Cover
story
Churchs human rights record a mixed bag
By JOHN L. ALLEN JR.
NCR Staff
Evaluating the Catholic
churchs record on human rights in the past 50 years is a lot like
deciding whether a glass is half full or half empty.
From one point of view, its a story of breathtaking
transformation. In 1948, when the United Nations issued its Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the concept of religious liberty was still
officially heretical for Catholics; by the end of Vatican II in 1965, it had
become church doctrine.
That change was part of one of the most sweeping reversals in
church history, as Vatican II and its two popes, John XXIII and Paul VI,
overturned centuries of papal condemnations of Enlightenment-era notions of
human rights.
During the past half-century, the Holy See has emerged as an
important advocate for rights agreements. The Vatican was the fifth nation to
ratify the U.N. convention on the rights of the child, and was among the first
to ratify the anti-land mine treaty that won for its supporters last
years Nobel Peace Prize. Cynics might note that the Vatican city-state
has neither children nor land mines, but these were still important
gestures.
At an individual level, Catholic men and women during the past 50
years have performed astonishing acts of heroism in order to stand with the
oppressed.
Incomplete picture
Yet these triumphs present an incomplete picture. Ecclesial
detente with the human rights movement is compromised by several factors: an
ideological bias in favor of the status quo that has led the church into tacit
alliances with tyrants and thugs; a single-minded focus on abortion and
reproductive rights that threatens to scuttle important
international agreements; an unwillingness to apply the same human rights
internally that church leaders preach to others; and deep resistance to the
inter-religious dialogue many see as necessary to carry the human rights
movement forward.
If the Catholic church wants to become a more effective advocate
for oppressed people, experts who spoke to NCR say, resolving these
contradictions will be its major challenge.
The U.N.s Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted
Dec. 10, 1948. A commission led by Eleanor Roosevelt drafted the document. Its
30 articles call for civil rights such as freedom of speech and of the press,
as well as social rights such as the right to work and the right to
education. Subsequent covenants, one on economic, social and cultural
rights and another on civil and political rights, both
adopted in 1966, fleshed out the details.
If not in leading roles, Catholics were nevertheless important
actors in the adoption of the declaration. As papal nuncio to France, Angelo
Roncalli -- later to become John XXIII -- was active in behind-the-scenes work.
When the General Assembly took up the declaration in 1948, observers from the
Holy See were present.
U.S. bishops contributions
Leonard Swidler, an expert on human rights from Temple University,
said that historians have largely overlooked the contribution of the American
Catholic bishops to the U.N. declaration. A committee of the National Catholic
Welfare Conference -- the forerunner of the National Conference of Catholic
Bishops -- issued a statement on human rights in 1947. Swidler said a copy of
that statement reached Eleanor Roosevelt, and that many passages in the 1948
U.N. declaration are strikingly similar to the U.S. bishops document,
suggesting probable influence.
Historically speaking, its remarkable that Catholics played
any role at all. Popes into the 20th century had condemned much of what the
declaration contained.
In 1832, for example, Pope Gregory XVI described as false
and absurd or rather mad the principle that we must secure and
guarantee to each one liberty of conscience; this is one of the most contagious
of errors. ... To this is attached liberty of the press, the most dangerous
liberty, an execrable liberty, which can never inspire sufficient horror.
As late as Pius X and the anti-modernist campaign of the early 20th century,
these anathemas were vigorously enforced.
All that changed, beginning with Pius XII and culminating in
Vatican II. I suppose there are still some people who wouldnt want
to call this a reversal in teaching, Swidler said. But I would ask
them: If this doesnt count as a reversal, could you please describe
one?
Since 1948, the Vatican has played an increasingly constructive
role in international human rights efforts, according to Jesuit Fr. Robert
Araujo, a professor of law at Gonzaga University in Spokane, Wash. Araujo was
part of the Holy Sees six-member delegation during this summers
negotiations for the creation of an International Criminal Court -- a tribunal
with the power to try war criminals and human rights violators, modeled on
courts currently operating in Rwanda and Bosnia. The Holy See was among the
first states to call for the establishment of such a court, beginning with Pius
XII in the 1940s.
