Faith and Balance

First of all, thank you for the best Catholic newspaper this country has to offer and for the fair, balanced view of issues facing the Catholic Church in this country and throughout the world.

Second, the page-one article “In Today's Climate, Can a Priest Clear His Name?” (July 11-17) is a blessing beyond words. I am personally grateful for your “daring” in publishing the concerns on an issue that has caused a number of the clergy much hardship, and of course the Church itself.

Yet another example of the Register's well-balanced thought and reflection on the priest-hood and the Church as a whole.

FATHER MARIO MARZOCCHI, S.S.S.

Holiday, Florida

Title Trickery

Regarding “Eerie Silence? Convention Speakers Avoid the ‘A’ Word” (Aug. 8-14):

Titles are misleading. What happens when the title for anything loses its intended message? To retain that same message, you simply change the title. The image created in your mind will change along with it. Basic advertising!

Take, for example, the term “abortion.” An accurate definition is “the induced termination of a pregnancy resulting in the death of the embryo or fetus.” If you approved of this procedure, you were labeled pro-abortion. Abortion-rights activists concluded that, by retitling their position to “pro-choice,” the impact of what they were championing would be softened. Using this logic, Christians opposed to abortion could now, with clear conscience, feel comfortable backing political candidates who covertly support abortion by saying that they are “pro-choice.”

Lately, it appears that the term “pro-choice” may be losing its grip, so the abortion cause is again feeling the need for re-labeling. The new term is “single issue.” The question asked is, “Does a single issue outweigh the merits of a good social program?” Abortion supporters urge voters not to cast their ballots on any one “single issue.”

Could the term “single issue” be a defense mechanism created by Christians to justify their support of pro-choice or pro-abortion candidates? Does the need for title changes signal any guilt feelings on the part of pro-abortion Christians? Perhaps so. Nevertheless, they have opted for material gain and a higher standard of living, all at the expense of 4,000 aborted babies a day. What a trade!

One final question. How do Christian people end up supporting a position such as this? Do these Christians just choose to ignore fundamental beliefs of our faith, or is it that our clergy in general are not vocal enough? Religious leaders should seek to form the consciences of their followers by spelling out principles of morality. If they don't, then people are free to assume that these precepts are probably not too important. The leaders need to instruct persons on how they need to consider, first and foremost, the candidate's position on abortion — before the candidate's position on material, health and social issues.

People are intelligent enough to differentiate right from wrong, but leadership and guidance from our shepherds is essential. When this leadership decides to stand up in unison and defend the fundamental laws laid down by almighty God, then and only then will the number of Christians supporting abortion start to decline.

EARL AND MARGO HAGEN

Grand Blanc, Michigan

Wages of Abortion

Regarding “Kerry Admits Life Begins at Conception” (July 18-24):

Is a hired gun obliged to keep a contract to waste the intended victim? No, he is not bound to keep the contract, according to sound moral theology. There is no obligation, ever, to carry out a contract to do something evil. “Therefore contracts to do what is evil induce no obligations; for example to commit murder or theft” (Noldin, Summa Theologia Moralis, Vol. II, No. 526,4).

Is a lawmaker obligated to promote abortion if he has received money and support from prochoicers? The contract or agreement, if such was made, is null and void. He or she is not under obligation to keep a contract to do evil. The same holds for a promise to do something evil. God does not hold anyone responsible for not keeping a promise to do something evil.

Abortion, and the promotion of abortion, is a sin — a mortal sin by nature — because it is a grievous offense against God. As such it is against the natural law. The natural law, subjectively, is the obligation that God necessarily imposes on man to pursue his proper purpose through suitable actions. It is therefore the eternal law itself that God, by his will, imposes upon man (Noldin I, No. 112). “Thou shalt not kill the unborn child” is a law that God imposes on all of us alike, whether we are voters or legislators or judges. Because God has created us in his image and likeness, we are by nature and by birth obligated to reflect in our thoughts and actions on earth the eternal beauty and truth of the wisdom of God in heaven.

From this, it follows that no legislator, judge or voter is bound by any contract or commitment he or she may have made to promote abortion. Is it a mortal sin? God was not dealing with trifles when he promulgated the Ten Commandments. The matter is grave. If anyone does abortions, or promotes abortion, while he is in his right mind and is free to act, he offends God gravely and thereby forfeits the right to heaven and justly deserves the pains of hell. Not even God can distance himself from justice.

FATHER ANTHONY ZIMMERMAN, STD

Nagoya, Japan