Animal welfare:
Important to be responsible stewards

		Making Sense  Out of Bioethics  Fr. Tad  Pacholczyk

Sometimes sincere people concerned with protecting innocent human life will express sentiments along these lines:

"Animal rights advocates are eager to protect all kinds of animal life, but seem to ignore the most important animal of all, the human animal. They are willing to save the whales, but abort the humans. Protecting animals can never be as important a task as protecting young humans from abortion, embryonic stem cell research, or other forms of experimentation."

Such a viewpoint, though fundamentally correct, should not be taken to signify that animal abuse in our society is an ethical issue that we can forget about. Rather, concern for exercising proper stewardship over animals ought to be a balanced part of a broader concern to avoid exploiting the vulnerable, wherever they are encountered.

The Catholic Church recognizes how man holds a special place in creation, while remaining an integral part of that creation. Made uniquely in God's image and likeness, he still belongs to the animal kingdom. Feet on the ground, head looking up to the stars, man exercises a limited dominion over the world and over the remainder of creation, including the animal kingdom.

He perennially faces the question of how to properly exercise that dominion, which is not an absolute right of domination over God's creation. He is called to reasonably use, rather than abuse, the powers he has received.

To be precise, we should not speak of animal rights but of animal welfare. Animals do not have rights in the way that humans do. Animal welfare means that we recognize that animals can be used for reasonable purposes, but should not be abused.

Foie gras discussion

I was recently invited to participate in a press conference on a particular form of animal abuse. Rows of TV cameras assembled at City Hall in downtown Chicago to hear a panel of speakers encourage city council members (and the mayor) to uphold a recently-passed ban on serving foie gras in Chicago restaurants.

The production of foie gras involves the repetitive forced tube-feedings of ducks and geese. These animals have a pipe inserted into their throats to pump large quantities of food into their stomachs. This causes the animals (and especially their livers) to balloon to many times their normal size. From the enlarged livers, a delicacy in the form of a creamy patè can then be prepared for customers in upscale restaurants. As liver function and other organ systems become compromised, the bloated animals become diseased and experience considerable suffering.

I was asked to give a statement about the ethical concerns raised by the mistreatment and industrialization of these animals. Speaking alongside a Jewish rabbi, the president of the Humane Society, a representative from a group called Farm Sanctuary, and several others, I found myself in the midst of an unusual gathering of people from widely different political and religious perspectives.

The experience reminded me of how the Catholic Church is uniquely poised to speak across many societal strata and participate in many interrelated levels of ethical exchange in our culture.

In my comments, I stressed that the proper care and stewardship of animals should sensitize us not only to their weakness and vulnerability, but also to the vulnerability of our brother human beings.

'Disordered desire'

Interestingly, Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, once addressed the subject of foie gras explicitly during an interview with a journalist: "We cannot just do whatever we want with them . . . Certainly, a sort of industrial use of creatures, so that geese are fed in such a way as to produce as large a liver as possible, or hens live so packed together that they become just caricatures of birds, this degrading of living creatures to a commodity seems to me in fact to contradict the relationship of mutuality that comes across in the Bible."

"Animals too," he stressed, "are God's creatures and even if they do not have the same direct relationship to God that man has, they are still creatures of His will, creatures we must respect as companions in creation."

When I gave my statement at the press conference, I mentioned that when I had trained as a research scientist at Yale, I often had to deal with questions about research ethics, and about the use of animals in laboratory settings.

I pointed out that while animals may be sacrificed or used humanely for legitimate purposes, such as obtaining food and clothing, or advancing serious scientific research, the use of animals to produce foie gras is clearly in another category altogether. It is neither a humane nor a reasonable use of animals.

The production of foie gras is instead oriented toward the satisfaction of a disordered desire, a disturbing desire to satisfy the human palate to the point of promoting serious animal mistreatment. Some old Catholic manualists might even advert to the term, "morose delectation" to describe the root problem of a disordered palate that promotes other disorders.

Responsible stewards

Animals are an important part of God's creation, and we must live in an ordered way with them, exercising a responsible stewardship of the gift that they really are. Even those animals used for legitimate purposes ought to be treated humanely with reasonable housing, care, food, companionship, and pain control if needed.

Animals are a vulnerable part of creation, and that vulnerability should continually prompt us to examine our decisions on how we relate to them: are we exercising a reasonable and ordered stewardship, or are we exploiting their vulnerability for selfish and disordered ends?

