Serve The Lord With Joy

Browsing News Entries

Browsing News Entries

Confession: Offer It, and People Will Come

feature

Why is today called Spy Wednesday?

Judas betrays Jesus with a kiss, 14th-century fresco in the Collegiata of San Gimignano, Italy. / Credit: jorisvo/Shutterstock

CNA Staff, Mar 27, 2024 / 04:00 am (CNA).

You might hear today referred to as “Spy Wednesday.” What does that mean and why do some people call it that?

The name actually derives from the Gospel reading for today — also called Holy Wednesday, as it is the Wednesday of Holy Week — in which Judas Iscariot betrays Jesus for 30 pieces of silver:

“One of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests and said, ‘What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?’ They paid him thirty pieces of silver, and from that time on he looked for an opportunity to hand him over” (Mt 26:14-16).

At that point, Judas “spies” on Jesus, secretly plotting the most opportune time to turn him in to the Sanhedrin, the council of Jewish elders at the time who sought to condemn Jesus.

Today’s reading follows yesterday’s account of the incident from the Gospel of John, in which Jesus says: “Amen, amen, I say to you, one of you will betray me” (Jn 13:21). Simon Peter asks John — “the one whom Jesus loved” — to ask Jesus what he means. Jesus replies:

“‘It is the one to whom I hand the morsel after I have dipped it.’ So he dipped the morsel and [took it and] handed it to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot. After he took the morsel, Satan entered him. So Jesus said to him, ‘What you are going to do, do quickly’” (Jn 13:26-27).

Now the stage is set, so to speak, for the events of the night of the Last Supper through the Lord’s passion and death on Good Friday.

Use of the term “Spy Wednesday” for this day appears to have originated in England and Ireland in the 1800s, according to WordHistories.net. The website noted mentions of the term in Irish newspapers on several occasions throughout the century, with a clear definition given in 1881.

Pope Francis referred to the day as Spy Wednesday in his homily at a Mass on April 8, 2020.

Many use this day to discuss Judas’ betrayal, asking how and why someone who was so close to Jesus could do what he did.

“Judas gave up everything to follow Jesus for three years … Why would he betray him?” asked Dr. Edward Sri in a March 2021 podcast. “Perhaps a more important question we should all ponder is: Could something like that ever happen to me? Is it possible that I could turn away from Jesus?”

Bishop Robert Barron observed in an April 4, 2023, reflection: “Those of us who regularly gather around the table of intimacy with Christ and yet engage consistently in the works of darkness are meant to see ourselves in the betrayer.”

In his general audience catechesis on the Twelve Apostles in 2006, Pope Benedict XVI said God used Judas’ betrayal as part of his plan for salvation.

“The word ‘to betray’ is the version of a Greek word that means ‘to consign.’ Sometimes the subject is even God in person: It was he who for love ‘consigned’ Jesus for all of us (Rm 8: 32). In his mysterious salvific plan, God assumes Judas’ inexcusable gesture as the occasion for the total gift of the Son for the redemption of the world,” the pope said.

“We draw from this a final lesson,” Benedict concluded. “While there is no lack of unworthy and traitorous Christians in the Church, it is up to each of us to counterbalance the evil done by them with our clear witness to Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.”

This article was originally published on April 5, 2023.

Who Is Most on Jesus’ Heart as He Faces the Cross?

commentary

Catholic Medical School at Benedictine College Seeks Accreditation, Eyes 2027 Opening

cna

‘NaPro Technology’ Offers a Pro-Life Alternative to IVF for Infertility Treatment

cna

PHOTOS: Pro-life and pro-abortion activists hold dueling rallies outside Supreme Court

Hundreds of pro-life and pro-abortion demonstrators hold rallies alongside each other as the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the high-stakes abortion pill case Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration, March 26, 2024. / Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Washington D.C., Mar 26, 2024 / 18:15 pm (CNA).

Several hundred pro-life and pro-abortion activists held dueling rallies outside the Supreme Court building on Tuesday as the justices heard oral arguments in the high-stakes abortion pill case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration (AHM v. FDA).

At issue in the case is whether the FDA should restore certain restrictions on the abortion drug mifepristone that were in place prior to 2016, most notably those removed by the Biden administration such as prohibiting administering the pills through the mail or via telemedicine. 

At the pro-life rally, abortion demonstrators blasted loud music in an attempt to drown out the pro-life speakers.

Many pro-abortion demonstrators wore pink and held homemade signs such as one that read: “Leave my mifepristone alone.” Other signs held by abortion activists had vulgar messages on them, with some mocking conservative Supreme Court justices.

Pro-lifers, meanwhile, held signs reading: “Chemical abortion hurts women” and “Women’s health matters,” while some prayed. 

During a few tense moments, Capitol Police officers, who lined the street, had to intervene to separate the two groups as demonstrators got into each other’s faces and shouted slogans over megaphones.

