Aaron Oliver thinks it’s possible to be pro-life and a loyal Democrat. But party leaders want him to resign. / Courtesy of Aaron Oliver
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jan 2, 2022 / 07:30 am (CNA).
His fellow Democrats call him a traitor (and worse) and the leaders of his party have pressured him to resign.
What has Aaron “A.J.” Oliver, the Democratic municipal chairman in his New Jersey hometown, done to deserve such scorn?
He’s pro-life.
Never mind that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and other prominent Democratic leaders have professed tolerance for pro-life Democrats.
Or that Oliver, an Episcopal priest and New Jersey Army National Guard chaplain, says he’s a faithful Democrat soldier in every other respect.
“I’m a loyal Democrat, a lifetime Democrat,” he told CNA. “Many of us think that there’s not an inconsistency with being pro-life and a Democrat. We think the party should be the open tent that it claims to be.”
The flaps of the tent appear to be drawn tight in New Jersey when it comes to abortion, however, Oliver has found, even though Pelosi and other Democratic leaders insist there’s no litmus test on abortion. Pelosi famously cited her own “devout Catholic family” in 2017 as the reason for her openness to Democrats who don’t share her staunch support of abortion rights.
“Most of those people — my family, extended family — are not pro-choice,” she said. “You think I’m kicking them out of the Democratic Party?”
Democratic leaders in the Garden State have taken a different approach with Oliver.
A party ‘betrayal’?
The 41-year-old Morristown resident was elected to a two-year term in June as chairman of the New Jersey suburb’s municipal Democratic committee, an unpaid position. The committee’s chief role is to recruit and support strong Democratic candidates, Oliver said.
Until very recently, party leaders saw Oliver as that kind of candidate, having initially supported his run in 2021 for the Morris County Board of Commissioners, a GOP stronghold for many years.
His ultimately unsuccessful bid ran into trouble after a video surfaced of him at an event sponsored by Democrats for Life of America (DFLA), an organization that opposes abortion and promotes pro-life Democratic candidates. A public interest group called NJ11th for Change swiftly retracted its endorsement less than a week before the Nov. 2 election.
“Given the revelation that Oliver’s position is far removed from what most of us would consider ‘pro-woman’ or ‘feminist,’ we feel strongly that continuing to endorse this candidate would be a betrayal of our members’ values, which are and have always been overwhelmingly pro-choice,” the group’s co-executive directors said at the time.
In December, the Morris County Democratic Committee called on Oliver to resign his municipal post. The county organization said it was its “duty to choose representatives and party leaders who will support, protect and expand equitable and quality access to reproductive rights in New Jersey and help make that a reality for every American.” More recently, the committee Oliver chairs issued a “no confidence” vote against him.
But Oliver is standing firm. He says party leaders were aware of his pro-life views prior to his run for commission and still thought he’d be good candidate, “especially since the county government doesn’t vote on legislation involving abortion,” he added. Yet know they want him out as Morristown chairman.
“I don’t think that’s a sufficient reason to resign, I really don’t,” he said.
“And to be honest with you, many of us are sick and tired of being bullied and marginalized for a matter of conscience like this, for defending a consistent life ethic … and we don’t want to take it anymore.”
Embracing a ‘Whole Life’ approach
Oliver’s story illustrates not only the hardened abortion stance of the Democratic Party but also the diversity of the pro-life movement.
Oliver, who is gay and a staunch Democrat, witnessed that heterogeneity himself when he attended a Democrats for Life rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court on Dec. 1 during oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization abortion case. Among those advocating for the unborn that day were secularists, atheists, feminists, and members of the LGBTQ community.
“It’s not just religious people that are pro-life,” Oliver said. “I think that the pro-life movement is growing. It’s diverse in a lot of ways, I mean ethnically, politically, as far as age, religion. I was happy to see that.”
Nor is the pro-life movement strictly focused on abortion, he added. Democrats for Life’s own “Whole Life” philosophy embraces a range of issues, he noted.
