CATHOLIC TEACHING ON ABORTION
Anthony Fisher O.P.
"The Allen Review", 7 (Trinity 1992), 12-17.
Catholic Teaching on Abortion
The recent controversy over the Irish abortion-after-rape case has left some
people confused about where the Catholic Church stands on the matter of
abortion. During the debate occasioned by that tragic situation (and the
ghoulish interest of the media) it was sometimes suggested, even at times by
Catholic politicians and scholars, that Catholic teaching on abortion is
unclear. Yet in its earliest teachings and down through the centuries to
modern times, the Church has consistently and unequivocally condemned abortion
as a grave moral and social wrong. The Church argues its position on clear
philosophical grounds, rather than any special revelation private to
Catholics.
From a high view of the human person - shared by people from many
philosophical, religious and humanistic traditions - comes the basic principle
that every human being must be respected as a person, and accorded rights and
dignity equal to all other persons. A long list of basic human rights has thus
been enunciated and codified in United Nations conventions and other places -
of which the most basic right, upon which the others depend, is the right to
life. The direct taking of innocent human life is therefore almost universally
deplored. Thus Catholics join others in resisting disrespect for and threats
to human life in many situations: violent crime, murder, child abuse, embryo
experimentation, abortion, infanticide, euthanasia, genocide, killing of non-
combatants in war, starvation etc..
Abortion is a case of direct killing of an innocent human being - a violation
of the rights of the youngest members of our society and the human family. It
is, thus not just a matter of personal choice, religious opinion or women's
rights, but a basic human rights and social justice issue. All human beings
are called to respect (and, if they are in a position to do so, protect and
nurture) human life at all stages, and to ensure a society where crimes of
violence are as far as possible prevented. Thus the Vatican <Charter on the
Rights of the Family> (1983, #4) declares:
Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of
conception. Abortion is a direct violation of the fundamental right to
life of the human being.
In taking this position the Church is not proposing an eccentricity. Even
entirely secular government committees have soundly concluded:
The embryo is a genetically new human life organised as a distinct entity
oriented towards further development as a biologically individuated member
of the human species... It commands such a degree of respect as to prohibit
destructive non-therapeutic experimentation.
- Australian Senate Committee on Human Embryo Experimentation (1986)1
From a biological point of view, there is no argument as to when life
begins. Evidence was given to us by eminent scientists from all over the
world. None of them suggested that human life begins at any time other than
conception.
- New Zealand Royal Commission on Abortion etc. (1974)
What should be recognized, therefore, is that 'pro-lifers' including Catholics
are concerned about the abuse of the youngest members of the human family'.
They are not seeking to impose some personal religious opinion on the rest of
the population any more than those who oppose other forms of violence and
discrimination, such as rape, slavery, apartheid or the killing of Jews.
Some object that the Church has changed its position on abortion over the
centuries. It is true that there have long been disputes among philosophers
and theologians over the status of the early human being. Parallel traditions
developed, some arguing that the human being has a 'human soul' (rational and
immortal life-principle) and 'personhood' from conception, others arguing for
a later date ('delayed hominization'). Penalties attaching to abortion varied
from time to time and from place to place. But right from the beginning the
Church insisted that abortion was gravely wrong, whether or not it was actual
homicide (the direct killing of a human person), recklessly risking homicide
(directly killing what might well be a human person), or intentionally killing
an already human person-to-be.2 Even those who argued for delayed hominization
did not use the time of ensoulment as a moral dividing line between
permissible and immoral abortions.3
From the earliest centuries the Christian Church was noted for its opposition
to all abortion and most Christian theologians taught that abortion <at any
stage> was homicide. For instance, the earliest Christian document outside the
Scriptures declares "You shall not slay the child by abortion or kill the
infant already born" (The <Didache>, c. 80 AD). The influence of Aristotelian
biology led some theologians to argue that the human soul only entered the
'formed' or 'animated' foetus at 40 to 90 days after conception. Philosophical
and scientific developments gradually led the Church to abandon this
distinction.4 For the last century the popes, bishops, and an ecumenical
council have taught unequivocally that human life must be respected from the
first moment of conception, and that abortion at any stage is a grave evil.5
Thus the Second Vatican Council, aware of the debate over ensoulment, declared
that:
All offences against life itself, such as murder, genocide, abortion,
euthanasia, and wilful suicide... are criminal. They poison civilization,
and they debase the perpetrators even more than the victims... Life must
be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion
and infanticide are abominable crimes. (<The Church in the Modern World>(1965), ##27,51)6
Some academics still argue about when the embryo first has a human soul - and
the Church does not purport to referee that dispute.7 But precisely because of
this controversy the only prudent course is to treat the unborn as an actual
human person from conception. Just as a farmer seeing something moving in the
distance which might be a kangaroo or might be a child cannot responsibly take
the risk of shooting it until he knows for sure, so there is no stage of
development during which the unborn can be 'safely' destroyed without risking
killing a human person. The most recent Vatican statement on this matter
concludes:
The fruit of human generation, from the first moment of its existence (i.e.
the moment the zygote has formed), demands the unconditional respect that
is morally due to human beings in their bodily and spiritual totality. The
human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of
conception; and therefore from that same moment her/his rights as a person
must be recognized, among which the first is the inviolable right of every
innocent human being to life. (CDF, <Respect for Human Life in its Origin
etc>. 1987)
Of course some people will still say that unborn human beings are not fully
human persons. It is difficult to see by what revelation or dogmatic authority
this position is asserted. The slaughter of Tasmanian aborigines was once
justified on the basis of their not being human too. What is the unborn before