Bishop of Killaloe: Upholding Ireland’s pro-life legacy
(Vatican Radio) “One of the options could have been and should have been another referendum
on the issue [of abortion legislation], that was never even mentioned”, says Bishop
Keiran O’Reilly, SMA, of Killaloe diocese Ireland, commenting to Vatican Radio’s Emer
McCarthy on the Irish Bishops strongly worded initial response to a government commissioned
report on abortion legislation. Listen:
“We
believe that the terms of reference of the Expert Groups report were far too restricted”,
he continues, “the focus was towards legislation for limited abortion and that we
do not accept”.
The government appointed expert group were called to report
on the European Court for Human Rights judgement in A,B and C versus Ireland, which
states that legislation to regulate access to lawful termination of pregnancy in Ireland
is “constitutionally, legally and procedurally sound”.
The government is now
studying the reports recommendations.
The Bishops state that “of the four
options presented by the Report, three involve abortion – the direct and intentional
killing of an unborn child. This can never be morally justified. The judgement of
the European Court of Human Rights does not oblige the Irish Government to legislate
for abortion”.
Earlier this week an estimated 8 thousand people held a candle
light vigil outside Parliament buildings calling on the government to uphold the right
to life of the mother and unborn as enshrined in the nations’ constitution.
“What
was so special about the Vigil for life this week”, notes Bishop O’Reilly, “was that
people from across Ireland, Catholic and non Catholic, people of no particular religious
affiliation travelled to Dublin to express their concern about the reality of the
change in this country. We want to uphold and we want to maintain our very strong
pro-life ethos. The ethical basis for the positive approach to pro-life goes beyond
the Christian understanding of morality. Its an issue that affects all of society”.
Below the full statement of the Irish Bishops:
Initial
response by the Irish Catholic Bishop’s Conference to the Report of the
Expert Group on the Judgement in A,B and C v Ireland A society that believes
the right to life is the most fundamental of all rights cannot ignore the fact that
abortion is first and foremost a moral issue.
As a society we have a particular
responsibility to ensure this right is upheld on behalf of those who are defenceless,
voiceless or vulnerable. This includes our duty as a society to defend and promote
the equal right to life of a pregnant mother and the innocent and defenceless child
in her womb when the life of either of these persons is at risk.
By virtue
of their common humanity the life of a mother and her unborn baby are both sacred.
They have an equal right to life. The Catholic Church has never taught that the life
of a child in the womb should be preferred to that of a mother. Where a seriously
ill pregnant woman needs medical treatment which may put the life of her baby at risk,
such treatments are morally permissible provided every effort has been made to save
the life of both the mother and her baby.
Abortion, understood as the direct
and intentional destruction of an unborn baby, is gravely immoral in all circumstances.
This is different from medical treatments whichdo not directly and intentionally
seek to end the life of the unborn baby.
Current law and medical guidelines
in Ireland allow nurses and doctors in Irish hospitals to apply this vital distinction
in practice. This has been an important factor in ensuring that Irish hospitals are
among the safest and best in the world in terms of medical care for both a mother
and her unborn baby during pregnancy. As a country this is something we should cherish,
promote and protect.
The Report of theExpert Group on the Judgement
in A, B and C v Ireland has put forward options that could end the practice of
making this vital ethical distinction in Irish hospitals. Of the four options presented
by the Report, three involve abortion – the direct and intentional killing
of an unborn child. This can never be morally justified. The judgement of the European
Court of Human Rights does not oblige the Irish Government to legislate for abortion.
Other aspects of the Report also give rise to concerns. These include,
but are not limited to the fact that:
The judgement of the European
Court of Human Rights permits options on this matter of fundamental moral, social
and constitutional importance that are not offered by this Report. This includes
the option of introducing a constitutional prohibition on abortion or another form
of constitutional amendment to reverse the ‘X-case’ judgement. The Report
provides no ethical analysis of the options available, even though this is first and
foremost a moral issue and consideration of the ethical dimension was included in
the Terms of Reference. The Report takes no account of the risks
involved in trying to legislate for so-called ‘limited abortion’ within the context
of the ‘X-case’ judgement. The ‘X-case’ judgement includes the threat of suicide
as grounds for an abortion. International experience shows that allowing abortion
on the grounds of mental health effectively opens the floodgates for abortion.
The
Report also identifies Guidelines as an option. It notes that Guidelines can
help to ensure consistency in the delivery of medical treatment. If Guidelines can
provide greater clarity as to when life-saving treatment may be provided to a pregnant
mother or her unborn child within the existing legislative framework, and where the
direct and intentional killing of either person continues to be excluded, then such
ethically sound Guidelines may offer a way forward.
A matter of this importance
deserves sufficient time for a calm, rational and informed debate to take place before
any decision about the options offered by the Expert Group Report are taken. All
involved, especially public representatives, must consider the profound moral questions
that arise in responding to this Report. Abortion is gravely immoral in all circumstances,
no matter how ‘limited’ access to abortion may be.