A Letter to the Post Dispatch

This was graciously forwarded to me to post. I am grateful for the opportunity to share this letter.

Dear Editor,

Professor Flinn claims that Archbishop Burke has added to the confusion many have regarding the Catholic Church¹s teaching on abortion. This claim is surprising. His Grace has been quite clear: Abortion is profoundly evil, and we have a duty to do what we as Christians and responsible citizens can do to stop it. If anyone has added to the confusion over this matter, it is not his Grace but Professor Flinn.

It is false to claim, as Flinn does claim, that ³Catholic teaching on abortion has never been unanimous.² His support for this is the debate over when the soul enters the fetus, but this is a red herring. Augustine and all the schoolmen of the Middles Ages who asserted that ensoulment took place weeks after conception never denied the very grave evil of abortion even in the very first stages of pregnancy. It should also be noted that this theory of delayed ensoulment was based, as Flinn notes, on Aristotelian science which modern embryology and genetics have long since rendered
obsolete. This theory, it should also be noted, had no basis in the Bible or the Catholic liturgical tradition which celebrates the conception of Christ on the Feast of the Annunciation. Catholics have never celebrated the day of Christ¹s ³ensoulment².

Flinn tries to cite the changes in ecclesiastical penalties attached to abortion as evidence against a constant teaching against abortion, but this, too, is a distraction. Ecclesiastical penalties are part of the Church¹s positive law and as such can be changed, but changes in the positive law do not change moral teaching. If the Church decided to attach an ecclesiastical penalty to, say, shoplifting, that would not mean that the Church thought shoplifting was fine and dandy before she imposed the penalty. It is simply deceit to suggest, as Flinn does, that the Church did not condemn all abortion until Sixtus V attached the ecclesiastical penalty of excommunication to abortions in every stage of pregnancy.

Finally, Flinn argues that a Catholic may be obliged to vote for a pro-choice candidate who promises to follow employment policies that will radically reduce the slaughter of the unborn. One wonders what Flinn means by a radical reduction. During the '90s when we had a greatly expanding economy and record lows of umemployment, there were more than a million abortions each and every year. But, more importantly, while, of course, economic justice is important to the Catholic tradition, it can only be a handmaid to the sacredness of human life. Catholics do not obey Bertolt Brecht¹s notorious dictum, ³First comes the feed, then comes morality.² Human life is a given and must be defended in good times and in bad times, during both booms and busts.

Joe Griesemer

We shall see if the Post Dispatch allows this letter to be printed. After all, it isn't from a "Professor of Religious Studies" who claims to know what Church history is and what the Church teaches, but from a Catholic layman, who notes with clarity, the errors and obfuscations in Flinn's article.