Carl E. Olson's Blog, page 332

If pro-abortion politicians are willing to shut down the government...

... over the funding of Planned Parenthood, shouldn't Catholic bishops be willing to shut down pro-abortion politicians from receiving Holy Communion?

First, backing up a bit, there is this on the USCCB site:

WASHINGTON (April 14, 2011)—In an April 13 letter to the U.S. House of Representatives, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston urged Congress to vote for a resolution to ban federal funding of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. In the midst of a budget debate involving shared sacrifice and hard choices, Cardinal DiNardo wrote, "Whether to fund the largest abortion network in the country is not one of those hard choices."
          
Cardinal DiNardo is chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).
          
Cardinal DiNardo cited a March 4 letter to Congress from Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, California, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, which expressed the hope that "funds now provided to organizations that perform abortions… will be redirected to meeting the basic needs of the poor."   Cardinal DiNardo offered additional reasons for supporting H. Con. Res. 36:

• "First, it is indisputable that Planned Parenthood Federation of America is by far the largest provider and promoter of abortions nationwide, performing about a third of all abortions (332,278 abortions in Fiscal Year 2008-9).  Abortions also account for over a third of Planned Parenthood's income.  The organization has aborted over 5 million unborn children since 1970."

• "Second, the organization's involvement in abortion (now including chemical abortions using RU-486) has substantially increased in recent years, and its provision of other services such as prenatal care and adoption referrals has declined markedly.  Now the national organization insists that all affiliates provide abortions by 2013, a mandatory policy that has led at least one affiliate to leave the organization."

More on the USCCB site, including a link to Cardinal DeNardo's letter.

One little problem, to state the obvious, is that the pro-abortion party is in power and was/is apparently quite willing to shut down the federal government in order to keep the money flowing to abortion providers. An April 11th piece on Politico.com reports:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) had spent more than an hour meeting with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office, inching toward a deal to avert a shutdown, but he kept insisting that it include a prohibition against federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

That was a nonstarter for Obama. As the meeting was breaking up, Vice President Joe Biden told the speaker, in no uncertain terms, that his demand was unacceptable. If that became the deal breaker, Biden said, he would "take it to the American people," who would presumably punish the GOP for shutting down the government over an ideological issue.

James Taranto of WSJ comments:


A news story in Saturday's New York Times begins by observing that "the emergence of abortion as the last and most contentious of the issues" in the budget dispute "highlighted the enduring influence of social conservatives within the Republican Party." It seems to us that this gets it backward.

The Times, of course, views "social conservatives" as deviants and their opponents as normal--note how they're seldom even termed "social liberals." But if you look at the question from a more neutral point of view, there's no escaping the conclusion that Democrats are more dogmatically pro-abortion than Republicans are antiabortion. It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, who were willing to shut down the government over subsidies to Planned Parenthood.

Why? No doubt there is an element of cynical posturing (and that's true on both sides). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, for instance, said in a statement Friday: "The Tea Party is trying to sneak through its extreme social agenda. . . . They are willing to throw women under the bus, even if it means they'll shut down the government." Reid used to be against abortion; in 1999 he was one of only two Senate Democrats to oppose a nonbinding resolution saying rah-rah to Roe v. Wade. It's always possible that his conscience led him to the politically expedient position, but we're more inclined to think expediency is its own explanation.

There's also a financial angle. Planned Parenthood receives millions in taxpayer subsidies and spends hundreds of thousands on lobbying and campaigning. In February, OpenSecrets.org reported that Planned Parenthood's political action committee "donated more than $148,000 to federal candidates--almost all Democrats--during the 2010 election cycle" and "spent more than $443,000 overall." Planned Parenthood made an additional $905,796 in "independent expenditures" during the 2010 cycle--exercising its right to free speech pursuant to last year's Citizens United decision.

Taranto's colleague, William McGurn, writes:

In the end, President Barack Obama was the one who refused to blink on Planned Parenthood. Another way of saying it is this: The president was willing to shut down the entire federal government rather than see Planned Parenthood's federal funding cut. According to press accounts leaked by Democratic aides, House Speaker John Boehner argued for the funding cut late into the evening. The president answered, "Nope, zero." He then said, "John, this is it." Mr. Boehner accepted the budget deal without that cut. A Republican aide confirmed more or less the same account to me. He said it was "chilling" to see how inflexible Mr. Obama was. You might call it ideological....

