Newspaper Page Text
Pro-Life Work And Social Justice
Some Questions And Some Answers
By FATHER FRANCIS X. MEEHAN
Father Francis X. Meehan teaches mor
al theology at St. Charles Borromeo Semi
nary in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
The simplest things are the most
difficult to theologize about. Respect
for life is one of these simple things.
To speak too much is to risk compli
cating what God has made simple.
But in our day a cloud obscures the
light. So we must speak.
Here I shall pose questions that of
ten come up in pro-life work. I choose
a question-and-answer format for the
sake of clarity and with the hope that
it will help leaders communicate
these insights to their people.
I place the issue of abortion in the
context of comprehensive concern for
social justice. John Paul II in his first
encyclical chooses a similar context.
When all is said and done, a theolo
gy for pro-life work need not be in any
way complicated. The very first and
last reason for respecting life is that
the life is there God’s creation is
there. And if God’s creation is there,
there is a deep and yet simple theolo
gy that knows that the Lord Jesus is
present. He in whom all creation is
summed up is found in every suffer
ing or oppressed person. No theology
can capture the depth and yet the sim
plicity of the Lord’s theology: “I was
hungry and you gave me food ... I as
sure you, as often as you did it for one
of my least brothers, you did it for
me” (Mt. 25 : 36-40). Let us begin our
questions and answers knowing that
all is summed up in this Word of the
Lord.
Why should any minority be al
lowed to impose its view of the
morality of abortion on the rest of
the country?
This question comes up frequently.
It carries false assumptions and over
simplifies socio-legal realities.
First, those who are against the pre
sent situation of abortion in this coun
try may not be a minority.
Sociological analysis indicates that
much depends on how the question is
asked. There are good grounds for
thinking that those who favor the pre
sent fact of abortion on demand are
the real minority, and that it is they
who have imposed their morality on
the rest of us — not to mention what
they have imposed on several million
children in the womb.
Second, even if those against abor
tion were a minority that would not
settle the issue. It did not settle the is
sue of slavery or of discrimination.
Abortion is not an issue of private
morality. Pro-life people perceive
themselves (rightly, I believe) in
volved in the humane and progressive
struggle in this country for the rights
of those who are weak and voiceless.
This kind of social struggle cannot ac
cept mere head-counting as a norm
for who should have human rights.
How can a man dare to speak so
easily on abortion? He has never
been in the crucible of conflict
which a woman may experience
when she finds herself pregnant.
Simone Weil pointed out that it is a
sign of spiritual maturity to know that
two things diametrically opposed can
both be true. I would like to make the
same point — a little out of context,
but not completely without context. A
man cannot dare to speak about abor
tion. A man must dare to speak about
abortion. Both are true. Abortion is a
woman’s issue. But abortion is a hu
man issue.
There is a pastoral compassion that
dares not judge the heart, but this
cannot preclude all moral analysis. In
the end, abortion is more than a per
sonal moral dilemma. It is also a so
cial phenomenon. Supreme Court
rulings on abortion since 1973 have
treated pregnancy as so exclusively
the woman’s concern that not even
the father of the unborn child or par
ents of an unmarried minor consid
ering abortion have any rights in the
matter. This concept of pregnancy as
the woman’s private affair is an an
thropological first in the history of
cultures and civilizations.
The Church’s judgment on abortion
is neither male nor female. It is so
cial. It places the rights of the child in
the womb in that line of progressive
social thought that sees individual
dignity as inalienable. This is clearly
an area where the Church has coura
geously allowed her anima to shine
through — to use a Jungian term. It is
in the end a pro-woman posture,
which recognizes that she who was
once treated ask property must not
undergo a double jeopardy. It is a
Christian call to woman, who has
been oppressed, to resist the easy ten
dency to become the new oppressor.
Is it not true that pro-life people
are “single-issue” people? If so,
doesn’t this diminish their witness?
It is possible to emphasize a “single
issue” in a way that is narrow and so
cially regressive. But more needs to
be said about how the term is often
used. Its origin might provide an in
teresting study in the sociology of
knowledge. Who initiated the disdain
ful use of the term? Never those who
may be helped by the single issue in
question. When civil rights leaders
among blacks were pressing for so
cial legislation, they surely were not
the ones who ushered in a disdainful
use of the term. Dominance has a way
of coining the language. No wonder
Jesus ended up silent. Sometimes
there is nothing to say. The very lan
guage has been co-opted.
