From His Sacred Heart to Our Changed Hearts
On Friday June 24, 2022 the Church observed the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The Solemnity takes place on the Friday after Corpus Christi Sunday (i.e. Friday after the 2nd Sunday after Pentecost).
On the other hand, the specific day of June 24th is typically reserved for the Solemnity of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist. But this year, the Solemnity of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist was moved one day back to June 23rd (in order to observe the Sacred Heart on Friday).
To have the Friday after Corpus Christi Sunday (a moveable day depending on when Easter falls) fall precisely on June 24th does not happen often. In fact, the last time this occurrence took place was in 1960.
On June 23, 1960, the Solemnity of the Nativity of John the Baptist, the FDA approved the sale of the first oral contraceptive.
Does anyone think that the Supreme Court Decision of Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization coincidentally fell on June 24, 2022 (the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart) - the only other modern occurrence in which the Sacred Heart fell on the 24th and the Nativity of John the Baptist on the 23rd? I certainly do not see it as a coincidence, but as Divine Providence.
The Solemnity of the Sacred Heart beckons us to imitate Christ who is meek and humble or heart.
If God himself is meek and humble of heart, how much more should we be as His beloved creatures?
This question should convict everyone of us. It certainly convicts me. We all are inclined to pridefully idolize ourselves and other human structures. We all fall short of imitating Christ who is meek and humble of heart. But today’s Supreme Court decision beckons us to see this narcissism specifically made manifest in the cultural disposition towards abortion.
Why use such strong language? Unfortunately, the truth of the Sacred Heart unmasks the sins of pride and greed in our society - and the pro-abortion stance is the example we have been given by current events.
Why pride and greed? It is incredibly arrogant, prideful, pretentious, and turgid to think the following:
A person’s human value is dependent on the convenience of another
An individual’s desire for convenience dictates the life and dignity of another
A woman’s inherent gift by the Creator to uniquely participate in His very act of creation is somehow a ‘step back for women.’
Humanity can make science a deity when it suits goals of virtue signaling and self-affirmation (i.e. the pandemic), but dismiss and contradict science (i.e. the existence of another independent human in the womb) when it threatens their hubris and ‘autonomy.’
Truly, I never understood the logical incoherencies, inconsistencies, and moral contradictions of this pro-abortion position in America. When I say ‘pro-abortion position’, this of course does not pertain to women who had an abortion because they felt afraid and alone. They need our compassion, support, and healing love as members of Christ’s body. Moreover, arguments made for abortion in the case of the health of the mother should first be contextualized within the Church’s principle of double-effect, for clear distinctions are necessary to navigate through the particular matter of the mother’s health.
When I use the phrase ‘pro-abortion position’ in this article, I exclusively refer to the bullet points mentioned above. With this in mind, we can see that when it comes to the ‘pro-abortion position’, the excuses are, quite frankly, logically pathetic. There is neither a coherent nor consistent framework within the pro-abortion position.
Based on what I have seen on social media, here are some questions and observations that further reveal these logical contradictions:
How can one say ‘follow the science’ and then cite medieval writers for scientific evidence of when life begins (spoiler alert: science has progressed significantly since the Middle Ages…)?
How can one believe that the dignity of women must be maintained while also rejecting the very characteristics that make the feminine sacred? How does undermining the feminine beauty of maternally generating life bring about ‘progress’ for women? How is a mother killing her child (at times in order to adhere to arbitrary capitalistic and consumeristic expectations) ‘social progress’?
How can one care for the vulnerable when they advocate for killing the most vulnerable on the basis of convenience?
To rephrase the above question: How does the angry insistence to emphasize the dignity of all human life (the poor, the immigrant, etc.) not move one to support the dignity of the most vulnerable human life?
I cannot thoroughly deliberate over all of these questions, but I will address aspects of the last question due its prominence on my recent social media feed. The last question responds to an absurd argument that I have seen on social media: In response to the Supreme Court decision, I have read posts that exhume an angry insistence to promote the dignity of all human life (the poor, the immigrant, etc.). In many ways, it mirrors the slogan ‘All Lives Matter’ used by others from two years ago…a slogan that I guarantee the same individuals argued against.
