Formal Cooperation with Abortion

[Ron_Conte]

Direct abortion is a form of murder. Direct abortion is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral.

But formal cooperation with direct abortion is also intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral. Formal cooperation occurs when your knowingly chosen act assists the sin of another person in attaining its evil moral object. In the case of abortion, formal cooperation directly assists another person (or persons) in obtaining a direct abortion.

Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.” [CCC 2272]

**Pope Saint John Paul II:** "Christians, like all people of good will, are called upon under grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God's law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil." [Evangelium Vitae 74]



It is never morally permissible to commit an act of formal cooperation with direct abortion or any other intrinsically evil act. Formal cooperation is always immoral because it is intrinsically evil, and it is intrinsically evil because it is a direct cooperation with the intrinsically evil act of another person.



Examples of formal cooperation:

• encouraging another person to get an abortion
• promoting, approving, or voting for laws that legalize or widen the legalization of direct abortion
• trying to convince others that abortion is moral
• trying to convince others that cases of direct abortion are really indirect and morally permissible
  
  Basically, if you are encouraging, promoting, approving, or trying to morally justify direct abortion, you are guilty of formal cooperation. And the same is true for abortifacient contraception, mere contraception, and every other type of gravely immoral intrinsically evil act. Formal cooperation with any grave sin is itself a grave sin.

 

[josh987654321]

Direct abortion is a form of murder. Direct abortion is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral.

But formal cooperation with direct abortion is also intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral. Formal cooperation occurs when your knowingly chosen act assists the sin of another person in attaining its evil moral object. In the case of abortion, formal cooperation directly assists another person (or persons) in obtaining a direct abortion.

Catechism of the Catholic Church: “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense.” [CCC 2272]

**Pope Saint John Paul II:** "Christians, like all people of good will, are called upon under grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God's law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil." [Evangelium Vitae 74]



It is never morally permissible to commit an act of formal cooperation with direct abortion or any other intrinsically evil act. Formal cooperation is always immoral because it is intrinsically evil, and it is intrinsically evil because it is a direct cooperation with the intrinsically evil act of another person.



Examples of formal cooperation:

• encouraging another person to get an abortion
• promoting, approving, or voting for laws that legalize or widen the legalization of direct abortion
• trying to convince others that abortion is moral
• trying to convince others that cases of direct abortion are really indirect and morally permissible
  
  Basically, if you are encouraging, promoting, approving, or trying to morally justify direct abortion, you are guilty of formal cooperation. And the same is true for abortifacient contraception,

Amen. I completely agree.

mere contraception, and every other type of gravely immoral intrinsically evil act. Formal cooperation with any grave sin is itself a grave sin.

I completely disagree here, mere contraception is not the same nor as grave as abortion because mere contraception doesn’t involve the taking of an innocent life.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Rau]

…I completely disagree here, mere contraception is not the same nor as grave as abortion because mere contraception doesn’t involve the taking of an innocent life…

He did not comment on the relative “graveness” of the sins - just that both are grave, and that to facilitate either in a significant way is also grave. If you disagree with that, please outline the basis for viewing contraception as not grave.

 

[thistle]

Amen. I completely agree.

I completely disagree here, mere contraception is not the same nor as grave as abortion because mere contraception doesn’t involve the taking of an innocent life.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

I don’t agree with your statement.

CCC 2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

 

[Convert_in_99]

I dare say this thread was started as a kind of spin off protest of my thread regarding the use of birth control for medical reasons and the morality of maintaining an active sexual life with ones spouse in the midst of it.

 

[PhiloMed]

I dare say this thread was started as a kind of spin off protest of my thread regarding the use of birth control for medical reasons and the morality of maintaining an active sexual life with ones spouse in the midst of it.

Exactly. Some CAF nuts will never accept what the church teaching is and interpret it in their own way.

Ignore. Ignore. Ignore them.

 

[Kelfa28]

I dare say this thread was started as a kind of spin off protest of my thread regarding the use of birth control for medical reasons and the morality of maintaining an active sexual life with ones spouse in the midst of it.

Unless he pulled it from the one you put in Family Life…it’s not.

You started that thread the 9th. He started this one the 8th.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Unless he pulled it from the one you put in Family Life…it’s not.

You started that thread the 9th. He started this one the 8th.

My apologies! Thank you for pointing that out Kelfa!

 

[rotlex]

Exactly. Some CAF nuts will never accept what the church teaching is and interpret it in their own way.

Ignore. Ignore. Ignore them.

Too true unfortunately.

Far too many on here have an extremely unhealthy obsession with the sex lives of others in general. Perhaps they aren’t getting enough.

 

[josh987654321]

He did not comment on the relative “graveness” of the sins - just that both are grave, and that to facilitate either in a significant way is also grave. If you disagree with that, please outline the basis for viewing contraception as not grave.

Hi Rau,

It was my understanding that abortion and mere contraception was trying to be equated, which I believe is a huge mistake, as I believe abortion to be the graver sin and if a bill or something were proposed that would stop abortion, but not contraception, I would still jump on it in order to see abortion stopped, I still disagree with contraception, but I don’t view it anywhere near as gave as the taking of an innocent life.

I don’t agree with your statement.

Hey thistle. Okay

CCC 2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:

Thank you, I agree with the Catechism, I don’t agree with contraception, but I also don’t view it as gave as abortion, because one I believe is much more gave.

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

Okay.

God Bless you both.

Thank you for reading
Josh