A very good and poignant pastoral letter from Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton (incidentally, that’s Sen. Joe Biden’s home turf!) addresses pro-life issues in voting. This letter will be read at all Masses this weekend in the diocese. You can find the entire pastoral here (give it some time to load).
A few highlights:
1. Laws that protect and secure the right to abortion are discriminatory and unjust at their fundamental level. No Catholic in good conscience can support these laws.
2. Euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research carry the same moral weight as abortion.
3. Just war theory has the moral force of a life issue. If a Catholic believes that an objectively unjust war (such as the war in Iraq) is just, then they are in error on the issue of the defense of human life. However, their erroneous judgment does not come at the expense of believing that human life may be destroyed without condition. Thus, while they support an intrinsically evil act by their misapplication of just war theory and out of ignorance, these Catholics are not in bad faith provided they hold that innocent human life may not be deliberately taken on demand. Hence, the qualitative difference is not between actions (abortion and unjust war being intrinsically evil acts of similar moral weight) but between the intention of the Catholic voter. In other words, there’s room in the Communion line to be wrong on the moral status of a war, but not on the moral status of an abortion. Of course, the question arises how much ignorance a Catholic can plea when there is unanimity among the pope and that Catholic’s bishops on the moral status of a particular war, a question which Bishop Martino opts not to address.
A few ambiguities in the letter:
1. After rightly noting that abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research are of equal moral weight, Bishop Martino quotes approvingly from his predecessor, Bishop Timlin, the notion that abortion is the single most important issue for Catholic voters. This conflicts with Bishop Martino’s earlier and correct claim if by “importance” we mean moral gravity. It seems to me that these three issues–and especially abortion and embryonic stem cell research for Catholics in America–are of equal importance inside and outside the voting booth.
2. Bishop Martino rightly notes that issues of education, economic security, taxes, and health care do not involve the same violation of life as do abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research. However, health care, as John Paul II and many U.S. bishops have noted, encroaches the issue of life in many of its particulars. This is not to say that health care belongs alongside abortion or euthanasia, but to note that it is more important from a moral standpoint than, say, taxes or economic security. Bishop Martino does little justice to the Church’s emphasis on the importance of health care by grouping it along with taxes and economic security.
3. Bishop Martino is ambiguous in claiming that the “moral failure” in misapplying just war principles is not as “corrupting of the individual, and of the society” as the moral failure of abortion. Now, if he means the moral failure of the Catholic voter who votes according to these principles, then there is no error in his statement. However, if Bishop Martino means that an unjust war as an action is not as grave a moral failure as an abortion is as an action, then he is manifestly wrong. The context seems to suggest that the former interpretation of his words is the accurate one.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In