Abortion and Excommunication

[JReducation]

. I was taught that the mother’s life, in such instances, has priority since “the child cannot live without the mother.”

OH DEAR!

No . . . whoever taught you that, taught you heresy. The Church has infallibly declared that abortion is never morally justified and that neither life takes priority over the other. One must do whatever is necessary to protect both lives, but if one or both die, we accept the will of God, even when we don’t understand God’s plan.

We may never touch the child in the womb, even to save his mother’s life. In Evangelium Vitae, Bl. John Paul makes this an apostolic decree, morally binding on all Catholics for all time.

Having said this, there are medical procedures that have we know will end the life of the child and which cannot be avoided, because we don’t know how to preserve that life, not because we have done anything directly to the child.

For example, if there is a cancer that has to be removed and it cannot wait, to remove the cancerous uterus, even though there is a child inside, is not an abortion, because the physician is not touching the child. He’s taking out the cancerous uterus. An abortion would be if he invaded the uterus to take out the child. However, if the surgical procedure can wait until the child is viable, past week 25 today, there is a moral obligation to wait as long as possible to give the child a fighting chance and to allow us to use all the medical technology available to us to save the child.

I hope this clarifies the point.

Merry Christmas!

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

 

[DebChris]

OH DEAR!

No . . . whoever taught you that, taught you heresy. The Church has infallibly declared that abortion is never morally justified and that neither life takes priority over the other. One must do whatever is necessary to protect both lives, but if one or both die, we accept the will of God, even when we don’t understand God’s plan.

We may never touch the child in the womb, even to save his mother’s life. In Evangelium Vitae, Bl. John Paul makes this an apostolic decree, morally binding on all Catholics for all time.

Having said this, there are medical procedures that have we know will end the life of the child and which cannot be avoided, because we don’t know how to preserve that life, not because we have done anything directly to the child.

For example, if there is a cancer that has to be removed and it cannot wait, to remove the cancerous uterus, even though there is a child inside, is not an abortion, because the physician is not touching the child. He’s taking out the cancerous uterus. An abortion would be if he invaded the uterus to take out the child. However, if the surgical procedure can wait until the child is viable, past week 25 today, there is a moral obligation to wait as long as possible to give the child a fighting chance and to allow us to use all the medical technology available to us to save the child.

I hope this clarifies the point.

Merry Christmas!

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

I think we are getting into an area of semantics. The medical term, abortion, does not necessarily involve the invasion of the uterus. Please read my post closely. Every effort must be made to save both lives, if possible. I no longer have my copy of a book that shows this consistent Papal stance on abortion. An extra-uterine pregnancy must be terminated in order to save the mother’s life. It is unfortunate that the child will be lost, or aborted, in the process. If the pregnancy is not terminated, both the mother and child will die. This is an example of a therapeutic abortion. It does not go against what the Church teaches.
I’m sure that my mother did not teach me heresy. I also know how upset she was that the doctor put “abortion” in her medical file when my younger brother was stillborn. She did not understand that this is the correct medical term. It would have been the diagnosis, not the procedure. *.
Using your example of a cancerous uterus, the uterus is removed to save the mother’s life The child is aborted in the process. In medical terms, this also would be called a therapeutic abortion.

The intentional, and voluntary, destruction of the fetus within the womb is an aborticide, what Tabor’s medical dictionary would call a “voluntary abortion.” My medical dictionary, with almost half a page of terms referring to different types of abortions is stateside.*

 

[iloveangels]

I think we are getting into an area of semantics. The medical term, abortion, does not necessarily involve the invasion of the uterus. Please read my post closely. Every effort must be made to save both lives, if possible. I no longer have my copy of a book that shows this consistent Papal stance on abortion. An extra-uterine pregnancy must be terminated in order to save the mother’s life. It is unfortunate that the child will be lost, or aborted, in the process. If the pregnancy is not terminated, both the mother and child will die. This is an example of a therapeutic abortion. It does not go against what the Church teaches.
I’m sure that my mother did not teach me heresy. I also know how upset she was that the doctor put “abortion” in her medical file when my younger brother was stillborn. She did not understand that this is the correct medical term. It would have been the diagnosis, not the procedure. *.
Using your example of a cancerous uterus, the uterus is removed to save the mother’s life The child is aborted in the process. In medical terms, this also would be called a therapeutic abortion.