The Holy See has also become an important supporter of U.N
agencies and initiatives, such as the World Health Organization, UNICEF and
UNESCO (the Vatican has since cooled to UNICEF over family planning
disputes).
Many Catholics -- even priests and bishops sometimes
-- are unaware of the extent to which the church has developed a human rights
doctrine, according to Marist Fr. Ted Keating, who works on human rights issues
for the Conference of Major Superiors of Mens Institutes, based in Silver
Spring, Md.
This is an especially acute point for American Catholics, Keating
said. We buy into American exceptionalism, the notion that we invented
human rights, Keating said. He added that Americans are likely to see
human rights as synonymous with civil and political liberties, such
as free speech and freedom of the press.
Social and civil rights
What we miss is the development of the last 30 or 40 years,
which has come to see social and civil rights as interrelated, Keating
said. As Americans, we are unwilling to acknowledge the rights to work or
to health care that much of the rest of the world accepted long ago. Were
actually out of step. But the church is right there.
Even given this doctrinal progress, many observers believe the
churchs best moments on behalf of human rights have come not in papal
documents but on the ground, struggling for justice for suffering people.
In Europe, the Solidarity movement in Poland was a classic example
of political resistance built on a bedrock of Catholic identity; in Latin
America, heroes range from the four American church women killed by the
Salvadoran army in the 1980s, to lay men and women who organized base
communities, led protests and faced death to do so; in Asia, the most recent
example may be Bishop John Joseph of Pakistan, who killed himself in order to
protest the mistreatment of Christians.
The honor roll could be extended indefinitely, from Bishop Samuel
Ruiz García in Chiapas to Bishop Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo in East
Timor, but the point is clear: Motivated by the deepest stirrings of their
faith, Catholic men and women have time and again acted to defend the rights of
others.
Human rights was the focus of this summers joint gathering
of the Conference of Major Superiors of Men and the Leadership Conference of
Women Religious, held in Milwaukee. The two groups worked together, Keating
said, to produce an inter-religious statement on human rights, culling ideas
from a variety of different faith traditions in America -- Christian, Jewish,
Moslem, Bahai and others -- to demonstrate the universal character of the
idea of human rights. The statement may be found at www.hrusa.org. The
religious mens association is also launching a national effort to teach
human rights in the parishes, schools and other ministries they staff, Keating
said. Curricular materials are presently being distributed.
Of course, its not just members of religious communities
whove made contributions. The founders of Amnesty International, for
example -- Peter Benenson and Luis Kutner -- were Catholic laymen. Kutner had
previously served as an unofficial papal diplomat under Pius XII. Benenson
chose Trinity Sunday to launch Amnesty International in 1961.
Such acts, both institutional and individual, offer much for
Catholics to be proud of. Yet the story is more complex, because when it comes
to the church one hand sometimes takes away what the other hand offers.
Odd bedfellows
For one thing, the fierce anti-communism that dominated Vatican
foreign policy for most of the 20th century made odd bedfellows out of the
church and several brutal regimes around the world. Catholics suffering at the
grassroots too often lifted their eyes to see church leaders nuzzled up with
their persecutors. Witness Argentina in the late 1970s, when scores of
dissidents were being disappeared while Cardinal Pio Laghi, the
papal nuncio, played tennis with the nations generals and told them human
rights must be respected only as far as this is possible. The
quote, reported in La Nacion on June 27, 1976, reportedly was made by
Laghi in a speech to generals in Tucuman in northwestern Argentina.
The churchs checkered history flared up anew last October
when John Paul beatified Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac, a man closely identified
with the Nazi puppet state that ruled Croatia during World War II. The decision
drew fire from Jewish groups and the Orthodox church, both of whom remember the
program of resettlement, forced conversion, and, in some cases, mass murder the
Ustashi carried out against Jews, Serbs and Gypsies.
While Stepanic did denounce Ustasha excesses, and did suffer
greatly under the Yugoslavian communists who ruled Croatia after the war, he
also stood by Ustasha leader Ante Pavelic well after the regimes
brutality was clear. Beatification by John Paul -- who called Stepanic
the bulwark of the church among the Croats who resisted the yoke of
communism in the name of human rights and Christian dignity -- will be
seen in many circles as proof that the church cares more about the victims of
communism than other kinds of martyrs.
While global communism is no longer a threat, Keating said, the
church remains ambivalent about progressive social movements. Today
its not so much communism as a general fear of instability that
preoccupies the moderate middle in the church, Keating said.
Its almost psychological -- a fear of chaos. [Cardinal Joseph]
Ratzinger, for example, is no anti-communist, but he certainly is a protector
of the established order.
On the other hand, Keating said the church has gotten better.
Before Vatican II, the idea that social justice should influence the
Vaticans foreign policy was laughable. It was exclusively a matter of
institutional self-interest. Thats changed.
With the communist bogeyman gone, some observers believe that
church officials have fastened upon feminism as a new enemy, and
have proved equally willing to shuck their commitment to human rights to combat
it. The flash point is usually abortion or other reproductive
rights.
Enforced pregnancy as
crime
Tensions between the Holy See and womens groups have flared
up at several international gatherings -- the U.N. conference on population in
Cairo in 1994, for example, or the U.N. conference on women in Beijing in
1995.
The most recent dispute came during negotiations for the new
International Criminal Court. Advocates for women, most prominently the New
York-based Womens Caucus for Gender Justice, argued for including
enforced pregnancy as a war crime. They pointed to Bosnian Serbs
who had impregnated Croatian and Muslim women and forced them to carry the
babies to term.
The Holy See argued that existing prohibitions against rape and
involuntary servitude could cover the offense, suggesting that womens
advocates were surreptitiously trying to create a right to abortion. The
Vatican aligned itself with several conservative Islamic states to oppose the
enforced pregnancy statute.
Rhonda Copelon, a legal adviser to the Womens Caucus,
declared this coalition an unholy alliance.
The Vatican was using the court to foist an essentially
religious agenda on the world community, Copelon said. I personally
found it reprehensible. It denied a very grave crime for a purely political
reason.
Araujo, of the Holy Sees delegation to the negotiations,
said that despite statements from Copelon and others to the contrary, abortion
was the real issue in the dispute over enforced pregnancy. I look at
these documents as a lawyer and I say its the ones who argue for choice
who arent being fully honest about what they mean.
Araujo said he also questioned the pro-choice groups
commitment to social justice, noting that they did not join the Vatican in
opposing capital punishment as one of the new courts penalties.
Theyre saying the church is only concerned about the so-called
reproductive issues, but lets be frank, lets be honest. Where were
they when this important issue was being discussed? They werent there, it
wasnt on their radar screen.
Many observers believe the Holy See would have abandoned the
negotiations rather than cave in on the enforced pregnancy issue. Araujo said
he could not comment on whether the Vatican delegation would have pulled
out.
As it happened, a definition of war crimes was created that
avoided any reference to abortion, and the Vatican joined the 120 nations
voting to create the court. (Seven voted against it: the United States, Iraq,
Libya, Qatar, Yemen, China and Israel. Twenty-one nations abstained. U.S.
diplomats argued the treaty would allow its peacekeeping troops to be charged
as war criminals.) The full text of the agreement may be found at
www.un.org/icc.
Araujo said the churchs commitment to the protection of life
demands that it take a hard line on abortion. If we somehow see a fetus
as not being a part of this human family, then we can see a Hutu or a Tutsi not
as being part of this human family. Thats the common denominator,
he said.
Copelon was unswayed. Were basically reliving the
attack on the womens platform at Beijing, she said. As far as
reproductive issues are concerned, Copelon said, the Vatican needs to find a
way to work constructively despite differences or it risks alienating the
worlds women.
The inside issues
For many rank-and-file Catholics, however, the big human rights
issues facing the church are not found at international conferences, but inside
its own doors. Vatican crackdowns on dissent, the churchs refusal to
ordain women (and, under the present pope, to even talk about ordaining women),
and the lack of democratic accountability in its governnance structures have
led some to charge that the church does not practice what it preaches.
Freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience
-- these ideas were all advocated in the 1965 Vatican declaration on religious
liberty. Why dont they apply inside the church? asked Swidler.
When you read the language of that declaration and it says no coercive
force should be used, especially in matters of religion, the natural thing is
to think that applies to being Catholic, right?
A famous line from the concluding document of the 1971 Synod of
Bishops, an outgrowth of the collegiality called for by Vatican II, lent
credence to this view. The bishops said, While the church is bound to
give witness to justice, she recognizes that anyone who ventures to speak about
justice must first be just in their eyes.
In an attempt to provide some due process protection for
Catholics, Swidler has been working to draft a Catholic constitution, picking
up on Paul VIs call for such a document. He says the project has reached
the stage where, after receiving extensive feedback from all over the world, a
draft is in place. Swidler will be carrying that draft to a meeting of reform
groups in Liechtenstein in January, where he hopes to get approval to circulate
it under the aegis of the international We Are Church movement. The draft may
be found on-line at http://blue.temple.edu/~dialogue.
The association founded by Swidler held a symposium in New York
Nov. 21 commemorating the U.N. declaration. At that event, auxiliary bishop J.
Francis Murphy of the Baltimore archdiocese said the churchs
credibility is at stake if its treatment of members contradicts
modern standards.
Carrying on the status quo inside the church is not
consistent with public praise for the U.N. declaration, Murphy said. He also
told association members he was encouraged by your vision.
Interreligious dialogue
A final tension identified by several sources between the
churchs talk and its behavior concerns inter-religious dialogue, and its
relationship to the human rights movement.
One of the most intense debates today concerns whether rights are
applicable across cultural and national boundaries. Lots of people around
the world see the language of human rights as wrapped up in Western
imperialism, Keating said. You see this in many of the Asian
nations, for example, who wonder why they should accept notions that were often
part and parcel of a system that oppressed them.
Keating believes the worlds religions must lead the way in
figuring out how to talk about rights in a way that transcends cultural
specifics. If the concept of universal rights is going to survive, it
will probably fall to the world religions to figure it out. Itll be hard
to support with a purely secular philosophy, Keating said.
John Paul himself has been one of the clearest voices on this
issue. In a speech delivered on World Peace Day, the pope stressed that the
universal character of human rights must be strongly affirmed in order to
reject the criticisms of those who would use the argument of cultural
specificity to mask violations. He has invited leaders of other faith
traditions to join him in human rights advocacy.
Here too, however, observers fault the pope for failing to match
words with deeds. Citing the since-lifted excommunication of Oblate Fr. Tissa
Balasuriya, and the investigation of Jesuit Fr. Jacques Dupuis for suggesting
that other religions might be vehicles of salvation, several sources told NCR
that a clear chill has settled over the area of inter-religious dialogue.
We have to get out from under our own mythologies and find
out what a truly universal right might look like, one source said, who
asked not to be identified. But anybody who talks about that now is
committing professional suicide.
Scholars interested in this kind of work, she suggested, are
either gravitating to secular universities or simply waiting for a new pope,
hoping for a change in climate.
In all of these areas, many believe the church is not yet living
up to its talk on human rights. Asked if she drew any hope from the progress
made in the past half-century, one source was dubious. I dont know
that the church deserves a lot of credit for simply catching up to where the
rest of the world already is. The question is, she said, where do
we go from here?
The full text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may
be found on the NCR Web Site. Click on documents at
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/
New Earth Ministries, at
http://www.sistersofsaintanne.org/nem/, includes extensive links to
human rights groups on the Web. Click Social Concerns, then
click Human Rights and Related Categories.
National Catholic Reporter, December 11,
1998
|