|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: She's only nine years old! (abortion thread)
|
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022
|
Posted
All of those things are about people harming other people. A foetus is not, legally, a person, and so such laws are trying to control what a woman does with what remains part of her body. Or in this case, what a 9 year old girl should be forced to go through.
There may be a case for restriction of abortion, hence the laws which currently exist, although I think there should be abortion on demand for the first 14 weeks which would discourage late abortions. However, my prority is and always will be, those who are here already, not those who might be but are not at the moment. If you choose yourself to believe that the foetus is life at conception - fine - but I don't accept that, and see no reason why that view should be forced on those who do not believe it, given the consequences - which would not be the same in any of the other examples you give.
--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced
Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomb
Shipmate
# 174
|
Posted
[tomb mumbles to himself and counts his toes. 10? Thank God. He hasn't completely lost his mind. Only his thumbs. Oh, well.]
This is a nine figgin' year old little girl, people. This is not a General discussion about abortion. This is a Particular case.
Jesus, I wish the world were so serene that the General always informed the Particular, but it doesn't.
JL, I'm so so glad you agreed with my earlier post, but your subsequent posts prove that you still don't get it: people who enforce theological absolutes DO VIOLENCE.
Let me repeat myself: YOU are HURTING PEOPLE. You. Personal. Not people who think like you. Not people who support your position. Not people who have written encyclicals. YOU.
Go to confession.
Even if your ethico-moral position never obtained, the fact that you could possibly hold it in the demonstrable face of TERRIBLE HUMAN MISERY effectively NAILS YOU TO THE WALL.
My God man, we're talking about a little nine year old girl! We're not talking about general principles here. We're talking about the specifics of a terrible act that would make Jesus weep.
Your certitude is staggering! And sickening! I bet you're one of those assholes who thinks he knows why the sun comes up in the morning.
There is no theological or ethical principal that will cut through this dilemma. Your life-at-all-costs bullshit effectively will kill the life of a child.
Ordinarily, JL, I respect and admire your posts and positions. But in this case, you're so full of shit I'm sure it's brown when you blow your nose.
Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
We're talking about the specifics of a terrible act that would make Jesus weep.
Bravo, Tomb, and thank you.
Would it be impertinent for me to suggest that you apply a hostly padlock to this thread?
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
Hhmmmm, what's that i hear?
Clip-clop...BANG!
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420
|
Posted
I disagree. No one is required to visit a thread. As long as people continue to express themselves, let threads remain. I for one am rather sick of "so I'm closing the thread."
--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn
Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mamacita:
quote:
We're talking about the specifics of a terrible act that would make Jesus weep.
Bravo, Tomb, and thank you.
Would it be impertinent for me to suggest that you apply a hostly padlock to this thread?
No, just useless - tomb is hellhost emeritus, with all of the glory and none of the power.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Agreed, NO. I am still,feeling angry over the whole situation.
And I appreciated your posting about the changes of policy re helping people to get out of horrible situations.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
Hhmmmm, what's that i hear?
Clip-clop...BANG!
You know, you really should learn what is a Dead Horse topic, and what isn't. I'll give you a clue: topics which have been repeatedly argued about on these boards, where there are at least two opposing, untractable and unconcililatory positions. Threads about child abuse do not fall into this category generally.
Viki, hellhost
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
3M Matt
Shipmate
# 1675
|
Posted
quote:
1. The deliberate killing of an innocent is always wrong, and there are no circumstances which would justify resorting to such a wrong.
2. Abortion constitutes the deliberate killing of an innocent.
3. Abortion can never be justified.
JL, this is probably the clearest statement you have made of your argument.
The problem lies in point (1)
Some of us, (eg. Mersey mike) disagree that "an innocent [person]" is being killed at all.....hence, the rest of your argument.
Some of us, (eg. me) agree that an innocent person is being killed, BUT disagree that the killing of an innocent is always wrong.
