ABORTION is such an emotive subject that it needs a measured and rational debate.
That is why I am aghast at the approach taken this week by Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the senior Roman Catholic in Scotland.
He has sparked controversy by indicating that Catholic Scottish politicians who defend abortion should not expect to remain full members of the church. He also made it clear, speaking 40 years since the Abortion Act came into force, that pro-abortion MPs should consider their stance on receiving Communion.
How on earth does he think he can get away with doing that? As a Roman Catholic, I listen to such comments and shake my head in disbelief. I feel sure that many other Catholics will be doing the same.
This column is not about abortion. I would support abortion in specific circumstances but I do not want to go into that debate here. That is for another time. No, this column is about the way the cardinal has gone about making his point by threatening elected politicians and, by implication, members of his own church. Compassion is one of the main themes of the Bible: where is the compassion in his comments?
I was brought up a Catholic, remain a Catholic, and my father and other family members are Catholic churchgoers. They, I am sure, will listen to what the cardinal says and find themselves confused at what they see as double standards by the church.
This, in my view, is a church that needs to modernise but instead has failed time and time again to take account of the world in which it operates. It failed terribly to deal with the issue of paedophilia by its own priests, preferring to bury its head in the sand instead of dealing with the issues. It also showed bigotry when it condemned gay people. Now, one of its senior churchmen has come out with these extreme comments about abortion. What are people to think?
Abortion is an issue that requires sensitive handling, yet here we have a cardinal using what some critics have already, quite rightly, described as inflammatory language.
In my view, the cardinal is using this as a vehicle for his own views rather than encouraging measured debate. If his intention was to evoke strong reactions and alienate plenty of people within in his own church then he has succeeded. But I do not think that is the right approach.
I have always looked at bishops, cardinals and archbishops to give wise leadership. I have referred before to the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, and I have also had a lot of dealings with the Bishop of Whitby, the Right Reverend Robert Ladds. Both, in my experience, are wise men. They are also from the Church of England and yet I, as a Catholic, have been happy to listen to what they have to say. If I need guidance, I would have no concerns about approaching them.
Then I listen to Cardinal O'Brien. A politician who made these kind of comments, using terms like a "social evil" and "an unspeakable crime", would be slaughtered. In my view, the cardinal has been overly self-righteous, speaking as if he has a direct link to God. I talk to Roman Catholic priests and they tell me that their congregations are dwindling. Comments like this can only deter those who might have considered joining, and possibly make some members consider leaving.
Yes, abortion is an emotive issue, yes it needs to be aired and yes, there are many people, including Roman Catholics, who have strong views on either side, but if the cardinal thinks he has helped with the debate he is very much mistaken. He can only have damaged it.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article