Church Teaching on Abortion

[choy]

I don’t doubt that these women are truly sorry for their abortions, even most non-religious women feel tremendous guilt after having one. Thats not really the point, these ladies knew exactly what they were getting into when they went to the Dr’s and asked for an abortion, walked into the clinic and had it done. Its one thing for a women to get one because she doesn’t believe its wrong, but for someone who knows better and decides to go ahead and do it anyway??? Going in with full knowledge that its a mortal sin, and they know they can go to reconciliation after? Thats just so crazy.

Catholic teaching states that even though absolution reinstates the person’s standing with the Church and perfects his/her relationship with God, there still may be temporal punishment for the sins which will occur in purgatory

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Catholic teaching states that even though absolution reinstates the person’s standing with the Church and perfects his/her relationship with God, there still may be temporal punishment for the sins which will occur in purgatory

Yes; and I doubt it will be very present. Certainly something you should avoid.

 

[vera_dicere]

Yes, I understand that much. My question is, can the Church’s teaching be changed, for example, to allow a mother to abort her child when both are going to die anyway and the only way to save one of them is to abort the child? Or is the teaching absolutely irrevocable and infallible?

Not to come across as faecetious or anything, but we’re all going to die anyway.

So, if we say “well, the baby/foetus is going to die anyway, its justified to abort it” then the same logic can be applied to the elderly man in a retirement home with Alzheimers, or the teenager comtemplating suicide, since they’re going to die anyway, why not hurry the process along?

Bar the anti-Christ finding his way into the position of Pope, this teaching will always remain the same.

And medically, bar ectopic (and with ectopic, its the removal of the tube, not the direct killing of the foetus that is the treatment), there is no condition which requires the death of the foetus to save the mother, killing the foetus may take some stress off the mother, but the point then is the fact its not a dead foetus that has unstressed the mother, but the mother no longer being pregnant, so, the child can be born alive prematurely if a state of non-pregnancy is desired.

 

[elts1956]

Why do you feel the need to take a sentence out of my post and take it out of context? My post was about absolution and whether a person who has gotten an abortion could be sorry for their sin, despite their reasons, and could receive absolution.

But okay, have it your way: Evidently it can, and has. Women have gotten abortions because their life was in danger and have gotten absolution and remained in good standing with the Church. Whether you like it or not is irrelevent. It’s been done. This doesn’t change the teachings of the Church, but it’s been done. So obviously it can be done, because it is done. So saying it can’t be done is just being stubborn.

I apologize. I did take it out of context. So sorry. Materially, can’t think of another way to say it, abortion can be done to save the life of the mother, spiritually no, it cannot be done.

 

[elts1956]

Why do you feel the need to take a sentence out of my post and take it out of context? My post was about absolution and whether a person who has gotten an abortion could be sorry for their sin, despite their reasons, and could receive absolution.

But okay, have it your way: Evidently it can, and has. Women have gotten abortions because their life was in danger and have gotten absolution and remained in good standing with the Church. Whether you like it or not is irrelevent. It’s been done. This doesn’t change the teachings of the Church, but it’s been done. So obviously it can be done, because it is done. So saying it can’t be done is just being stubborn.

Rence, the flaw in your reasoning is this:

“In the case of an abortion, there’s no doubt in my mind some women are truly sorry for the abortion, especially if they wanted the pregnancy but it had to be terminated to save their own lives. The priest of course would grant absolution, if the person regretted the action, and if the person doesn’t intend to do it again.”

There is no such allowance presented in Catholic teaching
and relying on a future “absolution” for one’s “regret” speaks to the sin of presumption.

You must see that, yes?

Thank you.

 

[Rence]

I didn’t see this post, but this is exactly what I’m trying to say. I know everyone deserves forgiveness but why even be Catholic if you’re going to get an abortion knowing you can just go confess after? Why is that even an option? It’s just strange to me that people are allowed to do this, and be in good standing with the church.

But doesn’t that apply for every sin confessed in confession? I mean, we all sin kind of on the spur of the moment, due to losing one’s temper, or poor judgement in the heat of the moment. And certainly we can regret those actions that are deemed sinful, even more so if we didn’t intend to do them, but fell to weakness at that time.

But we also know that there are those (especially with all the threads started regarding specific sins in the moral theology subforum) who go to confession for the same exact sins over and over and over again.