To the extent that we are attentive to the weakness and vulnerability not only of our brother human beings, but even of our friends in the animal kingdom, we decide the sort of society we will become: either a society marked by respect, kindness, and reason; or one that is marked by various forms of barbarism.

Fr. Tadeusz Pacholczyk earned his doctorate in neuroscience from Yale and did post-doctoral work at Harvard. He is a priest of the Diocese of Fall River, Mass., and serves as the director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, Pa.

Reflections: On election 2006 referenda

		Eye on the  Capitol  John Huebscher

Some parting thoughts as we say farewell to election 2006:

Neighbors think alike. As I scanned the vote totals for the constitutional amendment to define marriage, I was struck by how much the debate and the outcome in Wisconsin mirrored that in our neighbor to the east - Michigan.

The states are similar politically. Both are in the Upper Midwest. Both have voted Democratic for statewide office in recent years. Both have a relatively high percentage of regular churchgoers. Both have an above average percentage of Catholics.

	Related article: November 16, 2006 edition: • State referenda: Both pass, to mixed response

The language of the amendment on our ballot was very similar if not identical to that voted on two years ago in the Automobile State. In both states, opponents expressed concern over the impact of the "second sentence." Both states had well funded campaigns.

And the outcome was nearly identical. Both states approved the measure by a 59 percent to 41 percent margin. In both states nearly every county voted yes. In Wisconsin the count was 71 to one; in Michigan 81 to two.

In both states, the counties that opposed the amendment were those that included major universities. The margin in each state's major metropolitan area - Wayne County (Detroit) and Milwaukee County - was 55 percent to 45 percent in favor. The vote "out state" in both places was about two to one in favor. Finally, exit polls suggest that Catholics supported the amendment at about the same rate as the rest of the electorate.

The more we talk about the death penalty, the less we like it. The 55 percent to 45 percent vote in favor of the advisory referendum on the death penalty also reflected the national conversation on the topic. Most polls on the death penalty show strong support of 70 percent or greater. However, as one discusses the issue and invites respondents to consider other options, support drops to nearly 50 percent or less.

We saw that pattern play out here. Polls on the referendum last spring showed support of close to two to one or more when factoring in the undecided. As the campaign progressed, support for the death penalty dropped. By Election Day it was down to 55 to 45. Moreover, in one pre-election survey, when offered the option of life in prison without parole, the respondents opted for life in prison by a narrow margin.

Finally, even as they approved the advisory referendum, voters were electing a governor and legislators who oppose enacting a death penalty statute. Consider the case closed for the time being.

Referenda can engage citizens in public conversation. While there was speculation that the referenda issues would serve to draw out "socially conservative" voters inclined to support a certain kind of candidate, the results show that the electorate is more complex. Voter turnout was up overall and young voters participated in greater numbers than in past mid-term elections.

Further, while many feared that the referenda discussions would generate more "heat than light," the public face of the campaigns on the issues and the public debates and discussions were civil and informative.

Like any election 2006 had its lessons. And they offer food for thought.

John Huebscher is executive director of the Wisconsin Catholic Conference in Madison.

Sexual complementarity:
Authentic love a two-way street

		A Culture  of Life  Christopher West

The body is the revelation of the person, as John Paul II puts it. This means that all our differences as men and women (emotional, mental, spiritual, as well as physical) were created by God to complement each other, to unite us in life-giving ways.

Because of sin, however, we often experience these differences as the cause of great tension, conflict, and division. Indeed, history tells the tale of the chaos that original sin has brought into man and woman's relationship.

Initially, Adam received Eve as the true blessing and gift from God that she is. But after sin, he was blaming her for all his problems.

He even faulted God, saying, "The woman you put here with me - she gave me the fruit" (see Gn 3:12). It's all her fault. How often do men, even today, blame and resent women for their own problems?

Furthermore, women throughout history have suffered greatly because of the dominance of men. "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gn 3:16): This is not God's intention. This is a result of sin. But some men, refusing to face their own sinfulness, even try to use various Scripture verses to justify their dominance.

'Two-way street'

But let's remember that it's a two-way street. Fallen woman's "desire for her husband" has also been a source of angst for men. While men often dominate and manipulate women for their own physical gratification, women often use their "feminine wiles" to manipulate men as well perhaps more for emotional gratification. As the common observation goes, men will use love to get sex, and women will use sex to get love.

