Students from Liberty University pray in front of the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization abortion case on Dec. 1, 2021. / Katie Yoder/CNA
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, May 2, 2022 / 21:25 pm (CNA).
Pro-life leaders had mixed reactions Monday night to the news of a purported U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion signaling that justices will overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationwide. While many declined to comment on the reported leak, all of them condemned Roe.
Politico on Monday night published a purported 98-page draft majority opinion allegedly written by conservative Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. in the closely watched Mississippi abortion case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The document states, “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
Court experts reacting to the news emphasized that, if authentic, the draft may still be subject to changes before any final decision is announced.
The March for Life “will not be providing comment on an official decision of #scotus possible leak until a decision is officially announced,” Jeanne Mancini, the president of the March for Life, responded on Twitter after Politico published its exclusive report.
“We also believe that given the leak the court should issue a ruling as soon as possible,” she added. “This leak was meant to corrupt the process. It is heartbreaking that some abortion advocates will stoop to any level to intimidate the court no matter what the consequences.”
Back in December, Supreme Court justices heard oral arguments in the Dobbs case, which centers on a 2018 Mississippi law restricting most abortions after 15 weeks and directly challenges Roe and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which upheld Roe in 1992.
“It is commonly known that Roe was erroneously decided,” Mancini said. “#SCOTUS needs to correct the wrong and give people the ability to decide abortion policy.”
Pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List similarly declined initially to comment on the alleged leak, tweeting, “Regarding the SCOTUS leak on Dobbs, SBA List will not be commenting until an official decision is announced by the Court.”
Later, however, SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser issued a fuller statement. “If the draft opinion made public tonight is the final opinion of the court, we wholeheartedly applaud the decision. The American people have the right to act through their elected officials to debate and enact laws that protect unborn children and honor women. If Roe is indeed overturned, our job will be to build consensus for the strongest protections possible for unborn children and women in every legislature,” Dannenfelser said.
“We also recognize the need for the pro-life movement to continue its existing work to support pregnant women and children in need. There are thousands of pro-life pregnancy centers and maternity homes nationwide and an ever-growing pro-life safety net,” the statement continued. “The pro-life movement will continue to grow to meet the needs of these women and their families, walking and planning with them to love and serve both mother and child.”
In response to the Politico report, Lila Rose, the president and founder of Live Action, responded with a slew of tweets, beginning with, “Roe Must Go! The right to kill a child doesn’t exist. But the right to life is a basic human right.”
She commented on the “Unprecedented leak of a draft SCOTUS decision.”
“Roe has been wrongly decided since the day it was issued. It’s illogical and gravely unjust. Overruling Roe would be an important step in the right direction of protecting our fundamental right to life. But if this decision is issued, true justice has not yet been achieved,” she stressed in a Twitter thread.
“It’s not enough to send abortion back to the states,” she said, indicating what would happen if Roe is overturned. “Democracies shouldn’t have the ability to vote on if a genocide can be committed against an entire group of people. Human rights are not decided by majority vote. They are inalienable.”
“Pray for the Justices tonight and every night until the decision comes out,” she concluded. “I fear there will be unprecedented threats against them.”
As president and CEO of Americans United for Life, Catherine Glenn Foster responded, “We stand alongside all Americans who have waited so hopefully and for so long for the Supreme Court to reverse Roe, to set American on the path to abortion abolition, and to restore justice to our nation. Today is a day for courage and hope.”
In the same statement, Steven H. Aden, chief legal officer and general counsel at AUL, condemned the leak.
“The Supreme Court wishes to return the issue of abortion to the American people, and for that reason this draft opinion language is to be applauded,” he said. “It is outrageous that this draft language was leaked, presumably by pro-abortion staffers within the Court. It is a cynical and naked attempt to pressure justices to alter course in Dobbs and to perpetuate abortion violence. The Court should maintain the moral high ground, stick to the clear and courageous language this draft opinion, and not allow itself to be ruled by the expectations of pro-abortion activists or proxy media allies.”
AUL took the position that the “implicit intent of this leak is to pressure and manipulate members of the Court to alter their votes or otherwise water down the language of the final opinion — if the Court is truly the nonpolitical body that Chief Justice John Roberts has said that it is, the Court cannot now bow to partisan pressure to change course for the sake of an illusory detente.”
Another pro-life leader, Kristan Hawkins, the president of Students for Life of America, said, “We don’t know whether rumors of the end of Roe are accurate yet, but we know that ending Roe is the right decision, returning the issue to ‘we the people’ from a few judges with an agenda.”
“You won’t find ‘abortion’ written in invisible ink in the Constitution undiscovered until 7 men saw it in 1973,” she added, referring to the Roe decision. “Ending preborn human life is and has always been a judicial error. The court cannot allow the bullying tactics of the left combined with the threat of chaos caused by an unprecedented leak to change the right course — the end of Roe.”
[…]
Anyone who seeks truth seeks God, itself an irrefutable truth whether one proceeds to identify God as truth itself. Doctor of truth, “A title that was proposed for her at the time was ‘doctor veritatis’ because of her relentless intellectual pursuit of truth, which after her conversion she recognized in the person of Jesus Christ”.
Edith Stein as she preferred to be called identified Christ with his Cross, which is to identify him as love. Her history, a life story of discovering truth in Christ during a philosophical search for truth makes her a perfect model and source for grasping our teleological end in this life. From this writer’s perspective her writing has the depth and clear focus on the acquisition of truth that would benefit the reader.
I am unaware that Teresa Benedicta of the Cross preferred to be know by her secular name. At her Baptism she was named Teresa. At her clothing with the Discalced Carmelite habit she once again deliberately chose Teresa, added Benedicta in honor of St. Benedict whose monks were instrumental in giving her a deep love for the liturgy and matured her personal spirituality. The title “of the Cross” was in honor of St. John of the Cross for whom she had great devotion. She thought of it as Teresa “blessed by the Cross.”
I am often disappointed and simultaneously amused at the contrived use of photos of Sts. Therese and Teresa Benedicta before they took the habit. There was not much that they desired more than to be clothed in the habit of Carmel. Presently we even have to strip the saints of their religious habits in order to be post-conciliar. I don’t have to wonder what they would think of the confection.
Assuming a new name upon monastic investiture is a very personal and deeply spiritual act. Her religious name framed her existence as a Discalced Carmelite which fulfilled the deepest longing of her heart.
Edith Stein no longer existed
“I am often disappointed and simultaneously amused at the contrived use of photos of Sts. Therese and Teresa Benedicta before they took the habit.”
Weird Comment of the Day. Sigh.
How often do you see a book on John Paul using his image from a time before his papacy? Unless a photo is specific to a topic in the individuals life, why would use one that did not portray the person in the maturity? Or even his priesthood?
How often Padre Pio as a layman? Maximilian Kolbe in his civvies? How often a portrait of Ignatius in his armor?
The abandonment of the religious habit was instrumental eradicating religious life, particularly for women.
The attempt, frequent within the effort to justify the abandonment of the traditions of orders and congregations, to equate figures from their history assenting to the mutilation they have undergone is propaganda. Therese of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face fought hard to get that habit, Edith Stein sought for ten years to enter Carmel. Embraced in their spousal relationship with Christ the old woman was dead.
Therese of the Child Jesus died the Carmelite iron maiden, at the height of her religious maturity, no little girl.
Teresa Benedicta walked off to her death at the hands of the Nazis braced in her Carmelite habit, a nun, no longer the up and coming academic. What a comfort to her fellow prisoners, what a chill up a Nazi spine.
I understand the point you are making yet I have no problem with those two photos. In fact, I like them because they represent the development, the path of the person to God and this article does just that, outlines her path so two photos provide a good illustration. It is also very interesting and enlightening to see the transformation reflected on the face of the Saint.
I also disagree with “Edith Stein no longer existed”. She was incorporated. The academic did not disappear but very clearly seen in her last book, ‘The Science of the Cross’ (a discourse about St John of the Cross’s doctrine’.
I recently read ‘The Milestones’, Pope Benedict’s autobiography written while he was a Cardinal. I looked at his photos there, from the early age to older with great delight. By the way, his autobiography convinced me of his true and utmost humility and truthfulness = holiness. I think he is Blessed.
Yet you might well see books by Joseph Ratzinger from the time before he became Pope Benedict bearing photos of him from about the time he wrote the books. As Edith Stein, she wrote about philosophy, and, aside from her last days leading up to and including her martyrdom, these writings are what most people know about her.
To my understanding, Sr Teresa Benedicta of the Cross was not a martyr for Christian faith. She (so as her sister Rosa) was killed because she was a Jew. I have always thought that “Doctor of the Church” is the best title for her.
In connection to her, I also recall that the Discalced Carmelites organized a monastery on the territory of Auschwitz with the major purpose to pray there and make reparations and purify the place of horror, hell on earth. Unfortunately, they had to leave that place because of the pressure of Jews who claimed Holocaust as their own; they accused the nuns of “appropriating” the Jewish Holocaust. To settle the conflict, Pope JPII (I think it was him) ordered Carmelites to leave their house. Reportedly, many visitors of Auschwitz would drop into the monastery seeking some comfort after what they saw and so the removal of Carmelites was bad for everyone including non-Christians.
I think Sr Terresa Benedicta of the Cross would be appalled with the fact that some people of her race insisted on a removal of a group of the dedicated to God women from the sight the murder, of her and many others – Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, Christians, communists. I studied her life, she was deeply Jewish and deeply Christian, her Jewishness found its completion in her Christianity. Her zeal for God is something I believe to be innate in the Jewish people. That utmost dedication to One True God to the point of death is very Jewish, like in the Prophets.
I am not sure why I am writing about this. Probably because figures like Edith Stein highlight the tragic idiocy of humanity (“this is mine” – “no, this is mine”) making it truly unbearable.
No offense, but I would like some clarification on what it now means to be a “Doctor of the Catholic Church”. For centuries, the title seemed to designate a saint who had ALREADY had a remarkable influence on the Church as a whole, but more recently it seems to indicate someone whom the Pope then reigning HOPES will at some point in the near future have a larger influence on the Church. Sts. Athanasius, Anselm, Ambrose, and Augustine fall into the former category; St. Hildegard into the latter.
Wikipedia can be useful: “Doctor of the Church (Latin: doctor “teacher”), also referred to as Doctor of the Universal Church (Latin: Doctor Ecclesiae Universalis), is a title given by the Catholic Church to saints recognized as having made a significant contribution to theology or doctrine through their research, study, or writing.”
This certainly describes Edith Stein, even in her earlier writings on phenomenology which she wrote under her preceptor, Edmund Husserl.
“This certainly describes Edith Stein, even in her earlier writings on phenomenology which she wrote under her preceptor, Edmund Husserl.” At best, that is like saying that Lars Onsager is a famous physicist. He kind of is, but unless you are a physicist (or maybe a chemist, since he won a Nobel prize in chemistry), I’m pretty sure you’ve never heard of him.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, on the other hand, is basically a nobody that everyone has heard of. You might not think physics had the equivalent of a Paris Hilton, but that’s kind of what he is.
Then there are people like Einstein and Newton; physicists who are genuinely important and actually well-known. These are the physics equivalents of Sts. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas; they need no introduction.
If you really want to see what something means, sometimes you have to dig deeper than Wikipedia.
God, as Truth, has been for me a treasure beyond price. May He be so to every one of us – Mahatma Gandhi
St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross has been an object of devotion for me since I was a boy sixty years ago. What a heroic woman…she continues to leave me speechless. I made sure I was at her canonization. Her witness to Jesus Christ has been an anchor for my faith for many decades.
She was an impressive philosopher. I have found her theological and devotional writings rewarding. Do they support her being declared a Doctor of the Church? I think not. That sort of theological reflection was not her vocation.
Let us be honest in our recognition of heroic virtue and of superior theological contributions to the faith. There is no need to patronize any individual over and above their accomplishments achieved by cooperation with Grace. For some time now we have been canonizing individuals who, while good, very good even, are not exactly examples of heroic virtue.
The ambition to bestow the doctorate upon St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross is, honestly, merely an ecclesiastical DEI job because of her identity as a woman, a Jew, a scholar. It has nothing to do with groundbreaking exceptional theological reflection. It is a vacuous effort, it is ultimately dishonest.
St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross would not approve. She was a profoundly honest woman of exceptional common sense and virtue. Not a theologian. Her contemplative reflection does not rise to the level of Teresa, Catherine, Therese…
Well said. We need great theologians like St. Augustine, but we need great prayer warriors like St. Monica even more. St. Monica will never be a Doctor of the Church, nor should she, but she might be greater in the Kingdom of Heaven than her son, and we can be sure that for every famous theologian, there are hundreds or thousands of St. Monicas known only to God.
Profoundly insightful, and wonderfully unsettling. Puts things in their supernatural perspective.
I too greatly admire the writing and the life of St. Teresa Benedicta together with her fellow Carmelite saints Teresa, Therese, and John of the Cross. I’ve read much of their work, some more than once. Teresa Benedicta wrote a treatise on St. John (The Science of the Cross), but she very meticulously repeated and clarified what St. John had written. She has a brilliantly detailed work on ’empathy’ which is philosophy, not theology. I believe she wrote biographical notes or essays on some other notable Carmelites. She also has some wonderfully thoughtful and insightful essays on womanhood.
Her heroic virtue in her arrest, time in the concentration camp and facing death was apparent to all. Her love for her natural family, particularly her mother, was heart-rending to us folk who shared Edith’s anguish on the days leading to the day in the parlor. There we share Edith’s sorrow at informing her Jewish mother of her wish for Catholic Baptism. Her biography inclines her to sainthood. But what inclines the Church to name her one of its doctors? Nothing that I know.
Correction: The days of anguish for Edith occurred not prior to her Baptism but prior to her entrance into convent.
Would that St. Benedicta and St. John of the Cross would help me reserve my exuberant sharing of inaccurate memory!
Why the bigotry of calling her by the wrong name? She is St. Theresa Benedicta of the Cross.
I don’t think anything ill is meant by it. We tend to call recently departed saints by the names they were best known by when they were alive. We’ll be saying “Mother Teresa” instead of “Saint Teresa of Calcutta” and “Padre Pio” instead of “Saint Pio of Pietrelcina”, which is not quite the same thing, but somewhat related.