In the aftermath of the United States mid-term elections, Nancy Pelosi announced her retirement as leader of the Democratic Party in the House of Representatives. She proclaimed on retiring that she was a wife, a mother, a grandmother, a devout Catholic and a proud member of the Democratic Party.
A devout Catholic? The archbishop of her home archdiocese of San Francisco, Salvatore Cordileone, certainly did not agree. Citing her support for pro-choice abortion, he has forbidden her access to Holy Communion anywhere in the archdiocese. In this he does not hesitate to differ from Pope Francis, who has received Mrs Pelosi at the Vatican and apparently has no reservations in ministering Holy Communion to her.
So, the question remains: how does Mrs Pelosi, as a proclaimed ‘devout Catholic’, reconcile her support for pro-choice abortion with the Catholic teaching that, apart from a few exceptional cases where the life of the mother is threatened by a continuation of the pregnancy, abortion is morally unacceptable in all circumstances? Or, more broadly, what sort of moral reasoning could Mrs Pelosi invoke to support her pro-choice stance?
May I rehearse three general considerations and then three more specific to Mrs Pelosi’s circumstances?
Firstly, Mrs Pelosi may simply believe — and, presumably, in good conscience — that the Church teaching is just wrong. Recalling the Church’s negative pronouncements on contraception (Humanae Vitae, 1968), In Vitro Fertilisation (Donum Vitae, 1987) and women’s ordination (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 1994), she might claim that it is just another manifestation of the Church’s patriarchal, chauvinist and misogynistic attitude towards women that it prioritises the right to life of the embryo or foetus over the right of the mother to decide to continue or discontinue her pregnancy.
Secondly, Mrs Pelosi may believe in inverting the Church’s priority in all cases or she may limit it to cases of rape, incest, child pregnancy, or cases where severe — or even lesser — signs of disability are detected in the early stages of pregnancy.
Or, thirdly, she may believe that, whatever may be said of the later stages of pregnancy, the early embryo and foetus certainly do not qualify for personhood status and the consequent protection which we afford fully fledged human beings.
'Abortion and euthanasia, the Pope claims, are "innocent life" issues for which the Catholic politician must be willing to sacrifice political influence and even career opportunities.'
The foregoing three considerations are the standard justifications for the pro-choice stance