Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla) penned a thoughtful op-ed in the Wall Street Journal recently, outlining all the tougher provisions in the Senate bill—the path to citizenship for those who broke the law is marked with fines and sanctions. The same goes for employers who undercut the market by employing those who broke the law and got in ahead of those who waited in line. Senator Rubio further invited people to express ways the security provisions could be further strengthened.

For those who are concerned about rewarding law-breakers—the roughly 11 million or so illegals currently here—Rubio correctly responds that we have to deal with reality that people are not going home. We can further add, that they’ve been here so long, many having children that mass deportations would be unjust, in addition to politically untenable.

It’s this focus that has rightly animated Catholic activists on the topic, all the way up to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and its leader, Cardinal Timothy Dolan. Legalization is the only way to ensure migrant workers aren’t exploited.

But in my view, pro-immigration activists have too often neglected the need for strengthened border security as an important prerequisite of any true immigration reform. Dealing with current reality is one thing—allowing the same conditions that created it to fester and doing this all over again 25 years from now is quite another. Furthermore, the very principle of what is just—something touched on by CV blogger Tim Shaughnessy in two good posts here and here—is hindered, when a system doesn’t reward those immigrants who wait in line and do things the proper way.

The following two paragraphs are extracted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and effectively sum up the Church’s teaching on immigration…

#2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws (emphasis added) and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

I’ve emphasized the part about obeying the laws, because this is a facet of Church teaching that Catholic activists have too often overlooked—not contradicted directly, but seemingly passed over. It’s time for immigration reform to become a reality, and to take 11 million people and get them “on the grid”, so to speak. But it shouldn’t happen until we’ve taken the necessary steps to ensure this whole illegal mess doesn’t repeat itself. Upholding this facet of immigration laws is woven into Catholic doctrine and an essential part of keeping the whole intact.

Not even the the cardinal archbishop of Washington could be bothered to utter a word of condemnation or even a tut-tut. The loudest voices for his ouster will likely come from Washington Wizards fans, but considering his stats their rationale likely won’t be his sexuality. Though some of the less cordial ones may use anti-gay slurs in voicing their displeasure.

Anyhow, I thought this factoid might be helpful in discussing the Carla Hale matter.

Bishop Watterson High School, where Carla Hale used to teach Phys Ed.

Carla Hale was a teacher at a Catholic high school. Jason Collins plays basketball.

Carla Hale worked for an organization which believes one’s personal example is the most powerful teacher; that students can look up to their teachers for an education not only in their classroom instruction but in how they live their lives in light of the Gospel.

Jason Collins plays basketball and is only a role model for those who choose to emulate him.

Carla Hale, like every other teacher at that Catholic High School, and even Bishop Campbell himself, was charged with teaching not only through classroom instruction, but also through the witness of her life. Hale, like every other teacher and even Bishop Campbell himself, is a sinner in various ways. No one is fired for simply being a sinner—no one would be left to teach. The question is not “does one sin?” but “how does one react to their own sins?”

A teacher who enters into an adulterous relationship but who is never caught cannot be fired for what no one knows about. If the affairs becomes public knowledge, it seems to me that would be grounds for a review of employment. If the person ends it, repents, and honestly, truly seeks the healing and help he or she needs not to do it again, that person could probably stay on. If that person persists in the affair and refuses to acknowledge the wrong, that person ought to be fired. It’s a matter of public witness in a Catholic setting—do you repent and accept the Gospel as taught by the Catholic Church, or do you persist and reject?

None of this, of course, applies to Jason Collins playing basketball. He does not work for an organization that is dedicated to teaching. He does not work for an organization that upholds Catholic morality and works to instill those values in the young. He gets paid to play basketball by an organization whose mission is to field a good basketball team for the entertainment of their fans. Therefore, it really does not matter that Collins has come out as gay (to tell the truth, I’m glad he did… but that’s another post).

Jason Collins still is employed because being actively, openly gay is not a barrier to playing basketball.

Carla Hale is no longer employed by the Catholic high school because embracing the homosexual lifestyle to the point of publicly listing your same-sex partner as a spouse bars one from being considered a teacher of Catholic morality.

Frankly, had Carla Hale not allowed her mother’s obituary to reference her partner as a “spouse,” or if she had accepted that the relationship was inconsistent with Catholic teaching, ended it, sought the counseling necessary to rectify some off-kilter matters in her life, and publicly apologized for the scandal, she would likely still be employed.

