Nun Automatically Excommunicated For Approving Abortion

[catharina]

The scenario offered here is not morally permissible because there is no medical reason to have a c-section this early, the only purpose would be to kill the child. Intent matters. Whereas in the case of the mother in question there was a medical reason for an early c-section (or other medical procedure to deliver the baby alive at the 11 weeks) & the intent would be different, to deliver the child to save the mother & try to preserve the dignity of life of the child not to purposely kill the child (even if it was prior to viability for medical science & the child most likely would not survive). The long term fertility should not weigh more than the lives being discussed.

This is indeed a very sad situation & I’m praying for all involved.

ryecroft says she’s Catholic.
So she must KNOW everything you’ve said.
However, it seems it doesn’t matter to her.

Of course, no delivered child can survive prior to approx 24 wks gestation.

 

[PPeterson]

as far as we know from the information provided she helped make a tough decision in a medical emergency and saved the one life that had a chance. if you think it would have been better for both to die so that everyone can be in good standing with the Church, then honestly I think you’re the one whose moral compass needs adjusting.

 

[catharina]

as far as we know from the information provided she helped make a tough decision in a medical emergency and saved the one life that had a chance. if you think it would have been better for both to die so that everyone can be in good standing with the Church, then honestly I think you’re the one whose moral compass needs adjusting.

As far as we know from the information provided,
M. McBride made a decision that put herself outside the Catholic Church.
If she wishes to be non-Catholic, that’s her decision, but it is not her right to make that call
while the Church allows her to be fed, housed, clothed and paid as a “Catholic” employee.

So she has lost her position of authority in a Catholic hospital;
she can’t (possibly) be surprised about that.

 

[doughnut]

Well, I’ve been praying for the “very confused” for 40+ yrs.
Yet I can’t imagine that any Catholic would reject the Teachings of the Church,
especially when their choice is feeling-based.

God gives us intellect and will that we might follow Him.
“Feelings” aren’t part of the act of Faith. (Never were.)

Well, now you are telling me we are not supposed to feel?

Please help me understand, what is LOVE?

Is LOVE just a mechanical action of following a set of RULES,

or does LOVE comprised of “feelings” and “compassion” towards one another?

When we separate emotions from the intellect, what does that leave us?

I thought one of the greatest beauty of human life is, the great capacity to LOVE, and pardon my shallow understanding, LOVE is from the heart, not the head.

Also, earlier on, you mentioned about things beyond understanding but must be accepted.

So, intellect is not part of the equation either?

Now, take intellect, and love out of the human body…what becomes of men?

 

[catharina]

Well, now you are telling me we are not supposed to feel?

Please help me understand, what is LOVE?

Is LOVE just a mechanical action of following a set of RULES,

or does LOVE comprised of “feelings” and “compassion” towards one another?

When we separate emotions from the intellect, what does that leave us?

I thought one of the greatest beauty of human life is, the great capacity to LOVE, and pardon my shallow understanding, LOVE is from the heart, not the head.

Also, earlier on, you mentioned about things beyond understanding but must be accepted.

So, intellect is not part of the equation either?

Now, take intellect, and love out of the human body…what becomes of men?

What becomes of men?
First of all we are made in the image and likeness of God.
We are told to love ALL. Love God, love all men.

Love is an act of the Will.
It is an action of the will.
We will to love, to be loving.

We don’t love because we FEEL like it.
We don’t love because we decide we “should.”
We don’t love because we “understand.”
We direct our will toward love.

We love because we are called to love, to be loving.
It is the will of God that we love.

Hope that makes it clear.

 

[doughnut]

What becomes of men?
First of all we are made in the image and likeness of God.
We are told to love ALL. Love God, love all men.

Love is an act of the Will.
It is an action of the will.
We will to love, to be loving.

We don’t love because we FEEL like it.
We don’t love because we decide we “should.”
We don’t love because we “understand.”
We direct our will toward love.

We love because we are called to love, to be loving.
It is the will of God that we love.

Hope that makes it clear.

Actually not really, but I’ll try to understand.

My experience with love, has always been an emotion that defy all my rational senses.

