Love is for Life: Pastoral Letter of the Irish Bishops
Appendix II

Statements by the Irish Bishops regarding Civil Law and Morality.

A. In 1973, with reference to proposals for legislative change regarding the sale of contraceptives in the Republic of Ireland, the Catholic Bishops stated: (on 25 November, 1973):
The question at issue is not whether artificial contraception is morally right or wrong. The clear teaching of the Catholic Church is that it is morally wrong. No change in State law can make the use of contraceptives morally right since what is wrong in itself remains wrong, regardless of what State law says.
It does not follow, of course, that he State is bound to prohibit the importation and sale of contraceptives. There are many things which the Catholic Church holds to be morally wrong and no one has ever suggested, least of all the Church herself, that they should be prohibited by the State.
Those who insist on seeing the issue purely in terms of the State enforcing, or not enforcing Catholic moral teaching, are therefore missing the point.
The real question facing the legislators is: What effect would the increased availability of contraceptives have on the quality of life in the Republic of Ireland?
That is a question of public, not private, morality. What the legislators have to decide is whether a change in the law would, on balance, do more harm than good, by damaging the character of the society for which they are responsible.
We then pointed out the harmful consequences for the moral quality of life in society of the increased availability of contraceptives, and went on:
The factors outlined above are important and they have tended to be overlooked in public discussion. They should be put in the balance, along with such other factors as the actual degree of inconvenience which the present law and practice cause to people of other religious persuasions, and a realistic assessment as to whether a change in the law would have any significant effect at the present time on attitudes towards the reunification of Ireland....
The issue before the legislators and the people is therefore a grave one. People must try to weigh up all the issues fairly in their own minds, asking themselves what kind of society do they want, for themselves and their children.

B. In 1978, with reference to proposed legislation dealing with family planning and contraception, we stated (4 April, 1978):
There is a public and social aspect to this matter....
In the area of contraception, laws can affect the way people think about marriage, about the family, about fidelity. Laws can affect people's attitudes about relations between the sexes, both within marriage and outside it. Laws affect the moral environment in which we live. Laws can make decent living for the young more difficult or less difficult. The law-maker has to consider the effects which new legislation in this area is likely to have. He must weigh the good against the bad. The good which a law may do must be set against the harm which it can do.
It may be said that conscience is a sufficient safeguard of moral standards. But conscience itself can become confused and weakened by society's attitudes. A change in the law can deceive people into thinking that the morality has changed also.
If we point to some of the difficulties inherent in the framing of amending legislation in the area of contraception, this is because we feel that certain aspects of the problem may be ignored in public discussion. We do so also because we are convinced that certain kinds of legislation would almost certainly bring about consequences about which people might not otherwise be forewarned.
The matters to which we shall refer are, all of them, questions of public morality. They are concerned with the impact on society which certain changes in legislation would be likely to have. Law-makers have a moral obligation to take account of this moral and social dimension of new legislation.
Societies in which contraceptives have become generally accepted and widely used have experienced a lowering of standards in sexual morality. Marital infidelity has increased. The stability of the family has been weakened. A whole new attitude towards sexual relationships has developed. Promiscuity has tended to increase. Legalisation of abortion has usually followed.
Some of these evils, sad to say, are already amongst us. We must expect trends in this direction here to be increased if contraceptives were to become widely available in this country....
The goodwill and good intentions of the legislators should be recognised. Many of them are themselves parents and they share the concern of people generally to protect marriage and the family and to avoid creating new problems for young people trying to be good in a world which already makes things so difficult for them. In particular, legislators would presumably seek to do everything the law could do to limit and control the availability of contraceptives and to oppose their spread among young unmarried people.
Experience in other countries indicates, however, that where contraceptives have been made legally available, any controls embodied in the legislation have had only very limited effect.
The multi-national contraceptive industry sets aside large sums for advertising. This exerts a constant pressure on people to use contraceptives. Some advertising is beamed explicitly on the young, even from their earliest teens. Some is distributed widely through the post. The sales campaigns by contraceptive manufacturers in other countries have certainly contributed to the general decline in sexual morality. The advertising and the promotion of contraceptives are a question of public morality and require very careful attention from legislators....
The issues which we have been raising are issues of public morality, affecting the wellbeing of our whole society. No responsible person wishes to see multiplied in our country the social evils to which we have called attention....

In the Pro-Life Amendment debate, we stated ( 22 August, 1983):
There are people who are sincerely opposed to abortion and yet who feel that no referendum should take place at all or that a different form of words should have been used. We respect their point of view.
However, a concrete situation faces us now. A form of words has been decided upon by the Oireachtas. It is this form of words which is being put before the people. We recognise the right of each person to vote according to conscience. Each voter has the responsibility of weighing the moral consequences of his or her vote and of making a conscientious decision in the privacy of the polling booth.

In our oral submissions to the New Ireland Forum, we stated (9 February, 1984):
The Catholic Church in Ireland totally rejects the concept of a confessional state. We have not sought and we do not seek a Catholic State for a Catholic people. We believe that the alliance of Church and State is harmful for the Church and harmful for the State. We rejoiced when the ambiguous formula regarding the special position of the Catholic Church was struck out of the Constitution by the electorate of the Republic. The Catholic Church in Ireland has no power and seeks no power except the power of the Gospel it preaches and the consciences and the convictions of those who freely accept that teaching....

Net publishing courtesy of the Newman Center at Caltech

Back to: Table of Contents