By Dennis Sadowski
LOUISVILLE, Colo. (CNS) – Amid the smoldering ashes of his family’s recently remodeled Louisville, Colorado, home that was destroyed by a Dec. 30 wildfire, Tom Greany found hope in a symbol of his deep Catholic faith.
A statue of Mary that he and his wife Kat had placed outside their home was left unscathed except for the soot that covered its right side.
“Bricks appeared to have fallen all around her – some probably even hit her. But she didn’t even fall over,” Greany wrote in a reflection shared with Catholic News Service by a friend, who asked to remain unidentified. He wrote about what happened just hours after the blaze raced through the suburban communities of Louisville and Superior, about 20 miles northwest of Denver.
Greany wrote that the discovery of the statue is a reminder of how their faith provides protection and can “sustain us through everything.”

The Greanys were among hundreds of families who lost their homes in the wildfire driven by winds estimated to top 100 mph. In the Greanys’ Louisville neighborhood, 50 of 55 homes were destroyed. The other five were untouched.
Authorities said 991 structures, including businesses, were destroyed and another 127 damaged. Flames from what is called the Marshall Fire swept through more than 6,000 acres, devastating entire neighborhoods before snow helped extinguish the blazes. Residents said they fled with few possessions through dense smoke that turned the sky orange.
The Archdiocese of Denver reported on its website that two parishes – St. Louis in Louisville and Sacred Heart of Mary outside Boulder – were evacuated as flames advanced, but were undamaged. The fire nearly reached Sacred Heart, seemingly blocked by a roadway.
Both parishes as well as St. Thomas Aquinas University Parish in Boulder and Immaculate Conception Parish in Lafayette, northeast of Louisville, were helping affected families.
Saying the ferociousness of the flames “shocked everyone,” Denver Archbishop Samuel J. Aquila quickly established an emergency fund Dec. 31, seeding it with $250,000. He asked that parishes throughout the archdiocese take a special collection at Masses the weekend of Jan. 8-9.
“To those affected by these fires, know that Joseph and Mary had to flee with Jesus shortly after he was born. The Holy Family is close to you and knows the anguish and loss you are feeling,” the archbishop said in a statement posted on the archdiocesan website.
Archbishop Aquila also encouraged parishes and other agencies to help those who fled — with little more than the clothes they were wearing, computers and important documents — by hosting families, opening food pantries and offering other services.
Recovery was complicated by cold weather and the onset of snow following an unusually warm and dry fall and early winter in the area located near the Rocky Mountains.
The fire in the middle of the holiday season remained under investigation. Authorities have focused on a property south of Boulder where the fire is believed to have started, Boulder County Sheriff Joe Pelle told reporters Jan. 2.
In the aftermath, the Greany family is counting on Mary to intercede for them as they seek to rebuild their lives.
“It stings to look at this – our home and all of its contents were lost,” Greany said in his reflection. “The Christmas giving we had celebrated with our sons up in smoke along with everything else they and we owned. The entire neighborhood gone in less than a day.”
“Awareness of the loss stings mightily,” he continued. “But we can only feel the loss as pain because of the extraordinary magnitude of the gifts we have been given in our lives. How richly blessed we are!
He said his family’s home was not burned to teach them a lesson, but it did give them the chance to experience God’s comfort through Mary’s intercession.
Greany is also convinced no one can take away his family’s faith and their trust that the Holy Family is “looking out for us.”
“They pray for us. And they pray for the world in these dark times we live in.”

By Carol Zimmermann
WASHINGTON (CNS) – In the Supreme Court’s first major abortion case in decades – which looked at Mississippi’s ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy – the majority of justices Dec. 1 seemed willing to let that ban stay in place.

But it was unclear if they would take this further and overturn Roe.

While the justices considered the state law and the possible ramifications of supporting it or not, people on both sides of the issue were on the steps of the Supreme Court revealing the divide on this issue by what they were shouting or with their placard messages calling abortion murder or an essential right.

At several points during the argument, Chief Justice John Roberts continued to bring the focus back to the question at hand: the 15-week ban on abortions in Mississippi, which was struck down by a federal District Court in Mississippi in 2018 and upheld a year later by the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

A 15-week ban is not a “dramatic departure from viability,” Roberts said.

The point of viability – when a fetus is said to be able to survive on its own – was key to the discussion because the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that states cannot restrict abortion before 24 weeks or when a fetus is said to be able to survive on its own.

Roberts seemed hesitant to take this further, asking if the court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, if it also would be asked to reconsider several other cases that people could say have been wrongly decided.

And that discussion of previous court decisions, the use of “stare decisis” came up frequently. The term, which literally means to stand by things decided, was used in reference to previous abortion cases but also several other cases with some justices pointing out that precedence should not always be a deciding factor and that some cases did need to be overturned.
Justice Stephen Breyer indicated the court was treading on contested ground and was concerned that its decision could be seen as merely being political.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor took this a step further, saying the court would be seen as highly politicized if it were to overturn Roe and other related rulings. “Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked. “I don’t see how it is possible.”

But as the arguments continued, more reflection seemed to be on the issue of abortion itself and the possibility of bringing the issue “back to the people,” as Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart suggested.

Stewart stressed that Roe and Casey court decisions “haunt our country” and “have no home in our history or traditions.”

Roe v. Wade is the 1973 decision that legalized abortion. Casey v. Planned Parenthood is the 1992 decision that affirmed Roe and also stressed that a state regulation on abortion could not impose an “undue burden” on a woman “seeking an abortion before the fetus attains viability.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized the court was being forced to “pick sides” on a contentious issue and questioned why the court had to be the arbiter here.

“The Constitution is neither pro-life nor pro-choice,” he said, noting that it “leaves the issue to the people to resolve in the democratic process.”

Justice Clarence Thomas asked what those opposed to the state ban thought was the constitutional right to an abortion, and Justice Samuel Alito spoke of the fetus having “an interest in having a life.”

Julie Rikelman, of the Center for Reproductive Rights, who represented the Jackson Women’s Health Organization in its challenge of Mississippi’s abortion law, said keeping the law in place would cause “profound damage to women’s liberty, equality and the rule of law.”

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar went on to argue that overturning the court’s previous abortion rulings would have “severe and swift” effects causing abortion restrictions in other states.

If the court sides with Mississippi, it would be the first time the court would allow an abortion ban before the point of viability and could lay the groundwork for other abortion restrictions that other states could follow.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, in a court brief supporting Mississippi, stressed that abortion is not a right created by the Constitution and called it “inherently different from other types of personal decisions to which this court has accorded constitutional protection.”

Referring to the court’s major abortion decisions, the brief warned that if the Supreme Court “continues to treat abortion as a constitutional issue,” it will face more questions in the future about “what sorts of abortion regulations are permissible.”

Just as the arguments started, the USCCB issued a statement from Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, which said: “We pray that the court will do the right thing and allow states to once again limit or prohibit abortion and in doing so protect millions of unborn children and their mothers from this painful, life-destroying act.”

A ruling in the case is expected in July.

(Follow Zimmermann on Twitter: @carolmaczim)

By Peter Finney Jr.
NEW ORLEANS (CNS) – Eternal hope is the overarching message of Christmas: A child born in a barn changed the world.

Charlie LeBlanc was one of those hope-filled New Orleans Catholics – a regular communicant, a longtime member of the Knights of Columbus and a straight shooter – who for decades ran the Christ in Christmas Committee billboard campaign with deep faith, good humor and back-of-the-envelope math.

When LeBlanc’s home was flooded after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, he never lost his faith that someone bigger was in control.

“I don’t know,” he said in 2006 as he prepared to rebuild, shortly before his death. “I’m 85 years old, and I just got approved for a 30-year mortgage.”

LeBlanc was one in a line of New Orleans Catholics who since 1952 have created the most successful Christmas billboard campaign in the country.

This year, more than 60 “Keep Christ in Christmas” billboards sponsored by Catholic schools, Knights of Columbus councils and women’s auxiliaries, businesses and individuals sprouted up after Thanksgiving in the Greater New Orleans area. The billboards, emphasizing the spiritual meaning of Christmas, are put up by Outfront, the company that has been involved in the program since 1952.

Another seven to 10 electronic billboards with the “Keep Christ in Christmas” message will be running around the clock near the city on the Northshore, courtesy of Lamar.

“I’ve mentioned it to people in other states, and nobody’s done it to the extent that we have in the Archdiocese of New Orleans,” said Stephen Hart, who succeeded LeBlanc as committee chair in 2002 and has witnessed the number of billboards grow from the low to mid 20s to more than 60.

Former committee member Blanche Comiskey recalled being asked to join the mostly male group in the late 1960s. She said Francis Doyle, a local bank executive, had started the effort because he felt the secularization of Christmas, with the emphasis on buying things, was overshadowing the spiritual message.

As a leading member of the Council of Catholic School Cooperative Clubs – the association of parents’ clubs across the archdiocese – Comiskey recruited more schools to sponsor billboards. Dozens of schools continue to do so.

“The schools really do cooperate, and if one school can’t afford a whole board, they can combine with another school,” Comiskey said. “It was wonderful to see the reaction. It means that sometimes volunteer work is rewarding. Imagine the little kids who might have put in a little money for a billboard. They had to feel special.”

The cost of sponsoring a “Keep Christ in Christmas” billboard is $430. Although all reservations have been made for this year, there are always openings for next year, Hart said.

“We’ve had a number of people thank us for doing the ministry – for getting the message out and for putting it at the front of people’s attention,” Hart said.

“I’m hoping what the billboards do is bring back the family celebration and the real meaning of Christmas, where people can celebrate together,” he said. “This whole isolation – where parents are isolated in their home and often couldn’t visit their grandkids because they were afraid for their own safety – hopefully will all be over.”

(Editor’s Note: More information on the Christmas billboard campaign can be found at www.keepchristinchristmasnola.org. Finney is executive editor/general manager of the Clarion Herald, newspaper of the Archdiocese of New Orleans.)

Por Carol Zimmermann
WASHINGTON (CNS) – En el primer caso importante sobre el aborto en la Corte Suprema en décadas, que examinó la prohibición de Mississippi sobre los abortos después de 15 semanas de embarazo, la mayoría de los jueces parecían dispuestos el 1 de diciembre a dejar que la prohibición se mantenga.

Pero no estaba claro si irían más allá y anularían el antecedente de Roe contra Wade que permitió el aborto en EE.UU. como un derecho.

Mientras los jueces consideraban la ley estatal y las posibles ramificaciones de apoyarla o no, partidarios de ambos lados del asunto estaban en las escalinatas de la Corte Suprema exponiendo la división en este tema por lo que gritaban o con sus mensajes en pancartas calificaban al aborto como un asesinato o un derecho esencial.

En varios momentos en la etapa de argumentos, el presidente de la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos, John Roberts, continuó centrando la atención en el tema principal: la prohibición de abortar a las 15 semanas en Mississippi, que fue anulada por un Tribunal Federal de Distrito en Mississippi en 2018 y confirmada un año después por el Tribunal de Apelaciones de Estados Unidos para el 5º Circuito, con sede en Nueva Orleans. Una prohibición de 15 semanas no es “una desviación drástica de la viabilidad”, dijo Roberts.

El punto de viabilidad –cuando se dice que un feto es capaz de sobrevivir por sí mismo– fue clave en la discusión porque el Tribunal Supremo ha dictaminado sistemáticamente que los estados no pueden restringir el aborto antes de las 24 semanas o cuando se dice que un feto es capaz de sobrevivir por sí mismo. Roberts parecía tener dudas en cuanto a llevar el asunto más allá al preguntar si en el caso que el tribunal anulara Roe vs. Wade, también se le pediría que reconsiderara varios otros casos que la gente podría decir que se han decidido erróneamente.
Y en esa discusión sobre decisiones anteriores del tribunal, el uso de “stare decisis” surgió con frecuencia. El término, que literalmente significa mantener lo que se ha decidido, se utilizó en referencia a casos anteriores sobre el aborto, pero también a otros varios casos en los que algunos jueces señalaron que el precedente no debería ser siempre un factor decisivo y que algunos casos debían ser revocados.

Pero a medida que los argumentos continuaban, la mayor reflexión parecía centrarse en la cuestión del aborto en sí y en la posibilidad de devolver el asunto “al pueblo”, como sugirió el procurador general de Mississippi, Scott Stewart.Stewart subrayó que las decisiones judiciales Roe y Casey “persiguen a nuestro país” y “no tienen cabida en nuestra historia ni en nuestras tradiciones”.

El caso Casey contra Planned Parenthood es la decisión de 1992 que afirmó el fallo en Roe y también subrayó que una regulación estatal sobre el aborto no podía imponer una “carga indebida” a una mujer “que busca un aborto antes de que el feto alcance la viabilidad”.
El juez Brett Kavanaugh enfatizó que el tribunal se estaba viendo obligado a “elegir un bando” en un tema polémico y cuestionó por qué el tribunal tenía que ser el árbitro aquí.”La Constitución no está ni a favor de la vida ni a favor del aborto”, dijo, y señaló que “deja la cuestión al pueblo para que la resuelva en el proceso democrático”. El juez Clarence Thomas preguntó qué pensaban los que se oponían a la prohibición estatal sobre el derecho constitucional al aborto, y el juez Samuel Alito habló de que el feto tiene “un interés en tener una vida”.Julie Rikelman, del Centro de Derechos Reproductivos, que representó a la Organización de Salud de la Mujer de Jackson en su impugnación de la ley de aborto de Mississippi, dijo que mantener la ley en vigor causaría “un profundo daño a la libertad de la mujer, a la igualdad y al estado de derecho”.

La procuradora general de EE.UU., Elizabeth Prelogar, continuó argumentando que anular las sentencias anteriores del tribunal sobre el aborto tendría efectos “graves y rápidos” que provocarían restricciones al aborto en otros estados.

Si el tribunal da la razón a Mississippi, sería la primera vez que el tribunal permitiría una prohibición del aborto antes del punto de viabilidad y podría sentar las bases para otras restricciones al aborto que podrían seguir en otros estados.

La Conferencia de Obispos Católicos de EE.UU., en un escrito judicial de apoyo a Mississippi, subrayó que el aborto no es un derecho creado por la Constitución y lo calificó de “intrínsecamente diferente de otros tipos de decisiones personales a las que este tribunal ha concedido protección constitucional”. “Rezamos para que el tribunal haga lo correcto y permita que los estados vuelvan a limitar o prohibir el aborto y, al hacerlo, protejan a millones de niños no nacidos y a sus madres de este doloroso acto que destruye la vida”.

Se espera en julio un fallo sobre el caso.