Excommunication result of Brazil Girl's abortion

[Flame4]

Some time ago a 7 year old girl recieved an abortion and her mother and the doctor were excommunicated.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/03/07/catholic-abortion.html

Now the girl was raped by her step father. I know someone challenging me on this saying the Church is not punishing the right people (the father.) I was a bit shocked and couldn’t get the right words out. What can I say? Abortion is murder. What is worse:rape or murder? I don’t like to say stuff like that b/c i don’t want to undermine the pain of rape victims, but I don’t know what else to say.

Please Help

Happy Easter

 

[Doc_Keele]

…and this 7 year old was physically capable of carrying the pregnancy to term without serious risk to her life?

 

[CMatt25]

This is a case IMHO where black and white adds up to gray. Personally I think it’s a bit too black and white to force a child of that age, who was raped, to carry to term. But that’s me.

 

[CMatt25]

…and this 7 year old was physically capable of carrying the pregnancy to term without serious risk to her life?

Doc, in the end when push comes to shove does the Church even care or would it take the position the child would be a martyr?

 

[Anian]

The Excommunication is deserved, it is an offense in the church to have, or procure an abortion, and in fact this 8 year old could have had a sucessful preganacy, in fact the youngest mother ever was five years old, and her child was 5 lbs. and grew up big and strong like anybody else, this was also back in 1939, imagine the wonders medical science in 2010 could have done for her.

 

[Doc_Keele]

The Excommunication is deserved, it is an offense in the church to have, or procure an abortion, and in fact this 8 year old could have had a sucessful preganacy, in fact the youngest mother ever was five years old, and her child was 5 lbs. and grew up big and strong like anybody else, this was also back in 1939, imagine the wonders medical science in 2010 could have done for her.

Not exactly logical
one 5 year old manages to have a live birth (by Caesarean) therefore it must be safe?
There’s a lot of doubt about this story, and certainly at medical school I was taught the youngest female to have a live birth was 8.

 

[Rence]

Well, I’m sure I’ll get grief for my opinion, but I believe the Church made complete fools of themselves in this particular situation. In Brazil, abortion is illegal except for the case of rape, incest and threat to the woman’s life. However, that only led people to get them illegally. Therefore, if the Church wanted to make an example, or to drive the point across that abortion is not to be tolerated, methinks they would have had plenty of opportunities (both on the legal and illegal side) rather than to drag this child, her mother, and doctors through the mud and make spectacles out of them. They’re all about protecting the innocent, but wasn’t this child an innocent as well? Very poor judgement IMOHO. There is no honor in making the Church look bad out of pure stubborness. The Bishop could have done it all quietly but chose to make a public announcement and only succeeded riling up supporters of the child. It also resulted in the Bishop stepping down. It raised a ruckus in Brazil. Of course, on an online Catholic forum, there will be many who disagree with me and claim that the Bishop was right. But out there in the real world, it just pushed people away, made the Church look bad, and made heros out of those who helped the child. It did NOTHING for the pro-life momement and smeared a big egg in the Church’s face. What exactly did it accomplish?

 

[Holly3278]

This is so sickening. The Brazilian girl never should have been excommunicated and her doctor never should have been excommunicated either. The pedophile who raped her is the one who should be excommunicated. This girl had every right to get an abortion if she or her parents felt it was right for her. No 7 year old child should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Not only is that dangerous, it is foolish as well.

 

[Mark77]

**So many misunderstandings & outright misrepresentations of the Truth! Where do i begin?
**
First, the Catholic Church teaches that direct involvement in an abortion is always a grave evil, that is why the Doctor & the 9 year old’s mother, both Catholics, were excommunicated immediately.

**The Church always gives priority to the health & safety of the mother’s Iife! If without directly murdering the baby through abortion, the required medical treatment of the mother inadvertently results in the baby dying, then no intentional harm has been done!
**
**The Church would never expect a 9 year old to take a baby to term if her health was threatened by the pregnancy! With modern medical techniques, babies born prematurely as young as 20 weeks have survived & at 24 weeks more than 50% survive!!!

Why murder an innocent baby by abortion & cause further emotional harm to the poor 9 year old! i’m sure there are many families who would have loved to adopt this beautiful baby!

