An Election Prayer by Fr. John A. Hardon, SJ (Servant of God)
Lord Jesus Christ, You told us to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.
Enlighten the minds of our people in America. May we choose a President of the United States and other government officials according to Your Divine Will.
Give our citizens the courage to choose leaders of our nation who respect the sanctity of unborn human life, the sanctity of marriage, the sanctity of marital relations, the sanctity of the family and the sanctity of the aging.
Grant us the wisdom to give You what belongs to You, our God. If we do this as a nation, we are confident You will give us an abundance of Your blessings through our elected leaders. Amen.
Among the over 115+ bishops who have spoken out in this election in defense of Church teaching are 74 ordinaries (bishops who head dioceses). That's over one-third of the 197 dioceses and archdioceses in the United States.
There are also 5 cardinals and 13 archbishops on the list.
The regional dispersion is rather even: South 10, Southeast 7, Southwest 11, West 6, Northeast 21, Midwest 31, and Northwest 3.
The "red state, blue state" representation is close to even as well: Red 43, Blue 40.Here is what looks like the final list for the 2008 election. Thanks to all the readers who offered additions and corrections. (Please let me know if I have left any out.)
"A Catholic Mom in Hawaii" has listed these bishops by states and dioceses. Thanks Esther!1. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver
2. Bishop James Conley, auxiliary of Denver
3. Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C.
4. Justin Cardinal Rigali of Philadelphia, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities
5. Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, chairman of the Committee on Doctrine
6. Edward Cardinal Egan of New York
7. Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo
8. Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh
9. Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs
10. Archbishop Jose Gomez of San Antonio
11. Bishop Oscar Cantu, auxiliary of San Antonio
12. Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre
13. Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa
14. Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas
15. Bishop Gregory Aymond of Austin
16. Sean Cardinal O'Malley of Boston
17. Bishop Thomas Wenski of Orlando
18. Archbishop John Nienstedt of Saint Paul/Minneapolis
19. Francis Cardinal George of Chicago, President of the USCCB
20. Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker
21. Bishop Jerome Listecki of La Crosse
22. Bishop Richard Lennon of Cleveland
23. Bishop Ralph Nickless of Sioux City
24. Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco
25. Bishop Glen Provost of Lake Charles, LA
26. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn
27. Bishop Joseph F. Martino of Scranton
28. Archbishop Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura
30. Bishop Peter J. Jugis of Charlotte
31. Bishop Michael F. Burbidge of Raleigh
32. Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, KS
33. Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph, MO
34. Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, WS35. Bishop Ronald Gilmore of Dodge City, KS36. Bishop Paul Coakley of Salina, KS37. Bishop Michael Jackels of Wichita38. Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito of Palm Beach39. Bishop Kevin W. Vann of Fort Worth
40. Bishop Rene H. Gracida, retired, of Corpus Christi
41. Daniel Cardinal DiNardo of Houston
42. Bishop Paul S. Loverde of Arlington
43. Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo of Richmond
44. Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Center
45. Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester
46. Bishop Arthur Serratelli of Patterson
47. Bishop Robert Herrmann of St. Louis
48. Archbishop Edwin O'Brien of Baltimore
49. Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix
50. Bishop Thomas D. Doran of Rockford
51. Bishop Joseph A. Galante of Camden
52. Bishop Robert J. Baker of Birmingham
53. Archbishop Alexander J. Brunett of Seattle
54. Bishop J. Peter Sartain of Joliet
55. Bishop John M. Smith of Trenton
56. Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing
57. Bishop Leonard R. Blair of Toledo
58. Bishop Francis J. Dewane of Venice
59. Bishop W. Frances Malooly of Wilmington
60. Bishop John Yanta, retired, of Amarillo
61. Bishop James V. Johnston of Springfield-Cape Girardeau
62. Archbishop John Vlazny of Portland
63. Bishop Blase J. Cupich of Rapid City
64. Bishop Lawrence Brandt of Greensburg
