Charles Curran on Abortion Law

The other night I opened the 11/16 issue of the National Catholic Reporter, to discover a special 4-page insert entitled “US Catholic Bishops and Abortion Legislation – a Critique From Within the Church.” The author was Fr. Charles Curran, no favorite of the Catholic magisterium, and this latest work will no doubt intensify the criticism that is regularly heaped upon him. The text was originally given at a lecture in Dallas on October 28, and you can find parts of the article at the NCR web site HERE.

Curran immediately acknowledged and DID NOT DISPUTE CHURCH TEACHING in his talk. However, he argued that various approaches to the law are acceptable under Catholic teaching, not just the approach taken by US bishops: “In my judgment, the US bishops claim too great a certitude for their position on abortion law and fail to recognize that their own position logically entails prudential judgment so that they cannot logically distinguish it from most of the other issues such as the death penalty, health care, nuclear deterrence, and housing.”

That judgment came about halfway through a lecture that first traced the narrowing of the bishops’ approach to abortion since the mid-1970s when, in the wake of Roe vs Wade, the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, the bishops resisted a single issue approach to political involvement. A document on political responsibility before the 1976 election, wrote Curran, “insisted the bishops did not want to form a voting bloc or tell Catholics how to vote. Voters should examine the candidates on a full range of issues, and with a consideration for the candidates’ integrity, philosophy and performance. The document lists eight issues in alphabetical order, beginning with abortion, but does not give priority to any of these issues.”

In contrast, today the bishops “now clearly state abortion is the primary issue.” Their rationale for doing so, he said, rests on their conviction that other issues of public policy and law “involve prudential judgments,” but that abortion laws (according to the bishops) “deal with something that is intrinsically evil and does not involve prudential judgments. Catholics have certitude on the abortion law issue.”

However, Curran states, the bishops’ thesis is wrong for four reasons:

●“The speculative doubt about when human life begins;
●The fact that possibility and feasibility are necessary aspects involved in discussions about abortion law;
●The understanding and role of civil law; and
●The weakness of the intrinsic evil argument.”

His points and arguments make for intriguing reading, and I personally hope they will spark discussion on this issue. Such a discussion might not be welcomed by our Catholic hierarchy, since they might feel that it would weaken the certitude with which they have spoken on this issue.

However, a great many Catholics feel that the Church has effectively chosen sides on behalf of the Republican party and its platform solely because of the priority given by the bishops to this issue. This is true for Catholics on both sides of the aisle. Republican Catholics no doubt take comfort in it as much as Democratic Catholics feel abandoned by it. Catholics for whom the wider range of social justice issues is especially important [as I am and as, in fact, I think all Catholics should be] often feel isolated by this.

I am not going to hold my breath waiting for this discussion. However, I will study Curran’s arguments, and ask questions when I have the opportunity to do so -- though not in any homily, since there is no opportunity for discussion at such a time.