Matthew M. | Catholic Conscience †

“Ordinary Joes”: What happens when we each play our part in the ordinary, day-to-day? A Lesson on Faith and Stewardship

I’ve been mulling this item since Monday of the third week of Lent. But on the Feast of Saint Joseph, a posting on Catholic Insight gave me the title and neatly summarized the theme I am trying to express: “Ordinary Joes”. It was applied in that posting to the very least ordinary of Joes, but author April St. Martin had a point: our job in this life is to play the role that is assigned to us, no matter what it is, great or small, in devout keeping with the virtues of faith and deep humility. READ REFLECTION HERE [CTA Button/Link to full reflection on website]

If we do that, who knows what God might be able to accomplish through us?

The reading on that Monday was from the Second book of Kings (2 Kings 5:1-15):

Naaman, commander of the army of the king of Aram, was a great man and in high favour with his master, because by him the Lord had given victory to Aram. The man, though a mighty warrior, suffered from leprosy.

Now the Arameans on one of their raids had taken a young girl captive from the land of Israel, and she served Naaman’s wife. She said to her mistress, “If only my lord were with the prophet who is in Samaria! He would cure him of his leprosy.” So Naaman went in and told his lord just what the girl from the land of Israel had said. And the king of Aram said, “Go then, and I will send along a letter to the king of Israel.”

He went, taking with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold, and ten sets of garments. He brought the letter to the king of Israel, which read, “When this letter reaches you, know that I have sent to you my servant Naaman, that you may cure him of his leprosy.”

When the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his clothes and said, “Am I God, to give death or life, that this man sends word to me to cure a man of his leprosy? Just look and see how he is trying to pick a quarrel with me.” But when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his clothes, he sent a message to the king, “Why have you torn your clothes? Let him come to me, that he may learn that there is a prophet in Israel.”

So Naaman came with his horses and chariots, and halted at the entrance of Elisha’s house. Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, “Go, wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall be restored and you shall be clean.” But Naaman became angry and went away, saying, “I thought that for me he would surely come out, and stand and call on the name of the Lord his God, and would wave his hand over the spot, and cure the leprosy! Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Could I not wash in them, and be clean?” He turned and went away in a rage.

But his servants approached and said to him, “Father, if the prophet had commanded you to do something difficult, would you not have done it? How much more, when all he said to you was, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”

So Namaan went down and immersed himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the word of the man of God; his flesh was restored like the flesh of a young boy, and he was clean.

Then he returned to the man of God, he and all his company; he came and stood before him and said, “Now I know that there is no God in all the earth except in Israel.

Now, in this passage, at least seven people are mentioned. Several are both named and quoted, including a king, a military commander, and a prophet. The great points we are apparently meant to take away from the passage are the saving faith and humility of the great commander before people he had helped to conquer; and the casual yet exquisitely faithful disdain of the prophet, who declined to meet face to face with the foreign conqueror even while arranging his cure.

But who is the real hero of this story, the one without whom nothing would have come to pass except the ultimate demise of Naaman through leprosy? Of all these characters, who is it that displays the greatest humility? Who acts in the spirit of deepest, cheerful faith, despite what might seem like compelling reasons to rebel?

The behavior of the “young girl taken captive from the land of Israel,” who served Naaman’s wife, has always struck me as astonishing.

It seems highly probable that this young lady’s introduction to the family she served involved the slaughter or enslavement of her own family, or at the very least her involuntary separation from the home, her neighbours, and the land in which she had been born, not to mention the loss of her own life’s freedom. Yet from all appearances, she cheerfully stepped up to aid her oppressor, the conqueror of her people, in his need. Far beyond the virtue of stooping to the level of the beaten in order to obtain a cure, or of deigning to cure an enemy without the inconvenience of meeting him face to face, this strikes me as turning the other cheek, going the extra mile, and adding tunic to cloak as mentioned later on the Mount of Beatitudes.

As April St. Martin explains, holiness seems less often to be tied up with the things we say, the preaching we do, than with the actions we elect to undertake: simply serving in the capacity and the circumstances that God has placed before us. Sometimes that involves the freedom to make choices; other times not. Joseph the son of Jacob served his oppressors faithfully, and thereby was enabled to rescue his entire nation; Joseph the foster-father of Our Lord showed up, obeyed, protected, and worked, and thereby was enabled to facilitate the coming and the mission of the Messiah. How many porters and doorkeepers have served their way to sainthood? The unnamed girl of 2^nd Kings 5 faithfully shared the Good News of God and his prophets with those she was compelled to serve, without apparently seeking any quid pro quo.

In our own lives, we can seek opportunities for simple, quiet service by accepting the families, the homes, the work, and all the other circumstances God has provided for us. And we can usually do more than that, without a great deal of trouble: in a spirit of proper stewardship, we can invest a little of the time that God has entrusted to us in humble contributions to the building of his Kingdom.

For example, we can take the time to pray, to educate ourselves, and to vote, when the time comes, with the good of everyone in mind; and we can take the time to get to know those we’ve elected to serve us, and attempt to prompt them into setting policies based on values of virtue.

It doesn’t seem like a lot, compared to what was asked of Saint Joseph or the young saint-girl of 2^nd Kings. April St. Martin put it very well:

“It made me realize that holiness isn’t about being seen or recognized, but about being faithful in what you’ve been given.”

Just think: if we do that, if we faithfully use all the time, talent, that are given to us, in the circumstances that are given to us, for God’s purposes, what great things might God accomplish through us?

Of Common Concern: Just War, Revisited

The eruption of new conflicts in the Caribbean and in Western Asia suggests that debate over Just War doctrine will remain active for the foreseeable future. Current debate suggests several points to ponder.

As explained in our previous Just War posting, classic Catholic doctrine imposes strict conditions on the use of military force, even in defense. Among other criteria, in the Catholic view all other options must be exhausted before resort to violence can even conceivably be justified. (Catechism 2302-2308). This was strongly reinforced in Fratelli tutti. Pope Francis pointed out that in practice war is often started by aggressors:

...invoking all sorts of allegedly humanitarian, defensive or precautionary excuses, and even resorting to the manipulation of information. In recent decades, every single war has been ostensibly “justified…” [A critical] issue is whether the development of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the enormous and growing possibilities offered by new technologies, have granted war an uncontrollable destructive power over great numbers of innocent civilians. The truth is that never has humanity had such power over itself, yet nothing ensures that it will be used wisely. We can no longer think of war as a solution, because its risks will probably always be greater than its supposed benefits. In view of this, it is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a ‘just war.’ Never again war! (1)

Points to Ponder:

Several justifications for US and Israeli intervention in Iran have been offered to the public, including imminent military threats posed by Iran, regional aggression on the part of Iran, and prophetic religious grounds. Similarly, the threat of narco-terrorism was cited in support of US intervention in Venezuela. Importantly, in each case ex-patriates and other natives of the target countries have voiced support for the intervenors’ vigorous action, citing long-standing maltreatment of local citizens and the utterance and realization of various threats.In each case, however, it is also true that each of the cited grounds has been questioned, sometimes at apparent personal cost to those who refute them.For example, it is widely reported that the director of the US National Counter-terrorism Center resigned on grounds of conscience, noting that no imminent threat to the US existed. Likewise, it is reported that shortly before direct US intervention in Venezuela, a senior US Navy admiral took voluntary early retirement. Others have criticized the interventions on legal grounds, while Pope Leo XIV has pleaded for peace and efforts to avoid a spiral of violence. (2)How can the justifications offered be considered fairly? For example:
- Under classical Catholic Just War doctrine, can pre-emptive attacks ever be justified?
  - Does the fact that multiple justifications, each of them in turn disputed, were offered after the fact, help or hurt the cases offered for pre-emptive strikes?
  - If it is possible to justify such attacks under classic doctrine, do the clarifications offered by Pope Francis alter the analysis?
  - As noted, in some cases the legality of the attacks under national laws has been questioned.(2) How do universal moral and national legal requirements relate to one another?

Estimates of both the human and economic effects of the war vary widely. (3)For example, the US and Israel report the deaths of approximately 30 of their own soldiers, and several thousand deaths among civilians, many of them among Arab neighbours of the combatants. Iran is reported to have suffered approximately 6,000 deaths, military and civilian. In Venezuela, dozens of people were killed, apparently in order to effect two extraordinary arrests. Between the two actions, economic damage is reported to exceed tens or potentially even hundreds of billions of dollars. Environmental damage has not yet been reliably assessed.
- Do the number of reported deaths affect your conclusions about stated justifications for the attacks? What about economic or environmental costs?
  - Human losses would not appear to be fully compensable in this life, meaning that judgment for those will reside with Christ.
  - Who will bear the economic and environmental costs? Will they be borne by the same people who have incurred them, or passed to others?

In the Iran conflict, both sides have used robotic and remotely-controlled weapons in their strikes, including weapons programmed to target specific individuals. In several cases, such attacks have resulted in the “collateral” deaths of individuals who were not specifically targeted, but who happened to be close to the intended targets.
- Can the use of robotic weapons be justified? Can targeted military or political assassination be justified? Do “collateral” deaths of innocent bystanders matter to your answer?
In the Democratic West, reports of the ongoing effect of the war have sometimes tended to focus on domestic prices for commodities such as gasoline and food. (5)
- Does Catholic social doctrine support consideration of the price of local consumer commodities to justify wars that are reported to have killed thousands of people?
To the extent that violent military intervention has not been justified, and given that several of the stated grievances would seem to bear weight, what non-violent alternatives might be available to the various parties to the conflict?
What would Christ say about the interventions? Would his remarks recorded at Matthew 5:17-20; 38-48 have any relevance?

References:

(1) Pope Francis, Fratelli tutti, 258

(2) See, for example,
- https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/17/politics/joe-kent-resigns-iran-war;
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/18/who-is-joe-kent-and-why-did-he-resign-as-trumps-counterterrorism-chief
- https://www.democracynow.org/2026/4/1/palestinian_christians_west_bank
- https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2026-03/pope-leo-xiv-angelus-appeal-peace-middle-east-iran.html

(3)See, for example,
- https://www.oxfordeconomics.com/resource/the-2026-iran-war-an-initial-take-and-implications
- https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-conflict-poses-new-risk-us-economic-resilience-2026-03-02
- https://www.middleeasteye.net/live-blog/live-blog-update/iea-chief-world-faces-greatest-global-energy-security-challenge-history
- https://www.janes.com/osint-insights/defence-and-national-security-analysis/iran-conflict-2026-disruption-to-strait-of-hormuz-increases-energy-and-food-production-risks

(4) See, for example,
- https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/02/middle-east-crisis-oil-prices-inflation-us-iran-interest-rates-growth

(5) See, for example,
- https://www.axios.com/2026/04/01/oil-prices-200-barrel-strait-hormuz?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosgenerate&stream=top
- https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/02/middle-east-crisis-oil-prices-inflation-us-iran-interest-rates-growth

CST Rosary: Third Joyful Mystery – the Nativity

Christ was sent to us to proclaim a New Covenant between humans and God, and thereby establish the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. His Father chose a surprising way of doing that.

The mystery of the Nativity offers rich ground for reflection on the CST principles of life and human dignity, the priority of the family among social institutions, and the preferential option for the poor, as well as the Christian virtue of humility.

Scriptural Reference

Luke 2:1-20(Catholic RSV)¹

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirinius was governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child.

And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear. And the angel said to them, "Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger."

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!" When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us."

And they went with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they saw it they made known the saying which had been told them concerning this child; and all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them.

But Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

CST Reflection

We often equate the idea of kingship with power and material plentitude. As humans we are naturally inclined towards these things, and because of our fallen nature it can be easy for us to strive solely towards goods that satisfy the concupiscence of the flesh and eyes, and to revere power and name recognition in an attempt to satisfy our pride. And yet in the mystery of the Nativity, God’s perfect wisdom proves that the poorest, least powerful of the human form is compatible with Divine nature. And He demonstrates this by coming to earth as a tiny baby, born into a stable with no earthly possessions and no name recognition. The Catechism of the Catholic Church cites the following: “Jesus was born in a humble stable, into a poor family. Simple shepherds were the first witnesses to this event. In this poverty heaven's glory was made manifest.”2

The state in which Christ was born is in direct resistance to the threefold concupiscences that all humans are susceptible to, and thus exemplifies the infinite value of the weakest and most lowly of humans. It is in His lowliness that we revere Him. And today, as we meditate upon the mystery of the Nativity, we can think about the lowly and poor among us. As Christ is quoted in Matthew, “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” 3 Christ references the poor among us as He was the poor among us, and in each of our lives, He is the poor among us.

Through this mystery, we are also reminded of the beauty and dignity of the domestic church and the preciousness of the familial unit. This mystery inspires us to remember our responsibility to prioritize the vocation to the family over material goods and power. God chose to be born into the loving arms of Mother Mary rather than onto a throne of grandeur and majesty. He also chose to be born under the protection of St. Joseph, a humble Jewish carpenter rather than under the protection of many legions of men. God, Creator of the universe, could have arranged any kind of entry into the world, yet He chose to take our form in the context of a poor family, and God therefore blesses both the poor and the family. As we pray, we can ask ourselves - do we recognize the image of God in the poor and vulnerable in our lives, and do we honor and love the domestic church that is our own unique family unit?

Fruits of the Mystery

Mother Mary, we pray in the name of your divine Son that by contemplating the circumstances of His birth we might come to a greater appreciation of the inherent dignity of all human life and the critical priority of the family unit, and thus grow toward God together, in a spirit of deep and sincere humility.

______________________

Credits

1 Scriptural Reference: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4782437

2 Catechism of the Catholic Church, 525, The Mysteries of Jesus’ Infancy and Hidden Life (Pope John Paul II, 1992)

3 Holy Bible, Matthew 25:40 (NIV)

Image: James Tissot, The Adoration of the Shepherds, ca. 1890 (Wikimedia Commons / Brooklyn Museum, public domain)

CST Rosary: Second Joyful Mystery – the Visitation

By Kathleen Muggeridge

Catholic Conscience’s CST Rosary continues with the second Joyful Mystery: the Visitation. The second Joyful Mystery beautifully highlights the principles of the Sanctity of Life and Human Dignity, Solidarity, and the teachings of Saint John Paul II.

Scriptural Reference

Luke 1:39-56 (Catholic RSV[i]):

In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a city of Judah, and she entered the house of Zechari'ah and greeted Elizabeth.

And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilment of what was spoken to her from the Lord."

And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name. And his mercy is on those who fear him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent empty away. He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his posterity for ever."

And Mary remained with her about three months, and returned to her home.

______

CST Reflection

Mary’s Visitation to Elizabeth is a mysterious chronicle that highlights two important principles of Catholic Social Teaching, both of which are simply channeled through the feminine genius of a seemingly ordinary Jewish maiden: the Sanctity of Life and Human Dignity, and Solidarity.

In particular, the very human dignity of Mary’s womanhood is woven deeply into this Mystery as she demonstrates the quintessence of God’s design through her delicate application of what Saint John Paul II aptly described as the feminine genius in her gentle actions, exemplifying the quiet but wondrous contribution that women will always offer within the context of salvation history.

Even in her youth Mary sets a shining example of the role we are all called to play as members of the Church Pilgrim.

The angel Gabriel revealed to Our Lady during the Annunciation that Mary’s older cousin Elizabeth was also bearing a child. With haste Our Lady made the excursion to her cousin Elizabeth’s house whilst bearing Jesus Christ, King and Savior of the World, in her virginal womb. God, in his perfect wisdom, who handed Our Lady this task, provided Mary with the grace to convene with Elizabeth. When the two women met, John leapt in the womb of his mother Elizabeth, demonstrating his recognition of the humanity of Jesus Christ in Mary’s womb. Here, John not only acknowledges the existence of life within Mary’s womb, but also gives a testimony to his own capacity for excitement, passion, and spiritual experience, demonstrating that even he, a tiny and vulnerable unborn child has the capacity to worship and adore God. Thus one can confidently assert that all living humans, regardless of their level of vulnerability or capability are able to partake in knowing, loving and serving God in this life, and therefore that The Life and Dignity of All People must be guarded, protected and served at all cost.

Through the Visitation, we can also witness a perfect example of Solidarity; Mary does not sit back only to consider her own physical and spiritual needs (both of which must certainly have been great as she was tasked with bearing the Son of God in her womb after conceiving Him with the Holy Spirit). Instead, she chooses to set out in haste to serve her cousin. Pope Francis, who demonstrated a great love for simplicity and care for those in need, wrote the following in his work On Fraternity and Social Friendship from Fratelli Tutti:

“Solidarity means much more than engaging in sporadic acts of generosity. It means thinking and acting in terms of community. It means that the lives of all are prior to the appropriation of goods by a few… Solidarity, understood in its most profound meaning, is a way of making history, and this is what popular movements are doing.”[ii]

Mary did not dash off a short note filled with well-wishes and post it via camel to support to her cousin, but rather she sacrificed her comfort and convenience to travel many miles in order to radically give herself and her gifts to her pregnant cousin. In doing so, as Pope Francis said, she made history.

Women are called to emulate Our Lady, Mother of God and Mother of all Men, and men in turn are called to look to women as spiritual mothers and models of Faith. Saint Pope John Paul II says the following in his Letter to Women:

“They [women] see others in their greatness and limitations; they try to go out to them and help them. In this way the basic plan of the Creator takes flesh in the history of humanity and there is constantly revealed, in the variety of vocations, that beauty - not merely physical, but above all spiritual - which God bestowed from the very beginning on all, and in a particular way on women.”

Let us gaze upon Our Lady’s demonstration of radical self-sacrifice to her cousin, and the beauty of her acts of service within which she perfectly demonstrated the virtue of Solidarity.

Let us never forget that seemingly small acts of Solidarity are never really small, but rather are heroic, as exemplified by Mary’s service of her cousin which had an impact not only on Elizabeth and her little baby St. John, but also on the entirety of the Church for millenia to follow.

Let us, in turn, reflect on the idea that the dignity of a person is deeply inherent regardless of a person's level of vulnerability or capability, as demonstrated by the unborn John the Baptist and Our Lord during the Visitation.

Following the interaction between Jesus and John, this concept is made even clearer during Mary’s Magnificat when she states that God has “looked with favour upon the lowly...”

Like all humans, we Catholics are made in the image of God, and thus are called to Imitatio Dei (imitation of God). We are all called to look with favour upon the lowly and to recognize the Dignity of All People, including the poor, the unborn, the disabled, the elderly, the marginalized, and all Children of God.

Let us reflect on how a beautiful and humble Jewish maiden, the Mother of God and the epitome of feminine genius, tells us outright of the disposition that all are to have towards the Life and Dignity of all People, and provides us with a perfect example of loving our neighbors and community by acting in Solidarity with them.

______

Fruits of the Mystery

Lord God, almighty Father, we pray in the name of your divine Son that by contemplating the selfless response of your daughter Mary to the needs of her cousin Elizabeth, we might be inspired to pay our full due to the needs of others, applying the full strength of our abilities in faithful conformance with your intentions and design.

______

Credits

[i] Scriptural Reference: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4782437

[ii] Pope Francis, Encyclical Fratelli Tutti – On Fraternity and Social Friendship (Vatican City, 2020)

Image: The Visitation (Attributed to Master Heinrich of Constance (MET, 17.190.724) / Wikimedia Commons)

CST Rosary: First Joyful Mystery – the Annunciation

In the first installment of a series of Rosary reflections highlighting the principles, values, and virtues of Catholic Social Teaching, we consider the Annunciation. The first Joyful Mystery beautifully illustrates application of the principle of subsidiarity in humility and a profound spirit of stewardship.

Scriptural Reference

Luke 1:26-38 (Catholic RSV*):

In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!"

But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and considered in her mind what sort of greeting this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end."

And Mary said to the angel, "How shall this be, since I have no husband?" And the angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. For with God nothing will be impossible."

And Mary said, "Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her.

_________

CST Reflection

The Rosary opens with a striking example of one of the most important and least understood of all Catholic social concepts: subsidiarity.

The confusion surrounding this principle appears to arise from its name. It is not actually difficult to understand, however, particularly when illustrated by example or when thought of as a Catholic form of “empowerment.”

In simple terms, the principle of subsidiarity states that each element of society should serve its own proper purpose, and support others in serving theirs, with the over-arching goal of encouraging and enabling authentic human development for the whole of society. All social elements are called to support one another by providing any required help, or “subsidium.” This includes staying out of the way of other, properly responsible social elements. One consequence of the principle is that each individual, and all smaller groups of people, should be allowed to make for themselves all the decisions that can responsibly be left to them, while rightfully being able to look to higher authorities for help, if and when help is required.

Has there ever existed a better example of this principle than the Annunciation? Consider the act of God the Almighty Father, Eternal King and Creator of the Universe, in approaching a young girl in a small village otherwise barely known to history, to ask her assistance in bringing His only Son, whom He has designated to be the savior of the world, to life in human form. Rather than doing the job the easy way, sending Christ down fully formed on a cloud with a backdrop of lightning, God elected to glorify His own creation by appointing a devout, patient, and capable young woman from a tiny and obscure village to the task, and letting her do it. Importantly, He did not just give her the job and then abandon her. He sent her support in the form of a strong, humble, understanding husband, Joseph, to watch over her as she gave birth alone in a stable, and to accompany her into exile in a foreign land to avoid her child's slaughter. God continued to watch over them all the way along, through all of Christ’s life and mission, while Mary and Joseph put their own unique parental stamp on His Son, helping to shape the child’s experiences and responses to them.

By choosing this path, God allowed both Mary and Joseph to apply and develop their talents over their entire lifetimes. In doing so, they not only shaped Christ’s life and humanity; they also provided all the rest of us with shining examples of the virtues of charity, obedience, and humility, as well as realistic self-assessment, respect, hard work, and good stewardship: qualities that Mary and her husband have continued to put to good use on our behalf through their heavenly intercession, throughout the entire subsequent 2000 years.

As explained by the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, the Catholic principle of subsidiarity “is imperative because every person, family and intermediate group has something original to offer to the community. Experience shows that the denial of subsidiarity, or its limitation in the name of an alleged democratization or equality of all members of society, limits and sometimes even destroys the spirit of freedom and initiative.” (Compendium, 187)

_________

Fruits of the Mystery

Mother of God, we pray in the name of your divine Son that by contemplating your faithful answer to God’s call we might grow in faithful and selfless attention to our own duties, recognizing the help God sends us in our own missions and following faithfully the example you provided of impeccable stewardship of the gift of life.

_________

Credits

* Scriptural Reference: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4782437
* Image: Fra Angelico, the Annunciation. San Marco, north Corridor (Wikimedia Commons)

Consecration of Catholic Conscience to the Blessed Virgin Mary

Seat of Wisdom, Model of Humility and Obedience, we renew and ratify in your hands the promises of our baptism, and deliver and consecrate to you all fruits of all the hopes, work, and prayers we have devoted and do devote to our work with Catholic Conscience, with the prayer that you will bless and deliver them to your Son with the special grace of your commendation.

We ask particularly for your constant care and guidance, in union with the Holy Spirit your spouse, that we might serve you and your Son with true:

Purity, never straying from the path of true devotion in order to follow the false light of our own selfish interests;
Faith, knowing that you will watch over us with true motherly love and care;
Obedience, remaining faithful always to the Gospels and the social teachings of the Church;
Wisdom, seeking always the course which will best serve to gather souls for your Son;
Humility, knowing that it is you, and your Spouse the Holy Spirit, who guide our best actions, and not our own weak and clouded minds;
Patience, trusting that you and your Son hold us and our mission safe in the cradle of your hands;
Prudence, avoiding rash judgments, decisions, and conclusions;
Charity, seeking always what is truly best for our brothers and sisters in the Lord;
Compassion, remembering the love that held you firm in place beneath the cross of your Son; and
Joy, quietly and soberly celebrating the opportunities you guide us toward for sharing the love of your Son with others.

Pray for us, most Holy Mother of God!

Points to Ponder in Evaluating Policies and Legislation

The Church teaches that the purpose of government is to provide a legal, political and economic framework in which the true common good can flourish, in order that the people may accomplish their life’s mission - that is, so that they may use the freedom granted to them by God to seek and live in accordance with the truth, and thereby find their way back to Him. The true common good consists in enabling and encouraging all individuals to seek their own proper path to God.

In accomplishing this purpose, government is expected to work together cooperatively with all other social institutions, including the family; the Church and other moral and educational institutions; civil society and cultural organizations; the organs of a fair market economy; the media; and all other levels of government.

All of government’s activities should be informed by and discharged in accordance with the principles, values and virtues of good government. In the Catholic view, good governance consists in adherence to:

The permanent principles of the sanctity of life and human dignity, the common good as defined above, subsidiarity, and solidarity;
The fundamental values of truth, freedom, justice and charitable love.
The virtues of prudence and good stewardship, wisdom, humility, and respect.

Governance in accordance with these principles can help to ensure that policies and legislation are adopted only when they are wise, prudent, and balanced, and likely to serve the true good of society.

In considering any proposed policy or legislation, Catholics should ask:

Is the proposal appropriately tailored to enable government to accomplish a legitimate social purpose in right cooperation with other social institutions, properly respecting the rights, roles, needs, and proper expectations of such other institutions? Does it tend to usurp authority or responsibility which properly belongs to other institutions?
In particular, does it promote the common good without unduly burdening families, individuals, or other organs of society?
Does the proposal properly support growth or development in individuals and lower-order entities, without unnecessarily or unjustly burdening or harming anyone?
Is the proposal consistent with democratic principles of providing all members of society an appropriate voice in governance, as well as equal protection and equal benefit under the law? How does it affect my neighbours? How does it affect those in other cities, other provinces, other countries, or other generations?
Is it likely to accomplish its purpose with prudence and efficiency? Are there simpler, less expensive, or less intrusive alternatives for accomplishing the same purpose? Does the proposal tend to unnecessarily expand legislation or bureaucracy?

MDRC 2024-4: Same-Day Assisted Suicide in Ontario

A new report raises questions about the "provisioning" of same-day suicide requests in the province of Ontario.

According to the province, in January 2024 the office of its Chief Coroner established, as part of a procedural adjustment reflecting an allegedly “more mature state” of Socially-Assisted Death (SAD)¹ practice in Ontario, a new Death Review Committee (MDRC) comprised of 16 members from across multiple disciplines, including law, ethics, medicine, social work, nursing, mental health and disability experts, and one member of the general public, to add “advisory support” to existing SAD oversight measures in Ontario. The committee is mandated to provide recommendations and guidance that may inform the practice of SAD through the evaluation and discussion of topics, themes, and trends identified by SAD review teams (MRTs).”

The goal of the MDRC is identified as providing multidisciplinary expert review of SAD deaths in Ontario with legislative, practice, health, social, and/or intersectional complexities identified through the already-existing oversight and review process, with a goal “to support quality practice and the safety of patients and [SAD] practitioners.” This goal is to be accomplished “through the dissemination of reports.”

These reports are meant to include, “where possible and appropriate, a diversity of thought and perspectives from committee members,” without aiming to establish consensus. Opinions of members are not collated or counted; rather qualifiers such as “few, some, many, most” are used to express the extent of support by committee members.

A recent MDRC Report² raised concerns with several assisted suicides “provided” within 24-48 hours of request. Each of the cases involved circumstances that called the effectiveness of the consent into question, such as withdrawal of earlier requests and statements of reservation on spiritual grounds; disagreement among SAD assessors and “providers”; reliance on virtual assessments rather than in-person consultation; possible undue influence by family members; and unavailability of a preferred options such as palliative care.

Church Teaching:

Sanctity of Life: the Church proclaims the sanctity of human life, from conception to natural death.
We care about the sanctity of life because the entire purpose of each soul God endows with life is to find its way back to God by loving God and caring for all the souls God has placed around it, using all the time and talents that have been entrusted to us to seek God in heaven, our hearts, and each other. Voluntary termination of life any time between conception and natural death necessarily frustrates that purpose.Even when we are disappointed, ill, or in pain we are meant to accept our challenges, offering our suffering to God in the knowledge that this life is passing and that we are intended for greater things. It’s also important to remember that human sufferings and weaknesses offer souls the opportunity to help one another, accompanying each other through all phases of life.

Socially-assisted suicide is clearly contrary to these purposes.
Truth, Freedom, Justice, and Charitable Love. These four fundamental values of Catholic teaching offer rich ground for reflection in the context of birth, life, and death.

Points to Ponder:

When patients are weak, worn out, in pain or distress, confused and not thinking clearly, alone and facing death, are they typically considered to be in condition to make wise, well-considered decisions regarding the culmination of their lifetimes’ work? When decisions are pushed upon them in such conditions, is their consent really sincere or effective?
What happens when SAD or “MAiD” assessors disagree with one another, or with SAD “providers?” How is a decision reached? Given the sharp distinction between life and death, is compromise possible? If not, what would a just, loving, charitable, wise, or prudent decision look like?
Clearly the responsibility of SAD assessors and “providers” is immense; the line between a consented and an unconsented killing can be very thin. What happens when an assessor or “provider” crosses the line between a true consent into something that looks more like a decision in favour of bureaucratic or organizational efficiency, or maybe even something worse?
How are SAD assessors and “providers” chosen, and reviewed? What criteria are applied? And what happens when they make unjustifiable choices that result in the killing of other people?
The table below is taken from MDRC Report 2024-02. It purports to show underlying conditions that were relied upon in the SAD process to justify government-inflicted homicides for which responsibility has been distributed among all members of society. Note that separate lines are provided for “Complex Chronic,” “Musculoskeletal”, and “Autoimmune” causes, to each of which none or single deaths are attributed. It being the case that zero or one killings justified separate listing of those causes, what conditions are covered by the 14 causes grouped under “Other” cases listed on the 4^th line? If authors of the report were willing to devote lines to causes with single or no deaths, why could not the 14 “other” causes be defined?

¹NOTE: Federal and Provincial authorities identify Socially-Assisted Death practices as “medical assistance in dying, or “MAiD”. Catholic Conscience prefers the acronym “SAD”.

² MDRC Report 2024-4: Complex Same-Day / Next Day Provisions, accessible at https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/MDRC-Report-2024.4_Same-Day-Next-Day-Provisions_Final.pdf. Catholic Conscience thanks the Macdonald – Laurier Institute for making the report available to the public.

Combating Hate (Canada Bill C-9)

Among bills debated by the House of Commons during the 45th Parliament is C-9, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (Hate Propaganda, Hate Crime, and Access to Religious or Cultural Places).¹Along with other bills considered during that parliament, it is summarized and annotated on our Parliament Brief page.²

According to Bill C-9’s sponsor, Justice Minister Sean Fraser, during his introduction at second reading,

…One of the great promises of Canada is the right of its citizens to live freely, regardless of the colour of their skin, the God they pray to, their gender identity or the person they love…

It is important we understand the scale of what we have observed in Canada's recent history. Nearly 5,000 hate crimes are officially reported by law enforcement annually in this country. We know, through conversations with affected communities, that the true number is much, much higher. The under-reporting of hate crimes is in and of itself a symptom of a societal problem: that people may not have faith that the criminal law is actually equipped to deal with the circumstances they face so routinely in their communities.

It troubles me greatly when I open the newspapers and see such stories. When I meet with Jewish Canadians, they tell me that they are beginning to question whether they have a place in this country, as a result of the hate they have been subjected to. I think about what I have witnessed in my own community, with local police laying charges for the advocating of genocide toward Jewish Canadians. Recently in my home province of Nova Scotia, synagogues have been desecrated with hate symbols that seek to intimidate people of the Jewish faith against practising their religion. The National Holocaust Monument has been desecrated. Is there no limit to indecency?

There are many communities that are impacted. I think about Muslim Canadians, who are suffering from a wave of Islamophobia that we must address. I have met with people and visited their mosques, people who have told me what it is like to be harassed in their communities and told me about the fear they have when they seek to gather and pray…

This is completely unacceptable. .. People do not feel safe to practice their religion and to visit their churches, synagogues, mosques, or temples…

I fear that, too often, we, as Canadians, are failing our neighbours. We should seek to be better neighbours. We are responsible, in my view, not only for the acts that we ourselves commit, but for the injustices that we see and accept through our acquiescence and through our inaction. When we see instances of hate in our community, we have a duty to condemn them, to speak up and to show support for our fellow Canadians. It should not be too much to ask that our neighbours take care of one another. Should we adopt that approach, we will collectively be better off.³

Official Summary:

The Act proposes to amend the Criminal Code to, among other things,

(a) repeal a requirement that the Attorney General consent to the institution of proceedings for hate propaganda offences;

(b) create an offence of wilfully promoting hatred against any identifiable group by displaying certain symbols in a public place;

(c) create a hate crime offence of committing an offence under that Act or any other Act of Parliament that is motivated by hatred based on certain factors;

(d) create an offence of intimidating a person in order to impede them from accessing certain places that are primarily used for religious worship or by an identifiable group for certain purposes; and

(e) create an offence of intentionally obstructing or interfering with a person’s lawful access to such places.

Commentary

Commentary at second reading fell along predictably partisan lines.

While commending the objectives of protecting vulnerable communities and supporting police and prosecutors, Conservative members questioned:
- Why the bill proposes to define hatred as “the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike”, rather than adopting the stricter standard adopted by the Supreme Court in Regina v. Keegstra of “extreme detestation and extreme vilification.” The party further questioned why the qualifier “extreme manifestations” had been dropped.
- Why it is proposed to remove the existing requirement that the relevant provincial Attorney General consent to the laying of hate charges.
- Why attacks against Christianity within Canada had not been mentioned by the government. When another member laughed at this question, a Conservative member reminded the House that between May 2021 and December 2023 thirty-three Christian churches had been burned in Canada, and that the previous Parliament had declined to condemn the attacks, along with crimes against other religious groups.
- Why it was not proposed to refine existing laws, rather than adding a new and confusing piece of legislation.
The Bloc Quebecois questioned failure of the propsal to repeal a religious exemption from hate speech, where statements are based on religious texts.
The Green party questioned why, when several “strong pieces” of hate legislation already exist, additional strictures tied to a new definition of “hatred” are proposed, since “[I]t does not make sense to add new legislation where it is not needed” and thereby make things more confusing.

The Government replied that it welcomed all good-faith criticism, and wished to adapt the bill so that all parties are satisfied. However, several of the objections were stated to be suspected of being based on bad faith.

In the press, Catholic commentators expressed concern over the apparent lack of concern about the federal government toward the more than 300 arsons and acts of vandalism perpetrated against Christian churches since 2021.⁴

Points to Ponder

What is the best way for a society to combat hate? Is it preferable to add laws attempting to carefully circumscribe all combinations and permutations of action and mental states, or to rely on simpler, already existing laws, where they exist and cover the proscribed behaviour?
- Canada Criminal Code Section 434, for example, specifies that “Every person who intentionally or recklessly causes damage by fire or explosion to property that is not wholly owned by that person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.” This would cover churches and other places of worship, as well as parked cars, trash bins, and all other forms of property.
  - Which is more difficult to prove? That a fire was intentionally or recklessly set, or that it was set with “an emotion of detestation or vilification (extreme or otherwise) that is stronger than disdain or dislike?”
  - Would it make sense, in addition or as an alternative to adding new laws, to enforce existing laws? It is charged, for example, that authorities declined to take serious action to investigate or prosecute several of the fires that destroyed Canadian Catholic churches between 2021 and 2023.⁶
- Do there already exist laws that prohibit individuals from blocking others from access to places of religious worship?
- Do there exist other ways to combat hate, in addition or as an alternative to criminal legislation?
  - For example, should public schools teach children that burning churches and other places of worship, or barring worshippers from entering, is wrong?
  - Does, could, or should the Catholic Church have any role to play in combatting hate? What, if anything, could or should be done?
- Like arson, murder - and inciting others to commit murder or other forms of violence - is also already illegal in many jurisdictions. Still, it is reported that following the murder of activist Charlie Kirk in September 2025, a number of public figures openly praised the killing⁶ in terms that might well be construed as approving of the killing of individuals who speak publicly against their own ideas. Such figures included, for example:
  - A professor of political science and religion at the University of Toronto, who shared a post citing the killing as “honestly too good for so many of you fascist c—ts.”
  - A University of Calgary associate professor, who posted comments including “Bullseye” and “Charlie Kirk no longer exists” together with an emoji of a laughing face.
  - The province of Manitoba’s Minister of Families, who shared a post stating that “I extend absolutely no empathy for people like that.”
    Do such statements fall as “hate speech,” or as motivated by hatred, within the strictures of the proposed law, or any other? To the extent that they incite further violence, should such statements be curtailed?

As noted above, concerns have been stated about the apparent governmental indifference to crimes against Christian communities. In introducing and justifying the bill, however, Minister Fraser stated, among other things, that “People do not feel safe to practice their religion and to visit their churches, synagogues, mosques, or temples…”³
- The term "place of religious worship" does not appear to be defined within t bill. However, most dictionaries accept that a “church” is a place of Christian worship, or a body of Christian believers.
  - Is it important that Catholics and other Christians respect truth and fairness in argument?
  - If so, is the fact that the Minister led his list of worship houses with churches relevant?
  - It seems undeniable that the previous government was not very interested in defending Catholics or other Christians from persecution. Has the current government given any indication of its interest level?

Sources:

« Previous

“Ordinary Joes”: What happens when we each play our part in the ordinary, day-to-day? A Lesson on Faith and Stewardship

Of Common Concern: Just War, Revisited

CST Rosary: Third Joyful Mystery - the Annunciation

Consecration of Catholic Conscience to the Blessed Virgin Mary

Most Holy Mother of God,

Annual Conference: Building a Culture of Life and Dignity

Quebec Provincial Election 2026

Prince Edward Island Provincial Election 2027

Manitoba Provincial Election 2027

Northwest Territories General Election 2027