CNA spoke with some of the demonstrators to learn why they came. Here is what they said:

‘My daughter has rights’ 

Savanna Deretich (left) with Students for Life and Savannah Evans (right) with Live Action stand in front of the Supreme Court building as pro-life demonstrators, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Savanna Deretich (left) with Students for Life and Savannah Evans (right) with Live Action stand in front of the Supreme Court building as pro-life demonstrators, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Savannah Evans, a pro-life activist with Live Action, traveled from Florida to stand for life in front of the Supreme Court. Evans, who is 34 weeks pregnant, lifted her sweater to reveal her baby bump on which she had written the words “Human Too.”

“Human life begins with fertilization, and anything after that is the killing of a human being,” Evans said.

“I’m out here because I’m 34 weeks pregnant, and I believe that my daughter has rights.”

‘Force the FDA to do their job’

Ken Meekins, a student from George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, said he came because he believes that “the abortion pill does hurt women.”

“I’m here to stand for women’s health,” he said. “I think that it’s awful because the majority of abortions are chemical abortions. And not only that, they’re even more dangerous than surgical abortions because they’re done at home. And so, I’m out here today to ask the Supreme Court to force the FDA to do their job.”

 ‘The pope should not dictate what medications we’re allowed to take’

Ashley Wilson (left) and Kate Hoeting (right) with Catholics for Choice stand in front of the Supreme Court on March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Ashley Wilson (left) and Kate Hoeting (right) with Catholics for Choice stand in front of the Supreme Court on March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Ashley Wilson and Kate Hoeting, members of a group that calls itself “Catholics for Choice,” were in front of the Supreme Court building advocating for abortion. They claimed to represent what they said was the majority of Catholics who “disagree with the bishops on abortion.” Wilson called the attempt to regulate abortion pills an example of “religious overreach.”

“One in four abortion patients in this country is Catholic,” Wilson said. “So, we trust a woman’s conscience-informed decision to have an abortion if she needs one.”

Pro-abortion demonstrators cheer as Catholics for Choice President Jamie Manson gives a speech in front of the Supreme Court building, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Pro-abortion demonstrators cheer as Catholics for Choice President Jamie Manson gives a speech in front of the Supreme Court building, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

 Jamie Manson, president of Catholics for Choice, was one of the speakers at the pro-abortion rally. She called the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the movement to place more restrictions on abortion “part of a coordinated long game to undermine democracy and establish a theocracy.”

“The pope should not dictate what medications we’re allowed to take in the United States,” she went on. “We want doctors, not doctrine, to shape our health care.”

‘I came to D.C. today to stand up for my patients’

There were a large number of pro-life doctors, many from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), who rallied in front of the Supreme Court, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
There were a large number of pro-life doctors, many from the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), who rallied in front of the Supreme Court, March 26, 2024. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Dr. Susan Bane, an OB-GYN from North Carolina and member of the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs (AAPLOG), spoke at the pro-life rally. 

She told CNA that she is advocating for restrictions on mifepristone because of the life-threatening dangers the drug poses to women. She said it is especially dangerous to administer mifepristone without medical supervision. 

“I came to D.C. today to stand up for my patients as well as the thousands of pro-life members of AAPLOG to care for women,” she said.

“The FDA’s own labeling says 1 in 25 women who use abortion drugs will go to the emergency department and they show up with potentially life-threatening complications, retained tissue infections requiring antibiotics, bleeding that’s so severe that they need transfusions or emergency surgery.”

“So, women should have the ongoing care of a doctor when taking high-risk drugs. And that’s why we want to see these safeguards put back in place,” she went on. “We want the FDA to do their job, and their job is to protect our patients.”

‘Science tells us that there is a life in the womb’ 

Hayden Laye, a member of the Democrats for Life of America, traveled to D.C. from South Carolina. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Hayden Laye, a member of the Democrats for Life of America, traveled to D.C. from South Carolina. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Hayden Laye, a member of Democrats for Life of America, traveled to D.C. from South Carolina. He said that his belief in science tells him that “there is life in the womb.”

“As a Democrat, I’m against killing human beings, and that includes human beings in the womb,” he said.

He added that he felt “compelled” to come to express his support for restoring safeguards on the abortion pill out of concern for his community.

“I just want to make sure that both women and children in my state, in my community, are safe, are protected. I hope and pray that the Supreme Court upholds the safety laws for women regarding the abortion bill.”

‘We look to protect the women and children of Texas’ 

Jade and Casey Casias from Amarillo, Texas, traveled over 1,500 miles to show support for the pro-life side. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Jade and Casey Casias from Amarillo, Texas, traveled over 1,500 miles to show support for the pro-life side. Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

 Jade Casias and her husband, Casey Casias, came to demonstrate for life. They flew over 1,500 miles from Amarillo, Texas, where AHM v. FDA originated.

“In Texas, we’re really big on our pro-life issue,” Jade said. “We don’t come up to Washington, D.C., regularly to protest or anything. I haven’t been here in years, and this is my husband’s first time. But because that case originated in Amarillo, we felt like it was necessary to really represent our culture.”

Despite abortion being illegal through all nine months of pregnancy in Texas, Jade said that mifepristone, which can be obtained via mail and administered without any doctor’s supervision, still threatens Texan women’s lives.