Reflect a bit further. Any group se
rious about producing social change
engages in structural coalescence.
People who mean business, politically
speaking, appreciate the need for
heavy publicity focused on single is
sues. That’s how pieces of legislation
become law — one at a time, to the ac
companiment of a concentrated push.
We can leave to academics, talk show
hosts, and people at cocktail parties
the luxury of covering many issues
with cosmic sweeps that are rarely
translated into action.
Marxists have a good name for this
— academicism. The extentialists
called it “evasion.” I do not mean to
be quite so harsh since all of us are
guilty in some way. My point is deep
er. I am talking about an often un
talked about significance of social
morality. Abortions are happening on
a massive scale 'now. There has to be
a response from someone. The re
sponse — in order to be responsible
and not merely an exercise in moral
izing — must put together a socio-po
litical movement that is structurally
effective. It is no surprise to find those
who are satisfied with the status quo
disparaging this as “single-issue”
politics. If children in the womb could
speak, what would they say about
“single-issue” people? What do other
victimized minorities say about their
“single issues”?
Pro-life activists often use pic
tures of fetuses to influence people.
Isn’t this an unfair use of emotional
shock?
When pictures speak a very deep
truth, they can be very fair. Take a fe
tus in the third month of pregnancy.
Its picture speaks a great truth. To
hide the reality of what the fetus looks
like is unfair and untruthful. It is un
fair not to allow people to see what
they are about when they extol the
right “to choose.” It is important to
know that the choice involves some
one with arms and little fingers and
little feet. It is emotional exploitation
to speak of “little fingers and little
feet”? Little fingers and little feet are
simply there.
Pictures, if they are fair to the con
text, can deliver us from what the
Greeks calledscotos/s. The word ref
ers to a kind of intellectual blindness
that becomes a moral blindness. It is
not always malicious. There can be a
kind of technological blindness to hu
man reality. Jacques Ellul, the distin
guished Protestant theologian who
analyzes social issues with a certain
evangelical zeal, warns that we have
become a “civilization of means.”
Sometimes we end up “solving prob
lems” by doing away with them. And
then we use technical language to
hide the human reality of what we
have done. The language maintains
the illusion that nothing significant is
happening — “just a routine opera
tion.” Pictures can pierce through the
illusion.
Many were upset during the Viet
nam war when television crews fo
cused on wounded and dead bodies or
on napalmed children running and
screaming in pain. Would truth have
been better served by pictures of a
button being pushed at 10,000 feet in a
B-52? And in abortion, is it not merely
a “termination of pregnancy”? Or a
saline “treatment” or “evacuation”?
No, it is not merely any of these. The
truth of abortion involves fingers and
feet and arms. So we are back to pic
tures, which break through to the hu
man truth. This is not unfair playing
on emotion. It is an intellectual in
sight into the real.
Why legislate morality? Should
church people and church groups
be getting into political and legal
matters like this?
The relationship between morality
and law, as between Church and so
ciety, is surely complex. But in the
practical world one must unravel
complexity in the best way possible
and then take a position. While the
question raised here is certainly legit
imate in itself, it is nevertheless often
raised in a context that reveals indi
vidualistic and privatist assumptions.
In this country, which has been said
to possess the “soul of a church,” le
gal structures have a special power to
teach and propagate morality — or
immorality, as the case may be. Peo
ple here and everywhere have a ten
dency to accept what is given.
Hannah Arendt, the Jewish political
philosopher, saw how this happened
in Germany. She called it the “banali
ty of evil.” Things which a short time
earlier would have been perceived as
outrageous became acceptable, sim
ply because a legal structure legiti
mized them. (The analogy is to be
applied carefully. In no way do I im
ply that my adversaries are equiva
lent to Nazis.) I am saying that
analysis of the impetus which social
structure gives to a particular view of
morality is highly relevant to abortion
in this country.
Legal structures, if they are not
good ones, have a way of making it
hard “for a good person to be good” —
as the bishops of Appalachia put it. If,
therefore, the Catholic Church or any
church is serious about moral per
suasion, concerned not only about pri
vate morality but about history itself
and its impact on the human, there is
no way' for it to avoid becoming in
volved in structural issues, including
issues of law and policy.
What might contribute to a
new spirituality for those engaged
in social struggles on behalf of life?
In this work of social justice, there
is need for two great virtues that are
at once new and old — patience and
humility.
First patience. In pursuing social
goals, the Christian acts in a way that
is different from the world’s way. It is
a less compulsive way, a way of confi
dence that, through the victory of the
Lord Jesus on the cross, all evil has
been, as it were, cut at the root. This
is not a Pollyannish view. Nor does it
imply escape from the human lot of
daily work, anxiety, and even humil
iation as a result of failure and mis
takes. But one resists becoming a
zealot. We must not force the times.
And sometimes things will go badly.
One lesson learned by social activ
ists in the 1960s was that evil is far
more deeply embedded in structures
and systems than they imagined.
There may be, in the words of Mama
Cass’ popular song, “a new world
coming,” but the Christian does not
know whether “it is just around the
bend.” We leave that to God. We leave
knowledge of the “hour” (of God’s
coming) to the Father. It is for us to
know (Acts 1:7). A generative love
knows how to work for success that
may not be fully realized in one’s own
generation, perhaps even in one’s
children. Yet one still works urgently,
as if the kingdom is tomorrow.
Humility is the other virtue re
quired. Among other things, humility
is a unifying virtue. Groups working
on social issues are very easily splin
tered, for there is always room for
disagreement in analysis, tactics, and
priorities. Pope Paul VI put it well:
“Humility about how much we share
in injustice will rid action of all inflex
ibility and sectarianism; it will also
avoid discouragement in the face of a
task which seems limitless in size”
Octogesima Adveniens, 51).
xperience
il
The Care of Dying Persons
By PRISCILLA M. RUSSO
Priscilla M. Russo is a free-lance writer and public rela
tions consultant living in New York City.
The art of pastoral care of the terminally ill today
is emerging from the dark. It has been an incre
mental development, but there is new rededication,
new insight and more adequate programs. Let us
briefly reflect on several aspects of contemporary
ministry to the dving.
THE ROLE OF THE PRIEST
What happens when a parishioner seeks a priest’s
aid about his or her own approaching death, desper
ate to be relieved of a burden of physical or emo
tional pain that barely permits a marginal
existence? “Do something for me,” this person
says. “Make me hurt less, tell me the facts that I
am coping with are not true.” How is this minister
of the Gospel supposed to respond to this demand?
Some of the comments that follow, while ad
dressed to priests, also relate to all persons in posi
tions to minister in some way to the dying.
Priests should approach the dying with all the
skills they can muster. They should be aware of
the contributions of the social and behavioral sci
ences, but they should not forget that they ap
proach the sick and the dying as priests: persons
whose whole attitude is dominated by their faith
in the life, death, and the resurrection of Jesus.
“None of us lives as his own master and none of
us dies as his own master. While we live we are
responsible to the Lord, and when we die we die
as his servants. Both in life and in death we are
the Lord’s. That is why Christ died and came to
life again, that he might be Lord of both the dead
and the living” (Rom. 14:7-9).
The phrase “watch with me” sums up all that any
group of concerned people can do as they care for
the dying. It matters little whether they be family,
doctor, nurse, priest. The time will come when all
has been done that could be done; then comes the
time of watching.
Being with the dying is what really matters. What
we say to the dying may be important; what we are
to them is always important. Listening is the great
est thing we can do for them, a listening that is pa
tient, a listening that can hear even the silences and
gradually come to know the difference between si
lences. I should come to have “a small hole in my
heart, a deaf spot, so that I might hear the unsaid
moreclearly” (Ann Sexton,Live or Die, p.32).
There is one part of the dying person’s last hours
where the priest’s influence can be most felt, and
that is in the sacramental world of reconciliation,
Eucharist, and anointing of the sick. Anyone who
has spent time with dying believers knows how
much the sacraments mean to dying patients and
their families. Much of this depends upon how the
sick have been cared for in the long days of dying.
The inter-personal character of the sacraments
provides the firmest bridge between priest and pa
tient. There is the peace that comes from the sacra
ment of reconciliation wherein we come to terms
with our lives, when we try to make peace with God,
our families and friends, wherein we still hear the
voice that Peter and Magdalen heard. That same
voice echoes through thousands of sick rooms
where men and women still hear that wondrous
promise: “Go in peace, your sins are forgiven
you.”
EDUCATION
Education is critical. We cannot prevent death or
any one individual’s experience with it, but we are
derelict if we do not attempt to bring the subject of
death and dying to light.
We should start with our children — help them as
early as possible to better understand illness, loss,
and the pain of permanent separation.
Children do not understand mortality; the dai
ly round of a youngster’s life is perceived by
them as going on forever. Children experience
the illness and/or death of a grandparent, par
ent, brother or sister as rejection — punishment
for their angry feelings and bad behavior, per
haps. They often resent the fact that their needs
are set aside in the wake of the demands, both
emotional and physical, that a seriously ill fami
ly member makes on those closest to him or her.
It would be fruitful if programs were included in
the curricula of the Catholic schools that would help
children prepare for and better deal with the inevi
table pain an experience of this kind produces.
For younger children it might be useful to include
such things as the nurturing of and responsibility
for living creatures, which many of our 20th cen
tury urban children never experience. It can help
them to know, not only through first-hand experi
ence, but combined with films and discussions
about the cycle of birth, life, and death in the ani
mal world (its beauty as well as its pain), a little
more clearly the meaning of life and death.
Older children and adolescents, whose capacity is
more sophisticated, would be well served if, as part
of their educational training, field trips to and vol
unteer service in hospitals, hospices, nursing
homes, and home visits to the elderly and shut-ins
were included. Something for which they could earn
credit. These experiences, combined with dis
cussions of what they saw and what they felt in a
setting that is academic, positive and free of the
stress of real life situations, can help these young
people better cope with life and death, when con
fronted with it.
Another area is general parish education.
Parishioners need to hear homilies at Mass on
the subject of death and dying. Not the death of
the body which will be overcome by the resur
rection at the General Judgment. But the univer
sal, raw fact that every living being will face;
that every husband or wife, sister or brother,
daughter or son will experience.
HOSPICES
An example of institutional service devoted to the
care of the terminally ill is the hospice. To illustrate
what the hospice concept involves, let us look at
Hillhaven Hospice, “a free-standing family-cen
tered program,” located in Tucson, Arizona. A 39-
bed facility, modeled after St. Christopher’s in Lon
don, it opened its doors in April 1977. Hillhaven Hos
pice is not unlike Calvary in the way it services
dying cancer patients. The administration of Hill
haven believes the facility exemplifies these char
acteristics:
• The patient-family is the unit of care.
• Emphasis is placed on symptom control —
not just of pain, but of nausea, vomiting, cough,
and breathing difficulties.
• While patients retain their own physicians, a
qualified physician is on the hospice health care
team.
• Home care and inpatient programs are coor
dinated by the autonomous hospice administra
tor.
• Services are provided through an interdisci
plinary team approach.
• There is 24-hour, 7-day-per-week coverage,
with emphasis on the availability of medical-
nursing skills.
• Volunteers are used as an integral part of the
health care team.
• Care of the family extends through the be
reavement period.
All patients who enter Hillhaven Hospice have
cancer in one form or another. They are accepted
as unique individuals with the right and need to
know what is going to happen to them and the right
to participate in the medical and nursing decisions
affecting them. The patients’ primary needs are
satisfied to allow their more mature needs to
emerge. In this way they are freed to respond at the
highest level of which they are capable.
Hillhaven’s goal to strengthen and maintain fam
ily ties is best achieved through a family-centered
approach to care, which provides special consider
ation for children. Karen Fond, author of “Dealing
with Death and Dying Through Family-Centered
Care,” says that “ in families, no matter how ex
tended or nuclear, every member plays an impor
tant and unique rold.” Children bring love and
sunshine not only into the life of a family member
but into the lives of all patients in the hospice.
CONCLUSION
The moment of death always comes. When hu
man skills and human caring have done all that
could be done, then hope takes over and we trust
that God will do for us all he has promised. We
pray, “Father, into your hands I commend my spir
it.”
“The justice I possess is that which comes
through faith in Christ. It has its origin in God and is
based on faith. I wish to know Christ and the power
flowing from his resurrection; likewise to know
how to share in his suffering by being formed into
the pattern of his death. Thus do I hope that I may
arrive at resurrection from the dead” (Philippians
3:9b-ll).
(NC Photo)
Come Watch With Me
Sometimes all that anyone can do for the dying person, the author states, is ‘watch’ with the
person. It matters little whether they be family, doctor, nurse or priest.