Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Life Concerns Paramount And Eclipse Any Other Considerations When Voting"
LifeSiteNews.com ^ | May 4, 2004 | LifeSiteNews.com

Posted on 05/05/2004 9:35:48 AM PDT by Polycarp IV

U.S. Archbishop: Life Concerns Paramount And Eclipse Any Other Considerations When Voting

Political compromise possible on many social justice issues but not abortion

NEWARK, NJ, May 4, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Archbishop John Myers of Newark, New Jersey has issued a pastoral statement to the Catholics of his diocese bringing a close to many debates around abortion and its political ramifications.

"There is no right more fundamental than the right to be born and reared with all the dignity the human person deserves," says the Archbishop. "On this grave issue, public officials cannot hold themselves excused from their duties, especially if they claim to be Catholic. Every faithful Catholic must be not only 'personally opposed' to abortion, but also must live that opposition in his or her actions."

Catholics in the diocese have been given specific direction, They will no longer be left wondering which of the church's social justice stands to give first priority when casting their vote. Archbishop Myers makes it clear that life concerns are paramount and eclipse any other considerations when voting, or carrying out political duties as a politician. "As voters, Catholics are under an obligation to avoid implicating themselves in abortion, which is one of the gravest of injustices. Certainly, there are other injustices, which must be addressed, but the unjust killing of the innocent is foremost among them," says the Archbishop.

Archbishop Myers notes that the "Church's social teaching is a diverse and rich tradition of moral truths and biblical insights applied to the political, economic, and cultural aspects of our society." He adds, however, that "reasonable Catholics can (and do) disagree about how to apply these teachings in various situations." He gives the example of the preferential option for the poor and how Catholics can legitimately differ on methods to assist the poor - "both those who propose welfare increases and those who propose tax cuts to stimulate the economy may in all sincerity believe that their way is the best method really to help the poor."

The Archbishop makes a pointed distinction between such social justice concerns and matters of life. "But with abortion (and for example slavery, racism, euthanasia and trafficking in human persons) there can be no legitimate diversity of opinion," he says. "The direct killing of the innocent is always a grave injustice. One should not permit unjust killing any more than one should permit slave-holding, racist actions, or other grave injustices. From the perspective of justice, to say 'I am personally opposed to abortion but.' is like saying 'I personally am against slavery, but I can not impose my personal beliefs on my neighbor.' Obviously, recognizing the grave injustice of slavery requires one to ensure that no one suffers such degradation. Similarly recognizing that abortion is unjust killing requires one-in love and justice-to work to overcome the injustice."

Archbishop Myers also admonishes Catholics who support abortion, stating that their reception of communion, despite this state of separation from the Catholic Church, is "a grave scandal."

He concludes stating, ". we have a most grave obligation to defend all human life from the moment of conception until natural death. God help us if we fail in this most fundamental obligation."

See Archbishop Myers' full statement:

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004_docs/bishopmyerstimeforhonesty.htm

and

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004_docs/Myerspastoralstatment.pdf (acrobat format)


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: catholiclist; singleissuevoters; sinlgeissuenolife1st
Archdiocese of Newark
Office of Communications & Public Relations
171 Clifton Ave.
Newark, NJ 07104
www.rcan.org

contact: Jim Goodness
973-497-4186
goodneja@rcan.org
For Release
May 4, 2004

(Note to Editors: The following Pastoral Statement by The Most Reverend John J. Myers, Archbishop of Newark, will appear in the May 5, 2004 edition of The Catholic Advocate, the newspaper of the Archdiocese.)

A Time for Honesty

A Pastoral Statement by The Most Reverend John J. Myers, Archbishop of Newark

* Note: text bolding is by LifeSite for emphasis of especially significant sections *

Our times demand honesty. It is possible to value sincerely one’s Catholic heritage and to revere one’s Catholic forebears and yet not to have Catholic faith.

Faith is a free and personal act inspired by the Holy Spirit, by which we entrust ourselves to the living God and to Jesus Christ his Son and our Lord. While intensely personal, the act of faith is always at the same time ecclesial. This means that the act of faith embraces the Church to which Christ Himself has entrusted His mission. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “Whoever says ‘I believe’ says ‘I pledge myself to what We believe.’” In other words, faith, while free and personal, is also a commitment to make one’s own faith the faith of the Church.

It is always a temptation to emphasize the personal aspect of faith with the intent of “reducing” the faith to those elements with which we are comfortable in our life. This is deeply erroneous. The commitment of faith is a commitment to grow not only closer to Jesus Christ but also to continue to grow, sometimes through questions and struggles, into the full faith of the Church.

It is clear in the constant teaching of the Church, and recently articulated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, that protecting the fullness of the proclamation of the faith in any generation is a task entrusted to the bishops of the world in union with the Bishop of Rome. Through the grace of the Holy Spirit, the bishops are charged in each era and in each culture with proclaiming the truth of the Gospel and maintaining that truth in good times and in bad.

Cardinal Christoph Schonborn of Vienna has pointed out that perhaps the most powerful words in the Creeds of the Church are those that come first: “I believe in God the Father Almighty Creator of Heaven and Earth….” With these words we acknowledge that God is the source of the universe and of our existence. It is God’s world in which we live and it is our task to come to understand and respect that and live in the world as God intended. Authentic Christians know that it is not ours to define our own being in an absolute way, but rather it is ours to discover and live with joy the being in the world, which God has given us.

This is also true for the human conscience. Clearly each human person has a conscience and should follow it because by definition conscience is the intellectual act of judgment of what is right and wrong to do or not to do. It is the last best judgment of what one ought to choose. Thus, conscience must be formed through education and prayer, and be informed by the teaching of Christ. We cannot form our conscience in solitary isolation or simply with reference to cultural practices or convictions. Conscience can only be formed authentically by reference to the truth. Truth and conscience go together. Following an authentic conscience builds the truly human. Following a conscience without reference to truth sets an individual and society adrift on a sea of hopelessness.

There are many implications of these principles. We profess our faith not merely in a formula of words, but rather in the realities to which those words refer. And that certainly applies in the matter of abortion, euthanasia, cloning and other issues which are before the American people and the world public at this time. Long before science made clear that each individual is genetically new and unique from conception, the Church taught that abortion is a great evil. She still teaches this even in the face of the tragedy in our country where respect for the sanctity of human life has been eroded.

There is no right more fundamental than the right to be born and reared with all the dignity the human person deserves. On this grave issue, public officials cannot hold themselves excused from their duties, especially if they claim to be Catholic. Every faithful Catholic must be not only “personally opposed” to abortion, but also must live that opposition in his or her actions. In Robert Bolt’s play A Man for All Seasons, St. Thomas More remarks, “I believe, when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties…they lead their country by a short route to chaos.” Sadly, too few follow the example of St. Thomas More. As voters, Catholics are under an obligation to avoid implicating themselves in abortion, which is one of the gravest of injustices. Certainly, there are other injustices, which must be addressed, but the unjust killing of the innocent is foremost among them.

At the same time, I point out that this is not simply a Catholic issue, but a basic moral issue of justice and human dignity. It applies to all persons. Some justify their actions by saying that they must respect the consciences of others. But this “respect” for another’s conscience should never require abandoning one’s own properly formed conscience. Conscientious opposition to abortion,

rooted in an understanding of the sanctity of human life, may not be sacrificed simply because others, whose consciences are gravely mistaken, would unjustly take the life of an unborn baby.

I have already said this before, in a previous Pastoral Letter in 1990:

“Although we must all follow our conscience, the task of conscience is not to create moral truth, but perceive it. It is quite possible for an individual to perceive the moral reality of a particular situation erroneously. Such a person may be sincere, but he or she is sincerely wrong.

“Catholics who publicly dissent from the Church’s teaching on the right to life of all unborn children should recognize that they have freely chosen by their own actions to separate themselves from what the Church believes and teaches. They have also separated themselves in a significant way from the Catholic community.

“The Church cannot force such people to change their position; but she can and does ask them honestly to admit in the public forum that they are not in full union with the Church.

“One who practices such dissent, even in the mistaken belief that it is permissible, may remain a Catholic in some sense, but has abandoned the full Catholic faith. For such a person to express ‘communion’ with Christ and His Church by the reception of the Sacrament of the Eucharist is objectively dishonest.”

This is not a new teaching of the Church. From the earliest years, it has been pointed out that one cannot claim to be a Christian and yet believe other than what the Church teaches. In the second century St. Justin Martyr described the Eucharist in this way: “No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.”

The law and discipline of the Church recognizes this fact in various ways. It is a time for honesty. I ask and urge that Catholic voters and Catholics in public life carefully consider their position if they find themselves in opposition to Church teaching in these matters. Sadly, I must point out that to continue down this road places them in danger of distancing themselves even more from Jesus Christ and from His Church.

Perhaps it is also time to remind ourselves of the meaning and purpose of communion. No one has an absolute right to the Eucharist. It is a gift given to us by a merciful and gracious God. In fact, the Eucharist is God’s gift of Himself to us. In receiving Him we are made one flesh with him. This reception also symbolizes and makes real our union with the whole Church. To receive unworthily or without proper dispositions is a very serious sin against the Lord. St. Paul explicitly

teaches this in his letter to the Church at Corinth when he wrote, “This means that whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily sins against the body and blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first; only then should he eat of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats
and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks a judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11: 27-29). “Without recognizing the body” refers both to recognizing the presence of Christ in the Eucharist and recognizing the Body of Christ, which is the Church. Obviously this means that no Catholic should approach communion unless properly disposed (without unconfessed mortal sin on one’s conscience, having fasted at least one hour in accordance with the Church’s discipline, etc.).

But, receiving the Eucharist also means that one is in fact in full communion with Christ and His Church. To receive communion when one has, through public or private action, separated oneself from unity with Christ and His Church, is objectively dishonest. It is an expression of communion by one’s action that is objectively not in accordance with one’s heart, mind, and choices.

Communion is Not Private

Because the Eucharist is the source and summit of our faith, the most sacred action of our Church, to misuse the Eucharistic symbol by reducing it to one’s private “feeling” of communion with Christ and His Church while objectively not being in such union is gravely disordered.

This is particularly true when it comes to the area of protecting human life. Abortion and infanticide are, as Vatican Council II stated, “abominable crimes” (Gaudium et Spes, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, 51). The fact that all too many U.S. citizens have grown comfortable with the on-going injustice of abortion on demand is quite upsetting. That some Catholics, who claim to believe what the Church believes, are willing to allow others to continue directly to kill the innocent is a grave scandal. The situation is much much worse when these same leaders receive the Eucharist when they are not objectively in communion with Christ and His Church. Their objective dishonesty serves to compound the scandal.

Some might argue that the Church has many social teachings and the teaching on abortion is only one of them. This is, of course, correct. The Church’s social teaching is a diverse and rich tradition of moral truths and biblical insights applied to the political, economic, and cultural aspects of our society. All Catholics should form and inform their conscience in accordance with these teachings. But reasonable Catholics can (and do) disagree about how to apply these teachings in various situations.

For example, our preferential option for the poor is a fundamental aspect of this teaching. But, there are legitimate disagreements about the best way or ways truly to help the poor in our society. No Catholic can legitimately say, “I do not care about the poor.” If he or she did so this person would not be objectively in communion with Christ and His Church. But, both those who propose welfare

Increases and those who propose tax cuts to stimulate the economy may in all sincerity believe that their way is the best method really to help the poor. This is a matter of prudential judgment made by those entrusted with the care of the common good. It is a matter of conscience in the proper sense.

Injustices Are Impermissible

But with abortion (and for example slavery, racism, euthanasia and trafficking in human persons) there can be no legitimate diversity of opinion. The direct killing of the innocent is always a grave injustice. One should not permit unjust killing any more than one should permit slave-holding, racist actions, or other grave injustices. From the perspective of justice, to say “I am personally opposed to abortion but…” is like saying “I personally am against slavery, but I can not impose my personal beliefs on my neighbor.” Obviously, recognizing the grave injustice of slavery requires one to ensure that no one suffers such degradation. Similarly recognizing that abortion is unjust killing requires one—in love and justice—to work to overcome the injustice.

Among my most important responsibilities is that of pastor and teacher. In light of recent developments in our nation, I wish once again to affirm the teaching of the Church. Human life is a gift from God and as Catholics we have a most grave obligation to defend all human life from the moment of conception until natural death. God help us if we fail in this most fundamental obligation.

#####


Published courtesy of LifeSitenews.com and Interim Publishing

Your href="http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/">contributions to LifeSite would be most helpful!
Comments, suggestions, requests - href="mailto:lifesite@lifesite.net">mailto:lsn@lifesite.net
LifeSite - http://www.lifesite.net/


1 posted on 05/05/2004 9:35:49 AM PDT by Polycarp IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: .45MAN; AAABEST; AKA Elena; al_c; american colleen; Angelus Errare; annalex; Annie03; Antoninus; ...
Excellent!

Ping. (As usual, if you would like to be added to or removed from my "conservative Catholics" ping list, just send me a FReepmail. Please realize that some of my "ping" posts are long.)

2 posted on 05/05/2004 9:38:57 AM PDT by Polycarp IV (PRO-LIFE orthodox Catholic--without exception, without compromise, without apology. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
BUMP
3 posted on 05/05/2004 9:40:15 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
Good for Archbishop John Meyers of Newark. Very refreshing.

Thank you for the information!

4 posted on 05/05/2004 9:53:18 AM PDT by TOUGH STOUGH (For the good of our country,our state and the conservative cause, replace Santorum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xsmommy; dubyaismypresident
PING.
5 posted on 05/05/2004 9:56:01 AM PDT by hobbes1 (Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
It is heartening that the Church establishment is waking up to the abomination of pro-abortion politicians that call themselves Catholic.
6 posted on 05/05/2004 10:07:13 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
This, of course, raises another question. Is it permissible for a Catholic voter to receive Communion and vote for a pro-abortion politician?

I believe, the excuse is when all politicians on the ballot are pro-abortion. Otherwise, the voter assists in infanticide.
7 posted on 05/05/2004 10:23:33 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
Killing the children of the poor is not a good approach to social justice. And it's hard to see justice done to people who are dead. God bless the Archbishop Myers!
8 posted on 05/05/2004 10:23:50 AM PDT by justanotherfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Is it permissible for a Catholic voter to receive Communion and vote for a pro-abortion politician?

I believe, the excuse is when all politicians on the ballot are pro-abortion. Otherwise, the voter assists in infanticide.

Definitely. Knowingly voting for a pro-abortion politician when there is a valid option to not do so is a mortal sin, and as such that voter should refrain from Communion until that mortal sin is repented and confessed.

9 posted on 05/05/2004 10:45:51 AM PDT by Polycarp IV (PRO-LIFE orthodox Catholic--without exception, without compromise, without apology. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Someone added "SINGLEISSUEVOTERS" to the "Keywords" on this thread.

As the title of this thread rightly states, "Life Concerns Paramount And Eclipse Any Other Considerations When Voting."

In other words, Life is not a "Single Issue." Those who take the life issues into consideration first, are NOT "SINGLEISSUEVOTERS"

The founders knew this too, and expressed it in the phrase, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The knew that LIFE is not a single issue, it is the FOUNDATIONAL issues upon which all other rights rest. They understood that LIFE comes first, not liberty or happiness.

If one has no right to life, there can be no right for them to "Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Anyone who cannot get it right on this Foundational Issue will not be able to get it right on ANY issues or other rights.

Therefore, Pro-life considerations are not "SINGLEISSUE" considerations, they are Foundational and Primary issues upon which all other issues rest and depend.

Those who call pro-lifers "SINGLEISSUEVOTERS are fools who do not grasp the reality of LIFE!

10 posted on 05/05/2004 10:56:19 AM PDT by Polycarp IV (PRO-LIFE orthodox Catholic--without exception, without compromise, without apology. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
Good article and good comments..
11 posted on 05/05/2004 11:18:06 AM PDT by .45MAN ("Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
A great response!

I have one, and only one beef with Rush Limbaugh - Rush castigates those who are single issue voters (not necessarily in regartds to abortion though).

In my opinion, a politician who votes in support of abortion has a serious character flaw and cannot receive my vote.
12 posted on 05/05/2004 11:25:15 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV; SwimmingUpstream
Besides, "single issue" is a cliche designed to muddle up the thinking process.

Abortion may be a single issue but it is the right issue, -- the right ground for us to fight.

My friend SwimmingUpstream wrote in his essay:

we can individually bombard congressional Republicans and the President by internet, mail, and telephone. The many existing pro-life organizations can do likewise. We inform the Republican Party that we won't vote in the upcoming federal elections for any of its candidates if the Party does not force a vote on pro-life legislation that if passed effectually sets aside Roe v. Wade and excludes the courts from review.

If the Republican Party won't bring this legislation to a vote during this Congress, then it must pay the price for its 31-year pro-life masquerade. If it wants our support to keep it in power, it must be actively pro-life -- right now.

Yes, if the Republicans fail us our concerted refusal to vote for them in the 2004 elections may result in victory at the polls for Democrats.

What if it does?

We have no essential political ground left to defend.

As Republican strategists like to point out, the Republicans have cleverly fulfilled all the election promises made by Democrats, thereby taking all the Democrats' issues away from them. In short, a majority of Republicans are now nothing more or less than effectual Democrats.

As for the so-called War On Terrorism -- it will continue to be waged, ham-handedly, no matter what mixture of the current crop of candidates is in office.

The time for excuses not to fight has passed.

(Good Friday Reflections On The Culture War; also discussed HERE)
13 posted on 05/05/2004 11:26:27 AM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
Anyone who cannot get it right on this Foundational Issue will not be able to get it right on ANY issues or other rights.

Indeed. I cannot imagine voting for some baby-killer just because I happened to like his ideas on tax policy or education reform.

14 posted on 05/05/2004 11:29:36 AM PDT by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp IV
It looks like the fecal material is just about ready to make violent contact with the rotating blades!

It's about time! At least we have a bishop or two who knows why he is there.
15 posted on 05/05/2004 4:33:09 PM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson