What would John Courtney Murray say? On abortion & euthanasia

Commonweal, Oct 7, 1994 by Todd David Whitmore

In the same article on censorship, Murray indicates the appropriate starting point: intermediate institutions. "[Law] enforces only what is minimally acceptable, and in this sense socially necessary. Beyond this, society must look to other institutions for the elevation and maintenance of its moral standards--that is, to the church, the home, the school, and the whole network of voluntary associations that concern themselves with public morality in one or another aspect." He goes on to comment that persons in such institutions, especially those associated with the Catholic community, should not do everything that is legal for them to do. Certain forms of activity would have "the disastrous effect of obscuring from the public view the true visage of the church of God's kingdom of truth and freedom, justice and love." Therefore, even in instances where protests, blockades, and boycotts are legal, such activities may not be reflective of the church as a community of the people of God. "The chief danger is lest the church be identified in the public mind as a power-association."

We are left, then, with this problem: We need to help shape public opinion so as to reduce the distance between American law and Catholic teaching on abortion. Law itself is a bad vehicle for this. It is necessary to turn to intermediate institutions, particularly the church itself. How can the Catholic community become "the true visage of the church of God's kingdom of truth and freedom, justice and love" and not simply a power-association? Segers makes a recommendation that is suggestive: "Were Murray alive today, I think he would stress the church's positive role in society rather than its political role in shaping a more restrictive abortion policy. Murray would hold that prudence dictates that the church should not focus primarily on using coercive law to restrict abortion; rather, the church's role in this controversy should be to exemplify Christian charity by using its resources to assist women who are involuntarily pregnant."

Such assistance appears to me to be precisely in line with what it means for the church to be a "visage" of the community of God. Such a community, by its practice, helps to create in a noncoercive manner a context within which Catholic teaching on abortion appears more plausible and life in accordance with it more possible. The only problem is with the way in which Segers appears to pose this activity as an alternative to efforts to shape law. She suggests the church is to aid women "rather than" help shape public law. As a result, she tends to separate law and morality in a way that is foreign to Murray's social theory, though it is consistent with her argument that abortion is a private matter. However, from the perspective of a tradition that seeks to keep law and morality related, aiding women is not an alternative to law; it is, among other things, the concrete precondition for bringing morality and law closer together.

Exactly what laws are appropriate at what point in time remains a matter of prudential judgment. What Murray's writings leave us is simply a direction in which the law should go. Judgments about the adequacy of any proposed abortion law must be made in terms of two questions: (1) In comparison to the laws in place, does it move in the direction of a greater harmony between Catholic teaching on objective morality, on the one hand, and law, on the other? (2) Have we as a church been successful in helping to shape a society where a more restrictive law is plausible? There has been much reflection and action on the first question and not enough of either on the second. The National Conference of Catholic Bishops' 1985 "Reaffirmation" of their earlier "Pastoral Plan for Prolife Activities" states that aiding women who might otherwise consider abortion in the care of their children is simply an "ideal." While there are numerous pregnancy care centers nationwide, their efforts are dwarfed by the magnitude of the problem of unintended pregnancies. The Catholic community has hardly begun to comprehend adequately--let alone respond to adequately--the enormity of the task of creating the kind of society where Catholic teaching on taking the life of the embryo-fetus is more plausible, and life in accordance with it more possible.