Who can deny it? Our Western civilization, and now virtually the rest of the world, in a great and monstrous act of sycophancy, seems intent on destroying the human race. Demographers tell us with certainty that in a mere 40 years, the world's population will begin a collapse, slow at first, and then in a great horrifying plunge, called by some of them "The White Pestilence" ("White" being more relevant to our hair than our ethnicity). These easily forecast effects will be even more severe than the unpredicted historical outbursts of the Black Plague. World population will go from 9 billion to 3 billion or less by the year 2100. At that time, the fertility rate will be between a diminishing 1.85 (the U.N.'s unsubstantiated hope) and the more realistic 1.2 of a disappearing population. There is no new governmental fertility program that can be fashioned which can escape this outcome. The present generation of more religiously dedicated younger people can only mitigate the effect of the "end game" for their grandchildren by having babies now and passing on the True Faith. (Steve Mosher's recent book "Population Control" is a great reference that needs study by every serious person.) The children of today's elderly will experience the beginnings of this great human drama; their grandchildren will see the plunge; their great grandchildren will know the end results. It would be crass to assert that the "White Pestilence", just over today's time-horizon should be the great motivator for Catholics to respond to their marital vocation, but today certainly is a time to recognize the awful results of the world's manifest growing rejection of life, particularly for the last 50 to 100 years. Only the great ideal of a full-fledged Catholic Faith, lived with youthful ebullience, can serve God's Will.

Today, the Church's reply to this great impending event of the 21st century has been limited to a rhetorical rejection of abortion and a wimpish finger-shaking at contraception and divorce. Even the Vatican's representative at the UN talks of "Sustainable Development" and other such euphemisms employed by Planned Parenthood and the UNFPA. Instead, it must give a resounding vocational call to generosity in family life, however belated. Bland "Oh my!" type observations that Catholics are no longer different from the people among whom they live is not merely to observe the obvious, it is to leave them in the midst of the foul swamp where they have wandered to die. But how will they confront their mistaken ways and march back to the dry land if they have an uncertain bugler? Protestant Randall Terry of Project Rescue has the right message, "Throw away your contraceptives and have the Children God wants you to have."

Most Catholics (54% in the last US National election) no longer even believe that aiding and abetting the continuation of abortion is utterly incompatible with continued membership in the Church, or its overwhelming importance vis a vis every other public question in our National life. Surely, if one gives a fair reading to the intent of Canon Law and the Catechism, regardless of the evasions employed by both the pro-aborts and the pastoral Episcopacy, this is incontestable. Without any sense of rancor, or desire for punishment or vengeance (incomprehensible sentiments in any Catholic, regardless of who might accuse them, even a Bishop), a recognition of apostasy, heresy, and grave public sin must have public consequences on the practical level. The Eucharist itself is being publicly abused. Bishops disgrace themselves and cause scandal when they discount the expressed and manifest mind of the Pope and Canon Law about pro-abortion public figures receiving Holy Communion. They "waffle" on the question and forget that the law is a teacher, but unenforced law is a nightmare.

We can observe that the Church does not routinely announce to non-Catholics that they will be denied the Eucharist when they attend Mass. The Bishop's directive on this topic, though infrequently spoken, appears in many missals in the pew. Non-Catholics know that they should not approach the Eucharist. Similarly, divorced persons, and persons living in some attachment to sin or irregular marriage, do not approach the Eucharist. Heroic persons in such situations simply stay in their place at that time of the Mass, regardless of human respect. If those who aid, abet, promote, legislate, acquiesce to, assist, or commit abortion are not told explicitly that they have excluded themselves from the Church, there will never be comparable behavior on their part, and they will continue to erode respect of the Holy Eucharist.

Cardinal Stafford's recent comments on the occasion of a review of Humanae Vitae were remarkably grave. His insights were certainly not simplistic. They displayed a serious understanding of Salvation History and where we are today as a result of the recent Presidential election and the voting pattern of persons claiming to be Catholic. After positioning the Eucharist squarely in the center of Catholic marriage and all its attendant issues, he quotes from the Encyclical itself, "we are to be true with body and soul". Nevertheless, standing in distinct opposition to this has been the ambiguous "jawboning" of American Bishops. Rightly or wrongly, today they are widely perceived, by Catholics and non-Catholics as well, to be uncertain about their conclusions on abortion since there is no observable public result. The causes of this are probably many, but the "pastoral" tone of their governance and their recent public record of distrustful behavior is prominent in the list. Many Catholics do not believe the Bishops when you say abortion is always and everywhere wrong. Furthermore, it is commonly and reasonably understood that many of the clergy believe contraception is morally permissible, and abortion acceptable when it does not work. Public testimony of mature and faithful priests re-enforces this belief. Further still, the indecent presentation and teaching of NFP, under the auspices of the Church as if it were some new dogma ("99% effective in avoiding conception", Archdiocese of Phoenix, e.g.), has destroyed any concept of self-sacrificing dedication to the fecundity that God expects of a Catholic couple. Few take seriously any more the teaching authority of the Church on abortion. Three vignettes from recent days make this point.

1) Two elderly ladies in my retirement community, on the last day of the prayer campaign to end abortion, just before the election were seated in the Blessed Sacrament chapel saying the Rosary in a soft voice, their heads leaning toward each other. One, a life-long Democrat, had announced in adamant and aggressive tones that she could not wait to vote for Obama. The other, not so clearly political, had indicated that her vote was for McCain because of Obama's stance on abortion. Their contradictory positions and the consequences seemed to go unnoticed in the pious confusion of the Obama supporter.

2) I asked a 90-year-old lady, a friend who had announced her vote for Obama, if she knew what FOCA meant, thinking she did not and might be persuaded to change her vote if she did. "Oh, yes. It means the Freedom of Choice Act to allow abortion." "But abortion means the murder of a child", I said. "Oh Bernie, we have to have some choices, don't we?", was her reply.

The situation begs the question: Must not Bishops make it absolutely clear that pro-abortion conduct means a person no longer holds to the Catholic Faith, and that such persons have excommunicated themselves? It seems to me that nothing short of public recognition of this fact, in the case of public figures, will make this point clear and focus the attention of both Catholics and the general public.

Recently, I heard that Venerable John Cardinal Newman once said, "Persons influence us, voices melt us, looks subdue us, deeds inflame us. Many a man will live and die upon a dogma: no man will be a martyr for a conclusion." Rhetorical conclusions seem like all we've had so far.