Korean Bishops' First Public Statement on a Social Issue

The Catholic Times featured an article on a labor issue to commemorate its centennial anniversary. This incident is significant because it was the first time the Korean Church had officially spoken out on a social issue through a statement from the bishops' conference. 

The details can be summarized briefly. In May 1967, a legitimate labor union was formed at Simdo Textile in Ganghwa Island, with JOC members (Young Christian Workers) from the Ganghwa Parish playing a leading role. Among the 21 textile companies in Ganghwa, some had already established unions. Father Michael Bransfield, a Maryknoll missionary (1929-1989), the then parish priest of Ganghwa, indirectly supported the union activities by allowing them to use the meeting space.

The company president, a member of parliament, not only dismissed the union officials but also forced the protesting workers out of the factory. Other company presidents seized this opportunity to fire active union members. Sixteen of the dismissed workers were all practicing Catholics. The business owners also went so far as to approach the priest, accusing him of being a subversive element who was inciting the workers, and threatened him, holding him responsible for the factory's losses.

They issued a resolution stating that they would not employ any Catholics, and the president of Simdo Textile claimed that 'the factory was paralyzed due to the unfair interference of the priest before announcing a closure. There were instances where workers, instigated by the company owners, gathered at the church to protest. The police chief of Ganghwa, along with the business owners, urged the priest to formally apologize to the employers, citing accusations of violating anti-communist laws. This situation led to divisions not only among the local residents but also among some of the parishioners.

Management attempted to dismantle the union by unlawfully dismissing two members, prompting union members to gather at the Ganghwa Church to hold a meeting on the situation. This time, the police intervened, apprehending about 30 Catholic believers, and the owner of Simdo Textile, along with the head of the Ganghwa police station, threatened Father Bransfield, saying he would be arrested for violating anti-communism laws if he continued to interfere with union activities.

The 'Ganghwa Textile Council,' an association of 21 textile companies in Ganghwa, published a statement in a central daily newspaper declaring that they would no longer hire JOC members. Following this, the management mobilized over 150 workers to protest against Father Bransfield, and the police detained him, demanding an apology. Furthermore, they pressured Bishop William McNaughton, the head of the Incheon diocese, to have Father Bransfield reassigned elsewhere. In this worsening situation, the bishop expressed intense regret through a statement addressed to the management and police authorities, protesting against the infringement of workers' legitimate rights.

The bishop considered this incident as a full-scale repression of the Church, beyond just a simple labor dispute. At the time, the president of JOC was Cardinal Kim Soo-hwan (Stefano), who would be appointed as Korea's first cardinal in 1969. Cardinal Kim assessed the situation and persuaded other bishops, leading the bishops' conference to issue a statement titled 'We uphold social justice and workers' rights' on February 9, 1968. The statement acknowledged the rights of workers to form unions and engage in collective action, reflecting the Church's fundamental stance on labor issues.

Although the bishops' statement might have seemed radical in Korean society at that time, Pope Paul VI sent a letter of encouragement and support to the Korean bishops' conference.

As the consistent protests from the entire Korean church and the support from the Vatican were conveyed, the government eventually stepped in to resolve the situation, leading the textile council, led by Simdo Textiles, to annul previous resolutions and reinstate the dismissed workers. The Ganghwa textile incident was a symbolic event where the Korean church actively expressed its stance on social issues for the first time after the council. Subsequently, the Korean church would assume a prophetic role in various areas of social engagement, including labor issues, democratization, human rights movements, national reconciliation, and the pursuit of social justice, drawing on this valuable experience.

St. Augustine, Church Father

 

August 28 is the Feast Day of St. Augustine, a bishop and scholar revered as a source of church renewal. This year, in particular, the spirituality and teachings of the saint are being newly highlighted with the accession of Pope Leo XIV, the first pope from the Order of St. Augustine. Through a special article of Daegu Catholic University, the thoughts and legacy of St. Augustine convey the significance of Pope Leo XIV's pastoral spirit in leading the universal church today.

On May 8, Pope Leo XIV appeared for the first time on the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica. He introduced himself as follows: “I am the son of St. Augustine (354-430) and a member of the Augustinian Order.” With a smile on his face, he looked out at the world and the crowd and recited St. Augustine's famous words. “For you, I am a bishop, but with you, I am a Christian.” (Sermon 340,1) This is an excerpt from a sermon given by Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, on the anniversary of his episcopal ordination.  

