Religion & Law

Anne Hendershott?s WSJ article, How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma is well worth reading.  It tells the tale of what should now be seen as an infamous meeting in 1964 of Catholic theologians and Jesuit priests with members of the Kennedy family at their Hyannisport compound during which they formulated a strategy for Catholic support for abortion rights.

As the article points out, we now see the legacy of that fateful meeting not only in Senator Ted Kennedy?s near perfect pro-choice voting record (see here and here and his website here which refers to abortion as among ?the cherished liberties granted by the Constitution?).  We also see this legacy in the promotion of his niece Caroline Kennedy?s pro-choice views as a credential that serves to qualify her for Hillary Clinton?s senate seat.  (See NARAL?s positive take on Kennedy?s possible appointment here).

We can, I think, all be proud of the fact that the Catholic bishops in this country were among the first groups to denounce abortion with a prophetic voice and to suggest practical strategies for how it might be avoided.  (For example, see their initial Pastoral Plan for Pro-life Activities in 1975 here and their most recent plan from 2001 here).

The bishops were decidedly less resolute in responding to the statements and actions of Catholic politicians who served to advance the legal regime of abortion and to make it a fixture in our culture.  That is, they did not challenge the moral and religious integrity of politicians who claimed to be Catholic (and so presumably had at their disposal the moral and philosophical patrimony of the Church) but who nevertheless supported the legal protection of abortion ? a deliberate act which science tells us brings about the dismemberment and death of a developing human being.

In recent years, with documents like Living the Gospel of Life (1998) and Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship (2007) the bishops have begun to find their collective voice with respect to Catholic politicians who support legal abortion.

One cannot help but wonder, however, how law and politics ? and in particular Catholic legal and political culture ? might have developed differently if the bishops had taken a more forthright stand with respect to the pro-choice stance of Catholic politicians in 1974, 1976, or even 1980.  By 1984 vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro could confidently proclaim ? and without any trace of irony in the minds of many professed Catholics ? that ?the Catholic position on abortion is not monolithic.?  Indeed, many, including Ms. Ferraro, were bewildered and offended by the challenge to her position put forth by Archbishop John O?Connor and others.  That is to say, a little more than ten years after Roe, the idea that Catholics could or should oppose legal abortion was verboten.  Not only was it viewed as an illicit attempt to undermine the Constitution and impose a set of sectarian beliefs on an unbelieving public, in some circles it was seen as simply bizarre.  Didn?t the bishops know that calling the integrity of Catholic politicians into question was out of bounds?

One cannot help but wonder what our political parties would look like today, what Catholic law schools would look like today ? indeed, what conversation we would be having today ? if the bishops had confronted this scandal before it became the norm.

Those of us who were raised in our youth to admire the members of the Kennedy family for their conspicuous Catholic faith and commitment to public service know in our middle age that our parents? heroes did much to undermine that faith.  We have also come to know that the service they provided, laudable in some respects, came at a terrible price ? a price for which, as the next Kennedy likely to enter politics demonstrates ? the bitter wages still pay.