Is abortion ever justified?

[bobzills]

I’ll answer the question marks in order. Yes. The Roman Catholic Church is the Church founded by Chirst outside of which there is no salvation. This is why the schismatic Orthodox (who are not “orthodox”) should become Catholics. The Vatican agrees with them, which is why they have not declared them heretics.

Heres the deal, Vatican II formally taught over 200 heresies. Just a few: 1) Christ united himself to everyman through his incarnation. 2) Muslims worship the one true God 3) Then Old Covenant was never revoked 4) Religious Liberty is a good thing 5) The church esteems the Hindus.

In other words, Vatican II contradicted the irreformable teaching of the magisterium, often almost word for word. Those who signed onto this excoomunicated themselves, “ipso facto, without need of declaration” (per the 1917 code). They thus lost their offices and authority. Therefore they ahve less standing than I, because I’m still a Catholic and they’re not. This is simply an indisputable fact. the evidence is overwheling and available to anyone who seeks it.

This raises more questions.

1. Since almost everyone in the Church, Pope, cardinals, bishops, faithful, accept Vatican II, where is the Catholic Church today, out side of which ther is no salvation.
2. IF the Popes, bishops, cardinals, and lay people have accepted Vatican II, which you say has promoted herey, does that not mean that the Catholic Church has defected?
3. How could the Holy Spirit be guiding the Catholic Church, since the Catholic Church has held and promulgated a heretical Council?
   And more, but that’s it for now.

 

[danandirma]

no!

 

[CatholicRox]

1. I think the Catholic church needs to take consideration if a woman is raped, and ends up pregnant. I think she should have the right to abort without being discramanated by her own church.
2. What if this happened to you:

A woman walking home from work in New York City is attacked by a rapist. The man uses a wash cloth and covers her mouth so people cannot hear her scream. She is then knocked out… later she is found on the side of an alley way with all her clothes torn off of her, she can only suspect the worst. The police finally find her… her husband is terrified that she was raped… his woman… scared for life. 2 weeks later they found out she was pregnant. Now, answer me this… if YOUR wife had gotten pregnant… would you not have gone into a stage of denial?! The woman wants terribly to abort. She thinks that it would be a mistake if she lets the child inside her wound let live, not knowing if she would love the child, i child she did not want and did not plan for. Her husband decides not to abort but leave the child to be born, when the child is born, he looks so much like the man that raped he wife she cannot stand to see the child, for she gets flash backs of that terrible day she was raped. 13 years later the child is miserable… he thinks he is a soul sent from hell. When asked who was his father… his mom tells him he was a man who raped her. With that the child is petrified, he then commits suicide. Knowing that it was not his moms fault… and that deep down he parents never really wanted this out come…SO NOW, IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU, WOULD YOU NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION FOR ABORTION?

GOD BLESS YOU ALL. :clapping:

 

[mulligan59]

This raises more questions.

1. Since almost everyone in the Church, Pope, cardinals, bishops, faithful, accept Vatican II, where is the Catholic Church today, out side of which ther is no salvation.
2. IF the Popes, bishops, cardinals, and lay people have accepted Vatican II, which you say has promoted herey, does that not mean that the Catholic Church has defected?
3. How could the Holy Spirit be guiding the Catholic Church, since the Catholic Church has held and promulgated a heretical Council?
   And more, but that’s it for now.

1. The Church consists of faithful Catholics. By this I don’t mean pure and perfect people, but simply people who believe in what the Church has always taught. It is sort of “in the desert”.
2. No. First, they are not members of the Church as heresy means automatic excommunication. No one has to declare this, is simply happens, because the Church is a supernatural institution. I am not making this up, this is what was always taught up through the reign of Pius XII. But second, they “defect” argument can easily be turned around, brcause essentially what Vatican II taught was that the Church had been defective for 2,000 years and they were finally fixing it. They didn’t say this explicitly of course, they just contradicted dogmatic definition after dogmatic definition. The clearest, simplest way to get a handle on this I think is to read the Syllabus of Pius IX along side the primary docs of Vatican II. Vatican II essentially represents a Masonic revolution, a usurping of the Church’s offices.
3. He wasn’t. Again these men were not even Catholic, let alone office holders. John XXIII excommunicated himself long before he became “Pope”. In the 1920s he was removed from his teaching post for teaching modernism. They made him a diplomat instead. He then joined the Free Masons and actively supported communism, bith excommunicable offenses. A false Pope cannot call a valid council.

 

[st_lucy]

1. I think the Catholic church needs to take consideration if a woman is raped, and ends up pregnant. I think she should have the right to abort without being discramanated by her own church.

WHAT!?! I am a direct result of a rape, are you saying that if my mom chose I should not be here, that I should have had my arms and legs ripped apart because my father was not nice?

1. What if this happened to you:

A woman walking home from work in New York City is attacked by a rapist. The man uses a wash cloth and covers her mouth so people cannot hear her scream. She is then knocked out… later she is found on the side of an alley way with all her clothes torn off of her, she can only suspect the worst. The police finally find her… her husband is terrified that she was raped… his woman… scared for life. 2 weeks later they found out she was pregnant. Now, answer me this… if YOUR wife had gotten pregnant… would you not have gone into a stage of denial?! The woman wants terribly to abort. She thinks that it would be a mistake if she lets the child inside her wound let live, not knowing if she would love the child, i child she did not want and did not plan for. Her husband decides not to abort but leave the child to be born, when the child is born, he looks so much like the man that raped he wife she cannot stand to see the child, for she gets flash backs of that terrible day she was raped. 13 years later the child is miserable… he thinks he is a soul sent from hell. When asked who was his father… his mom tells him he was a man who raped her. With that the child is petrified, he then commits suicide. Knowing that it was not his moms fault… and that deep down he parents never really wanted this out come…SO NOW, IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU, WOULD YOU NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION FOR ABORTION?

GOD BLESS YOU ALL. :clapping:

 

[aggiecatholic05]

1. I think the Catholic church needs to take consideration if a woman is raped, and ends up pregnant. I think she should have the right to abort without being discramanated by her own church.
2. What if this happened to you:

A woman walking home from work in New York City is attacked by a rapist. The man uses a wash cloth and covers her mouth so people cannot hear her scream. She is then knocked out… later she is found on the side of an alley way with all her clothes torn off of her, she can only suspect the worst. The police finally find her… her husband is terrified that she was raped… his woman… scared for life. 2 weeks later they found out she was pregnant. Now, answer me this… if YOUR wife had gotten pregnant… would you not have gone into a stage of denial?! The woman wants terribly to abort. She thinks that it would be a mistake if she lets the child inside her wound let live, not knowing if she would love the child, i child she did not want and did not plan for. Her husband decides not to abort but leave the child to be born, when the child is born, he looks so much like the man that raped he wife she cannot stand to see the child, for she gets flash backs of that terrible day she was raped. 13 years later the child is miserable… he thinks he is a soul sent from hell. When asked who was his father… his mom tells him he was a man who raped her. With that the child is petrified, he then commits suicide. Knowing that it was not his moms fault… and that deep down he parents never really wanted this out come…SO NOW, IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU, WOULD YOU NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION FOR ABORTION?

GOD BLESS YOU ALL. :clapping:

no, we would not abort. my wife and i have discussed this. the child wouldnt be mine, but it would still be half her so i could love it. if she couldnt better to go the adoption route(very easy for babies to get adopted) than the murder route.

now i have a hypothetical for you. suppose your father was the man that raped this woman. he fled the country and couldnt be extradited. could the police arrest you for his crime? a judge convict you? could you be executed for what he did if he can’t be punished?
-my question is no different than aborting the child concieved through rape.

 

[st_lucy]

What I don’t understand is why do so many through out this story of it being okay if one is raped to kill their child, but when I give my real life story they will refuse to answer me, so once again CatholicRox do you think my mom should have had the right to kill me?

 

[BobCatholic]

Heres the deal, Vatican II formally taught over 200 heresies.

Translation into English: The gates of hell have prevailed over the Church.

What’s the address of the local synagogue?

And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

 

[mulligan59]

Translation into English: The gates of hell have prevailed over the Church.

What’s the address of the local synagogue?

And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?

No, the gates of Hell have not prevailed, simply because the Vaitican II establishment is not the Church. The topic at hand? I was replying to direct questions, probably this track resulted from my challenge to someone who quoted a modern “bishop” about circumstances that may justify abortion.

Bob, If you were fatihful to the Magisterium as you describe yourself, then you would have to hold my position. The Magristerium has a long History before Vaitican II. The Magisterium has told us how to react to heretics and heresy even on the part of a “Pope” (Cum Exapostotatus Officio, Paul IV) as well as the Doctor of the Church, St. Robert Bellarmine. The current situtation was in fact anticipated in both scripture (the Great Apostasy) and in the writings of the great Saints. It is not difficult or contradictory.

 

[kage_ar]

1. I think the Catholic church needs to take consideration if a woman is raped, and ends up pregnant. I think she should have the right to abort without being discramanated by her own church.
2. What if this happened to you:

A woman walking home from work in New York City is attacked by a rapist. The man uses a wash cloth and covers her mouth so people cannot hear her scream. She is then knocked out… later she is found on the side of an alley way with all her clothes torn off of her, she can only suspect the worst. The police finally find her… her husband is terrified that she was raped… his woman… scared for life. 2 weeks later they found out she was pregnant. Now, answer me this… if YOUR wife had gotten pregnant… would you not have gone into a stage of denial?! The woman wants terribly to abort. She thinks that it would be a mistake if she lets the child inside her wound let live, not knowing if she would love the child, i child she did not want and did not plan for. Her husband decides not to abort but leave the child to be born, when the child is born, he looks so much like the man that raped he wife she cannot stand to see the child, for she gets flash backs of that terrible day she was raped. 13 years later the child is miserable… he thinks he is a soul sent from hell. When asked who was his father… his mom tells him he was a man who raped her. With that the child is petrified, he then commits suicide. Knowing that it was not his moms fault… and that deep down he parents never really wanted this out come…SO NOW, IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOU, WOULD YOU NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION FOR ABORTION?

GOD BLESS YOU ALL. :clapping:

This woman and her husband need love, counseling and care by their priest, counselors and physicians. Christ can heal the hurt and the pain.

The baby in question may be loved and accepted by the parents or placed with a couple who will adopt, love and cherish this child.

Abortion does not un-rape anyone.

 

[bobzills]

1. The Church consists of faithful Catholics. By this I don’t mean pure and perfect people, but simply people who believe in what the Church has always taught. It is sort of “in the desert”.
2. No. First, they are not members of the Church as heresy means automatic excommunication. No one has to declare this, is simply happens, because the Church is a supernatural institution. I am not making this up, this is what was always taught up through the reign of Pius XII. But second, they “defect” argument can easily be turned around, brcause essentially what Vatican II taught was that the Church had been defective for 2,000 years and they were finally fixing it. They didn’t say this explicitly of course, they just contradicted dogmatic definition after dogmatic definition. The clearest, simplest way to get a handle on this I think is to read the Syllabus of Pius IX along side the primary docs of Vatican II. Vatican II essentially represents a Masonic revolution, a usurping of the Church’s offices.
3. He wasn’t. Again these men were not even Catholic, let alone office holders. John XXIII excommunicated himself long before he became “Pope”. In the 1920s he was removed from his teaching post for teaching modernism. They made him a diplomat instead. He then joined the Free Masons and actively supported communism, bith excommunicable offenses. A false Pope cannot call a valid council.

So Pope John XXIII excommunicated himself? And did everyone else in authortiy in the Roman Catholic Church excommunicate themselves by adhering to Vatican II?

 

[BobCatholic]

No, the gates of Hell have not prevailed, simply because the Vaitican II establishment is not the Church. The topic at hand? I was replying to direct questions, probably this track resulted from my challenge to someone who quoted a modern “bishop” about circumstances that may justify abortion.

Bob, If you were fatihful to the Magisterium as you describe yourself, then you would have to hold my position. The Magristerium has a long History before Vaitican II. The Magisterium has told us how to react to heretics and heresy even on the part of a “Pope” (Cum Exapostotatus Officio, Paul IV) as well as the Doctor of the Church, St. Robert Bellarmine. The current situtation was in fact anticipated in both scripture (the Great Apostasy) and in the writings of the great Saints. It is not difficult or contradictory.

So what does Mormonism have to do with the topic at hand?

 

[mulligan59]

So Pope John XXIII excommunicated himself? And did everyone else in authortiy in the Roman Catholic Church excommunicate themselves by adhering to Vatican II?

Probably not “everyone”, but certainly those who knew that they were contradicting a previous definition. This is how the Church defines its membership: Baptism is the gateway. Holy Mother Church claims all the Baptized. Therefore for example Protestant Children are in fact members of the Church if they are Baptized with a valid form (as most probably are).

They (protestants) don’t fall outside of the Church until they are taught a specific dogma (such as the perpetual virginity of Mary which I think all protestants and perhaps even some “orthodox” reject), and then refuse to believe it.

Now a protestant who beleives that Christ had natural brothers, but has never been taught the Catholic position, and shown the ample evidence for it and the correct interpretation of the scriptures in support of this position, etc, is a “material heretic”. He is a heretic in fact. However since he is ignorant of the dogma (at minimum a baptized person must only beleive in the Trinity and the Incarnation, UNLESS he has been taught more) the Church has taught that material heresy does not excommunicate you. The primary problem most protestants have (since they are mostly quite ignorant) with salvation is that they have no means to be restored to grace should they sin after Baptism. Most beleive in “eternal security”, once saved always saved, and consistent with this position they do not believe in confessing to a priest or even the notion of a priesthood.

Christ however gave the Apostles to power to forgive sins for a reason. He wasn;t just wsting his breath. It is the means. It is the purpose of the Church.

However “obstinate heresy” does. An obstinate heretic rejects a dogma he has been taught. Certainly a man who had a pre-vatican II education as a Doctor of Catholic Theology, who proclaims something such as “Through the Incarnation Christ united himself forever to everyman”, would be an obstinate heretic. Some young priest who has had a woefully inadequate education or formation in the post Vatican II era may not be. He may indeed be ignorant. It is actually amazing to discover hwo uninformed some of these men are, one wonders wht they studied in all of those years in the seminary.

Follow me?

 

[mulligan59]

So what does Mormonism have to do with the topic at hand?

I dunno. Who mentioned Mormonism?

 

[RWMorris]

The only scenario where abortion would ever be consider legit to me, is if the physical life of the mother was truly 100% threatened by the pregnancy. From what I’ve read such situations are so completely rare as to be almost non-existent.

Abortion should be the same, “so completely rare as to be almost non-existent”.

 

[BobCatholic]

I dunno. Who mentioned Mormonism?

You did.

You mentioned their doctrine.

The gates of hell prevailed, the Church totally apostacised, the Catholic Church preaches heresy…

Your doctrine has nothing to do with the thread at hand.

 

[mulligan59]

You did.

You mentioned their doctrine.

The gates of hell prevailed, the Church totally apostacised, the Catholic Church preaches heresy…

Your doctrine has nothing to do with the thread at hand.

Bob,

Last first: Someone tried to use a the statement of a Bishop to justify some abortions.
Then I responded to direct questions., and we strayed to here.

That aside, we know PRECISELY BECAUSE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS INDEFECTIBLE, that she cannot change her Doctrines. One of those indefectible, irreformable doctrines of the Church is that heretics are not part of the Church. A man dressed up like a priest or a bishop spouting heresy is NOT THE CHURCH. In fact your position is actually the Protestant one (I don’t know why you singled out Mormons, the protestant position is no different in this regard) because it presumes to follow MEN and not Dogma. If you think that a man calling himself the Pope can unmake an irreformable dogma like “Limbo”, or can commit an act of apostasy like kissing the Koran and remain a Catholic, then it is clearly you who doesn’t understand what the Church teaches in this regard. The Church, the Supernatural, Mystical Body of Christ, is spotless in her teachings. It is Vatican II (not I) that presumed to say that the Church was indeed defective. Therefore I conclude that Vatican II was a counterfiet, a fraud, a Masonic usurptation. Much the same thing happened during the Aryan crisis, when over 90% of the sees were held by heretics. St. Anthanasius said of the time: “They have the buildings, but we have the Church”. Consider again the Anglican revolt in the 1500s. The hierarchy largely defected. There were no Catholic parishes allowed to function. Does that mean that there was no Catholic Church left in England? It certainly produced a lot of Martyrs. So what I am saying is not at all opposed to Catholic teaching. You don’t understand it or you pretend not to.

 

[kage_ar]

Pretty please, take the EENS, Vatican II, heresy debate to it’s own thread.

 

[st_lucy]

Pretty please, take the EENS, Vatican II, heresy debate to it’s own thread.

Thank you, this thread is about abortion.

 

[bobzills]

If you think that a man calling himself the Pope can unmake an irreformable dogma like “Limbo”, or can commit an act of apostasy like kissing the Koran and remain a Catholic, then it is clearly you who doesn’t understand what the Church teaches in this regard. The Church, the Supernatural, Mystical Body of Christ, is spotless in her teachings. It is Vatican II (not I) that presumed to say that the Church was indeed defective. Therefore I conclude that Vatican II was a counterfiet, a fraud, a Masonic usurptation.

It is difficult to beleive that the Pope and the Vatican II Council are wrong, but you are right. Where is your authority to determine that the Pope cannot make these declarations? did not Our Lord give the keys to the Pope and not to you?