that I do not even understand much of what is in the media, or which I have heard discussed, about thirteen genders; who is bigender; how so many people are not identifying with the gender they originally were assumed to have. Yet I have read of children (some not even old enough for puberty) developing grave depression or killing themselves for not being accepted for being transgender. It is confusing, but a very delicate area. (Even the decision of the Church of England, to not allow church marriages for same-sex couples, is being treated as if it were hateful and a violation of civil rights. Yet too many Church positions in the past 50 years have seemed to be presented more as a matter of civil rights than with attention to theological detail. I'm of mature years. My generation, well-meaning though we were, seemed to forget salvation, deification, theosis - the only personal sin left was being judgemental, even if we were speaking in theory, not judging the state of another soul, which never would be appropriate.) I cannot say how this could be done, but there needs to be an overall stress on worship - on our human dignity, created in the divine image, deified through the Incarnation/resurrection. It sometimes saddens me when I read of religious communities who have a very selective emphasis on, for example, devotions for the unborn or sin of abortion. That does not mean I believe in abortion - though it can be a very complicated pastoral area - but that the focus is too limited, and I cannot help but wonder if someone who had an abortion might feel she was guilty of the unspeakable sin and could never return to the Church. I would not want a congregation to be founded to specifically focus on gender issues. It could be taken to mean that those with whatever these gender situations are are 'the enemy.' The Church is catholic - that 'all are welcome' should be 'a given.' (I'm so 'live and let live' that I wouldn't notice if someone in the next pew had two heads. I am not a priest, or a spiritual director or confessor, or a moralist - what might be appropriate in such a role could be either teaching documents or pastoral guidance with knowledge of an individual's background.) But we've all neglected the dignity of creation, the focus on worship instead of only human relations, and so forth for too long. I would not want to see a single matter (much as it confuses me entirely, and I can't keep track of who is a 'he,' 'she', or 'they', since 'they' was a plural for 65 years of my life) be a community's focus. Campaigning and even offering devotions against puzzling developments in relation to thoughts of gender could keep those of us who are not transgender, binary, homosexual, and so forth from seeing our own sins and distractions. Devotions entirely against gender ideas could drive those who believe they don't fit in to despair. I hope I'm making some sort of sense. I just do not think that a religious community should be established just to work against some very new and confusing idea. Preaching and living virtue and worship is part of all Religious life (or should be), and there is very little witness to vowed life left today. Vowed chastity, for example, has an eschatological dimension - the idea that life-long celibacy could be a charism only evolved in light of the resurrection, and recognition that there is more to our existence than this world, or living on through our children.

Are you even qualified to make such a diagnosis? What degrees do you hold? You can disagree, even strongly disagree, with someone without making what is highly likely unlicensed medical advice.

Maybe, but now it's about how Professor Nunsuch will be helping Jack get his doctorate in Proper Internet Discussion and Discord. The first 14 years will consist of two gruelling 14 hour lectures each day listing all the many ways she can't take him seriously.

Not the OP, of course, but I just wanted to say that I found this really encouraging. Thank you.

I'd be interested in your source for this. I'm a theologian, and AFAIK, the Church does NOT teach this, at least since Vatican II. There are certainly a lot of people around who express thoughts like the ones you cite ("undivided heart" etc.), but for all I know, official Church teaching makes it very clear that there is no state of life (as in marriage, single life or consecrated life) which is per se higher than another. You got this totally right with your impression that the Bible teaches we are all called to love God with all we are and have. Maybe you just read some older material which gave you a misleading impression?

I agree with Lou.,Whatever state God calls you to is the holiest way for you. Look at Zelie and Louis Martin. If they hadn't got married we wouldn't have Saint Therese. Have you visited or contacted any communities. Why not think about going on a vocations retreat. Quite a few communities run them. Keep your mind open.

