(DISCLAIMER: I am in NO WAY making an endorsement or a rejection for or against a political party or candidate in this post. My intent is solely to draw attention to one of the more common twists a Catholic may make to justify their position on a topic when it clearly contradicts Church teachings.)

This is getting a bit ahead of things, but since I stumbled upon it, and it relates all-too-strongly to topics we will cover later on in class, I thought I’d put down some reflections and an important web-link for those students who wish to get a leg up on this discussion.

The Democratic National Convention is going on as I write this. Barack Obama has been declared the candidate by acclamation and is in Denver to make his acceptance speech this evening. High up in the Democratic leadership are two Catholics; Vice-Presidential candidate Joseph Biden and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Some debate in Catholic circles has taken place about whether Biden and Pelosi ought to be denied Communion as a result of their marked public support of the unlimited abortion right.

The issue of whether they should be denied the Eucharist or not is not a point of discussion I wish to engage. That discussion is better fit for an actual college-level theology class, and such a class is not offered at Tri-Cities Prep.

Instead, I want to focus on something Mrs. Pelosi said just in the past couple of days -while at the convention- as a means of justifying her stance on abortion:

REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There’s very clear distinctions. This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…

To boil that down to a basic nut, Mrs. Pelosi has taken the 1700 year-old teachings of St. Augustine, who suggested that life began at 3-months gestation -because that is when the mother begins to feel the baby move inside of her- and used it to say, “The Church does not really know for sure when life begins.” From this, she then makes the claim that she is morally justified in her stance on abortion, despite the strongest condemnation from the Church -for centuries- that this is incorrect.

One cannot cherry-pick one’s morality. A thing either is moral or it is not. If our instincts are at odds with morality, then we must further study the issue so that we better understand, and our instincts (our conscience) are then in tune with morality. There is a word that describes what Mrs. Pelosi is doing here. That word is “rationalization.” She is taking an ancient Church teaching -which was made at the time on the best knowledge there was- and interpreting it literally for her own purposes. If Mrs. Pelosi were to interpret the spirit of Augustine’s teaching, perhaps by asking the question, “I wonder what Augustine might say if he had access to today’s modern imaging technology, which allows us to see a fetal heartbeat as early as 4 weeks of life?” One is tempted to suspect that Augustine might lower his estimate on when life begins, and Mrs. Pelosi would then have either to re-evaluate her position on abortion, or she would have to engage in more mental gymnastics to justify her position. Can one honestly say that Augustine would state for sure: “Doesn’t matter. Life still begins at three months”? Augustine was rational and reasonable. He worked as best he could with his intellect, using the best knowledge available at the time. It is difficult -if not impossible- to honestly suggest that he would say such a thing today.

Remember, we do not make our own morals. They’ve already been made for us. As our understanding of the natural world improves, so our understanding of moral truths also improves. But that improved understanding doesn’t alter the underlying reality of those moral truths.

They are still truths. They are still right.

Now, some questions assert themselves when examining this topic:

• If Church teaching is so clear, why are these politicians hewing to their incorrect conclusions, even in the face of elementary logic?
• How much pressure does a political office place on the officeholder to mutate their moral positions?  What forms do that pressure take?
• Put another way: Might Mrs. Pelosi’s or Senator Biden’s positions change if they were out of office?

For a better round-up on this, check out The Anchoress, a very wise Catholic blogger.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

TO REITERATE: I am not suggesting in this post that Pelosi or the Democratic Party is completely immoral. I AM suggesting that Mrs. Pelosi is not being intellectually honest in her pursuit of moral truth here.

You will not find a morally pure political party. In general, the Democrats have it wrong in terms of abortion. In general, the Republicans have it wrong in terms of capital punishment. Any earthly endeavor is going to have its flaws. Politicians are not exempt from this basic fact.