Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life
We seem to have a major problem in the Church in the area of
reading comprehension. The problem is most obvious when the reading material
asserts the primacy of abortion among issues that voters have to consider in
elections.
Statements of the Pope, various Vatican officials, committees and
officials of the USCCB, and the entire body of US bishops, all point to abortion
as the fundamental human rights issue of our day. Even Cardinal Joseph Bernardin,
who during his life was a key spokesperson for the "consistent ethic of life,"
pointed out repeatedly that the fundamental right is the right to life.
To illustrate how profound the reading comprehension problem is, just
take a look at the list of quotes I have added at the end of these remarks. Then
determine for yourself whether they are clear or not.
Meanwhile, we have people in various positions within the Church
saying that all the issues are equal. Excuse me, but not only does that violate
Catholic teaching, it violates common sense. Ask any parent whether, among their
daily activities caring for their children, all issues are of equal importance.
In fact, you can ask the children themselves. They seem to know the answer
better than some Church officials do.
I’ve been acquiring a whole file of letters sent out, often from
offices of "social ministry" in various dioceses, which state that voters have
to consider a wide range of issues. So far, so good. But then these letters say
that no issue is more important than another. And that’s where the lack of
reading comprehension reveals itself. Either they have never seen the quotes
below, or they are deliberately ignoring them. And neither is appropriate for a
person who has the responsibility to convey Church teaching.
Two explanations can be offered for why some would distort the
teaching.
The first is simply loyalty to the Democratic party. The
problem has to be faced honestly that the loyalty of some Church ministers to
the Democratic Party is deeper than their loyalty to Catholic teaching. There is
nothing wrong with belonging to a political party and being loyal to it. But
when that party promotes the widespread, daily, legal killing of children, the
voice of protest must be heard. Silence is not an option, neither for Democrats,
Republicans, or anyone else – most certainly Catholics.
The second explanation for the reading comprehension problem is a
legal concern. Unfortunately, the Church has been fed for decades with legal
advice which is far more restrictive of the Church’s freedom than the IRS or the
FEC has ever been. And this is wrong. Not only are the IRS/FEC restrictions on
the Church minimal, but the enforcement policy is even looser. No Church has
ever lost its tax exemption by teaching about abortion, or the primacy of the
right to life, or the duty of public officials and voters to advance the Culture
of Life by voting. No Church has ever lost its tax exemption for doing what it
exists to do, namely, convey the teachings of the Church. No Church has ever
lost its tax exemption for distributing materials that did not cover a
wide-enough range of issues; in fact, no Church has lost its tax exemption for
distributing voter guides, period.
Despite all this, various Church officials will go into all kinds of
contortions to protect their assets from legal problems that they think will
arise if the Church says that the right to life is primary among all the issues.
Of course, the problem here is that this kind of legal advice, if it were
accurate, would prove too much. Statements of the US Bishops themselves, like
"Living the Gospel of Life" (1998), would constitute illegal activity under such
an erroneous framework. The best way to describe the current problem with some
of our attorneys is the bumpersticker that says "I Brake for Hallucinations."
The solution to all of this is for all of us, clergy and laity alike,
to bear faithful witness to the teachings of the Church, no matter what the
political implications may be. Bear witness to the consistent ethic of life, and
to that which makes it consistent – the right to life. Proclaim that there are
many rights, and proclaim the foundational right.
And be sure to keep your reading skills in top shape!
Abortion: The Primary Issue
According to Statements from the Pope and Bishops
The 1974 Declaration on Procured Abortion published by the
Vatican's Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated, "The
first right of the human person is his life. He has other goods and some are
more precious, but this one is fundamental - the condition of all the others."
Pope John Paul II elaborates on this theme in his 1988 apostolic
exhortation, The Vocation and the Mission of the Lay Faithful in the Church
and in the World (Christifideles Laici) in the following passage: "The
inviolability of the person, which is a reflection of the absolute inviolability
of God, finds its primary and fundamental expression in the inviolability of
human life. Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of
human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family,
to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and
fundamental right and the condition of all other personal rights, is not
defended with maximum determination . . . "
In 1989, in their Resolution on Abortion, the US bishops
stated, "At this particular time, abortion has become the fundamental human
rights issue for all men and women of good will. …. For us abortion is of
overriding concern because it negates two of our most fundamental moral
imperatives: respect for innocent life, and preferential concern for the weak
and defenseless."
In The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae, 1995), Pope John Paul
II pointed out that there is a wide array of life issues and attacks on human
dignity about which we must be actively concerned. He then, however, points to
abortion and euthanasia as attacks of "another category" and of "extraordinary
seriousness." He explains what he means as follows:
"It is not only that in generalized opinion these attacks tend no
longer to be considered as "crimes"; paradoxically they assume the nature of
"rights", to the point that the State is called upon to give them legal
recognition and to make them available through the free services of health-care
personnel. Such attacks strike human life at the time of its greatest frailty,
when it lacks any means of self-defence. Even more serious is the fact that,
most often, those attacks are carried out in the very heart of and with the
complicity of the family—the family which by its nature is called to be the
'sanctuary of life' "(n.11).