Actually, that is *not* what the research shows. Here is an article about the largest study ever conducted. Coincidentally, it was published today. I'm gifting it, so you should be able to read it without a subscription. https://wapo.st/3TAKDyw

Thank you, @BarbTherese--I think I did misinterpret your message. Sorry--and glad for the clarification. We both seem to be on the "same page" (along with @gloriana35). I know a couple of very well adjusted and happy trans people who are colleagues, and they are fortunately accepted and supported, both personally and professionally (one just got tenure at my uni; the other has a professional staff position). I have also had a few trans students. I believe that knowing people who experience something entirely outside our own experience is the first step toward understanding.

Photos from Sister Margaret's first profession at Wrentham: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100064867895267

I agree with Gloriana. I am still in high school, and many of my friends have some form of "body dysmorphia", which is a health condition that usually leads to someone wishing to change their gender. (here is a greater explanation of it https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/body-dysmorphic-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20353938) They have also had really bad experiences with "Christian" people(one of my friends was in a cult for the first seven years of their life), but they are very curious about my experiences with religion, especially religious life. As a way to respect them, I use their preferred pronouns and names, but have been very upfront that I draw the line at true body changing(hormones, surgery, etc.) While I do not know if this is a sin or an offense against God, I do know that I have been able to reach people that probably would not have had any "good" experiences with Catholics/Christians if I had not been placed in their lives. This is just my two cents. Again, I am not a theologian or anyone with any true understanding of the matter. These are just my life experiences.

It remains fascinating to me, that even in retrospect, people remains hard-set in defending disproportionate responses and outright absurd actions taken during the said pandemic. Out of fear of death, people accepted to stop living. From a minute chance of dying, people still stand behind the destruction of fundamental freedoms of not only themselves, but forcing it on others. News Flash for everyone - WE ARE GOING TO DIE. All of us, in turn, in due time. Even the Lord died on the cross - none amongst us will be an exception to this rule. Worry about living, not dying; isn't there a passage or two in the bible to that effect?

I stand mainly with Didacus in his sentiments on this issue. We're already Communist in the US. Canada is even further gone. Interestingly, the very things that good people would describe as "insane" in the Western world are things that Russia went through decades ago, realized they were bad, and then moved away from. And, unsurprisingly, these same things are the very things that Russia already said they would do to influence the West, also decades ago, in order to tear down Western civilization. This chaos was all planned. So is Russia innocent here? No, of course not. But morally speaking, they have the high ground over countries like Canada and the US for those things that offend God most. There are very few, if any, countries in the world now that do not offend God with those sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance. If Russia attacked Canada, I would start moving to a bunker, because the US is soon to follow. Lastly, though Russia is not the good guy right now, it's good to remember there are several prophecies that say that God's deliverance from the "sins of Russia" (Communism) would also come through Russia.

A great woman erased from history The branding of the syrup was a tribute to this woman’s gifts and talents. Now future generations will not even know this beautiful woman existed. What a shame. The world knew her as “Aunt Jemima”, but her given name was Nancy Green and she was a true American success story. She was born a slave in 1834 Montgomery County, KY. and became a wealthy superstar in the advertising world, as its first living trademark. Green was 56-yrs old when she was selected as spokesperson for a new ready-mixed, self-rising pancake flour and made her debut in 1893 at a fair and exposition in Chicago. She demonstrated the pancake mix and served thousands of pancakes, and became an immediate star. She was a good storyteller, her personality was warm and appealing, and her showmanship was exceptional. Her exhibition booth drew so many people that special security personnel were assigned to keep the crowds moving. Nancy Green was signed to a lifetime contract, traveled on promotional tours all over the country, and was extremely well paid. Her financial freedom and stature as a national spokesperson enabled her to become a leading advocate against poverty and in favor of equal rights for all Americans. She maintained her job until her death in 1923, at age 89. This was a remarkable woman, and sadly she has been ERASED by Woke politics. https://www.legacy.com/news/culture-and-history/finally-a-proper-headstone-for-the-original-aunt-jemima-spokeswoman-nancy-green/

Yes, they are part of our family! They have a lovely place near Fanjeaux which is their centralized location. They have a house in Kansas.

