Sonia Sotomayor and the Catholic Church’s Failures

If the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court is successful, half of the Catholics who have ever served on the Supreme Court will be serving simultaneously. Writing recently for First Things, Jordan Ballor noted that this zenith in Catholic representation contrasts the Protestant nadir – the retirement of David Souter will mean that John Paul Stevens will be the lone Protestant on the bench. Ballor raises this point to ask whether the shift in legal influence reflects an underlying deficiency in American Protestantism. Despite the considerable influence of Protestantism on the development of the western common law, contemporary Protestant conceptions of justice have severed theology and law, created a division between word and deed. He argues that Natural Law, which flourished in the first two centuries following the Reformation, has subsequently come to be perceived as the strict domain of Catholic moral and legal theorists. As a result, he laments that even when “Protestants are in the game, whether morally, legally, or politically, they are largely playing from behind. And Protestants will continue to do so until they begin again to draw from the same well of wisdom that once nourished centuries of Protestant moral, legal, and political thought: the natural law tradition.”

However, Catholics would be amiss in thinking that, unlike Protestants, they have got it right. Sotomayor’s nomination is a segue to Ballor’s exposition, but he realizes that “Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court is not […] an indictment of contemporary Protestant approaches to the law.” Not only is Sotomayor not known as an adherent to the Catholic-developed natural law tradition, she may oppose the Church’s clearly defined teaching on the inviolability of life from the time of conception. During a meeting with Sotomayor, Senator Jim DeMint, a Republican from South Carolina, purportedly asked the judicial nominee if the preborn have any rights. “I was surprised that she said she had never thought about it,” DeMint said in a statement. Unsurprisingly, reports have since appeared which claim to link Sotomayor with pro-abortion briefs. It would have been astounding if Obama’s nominee had been pro-life (one wouldn’t expect a Republican Administration nominee to be pro-abortion). When Obama was elected, the nomination of pro-abortion candidates was a fait accomplis. Catholics should now focus their attention not on Sotomayor’s limited words and alleged views, but remedying the underlying problems which they manifest: the Church’s failure to effectively disseminate its teachings at a foundational level.

If the reports prove accurate and Sotomayor is pro-abortion, she is only one of a myriad of such Catholics who have gained prominence under Obama. Other pro-abortion Catholics serving under the President include:

- Vice President Joe Biden, who incorrectly asserted in 2007 that his pro-abortion position is allowed by Church teaching, a remark that incited a barrage of rebukes from dozens of U.S. bishops.

- Obama appointed former Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). While a state representative, Sebelius fought against laws that would provide parental notification of minors’ abortions, greater abortion waiting periods, and informed consent. As governor, Sebelius issued two vetoes against abortion facility regulation legislation, and one against a bill requiring explicit medical reasons for a late-term abortion.

- Obama appointed Leon Panetta as the head of the CIA. A practicing Catholic, Panetta amassed a strong pro-abortion as a California congressman. He co-sponsored the Freedom of Choice Act in 1990 and during his run as Clinton’s Chief of Staff supported the president’s veto of the partial-birth abortion ban.

The appointment of pro-abortion politicians to influential positions was the inevitable consequence of Obama’s election. However, when those appointed are self-purported Catholics, the non-Catholic public is left with uncertainty as to where the Church stands on abortion and how strongly it holds its ground. Poorly-catechised Catholics are left with the illusion that Catholicism and abortion are compatible. The Church needs to address the misperceptions which arise. Failure to evangelize from the pulpit is causing the doctrines of secularization and moral relativism to flourish.

It is a strong indictment of the Church when a practicing Catholic, particularly one so well educated, could even assert that she has never thought about the rights of the pre-born. True, there are many teachings of the Church which Catholics need to hear during Sunday homilies, but the protection of the pre-born has taken on special significance for the faithful. The Church has supported and entrenched the view that life begins at conception and must be defended. That Sotomayor can seriously claim that she has never thought about the rights of these children is evidence enough that many homilists have been negligent in their duty to teach and lead the faithful.

SOURCES:

Jordan Ballor, “Sotomayor, Catholic Supremacy, and Protestant Approaches to Law” First Things (Jun 11, 2009 )
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2009/6/sotomayor-roman-catholic-supre

Kathleen Gilbert, “Obama Selects Yet another Pro-Abortion “Catholic” for Leading Office” LifeSiteNews (January 6, 2009)
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jan/09010603.html.