CATHOLICS ONLY: Abortion...

[bostonlass]

It wasn't meant to be disrespectful, and although Catholics do see scripture as a part of Catholic tradition...should push come to shove...their traditions outweigh scripture...even traditions begun today...so that's why I suggested checking out scripture...as long as current day traditions haven't changed things.

Could you please cite me one example of how Catholic tradition goes against scripture?

 

[Lynn]

If you want scripture then just look at the commandments, Thou shall not kill.
But then, you already know that. What scripture are you looking for? Do you think that Catholics just make it up as we go along? The Church has founded its beliefs and teachings upon scripture, including the commandments.

I'm just not sure what your point is, except to stir things up a bit.

lynn

 

[Deb7777]

I pulled this off of the New Advent, catholic library. Abortion has always been considered evil, I think through the different centuries the penances varied according to when they believed the soul enter the body. Even the less "severe" penances would be alot more than what we have today, the church is not into the penances of yesterday but it too condemns abortion as evil with hopes of reconcilation for all invovled back to God. Here's a apart of the article:In the course of history, the Fathers of the Church, her Pastors and her Doctors have taught the same doctrine--the various opinions on the infusion of the spiritual soul did not introduce any doubt about the illicitness of abortion. It is true that in the Middle Ages, when the opinion was generally held that the spiritual soul was not present until after the first few weeks, a distinction was made in the evaluation of the sin and the gravity of penal sanctions. Excellent authors allowed for this first period more lenient case solutions which they rejected for following periods. But it was never denied at that time that procured abortion, even during the first days, was objectively grave fault. This condemnation was in fact unanimous. Among the many documents it is sufficient to recall certain ones. The first Council of Mainz in 847 reconsidered the penalties against abortion which had been established by preceding Councils. It decided that the most rigorous penance would be imposed "on women who procure the elimination of the fruit conceived in their womb."[9] The Decree of Gratian reported the following words of Pope Stephen V: "That person is a murderer who causes to perish by abortion what has been conceived."[10] St. Thomas, the Common Doctor of the Church, teaches that abortion is a grave sin against the natural law." At the time of the Renaissance Pope Sixtus V condemned abortion with the greatest severity.[12] A century later, Innocent XI rejected the propositions of certain lax canonists who sought to excuse an abortion procured before the moment accepted by some as the moment of the spiritual animation of the new being.[13] In our days the recent Roman Pontiffs have proclaimed the same doctrine with the greatest clarity. Pius XI explicitly answered the most serious objections.[14] Pius XII clearly excluded all direct abortion, that is, abortion which is either an end or a means.[15] John XXIII recalled the teaching of the Fathers on the sacred character of life "which from its beginning demands the action of God the Creator."[16] Most recently, the Second Vatican Council, presided over by Paul VI, has most severely condemned abortion: "Life must be safeguarded with extreme care from conception; abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes."[17] The same Paul VI, speaking on this subject on many occasions, has not been afraid to declare that this teaching of the Church "has not changed and is unchangeable."[18]

 

[Qidron]

You can't expect to attack someone (in their own house) and not ahve someone call you out on that. You are saying things that are clearly against what OBOBers would say the believe. That's like me going into a Baptist room about sola scriptura and saying:

"Look, despite the fact that you all hate gay people, I was wondering how the Bible supports the idea of a loving God?"

And then when someone tries to defend themselves from what was said, I come back and say:

"Hey, don't take the thread off track. My question was about the OP."

Doesn't seem very fair or respectful, but maybe it's just me.

OK, I apologize.

 

[AMDG]

Thank you Deb7777. Did kind of wonder about that idea that abortion was tolerated in the past when The Didache (written between 25 and 80 A.D. and is thought to be a Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) explicitly states "thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou slay it when born".

 

[Called2Grace]

I just have a question, what if the pregnancy is life threatening to mother and/or child - in the case of ectopic pregnancy, is it ok to terminate the pregnancy?