Some example situations would include warfare, for example, in which the benefit of many innocents may depend upon the loss of some innocents.
Another example might include a situation of a madman with a gun running down a street. Yes, he may be morally "innocent" as he is out of his mind, and therefore not morally responsible. However, if it was the only possible course of action, I would shoot him to protect the other innocents he might kill.
Another example might be someone who is acting on false information and is thus about to commit some terrible act in good faith that they are doing the right thing. Again, here, killing of a morally innocent being may be necessary.
Of course, in all these cases, the killing of an innocent is done reluctantly, as a last resort. Whether it is sin, I honestly do not know. If faced with any of these situations I would no doubt find myself needing to ask forgiveness afterwards.
I think in the case of the 9 year old, we may well be faced with that last resort.
Is the abortion sin? Yes. I think it is, but sin has momentum to it. When the rapist raped that girl, he started a train of sinful events in motion. Sin breeds sin.
This is why we say we live in a sinful world. The sin has soaked into the very material of the world we live in...so we have droughts and earthquakes and volcanos.
While at every opportunity we should seek to follow a course of action which is consistent with God's perfect sinless standards, sometimes there simply is no available course of action which is fit to bear that title.
In the case of this girl, abortion was not the "better of two options" (and I refuse to believe abortion ever can be the better of two options), but rather it was the only option. It was a hobson's choice...death of an innocent and suffering...or...death of an innocent and suffering.
matt
--------------------
3M Matt.
Posts: 1227 | From: London | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
So what can we do to the rapist?
Tie him up and visit him with a huge monster who pokes him violently with a hollow steel shaft full of shit which leaves a deposit which grows painfully into a kicking struggling creature which eventually cuts, tears, rips its way put? And then devours him.
How about that?
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
"out" not "put"
Can't see any Freudian slip there...
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
3M Matt
Shipmate
# 1675
|
Posted
How do deal with the rapist?
Hmm..well, my favored method would be to make a big bundle of razor wire, strip him naked...throw him on it with his hands and feet tied.
Then pass a low voltage current through the razorwire, causing his body to spasm. As it spasms he will of course move over the razorwire cutting himself.
Over the course of the next 30minutes or so he should die from loss of blood. It's known as "the death of a thousand cuts"
Apparently it's one of the most painful ways to die.
matt
--------------------
3M Matt.
Posts: 1227 | From: London | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
I want to scream now. Thankfully, this is Hell, so I can.
I'm very anti-abortion. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) I have not yet been convinced that even horrible, extreme cases like this one would justify it.
But DAMMIT, hello, Bueller? is anyone listening? not noticing that this is a really horrible case, and even if it is true that it would be wrong to abort the child, that it is a very difficult case to handle, and that even if it is still wrong (to abort the infant in question) it can seem justified to do so, to good, intelligent people, is mind-numbingly insensitive and heartless. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
JL, I have the greatest sympathy and probably agreement with your technical doctrinal position on abortion. But it's times like this which make me say (and unlike certain other issues I have no expectation that my position will change) that if I based my beliefs on the actions and apparent attitudes of the people who hold them, then I'd probably be so "pro-choice" it'd make your head swim.
Sometimes it's embarrassing to be anti-abortion (I refuse to use what I see as a euphemistic, even propagandistic phrase, "pro-life"). JL -- I am sorry to say this -- but when you post the way you do sometimes, you are not helping. ![[Embarrassed]](icon_redface.gif)
God have mercy, God have mercy, God have mercy. What a horrible situation.
David
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Sounds great, Matt the Mad Medic. ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Do we get to take turns pressing the button to cause the electric shocks?
I'm still waiting to hear what the Seminole women would do.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
David,
I have apologised for the lack of sensitivity, and I'll do so again. However, I remain convinced that there would have been no justification for an abortion in this case, and can't help feeling that some of the accusations of insensitivity (not all, mind; I deserved most) stem from a fear of moral certainty, or simple disagreement with the pro-life position, more than anything else.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lou Poulain
Shipmate
# 1587
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jesuitical Lad:
...and can't help feeling that some of the accusations of insensitivity (not all, mind; I deserved most) stem from a fear of moral certainty, or simple disagreement with the pro-life position, more than anything else.