Speaking of hell... "watch out that you don't fall in..." There's good advice if ever I heard it!

Just getting back to this... If 17,000 doctors got together to protest the vaccines, would that cause you even the slightest pause? Honestly asking. https://www.bizpacreview.com/2022/01/24/we-are-not-one-doctor-we-are-17000-doctors-dcs-defeat-the-mandates-march-opens-floodgates-1192322/ There are links in this thread to public declarations that were signed by thousands of doctors. The pharma companies are still legally keeping at least some of the ingredients of their vaccines secret. These same pharma companies are protected by law - they cannot legally be prosecuted if anything goes wrong. These same pharma companies publicly disclosed they made hundreds of billions of dollars off the whole ordeal. ?? This happened 18 months ago - not new by any standard in the age of covid: https://www.humanevents.com/2021/09/27/3000-doctors-scientists-accuse-covid-policy-makers-of-crimes-against-humanity/ In order to be convinced, do you need the majority of doctors in the world to agree? And the media? And the politicians who also made money on all this? What would it take, honestly, for your eyes to be opened?

So the FBI is now an conspiratorial source of misinformation. They believe that the COVID-19 virus was likely leaked from a lab. Which they announced on Twitter some days ago. How ironic considering they would have pressured Twitter to cancel anyone saying the same a few years ago. Has any of the multi-billion dollar pharma corporations released any of their COVID-19 vaccine trial data for independent peer review or does it remain effectively top-secret?

New novice at Benedictine Sisters at Mount St. Scholastica http://theleaven.org/nurse-accepted-into-the-novitiate-at-mount/

Putin?

One thing that troubles me about the transgender movement is when permanent changes are proposed for children as a solution to dysphoria. (like going beyond "puberty blockers and moving more towards hormones and surgeries that would cause things like INFERTILITY and such. A child can not offer consent and certainly wouldn't have an understanding of how important the possiblity of biological children might be to them in 20 years.) That is more my political view than my religious view. Also, if I had kids, which I do not, I certainly would not be sending them to a public school where the idea would be promoted to them that my little boy might not be a boy or little girl might not be a girl. If my child organically had struggles with that, I would need to figure out what to do with that. But having that promoted to them? Nope. Also, I do have a serious difficulty as well with biological men participating in women's sports, as if the only biological advantage they have is testosterone and lowering that hormone levels the field. And I also have a serious issue with this idea that everyone needs to "approve" of the trans person. Like, be treated decently, sure. Be approved of without reservation? I don't expect that in my own life. That's not realistic. And not necessary. People do not have to agree with my self-expression, religious or political views, life choices, relationships, etc. If people are so convince of their own gender as a trans person, they shouldn't need every other person to affirm them. I do believe is treating people compassionately and respectfully, of course. I have a trans friend, who is Catholic, although much less Catholic than before they became trans. (Meaning they don't reference the Church or God much anymore and I don't know if they go to Mass.) I use their preferred pronouns, and listen to their thoughts and ideas. I don't actually think this person IS a woman, but if they want to express themselves that way, it is not my busniness. I care about this person, they are an adult, and they deserve respect and freedeom. My basic view is in agreement with the WHO, which distinguishes sex and gender and doesn't pretend that having a self-perception of a gender actually changes someone's sex. I personally don't think a religious community with a campaign against gender issues is a great idea. In my view religious should be moreso about being FOR something than AGAINST something. Like for prayer, for service, for being a witness to God, for humility... I suppose you could say religious have been against heresy, but that had to do with problems in Christianity. I don't think expecting to remake the world in our likeness is going to succeed, but rather the "make disciples..." mandate. Just my food for thought.

Show me a President that plays hockey... and wrestles a bear. Until then... talk about golf amongt yourselves.

Snopes should check that claim!

I agree G35 ............... Active and direct involvement in seeking and presenting potential "practical solutions and alternatives" is an important and vital aspect of working with social problems of any kind. I do think that anything less is involved in one aspect only of a social problem - it is a negative (action) with nothing positive to contribute to the involvement, diminishing or even eliminating the problem itself, at least in potential anyway. A Is to diminish one life and to destroy another. A could even be described theologically as destruction of two lives presupposing abortion is grave matter and potentially mortally sinful. B Is to diminish one life; alternatively, theologically speaking, potentially destruction of that life.

Thanks very much for these links. I hope her cause will be opened soon and sister Clare becomes better known.

Do you honestly believe the US is completely innocent regarding Ukraine? Even Pope Francis has made comments implying that's not the case. If you read my comments, I'm not saying Russia is innocent, either. I'm just saying there have been many times they could have escalated, and they didn't. I'm not naive; I believe entirely that they will escalate at some point to the detriment of the whole world... We are Communist behind the scenes. We only have the illusion of freedom here. We no longer have real elections. We are very quickly losing personal rights and private property. Even the freedom of speech is up for grabs now, since we have crossed the line of compulsory speech, following Canada's lead. I'm just waiting for the rights we still have to a degree to be removed completely. I'm wondering why it hasn't happened yet. But I know it will happen, in God's time, and when He deems it necessary. Still there is hope, and even Divine Assurance that just when things are at their worst, and when it appears that the Church is all but dead, a great chastisement will wipe out those who are in power in the world now, and the world will be made right and good and once again pleasing to the King of Kings.

You clearly do not understand what communism is. And that is my final word here. There is no point in trying to reason with someone who says something as obviously incorrect as this.

Thanks very much!: Interesting to me that someone brings up that there have been many reasonable people arguing with me, and I refuse to acknowledge "the truth". But at the same time very, very few people here have acknowledged when I've brought up very good points. More than that, many of the things that I've said about all of this over the last 3 years is coming out as true. Some of the things that I posted that got me branded as a "conspiracy theorist" are now confirmed even by major media outlets like cnn and msnbc, and even vox and slate. Right now it's looking like Dr. Fauci was guilty of crimes that I said he was guilty of a long time ago. Some people are still holding onto the idea that the man is some kind of hero - despite the fact that it's looking like he may have had a personal hand (at least financially) in the creation of the covid virus, not to mention the "philosophical" crimes he committed by enforcing mandates and shutdowns. I have posted dozens of scientific papers, published research papers, doctors qualified statements, etc... The evidence present in all of it was refuted by calling those doctors "quacks". So there is now zero motivation for me to continue posting those. If you wanted to see the scientific truth about the covid shots, you could look them up for yourself. Do you want to? On the more important matter of Catholic morality, I posted a rather lengthy moral argument against the covid vaccines, after I was asked to do so, and not one person responded to it (including the requester), with any kind of response. Methinks this is because it actually registered with people as truth and they didn't want to admit it. Of course, a number of people here are just tired of the subject and don't want to even read it anymore. I also noticed you didn't answer my question. I responded with evidence, and you disregarded it. Those same doctors who are against the mandates are also against the shots. And not all the links I posted were to articles about the mandates. That's why I posted more than one. But you lump them all together as "not scientific"... sigh... Again, I ask, what evidence would it take for you to change your mind on this issue? If all "scientists" and the main stream media they pay off suddenly switched course and claimed that the covid shots were bad (along with reasons why they were not to blame for the harm committed against humanity), would you agree with them? Or do you have sufficient "scientific" evidence now in your own possession that you would disbelieve them? What if God told you, Himself, in a kind of experience or vision or illumination, that was completely convincing for a time, but then "scientists" explained it away a few days later? Would you believe the "scientists", or the vision?

The Gospel reading, we have heard today, the story of the Samaritan Woman or the Woman at the Well from St John, is a description of a moment in the life of Jesus. In fact, this passage contains the longest conversation with Jesus recorded in the Bible. It is extraordinary that this conversation occurs with a woman, a Samaritan woman, drawing water at the well in the heat of the day. Jesus and his disciples are making a journey on foot, walking from Jerusalem to Galilee, taking the shorter route through Samaria. When the disciples go into the city to buy food, Jesus waits by the Well of Jacob. A woman approaches with her water jar, normally they would not speak to one another. But Jesus is thirsty, and He asks for a drink. Jesus and the woman engage in spiritual dialogue that is both metaphoric and literal. “I can give you living water,” he says. Taking living water in its literal sense, she responds. “How? You have no bucket; the well is deep.” Jesus replies with poetry: “anyone who drinks the water that I shall give will never be thirsty again:.” Her comeback is spirited, and somewhat sarcastic: “ Sir, give me some of that water, so that I may never get thirsty and never have to come here again to draw water.” Jesus sets the trap. “Go, call your husband.” And when she says, “I have no husband,” and he counters, “You have had five husbands,” the woman responds, “Sir, I see you are a prophet,” and engages him in discussion of worship. “I know the Messiah is coming,” she says with confidence. Again, Jesus brings her up short. “I who am speaking to you, I am he.,” he declares. The Samaritan woman realizes that she has had an experience of God there at the well. She leaves her water jar behind. She gathers her neighbours – “Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done!” – and many come to believe that Jesus is truly the saviour of the world. But what about the time of day? Unlike Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night, in the darkness of disbelief, the Samaritan woman is an example of a faithful woman. She comes at noon – in daylight – because daylight signifies faith. Jesus sees her – “You’ve had five husbands” – and she in turn sees him for what he is, prophet and Messiah. Having had this theophany, this revelatory experience of God, the Samaritan woman goes on to become an enthusiastic evangelist, a witness to the transforming power of faith. She uses her voice and her experience to gather more believers to Jesus. “Come and see,” she says to the people of the city. While at first, they are convinced because of her testimony, she invites them to experience Jesus for themselves. It can be no accident that John chooses the Samaritan woman as the protagonist in the longest recorded conversation with Jesus. The Samaritan woman is a dynamic character, energized by her meeting with a stranger at the well at midday. In the passage from Romans, Paul writes of suffering that produces endurance, endurance that produces character, and character that produces hope. By her faith, her willingness to engage in spiritual dialogue and to believe in the abundant life that Jesus offers her, the woman at the well emerges from the image of thirsty, careworn outcast to hopeful evangelist. As Paul affirms, “Hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us” (Romans 5:5). Salvation springs from relationship with God; it is never bound by any particular deed, creed or ritual. Salvation happens when we attend to God's thirst and respond with personal hospitality. The Samaritan woman is a shining example of faith, of spiritual questioning, of experiencing the powerful presence of God. She is a voice of evangelism and witness. She might join the ranks of other faithful women who speak in the New Testament: Elizabeth, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Mary and Martha of Bethany, and Lydia of Philippi. Once we have been affected by a relationship with God, it automatically begins to flow into all our other relationships, making us not just believers, but almost irresistible evangelizers.

Wow, that's amazing!

"...usually after a whole heap of growling and grumbling.." Me, too. I'm not the Suffering Servant, I'm the Unwilling Servant. I relate to the parable of the father who told his older son, "I need you to work in the fields today," to which the son replied, "Why should I work in the fields? I'm not a hired hand!" Then the father told his younger son, "I need you to work in the fields today," to which the younger son replied, "Well, certainly! Happy to do it, too!" But the younger son didn't go to the fields and the older did. The moral of the story being, "Which one did the father's will?" ... I'm the older son - growls, grumbles, grimaces, grinds teeth, but eventually does whatever it is. I have not yet achieved St. Therese's equanimity...

The March for Life has taken place in Washington DC since 1973, never heard of hats or clothing with a pro-life message being sighted as criminal behavior in or around a government-funded building before.