Saint Augustine is quoted almost without exception in the new pope's speeches and homilies, and his influence is vividly evident in his writings and pastoral mottos. Who exactly is Saint Augustine?

It has been said that all ancient thought flows into Saint Augustine, and all later doctrinal traditions flow from him. (Pope Paul VI, May 4, 1970, speech at the opening ceremony of the University of Saint Augustine in Rome) It is also said that the path of Western Christianity and culture converges on Saint Augustine's diocese of Hippo and spreads out from there. 

What significance does St. Augustine, who passed away 1,600 years ago, have for us today? St. Augustine and other Church Fathers provided numerous inspirations and pastoral sources for the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), which became the driving force behind the modern Church's renewal. This is because the Church Fathers are the source of the “sacred tradition” that is connected to the Bible.

After the council ended, Pope Paul VI (1897–1978), who deeply felt the need for patristic studies, entrusted the Augustinian Order with establishing and operating a patristic research institute. Finally, in 1970, the Augustinian Patristic Institute opened with the blessing of Pope Paul VI. 

Pope Leo XIV served as rector of this university from 2001 to 2013, and the patristic professors who teach there are his fellow monks. Pope Leo XIV, who specialized in canon law, taught canon law and patristics at a seminary in Peru, which was also a result of this tradition.

The heart pierced by an arrow and the book in the papal coat of arms are symbols of the Order of Saint Augustine. They represent Saint Augustine's confession, “You have shot an arrow into our hearts with your love, and we have been pierced by your words” (Confessions 9,2,3). The Pope's pastoral motto is taken from Psalm 127:3, written by the saint. The four-word Latin phrase seems simple at first glance. Literally translated, it means “In that One, we are one.” The Episcopal Conference's translation office considered the context and translated it as “In Christ, who is one, we are one.”

However, this short sentence contains St. Augustine's theory of “Totus Christus” (the whole Christ). Jesus Christ is the head of the Church, and we are His members; however, even after His resurrection and ascension, He continues to experience the suffering of the Church through trials, temptations, poverty, and deprivation in this world. Jesus, the head, is not resting on his heavenly throne, but is still suffering with his members, united with humanity from head to toe. The head is not separate from the body, nor is Christ separate from Christians. It is not that he is one and we are many, but that “in Christ, we are one.” This is the pastoral motto chosen by Pope Leo XIV.

In the following passage, St. Augustine concludes, “Therefore, Christ, who is both head and body (Christus caput et corpus), is one person.” The saint who taught us, “We are the Church!” goes further and proclaims, “We are Christ!” “We have not only become Christians, but we have become Christ Himself. We have become Christ!”  This is the amazing insight of St. Augustine, which Pope John Paul II also emphasized: that you, I, and all of us are one Christ.

Pope Leo XIV will embrace all brothers and sisters in the world, as well as the poor and suffering, as Christ did, with the pastoral vision of “We are all one Christ!”

“In Illo Uno Unum” (In Him We Are One). Is the Pope's motto.

St. Augustine is the Church Father who left behind the most writings. His masterpiece, Confessions, has become a classic loved by many. However, the saint is not an old man in a classic. His words and writings are both old and new. For example, Pope Francis revised paragraph 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which refused to abandon the exceptional inevitability of the death penalty, and clearly stated that “the death penalty is... unacceptable.” This occurred in 2018. In correcting this doctrine, Pope Francis drew extensively on the teachings of Saint Augustine. He frequently relied on the authority of the Church Fathers 

As Saint Vincent of Lérins (c. 445) said, doctrine grows. Just as a child grows into an adult, so too does doctrine grow and mature. Thanks to Pope Francis, who reintroduced and reinterpreted St. Augustine and other Church Fathers of this era, including Lactantius (c. 250–325), the Church finally came to possess a more mature and evangelical doctrine on capital punishment. Thus, the vast yet straightforward teachings of Saint Augustine will serve as an inexhaustible source of renewal for Pope Leo XIV and the Church. 

Dealing with Doubt

A seminary professor, in his column on spirituality, offers some guidance on overcoming doubts in daily life.

It is said that the following words were inscribed on the tombstone of a certain hypochondriac: “See, I told you so!” Was he right? Did he contract a fatal illness, just as he feared? Or did his doubts cause mental illness, which in turn harmed his body?

During his time studying abroad, the professor once fell into a deep state of doubt. Especially after he started feeling sick. He couldn't sleep properly, and strange bodily symptoms began appearing. He wondered if he had contracted a serious illness. It was health anxiety. He lived in a constant state of gloom, and his fellow students would ask, “Still struggling?” They tried to pull him out of his depression, but he was overcome by doubt. It took a long time to escape that doubt.

As everyone experiences, humans are weak beings who often fall into doubt, which possesses tremendous power and dominates us. The more you doubt, the more doubts pile up one after another. The more you fight against your doubting self, the more you get trapped in it and sink deeper into doubt. Yet the Lord, who draws good even from evil, does not abandon us in our doubt. He guides us to confront and overcome it.

Doubt has many stages. There is a simple doubt about facts, a doubt that refuses to trust in people, and finally, a doubt about the very foundation of existence. Is there meaning to life? Does God exist? Or do I simply return to nothingness with death?

Because human existence itself is uncertain, doubt always lingers beside us, within us. This holds true even for people of faith. When great trials strike, when confidence and certainty vanish amid tribulation, when we suffer from illness or the threat of death, when only a bleak tomorrow seems visible, when hope feels far removed—we fall into profound depression. This doubt stems from the loss of faith that the Lord is with us, the loss of hope that the Lord will care for and protect us to the end. Ultimately, doubt is also a matter of hope. Even Jesus sought God on the cross. “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)

Where is hope, and how can we find it? "Take courage. Do not be afraid." (Mark 6:50) Since the Lord is with us, let us not fear but entrust all our worries and anxieties to Him. 

At a reunion of a Holy Land pilgrimage group, a nun shared: "Throughout the pilgrimage, my heart felt heavy and uneasy. But while visiting Assisi, standing before the bed where Saint Clare passed away, with just a single candle lit and a single flower placed there, in her simple passing, in that humble bedroom, I saw hope. Right then, my heart felt at peace, and I felt hope blossoming."

Her words were that hope sprouts from emptying, erasing, and letting go. Ultimately, isn't the reason we cannot entrust everything to God because we cannot empty, discard, and let go? Is that not why we fail to find hope and instead doubt? Detachment once again illuminates our dark night path. This poverty is a source of hope.

Understanding Intersubjectivity

The Jesuit professor in the Catholic Peace philosophical chat column provides an understanding of the many ways we can open ourselves to a larger world. 

We refer to an existence other than ourselves as the 'other.' However, the other carries more profound philosophical implications. We cannot imagine a world without the other, and the other becomes a major catalyst for self-awareness and self-recognition.

The concept of the other became a philosophically important subject after Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) presented the intersubjectively shared self and the other. [Intersubjectivity describes the shared understanding that emerges from interpersonal interactions]

According to Martin Buber (1878-1965), humans exhibit two attitudes in relating to the world: 'I-Thou' and 'I-It.' The former treats the other as a unique personal being, while the latter objectifies and instrumentalizes the other. When humans relate to the other as an individual being of I-Thou, they can engage in genuine dialogue and realize themselves through the other’s presence.

Philosophers who spoke about this are Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) and Emmanuel Levinas (1906-1995). Sartre views the other as a conflicting being opposing me; Levinas sees the other as a transcendent entity to whom we must extend absolute hospitality.

Sartre argues that the Other comes to me primarily as an uncomfortable and disconcerting gaze. The gaze of the other objectifies and limits my freedom by making me an object. As I am observed by others, I become the object of observation, which fundamentally triggers feelings of shame. However, recognizing myself as an object in the world of the other with this uncomfortable gaze leads me to strive to become a truly free subject in relation to the other. In this conflict with the other, we confront the other as intersubjective beings.

In contrast, Levinas focuses on the Other not as a being that causes conflict through an uncomfortable gaze, but rather a being we must actively welcome. Levinas emphasizes, above all, the transcendence and incomprehensibility of the Other, which is absolutely beyond my understanding. The Other is an existence that cannot be understood through knowledge or concepts, and as a being that is essentially different from me.

Thus, the Other exists in a manner that is completely 'different' from me and invites me to be a subjective being. If we refuse to acknowledge this difference of the Other or merely see it as an object of confrontation and struggle, the path to truly becoming oneself will be far away. This is because the otherness of the Other is the most important catalyst for human beings to recognize themselves and to have their subjectivity.

What is truly necessary?

The need for a lifestyle that is satisfied with the bare minimum is the topic from the Desert Fathers that the Benedictine priest wants us to reflect on this week in his column in the Catholic Times. 

The Desert Fathers simplified their lives, focusing on the essentials, and gave us a lesson in minimal living. It is a lifestyle that focuses on reducing possessions and living with less, emphasizing concentration on the important aspects of life and pursuing a simple and meaningful existence. Those who practice minimalist living in their daily lives are called “minimalists.”  

In this sense, the Desert Fathers were the original minimalists, practicing minimalist living long before us. They followed Christ, who owned nothing, and sought to emulate him, who had nowhere to lay his head, by being content with little and living with only the bare necessities. Looking at the desert fathers' way of life, one immediately wonders, “How could they live that way?” Their asceticism and self-denial seem almost superhuman. When it came to the necessities of life, they did not shy away from poverty and deprivation, but strove to maintain a spirit of complete renunciation and detachment.

They kept only the bare necessities in their cells. Peeking into the cell of a holy monk, there was nothing to see except possibly for a mat, a basket containing a few small pieces of dry bread, and a basket of salt. Although there are no documents listing the belongings of a hermit monk, based on scattered information in various documents, it is estimated that the basic necessities included a teapot, a jar with a handle, other jars, a work knife, an awl, a spindle, a needle, and farming tools. 

They either had no books at all or, like the monk Isaiah, had only one. As monks began to accumulate books in their cupboards, an elder lamented, “The prophets wrote books, our fathers read them, their descendants memorized them. But in our time, books have been copied, systematized, and have become useless in the cupboards.” 

Abba Isaac lamented to Cassian that monks were not content with one or two rooms, but were building monasteries that were larger than necessary, with four or five rooms furnished with luxurious furniture, in order to satisfy their worldly desires.

The clothing of the hermits was very simple, rough, and shabby. Perhaps they were inspired by what the Bible says about Elijah and John the Baptist. Elijah wore rags sewn together, and there were monks who wore mats. “A monk's clothing should be such that even if it is left outside his cell for three days, no one would take it.” 

There were no strict regulations regarding clothing at that time. The materials used for monastic robes varied greatly, but monks were advised not to wear clothes that were too shabby or too expensive so as not to attract attention. This was because of the fear of vanity.  If there was a rule, it was to wear clothes that were neither too shabby nor too expensive. The early desert fathers tried to follow Jesus' advice to own nothing but a tunic. The custom of owning a slightly better tunic to wear to church on weekends and Sundays quickly became established.

The regulations regarding food and drink in the desert were very diverse. This diversity stemmed from differences in personality, age, health condition, location, and environment. However, general rules gradually emerged based on experience. “Regardless of the frequency of meals, the type of food consumed, or the quantity and quality of beverages, one must avoid feeling full and eat only what is necessary to sustain the body, leaving it slightly hungry”  In other words, “It is not about satisfying the desire to eat until full, but about taking the necessary amount to maintain physical health according to one's physical strength and age.” This is the basic principle and the golden rule. 

Excessive asceticism should be avoided just as much as excessive food and drink. The spirit of gluttony leads to less asceticism. The diet was extremely simple, typically consisting of bread, water, and salt, with two small loaves of bread per day. However, the rules were relaxed for the sick and guests. This was because charity always took precedence over rules. 

When oil was used, only a minimal amount was used, and there was no meat at all. Palladius reports that Macarius of Alexandria did not eat bread or drink water during Lent. He is said to have been satisfied with chewing a few cabbage leaves on Sundays just to create the atmosphere of a meal. 

When the writer was studying Latin at the seminary, he came across the phrase “Parvo Contentus,” and it has lingered in his mind ever since. This phrase, meaning “to be content with little,” is naturally connected with the monastic life. From then on, under the motto of “living with the bare minimum,” he began training himself to reduce all possible needs and live with the bare minimum. This lifestyle gradually became ingrained, but over time, unnecessary things began to accumulate one by one. 

Living with the bare necessities means simplifying one's life. It means not wasting time and effort on unnecessary and secondary things, but focusing solely on the one thing that is necessary (Unum Necessarium). All human desires and attachments complicate life and cause us to continue collecting and clinging to things. As time goes by, he became more deeply convinced that we do not need as much as we think to live. He has one modest wish: that his successors will not have a difficult time sorting his  belongings after he dies.

Of course, there is a big difference between the geographical and social environments of 4th-century Egypt and the 21st century in which we live today. Therefore, we cannot and do not need to follow the desert fathers' minimalist lifestyle.  However, their attitude and spirit of minimizing the secondary aspects of life in order to focus on what is essential and meaningful are still worth emulating. 

The minimalist lifestyle we should pursue from a religious perspective is an attitude of being satisfied with the bare minimum. If we strive to possess more and enjoy more, we risk losing sight of our goal of happiness. If we excessively satisfy our physical desires, our souls become sick, and our minds lose peace. Is it not far more essential and wise to strive for something more noble and valuable—to nourish the soul and seek inner peace by being content with the bare necessities?

Power of the Creative Self

A Salesian sister in her 'Hello Again Today' column of the Catholic Peace Weekly reflects on the creative self-reward of addiction and finding oneself. We all have the power of a creative self. Parents, in particular, should help their children develop their inherent creative control over their immediate needs. 

The child approaches the mother with a big lollipop, smiling. The mother, however, said, "I don't want you to eat now." The child's face changes quickly; the way she looks at the candy seems to contain the worries of the whole universe. The child places the candy in the mother's hand. The mother hugs the child and says, "Thank you! You're the best!" The child's face is filled with joy as if he has won the entire world.

In place of giving up immediate external physical pleasure, the child recovered his self-esteem by earning a positive reward from his mother's recognition. This is the power of the creative self.

Psychiatrist Alfred Adler said, "With the creative power of the self, we can also solve the need for compensation." Humans are not just passive beings, but active beings who create meaning on their own. However, modern society subordinates us to a quick reward system, forcing us to pack up and flee even before we can exert creative power. The addictive reward you seek while trying to overcome your inferiority complex is, in the end, a dangerous temptation to cover it up. As I am driven by temporary compensation, I am gradually moving away from my true self.

We are now living in an era of reward addiction. From the moment I wake up to my smartphone alarm in the morning to a cup of coffee, music, YouTube, and online shopping, I respond to the constant 'external reward'. But I don't even realize whether it's my choice or being dragged by the reward system.

Not long ago, when I asked young people, "What is the biggest temptation that hinders my growth?" no one picked up a smartphone. For them, smartphones are not a temptation but an indispensable tool. We know how to use tools, but are we actually being used by them? The means to an end have become the end itself, and hours are wasted without knowing it.

There is nothing more dangerous than not being aware of a need. The automated reward moves us without the awareness of 'reward'. The more you do, the more life becomes subordinate to the design of others, and the power of self-interpretation and meaning becomes paralyzed. 

Rewards are always aimed at our deficiencies. He needs the external compensation to soothe his inferiority complex, but the reward leaves only a fake feeling of satiety instead of real satisfaction. Inferiority in the unconscious stimulates the desire for compensation, and we are drawn to that need and live a life consumed by a reward system rather than creating a life for ourselves.

As Adler said, do we humans inherently have the creative power within ourselves? If so, does it clearly have the ability not to be subordinated to immediate compensation, swayed by the external environment?

The child gave up the immediate and sensuous reward of candy, but chose the more profound and lasting satisfaction of the mother's love, recognition, and belonging. It did not suppress the desire, but changed its direction. This is a reward for self-growth, and it is an active choice, not passive suppression. Through that choice, the child sublimates his needs to a higher value. It is a fantastic moment to experience one's inherent creative power.

It's like the experience that a more meaningful path opens only when you give up a comfortable path, and a journey back to the essence of existence, like a salmon going back against a strong current.

We all have the power of a creative self. The question is the will to use it. Every moment, the key is whether you can make a choice that sees the whole instead of a part. In an age of reward, "living life as a struggler" may be an uncomfortable choice. But it's a choice that makes me who I am. 

