A brief, and admittedly partial, review of an election scorecard

This post started out as a response to a Facebook friend's post of an election scorecard by an organization called "Network." My response quickly grew larger than the average Facebook response, so as an act of mercy to my friend and her followers 😊, I decided to move it to my blog.

Whenever I see an election scorecard, the first thing I do is look at who produced it. This one was produced by Network, an organization that describes itself as "Advocates for Justice, Inspired by Catholic Sisters." As it states on its "About Us" page, it was "[f]ounded by Catholic Sisters in the progressive spirit of Vatican II." While its list of values on that page includes a number of issues important to Catholics, it makes no mention at all of some very important issues affecting life and the family, including abortion and euthanasia. 

It's worth noting that in its 2012 "Doctrinal Assessment of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious," the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith explicitly mentioned Network as an organization associated with the LCWR. The CDF wrote that "while there has been a great deal of work on the part of LCWR promoting issues of social justice in harmony with the Church’s social doctrine, it is silent on the right to life from conception to natural death, a question that is part of the lively public debate about abortion and euthanasia in the United States. Further, issues of crucial importance to the life of Church and society, such as the Church’s Biblical view of family life and human sexuality, are not part of the LCWR agenda in a way that promotes Church teaching."

I bring this up because, what an organization considers important and unimportant--or at least not worth mentioning--is inevitably going to impact its assessment of a candidate's position on various issues. As I reviewed their analysis of the scorecard on their website, I found examples of this in Network's scorecard. For example, 

• With regards to maternal mortality (3rd point in the first section of the scorecard), Pres. Trump signed into law the "Preventing Maternal Deaths Act," but because he did not say anything publicly in support of the legislation or regarding maternal death on his website or Twitter feed, they gave him a negative rating. 
  
  
• Network and its associates have strongly advocated for the Affordable Care Act from its introduction in 2009, so it is no surprise that they give Pres. Trump a negative rating for his efforts to repeal the ACA. However, despite its support of efforts to expand health care to the uninsured, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops also opposed final passage of the ACA because of its expansion of federal funding of abortion and its lack of conscience protections both within and beyond the abortion context. (See the USCCB's backgrounder on "Health Care Reform" dated February 2011.)
  
  An example of the latter is the repeated efforts by the Obama administration and by various state governments citing ACA to force religious organizations such as the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for artificial contraception, including abortifacients, as part of their health insurance plans. In fact, in July, when the Little Sisters were again supported by the Supreme Court in their efforts to be exempted from the mandate, Biden expressed his disappointment with the decision. (This was reported in a number of news outlets, such as the National Review, as well as in an editorial in the Wall Street Journal. I tried to find other, more liberal news outlets who reported on it, but was unsuccessful. 😒)
  
  Biden further said that, if elected president, he would work to reinstate the mandate by providing an "accommodation" for NPOs. Unfortunately, even with the so-called "accommodation," first introduced by Pres. Obama, the USCCB and others have stated that "the mandate continues to substantially burden the religious liberty of stakeholders with religious objections to the mandated coverage." (See also the USCCB's document, "Twelve Things Everyone Should Know about the Contraceptive Mandate.") 
  
  

I could keep going, analyzing their approach to some social justice issues while downplaying or ignoring others, but I've already spent almost five hours on this post 😵, so I'm going to stop now.  But suffice it to say, the issues are more complex than the Network scorecard might lead one to believe.

Upheaval

His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire. -- Matthew 3:12 (RSV)

For a number of months now, as I've thought about 2020, the word that has come to mind is "upheaval." I didn't know if it would be upheaval on a small, personal scale or a larger, even global scale. There was just that sense of "upheaval."

It's only early March and I've already seen some small upheavals in the lives of some of my family and friends, with unexpected injuries, deaths, etc. Larger scale ones, such as the coronavirus outbreak, appearing to be looming on the horizon. 

