PASTORAL LETTER OF MOST REV. KEVIN McNAMARA,
BISHOP OF KERRY, IRELAND
The Pro-Life Amendment to the
Constitution:
one year later
The following Pastoral Letter was issued by the Bishop of Kerry, Most Rev.
Kevin McNamara, on 1 September 1984.
On 7 September 1983 the Irish electorate voted by a large majority to
write into the Irish Constitution an explicit statement of the right to life of
the unborn child. This made Ireland the first country in the world to give clear
constitutional protection to unborn human life. The Amendment has made a lasting
contribution to ensuring that the right to life of the most innocent and
defenceless members of our society will continue to be vindicated by our laws.
In accordance with hopes widely expressed in the run-up to the Referendum,
the passing of the Amendment has also led to a new awareness among us of the
problems of pregnant women in distress. To point to just one example of this,
the CURA service in this diocese has been put on a new footing during the past
year, in order to give a more efficient and flexible service. In general the
highlighting of the abortion issue during the Referendum campaign has created a
more understanding and compassionate approach to the acutely distressing human
problems involved. At the same time it has made the public more aware of the
forces in our society which seek to deny unborn life the respect and full legal
protection to which it is entitled.
One year after the Referendum, it is appropriate to bring these facts to
mind. I hope the anniversary of the passing of the Amendment will be for all of
us an occasion to renew our commitment to respect and defend human life at every
stage, and especially to do everything in our power to remove anything in our
society that would tend to make recourse to abortion more likely.
It must not be forgotten, of course, that if the scourge of abortion is to be
fully and finally overcome, the most fundamental requirement is respect for
God's law concerning human sexuality. The virtue of chastity, though widely
disregarded today and often derided as impractical and out of date, remains an
essential safeguard of dignity of the human person and of God's design for the
well-being of the individual and of society. Our youth especially must be taught
to love and practise it. Let no one do them the injustice of supposing that they
are unwilling or unable to respond to its challenge. Let no one try to teach
them that morally responsible behaviour consists not in doing always what is
right and good, but in eliminating as far as possible the awkward consequences
of one's actions.
One of the effects of the Pro-Life Amendment Campaign has been to make people
in general more aware of the need to take a stand on basic moral issues. In our
day not to take a stand is to acquiesce in the gradual breakdown of the moral
fabric of society. It is not too much to say that the very future of
civilization is at stake in the struggle being waged today about what moral
standards should prevail, whether in the sphere of private or public morality.
At the heart of that struggle lie the family and family values. Perhaps that
is not surprising, since it is the family that determines the kind of society we
have. As Pope John Paul II has said, "the future of humanity passes by way of
the family". There is no need for me to repeat here what I wrote to you on this
question in my Pastoral Letter on the Family earlier in the year.
I want to refer briefly, however, to a danger that seriously threatens the
family in our country at this time. It is the proposal, increasingly heard
today, that steps be taken to introduce legislation permitting divorce and
remarriage. Such a move would cause untold damage to the family and society. It
is an inescapable fact that divorce breeds divorce. For this reason the Second
Vatican Council has rightly described divorce as "a plague". As Pope John Paul
II said in Limerick: "Divorce, for whatever reason it is introduced, inevitably
becomes easier and easier to obtain and it gradually comes to be accepted as a
normal part of life. The very possibility of divorce in the sphere of civil law
makes stable and permanent marriages more difficult for everyone...May the Irish
always support marriage, through personal commitment and through positive social
and legal action."
Do not listen, my dear people, to those who tell you that divorce in Ireland
will be carefully limited to a small number of cases; that somehow or other,
things will be different here from all the other countries where divorce has
come in.
Once introduced into Ireland, divorce will lead to the same tragic
consequences as elsewhere. It will lead to an increasing number of children who,
because of the divorce of their parents and the remarriage of one parent or of
both, will suffer greatly and may well be emotionally scarred for the remainder
of their lives. It will lead to insecurity among those who are married and will
make marital fidelity more difficult. It will lead sooner or later to an
entirely new idea of marriage in our society, the idea of marriage not as a
life-long, unbreakable union, but as a provisional arrangement that may be
terminated as required.
Nowadays divorce-and-remarriage is granted in many countries not only where
one of the partners is seriously at fault, as earlier divorce laws provided, but
simply on evidence of what is called irretrievable marital breakdown. This type
of divorce, which is obviously easier to obtain and accordingly spreads more
rapidly, has also had the effect of reducing maintenance allowances for divorced
wives and their children, since the husband is not seen as being at fault and
the courts, therefore, are reluctant to burden him with the costs of
maintenance. Wives and children, therefore, suffer more than ever under this
form of divorce, which has today become common. It is precisely this "no fault
divorce", or divorce based on "irretrievable marital breakdown", we are now
being told, which should be introduced into Ireland.
Let us be under no illusion about the devastating blow that a law permitting
divorce and remarriage would inflict on the Irish family and on our whole
society. God has made known to us his plan for marriage and the family and we
disregard it at our cost. The State which prohibits divorce, therefore, is
acting for the good of society. On a matter such as this the law of the land
cannot be neutral; the State must either support marriage by forbidding divorce,
or undermine marriage by allowing it. If it chooses the latter course, it cannot
avoid responsibility by claiming that it does not wish to impose the morality of
some on those with a different morality. Unavoidably, the State must choose
between the view that legalized divorce and remarriage is in the best interest
of society and the view which says that it inflicts upon society grave and
irreparable damage. One or other of these views must prevail. It is impossible
for the State to accommodate both views at once. This may be awkward, but it is
certainly a fact. There is no way of escaping it. No amount of discussion can
change it.
What then is the solution to the problem of marital breakdown in Ireland?
Surely the solution must be to tackle the causes. These have by now been clearly
identified. Chief among them are: poverty in the home, violent behaviour,
inadequate consideration by the State for the financial needs of larger
families, drinking to excess, insufficient preparation for marriage. Successive
Governments in this country have not pursued policies calculated to reduce these
problems; indeed many policy decisions have positively worked to the detriment
of marriage and the family. It is time that a serious effort was made to change
this situation. A change of policy along these lines, and not divorce, is what
our country now urgently needs.
One final point. If we really care for the family, we also need to face up to
the damage now being done to the moral fabric of our society by the spread of
the contraceptive mentality. We have not yet realized how deep and wide-ranging
this damage is. The irony is that it is taking place at a time when improved
methods of natural family planning have made recourse to contraceptives
unnecessary.
Despite the evidence of the tragic moral decline to which the widespread
availability of contraceptives has led in other countries, we hear today of
proposals to facilitate access to contraceptives for the unmarried and the young
in our society. We should be clear in our minds what the effects will be if
these proposals are adopted. If we travel this road, we shall cause further
damage to the moral conscience of our youth, who already have so many
difficulties to contend with. We shall be setting the scene for an increase in
venereal disease, teenage pregnancies, illegitimate births and even abortion. We
shall be paving the way for recourse to contraceptives by ever younger age
groups.
Is it really our wish to shift the aims or our society away from genuine
moral education, self-discipline and strength of character? Is it our wish to
weaken the moral fibre to which we owe our survival as a nation and the great
achievements of our past? Is it our wish to turn our back on the true dignity of
the human person, which is based on a genuine moral response to the voice of
conscience and the law of God?
We cannot simply brush these questions aside. They now confront us urgently,
and how we respond to them will profoundly influence our future. If we do not
meet the challenge of these questions, the gains achieved by the Pro-Life
Amendment to the constitution, and much more besides, will be put at risk. May I
invite you, my dear people, to reflect seriously on this as we look back over
the year that has gone by since the Pro-Life Amendment was passed.
Kevin McNamara
Bishop of Kerry
Teachings of the
Magisterium on Abortion