Trump: Are Pro-Lifers Inconsistent?editor
I hesitate to wade into the fever swamp that has arisen over the past few days over the question of whether women who have abortions should face prosecution. (A question that is, as a friend suggested to me earlier this morning, the “ultimate gotcha question” for abortion advocates to pose to politicians running on a pro-life platform.)
And yet…and yet…
I’ve made no secret that I have serious problems with the way the pro-life movement handles certain aspects of the decades-long war. I’ve written about the problem with abortion politics, and the need for us to demand, unequivocally, intellectual honesty (read: scientific truth) about abortion. In 2015, I went to the March for Life and interviewed marchers on the street about why they still come after 42 years with no major successes. I keep trying to understand what we’re doing wrong. I keep trying to understand why we seek a political solution to an inherently moral problem.
And now pro-lifers are up in arms because, when pressed repeatedly by Chris Matthews, Donald Trump said that women who seek abortions should face “some form of punishment.”
This isn’t a post about Donald Trump. It’s a post about us. About how we think, about how we approach this topic, about why we fail to win even the debates over abortion, which should be a slam dunk.
You see, fellow pro-lifers, we have very little credibility. We say abortion is murder, but then we often actlike it isn’t.
In today’s world, it’s almost impossible not to know someone who has had an abortion, or helped someone else get one. Many of us even have these people among our circle of loved ones. Family members. Friends. We live with the knowledge of this horror marring the past of those closest to us. That abortion is a sin of murder is indisputable. That murder is (in a civic sense) a crime is also indisputable.
But when someone that such a crime should be punished, the very loudest voices arguing that abortion is a crime turn their ire on the person saying it.
The fog of cognitive dissonance we have had to live with for over 40 years on this issue no doubt mitigates individual culpability to a degree. But it is neither illogical nor absurd to suggest that, in the event that abortion were outlawed, there should be some criminal penalty levied against the mother who seeks one.
I’m not motivated at all to prosecute all the hurt, even broken women, who have been led into this error by force or deception. But jurisprudence demands that we be consistent, not arbitrary. And the reason this issue is being discussed right now was a question of jurisprudence – and policy moving forward.
The pro-life movement is nauseatingly dishonest when it comes to certain issues. Think of all the pro-lifers who admit exceptions in the case of rape and incest.
Really? So it’s murder except when it reaches a certain level of discomfort? Tell me more.
There are not a few women who are victims of abortion, flat out — coerced into an action they want no part of. There are others who are both perpetrator AND victim — women who make the choice freely, but are deeply conflicted over it, and who likely would not make such a terrible choice if it were not so readily available, or if they knew they had better options. And there are some who, as hard as it is to understand, are callous and bloodthirsty. These last are proud of the abortions they’ve had.
This spectrum, like any human action, has a diverse set of factors that must be taken into account when assessing culpability, both morally and legally. Not least is the near-total societal approval for this heinous act.
But if a day came when abortion was again outlawed, such circumstances would require the assessment of criminal penalties for those found guilty of what would then be a criminal violation of the law. I’m not anticipating or arguing for Nuremberg trials for past abortions here. That would be impossible and unwise. I’m talking about the fact that a broken law necessitates consequences — for the purposes of restitution, rehabilitation, or simply the satisfaction of justice. Even addicts, who may well have a morally limited freedom because of their addiction, are still arrested and prosecuted when caught using illegal substances.
We have to make sense in how we approach this. Nobody should be shouted down for bringing the logical consequences of a desired change in the law on abortion to the table — least of all those who are advocating for that very change to the law. I understand that there are many emotions involved, and not a few such advocates are too close to this issue for comfort, having been guilty at some point in their lives of abortion themselves.
But these emotions cloud our logic, and mar our credibility as advocates for the unborn. We must not allow this to happen. It’s incredibly damaging to the cause. Source
Like the author of the blog 1P5, I do not want this thread to be hijacked into a discussion on the controversial American politician Donald Trump. He serves our purpose only by providing a context for us in which to consider the apparent inconsistency of the pro-life movement, which seeks to repeal a law legalising abortion, only to argue that it is one class of murder which should not be punishable by law.
Doesn’t make sense – does it? Or does it?
Comment deleted – off topic.
I’m not sure about this, so I am only thinking out loud, if bloggers will bear with me.
I was about to say that I don’t think a woman should be prosecuted for seeking an abortion, because we don’t prosecute someone who, for example, asks around for a drug dealer, but then I realised that it’s not really the same thing. We do prosecute someone for soliciting murder, looking for a hitman, but I think, even then, there has to be evidence that the request for a hitman was serious, e.g. money has to change hands. So, if a doctor reported a woman to the police for asking for an abortion, how could they arrest her etc, since she might have changed her mind before the time came for the operation?
Doctors who perform abortions are the ones who should be prosecuted IMHO. They have made an oath to “do no harm” and they are certainly breaking that oath by killing babies in the womb. They should be trying to help vulnerable mothers-to-be instead of going along with their desire, which might pass, to abort their baby.
I’m not sure what to think about this but there is no sense right enough in making abortion illegal if there is no way to enforce it, and it must be illegal again. It is a barbaric law to allow the murder of unborn babies. I look forward to what others think on this.
A very thoughtful comment – thank you for making us all think… or should that be, as in the cartoon figure in the intro, “ThiMk”?!
It certainly makes no sense at all to introduce a law (or in this case, restore a law) without some penalty for breaking it. Just imagine if it were officially against the law to park on double yellow lines but there would be no punishment for those who chose to do so anyway. I’d do so anyway, what about you?
However, having said that, the mentality in the UK today is so emotion-based, intelligence levels stuck on “superficial”, without any real concept of, or ability to rationalise, objective right and wrong, that it looks to be absolutely impossible to have the Abortion Law repealed, if there were any question of criminalising the women or even the doctors, who are involved in the whole gruesome industry. Certainly not with the almost apologetic way the official pro-life groups are tackling the issue at the moment.
In a land where people are demonised for thinking “outside” the PC box, for daring to challenge the legalisation of evils such as abortion, homosexuality and transgenderism, in a very DIS-United Kingdom where people are labelled “racist” for suggesting a limit on immigration and “sexist” for suggesting a mother should stay at home to raise her children if at all possible, the very idea of prosecuting women seeking abortions, and doctors providing it, would be laughed, literally, out of court. The discussion would break down at the first weepy story about a vulnerable woman with 20 children who just couldn’t look after another one, and in any case, her “current partner” routinely beats her up on Friday nights, so hey, how could anybody be so mean and heartless as to try to save the life of her innocent unborn baby. He/she is an aggressor, taking over her body against her will. It’s an outrage! That’s the level of “debates” these days where “it’s your choice” is the determining factor in morality. Crackers.
Anyway – in all honestly – are the pro-lifers seriously trying to have the Abortion Act repealed? If YOUR mortgage payment relied on abortion remaining legal, would YOU really fight to end it? That’s the dilemma facing those at the top of the pro-life organisations, all those who earn their living by “fighting” abortion. I remember when a new group of militant pro-lifers came on the scene for a bit in Scotland, and were interviewed on BBC TV’s Newsnight programme. One of the pro-abortion people on the programme said it all when she pointed out that until this “extremist” group came along showing their graphic images of babies who’d been aborted and life-size images of unborn babies, they had enjoyed very good relationships with the pro-life organisations. I’ll bet. So, I’m not convinced that the official pro-life groups are making any real attempt to have abortion criminalised.
That is not to say that individual pro-lifers do not do great work and even save some babies – I’m certain that is the case. I know some, personally, who do just that. But, in terms of the organisations themselves making a difference, getting through to the law-makers that this is a very grave matter, that unborn lives are at stake and the holocaust must end – “success” is not the word that springs to mind.
I totally agree with you, there is virtually no chance that the present group of M P ‘s will vote to have the abortion law repealed, think of how much pressure they will come under by feminist movements and the mass media especially the BBC.
If they did not consider abortion law eight months ago when the video’s of ‘planned parenthood ‘ selling ‘baby parts’ were in the news nothing will.
Having said that there was little/no coverage of the video’s by our liberal media.
Keir Starmer (director of public prosecutions)in 2013 failed to prosecute 2 doctors offering abortions based on gender, two days later Attourney General asked to explain praised the DPP stating that doctors had a great burden of responsibility in assessing the mental health of a woman.
When you consider most abortions are granted due to the mental health risk to the mother. The logical conclusion would be is there no limit to what constitutes a mental health risk.
A pro-lifer must, if that want to win in abortion politics, be consisently pro-life, and not selectively so.
That[s rather naughty, isn’t it? No-one is suggesting the death penalty for abortionists.
Pro-lifers like Catholics should always be honest, I guess.
Editor: I think that’s obvious. Now please answer the question – see my blue comment in the introduction.
Pro-lifers like Catholics should always be honest.
I quite agree.
Comment deleted. Off topic.
Comment deleted – without original off topic comment it won’t mean anything to readers. I know you will understand, Therese. Fr Arthur is trying to divert this thread and he ain’t going to succeed.
I deleted your original lengthy post banging on about various other issues as “pro-life” and you have the temerity to return with the same nonsense, in a nutshell.
If you are unable to understand simple English then blogging is not for you. It is absolutely clear that the topic is about whether it is inconsistent to fight for abortion to be illegal again but to say nobody who breaks the law will be punished.
Do you really not get it?
Here is the topic spelt out very clearly. Tell me which word(s) you do not understand:
[This thread is to discuss] the apparent inconsistency of the pro-life movement, which seeks to repeal a law legalising abortion, only to argue that it is one class of murder which should not be punishable by law.
Doesn’t make sense – does it? Or does it?
Now, stop playing silly beggars and answer the question.
The real trouble is that most of us still refuse to recognise the unborn are as human as we are, despite all of the evidence. If we did, there would be no need to ask the question; indeed the question would be an affront. If one is complicit in the death of an innocent human being, of course one should be punished. Naturally, circumstances (ie mental and emotional pressure and imbalance) should be taken into account, and may mitigate the level of guilt – and therefore of punishment, but let’s face it, we wouldn’t be having this discussion if we were talking about – say – those innocents who were slaughtered in concentration camps. would we?
If we take your example Michaela’s, that the doctors are the ones who should be prosecuted, shouldn’t the guards who led the prisoners to the execution chambers be guiltless as they didn’t actually do the killing, and – even more relevant – they would have been killed themselves if they didn’t do what they were ordered to do?
A pro-lifer must, if they want to win in abortion politics,..*
I doubt very much whether pro-lifers will win in the abortion politics; the world, and all it loves, is too far gone now, and it will take more than concrete facts and compassion to win it back. That’ doesn’t mean we have to stop protesting, of course. God will not be mocked forever.
*Sorry to make such a fragmented reply – after thoughts you know!
Well said. We must keep protesting, come what may, until the murder of the unborn – a real holocaust – is ended. Well said.
Yes, I think woman who have an abortion should be prosecuted. They have chosen to deliberately kill their child. If that’s not murder then I don’t know what is. In my opinion, it’s the most depraved form of murder.
I think your “after thoughts” hit on a good point, which is that many pro-lifers are already up against it just trying to have that murderous practice abated or, better still, stopped altogether. If they now introduce the added demand that those who seek to procure abortions be penalised by the State, they would be written off by the liberal elite as nuts.
I suppose diplomatic compromise is what is at work here for many pro-lifers. Better to lobby for the saving of infant lives than the punishment of those who would destroy them. These are difficult times, not at all conducive to a re-establishment of the natural moral order, much less the Commandments of God. In such a scenario it is best to do what one can, bearing in mind that the unrepentant will not escape the justice of God, which is far more rigorous and awful in eternity for those who do evil than any temporary punishment on earth. Hearts must change before kingdoms do. So long as Christ the King remains dethroned in our modern society, Satan will reign as usurper ruler. Getting any kind of concession to protect innocence in such a Hellish environment, when everything is turned on its head so that all that was once good is now bad and all that was bad, good, is nigh on impossible. So diplomacy, I think, plays a large part in tactics with many pro-lifers. Our Lord will re-establish His reign, but in His own good time. The devil right now is like a dog on a leash. When his time is up, and it is limited, he will be reigned in and chained up again in Hell. That much is certain.
