Brazil Church condemns abortion of twins

  • Thread starter Thread starter browser1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Direct taking of human life is always wrong. At the moment the girls life was in danger (if it came to that) they would have to get the babies out and keep them alive the best they could. She would not necessarily have to carry them to term for them to survive.

What an awful situation!
 
Did Augustine not also say something like…I accept first and try to understand second? My point is we all need to be more docile and open to Church teaching rather than seeking to cultivate obstinate doubt and reasons to disgaree.
Simply beautiful quote. Thank you. Makes PERFECT sense.
 
An article from Cathnews

As heartbreaking as this story is, I don’t understand the outcry over the excommunication. The church is very clear on procurement of a completed abortion. Really the mother excommunicated herself
This is SO cool!! 🙂 After hearing so often about Church hierarchy giving Communion to those who promote abortion… (J Kerry :rolleyes:, etc.) it is good to hear this…

I’m glad some people are still truly Cathlic…

but it happened in Brazil, a mostly Catholic country…Good… but I want to hear about it happening in our good old :rolleyes: US of A…

Heard anything like that lately? I need some encouragement…

🙂
 
This is SO cool!! 🙂 After hearing so often about Church hierarchy giving Communion to those who promote abortion… (J Kerry :rolleyes:, etc.) it is good to hear this…

I’m glad some people are still truly Cathlic…

but it happened in Brazil, a mostly Catholic country…Good… but I want to hear about it happening in our good old :rolleyes: US of A…

Heard anything like that lately? I need some encouragement…

🙂
This has been in the headlines for some days now. Most pro-abortion catholicgovernor in the nation has been picked by Obama to head Health and Human Services. It’s mind-boggling. Her own bishop forbade her from recetion of the Holy Eucharist. Read the article. In part —Archbishop Naumann crossed swords publicly with Sebelius ever since she took that step of identifying herself as a Catholic governor who would veto pro-life legislation. Naumann then said that nothing in Sebelius’ political career suggests that she ever took any action to defend life. In fact, her political career shows Sebelius has been informed by anything but her Catholic faith.—http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08052805.html
 
" Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand."
  • St Augustine
Could this be the quotation?

Cinette
I’m not very familiar with Augustine, but thank you, Cinette. Sounds like that could be it.
 
I think that the Brazilian bishops handled this very wrong. They did not have to announce this excommunication publically and should not have made an example of this family.

And yes, I think it’s dangerous for a nine year old girl who weighs less than 66 pounds to carry twins… One cannot imagine how scary that would be for this family, and you have to wonder if the people were acting freely in this case. If everyone’s fear about this underweight (for a nine year old) carrying twins would kill her, made it difficult for the parties involved to act freely.

IF people were going to be excommuniated the stepfather certainly should have been.excommunicated as for he did not “murder” anyone, well to be quite frank, this man put this little girl’s life at risk with his actions. And let’s not talk about the damage that was done to this little girl.
 
FONT]
I think that the Brazilian bishops handled this very wrong. They did not have to announce this excommunication publically and should not have made an example of this family.

And yes, I think it’s dangerous for a nine year old girl who weighs less than 66 pounds to carry twins… One cannot imagine how scary that would be for this family, and you have to wonder if the people were acting freely in this case. If everyone’s fear about this underweight (for a nine year old) carrying twins would kill her, made it difficult for the parties involved to act freely.

IF people were going to be excommuniated the stepfather certainly should have been.excommunicated as for he did not “murder” anyone, well to be quite frank, this man put this little girl’s life at risk with his actions. And let’s not talk about the damage that was done to this little girl.
I believe your analysis is very wrong.

The stepfather should be jailed no doubt about that - he committed a horrific offense/sin and should have to serve some years in jail for this.

What the Mother/Doctors did was murder which is a mortal sin. The Church can never condone murder however terrible the circumstances. It is like the termites that erode and if not checked will destroy. You begin by condoning this Abortion/Murder of the two children and then you end up with full blown acceptance of Abortion/Euchanazia.

Can’t you see that?

Think about it.