65. Bishop Dennis M. Schnurr of Cincinatti
66. Bishop Larry Silva of Honolulu
67. Bishop Paul Swain of Sioux Falls
68. Bishop Michael J. Sheehan of Santa Fe
69. Bishop Eusebius Beltran of Oklahoma City
70. Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades of Harrisburg
71. Archbishop Daniel Buechlein of Indianapolis
72. Bishop Alexander Sample of Marquette
73. Bishop Timothy McDonnell of Springfield, MA
74. Archbishop Timothy Dolan of Milwaukee
75. Bishop David Ricken of Green Bay
76. Bishop William Higi of Lafayette
77. Bishop Patrick Zurek of Amarillo
78. Archbishop Alfred Hughes of New Orleans
79. Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence80. Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory of Atlanta
81. Archbishop John F. Donoghue, retired, of Atlanta
82. Bishop George W. Coleman of Fall River, MA
83. Bishop Peter Christensen of Superior, WI
84. Archbishop Elden F. Curtiss of Omaha
85. Bishop Ron Ganier of Louisville
86. Joint Statement by the bishops of New York State (22 bishops)
87. Joint Statement by the bishops of Pennsylvania (16 bishops)
88. Joint Statement by the bishops of Kansas (4 bishops)89. Joint Statement by the bishops of Florida (9 bishops)
Te Deum Laudamus! Home
Plundering the Plumber's Records
by Michelle Malkin
If Joe the Plumber were Jawad the Suspected Terrorist, civil liberties activists would stampede the halls of Congress on his behalf. Liberal columnists would hyperventilate over the outrageous invasions of his privacy by Ohio state and local employees. The ACLU would demand the Big Brother snoopers' heads. And Democratic leaders would convene immediate hearings and parade him around the Beltway as the new poster boy/victim of unlawful domestic spying.
But because peaceful American citizen Joe Wurzelbacher is an outspoken enemy of socialism, rather than an enemy of America, the defenders of privacy have responded to his plight with an impenetrable cone of silence.
After the last presidential debate, during which John McCain invoked Joe the Plumber's anti-socialism shot heard 'round the world, several taxpayer-subsidized employees in Ohio immediately rifled through government databases in search of damning information. The Columbus Dispatch identified Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, as one of the dirt-diggers. She also happens to support Barack Obama and contributed the maximum amount to his presidential campaign.
On Wednesday, Jones-Kelley admitted that the records checks on Wurzelbacher that she approved were far more extensive than she first acknowledged. In addition to pawing through his child-support papers, the agency "also checked Wurzelbacher in its computer systems to determine whether he was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes."
Jones-Kelley argued that plumbing the plumber's information was no big deal because the agency always checks up on citizens who come into public light. Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland quickly pooh-poohed the civil liberties infringements and denied any nefarious political motives.
If that doesn't send a chill up your spine, you don't have a spine.
...continue reading Plundering the Plumber's Records
Te Deum Laudamus! Home
The Catholic Church and the Issues
In this election cycle, many public misrepresentations about Catholic teaching on the
life issues, particularly abortion, have surfaced.
Certain groups and individuals have used their own erroneous interpretations of Church documents,particularly the U.S. Bishops’ statement on Faithful Citizenship, to justify their political positions and to contradict the Church’s actual teaching on the centrality of abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research.
The faithful of the Diocese of Scranton are hereby reminded that partisan political groups such as Catholic United, Catholics in Alliancefor the Common Good, and other like-minded groups and individuals who make statements about Catholic teaching do not speak with the same authority or authenticity as their bishop.
This issue of The Catholic Light contains several articles that clarify what the Church actually teaches about the issues and the concept of the common good.
Warriors with Our Eyes Fixed on HeavenSource: Bishop Finn's Latest Column at the Catholic Key BlogLast Saturday I had the privilege of consecrating the restored church of Old St. Patrick. This is the oldest existing Catholic church in Kansas City. It will serve as the Oratory for the Latin Mass community which first began here under Bishop John Sullivan, and for many years has shared the parish of Our Lady of Sorrows.
