Going the Distance - Patrick Madrid

N.O.W. Hear This!
Some pro-abortionists are being won over to the truth, one heart at a time.

I was just a kid when, in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court befouled itself and the nation with its ruling on the Roe v. Wade "abortion rights" case. From that moment forward, the forces of death have gathered strength. Leering at us from behind the fig leaf of their newfound legal status, the abortionists and their many political quislings steamrolled ahead, grinding into the pavement of our national history the blood and torn flesh of millions of baby boys and girls. Their apologists have crowded the airwaves and print media for over two decades, jostling for our attention, screeching about a woman's right to choose, and shoveling scorn on anyone willing to stand up to their bullying rhetoric. But those many men and women who have sought to protect the rights of unborn children have pressed doggedly onward.

Although the pro-abortion screamers always seem to have the upper hand when it comes to dominating the media, the truth and goodness and beauty of the principle that unborn children have an absolute right to life is gradually seeping into the hearts of some of those who oppose this principle. For example, Carole Everett, who was the owner of two abortion clinics, is now a prominent pro-life speaker. There's also Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a former abortion-performing doctor and foe of the pro-life movement, who not only turned his back on the "pro-choice" philosophy that fueled his lucrative abortion practice, he renounced all its pomps and funding when he experienced a profound change of heart. This journey eventually led him to become Catholic. Many other men and women who were once active in or sympathetic to the abortion industry have also been touched by God's grace and are finding their way into the light of reason and salvation, the light of Christ.

One of the refugees who managed to escape from the "pro-choice" nightmare is Norma McCorvey. You may not know her by her actual name, but you certainly have heard of the legal case that made her pseudonym, "Jane Roe," a household word. That's right, "Jane Roe" — the woman who, in 1973, stood at ground zero when this country officially declared war against the rights of unborn children — became pro-life, and now to complete her journey, has decided to become Catholic. That's an unpleasant development for the members of pro-abortion groups like the National Organization for Women, as well as their governmental and media sycophants. Their main pro-choice, pro-abortion, pro-death icon has come to life. On page 46, Fr. Frank Pavone, director of the national Catholic apostolate Priests for Life, introduces you to the real "Jane Roe." Father Pavone tells the amazing, true story of this woman's return to the land of the living.

Gimme some of that really old-time religion

Even though I disagree with much of the Evangelical Protestant theology it espouses, I always enjoy reading the Christian Research Journal, the apologetics quarterly produced by the Christian Research Institute. Under the able leadership of editor Elliott Miller, the Journal provides well-researched and interesting articles on a range of apologetics subjects. The layout and graphics are routinely excellent, and the writing is usually incisive and challenging. I say "usually" because in a recent issue, the Journal let its readers down by printing a piece of pseudo history by a Protestant apologist who argued that the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325) was not Catholic (ie. Roman Catholic) in its theology. Rather, the article attempts to give answers to Catholic claims by proving that the Council was in reality a gathering of Christians who held to Evangelical Protestant doctrines, such as sola scriptura (Latin for by Scripture alone), and who would have rejected any distinctively Catholic doctrines, such as the role of Sacred Tradition, the primacy of the bishop of Rome, the authority of the magisterium, Eucharistic transubstantiation and purgatory. It was evident that the writer wanted to stir up these Roman Catholic controversies in the minds of his readers. The historical and theological problems in this article were such that many Catholic readers (and, I suspect many historically knowledgeable Protestant readers) were aghast that such shoddy "scholarship" could have been published in such a reputable magazine. One particularly disappointed reader was a patristics scholar, our own Fr. Hugh Barbour, O.Praem., who edits our Faith of Our Fathers department. Since he is himself an expert in the history and theology of the early Church, as well as fluent in Patristic Latin and Greek, Father Hugh felt the need to set the record straight by telling the truth about what really happened at Nicea. The picture of the early Church, as drawn by the Fathers themselves, is laid out by Father Hugh. His critique of this fatally flawed article begins on page 30.