Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest — even insist — that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society.  It is wrong, and it cannot — must not — be tolerated.

But you might protest that all of this is too easy.  Why, you might inquire, have I not delved into the opinion of philosophers and theologians about the matter?  And even worse: Why have I not raised the usual questions about what a “human being” is, what a “person” is, what it means to be “living,” and such?  People who write books and articles about abortion always concern themselves with these kinds of things.  Even the justices of the Supreme Court who gave us “Roe v.  Wade” address them.  Why do I neglect philosophers and theologians?  Why do I not get into defining “human being,” “person,” “living,” and the rest?  Because, I respond, I am sound of mind and endowed with a fine set of eyes, into which I do not believe it is well to cast sand.  I looked at the photograph, and I have no doubt about what I saw and what are the duties of a civilized society if what I saw is in danger of being killed by someone who wishes to kill it or, if you prefer, someone who “chooses” to kill it.  In brief: I looked, and I know what I saw.

But what about the being that has been in its mother for only 15 weeks or only 10?  Have you photographs of that too?  Yes, I do.  However, I hardly think it necessary to show them.  For if we agree that the being in the photograph printed on this page is an innocent human being, you have no choice but to admit that it may not be legitimately killed even before 20 weeks unless you can indicate with scientific proof the point in the development of the being before which it was other than an innocent human being and, therefore, available to be legitimately killed.  Nor have Aristotle, Aquinas or even the most brilliant embryologists of our era or any other era been able to do so.  If there is a time when something less than a human being in a mother morphs into a human being, it is not a time that anyone has ever been able to identify, though many have made guesses.  However, guesses are of no help.  A man with a shotgun who decides to shoot a being that he believes may be a human being is properly hauled before a judge.  And hopefully, the judge in question knows what a “human being” is and what the implications of someone’s wishing to kill it are.  The word “incarceration” comes to mind.

However, we must not stop here.  The matter becomes even clearer and simpler if you obtain from the National Geographic Society two extraordinary DVDs.  One is entitled “In the Womb” and illustrates in color and in motion the development of one innocent human being within its mother.  The other is entitled “In the Womb-Multiples” and illustrates in color and motion the development of two innocent human beings — twin boys — within their mother.  If you have ever allowed yourself to wonder, for example, what “living” means, these two DVDs will be a great help.  The one innocent human being squirms about, waves its arms, sucks its thumb, smiles broadly and even yawns; and the two innocent human beings do all of that and more: They fight each other.  One gives his brother a kick, and the other responds with a sock to the jaw.  If you can convince yourself that these beings are something other than innocent and living human beings, (perhaps “mere clusters of tissues,” as one national newsmagazine suggests) you have a problem far more basic than merely not appreciating the wrongness of abortion.  And that problem is-forgive me-self-deceit in a most extreme form.

Adolf Hitler convinced himself and his subjects that Jews and homosexuals were other than human beings.  Joseph Stalin did the same as regards Cossacks and Russian aristocrats.  And this despite the fact that Hitler and his subjects had seen both Jews and homosexuals with their own eyes, and Stalin and his subjects had seen both Cossacks and Russian aristocrats with theirs.  Happily, there are few today who would hesitate to condemn in the roundest terms the self-deceit of Hitler, Stalin or even their subjects to the extent that their subjects could have done something to end the madness and protect living, innocent human beings.

It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing — and approving — with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers.  We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets.  Nor can we honorably cover our shame (1) by appealing to the thoughts of Aristotle or Aquinas on the subject, inasmuch as we are all well aware that their understanding of matters embryological was hopelessly mistaken, (2) by suggesting that “killing” and “choosing to kill” are somehow distinct ethically, morally or criminally, (3) by feigning ignorance of the meaning of “human being,” “person,” “living,” and such, (4) by maintaining that among the acts covered by the right to privacy is the act of killing an innocent human being, and (5) by claiming that the being within the mother is “part” of the mother, so as to sustain the oft-repeated slogan that a mother may kill or authorize the killing of the being within her “because she is free to do as she wishes with her own body.”

One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the “Dred Scott Decision” in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.

Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of “legalized” abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.

Edward Cardinal Egan

Archbishop of New York

The chalice-maker whom I chose had a tiny workshop on the ground floor of an old "palazzo" with a small door and an even smaller window opening out on to the "Via dei Coronari" very near the Piazza Navona, where tourists gather today in large numbers to enjoy a chocolate dessert known as "Tartufo" and purchase paintings from struggling artists. The "Via dei Coronari" is now an elegant avenue with art galleries and antique stores from one end to the other. A half-century ago it was a rather run-down, cobblestone street with humble workshops on either side in which furniture-makers, upholsterers, framers, goldsmiths and silversmiths plied their trades.

My chalice-maker was Signor Arturo Brandizzi, whom I visited on an October afternoon to discuss his fashioning a chalice for me. I told him of one he had made for a friend of mine some years earlier and asked for a similar design with a few adjustments. He was a warm, gentle fellow who accepted the assignment with a smile and stipulated a price that seemed quite reasonable.