Finally, the stepfather was not initially excommunicated because people are presumed innocent until proven guilty! Once convicted, if he does not repent & confess his sin, the stepfather would be excommunicated as well.**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[CMatt25]

Well, I’m sure I’ll get grief for my opinion, but I believe the Church made complete fools of themselves in this particular situation. In Brazil, abortion is illegal except for the case of rape, incest and threat to the woman’s life. However, that only led people to get them illegally. Therefore, if the Church wanted to make an example, or to drive the point across that abortion is not to be tolerated, methinks they would have had plenty of opportunities (both on the legal and illegal side) rather than to drag this child, her mother, and doctors through the mud and make spectacles out of them. They’re all about protecting the innocent, but wasn’t this child an innocent as well? Very poor judgement IMOHO. There is no honor in making the Church look bad out of pure stubborness. The Bishop could have done it all quietly but chose to make a public announcement and only succeeded riling up supporters of the child. It also resulted in the Bishop stepping down. It raised a ruckus in Brazil. Of course, on an online Catholic forum, there will be many who disagree with me and claim that the Bishop was right. But out there in the real world, it just pushed people away, made the Church look bad, and made heros out of those who helped the child. It did NOTHING for the pro-life momement and smeared a big egg in the Church’s face. What exactly did it accomplish?

No grief from me. Excellent post. :clapping:

It accomplished what you said it did. Not exactly the same but something similar occured when the Church protects the innocent but then covered up child abuse from within. It accomplished some of those same things.

 

[Mark77]

This is so sickening. The Brazilian girl never should have been excommunicated and her doctor never should have been excommunicated either. The pedophile who raped her is the one who should be excommunicated. This girl had every right to get an abortion if she or her parents felt it was right for her. No 7 year old child should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Not only is that dangerous, it is foolish as well.

**Before we scream in outrage let’s get the facts straight.

The 9 year old girl was never excommunicated!

The girl’s mother & doctor were. (If they repent & confess their sins, they will always be forgiven by Jesus & welcomed back to the Catholic Church!)**

"Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance." (LK 15:7)

Read my post above!

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[Rence]

This is so sickening. The Brazilian girl never should have been excommunicated and her doctor never should have been excommunicated either. The pedophile who raped her is the one who should be excommunicated. This girl had every right to get an abortion if she or her parents felt it was right for her. No 7 year old child should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Not only is that dangerous, it is foolish as well.

IIRC, the girl was not excommunicated (she was too young?). But her mother and doctors were. As far as I know there was no follow up for reconcilation, which of course is possible.

No one ever said anything about there being medical complications, and I’m sure they would have, if there were. It’s true that the unborn could have been delivered via caesarean at 20 weeks or more. Again, it would have been publized with the rest of the story if the child was at risk for this as well.

But it was just a stupid move on the part of the Church. Like I said, there were plenty of opportunities out there with which the Church could have made moral examples. This child didn’t need to be dragged through the mud like that.

 

[CMatt25]

The Excommunication is deserved, it is an offense in the church to have, or procure an abortion, and in fact this 8 year old could have had a sucessful preganacy, in fact the youngest mother ever was five years old, and her child was 5 lbs. and grew up big and strong like anybody else, this was also back in 1939, imagine the wonders medical science in 2010 could have done for her.

That’s like saying there was the case of the thief going to heaven so baptism doesn’t matter.

 

[hellopeople]

Some time ago a 7 year old girl recieved an abortion and her mother and the doctor were excommunicated.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/03/07/catholic-abortion.html

Now the girl was raped by her step father. I know someone challenging me on this saying the Church is not punishing the right people (the father.) I was a bit shocked and couldn’t get the right words out. What can I say? Abortion is murder. What is worse:rape or murder? I don’t like to say stuff like that b/c i don’t want to undermine the pain of rape victims, but I don’t know what else to say.

Please Help

Happy Easter

I think this is ridiculous…think about how many Catholics get abortions, don’t tell anyone about it, and just go on in the church…but these people get excommunicated? Ridiculous.

 

[Rence]

**So many misunderstandings & outright misrepresentations of the Truth! Where do i begin?
**
First, the Catholic Church teaches that direct involvement in an abortion is always a grave evil, that is why the Doctor & the 9 year old’s mother, both Catholics, were excommunicated immediately.

Poor judgement. Why aren’t they excommunicating adults as they exit from abortion clinics then? Why a child? Do they not have the guts to pick on an adult and instead go after a victimized child, resulting in further vicimizing her? The Bishop lacked kindness, compassion, charity, and had no heart IMOHO.

Finally, the stepfather was not initially excommunicated because people are presumed innocent until proven guilty! Once convicted, if he does not repent & confess his sin, the stepfather would be excommunicated as well.

No he won’t. Could you please find documentation of that? I haven’t seen one rapist or child molestor excommunicated for a rape or molestation. According to what I read here on this forum, that’s not an automatic excommunication. Though it is a ‘grave sin’ or whatever. Right.

 

[Rence]

I think this is ridiculous…think about how many Catholics get abortions, don’t tell anyone about it, and just go on in the church…but these people get excommunicated? Ridiculous.

Like I said in my last post: if this Bishop’s actions were so right, why don’t they stand outside of abortion clinics and excommunicate the adults coming out of there? But this Bishop decided instead to go after a child rape-victim, her mother and the doctors who helped her. Rapists, OTOH, don’t get excommunicated like this.

 

[Ruthie_again]

“There is no honor in making the Church look bad out of pure stubborness.”

I’m afraid that what I wrote below sounds cold & emotionless. Please believe that I feel passionately about this poor girl, and the lack of protection she got from this man and his perverted acts.

We cannot choose between “looking good” and fundamental morality. The Church is suffering from this already, because some of our hierarchy hid crimes, trying to keep the Church’s reputation intact.

Neither can we have double standards. We cannot say it is OK for this poor little girl to have an abortion, but not OK for a middle class grown woman to have one. An innocent person is always murdered by abortion, no matter how the pregnancy occurred. Both people have an equal right to life.

We don’t know what happened to the stepfather. Neither do we know how other abortionists have been handled by the Church in Brazil. Those things are not “worthy” of international headlines.

This poor little victim’s case made the papers precisely because she was only seven years old. If she had been a teenager, we would never have heard about it.

Praying for all concerned,

Ruthie

 

[TedDC]

This is so sickening. The Brazilian girl never should have been excommunicated and her doctor never should have been excommunicated either. The pedophile who raped her is the one who should be excommunicated. This girl had every right to get an abortion if she or her parents felt it was right for her. No 7 year old child should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Not only is that dangerous, it is foolish as well.

Exactly right! The only guilty party is the rapist.

 

[Rence]

“There is no honor in making the Church look bad out of pure stubborness.”

I’m afraid that what I wrote below sounds cold & emotionless. Please believe that I feel passionately about this poor girl, and the lack of protection she got from this man and his perverted acts.

We cannot choose between “looking good” and fundamental morality. The Church is suffering from this already, because some of our hierarchy hid crimes, trying to keep the Church’s reputation intact.

Neither can we have double standards. We cannot say it is OK for this poor little girl to have an abortion, but not OK for a middle class grown woman to have one. An innocent person is always murdered by abortion, no matter how the pregnancy occurred. Both people have an equal right to life.

We don’t know what happened to the stepfather. Neither do we know how other abortionists have been handled by the Church in Brazil. Those things are not “worthy” of international headlines.

This poor little victim’s case made the papers precisely because she was only seven years old. If she had been a teenager, we would never have heard about it.

Praying for all concerned,

Ruthie

That’s the point I was trying to make. Why go after a seven year old’s case when there are all those other cases to worry about as well, and they get no attention. Why doesn’t the Bishop annouce their excommunication? How did they choose fundamental morality over looking good in this case, given their actions (or inactions) in other cases? Why was there a double standard in this case? What made this case so special that the Bishop had to publicly humiliate the child and her mother and doctor? If abortion is bad in all cases, why did they choose this particular action for this particular case and ignore all the other cases?

I disagree with the last part. If she were a teenage rape-victim, she would have heard about it. I believe we would have heard about it for any rape victim. That’s why most countries (and even states) that have laws against abortion make exceptions for rape. Even banning of federal funds for payment of abortion makes exception for rape.

Again, I don’t really CARE whether or not the Church forbids all abortions, even for rape. The fact is, they only enforced it on a 7 year old rape victim, and don’t do this with adults. It’s certainly an in-your-face-fact that the opportunity is there: look at all the abortion clinics. Where are the Bishops? Why aren’t they excommunicating those women? What made this 7 year old warrant such unwanted attention? I don’t even care that he excommunicated those involved. But why did he choose to make a public announcment about it? What drove his actions in this particular case? Why doesn’t he just parade all involved in town with a big huge A embroidered on the front of them?

 

[CMatt25]

Exactly right! The only guilty party is the rapist.

:sad_yes: