Need help explaining that supporting abortion is a sin

[randomguy0187]

I am in a bit of a bind: I have been discussing with my cousin (who is Catholic) the topic of abortion. He claims that he can hold a pro-choice stance because “there are clear differences within the Catholic Church on this issue. …] There have always been differences within the Catholic tradition. From what I understand, Chaput stands at one end of the spectrum of American clergy on this issue.” Now, I know this is completely wrong, and I am preparing my arguments against that.

Can anyone point me to an official document of the Church that explains, in ironclad terms, that support for abortion is a sin? I say ironclad because he is a lawyer, and he tries to twist statements to prove his point It’s been a very frustrating correspondence. I am familiar with the catechism (2270-2275 are parts I am planning to point out). Any other documents and statements would be very useful.

 

[teachccd]

The fifth commandment is pretty clear…teachccd

 

[Dirk_Skene]

I know you are needing a detailed argument that you can use to state your case clearly, but I can only come up with an answer that it is cold blooded, premeditated murder.

 

[edwest2]

I think the best explanation is that all of us begin life as an embryo. This is a scientific fact. The moment a woman becomes pregnant, her doctor tells her what? To take care of herself because it will aid the development of the baby growing inside her.

The moral dimension and about which the Church was never unclear, is that human life is sacred from conception till natural death. The dignity of man comes from God and our soul comes from God.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Caesar517]

Just to clarify: he is saying that abortion is not a sin?

 

[Padilla7921]

I don’t have any Church documents to produce (but they are out there), but I do have some sound logic:

The person inside the mother’s womb is alive, “it” exists. The only way to end that person’s existence is to abort the pregnancy. An abortion, which is a means to end the existence of a not-yet-born individual, is murder, as the individual being aborted is innocent and has not done anything but simply exist. How do you end the existence of a living organism? Kill it. The definition of murder? The killing of an innocent individual.

 

[thistle]

Extract from The Didache (written around 70AD to 100AD).
The Didache could be construed as the earliest catechism.

Chapter 2. The Second Commandment: Grave Sin Forbidden. And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born. You shall not covet the things of your neighbor, you shall not swear, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall bear no grudge. You shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. You shall not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor evil disposed, nor haughty. You shall not take evil counsel against your neighbor. You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life.

 

[randomguy0187]

He hasn’t said “abortion is not a sin” in those words. Here are some quotes I have from him:

“Roe v. Wade grew out the same set of legal principles that allow parents to make educational and medical decisions for their families–that say that areas like medical care and reproduction are too private and too important to permit undue government interference or regulation. Frankly, I think it is entirely appropriate and right that I am allowed to make decisions in those areas (for me and for my family) with minimal interference from the government.”

"I would be interested to hear the Archbishop’s basis for the view that “[t]he first principle of Christian social thought is: Don’t deliberately kill the innocent, and don’t collude in allowing somebody else to do it.” I could understand if he was talking about it strictly and wholly in the context of the Roman Catholic Church, which has an extensive and well-developed theology specific to abortion.

But that then begs the question: it makes the argument for a pro-life politics by assuming that a pro-life position should be the central premise of any social policy, based on the fact that the Church has taken it to be so.

It may be just as compelling to argue that in Matthew 22:35, Christ directed us toward overall social justice and equality as the overriding principle of Christian social thought, and that theologians (Catholic and otherwise) that focus solely or principally on pro-life politics are making a mistake.

For that matter, it might be just as compelling to argue that ******'s [note from poster: he mentions a specific candidate’s name, I edited this out] history of adultery and divorce (also a sin) make him an unfit leader. Perhaps more unfit, since he himself is guilty of those sins.

Moreover, there are clear differences within the Catholic Church on this issue. See zenit.org/article-23965?l=english, in which Caput distances himself from the arguments made by another theologian within the Catholic tradition. There have always been differences within the Catholic tradition. From what I understand, Chaput stands at one end of the spectrum of American clergy on this issue."

Some background: I posted an article to my Facebook profile in regards to the election, and he responded. The earlier parts of our correspondence discussed more of the legal aspect of it (he is a lawyer after all). I managed to shift the conversation into a moral discussion and include Catholic teaching (since we’re both Catholics). This lead us to the point of contention in my first post.

So to be clear, he hasn’t come out directly and said, “I support abortion” nor has he said “abortion is not a sin.” His arguments focus on:

1. it is appropriate for this to be a private choice with minimal interference from the government (see above quote)
2. because there are differences among members of the Catholic Church on this topic, it is ok to have a pro-choice stance.

I think my argument is going to touch on:

1. the biological dimension: that the moment of conception is the beginning of a unique human life (I’ve explained this argument as a teen Confirmation teacher, so I’m good on this end)
2. the 5th commandment and it’s application to abortion (as outlined in the Catechism 2270-2275)
   2a. it is an official teaching of the Catholic Church that abortion is an intrinsic evil (and that formal cooperation in an abortion is a grave offense)

points that I need more help on as far as documentation or further development:
3. all of those with teaching authority in the Church (i.e. ALL of the bishops) have always and continue to stand united in proclaiming the moral evil of abortion

• I’m planning to use the USCCB publication “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” as an example of this, but I was wondering if there were any other documents I could look at

1. that voting for public officials with a “pro-choice” stance because they are pro-choice (i.e. supporting the pro-choice platform) is also a sin

• would it be correct to say that doing so is equivalent to formal cooperation with abortion?

1. just because some Catholics disagree doesn’t mean one is free to disregard the official teaching of the Church

• I haven’t fully thought out this one

1. the importance of obedience to the Church’s teaching authority in moral and spiritual matters

• I just thought of adding this one in right now

I’m still formulating my argument, so I’m sure that other points will come up. Help developing these points as well as any official documents on these would help greatly.

I’d also like to clarify that my intent isn’t to convince him to vote one way or the other; it is simply to explain the true teaching of the Church.

Thanks everyone!

 

[Scottgun]

He’s basically pulling the “consistent ethic of life” argument. It’s pure smokescreen. I talk about it here:forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4307883#post4307883

 

[Caesar517]

So to be clear, he hasn’t come out directly and said, “I support abortion” nor has he said “abortion is not a sin.” His arguments focus on:

1. it is appropriate for this to be a private choice with minimal interference from the government (see above quote)

If abortion were not murder, I would agree with him here. Since abortion is a violation of the right to life, I believe government interference is warranted.

1. because there are differences among members of the Catholic Church on this topic, it is ok to have a pro-choice stance.

This is faulty logic. There will always be heretical members of the Church, including heretical priests. Instead of looking at members of the Church, he should look at the official teachings of the Church.

I think my argument is going to touch on:

1. the biological dimension: that the moment of conception is the beginning of a unique human life (I’ve explained this argument as a teen Confirmation teacher, so I’m good on this end)
2. the 5th commandment and it’s application to abortion (as outlined in the Catechism 2270-2275)
   2a. it is an official teaching of the Catholic Church that abortion is an intrinsic evil (and that formal cooperation in an abortion is a grave offense)

The above are all good points.

points that I need more help on as far as documentation or further development:
3. all of those with teaching authority in the Church (i.e. ALL of the bishops) have always and continue to stand united in proclaiming the moral evil of abortion

• I’m planning to use the USCCB publication “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” as an example of this, but I was wondering if there were any other documents I could look at

I’ve heard that the USCCB publications aren’t as strong as they should be, but I don’t have any other links on hand.

1. that voting for public officials with a “pro-choice” stance because they are pro-choice (i.e. supporting the pro-choice platform) is also a sin

• would it be correct to say that doing so is equivalent to formal cooperation with abortion?

Yes, it would.

1. just because some Catholics disagree doesn’t mean one is free to disregard the official teaching of the Church

• I haven’t fully thought out this one

This is a critical point, as he may have some statements from heretical priests.

1. the importance of obedience to the Church’s teaching authority in moral and spiritual matters

• I just thought of adding this one in right now

I’m still formulating my argument, so I’m sure that other points will come up. Help developing these points as well as any official documents on these would help greatly.

I’d also like to clarify that my intent isn’t to convince him to vote one way or the other; it is simply to explain the true teaching of the Church.

Thanks everyone!

If he is a lawyer, then he should know that Roe v Wade was unconstitutional anyway. The Supreme Court doesn’t have the authority to create law, which is essentially what they did.

If the Constitution does protect unborn life, then any law protecting abortion is unconstitutional. If it does not, then it should be left to the states. Whether the Constitution does or does not protect unborn life can be debated all day long, but Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton are unconstitutional anyway.

I think what you really need to find out is when he thinks ensoulment occurs. He talks about “differences within the Catholic Tradition”. Catholicism has always held that aborting an unborn child is a grave moral evil. The “difference” is that theologans in history have debated about when ensoulment occurs. If there exists a stage after conception but before ensoulment, then the concieved life would not posess divine rights (i.e. the right to life).

Some theologans held that ensoulment occurs at quickening (I believe Aquinas was one of them). This is a reasonable stance, given the medical knowledge of the time; quickening is the first visible sign of life.

With the advent of modern medical technology, we were able to see children develop in the womb. We saw that there was no difference before and after quickening or any other developmental stage. Therfore, we know that ensoulment occurs at conception.

Of course, all of this is arguing why abortion is a sin. If he believes that abortion is a sin, but he can still support it, that is a much simpler argument: supporting sin is a sin.