One particular class focused on the difficulty of reconciling personal morality with public life. The class read a speech by former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, who is a Catholic. Cuomo gave a speech which essentially defended his public position on abortion - why he would not move to make legislation illegal (which he cannot anyway because of the Roe vs Wade ruling) and why he even provided funds for low income women to have abortions. We have to post responses to the readings each week and here is an extract of mine:
"An interesting argument he made was that the church is interested in "principles or ends", ie the ideals rather than determining which technical solution is best suited to achieving a certain end. Whilst this is, in some sense, a convenient rationalisation (which also leaves a lot of room to manoeuvre), Governor Cuomo has also usefully highlighted the need to address problems at their root causes rather than at the symptomatic level. In the case of abortion, for example, he calls to Catholics to set a personal example by respecting the right to life and thus moving others to this point of view, rather than seeking to change the law. He has also noted that it is always
possible to work on areas of common agreement, for example programmes which help pregnant women have a "real choice" by assisting them to give birth to healthy babies, in subsidising pre-natal and in-patient care. In NY City, Governor Cuomo also introduced a programme to help teenage mothers continue with their education and acquire job-relevant skills."
Whilst I do think that this argument is, in a sense, Cuomo's rationalisation of his actions, it is also in a way a response to the many criticisms of the Church's position on AIDS prevention in Africa. The Church is not about means, but ends. The Church's solution to AIDS (abstinence) may be too idealistic, and not practical in the eyes of many. But ideals are surely expected of a religious organisation! God's ways, unfortunately, are not always man's.
I liked your ending: after all if religious organisations like the Catholic Church didn't uphold the ideals, then what is it worth?
ReplyDeleteI think it is extremely difficult to be a Catholic but then I think being human is difficult and being Catholic actually makes being human easier.
Entirely agree with your position.
I would agree partially with your position, but not that the Church is about ends more than means. One cannot achieve a good end using illicit means - that would be a bad act, not a good one.
ReplyDeleteDirect killing of a baby is wrong, but removing a fallopian tube with a foetus growing in it (ectopic pregnancy) to save the mother's life is acceptable. Both have the same outcome, the baby dies, but it is an indirect consequence in the second case.
Thanks for your comments. FYI, we had to submit an assignment on whether we agreed with Cuomo's position or the position of the protagonist in another case. I chose to do mine on Cuomo. The thrust of my response was that I disagreed with Cuomo. I acknowledged that given the existing state of the law and public beliefs in the US, it would be difficult to change the law to prohibit abortions. However, he was in a position to actively shift values and I felt he could have found more ways to reconcile his personal and public morality.
ReplyDeleteI also contrasted Cuomo with David Alton, a UK Liberal Party MP who in 1988 tabled a private member's bill to reduce the period for legal abortions in the UK from 28 weeks to 24 weeks. The bill was unsuccessful but a few years' later, a subsequent bill was passed with the same reduction in the abortion period. Skimming through Alton's speech, he took his position on humanitarian, rather than religious grounds. Alton was re-elected (i.e. it is possible to take unpopular stands and still get re-elected) but decided to leave the Liberal Party subsequently as they became more pro-abortion.
Incidentally, I did not say that the church is more about ends rather than means. It was Cuomo, quoting Catholic bishops!