The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Church credibility harmed by 'hasty' excommunication
Vatican official says girl who had abortion should have been defended
Mar. 16, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionVATICAN CITY -- A 9-year-old Brazilian girl and the doctors who performed the girl's abortion needed the Catholic Church's care and concern, not its condemnation, said a leading Vatican official.
Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, criticized what he called a "hasty" public declaration of the excommunication of the girl's mother and the doctors who aborted the girl's twins.
The girl "in the first place should have been defended, hugged and held tenderly to help her feel that we were all on her side" he wrote in the Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, March 15.
"Before thinking about excommunication, it was necessary and urgent to protect her innocent life and bring her back to a level of humanity of which we men of the church should be expert witnesses and teachers," he said.
"Unfortunately, this is not what happened and it has impacted the credibility of our teaching, which appears in the eyes of many as insensitive, incomprehensible and devoid of mercy," he said.
Doctors at a hospital in Recife, Brazil, performed an abortion March 4 on the girl, who weighed a little more than 66 pounds and reportedly had been raped repeatedly by her stepfather from the time she was 6 years old. Abortion in Brazil is illegal except in cases of rape or if the mother's life is in danger.
After the abortion, Archbishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho of Olinda and Recife said it was "a crime in the eyes of the church" and that human laws can never override the laws of God.
He told a Brazilian newspaper that, while it was true the child ran health risks if she continued the pregnancy, "the end does not justify the means. The good aim of saving her life cannot justify the killing of two other lives."
The Vatican's prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, said excommunication against those responsible for the abortion was legitimate.
In an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa March 7, the cardinal underlined that according to canon law anyone who procures an abortion incurs automatic excommunication, meaning there is no need for an official decree from church authorities.
However, canon law indicates several conditions -- for example, not yet having turned 17 years old -- that would render an individual exempt from the penalty of excommunication.
The church officials' statements puzzled Brazilian Catholics and were criticized in the media. Many priests were called upon by their parishioners to explain the church's position. Nongovernmental organizations criticized the fact that the stepfather would not be excommunicated.
Fisichella criticized the way Archbishop Sobrinho handled the situation.
"Only because the archbishop of Olinda and Recife hastily declared the excommunication of the doctors" did this story of despicable, yet all too common, violence against girls and women make newspaper headlines, he said.
Fisichella said that because of the Brazilian girl's young age and her "precarious state of health her life was in serious danger" by continuing the pregnancy.
"How should one act in these cases?" he asked, underlining that the girl's case represented an "arduous decision for doctors and moral law itself."
Doctors deserve respect for the difficult decisions they must often grapple with, he said, adding that no one nonchalantly makes life-and-death decisions and to even suggest it "is unjust and offensive."
He said the Catholic principle that upholds the sanctity of life is unshakeable and "abortion has always been condemned by moral law as an intrinsically evil act."
However, because excommunication is incurred automatically at the moment a direct abortion is carried out, "there was no need to declare with such urgency and publicity a fact that occurred automatically," he said.
Fisichella said the church can still be firm with its moral principles and at the same time reach out and show mercy toward others.
He told the young girl in his written article: "We are on your side. We feel your suffering and we would like to do everything that would help you restore the dignity that you have been deprived of and the love that you will still need.
"There are others who deserve excommunication and our forgiveness, not those who have allowed you to live and who will help you regain hope and trust despite the presence of evil and the wickedness of many people," he said.
At a press conference at the Brazilian bishops' conference headquarters in Brasilia March 12, church officials seemed to backpedal on Archbishop Sobrinho's comments.
Sobrinho "did not excommunicate anyone," but simply cited the norms that exist in canon law, said Auxiliary Bishop Dimas Lara Barbosa of Rio de Janeiro, secretary-general of the Brazilian bishops' conference.
Archbishop Geraldo Lyrio Rocha of Mariana, president of the bishops' conference, said to reduce the issue to a simple question of excommunication was to push to the back burner the issue of violence against children, which needs to be discussed by the country. This year the bishops' annual Lenten fraternity campaign, "Fraternity and Public Security," addresses domestic violence as a source of insecurity among Brazilian women and children.
At the press conference, Archbishop Rocha said: "Rape is such a repugnant act that the church does not need to call attention to it. Abortion, however, is not seen as such by some, and that is the reason for excommunication: not only to punish but to show those who practiced the act the gravity of their deeds."
(Contributing to this story was Lise Alves in Brazil.)
"However, because
"However, because excommunication is incurred automatically at the moment a direct abortion is carried out, 'there was no need to declare with such urgency and publicity a fact that occurred automatically,' he said."
- Like I thought. The bishop in Brazil handled this with as much delicacy as a palsy victim with a jackhammer. Could have been handeled in a MUCH better way.
As you all probably know, I am proud to stand up to defend the Church's teachings, but I am also the first to admit that those in change can handle things very badly. Hey, it happened when someone with the attitude very much like Archbishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho tried to bring Luther back into the fold. It might have succeded had someone with a little more tact been doing the talking.
Thank you for injecting some common sense, Archbishop Fisichella.
Unfortunately the "common
Unfortunately the "common sense" of Archbishop Fisichella is really nothing except media "SPIN".
Nothing is changed. The mother and doctors are still "automatically" excommunicated.
Once again the hierarchy has misstated the problem. They wrongness that they want to focus on is the "hasty, public" confirmation of the excommunications. I see the wrongness as their inability deal with the real world exception that abortion not is always a sin.
This rape victim 9 year old girl is more important than the cells in here uterus. The wiggle word "protect her innocent life and bring her back to a level of humanity of which we men of the church should be expert witnesses and teachers" is equivalent to "Somebody ought to do something" because it includes no action. Unfortunately, my experience is that there will only be words and no action.
