Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Vatican backs abortion row bishop

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:24 PM
Original message
Vatican backs abortion row bishop
Source: BBC News

Page last updated at 16:19 GMT, Saturday, 7 March 2009

Vatican backs abortion row bishop


A senior Vatican cleric has defended the excommunication in Brazil of the mother and doctors of a young girl who had an abortion with their help.

The nine-year-old had conceived twins after alleged abuse by her stepfather.

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re told Italian paper La Stampa that the twins "had the right to live" and attacks on Brazil's Catholic Church were unfair.

It comes a day after Brazil's president criticised the Brazilian archbishop who excommunicated the people involved.

Brazil only permits abortions in cases of rape or health risks to the mother.

Doctors said the girl's case met both these conditions, but the Archbishop of Olinda and Recife, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho said the law of God was above any human law.

He said the excommunication would apply to the child's mother and the doctors, but not to the girl because of her age.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7930380.stm



Here is the link to the original LBN story regarding the 9-year old girl, raped by her stepfather, pregnant with twins.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Religion! How it dominates man's mind, how it humiliates and degrades his soul. God is everything, man is nothing, says religion. But out of that nothing God has created a kingdom so despotic, so tyrannical, so cruel, so terribly exacting that naught but gloom and tears and blood have ruled the world since gods began.

Anarchism: What It Really Stands For (1910)
Emma Goldman


http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rebecca_herman Donating Member (494 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why does the church see abortion as worse than murder of the born?
A woman who has an abortion is automatically excommunicated, regardless of the circumstances, including rape, but if the rape victim kills her newborn because she looks at it and it reminds her of the rapist father, she would not automatically be excommunicated.

Why is one considered so much worse?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
36. Murder, under Catholic Doctrine is ALWAYS Automatic excommunication.
Thus in your hypothetical, the mother who kills her new born baby would be excommunicated, Please note the none year is NOT excommunicated, being to young to understand what is happening, but her mother is (i.e. the wife of the person who sexually abused the nine year old).

As to the father of the child, he is under arrest and will be tried for abuse. Those are also "Sins" under Catholic rules, but they are NOT "Severe Sins" as that term is used in the present catechism (Use to be called "mortal sins"). Now if the abuse is severe enough, excommunication may be applied, but all we have is accusations NOT a confirmed act.

People my disagree with the Church's position, but it is based on the assumption that a fetus becomes Human on conception NOT later. Since the fetus in this case (Two Fetuses since twins are reported) is a Human being, to kill that human just to make another human's life better is a sin. Even we in the US take that position except we we NOT accept conception as the point when Zygote becomes a Human being, we preferred the old Catholic Rule, (Pre-1869 Vatican I Rule) which made it a "Severe Sin" to have an abortion in the final trimester, but only a minor sin before that time. This was derived from medieval church rules as to abortion which in turn can be traced back to the Greeks of Roman times (And even earlier in both Greek and Jewish tradition that held a fetus was NOT a human being till it could survive outside the womb, which in humans ins about the 26th week, commonly called "Quickening").

The main problem with abortion has always been "when does the fetus become a Human Being, with all the rights of being Human, including the right to live?" If you hold it to be conception then what this bishop ruled is the only correct ruling in this case. If you hold it to occur later, then this is an acceptable abortion. When does a fetus become a human being? All of the possible dates have problems, the problem with conception is clearly seen in this case, the problem with the 26 week rule is, while it is the point where the mother and others can feel the child in her womb, as to actual development of the fetus, the only difference between the 20th week and 26th week is size of the fetus (And this was NOT found out till the early 1800s and then Doctors used it to push mid-wives out of the job of helping at births, where it had been for millennia and under the care of Doctors, the religious reversion of this issue followed the medical revision, thus the Catholic Church revision in 1869).

Birth is even worse then "Quickening" for it is clear the child can survive outside the womb before birth (and may have been able to survive outside the womb since Quickening). The next big development is when the child starts to talk and walk at about none months of age (And this appears to have been used in ancient times, but appears to have faded out when Christianity took hold). As you can see all of these dates have problems. The one that has worked the best and the longest is Roe vs Wade (i.e. the Catholic rule pre-1869, it had been adopted as part of the English Common law in the middle ages, but can trace it use back to Greek and Jewish roots).

Thus the dilemma for the Church and most other people who face this dilemma, when does human life begin and with it the protection of our society? We can attack the Catholic Church for its position, but it is a consistent position and this is one of its admitted downsides, but similar downsides exists for the other positions. When does human life begins decides the issue, and it is a debated that is generally avoided for we are uncomfortable about it. It comes up in cases like this, where the people who have debated it gets attacked for their position in the face of a case like this appear ridiculous, but then quickly dies for such cases are rare and we return to out normal rule of ignoring the problem hoping it will go away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. To Follow the Church's Logic On This One to Its Natural Conclusion
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 04:35 PM by NashVegas
Is to condemn a nine year old girl to a ruptured womb, definitely, and to death, possibly, while the fetuses died anyway because their pre-adolescent host didn't have a big enough womb to carry past 4-5 months.

Which is a great reminder of why the FF's made a case for separation of religion and state.

It's very easy for the pope and company to sit back in judgment of these people: they don't have the political power to stop the abortion and if they did, they'd have to face the world's outcry over a 9 YO girl child's death. Win-win situation for Rome they can publicly cling to their ideal while privately sighing in relief they aren't the ones who had to make this call.

Anyway, excommunication can be rescinded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. You are WRONG--and are either deliberately lying to protect your
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 04:36 PM by msanthrope
bastard church, or are truly ignorant of its disgusting processes.

MURDER is NOT latae sententiae. It may be ferendae sententiae, but I'd like to see you produce a recent ruling. Although, according yout church's frakked-up value system, violence against a bishop is latae sententiae.

ABORTION is latae sententiae. (Canon law 1398.)

Kindly cite the Canon Law under which you claim MURDER is latae sententiae.

Fact is, your church does not consider the murder of the born as seriously as it does as the termination of embryos.

If it did, then anyone who helped or supported an execution would be latae sententiae.

Your church simply doesn't like the fact that women are able to control their own bodies through abortion---the uterus is a sacred and sentimental place to men who cannot reproduce on their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. Any violation of the Ten commandments tend to excommunication
Under the Canon Code Murder is covered by canon 1397, which is the one the precedes the Canon rule on Abortion Rule 1398:
Can. 1397 A person who commits a homicide or who kidnaps, detains, mutilates, or gravely wounds a person by force or fraud is to be punished with the privations and prohibitions mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336 according to the gravity of the delict. Homicide against the persons mentioned in ⇒ can. 1370, however, is to be punished by the penalties established there.

Can. 1398 A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.


Notice, that while Rule 1398 (Abortion) clearly states that abortion is a latae sententiae excommunication, Canon 1397 (Murder) refers you to Canon 1336:

Can. 1336 1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in 1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.


Thus Murder can be latae sententiae. The restriction to such a sentence contained in 2 relates to acts generally left up a hearing, as would be in the case of Abortion (i.e. reserved for Priests and other "religious" as that term is used in the Canon Law i.e. NOT parishioners).

Side note on the concept of "Nullity". The church has a long history of NOT ruling something was Null and Void if the person who did the act was under some-sort of ban, and the person affected by the act did not know of the ban. i.e. if a priest was excommunicated but did a marriage ceremony which as an excommunicated priest he could no longer do, that marriage is still valid. It has nothing to do with this act (the nine year getting an abortion) nor the hypothetical act of a mother killing her baby.

Complete Canon Law:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. So, "Murder, under Catholic Doctrine is ALWAYS Automatic excommunication" was completely wrong
It's not 'always'; there's nothing 'automatic' about it, unless it's the Pope (or an interdict rather than excommunication, for a bishop), from 1370; and 1336 doesn't even mention excommunication or interdicts. I can't see how it even allows excommunication as an option, unless it's the Pope who was murdered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. The preferred way is always a hearing, but Murder is clearly automatic
If you look at Canon 1336, you will see all BUT the items listed in paragraph 3 related to one's place within society and where you may live NOT what you did in Church. The later is what excommunication in the Catholic Church is gear to. Even Wikipedia acknowledges that:

According to the Catholic Church, excommunication, in the sense of a formal proceeding, is not a penalty, but rather a formal proclamation of a pre-existing condition in a more or less prominent member of the Catholic Church. When such a person commits acts that in themselves separate him from the communion of the faithful, particularly when by word, deed, or example he or she "spreads division and confusion among the Faithful", it is necessary for the Church to clarify the situation by means of a formal announcement, which informs the laity that this is not a person to follow, and notifies the clergy that the person, by their own willful acts, has separated from the Church and is no longer to receive the sacraments, with the exception of Reconciliation. The decree may also indicate the mode of Reconciliation required for re-entry into the Church, specifying whether the local bishop may administer the process or it is reserved to the Pope. Excommunication is never a merely "vindictive penalty" (designed solely to punish), but is always used as a "medicinal penalty" intended to pressure the person into changing their behaviour or statements, repent and return to full communion.

Excommunicated persons are barred from participating in the liturgy in a ministerial capacity (for instance, as a reader if a lay person, or as a deacon or priest if a clergyman) and from receiving the eucharist or the other sacraments, but is normally not barred from attending these (for instance, an excommunicated person may not receive Communion, but would not be barred from attending Mass). Certain other rights and privileges are revoked, such as holding ecclesiastical office.

Excommunication can be either ferendae sententiae (declared as the sentence of an ecclesiastical court) or, far more commonly, latae sententiae (automatic, incurred at the moment the offensive act takes place). The excommunicant is still considered Christian and a Catholic as the character imparted by baptism is indelible.<1>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication

The Church wants people to attend mass and see the "errors of their ways" (Or to show the church it is wrong and make the correction). Literally you are NOT kicked out of the Catholic Church (King Henry VIII of England was excommunicated but died believing he was still a good Catholic, in fact the Kings and Queens of England still bear the title the Papacy first provided Henry VIII, "Defender of the Faith" which the Catholic Church never took away from Henry nor his successors).

My point is Excommunication is NOT designed to punished someone, but to point out the errors of their ways. This is a good case to show that the Changes in Catholic dogma as to Abortion adopted in 1869 should NEVER have been adopted, the older Catholic Rule was the better rule in such hard cases. It is hard to switch back now, but I do see it coming. The old rules were dependable, much more then the present rule if you look at how people actually have to face the problem of abortion and how to keep abortion to a minimum (Which is what most Americans want, even as most americans want to keep abortion legal). Had the older rule been in place, no excommunication would even have been thought of, but we are operating in the post-1869 ruling and this case is a sample of one of the down side of that change in dogma.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. You are a liar for your church---MURDER IS NOT AN
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 10:57 PM by msanthrope
automatic excommunication.


And you still haven't proven that it is. You still keep citing 1336--which are Latae senteniae expiatory penalties....1336 does NOT speak of latae senteniae excommunication and guess what???? THEY AREN'T THE SAME THING.

You are looking in the wrong delict section. My suggestion is that you look in the right one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-09-09 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #51
56. No, it's clearly not automatic (unless the victim was the Pope)
We'll go through this step by step:

A person who commits a homicide or who kidnaps, detains, mutilates, or gravely wounds a person by force or fraud is to be punished with the privations and prohibitions mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336 according to the gravity of the delict.

Note what I have emboldened - 'according to the gravity' means someone has to make a judgement, since this has listed several offences, and 1336 lists several penalties. So this can't be 'latae sententiae' - happening at the moment of the offence. However, there is a way the penalty can become latae sententiae:

Homicide against the persons mentioned in ⇒ can. 1370, however, is to be punished by the penalties established there.

