Vatican Official Defends Child's Abortion

[system]

“…helping mothers to see the wonder and gift from God which is growing in their wombs…”

The child was raped. How on earth is that a “gift from God”?

“It is very clear that the stepfather is in a sense excommunicated, he is not permitted to receive the Eucharist until he goes to Confession.”

As I say, you really don’t get it.

"And I notice you had to go back a long way to find something suitable to rail against the Church about. "

1. So, if it’s a long time ago, it’s less relevant, or abhorent?
2. You have not the faintest idea how long ago anything I referred to was.

As I say - it’s the sound of catholics falling over themselves to excuse the inexcusable (see 1 above and as happened a few weeks ago on a radio phone-in regarding sexual, emotional and mental abuse at the hands of nuns and clergy (catholic in both cases)) that shows the church at its worst.

As far as I can see, the church still doesn’t get it.

Had the Holy Father said on his visit to UK recently, “The church not only accepts the hideous crimes committed by its clergy over the years but is putting massive resources towards supporting victims, pursuing the guilty with no stone left unturned, handing all documentation to the police, including all the data and documentation held in the Vatican and ensuring no similar crime will ever again be covered up, excused or hidden…” I would have been far more impressed.
As it was he tried to link Nazism with atheism - which is historically innacurate and morally repugnant - given - for one thing - the style of device on the Nazi soldier’s belt buckles…

I repeat - my faith has been eroded in the face of this (recent) catalogue of gut-wrenching crimes, cover ups and excuses, on top of a long catalogue of other recent and not so recent personal experiences.

I have heard nothing that gives me any good reason to add any excuse of my own for the inexcusable.

There aren’t any.

And I have to say I feel so much better for facing up to it.

 

[pnewton]

I repeat - my faith has been eroded in the face of this (recent) catalogue of gut-wrenching crimes, cover ups and excuses, on top of a long catalogue of other recent and not so recent personal experiences.

What recent crimes? This crime was committed by the step-father.

 

[system]

What recent crimes? This crime was committed by the step-father.

Are you serious? You can’t think of any crimes recently committed by the catholic church?

Really???

(Hint: child rapists, child rapists being moved from one parish to the next, victims being told to hush, hush say nothing…)

Really.

I actually said:

I repeat - my faith has been eroded in the face of this (recent) catalogue of gut-wrenching crimes, cover ups and excuses, on top of a long catalogue of other recent and not so recent personal experiences.

I’ve faced up to an ugly truth - and as a result feel free and feel clean(er).

But that’s just me.

You do as you think fit.

 

[pnewton]

Are you serious? You can’t think of any crimes recently committed by the catholic church?

Really???

(Hint: child rapists, child rapists being moved from one parish to the next, victims being told to hush, hush say nothing…)

I said recent. I know of no such recent actions. I am sure they exist still happen, but in a far smaller number than any other population of people. In addition, that is not the topic here and has zero to do with the topic, except in a vague, hate-all-things-catholic sort of way.

Do you have a point, or are you just here to flame, rant, rave and generally go off into illogical, incoherent emotional tantrums?

 

[elts1956]

Are you serious? You can’t think of any crimes recently committed by the catholic church?

Really???

(Hint: child rapists, child rapists being moved from one parish to the next, victims being told to hush, hush say nothing…)

Really.

I actually said:

I’ve faced up to an ugly truth - and as a result feel free and feel clean(er).

But that’s just me.

You do as you think fit.

Please go to the following website. Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen spoke on Scandal in the 1950s and the infallibility of the “teachings” of the Church. I am not giving excuses for the heinous crimes some of our clergy are chaged with in using their positions of authority to commit crimes against children and society, but the article is a clarification of the separation of Church teachngs and the sinful human nature of some of her teachers. Do read it. Part of it I have copied below.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=9424

Scandals
by Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

Every now and then people come across a counterfeit bill, but I never knew anyone who, because of it, argued that the United States currency was worthless. Astronomers have seen spots on the sun, but I have yet to hear of one who denied that the sun is the light of the world. But I know many who pick out the failings and sins of a few Catholics and then say: “But, my dear, they don’t tell you everything! The Church is really the work of the devil.”

