By Bob Sullivan
Most Catholics would agree that being pro-life means to protect life from womb to tomb. But due to Roe v. Wade and the enormous loss of life due to the culture of death since then, there has been a significant focus on abortion, while many other life issues have received a lower priority.
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was the Archbishop of Chicago from 1982 to 1996. At that time, many Americans were concerned about nuclear war, the economy and poverty, worldwide famine, and injustice in general. While Cardinal Bernardin called abortion a significant evil, he didn’t think we should focus on abortion at the expense of other problems in the world. This led to the development of the “Consistent Ethic on Life,” which is more commonly referred to as the Seamless Garment theory.
There is something about a progressive approach to the Christian faith which makes a person confuse Catholic social doctrine with a very secular style of social activism. There is also something about progressive Christianity which attracts people who are progressively liberal in their politics. Both of these seem to make a person much more susceptible to the Seamless Garment theory. Because of this, “social justice” is often misidentified as “the social justice teachings of the Church.” In reality, they are merely small parts of the Church’s social doctrine, and are frequently inconsistent with the Church’s social doctrine. This is why the phrase “social justice” has taken on a negative connotation within the Church.
Granted, there are some things about the Catholic faith which also attract some very morally conservative people, too. However, in cases where the Church is not “conservative” enough for them, they simply tend to leave the faith, whereas people with progressive liberal political views seem to continue to say they are devout Catholics even when they also acknowledge that they are not “all in” with the Church’s teachings.
The Church’s social doctrine, as set forth in Rerum Novarum by Pope Leo XIII, is much more comprehensive and has a spiritual aspect which is absent in the approach some social justice activists identify with today. The government can run a soup kitchen which feeds the body, but only by the grace of God can the body and the soul be fed.
Rerum Novarum was Pope Leo XIII’s invitation to a world which was experiencing the rise of the power of the Godless State through Marxism, communism, socialism, as well as unrestrained capitalism, and the vulnerability of the people who were the laborers and subjects under such forms of government. The social doctrine of the Church was Pope Leo XIII’s invitation to rebuilding a Christian culture with God and family as its foundation. God and family are things which Marxism, communism, socialism, and capitalism aim to eradicate in favor of the State or, in the case of capitalism, in the name of corporate profit. A great and short explanation of this can be found at discerninghearts.com.
One could say that Cardinal Bernardin himself did not want to see the development of his theory take the turn it has over the last 40 years, as he clearly stated in an address to a 1984 right to life conference in Kansas City, Mo., that it “…sets forth a spectrum of issues of current concern to the Church and society [and] should not be understood as implying that all issues are qualitatively equal from a moral perspective.”
Too many people have since twisted the Seamless Garment theory to mean that all societal issues are qualitatively equal. Strangely, some have decided at least in practice, that some issues are even more important than abortion. This is a misinterpretation of Cardinal Bernardin’s actual words, but possibly not his actual intent. Today, we have to deal with the theory in its current reality, not its philosophy of origin, which remains shadowy at best.
Are all moral issues, “life” issues? To varying degrees, they are. From contraception, to abortion, to radical feminism, prejudice, poverty, immigration, animal cruelty, crime, worker’s rights, same-sex “marriage,” gender ideology, to euthanasia and many other ills, all moral issues impact human life. However, only one is a corporate industry which kills innocent human life on a staggering level. Should we devote as much attention to saving the lives of children as we do to making sure that livestock is not mistreated or exploited?
If you answer “no,” then you agree with Jesus. Jesus says this is the wrong way to deal with evil. In Matthew 7, He deals with the hypocritical judgment which had infected Pharisaical Judaism. He teaches that we are not to judge (condemn, actually) hypocritically. One must address the serious sin in our self, before addressing the less grave sins in others. It is like Bernie Madoff chastising someone who didn’t leave a tip at a restaurant. Jesus clarifies that evil is not all qualitatively the same. Some evil is worse than others, and it distorts our ability to make just and effective judgment.
At the 2017 meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo said, “My friends, civility begins in the womb. If we cannot come to love and protect innocent life from the moment God creates it, how can we properly care for each other as we come of age? Or when we come to old age?”
If we cannot bring ourselves to protect innocent human life, how can we take proper care of immigrants, or eliminate poverty, gun violence, pornography, broken marriages, the immorality of the LGBT lifestyle, human trafficking, and sexual assault or ensure the compassionate care of the dying until the moment of their natural death?
Deal with the worst first, and the other sins will be exposed to the light.