Recall that back in 2007-08, Catholics were being told—either with reassuring condescension or exasperated annoyance—that candidate Obama was not pro-abortion. On the contrary, the young senator from Illinois insisted, "I don't know anybody who is pro-abortion". He was, certain Catholic supporters said, a man with an "open mind" about abortion; he was actually "pro-choice", which some insisted with a completely straight face is quite different from being "pro-abortion. In the end, President Obama has kept his promise to stand by Planned Parenthood, a promise he made back in 2007:

On this fundamental issue, I will not yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield. But that doesn't mean that we can't find common ground. Because we know that what's at stake is more than whether or not a woman can choose an abortion.

Choice is about how we lead our lives. It's about our families and about our communities. It's about our daughters and whether they're going to have the same opportunities as our sons. There are those who want us to believe otherwise. They want us to believe that there's nothing that unites us as Americans—there's only what divides us. They'll seek out the narrowest and most divisive ground. That is the strategy—to always argue small instead of looking at the big picture. They will stand in the way of any attempt to find common ground.

To return to the initial thought at the top of this post: it's worth pondering for a moment the fact that a large number of politicians (some of them self-identified as Catholic) are willing to shut down the federal government in order to maintain funding and support for Planned Parenthood, but many Catholics consider it outrageous, narrowminded, and spiteful to insist that pro-abortion, Catholic politicians should refrain from receiving Holy Communion.

Or, to put into a sporting context (as odd as that sounds), consider that the National Basketball Association just fined superstar Kobe Bryant $100,000 for directing a "gay slur" at a referee during a basketball game two days ago. Yet many public servants who unapologetically support, in their voting and statements, the killing of unborn children are allowed to receive the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ at many Catholic parishes. As Archbishop Chaput recently noted, the problem is essentially one of lack of courage:

 Archbishop Charles J. Chaput gave a frank response when asked why there is so much disunity among Catholics on the question of Catholics in political life standing clearly with the church on major moral issues such as abortion.

"The reason ... is that there is no unity among the bishops about it," said the Denver archbishop, who was asked the question after his April 8 keynote address for the University of Notre Dame Right to Life Club's spring lecture series.

"There is unity among the bishops about abortion always being wrong, and that you can't be a Catholic and be in favor of abortion -- the bishops all agree to that -- but there's just an inability among the bishops together to speak clearly on this matter and even to say that if you're Catholic and you're pro-choice, you can't receive holy Communion," Archbishop Chaput said.

Individual bishops probably do take such a stand privately more often than anyone knows, the archbishop noted, and he said he is not in favor of refusing Communion without giving private notice ahead of time to the person. He emphasized, however, that Catholics who support keeping abortion legal should be told that they will not be given Communion, and not to present themselves to receive.

Archbishop Chaput said he and others have been trying to move the U.S. bishops' conference to speak clearly on this issue for a number of years. However, there is a fear, he said, that if they do so, the bishops might somehow disenfranchise the Catholic community from political life, making it difficult to get elected if a Catholic politician has to hold the church's position on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.

The strategy clearly has failed, he continued, "So let's try something different and see if it works. Let's be very, very clear on these matters," and he asked the audience to "help me to convince the bishops on that subject."

What does it say when a pro-abortion politician is more willing to upset ordinary Americans in his support for Planned Parenthood than Catholics are in taking a stand for their belief in the Holy Eucharist? What does it indicate when an entertainment/sporting industry is unafraid to levy a massive punishment/fine against one of its most public and popular figures over a vulgar, offensive word, but Catholics are unwilling to address those who publicly support the evil of abortion and then shamelessly present themselves to receive the Word of God in the most blessed Sacrament? (There are those, I know, who will immediately take up the tired and misguided argument that this is a "politicization" of Holy Communion. But those who use that argument, I find, are those who think nearly everything is political without considering that beneath all politics is a foundation of morality and ethics, which in turn is rooted in the soil of religious belief and intuition. Besides, to think that abortion is just a "political issue" is to avoid the fact that it is first of all a matter of objective truth and morality.)

I'm very glad to see Cardinal DiNardo state, "Whether to fund the largest abortion network in the country is not one of those hard choices." Personally, I believe that whether or not to allow pro-abortion politicians to receive Holy Communion in this country is also not a hard choice.

Bp. Robert W. Finn: "Episode by episode, Pope Benedict is a skillful teacher walking us through the Gospels."

Most Rev. Robert W. Finn, the bishop of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, Missouri, comments on the Holy Father's recently published book, Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week:

The second volume of Jesus of Nazareth , subtitled "Holy Week: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection," arrives just in time for Lent and offers readers a directed study and path to prayer under the tutelage of the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

Episode by episode, Pope Benedict is a skillful teacher walking us through the Gospels. This Scriptural record of salvation is not, according to the Pope, a collection of "mere symbols of meta-historical truths;" rather, he reminds us how biblical faith "bases itself on history that unfolded upon this earth." (p. 104) At the Last Supper Jesus truly gave His disciples bread and wine as His body and blood. Concerning the Resurrection: "Only if Jesus is risen," the Pope writes, "has anything really new occurred that changes the world and the situation of mankind." (p. 242)

Read the entire post on the Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week blog.

Fr. Fessio: "The Italian translation was really a mistaken understanding of the German..."

From a just posted Catholic News Agency piece about paragraph 420 of the YOUCAT (Youth Catechism):

"The Italian translation was really a mistaken understanding of the German," Ignatius Press Founding Editor Fr. Joseph Fessio told CNA on April 12. "We did notice in the German original there was some ambiguity, but we wanted to translate it in the way we knew was most consistent with the Church's teachings."

According to Fr. Fessio and Ignatius Press President Mark Brumley, the Italian version incorrectly translates the German word "Empfängnisregelung." Although the term literally means "birth regulation," in a general sense that can signify natural family planning, it is also sometimes used to refer to "birth control" through contraceptive means.

Read the entire piece. (Then say "Empfängnisregelung" tens times, really fast. Whew.)

Related posts on Insight Scoop:

• Distribution of Italian edition of YOUCAT (Youth Catechism) temporarily suspended (April 12, 2011)
• YOUCAT and contraception (April 12, 2011)
• Sample pages from YOUCAT (Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church) (Mar. 17, 2011)
• Pope Benedict XVI's Preface to YOUCAT (Youth Catechism) (Feb. 4, 2011)
• Benedict XVI describes New Youth Catechism (YOUCAT) as "extraordinary" and "gripping" (Feb. 3, 2011)

Why Did God Create the World?

Fr. Robert Barron and the folks at Word on Fire with the latest installment of "Faith Seeks Understanding":

 

On a related note, here is a reflection on the meaning and nature of creation by Adrienne von Speyr, from her book The Boundless God:

"The Reality of Realities": On God, Conversion, and the Priesthood

"The Reality of Realities": On God, Conversion, and the Priesthood | Fr. James V. Schall, S.J. | April 13, 2011 | Ignatius Insight

"Neither material things, nor money, nor buildings, nor any of the things I can possess constitute the essential, or reality. The reality of realities is God. This invisible reality seemingly far away from us, is the reality."
-- Pope Benedict XVI, Audience with Parish Priests of Rome, March 10, 2011 ( "Faithful Workers in the Lord's Vineyard," L'Osservatore Romano, English, March 23, 2011)

I.

The American Civil War began on April 12, 1861. On March 27th of that same year, Rome, though still in the hands of the Papacy, was declared the capital of united Italy. This year, 2011, is also the sixtieth anniversary of the Holy Father's ordination to the priesthood. In letters to the Italian President (March 16) and in a discourse to the National Association of Italian Municipalities (12 March), the Pope noted the unique relation of Italy with regard to the Church in its midst. To Mr. Georgio Napolitano, the Italian President, Benedict wrote of the "history of this beloved country, capital if which is Rome, the city in which "divine Providence has established the See of the Successor of the Apostle Peter." The See of Peter, then, is not in Rome for merely technical or political reasons, though there is a lively history of its being and remaining there.