:love:
 
I think that the Brazilian bishops handled this very wrong. They did not have to announce this excommunication publically and should not have made an example of this family.

And yes, I think it’s dangerous for a nine year old girl who weighs less than 66 pounds to carry twins… One cannot imagine how scary that would be for this family, and you have to wonder if the people were acting freely in this case. If everyone’s fear about this underweight (for a nine year old) carrying twins would kill her, made it difficult for the parties involved to act freely.

IF people were going to be excommuniated the stepfather certainly should have been.excommunicated as for he did not “murder” anyone, well to be quite frank, this man put this little girl’s life at risk with his actions. And let’s not talk about the damage that was done to this little girl.
My advice to you is to read the whole thread. Your words are off base, and hopefully you will realize this by reading the thread. You are quick to insult the Church. You are ignorant of the Truth and facts.
Please read the whole thread. God bless you.
 
catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15420

Very interesting further information. I don’t know if the source is reliable, but if it is, then this is compelling. To summarize, it treats the efforts of the girl’s biological father (not the rapist) to end the abortion, the girl’s isolation while the abortion was being prepared, and other steps leading up to the event. It also includes a few compelling points: a pro-life leader’s suggestion that there are 30,000 pregnancies PER YEAR in Brazil in girls under the age of 14 (horrible), and yet not one of those girls has died, assuming she has had access to prenatal care and a c-section…and the helpful reminder that this is not an isolated case, but one that pro-choice advocates had been using as evidence that abortion should be legalized, which gives us a certain context in which the Archbishop’s decision to speak out forcefully can be seen as all the more important…

Peace,
+AMDG+
 
My advice to you is to read the whole thread. Your words are off base, and hopefully you will realize this by reading the thread. You are quick to insult the Church. You are ignorant of the Truth and facts.
Please read the whole thread. God bless you.
No, I haven’t read all this thread. But I’ve heard about this case from Non Catholics, to know that this was a public relations disaster for the Church, and yes the Church could have said publically that they disagreed with abortion in this case, but did the excommunications in private…
What the Mother/Doctors did was murder which is a mortal sin. The Church can never condone murder however terrible the circumstances. It is like the termites that erode and if not checked will destroy. You begin by condoning this Abortion/Murder of the two children and then you end up with full blown acceptance of Abortion/Euchanazia.
Who said I’m condoning it? I’m not. But I don’t think that people are truly seeing this case from the perspective of Non Catholics. Many people are willing to agree with the Church that abortion should be illegal, but stop at the issue of a mother’s life being legitimately endangered. This case right here is the poster case for abortion advocates.

So why feed into them. I do think the Church should have spoken out and said that abortion in this case was wrong, and then publically presented the family’s other options like taking out the babies early. Etc. But they didn’t have to make the excommunications public because that was sure to make the Church like unfeeling and uncaring to the plight of this girl…

There’s a statement that people put on message boards “don’t feed the troll” and well that’s one of those cases, the bishop played into the hands of opponents of the Church when he reacted the way he did.

And this isn’t the case of a young child having one baby, it’s a case of nine year old having two, the doctors feared that this little girl didn’t have the pelvis to support twins.
 
No, I haven’t read all this thread. But I’ve heard about this case from Non Catholics, to know that this was a public relations disaster for the Church, and yes the Church could have said publically that they disagreed with abortion in this case, but did the excommunications in private…
While that course of action might have been the most acceptable for non-Catholics, the excommunication was made public to make sure that Catholics in Brasil were getting a clear message that this wasn’t an “acceptable” exception to the opposition of abortion.