There are many people whom I should not have been the least bothered. According to my rationale, I don’t know these people. But when I felt compiled to care for them, I see that reaction as a show of love, and compassion.

I did not ‘want to love’, ‘feel like loving’ ‘understand then love’; but that, from love, feeling and understanding comes. I also know that I’m a mere mortal who could not love all mankind equally.

Perhaps, my ability to love is not in full capacity as yet, perhaps even at infancy stage. But, how many of us are able to say we can love in all aspects that encompassed this ‘love’?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Doughnut, what happens when the man and woman who were so in love (full of those joyous, loving, caring feelings through which they ‘knew’ that they would love each other forever), who married, made the vows “till death do us part”. . .and then in just normal day to day living over the next few years stop having those joyous, loving, caring feelings??

Would you say that they have stopped loving each other because their ‘feelings’ changed?

What if, even though it is hard work, that man and that woman who had made the commitment to marry ‘till death’, despite having the feelings go ‘bye-bye’. . .made an effort of will to continue to exert the same kind of actions and behavior that (back when they felt the love) seemed so easy, but which, after the love ‘stopped feeling good’ seem like a burden and a chore?

Isn’t that love too? In fact, isn’t it a purer and greater love in that it doesn’t demand that the ‘feelings’ substitute for it or that they ‘get feelings’ out of it, but that they continue to care for each other when they aren’t getting the rewards of feeling all lovey?

Is love only for feeling happy?

Love is not ‘from the heart, not the head’. That would be (and I don’t mean this in a rude way) rather ridiculous . . .to separate something that is important enough to be listed as one of the three greatest things–faith, hope, and love-- and to completely ‘divorce it’ from the head (reason) as though one were ‘greater’ than another; as though love were ONLY feeling. It isn’t.

 

[doughnut]

Doughnut, what happens when the man and woman who were so in love (full of those joyous, loving, caring feelings through which they ‘knew’ that they would love each other forever), who married, made the vows “till death do us part”. . .and then in just normal day to day living over the next few years stop having those joyous, loving, caring feelings??

Would you say that they have stopped loving each other because their ‘feelings’ changed?

What if, even though it is hard work, that man and that woman who had made the commitment to marry ‘till death’, despite having the feelings go ‘bye-bye’. . .made an effort of will to continue to exert the same kind of actions and behavior that (back when they felt the love) seemed so easy, but which, after the love ‘stopped feeling good’ seem like a burden and a chore?

Isn’t that love too? In fact, isn’t it a purer and greater love in that it doesn’t demand that the ‘feelings’ substitute for it or that they ‘get feelings’ out of it, but that they continue to care for each other when they aren’t getting the rewards of feeling all lovey?

Is love only for feeling happy?

Love is not ‘from the heart, not the head’. That would be (and I don’t mean this in a rude way) rather ridiculous . . .to separate something that is important enough to be listed as one of the three greatest things–faith, hope, and love-- and to completely ‘divorce it’ from the head (reason) as though one were ‘greater’ than another; as though love were ONLY feeling. It isn’t.

Give me a few more decades I supposed. I am still an ignorant young person. But thank you for your illustrations, because you gave me more fruit for thought.

 

[ryecroft]

Exactly. A treatment cannot be the INTENTIONAL murder of an innocent life.

If a treatment (to save the life of a person) had the unintended cause of loss of life to an innocent life, it’s a different matter altogether.

I don’t know better how to explain this than to say that the fetus WAS causing most if not all of the problems. Look to one of my other posts where I explain what pregnancy hormones can do to someone who is having problems with the pregnancy. I’m not saying the fetus was the desease but it caused desease symptoms in the mother. Remove the fetus (without messing with the uterus (meaning causing it to seperate) by causing it to seperate while doing a c-section)- I have a hard time thinking of another way to get the fetus out so the symptoms can be aleviated other than abortion. You’ve got to think of saving at least one instead of just saying “oh well, God can intervene or the mother will get a heavenly reward fo loosing her life…” When both are going to die, it’s a WASTE OF PRECIOUS HUMAN LIFE - and the mother’s life is just as precious as that of the life of the fetus.
God Bless
Rye

 

[doughnut]

which makes me wonder

murder is a sin; but do they all warrant a similar judgement considering a variety of circumstances?

1. a psychopath enjoyed tormenting his victim, and hence kill the victim.
2. a soldier who was in a war, whereby his job demands that he kill his enermies.
3. a person who was attacked, and to which, in defence, killed his aggressor.
4. a judge who has pronounced the death sentence on the convict
5. a person who committed suicide
6. pulling the plug off the lifesupport of a person who had no chance of recovery
7. a person who committed murder because of revenge
8. abortion performed on a child too young to even understood what her body was going through, nor her body properly developed to carry the baby to term. (I think the youngest recorded mother was five?)
9. abortion performed because the baby was the main reason why the mother is dying, and there are no reasons to believe the baby had any chance of survivor due to the complex of the situation.
10. a mentally deluded person who murdered whilst not of a sound mind

i wonder if we hate all of them in the same ways because a SIN is a SIN no matter what the migitating factor is.

 

[ryecroft]

Wow Catherina, I’m so glad you’ve come along and that we no longer need to listen to the Holy Father, because obviously, you’ve decided to stand in for him. And since you’re judging people, I guess that we won’t have to worry about God judging us anymore - you’ve taken that job over. 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 oh and the idea isn’t to thrilling to you either because you love life. You can sit on high all you want, but at least I know God knows my heart, which you don’t and 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 (don’t know if you have kids but from your profile, it looks like you won’t be ending up in any of these situations yourself)- 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. But apparently, a woman on CAF knows better than all of them. Once you’ve dealt with it as the mother who’s life is now just a memory or the mother of said person and grandmother to the children or even one of the children - when you’ve dealt with this from that point of view - then I’ll listen to you deliver your dogmatic diatribes - until then, I think I’ll just put you on ignore.
God Bless
Rye

 

[Boxie]

Why American nuns are so anti-Catholic teaching?

FYI all of you! I cam back to the chburch with thoughts that there were provisions for a woman who wa going to die unless she had the child removed so shecould live What is up with you people areyou that heartless??? I cannot believe tis that you can be on the side of a male chovinist queer! No man should have that much power to say you can live ro die but God. This NUN madde the right decision if not let me knnow and i will go to an athiest site to forget aqll about this mess of a relgion.`I would never go back to that hospital ever again shecoud have died an if she wasin the wildeness who wouldhave keep the child? Youom people are baby happy and a life means absolutly nothing to ou. Woman suffer just as nuch in this faith as they do as athe mOrmons do. Nothing is worht living like you do. I am cathlic but i stay home and i am proud of it expecialy after this.

 

[seekerz]

FYI all of you! I cam back to the chburch with thoughts that there were provisions for a woman who wa going to die unless she had the child removed so shecould live What is up with you people areyou that heartless??? I cannot believe tis that you can be on the side of a male chovinist queer! No man should have that much power to say you can live ro die but God. This NUN madde the right decision if not let me knnow and i will go to an athiest site to forget aqll about this mess of a relgion.`I would never go back to that hospital ever again shecoud have died an if she wasin the wildeness who wouldhave keep the child? Youom people are baby happy and a life means absolutly nothing to ou. Woman suffer just as nuch in this faith as they do as athe mOrmons do. Nothing is worht living like you do. I am cathlic but i stay home and i am proud of it expecialy after this.

I’m sorry you feel that way about the Catholic faith. Name-calling really doesn’t help anything and as a woman in the Church I can definitely say that life is worth living for Catholic women.

 

[doughnut]

Wow Catherina, I’m so glad you’ve come along and that we no longer need to listen to the Holy Father, because obviously, you’ve decided to stand in for him. And since you’re judging people, I guess that we won’t have to worry about God judging us anymore - you’ve taken that job over. 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 oh and the idea isn’t to thrilling to you either because you love life. You can sit on high all you want, but at least I know God knows my heart, which you don’t and 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 (don’t know if you have kids but from your profile, it looks like you won’t be ending up in any of these situations yourself)- 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. But apparently, a woman on CAF knows better than all of them. Once you’ve dealt with it as the mother who’s life is now just a memory or the mother of said person and grandmother to the children or even one of the children - when you’ve dealt with this from that point of view - then I’ll listen to you deliver your dogmatic diatribes - until then, I think I’ll just put you on ignore.
God Bless
Rye

One big hug for you to have gone through all these. Jesus loves you.

 

[Santi2]

Wow Catherina, I’m so glad you’ve come along and that we no longer need to listen to the Holy Father, because obviously, you’ve decided to stand in for him. And since you’re judging people, I guess that we won’t have to worry about God judging us anymore - you’ve taken that job over. 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 oh and the idea isn’t to thrilling to you either because you love life. You can sit on high all you want, but at least I know God knows my heart, which you don’t and 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 (don’t know if you have kids but from your profile, it looks like you won’t be ending up in any of these situations yourself)- 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. But apparently, a woman on CAF knows better than all of them. Once you’ve dealt with it as the mother who’s life is now just a memory or the mother of said person and grandmother to the children or even one of the children - when you’ve dealt with this from that point of view - then I’ll listen to you deliver your dogmatic diatribes - until then, I think I’ll just put you on ignore.
God Bless
Rye

When did Catharina ever judge anyone? All she has done is let everyone know where the Catholic Church stands on the matter of abortion. When did it ever become unacceptable for any Catholic to speak of what the Catholic Church teaches? Why is it that we are now debased for our position against abortion, which is what this case is about? The Holy Father does not have to come to post at CAF to tell you what the Catholic Church position is over licitness and illicitness of therapeutic means. The excommunication of the nun is evident proof that the Catholic Church does not see her conduct as acceptable. Yet, those of us who agree with the Church have been debased for our assent to Catholic teaching. Another poster even mentioned “kissing up to God”, with no other intention than to mock and to make it appear that a conduct, which places God above all, is abhorrent. .

We ALL appreciate that this case is a very difficult one. However, we do not need to suffer the same personal circumstances to make our convictions of faith. We have saints to shore the spiritual discipline to enable us to fully submit our trust in God, if and when we DO face the same. St Gianna was one of those saints. The Catechisms of the Church is also one of those that guide us when confronted with hardships over our conduct as Catholics. Then you exercise your free will. And in so doing, one is also minded of what is incurred when that free will is exercised contrary to what the Church teaches.

 

[Elizabeth502]

If we’re all required to replicate what St. Gianna did, then there is zero signficance to her sainthood, and she is not set apart as someone who did anything special, let alone heroic, but did what all ordinary laypeople are supposedly required to do. I think ryecroft knows a little bit about what Gianna Beretta Molla did and did not do. Perhaps ryecroft would like to share that with us.

Conversely, if Gianna is the standard that’s expected, then there are way more saints than could ever be counted, and her title is therefore nothing particularly special.

 

[seekerz]

If we’re all required to replicate what St. Gianna did, then there is zero signficance to her sainthood, and she is not set apart as someone who did anything special, let alone heroic, but did what all ordinary laypeople are supposedly required to do. I think ryecroft knows a little bit about what Gianna Beretta Molla did and did not do. Perhaps ryecroft would like to share that with us.

Conversely, if Gianna is the standard that’s expected, then there are way more saints than could ever be counted, and her title is therefore nothing particularly special.

Interesting take on the matter. Actually, after reading her story I came to the conclusion that such a sacrifice might not at all be necessary today given advances in medical technology. Many women have surgery while pregnant and go on to carry their pregnancies to term. Indeed the Church allows for treatment of serious health conditions in pregnancy under the principle of double effect.

The basic problem I see with this discussion (as well as with our Church’s stand, to be perfectly honest) is that there seems to be no clear definition of what is and is not illicit in particular cases - instead we are given guidelines to apply which others are then free to judge, condemn, interpret and dissect. We all know what medical procedures are available today, so why not give specific guidance (not consensus opinions of theologians, but rather official doctrine): in what scenarios are specific procedures licit or illicit, which methods of treatment constitute direct abortion and which do not? Seems pretty straightforward to me.

As it stands now, I have seen Church doctrine quite creatively used to allow procedures that by all medical standards would meet the definition of abortion (medicine does not differentiate between direct and indirect abortion - you take a baby out before it’s viable, by C-section/D&C/ by bringing on labor, alone or along with another organ it’s all abortion, medically, even if that term may not be used out of sensitivity to those involved). In addition, there is considerable confusion among lay people regarding abortion and medical issues on a whole (An earlier poster wanted to know how it was that a Catholic hospital had available a doctor who could do abortions, obviously unaware that all OB/Gyn’s are capable of performing at least certain types of abortion if they so choose - not that they all do, but they could if they wanted to).

 

[Santi2]

If we’re all required to replicate what St. Gianna did, then there is zero signficance to her sainthood, and she is not set apart as someone who did anything special, let alone heroic, but did what all ordinary laypeople are supposedly required to do. I think ryecroft knows a little bit about what Gianna Beretta Molla did and did not do. Perhaps ryecroft would like to share that with us.

Conversely, if Gianna is the standard that’s expected, then there are way more saints than could ever be counted, and her title is therefore nothing particularly special.

I agree. St Gianna did “what ordinary lay people are supposedly required to do”. There are many lay people who will never reach the prominence of St Gianna and who would, all the same, be exemplary. If we knew about them then there would be more saints we could emulate in difficult situations. My aunt was one of those lay people and her circumstances would only be confined to those who knew her.

 

[seekerz]

I agree. St Gianna did “what ordinary lay people are supposedly required to do”. There are many lay people who will never reach the prominence of St Gianna and who would, all the same, be exemplary. If we knew about them then there would be more saints we could emulate in difficult situations. My aunt was one of those lay people and her circumstances would only be confined to those who knew her.

St Gianna actually went beyond what is expected of ordinary lay people because it seems from her story that she could have allowed the baby to be delivered prematurely, beyond viability but before term (a course much more risky to the baby then than now). I have also read that she could have licitly accepted a hysterectomy.

Of course, that situation isn’t the same as having heart-lung complications at 11 wks of pregnancy; the chances of one or both surviving a pregnancy to the stage of viability would likely have been significantly different than in St Gianna’s case. So the question of dying to save her baby in the case of this mother was likely not even an option (though it’s impossible to say for certain without knowing all her details).

 

[Rence]

Wow Catherina, I’m so glad you’ve come along and that we no longer need to listen to the Holy Father, because obviously, you’ve decided to stand in for him. And since you’re judging people, I guess that we won’t have to worry about God judging us anymore - you’ve taken that job over. 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 oh and the idea isn’t to thrilling to you either because you love life. You can sit on high all you want, but at least I know God knows my heart, which you don’t and 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 (don’t know if you have kids but from your profile, it looks like you won’t be ending up in any of these situations yourself)- 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. But apparently, a woman on CAF knows better than all of them. Once you’ve dealt with it as the mother who’s life is now just a memory or the mother of said person and grandmother to the children or even one of the children - when you’ve dealt with this from that point of view - then I’ll listen to you deliver your dogmatic diatribes - until then, I think I’ll just put you on ignore.
God Bless
Rye

I’m so sorry Ryecroft :console: I know you loved your baby, and I know you suffer from his loss. But I’m glad you’re here to write about it and share your experiences. I think it’s wrong to claim that another person is not pro-life, especially someone who was forced to have an abortion because the pregancy was too much for her body to bear. I rather believe that being pro-life is more about holding all life in high regard, not just unborn life. Just letting two die instead of one for the sake of sematics, when you can save at least one, doesn’t seem very pro-life to me

At least you have the consolation of knowing you did the right thing in consultation with your priest and Bishop. If your priest and Bishop counseled you, then you don’t have to worry about what anyone else has to say about it because it doesn’t matter. A layperson does NOT know more than the priests and Bishops you spoke with.

You are a loving, warm woman and you deserve life, just like anyone else. Your husband and children are as lucky to have you as you are to have them.