A week ago I heard a talk at a Christian meeting about us being in a time of purification. As part of it, the speaker used the quote from the Gospel of Matthew given above and showed a photo of a farmer using a winnowing fork. (I opted to use this illustration from Wikimedia Commons that's in the public domain, but you could easily find a photo of a farmer winnowing grain on the Internet.) He explained that winnowing involved tossing the grain up into the air with a fork or similar tool so that the wind could blow away the chaff and the clean wheat could fall to the ground. It could take multiple tosses of each pile of grain to get it to a place where it was clean enough to use.

I had never really thought much about the process of winnowing--I just knew that it was an ancient harvesting process--but it suddenly occurred to me that winnowing involves exactly what I had been sensing. It involves "heaving up" the grain so that the wind can strip it clean.

With that insight, my perspective on the current and coming upheavals changed. Without realizing it, I had been thinking of them as destructive. But they're really intended to be purifying. God, in His mercy, wants to purify us so that we're ready to stand before Him, whether as individuals at the moment of our deaths or as a world at His second coming.

If wheat had a will, it would be smart for it to cooperate with the winnowing process. Don't cling to the chaff! Cast it off! Let the wind blow it away! The faster the chaff is gone, the faster the upheavals can end! 

Help me, dear Lord, and help Your Church, this nation, and the world to cooperate with Your purifying action in our day. Please do in me and in us all whatever will best accomplish Your merciful purposes to make us ready to stand before You, purified and clothed in Your mercy.

His power, my weaknesses

"My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." -- 2 Corinthians 12:9a (RSV)

St. Paul in Prison by Rembrandt

3-7-17: I was just reflecting on the Lord's promise to give me everything I need in light of my many weaknesses. And the thought just occurred to me that I need weaknesses. I need weaknesses to make me humble, to prevent me from becoming self-reliant, to keep me turning back to Jesus, relying on Him, clinging to Him, depending on Him, on His Mercy.

Thank You, Lord, for giving me everything I need, including my weaknesses. Help me to always remember that my weaknesses are a gift from You, something that I need, and to thank You for them. Amen.

I wrote those words in my prayer journal last Tuesday morning. On Wednesday, a huge windstorm swept across lower Michigan with wind gusts as high as 68 mph. Over 800,000 homes and businesses lost power, more than one-third of the customers of the local utility company. My home was out of power for almost three days, my parish where I work for six. It was a time of upheaval, as my housemate and I sought other places to stay, and each day brought the cancellation of more events at our parish, including the Sunday Masses. It brought into sharp focus how much we depend on electricity for even the basic tasks of work and daily living.

On Saturday I was praying that electricity would be restored in time for the Sunday Masses. I suddenly felt like the Lord said, "How badly do you want MY power?" My sense was, As badly as I wanted to see electrical power restored, that's how badly He wanted me to seek Him to see His power unleashed in the parish.

Yesterday, I was praying with the opening verses of 2 Corinthians 12 about St. Paul's famous "thorn in the flesh," which he begs God to remove from him. The Lord responds, "'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.'" (2 Cor. 12:9a) It's a verse I've pondered many times before, especially since February 2006, when I sensed that this verse represented "new territory" that the Lord had for me and for us as a parish.

This time as I read the verse, I asked myself, "Do I want His power enough that I want to fully experience my weaknesses?" It's not pleasant. Any romantic notions of being without power quickly faded under the cold winter winds. The stresses of the past days (and my situation was not nearly as bad as some, since I had friends who quickly took me in until our house power returned) revealed that my patience and any other virtues I may have thought I had were really as thin and brittle as old parchment. I squirmed with discomfort as I was confronted with my pride and other vices lurking just under the cracking veneer.

But if I really want to experience His power operating, then I need to experience my weaknesses. I need to be able to say with St. John the Baptist, "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 3:30) I need to know the truth of His words that "apart from me you can do nothing." (John 15:5b)

Help me, Lord. Through the prayers of Your Mother, the simple, pure Handmaid of the Lord, and the power of Your Spirit, her Spouse, help me reach the point where I can say with St. Paul, "I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities; for when I am weak, then I am strong." (2 Cor. 12:9b-10)

Partial birth abortion, Part 2

Kindness and truth shall meet, justice and peace shall kiss. -- Psalm 85:10 (NAB, 1st ed.)

"Justice and Mercy" by sculptor Glynn Acree,
in the courtyard of the Cumberland School of Law,
Samford University, Birmingham, Alabama.

In my first post on partial birth abortion, I started to respond to some of the questions and comments posted by one of my Facebook friends in response to a post I had made the morning of the election regarding a candidate's stand on partial birth abortion. That response was getting pretty lengthy, though, so I decided to break it up to make it a bit more readable. (An act of mercy to both of us! :-))

When I came upon this photo of this beautiful statue, I knew that it was perfect for this post, partly because I am going to be dealing with the two 1973 Supreme Court cases that legalized abortion in the U.S. I also love it, though, because it reminds me of the Scripture quote at the top of this post, which I pray will guide all my discussions and conversations on this and other "hot topics" from this time forward. Holy Spirit, help!

When I left off my first post, I mentioned the common understanding that partial birth and other late-term abortions occur only in the case of fetal abnormality, when the fetus is highly unlikely to survive after birth, or when the life of the mother is at stake. To address this, we first need to review two important holdings of the two U.S. Supreme Court cases that legalized abortion in the U.S.

Most people are familiar with the fact that in Roe v. Wade the U.S. Supreme Court held the following:

(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.
(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life [410 U.S. 113, 165]   may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.[1]

Many people do not realize, however, that there was a companion case to Roe called Doe v. Bolton. In their opinion on Roe, the justices explicitly said, "That opinion [Doe] and this one, of course, are to be read together."[2]

In Doe v. Bolton, the Supreme Court held that

We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health. [3]

In the years following the Roe and Doe decisions, this broad definition of "health" effectively led to abortion on demand through all 9 months of pregnancy. It allowed a physician to judge that any of the factors listed in Doe could justify making an exception to a regulation and performing an abortion.

One of the few laws that has been able to restrict this definition of health was the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The act states that the prohibition on partial birth abortions "does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself." [4]

The ban was immediately challenged, in part because of the limit of the exception to the mother's physical health. When the case went to the Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Carhart, the ban was upheld. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, stated

The Court assumes the Act's prohibition would be unconstitutional, under controlling precedents, if it "subject[ed] [women] to significant health risks." Id., at 328. Whether the Act creates such risks was, however, a contested factual question below: The evidence presented in the trial courts and before Congress demonstrates both sides have medical support for their positions. ... Other considerations also support the Court's conclusion, including the fact that safe alternatives to the prohibited procedure, such as D&E, are available. In addition, if intact D&E is truly necessary in some circumstances, a prior injection to kill the fetus allows a doctor to perform the procedure, given that the Act's prohibition only applies to the delivery of "a living fetus"... [5]

Nevertheless, in light of the fact that there were over 13,000 abortions after 21 weeks of pregnancy in 2011 (as noted in my previous post), are these abortions truly taking place only in exceptional situations of fetal abnormality or when the life of the mother is at risk? Until recently, it has been very difficult to answer that question, but a study published in the December 2013 issue of Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health provides a clue.