You’re right. Why bother going to confession? It shouldn’t be allowed that you sin and can just be absolved. Especially for that teenager who gave into peer pressure and shop lifted. After all, she knew very well what she was doing. So why should she continue being called catholic if she can just go to confession for something she did deliberately? And what about all those guys who are having trouble not masturbating. I completely agree with you, why should they be allowed to just do the deed and just go to confession, followed by communion - over and over again? I’m seeing your point and it makes sense to me. What about that man who lied on a job application to get a job. Should he call himself catholic, even though he lied on his application, and can just go to confession and confess it and all is well? Or what about the man who lied to his boss about completing an assigned task that he didn’t do, had no intention of doing, but told his boss he did it. Why bother having confession at all? Maybe my dad was right: maybe it’s just between God and man? Should a priest forgive someone who sins intentionally? or just tell the person he’s no longer catholic?

I wonder if it would be okay then, to add when they’re in confession that they fell to the weakness of thinking that they could just go to confession after they sinned? Maybe not.
But I can see someone saying: I know it was a sin, but I was scared. Or I was broke. Or I felt people would be mad at me. Or, I was weak and did it knowing it was wrong. Should the priest abolve them and counsel them to sin no more? Or tell them, “well, you knew you were wrong, so I’m not going to absolve you. You are a poor excuse for a Catholic. I only absolve people who unintentially sinned. So just leave”.

I can understand that perspective pretty well. I mean, here we have in the example of this thread, a woman who is scared of dying, and in poor health, and was told by her physician that she needed an abortion in order to continue living. So in her fear, weakness and maybe even in the heat of the moment she worries over her children and family, she goes ahead and has one. I mean nothing is a better reminder of one’s mortality than the threat of death slapping one across the face. And then later regrets it, or even (correctly) thinks she made the wrong decision. Why should she be able to go to her priest and talk about it and get absolution? Even if she resolves to never do it again, she did do it. Even if her priest says to her that God understands human weakness and absolves her. She, (just like the shop lifter, the one who lied on the application, the person who follows a masterbate/confess pattern, the person who lied out of fear, the person who was dishonest about fixing a car, the person who didn’t actually do a job he was paid to do - and they weren’t even in life-or-death situations) made a deliberate decision, so why should she go to confession and reconcile with the Church and continue to call herself Catholic.

I do see your point. I think that’s probably why very few people go to confession anymore. I never have to wait to go to confession, no matter which Church I’ve gone to. One of my priests said that he typcially has 3-5 people coming to confession during the one hour alloted before communion on Saturday afternoons until two weeks before easter, when there might be up to 20. So I would think that many people agree with you.

 

[catharina]

But doesn’t that apply for every sin confessed in confession? I mean, we all sin kind of on the spur of the moment, due to losing one’s temper, or poor judgement in the heat of the moment. And certainly we can regret those actions that are deemed sinful, even more so if we didn’t intend to do them, but fell to weakness at that time.

But we also know that there are those (especially with all the threads started regarding specific sins in the moral theology subforum) who go to confession for the same exact sins over and over and over again.

You’re right. Why bother going to confession? It shouldn’t be allowed that you sin and can just be absolved. Especially for that teenager who gave into peer pressure and shop lifted. After all, she knew very well what she was doing. So why should she continue being called catholic if she can just go to confession for something she did deliberately? And what about all those guys who are having trouble not masturbating. I completely agree with you, why should they be allowed to just do the deed and just go to confession, followed by communion - over and over again? I’m seeing your point and it makes sense to me. What about that man who lied on a job application to get a job. Should he call himself catholic, even though he lied on his application, and can just go to confession and confess it and all is well? Or what about the man who lied to his boss about completing an assigned task that he didn’t do, had no intention of doing, but told his boss he did it. Why bother having confession at all? Maybe my dad was right: maybe it’s just between God and man? Should a priest forgive someone who sins intentionally? or just tell the person he’s no longer catholic?

I wonder if it would be okay then, to add when they’re in confession that they fell to the weakness of thinking that they could just go to confession after they sinned? Maybe not.
But I can see someone saying: I know it was a sin, but I was scared. Or I was broke. Or I felt people would be mad at me. Or, I was weak and did it knowing it was wrong. **Should the priest abolve them and counsel them to sin no more? Or tell them, “well, you knew you were wrong, so I’m not going to absolve you. You are a poor excuse for a Catholic. I only absolve people who unintentially sinned. So just leave”. **

I can understand that perspective pretty well. I mean, here we have in the example of this thread, a woman who is scared of dying, and in poor health, and was told by her physician that she needed an abortion in order to continue living. So in her fear, weakness and maybe even in the heat of the moment she worries over her children and family, she goes ahead and has one. I mean nothing is a better reminder of one’s mortality than the threat of death slapping one across the face. And then later regrets it, or even (correctly) thinks she made the wrong decision. Why should she be able to go to her priest and talk about it and get absolution? Even if she resolves to never do it again, she did do it. Even if her priest says to her that God understands human weakness and absolves her. She, (just like the shop lifter, the one who lied on the application, the person who follows a masterbate/confess pattern, the person who lied out of fear, the person who was dishonest about fixing a car, the person who didn’t actually do a job he was paid to do - and they weren’t even in life-or-death situations) made a deliberate decision, so why should she go to confession and reconcile with the Church and continue to call herself Catholic.

I do see your point. I think that’s probably why very few people go to confession anymore. I never have to wait to go to confession, no matter which Church I’ve gone to. One of my priests said that he typcially has 3-5 people coming to confession during the one hour alloted before communion on Saturday afternoons until two weeks before easter, when there might be up to 20. So I would think that many people agree with you.

Please, Rence, get a clue. An unintentional sin is not a sin and you know that. IOW,
one “sins” with no intent to sin, no knowledge of the act as sin = NO CULPABILITY.

Priests are given to forgive sins.
They do not forgive “non-sins.”
Sins are intentional.
I know that you MUST know that.

 

[Rence]

I apologize. I did take it out of context. So sorry. Materially, can’t think of another way to say it, abortion can be done to save the life of the mother, spiritually no, it cannot be done.

Elts, I understand what you’re saying, and I appreciate it. I especially understand what you’re saying when the abortion clinics are jam packed to capacity with women who are having elective abortions. But the fact of the matter is: there ARE women who have been in danger of losing their lives, and who were pregnant, and who (at the advice of their doctor) had abortions, and who were told by their priest and bishop that they had no other choice, and they recieved absolution and are in good standing with the Church. It is not for us (you or me) to question the priest or bishop. That would make us equivalent to whose who are criticizing the Bishop in arizona, and a different brand of cafe catholic, wouldn’t it? That is beyond us. At that point, it is in God’s hands and no one else’s. It’s beyond us to question these indivual cases when priests and bishops have decided on them already. So to explain myself and my comments: It can be done simply for the fact that it has been done. Perhaps it shouldn’t be done, but the fact that is has been done means that it is being done.

I’m NOT saying that women should just go out and have abortions whenever they want and not worry about it because they’ll just go to confession. But there are dire circumstances that compell people to make choices that they would normally not make in everyday stress and circumstance, and when they fall to those temptations, according to the Catholic Church, they CAN be reconciled with the Church even if they deliberately made the wrong decision at the time. That’s part of the confession. To say that’s not true is saying that those who sin shouldn’t bother going to confession and being reconciled with the Church. If that’s the case, why bother going to confession for anything at all? Why bother reconciling with the Church at all for any sin? Is that what Jesus wants? Should we just send those women away instead of help them back into the Church?

We can’t change the world. We can only make a difference in our part of it in our day-to-day interactions. When I encounter a woman who has had an abortion, for any reason, I’ll work on moving forward, and bringing her back to the Church. We can’t change the past, we can only change our present and future. We all have to do what we think is best in our corner of the world. You, of course, will have to do what’s best in yours

But I truly feel, it is way out of line for people to make judgements on what happens during another person’s interactions in the confessional with a priest. Just IMOHO for what it’s worth.

 

[Rence]

I love it when people get a clue and prove my point

 

[catharina]

Elts, I understand what you’re saying, and I appreciate it. I especially understand what you’re saying when the abortion clinics are jam packed to capacity with women who are having elective abortions.

But the fact of the matter is: there ARE women who have been in danger of losing their lives, and who were pregnant, and who (at the advice of their doctor) had abortions, and who were told by their priest and bishop that they had no other choice, and they recieved absolution and are in good standing with the Church.

It is not for us (you or me) to question the priest or bishop. That would make us equivalent to whose who are criticizing the Bishop in arizona, and a different brand of cafe catholic, wouldn’t it? That is beyond us. At that point, it is in God’s hands and no one else’s. It’s beyond us to question these indivual cases when priests and bishops have decided on them already. So to explain myself and my comments: It can be done simply for the fact that it has been done. Perhaps it shouldn’t be done, but the fact that is has been done means that it is being done.

I’m NOT saying that women should just go out and have abortions whenever they want and not worry about it because they’ll just go to confession. But there are dire circumstances that compell people to make choices that they would normally not make in everyday stress and circumstance, and when they fall to those temptations, according to the Catholic Church, they CAN be reconciled with the Church even if they deliberately made the wrong decision at the time. That’s part of the confession. To say that’s not true is saying that those who sin shouldn’t bother going to confession and being reconciled with the Church. If that’s the case, why bother going to confession for anything at all? Why bother reconciling with the Church at all for any sin? Is that what Jesus wants? Should we just send those women away instead of help them back into the Church?