One of the beauties of the Traditional Latin High Mass that I celebrated is that it highlights a most profound aspect of the Mass, namely our participation with the Communion of Saints. The high altar, multiple candles, incense and Gregorian chant, collectively give us a striking image of the Heavenly Jerusalem which is our ultimate home. Every Mass celebrates this reality, but I must admit that the traditional Mass captured this magnificent expression of the ultimate hope and goal of Christians in a powerful way. We should reflect on this often, because the ultimate goal of everything we do is to get ourselves to heaven and bring with us as many as we can.
The month of November begins with the two great celebrations: All Saints day (November 1) and the Commemoration of All Souls (November 2). These feasts celebrate our communion with the "Church triumphant" in heaven, and the "Church suffering" in purgatory. Today I would like to share a few brief comments about what we have sometimes called the "Church militant," the Church here on earth.
We, the Church on earth, have a very special challenge as participants in the grace and life of Jesus Christ to "fight" against the enemies of Christ's justice and truth and light and life. We must be attentive to the demands of this daily "battle" in a peaceable but serious manner.
I am sometimes amazed at the casual manner with which Christians, Catholics included, take up our life within what Pope John Paul II rightly called the "culture of death." The Church, by comparison, reminds us that we are engaged - by reason of our Baptism and Confirmation - in a battle, "not with flesh and blood, but with the principalities and powers, with the rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in heaven." (Eph 6:12) Jesus Christ has won the ultimate battle, but we, in the course of our human life must make our choice, determining on whose side we will live and die. Whose side will you choose?!
What is at stake in this battle is our immortal soul, our salvation. My responsibility as bishop is with the eternal destiny of those entrusted to my care. My total energies must be directed to the well being of those who otherwise may come under the spell of a radically flawed and fundamentally distorted moral sense, at odds with what our Mother the Church teaches. There are objective and transcendent truths. There is such a thing as right and wrong. There is a legitimate hierarchy of moral evils, and the direct willful destruction of human life can never be justified; it can never be supported. Do you believe this firm teaching of the Church?
Did you know that in Canada priests and Christian ministers have already been brought before tribunals for preaching and teaching in support of marriage? They are charged with "hate speech" against homosexuality. In light of the tyranny of choice growing each day in our own beloved country, we ought to be ready for similar attacks on religious freedom. We must not fail to preach the Gospel. We can not withhold the truth of our faith. That is why I will never be silent about human life. It is why I am proud of so many others - bishops, priests, deacons, religious and laity - who are not afraid to speak out about the values that matter most. What about you?!
Our Lord told His apostles that they would be hated by the world, just as He was. Nearly all of them died a martyr's death. As warriors in the Church militant, we must never resort to violence. But we must stand up fearlessly against the agents of death, the enemies of human life. Human beings are not Satan, but we know too well that they can come under his spell. They can become willing agents of death, numbed and poisoned in this culture of death. What about you?!
As we begin this month of November, the month of the Church, let us call upon the Saints to inspire us, befriend us, and pray for us. Let us offer many prayers and sacrifices for the poor souls who have gone before us. They need our meritorious suffrages to help them reach heaven.
And let us resolve to be warriors of the Church militant; warriors with our eyes fixed on heaven. Let us ask God's mercy and strength to persevere in our call - individual and collective - to holiness. Mary, Mother of the Church, Pray for us!
What: A bowling party hosted by the Knights of Columbus in efforts to raise money for the Canons Regular of the Holy Cross monastery in Brazil.
How Much: It will cost $15.00 per person during the day session and $25.00 per person during the night session. Each session includes two hours of bowling, shoes, two slices of pizza and a pop.
When: November 15th from 2:00pm to 4:30pm (Day session) and November 15th 8:30pm to 11pm (Night session).
Where: Universal Lanes, 2101 E 12 Mile Rd Warren, MI 48092 (on 12 Mile in-between Dequindre and Ryan).
Why: The proceeds will be donated to the Monastery of Santa Cruz (Mosteiro da Santa Cruz), a Canons Regular of the Holy Cross monastery in Brazil. Recently, Fr. Basil Nortz, the prior of this monastery, contacted Council 13419 asking us to adopt two seminarians of his order. The Council voted to organize this event in an effort to raise additional funds for the seminarians.