“We talk about issues like euthanasia, and capital punishment, and protecting women — providing real choice for them when it comes to pregnancy support (and) reducing the maternity mortality rate,” he said. “And our (DFLA) movement is actually led by women, so the false dichotomy, (that) it’s a men versus women thing, I think is kind of a false narrative.”
Extreme NJ bill a ‘turning point’
Faith and service have been running themes in Oliver’s life.
Raised in a Methodist family, he says his brother and several other relatives served in the military. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, he enlisted in the New Jersey Army National Guard in 2003, joining an infantry unit. Meanwhile, his spiritual journey led him to join the Orthodox Church, and after discerning a vocation, he became an Orthodox priest and a U.S. Army chaplain.
The journey wasn’t over. He left the Orthodox Church and was accepted as an Episcopal priest in 2012. A couple of years later he went on active duty with the Army for five years, spending some of that time overseas. He rejoined the National Guard as a chaplain and captain in 2020.
He says his pro-life position evolved over time.
“I certainly haven’t reached this point overnight,” Oliver told CNA. “I’ve always had pro-life inklings … I’ve always wanted to look out for the vulnerable and the marginalized. And I started to see unborn children as being vulnerable and marginalized, and I started asking more questions, like, ‘Why aren’t we standing up for them and supporting them?’”
Those questions ultimately led him to Democrats for Life of America, which states on its website that “every human being is worthy of dignity and respect, from fertilization to natural death.”
But Oliver says the real turning point for him politically was Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy’s effort to pass the New Jersey Reproductive Freedom Act.
Crafted as a hedge against the possible decision in the Dobbs case that would overturn the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide, the legislation would codify an unrestricted right to abortion up to the moment of birth, while removing the state’s longstanding conscience protection for medical professionals who object to abortion.
Additionally, the act authorizes non-physicians to perform certain abortions, and requires insurers to cover abortions with no out-of-pocked costs. It also mandates an annual allocation of state taxpayer funds to Planned Parenthood.
“Those provisions terrified me, honestly,” Oliver said. “I started talking to DFLA and we started a movement to protest it, which I think was pretty effective.” After enough Democrats were persuaded the legislation was too extreme, the legislation stalled in the state’s legislature last year, though Murphy, a Catholic, is pushing to get it passed in 2022.
Oliver said the extreme nature of the legislation “galvanized” his thinking on the abortion issue.
“At first I was kind of afraid to talk about it, because I don’t want to be accused of being anti-woman or not being sensitive to people who have to make that difficult decision,” he said. “But then I realized that … this is the civil rights issue of our time.”
Oliver says some of his fellow Democrats have privately told them that they share his pro-life views, but they’re too afraid to buck the party. At the same time, Oliver says it disturbs him to hear some abortion rights proponents talk about the issue in a way that “goes beyond pro-choice to pro-abortion” and equates abortion with routine health care.
“I’m even starting to hear people say, ‘Yes, the fetus is a (human) life, but abortion is still OK,’” he said.
Oliver and the DFLA have their work cut out for them staving off the abortion legislation in New Jersey indefinitely. In addition to pressing for the act to be passed, Murphy found a way around the legislature when political appointees sitting on the New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners agreed to allow nurses and midwives to perform first-trimester abortions, effective Dec. 6.
Kristen Day, DFLA’s executive director, calls Oliver a role model for pro-life Democrats, in the tradition of former Illinois congressman Dan Lipinski.
“I just have such respect for him, because when they went after him before, right before the election, he took the high road. He never called anybody names, he never got angry. He just laid out his case why he would be a good candidate, and all the things that he has done to support Democrats in New Jersey,” Day said of Oliver.
“So I think what they’re doing to him now is just really terrible. I mean, the names they’re calling him, the emails that they’re sending. It’s just not what the Democratic Party, (which) prides itself on diversity and inclusion, should be doing to someone who really cares about the party and wants to elect Democrats and who cares about feeding the poor, cares about … affordable health care and child care. I mean, he’s fighting for all of that. In addition, he wants to support pregnant moms and the right to parent,” Day said.