 

[Qidron]

If you want scripture then just look at the commandments, Thou shall not kill.
But then, you already know that. What scripture are you looking for? Do you think that Catholics just make it up as we go along? The Church has founded its beliefs and teachings upon scripture, including the commandments.

I'm just not sure what your point is, except to stir things up a bit.

lynn

No I didn't come in to stir things up. The OP asked

Has there been an infallible decree from the Church regarding abortion? There have been Popes and bishops in the long past that have supported abortion in the early stages, or when the life of the mother was in jeapordy. And although they may have been misguided in their teachings, would not an infallible decree today place those Popes and Bishops who did support abortion outside the salvation of the Church?

My point is that if a pope has not made an infallible edict...perhaps scripture makes the atrocity of abortion clear. Yes I know about "thou shalt not murder"...but obviously the proponants of abortion do not consider the preborn to be people yet. I was seriously asking if anyone here knows what scripture says about killing the preborn...really I was.

I apologize for the comments about the pope. It was inappropriate for THIS forum.

 

[Xpycoctomos]

here's some that come to mind (although man, that didache thing kind of shuts the case... that was written int eh VERY early Church):

Isa 44:2 "This is what the LORD says--he who made you, who formed you in the womb, and who will help you:"

Isa 44:24 24 "This is what the LORD says-- your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,"

"Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you even at my mother's breast. From birth I was cast upon you; from my mother's womb you have been my God."

These at least point to the fact that God recognizes us while we are in the womb while He was forming us. That with the "Thou shalt not murder" would point strongly against any ideaa of abortion.

 

[AMDG]

My point is that if a pope has not made an infallible edict...perhaps scripture makes the atrocity of abortion clear. Yes I know about "thou shalt not murder"...but obviously the proponants of abortion do not consider the preborn to be people yet. I was seriously asking if anyone here knows what scripture says about killing the preborn...really I was.

I once knew a person who would use Exodus 23:19 as a Scripture cite against abortion, but I don't think it that's what it is referring to.

Perhaps the proponants of abortion do not consider the preborn to be people yet, but science has shown that since the preborn develop into people, they really are simply the people they develop into. (IMO, in that case, Exodus 20:13 STILL is your Scriptural statement against the practice.) Of course as you know, the proponents of abortion STILL will not listen to science either, so it's not surprising to me that they won't listen to the Scripture in the first place.

 

[SmileBugMG]

I just have a question, what if the pregnancy is life threatening to mother and/or child - in the case of ectopic pregnancy, is it ok to terminate the pregnancy?

Ectopic pregnancy: abortion is really the only choice. The child cannot survive implanted into the fallopian tube, and if it stays there then the mother will die too. Science is not yet sufficiently advanced to save the life of that baby. I don't have my Catechism with me right now, but it does address the "life of the mother" issue.

 

[TexasCatholic]

oops, I see...forgive my fallibility. Well, obviously the popes haven't been able to see their way through to declaring abortion murder...thereby fixing the problem. So, moving past Catholic tradition...what does scripture say about it? That'd help out the situation...maybe....probly not....it don't matter none what God says ...you gotta have the pope's current "ex-cathedra" on it.

.

 

[bostonlass]

I just have a question, what if the pregnancy is life threatening to mother and/or child - in the case of ectopic pregnancy, is it ok to terminate the pregnancy?

This beautiful woman was posed with the choice of aborting her baby or dying of cancer. She chose to have her baby live over her own life and is now a Saint.

Gianna Beretta Molla (1922-1962)

http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20040516_beretta-molla_en.html​

 

[Called2Grace]

This beautiful woman was posed with the choice of aborting her baby or dying of cancer. She chose to have her baby live over her own life and is now a Saint.

Gianna Beretta Molla (1922-1962)


http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/saints/ns_lit_doc_20040516_beretta-molla_en.html
​

Do you mean becuase she chose not to receive treatment for the Cancer too?

My main concern was when both were at risk., such as the ectopic pregnancy, I know that I would never chose my life over the life of another human being, but when it comes to both being at risk as is the case in an ectopic pregnancy I wasn't sure...

 

[Called2Grace]

Ok I just read the article. It is beautiful.

 

[Monica02]

Do you mean becuase she chose not to receive treatment for the Cancer too?

My main concern was when both were at risk., such as the ectopic pregnancy, I know that I would never chose my life over the life of another human being, but when it comes to both being at risk as is the case in an ectopic pregnancy I wasn't sure...

I believe blessed Gianna chose the route that would not harm her unborn child. I think she had three options, abortion and treatment, treatment that could have unintended consequence of the death of the baby and the one she chose which would not harm the baby. I am not sure- but I read somewhere that she could have chose the second option (indirect abortion) and still been in good standing withthe CHurch. She unselfishly chose the third. Someone please chime in on whether this is correct.

The teaching is that DIRECT abortion is never allowed and I think the treatment for an etopic pregnancy (removal of tube) is considered an INDIRECT abortion. MAybe someone more knowledgeable could confirm or refute this.

 

[SmileBugMG]

First, while the Church opposes all direct abortions, it does not condemn procedures which result, indirectly, in the loss of the unborn child as a "secondary effect." For example, if a mother is suffering an ectopic pregnancy (a baby is developing in her fallopian tube, not the womb), a doctor may remove the fallopian tube as therapeutic treatment to prevent the mother’s death. The infant will not survive long after this, but the intention of the procedure and its action is to preserve the mother’s life. It is not a direct abortion.​

From http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0898.asp

Hehe I dressed up as St. Gianna for All Saints Day!

 

[zhilan]

Those quotes are really bothering and upsetting to me. Can someone please explain those? How could popes have supported that it was ever ok to have an abortion?

 

[ZooMom]

I have survived two ectopic pregnancies...and aborted neither. Of course, I wasn't faced with the choice, either, but I would not have aborted. For any reason.

 

[epiclesis]

I apologize for the comments about the pope. It was inappropriate for THIS forum.

actually, your comments were not just inappropriate for this forum, they are inappropriate for any forum, or any place.

Pax Christi.

 

[SpiritualGladiator]

Has there been an infallible decree from the Church regarding abortion? There have been Popes and bishops in the long past that have supported abortion in the early stages, or when the life of the mother was in jeapordy. And although they may have been misguided in their teachings, would not an infallible decree today place those Popes and Bishops who did support abortion outside the salvation of the Church?

I don't know of any Pope or Bishop who officially declared that abortion was appropriate at any stage, but would appreciate proper references if you can provide them.

As for infallibility, there seems to be an over emphasis on this capacity of the Pope to "declare" something as infallible. Consider this, it has only ever been used Twice! These two instances were for the declaration of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary into Heaven.

Yet...if used only twice, what about the Trinity? Jesus' divinity? Was Joseph really visited by an angel? What about the 12 Apostles? Were there 12? Did Judas betray Jesus? Can we trust anything in scripture? Of course we can, and of course these things are known infallibly. Also, anytime a Pope, a Bishop or a lay person speaks about these facts, as facts, then they too speak infallibly.

Infallibility is a very intense topic to discuss indepth, one best left to another thread.

Now what about murder? Is it REALLY all that wrong? Is it always wrong? Does a human have any rights at all? Does one need to declare this infallibly?

Many "laws" are divine laws and though many may not claim so, natural laws are also divine yet they can be deduced by reason and not by revelation. A major distinction.

Now those laws that we have deduced from our reasoning, like the right to life, seems quite rational, even though this has been reemphasized through revelation, both in the OT and in the NT, first through Moses and the Commandments, and then through Christ and His preaching. It seems again rational that the Pope would not have to declare that he is preaching ex cathedra on all things that have to do with our Faith, dogmas or doctrine, when those are explicit in Scripture. Certain things are taken for granted as FACT and TRUTH, without the need to declare it so. Abortion is one of these truths. The Pope need not declare it infallibly because we ought to know already that it is wrong in all cases. That is the active killing of an unborn child.

