Archbishop Chaput comments on Senator Biden's comments

A letter issued today, "Public Servants and Moral Reasoning", from the office of Archbishop Charles J. Chaput.

A notice to the Catholic community in northern Colorado

To Catholics of the Archdiocese of Denver:

When Catholics serve on the national stage, their actions and words impact the faith of Catholics around the country. As a result, they open themselves to legitimate scrutiny by local Catholics and local bishops on matters of Catholic belief. In 2008, although NBC probably didn't intend it, Meet the Press has become a national window on the flawed moral reasoning of some Catholic public servants. On August 24, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, describing herself as an ardent, practicing Catholic, misrepresented the overwhelming body of Catholic teaching against abortion to the show's nationwide audience, while defending her "pro-choice" abortion views. On September 7, Sen. Joseph Biden compounded the problem to the same Meet the Press audience.

Sen. Biden is a man of distinguished public service. That doesn't excuse poor logic or bad facts. Asked when life begins, Sen. Biden said that, "it's a personal and private issue." But in reality, modern biology knows exactly when human life begins: at the moment of conception. Religion has nothing to do with it. People might argue when human "personhood" begins - though that leads public policy in very dangerous directions - but no one can any longer claim that the beginning of life is a matter of religious opinion.

Sen. Biden also confused the nature of pluralism. Real pluralism thrives on healthy, non-violent disagreement; it requires an environment where people of conviction will struggle respectfully but vigorously to advance their beliefs. In his interview, the senator observed that other people with strong religious views disagree with the Catholic approach to abortion. It's certainly true that we need to acknowledge the views of other people and compromise whenever possible - but not at the expense of a developing child's right to life. Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, "I'm prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception," then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there.

As the senator said in his interview, he has opposed public funding for abortions. To his great credit, he also backed a successful ban on partial-birth abortions. But his strong support for the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade and the false "right" to abortion it enshrines, can't be excused by any serious Catholic. Support for Roe and the "right to choose" an abortion simply masks what abortion is, and what abortion does. Roe is bad law. As long as it stands, it prevents returning the abortion issue to the states where it belongs, so that the American people can decide its future through fair debate and legislation.

In his Meet the Press interview, Sen. Biden used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can't "impose" their religiously based views on the rest of the country. But resistance to abortion is a matter of human rights, not religious opinion. And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people's convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law. American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year. Other people have imposed their "pro-choice" beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades.

Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

Archbishop of Denver

Access the letter as a PDF document.

Visit the Archdiocese of Denver homepage.

Comments

[walter]

We may have lost Burke to Rome but thank God we still have Chaput in the US.

[BillyHW]

And to think the U.S. bishops probably thought they were going to get off easy this election cycle when Rudy Giuliani dropped out!

Ha.

[Ed Peters]

walter, great point.

[Mulder]

Nice.

[Ed Peters]

BillyHW, great point.

[Trubador]

I wish Archbishop Chaput and the other bishops would also mention the companion case Doe v. Bolton along with the more famous Roe v. Wade (both were decided on the same day by the U.S. Supreme Court).

Also, I wonder how much affect this whole national discussion and instruction/correction from these bishops is having on one Supreme Court Justice – Anthony Kennedy (the one Catholic on the court who’s been on the wrong side of this issue).

Thank God for the other four Catholic justices: Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and Alito!

[Christopher Milton]

" And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people's convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law. American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year. Other people have imposed their "pro-choice" beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades."

Seriously brilliant!

[Augustine]

Should I hold my breath until Biden's bishop invites him for a meeting?

May St. Nicholas pray for us.

[Pat]

All the media is making an issue of Obama's McCain's and Palin's teaching from their 'church'. How come there are no real 'in-depth' looks at the teaching of Biden's Church and how it might affect his decision making in office. Obviously, Biden doesn't make decisions based on the teachings of the Church he claims to be a member of. Why are we being lead by the MSM to believe that the Apocolypse may be upon us if Sarah Palin is elected.

[Jackson]

"Roe is bad law. As long as it stands, it prevents returning the abortion issue to the states where it belongs, so that the American people can decide its future through fair debate and legislation."

This addresses the alleged "criminalization" issue. As Chaput rightly intimates here, the overturning of Roe/Doe would not criminalize abortion, but would return the issue to the states, which would then be free to criminalize it or not.

[Stohn]

"returning the abortion issue to the states where it belongs"

This "abortion issue" is not a state issue - it is universally wrong. Why should each state have the 'right' to define when life begins? Should we not strive for a national right to life?

Also, Roe v. Wade wouldn't necessarily return it to 'the states', it would also allow Congress to do what they'd like on it, and that would trump whatever the individual 'state' would decide. Where we stand now, our best choice, working within the 'system', would be a constitutional amendment banning abortion, though unlikely, it is the only political option we have.

[Trubador]

Given that 34 of the 50 states are needed to ratify a Constitutional Amendment.... and with a minimum of 30 states with laws already on the books that say that if a pregnant woman is killed the accused would be charged with TWO counts of murder, it's de facto personhood for the unborn baby. All that would be needed is to ask the people or the legislatures of each state to re-affirm that law.

My 2-cents.

[LJ]

Stohn is right. Strategically, from the pro-life perspective, this would turn into the same scenario that is developing regarding gay marriage. Fifty battles instead of one, and interstate shopping for abortions.

If I heard him correctly at the time, this was at least part of the discouragement Doug Kmiec expressed, after he had bizarrely embraced the one presidential candidate who's claim to fame on this issue was his refusal to support the Infants Born Alive legislation in the Illinois State Senate. What is even more disturbing, if true, are the reports that Barack Obama would try to push federal legislation enshrining abortion nationally if elected, which goes far beyond the status quo, bad as it is.

Although it would take time, it is possible to go from the status quo directly to the Constitutional Amendment. If Roe was reversed first, the odds are the States would scramble quickly to write their own laws, which at this point does not look good for pro-life. Then the momentum would be against the Constitutional Amendment.

One this is certain, for a variety of reasons, it would not be a good thing to have Obama appointing justices to the Supreme Court.