Can raped girls abort?

[JReducation]

If someone is considering an order and has not revealed these thoughts to the authorities. By definition a Secular Order is a real Order. Secular Orders answer to the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. They also answer to the Holy See. Therefore, they are governed by canon law.

I strongly recommend that anyone who holds a position on abortion or euthanasia contrary to that which the Church demands not enter an order. And if you are already in an order, such as a candidate or novice, you have a moral obligation to reveal your position to the superior of the community, whatever title he may go by.

The profession would be invalid, if the person making the profession is in a situation that places him or her out of communion with the Church. The person would then be adding a very serious sin to their lives. Knowingly making an invalid profession, whether in a religious order or a secular order, is a grave sin. It is equivalent to knowingly entering into an invalid marriage.

It is also an injustice to the Order, because the Order accepts the candidate in good faith. It believes that the Candidate is truly Catholic and holds and believes everything that the Catholic Church teaches. The Order also believes that the candidate truly wants to obey the authority of the Church and that the candidate will not say or do anything that will compromise the reputation and fidelity of the order. To enter an order with positions that are contrary to faith and morals, should be reported.

In charity, I strongly recommend to anyone who is in such a position to have an honest discussion with the proper authorities in their order. They may be able to address your concerns and answer your questions on this subject. If nothing else, they will be able to tell you if you can join them and hold these views.

This is a true fraternal concern.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Podo2005]

Can someone please show me a picture of gravity?

 

[Podo2005]

What does my profile state kage ar - “Christian”
I’m not “anti-Catholic”, and I hope the administration investigate your claims
Appeal to force, the sign of a weak argument. Thanks for participating!

I can sum up ur participation in most discussions to this:
This is the Catholic Line.
If you don’t agree with it you’re either not a Catholic or a heretic.
Not really an argument at all, just a successsion of appeals to force/authority.

I must apologise for thinking for myself

Well… as a catholic I believe in the teachings of the **Catholic Church **which I believe is the one true church…i.e. I believe that the teachings of the Catholic Church are true( objectively true). If I don’t agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church then why would I bother calling myself a catholic?

As for your comment about thinking for yourself… do you honestly believe that you can just make up truth/reality as you go along and believe whatever you want to believe?

-Zac

 

[Podo2005]

Under current United States law, yes, someone who is raped may ask for a termination of the pregnancy. If they are under age, they may have to get parental consent.

Again for those who havent understand the question yet…
its not a question of abortion being legal or not… its a question of whether abortion is morally right or wrong

 

[LittleSoldier]

Our priest is the Spiritual Adviser to the Third Order Discalced Carmelites in our parish and a neighboring parish. They take a Vow of Obedience. I understand the contemplative nature of the Carmelites, and respect it though I know I am not called to it. But, you are expected to be obedient to the Church. I find it curious that you list your ‘Religion’ as “Christian”, and listed “Third Order Carmelite novice” under “Hobbies.”

---

About Doc Keele

Religion
Christian

Hobbies
Third Order Carmelite novice, received in Dec 2009***

Is there a reason you don’t acknowledge your religion as Catholic? “Christian” is deliberately vague. If you don’t accept the teaching and the Authority of the Church, why would you then join a Catholic Order? You don’t need to be in an Order to be contemplative. I really do not understand. It seems to me you do a disservice to a Catholic Order, and to the faithful in the Order, if you do not accept the Authority of the Catholic Church.

Because you are in a contemplative Order, do you feel your contemplations have more value and correctness than the contemplations of those who are not in such an Order?

This is what I don’t understand. Doc must have some sort of agenda; otherwise his actions make no sense at all. Why be a Catholic if one isn’t a Catholic? Why join a Catholic Order if one doesn’t even agree with Catholic Church teaching? It’s heresy and it makes me ill because my life was saved by a Carmelite monk who took the time to explain Truth to me and to show me that my eternal life was important to him - someone I had never met before.

Doc is definitely doing a grave disservice to the Carmelite Order and to his own eternal soul.

Blessed Mother,
please pray for us.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Can someone please show me a picture of gravity?

 

[LittleSoldier]

***So if I am not under the spell of, or existing without benefit of, sanctifying grace, then I am without sin? Didn’t Jesus die for my sins? Or did He just die for the sins of Latin Rite Roman Catholics? This stuff is circuitous and frustrating.

Limerick***

Well, actually “Latin Rite Roman Catholics” is not correct. It’s either “Catholic, Latin Rite” (which is the proper way to put it) or “Roman Catholic.” The two terms mean the same thing. There are other rites.

Jesus died for everyone’s sins.

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.

 

[JReducation]

Doc is definitely doing a grave disservice to the Carmelite Order

Since we are in the Social Justice forum, the issue here is one of justice. I’ll use myself as an example, rather than repeat what I already said before.

