Question about abortion?

[woblim]

The Holy Father of blessed memory John Paul II made a saint of a woman who died in child birth. It seems she had a choice…have the baby or live.

what is the Holy Churches position on abortion to save the mothers life? I personally think it is a sin.

Also conversly there is the subject of ceasarean section. Isn’t it just another form of abortion? If God is the lord of life is he not also the lord of death? Is it just as bad to bring a child into the world against the will of God just as bad as taking one out?

 

[thistle]

woblim:

The Holy Father of blessed memory John Paul II made a saint of a woman who died in child birth. It seems she had a choice…have the baby or live.

what is the Holy Churches position on abortion to save the mothers life? I personally think it is a sin.

Also conversly there is the subject of ceasarean section. Isn’t it just another form of abortion? If God is the lord of life is he not also the lord of death? Is it just as bad to bring a child into the world against the will of God just as bad as taking one out?

Why would you think a ceasarean section is a form of abortion? Its a form of delivery not abortion!

 

[m134e5]

woblim:

what is the Holy Churches position on abortion to save the mothers life? I personally think it is a sin.

The Church recently canonized a saint who gave their life rather than have an abortion. I think we know the Church’s position…

woblim:

Also conversly there is the subject of ceasarean section. Isn’t it just another form of abortion? If God is the lord of life is he not also the lord of death? Is it just as bad to bring a child into the world against the will of God just as bad as taking one out?

Cesearean Section is not another form abortion- it allows life- abortion causes death. We are rational beings- we are allowed to come up with technology on our own to protect, preserve, and better our lives. We just can’t destroy a life to make another life more comfortable.

 

[Batjacboy]

woblim:

what is the Holy Churches position on abortion to save the mothers life? I personally think it is a sin.

You are correct. Since we know that any abortion is evil, the “reason” for having one is irrelevant.

We are never permitted to do evil. Ever. Even if some so-called “good” may come of it.

 

[Flopfoot]

I PM’ed Fr Vince Serpa once when I didn’t understand his answer regarding abortion to save a mother’s life. This is what he told me.

Dear F,

Yes, if conception takes place in the fallopian tube, when the embroyo reaches a certain size, it can cause the mother’s death and, of course it’s own as well. The tube is too narrow to sustain it for any length of time. The Church allows the removal of the tube as a diseased organ. The death of the embroyo is the un-intended result.

This would allso follow in the case of a woman with cancer of the uterus. The main purpose of the surgery would be to remove a diseased organ.

But the Church cannot sanction the deliberate distruction or removal of an embroyo or fetus from the womb. Such removal can never be an end in itself or a means toward something else. It can only be the un-intended result.

The key phrase here is “un-intended.”

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

Hope this helps.

 

[1ke]

woblim:

The Holy Father of blessed memory John Paul II made a saint of a woman who died in child birth. It seems she had a choice…have the baby or live.

Blessed Gianna Molla

woblim:

what is the Holy Churches position on abortion to save the mothers life? I personally think it is a sin.

Abortion is always wrong. It is a grave sin when done with full knowledge and consent.

If a woman’s life is in danger she may seek legitimate medical treatment for the condition. Abortion is never such a treatment. Gianna Molla decided not to seek treatment for cancer, that was her choice.

woblim:

Also conversly there is the subject of ceasarean section. Isn’t it just another form of abortion? If God is the lord of life is he not also the lord of death? Is it just as bad to bring a child into the world against the will of God just as bad as taking one out?

No, this is not Catholic teaching. There is nothing wrong with using medical means to save lives.

 

[1ke]

m134e5:

The Church recently canonized a saint who gave their life rather than have an abortion. I think we know the Church’s position…

Actually this is not true. There was no choice between death and abortion.

Gianna Molla had cancer and had to choose between a treatment that could result in the death of her child or no action until after the baby’s birth, which could prove too late to act on the cancer.

She chose to wait for treatment until after the baby’s birth, and by then the cancer was too advanced.

 

[Zerith]

In the rarest of the rare, when it comes down to the life of a mother, or the life of an unborn child, the Church does not count the woman chosing her life over the child’s as a sin - She is a mother, she has a husband (Hopefully!), a family, friends and so on. She is very important… But as my first clause stated, “The rarest of the rare”, it doesn’t really happen that often - You might wonder “But here and there there were abortions in those circumstances”, most of those cases are “hyped” up, of course, some doctors couldn’t care less, except maybe for money, and Social Liberals, Social Democrats and Socialists love to spread that around a lot.

That woman who was cannonised made a grave sacrifice for the life of another, hence why she was cannonised. Though I am adiment that if she chose to save her life, on account of her importance to her family etc… She wouldn’t have committed a sin.

 

[jrabs]

1ke:

Blessed Gianna Molla

She is a Saint now. Canonized May 2004 with her husband and children in attendance. How awesome.

 

[migurl]

It would be a sin to purposly do something that causes the death of a child. Now, in the case of a eptopic (sp?) pregnancy, if the tube is not removed BOTH the mother and child will die. It is physically impossible for the child to survive in the fallopian tube! IN the case of a cancerous uterus, i am not so sure. I think that it would be wrong to do something that would hurt the baby. If you are not capable of having the child, God either wouldn’t allow pregnancy, or there would be a miscarriage. If you did get pregnant, I would assume that God knows what he is doing. Perhaps it is your fate to die in childbirth .I would see it as a chance to earn grace before death and thus, get to heaven faster. But, I have never been there, and I pray that I won’t ever have to face that decision.

 

[BlestOne]

migurl:

It would be a sin to purposly do something that causes the death of a child. Now, in the case of a eptopic (sp?) pregnancy, if the tube is not removed BOTH the mother and child will die. It is physically impossible for the child to survive in the fallopian tube! IN the case of a cancerous uterus, i am not so sure. I think that it would be wrong to do something that would hurt the baby. If you are not capable of having the child, God either wouldn’t allow pregnancy, or there would be a miscarriage. If you did get pregnant, I would assume that God knows what he is doing. Perhaps it is your fate to die in childbirth .I would see it as a chance to earn grace before death and thus, get to heaven faster. But, I have never been there, and I pray that I won’t ever have to face that decision.

migurl,
In the event of an ectopic pregnancy, I believe that a person would have the fallopian tube removed as a procedure to save her life. Since the “fetus” is in the fallopian tube, it is considered a secondary consequence to the removal that the child perishes. In other words, you are not directly killing a baby, you are removing a tube that is about to burst to save the life of the mother, as a consequence of this action, the child cannot be seperated from the tube and dies…not an abortion.

 

[migurl]

I am aware that in an eptopic preg. it is ok, I was talking about in a case involving cancer. Re-read my post.

 

[puzzleannie]

St Gianna was given the choice of accepting cancer treatment which almost probably would have killed her unborn child, or waiting until after delivery. She could have morally accepted the treatment, since the possible harm to the infant was not the intended result of the treatment. Direct abortion was not an option and would not have helped her therapy or recovery. Her choice was timing of treatment. She chose the more heroic path, which is why she is a saint, also of course because of the holiness and virtue of her entire life, not this one incident.

Another example from my in-laws. Pregnant woman diagnosed with fast-growing thyroid cancer, told radiation will certainly damage the child, abortion is counselled and she flatly rejects it. She undergoes treatment, cancer is gone, daughter born normal, graduates college, professional athlete and mother of 3 healthy boys. This Catholic mother was entirely submissive to church teaching, accepted treatment for her illness. Even if the child had been damaged or died, it would have been an unintended result. Abortion however would have been moraly wrong.