“We’re seeing that abortion pills are being mailed to our women,” she said. “We’re here to say, mifepristone, we don’t want that across state lines, but more than that, we want to have a call to say everyone needs to have some action in this.”

‘Pray, pray, pray. I think that’s the answer’ 

Joan McKee, a Catholic pro-lifer from D.C., said what we need is to "pray, pray, pray." Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
Joan McKee, a Catholic pro-lifer from D.C., said what we need is to "pray, pray, pray." Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Joan McKee, a Catholic pro-lifer from D.C., said she came to “help these people stop murdering their children.”

While tensions were high between the two crowds, with people trying to out-scream one another, McKee was holding a rosary in her hand. She said she was praying for not only an end to abortion but also the conversion of those advocating for abortion.

“Pray the rosary, pray to St. Joseph, the Holy Family,” she said. “Pray, pray, pray. I think that’s the answer.”

US Supreme Court Hears Abortion-Pill Case

cna

Abortion pill opponents face Supreme Court skepticism

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 26, 2024, for a lawsuit brought by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM), which seeks to impose more restrictions on the prescription of mifepristone. / Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Mar 26, 2024 / 15:45 pm (CNA).

United States Supreme Court justices on Tuesday pressed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone but appeared skeptical that a pro-life doctor’s group challenging the agency had any legal standing to sue. 

The justices heard oral arguments on March 26 for a lawsuit brought by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM), which seeks to impose more restrictions on the prescription of mifepristone. The drug is approved to chemically abort a child up to 10 weeks into the mother’s pregnancy. 

AHM, which represents pro-life medical groups, sued the FDA in November 2022 to challenge the agency’s approval of mifepristone. The lawsuit further challenged the FDA’s subsequent deregulation of the drug, particularly its permission to prescribe the medicine without an in-person doctor’s visit and to dispense the drug through the mail. 

FDA questioned on abortion pill’s safety

During oral arguments, the court’s more conservative justices questioned the FDA’s lawyer, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar, on whether the FDA followed proper protocol when deregulating mifepristone.

This Supreme Court case is the most-watched abortion-related decision since the court overturned Roe v. Wade, which allowed states to impose restrictions on abortion. Six justices voted to overturn the precedent: Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch. 

Barrett, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, expressed concern that ending the in-person requirement could “lead to mistakes in gestational aging” because doctors would not be able to perform an ultrasound. She asked whether this “could increase the need for a [dilatation and curettage procedure or increase] the amount of bleeding.”

Alito questioned why the agency only studied the effects of the deregulatory actions individually rather than studying how they could pose a safety risk when taken together as a whole. 

In defending the FDA’s decisions, Prelogar told the justices that the FDA “demonstrated that these changes … were safe” through its analysis of studies and that the deregulation being safe was not reliant on “other different safeguards in place.” She also noted that ultrasounds had never been required by the FDA. 

“I don’t think you can fault the agency for not giving even more explicit attention to this issue,” she said. 

Prelogar said the FDA found that some studies suggested the deregulation would increase emergency room visits but found no evidence that it would increase adverse effects. She said the “FDA’s actions were lawful” and that AHM “just disagree[s] with the agency’s analysis of the data before it.”

“That’s a question that Congress has entrusted to the FDA,” Prelogar said.

Jessica Ellsworth, a lawyer representing mifepristone provider Danco Laboratories, similarly expressed concern about courts assuming the authority to determine how the FDA handles its protocol related to studying the safety of drugs and deregulation. 

“Courts are just not in a position to parse through [the studies] and second guess [the FDA’s conclusion],” Ellsworth said.

Erin Hawley, a lawyer for Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which is representing AHM, later countered the arguments from the FDA and Danco, saying that in-person visits would increase the likelihood of the woman receiving an ultrasound before being prescribed the drugs, rather than “to be able to order these online with a couple of screening questions.”

Does AHM have legal standing to sue? 

When Hawley was questioned about the lawsuit, the justices focused heavily on whether AHM had any legal standing to sue the FDA. 

Hawley argued that her clients, some of whom are emergency room doctors, have standing to sue because they are forced to care for women suffering from complications with the abortion pill, even if the doctors object to abortion.

“[They are] forced to manage abortion drugs’ harm,” she said.

Although federal law allows doctors to refrain from providing services that violate the doctor’s conscience, Hawley claimed that objections in these situations are not practical because of the “emergency nature of these procedures.” 

Hawley said the lack of in-person care leads to inadequate follow-ups for the women who use the drug, which leads them to seek care in emergency rooms. 

“[The FDA’s deregulations] turn emergency rooms into that follow-up visit,” Hawley said.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, said that federal law already protects their right to object and questioned why the court would need to impose “an order preventing anyone from having access to these drugs at all” to remedy these concerns. 

During the conversation, Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch similarly expressed concern about a district court’s ability to restrict access to a drug nationwide based on the legal objections from a handful of doctors.

Both Alito and Thomas pressed the FDA’s lawyer on who would be allowed to sue the FDA in this situation if not AHM. Prelogar said it would be hard to identify any person or group who would have the legal standing to file a lawsuit.

The Supreme Court is expected to decide the case by June.