It's important to realize that even though we may be tempted to think men's perversions are uglier than women's, each, in its own way, is a serious distortion of authentic sexual love.

Both treat the other not as a person created for his or her own sake but as a thing to be used for selfish gratification. Such gratification at the expense of others always causes serious troubles.

While an echo of God's original intention remains in our hearts, this distorted way of relating has become our lot. Tragically, for many people, it's all they know. They simply accept it as the norm. After all, "men will be men," and "women will always play the temptress," right?

'Original intention'

Wrong! Christ came to restore God's original intention of love in the world. This is the good news of the Gospel. Through an ongoing conversion of heart we can experience the redemption of our sexuality.

This is what Christ was calling us to in the Sermon on the Mount when he said: "Everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Mt 5:28). Of course, his words apply to men and women equally.

As if to emphasize the seriousness of this sin, he immediately added, "If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out . . . And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off . . . It is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell" (Mt 5:29-30).

Hell is the absence of God's love. So is lust. That's why it's so serious.

So what are we to do? If we look at the common human experience, it seems that everyone is condemned by Christ's words. That's true. But let's remember, Christ came into the world not to condemn us. He came to save us (see Jn 3:16-18).

Christopher West is a research fellow and faculty member of the Theology of the Body Institute in West Chester, Pa. His column is syndicated by www.OneMoreSoul.com and reprinted from his book Good News About Sex and Marriage: Honest Questions and Answers About Catholic Teaching (St. Anthony Messenger Press).

In God's hands:
Facing inevitable choices at the end of life

		Grand Mom  Audrey  Mettel Fixmer

Today's senior citizens seem to be blessed with many more ways to spend their final years than we ever dreamed possible. Certainly far more choices than our parents had in their generation.

We started out our retirement years filled with plans for travel, better homes (and gardens), more time for our hobbies and friends, more time to volunteer for our church, and more time for entertaining. For me it was a grand continuum of "overloading," trying to do it all.

Alas, those active retirement years flew by all too quickly. Now as our bodies refuse to keep up with our minds, we have to face the inevitable. We are growing old. When we read the obituary column every night, we soon realize we have passed our "sell by" date and must face the inevitable.

Changes in life

A friend of mine once told me that the thing that was so scary about learning she was pregnant again was the "inevitability" of it all. You would carry the baby full term, you would suffer labor pains, bring the child into the world, love it and care for it for the rest of your life. You were powerless to change anything about it.

Similarly, we seniors in our 70s and 80s are feeling the inevitable end of life. Bob and I recently made the decision to sell our "dream house" because it has become too much to handle. The huge lawn is too costly to have mowed every week, the many gardens I planted so enthusiastically are now sources of frustration as they are overridden with weeds, and all that kitchen equipment I stored in the basement for "entertaining" is just collecting dust, to say nothing of the thousands of Bob's books in his office. It will go on the market in spring, after we have time to shed tons of materials.

Next step

The good part is that in today's world it's not a matter of choosing which of our kids to live with, but rather which "senior village" we want to go into. These villages begin with buying a home (downsizing) for a reasonable price with the guarantee that when you leave you will not have to sell it, but rather that they will buy it back at anywhere from 50 percent to 90 percent of your original cost. These homes belong to an association that agrees to do all of the outside landscaping, painting, snow removal, etc. You pay a monthly fee for that service, and in some cases the fee takes care of your taxes as well.

An added benefit is that most of these places include health care on an as-needed basis. They include Community Based Retirement Facilities (CBRFs) and nursing care, where one is guaranteed to be admitted when needed. Bob and I have had to accept the fact that we have no such place within our parish of St. Joseph in Fort Atkinson, so we are now looking into nearby towns. The thought of leaving here makes us sad. We have watched our friends go through this and eventually come to love their new location, so we have hope.

Gift of the Holy Spirit

At this point our prayers are asking to receive the gift of discernment. Discernment. That's what they now call the gift of the Holy Spirit that was called "wisdom" in our day. One dictionary defines discernment as "The art of discerning . . . a quality of skill of discovering, especially what is hidden or obscure . . . keenness of insight."

We must leave it in God's hands. He has pulled us through lots of other troubles, so we have the faith we need that He will guide us.

"Grandmom" likes hearing from other senior citizens who enjoy aging at P.O. Box 216, Fort Atkinson, WI 53538.