In 1998, the US Bishops issued Living the Gospel of Life: A
Challenge to American Catholics. Paragraphs 21-23 of that document discuss
the relative importance of various issues as follows:
21. "Bringing a respect for human dignity to practical politics can
be a daunting task. There is such a wide spectrum of issues involving the
protection of human life and the promotion of human dignity. Good people
frequently disagree on which problems to address, which policies to adopt and
how best to apply them. But for citizens and elected officials alike, the basic
principle is simple: We must begin with a commitment never to intentionally
kill, or collude in the killing, of any innocent human life, no matter how
broken, unformed, disabled or desperate that life may seem. In other words, the
choice of certain ways of acting is always and radically incompatible with the
love of God and the dignity of the human person created in His image. Direct
abortion is never a morally tolerable option. It is always a grave act of
violence against a woman and her unborn child. This is so even when a woman does
not see the truth because of the pressures she may be subjected to, often by the
child's father, her parents or friends. Similarly, euthanasia and assisted
suicide are never acceptable acts of mercy. They always gravely exploit the
suffering and desperate, extinguishing life in the name of the "quality of life"
itself. This same teaching against direct killing of the innocent condemns all
direct attacks on innocent civilians in time of war.
22. "Pope John Paul II has reminded us that we must respect every life, even
that of criminals and unjust aggressors. It is increasingly clear in modern
society that capital punishment is unnecessary to protect people's safety and
the public order, so that cases where it may be justified are "very rare, if not
practically non-existent." No matter how serious the crime, punishment that does
not take life is "more in conformity with the dignity of the human person"
(Evangelium Vitae, 56-7). Our witness to respect for life shines most brightly
when we demand respect for each and every human life, including the lives of
those who fail to show that respect for others. The antidote to violence is
love, not more violence.
23. "Any politics of human life must work to resist the
violence of war and the scandal of capital punishment. Any politics of human
dignity must seriously address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment,
education, housing, and health care. Therefore, Catholics should eagerly involve
themselves as advocates for the weak and marginalized in all these areas.
Catholic public officials are obliged to address each of these issues as they
seek to build consistent policies which promote respect for the human person at
all stages of life. But being 'right' in such matters can never excuse a wrong
choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life. Indeed, the failure to
protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims
to the 'rightness' of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least
powerful of the human community. If we understand the human person as the
"temple of the Holy Spirit" -- the living house of God -- then these latter
issues fall logically into place as the crossbeams and walls of that house. All
direct attacks on innocent human life, such as abortion and euthanasia, strike
at the house's foundation. These directly and immediately violate the human
person's most fundamental right -- the right to life. Neglect of these issues is
the equivalent of building our house on sand. Such attacks cannot help but lull
the social conscience in ways ultimately destructive of other human rights."
The Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities of the US Bishops has
always pointed out the priority of abortion, and the most recent version of the
plan (2001: A Campaign in Support of Life) explains it this way:
"Among important issues involving the dignity of human life with
which the Church is concerned, abortion necessarily plays a central role.
Abortion, the direct killing of an innocent human being, is always gravely
immoral (The Gospel of Life, no. 57); its victims are the most vulnerable and
defenseless members of the human family. It is imperative that those who are
called to serve the least among us give urgent attention and priority to this
issue of justice.
"This focus and the Church's commitment to a consistent ethic of life complement
one another. A consistent ethic of life, which explains the Church's teaching at
the level of moral principle—far from diminishing concern for abortion and
euthanasia or equating all issues touching on the dignity of human
life—recognizes instead the distinctive character of each issue while giving
each its proper place within a coherent moral vision."
Faithful Citizenship (2003) quotes Living the
Gospel of Life 5 as follows: "As we wrote in Living the Gospel of Life, "Abortion
and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human life and dignity
because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental good and the
condition for all others".28 Abortion, the deliberate killing of a
human being before birth, is never morally acceptable."
Bishop Elio Sgreccia, Vice-President of the Pontifical Academy for
Life,
said the following in an interview conducted in May, 2004:
"Without respect for life, without respect for the family,
society simply does not exist…all [other] rights presuppose the right to life.
If the right to life is not defended, the defense of all these other rights is
useless. It becomes a lie, because it would mean that the defense to the right
to work, to society, etc. applies only to some, and not to all."
Cardinal Renato Martino, President of the Pontifical Council
for Justice and Peace,
said the following in an interview conducted in May, 2004:
"The Holy Father speaks of the protection of life as the
fundamental realization and respect for human rights. Without that realization,
without that respect for the right to life, no other discussion of human rights
can continue; it must be based upon the foundation of human dignity and the
right to life."