But Mr. Rana, it seems, took short-cuts. He built without a permit. Whether through shoddy work or poor engineering, the tremendous weight added to the structure made it unsound. When cracks appeared in the building, workers became concerned. According to this report, the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association asked factory owners to suspend operations. “Factory owners opened their factories relying on assurance by the building owner, who said that engineers had checked and certified that the building was okay.” It was not.

When the building collapsed on itself last Wednesday, more than 3,100 workers were inside. So far, more than 400 have been confirmed dead. With about 1,000 souls still missing, the rescue effort has been called off.

On Monday, Pope Francis offered prayers of consolation and solidarity for those affected. “I would like to offer up a prayer for [them]. I express my solidarity and deepest sympathy to the families mourning their loved ones and from the depths of my heart I make a strong appeal that the dignity and safety of the worker may always be protected.”

In addition to joining the Pope in his calls for prayers for the workers and their families, I want to make two quick points. It is easy to see the appalling conditions of a third world sweat shop and think it has nothing to do with us. This would be a mistake: the garments made in that factory were being sold in Western stores. In short, Western consumption enabled, however indirectly, the horrific business malpractice that cost so many lives.

But by the same token, we shouldn’t take for granted the cultural, legal, and moral achievements that make tragedies like the one last week all but unthinkable here in the United States. The kinds of appalling working conditions that are commonplace in Bangladesh all but disappeared from this country a century ago.

That was no accident. It happened because laws were changed. It happened because labor unions provided workers with effective means for demanding better treatment. It happened because our American entrepreneurs generated work opportunities and a growing, competitive labor market. It happened because religious leaders condemned the mistreatment of workers. And because employers—who are just as human as those they employ—chose to treat their workers like people, instead of parts.

The point isn’t to play cheerleader for America nor to gloss over our myriad shortcomings when it comes to the economy, corporate responsibility, or labor unions. The point is simply this: if the best, most humane aspects of the American economy are public and cultural achievements, and I argue they are, then those achievements can also be lost if they are not consciously maintained. The market, like democracy itself, does not—cannot—make men good of its own accord.

As Pope Benedict XVI wrote in Caritas in Veritate:

The exclusively binary model of market-plus-State is corrosive of society, while economic forms based on solidarity, which find their natural home in civil society without being restricted to it, build up society. The market of gratuitousness does not exist, and attitudes of gratuitousness cannot be established by law. Yet both the market and politics need individuals who are open to reciprocal gift.

Markets and laws only get us so far. It is our responsibility—especially through civil society—to guide both the market and the law so that they are effective and humane.

On this feast of St. Joseph the Worker, let’s pray for those denied the dignity of honest, meaningful work. Let us join the Pope in praying for those who lost lives and loved ones in Bangladesh. And let us pray, in a spirit of humble gratitude, for what we have been given, for the wisdom and character we will require to preserve and strengthen the achievements that are our inheritance, and for the courage and perseverance to correct the many inadequacies that remain.

Campbell said earlier in the day that Hale was not fired because of her sexual orientation but because her “quasi-spousal relationship” with another woman violates the church’s moral teaching. He said Hale violated a teacher contract and Roman Catholic Diocese of Columbus policy that prohibits immoral behavior and requires employees to follow general church tenets.

In an exclusive interview with The Dispatch, the bishop said diocesan officials “don’t necessarily go looking for things like that,” but Hale’s decision to name her partner in her mother’s obituary made the relationship public and initiated the termination process.

As bishop, he said, he has a “fundamental responsibility” to maintain the Catholic identity of the institutions under his purview.

“We do this in an atmosphere of care, of calm consideration, but yet out of the realization that at particular times we have to make particular decisions,” he said. “And they are difficult sometimes, but they do flow from what we believe, who we are and how we are to live.”

His Excellency, The Most Rev. Frederick Campbell, Bishop of Columbus (Catholic News Agency File Photo)

Unfortunately this is not the last word on the matter. According to the Columbus NBC affiliate, WCMH Channel 4, Hale’s attorney has formally filed a criminal complaint against the Diocese of Columbus which carries a possible penalty of up to six months in jail and has no exemption for religious organizations. That Bishop Campbell waited until now to speak publicly on the matter is evidence of how agonizing and heartbreaking this must be for him to see a former employee now lashing out against the Church.