This extreme point of view starts with a fact: There are scandals. For example, some Catholic husbands and wives are unfaithful; some Catholic politicians are more crooked than those who have no religion; some Catholic boys steal; some Catholic girls worship the same saints as pagan girls: movie heroes or band leaders; some Catholic industrialists are selfish and hardhearted and totally indifferent to the rights of workers; some Catholic labor leaders are more interested in keeping their leadership by annual strikes than in cooperating for social justice. Then in the Papacy, there is Alexander VI.

What does all this prove, but that Our Dear Lord has espoused humanity as it is, rather than as we would like it to be! He never expected His Mystical Body the Church to be without scandals because He Himself was the first scandal. It was a terrible scandal for those who knew Him to be God to see Him crucified and go down to seeming defeat, at the moment His enemies challenged Him to prove His Divinity by coming down from the Cross. No wonder He had to beg His followers not to be scandalized by Him. If the human nature of Our Lord could suffer physical defeat and be a scandal, why should there not be scandals in Our Lord’s Mystical Body made up of poor mortals such as we? If He permitted thirst, pain and a death sentence to affect His Physical Body, why should He not permit mystical and moral weaknesses such as loss of faith, sin, scandals, heresies, schisms, and sacrileges to affect His Mystical Body? When these things do happen, it does not prove that the Mystical Body the Church is not Divine in its inmost nature, any more than the Crucifixion of Our Lord proved He is not Divine. Because our hands are dirty, the whole body is not polluted. The scandals of the Mystical Body the Church no more destroy its substantial holiness than the Crucifixion destroyed the substantial wholeness of Christ’s Physical Body. The Old Testament prophecy fulfilled on Calvary was that not a bone of His Body would be broken. His flesh would hang like purple rags about Him, wounds like poor dumb mouths would speak their pain with blood, pierced hands and feet would open up torrents of redemptive life – but His substance, his bones, they would be sound. So with His Mystical Body. Not a bone of it shall ever be broken; the substance of Her doctrines will always be pure, though the flesh of some of her doctors fail; the substance of Her discipline will be sound, though the passion of some of her disciples rebel; the substance of Her faith will always be Divine though the flesh of some of her faithful will be so carnal. Her wounds will never be mortal, for Her Soul is Holy and Immortal, with the Immortality of Love Divine that came to Her Body on the Day of Pentecost as tongues of living fire.

 

[St_Francis]

The child was raped. How on earth is that a “gift from God”?

The rape, of course, is against the will and laws of God; however, the babies are a gift from God.

As I say, you really don’t get it.

Actually, it is you who do not understand. Excommunication is like a Dear John letter to a wandering husband; who would write a Dear John letter to a husband who is already gone?

1. So, if it’s a long time ago, it’s less relevant, or abhorent?

No, it means you skipped over lots of more recent events which you deemed insufficient for your porposes here.

1. You have not the faintest idea how long ago anything I referred to was.

Well, since you are responding in a thread whose topic is a specific event, and you are referencing that event, I assume that you are referring to that event, which took place over a year and a half ago.

As I say - it’s the sound of catholics falling over themselves to excuse the inexcusable

Please provide evidence of any Catholic in any way trying to excuse the stepfather’s rapes of the two girls.

(see 1 above and as happened a few weeks ago on a radio phone-in regarding sexual, emotional and mental abuse at the hands of nuns and clergy (catholic in both cases)) that shows the church at its worst.

It’s really difficult for anyone to comment on something that is not referenced. Maybe you could provide a transcript of the comments or something so that we can have some idea of what you are talking about.

As far as I can see, the church still doesn’t get it.

You seem not to understand what is really going on. The Church has paid out literally billions in reparations for these crimes, and instituted programs all over the world to protect children. The allegations that are coming out now occurred *before *that; the Church has then already responded.

Had the Holy Father said on his visit to UK recently, “The church not only accepts the hideous crimes committed by its clergy over the years but is putting massive resources towards supporting victims, pursuing the guilty with no stone left unturned, handing all documentation to the police, including all the data and documentation held in the Vatican and ensuring no similar crime will ever again be covered up, excused or hidden…” I would have been far more impressed.

I am sorry that the Holy Father did not say what you wanted to hear, but quite frankly, the Church has apologized for these terrible crimes and has put massive resources to helping victims, and to prevent future occurences of these crimes.

WRT to releasing papers to the police, 1. the Vatican only recently started handling these cases, before that they were handled on the diocesan level. Consequently, the Vatican does not have a lot of papers and documents; and 2. neither the Vatican nor the dioceses can release those documents without the permission of the victims. Those victims who have come forward have been involved with the disposition of the paperwork in their cases.

As it was he tried to link Nazism with atheism - which is historically innacurate and morally repugnant - given - for one thing - the style of device on the Nazi soldier’s belt buckles…

You might read the speech itself before commenting on it, and so what if the Nazis had God is with us written on their belt buckles? Would you say that they were acting like good Christians? What a person does is better evidence of what they ultimately believe than does what they have written on their belt buckles.

I repeat - my faith has been eroded in the face of this (recent) catalogue of gut-wrenching crimes, cover ups and excuses, on top of a long catalogue of other recent and not so recent personal experiences.

If you want to believe the media’s take on the Church and leave, then that is what you will do. But understand that you are leaving the Church because of what people in the Church have done which is contrary to Church teachings. Many of us look at what those who live according to Church teachings do and stick with the Church.

I have heard nothing that gives me any good reason to add any excuse of my own for the inexcusable.

There aren’t any.

This is not really clear to those of us who do not know you.

 

[system]

Do you have a point, or are you just here to flame, rant, rave and generally go off into illogical, incoherent emotional tantrums?

No - you still don’t get it.

I came here to see what the catholic response was to the outcry over the fact that when a 9 year old child was raped was made pregnant with twins, it was the child’s mother and the medical staff involved in the abortion who were the focus of the excommunications - not the real criminal.

I expected to find excuses for that hideous state of affairs. And I did.

The rape, of course, is against the will and laws of God; however, the babies are a gift from God.

And here’s an example of the kind of thinking that helped me decide that I could think better for myself. Why on earth would a god want to make a gift of two babies to a 9 year old raped child? Being a god, he could of course just hold back on that one, couldn’t he? So ask yourself - why did that not happen?

And I will say again - if this story appeared in the New Testament Bible how would it look? Who would be taken to task and who would be comforted? (Hint: I think Jesus would be on the side of the mother and the child - but of course, I could be wrong.)

You seem not to understand what is really going on. The Church has paid out literally billions in reparations for these crimes, and instituted programs all over the world to protect children. The allegations that are coming out now occurred before that; the Church has then already responded.

The real crime in this hideous level of abuse is the cover up and the excusing - by the church and especially the “faithful”.

On the subject of abuse by clergy:

I said recent. I know of no such recent actions. I am sure they exist still happen, but in a far smaller number than any other population of people. In addition, that is not the topic here and has zero to do with the topic, except in a vague, hate-all-things-catholic sort of way.

You think abuse happens but in “a far smaller number than any other population of people.”

It’s that kind of thinking that will ensure it goes on and on and on.

 

[St_Francis]

No - you still don’t get it.

I came here to see what the catholic response was to the outcry over the fact that when a 9 year old child was raped was made pregnant with twins, it was the child’s mother and the medical staff involved in the abortion who were the focus of the excommunications - not the real criminal.

I expected to find excuses for that hideous state of affairs. And I did.

It so often happens that one does find exactly what one expected to find.

And here’s an example of the kind of thinking that helped me decide that I could think better for myself. Why on earth would a god want to make a gift of two babies to a 9 year old raped child? Being a god, he could of course just hold back on that one, couldn’t he? So ask yourself - why did that not happen?

I guess you really don’t know much about babies or children, do you?

And I will say again - if this story appeared in the New Testament Bible how would it look? Who would be taken to task and who would be comforted? (Hint: I think Jesus would be on the side of the mother and the child - but of course, I could be wrong.)

Oddly enough, the Church was indeed on the side of the little girl and her mother… and on the side of the little girl’s two daughters as well.

That little girl had plans for her babies–she was going to let a relative have one and keep the other as a little sister. Of course, nine-year-olds don’t put things the way adults do. But she was looking forward to her relatives’ happiness and to playing with her baby.

And it ain’t the doctors who are going to have to explain to her that her daughters were killed in the name of expanding abortion rights in Brazil…

The real crime in this hideous level of abuse is the cover up and the excusing - by the church and especially the “faithful”.

Where was the cover-up? Where is the excusing?

On the subject of abuse by clergy:

You think abuse happens but in “a far smaller number than any other population of people.”

It’s that kind of thinking that will ensure it goes on and on and on.

It will happen always and everywhere. It is due to our sinful decisions that this sort of thing happens, but it is, as I mentioned before, against Church teaching. Now the Church will handle it better than they did in the past, and there will be fewer occurences as the result of the protections put into place.

 

[system]

Quote:
I said: And here’s an example of the kind of thinking that helped me decide that I could think better for myself. Why on earth would a god want to make a gift of two babies to a 9 year old raped child? Being a god, he could of course just hold back on that one, couldn’t he? So ask yourself - why did that not happen?

I guess you really don’t know much about babies or children, do you?

So why would a god make a gift of two babies for a 9 year old rape victim then?

You guess wrong.

 

[St_Francis]

So why would a god make a gift of two babies for a 9 year old rape victim then?

Children have a great love for babies.

Unlike a lot of adults.

You guess wrong.

Evidence? You are a stay-at-home parent with 10 kids, something like that?

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

I remember the flurry of arguments when this first hit the news stands. The options were abort the baby or let both the mother and baby die. The way I see it, the nun would have killed two people if she had done nothing, and only one person via the abortion route.

 

[St_Francis]

I remember the flurry of arguments when this first hit the news stands. The options were abort the baby or let both the mother and baby die. The way I see it, the nun would have killed two people if she had done nothing, and only one person via the abortion route.

Your mention of a nun leads me to believe that you are talking about a different case. The topic of this thread is the case in Brazil about a year and a half ago.

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

Your mention of a nun leads me to believe that you are talking about a different case. The topic of this thread is the case in Brazil about a year and a half ago.

Yup, guess I was thinking about this:
abcnews.go.com/WN/Media/church-excommunicates-nun-authorized-emergency-abortion-save-mothers/story?id=10799745

The case is not that much different

 

[St_Francis]

Yup, guess I was thinking about this:
abcnews.go.com/WN/Media/church-excommunicates-nun-authorized-emergency-abortion-save-mothers/story?id=10799745

The case is not that much different

True In each case automatic excommunications were announced publicly after babies had been killed in their mothers’ wombs.

One can not take an innocent life in order to the life of another. I cannot kill my grandfather to get an organ which will save the life of my child, even if my child is dying and my grandfather in a comatose state; and in the same way, we can not kill an unborn child to save the life of the mother. In each case, those who were excommunicated were either told or ought to have known the exact position of the Church on this issue.

The details of the Phoenix case are not known, but the case in Brazil concerned a 9-year-old girl carrying twins who was doing fine at the time the abortion occurred.

 

[system]

@ “St Francis” [sic]

Quote:
Originally Posted by flamenco View Post
So why would a god make a gift of two babies for a 9 year old rape victim then?

Children have a great love for babies.

Unlike a lot of adults.

Quote:
You guess wrong.

Evidence? You are a stay-at-home parent with 10 kids, something like that?

So - just to be clear - you believe a god would make a gift of two babies to a 9 year old rape victim because ‘children have a great love for babies.’

Some god.
Some belief.
Yep - I WAS right. Thinking for oneself sure beats following anti-human, anti-child,dogmatic nonsense like that.

 

[Rence]

The child was raped. How on earth is that a “gift from God”?

It’s not a “gift from God”, it’s the result of sexual activity (forced or consentual, sex should be expected to have some degree of certainty that conception will result). Though, you have to acknowledge that some rape victims find great joy in that something good that came out of something so evil. And still, there are others who would not share that sentiment. The American Bishops, who haven’t forgotten the rape victim, have stated that a rape victim has the right to defend herself against an unwanted pregnancy by allowing the usage of emergency contraception if done immediately after the rape and if 1) a negative pregnancy test assures that the woman is not pregnant from a sexual encounter prior to the rape and 2) a test confirming that she is not ovulating. catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0566.html
Therefore, though God is reponsible for each and every soul, a rape victim conceiving as a result of her rape is not anymore ‘gifted’ than any other woman’s pregnancy. Unfortunately, the pregnancy of this child from the article was not addressed in ample time to take emergency contraception. As a Catholic, she would have no other choice but to carry the pregnancy to term under normal circumstances. Yet, I do not pretend to know all the details of this case and what happened, and if her life was truly in danger.

I agree that the emphasis should have been on the little girl and helping her to heal, and to bring her tormentor to justice. IMOHO the Bishop should have been doing a lot more with regards to the rapist than to the victim, but the Church has never promoted its own public image, has it?

As I say, you really don’t get it.

I get it and I agree with you. You are appalled that all of the focus of “sin” was concentrated on the mother of the rape victim and on the doctors, while little mention was made about the actual rapist. It’s sad that the real victim was lost in the shuffle of a bunch of adults bickering back and forth and the real victim was the child who was abused and raped. Sometimes in the heat of the moment, some people forget that the unborn aren’t the only ones who need protecting, and that once someone is born, they still need advocates. But the rapist was automatically excommunicated, and had removed himself from being in communion with the Church long before this happened despite the lack of emphasis on his part of the story. It’s just that the abortion part of this story is getting all the attention and bad publicity. I think that there is little emphasis on him because it’s “expected” that he is excommunicated, at least I hope that’s what it is.

Try not to get lost in the middle of radicals on both sides of the fence making all the noise. They don’t represent the Church, they only represent the human aspect of it, which is imperfect.

 

[pnewton]

Which child deserves the most sympathy, the one who was raped or the one who was murdered. The answer, if one reads the article, is that there is a division among Catholics here. That is what the article was about. One person was trying to make a delicate balance. Another criticized this, as would I, for being ridiculous. How can anyone compare such evil. This “think for myself attitude” that this new anticatholic poster wears as his red badge of courage is exactly what these two Church leaders were doing. They came up with different ideas and disagreed.

I can not fathom those that can judge the bioethics of this situation across cyberspace and denounce decisions when one is necessarily ignorant of the medical nuances. These things do matter. There is a principle of moral theology that mandates that one can not do something evil to get a good result. The end can never justify the means. However, there is also the priciple of double effect. If there is a threat to the life of the mother and action is taken to save the life of the mother that results in the death of the child, that is morally acceptable. Without a detailed understanding of the medical situation, which applies is simply unknowable.

For a noncatholic to jump into a very complex problem in moral theology is simply not going to yield a fruitful discussion. It is putting the cart before the horse, focusing on secondary things without a primary base. The result will be understandably negative.

 

[illmatic]

If they were acting in the way that they thought was right then I see no reason to condemn them. I think this definitely falls into SPECIAL CASE ground where it would take a lot more diligence than a black/white catechist attack on it to reach a fair conclusion. No offence intended to anyone.

 

[Rence]

If they were acting in the way that they thought was right then I see no reason to condemn them. I think this definitely falls into SPECIAL CASE ground where it would take a lot more diligence than a black/white catechist attack on it to reach a fair conclusion. No offence intended to anyone.

I think that I’m not alone on this forum (whether one lurks or posts regularly) to acknowledge the fact that real life is full of situations that fall in the grey areas, and that not all the rules and regulations work all the time for every situation. Not every single real life senario has a CCC answer in black and white. Life doesn’t come with a script…

 

[crazzeto]

Direct abortion is never permissiable under any circomstance. As such, a grave personal sin was committed by the Doctors and the Mother of the child and nothing can change this fact.

With regards to the excommunication, I’m not a canon lawyer so I can’t answer whether or not the actions merit that corrective action. However I have seen some arguments here postulating that in this case, there was no sin in aborting the children. That isn’t the case.