I’m a Franciscan Brother of Penance, one of the many Franciscan obediences. But that’s not important right now. What is important is that I, even when I’m thinking for myself, as Doc put it in one of his posts, I do not have the right to misrepesent my Franciscan family and my founder. St. Francis of Assisi commanded total obedience to everything that the Church teaches and to whatever he commanded, even after his death and what was commanded by his successors. His founded an order that was faithful to the teachings of the Church.

Now we have a question onthe table. “Can raped girls abort?” It makes no difference what I opine on this subject or what degree I may have. I have a duty to my Franciscan family to represent its love for the Church and its submission. This is not a lack of free thinking. On the contrary, this is an action that I make freely, because I freely chose to be a Franciscan. No one held a gun to my head. I knew that it meant that I would have to imitate my spiritual father’s fidelity to the Church in all things and at all times.

I know a great deal about the Carmelite Order, especially the Discalced Carmelties. I did my doctoral dissertation on Teresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi. Teresa of Avila would never approve of any Carmelite holding a position contrary to the teachings of the Church. Obedience was key to her reform of the Carmelite family.

The Carmelites of the Acient Observance (O’Carm) also place great emphasis on obedience. In fact the Rule of St. Albert opens with:

Albert, called by God’s favour to be patriarch of the church of Jerusalem, bids health in the Lord and the blessing of the Holy Spirit to his beloved sons in Christ, B. and the other hermits under obedience to him, who live near the spring on Mount Carmel.

Obedience is the foundation of any spiritual journey. The question posed on this thread does not allow those of us who have chosen to live under obedience to answer differently from the Church. That would be a lack of fidelity to the Church and to our religious family.

I know that many people in orders and secular priests too believe that they can be their own Rule of Life and their own Magisterium. But the truth is that this is not what our Church has taught us or expects of us. We have a duty to represent what the Church teaches us and what she epects of our orders.

Teresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi shared a mystical connection. Both saw the heavenly fruits of detachment from one’s own opinions.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[limerick]

Again for those who havent understand the question yet…
its not a question of abortion being legal or not… its a question of whether abortion is morally right or wrong

***Then it should have been phrased as such.

Limerick***

 

[limerick]

Well, actually “Latin Rite Roman Catholics” is not correct. It’s either “Catholic, Latin Rite” (which is the proper way to put it) or “Roman Catholic.” The two terms mean the same thing. There are other rites.

Jesus died for everyone’s sins.

Ave Maria! Ora pro nobis.

***Did Jesus die for our sins in advance of commission of those sins? Was he prescient as His Father is? Could he see in advance all the abortions to take place in the future of the world after His death? Did He die for Original Sin? Which sins did He die for - and why? Why was Christ commanded to give His life “so that others may live”? Why could not the design of the world and its inhabitants be more streamlined than that? Why build human need into the equation? I don’t find that a level playing field. In fact, I feel a big, fat resentment coming on … the whole deal feels like a set-up.

Don’t try, Soljah. It’s all rhetorical, and whatever answers you come up with are bound to fall short of anything I’m looking for. No offense intended; I just don’t think humans have the capacity to fully consider the situation, so instead many rely on religion. The rest of us keep trying to move ahead in good faith.

Limerick***

 

[JReducation]

***Then it should have been phrased as such.

Limerick***

But wait a minute, my friend. If you’re on a Catholic Forum and the sub-forum is Social Justice, the context would suggest that the question is a moral one, not a legal one. Why would anyone ask a legal question in this context? Besides, most people are familiar with the law in their country. You’re being a smart alec now. :tsktsk:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[limerick]

***“Alix” is a new member here, with only 25 posts under his/her belt at the time this thread was started. When I began here I had no idea where to place a thread - indeed, sometimes I still don’t and so I don’t often attempt to start one.

I NEVER assume that people know the laws of this country. The laws I was encouraged to learn in Texas were 1) when the liquor stores opened and closed, and 2) under what circumstances I might legally kill a home invader with minimal legal consequences.

Those were the old days; I’ve learned much since then. But there are lots of people who simply don’t know stuff and I’m giving them headroom. I’m also a grammar snob and I can’t stand it when people cannot or will not say what they mean.

Sorry if I offended you, JReducation. I just don’t take for granted some things that you seem to.

Limerick***

 

[LindaSK]

***Then it should have been phrased as such.

Limerick***

The OP asks, “.Is it okay…” The question is not, “Is it legal?” If it were a question of legality, the question would not even need to be asked. Sadly, at the moment, the answer to the latter would be , “Yes.” That is not an acceptable answer, however, to the question posed. I pray that someday the answer to both will be an unwavering, “Yes.”

 

[JReducation]

Limerick

I have to try to squeeze a lot into a little window here. Even though you’re a grammar snot, you’re going to have to bear with me on two counts: I don’t have much room here and English is not my first language. I learned it as a teenager. My first language is Hebrew.

If you read the Prologue in John’s Gospel, he tells us “In the beginning was the Word.” If you read the Book of Genesis, it begins with the sentence, “In the beginning . . .” As a Jew, I know what this means and why it is used. This was a common way of speaking existence before time, before creation, before space existed. What we are told is that Jesus is pre-existent. He became human at a specific point in time, but he existed before he became human. In fact, he existed before everything else existed.

Also, John refers to Jesus as “Logos” the Greek term for “Word”. The writers of Genesis stated, “And God said . . .” Each time that God said, something new came into existence. The term, “God said”, is an ancient Hebrew equivalent to the Greek term, Logos. In other words, God the Father created everything through the Word. The Word that the Father spoke, was “Son”. We see this in several Gospels and again at the Transfiguration. “This is my beloved Son.” God creates through the Son.

The writers of Genesis also state that the Spirit of God hovered over the emptiness, meaning the absence of everything. What we have here is the presence of a Trinitarian being. Genesis makes reference to ONE God. But it makes reference to the Spirit of that God. It makes reference to the Word of that God. If Spirit and Word were pre-existent along with the Creator, but there was only one God, and this God says, “Let US create” then these three persons all have the same divine power. Therefore, they share in the same divine substance. Meaning that all three are the one God, how so? Who knows? That’s the part that’s like the kid who tries to pour the ocean into a hole that he has dug on a beach. It’s impossible to understand.

This human nature makes it possible for Jesus Christ to die on a given day in human history, but at the same time to redeem man from the beginning of history to its conclusion. Because of his Divine nature, Jesus’ saving act can also transcend time. It had to be a human being who made restitution, because it was Adam who sinned. Admah is Hebrew for Man. Man must make restitution. But man cannot make restitution worthy of his Creator, who is God. The only way to level out the playing field is for God to become Man or the new Adam. This way, the restitution is worthy of God, because it’s made by the God-Man to God the Father.

Why did God not build us differently? God made us like himself, loveable and loving; free; intelligent; and knowledgeable of right and wrong. Man chooses to do what is wrong. He upsets the balance of creation. In doing so, he also upsets the balance in his emotional life. This is the direct result of sin. It’s interesting. I was a psychologist, before I became a theologian. I always found that those who had a good spiritual balance also had very good mental hygiene. Upset the moral balance and you upset the emotional life and appetites of man. William James wrote about this at the end of the 19th century beginning of the 20th and he did a very good job explaining it.

God does not set us up. Adam and Eve upset the balance that God built into human nature and into the created universe. God knew that they would do this. But he loved them. He would not take away their freedom. Instead, he had an eternal plan to rescue man from himself. This is why his son breaks into human history, becomes man and dies on the cross to make restitution. But since the Son shares in the Divine substance of the Father, he cannot remain dead. He rises on the third day. Besides, it would be unjust for Jesus to remain dead. He did not sin. Instead, he died to save man from sin. He who conquers sin has authority over life and death. That’s why we don’t believe that man has such authority over the life of the unborn, because that authority belongs to someone else.

When you understand how the Jeiwsh and Christian writings of the bible fit together, the truth that you find is very beautiful. I hope this helps

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Doc_Keele]

Much though I am touched ( NOT ) to have so much discussion about me, I must ask you modestly to desist.
I hate to use the word libel and cause for action but sometimes it’s necessary:thumbsup:
and remember the UK is the libel capital of the world

 

[JReducation]

Much though I am touched ( NOT ) to have so much discussion about me, I must ask you modestly to desist.
I hate to use the word libel and cause for action but sometimes it’s necessary:thumbsup:
and remember the UK is the libel capital of the world

Why do you think that I live in the USA? NOT :d I loved England. Though I have to admit that the mores in the UK, but especially England, have collapsed faster than in any other country that I know. I have no logical explanation for it. Even the USA, which has a history of conflict between morality and the quest for material acheivement, still struggles with moral questions and issues. I found that in England, most people have given up the struggle. That really frightened me. At the time that I lived there, I was married. My children were born in Bath. Their mother was from Bath. We moved to the USA after the youngest was born. After her death my in-laws invited me to come live with them. But I could not see bringing up my children in a society that did not struggle with moral issues. I know that individuals and small groups do. But as a nation, I found the UK to have surrendered. I sometimes wonder if people just got tired.

I could be all wrong on this point. But you mentioned the UK and libel and I was reminded about how I felt concerning the morality in the UK.

Sorry for the wandering.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Doc_Keele]

My comments about libel weren’t directed at yourself JRed but others who I know are from the US
The abortion laws are more restrictive in the UK than the US. Religion doesn’t have the central role in public life in the UK that it seems to in the US.

 

[JReducation]

My comments about libel weren’t directed at yourself JRed but others who I know are from the US
The abortion laws are more restrictive in the UK than the US. Religion doesn’t have the central role in public life in the UK that it seems to in the US.

Bold is mine.

That’s why I did not raise my children there. I believe that a society that does not struggle with the moral questions of the day is a society destined for moral collapse.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF