Can raped girls abort?

[Rence]

I will pray for you Rence. Whatever happened has you very upset. It is up to your spiritual advisor, and you to see to your needs. Whether B/MAP or RU486 preventing of the beginning of a life is also frowned upon by the Catholic church,

Acutally, it’s not. The Church allows Plan B in the ER after rape, after a negative pregnancy test, which is completely reasonable. But you also have to take a test to see if ovulation has started or if you’re ovulating. I know of the test, I’m just not sure exactly what part of ovulation it determines. It’s the same kind of test for ovulation that one does to either become pregnant or practice NFP. I’m not going to bother digging up the statement from the Bishops, it’s somewhere buried in this thread though. So they do allow that much and the statement specifically states that though the Church allows use of EC in cases of rape, it in no way changes their stance on artificial brith control. I don’t think any of the conservatives here will argue with that.

The bone of contention is that another prominent priest who has been writing articles for the Church, and whose articles are on the EWTN website, has said that it is permissible to err on behalf of the rape victim in the case of rape. Specifically, if the ovulation test is not available or if it is inconclusive. And I strongly agree. Because again, it takes TIME for conception to occur. And if a rape victim goes to the ER for treatment and wants Plan B it’s to prevent conception, not to terminate life later. Anyone can go have an abortion these days, and it’s silly as hell to argue about it because it’s a fact. And all this silly-talk about abortion clinics is a waste of time as well because you can get one at hospitals, women’s health clinics and doctor’s offices. So it’s not like the opportunity isn’t there. And while pro-lifers like to case abortion clinics they wouldn’t know about all the other abortions scheduled in the other areas of care. So really, anyone can have one descretely and go about their business without anyone knowing, and without any resulting drama afterwards. Clearly taking Plan B in a rape situation is all about prevention.

 

[limerick]

I just keep coming in here, hoping, PRAYING, that Rence and the others who are trying (and in some cases, doing a very good job of!) to explain that rape is a horrible act, and the woman would be justified to not want to carry the pregnancy that was the result of a rape to term.

… I am hoping and praying that they can understand that no amount of hurt, pain, embarrassment, depression, self-loathing, or anger can make it OK for a person to end another life.

Some one else asked if abortion is ok in other instances; so far, I have not seen the reply to this question. (Lots of, ‘I’ve already answered’, though)

An unplanned or unwanted pregnancy is just that: unplanned or unwanted. That doesn’t make it any less of a pregnany, or any less of a human being, or any less of a child of God.

I am still trying to understand if the people who support abortion in the case of rape understand that what the propose would be equal to saying ‘if you are hurting, it’s ok to play god’.

Do you?

What am I missing?

***You are missing an accceptance of the fact that you are addressing the lives of millions of women and, therefore, millions of concepts of Free Will. Your conscience happens to align with Catholicism. Every woman on the planet is not Catholic. What is so confusing about that?

Limerick***

 

[kage_ar]

***You are missing an accceptance of the fact that you are addressing the lives of millions of women and, therefore, millions of concepts of Free Will. Your conscience happens to align with Catholicism. Every woman on the planet is not Catholic. What is so confusing about that?

Limerick***

Because God’s law applies to all humans, it applies to you and to me and every person. The Moral Law is universal. No “if not Catholic, you get a free pass to murder” card.

 

[JReducation]

The Church allows Plan B in the ER after rape, after a negative pregnancy test, which is completely reasonable. But you also have to take a test to see if ovulation has started or if you’re ovulating. I know of the test, I’m just not sure exactly what part of ovulation it determines. It’s the same kind of test for ovulation that one does to either become pregnant or practice NFP. I’m not going to bother digging up the statement from the Bishops, it’s somewhere buried in this thread though. So they do allow that much and the statement specifically states that though the Church allows use of EC in cases of rape, it in no way changes their stance on artificial brith control. I don’t think any of the conservatives here will argue with that.

The bone of contention is that another prominent priest who has been writing articles for the Church, and whose articles are on the EWTN website, has said that it is permissible to err on behalf of the rape victim in the case of rape. Specifically, if the ovulation test is not available or if it is inconclusive.

This is the same thing that I was saying. I admit, as I did before, I’m not an OB/GYN. I’m a religious and a psychologist. That’s why I said, you need to get the medical information from a physician.

But the point remains the same. One may not do anything to terminate the life of the child. Having a procedure that cleanses is not the same and does not have the same intent as terminating a live or contraception.

One more thing, it’s important to clarify language here.

CONSERVATIVE: This is not about being liberal or conservative. This is not a political question. It’s a moral one. The proper language is truth or error. Truth is that all life is sacred and cannot be subject to willful destruction or termination. To label someone conservative because they know the truth and they stand behind it is unfair.

THE CHURCH ALLOWS OR PROHIBITS: The Church does not allow or prohibit. The Church teaches. That is her function in the public sphere. Her role is to teach the truth and to teach the difference between right and wrong. The Church prohibits in matters of discipline. In matters of faith and morals she teaches what is true and points out what is in error.

It is very disturbing to hear Catholics saying that the Church is conservative or that she prohibits this or that. That kind of language suggests that the truths taught by the Church are only applicable to Catholics. Truth is applicable to everyone. Truth is revealed by God, not fabricated in some back room at the Vatican.

Even people who are not Catholic are bound to live according to the truth.

**Part 1, Section 1, Chapter 1, SubSection 1 (CCC)

27 The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for:

The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.**

**Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum

GUARDING THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH IS THE MISSION WHICH THE LORD ENTRUSTED TO HIS CHURCH, and which she fulfils in every age. The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, which was opened 30 years ago by my predecessor Pope John XXIII, of happy memory, had as its intention and purpose to highlight the Church’s apostolic and pastoral mission, and by making the truth of the Gospel shine forth to lead all people to seek and receive Christ’s love which surpasses all knowledge (cf. Eph 3:19).**

It is unreasonable and unfaithful for any Catholic to believe that he or she can be in posession of truth when he or she holds a position that is in conflict with the deposit of faith that the Lord entrusted to the Church. The deposit of faith is not entrusted to individual Catholics or anyone else, but to the whole Church governed according to the Magisterium.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Eris_Discordia]

Even people who are not Catholic are bound to live according to the truth.

I disagree. I’m not Catholic, and I refuse to live by the moral codes set forth by the Pope. I am not bound by anything in the church, and my morals are mine. This is why I’m apostate. I do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope, and that he and the government can make decisions of morality that are infallible, because they are human, and they do not have a direct contact with God.

 

[mary1173]

I disagree. I’m not Catholic, and I refuse to live by the moral codes set forth by the Pope. I am not bound by anything in the church, and my morals are mine. This is why I’m apostate. I do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope, and that he and the government can make decisions of morality that are infallible, because they are human, and they do not have a direct contact with God.

Oh boy…what to say…hello, and welcome to Catholic Answers Forums…JReducation? any thoughts?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

kage

*Because God’s law applies to all humans, it applies to you and to me and every person. The Moral Law is universal. No “if not Catholic, you get a free pass to murder” card. *

Exactly.

When you can find an atheist like Chester Dolan who agrees with the Catholic position on abortion, you can see the universality of ethics transcending “free to be me” ethics.

The pro-aborts wants rights even the ancient Greeks denied physicians … the Hippocratic oath would not allow abortion. Today it does. We have descended in morals to a savage state where anything goes.

It is legal to kill our children.

It is legal to marry the same sex.

Why isn’t it legal to have more than one married partner simultaneously?

Why isn’t incest legal and marrying our brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers?

Everything is going to be legal sooner or later except common sense, which has already been outlawed.

 

[kage_ar]

I disagree. I’m not Catholic, and I refuse to live by the moral codes set forth by the Pope. I am not bound by anything in the church, and my morals are mine. This is why I’m apostate. I do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope, and that he and the government can make decisions of morality that are infallible, because they are human, and they do not have a direct contact with God.

I do not believe in the law of gravity.

That does not change the fact that it still applies to me.

 

[Apryl]

***You are missing an accceptance of the fact that you are addressing the lives of millions of women and, therefore, millions of concepts of Free Will. Your conscience happens to align with Catholicism. Every woman on the planet is not Catholic. What is so confusing about that?

Limerick***

Actually, I have not missed it.

Just like someone telling a terrible joke: I don’t see it. I didn’t miss it, just don’t get the result you want me to get.

Free will is what we say when we want Willie to come out and play

(See, you didn’t laugh, did you?)

Whether a person is Catholic or not, the life is still a life. As I am a Catholic, I need to preserve the life of the unborn child.

As an American woman, I need to protect women from doing themselves great bodily harm (see, this too impacts the non-Catholic, even athiest women)

This isn’t just about religion.

I’ve said it many times: my stance on abortion is what it is, with NOTHING to do with religion. Not a thing. Religion is just an added, ‘oh yeah’ to the situation.

First the rapist rapes the woman, then we want to get her again? This just reminds me of how they used to get women who were raped to cut their hair off. Why punish her? Why victimize the victim?

 

[JReducation]

I disagree. I’m not Catholic, and I refuse to live by the moral codes set forth by the Pope. I am not bound by anything in the church, and my morals are mine. This is why I’m apostate. I do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope, and that he and the government can make decisions of morality that are infallible, because they are human, and they do not have a direct contact with God.

I said that even non-Catholics are bound by truth. Are you saying that you are not bound by truth? Or are you saying that you have the power and insight to define truth?

No one is saying that you have to be Catholic, only that you have to be guided by truth. You can be an atheist, if you wish. But if you’re a social animal, you can’t live in society without truth. That would make you anti-social.

You can refuse to live by moral codes set forth by the Pope. However, popes don’t create moral codes. You’re misunderstanding their role. They point to moral laws that exist independent of us human beings. That’s their role. To codify moral law is not the same as creating it. No pope has ever created moral law. They simply codify it, just like the state codifies civil law.

You say that “they are human and do not have a direct contact with God.” How do you know this? Who said they did? What has been said since the time of Christ is that God does not allow popes to teach contrary to faith and morals. It is God’s action, not the popes’.

You can deny that God protects the popes from making errors on matters of faith and morals, if that is what you wish to do. But if you’re going to do that, you must make sure that you use language correctly and that you understand what is being taught. No one is teaching that popes have a hotline to God or that they are gods. We are saying that we believe in the power and mercy of God and we believe in the promise that Jesus made to Peter that “the gates of Hell will not prevail against you.”

You can argue that Jesus could not make such a promise and that his promise is null and void. But you would have to prove that. The only way that you could win that debate is to prove that Jesus is not who he said he was, the one and only God.

If you are saying that you do not believe in Jesus Christ, then that’s another discussion. We would have to start a thread on Christology.

I’m sorry that you think this way. I would suggest that you read an old classic written by Thomas Merton, No Man Is An Island.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[SugarMagnolia]

I would argue that one is not compliant or contrite if, given the opportunity one would commit the same act. Whether the opportunity arises is irrelevant to the actual sin. It is the nature of one’s heart. Regardless, being truly penitent is required and this requirement is not met. From the CCC, "1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place. Contrition is "sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin “.”

Even if one who has an abortion confesses and does not do so again, any effort to support another person’s ‘choice’ to abort puts their soul in jeopardy of separation from the Church and from God. This is where awareness of contributory sin is important. Someone who supports women’s right to choose to abort their child, whatever the circumstance, is automatically excommunicated. This is in recognition of their choice to separate themselves from God.

So if one honestly and truly believes elective abortion is not immoral at all, even if that person were to never have an abortion, that person would not be able to have reconciliation ever? A person could promise not to do something (like have an abortion) and mean it; but to say they no longer believe it’s okay would be a lie. A person can’t just stop believing something they truly believe.

And if a person had an abortion and didn’t regret it, even if they promised not to have any more, they too would never be reconciled. A person cannot force themselves to regret doing something if they truly believe what they did was good.

To remain in the Church, but to deny parts of the truth doesn’t really help the individual and certainly does not even make sense. The truth that has been revealed to us is that human life is sacred from conception to natural death. If we belong to the Church, presumably we remain because we believe that the fullness of truth is there. Otherwise, why stay?

Does this mean that someone like I described above, should just give up the church completely? I mean, if the person is already in mortal sin and can never be reconciled because it would be lying to say they believed abortion is wrong, should they leave?

I was thinking in answer to your, presumably rhetorical, question “why stay?” that they might see some truth and some is better than none. And even if this one thing is in disagreement they might be trying to conform to the teachings they do agree with. But if they’re not wanted anyway, then “why stay?” is a rhetorical question. Such a person might say, well since I can’t be in 100% agreement and the church won’t accept less than 100% I might as well just go back to the way it was before. One mortal sin or a hundred is the same thing anyway.

 

[limerick]

Actually, I have not missed it.

Just like someone telling a terrible joke: I don’t see it. I didn’t miss it, just don’t get the result you want me to get.

Free will is what we say when we want Willie to come out and play

(See, you didn’t laugh, did you?)

Whether a person is Catholic or not, the life is still a life. As I am a Catholic, I need to preserve the life of the unborn child.

As an American woman, I need to protect women from doing themselves great bodily harm (see, this too impacts the non-Catholic, even athiest women)

This isn’t just about religion.

I’ve said it many times: my stance on abortion is what it is, with NOTHING to do with religion. Not a thing. Religion is just an added, ‘oh yeah’ to the situation.

First the rapist rapes the woman, then we want to get her again? This just reminds me of how they used to get women who were raped to cut their hair off. Why punish her? Why victimize the victim?

---

Ah, so you chose to overlook the point because it does not support your “need to preserve the life of the unborn,” and your “need to protect women from doing themselves great bodily harm.” Therein lies choice - you practice it without endorsing it. And it appears from what you have written that your*** needs outweigh those of the women grappling with their options in this very horrifying situation. How very interesting.

I don’t want you to “get” any particular result. It would be encouraging if you could widen your understanding enough to allow for differences of opinion. And if your stance on abortion has “NOTHING to do with religion. Not a thing,” why peddle your opinion on a Catholic forum?

What does this mean - " … we want to get her again"? If a woman who has been raped and discovers she has conceived chooses to procure an abortion, this is not a case of someone “getting” her. It is her decision to make based on her relationship with God, her relationship with the father of the fetus if he is in any way present, and her relationship with herself: her own conscience, her own circumstances, her own personal, spiritual, emotional, psychological and mental strength. It’s none of your affair, nor is it any of my concern. I have the decency to allow the woman to act on her own behalf and to assume whatever consequences may be attached. This is not a spectator sport. This is not a lottery. It is a private matter. And it does have something to do with religion: many, many women choose to carry their pregnancies to term either because they love God or because they are afraid of Him.

Are you aligning yourself and your activities with the collective “we” who are “getting” the woman who is seeking an abortion after rape and conception? Be careful how you word your alliances. And anyone who can facetiously joke about free will in this discussion has some living to do before offering another opinion.

Limerick

 

[Apryl]

Ah, so you chose to overlook the point because it does not support your “need to preserve the life of the unborn,” and your “need to protect women from doing themselves great bodily harm.”

It wasn’t overlooked. I was being polite and not mentioning how pointless it was.

Is it better now that I’ve said it plain?

Therein lies choice - you practice it without endorsing it. And it appears from what you have written that your needs outweigh those of the women grappling with their options in this very horrifying situation. How very interesting.

It appears that way to you? How so?

What have I posted that said that this has anything to do with my needs? Where?

I don’t want you to “get” any particular result. It would be encouraging if you could widen your understanding enough to allow for differences of opinion. And if your stance on abortion has “NOTHING to do with religion. Not a thing,” why peddle your opinion on a Catholic forum?

um… 'cause I’m here alla the time… and I hope that Catholics ALSO don’t get abortions.

If you think that abortion is ok, why do you peddle your opinion on a Catholic forum?

(This is gonna be interesting)

What does this mean - " … we want to get her again"? If a woman who has been raped and discovers she has conceived chooses to procure an abortion, this is not a case of someone “getting” her. It is her decision to make based on her relationship with God, her relationship with the father of the fetus if he is in any way present, and her relationship with herself: her own conscience, her own circumstances, her own personal, spiritual, emotional, psychological and mental strength. It’s none of your affair, nor is it any of my concern. I have the decency to allow the woman to act on her own behalf and to assume whatever consequences may be attached. This is not a spectator sport. This is not a lottery. It is a private matter. And it does have something to do with religion: many, many women choose to carry their pregnancies to term either because they love God or because they are afraid of Him.

Are you aligning yourself and your activities with the collective “we” who are “getting” the woman who is seeking an abortion after rape and conception? Be careful how you word your alliances. And anyone who can facetiously joke about free will in this discussion has some living to do before offering another opinion.

Limerick

No… NOT AT ALL. I’m aligning YOU and those who would have the woman undergo an abortion.

Sure, the woman is emotional, hurt, vulnerable… so you rush her off to ‘fix things’, but who is there to hold her hand afterwards as she tries to deal with the consequences she had no way of foreseeing before she ‘fixed’ things? And what about the consequences she took because you and your ilk would suggest that she would be better off, some how ‘fixed’ by having an abortion.

You look at who you are aligned with!

 

[JReducation]

Does this mean that someone like I described above, should just give up the church completely? I mean, if the person is already in mortal sin and can never be reconciled because it would be lying to say they believed abortion is wrong, should they leave?

I was thinking in answer to your, presumably rhetorical, question “why stay?” that they might see some truth and some is better than none. And even if this one thing is in disagreement they might be trying to conform to the teachings they do agree with. But if they’re not wanted anyway, then “why stay?” is a rhetorical question. Such a person might say, well since I can’t be in 100% agreement and the church won’t accept less than 100% I might as well just go back to the way it was before. One mortal sin or a hundred is the same thing anyway.

I would never tell anyone to leave the Church. My question has to do with the person’s comfort at the level of conscience. The question becomes, “Why do I identify with a faith that I do not share?”

My hope is always that a person will try to put some distance between themselves and this conflicting position. Sometimes we have a conflicting position, but we can say, “I don’t understand or I don’t feel the way that others feel about this, but I trust that God is truly present and speaking through the Church. I don’t have to feel it. I can simply accept it, because in the end, faith is not about what I feel, but about what God reveals.”

Many of us have conflicts and questions about different teachings in the faith. But there is a drive to love God above all things. As Jesus says in Matthew’s Gospel, “Anyone who loves father and mother more than me is not fit to be my disciple. Anyone who loves son or daughter more than me, is not fit to be my disciple.” When you stop to think about it, loving anyone more than we love our children is a tough requirement. But we remain in the race, because we know that faith is a process. We grow toward the fullness of love. We don’t always have to feel 100% about something. We can remain in our faith with the hope that we’re moving in the direction that God wants us to go.

In this case, if I were the person who struggled with the question on abortion, knowing that God requires that I love him more than I love my opinion or my feelings on this subject, my position would be to ask God to help me move in that direction. God knows that we’re not always there, but if we have the willingness to grow in the direction that he calls, he certainly accepts our humble attempts.

That being said, when we dig in our heels and we make no allowances for change, to be converted by God, then we have a serious problem. God cannot change our hearts and minds unless we are open to that possibility. A person who struggles with this issue has to be open to be converted. That conversion begins with an acceptance that faith is not about me or what I feel, but about the God whom I love and what he wants and I am open to whatever he wants, no matter how difficult it may be to swallow. This requires a great deal of humility and honesty. We have to admit that we are not where God wants us to be, that’s honest. Honesty and humility are the same thing. But to remain in the Church on our terms is not humble and dishonest. The Church is not for us to do God a favor. It is the other way around. It is for God to do us a favor.

I don’t know if that is clearer. I hope it is.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Yes, of course you can argue that, just as I can argue that confession is for sinners, not nonsinners. And surely if people are confessing the same things over and over again, like masturbation and adultery and stealing, and they are reconciled, surely a rape victim would be. And Fidelis, I know you’re a kind hearted person and your heart is certainly in the right place, so don’t be offended, but it’s not up to you who can be reconciled with God. That’s between God and the sinner. Actually, no one can get in the middle of that. That’s between God and the individual. We are not here pass judgement on our fellow people on behalf of God.

Hold on a sec. I’m not judging anyone and I wish to heck people would stop claiming that I am. :nope: This is a discussion about Catholic teaching and my response is to your (incorrect) statement. Becoming learned in Church teaching is how we are able to more fully participate in our faith. It is hard to have an informed conscience if one does not spend time learning about their faith through discussion, studying Church history, the CCC, the Bible and Vatican documents (e.g. Humanae Vitae). Is confession between the person and God? Of course, but we have a responsibility to know the nature of sin and how confession works and what our Church teaches.

One of the necessary parts is to make reparation. CCC “1491 The sacrament of Penance is a whole consisting in three actions of the penitent and the priest’s absolution. The penitent’s acts are repentance, confession or disclosure of sins to the priest, and the intention to make reparation and do works of reparation.” How does one do that when the victim of their actions is dead? Well, for example, they may help others to not commit the same sin or, at the very least, they must refrain from contributory sin (ie, not counseling, consenting, concealing, defending, partaking, provoking, praising or silence.) Doing any of these would be an impediment to being contrite or repentant.

You brought up the idea that a woman can get an abortion, go to confession and be absolved of her sin. I still maintain that this is true UNLESS she is not truly penitent. zYou claim that since she’s unlikely to get raped again it’s not an issue. This is patently untrue. The state of her soul is the issue. It doesn’t matter if the situation comes up again or not, it matters what she would do if it did. One cannot get an abortion, planning to go to confession and get rid of a sin you are not truly repentant of. Doesn’t matter if the circumstance may never arise again, the issue is the state of the woman’s soul. If she would commit the same sin again then the absolution is not valid as it is a necessary part of the Sacrament of Confession. It’s not like taking a quick shower. It is the state of one’s soul and one’s willingness to submit to God’s will. Confession is for *repentant *sinners.

While we are on the subject… We believe … the Catholic Church believes that this is a human life and abortion is a mortal sin, separating one from God. From the Catholic viewpoint, no one wishes that a victim of rape then suffer an abortion, 'causing them to be further from God’s Grace and missing out on the healing Graces they might otherwise be afforded.

You made an earlier comment that rape is worse than murder. From my personal experience of being raped in my twenties, I wholeheartedly disagree. In fact the first positive emotion, the glimmer of hope coming was being able to feel glad to be ALIVE. The sun shone, a bird sang, all those lovely signs of life that God created brought. With life there is always hope.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

I do not believe in the law of gravity.

That does not change the fact that it still applies to me.

:tiphat: nicely put!

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

Actually, I have not missed it.

Just like someone telling a terrible joke: I don’t see it. I didn’t miss it, just don’t get the result you want me to get.

Free will is what we say when we want Willie to come out and play

(See, you didn’t laugh, did you?)

Whether a person is Catholic or not, the life is still a life. As I am a Catholic, I need to preserve the life of the unborn child.

As an American woman, I need to protect women from doing themselves great bodily harm (see, this too impacts the non-Catholic, even athiest women)

This isn’t just about religion.

I’ve said it many times: my stance on abortion is what it is, with NOTHING to do with religion. Not a thing. Religion is just an added, ‘oh yeah’ to the situation.

First the rapist rapes the woman, then we want to get her again? This just reminds me of how they used to get women who were raped to cut their hair off. Why punish her? Why victimize the victim?

I did!

I agree Apryl. Religion has nothing to do with whether I believe abortion is ok, it is wrong simply in terms of humanity; and many my athiest and agnostic friends agree. (godlessprolifers also supports this).

My faith REQUIRES me to not contribute to another’s sin and to protect innocent lives. Why is everyone’s freedom of speech and of religion honored, unless we are Catholic? I’m suddenly not allowed to say what I believe, because people don’t like it.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

***You are missing an accceptance of the fact that you are addressing the lives of millions of women and, therefore, millions of concepts of Free Will. Your conscience happens to align with Catholicism. Every woman on the planet is not Catholic. What is so confusing about that?

Limerick***

I don’t believe anyone is ‘missing’ this. One person’s free will doe not give them permission to murder another human being, ever.

What is missing, is the understanding that abortion ends the innocent life of a woman’s offspring and a society that readily does so will suffer for it. Catholic or not.

I cannot sit back and let a man murder another man, however justified it may seem, and tell him, “it’s ok I understand why you had to do you, you were suffering”. Neither can I sit back and allow the deaths of millions of unborn babies without speaking out.

makes me wonder what their consciences would have said.

 

[Fidelis_Unus]

I found today’s Gospel reading appropriate and thought I would share.

Mt 5:17-19
17 'Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete them.
18 In truth I tell you, till heaven and earth disappear, not one dot, not one little stroke, is to disappear from the Law until all its purpose is achieved.
19 Therefore, anyone who infringes even one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be considered the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but the person who keeps them and teaches them will be considered great in the kingdom of Heaven.

May you all have a blessed day.

 

[kage_ar]

So if one honestly and truly believes elective abortion is not immoral at all, even if that person were to never have an abortion, that person would not be able to have reconciliation ever? A person could promise not to do something (like have an abortion) and mean it; but to say they no longer believe it’s okay would be a lie. A person can’t just stop believing something they truly believe…

Belief is a choice. A person can just stop believing in something, they simply choose to believe something else. If a person has no choice over what they believe, they have a mental illness or are below the “age of reason”.

And if a person had an abortion and didn’t regret it, even if they promised not to have any more, they too would never be reconciled. A person cannot force themselves to regret doing something if they truly believe what they did was good. .

One cannot be forgiven of sin if one is not sorry for that sin.

Does this mean that someone like I described above, should just give up the church completely? I mean, if the person is already in mortal sin and can never be reconciled because it would be lying to say they believed abortion is wrong, should they leave? .

They should change what they believe, pray to have doubts removed and work with a Spiritual Director.

I was thinking in answer to your, presumably rhetorical, question “why stay?” that they might see some truth and some is better than none. And even if this one thing is in disagreement they might be trying to conform to the teachings they do agree with. But if they’re not wanted anyway, then “why stay?” is a rhetorical question. Such a person might say, well since I can’t be in 100% agreement and the church won’t accept less than 100% I might as well just go back to the way it was before. One mortal sin or a hundred is the same thing anyway.

Should they wish to continue in sin, they have chosen to reject Christ.

These people need our prayers!