Here's an overview/summary. https://www.oursundayvisitor.com/debating-hell-and-remembering-the-holy-souls/ You can also go to Fr. Rooney's FB page, but that's something of a rabbit hole - watch out you don't fall in! He posts about this topic three or four times a week, and has been for six or eight months. Some of the posts are quite long, and most posts have lots of responses. https://www.facebook.com/stmichael71

Actually, no, a nun or religious is a canonical state recognized by the Church. Our vows are "public" (even if done with no one there but the prioress and a witness). Our life is an ecclesial witness to the Church. We are not "private persons" even in the most hidden life a religious might live. Most contemplative nuns of the major orders have solemn vows and the order/congregation is not diocesan but papal right so falls directly under the Holy See.

I don't know the source of this quotation, but it sounds similar to a theological 'debate' ("rumble" might be a better word) I'm sort of following. There's a theological movement afoot called universalism, led by David Bentley Hart of Notre Dame University and John Milbank of Nottingham University. They contend that all people who die go to heaven because God, being all-loving, could not possibly condemn any of his children/creatures to eternal misery. The opposition is led by Fr. James Dominic Rooney, OP, who makes - among many others - the same argument as the quotation above. I say I'm "sort of following" the debate because it's all very complicated and convoluted, and I'm not trained at all in theology. But the quotation Lady Grey, Hot is looking for does represent the traditional Church view on the question.

I am 77 years old. I refused the jab on moral grounds and the physical harm they were doing to people. Everyone I know and every family member has taken the 'vaccine' and have come down with covid except me. Thanks be to God they are all still alive, but I pray every day for my children and grandson to be spared the damage/death this 'vaccine' has caused. I researched building up my immune system. In the past 13 years, I have not had any sickness, cold, flu, or covid. God is good!

Posted by the Sparkill (New York) Dominican Sisters (Congregation of Our Lady of the Rosary) today. I know Sister Marie. She was very good to me when I was in high school. She has been a very accomplished musician all her life, but she's just about stone deaf these days. Yet she keeps on keeping on! "Today, our very own Sister Marie Daugherty celebrated her 102nd birthday. We are so grateful for Sr. Marie’s life on Earth and her religious vocation to our Sparkill community. For the past 84 years we have the honor of calling Marie our Sister. Daughter, sister, aunt, friend, teacher, musician, prayer, healer, are some of the ways Sister Marie has generously shared her life with others. In between all her prayer, Sr. Marie enjoys resting in the Spirit, playing Scrabble with her good friend Chris, and sharing life with her Sisters. Sister Marie continues to be a woman making a difference each day."

This is delightful!

Executive time is very important! A president must stay informed!

Others say: People who oppose abortion don't do enough to support mothers and their babies/children. You are anti-abortion but you are not really pro-life." I reply: That's simply not true. 1. It's not really my responsibility to take care of other people's children. Since Adam met Eve, in every culture on the face of the earth, the parents are primarily responsible for their own children. Often, members of extended families also contribute to the care and feeding of children - grandparents, single aunts & uncles, siblings, cousins, etc. I've been the beneficiary of that kind of familial support myself. 2. But all working women and men do, in fact, contribute to the care, feeding, housing, clothing, and education of other people's children every day by paying their taxes, which are the source of government funds for WIC, AFDC, public education, free health care, etc. No one in America wants to see anyone else in America go hungry, or thirsty, or homeless, or uneducated, or unhealthy, so we allow at least three levels of government to take some of our hard-earned dollars and use them for the public good, including the good of other people's children. 3. Virtually every person in this country - religious or not - does, in fact, contribute to the care of other people's children regularly by contributing to back-to-school supplies drives, Thanksgiving food collections, Christmas toy drives, diaper drives, donations to scholarship funds, buying (unwanted and unnecessary) fundraising pizzas, popcorn, gift wrap, ready-to-bake pastries, and a vast array of other goods. 4. People who make the "Not X Enough" argument usually have no other viable argument to present, so they resort to this ad hominem argument.