Finding the Challenges and Joys of Paul VI's Teaching on the Family

By Maria Wiering

Looking back, I’m sure the moment was awkward.

My now-husband and I were on our second date: evening coffee at a laid-back café in St. Paul, Minnesota. We had been friends for years, and I wanted to investigate potential roadblocks as we moved from friendship to something more.

So, I asked, with the coolness of the Grand Inquisitor: did he agree with the Church’s teaching on contraception?

Graciously, my husband has no recollection of this moment. I recall him looking slightly uncomfortable, but he affirmed that yes, he trusted the Church.

Whew, I thought, probably searching for the next conversation non-starter.

The truth is, if he had said no, it probably would have been a deal breaker. I felt strongly about avoiding contraception, and realized I needed a like-minded spouse. The question wasn’t like asking his feelings on vegetarianism, or another lifestyle preference, even one with ethical components. I was asking him, essentially, if he was willing to surrender decisions about our family size – and therefore our personal plans and aspirations – to God’s providence.

Admittedly, it was a big ask.

In Humane Vitae, the 1968 encyclical affirming the Church’s teaching on birth control, one gets the impression Pope Paul VI also knew he was putting in a steep order. He acknowledged that abiding by the Church’s teaching could be a burden for some couples, and told them to focus on eternal life – not a card one usually has to play if the immediate upside of something is blatantly obvious. However, the encyclical is incredibly pro-woman, pro-child and pro-family, which is what has convinced me, and many others, to shape our lives around it.

After Paul VI explained contraception was an unacceptable means to prevent births, he acknowledged that couples who wished to avoid pregnancy must practice self-discipline. He promised it would bear fruit: “It fosters in husband and wife thoughtfulness and loving consideration for one another. It helps them to repel inordinate self-love, which is the opposite of charity. It arouses in them a consciousness of their responsibilities.” And, he added, it’s a good example for their kids, too.

By contrast, he pointed to the potential characteristics of a world rife with contraception use, including marital infidelity; a “general lowering of moral standards”; disrespect of women, making them “mere instruments of selfish enjoyment”; and governmental endorsement (imposition even) of artificial contraception.

Looking around today, it’s hard to argue he wasn’t right.

In March, Pope Francis said Pope Paul VI’s “genius was prophetic.” He cautioned, however, that the encyclical should be pastorally applied with great mercy – something Paul VI called for as well.

As Catholics, we often think of this mercy being expressed in the confessional, but it should be an attitude we in the pews embrace as well. We Natural Family Planning promoters must avoid a better-than-thou air of haughtiness. A certain sense of pride is understandable, given our minority status and the kind of dedication it requires to practice it. NFP is, however, only a tool to space births, not the marital end game. A merciful attitude towards Catholics who struggle to keep this teaching, instead of an us-and-them approach, would serve all lay Catholics well.

That’s not to say we shouldn’t widely extol the benefits of NFP. I love understanding how my body works, and that my husband understands it as well. It also appeals to my crunchy, organic-produce-loving self, as it requires thought and time, but nothing artificial – and potentially harmful – in my body. It also has helped numerous friends pinpoint fertility problems and eventually become pregnant.

I’ve been married – and a mom – long enough to know that this vocation does entail burdens, some that the girl at the coffee shop six years ago couldn’t have anticipated. Those burdens, however, deepen my admiration of my husband and appreciation for my son, and are lightened by the quiet comfort and joy of cooperating with God’s plan for our family.

Maria Wiering is a staff writer at the "Catholic Review," newspaper of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. USCCB offers resources for finding a national NFP provider and local NFP classes.

Five Things to Remember for Dec. 11

1.   The Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe is tomorrow, December 12. As the patroness of the Americas the Virgin of Guadalupe holds special meaning for people in the United States. Download a special prayer card to celebrate this feast and petition for regard for religious liberty.

2.  After setting up the Christmas tree that points upwards toward heaven, take time to bless this symbol of God’s evergreen love for us.

3.  Many believe that their odds for divorce are 50/50. But there are things couples can do to decrease the risk of a split. One study, The State of Our Unions, finds that “if you are a reasonably well-educated person with a decent income, come from an intact family and are religious, and marry after the age of 25 without having a baby first, your chances of divorce are very low indeed.”

4.  Hurricane Sandy’s devastation on the East Coast still has people out of their homes. The U.S. bishops have urged parishes to take up collections for victims of Sandy to address the needs for food, clothing, shelter and other basic needs. Collection money will go to Catholic Charities USA, the official domestic relief agency of the U.S. Catholic Church. Funds will go to respond to immediate emergency needs and long-term pastoral and reconstruction needs of the church.

5.  God Loves You.

From Virulent Partisanship to Bold Cooperation

 

By Sister Mary Ann Walsh

 

With the election over, it’s time for the nation to retake its noble position as the home of the brave. Certainly the next four years will mark a critical time for our nation, an opportunity to show our better selves after unprecedented political rancor. It’s long been accepted the truth is the first casualty of political warfare; now we can add decency and civility to the casualty list. We’ve nowhere to go but up.

 
Despite this, however, we remain a blessed nation. A quick look at starvation in Africa and war in the Middle East drives home awareness of the blessings the United States holds. Even when the terrifying hurricane roared up the east coast a few weeks ago, as a nation we have the internal and external resources to deal with the devastation.
 
Yet since the Bible notes that to whom much is given, much is to be expected,  it is worth dwelling on expectations. America’s bounty calls for a generous response. The response can take many forms. Overall the response needs to be marked by selflessness –  a sharing of the benefits bestowed upon us; humility – the realization that we receive God’s gifts because of His generosity not because of our worthiness, and  a disposition to take the long view – instant gratification isn’t all it initially seems to be.
 
First of all, as people of strength undaunted by flood and wind we must stand for the weakest among us, especially to protect innocent life, be it infants in utero, the elderly in their waning days on earth and everyone in between. There’s no need to see innocent life as burdensome, another’s frail life as taking something from us or people as anything but the face of God, perhaps scarred, but always precious.
 
God’s blessings on our United States call for us to offer reciprocal generosity to those who have less, such as immigrants seeking refuge and people without means for a decent life. Much of the technological greatness we see now, for example, has come from people who were immigrants back then. Widespread poverty now stands as a blight upon our nation. We must address our treatment of the weak for our national greatness is rightly measured by what we do for the least among us. Can we blithely share in a bountiful buffet while fellow citizens go malnourished and suffer from ailments just a dose of medicine away from a cure?

A nobility of spirit also urges Americans to take the long view. The U.S. Constitution for more than 200 years has enshrined Americans’ basic rights, including the right to religious liberty. This guarantee, described in the Constitution’s First Amendment, promises that government will not force citizens to violate their religious beliefs. A steadfast defense of this constitutional guarantee strengthens our roots in U.S. democracy. Paramount too is a defense of the institution of marriage that guarantees a child’s right to be raised in a loving home by a caring mother and father. A country rooted in faith and family can continue to build on the greatness of the early and growing America that built a legal system that protects the weak, innocent child first of all.

With the election over, efforts to regain our nobility also mean we need now to restore civility in dialogue. Virulent bipartisanship must to yield to bold cooperation. All  Americans must work as one for the spiritual and material health of our country and beyond.

Voting: A Matter of Conscience

Serious people feel overwhelmed going into the 2012 election. Seeing many choices or none, some seek a rationale to stay home on Election Day, but to give in to such discouragement is political despair.

Fortunately, conscience can guide us, even when we don’t know it. The voice of conscience can include a feeling of disconnect – a this-doesn’t-feel-right sensation, and a sense of puzzlement – and the sense that this-doesn’t-gel-with-what-I’ve-been-taught. People of conscience weigh key moral issues. They study and struggle with the questions at hand. They engage in a lifetime effort to develop the fine-tuned moral sensitivity needed to understand deeply Church teaching on critical issues.