Can. 1370 1. A person who uses physical force against the Roman Pontiff incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; if he is a cleric, another penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state, can be added according to the gravity of the delict.

2. A person who does this against a bishop incurs a latae sententiae interdict and, if he is a cleric, also a latae sententiae suspension.

3. A person who uses physical force against a cleric or religious out of contempt for the faith, the Church, ecclesiastical power, or the ministry is to be punished with a just penalty.


So, 2 latae sententiae penalties there - excommunication if it was the Pope, and an interdict if it was a bishop. When the victim of homicide is just an average person, no penalty has yet been defined. On to canon 1336:

Can. 1336 1. In addition to other penalties which the law may have established, the following are expiatory penalties which can affect an offender either perpetually, for a prescribed time, or for an indeterminate time:

Note we are in a list of possible alternatives, so someone must make a judgement when using them.

1/ a prohibition or an order concerning residence in a certain place or territory;

2/ privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;

3/ a prohibition against exercising those things listed under n. 2, or a prohibition against exercising them in a certain place or outside a certain place; these prohibitions are never under pain of nullity;

4/ a penal transfer to another office;

5/ dismissal from the clerical state.

2. Only those expiatory penalties listed in 1, n. 3 can be latae sententiae.


Again, we have a 'can' in 2 - there's a possibility there, not something automatic from 1336 alone (if another canon says there is some latae sententiae penalty, as defined in 1336, this is clarified by 2 as only being the prohibition of exercise of something); and there's an 'or' in 1, n. 2 - this is a wide-ranging list of possible penalties. Being in communion with the church may be technically counted a 'right' or 'privilege' for a layman - I don't actually know - but canon 1336 does not say "all powers, offices, functions, rights, privileges, faculties, favors, titles, and insignia, even merely honorary" are prohibited from exercise - it says they can be. So, at most, this is saying excommunication is one possible penalty amongst many. And since this is so vague, it can't be latae sententiae - it requires someone to judge what is appropriate "according to the gravity of the delict".

What is more, excommunication is spelled out in Canon 1331, under 'Title IV, Chapter I - Censures'. Canon 1136 is 'Title IV, Chapter II - Expiatory Penalties'. This would seem to show that excommunication is not regarded as 'a prohibition against exercising' a right or privilege, but as something separate, and more serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. What you posted proves me correct. Murder is not latae
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 06:17 PM by msanthrope
sententiae--it is simply NOT automatic. It must be judged by an ecclesiastical court, unless, of course, according to the Church, you murder one of them. Then you get latae sententiae, as I posted above.

Nice church....fetal cells are more important than actual children, merely because they are placed in a uterus....got to control that organ....and who is most important of all???? The clergy, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. If you read paragraph 1,2 4, 5 of Canon 1336, they all relate to personal acts
Paragraph 3 is the only one that relates to

Latae sententiae applies is some one who exercises (and who had committed Murder or the other crimes listed with it) "privation of a power, office, function, right, privilege, faculty, favor, title, or insignia, even merely honorary;". that is what most people will call Excommunication WITHOUT A HEARING.

We may be splitting hairs here, the Church prefers a hearing in all such actions, even in the case of abortion, but murder can lead to the same restrictions from the church. This is like the old rule on Suicide, suicide lead to your automatic excommunications UNLESS it can be showed it was do to some mental condition. Such exemption from the general rule can only occur after a hearing, and the Catholic Church has always prefer trials to decision issued by its priests and bishops (Through one of the problem with the Catholic Church in the US is a tendency to want to decide cases by decree instead of by trials, this was the main reason for the pedophile cases, the Bishops refused ot hold hearings on the priests accused and instead transfered them and telling the victim's family the problem had been solved, when all it was was transferred, had the Church followed their own rules as to accusations and held a hearing, the Priest probably would have been found non-guilty but the fact the Priest would keep having such hearings would made it clear, sooner then it did, that the priest was a problem and should be kept away from potential victims. From what I have gathered this is the tendency in most of the world, but in the US the Church tends to want to avoid even its own court system).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. You've read it wrong...as in, your reading comprehension
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 10:52 PM by msanthrope
truly sucks.***

Canon law 1336 doesn't mention latae sententiae excommunication. It talks about latae sententiae expiatory penalties.
Expiatory penalties are NOT excommunicative.