To the Italian mayors, Benedict recalled the broader context of the presence of the Church in any civil society: "The Church demands no privileges but only asks to be able to carry out her mission freely, as effective respect for religious freedom requires. In Italy religious freedom permits the collaboration that exists between the civil and ecclesial communities. Unfortunately in other countries Christian minorities are all too often victims of discrimination and persecution." The Pope does not name the countries in which this "discrimination and persecution" exists.

The Pope likewise addresses the Roman clergy, whom he meets every year. He goes over a "lectio divina," with them. The reflective reading together this year was of a passage from the Acts of the Apostles (20: 17-38). Here, Paul explains nothing less than how to be a priest. But Benedict also begins with a reference to the uniqueness and importance of Rome and its clergy. He thanks this clergy "for the work you do for the Church of Rome, which—according to St Ignatius (of Antioch)—presides in charity and must also always be exemplary in her faith. Let us do all we can together to ensure that this Church of Rome measure up to her vocation...."

Read the entire essay on IgnatiusInsight.com...

Abby Johnson to speak in Portland, OR, and at Franciscan University of Steubenville

Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood director and author of Unplanned: The Dramatic True Story of the Planned Parenthood Leader Who Crossed the Life Line to Fight for Women in Crisis, will be a featured speaker at the 2011 Annual Oregon Right to Life Conference "Welcome Life, Protect It by Law", in Portland, Oregon, this coming Saturday, April 16th.

Abby will also be giving an address on Monday, April 18th, at Franciscan University of Steubenville. Information is available on the Franciscan University of Steubenville site.

For information about other talks and appearances by Abby, visit her personal website.

For more about Unplanned, visit the book's website, www.unplannedbook.com. You can also read the first chapter of Unplanned on Ignatius Insight:

Distribution of Italian edition of YOUCAT (Youth Catechism) temporarily suspended

From Catholic News Service:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Distribution of an Italian edition of a new youth catechism was temporarily suspended because of a translation error concerning the church's teaching on contraception.

Thousands of copies of the Italian translation of "YouCat," a recently released supplement to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, erroneously left the impression that Catholic couples could use "contraceptive methods."

As a result, "the product is temporarily suspended, but not halted," so that the Italian publisher can "examine the text," Elena Cardinali, a spokeswoman for the Citta Nuova editorial group, told Catholic News Service April 12. Citta Nuova, the publishing arm of the Focolare lay movement, handled the Italian edition of the catechism.

The youth catechism was originally written in German and the work was supervised by Austrian Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna. The Italian edition was translated by Pietro Podolak and translation revisions were overseen by Cardinal Angelo Scola of Venice, according to the credit pages in the book.

The 300-page book uses a question-and-answer format to talk about what the church teaches.

Question 420 of the Italian edition and its brief reply incorrectly suggest that a married couple can use contraceptive methods.

Read the entire piece.

Here is more information about about the English edition of YOUCAT, published by Ignatius Press.

Also, the Catholic Truth Society, publisher of YOUCAT in England, has issued this statement regarding paragraph 420 in the Youth Catechism.

Related on Insight Scoop:

• YOUCAT and contraception (April 12, 2011)
• Sample pages from YOUCAT (Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church) (Mar. 17, 2011)
• Pope Benedict XVI's Preface to YOUCAT (Youth Catechism) (Feb. 4, 2011)
• Benedict XVI describes New Youth Catechism (YOUCAT) as "extraordinary" and "gripping" (Feb. 3, 2011)

Now available: "Poor Banished Children: A Novel"

New from Ignatius Press:

Poor Banished Children: A Novel

by Fiorella de Maria Nash

Related Products:
Poor Banished Children  - Electronic Book Download

An explosion is heard off the coast of seventeenth-century England, and a woman washes up on the shore. She is barely alive and does not speak English, but she asks for a priest . . . in Latin.

She has a confession to make and a story to tell, but who is she and from where has she come?

Cast out of her superstitious, Maltese family, Warda turns to begging and stealing until she is fostered by an understanding Catholic priest who teaches her the art of healing. Her willful nature and hard-earned independence make her unfit for marriage, and so the good priest sends Warda to serve an anchorite, in the hope that his protégé will discern a religious vocation.

Such a calling Warda never has the opportunity to hear. Barbary pirates raid her village, capture her and sell her into slavery in Muslim North Africa. In the merciless land of Warda's captivity, her wits, nerve, and self-respect are tested daily, as she struggles to survive without submitting to total and permanent enslavement. As she is slowly worn down by the brutality of her circumstances, she comes to believe that God has abandoned her and falls into despair, hatred, and a pattern of behavior which, ironically, mirrors that of her masters.

Poor Banished Children is the tale of one woman's relentless search for freedom and redemption. The historical novel raises challenging questions about the nature of courage, free will, and ultimately salvation.

- An award-winning European novelist presents a powerful story of mystery, adventure, peril, suffering, faith, and courage
- A thrilling  historical novel that explores the life and cultures of  17th century England, Malta and Africa
- A challenging work that tells the story of one woman's relentless search for freedom and redemption amidst great suffering, loneliness and despair

"De Maria (The Cassandra Curse) writes an absorbing tale replete with Barbary pirates and concubines. In 1640, a badly injured woman washes ashore on the coast of England following an explosion at sea. Warda, the woman, has come a long way from the island of Malta where she was born, and her sickbed confession to a priest is a story of adventure, enslavement, and piracy. Disowned by her family, young Warda is raised by a Catholic priest who teaches her Latin and the healing arts and prepares her to live as an anchorite. But the landing of a pirate ship dashes that, and Warda is captured and sold into slavery in North Africa. Through changing circumstances and locales, she remains fiercely stubborn, balancing a refusal to concede to her circumstances with a ferocious desire to live at any moral cost. The author creates a memorable heroine and renders scenes set in unfamiliar places and times with only a few details and swift dialog. Varying viewpoints provide a fuller portrait of Warda, her aching soul, and her momentous choices. Catholic writer De Maria deserves a wide audience." (March, 2011)
-Publishers Weekly

"A soulful, beautifully written, and haunting novel."
- Ron Hansen, NY Times Best-selling Author, Mariette in Ecstasy

"The hypnotic tale of an unforgettable girl who loses everything in the world but her courage -- and the unshakeable knowledge that with every new trial, her soul remains at stake. Set in the terrifying days of Barbary piracy, peopled by both savages and saints, this novel will rivet any reader ever to have felt the forces of evil and redemption. It is a meditation on guilt, innocence, and transcendence that will haunt the reader long after the book is done."
- Mary Eberstadt, Author, The Loser Letters: A Comic Tale of Life, Death, and Atheism

"This is serious fiction with prose that is clean, strong, and worthy. We are drawn into a first-rate story-Corsairs, Barbary pirates, cruelty, slavery, shipwreck, suffering, and heroic sanctity. It has skillful character presentation and true craftsmanship in the narrative: dreams, memory, straight reporting, and confession. Above all, here is the Catholic Faith in all of its depth, radiance, and plenitude."
- Thomas Howard, Author, Narnia and Beyond

Fiorella De Maria was born in Italy of Maltese parents. She grew up in Wiltshire, England, and attended Cambridge, where she received a BA in English Literature and a Masters in Renaissance Literature, specializing in the English verse of Robert Southwell, S.J. She lives in Surrey with her husband and her three children. She won the National Book Prize of Malta (foreign language fiction category) for her novel The Cassandra Curse.

"The great commandment in this postmodern, relativistic world of ours...

... is this: "Don't impose your morality on me."

Obviously, it didn't used to be this way. Once, if you mentioned basic moral rules like the Ten Commandments, everyone would agree that they were right. Not only were they right for all, but they were also known to all. Everyone knew that honoring parents and telling the truth is right for everyone. And everyone knew that deliberately taking innocent human life, sleeping with your neighbor's spouse, and mocking God is wrong for everyone. Today all of that has changed.

Or has it? According to University of Texas Professor J. Budziszewski, it really hasn't -- at least not in the way you might think.

Budziszewski has just released the revised and expanded version of his classic book, What We Can't Not Know. Budziszewski, a leading natural law theorist, explains that there are certain basic moral truths that all of us really know, even if we pretend to ourselves that we don't. The murderer knows the wrong of murder; the adulterer knows the wrong of adultery.

The Apostle Paul confirms this when he says in Romans 2 that God's law is "written on the heart" -- everyone's heart, even the hearts of nonbelievers. People who pose as moral skeptics are playing make-believe, and, as Budziszewski writes, they are doing it badly.

That is from Charles Colson's April 5, 2011, edition of "Breakpoint". The revised and expanded edition of Dr. Budziszewski's book, What We Can't Not Know: A Guide, was published a few weeks ago by Ignatius Press; I'll be posting an interview with the author in the near future. In the meantime, here is an excerpt from the book:

• Natural Law and Bearing False Witness | J. Budziszewski

Also see (on Ignatius Insight):

• The Scandal of Natural Law | Interview with J. Budziszewski
• Objections, Obstacles, Acceptance | Interview with J. Budziszewski

YOUCAT and contraception

Catholic News Agency has reported that the Italian edition of YOUCAT (Youth Catechism of the Catholic Church) suggests that "contraceptive methods" can be used by Catholic couples in regulating the size of families. The report says, "Vatican sources who spoke to CNA April 11 on the condition of anonymity speculated that the problem was in the original German text, a fact that was later confirmed by CNA." (UPDATE: Mark Brumley, President of Ignatius Press writes: "The problem did not originate with the German text--at least not if the Italian translation is based on the same German text as that on which Ignatius Press based its translation. The German text of question 420 asks whether a Christian married couple may regulate the number of children they have. It does not ask whether the couple may use methods of contraception.")

It further reports: "The English edition, published by Ignatius Press, does not contain the problematic language. It is not yet known if other language versions also contain the same controversial statement on contraception."

Below are paragraphs 420 and 421 from the English translation of YOUCAT, published by Ignatius Press:

420 May a Christian married couple regulate the number of children they have?

Yes, a Christian married couple may and should be responsible in using the gift and privilege of transmitting life. [2368–2369, 2399]

Sometimes social, psychological, and medical conditions are such that in the given circumstances an additional child would be a big, almost superhuman challenge for the couple. Hence there are clear criteria that the married couple must observe: Regulating births, in the first place, must not mean that the couple is avoiding conception as a matter of principle. Second, it must not mean avoiding children for selfish reasons. Third, it must not mean that external coercion is involved (if, for example, the State were to decide how many children a couple could have). Fourth, it must not mean that any and every means may be used.

421 Why are all methods of preventing the conception of a child not equally good?

The Church recommends the refined methods of self-observation and natural family planning (NFP) as methods of deliberately regulating conception. These are in keeping with the dignity of man and woman; they respect the innate laws of the female body; they demand mutual affection and consideration and therefore are a school of love. [2370–2372, 2399]

The Church pays careful attention to the order of nature and sees in it a deep meaning. For her it is therefore not a matter of indifference whether a couple manipulates the woman's fertility or instead makes use of the natural alternation of fertile and infertile days. It is no accident that Natural Family Planning is called natural: it is ecological, holistic, healthy, and an exercise in partnership. On the other hand, the Church rejects all artificial means of contraception—namely, chemical methods ("the Pill"), mechanical methods (for example, condom, intra-uterine device, or IUD), and surgical methods (sterilization)—since these attempt to separate the sexual act from its procreative potential and block the total self-giving of husband and wife. Such methods can even endanger the woman's health, have an abortifacient effect (= cause a very early abortion), and in the long run be detrimental to the couple's love life.

The same page includes this quote, in the margin, from Pope John Paul II:

Pope John Paul II describes "contraception" (as opposed to "the regulation of births") as follows: "When couples [have] recourse to contraception … they manipulate and degrade human sexuality—and with it themselves and their married partner—by altering its value of total self-giving. Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality." Pope John Paul II (1920–2005), Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, no. 32

Click here for more information (including a link to sample page) about YOUCAT.