These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The New York Times ad.
    Author: Hunt ME, Kissling F.
    Journal: Conscience; 1993; 14(1-2):16-23. PubMed ID: 12178920.
    Abstract:
    Feminization of patriarchal institutions is necessary in order to eliminate the exclusivity and mutuality of hierarchical, gender, class, and race stratification. The aim of this paper is to explain the history and activities surrounding the New York Times ad on Sunday, October 7, 1984 (the Catholic Statement on Pluralism and Abortion signed by Barbara Ferraro and Patricia Hussey of the Sisters of Note Dame de Namur, Rose Dominic Trapasso of the Maryknoll Sisters, and 67 other signers). The significance of this ad for Roman Catholic feminists and suggestions for new models of relationships between feminists is given. The Statement was written by Daniel Maguire and Frances Kissling and reviewed by 20 Roman Catholic ethicists. A sponsoring committee of early signers sought other support. Catholics for a Free Choice sponsored the funding for circulation of the Statement among professional societies, but not necessarily canonical communities. Publication of the entire statement in the Times was at the height of the presidential campaign. Conservative Bishops Bernard Law of Boston and John O'Connor of Boston publicly denounced Ferraro's position. The first institutional church response came on November 14, 1984, and stated that the Statement was personal opinion and contradictory to clear and constant church teachings about abortion. On November 30, 1984, Cardinal Jean Jerome Hamer of the Congregation for Religious and Secular Institutes responded to most presidents of canonical communities to request a public retraction from signers under threat of dismissal. The issue was obedience to the church. Several members of the canonical community and priests published retractions; negotiations with the Vatican began. Freedom of conscience and empowerment of canonical communities, as agents of their own lives, were given as reasons for the challenge to paternalism. The response was that women were subject to obedience within their communities and had taken public vows and were public members of the church. The superiors groups (Committee of Concerned Leadership) did not have a united public stand. A compromise was reached on "clarification" rather than retraction. On March 2, 1986, another Times letter declared that reprisals have a chilling effect on dissent.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]