D. W. Lafferty PhD writes regularly for the online Catholic magazine ‘Where Peter Is’.
His article “Abortion and Political Love” (WPI, November 24, 2020) discusses abortion in relation to “Political Love” , a concept promoted by the Holy Father, Pope Francis.
Intentionally or not, Lafferty’s article lends subtle support to Joe Biden, the new President of the USA, and to all those who assert that his policies are compatible with Catholicism.
A RWANDA GENOCIDE — EVERY YEAR.
Abortion has killed 45 to 60 million Americans since Roe v. Wade.
On an annual basis, the death toll approximates to the genocide in Rwanda: each and every year.
Joe Biden present himself as a “devout” Catholic yet makes no attempt to moderate the provision of abortion. He does not espouse Bill Clinton’s snappy compromise: “Safe, Legal and Rare” nor has he made any attempt to re-educate the moral conscience of America. It takes a very unique person to legitimize the killing of every unborn child while rejecting a fundamental tenet of their own religion and trying to force Catholic nuns to pay for those murders.
Abortion and Political Love
Lafferty’s article is written in a way which gives much more benefit of the doubt to Joe Biden. It is likely to move Catholic opinion into accepting or tolerating Biden’s pro-abortion platform over the platform of his former opponent. He appears to use Pope Francis’s encyclical Fratelli Tutti for partisan reasons instead of proper instruction or the development of fraternal Christian unity.
The teachings of the Catholic Church
Lafferty confirms parts of the Church’s teaching on abortion at least twice in his article. The first is in the section “Abortion is a moral problem” where he states the Church’s position definitively:
On the question of the morality of abortion the Church has a definitive, irreformable answer: abortion is wrong, and is always wrong in all circumstances. No matter what new perspectives on the problem of abortion we may come to, by keeping this moral absolute firmly in mind we will stay anchored in Church teaching.
Lafferty immediately adds several ‘New Perspectives’ in the sections dealing with legal and social problems. He includes an extensive discussion of (pro-abortion) Frederick J. Taussig’s 1936 study of spontaneous and induced abortions. Mary Calderone, the medical director of Planned Parenthood at that time, even cited Taussig’s book as “a pioneering work”! These ancient statistics cannot be verified and add almost nothing to the current Pro-Life debate. He goes on to make the suggestion that the “Shout Your Abortion” movement was the fault of Pro-Lifers for attempting to defund Planned Parenthood — in effect, he blames it on the anti-abortion lobby! Lafferty suggests that abortion is OUR collective sin, even though many are working hard to minimize the social and legal problems which engender abortion.
Next, he notes:
In saying all this, I should be clear I don’t mean to deny that abortion is a preeminent moral issue.
Then yet again, he immediately follows this with more ‘New Perspectives’: …but especially in the sense that it is integrally connected to all those other issues that pro-lifers too often write off as prudential or negotiable, such as those relating to social, economic, and environmental justice. Lafferty ends his article with a very different discussion on the Church’s teachings under the heading:
“The Challenge of Abortion.”
None of the above is intended to water down Catholic teaching on abortion or suggest that we accept the status quo. Instead, my point is that the problem of abortion poses an even greater challenge than we tend to think. It should weigh upon the consciences of us all, forcing us to ask ourselves what we need to change in ourselves and our society in order to foster solidarity with both women and the unborn. Pope Francis maintains that “everything is interconnected” (Laudato Si, 70), and this applies not only to our connection with our natural environment, but also to each other.
An abortion politics that is rooted in mere moralism, and is focused purely on punitive measures, is one drained of love. We have seen again and again how such a limited strategy and perspective can dissolve our broader understanding of morality and lead us into a politics of force, or even of hate. Law can certainly be a part of political love, and the accomplishments of the pro-life movement may one day be cemented and maintained through law, but it is increasingly apparent that law cannot lead the way and must instead follow a path forged by love.
Lafferty dilutes Catholic teaching with distractions and ‘Whataboutisms.’ Again, he hints that abortion is our collective fault or sin by saying it should “…weigh upon the consciences of us all.” He tosses out terms like “mere moralism”, “punitive measures”, “politics of force” and “hate” while he himself is blind to the enormous path of love which IS being forged by many Pro-life/Whole-Lifers.
The March for Life
The fact is, though, we can’t wipe our hands clean of the stain of abortion just by identifying as pro-life or voting according to the prescriptions of anti-abortion advocacy groups. It is tragic that we spend little to no time examining our consciences for sins of omission that leave untouched the social and economic structures that ensure the continued existence of abortion.
Lafferty’s antipathy to the current Pro-Life/Whole-Life movement is in no doubt. His vision of a Pro-Life Movement is impractical and nigh unattainable.
