Respect for Life

To the Clergy, Religious and Laity of the Church of Pittsburgh

Dear Friends:

On October 1 we begin our annual observance of Respect Life Month. We are called to proclaim anew our firm belief in the sanctity of human life and to address a whole range of issues that erode this most fundamental of human rights. These issues include every aspect of human life--prenatal care, birth, nurture and growth, marriage and family life, housing, employment, care for the disabled and handicapped, ministry to those with AIDS, rehabilitation of those addicted to alcohol and drugs, care of the elderly--indeed, any issue related to the dignity of human life.

Our belief in the sanctity of human life is rooted in the scriptures, the word of God. The Book of Genesis teaches us that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1.26). "Thou shall not kill," says the Lord in transmitting the commandments to Moses. "Choose life, then, so that you and your descendants may live," Moses warned the chosen people (Dt. 30.19). And of course the whole life, teaching and ministry of Jesus confirmed the dignity of human life and each individual person. Jesus said, "I have come so that they may have life and have it to the full" (Jn. 10.10). This teaching of the scriptures, along with the clear and consistent teaching of the Church throughout the ages, serves as the unshakable foundation of our commitment to human life. In view of this testimony, therefore, the primordial transgression against God, the giver of life, is the act of destroying the life of others.

Even though our concern for life crosses a wide range of issues, it is inevitable that respect for life in these days will focus primarily on the question of abortion---the most important social and moral issue of our age. The Supreme Court, in its most recent ruling on abortion, has returned to a far more balanced understanding of the abortion issue by backing away from its blanket permission for abortion on demand. The Supreme Court has recognized that this issue should be addressed at the level of the state legislatures. More importantly, the Supreme Court has recognized that all citizens have a legitimate interest in restricting abortions.

Obviously we would like to see an end to all abortion for the simple truth that abortion terminates the life of an unborn child. In every case, regardless of surrounding circumstances, an innocent, silent and defenseless unborn human being is put to death in an abortion. That alone is reason to hope and pray for an end to all abortions.

We are also well aware that abortion victimizes the women it purports to help. A woman is encouraged to have an abortion at a difficult moment in her life when she too is very vulnerable. As the documentation of the United States Catholic Conference points out: "In fact, women are often pressured by the father, by their families, and finally by the abortion industry, to be not the authors but the terminators of life. Following abortion, they face the most intimate physical and psychological scars...". Women are told by those advocating abortion as "just another method of birth control" that abortion is a safe and easy solution to their immediate problems, while their total health and long range well-being are neglected. The social policy of abortion virtually on demand threatens the health and the true freedom of women, as well as the life of the unborn child. Because this is true the USCC underlines that "the right touted as the preserver of women's freedom has thus become a vehicle for their oppression."

We cannot fail to notice that abortion is a very profitable, commercial enterprise. The abortion industry makes money at the expense of those they victimize. This moral evil is compounded when taxpayers' money is used, money often provided by those who in conscience oppose abortion, to pay for the abortions. Not only is such policy immoral but it attempts to violate the conscience of others and force them to share in the evil.

It is fortunate, therefore, that the Supreme Court has returned the question of abortion to state legislatures where, hopefully, reasoned argumentation and calm discussion will pave the way for at least the beginnings of restrictions of abortion on demand. This is our fervent hope but we know it will not be easy. Those who favor abortion are well organized, and richly financed. In many cases, this group enjoys the willing support of the media. In addition, too often the argumentation lacks both the calm and serious reflection needed for reasonable discussion.

Why is it so hard to find a calm, reasoned and truthful discussion about this important social and moral issue? Perhaps one reason is found in the fundamental weakness of the arguments set forth by those who promote abortion. A desire to escape burdens, for example, or to maintain a higher standard of living, is understandable, but it is clearly no reason to kill. Under calm analysis the arguments put forth by those who favor abortion cannot bear the weight of their conclusion---that it is good to kill an unborn child.

Women tempted to have an abortion are usually faced with "reasons" why they should give into such a solution. An unmarried girl might feel pressured by the father of their child, by her family or by others with varying agendas. The argument runs: "She could have this baby in a second if her boyfriend wasn't set against it." She might be frightened that future career options could be more limited. "Remember what happened to your cousin, pregnant at 16, forced to quit school when she might have become an engineer." Or, "How can she care for a child when she is still on drugs?"

The difficulty and confusion of an unanticipated pregnancy deserves loving, compassionate, human support. The pain should not be compounded by the tragedy of an abortion.

Mothers also find that they confront the decision about their baby against the background of their own social and economic status. "There is just no room for another." Sometimes the reasons have almost nothing to do with the baby. "I forgot to take my pill," or "I'm still recovering from a divorce and don't want to face the issue of a child by my lover."

When all the reasons are viewed calmly, with compassion and with help offered to the young or not so young mother, they do not add up to real reasons to justify the final and drastic decision to take the life of the child. In varying degrees they can be vexing, painful and pressing reasons that call for a great deal of help, understanding and support. But they do not justify the taking of the innocent life of the baby in the womb. That may account for the fact that most of the arguments put forward by those who support killing the unborn are almost always emotional ones.

We are usually told of all the cases of rape and incest across this nation that result in unwanted children and hence the need for abortion on demand. But the facts show that almost all of the 1.6 million abortions every year in the United States are performed for the sake of someone's convenience. They have nothing to do with rape or incest or the life of the mother. More than one and a half million unborn children are killed because they are---mostly for the reasons we reviewed above---inconvenient to someone.

The so-called "freedom of choice" argument is undoubtedly the weakest link in the whole pro-abortion chain. The argument sounds something like this: "Personally I'm against abortion, but I believe that women should have the right to choose." What would happen if we allowed this argument to apply to other aspects of our lives? Would we dare allow this approach to be used in other current social and moral questions?

For example, as a nation we have waged a very vigorous campaign against drugs and are currently renewing this "war". In this case we clearly recognize and affirm the right of our government to step in for the wider good of our society and to intervene in the personal actions and private commerce of a drug dealer and a drug user. Who would argue that the drug seller and user have the "right to choose?" Who seriously says, "Personally I am opposed to drugs, but I believe that every person should have the right to choose and the government should not interfere in this choice?" What chaos would result in our society if we applied this argument to other areas of public concern! What would happen if we employed this approach to questions such as child abuse, pornography, drinking and driving, racial equality, or any other important social and moral questions. And yet, this "right to choose" argument continues to be the favorite approach of those who demand and promote abortion!

Let us make no mistake or be fooled by the rhetoric. The 1.6 million unborn, defenseless children killed last year in abortions had no choice. Someone else made a decision for them. No choice was offered the child. Only a decision. The child is to die.

Whether or not a pregnant woman wants to have a child is not the issue. She already has a child---in her womb. The issue is whether the child will be allowed to live. Two lives are involved. In this partnership of human life it is unfair for only one to make the choice, the decision---about the life of the other.

Sometimes we are told this is a "rights" issue, the right of a woman to have power over her own body. There is always sentiment in support of personal rights. As Catholics and as Americans we feel an almost instinctive reaction to support "rights". Yet in pregnancy we have two lives. The rights involved include the right of two human lives.

We know that it is good and reasonable to limit the "rights" of one person when they touch the life of another. We seek to limit the "right" to drink when it comes to drunk driving. We recognize that all civil rights are rooted in the basic human right to life. No "legal" right to abortion can erase the primordial and God-given right of the child in the womb to life.

The struggle over civil rights for black Americans as well as the prior struggle of this nation to reject slavery as an acceptable part of our legal system and way of life are both rooted in the recognition that some "legal rights" have no real meaning in the face of the basic human right to one's life and human dignity. No one's claim to a "legal right" can take away another's human right to life.

It is sometimes said that the abortion issue is only a Catholic concern. We hear that the effort to regulate abortion is a violation of the separation of Church and state. Yet, we are all members of the state in which we struggle to live together as a human community. The commonwealth has an obligation to foster and protect those values that mold, form and identify a people. The most important and foundational value is the right to life.

Laws exist to foster and protect life and those values that flow from human life. Every citizen, Catholic or not, has a stake in the laws of the land. This is all the more true when those laws challenge basic fundamental human rights--especially the right to life itself. There cannot be a truly human society, let alone one rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition, that would attempt to separate morality from law, or God from the collective expression of our most cherished values.

As we address the abortion question, we should be prepared to expect a certain amount of religious bigotry to surface. Small and irresponsible groups will continue their campaign of misinformation and innuendo aimed at sincere people of goodwill who truly believe that life is sacred and abortion is evil.

The Catholic Church is sometimes the object of religious bigotry. On the issue of abortion, because Catholic teaching rejects abortion and the Church abhors it, we should not be surprised if we are made the object of prejudice. When we suffer this injustice, however, we should pray for those who offend us and we should recall that Jesus Himself said: "Blessed are those who are persecuted in the cause of right: theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5.10).

We must always be aware just as we ask others to understand that in the abortion struggle---the struggle for the right to life against the right to take life---we reject all forms of violence. Even in our protest against the radical violence that is abortion, we do not condone violence.

When everything is said and done, we must remember that we are dealing here with a life and death issue--the life or death of the child in the womb! The right of the state to protect that innocent life by law must be established and defended. The spurious arguments introduced into this discussion by those who favor abortion must be recognized for what they are and discarded so that all parties can focus on the ultimate question: Will this child in the womb live or die?

When we are asked to look at abortion and address it, the following realities should be very clear in our minds:

1. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, life is sacred. Abortion is the destruction of an unborn and innocent human child.

2. Women, too, are victimized by abortion. They suffer at the hands of those who exploit them, those who disregard their ultimate well-being, often for the sake of personal profit.

3. Abortions take place in the United States almost always for the sake of convenience. Rarely are questions of rape, incest or the life of the mother involved.

4. The argument of "freedom of choice" is fallacious. To begin with, one party of the partnership, the child, is not given a choice. He or she is presented with someone else's decision. No one has the "freedom of choice" to take the life of another innocent human. That decision is not ours to make.

5. The idea that a person can oppose abortion personally and defend and support it publicly is no more applicable to abortion than it is to any other social or moral question.

6. All civil rights must be rooted in the defense of the basic human right to life. It is the ultimate sophistry to defend the "legal" right to deny another innocent human being the basic, God-given human right to life.

7. By condoning abortion on demand, our society is teaching our children that it is acceptable to kill for convenience sake, and that fundamental principles can be compromised for the sake of personal convenience.

8. Each follower of Jesus Christ has an obligation to defend innocent human life. This witness can take place in many ways: teaching, non-violent public demonstrations, the legislative process, preaching, as well as financial support, prayer and ministry to those who suffer.

As we have already indicated, respect for human life touches many issues. Respect Life Month calls us to continue to reach out to all of our sisters and brothers in need. Our land, so richly blessed by God, cannot tolerate the sufferings of the homeless, the hungry, the abused, the addicted, the undereducated, the unemployed, the battered spouses and children, or others whose tragic stories have become all too familiar in our contemporary world. We are, indeed, a nation rich in resources, talent, personal dedication and faith. There is no reason why we cannot address in a concerted and effective manner the many sorry consequences of the human condition.

As I recalled in my pastoral letter, NEW BEGINNINGS: "We are called, not only to teach, but to do. Our challenge is to live the gospel message of compassion and care for others." In RENEW THE FACE OF THE EARTH, my recent pastoral letter and call to spiritual renewal, I ask you to reflect with me that, "As believers, our hope for a better world is rooted in our faith that God will help us make this happen; ... God will be with us to bring about that world of peace, justice, understanding, wisdom, kindness, respect (for life) and love that we call the kingdom of God."

As members of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, the Catholic Church in the six counties of Southwestern Pennsylvania, we should be aware and proud of the fact that the Church has generously served many people in our region who have very serious needs. For decades we have served and continue to minister to all, female and male, young and old, of all racial and ethnic origins, Catholics and neighbors of other faith traditions alike. Roselia Manor for single mothers, Mom's House for the children of young mothers, St. Joseph's Shelter and House of Hospitality and the works of the Little Sisters of the Poor are only a few on a list too long to include in this letter. In so doing, we proclaim in action the dignity of human life and we have extended the compassionate care of the Lord Jesus. Respect Life Month calls us to renew our efforts aware that what we do does make a difference.

Much more could be said about human life in our society, and many other issues could be addressed. But these are beyond the limitations of this one particular letter. Nevertheless, I hope that the reflections I have offered will provide useful information and sincere encouragement to all those who share my concern for the sanctity of human life. Let us work and pray for the success of Respect Life Month. By our every thought, word and deed, let us "choose life, so that we and our descendants may live!"

Faithfully in Christ,

Donald W. Wuerl
Bishop of Pittsburgh
September 27, 1989
The Feast of St. Vincent de Paul