Chicago’s Cupich Stirs Criticism . . . His False Moral Equivalence Boosts Liberals’ Issues

By DEXTER DUGGAN

Speaking at the annual Red Mass in Phoenix for Arizona public officials last January, Springfield, Ill., Bishop Thomas Paprocki recalled that he had served as chancellor in the Archdiocese of Chicago for Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, who was known for his development of thinking on the “consistent ethic of life” — sometimes called the “seamless garment.”
However, the “consistent ethic” has been misused to equalize any of a number of political or social causes with fundamental, “non-negotiable” Catholic teaching on an issue like the defense of unborn babies from abortion. Thus, a vote-seeking liberal Democrat might assert that his being “good” on, say, seven left-wing issues outweighs that he’s “bad” by being strongly pro-abortion.
But Paprocki told listeners at St. Mary’s Basilica in Phoenix on January 20 that Bernardin himself rejected such false equivalency.
“I know this misapplication of the consistent ethic of life deeply troubled Cardinal Bernardin,” Paprocki said, quoting the cardinal as saying, “That is a misuse of the consistent ethic, and I deplore it.”
Bernardin appointed Paprocki vice chancellor in 1985, followed by the chancellorship from 1992 to 2000. Bernardin, who died in 1996, was succeeded in the Chicago Archdiocese by Francis Cardinal George, OMI, who in turn was succeeded last year by Archbishop Blase Cupich.
Cupich has been building a reputation as the sort of Catholic prelate whose passivity on “non-negotiable issues” is taken advantage of by pro-abortion politicians, especially left-wing Democrats.
The Chicago archbishop recently came under serious criticism from some practicing Catholics when he piggybacked various social causes onto the horrors revealed in videos by the Center for Medical Progress at Planned Parenthood abortuaries. In a column posted at the Chicago Tribune on August 3, Cupich wrote:
“This newest evidence about the disregard for the value of human life also offers the opportunity to reaffirm our commitment as a nation to a consistent ethic of life. While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness, and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice. . . .
“Can we use our shared outrage at all these affronts to human dignity,” Cupich continued, “to unite us and begin a national dialogue on the worth of human life?”
His equivalency seemed even stranger because earlier in his column he granted that “the widespread revulsion over the (video) tapes arose because they unmasked the fact that, in our public conversation about abortion, we have so muted the humanity of the unborn child that some consider it quite acceptable to speak freely of crushing a child’s skull to preserve valuable body parts, and to have that discussion over lunch.”
One of the online reader responses at the Tribune website well expressed the puzzlement at the archbishop’s false equivalency: “His opinion shows his deep left-wing bias. Notice that when the country was rightly outraged by the murder of nine congregants in the South Carolina church, he didn’t write his opinion piece claiming it’s no worse than having some citizens without health insurance.”
Cupich’s belief that trafficking in the body parts of cruelly killed unborn infants is on a par with a list of ills including joblessness not only was disproportionate but, as some critics pointed out, actually untrue.
How could the archbishop think, for instance, that there are “thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care”? Was he confessing that Barack Obama’s signature Obamacare is a massive, complete failure?
Or was Cupich talking about deaths throughout the entire world? If so, he had best address that with aloof political authorities in a multitude of other countries instead of shaking his finger at Americans.
Catholic writer Phil Lawler posted at catholicculture.org on August 6: “If Archbishop Cupich means to compare the Planned Parenthood scandal with all the other horrors taking place around the world, it’s curious that he doesn’t mention the slaughter of Christians in the Middle East. If he’s restricting his focus to the U.S., then his claim that ‘thousands’ of people die ‘daily’ because they lack access to medical care is shameless hyperbole. But it gets worse.
“Yes, of course, the archbishop mentions the death penalty. Full disclosure: I oppose the death penalty. But I can’t say that I am ‘no less appalled’ by the execution of a convicted serial killer than the destruction of an innocent child,” Lawler continued. “The two are not morally equivalent actions. . . .
“Joblessness? I’ve been unemployed. I’d like to think that upon reading this, you feel a pang of sympathy. But if you would be ‘no less appalled’ to learn that I had been chopped into pieces, and the parts sold to the highest bidder, I’m afraid I can’t count you as my friend,” Lawler wrote.
The Rorate Caeli blog added: “Not only as Catholics, but as simple human beings, we are appalled by this outrageous and indecent moral equivalency that only tries to give cover to Blase’s (that’s his preferred way of being called) political friends. But this is so much beyond any political friendship! Can’t he realize that? Can’t he have the decency to at least avoid cheap political equivalencies at such a horrendous moment? Will you, Blase, please?”
Steve Skojec, founding publisher of the OnePeterFive blog, wrote:
“My questions for the archbishop are . . . obvious: Is there some comparable

exposé, showing the eviscerated remains of those with insufficient medical insurance, or can’t manage to immigrate legally, or suffer from racism? Is there even a shred of evidence that there are really ‘thousands’ of them who ‘die daily’? Is he aware that over 2,000 abortions in the United States are performed every day?”
Skojec also recalled some of Cupich’s episcopal run-ins with pro-lifers and practicing Catholics before he arrived in Chicago.
Three months earlier, on May 4, the secular, conservative Truth Revolt blog noted a joint appearance by Cupich and strongly pro-abortion Sen. Dick Durbin for “immigration reform.”
The article, headlined “Archbishop Cupich getting comfortable with pro-aborts on immigration reform,” said Cupich “joined Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D.-Ill., a dissident Roman Catholic with a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL on abortion issues, at the Temple Jeremiah synagogue in Northfield, Ill., to discuss how people can support the cause of immigration reform.
“Democrats hope reform will translate into largely Catholic Hispanics voting for pro-abortion/pro-gay marriage Democrats in order to gain citizenship,” the article added.
It concluded: “Archbishop Cupich has stated in the past that immigration reform is ‘God’s agenda’ but has made no similar claim about abortion. In fact, he has previously gone on record saying he has no qualms about giving Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians like Dick Durbin, and when he was archbishop of Spokane he privately discouraged priests from participating in 40 Days For Life prayer vigils” against abortion.
It may have been just a coincidence, but exactly one week after Cupich’s opinion column was posted, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, OFM Cap., posted his own column at catholicphilly.com expressing a very different view.
“Here’s a simple exercise in basic reasoning,” Chaput wrote. “On a spectrum of bad things to do, theft is bad, assault is worse, and murder is worst. There’s a similar texture of ill will connecting all three crimes, but only a very confused conscience would equate thieving and homicide. Both are serious matters. But there is no equivalence.
“The deliberate killing of innocent life is a uniquely wicked act,” Chaput wrote. “No amount of contextualizing or deflecting our attention to other issues can obscure that. . . .
“But of course, children need to survive the womb before they can have needs like food, shelter, immigration counseling, and good health care. Humanity’s priority right — the one that undergirds all other rights — is the right to life,” Chaput wrote.