These angry critics berate pro-life advocates for ignoring other social issues pertaining to the vulnerable (which sadly is at times a legitimate criticism - hence why I recommend people read Bishop Gainer’s Letter). Prioritization should not result in exclusivity. Like the Bishop, I have communicated that point in many ways and have applied that principle to the moral evil of abortion. In that communication, I often received bizarre criticism for doing such - tragically revealing the political tribalism (and idolatry of political parties) that we find in American Catholicism today.
I only mention this point because I am willing to give some people the benefit of the doubt with their angry posts. Besides having empathy and compassion for people whose anger is, understandably, a reaction to the horrible wounds of their past - I also have empathy for some who simply might be expressing their frustration towards a large number of Catholics who worship at the altar of a political party. As a priest, I share in their frustration towards such blatant idolatry.
With that being said, I must stress that this myopically exclusive disposition (and political idolatry) from some pro-life advocates can never change the reality that the unborn are indeed the most vulnerable. It does not change the need to prioritize our efforts to protect such people. It does not justify the pro-abortion advocate’s hypocrisy - to ignore, undermine, and even dismiss the most vulnerable in our society - the unborn.
So to summarize my point in blunt terms: the pro-abortion position, which I defined earlier, is (1) against science, (2) against ethics, (3) an assault on the intrinsic relationship between the beauty of motherhood and femininity, and (4) serves as a blatant contradiction of all political/philosophical logic that pro-abortion advocates typically express.
Why mention all of this? The Solemnity of the Sacred Heart sheds light in the dark room. It highlights the cause of such logical absurdity - why the pro-abortion position has no regard for logic, science, or ethics. The Sacred Heart reveals that the pro-abortion position is nothing short than the sin of pride.
This, however, beckons the pastoral and relational question we all face. What role do we play in the healing and changing of hearts? This matters because we all need healing. We all need to be known. Our wounds, the wounds of others, and the wounds of a broken society do not need to drag us down into the muddy hatred of ideological isolation.
Because of this truth, simply calling someone’s contradictions a manifestation of pride will not heal and change their heart. It might be a tempting way to negatively affirm yourself with a Calvinistic flavor (i.e. “I’m holy because everyone else is a wretch”). But again, it will do nothing to heal and change their heart, my heart, or your heart. Making people our enemy in place of sin and death will not heal (c.f. Ephesians 6:12). My arguments in this blog post can hopefully change some minds, but my arguments cannot ultimately heal and change hearts. One Supreme Court decision cannot transform a prideful heart. No political victory can bring true healing.
If none of these things heal and change us, what is it in our life that can?
That is why it is Divine Providence to have this moment on the day dedicated to the Sacred Heart. God has given us the road map to healing: Himself. The wounded heart of Jesus heals us. Only the Wounded Healer with His heart can heal.
In the end, this healing by the Sacred Heart configures our hearts to resemble His - and therefore changes us. When we give Jesus permission to dwell in the deepest well of our soul, our hearts are healed and therefore change. It is this healing event that leads to change. From that change, we invite others to experience that same event - an event that discourages isolation - but compels us to reach out and receive the presence of others, not matter how exposed and vulnerable it leaves us.
Here is where we find our identity - our mission - to let Him in our hearts, and in response, point Him out to others.
In that transformation, we find that our identity and mission is like John the Baptist - to be friends of the Bridegroom who point others to Him.
During this time, let us pray with humble thanksgiving and petition to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Let His Heart melt our stony hearts. Only then will we know what to do when we encounter a person who viscerally advocates for a grave evil like abortion. With new hearts configured to His Heart, we can receive their presence with compassion, offer healing, and through such point them to Christ - for we now share His love and affection for their humanity.
“O God, who in the Heart of your Son,
wounded by our sins,
bestow on us in mercy
the boundless treasures of your love,
grant, we pray,
that, in paying him the homage of our devotion,
we may also offer worthy reparation.”
From the Collect for the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus