The US Bishops, particularly Cardinals Keeler, McCarrick and DiMarzio, have written a response to the 55 Catholic Democrat Congressmen who wrote a statement recently about why they choose to ignore Catholic teaching on abortion.
The cardinals affirmed that the dignity of the human person mandates continued efforts to advance social justice in all its varied forms, but made plain that abortion as an issue in particular speaks directly to the right of every human being to live, and that that right to life, as John Paul II said, is " the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights" and that it must be defended "with maximum determination."
Another good response was published by Samuel Gregg of the Acton Institute. He does an especially good job of addressing the claims of the politicians to the primacy of "conscience." An age-old tactic to attempt to subjectivize Catholic teaching.
[T]he Catholic Church has always emphasized the importance of conscience. But it does not teach that conscience is somehow above the truth – this, the Catholic Church teaches, is revealed by reason and, ultimately, the Catholic faith. Conscience in fact only acquires morally binding characteristics when grounded in objective moral truth. Otherwise “primacy of conscience” could be used to justify all sorts of barbaric behavior. Thus we do not absolve Communists and Nazis who killed millions because they sincerely believed “in all good conscience” they were doing the right thing.In other words, the “tension” experienced by some signatories does not simply arise from the inconsistency between their position on certain issues and Catholic teaching. Rather it arises from their denial of truth: the truth about what science tells us about the beginning of each human life and the truth that all innocent human beings - regardless of their stage of development - ought, as a matter of natural justice, to enjoy equal protection from lethal force.
What I find remarkable is that the same politicians would likely never consider "primacy of conscience" a valid argument in cases involving issues like racism, or corporate corruption. Why not? Because those are moral issues which are just as clear as objectively as abortion, but, unlike abortion, they agree with the Church on these issues. Asserting "primacy of conscience" in those issues would only weaken the force of their and the Church's message. That's precisely what they want to do with the issue of abortion. "Primacy of conscience" has always been a backhanded way of saying "We believe we are right, and the source of this teaching [in this case the Catholic Church] is wrong." Rather than highfalutin platitudes, they ought simply to be honest.
Leave a comment