I also see a recurring theme here; the latest mishandling of pedophile priests. They want to talk and wait instead of doing anything. They also treat the perpetrator better that the victims - girl, mother and doctors. Imagine, if they "automatically" excommunicated the rapist stepfather, then ALL of those priests, nuns, brothers and others would have to be treated the same way. That’s only fair, RIGHT?
P.S. Let’s wait and see if the bishop is punished?
When did rape become the
When did rape become the criteria for excommunication? It is grevious, mortal sin. There is a major difference.
You do know that excommunication is not to be seen as a punishment like rolling up a newspaper and swatting a dog, right? It is meant to be used to call those under it back into the fold of the Church. You mistaken idea of its purpose may be part of your problem.
"They also treat the perpetrator better that the victims - girl"
- Really? I must be reading a different article than you. Did they say the rapist was without blame? Did they say that the rapist did not commit mortal sin? Did they say that the little girl excommunicated herself?
Perhaps your anger has driven you to incoherency?
I do like how, no matter what comes out of the Vatican, you think they are either lying or only doing something much worse than before.
Mike — The thing that galls
Mike — The thing that galls me about the abortion-excommunication linkage is that abortion is treated by the church in a manner different than all other killing. If I murder someone, I am not excommunicated. If I participate in or cause mass murder, I still get to be a member in good standing. But if I, as a physician (in real life, I am not one), exercise my best medical judgment and conclude that the life of a nine year old, 80 pound girl pregnant with twins will most likely be lost if she carries them to term and if I carefully examine my conscience and conclude that aborting the fetuses offers the best chance for preserving her life, then I get excommunicated automatically. Am I missing something here? Here are some present-day and historic examples. Robert Mugabe is a Catholic in good standing with the church. He is also responsible for the deaths of probably thousands of Zimbabweans. Does this not strike you as sort of insane, to not apply the same standard to him? In Rwanda, a number of Catholic clergy have been convicted by the international court of crimes against humanity for their participation in the slaughter of Tutsis. They have not been excommunicated. Does it make sense that these murderous slime should still be welcome in the church? Same thing happened in the former Yugoslavia — a number of Roman Catholic Croats have been convicted of crimes against humanity for their part in massacres during the recent unpleasantness. Why are they still members of the church? Going back a few more years, you may know that the President of the German puppet Slovak Republic was a Catholic, Fr. Joseph Tiso. The government of Father Tiso had the distinction of being the only government anywhere to actually pay Germany a certain amount per Jew to take their Jews off their hands, with full knowledge of what would happen to them. Even after he was tried and convicted of war crimes, Father Tiso was not excommunicated. And finally, of course, we come to Adolf Hitler. Hitler and most of the Nazis in his inner circle were baptized Catholics, yet the only one of them who was excommunicated was Heinrich Himmler — because he was divorced. Does it not strike you that there is something a little warped, perhaps something kind of immoral, about the rules of the church here? Do these things not make you wonder just a little if this is really the way God would want his church operated?
I have no quarrel with a general rule that those who procure or who perform abortions ought to be excommunicated. I have an enormous quarrel with the notion that those who perpetrate other forms of killing shouldn’t face the same penalty. After all, killing is killing.
In my view, the entire hierarchy of the Church, from the parish priest all the way to the Pope, was, once again, asleep at the switch. This situation did not exactly strike out of the blue. These guys had time to work out a plan. Had I been Pope (which I’m glad I’m not), the plan would have gone something like this. The Archbishop should have announced that the mother and doctors were, in fact, automatically excommunicated pursuant to canon law, BUT the church, being mindful of the grave threat to the life of the child and of the moral dilemma in which the mother and doctors found themselves, and wishing to demonstrate God’s mercy and forgiveness, had concluded that the excommunications should be lifted immediately. After all, if the church can lift the excommunication of some goofy Holocaust-denying bishop, it could do the same thing here. Doing so would have turned this situation — which I think we can all agree is a PR disaster — into a teachable moment that would have allowed the church to expound with some authority on human dignity, the sanctity of all life, and the moral challenges that all people face in their daily lives. Instead, what we have — and this isn’t surprising given the current ecclesiastical administration — is a Three Stooges moment, with Cardinals and Archbishops running around and verbally bopping each other on the head.
Thank you. Your words have
Thank you. Your words have truly expanded my way of thinking on this issue.
Well said. The Church is in
Well said. The Church is in need of continued reform. I admire Archbishop Fischella for speaking out. Even if it is only a start.
Abortion-excommunication is
Abortion-excommunication is treated differently than other murders because it is legal. If you look up the seven reasons automatic excommunication (see below)almost all of them are legal under the civil laws of most nations.
Automatic excommunication to remind Catholics that these are serious sins and one must repent and go to confession.
http://www.geocities.com/seapadre_1999/excommunicationoffenses.html
The seven offenses which bring automatic excommunication ("latae sententiae, so that it is incurred automatically upon the commission of an offence") are spelled out in canon law. Like legal language everywhere, it is a little bit complex. However, apart from procurring or participating in an abortion, the average Catholic is unlikely to commit one of the offenses. They involve the following: using violent force against the pope, committing a sacrilege such as throwing away a consecrated host, absolving a person with whom one has committed a sin against the six commandment, consecrating a bishop without a pontifical mandate, directly violating the seal of confession and formal apostasy, heresy or schism.
Mike: "You do know that
Mike: "You do know that excommunication is meant to be used to call those under it back into the fold of the Church."
You are the mistaken one, Mike. Any Catholic who remarried without getting the first marriage annulled by the Church (a costly endeavor) could tell you the truth about excommunication. Excommunication is indeed the ONLY means of punishment left to the Catholic Church since torture is no longer used. The Church's concern is merely with sex - adultery in a second marriage. There is no concern for the children of that first marriage, who become bastardized by the annulment.
Quite the opposite of your self-righteous statement of blatant ignorance, the threat of excommunication merely drove millions away from the Church, not called them "back into the fold of the Church." And by the way, Mike, they never look back either.
I think you need to study
I think you need to study what Excommunication is.
"There is no concern for the children of that first marriage, who become bastardized by the annulment."
- Huh. You do know that by the very definition of 'annulment' there is no problem with the person getting married again, right?
No one has ever said that the teachings of Christ's Church were east to follow.
You do not understand the
You do not understand the Church's position on this. First of all, the children of the annulled marriage are in no way considered illegitimate. The Church's position on the first marriage is not that no marriage took place at all, but that a sacramental marriage was not entered into.
Secondly, the first marriage is presumed to be until death unless investigated and found to be otherwise. Until it is clear that adultery is not being committed, the people involved in the second marriage cannot receive Communion **unless** they live as brother and sister **and** their receiving will cause no scandal.
Thirdly, the annulment process is not costly to those whose marriage is being investigated. first, the amount charged is much lower than any comparable service by, say, a lawyer, (altho the amount vaires from one diocese to another), and secondly, every diocese has a sliding scale so that no Catholic will have to live without an annulment for lack of money.
The Church's concern here is for the Eucharist and for the soul of those who receive the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ Himself, and the Church desires to protect that Body from profanation. And as St Paul said in the Bible, those who partake unworthily condemn themselves.
You are correct of course:
You are correct of course: 'Unfortunately the "common sense" of Archbishop Fisichella is really nothing except media "SPIN".
The whole idea of automatic excommunication which by its very nature does not take into account the specific circumstances is grotesque. Thankfully most decent Catholics will recognize its stupidity and treat it with the contempt it deserves.
I wish I could believe that
I wish I could believe that these bishops really felt for the girl - or, indeed, for the love of God. It just smacks of power-play and the fear of sexuality. Yes, abortion is wrong, but if it were not the result of a sexual act I wonder if they would be so quick to condemn.
I am deeply saddened and
I am deeply saddened and angry with the outcome of all of this. The almost-patronizing comments that the girl-in-question needs to be taken care of seem to me an afterthought by church officials who were much more intent on dealing with canon law than they were with love and mercy.
And now the archbishop washes his hands of the excommunication deed, saying that this is just automatic procedure written into canon law, so he did nothing. It is the way it is.
Can we only imagine this scenario: a young girl, from the age of six, was repeatedly raped by her stepfather. Due to an unusual biological situation of her even being able to produce any eggs at the age of 9, she gets pregnant. Not with one child, but with two. She weighs 66 pounds. Just from a medical standpoint, she would hardly be able to bring these babies to full term. She could die. But, Brazil, a hugely "Catholic" country allows abortions for cases of rape or if the mother's life is in danger, and so, she is free to terminate this pregnancy. Yes, it's a nightmare, a frightfully horrifying dilemma. What really are this girl's choices? She cannot make the choice herself, so her mother and doctors make it for her. She has legal recourse and her life is saved. Yes, two children died in the process. That is a terrible, terrible thing. Was their other choice to carry this pregnancy as far as they could, and then when the mother's life is sufficiently compromised, they make a decision to "take" the babies? And the 9-year-old dies, too?
My sadness is directly related to the actions of the church. The girl and her mother needed our deep compassion from the start, as well as did her doctors. The church's statement should have been that, not the issue of excommunication, which should have been rescinded due to the extreme circumstances.
I pray the little girl is healed.
Little girls do not produce
Little girls do not produce eggs. The eggs are there at birth.
Frances M - what in God's
Frances M - what in God's name is the point to your comment?!
Mine was in response to
Mine was in response to Kathy9999's - "Due to an unusual biological situation of her even being able to produce any eggs at the age of 9, she gets pregnant."
It requires ovulation for a
It requires ovulation for a female, adult woman or little girl to get pregnant. So the idea that this little nine year old could produce a situation that allowed her to get pregnant is certainly correct. Some times criticism is not good critique but is only in the service of tearing down the well thought out comments of others!
Peace and understanding,
R. Dennis Porch MD
R. Dennis Porch, MD - The
R. Dennis Porch, MD - The idea was to inform others who may well believe that females produce eggs. My intention was to make that clear. There was no other intention.
I am sorry, that is the
I am sorry, that is the understanding of human biology from the 1970s and before. While you can also use the fly/meat/jar/cheese-cloth experiment to emphatically disprove classical parthenogenisis (something living from what was dead), your statements on whether a 9-year old can produce eggs (ova) are out-of-date. I was also trained with what you dogmatically state, but that is not what current evidence supports, nor is it current biology.
The same science that demonstrated that the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" of Haeckel (a Lamarckian biologist) is to be literally rejected and gave the world videography of human fetal development in utero, now has a far different view of when a human female has "eggs". The current evidence supports theories which recognize that in the human female fetus the embryonic/fetal development of the ovaries produces primary oocytes. These are cells which cease divisional progression in prophase. In prophase, the chromosomes are "coiled" (placed in a compact form is more accurate), but have not undergone any meiotic division to form an "egg". In normal conditions, there will be TWO meiotic divisions, whether oogenic or spermatogenic. Unlike the dogma of the past, the human female infant is NOT "born with all of her eggs". When puberty (which can be described as adrenarche or menarche) occurs (it's getting ever earlier with a combination of abundant nutrition and environmental factors), THEN meiosis begins to form eggs (in the female) and sperm (in the male).