We can’t change the world. We can only make a difference in our part of it in our day-to-day interactions. When I encounter a woman who has had an abortion, for any reason, I’ll work on moving forward, and bringing her back to the Church. We can’t change the past, we can only change our present and future. We all have to do what we think is best in our corner of the world. You, of course, will have to do what’s best in yours

But I truly feel, it is way out of line for people to make judgements on what happens during another person’s interactions in the confessional with a priest. Just IMOHO for what it’s worth.

Rence, bolded above: you have claimed this in the past too.
It makes no sense and is unsupported by facts other than your “word of mouth.”

A priest or bishop says “you had no choice”
but then goes on to “forgive the sin.”

Total contradiction.
Makes no sense at all.

 

[Rence]

The fact of the matter is: there ARE women who have been in danger of losing their lives, and who were pregnant, and who (at the advice of their doctor) had abortions, and who were told by their priest and bishop that they had no other choice, and they recieved absolution and are in good standing with the Church.

Here’s an example: one woman’s unfortunate encounter with the threat of death if she continued her pregnancy and who was supported by her priest and bishop.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6663003&postcount=110

I’ll cut and paste the relevant portions:

“Again, I say, you have no idea about what you speak - until you have been in a situation - been the one whose life is slipping away by the moment and has a family and a husband who desperately don’t want you to die” …snip…“I have no doubt that He will take care of the sould of my Fetus/Baby that perished. And at least I know that in the(religious, Jewish) law that Jesus was brought up in, that had the technology been available, that at least we know compassion to the mother would at least have occured.Just so you know - just because you don’t agree with every teaching of the Church, doesn’t mean you’re not Catholic.”

“Once your daughter has slipped away and your grandchild” …snip…" and your son in law is beside himself with grief, trying to console the other 3 kids and explaining that mommy had to die because we were hoping for a miracle from God and God decided to say no - and telling you, "I hope you’re happy - now not only do I have a dead child, I have a dead wife and mother to my other children - some, who are old enough to know their mother could have been saved -and the others not caring just wanting their mommy back- I’m sure that reciting them Catholic docterine will help them understand and make them all alright with why their mommy and little brother had to die.

The Church is supposed to show compassion - (luckily** I have had priests show me compassion and even a Bishop tell me that I had no other choice **"

 

[catharina]

Rence, nice deflection, but AGAIN, you said this:

“But the fact of the matter is: there ARE women who have been in danger of losing their lives, and who were pregnant, and who (at the advice of their doctor) had abortions, and who were told by their priest and bishop that they had no other choice, and they recieved absolution and are in good standing with the Church.”

Now, please address it.

“No other choice” means coercion.
What sin needs forgiving in such a case? None.
No other choice = coercion = no sin.

Yet of course it IS a sin and that’s why absolution is sought!

Can’t you recognize the contradiction in your report??? If not, why not?

 

[Rence]

Rence, nice deflection, but AGAIN, you said this:

“But the fact of the matter is: there ARE women who have been in danger of losing their lives, and who were pregnant, and who (at the advice of their doctor) had abortions, and who were told by their priest and bishop that they had no other choice, and they recieved absolution and are in good standing with the Church.”

Now, please address it.

“No other choice” means coercion.
What sin needs forgiving in such a case? None.
No other choice = coercion = no sin.

Yet of course it IS a sin and that’s why absolution is sought!

Can’t you recognize the contradiction in your report??? If not, why not?

No, I don’t recognize the contradiction. I never said abortion in the case of the woman’s life was not a sin. Where did I ever say that? Abortion is always and forever a sin according to the Catholic Church and I’ve always said that. My posts in this thread have been about sin and absolution and reconciliation. I SAID they can get absolution after an abortion, and the support of the Bishop and priest in the case of their life being in danger, and so this one lady is an example of one who has. Sometimes, one is compelled to sin due to their circumstances. That’s a fact of life.

There is no one on this forum or outside of it that has not at one time been compelled to sin due to whatever circumstance led them to it. This is NO different. I have not contradicted myself at all.

Unique situations need to be addressed individually. The things that make it different lead people to make difficult choices. And God knows that. And so do the priest and bishops who have the guidance of the Holy Spirit to allow them to show compassion and kindness to those in difficult circumstances such as abortion in the case of the woman’s life being in immediate danger due to the physiological strains that pregnancy has on her already unhealthy body.

 

[catharina]

No, I don’t recognize the contradiction. I never said abortion in the case of the woman’s life was not a sin. Where did I ever say that? Abortion is always and forever a sin according to the Catholic Church and I’ve always said that. My posts in this thread have been about sin and absolution and reconciliation. I SAID they can get absolution after an abortion, and the support of the Bishop and priest in the case of their life being in danger, and so this one lady is an example of one who has. Sometimes, one is compelled to sin due to their circumstances. That’s a fact of life.

There is no one on this forum or outside of it that has not at one time been compelled to sin due to whatever circumstance led them to it. This is NO different. I have not contradicted myself at all.

You have presented a total contradiction.

If one is compelled to “sin,” there is no sin.
No sin, no absolution required.

You are attempting to have it both ways.

Sin requires absolution.
Coercion exists outside free will, therefore no sin, therefore, no absolution required.

No one can be “compelled to sin.” It cannot happen.
Sin requires the action of a free will.
You can’t have it both ways.
It defies Church Teaching and logic.

 

[Rence]

You have presented a total contradiction.

If one is compelled to “sin,” there is no sin.
No sin, no absolution required.

You are attempting to have it both ways.

Sin requires absolution.
Coercion exists outside free will, therefore no sin, therefore, no absolution required.

No one can be “compelled to sin.” It cannot happen.
Sin requires the action of a free will.
You can’t have it both ways.
It defies Church Teaching and logic.

By your reasoning, perhaps women who have had abortions in life-threatening circumstances had those abortions because they also thought that “if one is compelled to sin, there is no sin”, and that “coersion exists outside of free will, therefore no sin”. Clearly there are those who believe that being at risk of losing their lives warranted having the abortion, otherwise they wouldn’t have done it. I can understand this line of reasoning, even if the Church forbids abortion.

 

[catharina]

By your reasoning, perhaps women who have had abortions in life-threatening circumstances had those abortions because they also thought that “if one is compelled to sin, there is no sin”, and that “coersion exists outside of free will, therefore no sin”. Clearly there are those who believe that being at risk of losing their lives warranted having the abortion, otherwise they wouldn’t have done it. I can understand this line of reasoning, even if the Church forbids abortion.

Bolded above does not equate to “compelled to sin.”
Abortion falls under grievous matter, serious reflection and full consent of the will.

That’s my point.
You’re comparing apples and oranges.

Women seeking absolution recognize their own deliberate choice of grievous sin.
The action is not performed under a gun or on a whim.
There is deliberation. There is intent. There is sin.

 

[Rence]

Bolded above does not equate to “compelled to sin.”
Abortion falls under grievous matter, serious reflection and full consent of the will.

That’s my point.
You’re comparing apples and oranges.

Women seeking absolution recognize their own deliberate choice of grievous sin.
The action is not performed under a gun or on a whim.
There is deliberation. There is intent. There is sin.

Yep! that’s why my posts have been about sin and absolution

 

[catharina]

Yep! that’s why my posts have been about sin and absolution

Then you must admit that regarding abortion there is no such thing as
being compelled by being told they “have no other choice.”
Of course there’s another choice. Sin or don’t sin.

I wonder about the actual sanity of any priest or bishop who says
“you have/had no other choice.” That’s an example of total hypocrisy.

 

[catharina]

One more time, rence, from my post Post # 37.

"Rence, the flaw in your reasoning is this:

“In the case of an abortion, there’s no doubt in my mind some women are truly sorry for the abortion, especially if they wanted the pregnancy but it had to be terminated to save their own lives. The priest of course would grant absolution, if the person regretted the action, and if the person doesn’t intend to do it again.”

**There is no such allowance presented in Catholic teaching
and relying on a future “absolution” for one’s “regret” speaks to the sin of presumption. **

You must see that, yes?"

 

[Rence]

Then you must admit that regarding abortion there is no such thing as
being compelled by being told they “have no other choice.”
Of course there’s another choice. Sin or don’t sin.

I wonder about the actual sanity of any priest or bishop who says
“you have/had no other choice.” That’s an example of total hypocrisy.

I admit women in danger of losing their lives feel as if they are compelled, and have no other choice, but to have an abortion. This is especially true if they want to live, and there are those who count on them to be around: like a husand, other children, parents, siblings, etc. If they want to live, there is no other choice if their life is in danger.

I, OTOH, would wonder about the sanity of a priest or bishop who does not have compassion, understanding and kindness towards any woman in this difficult situation. What merit is there in only showing kindness towards someone who is always following the rules of the Church? They really don’t need priests if they’re always following the rules. Priests are there for sinners.