Reconciling Catholic Church teaching and "pro choice" Catholics

[Caramel]

Your answer at #686 only addresses whether you approve of murdering abortion providers or not, whereas my question asked do you belong to THE Army of God or is it another God army that you belong to? As for misrepresenting my words once again, permit me to just quote the song you say you already know well, which says,

“go ahead and cheat a neighbour
go ahead and cheat a friend
do it in the name of heaven
you can justify it in the end…”

“There won’t be any trumpets
blowing,
come the judgment day.”

Yes, I know the song. I already stated that I know the song. Personally I never did like the song, but I guess that doesn’t matter here.

OK, I clicked on your link (while hoping that in doing so you weren’t releasing some sort of virus that would infect my computer) and what I saw was a website put up by a group called “The Army of God” with a “thank-you” message to a “hero” for murdering Dr. Tiller.

We have already discussed Dr. Tiller. I think you brought it up. And back then I stated that I did not believe that the murder of Dr. Tiller was appropriate. Murder is murder.

A cult can call itself anything it wants, as long as it doesn’t infringe on copyright laws. I don’t think “The Army of God” is copyrighted, so any group can use that term.

To answer your question, NO!! I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THAT GROUP!! I didn’t even know it existed until you brought it up.

There is one God. I am a member of God’s Army. I love God the Father; I love God the Son; I love God the Holy Spirit. My shield and my sword are from God, not from any hate-spewing cult that IMHO have a lot of nerve to put the word “God” in their title.

I love God - I have offered my life to God and if you put a gun to my head I would state the same thing. OK?

 

[estesbob]

I will try one last time to reach the self-appointed (or home-brew-anointed?) small “b” bishops and lower-case “c” cardinals who keep simply repeating themselves on this thread, and who keep insisting that a pro-choice position is irreconcilable with Catholic Church teaching.

In my opinion, your case would be of more value (than it’s current value of zero) if it were not for the fact that you must be overlooking the neglected responsibilities of men according to 2270 and 2271. I submit that by overlooking these neglected responsibilities of men, while still expecting women to follow Church teaching, constitutes hypocrisy that goes beyond Pharisee level hypocrisy, according to my richter hypocrisy-magnitude scale. The reason I say “worse than Pharisee” is that those of the New Testament Pharisees found by Jesus to be “hypocrites” were following the letter of the law, as opposed to (or at the expense of) the spirit of the law, whereas the modern Pharisee portion of the anti-choice movement nowadays does not seem to follow either the letter or spirit of the law. Just half of the letter of the law is followed (the part applying to women only) and none of the spirit of the law is all that apparently remains intact of Church teaching in the hands of estebob, fix, Caramel, and thread host, small “w” wizard of OP.

Here is 2270 and 2271 in their entirety-I have also added 2272

[2270](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/2270.htm’) Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
[2272](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/2272.htm’) Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

Now please tell us where in these paragrpahs the Choice syas it isa OK to be pro-choice?

 

[estesbob]

Fix, gakroeger, estesbob, caramel and others…

When they do this…please provide clear, official, documented Catholic teaching which refutes their arguments as to why they can be pro-choice.

?

We have done so numerous times. I did so again this AM.

The problem is no matter how many times you post it Worthy5 will pratlle on about the American Political system and Zamboni will ignore it and claim that we are distorting Church teachings and dont care about women.

 

[gakroeger]

To all participants of this thread……

I agree that sadly this debate has disintegrated into a mish mash of he said you said, however, it is not because those arguing the pro life side have not provided over and over again references to proper Church teaching in encyclicals, catechism, Letters from various Church leaders, and links to articles on this subject. All of this has been met with indifference, ignored entirely, or misrepresented by pulling single sentences from a document and putting their own “pro choice” spin on it. The “pro choice” people have continually attempted (with some success) to drag the discussion away from Church teaching referencing the Supreme Court, movies, songs, and other unrelated and unauthoritative sources.