It’s great that the Church has increased her senistivity to non-Catholics but, in the end, when there is a choice, the good of the Catholics in his charge is the ultimate responsibilty of a Bishop.
Who said I’m condoning it? I’m not. But I don’t think that people are truly seeing this case from the perspective of Non Catholics. Many people are willing to agree with the Church that abortion should be illegal, but stop at the issue of a mother’s life being legitimately endangered. This case right here is the poster case for abortion advocates.
Which is exactly why the Church and the Bishop can’t be silent. There is not room in the defense of life for exceptions, usually hypothetical, that are always being used by pro-abortion factions to try to show a gap in Catholic/pro-life teaching. And the idea that this was to save this little girl’s life is a hypothetical.
So why feed into them. I do think the Church should have spoken out and said that abortion in this case was wrong, and then publically presented the family’s other options like taking out the babies early. Etc. But they didn’t have to make the excommunications public because that was sure to make the Church like unfeeling and uncaring to the plight of this girl…
Please read the whole thread, especially the post with the time line of what happened. The public statement of excommunication wasn’t an after-the-fact condemnation. It was part of the appeal to save the lives of all three children involved. There is no way that you can say that wanting to save three children instead of one is “unfeeling and uncaring.”
And this isn’t the case of a young child having one baby, it’s a case of nine year old having two, the doctors feared that this little girl didn’t have the pelvis to support twins
And it’s also the case of a girl who was in her fourth or fifth month of pregnancy, in no immediate danger. Just another month or two of cautious waiting and observation might have had a much better ending. To ignore that fact is practically criminal, even in Brasil.
 
I believe your analysis is very wrong.

The stepfather should be jailed no doubt about that - he committed a horrific offense/sin and should have to serve some years in jail for this.

What the Mother/Doctors did was murder which is a mortal sin. The Church can never condone murder however terrible the circumstances. It is like the termites that erode and if not checked will destroy. You begin by condoning this Abortion/Murder of the two children and then you end up with full blown acceptance of Abortion/Euchanazia.

Can’t you see that?

Think about it.

:love:

Mortal sin is that an act that is so incompatible with charity that it turns the sinner away from God, hardening the heart such that the Grace of God cannot enter. Surely the repeated raping of a tiny child, beginning at the age of six, meets this definition. For tax evasion someone should “serve some years in jail” as you put it. This was a truly horrific crime. For these bishops to say that this man’s deeds are not incompatible with the reception of the Eucharist and full communion with the Church, but those of the mother are… its simply hard to believe or understand. I say ‘these bishops’ because I take solace in the fact that now that the facts are out, the Vatican also seems to be having a hard time understanding the actions of these bishops.
 
For these bishops to say that this man’s deeds are not incompatible with the reception of the Eucharist and full communion with the Church, but those of the mother are… its simply hard to believe or understand.
Well, it’s hard to believe because that isn’t at all what the Bishops have said. As has been reiterated many times in this thread, the step-father committed mortal sins and is therefore not allowed to receive communion without repentance and reconcilliation. The Bishops specifically condemned his actions repeatedly. He broke communion with the Church by his actions. But so did the doctors in this case. (BTW, the mother’s excommunication is being debated because it now appears she may have been coerced as well) And the doctors (and the others who thrwarted attempts to stop the abortion) also broke canon law. So they are in mortal sin AND excommunicated. It’s not an either-or situation.

And if you don’t think it’s proportionate, I’m sorry. But the step-father will hopefully spend the rest of his life in jail and not be in a position to hurt anyone else. The doctors and the hospital are very likely to commit this same sin again. How many dead babies does it take to reach a level of proportionality?
 
I think that the Brazilian bishops handled this very wrong. They did not have to announce this excommunication publically and should not have made an example of this family.
Is waht man thinks more important than what God thinks? What the Church did was right… the Church is Christ’s Presence on EArth… and Christ hates sin … it leads people away from God and into Hell…

Shouldn’t we humans hate it as much?
And yes, I think it’s dangerous for a nine year old girl who weighs less than 66 pounds to carry twins…
How is it dangerous to CARRY them??? Childbirth may present a problem but NOT carrying them. Pregnancy is about the healthiest condition a female can be in… and as stated, if she is old enough to get pregnant, i’m sure her body is prepared for birth… that’s the way God designed things… the body prepares for birth from the moment of conception… and even long before… Hello everyone!!! Pregnancy is a NATURAL condition!!!
One cannot imagine how scary that would be for this family, and you have to wonder if the people were acting freely in this case.
big deal… a lot of things in life are “scary”… Does that mean we avoid them? The bible speaks of the “cowardly and the unbeleiving” not makign it to Heaven… we are to do God’s will whether it is scary or not… Obviously, murder is NOT God’s will… He doesn’t create life and then tell pepole: Ok, go ahead and destroy it… No problem…
IF people were going to be excommuniated the stepfather certainly should have been.excommunicated as for he did not “murder” anyone, well to be quite frank, this man put this little girl’s life at risk with his actions. And let’s not talk about the damage that was done to this little girl.
ex-communicated persons can be forgiven in Confession and be re-established in the Church… and if the perpetrator does not ask for forgiveness, sacramentally, he cannot receive Communion any more than any other unrepentent soul can…
 