No, Br. Jr is right. Have you ever heard of Bl. Gianna Molla?

The intentional, and voluntary, destruction of the fetus within the womb is an aborticide, what Tabor’s medical dictionary would call a “voluntary abortion.” My medical dictionary, with almost half a page of terms referring to different types of abortions is stateside.

I do come from a large Catholic family. I had four brothers, not counting my stillborn brother, and four sisters.*

 

[JReducation]

I think we are getting into an area of semantics. The medical term, abortion, does not necessarily involve the invasion of the uterus. Please read my post closely. Every effort must be made to save both lives, if possible. I no longer have my copy of a book that shows this consistent Papal stance on abortion. An extra-uterine pregnancy must be terminated in order to save the mother’s life. It is unfortunate that the child will be lost, or aborted, in the process. If the pregnancy is not terminated, both the mother and child will die. This is an example of a therapeutic abortion. It does not go against what the Church teaches.
I’m sure that my mother did not teach me heresy. I also know how upset she was that the doctor put “abortion” in her medical file when my younger brother was stillborn. She did not understand that this is the correct medical term. It would have been the diagnosis, not the procedure. *.
Using your example of a cancerous uterus, the uterus is removed to save the mother’s life The child is aborted in the process. In medical terms, this also would be called a therapeutic abortion.

The intentional, and voluntary, destruction of the fetus within the womb is an aborticide, what Tabor’s medical dictionary would call a “voluntary abortion.” My medical dictionary, with almost half a page of terms referring to different types of abortions is stateside.*

This is an important clarification, because people can read therapeutic abortion to include those cases where the doctor tells the mother that they must terminate the pregnancy for therapeutic reasons, but in fact they are attacking the fetus.

The Church avoids using this term, because it can confuse people. She refers to these procedures as medical procedures or surgical procedures that do not involve the killing of the unborn, but where the death of the unborn is an undesired and foreseeable collateral effect. This way, the difference is very clear. I know that OF/GYNs use the term abortion very broadly.

Unfortunately, their broad use of the term can confuse the person who does not know the difference. They also refer to a miscarriage as an abortion. To people like your mother, when they see this on their medical charts, it horrifies them. They never engaged in an abortion.

Merry Christmas!

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

 

[ForGood]

I remember a thread on CAF that asked the question should women who have had abortions be allowed in ProLife ministry. Their point was that as murderers, they do not have the right to be involved.

As shocking as that sounds - I can believe people say it. But statistically speaking - if that were the case then there would t be much of a prolife movement. One in every four woman are like to have had an abortion so odds are a large percentage of those who are prolife now are also postabortive - a cinsuring which PJP II thought to make them the most eloquent defenders of life. Good enough for me.

 

[DebChris]

This is an important clarification, because people can read therapeutic abortion to include those cases where the doctor tells the mother that they must terminate the pregnancy for therapeutic reasons, but in fact they are attacking the fetus.

The Church avoids using this term, because it can confuse people. She refers to these procedures as medical procedures or surgical procedures that do not involve the killing of the unborn, but where the death of the unborn is an undesired and foreseeable collateral effect. This way, the difference is very clear. I know that OF/GYNs use the term abortion very broadly.

Unfortunately, their broad use of the term can confuse the person who does not know the difference. They also refer to a miscarriage as an abortion. To people like your mother, when they see this on their medical charts, it horrifies them. They never engaged in an abortion.

Merry Christmas!

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

With today’s charged political climate, the medical record is just as likely to use “termination of pregnancy” whether referring to a surgical procedure meant to save the mother’s life or the intentional killing of the unborn. This euphemism does not conceal the truth. To be correct, using your example again of an acceptable medical procedure, the chart should read something like “termination of pregnancy via hysterectomy.” The diagnosis, objective findings, and assessment would serve as the reason why.
With a miscarriage, the “natural abortion,” would be a diagnosis rather than a treatment. Not everybody knows how to read medical charts.

 

[DebChris]

I remember a thread on CAF that asked the question should women who have had abortions be allowed in ProLife ministry. Their point was that as murderers, they do not have the right to be involved.

As shocking as that sounds - I can believe people say it. But statistically speaking - if that were the case then there would t be much of a prolife movement. One in every four woman are like to have had an abortion so odds are a large percentage of those who are prolife now are also postabortive - a cinsuring which PJP II thought to make them the most eloquent defenders of life. Good enough for me.

I think your “statistic” on how many women abort is extremely high. I do belong to the Facebook group Let’s find 1,000,000 people against Abortion. This group often includes in its postings the testimony of former Planned Parenthood members who actually performed abortions, and postabortive individuals.

 

[ForGood]

An Overview Of Abortion In The United States

Nearly half of all pregnancies to American women are unintended; four in 10 of these end in abortion.

About half of American women have experienced an unintended pregnancy, and at current rates more than one-third (35%) will have had an abortion by age 45.

Overall unintended pregnancy rates have stagnated over the past decade, yet unintended pregnancy increased by 29% among poor women while decreasing 20% among higher-income women.

In 2005, 1.21 million abortions were performed, down from 1.31 million abortions in 2000.

Nine in 10 abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions:
56% of women having abortions are in their 20s;
61% have one or more children;
67% have never married;
57% are economically disadvantaged;
88% live in a metropolitan area; and
78% report a religious affiliation.

 

[couponfit]

From the Code of Canon Law:

Can. 1398 A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Latae sententiae is an automatic excommunication that occurs from the person committing the act.

Good point, but absolution removes a person from excommunication unless it is imposed for a fixed period of time which it is not in latae sententiae. Since the excommunication was made in such a manner the church, priest and even the member herself would likely not be aware of that excommunication was in affect. Further I find that women who have abortions are not in active communion with the church and are in a place of darkness (pastoral description) so it is only upon receiving the Holy Spirit that they are even able to step back and return to the church. Thus excommunication tends to be enforced by the person without realizing it even before they commit such a sin.

 

[JReducation]

Good point, but absolution removes a person from excommunication unless it is imposed for a fixed period of time which it is not in latae sententiae. Since the excommunication was made in such a manner the church, priest and even the member herself would likely not be aware of that excommunication was in affect. Further I find that women who have abortions are not in active communion with the church and are in a place of darkness (pastoral description) so it is only upon receiving the Holy Spirit that they are even able to step back and return to the church. Thus excommunication tends to be enforced by the person without realizing it even before they commit such a sin.

If the person is unaware that there is an excommunication attached to abortion, the person is not excommunicated. You must know for the excommunication to apply.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :snowing:

 

[couponfit]

If the person is unaware that there is an excommunication attached to abortion, the person is not excommunicated. You must know for the excommunication to apply.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :snowing:

Thanks

 

[couponfit]

OH DEAR!

No . . . whoever taught you that, taught you heresy. The Church has infallibly declared that abortion is never morally justified and that neither life takes priority over the other. One must do whatever is necessary to protect both lives, but if one or both die, we accept the will of God, even when we don’t understand God’s plan.

We may never touch the child in the womb, even to save his mother’s life. In Evangelium Vitae, Bl. John Paul makes this an apostolic decree, morally binding on all Catholics for all time.

Having said this, there are medical procedures that have we know will end the life of the child and which cannot be avoided, because we don’t know how to preserve that life, not because we have done anything directly to the child.

For example, if there is a cancer that has to be removed and it cannot wait, to remove the cancerous uterus, even though there is a child inside, is not an abortion, because the physician is not touching the child. He’s taking out the cancerous uterus. An abortion would be if he invaded the uterus to take out the child. However, if the surgical procedure can wait until the child is viable, past week 25 today, there is a moral obligation to wait as long as possible to give the child a fighting chance and to allow us to use all the medical technology available to us to save the child.

I hope this clarifies the point.

Merry Christmas!

Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:

Yes but there are real cases in courts where those of the church legally compelled a woman to be denied cancer treatment. In ga over 60 mothers whose children died still or shortly after birth are in prison for murder. Clearly the message you share is lost in the attempt to satisfy the truth written n your first paragraph. It is these errors in judgement in failing to adhere to the truth written n your ending that our goal to save life is impeded by those who would actually agree with your words but not poor implementation.

 

[JReducation]

Yes but there are real cases in courts where those of the church legally compelled a woman to be denied cancer treatment. In ga over 60 mothers whose children died still or shortly after birth are in prison for murder. Clearly the message you share is lost in the attempt to satisfy the truth written n your first paragraph. It is these errors in judgement in failing to adhere to the truth written n your ending that our goal to save life is impeded by those who would actually agree with your words but not poor implementation.

Sorry, you lost me. Can you break this down a little more. Thanks.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF