The Catholic church once again demonstrates the follies of organized religion.
A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion in Brazil after being raped.
Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Catholic church’s Congregation for Bishops, told the daily La Stampa on Saturday that the twins the girl had been carrying had a right to live.
‘It is a sad case but the real problem is that the twins conceived were two innocent persons, who had the right to live and could not be eliminated,’ he said.
…
The regional archbishop, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, pronounced excommunication for the mother for authorising the operation and doctors who carried it out for fear that the slim girl would not survive carrying the foetuses to term.
“God’s law is above any human law. So when a human law … is contrary to God’s law, this human law has no value,” Cardoso had said.
He also said the accused stepfather would not be expelled from the church. Although the man allegedly committed “a heinous crime … the abortion – the elimination of an innocent life – was more serious”.
Yeah. Good luck with that.
* Headline corrected to indicate who was actually excommunicated
Cognitive dissonance in action.
[...] Catholic Church Excommunicates 9 Yr Old Who Had Abortion But Not The Father That Raped Her | Oliver …. [...]
No, if you read the report more carefully, and without prejudice, the 9 year old who had the abortion was not excommunicated but rather her mother who arranged the abortion, as well as the doctors. As far as the stepfather is concerned, rape is not as serious a crime as murder. Abortion, because it is the wilful destruction of an innocent human being, carries with it the penalty of automatic excommunication, as far as the Church is concerned.
When you stand before God to give an account for your own sins, as all of us will some day, you will suddenly realize the role that God’s Church played in this life.
Yeah. Good luck with that.
Better get up to speed quickly while you’re still on this side of eternity.
“Although the man allegedly committed a heinous crime…the abortion-the elimination of an innocent life-was more serious.”
So because abortion is worse than rape, rapists shouldn’t be excommunicated? There is no logic in that position whatsoever.
nah, not CD…just more of psychotically abstinent ment thinking they have the right to tell healthy people how to think and live and love.
What will the Church do when Jesus’s blood descendants come forward?
NOT defending this but the mother and doctors were excomm’ed, not the child
The Church also covered for several dozen (at least) serial child rapists. Lovely bunch the Catholic Church is.
Also, the Galileo deal was pretty shitty too. Oh, and the centuries of anti-Semitism. And sucking up to the fascists in WWDeuce. That was bad. Oh, and persecuting Gypsies (Roma). Right, and the Inquisition. That sucked. And gay bashing.
Indeed, a lovely bunch.
As for the ashes on the head. That’s just plain weird. Well, it is.
Corrected the headline
Oh, ONLY the mother that didn’t want her nine-year-old having a child by a rapist! What a relief! Thanks for clearing that up Eric!
After this, I can’t understand why anyone with a conscience would allow him/herself to remain a member of the Catholic Church.
…rape is not as serious a crime as murder.”
I still don’t get why that should prevent the rapist’s ex-communication, unless murder is literally the only thing that could get a person excommunicated (and, though I am not a Catholic, I do not think that is the case).
Ah, organized religion, practicing its grand tradition of ignoring actual evils while prosecuting imagined ones.
As far as the stepfather is concerned, rape is not as serious a crime as murder.
SHE’S A 9 YEAR OLD!
Also, according to the bible, it’s a property crime, not murder.
As horrifically wrong as the Church is in this case, they are being internally consistent. To them, a fetus is a human being. And in their hierarchy of offenses, killing a child is worse than raping one. Killing two is even worse.
No one has a “right” to be a Catholic. The Church has a right to set certain standards of conduct and behavior for its membres, upon pain of removal. They have chosen that abortion is a deal-breaker for them. In their eyes, a truly heinous crime was committed — a child was raped. The mother and doctor made that egregious sin even worse by killing two innocent lives.
As I said, I disagree with their position. But I do understand it, to an extent.
J.
As I said, I disagree with their position. But I do understand it, to an extent.
That’s really fucking fascinating. Thanks for sharing.
Given that the doctors were concerned that the 9 year old might not survive the rigors of childbirth, who is the RCC to set their judgment above that of trained medical professionals (and, heck, the child’s mother too) on whether or not it was moral and proper to terminate a risky pregnancy?
So, if a mother terminates her pregnancy upon medical advice, based on an assessment of serious risk of grievous harm or death, the RCC still says that’s a no-no?