Really?
It must be nice to have the certainty of an absolute moral principle that can be applied in every instance without exception.
I offer grudging admiration for your willingness to take your lumps for expressing your absolutism. Do you get the same level of criticism when expressing your strict pacifist views about war?
Lou
Posts: 526 | From: Sunnyvale CA USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
3M Matt
Shipmate
# 1675
|
Posted
Just wanna say, I totally agree with Chastmaster's position on this.
He seems to be, (along with myself) the only person here able to grasp a seperation of theoretical morality from the horrific practicality.
JL...YES...I think you are RIGHT. It's wrong to abort, but hello...this is the real world..S**T HAPPENS!
So I don't see a problem is saying "I think abortion in this case is quite possibly morally wrong in the highest sense, but totally understandable"
As I said, if it were my daughter, I would choose abortion...then ask forgiveness. Yes. It's inconsistent. Sometimes life is JL. If your life never has inconsistency like this, then can we swap please?
matt
--------------------
3M Matt.
Posts: 1227 | From: London | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LucyH
Shipmate
# 3570
|
Posted
I'm very anti abortion and very sure this little girl needs one and should have one. In fact I would send money to any lawyer who would sue for child abuse. j.L. her own life may very well be lost but I suppose that matters less than being theologically correct[ 'letter of the law kills' ring a bell? ] in your own eyes. Please go and ' be right' somewhere by yourself where you can't do any more harm. As usual with the sanctimonious, consequences of your self righteousness are to be born by someone else.
Praying for a miscarriage is just washing our hands like Pilate as far as I can see.
J. L. may you feel what you inflict. I've seen your posts elsewhere and they are never imbued with the least compassion. I hope you grow out of it . Go to your room [ or anywhere the f=== away] and don't come out until you have.If I'd met you first I wouldnt have allowed myself to be called christian.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lou Poulain:
Do you get the same level of criticism when expressing your strict pacifist views about war?
I don't have strict pacifist views. I also don't think there's any inconsistency there (despite your implication that there is,) insomuch as I'd hold the Just War approach which prohibits violence against civilian non-combatants and only justifies its use where the war is defensive. If someone is serving in an aggressive army waging a campaign against your homeland, then they're not an innocent, and you are entitled to use proportionate means to protect the common good.
quote:
Originally posted by Matt the Mad Medic:
So I don't see a problem is saying "I think abortion in this case is quite possibly morally wrong in the highest sense, but totally understandable"
I can understand why people might want the girl to have an abortion. I can understand why relatives of murder victims sometimes want to do horrific things to the perpetrators. I can understand why mobs screamed for the blood of the Bulger killers. But in every case I think they're wrong to do (or have done) so, and I have a serious problem with the idea that Christianity legitimises aiming lower than the best we can do - which in this case would have been not to procure an abortion, and thereby terminate the life of an innocent.
quote:
Originally posted by Lucy H:
that matters less than being theologically correct
Actually, a minor point - this isn't about being theologically correct. I would expect an enlightened, noble pagan to be just as opposed to abortion as any pro-lifer. There are pro-life atheists, pro-life feminists, pro-life Jews, pro-life Muslims, pro-life gays. It's a question of morality, not theology. I think there's a strong theological case too, but like I said to Tiffer, unless one is talking to people with similar theological foundations, it's not worth making since it's more likely to alienate than convince.
And thanks for the rest of your comments. I'll think about them.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
C'mon, Matt the Mad Medic,
What makes you think you and CM are the only ones to be aware of, and agonised by, the whole idea of having to do something against what you usually reckon fits with your conscience?
The fact that you would, in this case, shows your real, sufficiently flexible value system. Similar to the rest of us?
