This morning’s Philadelphia Inquirer has a few words on what it truly means to be pro-life, from the always-compelling Boston theologian Lisa Sowle Cahill. Not everyone will agree with what she has to say, but it’s worth pondering. Key snip:

More than 200 bishops will gather in Baltimore next week for a national meeting to vote on a political-responsibility statement released before every presidential election. In the past, this statement has been drafted behind closed doors. For the first time, it will be debated and amended in public. The final product will be closely read by Catholic voters and public officials who take their faith and political life seriously, and scrutinized by media sniffing the wind for another election-year tussle between the hierarchy and a Catholic presidential candidate. Since Catholics will again be key “swing voters” who could play a decisive role in the outcome, the bishops must be careful to avoid injecting themselves into national partisan politics or even giving the appearance of favoring one party over another. They also have an important opportunity to remind Catholic voters that their faith does not view abortion as the only life issue on which to judge a candidate.

Catholic teaching is clear that seeking peace and ending war, caring for the poor and most vulnerable, “promoting the common good in all its forms” – in the words of Pope Benedict XVI – are all nonnegotiable. The Catholic Church does not view abortion in isolation, but promotes a consistent ethic of life in all stages. Access to quality health care, fighting global poverty, addressing the AIDS pandemic, and taking seriously the threats of climate change are all fundamental life issues. Can public officials who support a reckless doctrine of preventive war, turn a blind eye to poverty in the world’s richest country, justify torture in the name of national security, or vote against health insurance for poor children really be called pro-life? Capital punishment, economic injustice, and the growing militarization of our world are also grave affronts to the sanctity of human life that candidates must answer to before they tout their pro-life bona fides. When was the last time you heard a bishop publicly taking to task a presidential candidate for supporting an unjust war or slashing welfare programs?

For more than three decades, abortion has been the grand battle in our nation’s culture wars. Liberals and conservatives defend ideological turf. Bumper stickers bark out slogans. None of this has promoted common-ground public policies that would make it easier for women to choose life. Many politicians talk a big game about ending abortion, but do nothing to actually help women by promoting quality pre-natal care, access to health insurance, jobs that pay living wages, and a safety net of social services. In contrast, there are legislators who don’t believe in criminalizing abortion (throwing women and doctors in jail), but who are committed to reducing abortions through policies that research tells us make it easier for women to carry a pregnancy to term and support their children. In fact, pro-life and pro-choice members of Congress have been working together on the “Reducing the Need for Abortions and Supporting Parents Act” that will do just this by seeking to prevent unintended pregnancies by expanding health-care services for low-income women and beefing up adoption programs.

Footnote: Lisa Sowle Cahill is a professor of theology at Boston College and the past president of the Catholic Theological Society of America. You can read more of what she has to say at the Inky link above.

More from Beliefnet and our partners
Close Ad