Vatican applies muscle at U.N.; it tries to ban abortion group from conference

National Catholic Reporter, March 31, 1995 by Carole Collins

In a highly unusual diplomatic move, the Holy See's Permanent Observer Mission to the United Nations sought to bar four abortion rights Catholic groups from attending the September 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China.

The effort failed but generated an ironic byproduct: a dramatic boost in the diplomatic and media visibility of the four groups -- the 22-year-old, Washington-based Catholics For a Free Choice, and its sister organizations in Brazil, Mexico and Uruguay -- which the Vatican sought to have excluded.

"We think that they did themselves an enormous amount of damage," CFFC President Frances Kissling told NCR from New York even before a U.N. committee ruled March 20 against the Holy See's March 15 request that the groups be denied accreditation as nongovernmental organizations. "Now when we walk the halls of the U.N.," she added, "diplomats and NGOs all know who we are. Everyone now knows the name Catholics For a Free Choice."

Cardinal William H. Keeler, president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, strongly backed the Vatican's objections in a March 16 statement, arguing that "no group which promotes abortion can legitimately call itself Catholic. To use the name Catholic to promote the taking of innocent life is offensive not only to the Catholic church, but also to all who expect forthrightness in public discourse."

The Holy See reiterated these arguments in a March 21 news release, asserting that because CFFC "publicly promotes some fundamental positions contrary to those held by the Catholic church, it cannot be recognized as Catholic. ... Furthermore, it is within the jurisdiction of the Holy See and the Catholic hierarchy alone to determine what organizations use the title `Catholic.'"

About 1,1300 NGOs, including the four contested by the Vatican, had earlier been approved for accreditation at the World Conference on Women by a credentials committee of the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, the U.N. agency responsible for overseeing planning for the conference. It is usually during this earlier process that organizations generating serious controversy among U.N member states are excluded, as happened to almost a dozen Tibetan and Taiwanese NGOs opposed by China as well as to several lesbian groups.

Passage of such an approved list by a U.N. plenary session is usually pro forma. This has been especially true in recent years as the U.N. opened up more of its deliberations to NGO participation. That is why, a Quaker NGO representative told NCR, the Holy See's objection was met by the "stunned silence" of both diplomats and NGO representatives attending the preparatory committee's final meeting prior to the conference.

The church's position amounts to an effort to "claim a registered trademark" over the name Catholic, said Kissling. "We've never claimed to be a part of the official Catholic church," she added. "That's why we've not named ourselves "The Catholic' but simply `Catholics."

The Vatican effort was strongly opposed by the United States and other governments that sought to swiftly resolve the dispute. After a report from the Commission on the Status of Women stated that CFFC and its affiliates met all criteria for accreditation, a representative of the Holy See proposed that an asterisk be added wherever the name of CFFC appeared, to footnote Vatican objections.

The commission official may refused, saying "the CSW bureau and the credentials committee will not do this. It has never been done before and we don't intend to set any new precedent like this," an NGO representative at the plenary told NCR.

The issue highlights a recurrent and often problematic ambiguity in the official status of the Holy See. Its diplomatic status as a permanent observer at the United Nations, like that of Switzerland, rests not on its representing a major religion but on representing the Vatican City State. This is the smallest state in the world, comprising only 108.7 acres and a population of 400 citizens and 800 residents, virtually all male church officials residing there on a nonpermanent basis.

Several groups, including the New York-based Center for Reproductive law and Policy, have questioned whether the Vatican meets the legal criteria for being considered a state and, hence, eligible for diplomatic status. In talking to the special committee trying to resolve the dispute, CFFC argued that its representatives "are not citizens of the Vatican" and that it was "inappropriate for the U.N. to resolve a religious dispute," Kissling said.

"We are legally incorporated in our respective countries, which do not object to our accreditation," she added. More than 200 NGOs signed an open letter to the United Nations and its member governments opposing "the attempt the Vatican to defy women's self-determination, to thwart the principles of freedom of speech and association and to politicize the accreditation process within the U.N."

Among the many groups that wrote to U.N. officials to protest the Vatican's position were several Catholic groups, including the Federation of Christian Ministries, Dignity/USA, Project Speak Out (a project of the Quixote Center), and Women-Church Convergence.