Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

[Corki]

“Well, at least one of the groups in the OP has already incurred excommunication. I’m not sure what widening is required. Any person who materially cooperates with abortion, such as the people involved with CFFC, is already excommunicated.”

Please share with the readers here where in Church doctrine it specifically states that “any person who materially cooperates with abortion … is already excommunicated.” I have read elsewhere within this forum that this is not the case.

“I am reiterating the teaching of the Church - it’s not alternative at all.”

It is alternative to many atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Jews, and others. Or don’t they count in the grand scheme of things?

Glenda,

Most of the readers here are already aware of the teaching of the Church regarding abortion. The specifics are in Canon 1329 and Canon 1398. What you have read here is a disagreement on what constitutes the line between material cooperation and proximate cooperation. Catholics for a Free Choice was, in fact specifically mentioned in a public excommunication decree by Bishop Bruskewitz (upheld by the Vatican). A similar decree was made just recently by Bishop Olmstead regarding a nun who did not procur an abortion herself but was materially cooperative with one occuring.

This is a Catholic Forum and the OP was about two groups claiming to share Catholic teaching. So, I am not really worried about the views of agnostics or athiests for the purposes of this discussion. And I know a lot of Buddists and Jews who would be shocked that you think that protecting the unborn is an “alternative” view.

 

[GlendaTheGood]

Glenda,

Most of the readers here are already aware of the teaching of the Church regarding abortion. The specifics are in Canon 1329 and Canon 1398. What you have read here is a disagreement on what constitutes the line between material cooperation and proximate cooperation. Catholics for a Free Choice was, in fact specifically mentioned in a public excommunication decree by Bishop Bruskewitz (upheld by the Vatican). A similar decree was made just recently by Bishop Olmstead regarding a nun who did not procur an abortion herself but was materially cooperative with one occuring.

This is a Catholic Forum and the OP was about two groups claiming to share Catholic teaching. So, I am not really worried about the views of agnostics or athiests for the purposes of this discussion. And I know a lot of Buddists and Jews who would be shocked that you think that protecting the unborn is an “alternative” view.

It does not surprise me that there is disagreement on the topic of what brings about an excommunication. It is the tip of the “Conservative/Reform/Liberal” Catholic quandary iceberg (to borrow from our Jewish friends). There is so much on this forum that contradicts itself that, as a microcosm, CAF is intriguing and often mis-informative.

Even more interesting is the original poster’s net surfing - the question arises: what was she originally looking for when she stumbled upon the heretically offensive website in the first place? Ah, but that’s a question for bearer, yes?

Corki, would you say there IS no grand scheme? Is that why every other sect is immaterial to this discussion?

 

[Corki]

Corki, would you say there IS no grand scheme? Is that why every other sect is immaterial to this discussion?

No, I am just saying that when it comes to providing Catholic information to Catholics, the opinons of people of other faiths don’t really factor into the discussion.

 

[vera_dicere]

Those silly people have been around for a long time. I met someone who visited one of their meetings [CFFC] back in the day when she was pro-abortion and she said she wasn’t Catholic, the president of this particular chapter replied “Nor am I, most of us aren’t Catholic in fact”.

Frankly, I think its just a bunch of pro-abortion plonkers who took the name Catholic to try and loosen the strings of Rome, as it were, and a few liberal catholics in name only joined up.

End of the day, its just the blind leading the blind, and using poor history and ignorance to push their own point. If anything, its very, very sad. I pray for their souls. They should know better. Its one thing to be pro-abortion because you were raised in a pro-aboriton, atheistic house hold, its another entirely to know the truth as taught by the church and to thus reject it.

As much as I accept these people exist, I don’t particuarly like them using the terrm “catholic” when what they beleive/teach is defintely not. I mean, would people wouldn’t find it very endeering if a group showed up calling themselves “Jews for Al Queda” or “Blacks for Sanger”, or “Gay Soliders for Westboro Baptist”.

They’ll be around for a long while yet, unfortunately.

 

[GlendaTheGood]

No, I am just saying that when it comes to providing Catholic information to Catholics, the opinons of people of other faiths don’t really factor into the discussion.

With regard to this particular discussion on this particular forum, may I ask why you believe these posts are reaching Catholics exclusively? I would think, given the scope of topics and threads on CAF, that there are many, many non-Catholics entering this forum looking for information. How does their exclusion help to enlighten them?

 

[Corki]

With regard to this particular discussion on this particular forum, may I ask why you believe these posts are reaching Catholics exclusively? I would think, given the scope of topics and threads on CAF, that there are many, many non-Catholics entering this forum looking for information. How does their exclusion help to enlighten them?

I am not excluding them at all. I am just not including non-Catholic views in a description of Catholic teaching. There is a sub-forum here at CAF that is dedicated to non-Catholic discussion. This is not it.

If a non-Catholic came to a forum titled “Catholic Answers,” he/she would be looking for Catholic teaching. It wouldn’t make sense that someone comes to Catholic Answers expecting to find non-Catholic teaching.

 

[GlendaTheGood]

I am not excluding them at all. I am just not including non-Catholic views in a description of Catholic teaching. There is a sub-forum here at CAF that is dedicated to non-Catholic discussion. This is not it.

If a non-Catholic came to a forum titled “Catholic Answers,” he/she would be looking for Catholic teaching. It wouldn’t make sense that someone comes to Catholic Answers expecting to find non-Catholic teaching.

I am a non-Catholic who recently comes to CAF looking for WHY people believe Catholic teaching, not for Catholic teaching itself. I am not the only one in this subset. Many people are searching for reasoning, for corroboration of claims and legends. It is not a slashing mission, nor is it one which easily tolerates a hook/line/sinker mentality. It is a curiosity about why people believe what they believe. I find it interesting that there are so many wide differences in posters’ offerings, particularly in the contemporary areas of choice, abortion, fornication, artificial birth control, NFP, lust - so many asking for clarification and others who seem to simply muddy the waters for them. It’s rather like an anthropological dig, but without the great, breathtaking discoveries that are possible in other efforts to unearth the surprises of Life.

Are you suggesting that all non-Catholics “stick to their own kind” and restrict their reads and posts to the non-Catholic threads? Isn’t that … un-Christian?

 

[Corki]

.

Are you suggesting that all non-Catholics “stick to their own kind” and restrict their reads and posts to the non-Catholic threads? Isn’t that … un-Christian?

No, I am suggesting that when someone comes looking for the Catholic view, whether it be the “what” or the “why” they shouldn’t be disappointed when the Catholic view is given and not the Jewish view, the Buddhist view or the Methodist view. I am not at all qualified to explain how Jews, Buddhists or Methodists explain matters of their faiths.

 

[Corki]

Are you suggesting that all non-Catholics “stick to their own kind” and restrict their reads and posts to the non-Catholic threads? Isn’t that … un-Christian?

No, I am suggesting that when someone comes looking for the Catholic view, whether it be the “what” or the “why” they shouldn’t be disappointed when the Catholic view is given and not the Jewish view, the Buddhist view or the Methodist view. I am not at all qualified to explain how Jews, Buddhists or Methodists explain matters of their faiths. If you want to ask about those views, the non-Catholic sub-forum is the best place to go.

 

[GlendaTheGood]

No, I am suggesting that when someone comes looking for the Catholic view, whether it be the “what” or the “why” they shouldn’t be disappointed when the Catholic view is given and not the Jewish view, the Buddhist view or the Methodist view. I am not at all qualified to explain how Jews, Buddhists or Methodists explain matters of their faiths. If you want to ask about those views, the non-Catholic sub-forum is the best place to go.

The disappointment lies in the inconsistency between responders’ posts, not in the fact that any other denomination’s doctrine is not addressed. Yes, the same could be said of any faith and its subscribers, that there might be inconsistency with interpretations of doctrine, dogma, etc. But since we are talking about Catholicism here, now, what have you to offer in the way of clarity with regard to Catholic teaching on excommunication as it directly relates to abortion and its participants? So much controversy swirls around this subject, and fueling the flame is this from Fr. Frank Pavone’s piece, “Never To Reject, Never To Kill”:

*“Together with the fact that abortion is a mortal sin, it should also be understood that an abortion brings an automatic excommunication upon those who procure it, perform it, or cooperate in it. The purpose of the excommunication is not to reject anyone, but precisely to HELP people understand how evil abortion is, and help them to turn away from it. We would not respect a doctor who did not tell us the seriousness of our disease; nor should we respect a Church that does not tell us the seriousness of our sin. But again, let us bear in mind that God’s mercy is ready to forgive our sin in the Sacrament of Confession, and to reconcile us to the Church by removing the excommunication”. *

Can you confidently say that anyone who has had an abortion has never confessed it and has never had the excommunication lifted? Can it not, therefore, be assumed that any given person participating in reproductive options, including abortion, can still be “saved” if confession and forgiveness enter the picture?

So much judgment and damnation of others’ actions, when the hourglass is not yet spent! If time is left, so is the possibility of redemption. Why get in an uproar when the tallies are not yet final? And whose business is it? God’s and, in my opinion, no one else’s but the actual abortion participants’.

 

[Dale_M]

Can you confidently say that anyone who has had an abortion has never confessed it and has never had the excommunication lifted? Can it not, therefore, be assumed that any given person participating in reproductive options, including abortion, can still be “saved” if confession and forgiveness enter the picture?

My understanding of what Corki wrote is that she agrees that abortion can be confessed, forgiven, and excommunication lifted. Certainly a well known case of that happening would be Dorothy Day, who is currently being considered for sainthood.