home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
062590
/
0625610.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
88 lines
<text id=90TT1694>
<title>
June 25, 1990: To Hell With Choice
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
June 25, 1990 Who Gives A Hoot?
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
RELIGION, Page 52
To Hell with Choice
</hdr>
<body>
<p>A Cardinal turns excommunication into a political weapon
</p>
<p> Stumping for the White House, John F. Kennedy promised
voters he would leave office if his Roman Catholicism ever
interfered with his political duties. Last week New York's John
Cardinal O'Connor proclaimed that Kennedy was wrong: Catholics
should fight, not quit. In a strongly worded twelve-page
statement published in the archdiocesan weekly, the Cardinal
declared that Catholic officeholders had an obligation to
support their church's moral teachings--especially on
abortion. Failure to do so, he said, merited excommunication.
</p>
<p> "Where Catholics are perceived not only as treating Church
teaching on abortion with contempt," wrote O'Connor, "but
helping to multiply abortions by advocating legislation
supporting abortion, or by making public funds available for
abortion, bishops may decide that, for the common good, such
Catholics must be warned that they are at risk of
excommunication." Though the Cardinal emphasized that he was not
writing on behalf of the U.S. episcopate, his words will
inevitably have nationwide impact, and could fuel a backlash
against church incursions into politics.
</p>
<p> Reaction was immediate--much of it indignant. Snapped New
York Congressman Charles Rangel, a pro-choice Catholic: "I
can't believe that such a meanspirited, threatening and
intimidating statement could have possibly come from my
Cardinal." New York Governor Mario Cuomo, a prominent target
of O'Connor's threat, called the statement "profoundly
disconcerting," adding judiciously that "those of us in public
life take what he says very seriously and always have."
</p>
<p> O'Connor's excommunication bombshell spotlighted his
penchant for grabbing controversial headlines and intensified
differences among U.S. bishops over how much to arm-twist
pro-choice Catholic politicians. Meeting last November, the
bishops declared, "No Catholic can responsibly take a
`pro-choice' stand when the `choice' in question involves the
taking of innocent human life." The same meeting elected
hard-liner O'Connor chairman of the bishops' pro-life
committee.
</p>
<p> But some prominent bishops are at odds with shock tactics.
Joseph Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago, O'Connor's predecessor
as pro-life chairman, says that "the church can be most
effective in the public debate on abortion through moral
persuasion, not punitive measures." On the other hand, San
Diego's Bishop Leo Maher denied Communion to a pro-choice
Catholic who was running for the California senate.
</p>
<p> Catholic canon law prescribes excommunication for specified
moral or ecclesiastical offenses, including procuring an
abortion. But bishops like O'Connor are breaking new ground in
publicly applying the penalty to politicians who vote
pro-choice or favor abortion funding. Father James Provost of
the Catholic University of America says that a bishop could
theoretically take such action under catchall canon-law
provisions concerning errant church members, but he says such
instances are "very rare." Though there was speculation that
O'Connor would not have issued such a sweeping statement without
tacit Vatican approval, Rome has no public policy on
pro-choice politicians. Indeed, the church has tended to play
down excommunication since the Second Vatican Council.
</p>
<p>By Richard N. Ostling. Reported by Cathy Booth/Rome and Andrea
Sachs/New York.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>