For meiosis for the human female, the "final product" is one secondary oocyte or "egg" and three polar bodies (which contain uniquely reassorted DNA that was excluded during the process of meiosis). For meiosis in the human male, all of the meiotic divisions produce uniquely reassorted DNA which are conserved as four individual spermatozoa. Each DNA "packet" produced in meiosis (male or female) is fully "human" and unique, having undergone chromosomal reassortment. An interesting observation is that, for species in which asexual, parthenogenic reproduction appears (lower plants, some succulent plants, some invertebrates, some reptiles, a few fish, as well as rare examples of sharks and birds), the asexual process involves the polar bodies produced during female meiosis. It is one of the polar bodies that "fertilizes" the egg. As each egg (secondary oocyte) and polar body have unique and reassorted DNA produced in the cell division of meiosis, each is different. Please notice that most reproduction is sexual, not asexual, and quite rarely (under stress or duress). While there is skeptical acceptance of what is considered parthenogenic in a limited modern/current sense, there is no scientific evidence or acceptance of parthenogenesis in the classical (Greek or Hellenistic) sense.
It is sad that the writings of Pope Benedict XV are so ignored. Why not read them at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xv? It is sad that so many 'conservatives' today reject everything except #5 out of Pope Benedict XV's Encyclical "AD BEATISSIMI APOSTOLORUM," written during World War I and before the Bolshevek "revolution". So much wickedness and evil has been brought into the world by those who only sought "victory" or "defense of the Catholic faith" and have failed to heed Pope Benedict XV's refusal to apply epithets to modify "Roman Catholic". Remember that World War I began under Pope St. Pius X, the "loyalty oath against 'modernity' papacy", a time which set the stage for so many of the worst corruptions of religion -- statist atheism and the countervailing radical authoritarian/Nationalist/Fascist/Monarchist/Phelangist/Nazi powers which brought on World War II in Europe.
Instead of regaling the world with "discussions" of the difference between "'latae sententia' excommunication" and "mortal sin" or whether the Fascists were "neo-pagans", "neo-modernists", "moderists" or "heretics", why not be far more cognizant of how to turn "the world" more toward #6 of "Ad Beatissimi Apostolotum"? Why not focus on methods for looking for the plank in our own eye before we start down the path of looking how to define whether our neighbor has a plank, beam or mote in their eye? While I would think that the "plank model" would apply to bishops FIRST, especially for the manner in which this situation has been (reportedly) handled, I would ask everyone to pray for and respect the humanity of this family and their medical staff.
Your Brother in Christ -- Pius
Diddicus Pius, thank you for
Diddicus Pius, thank you for your up-to-date comment regarding biology.
"The current evidence supports theories which recognize that in the human female fetus the embryonic/fetal development of the ovaries produces primary oocytes. These are cells which cease divisional progression in prophase. In prophase, the chromosomes are "coiled" (placed in a compact form is more accurate), but have not undergone any meiotic division to form an "egg".
In addition, I also see the parallels to our time and that of the beginning of the last century, the bloodiest century of all. We are in extreme danger of approaching our own annihilation if we make the same mistakes again. Unlike the beginning of the last century, there is the existence of nuclear weapons. This changes drastically our ability to survive a war with such weapons available for target by enemies or with use of in defense.
Finally, somebody within the
Finally, somebody within the Vatican's power structure is wising up to the situation and the amount of brutta figura it's causing the church. These issues are very often nowhere near as black and white as church law often insists on handling them as. This was a 9 year old innocent girl, raped by a relative and carrying twins. My 34 year old wife is having enough issues carrying my son in a normal non-complicated pregnancy that we wanted. We can't imagine the hell this poor girl is undergoing, as this pregnancy would have killed her had the doctors and her mother not acted. The point is when the church acts the way it did in this case, it presents it as black and white, when the reality is shades of gray. We live in a world of sin, and that often means the choice is between evils. That being said, the question always is in these case, which is the lesser of the evils since there are no good options here? Therefore I applaud Archbishop Fisichella for his very pastoral and compassionate stance on this issue. It's the classic example of advocating for the lesser of evils and trying to make some good out of it and should be commended for it is true bella figura
Well, as I read the article,
Well, as I read the article, it seems to say the girl, her mother and the doctors are still excommunicated. With sympathy, of course.
The "problem," it seems, was the Church acted "too hastily" in declaring it. And yet, from this article, the perpetrator of the crime, the one ultimately responsible for the abortion, is not excommunicated, not even for his hellish crime.
I don't think the bishops got the message. It wasn't the "hasty" excommunication that has eroded the Church's credibility. The idea that a nine-year old girl could be morally culpable for an abortion is repugnant. Her crime, it seems, is being a victim. If, as the article suggests, she has been abused since the age of six, one has to at least wonder whether she can begin to understand what is happening to her. The "expert witnesses and teachers" of humanity blew it.
They may still be
They may still be excommunicated technically, however, it should have been handled privately and with the utmost care. If it had been done this way, there would have been no need for the archbishop to get involved, the doctors would have gone to confession if their consciences moved them to that, done their penance and it would have been over and done with. Since it did get handled publicly however, the sad result is everybody involved has to bear this publicly. It has to be hell being 9 years old and officially cursed (the effect of excommunication) by one of the main institutions you trusted because somebody close to you violated your trust.
Rafael Pozos - You say -
Rafael Pozos - You say - "Since it did get handled publicly however, the sad result is everybody involved has to bear this publicly. It has to be hell being 9 years old and officially cursed (the effect of excommunication) by one of the main institutions you trusted because somebody close to you violated your trust."
Do you really think that a 9 year old even knows what excommunication really means? What makes you think that this 9 year old girl trusted the Church? Does this child even know what trust means? Does she know what normal means?
I am beginning to look at this situation as something that had to come to light publicly and not be buried so that people can really see what torture is for a little girl of 9 years old to be so violated, and since age 6 for Christ's sake. If this is not a situation of torture, then define torture. For the Church to have a law forbidding every and all abortions, even to save the life of this little girl, is to condone torture. Surely, it would have been torture for her to try to carry twins at age 9 years old. It would have been torture for her mother to witness as well. It would have been torture also for the doctor who knew she would not survive.
If anyone should be excommunicated it is the step-father. If anyone needs to do penance, he surely does. But, he is a pedophile. It seems our Church prefers pedophiles than simple people like innocent little girls who cannot defend themselves against perverts. She should have been tortured further is what the law of the Church demanded. This is a perfect example of when to break a Church law, to save the life of an innocent 9 year old little girl.