‘Moving Forward’ & Fratelli Tutti
More egregious perhaps is how Lafferty uses the opinions of the Holy Father in Fratelli Tutti against the Pro-Life/Whole-Life Movement. Lafferty knows the Holy Father’s opinion holds great weight with many Catholics (…and that few Catholics will ever read an encyclical!).
The ultimate goal of the pro-life movement is to eliminate abortion and not just make it illegal, and an approach that focuses only on abortion as a moral and legal problem risks becoming Quixotic and ultimately ineffective.
By recognizing abortion as a symptom of larger systemic social pressures we can shift to a more productive approach to pro-life activism—one that is rooted in the politics of the present and better reflects the teaching of the Church and especially the message of the Francis papacy.
In Fratelli Tutti, Pope Francis surveys the landscape of a fragmented world racked by conflict, anger, and indifference toward human suffering. His prescription is to call Catholics away from ideology and to a new awareness of human fraternity and the basic human needs of others.
Further, we are asked to expand our understanding of morality to include not only sins of commission but also sins of omission.
Lafferty admits that Fratelli Tutti only touches on abortion ‘in passing’ yet he is using it as a prime resource on abortion and Pro-Life issues. The only specific comments on abortion in Fratelli Tutti are:
18. Some parts of our human family, it appears, can be readily sacrificed for the sake of others considered worthy of a carefree existence. Ultimately, “persons are no longer seen as a paramount value to be cared for and respected, especially when they are poor and disabled, ‘not yet useful’ – like the unborn, or ‘no longer needed’ – like the elderly. We have grown indifferent to all kinds of wastefulness, starting with the waste of food, which is deplorable in the extreme”.
24. We should also recognize that…millions of people today – children, women and men of all ages – are deprived of freedom and forced to live in conditions akin to slavery…A perversion that exceeds all limits when it subjugates women and then forces them to abort…
Logically, when authors discuss the Holy Father’s opinion about abortion, they should reference a document which provides the Pope’s specific opinion on abortion rather than extrapolating what he thinks (or what they think he thinks) from some unrelated document. A quick Google search shows more about Pope Francis’ specific opinion on abortion than Fratelli Tutti does:
Pope Francis said Saturday that abortion was always unacceptable, regardless of whether a fetus is fatally ill or has pathological disorders. (New York Times)
Protecting human life is the ‘pre eminent'; social and political issue, Pope Francis said, and he asked the head of the U.S. Bishops Committee for Pro-Life Activities to convey his support to the pro-life community…. He said, ‘This is not first a religious issue; It’s a human rights issue; which is so true. (America: the Jesuit Review 2020)
These informal reports are consistent with the Holy Father’s formal statements, and those from most every Pope in the last 150 years!
Pius IX: gave the first guidance in 1869 when he established that a human should be protected, from the moment of conception onward.
Pius XII: repeatedly affirmed the Catholic support of the sanctity of life. He rejected “therapeutic” exceptions to abortion.
John XXIII: said the human embryo/foetus has the same dignity as other human beings and, therefore, possesses the same rights which are “universal, inviolable and inalienable.”
Paul VI: promulgated Humanae Vitae: “…above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children.”
John Paul I: Before being elected he wrote a series of letters which were published in the book Latissimi and took a critical perspective of abortion, arguing that it violated God's law. (JPI was Pope for only 33 days.)
St. John Paul II: promulgated Evangelium Vitae: ‘Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying.”
Benedict XVI: taught that embryos developed for in vitro fertilization deserve the same right to life as fetuses, children and adults “and that that right extends to embryos even before they are transferred into a woman’s womb.”
Pope Francis: in his encyclical Laudato Si’ said: “We forget that the inalienable worth of a human being transcends his or her degree of development.”
It is not possible to tackle every statement Lafferty makes in this article (from lack of space) but much was written with evident partisan motivation.
Once we realize this, we can’t ease our consciences simply by voting for an ostensibly pro-life candidate in an election, or by preaching to the pro-life choir about abortion as a great moral evil.
…that an executive order or court ruling will make abortion go away overnight, or that abortion can be eradicated solely or even primarily through such means.
Conclusion
Abortion is the single largest cause of death in the world and the Pro-Life/Whole-Life movement is akin to the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke. Now Lafferty is essentially saying we are “doing it wrong.” His article does not give a coherent vision of how we get from where we are, to where he thinks we should be — with a successful outcome.
Wishful thinking towards this new Biden administration — with its genocidal agenda — will simply not hack it. The challenge back to Lafferty is to show us a practical vision for the Pro-Life Movement — and how we get there!
St. Teresa of Calcutta said:
Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.
Dr. Kevin Hay.
Kevin is a UCD grad and a rural Family Doctor in Alberta, Canada.
You can follow him on Twitter @kevinhay77. (Though mostly on hiatus currently.)
