Our Bishop, a courageous champion for the unborn...
Bishop
Joseph Martino of Scranton has released the following letter addressed
to Senator Robert Casey correcting him for voting against the Martinez
amendment to restore the Mexico City Policy:
January 30, 2009
Dear Senator Casey:
I
wish to thank you for voting in favor of the Hatch Amendment to the
Children’s Health Insurance Program Reorganization Act of 2009 which
would have made unborn children eligible for child health assistance
had it passed. I am grateful for what you have done on behalf of
children in America who are without health care.
It is with deep
regret, however, that I learned of your vote against the amendment
offered by Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) to the same Children’s Health
Insurance Act. Senator Martinez’s amendment would have reinstated the
Mexico City Policy. That policy, instituted in 1984, required foreign
non-governmental organizations “to agree as a condition of their
receipt of [U.S.] federal funds” that they would “neither perform nor
actively promote abortion as a method of family planning . . . .” It
also prohibited them from lobbying governments to make abortion legal.
In effect, the reversal of the Mexico City policy will mean that over
450 million dollars of American foreign aid will go to organizations
that are militant in promoting abortion as a method of population
control, particularly in countries that find abortion objectionable on
moral grounds. Senator, is not this vote a contradiction of your
repeated claim that you support the protection of unborn life?
Contrary
to a release issued by your office yesterday, the 1973 Helms Amendment
does not provide the same restrictions as the Mexico City Policy. The
Helms Amendment prohibits only U.S. funds from being used to pay for
abortions or to motivate or coerce anyone to practice abortions. It in
no way keeps U.S. federal funds from organizations which use their own
money to pay for or support abortions. Nor does it place restrictions
on organizations that lobby foreign governments to reverse
anti-abortion laws. While I understand that the Helms Amendment is
still in place, it does not have the same effect in limiting abortions
abroad.
On Respect Life Sunday, October 5, I addressed the
faithful of the Diocese of Scranton. In keeping with the obligations of
my episcopal office, I called upon my brothers and sisters in faith to
be vigilant against the objections to the Church’s teaching on life so
prevalent in current political discourse. I vowed to be vigilant in
correcting Catholics who are in error with regard to the sanctity of
life. Your vote against the Mexico City Policy will mean the deaths of
thousands of unborn children. This is an offense against life and a
denial of our Catholic teaching on the dignity of every human being.
This action is worthy of condemnation by all moral men and women.
Your
release also says that you support “family planning . . . specifically
because reducing unintended pregnancies reduces the number of
abortions.” I remind you that it is never permissible to use immoral
means (e.g., artificial contraception) to achieve a good end.
As
I have done on several occasions, Senator, I urge you to consider that
Church documents speak clearly and compellingly on the special
responsibility that falls to you as a lawmaker to oppose abortion and
other clear evils, including contraception, infanticide, euthanasia and
embryonic stem-cell research. To that end, I refer you to two documents:
1.
Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding The Participation of
Catholics in Political Life. It says, “Catholics . . . have the right
and the duty to recall society to a deeper understanding of human life
and to the responsibility of everyone in this regard. John Paul II,
continuing the constant teaching of the Church, has reiterated many
times that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a
‘grave and clear obligation to oppose’ any law that attacks human life.”
2.
Christifideles Laici. It states, “If, indeed everyone has the mission
and responsibility of acknowledging the personal dignity of every human
being and of defending the right to life, some lay faithful are given a
particular title to this task: such as parents, teachers, health
workers and those who hold economic and political power.”
I
remind you further that when he was Prefect for the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Ratzinger sent a memo to the
bishops of the United States advising them that advocacy of, or
participation in, abortion and euthanasia can never be justified by
invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact
that civil law permits or requires it. He said there can be no
diversity of opinion among Catholics regarding abortion and euthanasia.
It
is my deepest wish, Senator, to convince you of the necessity of
rescinding your vote on the Martinez Amendment. It is the height of
irony that this amendment was defeated while the Senate passed
legislation to provide health insurance for children who would
otherwise be without it. What hypocrisy offers health insurance to
children in one part of the world when children in another part will be
deprived, by the stroke of the same pen, of their first breath?
I
recognize and respect the burdens that you bear as a United States
Senator; however, I remind you that your responsibilities as a Catholic
bound by the faith of the Church exceed even those of your office. Your
failure to reverse this vote will regrettably mean that you persist
formally in cooperating with the evil brought about by this hideous and
unnecessary policy.
As I have done several times before, I offer to make myself available to you to discuss the grave concerns that I raise here.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Most Reverend Joseph F. Martino, D.D., Hist. E.D.
Bishop of Scranton