According to the abstract of the article available on the Guttmacher Institute web site, the study, as part of a larger study, compared 272 women who received an abortion at or after 20 weeks’ gestation with 169 who received first-trimester abortions at 16 facilities across the country in 2008–2010. In summarizing the results, the authors wrote, "Most women seeking later abortion fit at least one of five profiles: They were raising children alone, were depressed or using illicit substances, were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence, had trouble deciding and then had access problems, or were young and nulliparous."[6]

Dr. Elizabeth Johnson of the Lozier Institute, in commenting on this study, noted that this study "marks a notable departure from previous statements by abortion rights advocates that late-term abortions were rarely elective.  ... The authors acknowledge that, in fact, wider 'data suggests that most women seeking later terminations are not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment.'"[7]

Well, it's getting late and I haven't even yet addressed the crucial question of, what about the women for whom a partial-birth abortion -- or any abortion, really -- is truly a matter of life and death? And what about the many others facing challenging situations for which abortion seems to be the only solution? But my brain is starting to shut down, so there's no way that I'm going to be able to get to those questions tonight. So I guess there will be a Part 3 at a date to be determined, hopefully in the not-too-distant future. Until then, may God bless you abundantly and keep you in His care!


Footnotes:
[1] Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), XI.1. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/410/113.html#t67.
[2] Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), XI.2. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/410/113.html#t67.
[3] Doe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), IV.C. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/410/179.html.
[4] S.3 - Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, Sec. 3.a. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/3.
[5] Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), 3.(b). Retrieved on November 13 2016 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/550/124.html.
[6] Foster, Diana Green, and Kimport, Katrina, "Who Seeks Abortions at or after 20 Weeks?", Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, December 2013. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/550/124.html.
[7] Johnson, Elizabeth, "The Reality of Late-Term Abortion Procedures," January 20, 2015. Retrieved on November 13, 2016 from https://lozierinstitute.org/the-reality-of-late-term-abortion-procedures/.

Partial birth abortion, Part 1

You created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made... -- Psalm 139:13-14a (NIV)

Photo of 18-week-old living fetus,
as seen on the cover of the April 30, 1965 issue
of Life Magazine. Photo by Lennart Nilsson.

On the morning of the election last week, I posted a comment on Facebook about one candidate's position on what's commonly referred to as partial-birth abortion. One of my Facebook friends challenged me with several questions, legitimate questions that deserve a thoughtful reply.

Before I begin, I want to say something in response to the violent demonstrations that our nation has experienced in the last week following the elections. I've been struck more than ever by the importance in all our controversies of holding fast to our love for one another. Love does not mean saying, in effect, "I'm ok, you're ok." Rather, when we love, "kindness and truth shall meet." (Psalm 85:10) Or, as Carmelite nun and philosopher St. Edith Stein put it, "Don’t accept anything as truth if it is without love. And don’t accept anything as love if it is without truth. One without the other is a harmful lie." With that thought in mind, and with the help of the Holy Spirit, let's proceed.
 
As I reflected on my friend's questions, I felt that it might be helpful to group them into roughly two categories: the procedure itself, what it involves, its frequency, etc.; and the women who undergo the procedure, their needs, concerns, etc. I'm going to use this post to try to address the first category. I'll then follow up with another post on the second category.

In an effort to be as objective as possible, I asked myself, "Has my knowledge about this topic been gleaned solely from pro-life resources, which might be simply 'pro-life propaganda'?" Therefore, I've made an effort to find sources that are as free as possible of pro-life bias, such as the Guttmacher Institute and the records of the U.S. Congress and Supreme Court.

First, what exactly is a "partial-birth abortion"? 

This is a common term for a late-term abortion procedure known in the medical community as "intact dilation and extraction" (IDX). The Medical Dictionary portion of the Free Dictionary describes the procedure as follows:

IDX first involves administration of medications to cause the cervix to dilate. Dilation usually occurs over the course of several days. Next, the physician rotates the fetus to a footling breech position. The body of the fetus is then drawn out of the uterus feet first, until only the head remains inside the uterus. The physician then uses an instrument to puncture the base of the skull, which collapses the fetal head. Typically, the contents of the fetal head are then partially suctioned out, which results in the death of the fetus and reduces the size of the fetal head enough to allow it to pass through the cervix. The dead but otherwise intact fetus is then removed from the woman's body. [1]

The same source notes that the procedure "is typically performed between weeks 19 and 26 of pregnancy." It should be noted that, although there is some controversy over the subject, there is much evidence that the fetus is able to feel pain by 20 weeks gestation. (See www.doctorsonfetalpain.com for more information.)