JL,
That is how we have to behave and belong in this world - we are aliens and wanderers at the moment - and the world is global, circular, not lots of tiny square blocks and cages. Anyone who tries to lock us up in these cages is being spiritually abusive and anyone who lives in one needs to grow out of it.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Atlanta
Shipmate
# 2659
|
Posted
How would any of you feel if that 9yr old was related to you?????
I know how I would feel Rightly or Wrongly.
We are in 2003, should this still be happening to children( or anyone)?
This is too close to home for me to make any rational comments.
--------------------
If you cant beat them, Join them!! But i refuse to start farming!!!!
Posts: 355 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
There was a report on Woman's Hour today giving an update on what was happening.
BBC
The interview was from Managua, and said that the medical panel had said her life was at risk. Apparently, this is the only reason that one may have an abortion legally, but there are many back-street and private abortions being performed. The women's groups are saying that "the law is extreme" and are the ones who helped and supported the family.
The father said that he was relieved that his daughter could begin to get back to being a little girl again, and that she would obviously still need psychological help. He said that he and his wife were taking responsibility for beginning to sort things out for their daughter. ![[Smile]](smile.gif) Good for them.
The rapist also gave her two venereal diseases.. (Matt TMM, have you any medical tortures for him? Aren't some old-fashioned treatments for VD agonising? )
The doctors and parents have been excommunicated. The Roman Catholic Church there has said that "they excommunicated themselves". Good for them! Some of the Conservative Right politicians are leaguing up together ti try and change the law to totally outlaw abortions! ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
Now for the most awesome news. We have on this board a woman with both Prophetic and Word of Knowledge gifting; a cardinal is regularly preaching at mass on Sundays for both political and religious total banning of abortion!!! However, the general population don't seem afraid of him, nor take excomunication seriously. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
The doctors and parents have been excommunicated. The Roman Catholic Church there has said that "they excommunicated themselves". Good for them! Some of the Conservative Right politicians are leaguing up together to try and change the law to totally outlaw abortions!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) How wonderful... when people are going through what must be the worst agony of their lives, what better way to draw them closer to Christ and his church than an excommunication? I know the RC Church cannot condone the action, but why could they not be quiet!?
It infuriates me all the more to think that this family are being used as pawns to further political positions.
--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn
Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
From the Catechism: quote:
Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence. 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, by the very commission of the offence, and subject to the conditions provided be Canon Law. 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.
By acting as they did, they excommunicated themselves. By honestly confessing what they did as a sin and undertaking proper penance, they will have the excommunication lifted.
Because I have no desire to start Lent in a bad mood, that's all I'm going to say at this point.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
starrina
The rose warrior
# 3549
|
Posted
I am feeling a lot of the same feelings that have been expressed at this terrible event. I too am lost for words at what has happened to this poor, innocent child.
I do not want her to go through any more pain or trauma, and yet I cannot help but feel for her unborn child. Regardless of the circumstances it was conceived it is still a being who has a right to life. Who are we to decide who is allowed to have life, at all, let alone based on the circumstances of their conception.
That to me is just as horrific as the thing this girl has gone through.
--------------------
"what have you been doing while Bells has been maturing?"
"Drinking better whiskey."
Posts: 275 | From: the kwoon | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
silverfran said,
quote:
Who are we to decide who is allowed to have life, at all, let alone based on the circumstances of their conception.
That's the responsibility God has given us. We are not passive beings, we are designed to make choices.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
starrina
The rose warrior
# 3549
|
Posted
I'm not debating that. My point is life is a gift given to us by God. SUrely by deciding who is able to have life we are elevating the status of our role in this world to God's.
i.e. no matter what I think of what the poor girl has suffered and will suffer surely our first responsibility is to keep God's statutes and commands??
People are right to question which is the most loving approach, because love is never easy. It is not the easy option or a way out, neither is abortion. That presents its own set of problems and traumas which she will have to endure.
--------------------
"what have you been doing while Bells has been maturing?"
"Drinking better whiskey."
Posts: 275 | From: the kwoon | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LucyH
Shipmate
# 3570
|
Posted
if an ectopic pregnancy occurs [ the foetus lodges in the fallopian tube ] the tube will rupture killing mother and baby.That this foetus was lodged in a nine years old womb was likely to have taken both their lives too .The choice was always between two evils not between right and wrong.All condemnation should pertain to the rapist alone.
Apart from that to be heaped on the church that has added to their burdens while 'they themselves do not lift a finger to help.'Let those with no history of child abuse , no turning of a blind eye to Hitlers treatment of the jews
do the excommunicating -to say nothing of the inquistion.I would they all cut themselves off....while they're about it.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Lucy H,
It's probably for the best that you didn't say anything about the Inquisition, given your ignorance of history with regard to the Church's involvement on the Holocaust. Here are some useful articles to help you avoid bearing false witness in the future:
Sir Martin Gilbert: Pius XII & the Holocaust
Rabbi David Dalin: Pius XII was a Righteous Gentile
I'm struggling to see the relevance of the child abuse scandals. The Church teaches the profound immorality of child abuse as well as abortion. The fact that clerics have failed to live up to the teaching of their Church by committing abhorrent crimes is a source of misery to all people of good will and right reason.
But then, dare I say it, so is abortion.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
Let me preface my comments by saying anyone who's read my exchanges between Fr. G, JL and myself on the "Are Other Christians Really Christian?" thread will see I hold no love for the Orthodox/RCC hierarchy, politics or the majority of their exclusionary doctrines.
I'd also preface by saying emotions on this thread are running very high, therefore calm, rational discussion is much more difficult to come by in this kind of environment.
JL might be a lot of things, but as someone who has read many of his posts, I disagree that he's self-righteous.
Yes, he's firm in his convictions about abortion and yes, his convictions are extreme by many people's standards here. That being said, the unpopularity of his convictions doesn't automatically mean they're wrong, nor does it guarantee they're right.
Because of his length of time as a Shipmate and tenor of his posts, I believe he's earned the common respect to have his opinions listened to (and disagreed with when necessary), as have we all, and I would ask that if you disagree with them, you do so without killing him. Please offer him the same consideration you would want from someone disagreeing with you.
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LucyH
Shipmate
# 3570
|
Posted
J.L. have lookd up the links you graciously provided. My information came from a bbc documentary , tho I cant provide the reference. My point I think [ through a haze of maternal rage ] was that I believe Hitler was counted as a Roman Catholic and never out rightly condemned.Along with all manner of other miscreants who are not or were not excommunicated.But the references you provided are enlightening.I still think the choice was between two evils and not right and wrong.
Thanks to Kenwritez for your moderating influence. some of the emotion is stuffed back in its box.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420
|
Posted
Both Hitler and Mussolini had been baptised Roman Catholic - though, obviously, they were far from any such beliefs when they came to power. I understand that Pius XII had some advice to formally excommunicate them (a different matter than that which JL previously explained), but, under consideration, decided it would do no good and possibly much harm. Excommunication (which basically involves being barred from the sacraments and, for priests, suspension of faculties for active ministry - not condemnation to hell or the like) is intended to lead the person to repentance - which was not going to happen with those two - and, especially considering both that Hitler would love to have taken the Vatican, and to have all the more reason to begin a full scale persecution of Catholics, for Pius to issue an excommunication could have been fuel for a Fascist/Nazi fire.
Most members of the Italian armed forces were at least nominally Catholic... and a much earlier Pius had seen what can happen when the head of state is excommunicated (even allowing for that English nationalism of the time of Pius V exceeded the norm for Italy.) I don't know if this was required of those serving in the military, but an elderly friend of mine, German and old enough to remember the Holocaust, informed me that at least some within the Nazi regime were required to swear to being "believers in God" - to form a contrast to godless communism. To have been Christian would both involve the possibility of ethics at odds with 'duty,' and of professing belief in a Son of God who was Jewish. There could have been implications for an all out war with the Vatican had an excommunication been issued.
This is not an apologia - but I am adding it because it can appear, quite wrongly, that moralists (which I am not - nor am I RC) are seeking to torture people, when, in truth, some of them are extremely pastoral.
I am familiar with the sort of excommunication which JL mentioned, yet, regardless of one's views about the actions of the girl's parents, it is most unfortunate that the hierarchy can be quoted regarding an excommunication in the media. Speaking in general (not in relation to this issue), very few people are aware that such an excommunication is intended as a spur to repentance, and that those in such a predicament are supposed to have pastoral care. The most solid RC moralist on earth could possibly see circumstances here that would decrease (for example) the parents' use of the will here, their ability to act with 'reflection and consent' in the instance of such psychological torture, etc. I cannot say how many people I have known who, rightly or wrongly, assumed they were excommunicated and that this meant there was 'no turning back' to the Church! Quite honestly, this media report makes it appear that the Church casts out people during their time of greatest agony.
I disagree with JL on various matters, but believe that, if there is one thing we share, it is the tendency to assume that others naturally know all of the details about matters we set forth.
--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn
Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by kenwritez:
I'd also preface by saying emotions on this thread are running very high, therefore calm, rational discussion is much more difficult to come by in this kind of environment.
So hell encourages calm rational discussion? I think not. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
Even in real life, there are times when we have to rush in and rapidly engage in something urgently and emotively - spontaneous action and words are often necessary.
I'm not killing JL, only the rapist and the cardinal and his political side-kick today.
Let them have nightmares of the rape, experiencing the violation of their bodies, the disgusting penetration of sperm, yuckiness and filthy germs. Let them wake up sweating and paralysed with fear. Let them feel the powerlessness.
Since they're not excommunicated, let them have flashbacks whenever they see blood.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Thanks Ken. Much appreciated.
Daisymay,
What you wrote would have made a lot more sense if the Church had sought to justify the rape. It did not. The rape was condemned. No-one's denying the horror of rape. What is being denied is the idea that deliberately killing an innocent can improve an already dreadful situation.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
I can't remember this detail from my Moral Theology lectures: does a rapist automatically excommunicate himself by virtue of his actions?
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ley Druid
Ship's chemist
# 3246
|
Posted
Dear Jesuitical Lad,
In all honesty I have sometimes wondered as to your motives for your exposition of Catholicism on these boards. What is special about April 1?
Confronted with this scandal of evil in the rape of this nine year old girl your answer has repeatedly been: quote:
My opposition is to the deliberate termination of innocent life
The deliberate killing of an innocent is always wrong, and there are no circumstances which would justify resorting to such a wrong
The deliberate killing of a person - regardless of how long they have left to live in this world - is impermissible
From the beginning, this thread was about the scandal of evil, not the morals of abortion
quote:
OP, originally posted by Elizabeth Anne:
I just found this horrible news story:
Raped nine-year-old girl now faces motherhood
I don't give a damn what your views on abortion are.
In the face of outrage at the existence of evil, you have answered with simple morality lessons. Perhaps, initially you thought people were seeking advice on the morality of abortion. However, you obviously glimpsed at the deeper problems involved when you said quote:
the conclusion one should draw is that God allows good to come out of the worst of human evils; not that deliberately killing innocents is somehow ethically justifiable
A shame you didn't pursue this line of thinking further.
Mother Church wisely points out the inadequacies of quick answers to difficult problems:
quote:
Providence and the scandal of evil
309. If God the Father almighty, the Creator of the ordered and good world, cares for all his creatures, why does evil exist? To this question, as pressing as it is unavoidable and as painful as it is mysterious, no quick answer will suffice. Only Christian faith as a whole constitutes the answer to this question...
Posts: 1188 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Ley Druid,
Actually, I think you need to re-read the OP, especially the last section of it. The complaint was that the girl was being told to go through with the pregnancy, rather than taking the allegedly more humane, easier option of abortion.
But thanks for your comments, all the same.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Big Yellow Taxi
Shipmate
# 2869
|
Posted
Unfortunately I haven't had time to read all the posts here. But having gone through 2 planned pregancies in my 30s, and knowing what it's done to me - no 9 year old should have to go through this (at least in these circumstances). I hate the thought of abortion (once you have a small being inside you, you realise just how quickly it becomes a child to you), but she's only a child herself. Who is having her childhood cruelly torn away from her. Not to mention the tremendous impact on the rest of her life.
--------------------
"Travel is a return towards the essential."
Posts: 137 | From: Toddler whirlwind somewhere in E. Midlands | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Amos:
quote:
I can't remember this detail from my Moral Theology lectures: does a rapist automatically excommunicate himself by virtue of his actions?
Not according to the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church (at least, not under the chapter dealing with the 6th Commandment). Nor does murder, from what I could make out. So Peter Sutcliffe didn't automatically excommunicate himself but the parents of a raped nine year old who decide that an abortion is the best thing to be done in a horrible situation do. Of course, these things are, properly, condemned in the strongest terms by the Holy See - but the rapist and mass murderer apparently warrant more pastoral sensitivity than the concerned parents.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Trevor
Shipmate
# 3644
|
Posted
Thanks for the info, JL.
I'm not trying to attack anyone, but I would like my ignorance relieved, because I'm really confused. I thought that the whole point of opposing abortion is that the zygote, embryo, or fetus human being has the same value and "person" status as an already-born human being. The links say that someone can be excommunicated for killing not-born people, but not for offing the born.
My brain has started to hurt, because this seems to place a greater value on those persons who are not yet born as compared to those who are. Again, this is a sincere request for explanation.
--------------------
my joy has been transfinite
Posts: 196 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Trevor,
One thought which occurs to me is that the Church can still rely - for the time being - on the State to deal with those who murder humans outside the womb. Those whose victims are not yet born, however, often have full State approval for their actions; thus one might argue that the Church needs to emphasise the gravity of the crime in a situation where the State too often instead offers applause.
That's my take on the affair, anyway. And excommunication is an option in cases of murder where the victim is born - it's just not automatically incurred.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ley Druid
Ship's chemist
# 3246
|
Posted
Dear Jesuitical Lad,
I will be very disappointed if you evade my question:
When someone confronts the scandal of evil, do you feel the Church suggests that it is sufficient to expound upon the wrongness of the evil?
Posts: 1188 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
If Jesuitical Lad had any sense of irony, he might appreciate that linking to not one, but two collections of canon law as a response to the complaint that the Roman Church is, in this instance, behaving somewhat legalistically was perhaps not the response best calculated to answer the complaint. The relevant passage would appear to be:
quote:
Can. 1397 One who commits murder, or who by force or by fraud abducts, imprisons, mutilates or gravely wounds a person, is to be punished, according to the gravity of the offence, with the deprivations and prohibitions mentioned in can. 1336. In the case of the murder of one of those persons mentioned in can. 1370, the offender is punished with the penalties there prescribed.
Can. 1398 A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.
Which implies that excommunication is not automatic in the case of murder or rape but is in the case of procuring an abortion, even if the person whom the abortion is procured for is a nine year old girl who has been subject to a horrifying and degrading assault*. Which is, I believe, what I said the first time round. So nice of you to back my point up JL.
The point that you appear to be missing is that, whatever one's views on the licitness of abortion, and my position is closer to yours than it is to the classic pro-choice stance, in the case of a nine year old the situation is deeply tragic. Given the reality of the situation confronted by two parents one would imagine that a degree of pastoral sensitivity would be appropriate. "By the way, you've just tripped the automatic excommunication switch" especially when murder (and the argument is abortion=murder right?) does not trip the automatic excommunication switch. On this reading there are sometimes mitigating reasons where murder takes place, but never when an abortion takes place? Not even in these circumstances? One doesn't expect the Canon Lawyers to start handing out planned parenthood leaflets at the beginning of Mass, but some recognition of the traumas undergone by the nine year old girl and her parents would be reasonably appropriate in giving some kind of account of the ethical issues at stake here.
*If you think that this is righteous froth as opposed to a reasonably accurate account of what took place may I suggest that rejoining the human species is in order before commenting on their affairs.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420
|
Posted
Thank you, Professor Yaffle.
JL, I have a question (and this is because I genuinely do not know - it is not 'bait.') I realise that matters of canon law, specifically those related to excommunication, usually developed because a particular practise (selling indulgences, violence towards the clergy, false accusations, violating the confessional seal) had serious effects on the church at large at the time the legal point was addressed (and perhaps continuously.)
Would you know why abortion, specifically, was made a condition for this automatic excommunication? I realise, of course, that one guilty of murder, rape, or assault would not be able to partake of the sacraments - but why are those who have committed such crimes not been subjected to excommunication if those who procure abortion are? It would not seem to be because of criminal law not dealing with abortionists, given that it is only in the 20th century that abortion became legal.
I believe I recall reading, a few years ago, that absolution of those who procured abortion still was reserved to the bishop, though many bishops chose to give their priests delegated authority in this area. Would murderers and rapists be able to be absolved directly by priests, with no special authority?
Little trivia note, for anyone interested: Until the modern era, people guilty of very grave sins often were penanced for extended periods, and may have had to do such penance for a long time before being re-admitted to communion. The mediaeval penitentiaries set this forth. However, except for cases involving excommunication reserved to bishops or to the Holy See, I believe such penance was at the discretion of the confessor.
--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn
Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Ley Druid,
No, I don't.
Professor Yaffle & Newman's Own,
I may be wrong - and I'm sure you'll tell me if I am! - but I think my response to Trevor should answer your queries.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Elizabeth Anne
Altar Girl
# 3555
|
Posted
Enough! Everyone's shown their true colors here. Just let the thread die already, please.
--------------------
Born under a bad sign with a blue moon in my eyes...
Posts: 974 | From: New York | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Thanks to Prof. Yaffle, Newman's Own, and JL for unfolding the implications of my question.
JL--when I studied Moral Theology, it was in a class, with other students (Jesuit Scholastics, mostly) and a teacher (SJ). It occasionally seems to me as if you have studied Moral Theology on your own, enthusiastically, with a stack of books. When you do things this way, one of the dangers is to miss nuances and truly problematic points, not to mention the Church's own internal discussion over the years on these points. IMO the dialogic method is better!
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Newman's Own
Shipmate
# 420
|
Posted
No one is forced to read this or any thread - if people want to make comments, they have no obligation to make a thread die.
I am not a moralist, of course, JL, but my own instruction in moral theology was in a setting similar to that of Amos. Perhaps you do not intend this, but you are arguing from a seeming standpoint (in relation to the canons) of 'it is the law because it is in the law.' The response you gave to Trevor does not seem adequate, and the links provide no explanation of the history of or reasoning behind that on which I requested your response.
My own studies were before the new Code was issued. Just borrowing a similar situation, related to killing, those who participated in a duel were automatically excommunicated, though not those who killed another under most under circumstances. (And this despite that one who killed another with pistol or sabre tended to be violating the penal code in any case.) There always are reasons why particular situations are singled out in forming just about any form of law.
--------------------
Cheers,
Elizabeth
“History as Revelation is seldom very revealing, and histories of holiness are full of holes.” - Dermot Quinn
Posts: 6740 | From: Library or pub | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575
|
Posted
Well, it seems that the best approach might be to ask a canon lawyer then, because I simply don't know. All I can offer are guesses, and those clearly aren't what's wanted.
Apologies.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