It is obvious to me that the laws of the Church need to take into account the innocent parties such as the little girl and her mother and doctor who saved her life. If the law does not serve justice, charity, compassion, for all involved, it is a bad law that should be done away with.
She may not fully understand
She may not fully understand what excommunication is quite the way we do in the moment, but in a Catholic country like Brazil is, it may come back to haunt her later in life. One thing I pretty much can guarantee is that she has suffered damage to her emotional development from not just the experience of being assaulted since she was 6 and being theologically assaulted for her mother's and doctors decision to save her life. That's the real tragedy. Nobody deserves to be tortured like that. There may be a purpose for it, but nobody ever deserves something like this and there is no justification for it on our plane of existence.
In the Roman Catholic
In the Roman Catholic Institution church, is the only life that is protected and sacred, the life in utero ? It certainly looks like that. Do any of these clerics have any knowledge of child development ? How can they hold this 8-year old, 66 pound girl responsible morally, spiritually, psychologically after having been sexually abused frequently since the age of 6, and forceably impregnated by her stepfather. This is a child that has been traumatized and victimized repeatedly by her stepfather and now by the church fathers. This is a child that has not even reached the stage of "reason". Either have the male church clerical hierarchy. This is beyond outrageous and once again points out the problem of an all male, clerical hierarchical church. If Jesus showed his anger towards the money changers at the temple, I can just imagine the rage he would feel towards those clerics who so mismanaged this situation. Didn't Jesus say something about anyone who injures "these little ones" having a millstone tied around their necks and thrown into the deep ? That doesn't just refer to that 23 year old stepfather who repeatedly sexually abused this small girl, but to these highly educated men who lack the capacity to compassionately deal with an 8 year old in addition to discerning the "spirit" of the law and the "letter" of the law....among other things. This is beyond tragic.
While I am not in favor of
While I am not in favor of abortion..I have to ask this question: why is not the perpetrator of the real crime: the step-father not excommunicated!!!!!! ???
How can he get away with a mere mention in the articles, when he is the biggest sinner here of all!!!!! Should he not have to bear the burden of the crimes???
In the same way that was
In the same way that was mentioned for the girl and her doctors, the step father actually was excommunicated. It just wasn't publicly proclaimed. We have a habit of getting our priorities wrong especially, it seems, when it comes to children. Remind anyone of any recent scandals in the Institutional Church in America? If excommunication is the act of separating oneself from the body of Christ because of one's acts, and lasts until repentance and absolution, who could possibly say the step-father, whether publicly stated or not, is not outside the body of Christ because of his years of rape and abuse? Probably someone, but they would be wrong,
Was the stepfather
Was the stepfather excommunicated? This is another nail in the coffin of the hierarchy,which talks about justice while continuing to practice injustice against women.
Please read what the Church
Please read what the Church actually teaches about excommunication before simply coughing up talk of 'bigotry against women'.
Of course that father wasn't
Of course that father wasn't excommunicated because the father's sexual act of rape is open to procreation. Even Bishop Sobrhino stated that the act of rape was less evil than the act of aborting the twin fetuses and was not excommunicable and he is canonically correct.
In Catholic sexual theology the logic runs that rape is more moral than masturbation because rape is open to pro creation. That is a fact. It may be a difficult one to swallow, but it is a fact. The other fact which this case points out quite clearly is that the unborn are held to a higher standard of life worthiness than those of us who draw breath on our own. That this unequal standard is not supported by biblical or Church tradition doesn't seem to matter.
Archbishop Fisichella is doing the best he can to mitigate the fall out from this case, but the fact is this young Brazilian abuse victim represents a loose thread in the conception end of the seamless garment of life. In the interests of reasonable mercy I honor all those innocents who have been caught up in this tragedy.
The short answer is that the
The short answer is that the Father is not excommunicated; however his status is pretty much the same.
The mother has been excommunicated under Canon Law, based on the Church's authority "to bind and to loosen" granted it by Christ who no doubt knew full well he was giving that authority to fallible human beings. Because of her excommunication she cannot recieve communion without "eating and drinking her own condemnation". That is something so worrying that the priest at ever mass prays on behave of the entire congregation "let this not bring me condemnation". To lift this ban she would have to go to confession, whereby the church uses the "loosen" part of its authority.
Now the Father because of his actions he is in a state of mortal sin. What does that mean? Well, (he) cannot recieve communion without "eating and drinking h(is) own condemnation". I copyclipped that last part form above, because his situation is identical to the mother.
And copyclipping again To lift this ban (he) would have to go to confession, whereby the church uses the "loosen" part of its authority.
All that being said the reason that excommunication is imposed for abortion and not fro say rape, is because the immoral status of that act is in dispute within the Church; witness the comments posed here or the existence of Catholics for a Free Choice.
Finally, I have to agree the Bishop shoul not have made a public example in this case, but there may have been things going on or being said, that I don't know about, that made him feel the need.
These acts of
These acts of excommunication, so widely & noisily proclaimed, once again show the sensitivity of male hierarchy to women...that is to say, there is no sensitivity...there is no understanding of who women are, what we do, what our lives are like, how we think, how spiritual we are...we are simply still "Eve", the whole cause of sin and darkness in this world. Rubbish!
I wonder if any bishop, or
I wonder if any bishop, or priest, ever thinks about the people that have left the church because they, because of arrogance, simply did not care enough to think about what they were saying or doing. Of course, some of us are blessed enough that no matter what kind of horrible experience we have in the church we see God and His Son, Jesus, as being with us through everything.
A child? Why is it the life of a living already born child is of no consequence to the average prince of the church?
This whole scenario will
This whole scenario will leave a bad taste in the mouth for younger generations especially; in particular, those who are having second thoughts about organized religion in the first place. Not to mention other older people too.