Archbishop John Foley, President of the Pontifical Council for
Social Communications at the Vatican, said the following in
an interview conducted in May, 2004: "Generally, law is needed to protect the
weakest members of society because strong members of society, the rich, the
powerful, the strong can usually take care of themselves but the weakest members
of society need the protections of society itself and the help of society
itself. That is why we need laws to protect the weak against violence form
outside. The weakest members of society are the unborn. They have no other
spokespersons except, you might say, society itself. So we must defend the
rights of the innocent unborn...If we don't have life we
don't have anything."
In July, 2004, Priests for Life also interviewed
representatives of the United States Bishops’ Conference and asked whether, in
the view of the bishops, it was true to say that abortion is the number one most
urgent moral issue.
Cathleen Cleaver Ruse, Director of Planning and Information for the
Pro-life Secretariat of the US Bishops’ Conference,
responded, "Sure, that's
absolutely true. The church has taught on this issue of abortion and its
immorality since the Apostolic Age. It's one of our longest standing moral
public policy issues and it is not like any other issue really. It is, some
might say, it's non-negotiable. There are no instances where it is morally licit
or justifiable. That sets is apart from other issues like capital punishment,
like just war theory and many other social issues that are very, very important
but don't have that kind of no exceptions policy. So, the way the Church looks
at abortion - abortion is one of those fundamental issues. If that right is
taken away, if the very right to life is taken away then no other right matters.
You don't have the ability to hold another right or to have another right taken
away. So, while health care, the right to a good education, housing all of these
issues are very, very important, they are meaningless if the right to life is
not first protected."
"If social issues are like a house then the foundation is the right to
life. An abortion takes away or rips out the foundation. The many other social
issues can be considered the walls of that house but they can't be built unless
there's a foundation."
Richard Doerflinger, Deputy Director of the Pro-life
Secretariat of the US Bishops’ Conference,
echoed the same theme:
"What the Church has said is that because it is the first gift from
a loving God and the condition for all other human goods, all our other rights -
life itself has to be a top priority it is the most basic gift and if we lose
the right to live we lose everything else. Now within the whole network of
issues about life, the first priority has to be the right of each individual at
every stage simply to exist at all. To be inviolable. To be free from direct
attacks. So the church has said that issues that involve direct attacks on
innocent human life - and in our society today, obviously abortion which takes
over a million lives in the United States every year - issues like euthanasia
for the terminally ill are primary. They are the most basic threats to human
life because they are direct attacks on life because they attack innocent life
that's not doing anybody else harm or attacking anybody else and because they
are attacking life at its most vulnerable and defenseless - the very stages
where children and the elderly should be able to expect the respect and
protection of their families because it is where they are weakest and most
vulnerable.
"What the Bishop's said in their 1998 document Living the Gospel of
Life, was that this whole edifice of human goods and ways of enhancing human
life are like a house but the other issues that enhance the quality of life for
everyone are like the walls of the house and protecting the inviolability of
life itself from attack is like the foundation. You cannot have a house anymore
if you don't have a foundation. It's meaningless to say we are going to enhance
all these qualities of human life and say that human life itself has no inherent
worth. Those have to primary. Everything else grows from that. We promote a
consistent ethic of life and at the same time there are priorities, some things
are more fundamental than others."
Following are some statements by Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who
was one of the key spokespersons on the "consistent ethic of life."
In 1984, Cardinal Bernardin wrote: "Our "Statement on Political
Responsibility" has always been, like our "Respect Life Program," a multi-issue
approach to public morality. The fact that this Statement sets forth a spectrum
of issues of current concern to the Church and society should not be understood
as implying that all issues are qualitatively equal from a moral perspective…As
I indicated earlier, each of the life issues—while related to all the others—is
distinct and calls for its own specific moral analysis. " (A Consistent
Ethic of Life: Continuing the Dialogue, The William Wade Lecture Series, St.
Louis University, March 11, 1984).
"A consistent ethic of life does not equate the problem of taking
life (e.g., through abortion and in war) with the problem of promoting human
dignity (through humane programs of nutrition, health care, and housing). But a
consistent ethic identifies both the protection of life and its promotion as
moral questions"
(Wade lecture, as above).
A year later, he declared, "The fundamental human right is to
life—from the moment of conception until death. It is the source of all other
rights, including the right to health care" (The Consistent Ethic of Life and
Health Care Systems, Foster McGaw Triennial Conference, Loyola University of
Chicago, May 8, 1985).
On Respect Life Sunday, 1 October 1989, Cardinal Bernardin issued a
statement entitled "Deciding for Life," in which he said,
"Not all values, however, are of equal weight. Some are more
fundamental than others. On this Respect Life Sunday, I wish to emphasize that
no earthly value is more fundamental than human life itself. Human life is the
condition for enjoying freedom and all other values. Consequently, if one must
choose between protecting or serving lesser human values that depend upon life
for their existence and life itself, human life must take precedence. Today the
recognition of human life as a fundamental value is threatened. Nowhere is this
clearer than in the case of elective abortion. At present in our country this
procedure takes the lives of over 4,000 unborn children every day and over 1.5
million each year."
