Roman Catholicism and the total abuse & murder of children (incl. abortion).

I contacted him about his two presentations on Seventh-day Adventists, and his errors therein. I have not heard back, but I did manage to post some material on his blog site. Also posting a differing video on an unrelated subject of "Dr. King" doesn't negate the information presented in his "Dr. King" video, does it?

So, did you desire to merely post a video and not discuss, or did you post that video to discuss specific information and time indexes therein, as I have already watched the two videos of his?

If so please post it in another thread, as this thread is not about the other topics, but is specific in its intent, to which you seem to want to run away from.

 

What I said was, in essence, 'it depends on context and definition and circumstance', but you ignored all what I said to make your claim seem valid. It wasn't ever valid.

 

By definition "miscarriage" is "abortion". That's why I asked you to define "abortion" several times, but always somehow manage to never do. As I said, you prefer your own SJW world. I prefer reality and truth.

 

Yes utilyan, that is what I kept trying to get you to do when you asked the question. They defined their terms. I defined terms. You defined??? Therefore, when you asked, "Is abortion murder?" I presented to you the facts that miscarriage, etc are also classed as abortion, legally and medically and definitionally. So, that's why with your vague question, it could be 'yes', or 'no' in response, depending, as already stated.

 

Those would be the parts where it is incorrect, as it does not represent all of the information available (ectopic pregnancy removal is not listed in their article, nor a few other things). The teaching is also already clear from scripture and the SoP/ToJ and written material already cited in this thread., and so to say there is not a clear teaching is in itself erroneous. Also, the "commandment keepers" do not represent the whole 'church', as there are sheep and goats, John's and Judas's. Therefore, to say that the remnant cannot be called "commandment keepers" because of what others do and say is also in error. It would be the same thing as attempting to say that Jesus was sinful through Judas's actions, words. Do you think that, really? Again, what an individual 'pastor' says is not necessarily what the whole of the body says. Individuals have said correct and incorrect things. You might say, "Aren't you an individual?". Yes, but I am not citing me, I cited the official statements from scripture and SoP/ToJ and pioneer material which is the actual position irrespective of individuals. The Bible says, Isaiah 8:20.

 

No, I cited actual Catholic teaching with Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat. I cited the official CCC and CCE, Canon Law, etc.

 

Of course it is, as I defined, now all you have to do is just define "unborn children" and "abortion" and you will see what I have said from the beginning. For instance, an ectopic pregnancy, what think you? What about early pregnancy that ends in failure (though unintended as final result), though it was surgically done to save the mothers life? (for instance an early C-section (technically an 'abortion', for it aborted the full process), for a 'premie' who dies shortly afterward, though the pregnancy was already in complications, threatening the mother's life)?

 

"... Q: Does the Catholic Church oppose abortion if it is needed to save a woman’s life?

A: ... the Church does permit morally neutral medical procedures designed to save a pregnant woman’s life that may have an unintended side-effect of causing a child to die in the womb, such as the removal of a cancerous uterus. ..." - [1]

 

"...


Roman Catholicism and abortion access
Possible exceptions to the ban on
abortion by the Roman Catholic Church

Sponsored link.



Note:
As described in a separate essay, the Roman Catholic Church has banned direct abortion during the past few centuries. However, there are unusual circumstances in which the Church may find abortion to be permissible today.



Exceptions to the blanket rule that forbids most abortions:

The Church bans abortions which "directly" cause the death of a fetus. However, there are certain medical procedures that a pregnant woman can undergo which, indirectly, result in the death of the embryo or fetus. Under some circumstances, the church regards these as a moral choice. These involve an ethical principle called "double effect." This is where an action that is directly undertaken for a moral reason has an unintended, unavoidable, second, indirect, and negative, effect. Perhaps the most common example is the administering a narcotic to ease the pain of a terminally-ill cancer patient. The medication will have the desired effect of alleviating pain. However, it may also has the side effect of hastening death.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I, an action involving a double effect may possibly be morally acceptable if all of the following four conditions are met:

That the negative effects are not sought, and all reasonable efforts are made to avoid them.
That the direct effect is positive.
That the negative effect is not made a means to obtain the positive effect.
That the positive effect is at least as important as the negative effect. 4
​

Examples:

We have found three relatively unusual examples in the literature involving the morality of killing an embryo or fetus:

Ectopic Pregnancy: In a normal conception, sperm fertilizes an ovum in one of the woman's two fallopian tubes (a.k.a. oviducts). The fertilized ovum then moves down the tube and implants itself in the wall of the uterus. In an ectopic pregnancy, the embryo becomes lodged in the duct. Initially, there is no problem. However, as the embryo grows, it will become too large to be accommodated by the duct. The latter ruptures. Unless the woman obtains immediate medical care, she will inevitably die of an internal hemorrhage. Ectopic pregnancies happen in about 1 per 4,000 pregnancies, and about 1 per 65 in-vitro fertilization pregnancies.

There are two medical procedures to avoid the death of the woman. Both will result in life for the woman and death for the embryo. However, either one or none of the procedures is allowable according to various Catholic sources:

One is to administer a medication that kills the embryo and leaves the fallopian tube intact;

The other is a surgical procedure. The physician cuts the fallopian tube, removes the section containing the developing embryo, and then stops the bleeding. The embryo inevitably dies due to a sudden termination in the woman's life support services.

We have found four interpretation of church law in such a case:

According to an article in Touchstone Magazine, the church has no objection to the surgical procedure. That is because the woman's life was saved by the removal of the oviduct; it was not directly saved by the death of the fetus. The fetal death was unintended and was not a goal of the procedure. 1

Author Gerald Kelly also comments on the surgical procedure: "there is...a pathological condition in the mother which is distinct from the mere fact that the fetus is present, (and) this condition exists in an organ which is not indispensable for the mother's life, (and) the sacrifice of it, when it is in a morbid condition can save her life, the removal of the diseased organ is morally permissible, although the death of the fetus ensues, because the operation is directed, not against the fetus but against the pathological condition of the mother. It is not the case of attaining a good effect by means of the bad, because the mother's life is saved, not by the death of the fetus, but by the removal of the pathological condition."

The fetal death is an indirect effect of saving the woman's life. ..." - [1]​

 

"... Uterine Cancer: Very rarely, a pregnant woman is diagnosed with cancer of the uterus. From a moral standpoint, this situation is similar to the previous example. However, in this case, the fetus would not be threatening the life of the woman; the cancer would. The normal medical response would be to surgically remove the womb and its contents, including the cancerous growth and the fetus. Unless a late-term fetus was involved, it would inevitably die -- again because of lack of life support. Catholic theologians regard this surgical procedure as moral, because the physician's goal is to save the life of the woman by removing the cancer. The death of the fetus was not the goal of the physician, only the unintended but unavoidable result of the procedure.

Treatment of frozen embryos: Surplus fertilized embryos are generally produced during each in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedure. Multiple ova are fertilized in the laboratory, and allowed to divide. Typically four of the healthiest-looking embryos are then implanted in the woman's uterus. The hope is that one will successfully implant and lead to a normal pregnancy. About twenty surplus embryos are typically left over after the procedure is completed. These are normally either discarded or frozen in liquid Nitrogen for a potential future use:

All of the implanted embryos may die, and a second try may be attempted.

In extremely rare instances, some embryos may be thawed and implanted in another woman. These are sometimes called "snowflake" babies. This is done with only a few dozen women each year. There are hundreds of thousands of frozen embryo in storage.​

Cardinal Hume of Westminster, UK, commented on the options for handling these embryos. The church considers these embryos to have been full human persons from the time of fertilization."

His preference would be that IVF procedures be stopped. But even if this were done, there remains the problem of the fate of the existing surplus embryos. Cardinal Hume was aware of two suggestions, "neither of which is without moral difficulties." He notes that the freezing process is an extraordinary means of preserving life. The least worse solution would be to simply expose the embryos to the laboratory environment and allow them to die. An alternative method would be to find other couples who would be willing to 'adopt' the spare embryos by having them implanted in infertile women who wished to become pregnant. He concludes that this would raise "substantial practical difficulties, and presents theological problems. These would have to be examined and resolved, if the Church were to endorse this option." 2 "- [1]

 

"... Research and publications from the Alan Guttmacher Institute in America illustrate some contradictions in the Catholic stance against abortion:

Catholic women in the United States are as likely as women in the general population to have an abortion, and 29% more likely than Protestant women.

Catholic countries, even where abortion is illegal, have high levels of abortions: in Brazil, the estimated number of abortions ranges from 1 million to 2 million per year and in Peru, 5% of women of childbearing age have abortions each year, compared to 3% in the United States.

64% of US Catholics disapprove of the statement that abortion is morally wrong in every case (Survey of 493 Catholics, designed by Lake Research and Tarrance Group, for US News & World Report, Sept. 1995, margin of error ± 4.5%.)

72% of Catholics in Australia say decisions about abortion should be left to individual women and their doctors. (Survey for Family Planning Australia and Children by Choice, Melbourne, AGB McNair, Aug. 1996.) ..." - [1]

 

"... Abortion Law Liberalized in Catholic Monaco

Last month [article dated June 5, 2009], after five years of advocacy, Monaco approved a new law, which legalizes medically necessary abortions. Monaco was one of the last three states in Europe where abortion was illegal. The other two countries are Ireland and Malta.

The law was passed unanimously by the National Council, Monaco’s parliament, in a 26-0 vote. This is significant because 90 percent of Monaco’s population is formally Catholic. ...

... The new law permits abortion for "hard cases" including rape, fetal deformity, fetal illness or danger to the life of the mother. ..." - Abortion Law Liberalized in Catholic Monaco - Rewire.News

 

"... Skotek case

In the 1980s, Skotek sexually assaulted and impregnated a minor female and helped her obtain an abortion, according to the report of a statewide grand jury that documented child abuse by 301 priests in six Pennsylvania dioceses, including the Diocese of Scranton.

Skotek remains a Roman Catholic priest, albeit removed from active ministry for the past 16 years.

Priest in rape/abortion case speaks out: 'I'm very sorry'

Diocesan spokesman Bill Genello confirmed Thursday that Skotek's case previously was referred to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. That Vatican panel defends Catholic doctrine, including investigations into serious crimes committed by clergy.

"The Congregation reviewed the case and decided not to pursue it," Genello said. "He was not laicized."

Laicization is the Catholic term for removing a priest or other cleric from the clergy -- what laypeople call "defrocking."

So not only was Skotek not excommunicated for assisting the girl in obtaining an abortion, he has never even been removed from the priesthood.

In 1989, three years after then-Bishop James C. Timlin became aware of the incident, Timlin wrote to the Vatican on Skotek's behalf.

"Conscious as I am of the severity of the crime he admits to, I nevertheless judge him worthy of consideration for a dispensation from this irregularity," Timlin wrote.

"The priest in question undoubtedly acted out of fear and panic," he added.

The Church's canon law cites several exceptions in which the excommunication is not automatic.

One of them is for persons under 16, which could to apply to Skotek's victim, depending on when the abortion occurred.

Another seems to echo Timlin's words: "... a person who acted coerced by grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or due to necessity or grave inconvenience ..."

While the Vatican's response is not contained in the grand jury report, Timlin's appeal apparently succeeded.

Skotek remained a priest, assigned to parishes in Wilkes-Barre and Mocanaqua, until 2002.

That year, he was removed from active ministry about four months after the diocese was contacted by the lawyer for a 47-year-old woman who claimed she was sexually abused by Skotek years before while attending Pocono Central Catholic High School, and working at the rectory at St. Mary's in Mount Pocono.

"Skotek admitted to his conduct when confronted," the grand jury report states.

Other cases

Elsewhere in America, and in other countries, clergy members and others who have facilitated abortions have not found church authorities so forgiving.

In November 2009, Sister Margaret McBride, a Roman Catholic nun who served as an administrator at St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, Ariz., gave her approval for an induced abortion to be performed on a pregnant 27-year-old woman who faced almost certain death due to complications if her 11-week pregnancy was allowed to continue.

According to reports by NPR and other sources, McBride consulted with the church's ethical directives, and believed their actions would be justified, in this case, to save the mother, which doctors did.

McBride told Phoenix Bishop Thomas Olmsted as much. The diocese responded by declaring that McBride had automatically excommunicated herself, the Catholic News Agency reported. The hospital, meanwhile, lost its Catholic affiliation.

In December 2011, however, the hospital released a statement indicating that McBride had regained good standing with the Catholic Church. The diocese declined to comment, saying the matter was a personal one between McBride and the Church.

In 2009, a Brazilian woman obtained an abortion for her 9-year-old daughter, who was pregnant with twins after being sexually assaulted.

An archbishop declared that the woman and the doctors were excommunicated, creating an international uproar. He was overruled by the The National Conference of Bishops of Brazil and criticized by a top church ethical official in the Vatican's own newspaper.

In 2016, Pope Francis gave all Roman Catholic priests the power to forgive abortion, something that was previously reserved for the pope, a bishop or a specially appointed priest, though that came well after the McBride and Brazilian cases -- and Skotek's. ..." - Excommunication for abortion? Not in the case of one Pa. priest