Note--this is why the canon for Homicide (1397) redirects you to 1336, first.

BUT NOTE--kill a prince of the church, and you go from canon 1397 to 1370--- latae sententiae excommunication. Those pricks take care of themselves.

1398--ABORTION, by contrast, doesn't redirect you anywhere. It says clearly, latae sententiae excommunication. There's no 'hearing' as you claim.

You might find this "hair splitting", but as this is the difference between 'heaven' or 'hell' in your faith, you might want to get it right.

Now, as for your commentary on the priest/pedophile problem....could you name me a single priest excommunicated for his pedophilia? Anywhere in the world? One? In fact, didn't "Crimine solicitationies" mandate excommunication for those who would try to do something about the pedophilia????

Stop being an apologist for this disgusting institution.




***FURTHER--you've quoted the canon 1336 incorrectly.....you meant to post note 3. You posted note 2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. First paragraph 3 directs one to paragraph 2
Paragraph basically says if someone does as act as defined in paragraph 2, that is grounds for Automatic sanction (i.e. Excommunication), merely hold a position as stated in Paragraph 2 does not. i.e. the act is more important then anything else.

As to defending the Catholic Church, I am not, just trying to explain what the Church is doing so the Church can be attack for what it is doing NOT what people say it is doing. The Canons MUST be read as a whole, like almost any other code. You must read all parts of it in consideration of all the parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-09-09 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #54
55. I'm still correct. Canon 1336 lists penalties, and never mentions
Edited on Mon Mar-09-09 01:01 AM by msanthrope
automatic excommunication. Automatic sanctions, as an expiatory penalty, yes...but only someone completely unfamiliar with the Canons would assume that automatic sanction and automatic excommunication are the same thing.

They are not.

Which is why you STILL aren't able to quote a canon, concordance, or any Catholic theologian of note stating that Murder (outside of a prince of the church) is automatic excommunication. Because it's not.

And as far as reading the canon, well, I've done it. The whole shebang. In Latin. You are full of stercus, as is your church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. The only Real Christian Church has no walls, no property, and no leader, but Jesus. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sultana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. PREACH!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. I do know and love the Lord.
My faith has become more universal and that has only affirmed the life of Yeshua.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. The church still doesn't consider women fully human
and the poison of their view of half the human race existing only as walking flowerpots in which to deposit seeds from the other half pervades everything in that church.

And they wonder why I left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Who needs a church like that? The Episcopalians will welcome them.
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 04:46 PM by MasonJar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I don't understand why there isn't a mass defection to the Episcopal Church
An Episcopal church looks like a Catholic church. Their services are similar to the Catholic services. The most notable difference are that they have women priests and that the clergy can marry and raise families.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
21. "All the pomp and none of the guilt"
that's what I always heard the difference was. :evilgrin:

Thanks to this case, this lapsed Catholic has come to the realization that she's never going back to the Catholics. This is so awful I don't know how I'll even be able stand attending any family events that might involve the Church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. The Church considers a 9 year old too young to ex-communicate, but not too young to
parent twins, who would be her half siblings as well as her offspring.

Sometimes, you only have to express something to realize how truly insane it is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
59. Insanity by a group of Child Molesters
Frocked out in dresses with thousands of dollars worth of gold draped down on their hideous costumes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. Do we know if the child's mother even gives a flying fuck what
the Vatican thinks? For all this child has gone through, how brave of the Vatican to back up such a malicious decision on the part of the Archbishop, disgusting display of contempt..all in the name of God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sultana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
8. What can one expect from a Church that allowed the raping of young children by priests?
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 05:46 PM by Sultana
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #8
29. That pretty much sums it up --------!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Frisbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
11. Fuck the Cathoic church and...
fuck the Pope. The world would be a better place without them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
12. Before this thread gets locked
I would like to say it is past time for we as intelligent, thinking and feeling human beings to stop putting up with the Catholic church, its followers and it's dark ages mentality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMickster Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
13. Does anyone know
if the step father was excommunicated for raping the child?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Very good question! Does the Vatican excommunicate any individual
found guilty by the courts for murder, rape etc? I'm not catholic and have no idea what their protocol is on such matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMickster Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I'm not catholic either
so I am a little undereducated on the details of what exactly one can do to become ex communicated. but it seems to me they would be remiss in not excommunicating the rapist seeing as it was his actions that led to the abortion being required.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #15
40. They can--by ecclesiastical court. Murder is NOT automatic
excommunication, but abortion is.

(See canon laws 1398/1397.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Thanks for the info, sad but very interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. They CAN excommunicate the step-father, too....
Here's what frosts my ass....these jokers have the power to convene an ecclesiastical court and excommunicate anybody they frakking well wish.....

Fidel Castro??? Excommunicated because he headed a commie country. No Shit....

But there is no way this church of molesters and enablers is going to excommunicate this asshole---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Hypocrisy reigns steady in the Vatican, I just hope the child receives
the support she needs and deserves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. I don't think he was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. Not according to a translation from a Brazilian newspaper:
Which translates to "He committed a repulsive crime, but he is not included in the excommunication. There are more serious sins. More serious than this is abortion, to eliminate an innocent life."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. No he has not been.
If I cared enough, I'd drag out my old copy of the Catechism and look up the reasons for excommunication. I know that the reasons are fairly limited but the only ones that comes to mind, (besides participating in an abortion in any way) is physically attacking the Pope and, I think, preaching against Church doctrine.

Rape a child, support an illegal war, support capital punishment - do all this without the fear that you'll still be allowed to repent and won't burn in hell for all eternity. Help a rape victim (and especially a 9 year old rape victim) avoid more trauma and you are damned.

Like my mom (still a Catholic) said yesterday, "I just can't believe Christ would want this child to suffer more." At least the Mother finally understands why I've had so much trouble with the Church.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
14. "...the law of God" is "above any human law." Yeah, it may be, but how do we know what it is?
That is the question!

Old guys in swishy red robes, with lace trimmed sleeves, who have been lying for millennia--about a whole lot of things--are going to tell us?

Or perhaps George (a million slaughtered innocents in Iraq) Bush?

Who speaks for God? And where did they get their crown?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. None of the Ten Commandments that God personally gave to Moses mention abortion or homosexuality
so clearly, anything that followed is something that man wrote, but claimed divine origin in order to squash criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #16
30. According to Mel Brooks . . . there were originally 15 commandments/3 tables---!!!
On the other hand, I've heard that the 10 commandments were all directed to males ---

!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
22. catholicism isn't the only religion out there
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 08:16 PM by SemperEadem
it's no great loss... change religions. problem solved.

Until everyone no longer lives on earth, we have to go by the laws of man--and Rome just has to deal with it.

Next week, they'll be nominating this child raping moron for sainthood... makes them yearn for those days when they all got away with raping children and holding them emotionally hostage with threats of everlasting hell fire and torment if they told anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
23. Fuck 'em.
The Church has no regard for human life. What they are interested in is control.

They don't care about the little girl. If she died, was sterilized, or traumatized by her rapist's seed, all the Church would give her would be some mumbo jumbo about being a martyr.

Talk about cold comfort.

And they don't care about the resulting children. Once they are born, anti-choicers drop them like a hot potato and try to block public funds for their care.

Not to mention that if one of their personnel rapes a child, they'd rather the perp be protected than to bring him/her to justice. They don't excommunicate clergy that aided child rapists, but they do excommunicate people helping a raped little girl.

And this is supposed to be good and holy?! Sick!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
24. Oh, well, good of them to exempt the victim from
excommunication.