Issues that directly affect innocent human lives, such as abortion and euthanasia, are primary and demand serious consideration. Since 1973, there have been an estimated 53 million abortions in the U.S. Two states, Washington and Oregon, have legalized physician-assisted suicide for persons with terminal illnesses, called “death with dignity.” Concern for other life issues, such as the death penalty, is vital. Today the Church questions if execution can even be used in modern society since we now have secure ways to keep people from harming others. Since 1973, there have been 138 documented cases of innocent people eventually freed from death row. After a ten-year hiatus the death penalty was reinstituted in our country in 1976. Has this contributed to the responsibility, restoration and rehabilitation needed in our criminal justice system?

Millions of undocumented persons demand our compassion. An estimated 11.1 million have made the U.S. their home, raising families and contributing to the economy. Some came here as children; this is the only land they know. There is an immigration problem and justice demands a humane solution to it, one that respects the responsibilities and rights of all.

There is a move to redefine marriage. The marriage of a man and a woman is the foundation of the family and the basic cell of society, yet various proposals seek to erode and ultimately redefine the perennial meaning of marriage in the law. The contribution marriage makes to the common good is essential, and protection of marriage is another matter of justice.

The growing disparity between rich and poor means most of the world’s resources are in the hands of a small percentage of its people. More than 50 percent of the world’s assets are owned by the richest two percent of adults … the bottom half of the world population own only one percent of the wealth. In our nation 46 million people live below the poverty line, established at $23,113 for a family of four. Approximately 25 million people are unemployed or underemployed – a real unemployment rate of 15.6 percent.

The Constitution heralds religious liberty in the First Amendment, yet in recent years religious groups have had to fight for this right. Some opponents dismiss religious freedom as inconsequential. We’ve seen legal efforts to deny the church the right to participate in government programs unless it cedes its religious principles. We’ve seen government officials dismiss those who defend marriage as between one man and one woman as “bigots.” We’ve seen the state try to define who can be a minister in a church. We see that people are persecuted for their faith around the world, losing their homes, even their lives, for lack of religious freedom.

State-sponsored violence through war and other aggression results in thousands of deaths and millions of disrupted lives. The Church’s long-held just war teaching suggests war is permissible only if the damage inflicted by the aggressor is lasting, grave, and certain; all other means of putting an end to the aggression have been shown to be impractical or ineffective; there are serious prospects of the war’s success; and the use of arms does not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.

Other issues are at stake in the coming election but the above issues deserve particular concern. Can they be discussed civilly? Can individuals look at them from several sides and consider what resonates with their conscience? These are matters for study and prayer before anyone enters the voting booth.

Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Keeping Love in the Debate

Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, the bishops' call to political responsibility, is a high-profile document. One reason is that it deals with issues that have major ramifications for the lives and well being of people everywhere. Another is that it provides a guide for the intersection of the values of faith and the world of politics, certainly a tall and delicate order. But another reason it draws so much attention is probably the fact that it covers an area--politics--that everyone likes to fight about.

People like having their arguments validated. And what greater validation is there than to be able to say that the bishops--and by extension, God--agree with this political view or that? This gives rise to regarding Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship not as a guiding tool for understanding Church teaching and forming one's conscience by it but like a Catholic Rubik's Cube with a secret code to crack, a code that provides the definitive Catholic ideological view. And from such a vantage point, of course, a person is then free to attack every other ideological view and the people holding them.

And therein lies a problem. Catholics have a duty to be advocates for issues affecting the common good, both at the ballot box and year round. But they also have a duty to carry out this advocacy in a way that's worthy of their faith. This means not giving into the cultural mentality that it's okay to engage in the scorched earth, zero sum game that American politics have become. In Catholic teaching, ends do not justify means.

In a video on civility in public discourse (part of a series of videos promoting Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship), Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington lists "falsehoods, lies, distortions, half-truths" among the sort of things Catholics should not be saying/spreading. He instead challenges Catholics to "speak the truth with love."

In the worlds of cable news, the blogosphere and comment boxes, both parts of this can be a challenge. Even when one manages to find the truth, there's the added challenge of not using it as a license to be a jerk.

Pope John XXIII famously reiterated a guiding principle that has been attributed to St. Augustine and others: "In essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity." While the first two items fuel endless debate as to what's essential and what's doubtful, "in all things, charity" trumps the rest. The Christian can never stop loving, even when engaging in intense debate over life-and-death issues. The person who does so risks becoming, in the words of St. Paul, a banging gong or clashing cymbal, something that gets attention by being loud and obnoxious, but ultimately lacks meaning or the ability to connect to people.

When Pope John Paul II canonized Edith Stein in 1998, he recalled that she went so far as to insist, "Do not accept anything as truth if it lacks love. And do not accept anything as love which lacks truth."

As Catholics engage the world of politics in 2012, they should view the truths of the Church from the perspective of love: Catholics care about immigration reform because they love immigrants. Catholics care about threats to human life because they love the unborn, the sick and the elderly. Catholics care about marriage because they love the family. Catholics care about religious freedom and domestic poverty because they love the poor and vulnerable and want to serve them freely. Finally, Catholics care about world peace because they love every person on the planet as part of one big, interconnected family.

The sheer importance of the Church's belief in the dignity of each person is what compels Catholics to take their faith into the public square. It follows then that this belief, essentially "Love thy neighbor," should also be translated into how Catholics treat the people they encounter in the public square, even fellow Catholics, no matter how heated the discussion or sharp the disagreement.

It's a challenge to live up to the standard first mentioned in the Gospels: that the rest of the world would recognize the followers of Jesus by their love.

Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Temptations and Voting

Nowhere do the issues of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, the U.S. bishops' call to political responsibility, get more delicate than when the document tackles questions of voting.

In the document, the bishops describe at length a Catholic moral framework that encompasses their priority issues for 2012 -- abortion and threats to human life and dignity, religious freedom concerns, efforts to redefine marriage, immigration reform, international peace, and domestic poverty, unemployment and the economic crisis. They describe the nature of these issues and why each is a concern for the Church, essentially why Catholics should care about them.

But then comes the inevitable question: how should Catholics put the pieces together when they go to vote? On this question, it's best to let the document speak for itself: "The consistent ethic of life provides a moral framework for principled Catholic engagement in political life and, rightly understood, neither treats all issues as morally equivalent nor reduces Catholic teaching to one or two issues."

This prompts the question, "Wait, so Catholics aren't supposed to be single-issue voters?"

The bishops answer this squarely, asserting, "As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate's position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter's support." But then it gets even more interesting: "Yet a candidate's position on a single issue that involves an intrinsic evil, such as support for legal abortion or the promotion of racism, may legitimately lead a voter to disqualify a candidate from receiving support."

Per the possibility of bringing a candidate back from a disqualified state, the bishops say, "There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate's unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons." They state that this is not a flippant matter: "Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preference or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."

Of course a voting Catholic's responsibilities don't end at avoiding evil; they must also do good. As the bishops note, "a voter should not use a candidate's opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues of human life and dignity."

So a candidate who passes the test on big issues doesn't get a free pass on every other moral question. The bishops list "unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy" as "serious moral issues that challenge our conscience and require us to act."

The delicate balance of all of these issues is best summarized as what could be called the "Two Temptations" of Faithful Citizenship:

1. To say that all issues are morally equivalent with no ethical distinctions. This simply isn't so, say the bishops. For instance, "The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life...is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed."

2. To say that only certain issues matter or, as the bishops phrase it, "the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity."

Suddenly the challenge of the Catholic voter becomes comparable to navigating a speeding car down a slippery road at night without falling into the ditches on both sides of the road, or like the children's board game "Operation," where players use tweezers to remove ailments from a patient without touching the metal sides, setting off a buzzer. This may sound like a daunting task, but it's a responsibility the bishops have entrusted to every U.S. Catholic. Voting may be only one way Catholics can answer the call to live out their faith in the public square, but accepting its challenge is a powerful way to show that they care.