For these bishops to say that this man’s deeds are not incompatible with the reception of the Eucharist and full communion with the Church, but those of the mother are… its simply hard to believe or understand. .
show me where the bishops said this!!! or even impied it…

the perpetrator cannot receive Communion unless he has confessed his sins in teh confessional (and shown repentance and willingness to stop this sin)…

so he is just as ex-communicated as those officially ex-com’d
 
Please read the whole thread, especially the post with the time line of what happened. The public statement of excommunication wasn’t an after-the-fact condemnation. It was part of the appeal to save the lives of all three children involved. There is no way that you can say that wanting to save three children instead of one is “unfeeling and uncaring.”
But your not understanding my issue. My issue isn’t so much with excommunication, but with the way the bishop and the church handled this whole case. It would have been far better in this case for the bishop to send an emissary to the family, or to go himself and talk to this family privately than to do a public excommunication. If the mother was being coerced than the Church could have made this public, and perhaps saved those babies lives.

I mean we have pro abortion canidates getting communion all the time, and nobody has done anything like that. But they do it in this situation where you have the girl’s mother acting out of the fear and safety of her child…

There are a lot of times when you can be technically right about something, like in the case of direct abortion being automatic excommunication, but you can handle the situation completely wrong. I feel this situation was handled wrong…
 
But your not understanding my issue. My issue isn’t so much with excommunication, but with the way the bishop and the church handled this whole case. It would have been far better in this case for the bishop to send an emissary to the family, or to go himself and talk to this family privately than to do a public excommunication. If the mother was being coerced than the Church could have made this public, and perhaps saved those babies lives.

I mean we have pro abortion canidates getting communion all the time, and nobody has done anything like that. But they do it in this situation where you have the girl’s mother acting out of the fear and safety of her child…

There are a lot of times when you can be technically right about something, like in the case of direct abortion being automatic excommunication, but you can handle the situation completely wrong. I feel this situation was handled wrong…
But I do understand your position. When I first heard about this I thought either this Bishop is seriously weak on the pastoral side of his job description or something was seriously lost in the translation. But you have to look beyond the headlines. If you insist on not reading all the posts (I don’t blame you ;)) just look at the link in post #410. You will see all that was done pastorally to help this family. This public excommunication statement wasn’t even a initiated by the Bishop’s office. It was in response to a question by a journalist.

Did you even know that a priest was visiting or trying to visit the girl and her family DAILY? Did you know that the girl’s real father was trying to help save his grandchildren’s lives and the Bishops office was helping him? Before you claim that the Bishop didn’t do enough to help the family, make sure you have looked at all the information you have been presented with here. Keep in mind that the press gets more leverage on printing what will be seen as “errors” of the Church than by reporting what the Bishop and others did that was right.

I also don’t think it is fair that this bishop in Brazil is being held accountable by you for the actions or inactions of Bishops in the US and elsewhere. Do you have any evidence that he hasn’t been consistent in his treatment of politicians in his diocese?
 
Hello,
I too was bothered by what I saw as a lack of senstivity on the part of the bishop. I see Abp. Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life has issued a statement on the subject which I think is worthy of posting here:
VATICAN CITY, MARCH 18, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The Pontifical Academy for Life president is lamenting the recently aborted Brazilian twins of a nine-year-old girl, and is calling the consequent excommunication of those who cooperated in it “precipitous.”

In an article published Sunday in L’Osservatore Romano, Archishop Rino Fisichella spoke about the case of a young Brazilian girl who was repeatedly raped by her stepfather, and was expecting twins. In early March, an abortion was performed on the girl, who is just over 52 inches tall and weighs 79 pounds.

The case drew even more controversy when Archbishop José Cardoso Sobrinho of Olinda and Recife excommunicated the mother and all the members of the medical team, generating criticisms against the Church in Brazil.

Archbishop Fisichella lamented the precipitous condemnation in such a morally delicate case. Referring to the excommunication “latae sententiae” [automatically incurred at the moment of the act], he said that “such urgency and publicity was not necessary.”

What is most needed at this time, he explained, “is the sign of a testimony of closeness with the one suffering, an act of mercy that, even while firmly maintaining the principle, is able to look beyond the juridical sphere.”

It is true that the girl “carried within her innocent lives like her own, though the fruit of violence, and they have been done away with; however, this is not enough to pass a judgment that weighs as a condemnation,” he added.

Mercy over justice

The archbishop lamented the image given by the Church in this case, as “before giving thought to excommunication, it was necessary and urgent to safeguard the innocent life of this girl, and return her to a level of humanity of which we, men of the Church, should be expert heralds and teachers.”

In this case, he said, the girl “should in the first place have been defended, embraced, caressed with tenderness to make her feel that we are all with her.”

He stated that Archbishop Sobrinho’s “hasty” reaction has caused resentment and has undermined the credibility of the Church’s teaching, “which in the eyes of many seems insensitive, incomprehensible and lacking in mercy.”

Archbishop Fisichella emphasized that the condemnation of abortion as an intrinsic evil is one of the moral principles which the Church cannot overlook even if she wished to. However, he pointed out that the present case “was very delicate,” and that “to treat it expeditiously does not do justice” either to the fragile person of the girl or to all those involved in the case.

The prelate also noted that, unfortunately, a case like this “would have passed unnoticed, as so many similar ones, if it was not for the uproar of the reactions caused by the bishop’s intervention.”

He affirmed, “Violence to a woman, already grave in itself, assumes an even more blameworthy dimension when the one suffering is a girl, with the additional burden of poverty and the social degradation in which she lives.”

“There are no adequate words to condemn incidents such as this one,” added the prelate.

Medical dilemma

Archbishop Fisichella acknowledged that in this case it is hard to make specific judgments while doing justice to truth, given that the doctors were faced with a very grave moral dilemma.

In regard to the girl, he stated, “because of her very young age and her precarious health conditions, her life was in serious danger by the pregnancy under way.” He continued: “How should one act in such cases? It is an arduous decision for the doctors and for the moral law itself.”

The prelate said, “Scenes such as this, though with a different casuistry, are repeated daily in resuscitation rooms, and the doctor’s conscience is alone at the moment of deciding what is the best thing to do.”

For any doctor, unless he is insensitive, “a choice such as this of saving a life knowing that he puts another in serious danger, is not easily lived,” he added.

The archbishop noted, “In any case, no one comes to a decision of this sort with ease; it is unjust and offensive just to think of it.”

Grave crime

In the same vein, Archbishop Geraldo Lyrio Rocha of Mariana, president of the Brazilian bishops’ conference, publicly lamented last week that “the most repugnant aspect of this case was diluted, given the controversy over the excommunication.”

However, as a March 6 statement from the conference pointed out, the real problem is “the increase of cases of abuse of minors in the country,” a topic “on which the national conscience must be awakened.”

The prelate also clarified that the penalty of excommunication “is not synonymous with condemnation to hell, but is a disciplinary act of the Church,” which attempts “to call the attention of consciences to an intrinsically grave act, of whose gravity at times there is no clear perception.”

He also pointed out that Archbishop Sobrinho himself “has not excommunicated anyone,” given that, according to the law of the Church, excommunication is automatic when an abortion is carried out.

Moreover, he clarified that “to incur an excommunication, the person must be conscious of the gravity of the act and have the freedom to practice it,” which in this case excludes the minor and no doubt also her mother, “who acted under pressure.”

See: zenit.org/article-25402?l=english
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top