Thank you, Archbishop
Thank you, Archbishop Fisichella, for putting the physical and spriitual well-being of this innocent child above the cruel, Pharisaical pronouncement made by Archbishop Sobrinho. Finally a small voice of compassion begins to speak out in this case. I pray that the entire hurt and injustice shown to this family be healed.
"Amen" to this comment. BUT:
"Amen" to this comment.
BUT: what would have happened if there hadn't been a such an outrage and howls of protest around the world? When this situation was reported in the media, some church leaders must have sensed that there was a problem that needed to be addressed in order to avoid further scandal. Pretty much the same as when the media started to report on the sexual abuse scandals. It seems to me that when the men in Rome don't hear anything, they feel that they can sweep things under the carpet and somehow get away with things. But luckily, things have changed and church leaders are now held accountable.
I don't know what exactly it was that motivated archbishop Fisichella to make the comments he made. I tend to believe that they are genuine, honest and well meant. I hope that they help in rectifying an otherwise very sad situation, first of all for the little girl, her parents and family, and the doctors and others involved in the abortion aimed at saving the little girls life. And leave it up to a merciful and compasionate God to take care of the aborted twins.
Things like this shouldn't happen in the first place.
Thank you, that it true. I
Thank you, that it true. I feel all the more convicted that Catholics must continue to participate in the conversation and hold the magisterium accountable, though this is difficult to do give the current papal climate of centralization. I greatly appreciate NCR's assistance in helping make things more transparent in the hierarchy. As the Gospel of John says, the truth is more evident in the light of day.
Au Contraire, Archbishop
Au Contraire,
Archbishop Geraldo Lyrio Rocha of Mariana has been quoted in the above article as saying,"Rape is such a repugnant act that the church does not need to call attention to it," in speaking of the excommunications automatically leveled at the doctors and mother of the 9 year-old Brazilian girl who "had been raped repeatedly by her stepfather from the time she was 6 years old."
I think it would have made a very loud and meaningful statement to call attention to the years of rape by her stepfather if the Roman Catholic Church had excommunicated him.
People do want to know why excommunicating the stepfather in this case is not even being considered. It is not too late to make such a statement.
There is no question that this entire affair has only further exacerbated the institutional church's credibility. This is unfortunate and leads many to believe that official statements, words, promises of accountability and transparency are no more than that, words.
Remember, the Holy See was an original signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child even though it has been reported that it has not submitted any of the required compliance reports since than signing.
Perhaps if church leadership had done the right thing for the right reasons with more concern for these children, these "least of the Lord's little ones," who were raped by trusted churchmen, the People of God would be more trusting of their present actions.
The very public excommunications of known clerical rapists would not hurt the church's credibility either.
Sister Maureen Paul Turlish
Victims' Advocate
New Castle, Delaware
maureenpaulturlish@yahoo.com
9 years old, brutalized since
9 years old, brutalized since the age of 6! How can anyone who remembers a guy named Jesus talking about the little children possibly think about inflicting more pain on her or her mother! even a "pena" of ecclesiastical nature! I guess this will be food for thought for the scholars and canonists. A confessor recently told me, with a sigh, that it is difficult to follow the teachings of the Church.... I guess this is just one more of those difficult teachings that has people flocking to the Church, to ministry, to community. The Grand Inquisitor of Dostoevski may be nearer than I think!
"Automatic excommunication"
"Automatic excommunication" is in and of itself immoral. It precludes the exercise of rational judgment and allows those whose primary responsibility is the use of mind and heart to find justice to avoid their duty. This is moral and intellectual cowardice. Like those who advocate "zero tolerance" provisions they seek to shift the burden of decision to an impersonal mechanism which would be beyond reproach. Such thinking is delusional, and ultimately erodes the purpose and effectiveness of law.
I don't think the original
I don't think the original intent of automatic excommunication is a symptom of cowardice. I believe the original intent of using it in these kinds of cases is to prompt somebody who has committed this serious a sin to go to confession like they are supposed to anyway. One example of this was related to me by a Franciscan Priest who will remain anonymous about a woman he was counseling who had had an abortion and had not yet worked through the pain of the experience and the mark it left on her conscience. One day during one of their sessions, she broke down and cried all over said priest's habit. He promptly put his stole on and absolved her on the spot.
Cases like the above mentioned are why automatic excommunication is there. It's intent is to get those who have sinned to realize it, go to confession and get absolved -- and better it be done so privately than publicly. The poor girl here really had no choice in the matter as she's still a child. It is an extremely sad imperfection in our church that she ended up cursed for all of this.
If she was crying because she
If she was crying because she was excommunicated, you would have a point that automatic excommunication serves a moral and useful purpose. However, by your own account, the woman was upset over the actual abortion, which would have troubled her even if she had not been excommunicated.
Of course the abortion
Of course the abortion herself would have troubled her regardless of excommunication. That's the whole point of automatic excommunication. It's designed to reinforce the notion that one should be troubled by events like this and that they should confess their roles and repent for it. In her case, she was already repenting for it and the priest did the right thing in absolving her on the spot.
I think it adds insult to
I think it adds insult to injury.
This is true.
This is true.
The injury added to this
The injury added to this insult to original injury is the Vatican's persistent and persisting inability to use wisely and well the tools of contemporary communications, despite years of ballyhooing the importance of social communications.
I would just like to add my
I would just like to add my voice.
Oh hierarchial church - "is the life of in ureto the only one to be protected?"
Good question. What about protecting the life of children and women?
What about saying 'excommunication' is a given for anyone who abuses a child? That would include priests by the way. And maybe Bishops (re: Law) how knowingly protected priests and continued to send them 'to the children.'
I'm sure 'the church' is very far away from acting like Jesus in this case. How did Jesus treat women? children? Oh church where is your voice when it is needed? Drowned by your preservation of your power.
Protect the living and you will protect the in ureto.
This is but yet another
This is but yet another example of a heartless bishop of the Catholic Church branding an innocent child as the aggressor of a sexual assault by a perverted male adult, becoming impregnated and then having the twin unborn fetuses aborted. This Cardinal Sobrinho is just as horrific as the man who violated the child in the first place, because he made the unfortunate little girl (the victim) think she was in peril of her soul. Can one imagine how this poor little girl felt thinking she was facing eternal damnation? I don't know why the Holy Father continues to honor such men with these positions of authority when they are obviously so incompetent and unworthy. What I do know is that, all around the world lately, we have been reading of stupid mistake after stupid mistake by one Roman Catholic Bishop after another. It is obviously time for the Holy Father to clean house among the Bishops and the Sacred College of Cardinals.
For all those who are
For all those who are thinking that the magisterium should have acted differently in this case, well, check the official teaching. The excommunication of all involved in the decision was automatic. Self-defense, or defense of the mother's life by her mother and physicians, is not permissible. If you have a problem with the brutality of the conduct of Archbishop Sobrino's conduct, your problem is really with the intransigence of magisterial teaching on abortion. So take the argument there, and demand that a right to self-defense be asserted in cases like these.
I would agree with you,
I would agree with you, Ifullam, that the problem is with the "intransigence of magisterial teaching on abortion." This is where the argument is going, directly to the hierarchy. This is truly where the focus belongs now, on their acts and the spirit of their unmerciful and hostile laws.
Another point I'd like to make is that the Archbishop Sobrino's following and proclaiming the letter of the law is what has brought us to this stage. It does seem odd that the laity is far ahead in their interpretation of the spirit of Jesus Christ that is merciful and loving than is our current hierarchy and as a result of that is the cause of our current dilemma of division in the Church, and the reason for many people leaving the Church, or being pushed out of the Church.
The Magisterium of the Catholic Church needs to act in a mature and conscionable as well as merciful way, not in a Pharisaic way. Many people have been trying to get through to them for many years on many fronts, but the trend has been in the opposite direction against compassion, against intellectual and contemplative reasoning with mercy towards one's neighbor. It is this backward trend of intransigence within the Magisterium that is the problem.
The poison of the Magisterium's intransigent reasoning against intelligent merciful reasoning has been leading the entire Body of Christ to a dead end. Evidence of this dead end is the fact that the Catholic Church is no longer credible as a teaching authority on many matters, which is the reason for the shortage of priests, priests now having affairs with women, pedophile priests being harbored and protected, and women becoming priests against this teaching authorities narrow-minded, grotesque dictates, among many other issues that I will not get into here.
The Holy Spirit cannot be contained within a few men at the top of a large organization of people who are the People of God. This indicates the Magisterium does not understand the Holy Spirit, or worse, is rejecting the Holy Spirit. This is another source for them not being credible witnesses to the living Christ.
The "demand that a right to self-defense be asserted in cases like these" is being made by the mother of the 9 year old little girl who was raped repeatedly as well as by many compassionate and understanding people in and outisde of the Catholic Church. She, in good conscience, made the decision to allow her doctor to save the life of her child. If she had waited to obey a Church Law or obey an Archbishop or teaching of the Church, her little girl would be dead. Such teaching by the Magisterium that leads to death of a little 9 year old girl who was raped is not from Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit. One has a duty in their daily life as a Christian or a Catholic, or as a mother, to defend the life of her child before defending a law of the Magisterium which was opposed to her duty as a mother to protect the life of her child.
How long will it be for the Magisterium of the Catholic Church to wake up in the spirit of Jesus Christ's teachings and to change their laws?
They are leading the Church to a complete dead end, and worse, to another historical period in the Church of leading a hostile and unmerciful movement of people to judgment against their neighbors in excommunications if one follows the spirit of Christ and basic duty as a mother to protect her child's life when it is endangered.
The Magisteriums teachings are confusing people to the point of hysteria and ill judgment and a lack of grace.
How long will it be for the Magisterium of the Catholic Church to wake up in the spirit of Jesus Christ's teachings and to change their many unjust and unmerciful laws?
Archbishop Rino Fisichella,
Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, criticized what he called a "hasty" public declaration of the excommunication of the girl's mother and the doctors who aborted the girl's twins.
The girl "in the first place should have been defended, hugged and held tenderly to help her feel that we were all on her side"
Would not this have been the action of a grandfather?
Maybe it is time to follow the advice of St Paul,
"Therefore a bishop should be.. married only once, temperate self controlled,decent hospitable...not aggressive, but gentle, not contentious..." 1Tim3
"He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with perfect dignity" Not a lover of money!
Side by side with him would be his spouse, contributing to the social welfare of the family.
What do we have with the present system? Men who allow the abuse of the most vulnerable and are found wanting by civil authority.
Men whose inaction in the face of abuse has resulted in the loss of billions of dollars to the common good!!
As one deeply committed to
As one deeply committed to Right to Life issues across the spectrum, I have only one question. When will we/the Church EVER justly exercise the compassion of Jesus?
"As one deeply committed to
"As one deeply committed to Right to Life issues across the spectrum, I have only one question. When will we/the Church EVER justly exercise the compassion of Jesus?"
Not in our lifetime, with the bunch that's running things now. And they will continue their nonsense as long as we keep financing it. Think about it.
This is becomming a pretty
This is becomming a pretty familar scenario: The Church acts; its enemies howl in opposition; and, the our enemies within the Church give aid and comfort to the external enemies with a sympathetic chorus of denunciation. People like Archbishop Rino Fisichella have always been with us, and they were characterized by Lenin as useful idiots.
Fred Dempsey: Now, what is
Fred Dempsey: Now, what is your point exactly?
I believe that many of us
I believe that many of us have great difficulty in applying abortion as wrong/evil in all situations. I know that here are some situations where the decision to procure and abortion has been made as the result of prayerful descernment. I believe this is a good example of when this can be the case. I wish that there was more humility and respect for an individual's difficult and prayerful process in a situation such as this.
Juli
The episcopacy is
The episcopacy is self-destructing in front of our very eyes! In the cases of Sobrihno and his ilky brethren, not a moment too soon. B16 will soon be surrounded by vacant churches that refuse to put up with this kind of bullroar for much longer.
Oh, it'll be a smaller church, Your Ratzingerness.
According to what I have
According to what I have read, doctors determined that to continue the pregnancy would lead to the death of the mother and the babies. Could someone please explain to me how the termination of a pregnancy in a 66 pound 9-year-old is somehow morally different from terminating an ectopic pregnancy?
It is not different.
It is not different.
It's very hard to understand
It's very hard to understand how women can read this and all of the other Church dogma and remain Catholics. The child sex scandals by priests all over the world have already proven that the Catholic Church, underneath their disguise of abortion mania, despises children. The discrimination against women is so anachronistic, it's hard for women to admit in public that they're Catholics. I can't even take the country of Brazil seriously since it is so overwhelmingly Catholic.
The little girl's mother
The little girl's mother cannot go to heaven now, because she can't receive holy communion from the priests. The doctor who saved her life cannot go to heaven, either. She can look forward, though, to meet up with her stepfather in heaven, and all the priests, bishops, cardinals and popes, too.
AW
Good heavens, please look up
Good heavens, please look up and read what excommunication is before you make yourself sound any sillier than you already do.
Pathetically, the obvious
Pathetically, the obvious incompetence and clumsiness of high clergy in their abusive application of "excommunication" makes the whole notion of it utterly absurd. Who in their right mind will take excommunication seriously anymore? The high clerics are excommunicating themselves from The People Church.
This is truly a time when
This is truly a time when prayer is needed, asking God’s intercession that leaders -- among the clergy and among the laity, and among both Catholics, the Orthodox and Protestants – might begin to appreciate that saving lives in utero is but one prominent aspect of a global need to rearticulate our common definition of Life. We will never reach this goal by turning and hurling medieval anathemas and excommunications, by throwing eggs at crimson-robed cardinals, or by burning rapists. Where we see leaderships condoning the use of death sentences and torture, embracing gender or other types of discrimination, or minimizing child molestation or the abuse of the elderly, there we see countries, churches and other human organizations failing to advance the cause of basic human dignity and thus appearing hypocritical – and in turn, betraying by association other works they support, religious or secular. This is a lot to pray for.
This is purely hubris on the
This is purely hubris on the part of the Church. Once again it betrays its utter irrelevance in the world. They have mocked the reprehensible pain of the little girl whose life will be forever damaged because of the sexual abuse she has endured and most likely her step-father will go unpunished much like the Bishop who passed down the excommunication. I struggle to continue calling myself Catholic because of this kind of insanity. How can this be a religion based on the life of Jesus. It seems to me the Church is more interested in maintaining its authority, hording it over the faithful and in this case an innocent child. That I find absolutely horrific.
It's very hard to understand
It's very hard to understand how women can read this and all of the other Church dogma and remain Catholics. The child sex scandals by priests all over the world have already proven that the Catholic Church, underneath their disguise of abortion mania, despises children. The discrimination against women is so anachronistic, it's hard for women to admit in public that they're Catholics. I can't even take the country of Brazil seriously since it is so overwhelmingly Catholic.
I wonder what Jesus would
I wonder what Jesus would have done facing this situation. As a Shepherd - one of his strongest symbols - he would seek out this lost sheep and carry it back to teh flock and nurse it back to health. The Bishops here were acting more like hired hands or Appointed Govonors abandoning those in need of the love and fogivness that Jesus calles us all to do.
I believe that the abortion
I believe that the abortion most certainly WAS justified in this case! Since when does the health and well-being of a mother this young take back seat to 2 infants? Sometimes sad choices need to be made and the usual Catholic Really Correct answers just don’t hold water.
If anyone thinks that the God of Jesus Christ would actually honor the excommunication of the mother in these circumstances, then that God isn’t worth believing in.
If anyone should be excommunicated it is the rapist father of these babies.
Even thought Abp Fischilla is trying to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, his comment that “We feel your suffering” is obscene. He wouldn’t have the slightest sense of the suffering that this little girl was being subjected to.
I honestly believe that the
I honestly believe that the automatic excommunications that the Church states happens for certain actions---should cease. I believe each case should be examined first---then and only then---applied.
In this case---why didn't Archbishop Sobrinho behave as Jesus has commissioned his Apostles (and their successors archbishops & bishops) to do and be as a servant? Why was he not pastoral? Why did he not go to visit personally the child's mother, the little girl herself? Why did he not speak to the doctors who performed the abortion? If he had, he would have seen that there are exceptions to every law. And the law of man (and Canon Law is a MAN-made set of laws) can be put aside if the situations warrent it. Even the Law of God (10 Commandments) have exceptions to it. Remember Jesus, healing the woman stooped over for 18 years. She came on the Sabbath to be healed---and Jesus healed her. One may not kill----but in self defence---one may.
My next question would be to the Archbishop Sobrinho---and it is, "Suppose, just suppose that the child was able to bear the babies to say about 7 months---and they were removed by Caesarian Section---do you think that they would be normal healthy babies? And who would have to raise all of these children? The mother who already has a mentally handicapped 14 year old daughter, and this little nine year old girl---both girls raped over and over again and then 2 more babies---who would either be mentally or physically handicapped? Would the Archbishop be there to assist? With funds? With personnel? No???
The Archbishop and the Catholic Church in general deserve all the criticism that they are receiving and more! They are behaving like a bunch of Catholic Pharisees----the Law is more important than the humans who are suffering!
Post new comment