Fr. Roger J. Landry
The Anchor
Editorial
February 2, 2007
On Sunday, Jesuit Fr. Robert Drinan, one of the most scandalous figures in the history of U.S. Catholicism, died. He was 86.
His obituaries focused on the fact that he was the first Catholic priest elected to Congress, the first to call for the impeachment of President Nixon, a passionate crusader against the Vietnam war, an intrepid foe of racism and an ardent proponent of government programs to support the poor and underprivileged. They noted his impressive curriculum vitae, which, among other things, included a fourteen-year stint as dean of Boston College Law School and a 26-year tenure as a professor at Georgetown sandwiched around his five terms as a Massachusetts Congressman.
They also acknowledged the fact that he — not just a Roman Catholic but a Roman Catholic priest — was one of the most reliable and influential proponents of abortion on Capitol Hill.
If Father Drinan took his vows of obedience seriously, he would have never run for office. He repeatedly ignored and disobeyed the explicit commands of his Jesuit General Pedro Arrupe not to run. According to canon law at the time, moreover, in order for a cleric to run for office, he needed the permission of the bishops of those areas he would represent. Fr. Drinan never received the permission of either the Archbishop of Boston or the Bishop of Worcester — who several times stated that they had not given it — but he ran and continued to run any way. He cited a conflict between conscience and authority, but as the documented histories of the time suggest, his conscience seemed to have a conflict with any authority that opposed what he wanted to do. That conflict between his conscience and authority was also evident in his support of the destruction of innocent children made in the image and likeness of the one whom Fr. Drinan in prayer would call Lord.
Fr. Drinan’s advocacy of abortion preceded his 1971-1981 Congressional tenure. When he was head of the American Bar Association’s Family law section, he gave a 1967 interview to Time magazine, in which he suggested that all abortion laws be repealed — so that “ the law and society [not be involved] in the business of selecting those persons whose lives may be legally terminated.” In other words, the only persons who should be involved in selecting those lives for legal termination should be mothers. Six years later, after the Supreme Court handed down its despicable Roe versus Wade decision, Congressman Drinan wrote a public defense of it, saying that it was a flawed but beneficial decision. Throughout his tenure, he supported every proposal to make abortion legal and to fund it with tax dollars. For one of his re-election campaigns, the National Abortion Rights Action League wrote a fundraising letter citing him as a friend whose reelection to Congress was essential to the abortion cause. After Pope John Paul II in 1980 forced him to leave Congress in order to remain in the priesthood, Fr. Drinan continued to advocate for abortion. As the head of the Americans for Democratic Action, he repeatedly criticized the pro-life movement and authored fundraising letters urging the moral necessity of electing pro-abortion candidates to Congress. The exclamation point came in 1996 when he authored an op-ed in the New York Times defending President Clinton’s veto of a ban on partial birth abortion. Cardinal John O’Connor said it well when he responded publicly to Drinan, “You could have raised your formidable voice for life; you have raised it for death.”
Despite his record, throughout his career Fr. Drinan always insisted he was pro-life. He said he was opposed to abortion on moral grounds but in favor of it on legal grounds. He routinely called abortion “virtual infanticide” — meaning, obviously, that he was in favor of a legal right to “virtual infanticide.” It should be noted that Fr. Drinan didn’t make the distinction between “moral” and “legal” in any other area of his political life. He was opposed to the war on moral grounds and voted against funding it on every opportunity. He was opposed to racism on moral grounds and never once voted in favor of something that was racist.
His distinction between moral opposition to abortion and legal support of it was political sophistry at its worst and had major consequences. It charted the path for others to follow. Soon many politicians, especially pro-life Catholic Democrats, would adopt a “personally opposed, publicly in favor” stance with regard to abortion. How could any layman be faulted for publicly supporting abortion if the most prominent Catholic priest in public life did the same? More than any other figure, he was responsible for leading so many Catholic politicians astray; many of them cited his votes in favor of abortion as influencing their own. More than any other figure, he, a priest, changed the Democratic party into the party of abortion. Had he publicly and politically used his moral authority and great personal skills to argue in favor of life, the political landscape today would be much different and perhaps millions of unborn lives could have been saved.
Fr. Drinan told the Boston Pilot in November of 2004 that “abortion is a small issue.” It obviously was to him. Doubtless it is not so insignificant to the one Fr. Drinan met face-to-face on Sunday, who said that whatever we do or fail to do to the least of his brethren, we do or fail to do to him (Mt 25:31-46). And in terms of the littlest of Jesus’ brothers and sisters in the womb, Fr. Drinan did a lot of damage and wasted an opportunity to do immense good.
We pray that the Good Shepherd, who alone sees the heart and therefore alone can judge, be merciful on him, and help all of us in the Church to learn from, repair and repent of his mistakes.