Catholics Care. Catholic Vote: Series Index

Catholics Care. Catholic Vote: an Introduction (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Political Engagement is Every Catholic's Duty (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: The Question of Conscience (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Human Life and Dignity (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Conscience Formation by the Numbers (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Religious Freedom and Ugly Assumptions (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Strengthening and Defending Marriage is a Matter of Justice (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Poverty and Helping People to Flourish (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Untangling the International Knot (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Immigration Reform and a Reasonable Church (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Temptations and Voting (Spanish here)
Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Keeping Love in the Debate (Spanish here)

Catholics Care. Catholics Vote: Conscience Formation by the Numbers

Numbers can be cold and impersonal. They lack the depth and nuance of words and ideas. "I feel like I'm just a number," a person struggling with a large or bureaucratic system might say.

But numbers can also be uncompromising. They force us to confront realities that can be dizzying, unavoidable and downright unwelcome. Someone who's seen the numbers no longer has plausible deniability.

In Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, the bishops similarly hold up six areas that often have unpleasant realities -- and equally unpleasant numbers -- associated with them. These are the issues, they say, that should carry special weight with the voting Catholic's conscience:

• Abortion and threats to the lives and dignity of the vulnerable, sick or unwanted
• Efforts to force Catholic health care, education and social services to violate their consciences or stop serving those in need
• Efforts to redefine the institution of marriage
• The economic crisis, unemployment, poverty, and addressing debt in ways that protectpoor persons
• A broken immigration system
• Moral questions raised by war, terror and violence, and the need for peace, particularly in the Middle East

Each of these areas simultaneously meshes and clashes with different political persuasions and cultural assumptions in the United States. And each of these can be subsequently aggrandized or rationalized away to suit these political and cultural preferences. This is why the bishops call on Catholics to form their consciences -- through prayer and reflecting on Scripture and Catholic teaching, but also by studying the issues.

On that last point, it's amazing what a few numbers will do.

On the direct taking of innocent human life, there's the estimated 53 million abortions that have occurred since Roe v. Wade legalized it in 1973. There's also the rather abrupt zero for the number of treatments for "incurable" diseases that have been developed with stem cells harvested from human embryos that were destroyed to obtain them. (Conversely, the number developed using adult stem cells, which cause no harm to the stem cell donor, is 73.)

On the question of giving Catholic institutions the choice between violating their consciences or going out of business, the number that most vividly illustrates the impact this would have on society is probably 1 in 6, the number of the total people hospitalized in the United States every year who are cared for in a Catholic hospital.

Looking at the care provided by Catholic charities, there's housing services to 497,732 people, adoption services to 38,829, addiction services to 81,866, pregnancy services to 93,542, not to mention 110,268 home delivered meals and 1,420,492 fed in soup kitchens.

On the bishops's promotion and defense of marriage, the most significant statistic is probably that children in single-parent families comprise 27 percent of all American children, yet they count for 62 percent of all poor children.

Bridging into poverty, there's the fact that 16.2 million U.S. children live in homes that can't provide enough food for all their members at some point during the year. There's the official U.S. poverty rate of 15.1 percent, the highest it's been in 17 years. There's the 10 months that the average unemployed or underemployed person spends looking for work.

Speaking of the economy, there's also the estimated $7 billion that undocumented immigrants pay into Social Security annually since it's believed that 50-75 percent of them pay federal, state and local taxes.

Finally, in international justice and peace, there's the fact that 90 percent of people killed or maimed by landmines and cluster munitions are non-military civilians. Additionally, 30-40 percent of landmine victims are children. There's also the 1 percent of the federal budget that goes to international aid or the 0.5 percent that goes to poverty-focused assistance. There are the 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads, or 700 launchers, in the hands of both the United States and Russia seven years after the ratification of the New START Treaty. And there are the over 10,000 people killed as a result of violence in Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Bahrain last year.

After a while, numbers start to run together, and so often they only tell part of the story ("There are lies, damned lies and statistics," the saying goes). However, the issues raised by the bishops in their call to political responsibility have real human dimensions and statistical realities behind them that should prompt Catholics to do their homework and adjust their consciences accordingly.

