James Jeffrey
Inside Saint Mary's Cathedral, Austin, Texas.
Many of the attendees at Latin mass in Austin’s Saint Mary’s Cathedral—men in suits and women with heads covered in silk mantillas—support Texas Right to Life, the state’s largest pro-life lobbying organization. But recently, the group got a very public rebuke from the Catholic Church.
A written directive released at the end of February by the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops directed all parishes to refrain from future activities with Texas Right To Life.
The group, the bishops said, misrepresents the Catholic Church’s position on new pro-life laws being considered by legislators in the Texas state capitol. The statement also noted that the group opposed proposed laws supported by the church, because they didn’t go far enough to limit abortions.
The subsequent rift in Texas’s powerful anti-abortion movement has highlighted an ever-present tension over the separation of church and state. In practice, this separation typically goes only one way: preventing state interference in religion, while church authorities remain free to influence the public domain—as they should, according to some.
The rift in Texas’s powerful anti-abortion movement highlights an ever-present tension over the separation of church and state.
“People of faith—‘the church’—have always been needed in politics,” says Helen Osman, communications consultant for the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops. “People driven by moral and spiritual values are the same folks who are interested in making the world a better place—through not just religious organizations, but through civic institutions as well.”
Texas is increasingly seen as the frontline of the abortion debate in America, with its governor—who is Catholic—saying he will keep Texas the most pro-life state in America. During the past few years, Texas has passed pro-life legislation viewed by critics as unfair to women and underhanded attempts to chip away at Roe v. Wade.
A 2012 Texas law requires women seeking an abortion to first have a sonogram and see a picture of the embryo or fetus, and hear a description of its development before having the procedure.
But the bishops’ directive has laid bare a long-simmering divide between the two groups over the strategies to achieve an end to legal abortion. The two groups clash, for example, over end-of-life reforms, with the directive saying that Texas Right to Life falsely implied that legislation backed by the bishops—supporting a balance between patient autonomy and medical best practice—would allow euthanasia and death panels.
Texas Right to Life also used a scorecard system to show which Texas politicians are pro-life, a strategy the bishops say is based on unfair analysis, and which meant that certain pro-life politicians were unfairly penalized during local elections last year.
James Jeffrey
Saint Mary's Cathedral sits next to the Fox 7 television broadcaster in Austin, symbolic of the close public scrutiny the church comes under, especially when it gets involved in politics.
“I agree with the bishops,” says Joe Larsen, a Catholic in a Houston parish. “My family are voters and we look up a politician’s stance on issues and then we decide—Texas Right to Life was undermining voters by putting out information they thought we wanted to hear rather than the entire picture.”
Melissa Conway, spokesperson for Texas Right to Life, disagrees.
“This is not a Catholic discussion, it’s a pro-life discussion. We have all sorts of members, some religious, some atheist,” Conway tells The Progressive. “Texas is known to pass legislation to save lives. Others want a softer approach. There will be no shift in how we operate. We have our eyes set on our mission and goal.”
Around the same time as the Texas Right to Life directive, the bishops spoke out in favor of extending the DACA program, which allows children born to undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States. The declaration urged parishioners to contact their politicians.
Jon Dahm, who attends regular mass at St. Mary’s Cathedral, a few blocks away from the State Capitol, notes the potential pitfalls of the bishops’ approach. “It’s a very political issue and while most Catholics don’t think children of undocumented immigrants should be sent from their homes, they are also uncomfortable about their church getting involved,” he says.
Conway says the bishops took exception to Texas Right to Life’s recommended candidates last year because those politicians weren’t as cooperative on other issues in the bishop’s agenda such as immigration.
“The Catholic Church does not tell people which candidates or political parties they should support,” Osman says in response. “The bishops encourage Catholics to form their consciences in accord with Catholic teaching and then use their prudential judgement to engage in the body politic and make sound moral decisions.”
Despite the public rift, those involved in the anti-abortion movement remain confident it will not be impeded in the long-term.
“The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops has proved itself one of the most effective organisation at promoting pro-life legislation,” says Joe Pojman, executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, a pro-life organization that works closely with the Catholic Church. “The pro-life position will continue to make gains in the Legislature.”
Pojman argues that if the U.S. Supreme Court allows states to decide on abortion, there is enough political muscle to pass a ban in Texas.
“Texas has a very strong Republican party and an electorate that supports it and is pro-life, which has been decades in the making,” he says. “Thirty years ago, it was very different.”
According to a 2010 study by the Pew Research Center, 50 percent of Texas Catholics think abortion shouldn’t be allowed in all or most cases, while 45 percent believe it should be allowed in all or most cases, with the remaining 5 percent unsure. There are roughly 8 million Catholics in Texas’s 28 million population.
The study also highlights how more Catholics lean Democrat than Republican, 45 percent to 29 percent respectively, with 26 percent reporting no lean. But those percentages don’t necessarily translate to the corresponding votes on election days due to the polarised debate over abortion having resulted in entrenched posturing by politicians.
In Congress, there are only three openly pro-life Texas Democrats, Michael Graham writes in The Federalist, quoting Kristen Day of Democrats for Life America, down from more than 60 in 2008, while the few Democrat candidates who admit to being pro-life “personally” usually clarify they’d still vote with their party on the issue over conscience.
In complex issues like abortion, end-of-life decisions, and immigration, the Catholic bishops must balance their core spiritual role and engaging in the political realm.
In dealing with such complex issues as abortion, end-of-life decisions, and immigration, the Catholic bishops seek to strike a balance between their church’s core spiritual role and engaging in the political realm, where policies affecting people’s daily lives are debated and ultimately decided.
Some parish priests acknowledge the recent fracas over Texas Right to Life has made them reflect on whether the church is getting that balancing act right.
“People come to the church for moral guidance, but the moral issues of the day—and not just for Catholics—wind up in the political sphere,” Dahm says. “The further the church gets involved politically, the more uncomfortable it is for congregations as you have a country that is split half-half on these issues.”
James Jeffrey is a British journalist who divides his time between America, East Africa, and the UK. His writing appears in various international media.