Each week during my seminary years in Rome, I would write a letter to my family telling of life in the City of the Popes and the Caesars. In one, early in October, I reported my visit with Signor Brandizzi and included in the letter a pen-and-ink drawing of what the chalice would look like. A few weeks later I received an urgent note from my mother telling me to watch for a little package with a memento from my grandfather that I might want to fit into the chalice.

In due course, the package arrived. It contained a gold cross that had been presented to my grandfather in recognition of his long and dedicated service to the Knights of Columbus. It was about five-eighths of an inch high and wide and cast in the shape of what the Knights of Columbus call "a Formée cross, having arms narrow at the center and expanding toward the ends." It is the cross on which the official emblem of the Knights is mounted to form a coat of arms.

Immediately, I took the cross to Signor Brandizzi and requested that it be attached to the base of my chalice. He reported that this would be costly, since it would require piercing the base, adding a nut and a bolt, changing the plate on the bottom of the chalice, etc., etc. I indicated that I would have trouble with an increased price and wondered if something simpler could not be done. I told him the chalice was a gift from my grandparents and the cross came from my grandfather who had been given it because he was an outstanding "Cavaliere di Colombo." Signor Brandizzi wrinkled his brow, gazed out at the passing parade on the "Via dei Coronari," shrugged his shoulders and announced with a sigh that there would be no change in the price. Grandparents, grandfather and "Cavaliere di Colombo" had turned the tide. "The chalice will be beautiful and worthy of the grandson of a 'Cavaliere'," he told me. And it was. For 50 years I have celebrated Mass with it and always loved it.

On Monday, August 6, at eight o'clock in the morning I flew to Nashville, Tennessee, to participate in the annual meeting of the Knights of Columbus, which they have come to call "The Supreme Convention." I have been a fourth-degree Knight for many years and was delighted to join 2,700 Knights and members of their families for a three-day gathering, which was also the 125th anniversary of their founding.

The meeting included an opening Mass with His Eminence, Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, Secretary of State of the Holy Father, as principal celebrant, and a "States Dinner" at which Cardinal Bertone was given the "Gaudium et Spes Award" of the Knights of Columbus, a recognition that had been presented to Mother Teresa of Calcutta, His Eminence, John Cardinal O'Connor, and only three others over the past several years.

Dr. Carl A. Anderson, the Supreme Knight, and Cardinal Bertone both addressed the guests, as did four other very special members of the hierarchy, namely, His Eminence, Jaime Cardinal Ortega y Alamino, Archbishop of Havana in Cuba; His Eminence, Juan Cardinal Sandoval Iñiguez, Archbishop of Guadalajara in Mexico; the Most Rev. Antonio J. Ledesma, Archbishop of Cagayan de Oro City in the Philippine Islands; and the Most Rev. Fouad Twal, Coadjutor Archbishop of Jerusalem. The reaction of those in attendance to each presentation was a standing ovation.

The rest of the evening was filled with music as we sang together songs from each of the States of the United States, each of the Provinces of Canada, and many individual nations, including Mexico, the Philippines and Poland. As a familiar beat was introduced by a lively band, the song of the State of New York took hold of the entire crowd. "Start spreadin' the news," it began; and without missing a beat everyone joined in, while 20 New Yorkers appeared in front of the dais, dancing, wearing top hats and waving canes. It was a great evening for all.

Asecond major event of the convention was the "Gala Banquet" in honor of Cardinal Bertone, at the beginning of which His Eminence delivered a stirring address that highlighted key concerns of the Holy Father, among them, the need for a deep faith, a fervent spiritual life and a generous commitment to service in all — clergy and laity alike.

The cardinal's words were especially appropriate, given the record of the Knights of Columbus over the past 125 years. In my invocation before the "States Dinner," I had an opportunity briefly to illustrate at least some of their achievements, as I thanked the Lord "for the zeal of the Knights as they instruct millions in the faith by word and work, as they care for the poorest among us, as they provide the best in academic training and spiritual formation to countless children and young people whose parish and religious schools they support, as they assist in the funding of Catholic colleges, universities and seminaries, as they care for men and women in the armed forces and teach us all the lessons of peace, as they sustain campus ministries, as they champion marriage and family life, and especially as they defend every human life from conception to natural death."

In the midst of all of this and more, Mr. Rob Astorino and I managed to broadcast our weekly program, "A Conversation with the Cardinal," on the Catholic Channel of Sirius Satellite Radio. On this occasion I seized the opportunity to tell the story of the founding of the Knights of Columbus in St. Mary's parish in New Haven, Connecticut, a century and a quarter ago, by a young diocesan priest, Father Michael J. McGivney. I described how difficult life was for Catholics at that time in New England and throughout the United States and explained that the Knights were established largely to provide basic insurance for the poor, adding that it is now a fraternal order with a membership of over 1,700,000 and an insurance company among the finest in the world. Nor did I fail to emphasize that the process for the beatification and eventual canonization of Father McGivney is well under way in Rome.

On Thursday morning I was back in New York, thanks to an early flight out of Nashville. At my residence I celebrated Mass with a chalice into the base of which a gold cross had been inserted a half-century ago. As I raised it for the Consecration, my thoughts turned to the Knights of Columbus, my grandparents, particularly my grandfather, and — yes — Signor Brandizzi too. For all have a special place in my heart.