There are ample references to passages wherin the Lord indicates He "knew us before we were in the womb" indicating that the union of our soul with our material being does not initiate us as a person in His eyes. The sanctity of human life, souless or not, seems to be universally held as such, even by non-Christians, the problem is all about a few layers of skin and a containment unit, the womb. The Church of course believes that a human life represents a human person from the moment of conception, a distinction that has been delineated by the "progressives" and has lead to legislation enforcing the woman's right to choose to abort a child.

What is interesting is that often the 6th commandment is translated as murder vs. kill. The distinction is important as killing has been historically sanctioned by God in certain cases, as illustrated in the OT. Of course also, just war theory permits killing in certain circumstances, and self defence leading to the death of ones opponent is also permitted, or rather, is not a mortal sin. Yet murder is always a mortal sin. Of course the distinction between what murder is vs. killing in self defense etc, is best described by philosophers and theologians.

But then what does does the Code of Canon Law say about murder? Firstly, it does not explicitly declare murder as falling under penal sanctions, but it does list homicidium. This means that the taking of life in any case, could in fact lead to penal sanctions. OF course, legally, homicide is usually preceded by an adjective like criminal, deliberate, excusable or justifiable, felonious, negligent etc. Obviously homicide always refers to the taking of a person's life yet the adjective preceding it designates the severity of the act. Thus c. 1397 would refer primarily to those homicides that are unjustified. But what does the canon read exactly? "A person is to be punished according to the gravity of the offence, with the deprivations and prohibitions mentioned in canon 1336."

Now, reading 1398, one notices that the offense of consummated abortion, that is "whenever not only a non viable fetus is ejected from the uterus of the mother but also when an action is performed with the direct intention of killing a live fetus - from the moment of conception - eitehr in the mother's womb or outside it, and by whichever means, as long as the effect ensues," incurs a latae senteniae excommunication. That it, it is automatic, it does not need to be declared by a Church official.

Now, we know that killing is prohibited, directly from God, in the Ten Commandments. If one were to translate ratsach as murder, then one gets more specific but also it escalates the severity of the act. Either way, it is of divine law and therefore there is no need to declare it infallible. Even by natural law, one understands it to be completely wrong to commit murder, that is criminal homicide. Yet canon 1397 does not list homicide, in any form, as incuring a latae senteniae excommunication - the most severe penalty in the Catholic Church. Why is that? Or rather...why does canon 1398, why does abortion have as an automatic penalty the most severe one? It is explicitly because this sin, this act is the most heinous physical act one can perform. As Mother Theresa so aptly stated: "The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me? There is nothing between."

This is the case, there is simply nothing more heinous. Nothing left, when a mother can in the end, kill her own child for whatever reason, which is always selfish. I don't use the word selfish lightly but at the base of every abortion is a selfish act, placing the mother's needs above the needs of the child. Something no rational mother would ever do. Not in an absolute sense.

So, does the Pope need to declare abortion as a sin? As worse than murder? Because it is not murder. No. It is not, for if it were, it would fall under criminal homicide. I wish people would not use the word murder. The pro-choicers have it right. This is not murder, never, not ever. What it IS is something far worse, far more devastating, sinful, repugnant etc. It is abortion. It is pride absolute. It is man declaring to God, not even your weakest, most precious, most feeble lives are worth anything to us. We decide what is precious. We decide who lives and who dies. We are gods. It is the worst physical sin in the world. For the worst sin is always a sin against the Holy Spirit.

Abortion is infallibly taught, because it is a Truth of natural and divine law. It may never have been declared so ex cathedra but then, I doubt any Roman Pontiff would consider humanity at large dense enough to not comprehend that it evil run pure.