(Sources by paragraph: 1. Guttmacher Institute; USCCB Pro-Life Activities; www.stemcellresearch.org; 2. Catholic Health Association; 3. Catholic Charities USA report; 4. Marriage Unique for a Reason; 5. USDA; USCCB Justice, Peace and Human Development; 6. USCCB Migration and Refugee Services; 7. USCCB Justice Peace and Human Development; New York Times; The Economist; UNHCR; Iraq Body Count database.)

Promesas rotas

Note: The following is a Spanish version of the May 15 post, "Broken Vows."

La saga mediática del padre Alberto Cutié, el sacerdote de Miami que ha admitido tener una relación sexual con una mujer, y el caso de John Edwards, cuya infidelidad está siendo expuesta por su esposa Elizabeth en su gira para promover su libro “Resilience” (Capacidad de resistencia), tienen algo en común.

Ambos casos cuentan la historia de una infidelidad. Pudiera parecer que las similitudes terminan ahí. Pero no es así.

El libro de la señora Edwards pone énfasis en los efectos de una relación fracturada sobre el otro miembro de la pareja. Dice que esto a ella la ha cambiado. La simpatía del público se ha puesto generalmente del lado de la esposa traicionada, quien está librando una batalla contra el cáncer y además perdió a un hijo adolescente en un accidente de tráfico.

En la historia del padre Cutié, sin embargo, la simpatía parece encontrarse del lado del hombre que “la ha traicionado” en lugar de aquel/los que han sido traicionados – la gente en la iglesia.

En ninguno de ambos casos se trata solamente de una historia personal de estos dos hombres. Aun sin la notoriedad pública de ambos, las dos son historias tristes que nos afectan a todos; pues, parafraseando el poema “Ningún hombre es una isla” del poeta metafísico John Donne, “La infidelidad de los demás me empobrece”.

La mayoría de las mujeres se estremece por dentro cuando escuchan acerca de la infidelidad en el matrimonio de alguien a quien conocen. El temor es obvio: si le ha sucedido a ella, también me puede suceder a mí. Es un pensamiento que pone el alma intranquila y que hace que la mujer se pregunte si se puede confiar en alguien y si ella será la última en saberlo.

La situación del padre Cutié, sin embargo, encuentra reacciones diferentes. El apuesto sacerdote con aura de estrella de Hollywood, quien se ha convertido en una industria unipersonal de publicaciones y consejos, se ha convertido, para mejor o peor, en la imagen de la última salva dirigida en contra de la Iglesia Católica.

Cutié declaró en el programa Early Show de la cadena CBS que “no quiero convertirme en el “sacerdote que está en contra del celibato”. Creo que eso es desafortunado. Creo que es un debate que se está dando en nuestra sociedad y creo que ahora yo me he convertido en una especie imagen, de abanderado de esta postura”.

Puede que el padre no quiera ser la imagen de esto, pero parece haber quebrantado la primera regla para acallar los comentarios: permanezca lejos de los medios.

A los medios de comunicación les fascinan las historias de sexo e hipocresía y, cuando ambos convergen en la historia de un sacerdote infiel, los medios no conocen fronteras. El celibato se convierte en un chiste, en lugar de algo que merece respeto; en algo imposible, a pesar de los millones —posiblemente más—de personas que han vivido célibes durante siglos.

Y sin embargo, a pesar de lo que cada uno piense sobre el celibato, el verdadero asunto aquí es la infidelidad, el haber quebrantado un voto sagrado. Esta ruptura de la fidelidad tiene impacto más allá de la pareja a la que involucra.

La fidelidad quebrantada menoscaba no sólo a la pareja sino también a la comunidad en sentido amplio. John Edwards no hirió sólo a su esposa sino también a su familia, sus amigos y las personas que lo admiraban. Sembró una sombra de duda sobre su trabajo en favor de los pobres, aunque su esposa alabe abundantemente esos esfuerzos en su libro y en la promoción mediática que lo acompaña.

El padre Cutié también ha hecho daño a otros, incluyendo a toda la gente de la parroquia que él guió tan bien. Parecen estar aguantando bien mientras tratan con los medios afuera de la iglesia. Sin embargo, uno se pregunta acerca de las parejas a las que él preparó para un compromiso de por vida en el matrimonio, los niños a los que enseñó a no decir nunca mentiras, los feligreses enfermos a los que les dio seguridad sobre su lugar en el cielo.

El efecto de la infidelidad es profundo. Elizabeth Edwards lo expresa bien en su libro cuando escribe: “Soy una persona diferente ahora. Antes no estaba herida, no tenía miedo, no sentía incertidumbre y ahora siempre los sentiré”.

Uno no puede más que desearles bien a los Edwards y al padre Cutié en vista de sus debilidades y de sus fallos. No hay nada aquí de lo que sus enemigos, en la política o en la iglesia, deban mofarse. Sólo algo que lamentar — el profundo dolor que John, Elizabeth y el Padre Alberto están experimentando en sus propias vidas y la sórdida y prolongada pena evocada en las comunidades a su alrededor.

Nadie es una isla. La fidelidad quebrantada nos duele a todos.

Broken Vows

The much media-hyped sagas of Father Alberto Cutié, the Miami priest who has come clean about a sexual relationship with a woman, and John Edwards, whose infidelity is being disclosed again by his wife Elizabeth on her "Resilience" book tour, have something in common.

Both tell the tales of infidelity. Similarities might seem to end there. But they don't.

Mrs. Edwards' book emphasizes the effects of a fractured relationship on a spouse. She said it changed her. Public sympathy has generally sided with the wronged wife who is battling cancer and who lost a teenage son in an auto accident.

Father Cutié's story finds sympathy, on the other hand, with the man who "done her wrong," rather than the actual one(s) wronged – the people in the church.

Neither man's story is just a personal one. Even without their notoriety, both are sad tales that affect us all. For, to paraphrase the metaphysical poet John Donne's poem "No Man Is an Island," "Everyone's infidelity diminishes me."

Most women shudder inside when they hear about infidelity in the marriage of someone they know. The obvious fear: If it happened to her, it could happen to me. It's a soul-stirring realization that makes a woman secretly question if anyone can be trusted, and makes her wonder if she'll be the last to know.

Father Cutié's plight, however, finds different reactions. The Hollywood handsome star, who has become a one-man publishing and advice-dispensing industry, has become, for better or worse, the poster boy for the latest salvo aimed at the Catholic Church.

Father Cutié declared on CBS' Early Show that "I don't want to be the anti-celibacy priest. I think that's unfortunate. I think it's a debate that's going on in our society, and now I've become kind of a poster boy for it."

Alas, he may not want to be the poster boy, but he seems to have forsaken the first rule in tamping this down: Stay off the air.

The media love a sex or hypocrisy story, and when both converge in the tale of the unfaithful padre, the media know no bounds. Celibacy becomes a joke, rather than something to be respected; an impossibility, despite millions -- likely more -- who have lived celibate lives for centuries.

Yet whatever you think about celibacy, the real story here is infidelity, not being true to a sacred vow. This fracture of fidelity has an impact on more than the pair involved.

Fractured fidelity undermines not just a couple, but their wider community. John Edwards did not just hurt his wife, but also his family, friends and people who admired him. It cast a shadow over his work for the poor, even though those efforts are much praised by his wife in her book and media jaunt.

Father Cutié has hurt people too, including the crowds surrounding the parish he led so well. They're holding up well as they mill about with media outside the church. Yet one wonders about the couples he prepared for their lifetime commitment in marriage, the children he taught to never tell a lie, the ailing parishioners he assured of their place in heaven.

The effect of infidelity is profound. Elizabeth Edwards says it well in her book when she writes, "I am a different person now. I was not wounded, not afraid, not uncertain before and now I always will be."

One wishes the Edwardses and Father Cutié well in the wake of their foibles and failings. There's nothing for political or church enemies to laugh at here. Only something to regret -- the acute pain that John, Elizabeth and Father Alberto experience in their own lives, and the dull, long-lasting pain evoked in the communities around them.

No one is an island. Fractured fidelity pains us all.