“New Jersey’s abortion numbers are an embarrassment,” Day added, referring to data from the Guttmacher Institute that place the state’s abortion rate among the highest in the U.S. “We should be doing more as a party to lower the abortion rate in New Jersey and provide women with real choice. And because he’s doing that, they’re trying to kick him out of the party.”
Oliver, who spent six weeks guarding the U.S. Capitol with his National Guard unit after the civil unrest on Jan. 6, isn’t sure what’s next for him, politically. Asked if he is considering switching to the Republican Party, Oliver said he would prefer to remain a Democrat, though his party isn’t making it easy for him.
In the meantime, he says his faith is helping him weather the adversity he faces now.
“My faith tells me that life begins at conception,” Oliver said. “So my Christian beliefs certainly inform my position on the issue. But they also allow me to hold firm on it, as well.
“They allow me to still advocate for life, even amidst all the criticism, and even hatred,” he said.
[…]
If the Pope is correct to say this to Ukraine then he is wrong to restrict the TLM.
Compare this quick action to defend Russian Orthodoxy versus papal inaction to defend the Catholic Faith after the Paris Opening Blasphemies.
Exactly right on both counts, dear Fool.
“Churches are not to be touched!”???
Hah!
Unless they offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass the same way it’s been offered for scores of generations.
Here contrary to disagreement, in instances conscientious resistance to the moral and structural policies including softening of perennial doctrine of Francis I, I’m in agreement with his stance on religious freedom, particularly the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian Churches. He holds the same correct position in Ukraine as well as Russia.
Taking that into account, our dilemma is the West, and Roman Catholicism’s lack of coherency to its doctrines in practice, whereas Russian Orthodoxy in particular can claim far greater adherence to moral principles both Churches share. Abortion in Russia is limited to 12 weeks after conception – the US and most of Europe abortion is open season. Homosexuality is permitted in Russia between consenting adults, beyond that it’s prohibited under severe penalty, particularly LGBT promotion. It’s homosexuality in all its disordered forms that will destroy America unless the Church takes a strong stand against, which it doesn’t under Francis I who gives indication of acceptance.
Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church insofar as these key moral positions are now actually the world’s primary challenge to the moral decay of the West, including the Zelensky government and Ukraine. Although war with Ukraine has other political motives besides religion. Nevertheless it’s a factor. And likely why PM Orbán of Hungary with a large Catholic population is leaning toward Putin’s Russia due to EU opposition to his policies against the Gay conglomerate and its growing prominence in the West.
As usual, I agree with Father Morello. And I offer a few thoughts of my own.
The Russians’ contempt for the moral abyss into which the West has fallen is at the core of their struggle to keep Ukraine out of NATO and the EU. (It also has perfectly legitimate geopolitical motives.)This is written off by Western elites as “authoritarian contempt for ‘democracy'”. But we who are subject to those elites know all too well what they mean by “democracy”.
It was the Clinton/Bush/Obama neocon “nation builders” who thrust NATO and the EU up to the western frontiers of the Russian rump state that Putin now leads. Biden, as their proconsul, and the Biden family grifters fomented the so-called “Maidan revolution”, which overthrew the duly elected Ukrainian government and encouraged the subsequent Zelensky government to pursue a ruthless ethnic cleansing campaign in the Donbas. The alleged Russian aggression in Crimea merely undid the phoney “transfer” by the Ukrainian Soviet boss, Khruschev, of the peninsula from the Russian FSSR to the Ukrainian SSR, during the 1950s — all in the Soviet Communist family.
I long since have given up trying to read the mind of Pope Francis. It may well be that his view is grounded in the neo-Pelagian modernist quicksand of Dignitatis Humanae. But, from my perspective as an indietrist, an historic Christian people (albeit, regrettably, one whose church is in schism) have a duty to express resistance to a militantly secularist regime that afflicts their country.
