Brazil Church condemns abortion of twins

[oldcelt]

A desire to save one life can never justify the direct termination of another.

What about self-defense?

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

 

[oldcelt]

I think the poster was referring to God’s passive will - His Divine providence. It’s manifestly obvious that God permitted this pregnancy to occur (since it happened).

There was no way to reverse this without violating the rights of the unborn, so it had to be allowed to continue.

Or is it possible that life is a bit more random?

 

[Middleman]

I, also, wonder at the injustice of excommunicating these people, yet the perpetrator gets off with a slap on the wrist. I also don’t understand why murder of an unborn child demands excommunication, yet murder of a born person doesn’t. That seems illogical to me.

 

[catharina]

What about self-defense?

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

Are you comparing an innocent child in the womb to an AGGRESSOR?

As for an actual aggressor:

one is allowed to defend one’s life to the point of killing another - but one is not commanded to defend one’s life to that point (e.g., St. Maria Goretti comes to mind).

 

[oldcelt]

Are you comparing an innocent child in the womb to an AGGRESSOR?

As for an actual aggressor:

one is allowed to defend one’s life to the point of killing another - but one is not commanded to defend one’s life to that point (e.g., St. Maria Goretti comes to mind).

The term aggressor could be taken to include anyone who threatens your life. This is an extraordinary case and one that I pray we never hear of again. However, from what I have read regarding this case, the carrying of these babies could have caused this child’s death.

I’ll admit I would have a very hard time telling a 9 year old she had to die in defense of life.

 

[oldcelt]

I, also, wonder at the injustice of excommunicating these people, yet the perpetrator gets off with a slap on the wrist. I also don’t understand why murder of an unborn child demands excommunication, yet murder of a born person doesn’t. That seems illogical to me.

Me too.

 

[catharina]

The term aggressor could be taken to include anyone who threatens your life. This is an extraordinary case and one that I pray we never hear of again. However, from what I have read regarding this case, the carrying of these babies could have caused this child’s death.

I’ll admit I would have a very hard time telling a 9 year old she had to die in defense of life.

Emphasis on “could have caused death” - OR “need not have caused death.”
We live in a world where, a young, slender woman gave birth to EIGHT babies at once.

Crossing a street can cause a death.
Having the flu can cause a death.
Eating tainted food can cause a death.
Having pneumonia can cause a death.
Yet none of these things will NECESSARILY cause a death.

OTOH, abortion will most definitely cause DEATH.

 

[oldcelt]

Emphasis on “could have caused death” - OR “need not have caused death.”
We live in a world where, a young, slender woman gave birth to EIGHT babies at once.

Crossing a street can cause a death.
Having the flu can cause a death.
Eating tainted food can cause a death.
Having pneumonia can cause a death.
Yet none of these things will NECESSARILY cause a death.

OTOH, abortion will most definitely cause DEATH.

But do we not apply preventive or treatment measures to help ensure that these circumstances do not result in death?

 

[Middleman]

I feel as if these Bishops are making a huge public relations mistake, and committing an injustice, in a case that is extreme, thus making the Church look stupid, sexist and unfair. Meanwhile, they are still debating whether to give communion to Catholic politicians who openly support liberal abortion in more normal cases. Why, Nancy Pelosi recently received an audience with the Holy Father!

These doctors made a medical judgment that the pregnancy would be damaging to the child, who had already been grossly violated. The case is an extreme one. But these Bishops had to go and punish those trying to protect the child, and let the horrible man who put her in danger in the first place go with 3 Hail Marys and and Our Father.

 

[Dauphin]

I feel as if these Bishops are making a huge public relations mistake, and committing an injustice, in a case that is extreme, thus making the Church look stupid, sexist and unfair. Meanwhile, they are still debating whether to give communion to Catholic politicians who openly support liberal abortion in more normal cases. Why, Nancy Pelosi recently received an audience with the Holy Father!

These doctors made a medical judgment that the pregnancy would be damaging to the child, who had already been grossly violated. The case is an extreme one. But these Bishops had to go and punish those trying to protect the child, and let the horrible man who put her in danger in the first place go with 3 Hail Marys and and Our Father.

Canon Law itself gives an automatic penalty of excommunication for the crime of abortion. The Bishop simply pointed out that this had happened.

Direct abortion is never permissible under any circumstances. The truth exists for its own sake, not to get “good PR” for the Church.

 

[Dauphin]

Or is it possible that life is a bit more random?

No, it’s not at all possible. God is perfectly in control of everything, or else He isn’t God.

 

[Dauphin]

The term aggressor could be taken to include anyone who threatens your life. This is an extraordinary case and one that I pray we never hear of again. However, from what I have read regarding this case, the carrying of these babies could have caused this child’s death.

I’ll admit I would have a very hard time telling a 9 year old she had to die in defense of life.

Suppose you have an innocent person in one chamber who is slowly dying, and two innocent people in another chamber who are hooked up to electric chairs. It is likely that the only way to save the dying person is to press a button which activates the electric chairs and kills the two others.

What would you do? The only morally permissible action is of course to allow the first person to die. It’s not pleasant, it’s not ideal, and it doesn’t make us feel good, but it’s the only choice. To directly kill innocents is gravely and intrinsically evil; it can never be permitted.

Some people are relying entirely on emotion in this case, instead of on the moral principles which the Church gives us.

 

[oldcelt]

No, it’s not at all possible. God is perfectly in control of everything, or else He isn’t God.

So the Lord God created this child to be raped and exploited?

 

[oldcelt]

We’ve entered into paradox territory…think I’ll back away.

 

[FrancesMarx]

God in His own plan, allowed her to get pregnant with twins.

God executed half of his plan through the step-father. Then he executed the rest through the doctor.
I think you saw just half of his plan. He also planned the abortion of the child.

 

[rayne89]

I’m sure you weren’t aware of this but this is the third thread on this subject.

Apparently the mods combined the threads after I posted this on another thread.

 

[catharina]

God executed half of his plan through the step-father. Then he executed the rest through the doctor.
I think you saw just half of his plan. He also planned the abortion of the child.

Accusing God of planning the deliberate killing (abortion) of the babies is horrific.
You’ve gone far beyond the pale.

 

[rayne89]

God executed half of his plan through the step-father. Then he executed the rest through the doctor.
I think you saw just half of his plan. He also planned the abortion of the child.

I’m beginning to think you just want to stir up an argument because this statement is just outrageous. God gives every one free will -to chose to do good or to do evil. To say God planned evil is impossible.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

I, also, wonder at the injustice of excommunicating these people, yet the perpetrator gets off with a slap on the wrist. I also don’t understand why murder of an unborn child demands excommunication, yet murder of a born person doesn’t. That seems illogical to me.

I note the above as a representative sample.

This is like the guy to tells the judge in traffic court, “It’s unfair that I have to pay this fine. Sure, I was speeding, but there were lots of other speeders on the road, too.”

Why is it unjust to excommunicate someone for contriving to take totally - and I mean totally - innocent human life? And should the perp die unconfessed and unrepentant, he is at risk of something more than a slap on the wrist. To overlook this is to be so temporal that it is to deny the existence of the spiritual realm altogether.

The Archbishop is not a part of the secular justice system; he is a successor to the Apostles, concerned with the concerns of the Church first and foremost. It is right and proper that the perp gets his temporal punishment from the secular justice system, and it is to be sincerely hoped he does - in spades. It is also right and proper that the Archbishop sees to the affairs of the Church.

Let me speak plainly. It is destructive, disloyal, and pernicious for Catholics to attack the Church, and one of her Archbishops, for standing witness to the penalty for the taking of innocent life. Notice that, as every Catholic should know, the people imposed the penalty ON THEMSELVES, through the commission of the act. The excommunication was laetae sententiae. I find it extremely offensive when Catholics find fault with an Archbishop who simply stands witness to what others have done to themselves.

It is well that the taking of innocent lives and the rape of a child are cited in this discussion. Otherwise, the scandalous utterances of some Catholics that are recorded here would be the most disgusting things in the thread.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Beautiful]

I’m beginning to think you just want to stir up an argument because this statement is just outrageous.

I understand your observation. There a balkers that respond negatively - racing through a thread making noise like nails scratching on a chalkboard and then they leave. These screamers are much worse sounding on secular news websites. I don’t bother reading the posts at my local online news agency which for the most part goes unedited.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be - only God’s Word lives - all else dies.