How Do You Sign Up: To reserve a spot, please send an email to rpc10@albion.edu by November 8th. We will need to give Universal Lanes an estimate of how many bowlers we will have. If you don’t reserve a spot, you can still come and bowl – Universal Lanes would like to have a rough estimate as to how many people will be attending.
Is It OK To Invite Family And Friends?: Yes, it would be great to have as many people as possible to raise money for this cause. This will be a great event for the youth of the parish and will give parishioners the opportunity to meet the men of the Knights of Columbus.
Any questions, please let me know.
Thanks,
Ryan Cryderman
Over 80 bishops have said that abortion/life issues are defining matters.for the Election. They have not injected themselves into partisan politics; they were drawn in by Catholic politicians skewing the teachings of the Church in public ways. The bishops are the teaching authority on Catholic matters for their dioceses.Bishop Responds to Governor
The Most Reverend Earl Boyea, Bishop of Lansing, issued the following statement on October 27, 2008 in response to recent comments by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm:In a Sunday address in Grand Rapids, Governor Jennifer Granholm incredibly said of Proposal 2 "As a Catholic, I can say to be pro-cure is to be pro-life." Of course, Catholics and all other responsible citizens will continue to seek cures for disease and injury. But to imply that Proposal 2 is a valid expression of Catholic principles is shocking. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Proposal 2, which goes before Michigan voters in a week, would give an unrestricted license to those who perform destructive experiments on human embryos. While the Catholic Church strongly supports legitimate forms of stem cell research and all other proper forms of scientific inquiry, the Church also teaches that is it is always immoral to destroy a human embryo. For that reason, the Catholic Bishops of Michigan have taken a strong position in opposition to this well-funded assault on human life.
Saint Paul reminds us that we must preach the Truth in season and out of season. The Truth will never go unspoken. To be in favor of Proposal 2 is not to be pro-life. A well-formed Catholic conscience would never lead a person to support Proposal 2 "as a Catholic."
"The Constitution reflected the enormous blind spot in this culture that carries
on to this day. The framers had that same blind spot ... the fundamental flaw of
this country."
In the news...
In the blogosphere....
Note: Many of comboxes are as interesting as the original posts.
No other issue, not all other issues taken together, can constitute a proportionate reason for voting for candidates that intend to preserve and defend this holocaust of innocent human life that is abortion.
I strongly urge every one of you to make a Novena and pray the Rosary to Our Lady of Victory between October 27th and Election Day, November 4th. Pray that God’s will be done and the most innocent and utterly vulnerable of our brothers and sisters will be protected from this barbaric and grossly sinful blight on society that is abortion. No woman, and no man, has the right to choose to murder an innocent human being.
Click here to download a PDF copy of Father's entire article (1 page) to email, link and distribute freely.
Just Look
The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.
Have you any doubt that it is a human being?
If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?
If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?
If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.
But you might protest that all of this is too easy. Why, you might inquire, have I not delved into the opinion of philosophers and theologians about the matter? And even worse: Why have I not raised the usual questions about what a "human being" is, what a "person" is, what it means to be "living," and such? People who write books and articles about abortion always concern themselves with these kinds of things. Even the justices of the Supreme Court who gave us "Roe v. Wade" address them. Why do I neglect philosophers and theologians? Why do I not get into defining "human being," defining "person," defining "living," and the rest? Because, I respond, I am sound of mind and endowed with a fine set of eyes, into which I do not believe it is well to cast sand. I looked at the photograph, and I have no doubt about what I saw and what are the duties of a civilized society if what I saw is in danger of being killed by someone who wishes to kill it or, if you prefer, someone who "chooses" to kill it. In brief: I looked, and I know what I saw.
But what about the being that has been in its mother for only 15 weeks or only 10? Have you photographs of that too? Yes, I do. However, I hardly think it necessary to show them. For if we agree that the being in the photograph printed on this page is an innocent human being, you have no choice but to admit that it may not be legitimately killed even before 20 weeks unless you can indicate with scientific proof the point in the development of the being before which it was other than an innocent human being and, therefore, available to be legitimately killed. Nor have Aristotle, Aquinas or even the most brilliant embryologists of our era or any other era been able to do so. If there is a time when something less than a human being in a mother morphs into a human being, it is not a time that anyone has ever been able to identify, though many have made guesses. However, guesses are of no help. A man with a shotgun who decides to shoot a being that he believes may be a human being is properly hauled before a judge. And hopefully, the judge in question knows what a "human being" is and what the implications of someone's wishing to kill it are. The word "incarceration" comes to mind.
However, we must not stop here. The matter becomes even clearer and simpler if you obtain from the National Geographic Society two extraordinary DVDs. One is entitled "In the Womb" and illustrates in color and in motion the development of one innocent human being within its mother. The other is entitled "In the Womb—Multiples" and in color and motion shows the development of two innocent human beings—twin boys—within their mother. If you have ever allowed yourself to wonder, for example, what "living" means, these two DVDs will be a great help. The one innocent human being squirms about, waves its arms, sucks its thumb, smiles broadly and even yawns; and the two innocent human beings do all of that and more: They fight each other. One gives his brother a kick, and the other responds with a sock to the jaw. If you can convince yourself that these beings are something other than living and innocent human beings, something, for example, such as "mere clusters of tissues," you have a problem far more basic than merely not appreciating the wrongness of abortion. And that problem is—forgive me—self-deceit in a most extreme form.
Adolf Hitler convinced himself and his subjects that Jews and homosexuals were other than human beings. Joseph Stalin did the same as regards Cossacks and Russian aristocrats. And this despite the fact that Hitler and his subjects had seen both Jews and homosexuals with their own eyes, and Stalin and his subjects had seen both Cossacks and Russian aristocrats with theirs. Happily, there are few today who would hesitate to condemn in the roundest terms the self-deceit of Hitler, Stalin or even their subjects to the extent that the subjects could have done something to end the madness and protect living, innocent human beings.
It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets. Nor can we honorably cover our shame (1) by appealing to the thoughts of Aristotle or Aquinas on the subject, inasmuch as we are all well aware that their understanding of matters embryological was hopelessly mistaken, (2) by suggesting that "killing" and "choosing to kill" are somehow distinct ethically, morally or criminally, (3) by feigning ignorance of the meaning of "human being," "person," "living," and such, (4) by maintaining that among the acts covered by the right to privacy is the act of killing an innocent human being, and (5) by claiming that the being within the mother is "part" of the mother, so as to sustain the oft-repeated slogan that a mother may kill or authorize the killing of the being within her "because she is free to do as she wishes with her own body."
One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the "Dred Scott Case" in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.
Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.
Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York
"State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber."
Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher became part of the national political lexicon Oct. 15 when Republican presidential candidate John McCain mentioned him frequently during his final debate with Democrat Barack Obama.
The 34-year-old from the Toledo suburb of Holland is held out by McCain as an example of an American who would be harmed by Obama's tax proposals.
Public records requested by The Dispatch disclose that information on Wurzelbacher's driver's license or his sport-utility vehicle was pulled from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles database three times shortly after the debate.
Information on Wurzelbacher was accessed by accounts assigned to the office of Ohio Attorney General Nancy H. Rogers, the Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency and the Toledo Police Department.
It has not been determined who checked on Wurzelbacher, or why. Direct access to driver's license and vehicle registration information from BMV computers is restricted to legitimate law enforcement and government business.
Consider that if someone with the kind of past associations as Barack Obama applied for a job with the federal government he would not pass the background check. Forget the government - most of the mainstream media has spent more time investigating the private life of Joe the Plumber than they have on Barack Obama.
Te Deum Laudamus! Home
Writing a Friday post on the Jesuits’ America magazine group blog “In All Things,” Stricherz responded to fellow blogger Michael Sean Winters’ description of the prelate as the nation’s “second most vocal supporter of the GOP.”Go read more at CNA: Archbishop Chaput’s pro-life remarks ‘not Republican or Democratic,’ pro-life Democrat says
Calling the description a “mischaracterization,” Stricherz, a pro-life Democrat, said he thinks it reflects “a larger misunderstanding that progressive Catholics have about their co-religionist opponents.”
He then referenced Archbishop Chaput’s August remarks in which the prelate acknowledged many important issues are relevant to the election, but also asserted that the right to life is “foundational” and all other rights depend on it.
“We can’t build a healthy society while ignoring the routine and very profitable legalized homicide that goes on every day against America’s unborn children,” Archbishop Chaput commented, continuing:
“Yet for thirty-five years I’ve watched prominent ‘pro-choice’ Catholics justify themselves with the kind of moral and verbal gymnastics that should qualify as an Olympic event. All they’ve really done is capitulate to Roe v. Wade.”
Stricherz said the archbishop’s stance should not be interpreted in a partisan spirit.
“This position is not, strictly speaking, Republican or Democratic,” he noted, saying it was the same position of the late Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Robert Casey, Sr.
Good news: Bishop Schneider's book, "Dominus Est," on the distribution of Holy Communion, just rolled off the presses yesterday. The retail price is eight dollars, but a 50% discount is being offered for the first month for orders of five copies or more to the same address (shipping & handling billed accordingly).Orders may be sent to: Newman House Press, 601 Buhler Court, Pine Beach, NJ 08741.An order form and further information may also be obtained by going to: jhcnewman.org; then click on "Newman House Press."
Priests and other Catholics are speaking up, as well:
And, don't miss this: Gotta Watch Video: American's Choice 2008
WASHINGTON—"Our faith requires us to oppose abortion on demand and to provide help to mothers facing challenging pregnancies," Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia and Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., said in an October 21 statement. The bishops urged Catholics to study the teaching of the Church, rather than rely on statements and materials from outside groups and individuals.
Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Murphy made the joint statement in response to arguments that the Church should accept the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision on abortion as a "permanent fixture of constitutional law" and should concede that the only way to reduce abortions is to provide more government support for pregnant women. At the same time the two bishops also responded to those who argue that the Church's efforts against abortion should focus solely on restoring recognition for unborn children's human rights and that proposals to provide social and economic support for pregnant women distract from that effort.
Cardinal Rigali chairs of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities. Bishop Murphy chairs the bishops' Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development.
"Providing support for pregnant women so they choose to have their babies is a necessary but not sufficient response to abortion. Similarly, reversal of Roe is a necessary but not sufficient condition for restoring an order of justice in our society's treatment of defenseless human life," they said.
The bishops also noted that "in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision knocked down laws against abortion in all 50 states, fabricating a constitutional 'right' to abortion that continues to haunt and divide our society....Roe v. Wade is a clear case of an 'intrinsically unjust law' we are morally obliged to oppose. Reversing it is not a mere political tactic, but a moral imperative for Catholics and others who respect human life," they said.
The bishops added that legalizing abortion had greatly increased annual abortions in the United States. "The law is a teacher, and Roe taught many women, physicians and others that abortion is an acceptable answer to a wide range of problems."
The bishops noted strides made in modifying Roe v. Wade's unjust legal precedent and drew attention to the many lives saved by the modest laws and regulations allowed under Roe. They voiced concern that the pending pro-abortion "Freedom of Choice Act" (S. 1173, H.R. 1964) in Congress would threaten strides made in limiting abortions.
"Bans on public funding [of abortion], laws requiring informed consent for women and parental involvement for minors, and other modest and widely supported laws have saved millions of lives. Laws made possible by reversing Roe would save many more," they said.
"On the other hand, this progress could be lost through a key pro-abortion proposal, the 'Freedom of Choice Act,' which supporters say would knock down hundreds of current pro-life laws and forbid any public program to 'discriminate' against abortion in providing services to women," Cardinal Rigali and Bishop Murphy said.
"By protecting the child's life to the maximum degree possible, improving life-affirming support for pregnant women, and changing the attitudes and prejudices imposed on many women to make them see abortion as an acceptable or necessary solution, we will truly help build a culture of life," they said.
The full text of the joint statement may be found at www.usccb.org/prolife/Rigali-Murphy-Joint-Statement.pdf.