I pray (as I did this morning, the Rosary in Latin, with a small congregation made up largely of Roman Catholic Poles and Ukrainians) for peace in Ukraine. Let us not forget that, when in 1917 Our Lady of Fatima asked for prayers for the conversion of “Russia” and for its consecration to her Immaculate Heart, “Russia” was “all the Russias”, including Ukraine. Maybe, after all, Francis got the consecration right in the way he proclaimed it a few years ago!
You cannot licitly fight evil by means of another evil. The Russian Orthodox Church is a schismatic and heretical Tsar-worshipping, warmongering sect that is out of communion with the rest of Orthodoxy, let alone Rome.
Russia is the abortion capital of the world, with regular church attendance in the low single figures, much lower than in Poland and Ukraine. In the territory of Ukraine under Russian occupation, there is no Catholic life at all, nor any Christian life other than that overseen by the Patriarchate of Moscow.
Yes Michael, Russia has the world’s highest abortion rate. Although it has a higher birth rate than some European nations. Example: Birth and death rate per increment of 1000 persons
UK 10/9.5 Poland 7.4/11.1 Russia 8.9/11.3 France 9.9/9.2 Italy 6.4/11.2 Spain 6.7/9.0 Germany 8.3/12.3 Institute National D’etudes Démographique. Russia has a higher birth rate than Poland, Italy, Germany, and Spain, while death rates except Spain are similar. What that likely indicates is greater usage of abortifacients and contraceptives in Italy, Poland, and Spain v abortions in Russia.
I agree with your assessment of Archbishop of Moscow Kirill and the Russian myth of a greater universal Russia. My comment was not to imply Russia is a moral paragon, rather based on face value it is better disposed on those moral issues.
“You cannot licitly fight evil by means of another evil. The Russian Orthodox Church is a schismatic and heretical Tsar-worshipping, warmongering sect that is out of communion with the rest of Orthodoxy, let alone Rome.”
I agree with you re: one should never fight evil by means of siding with another evil. Your description of the Russian Orthodox Church is a bit off. For a start, it does not worship tsar but there is a sect of so-called “tsarebozhiki” who worship emperor Nicholas II, considering him to be a co-redemptor with Our Lord. This sect was condemned by the Russian Orthodox Church. Also, there is an antiwar resistance within the Russian Orthodox Church and many priests were prohibited to serve or even arrested as a result of their activities. As for schismatics, “no, it is you (Catholics) who are schismatics because you broke off from the true Church” as any Orthodox (especially Greek) would say to you. Also, common believers learnt not to take mutual excommunications too seriously – if they did, we would not have a centuries-long precedent of Roman Catholics receiving communion in the Russian Orthodox Church and vice versa (please check how Catherine the Great saved Jesuits and how Catholic and Orthodox worshiped together in the USSR – persecution tends to release people from secondary things).
Now to the current affairs: there is a natural evil and there is an unnatural evil. Natural evil is practiced by Russia and like-minded. It is murder, slavery and so on, brutality without sophistication, cruelty which is not ashamed of looking cruel. Unnatural evil is transhumanism, transgender ideology, euthanasia “for the sake of preservation of dignity” and so on. It is the evil which is afraid of being seen as such so it covers itself with various “for your own good”. Russia (Putin) is the natural evil, West (Biden) is an unnatural evil. They are like two apocalyptic beasts, two types of human psyche clashing. People choose what they prefer. Personally, I prefer natural evil because it is at least straightforward. The unnatural evil repels me much more. Yet, being a Christian I know that I must not choose any but stick to Christ.
Most importantly, b of those evils are postmodern. That means Putin is not Orthodox and Biden is not Catholic. Putin represents a FAKE RUSSIA and Biden represents a FAKE WEST. Hence one who chooses either chooses a fake.
If you read my comment, you’ll see that it says that the Russian Church is in schism from Orthodoxy, let alone from Rome. So either way, the Russians are in schism. The Russian Church always was unique in the extent of its subjection to the Tsars, which was even more abject than elsewhere in Orthodoxy.