Interesting way to justify not excommunicating the rapist. His crime wasn’t as serious. So what? What does the relative severity have to do with anyhthing? If the abortion hadn’t occurred and therefore wasn’t around to compare the rape to, would the rape on its own have been serious enough?
Why not just say “we don’t think rape is a serious crime”? Oh, right. That would be just too blatant a display of hypocrisy.
“In their eyes, a truly heinous crime was committed-a child was raped.”
Not heinous enough for the rapist to be excommunicated.
Jay Tea: <i.As horrifically wrong as the Church is in this case, they are being internally consistent.
Only if one looks at a very narrow view of their position. In this case, for example, there was apparently significant concern that carrying to term would end up killing the 9 year old. So the Church isn’t really interested in saving life since the 9 year old’s wasn’t important.
Excellent point, Sean. I dunno how I didn’t make the connection between the age of the child and the likely threat to her life carrying not just one, but two fetuses to term would have posed. I think the Catholic Church recognizes the “life of the mother” exception, and this one surely ought to qualify.
Which would quite thoroughly undercut the Church’s excommunication of the mother and doctor — they were acting to save the life of the child in question. If she died, then it would almost be guaranteed that the fetuses would as well.
Times like this, I’m glad I’m an agnostic.
J.
J.G.Thayer: “I think the Catholic Church recognizes the ‘life of the mother’ exception, and this one surely ought to qualify.”
Except they clearly don’t believe in that exception, as this case proves.
Jay Tea: As horrifically wrong as the Church is in this case, they are being internally consistent.
Thinking about it a bit more, the only “consistency” I’ve been able to find in the positions taken by the Catholic Church is whatever protects their power. Looking out for the welfare of others, helping those in need, following their own teachings will take a back seat the instant doing any of those would run counter to the objective of the Church, which is to control the lives of and exercise power over as many people as possible.
Are there truly good people working for and following the church? Absolutely. But time after time over thousands of years of history the church has repeatedly chosen it’s own safety and comfort over those of others, often to the point of murder and abuse.
Going back to, oh, about 330 fucking A.D.
They just don’t condone “murder” for any reason (well, maybe vengeance on unbelievers or witches). If the 9yo girl dies, then it must have been “their god’s will”… I suggest that they stop taking medicine so we can test their god’s will.
And in their hierarchy of offenses, killing a child is worse than raping one.
[Insert pedophile/pederast priest reference here.]
What a bunch of hypocritical pigs.
Thank goodness I’m an atheist.
Sick bunch of assholes.
Under Roman Catholic canon law, any Roman Catholic who participates in an abortion is excommunicated latae sententiae, i.e. by the act itself. Accordingly, it would be more accurate to note that the bishop confirmed, not effected, the excommunication of those involved.
This provision of canon law applies to all Latin Church Catholics, i.e. most Catholics in the Americas, Western Europe and throughout most of the rest of the world. It does not apply to the Eastern Catholic Churches such as the Byzantine, Melkite, Maronite, Chaldean, etc. Catholic Churches, though abortion is considered a mortal sin everywhere. Point being that excommunication is a penalty applying automatically, by the act itself, to most Catholics as a matter of canon law for abortion and certain other sins.
“Point being that excommunication is a penalty applying automatically, by the act itself, to most Catholics as a matter of canon law for abortion and certain other sins.”
But being a pedophile is not, apparently.
She’s nine-years old! I seriously doubt she could have carried those two fetuses to term without doing serious damage to herself, or to the fetuses.
If the doctor and mother were the sort of Catholics for whom excommunication felt like a harsh penalty, then they’re also the sort of Catholics who knew it was coming.
They chose to save the girl anyway. Sometimes right is right and religion just isn’t.
“They chose to save the girl anyway. Sometimes right is right and religion just isn’t.”
Hell yeah.
As a recovering catholic who spent 3 years in a monastery that was half gay, I have some perspective on this. At least the “church” is consistent. According to church doctrine, masturbation is equivalent to abortion which is why masturbation, like abortion, is a mortal sin. Both will send you straight to hell. From puberty I was taught that masturbation was wasting life because sperm is potentially human life. When I pointed out to the doctrinaires that, given that reasoning, it was ok for females to masturbate but not males I was threatened with excommunication. They never considered the fact that females masturbate too.
When you follow the logic of any organized religion, it doesn’t hold up. Bottom line is that you can’t confine god with a formula including the catholic formula.
Anyone who is excommunicated by the church has been done a favor.
They chose to save the girl anyway.
They did what they knew was right despite knowing the penalty they would pay.
Isn’t the Church supposed to celebrate that kind of martydom?
Dr. Monkey says:
March 8, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Thank goodness I’m an atheist.
Amen, brother.
sperm is potentially human life
Sperm is potentially half of human life. I’m only half-joking when this sounds like more patriarchal nonsense.
Well put, SpiderJ. I’d say “amen,” but as an agnostic, I just can’t.
J.
Craig: When I pointed out to the doctrinaires that, given that reasoning, it was ok for females to masturbate but not males I was threatened with excommunication.
More evidence that the real goal isn’t to provide spiritual guidance or support, to help people in need, to answer questions. But instead to impose a close-minded doctrine where the prime directive is stifle dissent and keep the populace in afraid and in line.
The Church and many politicians are quite alike in that regard.
The Church and many politicians are quite alike in that regard.
Indeed. Power means money. And the Church is stinking rich. It reeks of power and money. Reeks, I tells ya.
[...] can hope for is success and long lime on earth, which brings me to a story, posted by Digby from Oliver Willis (both of whom are linked to this [...]
In one sense, I’ll grant the point to the defenders of the Catholic Church’s actions in this case. Yes, it’s true: abortion is worse than rape.
*BUT* – the church does not automatically excommunicate murderers! They chose to make a specific statement about specific people who made a choice in a specific circumstances.
And they did not merely declare that this was a sin, that required confession (or whatever the heck they call that sacrament – reconciliation?), but excommunicated the people involved.
Unless these people were loudly proclaiming that having an abortion is and should be consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church, I don’t see why they pulled out the big guns for this.
Now, I don’t know about
Yes, it’s true: abortion is worse than rape.
I want to believe you’re playing advocate for the church position here, and not actually arguing that abortion is worse than rape.
Because if you are arguing this point yourself, I’ve got a word or two to say in response.
*BUT* – the church does not automatically excommunicate murderers!
Just suicides.
Riddle me THAT, batman.
[...] And what does the Catholic Church do? It excommunicates the girl who was raped, her mother and the doctor, but not the pervert who raped a little girl, setting this entire, horrible chain of events in motion. I am not kidding. Read it and weep. [...]
“Because if you are arguing this point yourself, I’ve got a word or two to say in response.”
I’ll join you.
There is no such thing as a consistent pro-lifer.
Show me a pro-lifer, and I will show you a hypocrite; someone willing to make exceptions. This is because pro-life is ultimately impossible. Given the economic limits of life, any choice means denying resources to someone somewhere, and this leads to loss or limit of life.
This is blatantly obvious in the case of the Brazilian girl. Either the embryo was going to die, or the embryo and the girl; therefore pro-life options simply did not exist.
In order to have all the facts on Catholic teaching that are relevant to this case, rape and adultery are mortal sins. The stepfather, by committing both, has already cut himself off from the Church, and, without even a formal excommunication, is not in good standing with the Church.
Valerie: The stepfather, by committing both, has already cut himself off from the Church, and, without even a formal excommunication, is not in good standing with the Church.
And yet… the Church hasn’t excommunicated him as they have the mother and doctor. Whether his standing with the church is “not good” or not, the church has declared him to be worthy of their continued association.
The instigator of these events, the one who caused potential fatal injury to a child, who definitely cause severe emotional trauma to both the child and to her mother, is welcome at services. The victims are not.
[...] Catholic Church Excommunicates Mother, Doctor Of9 Yr Old Who Had Abortion But Not The Father That Ra… (oliverwillis.com) [...]
Will some Catholic defender tell me why having an abortion justifies excommunication but murdering someone who is born does not. Why is every lifers found guilty of murder/manshaughter not excomminicxated. Is it because the majority of murderers are men?
1) He didn’t say that rape wasn’t a serious crime. He said murder is a more serious crime. Do rapists always face the same punishment as murderers in a secular court of law?
2) Public excommunication is the result of publicly denying Church teaching. If rapists were going around claiming that there were cases in which rape was morally good or justifiable, the Church would excommunicate them as well.
3) There was no right solution to this case. Risking the child’s life is evil; taking the lives of her babies is evil. The archbishop chose to defend the most defenseless lives in this case — the lives of her babies.