It has been made obvious that the two remaining dissenters to the pro life position are not interested in the truth we are attempting to communicate; they are so committed to their political positions that they are not going to bend in any way to us on this thread. I suggest that everyone quit the endless and useless (at this point) exchange. Everything that can be expressed has been expressed. I request that the pro life people resort to prayer for those who still support abortion and stop the verbal useless exchange. Hopefully this will leave room for some more reasonable individuals to enter the discussion. If not the thread will die a natural death, hopefully there have been a few individuals more open to the truth of Church teaching who have learned from this thread.

I believe the two remaining dissenters are as committed to their “pro choice” cause as Sen. Kennedy who was willing to go to his grave with this ideology. Prayer is the only answer…….

Thanks to all for your participation

 

[Caramel]

This appears to be the beginning of yet another attempt to put words in my mouth,

Zamboni, nobody needs to put words in your mouth; you show your attitude by your own words.

 

[Worthy5]

The Church asks you to not support legalized abortion for obvious reasons. Are you claiming one may licitly support legalized abortion?

Okay, then the Church is saying you have to be a Republican and this really should be only a one party democracy.

“Are you claiming one may licitly support legalized abortion?”

Get down off you soap box Fix, and quit trying to impute the moral shortcomings of some people onto the rest of us.

 

[Worthy5]

We have done so numerous times. I did so again this AM.

The problem is no matter how many times you post it Worthy5 will pratlle on about the American Political system and Zamboni will ignore it and claim that we are distorting Church teachings and dont care about women.

" Prattle on" Well Estesbob do you consider Justice Sandra Day OConnor and Justice Kennedy (a Catholic) just " prattling on" when discussing American law and the Constitution of the U.S. in the Casey decision that upheld the core holding of Roe.

 

[SteveGC]

I only cut off your quote at this point (which continues in the original) because it looks like a mischaracterization is already forming by this point of how I attempt to reconcile a pro-choice vote at election time with belief in Catholic teaching, or maybe better to say how to apply it more evenly and therefore more successfully in a fallen world such as this, instead of becoming counterproductive to the Church’s own interests, like many extreme wings of the Protestant church have become their own worst enemies.

If you feel that I missed the relevance of your line of questioning, please feel free to follow up.

Thanks, zamboni. As I do not wish to mischaracterize, do you think you could fill in the blank to a #4 of my original statement…​

seems like the biggest arguments that Catholic pro-choicers have is that there is no teaching that tells them :

1. that they cannot ___________________________________________

---

…or is that whole framework of a statement unfair for your position? If so, I understand. And I do not want your position to be misrepresented.

It might be worth repeating that I have tried to make a distinction in this thread between what I expect or would prefer to see the Church herself do under the circumstances — specifically, not to change her own position at all — and what I expect or would ideally hope to see the laity do of its own volition — namely, help effect positive change instead of only pursuing Catholic teaching fractionally, and apparently without much if any regard for the consequences of concepts like, let’s say, the point of sinfully diminishing returns, or why not: how to make a mockery of the spirit of the law while pretending to care about the letter?

Ok…so if I understand you, you concede that Church teaching is clear that one cannot, in an active or direct manner, politically or socially support any platform or law that permits, supports or seeks to further legal abortion. But you reconcile the pro-choice position (which actively supports platforms which do this) because you recognize (rightly) that there is an abundance of further guidance on how one is to combat abortion evils, and since other Catholics are, to you, fractional in their approach (meaning, I think, that they dismiss the other teachings, and focus ONLY on the political agendas) and therefore damaging the overall effort to eradicate legal abortion…and the more they do this, the more that is added exclusively to the political, legal fight, the more is lost in the overall battle to effect a tangible decrease in overall abortion practices. Because of that exclusivity of effort, you remain prochoice, and also work more broadly and inclusively than these other Catholics do to fight abortion, and because of this more well-rounded and thorough approach, your prochoice position keeps you in good standing with the Church.

I know I may have completely misrepresented you again, but this is my attempt to spell it all out clearly, because some of us here are having a hard time narrowing down your position. If this is somewhat correct, my question to you is: why not adopt a prolife position and remain non-fractional while you wait for all the other Catholics to join you? Seems like the prochoice stance you take is more of a statement toward other Catholics than it is a productive effort to fight abortion…or do you also disagree that prohibiting abortions would have a tremendous effect on the decline of overall abortions?

 

[Caramel]

Your answer at #686 only addresses whether you approve of murdering abortion providers or not, whereas my question asked do you belong to THE Army of God or is it another God army that you belong to? As for misrepresenting my words once again, permit me to just quote the song you say you already know well, which says,

“go ahead and cheat a neighbour
go ahead and cheat a friend
do it in the name of heaven
you can justify it in the end…”

Really now, if you are going to use a song at least get the words right!!

The* correct* quote is:

“Go ahead and kill a neighbor,
go ahead and cheat a friend…”

I don’t see how this song applies to the “failure” of the prolife movement; rather I see it as indicative of the hypocrisy of the prochoice movement.

You see, there is a treasure buried. Or at least, it was a treasure at one time. Now it is only the decomposing, rotting shells of babies that the proponents of the prochoice movement believe it is OK to kill. The prochoice movement doesn’t want the treasure that comes from God and from His Heaven, which is the highest mountain of all.

“Go ahead and KILL an unborn creation of God’s love…”

“And the King answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these My least brethen, you did it to Me.” (Matthew 25:40)

 

[Worthy5]

Really now, if you are going to use a song at least get the words right!!

The* correct*

 

[jmcrae]

npatrol:kpeople:

Okay people, this poster has un-retired.(kind of like Michael Jordan-the first time however
) Let me ask you this EstesBobby:

Is the Catholic Church saying that in order to be able to receive the sacraments that one has to vote Republican in each and every election? Is the Church saying as an American you must support a one party Republican government?

You have to vote for the most pro-life candidate available to you. In a lot of cases, that’s going to be your Republican candidate. In theory, you could have a pro-life Democrat running against a pro-choice Republican, in which case, you’d vote for the Democrat.

The Church doesn’t require us to vote for this or that party - only that we vote for the pro-life candidate, or if there is none, then the least pro-death candidate (ie: the one who would forbid abortions after a certain stage of pregnancy, if the other one is in favour of partial-birth abortion.)

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Cease the bickering or the thread will be closed.
Thank you.

 

[Caramel]

Wheter the pro-life movement fails or not is irelevant as to whether one can reconcile being pro-choice with the teachings fo the Church.

As far as whether the pro-life movement being a failure tell that to those who forced the Stupak amendment on a releuctant Democrat congress.

The prolife movement has not failed and will never fail. Not all battles are fought on earth and certainly not all wars. We shall see the outcome of the prolife movement when we face God. As the prolife movement is on the side of Truth I don’t see how it can possibly fail.

All aborted children are in heaven as they are Holy Innocents. They are OK. That’s one of the neat things about souls. You can’t abort a soul.

 

[gakroeger]

Let us review the pro life position in an attempt to once more illustrate how following Church teaching would have eliminated the abortion problem and all of the related sins associated with it at least for Catholics and all others who followed this truth.

Starting with Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae in 1968 and how things would have unfolded if Catholic’s would have obeyed Church teaching at that point.

In 1968 when Pope Paul Vi’s encyclical Humanae Vitae was released, it was immediately ridiculed by most of the secular press and ignored by many Catholics. Why was this the case? One reason only, because it would have kept sexual intercourse as its intended purpose by God which was at the time for reproduction and expansion of the human race. It would have kept the moral status for sexual intercourse for marriage only and forbidden sexual intercourse between anyone other than one’s spouse. Catholics who refused to obey Church teaching at this time did so mainly within the confines of marriage but wanted to have sex whenever they wanted but did not want the children that God may send if they obeyed this Church teaching. However, this acceptance of artificial contraception also made it much easier to cheat and have sexual intercourse with others outside of marriage. Once sexual intercourse was disconnected from reproduction, it became acceptable to have sex before marriage without fear of pregnancy. Once this was the case it became easy to have sexual intercourse with anyone at anytime. It now became a case of sex was for personal pleasure only.

The next problem came when artificial birth control failed it resulted in a pregnancy that was not wanted and because it wasn’t their fault the artificial contraception failed, they felt no responsibility for the child that was conceived. Enter Planned Parenthood and their huge money making machine; the “easy” way out; quick and quiet termination of the child.

Additionally, the intimacy of the marriage act lost its meaning, sex was for selfish self gratification and divorce soared.

Add to this the increasing obsession with sex, pornography leading to rape, homosexual entitlement, sexually transmitted diseases, and every perversion know to man.

Enter the political opportunists that now promise protection for this behavior and bang we have the perverted society we now live in with Catholics supporting this declining morality.

We now have the situation that “pro choice” Catholics are willing to totally disregard (or distort) Church teaching to maintain the status quo.

Would this have eliminated the current situation entirely? Probably not, however, it certainly would have minimized it, and Catholics would not have been complicit in the tragedy, and who knows we may have set a positive example for everyone else.
.

 

[Caramel]

The song “One Tin Soldier” (written by Lambert-Potter & sung by Coven) has been used on this thread to portray the “failure” of the prolife movement.

This is a take-off of that song which I believe is a more accurate portrayal of the prolife movement:

Listen, children to a story
that was written long ago,
'bout a Great King on His Mountain
and the people far below.

Now these people had a treasure
sent to them from God above;
all He asked was that they guard it
and protect it with their love.

*Go ahead and kill your unborn;
go ahead and don’t ask why,
Do it in the name of Heaven,
you’ll get your reward when you die.

There will be a thousand trumpets blowing
come the Judgment Day,
when Our Blessed Holy Savior
and His people ride away.*

Some people couldn’t see the treasure;
some saw but pretended to be blind;
and they killed the very treasure
God had given them to mind.

Even though He’d sent them prophets,
even though He’d sent His Son,
still the people killed their children
and believed their battle won.

*Go ahead and kill your unborn;
go ahead and don’t ask why,
Do it in the name of Heaven,
you’ll get your reward when you die.

There will be a million trumpets blowing
come the Judgment Day,
when Our Blessed Holy Savior
and His people ride away.*
…
…
…

 

[Caramel]

Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae in 1968
.

Gakroeger, I deleted most of your post because of space constraints. I have a question and I apologize if this has been covered before. Somewhere (I really can’t remember where but I don’t think it was a Catholic source) I read that Pope Paul VI predicted that five things would happen if contraception were allowed and that they actually did happen, or most of them have happened, or something like that. I think it was something to do with his Humanae Vitae (which I admit I haven’t read yet but I will order a copy today).

I believe that one of the predictions was that abortions would increase and another was that pornography would increase.

Would you please discuss this? I think it’s important! Or if you have covered it, would you please give me the post number??

Thanks!!

 

[gakroeger]

Gakroeger, I deleted most of your post because of space constraints. I have a question and I apologize if this has been covered before. Somewhere (I really can’t remember where but I don’t think it was a Catholic source) I read that Pope Paul VI predicted that five things would happen if contraception were allowed and that they actually did happen, or most of them have happened, or something like that. I think it was something to do with his Humanae Vitae (which I admit I haven’t read yet but I will order a copy today).

I believe that one of the predictions was that abortions would increase and another was that pornography would increase.

Would you please discuss this? I think it’s important! Or if you have covered it, would you please give me the post number??

Thanks!!

Hi Caramel

You do not need to order Humanae Vitae, all the encyclicals are available on the Vatican’s web site. I have posted this link before; however, here it is again.

Yes, Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae in spite of the continued ridicule from the secular media was extremely prophetic. It certainly will remain one of the Church’s most important documents far into the future.

Humanae Vitae

This document alone gives the guidance every Catholic needs in regard to this issue. I have tried over and over to get the “pro choice” Catholics to read it.

It is a little long but can be read in and absorbed in less than an hour. I encourage anyone who has not read it to do so.

As mentioned in my last post, if every Catholic lived by this guidance this thread would be unnecessary because there would be no “pro choice” Catholics.

 

[zamboni]

Of the four responses I see to my most recent posts, only two appear to wish to engage me on a serious level, those being from estebob and SteveGC. The OP has already made up his mind about pro-choice people so I question why he would want to be the OP of such a thread if all he wants to do is pontificate. as his posts from beginning to end show. I ask Caramel not to address any further posts to me, but it’s a free world so she may do as she wishes as long as she respects my freedom to ignore her.

Here is 2270 and 2271 in their entirety-I have also added 2272

[2270](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/2270.htm’) Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
[2272](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/2272.htm’) Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

Now please tell us where in these paragrpahs the Choice syas it isa OK to be pro-choice?

You have not answered any of my questions, estebob, but since you have asked some non-rhetorical questions (even though they are repeats), I will reciprocate by giving you another complimentary casino chip. Since I have already explained what I think is missing from the pro-life interpretation of Catholic Catechism you give above, it should now be incumbent on you to either agree or explain why you disagree. It is dishonest to pretend that I did not answer these questions that people keep trying to rephrase over and over again. Here is what I originally said on this thread of the gaping black hole in pro-life Catechism:

…

…

…

 

[gakroeger]

Food for thought from todays Divine Office

Reading 2 Peter 2:9-22 ©

The Lord can rescue the good from the ordeal, and hold the wicked for their punishment until the day of Judgement, especially those who are governed by their corrupt bodily desires and have no respect for authority.
Such self-willed people with no reverence are not afraid of offending against the glorious ones, but the angels in their greater strength and power make no complaint or accusation against them in front of the Lord. All the same, these people who only insult anything that they do not understand are not reasoning beings, but simply animals born to be caught and killed, and they will quite certainly destroy themselves by their own work of destruction, and get their reward of evil for the evil that they do. They are unsightly blots on your society: men whose only object is dissipation all day long, and they amuse themselves deceiving you even when they are your guests at a meal; with their eyes always looking for adultery; men with an infinite capacity for sinning, they will seduce any soul which is at all unstable. Greed is the one lesson their minds have learnt. They are under a curse. They have left the right path and wandered off to follow the path of Balaam son of Beor, who thought he could profit best by sinning, until he was called to order for his faults. The dumb donkey put a stop to that prophet’s madness when it talked like a man. People like this are dried-up rivers, fogs swirling in the wind, and the dark underworld is the place reserved for them. With their high-flown talk, which is all hollow, they tempt back the ones who have only just escaped from paganism, playing on their bodily desires with debaucheries. They may promise freedom but they themselves are slaves, slaves to corruption; because if anyone lets himself be dominated by anything, then he is a slave to it; and anyone who has escaped the pollution of the world once by coming to know our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ, and who then allows himself to be entangled by it a second time and mastered, will end up in a worse state than he began in. It would even have been better for him never to have learnt the way of holiness, than to know it and afterwards desert the holy rule that was entrusted to him. What he has done is exactly as the proverb rightly says: The dog goes back to his own vomit and: When the sow has been washed, it wallows in the mud.

 

[gakroeger]

You are not likely to get much discussion here. If Catholics for Choice has a web site you could try there. Let us know if you do. I’d like to read the replies.

This was post number 4. Boy was he/she wrong…