While it hasn’t generated as much controversy as abortion itself, the subject of “imperfect legislation” has had its day in the boxing ring. In the abortion context, “imperfect legistlation” means a law which limits or contains or cuts back upon legalized abortion-on-demand (the situation we have now in these United States). On and off through the years, pro-life partisans have debated with each other about whether it is moral to support such laws. Examples include laws which require parental notification before an unmarried minor can obtain an abortion, and laws which would outlaw some, but not all kinds of abortions. A perfect example of the latter is Pennsylvania’s law forbidding abortions performed to eliminate a child based on its gender (“sex-selection” abortions).
During the 1980s, several authoritative Catholic sources had written approvingly of support for imperfect legislation, where permissive abortion policies reigned, providing certain conditions were met. As Cardinal Edouard Gagnon (speaking as the head of the Pontifical Council for the Family) wrote in 1987: “If they have reason to believe that the proposed legislation will not be the final stage, Catholics could decide to work toward legislation which prohibits abortion or abortion funding, but which allows certain exceptions. . . . However, even as they work for imperfect legislation, they must make it clear in the public forum that they remain opposed to all abortions” (17 Origins 148, July 30, 1987). Similar guidelines were offered by the Catholic Bishops of Great Britain in 1989 (“Imperfect Laws,” Catholic Bishops’ Joint Committee on Bio-Ethical Issues, Briefing 89, vol. 19, no. 14).
The Holy Father has now addressed this matter within the encyclical Evangelium vitae. He states:
A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive law already passed or ready to be voted on. . . . [W]here it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality.
Undoubtedly, application of the criteria for supporting certain imperfect laws could be tricky now and again. But given the authority accorded to the encyclical as an exercise of papal teaching responsibility, the Holy Father’s words are likely to help heal many of the remaining divisions over the morality of supporting imperfect laws.