But partial-birth abortion is rare, isn't it? 

The answer to this question depends on your perspective. For example, if you're talking about now, in November 2016, then yes, it is rare in the U.S. because of a Federal law passed in 2003 that made it illegal [2]. That law was challenged in court, but ultimately the constitutionality of the ban was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007 in the case Gonzales v. Carhart. [3]
 
If you go back to the years before that law was passed, then again, whether or not the procedure was rare depends on your perspective. According to the Guttmacher Institute, "Abortions performed by dilation and extraction were estimated to account for 0.17% of all abortions in 2000." [4] That is a very small percentage of all abortions. However, according to the same report, there were a total of 1,313,000 abortions performed in 2000. [5] Therefore, there were approximately 2,232 abortions performed by dilation and extraction in 2000. Translating the percentage into an actual number makes it seem less rare, at least to me, but again, it depends on your perspective.

This information brought to my mind another question, one that my friend didn't ask: If partial-birth abortion has been illegal in the U.S. for almost 10 years, then have late-term abortions dropped, or are there other procedures used for late-term abortions?

The Guttmacher Institute September 2016 Fact Sheet on "Induced Abortion in the United States" cites statistics from 2011 and 2012. [6] According to the chart "When Women Have Abortions," calculated in weeks from the last menstrual period, 1.3% of all abortions that occurred in 2012 took place at 21 weeks of pregnancy or later. [7] The same fact sheet states that in 2011 there were approximately 1.06 million abortions performed in the U.S. [8] The fact sheet does not provide total number of abortions for 2012. Applying the 2012 percentage of abortions taking place at 21 weeks of pregnancy or later to the 2011 total number, in 2011 approximately 13,780 abortions took place at 21 weeks of pregnancy or later.

So, I wondered, if partial-birth abortion was illegal by 2011, then what methods were being used to perform these over 13,000 abortions? I found the following methods listed on the internet as abortion procedures that could be used after 20 weeks of pregnancy:

• Dilation and evacuation (D&E): "A surgical abortion performed during the second trimester of pregnancy by dilation of the cervix and removal of the fetus and other products of conception, usually by use of vacuum aspiration and surgical instruments." [9]
  
• Induction abortion: Abortion performed by inducing early labor and delivery. According to WebMD, "Starting (inducing) labor and delivery in the second or third trimester of a pregnancy is done using medicines. To prevent complications, the cervix may be slowly opened (dilated) with a device called a cervical (osmotic) dilator before the induction is started." [10]
  
  Wikipedia, citing several medical sources, states, "If medical staff observe signs of life, they may be required to provide care: emergency medical care if the child has a good chance of survival and palliative care if not. Induced fetal demise before termination of pregnancy after 20–21 weeks gestation is recommended to avoid this." [11] An IDX abortion in which the fetus dies inside the uterus does not fall under the ban on partial birth abortions.

My friend's next question had to do with when a partial-birth, or by extension, other late-term abortion takes place. The common understanding is that these abortions occur only when the fetus is highly unlikely to survive after birth or when the life of the mother is at stake. Answering this question requires bringing in several pieces of background information that will make this blog post even longer than it already is! Therefore, I'm going to address the question of when these abortions take place in a separate post. Stay tuned for Part 2!


Footnotes:
[1] partial birth abortion. (n.d.) Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine. (2008). Retrieved November 12 2016 from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/partial+birth+abortion
[2] Public Law 108-105--Nov. 5, 2003, 117 Stat. 1201. Retrieved November 12 2016 from www.congress.gov/108/plaws/publ105/PLAW-108publ105.pdf
[3] See www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/05-380, retrieved November 13 2016. See also en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Carhart, 
[4] Finer, Lawrence B., and Stanley K. Henshaw, "Abortion Incidence and Services in the United States in 2000," Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, Jan./Feb. 2004. Retrieved November 12 2016 from www.guttmacher.org/about/journals/psrh/2004/01/abortion-incidence-and-services-united-states-2000. 
[5] ibid. Retrieved November 12 2016 from www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/tables/3500603t.html#t1
[6] "Induced Abortion in the United States," Guttmacher Institute Fact Sheet, September 2016. Retrieved on November 13 2016 from www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states.
[7] ibid. For a link direct to the chart, go to www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/images/whenwomenhaveabortionsgraph.png
[8] ibid.
[9] dilation and evacuation. (n.d.) The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary. (2007). Retrieved November 13 2016 from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/dilation+and+evacuation 
[10] See www.webmd.com/women/induction-abortion, retrieved on November 13 2016.
[11] "Late termination of pregnancy," Wikipedia.com, retrieved on November 13 2016 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_termination_of_pregnancy#Methods.

Catalysts

His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.' -- Matthew 25:21 (RSV)

I've long been fascinated by the hidden, largely unknown people who have served as the catalyst for someone else's conversion. People like Ponticianus, who stopped in one day to visit with his friends Augustine and Alypius. In the course of their conversation, Ponticianus told them about the Egyptian monk Antony and how two of Ponticianus' friends who stumbled upon a book about Antony were inspired to immediately leave everything behind and become monks. Ponticianus then left, unaware that he had set off an earthquake of conversion in the soul of the future Saint Augustine, an earthquake whose aftershocks are felt to this day.

In our own time, I've been thinking a lot lately about a 13-week old unborn baby who was aborted on September 26, 2009. Like millions of babies before and since, the little baby futilely fought to escape the abortionist's instrument that ultimately took its life. The baby would have just been another statistic, except for the fact that someone, horrified, was watching its life and death struggle on an ultrasound monitor. It was a moment of conversion for Abby Johnson, and her life, and the lives of thousands of others whom she has touched, will never be the same.

Thank you, little baby, for fighting the good fight in your all-too-brief life. I can easily imagine Jesus welcoming you into Heaven with the words, "Well done, good and faithful servant."

Musings on Myrrh

My lover is for me a sachet of myrrh to rest in my bosom. -- Song of Songs 1:13 (NAB)

When people speak of the wise men's gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, I always hear them speak of the myrrh as something used for embalming, a symbol of the future suffering of the Messiah. I know that's true, but there's another use of myrrh that you rarely hear mentioned. 

In the Song of Songs, as well as the book of Esther and Psalm 45, myrrh is a sweet perfume associated with lovers, particularly when they are preparing for their wedding night. (When I've heard the embalming aspect of myrrh emphasized, I've often thought that the Bride in Song of Songs probably wasn't comparing her Beloved to a bag of formaldehyde!) Although you don't generally think of that when you hear the gifts of the wise men, it's an aspect of the multi-layered celebration of Epiphany. 

The Epiphany, or "Manifestation," of Jesus traditionally reflects three different events in His life, two of which occurred decades after the Christmas event: the Adoration of the Wise Men, His Baptism in the Jordan, and the Wedding at Cana. In the Liturgy of the Hours on Epiphany, the Antiphon for the Canticle of Zechariah during Morning Prayer beautifully ties together all three events:

"Today the Bridegroom claims his bride, the Church, since Christ has washed her sins away in Jordan's waters; the Magi hasten with their gifts to the royal wedding; and the wedding guests rejoice, for Christ has changed water into wine, alleluia."

So, in light of that antiphon, maybe it's not so far-fetched to think that the myrrh was not only a symbol of Jesus' future suffering, but also of His future wedding to His Bride, the Church, a Bride that was born from His Pierced Side on the Cross.