“No, the taking of innocent human life is so heinous, so horribly evil, and so absolutely opposite to the law of Almighty God that abortion must take precedence over every other issue. I repeat. It is the single most important issue confronting not only Catholics, but the entire electorate.”
http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=29838&page=2
Which was posted here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2097369/posts
Similar comments (or the exact same one) of his and others have been posted more recently. The man apparently believes that adherence to and voting in accordance with anti-abortion dogma is the sine qua non of Roman Catholicism, which takes precedence over every other issue.
Let us explore the context. First, the bishop addresses the issues of scientific uncertanties regarding beginning of life. Next, he addresses the concerns regarding health care, education, economic security, immigration, and taxes, and finally moral theology of war. It is in comparison to these concerns that the horror of taking an innocent human life stands out. And he explains why:
the solutions to problems in these areas do not usually involve a rejection of the sanctity of human life in the way that abortion does. Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life.[...]
A person who supports permissive abortion laws, however, rejects the truth that innocent human life may never be destroyed. This profound moral failure runs deeper and is more corrupting of the individual, and of the society, than any error in applying just war criteria to particular cases
[...]
The failure to protect life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community. If we understand the human person as ‘the temple of the Holy Spirit’ – the living house of God – then these latter issues fall logically into place as the crossbeams and walls of that house. All direct attacks on innocent human life, such as abortion and euthanasia, strike at the house’s foundation
It is clear that "precedence over every other issue" is referring to precedence over issues of social policy in front of the voter, and not issues of abstract theology.
What a ghastly example of mischaracterization, error and cherry-picking.
Mischaracterization:
Your original statement in post four refered to: the recent heresy spread by some American Roman Catholic bishops that their imagined dogma of being anti-abortion supersedes all other dogmas of The Church.
In no way does the quote you provided support your contention. There is no discussion of dogma whatsoever, as borne out below in the larger context.
Error:
The quote you presented is clearly given attribution by the "raving" Bishop Martino.... to Bishop Timlin.
Cherry-picking: Here is the quote, in larger context. It is clear that "issues" refers to election issues, not Catholic dogma.
My predecessor, Bishop Timlin, writing his pastoral letter on Respect Life Sunday 2000, stated the case eloquently:
Abortion is the issue this year and every year in every campaign. Catholics may not turn away from the moral challenge that abortion poses for those who seek to obey God’s commands. They are wrong when they assert that abortion does not concern them, or that it is only one of a multitude of issues of equal importance. No, the taking of innocent human life is so heinous, so horribly evil, and so absolutely opposite to the law of Almighty God that abortion must take precedence over every other issue. I repeat. It is the single most important issue confronting not only Catholics, but the entire electorate.
If that's not enough, earlier in his letter, Bishop Martino states:
Another argument goes like this: “As wrong as abortion is, I don't think it is the only relevant ‘life’ issue that should be considered when deciding for whom to vote.” This reasoning is sound only if other issues carry the same moral weight as abortion does, such as in the case of euthanasia and destruction of embryos for research purposes. Health care, education, economic security, immigration, and taxes are very important concerns. Neglect of any one of them has dire consequences as the recent financial crisis demonstrates. However, the solutions to problems in these areas do not usually involve a rejection of the sanctity of human life in the way that abortion does. Being “right” on taxes, education, health care, immigration, and the economy fails to make up for the error of disregarding the value of a human life. Consider this: the finest health and education systems, the fairest immigration laws, and the soundest economy do nothing for the child who never sees the light of day. It is a tragic irony that “pro-choice” candidates have come to support homicide – the gravest injustice a society can tolerate – in the name of “social justice.”
That this much time would be spent deriding bishops for speaking out strongly in defense of life does no good witness for the Orthodox.
He is obviously speaking of political issues. Why did you say that he was speaking of theological issues?
Abortion does take precedence over other issues,Kolo,especially when it comes to Eucharist
From Cardinal Ratzinger before he became Pope...
The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion
General Principles
by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
“”A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. “”
“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.”
“Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.”