‘We have to make sense in how we approach this. Nobody should be shouted down for bringing the logical consequences of a desired change in the law on abortion to the table — least of all those who are advocating for that very change to the law.’
I cannot find any grounds on which I could disagree with that very simple statement. I understand the point about diplomatic compromise, but it won’t achieve anything in my opinion. Anti-abortionists are already dismissed as nuts by the liberal elite and almost the whole of our evil society. Maybe if they up the ante like this a few people may begin to see abortion for the heinous crime that it is. Campaigning for a law without consequence for those who break it, it seems to me, is never going to be taken seriously – the legal system just doesn’t work like that.
Thank you for publishing this interesting post. It is certainly a thought provoking article, but one that I don’t feel competent to even contribute to. Perhaps this is as a result of the widespread and socially embedded acceptance of abortion as a medical option, which deadens our senses to the horror of killing. All I can say that is that I expect like many Catholics, we detest the act, pray that it ends, but are not personally involved as a pro-life activist. Yes, it is certainly pricking my conscience.
On the question of legislation, I believe that it is clear cut. If a law states that abortion is illegal and a person attempts to procure one, then they must be charged with an illegal act. Attempted murder for instance is a serious offence because the intent was to kill. Just as conspiracy to defraud is as culpable as fraudulent activity. On this part of the debate I am certain that as far as legislation goes, there is no question of ambiguity. Imagine how hellish or society would be if attempts of criminality were deemed legal until the crime was consummated.
The problem of culpability arises because of the emotional element. Suicide is an illegal act, but how many are charged with attempted suicide? Often the ones who are under the spotlight are the ones who facilitate the attempt or the act. Yes they are guilty, but it seems they are treated as more guilty in some cases than the ones who want to commit the crime. But this is more than a sterile exposition of supply and demand.
Finally, society through the manipulative perversion of language, encourages abortion, suicide, sodomitical relationships and all the rest of the grave offences: ‘Safe sex’, ‘Termination’, ‘Equal love’, ‘Morning after Pill’, ‘Conscious uncoupling’, ‘Euthanasia’, ‘Family Planning’. This is the most serious difficulty to overcome in any fight, where the just are often forced to respond to these abominations using abominable language. I consciously have to check myself from using the word ‘gay’ when discussing homosexuality, probably as a result of its widespread acceptance and use in society.
Anyway, Trump at least can be thanked for raising the unholy issue of abortion. Without a doubt it shows the unease society has to even discuss such matters.
Thank you for your honest summation of the issues – although suicide is no longer illegal in the UK (the success rate in prosecuting would make for poor statistics!) Assisted Suicide legislation is frequently being brought before Parliament but to date has not succeeded. Anyway, that’s all presumably different from where you are “down under”, so just a point of information.
As for the rest – you are right to say, effectively, that we have become de-sensitised to the horror of abortion through it’s acceptance in wider society and the language used to discuss it. The proponents of these evil laws always understand the importance of changing the language and coining buzz words in order to get the bulk of society to accept the new moral norms. Amazingly, and tragically, it has worked every time.
I would disagree with you about two things:
1. My original post was off topic. I said in it prosecuting the women wouldn’t help.
2. I have never written one post, on any thread, to divert the topic. It seems people here lack the intelligence to recognise the nuances within the topic raised.
However, I have had the sad privilege of talking to women who have had abortions. I can tell you the dawning realisation, even if it is slow, of what they have done is punishment enough. To still lose sleep about your actions decades afterwards, and yearn to hold that precious child and say sorry to them is not an uncommon response. Prosecuting the women, who are themselves often victims, is not the answer. The recent events in The USA where one person who suggested the women should be prosecuted then had to row back and say the law we have is the law I support shows that such a proposal would be counterproductive.
We have to recognise too that in 47 years, not 42, the progress made has been limited when it comes to changing the law, and that is partly because we have hypocritical politicians who say “I am personally opposed but….”. It is also true that enough of the voting public do not see what, even the selectively pro-life see, and do not accept abortion as the wrong it is.
In the U.K. we have evidence that some doctors act outside the law by offering gender selection based abortions, and/or by interpreting what legal provision there is too widely. Again public opinion, which is mixed, might not support the prosecution of them which is why there are so few. Indeed a jury may not convict if it gets to court.
The fact is, for now, abortion is legal, and we must continue to work to change the law. We should also try to ensure that those who break the law are at least put in Court to face the judgement of their peers, but, as I say, that probably should not include the women.
As I tried to say in my original post, although I I did not say it explicitly as I didn’t mention protests, but a weakness of the case presented is the fact that some, indeed many, pro-lifers are selectively prolife and bang on about abortion but not other things that needn’t kill people – in a just and fair world – but do.
Protests are not the answer but are part of a rounded approach. (I have marched through London, and I seem recall other cities, and lobbied Parliament for these many decades, but I also support pro-life initiatives and not just those concerned with abortion.)
1. Educate the public and the politicians that life begins at conception, and should end at its natural end. God alone is the author of life.
2. Show a commitment to protect all human life from all things that prematurely – for whatever reason – threaten it.
3. Seek to win over hearts and minds, and don’t alienate possible “soft” support by seeking to prosecute anyone who may legitimately be seen as a victim in the matter of abortion.
4. Challenge Governments to ensure that the law, as it exists, is upheld.
5. Stealthily seek to change the law bit by bit, and challenge unjust social and economic situations which may force people to consider abortion or euthanasia etc as reasonable options.
6. Support in every way those that need pastoral, spiritual, and economic support to reach a “good” decision.
Change a heart to save a life!
Excellent reply Fr. Arthur, especially the bit about about ‘Life begins at Conception’.So often we hear about “Totally against abortion, except in cases of rape etc” argument from so many sources in the wider Christian world. Now that I have said that, we now have to explore the situation where various Bishops in various countries have “authorised” the use of the so called “MAP” which according to all the data available indicates that it has abortifacient properties.Therefore these Bishops have a great sin to answer to. Not helped by current Pontiff using statements like “obsessing over abortion”….further compounded by the Zika virus situation…the Belgian Congo nuns (NOT a myth according to Fr. Federico Lombardi, who amplified the Vicar of Christ’s statement on this subject, again using the Belgian Congo story.) This is deplorable in that the rank and file that I know, now THINK that the RC Church is OK with the MAP IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES !….which in said circumstances WILL, without a doubt, prevent the implantation of a READY conceived embryo (Life begins at Conception, AS YOU HAVE JUST SAID)! That this is now sanctioned by USCCB, The German bishops and the bishops of England and Wales as a starting point, makes me think quite clearly the following :- 1) The bishops have NOT carried out Due Diligence in researching this subject (they only have to read the pamphlet in every packet of the MAP (and this applies to all hormonal contraceptives anyway, only more so with the MAP, which takes NO prisoners, or else the Pharmaceutical companies would be in breach of the Sale of Goods Act) or 2) They know FULL WELL how this product works, care not and sanction anyway…..either way, they are UNFIT for office and in the business world would be sacked for Incapability or treasonous behaviour.
My conclusion is that THEY do NOT believe in the SOUL being infused at conception…simple as that and that they have taken a lead part in the prevention of a soul arriving in the world to develop as God would have wished…perhaps the soul who would have developed the cure for cancer even.I don’t think my reply is Off Topic in as much as this is a reply to your well worded previous reply…My point is that Abortion is what it is, always will be and the nuances we see today are narratives going on about so called “exceptional” cases…so people can say it is wrong,BUT if in a rape case the potential for an innocent child to be born, has to be snuffed out..not allowed and Catholic Bishops have given this the OK.
Did Pope Francis not make some other flippant remark about Catholics “breeding like rabbits”? I’m not sure of the context of his words, but if the quote is accurate then the context doesn’t matter. That would be a disgusting thing for a Pope to say in any context.
That is correct, he further chided a Latin American woman who had a few children and expecting another to “be tempting God”!…..so much for the Man of Mercy and nothing about Divine Providence…..but then who is HE to Judge ?
I am from a large family !
You simply cannot make this stuff up these days.
Thank you for that, I knew I had heard this of Francis somewhere but couldn’t quote the source.
Of course you are right, you simply couldn’t make this stuff up!
please explain to me why this post is deemed on topic?
I’ll explain it, since you obviously can’t figure it out for yourself.
We are speaking here on this thread about the evil of abortion and the difficulties faced by pro-lifers in trying to have the law changed to make it illegal. That task was made a thousand times more difficult in an instant when Pope Francis said what he did to a public audience. Now liberals everwhere can throw his words back in the faces of pro-life campaigners. You see what I’m getting at? Yes, it is very on topic.
Fr Arthur, you said Prosecuting the women, who are themselves often victims, is not the answer.
I wonder if you might elaborate how the woman who have abortions are victims. What do you mean by often? Frequently? Regularly? I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on this. I mean ,I consider the victims to be the aborted.
Women may become pregnant under pressure, or a sense of misguided love, in an immature frame of mind, or even unduly pressured to have an abortion by the father, or their families. In the post of mine that was deleted I gave the example of a woman who was thrown out of her family home by a pro-active, pro-life parent. If it were not for others, including their charity, that woman would have aborted her child. That she didn’t is no thanks to her supposedly pro-life parent.
Maybe a lot of young women get pregnant because they have had no religious formation, and that includes many young Catholic women. I know it’s not the solution to all of the pregnancy issues that arise outside of wedlock, or even within it, not that marriage is the choice of most co-habiters these days, but it seems to me that God is largely absent from the lives of people now, primarily because bishops, priests, educators and parents have all lapsed themselves. The young pay the price for the new liberal orientation in the Church and the world. Now that’s progress!!
Fr Arthur, forgive me for labouring the point, but you appear to be a victim of the victim culture, in that you present examples to me of ‘victims’, yet not one of them really is. Would those same mothers have killed a toddler under the same circumstances? If your answer is akin to “but they are not the same things”, then at least we have a clearer picture of your idea of the soul.
Clearly they are not the same things. When you actually start reading materials, or watching programmes, about modern life you will, hopefully, see that, unfortunately, unless me, not everyone believes that life begins at conception, and therefore they would not, and do not, see abortion as an issue.
To return to the daughter of a pro=life father, who became unintentionally pregnant, and was employed, and became homeless. Was she not in some way victimised by her family, and partner?
You may of course be aware that not all sins become public knowledge, and only one can result in pregnancy. Can I assume you, like The B.V.M., were born without the stain of original sin, and therefore do not some wrong choices, or is it, thankfully, your failings don’t become public.
I am dealing with life and death issues in the real world, and not that portrayed in some dusty old book whose value has long been questionable.
So because modern society sees things differently, that means they are? That speaks volumes for your values Fr Arthur: situation ethics methinks.
No. I have said what I believe: life begins at conception. I have also told you what others believe. That is not situational ethics. It is living as part of a free civil society. God does not treat us as pawns and we cannot treat others as pawns either. We can witness to the truth. We cannot impose truth.
The Church can most certainly impose truth on those who claim membership of the Mystical Body, such as the multitudes of Catholic politicians who think that living in a so-called “free society” means that they may happily leave their Catholic conscience at the door when they enter chambers to vote in favour of immoral laws.
The tragedy these days is that the Bishops’ Conferences generally accept this betrayal of Our Lord. Any individual Cardinal or Bishop who speaks of excommunication or refusal of Holy Communion for such hypocrites are usually met with scorn or silence by their “brothers in Christ”.
Perhaps with non-Catholics truth cannot be imposed, but that does not mean that error should be accepted. A strong united Catholic hierarchy has the greatest voice in the world to change things, but sadly today it does not “witness to truth”. It remains generally silent in this “free” (read licentious) society.
Apologies Fr Arthur. I should have used this quotation from above where you say… “I am dealing with life and death issues in the real world, and not that portrayed in some dusty old book whose value has long been questionable.”
You are a proponent of situation ethics my friend as are all modernists. You may say you are ‘living in the real world’ and so does Pope Francis. That’s going well, eh?
I fear it is you that do not understand what living as members of civil society means on the ground. The Church can, and must, as best she can proclaim eternal truths and witness to them, but she cannot demand assent from people who do not share that faith.
Jesus lived in the real world when he encountered such people as the woman caught in adultery, Zacchaeus, a former Tax Collector, Roman Soldiers, and various other people. to encounter people where they are at is not situational ethics, it is, as Pope Francis, says clergy “smelling The Sheep”.
I think if the model worked for Jesus it will probably work for The Church.
St Paul, at the Aeropagus, used the actual faith experience of his listeners to speak of higher truths. He didn’t dismiss their past experience, and insights, but led them to new ones.
Strange that the early Church grew as Jesus, and St Paul, obviously knew nothing of theology or of people.
But as a Catholic priest surely you’re already preaching to the converted, vis., Catholics, in your everyday encounters? And iif not, why not?
There is a great difference between Our Lord and St. Paul’s preaching the truth for the firsdt time to pagans and a Catholic priest reminding cradle Catholics of it. The latter are more culpable as they already know Our Lord and have benefitted from His graces as members of the Church. That changes the approach somewhat, does it not?
Having been a post -abortion counsellor and seen the effect of abortion and all the ills it brings I would say that they have been punished enough. However there are some who have hardened their hearts and do not regret their crime or at least not until they are old when the truth hits them and causes severe problems.
Post abortion trauma can cause, grief, guilt,nightmares, flashbacks, serious mental and psychological behaviour, marriage break up, loss of job, loss of relationship, depression, sleep disturbance, drug/alcohol abuse, guilt, grief, phobias, fear for surviving children and more…
Thank You Clotilde for reinforcing what I wrote at 8.27 a.m. today: “I can tell you the dawning realisation, even if it is slow, of what they have done is punishment enough. To still lose sleep about your actions decades afterwards, and yearn to hold that precious child and say sorry to them is not an uncommon response. Prosecuting the women, who are themselves often victims, is not the answer.”
How sad it is The Gospel of Mercy and The Gospel of Life have not been read by some people.
Mercy applies to the baby as well as to the mother. It’s less than merciful to kill an innocent baby in his mother’s womb. Take a look at some of the “products” of abortion here and then tell me you think mum has been “merciful” by choosing to murder her baby, albeit legally in the eyes of the man-made Abortion Act 1967. Nor is it true mercy to allow women to take the road to Hell by murdering their children. Mercy, Truth and Justice go together.
As for the Gospel of Life – check out the quote at the top of this page, under the photo of Pope John Paul II, author of The Gospel of Life: “today, more than ever, we must call things by their proper name. Abortion is murder.”
May I suggest you use your self proclaimed intelligence to join the dots.
In every post I have said human life should be protected from the moment of conception to its natural end. God alone is the author of life.
Yes, of course, abortion is always, and everywhere wrong, but the so is a child dying from drinking dirty water because people say “overseas aid is wrong”, and “charity begins at home”.
However, with every sin, and every crime, there may be mitigating circumstances. That is why the Church is so clear is stating what conditions need to be fulfilled to lead to the conclusion that a mortal/grave sin has been committed rather than a sinful act.
I have also said, again ignored by you, that we should work night and day, or to that effect, to change the abortions laws, and create a society where abortion is not seen as a legitimate option.
I refer you again to the post from Clotilde at 10.56. I also remind you that I have as a priest, the sad privilege of listening to the stories of women who have had abortions, and the way they now suffer.
Further, in this Holy Year of Mercy one thing being undertaken by The Missionaries of Mercy is to bring healing and forgiveness to women have had abortions.
I really am tired of your twisting and misquoting words.
At no time EVER have I spoken about my personal “intelligence” or lack of it. You forget that readers do read through all the comments so your falsehoods are being noted by those who are objectively reading the discussions. You are only making yourself look either foolish or nasty or, who knows, a combination of both. So, don’t misquote or twist. Please and thank you.
Here are YOUR own words – readers know that because I’m placing them in inverted commas, also known as speech marks:
“Yes, of course, abortion is always, and everywhere wrong, but the so is a child dying from drinking dirty water because people say “overseas aid is wrong”, and “charity begins at home”
Now, I’ve explicitly ruled out debating other social issues but I’m allowing this one only to stand (future examples will be deleted as soon as I see them) and it is allowed to stand only because it highlights the fact that you just do not get it.
To equate the murder of a baby with a child dying for any other reason, is to show that you just don’t get it.
We are not here to debate overseas aid but it is useful for this one time only example of the fact that despite your words about abortion being always and everywhere wrong, clearly you consider that it is not more wrong than something else.
Abortion is uniquely wrong. But you just don’t get it.
Now, if you’re not interested in this topic, there are bound to be blogs somewhere lamenting the mis-use of overseas aid. Find one of them and try to introduce abortion into the topic and see how far you are allowed to go.
And allow me to repeat, that I have not suggested prosecuting any woman who has had an abortion under the 1967 Act. EVEN those who have had one illegally under that Act. Such is the confusion in our times, that that would be unjust. But once a law is introduced, re-criminalising abortion, that is a different matter.
Now, if you are opposed to abortion being made ILLEGAL again, just say so. It seems there are pro-lifers out there who think the same. Is that your position?
Your point is in quoting the stuff about abortion and overseas aid?
Editor: But they are not the same as abortion. End of. You just don’t get it. Now bow out. You’ve made your position clear, abortion is on your list, all right, of stuff we need to fix, but it’s not any more important than any other issue relating to children. Unborn, newborn, whatever. Wrong. We are never going to “fix” the problems of overseas aid, blah blah, while we have governments that legalise murdering babies in their mother’s womb. Why can’t you see that?
Read my comment in full – it could not be more clear. YOU introduced overseas aid and if you do so again – or introduce any other social issue – I will delete it immediately. I have a couple of appointments today so it may be some time before I get back to the blog but you either stick to the rules here or take the consequences. I’m not going to allow you to take us off the topic.
Now, do you or do you not think abortion should be made illegal again?
I introduced the issue of overseas aid to make the point children are dying other than through abortion because of the moral choices people make. Any, and every one, of those deaths is sinful, wrong, and avoidable.
Editor: But they are not the same as abortion. End of. You just don’t get it. Now bow out. You’ve made your position clear, abortion is on your list, all right, of stuff we need to fix, but it’s not any more important than any other issue relating to children. Unborn, newborn, whatever. Wrong. We are never going to “fix” the problems of overseas aid, blah blah, while we have governments that legalise murdering babies in their mother’s womb. Why can’t you see that?
There is a difference between the procured killing of infants in the womb and children dying of starvation, etc., in under-developed countries. The difference is in intent. That’s why editor ruled out discussing other forms of child mortality for this thread. I think you should have spooted that obvious reason.
Yes, you should have “spooted” that obvious reason, and spotted it as well!! These darn typos.
Yes, the Gospel of Mercy and of Life is central to everything. But you seem to want to exclude the Gospel of Justice and turn Our Lord’s Sacred Heart into the heart of a hippy sop. Our Lord is divine judge as well as Redeemer, don’t lose sight of that whatever you do.
I forgot to add at the end that great motto: “The society without justice is a violent society”. I would say that pretty much describes today’s society of misplaced mercy.
As I’ve just said in a post which went up a few seconds ago, nobody is suggesting punishing women retrospectively. Women who have already had abortions under current legislation, would not be punished. Only those who seek an abortion under fresh legislation would be investigated, in the same way as any other crime is investigated, to see if they are guilty of breaking the law.
In fact, your experience of the guilt and trauma so many women experience, the regret for having had an abortion. is an argument FOR making the procedure illegal once more. Better, surely, for those in distress at being pregnant to have to find another solution to their “problem” – such as adoption – than to kill the child only to live in a traumatic state with regrets and sadness for the rest of their lives.
The statistics on abortion in Scotland show that approximately one in four abortions is performed of a female who has previously had an abortion.
I suppose that this could be interpreted as women being trapped in an abusive relationship.
Or it could be that abortion is used as a contraceptive.
Either way, whatever extenuating circumstances there may be, these women are serial killers.
Abortion is easy and has become, de facto, on demand. Around 98% of abortions are in category C, “the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman “. The weasel words are “mental health”. These are the words that allow any woman to have an abortion for any reason.
There are many people, with and without children, who would cheerfully adopt an unwanted baby. The social services however make it very difficult to adopt, with endless investigations and analyses. Almost as if aborting the future population of the country were the objective. It is certainly working as we are some 600,000 people short in Scotland of where we would be if there had been no abortions. The cost of the operations to the NHS in Scotland has been upwards of £300,000,000.
Your original post listed things which were in your view equally “pro-life” – poverty etc. manifestly designed to take us down a different route.
This is a favourite tack of Modernists who fail to see the distinction between bumping someone off in a cold blooded act of murder and failing to give them better living conditions if they make it through the first 9 months of their lives.
So, that first post was deleted so that our bloggers were not side-tracked into debating other issues when the murder of babies is the issue. I doubt if we ran a thread on the World War II holocaust, that you would kick start the thread by listing other atrocities as equally crimes against humanity, even if some of them are actually worse. When we post a topic here, you must focus on the topic as it stands, not re-design it to suit your own agenda.
And do not even think about insinuating or accusing anyone here of lacking intelligence. You really have no scope for doing that. Your every criticism of Church teaching (usually in the context of defending a churchman, from the Pope down) has been demolished by our bloggers who manifestly display above average intelligence.
As for the rest of your post – yes, it is true at there are many women who come to regret their abortions, although sadly some who brag about their abortions and say they are far from regretting them. I’ve read some such horror reports recently. Shameless.
However, the same could be said of other murderers. I say “other murderers” because, while – in the context of the fact that these women (all of us) live in a sexually permissive society – I do sympathise with their plight, and fully appreciate the distress they may later experience, the fact is they have murdered their child, the fact is, abortion is murder. That is one indisputable fact. It is the deliberate killing of a human being, at his/her most vulnerable, and by the one person he/she should be able to rely on to protect and nourish him/her – their mother.
So, it is important to have clear minds on this. I don’t think anyone is talking about prosecuting anyone retrospectively – that would certainly be ruled out. Nobody was prosecuted retrospectively after homosexuality was legalised.
However, once a law would be in place to criminalise abortion again, and once women (and a doctor) realise that if they seek an abortion they will be prosecuted, they will seek other solutions to their difficulty, hopefully with the help of the pro-life organisations but also Government assistance, since it is successive Governments which have caused the problem of sexual licence and bad laws in the first place; With proper practical help and positive advice, the lives of babies would be spared and, if the mother really doesn’t want the child, for whatever reason, he/she may be adopted.
As Christina rightly says, the legal system doesn’t work by passing laws but not enforcing them with due penalties. It’s the fear of prosecution or even fines (thinking speeding tickets!) that keeps us on the right side of the law all the time. That’s how the legal system works. Government schemes are put in place to help offenders or would-be offenders in all sorts of ways (drugs, for example) Why should an abortion law be any different?
May I refer you to the post of Clotilde on the subject of abortion posted at 10.56? She writes as a post abortion counsellor. Something I think promoted by “Life”, and possibly S.P.U.C.. precisely because abortion punishes/scars a woman.
With regards “The Holocaust of The Second World War”, then if you listened to anyone else you would know on Holocaust Memorial Day, in countries, and places, where it is marked then those gathered remember victims of all such events.
With regards intelligence, justice demands, you re-read, and correct, every post where you have questioned my intelligence. But, of course, you won’t.
As for The Faith, it doesn’t depend on the exposition of individual priests, or Bishops, but those in Communion with Rome who expound Tradition, and Holy Scripture, and Church teaching promulgated explicitly infallibly.
You speak of the Holocaust, whose surviving victims are still tracking down Nazis to this day and sending them to prison to die there. Yet, on the other hand, you argue against retrospective punishment for those who procure abortions. I am also against retrospective punishment, especially in decades old cases, but you seem to be selective in the matter.
They wouldn’t BE scarred or traumatised if they hadn’t had an abortion.
Some years ago, as a teenager/early twenties, I visited a prison and met some men imprisoned for murder.
They were very nice to me, very contrite. I’m sure they spent sleepless nights regretting what they’d done.
Should they not have been prosecuted?
Gerragrip. We all have to face the consequences of our actions and this image of wee, mousy vulnerable women who are contemplating or who have had abortions, doesn’t ring true with me at all. If they are so mousy and can’t face up to the consequences of their actions, they shouldn’t have been allowed to make such a momentous decision as to kill the baby in their womb in the first place.
That doesn’t mean that I have no sympathy for those who do live to regret their actions. We’ve all said or done things that we later regret.
However, that’s no excuse for keeping abortion legal. Better to allow scores of women in the future to abort their babies and then cater for them with good post-traumatic counselling. Is that it?
Better NOT to re-criminalise abortion – what do you think?
Some of the people we are talking about were sometimes pressured to have abortions by their Catholic families “for the good of the family”. They were not free agents.
Likewise if you grow up in a culture, and society, which predominantly says life does not begin at conception you are not to worry about “destroying a few cells”.
You can divorce the choices and realities faced by these people from the society in which we live.
What I think about criminalising abortion is irrelevant in a society which has a different view, and in which I, in effect, do not have a vote.
In terms of staying on topic – i.e criminalising abortion- may I remind you that you thanked and praised Summa for writing about assisted suicide: “Thank you for your honest summation of the issues – although suicide is no longer illegal in the UK (the success rate in prosecuting would make for poor statistics!) Assisted Suicide legislation is frequently being brought before Parliament but to date has not succeeded. Anyway, that’s all presumably different from where you are “down under”, so just a point of information. ”
If you treated everyone equally that would have been deleted. Just saying!
Editor: well don’t “just say” until you think the issue through. Summa was offering an analogy with abortion in the context of legalising/criminalising.
Listen, Fr Arthur,
I make no apology for asking questions about your intelligence because it’s either a lack of intelligence or sheer wilful Modernism that keeps you from seeing the truth, especially on the Pascendi thread. Now, we are not re-running that discussion here, but the fact is, assuming that you are at least of average intelligence like the rest of us, we are left to conclude that you are wilfully determined to stick to your false beliefs, condemned by Pope Saint Pius X, as clearly and concisely as any Pope charged with protecting the Faith and condemning errors, could possibly do so.
A truly intelligent person, faced with such a clear exposition of the heresy of Modernism would have said – as the Liverpool priest said – “I’m astounded” and then embrace the truth.
Similarly in this debate, you dodge the question about whether or not abortion should be made illegal again, the only consistent position for any pro-lifer to take. Yet, you refuse to answer.
Now, still on topic… which do you think I should highlight as most important – my good looks, my wit, or my… er… intelligence?
“Your [that is, Fr. Arthur’s] original post listed things which were in your view equally “pro-life” – poverty etc. manifestly designed to take us down a different route.”
I believe that original post is probably identical with Cardinal Bernardin’s notorious “Seemless Garment” ploy, which was cleverly – one might even say diabolically – developed to neuter the abortion protesters.
Happy Feast Day of the Annunciation of Our Blessed Mother to all.
A very apt topic to be discussing on this day when Mary became the Mother of God accepted her child even though young and yet unmarried.
Editor: I have to inject a correction here because it is a heresy – often corrected in our newsletter – that Our Lady was “unmarried”. This is not true. She WAS married. The Jewish ceremony was in two parts. The first part was the betrothal and constituted the legal marriage. The second part entailed the husband taking his wife to his home at a later stage, to consummate the marriage and live together as husband and wife. This is why St Joseph was disturbed and, as the Gospel reveals, considered “divorcing” Mary informally until an Angel revealed the truth about the matter. If, as commonly and mistakenly stated, even by priests in homilies, Mary and Joseph were merely “engaged”,there would be no need of divorce. When did you ever hear anyone say “I was engaged to X, but we’re divorced now.” I’m not only surprised, but dismayed that you have fallen into this error since I know you have been receiving (if apparently not reading) our newsletter for years now. Our Lady and St Joseph were married. That is a fact.
God works in marvellous ways his wonders to perform.
We are fighting demons in this fight to make abortion a crime and we need all the powers of the heavens to beat this evil. Our Lady of Gaudaloupe, pray for us.
Sanctimonious talk and criticism of pro-lifers is not going to change minds and hearts.
I do not and never have supported abortion and my first response to seeing slides of the unborn and how abortions were performed was the reason for going into pro-life work.
Where are all the young people from the traditional church when we hold placards in the street to show what abortion is and proclaim the message of life?
How many youth from the traditional church attended the Youth pro-life conference held in March to hear great speakers on many topics from euthanasia, medical ethics, and counselling to save mother’s unborn babies and save their souls and many other topics…
Fr. Gruner, God rest his soul, worked all his life to get the message of Fatima across to the Church. He didn’t get very far in the conciliar church even though he slaved relentlessly in words and actions to get his message across.
When the Mexicans killed their babies and children in horrendous rites to appease their pagan gods Our Lady of Guadaloupe came to them and converted thousands to the true faith overcoming the evil and bringing the true God into the New World. We need her now to help us in this work.
Why have the Sisters of Life not grown even though they do such good work to save lives?
All who work for the pro-life movement are working against powerful movements like the IPPF which are supported with vast sums of money ( our taxes which we should refuse to pay)to preach so-called women’s reproductive rights at the UN and EU and are bent on killing off populations, while the organisations which protect women and life work on a shoestring.
Abortion, as most know, is a direct result of the contraceptive mentality causing the loss of 900 souls every month in Scotland (a large comprehensive school) The priests and bishops are wondering why their churches are empty and why so many folk have given up their faith?
When they turn a blind eye to contraception and see the fall in Mass attendance they do not join the dots.. They will not preach the truth or allow speakers to come and talk about the subject nor do they know how to cope with those women affected by abortion. While the truth is brushed under the carpet we will never be able to end abortion.
Some of us say the rosary once a week outside our local hospital near the maternity wing where abortions are performed. We are few and our appeals for others to join us have met with deaf ears. A good friend of mine whos died recently went to jail twice for displaying explicit pictures of the unborn and the priest who worked hard to bring the message to the public eye has also died. May they rest in peace. He was sent to margins of the diocese to keep him away from parish life.
We hope that we can put the clock back soon before it is too late. It is time for all who desire the end of abortion to join the fight and if you have any good ideas about how to improve on what we do I am eager to listen as long as you want to work too and not just criticise.
The Feast of the Annunciation is Traditionally March 25th, which is exactly nine months from Christmas Day. What makes you say it is today, April 4th?
Because no feast takes precedence over Holy Week or The Octave of Easter. Good Friday was on March 25th, and therefore the Solemnity, in The Catholic Church, in Communion with Rome, is transferred to the first free day after The Octave of Easter.
It was transferred to today- if you look at the calendar because 25th March was Good Friday this year.
Yes, of course it was. My mistake.
I put my good wshes for the transferred feast on the Discussion thread😇. I am in Wales at the moment near the little SSPX chapel where a priest comes over for the First Sunday of the month to celebrate Mass. Father Vandendaele always says Mass on the Monday morning as well before he goes back to Scotland, so it was a great bonus having the transferred feast of the Annunciation today.
I, personally, took two young traditional Catholic boys to the 40 Days for Life event in Glasgow, on three different occasions, and would have loved to have been able to get there more often, but it was in an unsuitable place. There is no car parking there (I rang and after a lengthy chat with the telephonist who strongly advised me not to bring my car, it is impossible to get parked; she didn’t know why I was enquiring, would presume I was coming to visit a patient.) In the end, we went by bus – that is, two buses, there and two buses home, so it took up the entire day.
Then, we were standing in a group listening to diocesan Catholics praying the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary, so the “traditional” Catholic boys were confused as they’d never heard of these new mysteries and their mother would have thought twice about letting me take them had she been aware that after keeping them out of the school system to home-school in order to raise them in the traditional Faith, her work was about to be undermined by a pro-life event.
So, things are not as simple as seems. One of those boys is 13 and has asked me to recommend a Catholic pro-life group as he’d like to be more active in the movement. I can’t think of one – can you? They’re all falling over themselves to insist they are NOT “Catholic” and they are, in effect, ecumenical or in the case of LIFE, “humanist” – truly you couldn’t make it up.
As for your mention of Father Gruner – I’m, sure you were present at our Conference when he made the point that it is because the pro-life movement has left God out of its work, that God has left them to it and the lack of success in any meaningful sense of having the Act repealed, is there for all the world to see.
Sorry to criticise the pro-life movement but I have already said that I know of pro-life activists who do great work – yourself being one – but that doesn’t change the fact that as a movement, the pro-lifers have not made any serous impact on wider society. Nobody in the UK has any fear of the Abortion Act being repealed any time soon.
All the people that I have worked with in SPUC have been good Catholics. The few who are not are strong evangelicals However I knew an teacher who was an atheist who took the models into school for every senior class to show them every year. he was a LIFE member. U do think that in the end that the pro-life movement will bring all denominations together. I know of one London council member who converted while in SPUC and I am sure that there are many who during the 40days for Life in the US who will see how the numbers of Catholics greatly out number the other sects and will think more about converting.
Thank you for reminding me of the teaching about Our lady’s betrothal to St. Joseph as the first part of Jewish marriage. I should not have made that careless comment.
Well done for taking the children to the 40days. and attending 3 times. I was there only once and found it peaceful and prayerful. Being able to say the rosary and sing hymns was very uplifting. The Glasgow sun shone down on the large group of 12 which had gathered making it feel as if our prayers were being answered.
I was upset to see the new luminous mysteries in the handbook provided but at least we didn’t say them. The book was produced by a pro-life group from Edinburgh which may be ‘Precious Life’ or similar and it was helpful except for the above and inclusion of some of the modern hymns which are meaningless.
I guess we all haven’t reach the fullness of the faith and have clay feet about some of the theological beliefs of our faith but we all agree that abortion and all the other crimes surrounding this issue are leading many to hell.
Our priests and bishops are fully responsible for the diabolical sins committed today so we as lay people will just have to pray for them and try to change the hearts and minds of those who know nothing about the gift of life and how much God is being offended by these heinous crimes
Nor do our priests and bishops know and teach that marriage is a sacrament and that the marriage act is a joining of the souls and hearts of the man and his wife in the presence of the Holy Spirit.
Clotide, that very passionate post will put many, including me, to shame for not working as hard for this cause as you do. However, by the very nature of this work, you, your co-workers, priests, counsellors, etc., are going to hear the stories of those who suffer after having procured an abortion because they do possess a moral sense, however much it has been weakened, and bitter regret and repentance is what you will hear. These are the ‘hard cases’ indeed, who come to you tormented in soul and desperate for comfort.
You do not hear the stories of the far, far greater number who are utterly shameless, care about nohing but their own irresponsible sexual gratification, and refuse to see that the foetus is a living baby. These women deserve punishment, sometimes severe punishment, for they are cold-blooded murderesses.
If a law were to be passed, then, as always in English law, due consideration would have to be given to mitigating circumstances, and those for whom you are so rightly concerned would surely be found not guilty of any crime.
You have not mentioned the question of a law against abortion being brought back, so I do not know if you are for or against this move.
I’m sure nobody here has said anything to criticise your work, and I don’t think there are any ideas floating about as to what more can be done. However, I remain convinced that a law without the possibility of punishment for those who break it is a legal nonsense and no deterrent.
As you are not the one in The Counselling Room, or The Confessional, I hazard to guess how you can possibly know “are going to hear the stories of those who suffer after having procured an abortion because they do possess a moral sense, however much it has been weakened, and bitter regret and repentance is what you will hear. These are the ‘hard cases’ indeed, who come to you tormented in soul and desperate for comfort.
You do not hear the stories of the far, far greater number who are utterly shameless, care about nohing but their own irresponsible sexual gratification, and refuse to see that the foetus is a living baby. These women deserve punishment, sometimes severe punishment, for they are cold-blooded murderesses.”
I trust you will think again about making judgements about matter which you admit you have no personal experience of.
Such hardened attitudes about the supposed moral recklessness of others have surely driven some women to seek abortion, because they fear the very rejection, and isolation, such thinking would bring about.
There have been a lot of stories in the media about women who have had a succession of abortions and think nothing of it.
The problem with priests using the confessional as their get out clause is that those who ARE hardened, like the ones described by Christina, don’t think of going to confession because they see no sin in what they have done.
Not exactly rocket science, is it?
I believe neither you nor Christina are Counsellors, and are not priests.
It is wholly wrong of both of you to make any assumptions about the people who approach either a priest or a counsellor.
Further, as a long experienced confessor I can tell you even people who have not had an abortion, and might be thought of as hardened sinners, often wholly alienated from The Church for decades, never really lose their sense of sin.
Likewise, you will recall Clotilde, at 10.56, echoed my experience and she was not, as far as I can see, speaking of their sense of Christian morality but the pain brought about by their humanity.
Many people seem to have no sense of their own sin, but seem to write often, for example, about the sins and failings of others. Now just what did Jesus said to the people about to stone the woman caught in adultery?
I have never discussed rocket science in the confessional.
You really do need to accept that many people do not approach abortion from any moral viewpoint but from an entrenched view, wrongly proclaimed in society, science, and medicine, even medical circles, that we are dealing with cells not a human being.
Further they object to people banging on about abortion when they seem to have scant concern for the deaths of human beings already brought to birth.
If we were priests, I feel sure we would have done much, much more to educate the laity on the evils of abortion, both to the innocent babies, and to their souls. I know I would.
You may not know this but we are not in a Catholic country, and the thread is about abortion law. Not every Catholic has had an abortion. It is not compulsory.
Do you know , Father, it would be really good if you tried to educate us rather than attempt to stir up trouble. I presume you are here because you disagree with us and believe we are wrong ? Therefore, wouldn’t it be more becoming of your vocation if you educated us, in charity, rather than trying to get one over us? It’s not really working and is, quite frankly, quite unbecoming of your vocation.
This thread is about Abortion Law in The Uk. This is not a Catholic country and it has not been for centuries. Even in many Catholic Countries abortion is legal. I am not discussing laws, and actions, as they might exist in Utopia but the harsh reality on the ground. You cannot blame the wrong moral choices on The Church, and its schools. I am pretty confident one day some of those educated in “Home Schools” will sadly make the wrong choices. Who will you blame then?
You are not answering the question about whether the law against abortion should be re-introduced because you clearly do not think it should be, so be honest and just say so – your fancy footwork doesn’t fool any of us.
I did wonder at it taking so long before you came up with the “but this is not a Catholic country” as if only in truly Catholic countries should the law protect its people against evil. How ridiculous. Only Catholics are obliged not to murder their babes in the womb? Gerragrip.
The UK is not Catholic, true enough, so we can’t expect the Government to host parties to celebrate Marian feast days, but protect unborn babies? That’s not “Catholic” – that’s the natural moral law.
The logical conclusion of your (illogical) view – that because we’re not living in a Catholic country we can’t expect the moral law to be observed and kept in regard to abortion – means that we can’t expect stealing and perjury to be against the law either. Crackers.
I do not believe any attempt to repeal The Abortion Law will succeed no matter how much I might wish it.
That is why it is more a case of seeking to change attitudes, sound education, and recognise why for some people may believe abortion is the only option and offer a realistic alternative. Less stones and more love!
Further, you may disagree it is necessary to show every life is sacred, and needs to be supported.
Well I see now (9.03pm) that at least and at last you say you would like to see the Abortion Act repealed. Alleluia!
It is a huge error to presume that because someone opposed abortion that ERGO they don’t care about other lives – that’s ridiculous. It’s a non sequitur.
On the contrary, I know it isn’t. Some here only today mocked the importance given by some to other pro-life issues.
Editor: this thread IS NOT ABOUT OTHER ISSUES! Are you really not understanding this simple fact?
Can you not see that if this thread were about another issue – say world poverty – we would not allow anyone to continually divert us by writing about abortion? Yet you continually belittle abortion by equating it with other “life” – so called – issues. Abortion is unique.
Can you not see the difference between state sanctioned murder and the best use of overseas aid money?
I’m going offline now but I advise you to stop taking us round in circles because you’ll get fed up before I do. As well as my cert in Counselling, I have one that says I could type at 78 words per minute – some years ago. I’ve speeded up a bit since then. So, stop playing silly beggars. If you really cannot see the difference between abortion and other issues, keep the fact to yourself and go off and read a book.
I would disagree that abortion is unique. That fits in with “the woman’s right to choose”, and its “my body mentality”. The counter argument to that is that the child born from the womb, and until a much later age, is dependent on others for food, shelter, clothing and yet it is still a unique being. To me there is no acceptable age to let a child die, or kill it. That is where I part company with some.
You wrote: “The logical conclusion of your (illogical) view – that because we’re not living in a Catholic country we can’t expect the moral law to be observed and kept in regard to abortion – means that we can’t expect stealing and perjury to be against the law either. Crackers.”
However, in an answer to Theresa I said The Church only reinforces Natural Moral Law, and other truths, available to all.
In answer to you I said atheists, agnostics and people of other faiths, and non, are pro-life but won’t work with single issue groups.
In yet another answer I pointed out that Phylis Bowman left SPUC and founded Right to Life because SPUC was alienating pro-life Parliamentarians.
Ha! Yes, I do know that Fr Arthur, so no need for sarcasm. I laugh because I’ve often wondered over the years if I was actually in a Catholic church, and talking to “Catholics”, when the subject of abortion was brought up. (By me of course, never by the clergy.)
It seems that on every topic, the main point had to be repeated to you time and time again, so here goes: if the clergy had done more to educate Catholics, years ago, about their bounden duty to oppose abortion, and about what abortion actually entails, we would be in a better state than we are now, and countless defenceless lives would have been saved.
It is an odd world if everyone, like Adam, can blame someone else for their moral choices. Have I misunderstood that The Church only reinforces, in her teaching, Natural Law, and other Truths revealed by God. It is also true people don’t have a priest with them every day. I always thought Sin is a consequence of concupiscence, and that as moral persons we live in a world not always in tune with God. That is people can be subjected to peer pressure, or even pressure others. You know the kind of stuff: a guy says to his bird “you would do it if you love me”. Eve listened to The Devil before a moral textbook was ever published
Not that it is relevant, but since you make a wrong assumption, I do have a qualification in Counselling and although I’ll never get to host the Oprah Winfrey show, I have had some experience, albeit limited, of counselling – not in an abortion setting though, if it makes you feel better.
You need to quote something – anything – that suggests any of us “have scant concern for the deaths of human beings already brought to birth.”
That is a slur, and must be substantiated. Quote please.
I discuss the general worldview and you insist on discussing me!
It is clear that some here do believe is the chief moral wrong when it comes to pro-life issues. However, I was making a general point.
However, I also believe that, for example, Phylis Bowman founded Right to Life partly because pro-life Parliamentarians believed SPUC was making their work more difficult and not easier.
The message and the tactics matter. It is not just a message of saying this is the truth accept it.
You are discussing everything except the topic question.
SHOULD the law forbidding abortion be re-introduced? Or do we have to convert Parliament and the population at large, to Catholicism before suggesting it?
Many atheists, agnostics, and people of other faiths, are pro-life but they are consistently pro-life and won’t work with one issue groups.
Editor: and you think that shows them in a good light? They think other issues are as important as abortion? Murder of the unborn? WOW.
That was Cardinal O’Brien’s opening words at the SPUC Conference in Glasgow, which I attended a few years back and mentioned elsewhere on this thread – he began by saying he wasn’t a “single issue man”.
Sure wasn’t. Look what happened to him.
Anyway, I repeat, to equate abortion with other issues, as just “one more life issue” is to fail to recognise the unique gravity of abortion – the wilful murder that has been traditionally counted among the four sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance.
You wrote “That was Cardinal O’Brien’s opening words at the SPUC Conference in Glasgow, which I attended a few years back and mentioned elsewhere on this thread – he began by saying he wasn’t a “single issue man”.
Sure wasn’t. Look what happened to him. ”
So let me get this straight, you are saying people who look at pro-life issues are likely to be dodgy/
‘I trust you will think again about making judgements about matter which you admit you have no personal experience of.’
What utter nonsense you do talk.The ‘personal experience’ of any individual, even of you, is necessarily limited by position and circumstances in life. That is why we read, listen and generally educate ourselves about subjects we are not directly involved in through the ‘personal experience’ of those who are so involved, and who speak and write about their experiences for the information and education of others.
You are claiming to know what type of person turns to confession or a counsellor after an abortion. You even suggested what “type” wouldn’t, and I am confident you cannot possibly know.
Fr. Arthur, you are ‘confident’, indeed cocksure, about so many of your false and daft beliefs that your confidence about anything carries little weight. But for the sake of others following the discussion, I have pointed out the abundantly obvious fact that direct experience is not the only way in which we gain our knowledge of the world. I am not a counsellor, but I read the accounts of the experiences of those who are. I am not a priest, but I have read this, and other accounts of priests in the context of hearing about sins of abortion in the confessional. It is perfectly reasonable for such vicarious experience to help form my views.
Similarly I learn from statistics, and have been taught, by studying stastistics within an academic discipline, to interpret them very cautiously indeed, that while the study claiming that 95% ‘do not regret having had an abortion’ is flawed, clearly a majority do not regret it. I have read the boastful accounts of some of these women murderesses, from which I know about their ‘type’, as they choose to reveal it. As Editor said, it’s not rocket science.
And before you continue to prate and accuse others of making judgements not based on ‘direct experience’, look to the beam in your own eye. You have no ‘direct experience’ of bringing children into the world and bringing them up in a post-consiliar Church, yet you can make judgements, from what you’ve ‘heard’ from others, about the culpability of a parent who raised them. And PLEASE don’t hide behind that frequent lie of yours that you ‘speak in generalities’. It kids nobody.
Editor, I apologise for the off-topic paragraph, but judgmentalism, as practice or accusation, seems never to be far from this priest’s posts.
I have not looked at statistics but have looked into the eyes of others. I have sought to comfort and console them.
Likewise, how many of that 95% were asked at different periods of their lives? That is more than once in an ongoing study?
How many come to realise the wrong they have done when, even belatedly, they come to accept it wasn’t “just a few cells”.
How many come to a new realisation of the harm done not only to the child when they cannot later conceive.
Please cite these longitudinal studies, over many years, with these people.
I have not raised a child but I have been fortunate to have contact h who are, or who once were children. I have heard them speak of their upbringing.
I haven’t raised any children, and I haven’t met yours, but I think I can say I have gained direct insights to thousands who were not my children. Not only that, I actually listened to them!
To quote from the article you cite having done your extensive research:
“Several times, as I’ve spoken with a woman who’s had an abortion, I’ve thought to myself during the conversation: This woman was lied to. She didn’t freely choose this. She felt pressured. She was scared. Where are the pro-abortion people now that this woman needs healing, love, and forgiveness? They’re nowhere to be found, and the Church is left to pick up the broken pieces, which we will happily do.”
“Any priest will tell you that, whether in the confessional or in private discussion, women who feel the need to talk about their abortion carry tremendous pain and regret. A woman has never told me that she is proud of her abortion; on the contrary, it is one of the heaviest burdens that she carries. Hence the reason she goes to the priest: to receive God’s forgiveness and healing.”
You can sure unpick the facts!
And you can sure twist them!
How can direct quotes be twisted? They are the whole thrust of his article. You claimed to be able to cite/quote extensive studies that show that you have your finger on the button. And you provided an article by a priest that echoes what Clotilde and I have said. Thank You.
Please quote my words where I “claimed to be able to cite/quote extensive studies”
Quote my words where I claimed to have done “extensive research”.
Read more carefully. I said, referring back to your post that you twist FACTS not ‘direct quotes’.
Don’t thank me for anything. Read more carefully. I never cast doubts, anywhere, on what you or Clotide said about the trauma abortion can cause to a woman. The priest’s article was inserted, as well you know, to disprove your claim addressed to me that:
“As you are not the one in The Counselling Room, or The Confessional, I hazard to guess how you can possibly…hear the stories of those who suffer after having procured an abortion”
That priest’s account, and other similar accounts give insight and information to those, like myself, not directly involved with these women.
On second, third and fourth thoughts, forget it! You thrive on the arguments you stir up with your quarrelsome posts, and I’ll follow wiser counsels in future.
priests experiences what is? Statistics and lots of insight through the writings of priests? I quote ” I am not a counsellor, but I read the accounts of the experiences of those who are. I am not a priest, but I have read this, and other accounts of priests in the context of hearing about sins of abortion in the confessional. It is perfectly reasonable for such vicarious experience to help form my views.
Similarly I learn from statistics, and have been taught, by studying stastistics within an academic discipline, to interpret them very cautiously indeed, that while the study claiming that 95% ‘do not regret having had an abortion’ is flawed, clearly a majority do not regret it. I have read the boastful accounts of some of these women murderesses, from which I know about their ‘type’, as they choose to reveal it. As Editor said, it’s not rocket science.”
Further you specifically wrote it to argue a case against, as you say in the quote, “murderesses”.
Clotilde and I spoke of these women, or many of them, as victims. and that is the argument you sought to counter.
With your great insight you post an article by a priest who, in effect, says what Clotilde and I were saying.
At 6.15 a.m. I cited the relevant quote. I responded speedily out of courtesy.
I assume the it is on this thread, but certainly one of the current 5.
I am not skilled in IT and can’t post links, and how I wish I could.
The clear tone is that just hearing The Luminous Mysteries prayed would damage the faith, and Catholic sensitivities of people, especially your nephews, and a breach of the trust of your sister. Prayer can’t do that.
Of course abortion must be made illegal and therefore a punishable offence.
In order to do that the general public need to be told the truth but how can it be done when the media is hell bent on keeping the pro-life movement quiet . Several years ago I took part in a huge LIFE march through London with 25,000 others and the BBC showed a clip of about 6 pro-aborts protesting against us on the corner of a street with no mention of the pro-lifers rallied into Hyde Park.
Our Lady of Guadaloupe, pray for us.
There were 24 young delegates from Scotland at the SPUC Youth Conference in March. I know that 3 of them were from the northern isles. We need more young people to come and work for life. SPUC are organising the summer campaign again where young people go around all the cities with PROJECT TRUTH in an attempt to educate folk and especially young people. Do you know anyone who would like to join this very dedicated bunch of youngsters and to make friends with like-minded people.
in order to do that the general public need to be told the truth but how can it be done when the media is hell bent on keeping the pro-life movement quiet..
Your average parish priest could have done it, though, years ago. At least to the faithful. But the images were too shocking for the faithful, you know. But even then, and I’m talking about 35 years ago, the rot had well and truly set in, and I vividly recall the many parishioners in many churches who turned their faces away and wouldn’t even sign a petition calling for the end of abortion. One priest even told me he wouldn’t have such shocking literature in the church – as if I was peddling pornography. The hierarchy of the Church has failed shamefully and scandalously in the fight against abortion. God forgive them.
|It is unbelievably tragic and sad that people say they are PRO LIFE …yet are not willing to do anything about it .Sadly also our main Pro Life Groups are so wishy washy they just go with the flow not daring to speak out in case of offending anyone …thus the rabid abortionists do win as much as it absolutely pains me to admit they organise Rallys ,Petitions ,Letters ,tell dreadful ,blatent lies ….they harrass Pro Lifers Praying outside Mills or doing 40 Days for LIfe ..and get away with it too.
With such an Abortionist Government sadly we would get no sympathy ..but we must NEVER give up ..brave Abort 67 Stands with placards of aborted babies outside MIlls and in town centres and do get remakable results for their wonderful efforts ..there is to be a MArch For Life in May ….a Govt Petition about taxpayers funding Abortion is floundering at barely 2,000 signatures !!!!!!….Do I feel anxious and angry and sad ..yes I do .
It is heartbreaking to hear pro Lifers call abortionists pro choice …how they laugh at us …
When the wicked David Steele Mp then in 1967..bought in this hideous ,heinous satanic Act 1967..he opened the proverbial Pandoras Box of everything horrific ..that would turn Gynaecology on its head ,that ripped and tore The Sacred Hypocratic Oath apart …the floodgates then opened has drowned us ….millions of precious preborn babies killed in ways that if it were Animals the World would be screaming ,milions of people suffering both mental and physically directly from abortion …Scientists who should be seeking out marvellous cures spend time developing new Human Pesticides to kill more efficiantly and easily ,Evi lCharitys so called not sated by all the death here now spread their abortion mindset to the so called Third world …..Abortion Mills springing up like mushrooms in Towns and Citys ,Universitys absolute hotbeds of evil and hatred for their own species poor little children having the vilest and pornographic sex ed lessons taught to them from 8 years …£millions spent on disgusting organisations to hand out Pills and refer abortions to young people ,Drs now not allowed to progress if they are Pro Life ..millions of test tube babies discarded as if a tissue ,..all this in the name of Reproductive Rights nothing could ever be more wrong ..in the nearly 50 years of all this miasma how many successes has the Pro LIfe people seen ?….
We cannot get down but really we should be willing to reall yshow we have a backbone ….be prepared to speak up and stop being apologetic we have the most wonderful reason in the World to be brave …little precious Miracles called unborn Babies and their Mums ..if that doesnt move yo uthen nothing will ..fro those people who are God fearing I wonder what they will tell ALmighty God on Judgement Day when asked what they did to save His MAsterpieces ?
This is not a personal attack on anyone but just a cry for people to realise …the magnitude of the subject horrific that it is ..thank you
Please pray to FR James Morrow and FR Paul Marx OSB.R I P ..both MASSIVE figues in Pro Life work who never let anything pass them in their LOVE for Unborn Babies for help
This is why we must never ever give up however hard ..did they say ..safe ????…legal ????abortion I dont think so
I saw that sad story earlier today.
I am surprised it saw the light of day in a secular newspaper.
Do you think that is a promising sign, that some media outlets might actually begin to report on the reality of abortion and its effects, instead of the sanitised ideological reporting we are more used to?
The Mail does tell it as it is, and is non PC. That’s why they call it ‘that rag’.
Fr Arthur is correct when he said you cannot just condemn abortion without looking at the other issues involved. And they perhaps is what is going wrong in many of the criticisms. Where does the aborition mentality start. It starts with a child who perhaps grows up without a father or in a family where she does not experience love. Perhaps she was raised in an institution. There are many circumstances which make a girl vulnerable. She grows up looking for love and is taken advantage of because she believes she has found love in a sexual encounter. Others may follow. Then this lonely girl finds herself pregnant. What can she do? She is told about abortion. There is no one telling her about the baby. This is something we should really feel guilty about, the breakdown of family life and what I would perhaps criticise Fr Arthur for is not putting this into the context of our failed Scottish and English Church. There is no way such a child can be prosecuted. We share a blame in her circumstances with a lack of a pro family message. Abortion then becomes part of a contraception package and she could go on to have four or five aboirtions or more.. So we must look at the problem from the beginning. Yet I have been heartened in recent years that there are many young girls who despite the pressure are actually keeping their babies. That is a good result for the pro-life movement. wonder not that the world will hate you, Jesus said. Yes, they hate you because you contradict them and they know you are right. But as Christians let us face up to the problem and help young people and solve the problem that way..
Whilst I agree with a lot of what you say, I disagree that we should not prosecute someone who has an abortion. If we go down this road then we are not accepting that abortion is murder. If a mother murdered her newborn baby because of all the reasons you listed, would you still say that she shouldn’t be prosecuted ? I would hope not. If you agree that the mother should be prosecuted, should she murder a newborn baby, then you must see that a mother who has an abortion should also be prosecuted.
If the law was changed and abortion was illegal, there must be a consequence for those who have an abortion. What’s the point of the law if there’s no consequence ?
Thanks John for this thoughtful comment. These poor girls who are so ill informed and lacking in any spiritual and moral support need compassion and sympathy.
There are some on this blog who don’t see the devastation caused by this Godless society. They seem to be in a time warp. Is it bring back the cane and slipper time again?
Thank You for your powerful, deep, insights Clotilde. I guess actual experience on the ground helps keep you grounded. Statistics prove nothing, but an open ear, and heart, can bring healing to these broken people who are not numbers of sinful damned wretches but human beings.
Historically, it was abortion providers who faced legal action, not the women who had abortions. Absent the ghouls who exploited vulnerable women and killed their unborn children for monetary gain, abortion would be rare. Women who were reduced to desperate conditions were pitied, not jailed or penalized.
On a relate done, my tax dollars should never be used to fund an abortion. In the current parlance, one could say that I have a right to oppose my money being used to pay someone to end the life of a child. Pro-life individuals would do well to put the question to the abortionists about why they think they’re entitled to use our money for purposes we object to.
The Chris Matthews ambush question of Trump is a classical liberal gotcha trick that posits an unrealistic hypothetical to try to trip up someone the liberals want to demonize.
you cannot just condemn abortion without looking at the other issues involved.
That is a false dichotomy: one must condemn abortion, without hesitation or qualification; this does not preclude looking at the other issues involved.
Well said – false dichotomy indeed. Cardinal O’Brien of St Andrew’s & Edinburgh (not to say of unhappy memory) addressed a SPUC (pro-life) Conference in Glasgow which I attended some years ago. His opening words were an insistence on the fact that he was “truly” pro-life, and so opposed nuclear weapons, poverty, blah blah, not “just” abortion. By the end of his talk, it was difficult to remember that it was supposed to be about the unborn children being murdered in their mother’s womb. His concern was manifestly more about getting rid of trident and getting support, if not big bucks, for SCIAF (Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund).
Hence, I’m always suspicious of those who peddle the notion of “truly” pro-life – meaning, “don’t let’s obsess about abortion”, as someone (can’t quite remember who) said not so long ago…
Dear Gabriel Syme …thank you for your reply ….who knows if it is a sign of The Media starting to see the proverbial light you see it was only a few weeks ago The Daily Mail Australia was openly advertising how to get illegal abortions and when contacted would not rescind or back down …who knows if this is a wonderful Heavenly reward for all the devout Prayer and Sacrifice of 40 Days ..or perhaps a Pro LIfe Editor .
People are always impressed by letters and E -mails on contraversial subjects whether they agree or not …
I wonder how many other desperate people commit suicide but it goes unrecorded not only a huge amount of Infant lives gone but also their Parents ..tragic
The reason the law is not changed is because the Government has no control over family life and finds it easier to allow abortion in order to control the population and cut down the benefits bill.. Its message that abortion is a safe operation. In these conditions when the rights and wrongs of abortion are not allowed to be debated then I would say do not prosecute. However if society ever changers to be anti-abortion and the law reflects this then we would hope there would be in place incentives to persuade the girls and women not to abort including education. The girls then would be fully aware of what they were doing and yes, in such circumstances we could talk about punishment.
That would not be fair to other murderers. You are not seriously suggesting that women do not realise their baby is a human being and to end that life is murder? Seriously? Well, I’ve never heard any woman say she was expecting “something”/a “bunch of cells” or a “potential human being” – EVER. I’ve only heard talk of a baby coming along and even in the mindless dramas where they love to have an abortion in the script, the woman is portrayed as agonising over the decision. Traumatic. Why? If they don’t know they are considering killing a baby, what’s the agonising over? Why the trauma?
They know what they are doing. They know, too, that it’s legal – yet still agonise. Take away the legality and they then know that that is one route that is not open to them so they have to follow the old adage, that “problems are sent to make us think,not to make us worry.”
and voila! Either they will keep and love the baby or someone else will. Beats murder any day.
It is an odd world if everyone, like Adam, can blame someone else for their moral choices.
Not odd at all. Typical, surely?
Of course we live in a world not in tune with God’s laws; that’s why we need strong leadership and faithful, well educated in the faith laity, to have a hope of withstanding it.
Sin is not a consequence of concupiscence, but rather concupiscence is perhaps the most common means by which we are tempted and fall into sin. WE make the decision.
Please see below details of the Billings training course which is helpful for those who wish to know more about fertility and topics related.
Please forward on if you know anyone who might be interested in attending this.
Subject: Information Day – Saturday, 23rd April 2016, 11am – 2pm
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 09:36:28 +0100
We are having a “Drop-In” Information Day here at Newton Place on Saturday, 23rd April 2016 from 11am – 2pm for anyone interested in finding out more about The Billings Ovulation Method® Teacher Training Course in September/October 2016 in Dundee or about the method itself.
If you want to pop in for a cup of tea/coffee, you are most welcome. Please also encourage anyone you think might be interested to come along too (clients perhaps?) and if you have a local parish, you could ask your priest to advertise it too. (I will put a sample for bulletins at the end).
I would not recommend any of these Billings courses these days because I’ve learned from a friend who is an instructor, that they treat it like “Catholic contraception” without sticking to the Church’s teaching that NFP may only be used for a limited time in serious circumstances. When I pointed that out to my NFP instructor friend, she was amazed and said she had never heard that before. Since then, I’ve stopped recommending these courses to people because it can mislead them into thinking they can decide not to have children or to have only a couple, as long as they use NFP and not the pill or other contraceptive. It should only be taught to couples who understand and abide by the teaching of the Church.
One needs to attend this course to find out that it is much more than teaching about how not to have children.
There is a whole lot about understanding what it is to have a really loving relationship with a husband in a true marriage and I would not accept one persons point of view. It certainly depends on who takes the course. I know two teachers who have 11 children between them.
Far better to abide by the churches teachings this way than to take contraceptive advice from the medical profession. They know very little about how fertility works and cause dire destruction and suffering in the lives of many women with their kind of advice.
I am very concerned that you posted the advert for the Billings Course.
Firstly, it is off topic. This thread is about whether or not the Abortion Act should be repealed and once illegal again, should there be penalties for those involved in procuring an abortion. That has been made very clear to Fr Arthur and has been a cause of comment on here a number of times, yet you posted an off topic advertisement in any case. I am surprised and one other emotion that I won’t spell out here. I would ask bloggers to ignore this distraction and stick to the topic. I am getting a bit tired of having to say that.
For the record, Catholic Truth does NOT recommend attendance at any Billings course without first questioning the instructors to ascertain that they do know and accept the Church’s teaching that the natural methods may only be used as a temporary measure for very good reason. It is not, as MM has rightly said, to be taught (as I’ve seen it taught) as an alternative to contraception.
I would like to highlight something Athanasius posted near the beginning of this discussion, by pointing out that abortion is not a cause, but an effect. An effect of the demolition of the Social Reign of Christ the King, to be exact, which is, among other things, the demolition of the influence of the Catholic Church on society. So I do not believe there will be any major “political victories” on abortion until the real cause of this mass murder is corrected – though the expose on the sale of baby parts by Planned Parenthood has resulted, in the USA, in the withdrawal of some state (but not federal) funds from this work of the Devil.
That said, if legislation were restored outlawing this crime against God and humanity, then I do agree that the women who seek abortions should face legal consequences.
It saddens me to read some of the comments on here from a Catholic Priest although it should not surprise me. Editor has repeatedly asked Fr Arthur to state whether abortion law should be reintroduced and finally we had a grudging …well it won’t make any difference… type answer even though he wishes it was.
What kind of leadership is that? Wet rag leadership? In the Church today, there is a general attitude of pragmatism. Nothing is inviolable. We cannot upset the population. All that came before must be seen in a new light.
Bunkum! This is nothing more than breeding ground for heresy.
When a thousand voices say you are only killing a foetus and only one voice say it is a baby who is a distraught young lady going to believe? That is the point in the situation the girl does not start a debate she only wants a solution. And abortion is the will of the country and probably her family. What you have to do is not take your own Faith and your own standards and believe they should be present in the girl. She does not see things they way you see things. Yet through this debate we have been concentrating on the law and punishment when we should be approaching it from the eyes of Christ. We should be looking at the girl like Jesus looked at the woman taken in Adultery. He did not hand her out a penance but simply said “Go and sin no more. Was he wrong in this? Should he have asked her to atone? We are called as Christians to open our hearts to sinners not demonise them. Finally all those who attacked Fr Arthur what are they doing actively about abortion? Perhaps I should not ask that question but did Jesus not speak something about not seeing the mote in your brothers eye when the beam is in your own. .
You can bet your bottom dollar the girl will think more carefully about which “solution” (what an awful way to describe an abortion – reminds me of the Nazis “Final Solution”) to choose if one is likely to land her in prison
Our Prisons are full of people who have, in addition to dealing with major psychological problems, addictions, and the deprivations and hardships of Prison Life , also have to do Thinking Skills Courses. That is they have to learn to think!
How many people, whether married or single, think of their life options before they have sex, and more especially how many were too immature, or pressured. to have sex when psychologically and physically they were not ready for it.
How many Catholics, whether married or single, think of their life options before they have sex…? How often are Catholics educated from the pulpit in such matters (and NO, I don’t mean sex education)? How often are they reminded of Church teaching, and how much encouragement are they given to educate themselves on the consequences of contraception and abortion? How often are parents reminded of their duties towards their children in this regard?
We know very well that the “country” as a whole never gets any spiritual education,so we don’t need to be told that, thanks. It’s blitheringly obvious. Those “shepherds” who have so neglected their duty to instruct/remind their flocks of these basic truths are guilty of much. No more excuses, please.
I assume you have research to show your conclusions?
When did you ask other people who have sinned, in whatever way, were you not told that what you did was sinful?
I can say I have touched upon all these hot topics in sermons, and discussed them with individuals in confession.
Evidence suggests that even when proper counsel is given people still have a tendency to sin. I think it is called “concupiscence” but I bow to your superior knowledge no doubt built upon both in your market research, and the hours you have spent “hearing” confessions.
Well said. I see the ridiculous question asking for research evidence! Heavens above. Soon, dear Lord, may I wake up from this nightmare.
One of my former students told me, at aged 25, that after all his years in Catholic education he’d never once heard Hell mentioned and purity was something people looked for in their whites when the washing machine rolled to a halt.
That’s very gracious of you; yes, I have done years of research,trying to find a church where orthodox Catholic morality is spoken from the pulpit. Very little luck there. Many years of conversations with badly taught “Catholics”, (the young I talk to have never been taught the Faith to any useful degree); all of this informs me of the devastating lack of understanding of the Faith. All of the young Catholics I have spoken to and worked with see nothing wrong with “shacking up”, contraception, immodest dress and talk etc. When I ask them if they were not taught about these things at the “Catholic” schools they attended, they inform me that they haven’t. It goes without saying that they were never taught from the pulpit.
I’m extremely glad to hear that you talk of such things in sermons, Fr Arthur; I don’t say you are unique, but you are certainly very rare. If you don’t see that, then I’m forced to the conclusion that you haven’t done your research adequately.
I feel sure The Church says that the first, and primary, teachers of children are their parents, and neither the Parish or School can replace that role, or make up for what is lacking. For the tripartite system each of the players must undertake take their primary role.
Further , for example, in preaching to a typical Sunday congregation in a Church a priest would struggle always find language appropriate to the maturity, and learning skills, of every age group on delicate topics. Therefore Christian sex education is most probably best left to the parents of children.
In my experience of working with couples who want to get married, but are living together, I find that if I challenged them they don’t say I was never taught it was wrong but it is…(insert whatever decade)…… and everyone is doing it.
Just as I have had women post abortion break down in tears, I have countless parents do so as they wonder where they, not The Church, or School, have gone wrong as we “taught them right and wrong”. When are some parents going to stop blaming “The Church” and “The School”, and recognise some of them have failed their children. However, many more have done their job, and they must learn to recognise their children were not raised in a vacuum and cannot be immunised against societal pressures.
To return to the central point of this thread not all women who have had abortions willingly became pregnant, nor sought an abortion. Many have been taught it is “just a few cells”, or it is a woman’s right to choose, etc, and that abortion is just another form of contraception. Many are already vulnerable women, and when the harsh reality of what they have done is realised they are traumatised, and sorry. I don’t know any Gospel where Jesus said add trauma to trauma, but he did say come to me and I will give you rest.
I think theres some merit in what you say. However, A true Catholic educator knows that the whole package has to be there – the school, parish and home. There needs to be consistency.
Sadly, this is what is lacking. The revolution in the Church caused the breakdown of this triangulation. Priests stopped preaching the Faith in all situations, schools stopped teaching the Faith and the home stopped following the moral law.
I knew nothing about abortion until I got involved in pro-life work and counselling. A priest asked me if I would like to go along to a meeting where I saw the abortion slides, which opened up my eyes in a big way.
The only mis-guided guidance young people receive in school seems to be how to avoid becoming pregnant with none of the pitfalls either moral or physical so is it any wonder we have so many girls and women who try to take what they are brainwashed into thinking is the easy way out.
I would say that at least 9 out of 10 women who go for an abortion do not want to go down this road but are pushed by husbands, boyfriends, family, friends and doctors. Time and again they have said if they had been offered help or known what was going to happen to them they would not have made that choice.
They are threatened with losing their partner/husband, job, a home, and so on until they make up their minds to agree. Needless to say they still very often break up their relationships because thay can’t face the father again for allowing it to happen. Their self-esteem and worthiness are shattered because they have done this terrible thing which they will never be able to forget. They will not be able to carry on working and develop phobias and serious mental problems.The woman will often feel suicidal. (Sweden, where abortion rates are high, has the highest rates of suicide amongst women)
Women are told lies by pro-aborts nurses and doctors who say it is only a piece of tissue and there is nothing to worry about. When they do eventually see the ‘products of the uterus’ (as they are called euphemistically by medical staff) they are utterly devastated especially when they are given a powerful drug designed to kill the baby and expel its body. The mother takes the tablets -Mifepristone- herself, and is fully aware of the effects that the drugs are having on her body as they happen. If the baby is aborted at home this can be very traumatic for the mother (or father) particularly as she will deal with the body of her child and all that it implies. This drug can be taken up to 9 weeks with 3 visits to the hospital or clinic.
As a post-abortion counsellor I have listened to women who have given up their studies, given up work and another who was taken into a psychiatric hospital.
These women need to ask God for forgiveness and to forgive themselves which is often the hardest thing to do. They also need to forgive all who forced them to make this ‘choice’ It sometimes takes a long time but the victims of this crime they have committed against God, the child and themselves can be healed.
We want to end abortion and only through prayer and education will there be any changes to the law. The law must be changed but the important thing now since abortion is so easily avalable and seen as a right must be to teach the truth behind the facts.
Several efforts in parliament have been made to change the law and at least reduce the time limit but each attempt has made the law more liberal.
The prayers from the 40days for life especially in the US have succeeded in closing down many clinics and centres. If you are interested in finding out more you can log into the 40daysforlife site to read about the closures in America.
How many folk know that the the so-called Catholic version of the facts of life called ‘God’s Loving Plan’ refers to a series of lessons called ‘Living and Growing’ which was produced many years ago by Channel 4. (It is completely out of date anyway) Some of the content is explicit and pornagraphic and it uses words which you would not like to use in front of children. (or ever as far as I’m concerned) This syllabus above has been approved by the Catholic bishops and is being used in some Catholic schools.
Thank You Clotilde. There is much in what you say that any sane rational Catholic would take to heart.
Thank God to The Missionaries of Mercy sent specifically to reconcile these women who often have been failed by others, and are broken and in despair.
I would say that at least 9 out of 10 women who go for an abortion do not want to go down this road but are pushed by husbands, boyfriends, family, friends and doctors.
Similarly, one woman I came across who regretted her abortion reported that the men in her life said they would “be there” for her if she got an abortion, but nobody ever told her they would “be there” if she opted to keep the child.
Your second sentence – I’m not sure I really understand what you mean. Pope Francis is sending out 1,000 priests to absolve sins that every parish priest can already absolve, according to this video: http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/remnant-television/item/2316-the-missionaries-of-mercy-coming-soon-to-a-theater-near-you If priests can already absolve the sin of abortion, what is ‘specific’ about the ones being sent out by Pope Francis?
The right to absolve for abortion is not universally granted to all priests, and it is listed as a sin reserved to The Holy See. However, priests in some countries, including England and Wales, who can validly and licitly absolve sins, have had that faculty for decades.
May I quote this:
“Abortion A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae se ntentiae excommunication (1398). Automatic excommunication for abortion (CIC 1398) applies not only to the woman who has the abortion, but to “all those who commit this crime with knowledge of the penalty attached, and [this] includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would not have been committed” ( Evangelium Vitae 62).
No one is automatically excommunicated for any offense if, without any fault of his own, he was unaware that he was violating a law (CIC 1323:2) or that a penalty was attached to the law (CIC 1324:1:9). The same applies if one was a minor, had the imperfect use of reason, was forced through grave or relatively grave fear, was forced through serious inconvenience, or in certain other circumstances (CIC 1324).
A latae sententiae penalty is one that follows ipso facto or automatically, by force of the law itself, when a law is broken. A penalty that binds a guilty party only after there has been a trial and judgment is known as a ferendae sententiae (meaning “sentence to be passed”) penalty. “
Of course pro-lifers are in many cases inconsistent, because they have no qualms in supporting the grave moral evils of contraception, which limit the number of children and prevent the pro-creation of the human race and contradict the Divine Commandment issued by God in the earliest days of Creation in Genesis 1:28-
‘And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth’.
I remember Editor appeared on Big Questions with a young lady from SPUC and she was less than equivocal concerning contraceptives. Likewise, contraception creates the circumstances for abortion. If a condom splits and the woman is impregnated then that baby becomes an accident. This mentality gives the ‘couple’ the ‘justification’ to butcher the poor and defenceless infant.
Abortion is a most abominable crime and as Petrus said, it is one of the most depraved. Not only does a mother participate in the murder of her child, she also denies it the possibility of receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. Thus, the baby still bears the stain and guilt of Original Sin, and is consigned to an eternity in Limbo. Whilst Limbo is a place of bliss, the baby is deprived of the Beatific Vision. To think that a mother could murder her unborn offspring! As Mother Teresa said-
‘if a mother can kill her own child- what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me- there is nothing in between’. She also wisely stated: ‘the so-called right to abortion has pitted mothers against their children and women against men. It has sown violence and discord at the heart of the most intimate human relationships’.
Pope Pius XI of sacred memory also said in his 1931 Encyclical Casti Connubii, condemning both contraception and abortion-
‘Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious. Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, “Intercourse even with one’s legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Juda, did this and the Lord killed him for it.”
‘All of which agrees with the stern words of the Bishop of Hippo in denouncing those wicked parents who seek to remain childless, and failing in this, are not ashamed to put their offspring to death: “Sometimes this lustful cruelty or cruel lust goes so far as to seek to procure a baneful sterility, and if this fails the foetus conceived in the womb is in one way or another smothered or evacuated, in the desire to destroy the offspring before it has life, or if it already lives in the womb, to kill it before it is born. If both man and woman are party to such practices they are not spouses at all; and if from the first they have carried on thus they have come together not for honest wedlock, but for impure gratification; if both are not party to these deeds, I make bold to say that either the one makes herself a mistress of the husband, or the other simply the paramour of his wife.”
Consequentially, if a woman commits the abominable crime of abortion, it is entirely logical to call for her punishment. However, desire for true justice must also be tempered with mercy and if a woman aborts due to rape, mental illness or familial pressure (i.e. boys are preferred in some cultures), then it must be recognised that these are extreme and abnormal situations. The sternest punishment must be received by the doctor who performed the murder itself. Indeed, I would go so far as to call for the death penalty.
hideous video of Polish females walking out of Church because Priest spoke against abortion
Thank you so much for that video. How dare those women walk out of Church during the homily, showing disrespect, contempt and hatred towards our Holy Mother the Church, Our Lord present in the Most Blessed Sacrament and the Priest. Diabolical. How dare those women speak against the so-called ‘torture’ of women and ‘dignity, health and security’ of women. They are torturers of their babies and they destroy the dignity, health and security of their babies. I can think of nothing more undignified than having a doctor invade your womb and butcher the precious life within. Abortion is a form of rape.
Here’s another video: https://www.lifesitenews.com/pulse/ben-shapiro-reveals-sorry-state-of-college-students-pro-abortion-logic
Maybe Catholic Truth could send a collective electronic letter to the Archbishop of Gniezno, Msgr. Jozef Kowalczyk to consecrate Poland the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart. Let’s face it, Poland is the only Catholic country remaining in Europe, if not the World.
I’m astonished that you consider Poland to be a Catholic country.
Well, I consider Poland a Catholic country.
When one is in a city which offers eight Masses on Sunday and several ( if not all ) of these Masses are packed with those of every age group, demonstrating a reverence that is inspiring, it is reason to think Poland is still Catholic.
The hierarchy is in the main still orthodox and this has been expressed in statements made.
The Polish people still live and breathe Catholicism. When a people is deprived of the Faith for so long, it becomes so much dearer to them.
Now as to whether this will last, that is quite another question. The secular West’s influence is all around. Many Poles return from their time in the U K and elsewhere with a watered down Catholicism and this is having a great effect. Material plentifullness blots out the supernatural.
So I don’t know if the Poles will keep the faith. But they are much more Catholic than any people I’ve ever encountered ( my experience might be limited)
Am I off topic, editor? I’m answering Therese. So please blame her and CC. Thank you.
Not off topic although it would have been interesting if you had included your reaction to the Poles walking out of Mass because the priest upheld Catholic teaching on morals. I know you wouldn’t approve of that, not remotely. I do take your point about the influence of the secular UK on them, etc, but it doesn’t speak well for the spiritual, religious and moral formation of those who could walk out of a Mass because the priest was upholding the sanctity of life in the womb. No amount of secular influence would prompt a properly formed (i.e. REAL) Catholic to do that.
I’d better not reply to you as I can’t bear to be in the dog house yet again.
Watch it! You’ll end up in the dog house if you don’t watch it! I don’t like it when folks cast aspirins on my administrative character!
In short, Therese, I don’t think I like your altitude 😀
Please forgive me if this comment isnt the usual Pro Life one but in a way it is becaus e the E U is so pro death ..therby it affects us
If you dont like the EU then this is for you and if you like it please share it let our voices be heard
Even if some people wanted to vote “yes” in the referendum, they could use the envelopes to send a picture of an aborted baby or some pro-life literature. Just a suggestion!
A very brilliant idea .Michaela..and a message for pro abortionists everywhere ..splended might make MR Cameron think as well
I would like you to read this vile petition from rabid pro abortionists they are trying to stop Cardiff 40 Days For LIfe …these people have harrassed the peaceful .Prayerful Pro LIfe Group in a horrific way
they even dressed one man as Jesus to ridicule them …
How much longer will Pro LIfers have to suffer such things ?
Yesterday I was speaking to a very devout friend who does not have a computer he was saying about the dilemma of voting in or out of the EU..he had read in one Catholic magazine its in the best interest for us to stay in …I pointed out that given the E U stance on reproductive wrongs ,homosexuality ,abortion ,sex ed ..prostitution ,euthanasia your answer is there .
It should be a Moral issue as well as Financial etc
Unfortunately, we have a dreadful pope right now and he is about as worldly as they come, so he isn’t too bothered about the moral issues – he’s just given the green light to bishops and priests around the world to permit adulterers to receive Holy Communion, on the basis, put simply, that the adulterers can convince their priest that adultery is really not such a bad sin after all. Hence, it’s hardly surprising that he is supporting the EU. His mind is about as clear as a mountain of mud.
That linked report is just confirmation of what I’ve written above (12.03 pm) – that the Catholic Faith and Morals are not uppermost in this Pope’s mind. He is very much earth-bound. Watching him shaking hands with the migrants on TV news this morning, with reports that he is taking ten of them back to Vatican City with him (?***!!!!) just says it all. He won’t be trying to influence these members of false religions, to lead them to the truths of the Catholic religion – the only true religion. Far from it. He just wants to contribute to giving them a better life in this world. I’m convinced that if any of us asked him “what about the next world?” he would reply: “next world? What next world?”
That, Wendy, is my considered opinion! But we’re stuck with him – for now.
So does Cardinal NIchols give a strong signal that Catholics should vote for IN.
In The Tablet he is quoted –
Cardinal Vincent Nichols has warned that it would be harder for the UK to face socio-economic problems if it left the European Union.
Speaking at a press conference in London on Friday, the day that the Leave and Remain groups began to campaign in earnest, the Cardinal said that the Catholic instinct was “to look for the whole”.
The Bishops Conference of England and Wales today put out an effectively neutral statement on the EU Referendum, calling on Catholics to pray before they voted.
That statement said that the human person, not economics, was at the heart of the debate.
While the bishops acknowledged “the profoundly religious roots of European nations” and that “Europe has a two thousand year-old Christian culture”, they also noted “the justifiable concerns that many people have in relation to the European Union”.
But speaking in a personal capacity, Cardinal Nichols said that there was a long tradition within Catholicism “of holding things together”.
“Once you start down the path of division, that almost inevitably leads to further division. Once it becomes your solution it becomes a frequent solution,” he said
I had to laugh at the comment about “holding things together” and “not starting down the path of division” given the chaos in the Church after the division caused by Vatican II which he backs. I often find myself saying “do these men hear themselves?” .
Tragically your spot on who could believe it ??/…I bet he has his telescope ready every night to receive The Martians he so longs for.and go for a ride in their space ship possible to the next World ….. jokes aside this man is the leader of millions of Catholics and he is not nourishing any ones Soul is he ?……….what gift he is to the satanic and far left loonies ..very very scary indeed
Comments are closed.