In a bizarre side-story, an angry parent was escorted from a charity dinner with the Bishop after an outburst this past weekend. WCMH Channel 4 reports that John Petrucci supports Hale’s dismissal but was concerned about the violent threats that have been directed at Bishop Watterson High School. In response to the confrontation, a spokesman for the Diocese issued the following statement:

“During last evening’s dinner for diocesan ‘Bishop Annual Appeal’ contributors, an attendee, immediately prior to Bishop Campbell’s address, abruptly stood and began speaking regarding Carla Hale in a manner that was not understood or heard by many in attendance. While speaking, he began moving toward the Bishop in a way that concerned many in the audience.  Several attendees thought it necessary to intervene on the Bishop’s behalf, asked the man to leave, and escorted him from the event.  No extraordinary force was either required or applied in this process.

“Bishop Campbell is aware of the passions that have surrounded the Carla Hale issue and is deeply concerned about the anxiety and alarm it has created within our community.  He encourages all on either side of this subject to maintain civility and calm while the grievance process in this case moves forward.”

Given the threats that Petrucci is rightly concerned about, it is understandable that some in the audience may have thought he was a supporter of Hale. The attack on Belgian Archbishop Leonard is one recent example of the anger and hatred that is directed against the Catholic Church. The hacker group “Anonymous” has also issued threats against employees of the diocese. There will surely be worse to come for any who have the courage to defend the truth. Petrucci’s outburst illustrates how easily emotions and passions can overwhelm reason and good judgment. We must choose our words and our actions carefully.

Bishop Campbell and all who share his steadfastness will be called uncompassionate, intolerant, and hypocritical for holding fast to unpopular beliefs. However, we must remember that that love and compassion demand that we make sacrifices for the good of others. Carla Hale’s supporters who call for the Church to violate eternal truths have forgotten that compassion is not just about giving unconditionally, but that sometimes correction is needed when we go astray. The Bishop’s crozier is a reminder of this sacred duty not only to keep his sheep in the fold, but also as a rod to defend from wolves when the time comes.

Until these most recent development, the media coverage of this story has been entirely focused on Carla Hale’s supporters. However, members of the public who support Bishop Campbell and the Dioceses for upholding the Catholic faith have quietly begun to mobilize. A group of parents and students of Bishop Watterson High School has started a petition to offer prayers and encouragement to the Bishop and the Diocese. In the tribulations that lie ahead, they will need our help and our sacrifices.

A former physical education teacher lost her job because of her relationship with another woman.

…

Apetition [sic] was created on Change.org in support of Hale as a teacher, simply requesting: “Reinstate faculty member Carla Hale and apologize for discriminating against her on the basis of sexuality.”

…

Supporters added, “It’s unfair that someone who cared so much about her students and her job should lose them on the basis of something she cannot even control.”

Not quite. A distinction anyone should be able to see plainly has been entirely ignored.

A person with homosexual tendencies and same-sex attraction who lives a chaste, celibate life would not be fired by a Catholic school for “being gay.”

A person with heterosexual tendencies who is still single and maintains a chaste, celibate life would not be fired by a Catholic school for “being straight.” Seems ridiculous to say this, yes, but it is important when setting up the parallels here.

Simply being gay is not sinful and is not grounds for dismissal anymore than being straight is. A person who is gay but maintains that chastity consonant with his or her state of life—a virtue to which we all are called, by the way, gay, straight, bi, married, single, whatever—would not be fired for being gay.

The error, the sin, the grounds for dismissal, comes when the person decides that it is appropriate and acceptable to act upon their disordered desires and then does so. Again, this applies equally to a heterosexual person who pursues extra-marital sex and cohabitation as it does to those persons who engage in same-sex relationships and pursue same-sex “marriage.”

Whether a person is born gay or not is immaterial because, contra Lady Gaga, “Born This Way” Does NOT Mean “Act This Way”. Whether a person is heterosexual or homosexual, that person has a choice whether he or she will participate in sexual relations at all at any given moment, let alone whether they will act on disordered sexual desires—again, whether disordered but basically heterosexual or disordered and basically homosexual.

This teacher was not dismissed because of something she “cannot control” but because of what she chose to do in an area she most definitely can control.

There is a difference between disposition and behavior. Between inclination and action. Between thinking something and doing something. Between desire and activity. This mighty important distinction has been utterly lost in this discussion it seems.

The Diocese of Columbus is being sued for violating the city of Columbus’ statute against discrimination, which includes sexual orientation, and has no religious exemption. Three interesting points here:

1) The fairly recent Hosanna Tabor case should be a strong argument to toss the Columbus statute and force them to re-write it with a religious exemption.

2) Since she was not fired for the simple fact of her homosexuality but because she had engaged in behavior antithetical to Catholic teaching it is possible that the statute does not actually apply at all.

