Reconciling Catholic Church teaching and "pro choice" Catholics

[Caramel]

No, the overall abortion issue is not a Catholic (or even a religious) issue, it is a moral issue, however, the reason I started this thread is because there appears to be a large percentage of Catholics that call themselves “pro choice” and I am trying to understand how they can reconcile their differences with Church teaching. They are obviously not in full communion with the Church so why do they still profess to be Catholic? There are whole groups of organizations out there that call themselves Catholic and preach heresy. Do they think that they can influence the Church to abandon Holy Scripture? The Church teaching has been consistent for 2000 years. Do these groups believe they know better than spiritually inspired scripture? I would like to try to understand where they are coming from. The Catholic Church has not survived for 2000 year by straying from divinely inspired writings and tradition.

I believe where these groups fell off the rails was with contraception. I have had Catholic friends who thought Catholic teaching on contraception was unreasonable back in the 60’s so they rationalized their use of artificial contraception. Once this break with Church teaching occurred, it was all downhill from there. As Pope Paul VI warned in his encyclical “Humane Vitae” once the “marriage act” was decoupled from human reproduction, people began to believe that human sexuality was not for reproduction as God intended but was for their pleasure alone. Until this mind set occurred, people accepted pregnancy and children as they came; after this new “entitlement” happened, unwanted pregnancies were no longer accepted and the rationalization about “viability”, when souls are created and all of the rest of the excuses for abortion began. No matter how the argument proceeds, the bottom line is a human life is snuffed out for the convenience of others and no amount of rationalization can change this fact or make it morally acceptable.

So you believe that accepting contraception as being OK was the beginning of the slippery slope?? That is very good thinking and until recently I would have disagreed with you but I agree now. I’ve had Catholics try to tell me why contraception is wrong and I just couldn’t understand them. But one person, who wasn’t even talking to me, showed me how wrong my thinking was.

It is a slippery slope and I don’t think we’ve come to the bottom.

Have you seen the photos of the “Catholic” nun who is serving as an escort for Planned Parenthood?

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Have you seen the photos of the “Catholic” nun who is serving as an escort for Planned Parenthood?

Wait, what?? Is she really Roman Catholic? She couldn’t be! I mean, isn’t helping someone get an abortion earn you excommunication? How is she still allowed to be a nun? Something can’t be right there…:eep:

 

[Caramel]

This is not a Catholic issue per se. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists…cavemen!! all agree that killing your own species is the surest way to extinction. It just doesn’t make any sense.

One has only to look at Nature. What female of the species - any species - kills its own offspring? Even going down the animal chain to reptilian levels - mother croc goes to infinite pains to protect her young, even though they were originally just eggs & external to herself. I believe similar examples can be found in birds, amphibians and insects. It is a core activity of any living thing to protect, cherish and nurse its offspring even if it means the death of the parent. This is what makes us sentient beings. Without this maternal instinct, a species could not have evolved and certainly could not have survived.

Even the most callous atheist will admit that abortion is a total abberation of cosmic laws.

Actually I have to disagree with you here. Lots of animals kill their offspring - not in a conscious attempt to be evil, but because it provides the best chance of survival of their fittest young. For example, a dog will sometimes kill a newborn pup that is deformed. It is also shown in birds: in some cases a parent bird will push a chick out of the nest where it falls to its death. Again this is because this is the way that the healthiest chicks survive.

However, when you get up to the primate level it’s amazing to see the care that a mother has for her young. I saw a documentary on PBS which showed how a group of primates (I can’t remember if they were monkeys or baboons or what) shows amazingly human-like protective care for their young. They were following a group of monkeys (or whatever they were) and one little monkey had fallen from a tree and was killed by the fall. His mother stayed behind with her dead baby, leaving the pack and ensuring her own death. She wouldn’t leave her son. She could have left her dead son, stayed with the pack and reproduced again. She didn’t. That made me cry - that monkeys appear to show more love for their offspring than humans.

We are animals, too, but we are certainly more advanced than any other animal on earth. We should know better than to kill our young.

 

[Caramel]

Wait, what?? Is she really Roman Catholic? She couldn’t be! I mean, isn’t helping someone get an abortion earn you excommunication? How is she still allowed to be a nun? Something can’t be right there…:eep:

I don’t understand it either. They have photos of her - I’ve seen them. She belongs to a fringe “Catholic” group which believes in abortion, contraception, marriage of priests and women becoming priests.

I would think that she would automatically be excommunicated. But I don’t know what’s going on. I found the photos in an prolife group here on the forum. I just joined so I’m unclear as to how to navigate, etc. I’ll try to find out what I can.