I am glad that my comment seemed to cause you to reduce your generalisations a bit (from “heretical Tsar-worshipping” to more realistic “The Russian Church always was unique in the extent of its subjection to the Tsars, which was even more abject than elsewhere in Orthodoxy”). Indeed, the Russian Church has been severely oppressed since Peter the Great who abolished the instruction of Patriarchs. The fact that the Russian Orthodox Church elected the Patriarch immediately after it got freedom from the state after the 1917 revolution, shows that the Church knew it was an abnormal situation – at least the vibrant part of it which later was martyred or went into catacombs. I am a product of that free-thinking Church which never ceased to exist. It is the Church of Fr Edelstein, Fr Alexander Men, nun Juliana (Sokolova) and many others.
“If you read my comment, you’ll see that it says that the Russian Church is in schism from Orthodoxy, let alone from Rome. So, either way, the Russians are in schism.”
Again, a generalization. The Russian Orthodox Church broke a communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate over the latter giving an autocephalic status to the Ukrainian Church. Ecumenical Patriarchate is not (whole) “Orthodoxy”. Some local Churches supported Constantinople, some did not. It is a very sad event but it has happened in the life of the Orthodox Church before. Common believers, especially abroad, usually disregard that.
And yet he refuses to condemn the persecution of Catholics in communist dictatorships like Nicaragua, Venezuela and China.
There is a prophecy of Garabandal I and many others believe is coming during this pontificate. The prophecy is that a pope will make a trip to Moscow and as soon as he returns to the Vatican, “hostilities will break out in different parts of Europe.” This is in light of the message of Fatima. Francis is a globalist, and it is difficult to tell what his agendas are when he seems to make a comment such as this. He sides with China and shut down churches during Covid… I think he is working for the new word order that will come out of the crisis. He is always speaking of global human fraternity as if it is above the importance of Catholic doctrine and truth. Watch for a trip to Russia in 2025 to kick of the prophesied tribulation.
For once, I have to agree with PF.
I would be inclined to defer to the local Catholic bishop on this one, someone who knows what’s going on. I would like to hear a bit more from the Vatican about Russia attacking and destroying Ukrainian cities.
What the above comment illustrates is how far Roman Catholic Christianity has drifted from its own essential doctrines revealed to it by its author Jesus Christ.
Our Synod on Synodality process underway to assertedly renew and revitalize the Church reduces our Apostolic successors the bishops to facilitators for a diversity of Catholic and non Catholic laity committed to a search for meaning of Synodality with pretense of adopting the Jesuit discernment method by listening to the expected voice of the Holy Spirit for new revelation – defies both reason and St Ignatius’ methodology resulting in acceleration of the drift to a riptide. Resolution. Return to the Cross of Christ and revealed doctrine.
This is definitely a 50/50 argument. I’m
guessing that one of the reasons why Pope Francis doesn’t support this law is because he wants the Russian Orthodox to one day return to full communion with Rome. One the other hand, Abp Metropolitan Shevchuk’s support of the law makes for a compelling debate since the UGCC is a sui iuris (self governing) autonomous Church in full communion with Rome. Everything considered, I believe that Russian Orthodox faithful aren’t bad people. But Moscow Patriarch Kirill is a disgrace.
I think this act of Francis’ points up what so many have sensed: he is less ‘homo religiosus’ than he is ‘homo politico.’
Francis injects himself into the profane arena when it suits his own political proclivities. He sends a new papal nuncio to Venezuela after a three-year hiatus to send an approval signal to the dictatorship of the Maduro government. He says nothing about the persecution of the Church by the Marxist Daniel Ortega. He allows the dictatorial communist rulers of a billion Chinese to choose Catholic bishops, etc., etc. At the same time, he hates America, the Catholic Church in America, the Latin Mass, and traditional Catholic values. He gives protection to prelates who promote the desacralization of the Catholic Church.
We see Francis more clearly with every passing day by where he places his priorities.
How many churches have to be burned down or priests arrested for you lot to stop idolizing Putin?