3) If this statute does apply, it means homosexual activities are more protected in law than heterosexual activities because there would be no civil law preventing the Diocese of Columbus for firing a teacher who was cohabiting with an opposite-sex partner.

We shall see how this plays out, but it is another sign that the only intolerance still allowed is anti-Christian intolerance.

Saint Joseph Cathedral, Columbus, Ohio.

LifeSiteNews reports that the terms of employment which were approved by the union that represents Carla Hale explicitly forbid this kind of posturing: “A contract may be terminated at any time for gross inefficiency or immorality, for serious unethical conduct, or for willful and/or persistent violations of reasonable regulations of the school or the Diocesan Office of Catholic Schools.” Many disagree with the Catholic Church regarding the morality of same-sex unions, but surely they cannot disagree that lying to your employer for 19 years and then abruptly denouncing them in public is grossly immoral and seriously unethical.

Only royal trumpeters should toot their own horn. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)

The Catholic Church teaches that people with homosexual feelings fully deserve human dignity and compassion. However, the media frenzy that Hale is all too happy to keep feeding is the very definition of willful and persistent violation of Catholic teaching. In the Gospel, Jesus admonishes his disciples against such public displays, “When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.”

Meanwhile, the principal and other employees of the school have received threatening emails and phone calls from Hale’s supporters. From Hale’s handling of this case, it is clear she is aggressively pushing an agenda that goes beyond simply getting her job back. Even if the school wanted to bring her back, how could they possibly do so now with the media circus and angry mob following on her heels? Far from being contrite and resolving to sin no more, Hale is poisoning whatever sympathy might have remained for her from her former employer.

The invective and demagoguery surrounding this case is typical. All who defend Catholic teaching are derided as hypocrites, bigots, and simply mean-spirited. How wounding these criticisms must be to the heart of Bishop Campbell and the employees of the Diocese of Columbus and Watterson High School who so deeply love the Church and seek the best for all God’s children. Pray for them. Write them a letter to show your support. Thank them for their steadfastness and their courage in defense of the Catholic faith. Unlike Hale, these good servants of God’s people do not seek earthly recognition, but it couldn’t hurt to let them know they are not alone amidst the storm and fury of anti-Catholic persecution which is becoming so fashionable in our time.

As reported by the NCReporter, Cardinal Dolan was asked whether the reform process should be slowed down due to the immigration history of the Boston bombers. He said this:

That’s just illogical, for a number of reasons. First of all, just out of common sense, to label a whole group of people, mainly the vast population of hardworking, reliable, virtuous immigrants, to label them and to demean them because of the vicious tragic action of two people is just ridiculous. That’s illogical. That’s unfair. That’s unjust.

It would seem so…

Emily wrote keenly yesterday that measures proposed currently as “gun control” have no apparent nexus to actually reducing murders or killings.

These measures on their face would not have impacted mass killings like Newton and Columbine. They add burdens to law-abiding citizens who want to protect their families. Nearly all gun owners who comply with handgun rules, including those who buy misnamed “assault weapons,” use them in entirely legitimate and responsible ways.

Many background checks and restrictions already exist, and others such as gun bans have been shown to have no effect on crime.  Meanwhile, new gun control measures rarely seek to actually enforce existing laws against criminals, or to truly address the problem of mental illness.

Then let’s apply Cardinal Dolan’s logic.  People including folks associated with the US Bishops point to Newton and other violent incidents. Then they support banning and restricting guns for law-abiding citizens and families seeking self-defense.  They eventually support banning families from owning guns altogether, on the basis of instances of crime and mass violence.

Perhaps Catholics should follow the example of Cardinal Dolan, and respond as follows:

That’s just illogical, for a number of reasons. First of all, just out of common sense, to label a whole group of people, mainly the vast population of hardworking, reliable, virtuous [gun owners and families], to label them and to demean them because of the vicious tragic action of [a few] people is just ridiculous. That’s illogical. That’s unfair. That’s unjust.

#1 Top three myths about immigration

#2 The impact of immigration on jobs and income

#3 Why unskilled immigrants are good for the economy

To the “stealing our jobs” argument, it should also be noted that most immigrants to the U.S. are either very highly skilled or very low skilled (I believe I heard Ben Powell from video #1 make this argument but I can’t find it online). The U.S. native population, like most countries, has a bell-shaped skill distribution with relatively few people having either very low or very high skills and the vast majority of people in the middle of the bell curve. Therefore, when low- and highly-skilled immigrants come in, they only add to the already-small number of people at the tails. In other words, they don’t compete with the vast majority of people for jobs; they complement them.

I suppose the argument could be made that they still compete with the U.S. workers in the tails, and thus immigration should be prevented for the sake of those people. I’d respond that

1. That is a fairly small number of harmed Americans to justify keeping out immigrants who on net provide a large benefit to the U.S. as a whole. Hopefully the U.S. government isn’t in the business of changing its laws to suit only a tiny minority of its populace. (Oh, wait…)
2. Even if unskilled immigrants compete for jobs with low-skilled Americans, it seems the obvious remedy consistent with subsidiarity is to provide education and skills training to those low-skilled Americans, rather than to construct an elaborate bureaucratic system complete with long lines, countless documents, armed border agents, and super-duper high walls.
3. Even if highly skilled immigrants compete for jobs with highly-skilled Americans, I find it hard to see the downside of having more smart people here. But admittedly I’m not at that end of the skill distribution anyway, so I’m sure a comboxer will set me straight…

Highly-skilled Roman immigrant

Catholics should like immigration purely on humanitarian grounds. Actually, I may be preaching to the choir because the USCCB says “Nearly eighty percent of Catholic voters support earned citizenship.” Unfortunately, as with most polls of Catholics this one does not distinguish between those who self-identify as Catholic and those who, say, are weekly Mass goers. We know, for example, how most Catholics voted in the most recent presidential election. But I would hope the results would not differ much if the pollsters made such a distinction. Cardinal Dolan lent his support to legislative efforts to reform the immigration system.

Those who argue for the morality of keeping immigrants out usually go back to the welfare argument that was addressed in video #3 above; “Even if it’s a small number, some poor immigrants come here just to take advantage of our generous welfare benefits.” Wouldn’t it seem that the obvious remedy is to fix the broken, dependency-creating welfare system, rather than keep it in place but forcefully keep out most or all immigrants because we think that some of them will become welfare queens?

Others argue that immigration is immoral because most of it is done illegally, creating disrespect for U.S. law. I can think of lots of other laws that would seem to create this disrespect much more so than immigration laws, from the truly awful (Roe v. Wade, free contraception in public schools, legal protection of pornography, etc.) to the ridiculous (the TSA, no Big Gulps in Gotham, low-flow toilets, etc.). It would seem there are bigger elephants in the room.

Let’s hope that xenophobia does not carry the day in this debate. Lest we forget, the Good Samaritan was a foreigner, Jesus Himself was questioned because of His place of origin, and I’m going to go out on a limb and presume that most of you readers have an immigrant or two in your own ancestry. “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free!”

There is also the possibility that this case could end up in the Supreme Court, as the unanimous decision in the Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC case specifically leaves open the possibility of subsequent litigation for breach of contract. However, one has to wonder whether a contract based on a 19-year lie could still be valid. The Dispatch article does not state whether the school knew Hale was a lesbian and perhaps had some informal agreement with her provided she kept it quiet, but if so, the concealment on Hale’s part would only be more damning. Neither the school nor the diocese should be punished for trying to right the situation.

Bishop Campbell’s diocese is being sued for upholding Catholic teaching. (AP Photo/Paul Vernon)

An analogous scenario would be a bank manager discovering that one of her employees has been robbing banks, or a police chief discovering that one of his officers has been dealing drugs on the side for the past 20 years. Carla Hale clearly opposes Catholic teaching, so how can she possibly be a Catholic teacher? The Catholic Church is often accused of hypocrisy, but what could be more hypocritical than allowing a teacher to publicly contradict the Catholic faith?

Catholic schools entrust their teachers with a special responsibility to provide spiritual formation and act as role models for their impressionable charges. Not so long ago, most if not all teachers at Catholic schools were consecrated religious. Carla Hale is not even Catholic, but is a practicing Methodist. There is nothing wrong with ecumenism, but faithful Catholic parents have every right to expect that teachers at a Catholic school should be faithful ministers of the Gospel and witnesses to Christ in both their public and private lives.

Nevertheless, Hale has found a deep well of vocal support from partisans on the left. At time of writing, an online petition for her reinstatement had over 10,000 signatures. In times of persecution, there is always an angry mob that thinks it is in the right. Popular opinion claims to be loudly and fiercely opposed to any form of intolerance as a matter of principle, but this apparently does not include intolerance of faithful Catholics.

The more we are persecuted, the more we must pray that Bishop Campbell, and indeed all of us will have the strength to bear the cross. As the motto of the Carthusian order reminds us, “Stat crux dum volvitur orbis.” The Cross is steady while the world is turning. We must hold fast to the cross, because the world around us is not going to stop. We must remember as the cross grows heavier, it is because we still believe we are standing on solid ground, when in truth, the cross is all that is solid and eternal.

Catching up one morning last week, she mentioned that her sister now had two babies. Which is good.

She then mentioned more babies were hoped for. Also good.

Then, she said it. “I’m not sure when the next baby will come along, but she’s got four more on ice.”

“Four more on ice.” I wasn’t sure how to respond. Like I said, casual conversation, casual friend.

But, because I’m me and utterly incapable of not being me, I looked her in the eye, and said something about sympathizing with women desperately wanting to conceive, but then added how the thought of all those little persons, forever frozen, broke my heart.

“It makes me so sad,” I told her. “I can’t help but wonder who they are, who they’d be, or how they’d delight us and surprise us.”

After that, the conversation moved on. But I couldn’t forget the words: “Four more on ice.”

“She doesn’t know who she’s talking about,” I told myself. “She doesn’t know who those ‘four more’ are.”

That afternoon, waiting in an airport, I scanned the news.  More on Gosnell. More on same-sex marriage. More on guns. More on war and crime and poverty. More on the culture wars and men and women not getting married and the hook up culture and STDS and…again, all I could think was, “They don’t know who they are. We don’t know who we are.”

And we don’t.

Pick an area of human life, any area—marriage, family, sexuality, politics, the economy, faith, philosophy, science, education. It doesn’t matter which one, because whichever one you pick, wherever you look, you’ll find a crisis. And for as different as each crisis may be, at their core, at their root, you’ll find they all have one crisis in common: a crisis of identity.

As men and women, we don’t know who we are anymore. It’s not just that we don’t know Christ. It’s that we don’t know us.

We don’t know what it means to be the image and likeness of God, to be men and women, mothers and fathers, bodies and souls. We don’t know our own dignity. We don’t know our own beauty. We don’t know that every word we speak and every gesture we make has the potential to make visible the invisible God, to reflect his glory and his love.

Somewhere along the way, as a culture, we forgot that. We also forgot that each and every person has their own particular witness to bear, their own particular truth about God to reveal.

Which means we’re walking around not seeing that each of us is an unrepeatable work of wonder, that no one else in all of time will image God quite like we do, and that when we silence the witness of any one of us—inside the womb or outside the womb—we’re losing more than a person. We’re losing a glimpse of God that no one else can or will give.

But again, we don’t see that. We don’t see any of it. So we don’t live it. We don’t live it in politics. We don’t live it in the workplace. We don’t live it in relationships.

We give ourselves away to people we shouldn’t, when we shouldn’t, in ways we shouldn’t. We speak cruelly and thoughtlessly. We pursue things that don’t matter—money, power, fame, sensual pleasure and sensual goods—at the expense of the things that do matter—family, friends, our souls, our God. We turn our backs on others, we advocate for legislation that enshrines lies about who we are in law, and every day, in a hundred different ways, we fail to pour out our energy, our love, and all our blessings for the good of others.

We also stab newborn babies in the neck, ignore inconvenient truths when it serves our political pets, and detonate bombs that take the lives of innocent boys.

But how do you tell people that? How do you help them see? How do you get them to understand that when they’re freezing embryos or aborting babies or abusing their bodies, they’re doing something infinitely worse than juggling pottery rescued from the ashes of Pompei or letting children doodle on Caravaggio canvasses?

Truth? There is no one, sure-fire way. You pray for a miracle. And you do your best to heal your own blindness—reading the Scriptures, studying the saints, receiving the Sacraments. You let your own vision be shaped by grace. You learn the Theology of the Body.

Then you live it. You live what it means to be the image of God. You live the truth of your masculinity or femininity. You become a spiritual father or a spiritual mother. You treat everyone you meet as a gift, as the beautiful, precious unrepeatable work of wonder that they are.

In other words, you treat them like the Person they image. You treat them like Christ: You visit them when they’re in prison, feed them when they’re hungry, and clothe them when they’re naked. You also smile at them in the grocery store, choose not to cut them off in traffic, and refrain from flipping them the bird when they don’t do the same. And you hope, as you do it all, that love catches, that dignity is contagious.

Ultimately, loving as God calls us to love isn’t brain surgery. Being who we’re called to be isn’t astrophysics. But it starts with knowing—knowing how we’re called to love and knowing who we’re called to be.

That’s where our culture has it all wrong. And that’s where we’ve got to get it right.