Those guys are all heart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burning rain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
26. Hopefully this outrage leads more decent Brazilians...
to reject Catholicism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
27. A nine year old pregnant girl can't be excommunicated because of her age . . .
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 01:08 AM by defendandprotect
but the RCC would try to force her to have twins by incest---!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
28. Did they excommunicate the stepfather/abuser . . . ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #28
60. They will probably offer him a Deaconship
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
concerned canadian Donating Member (243 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
31. just when i thought it was safe not to hate the catholic church...

something this vile, and totally without compassion for the young girl, rears its ugly head. They fake so much concern for the unborn life, and as someone said up-thread, they don't give a damn about the same kid once he or she is out of the womb.

Hopefully, this completely 'out of touch with the human race' official church policy will trigger a rebellion within the more progressive minded Catholics, both clergy and congregation. Like everything these days, the Catholic church either changes or becomes irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smith_3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:43 AM
Response to Original message
32. And catholic priests don't even lose their job for child rape.
Let alone excommunication.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. They can deny the Holocaust and that's OK too
Ol Pope Eggs Benedict brought his pal Tricky Dicky Williamson back into the fold, and Tricky Dicky can still spit out the antisemitism that would have made Father Coughlin proud!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. And the Vatican demanded he withdraw that statement on the Holocaust
The Church authorities made a number of statements on the matter. Cardinal Daro Castrilln Hoyos, who had been negotiating with Bishop Fellay, stated that he had not been aware of Williamson's comments.<63> Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi commented that Williamson's views had no impact on the decision to remit his excommunication.<64> Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano reaffirmed that Pope Benedict XVI deplored all forms of anti-semitism and that all Catholics must do the same.<65> In an audience, the Pope expressed his "unquestionable solidarity" with the Jewish people, and stated his hope that "the memory of the Shoah will induce humanity to reflect on the unpredictable power of hate when it conquers the heart of man".<66> Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, head of the Italian Bishops' Conference, marked Holocaust Memorial Day by denouncing Bishop Williamson's views, which he said were: "unfounded and unjustified". <67> On 4 February 2009 the Vatican Secretariat of State issued a note stating that Williamson would have to distance himself unequivocally and publicly from the opinions that he had expressed (of which, it was said, the Pope had been unaware when the excommunication was remitted) if he was to be permitted to act as a bishop within the Church.<68><69> On February 12 Pope Benedict said to the Conference of American Jewish Organisations, "The hatred and contempt for men, women and children that was manifested in the Shoah (Holocaust) was a crime against humanity. This should be clear to everyone, especially to those standing in the tradition of the Holy Scriptures ..."<70><71>]/i]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Williamson_ (bishop)#Holocaust_denial_and_controversy

Pope Benedict XVI has told American Jewish leaders that any denial of the Holocaust is "intolerable", especially if it comes from a clergyman.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/europe/7885933.stm
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSTRE51B2LD20...

If you can read Italian, from the Vatican itself:
http://212.77.1.245/news_services/bulletin/news/23319.p...

There are other sites, but it is clear the Catholic Church will NOT tolerate Churchmen who deny the Holocaust took place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. So what??? They spoke sternly to him??? What really did they
do to him???

With his excommunication lifted, he gets to practice as a priest.

Now, where is the convening of ecclesiatical court for a new excommunication???? (crickets)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #37
49. Not true, Williamson STILL spits out his lies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vehl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
34. .......

dogma takes precedence over the life of an innocent kid! this is sickening x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
35. Another victory for the nazi pope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La Lioness Priyanka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
46. the catholic church has almost as much moral authority these days as a hyena
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eryemil Donating Member (958 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-09-09 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
57. Fuck the Church and its supporters. n|t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
panzerfaust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-10-09 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
58. "...the law of God was above any human law...", ummm
But this is OK ...

Isaiah 13:15-18
Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword.
Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.
Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eye shall not spare children.

PRAISE be to the God of Abraham!!!!!!

The high point of the RC church was when were there rival popes, who mutually excommunicated each other. We need more of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC