Read on Twitter
Mary McAleese's article in @The_Tablet is very strange, and in truth seems to at least border on the incoherent. In essence, she seems be criticising the Church for not making a claim she herself doesn't argue for: https://www.thetablet.co.uk/features/2/19423/flawed-defenders-of-the-unborn /1
It's hard to know where to start with the piece, which essentially argues: "This great assertive
champion of the unborn, never short of powerful words in defence of its right to life, retreats into mumbling hesitancy on the subject of its right to life with God after death." /2
champion of the unborn, never short of powerful words in defence of its right to life, retreats into mumbling hesitancy on the subject of its right to life with God after death." /2
Can't she see that arguments around the right to life are essentially calls for how we should behave in order to respect the dignity of other human beings, whereas arguments about eternal life are claims about how God behaves? Or even how God should behave? /3
Regardless of what we might think, these are different sorts of arguments, and if the Church doesn't make big claims about the fate of those who die before birth, this is because its silence reflects its uncertainty. /4
It's striking in this regard that not merely does Mrs McAleese not advance a shred of an argument for the basis on which the Church might claim certainty, but that she also doesn't think about the useful concept of invincible ignorance, or about speculations around Limbo. /5
The concept of invincible ignorance isn't directly applicable here, but it should seem obvious that if the Church entertains hope on behalf of the invincibly ignorant, it holds a greater hope for the unborn - one that underlies the trusting confidence expressed by @pontifex. /6
Here's a useful Reuters piece from 2007 on the Vatican document she alludes to that basically said the notion of Limbo should be ditched as it doesn't do justice to the grounds the Church has to hope and pray for those who died before birth or baptism: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pope-limbo-idUSL2028721620070420 /7
My take on all this, fwiw, is that I believe God can be trusted to do what is right and just, and so we can confidently and prayerfully trust him to treat with loving kindness those who die before birth. I tend to worry more about the souls of those who hasten that process. /8
Beyond that, the point of this latest intervention seems to be that Mrs McAleese is challenging the Church to claim as certain something it lacks certainty about, merely hoping and praying for it. It's an impressively ultramontane stance, and one I think not many would share. 9/9