 

[Caramel]

Whiteacre Girl wrote;

Fish eat their own young.

So why didn’t they become extinct? If it eats its offspring then there ain’t no more of that family around. Maybe you are keeping your fish in abnormal conditions for them to behave so. It just doesn’t make sense and it isn’t Nature’s way…in the wild.

It actually does make sense but it is almost impossible to explain. It ensures survival of the fittest. It’s a biological thing and I know about it just because I have a BS in biology so it was taught to me over a period of years.

Lizards sometimes eat their young.

But I know that no animal other than human beings (and I am using “animal” here only because in a biological sense that is what we are) goes out and procures an abortion. I’ve never heard of a snake going to an abortion clinic. We’re supposed to be different. We’re supposed to be made in the image of God. We’re supposed to be smarter.

 

[gakroeger]

I don’t understand it either. They have photos of her - I’ve seen them. She belongs to a fringe “Catholic” group which believes in abortion, contraception, marriage of priests and women becoming priests.

I would think that she would automatically be excommunicated. But I don’t know what’s going on. I found the photos in an prolife group here on the forum. I just joined so I’m unclear as to how to navigate, etc. I’ll try to find out what I can.

Here is a link to an article about her…

 

[fix]

I did a bit of reading on catholicsforchoice.org because this interests me.

It seems like, as you said, the legal aspect is a huge part of it too and for me that tends to carry more weight. It’s the same reason why I voted to allow Same Sex marriages in California. Pro-Choice Catholics might 100% agree with the catechism but still feel that in this country, people get to chose things for themselves: “Prevention Not Prohibition.” And I’d have to agree to an extent. Some people seem obsessed with outlawing abortion when their son or daughter is getting themselves into the same trouble because they are distracted by their cause. To me it seems like the Sola Fide and Salvation by Works debate, both sides are basically taking about the same thing, but arrive at the conclusion via a different route.

So, if a Pro-Choice Catholic agrees 100% with the catechism, your theological debate moves on to a different topic.

I can’t see how the issues are separated. Legalized abortion is gravely unjust. Catholics have a moral imperative to try and change such laws.

If one says they accept the CCC then they must accept legalized abortion is manifestly evil.

 

[gakroeger]

I can’t see how the issues are separated. Legalized abortion is gravely unjust. Catholics have a moral imperative to try and change such laws.

If one says they accept the CCC then they must accept legalized abortion is manifestly evil.

Fix, you are correct of course, however as I stated I wanted to limit this discussion to the theological issues only because on past discussions the legalities have served to muddy the water for the large number of Catholics that are disregarding Church teaching in favor of their preference to argue legalities.

These issues can be separated and IMHO must be separated if we are to hold any kind of meaningful discussion with our wayward brothers and sisters on this important subject.

 

[fix]

Fix, you are correct of course, however as I stated I wanted to limit this discussion to the theological issues only because on past discussions the legalities have served to muddy the water for the large number of Catholics that are disregarding Church teaching in favor of their preference to argue legalities.

These issues can be separated and IMHO must be separated if we are to hold any kind of meaningful discussion with our wayward brothers and sisters on this important subject.

Pro choice is a political term. Even faux Catholic groups are about politics, not theology. The CCC, and other Church documents, clearly state there is no right to direct abortion because it is murder.

I understand you do not want this to go off about specific legal issues, but my response to that other poster was to point out that the *theology *of this issue includes the idea that civil law is tied to the moral law.

 

[beafedor]

Pro choice is a political term. Even faux Catholic groups are about politics, not theology. The CCC, and other Church documents, clearly state there is no right to direct abortion because it is murder.

I understand you do not want this to go off about specific legal issues, but my response to that other poster was to point out that the *theology *of this issue includes the idea that civil law is tied to the moral law.

You guys are making great points, I hope that our Pro-choice brothers and sisters will read them. Just want to add, my Catholic cousin describes herself as “religiously Pro-life and politically Pro-choice”. This is a book that she suggested I should read to understand her position: “Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion: Constitutional Theory and Public Policy” by James R. Bowers. amazon.com/Pro-Choice-Anti-Abortion-Constitutional-Theory-Public/dp/0275949648

in addition, I’d like to quote from an email my cousin sent me:
"my position has a to do with preserving the freedom of will that God gave each of us – we are left to struggle against sin and make our choices. When the government forces choice, there is no choice to follow God, it is imposed. Which is not, I think, what God intended. I would like to see vastly increased social programs to provide sex education and support for girls and women so that they can make the right choice to keep their pregnancies.

We are both pro-life. Neither of us are pro-abortion. I just want to focus on helping women make the right choice for life, while preserving their right to make the choice (although it may be immoral and sinful). It’s the same free choice God gave each of us."

 

[gakroeger]

Pro choice is a political term. Even faux Catholic groups are about politics, not theology. The CCC, and other Church documents, clearly state there is no right to direct abortion because it is murder.

I understand you do not want this to go off about specific legal issues, but my response to that other poster was to point out that the *theology *of this issue includes the idea that civil law is tied to the moral law.

Yes, civil law “should” be tied to moral law; however, we know this is not the case with abortion (at least not in how the Supreme Court has interpreted the law).

Yes, “pro choice” is a political and misleading term, however, we pro life people understand that and use the term in parenthesis to acknowledge both our disagreement with the term and their preference to be called “pro choice”.

The Church has always been plagued with heresies; however, I don’t understand how these groups continue to call themselves Catholic. In the early Church these groups were always labeled with some term to separate them from the true Church. (Donatist, Arianism, Pelagianism, Nestorianism, etc.) I don’t know of any of these groups that have any high level clergy involved with them (as those earlier groups did); I think they are mostly lay groups that find following Church teaching too difficult and rather than leave the Church, or change their beliefs, elect to attempt to change the Church, which is a futile effort on their part. We hear periodically of some priests and (as mentioned in a post above) a nun but not Church leaders. The biggest danger of these groups is their influence on Catholics that are not a part of these groups (scandal) and believe them to be Catholic because they use the name Catholic in their name.

 

[gakroeger]

You guys are making great points, I hope that our Pro-choice brothers and sisters will read them. Just want to add, my Catholic cousin describes herself as “religiously Pro-life and politically Pro-choice”. This is a book that she suggested I should read to understand her position: “Pro-Choice and Anti-Abortion: Constitutional Theory and Public Policy” by James R. Bowers. amazon.com/Pro-Choice-Anti-Abortion-Constitutional-Theory-Public/dp/0275949648

in addition, I’d like to quote from an email my cousin sent me:
"my position has a to do with preserving the freedom of will that God gave each of us – we are left to struggle against sin and make our choices. When the government forces choice, there is no choice to follow God, it is imposed. Which is not, I think, what God intended. I would like to see vastly increased social programs to provide sex education and support for girls and women so that they can make the right choice to keep their pregnancies.

The first problem I have with your cousin’s position is that we have only one life, not two. We do not have a political life and a religious life; we are called to live a life which imitates Christ every day, not a Sunday go to Church and Monday through Saturday forget God and use our free choice to do whatever we wish.

Yes, God gave us a free will; however, he also told us what He expects us to do with that free will. Your point about government forcing one action over another and taking our free will choice away does not make sense. The government has a responsibility to maintain a free and safe society. As long as laws enacted by the government are in line with moral law there is no problem. Law against murders are fine; God gave us free will but He did not intend for us to use that free will to kill one another.

If you are pro life you are not pro abortion by definition. You stated this as though you believed that it was possible to be both pro life and pro abortion (or if you prefer “pro choice”). If you are pro life and want to help women make the right “choice” then you want the women to choose life in all cases.

Sex education belongs in the home not in the schools; we already have too much sex education in the schools teaching our kids that sex among themselves is OK. We need to teach our kids morality again not how to perform immoral acts. Our government has inserted themselves into this private matter of families for too long, and look where it has taken us; and they still have not learned, they are proposing more of what caused our problems in the first place. Someday soon I hope people will wake up and get the government out of our private lives.

 

[Holly3278]

Thank you for providing these links to the Catechism. I was actually reading them early this morning before you posted. I opened the Catechism right on the part your first link takes one to. It is clear to me that, as a Catholic, I must be prolife. I agree with every statement made in the Catechism regarding abortion.

Does anyone disagree?? Should I be prochoice while still remaining a Catholic?? Is it possible to be Catholic and prochoice??

No, it is not possible to be pro-choice and Catholic. It is a contradiction. One cannot logically be pro-choice and Catholic at the same time.

 

[Benadam]

The Church has always been plagued with heresies; however, I don’t understand how these groups continue to call themselves Catholic. In the early Church these groups were always labeled with some term to separate them from the true Church. (Donatist, Arianism, Pelagianism, Nestorianism, etc.) I don’t know of any of these groups that have any high level clergy involved with them (as those earlier groups did); I think they are mostly lay groups that find following Church teaching too difficult and rather than leave the Church, or change their beliefs, elect to attempt to change the Church, which is a futile effort on their part. We hear periodically of some priests and (as mentioned in a post above) a nun but not Church leaders. The biggest danger of these groups is their influence on Catholics that are not a part of these groups (scandal) and believe them to be Catholic because they use the name Catholic in their name.

I think they fall prey to the modern thou shalt not ’ push religious beliefs on everyone’ as a higher moral obligation.
A paradox for Catholics because it seems entrenched with a belief that the U.S. is a special divine work, a melting pot of all peoples and nations that is a human/divine cooperation that will, in the end, be ruled by an authentic expression of natural law.:twocents:

 

[Caramel]

Here is a link to an article about her…

Thanks for the link!! It not only saved me a lot of time but took me to an interesting website!!

 

[gakroeger]

I think they fall prey to the modern thou shalt not ’ push religious beliefs on everyone’ as a higher moral obligation.
A paradox for Catholics because it seems entrenched with a belief that the U.S. is a special divine work, a melting pot of all peoples and nations that is a human/divine cooperation that will, in the end, be ruled by an authentic expression of natural law.:twocents:

By they I assume you mean the “pro choice” Catholics, if so, then I agree, they seem to write their own scripture.

Regarding your statement that Catholics believe that the US is a special divine work; if this was true at some point, I certainly don’t believe it true any longer. Our separation of Church and State (which was bogus in the first place) has been carried all the way to separation of morality and State.

 

[beafedor]

The first problem I have with your cousin’s position is that we have only one life, not two. We do not have a political life and a religious life; we are called to live a life which imitates Christ every day, not a Sunday go to Church and Monday through Saturday forget God and use our free choice to do whatever we wish.

Yes, God gave us a free will; however, he also told us what He expects us to do with that free will. Your point about government forcing one action over another and taking our free will choice away does not make sense. The government has a responsibility to maintain a free and safe society. As long as laws enacted by the government are in line with moral law there is no problem. Law against murders are fine; God gave us free will but He did not intend for us to use that free will to kill one another.

If you are pro life you are not pro abortion by definition. You stated this as though you believed that it was possible to be both pro life and pro abortion (or if you prefer “pro choice”). If you are pro life and want to help women make the right “choice” then you want the women to choose life in all cases.

Sex education belongs in the home not in the schools; we already have too much sex education in the schools teaching our kids that sex among themselves is OK. We need to teach our kids morality again not how to perform immoral acts. Our government has inserted themselves into this private matter of families for too long, and look where it has taken us; and they still have not learned, they are proposing more of what caused our problems in the first place. Someday soon I hope people will wake up and get the government out of our private lives.

Thanks! I got that email months ago and I wish I had had the words to answer it like you did. All I told her is the choice you are supporting is abortion therefore you are pro-abortion and you can’t have it both ways. Well, she took it as a personal attack and stopped emailing after that.

 

[gakroeger]

Thanks! I got that email months ago and I wish I had had the words to answer it like you did. All I told her is the choice you are supporting is abortion therefore you are pro-abortion and you can’t have it both ways. Well, she took it as a personal attack and stopped emailing after that.

I know how difficult that is, I also have a cousin that thinks like yours and we have been emailing back and forth for years, it is kind of like beating your head against a wall. My cousin is a double cousin (my Mother and his Father were brother and sister and my Father and his Mother were brother and sister) we have the same genealogy on both sides of the family. Our parents raised us both Catholic so you would think our life outlook would be the same; however, my cousin became a university professor and lost his way. To bad he did not study theology instead of electronics.

 

[Worthy5]

=gakroeger;5906468]The first problem I have with your cousin’s position is that we have only one life, not two. We do not have a political life and a religious life; .

Your point about government forcing one action over another and taking our free will choice away does not make sense…

So why do we have a Democratic-Republic and not a Theocracy? Why can’t the U.S. Catholic Bishops simply rule our society and become the govt?

Our government has inserted themselves into this private matter of families for too long, and look where it has taken us; and they still have not learned, they are proposing more of what caused our problems in the first place. Someday soon I hope people will wake up and get the government out of our private lives.

So in the above the govt needs to get out of our lives, but when a Pro-Choice position states such in terms of the expansive use of the govt police power regarding the abortion decision then such govt interference in our " private lives" is okay? Forgive me, I am trying to follow. Thanks

 

[Worthy5]

The Feminist quote:

She said: “Of course the fetus is a human being. It’s not a dog or a pig, it’s human. And of course it’s alive or there wouldn’t be an issue. The point is that it is not viable.

Those analogies have some strengh. The better argument for the Feminist is that the fetus is not viable because it is intrinsically part of the women 's body at that stage-----that is the difference between the early fetus and the 4 month, 6 year old, and 88 year old. You are shifting the meaning of viability.