LIFE

CARDINAL O’MALLEY FINALLY COMMENTS ON POSSIBLE  OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE

CARDINAL O’MALLEY FINALLY
COMMENTS ON POSSIBLE 
OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE

Eleven days after the revelation of the draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jacksonand one week after the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops commented upon it, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, the Archbishop of Boston, has finally issued a public statement on the most earth shaking development in the half century struggle to stop the mass murder of the unborn in America.

The Cardinal’s statement, dated May 13th, says:

“At the Presbyteral Council, we asked our Archdiocesan General Counsel Fran O’Connor and Father Bryan Hehir to speak about the ramifications of the recently leaked draft Supreme Court decision in the Dobbs case.

The leaked document, of course, is only a potential version of what the final decision may be. But, all the controversy that it has created is something we want to address because many extreme things are being said. Also, the fact that Catholic institutions have been targeted in some places is truly outrageous.

The Church has worked, prayed and advocated for 50 years for the overturning of this very flawed decision, in which an activist court legislated for the entire country rather than allowing the American people to have a vote on this issue. For us, this is not a question of Catholic doctrine that we want to impose on the country, but rather a matter of defense of innocent human life, which is the obligation of everyone — regardless of faith.

In response to this ongoing issue, I have prepared the following statement, which I would like to share with you:

The leak of Justice Alito’s draft opinion on abortion has brought many voices into a conflicted question now almost fifty years old. Throughout those years, from the Roe v. Wade decision until today, the Catholic Church has been part of the abortion debate in this country. Two characteristics have marked our position.

First, while Catholic moral teaching has opposed abortion since the apostolic era, the case we have made to our religiously pluralistic nation is that abortion is fundamentally a human rights question. Such questions are argued in rational terms: the right in danger is the right to life. Its defense in the public arena can and should be articulated in ways which those of any faith or no faith can analyze and understand. We have tried to make that case and will continue to do so whatever the final decision of the Court will be.

Second, the human rights argument means that human life must be protected before birth and after birth. A pro-life position does not end at birth; it must extend to a public vision which encompasses the common good of our society. The child whose life is protected by the moral and civil law deserves the support of a society which will provide the socio-economic conditions in which life can flourish.

A draft opinion will not settle our long national debate. As it goes forward, before and after the final decision is made, my hope is that all participants will respect the dignity of others; on a question as deep as the one we seek to decide this attitude is essential.”

Catholic Action League Executive Director C. J. Doyle made the following comment: “Cardinal O’Malley, certainly, is to be commended for criticizing Roe and for condemning attacks on Catholic churches nationwide.”

“Lamentably, His Eminence seems incapable of saying something Catholic without pandering to and reinforcing the narrative of the political Left. He does so again with his gratuitous call for supporters of the right to life to protect life ‘after birth.'”

“One of the long established talking points of the Culture of Death is the false and defamatory claim that pro-lifers care nothing for children after they are born. In this, one sees a parallel to the Cardinal’s 2007 address to a crowd of pro-lifers on Boston Common, when he warned them ‘No violence, No, No, Never violence.'”

“The word murder is never used in the Cardinal’s statement, nor is their any mention of 63 million dead. Genocide is referred to as a ‘conflicted question.’ There is nothing in the statement which would mobilize Catholics or inspire and rally pro-lifers!”

“The late Massachusetts State Representative James J. Craven—a well known pro-life legislator—always counseled in politics ‘Play to your own strength.’ Cardinal Sean always seems to appeal to the Church’s enemies, trying to explain himself, reasonably, almost apologetically, in a low key, academically detached manner, to secular society. One is reminded of the Cardinal’s timid line from the marriage debate, nearly twenty years ago, when he wrote: “Support for traditional marriage is neither bigoted nor sectarian.”

The tone and focus of this statement suggests it was written by someone unconnected to the pro-life movement. One might reasonably assume that Father Bryan Hehir—the reputed father of the ‘Seamless Garment’ theory—who is mentioned at the beginning of the Cardinal’s statement, is the author of this cautious, tepid and bloodless exposition.”

2 Replies to “CARDINAL O’MALLEY FINALLY COMMENTS ON POSSIBLE  OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE

  1. He should also comment on the Catholic politicians in Massachusetts who strongly advocate for abortion. In the past week on the news we have seen Catholic politicians like Markey, McGovern, Mayor Wu, etc. making strong pro-abortion statements. Then we saw on the news as to how a Catholic High School in the Boston area gave pro-abortion ex-Mayor Martin Walsh an award. Walsh wouldn’t allow a Christian flag to be flown at City Hall. The U.S. Supreme Court 9-0 ruled that his actions were wrong. Inflation, extreme high gas and oil prices and baby formula shortages are severely impacting working class Americans. Yet, we only see the Democrats talking about abortion, foreign conflicts and illegal aliens.

  2. Its in today’s Boston Herald as to how Mayor Wu called the U.S. Supreme Court a “fringe group” re: the Roe vs. Wade possible overturning.. Imagine that? She gets elected mayor in an election where 70% of registered voters in Boston did not vote. She describes a melee with punks on motor bikes as a “food insecurity” problem. She describes rampant juvenile violence on the Boston Common and Downtown Crossing as “children needing their privacy protected”. As long as working class Bay Staters don’t vote, we will see more carpetbagging leftists elected here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.