Being the subject who actively chooses instead of recklessly jumping into a quick reward system. This would be the way to build the muscles of the creative self.

How can we build the power of our creative selves? The first step is to recognize the 'reward system'. Before going to sleep, when casually picking up a smartphone, I quietly ask myself, "Why am I doing this now?" This question awakens my inner spirit.

Change direction toward positive rewards through small choices such as reading a page of a book, contemplating, and praying. It is the way for salmon to move toward the essence of existence, going against a strong current. There, the breath of creation and the gaze of God who created me await.

Without wrapping ourselves up or fleeing with external rewards, we accept the preciousness and love we have already received. In that love, the inferiority complex heals, and the ego breathes. You don't push the real me away with fake rewards, but you accept the true me with positive rewards.

He asks whenever the unconscious inferiority complex brings the temptation of external rewards. "Where are you?" (Genesis 3, 9) The creative self wakes up in the step toward Eden.

Anonymous childbirth

 

An article in the Catholic Peace Weekly reports on the number of children abandoned in South Korea and the implementation of the anonymous childbirth program for pregnant women in crisis.

The number of abandoned children exceeded 1,000 per year until 2000,  and then fell below 100 in 2022, to 88 in 2023, and then to 30 the following year.

This sharp decline in the number of abandoned children last year, which fell to one-third of the previous year's level, is believed to be influenced by the implementation of the Protected Childbirth System, which guarantees anonymous childbirth for women in crisis pregnancies. 

The Crisis Pregnancy Protected Childbirth System is a system that supports women facing difficulties in childbirth and childcare for various reasons to give birth anonymously. The system was established to prevent a series of tragic situations, such as births outside of hospitals, child abandonment, and abortions.

On May 30 last year, just before the system was implemented, a woman in her 20s was arrested for abandoning a newborn baby in a toilet in an apartment building, causing the baby's death. On June 7 of the same year, a woman in her 30s was arrested and sent to the prosecutor's office on suspicion of abandoning her baby in a garbage sorting facility after giving birth.  Both women reportedly stated during police investigations that they were “worried about raising the baby alone” and “worried that others would find out about the birth.”

It has been one year since the Protective Childbirth System was implemented to protect the lives of women and babies in crisis. Although the system was launched with the noble intention of preventing child abandonment and ensuring safe childbirth with the support of the state, there are concerns that babies born through anonymous childbirth may have their right to know their parents violated if the parents refuse to acknowledge them, leaving the children unable to learn about their parents for life.

Above all, the reflection period for choosing the Protected Childbirth System, a critical decision for both the woman and the baby, is only seven days after childbirth, leading to on-site voices stating, “It is extremely difficult to persuade crisis pregnant women to raise their babies.” From the baby’s perspective, the time they can hold their mother’s hand is limited to just ‘seven nights.’

Professor Seong Jung-hyun of the Department of Social Welfare at Hyeonseong University emphasized, “Compared to the necessity of implementing the system, the discussion and preparation period was too short, and it is true that the measures taken after deciding on protective childbirth are insufficient. However, since we have already started with the attitude of ‘implement first, prepare later,’ it is necessary to revisit the areas of concern.”

According to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, 299 children were safely born during the first year of the protective childbirth system, which was implemented on July 19 last year. As of June this year, 160 mothers have received counseling from relevant agencies and decided to raise their children themselves. Of these, 107 chose protected childbirth (anonymous childbirth), while 32 opted to register the birth to allow the child to find their parents in the future, even if they did not raise the child themselves, and subsequently placed the child for adoption. Among the mothers who decided to raise their children themselves, 19 initially applied for protected childbirth but later changed their minds. The fact that pregnant women in crisis chose to raise their children themselves more often despite the option of anonymous birth available under the Protected Birth System is significant in itself.

This process is supported by 16 regional counseling centers for pregnant women in crisis nationwide, which help them choose life and find ways to live with their children. Half of these regional counseling centers are operated by the Catholic Church as unmarried parent support institutions.

The Protected Childbirth System is a “last resort”. Voices are saying that helping mothers and children live happily “together” is the true meaning of ‘protection’ and a “national duty.” As the Protected Childbirth System marks its first anniversary, we explored ways to achieve this. It is a “miracle of seven nights” that can hold onto mothers.