Brazil's influential Catholic Church raged against an abortion carried out on a nine-year-old girl who had been pregnant with twins after allegedly being raped by her stepfather. discuss

Dear examinator,

This is a shocking case.

Apparently the young girl has been sexually abused by
her stepfather since the age of six. And, although
abortion is illegal in Brazil, exceptions apply in
cases of rape (which this was), and where the mother's
health was at risk (which this also was). The doctors
that performed the abortion were convinced that the
girl's fragility would not allow her to carry the twins
to full term.

The Catholic Church is going to excommunicate all involved
in this case. Of course, the Catholic Church stands firmly
against abortion. And I have to admit that I felt a bit of
unease because the twins were 4 months ago. However,the doctor's
must have made the decision they thought was the right one
for both the mother and the babies. I don't believe that any
decision for an abortion is entered into lightly. The
repercussions usually last a lifetime. To me, the Church should
have shown more 'humanity' in this matter. If it could not
show compassion - it should have remained silent.

The family
has been traumatised enough,
I would have thought.

Where's runner? Come on runner.... out you come. You know you want to.

*To me, the Church should
have shown more 'humanity' in this matter. If it could not
show compassion - it should have remained silent.*

Very true indeed, but of course the Catholic Church is
responsible for much misery and suffering in the third
world.

If you check out Catholic dogma a bit deeper, they think
it is noble to suffer. That is why extremist Catholics
like Opus=Dei etc, have little whips to whip themselves.

It is high time in this world that we have freedom of
religion, but also freedom from religion. As if this
little 9 year old hasn't already suffered enough.

The Catholic Church should be ashamed of itself, or
at least the powers that be in Rome

But Houellebecq, you know exactly what he's going to say, you know he won't bother to make a rational argument, and you know he'll only respond to disagreement by telling you his mate Jesus is going to send you to hell.

For god's sake don't encourage him.

Has any one? any one at all, ever heard of the Catholic Church excommunicating a Priest who abused children?
This is sick, it is wrong, it does much harm to the church.

I think I've read enough of them to do a stand-in. Runner, if I get it wrong, feel free to correct me.

"You earth worshipping secularists have no right to criticise the church, it is because the secular dogma has led man astray that such horrible things happen. Secularists are trying to get more children exposed to porn and it's because of this that these rapes happen."

Did I miss anything? Of course, that doesn't at all delve into the depths of moral ambiguity or how to deal with such horrific events after they happen, but hey, that's dogmatic religion for you. At least it's got the whole 'sanctimony' thing downpat.

Ah TRTL, you clearly have the potential talent to be a
preacher :) You could sock it to them and take their
money, just like the other religions do. Once those
true believers are hooked, they are there for the fleecing.

Religion today is a great business to be in. A bit
of fast talking works wonders, push their emotional
buttons and they are there for the taking.

All very sad really, that the future of our planet
depends to some extent on those kinds of people.

Foxy,
I think most, if not all, Catholics will agree with you and question the wisdom - I am tempted to say sanity - of Cardoso Sobrinho, the archbishop of Olinda and Recife. You do not have to be a moral theologian to see that even if abortion is classified as killing it was a situation as in case of war when the ordinary soldier has to decide on spot whether or whom to kill (even the enemy soldier is innocent of starting the war) to save some other life/lives. He has to rely on his conscience and available information to make that decision. Like the doctors in this case.

Perhaps the Archbishop should/could not have condoned that decision by publicly acknowledging that this was an exceptional situation (although in my opinion this would have been preferable) but you are absolutely right, he should have at least remained silent.

We shall have to wait to see how the Church will disentangle itself from a situation this hapless local representative got her into. Otherwise one would have to agree with the Brasilan Health Minister that not the Archbishop but “the position of the Church is extreme, radical and inadequate".

The Catholic Church is doing itself no favours by publicly being deeply hypocritical. And deeply callous.

As Belly pointed out: Catholic priests who have abused children are not ex-communicated although Jesus Christ had something to say about those harming children, but silent on terminating pregnancies.

To me the utterances of a Bishop or the Pope of the Catholic Church has more import than the waffling of a cleric to a small congregration. This requires much more outrage in the media, then whatever that mufti said in Sydney a few years ago.

This issue is disgusting. Wonder if the raping step dad has gone to confession and is now lovingly back in the arms of his congregation straight on his way to heaven after receiving absolution, while people who are left with dealing with the consequences of this hideous man are thrown out of their community and out in the cold. Deeply, deeply offensive behaviour, regardless of your stance on abortion in general.

PS: Are the Victorians being punished some more now with an earth quake?

Belly

You ask an excellent question - somehow I doubt the Catholic Church will ever provide you with a reasonable answer.

How far has catholicism and christianity veered from any relationship with the teachings of Jesus?

How big is the universe?

You all probably know by now that I was
raised as a Catholic, as was my husband (Christian
Brothers). But by golly, I'm so ashamed at some
of the stands that members of my Church have taken
over the years. From sexual abuse, to gay rights -
their inhumanity at times is beyond comprehension.
And now this - in Brazil, which I simply can't
fathom or excuse.

What on earth is Rome going to do about this?
Where does the Church hierarchy stand on this?
If they can find the time to get involved with
that wonderful priest - Father Kennedy in Brisbane,
why can't they speak out on behalf of this little
girl in Brazil?

Shame on them!

We still shocked 'the church' is anti-abortion?.

You can't be staunchly opposed to something 'occasionally'. You either are, or you aren't. Makes no difference what the circumstances are.....to them.

It's not about the circumstances surrounding 'the mother'. It's about the welfare of the unborn child.

Obviously I THINK there's a place for abortion. I don't for 'lifestyle reasons', but if the kid's better off with a bullet in the back of the head (metaphorically speaking) than existing then so be it.

“Religion may be an INDIVIDUAL’S explanation for the meaning of life.
Dogma on the other hand is like a mass grave easy to get into nigh impossible to get out and as life affirming." (examinator ant)

As if the NINE year old didn't have enough to cope with just being raped...then pregnancy... and then twins... next being isolated from her people for life by one old man who lives in luxury, has never had children or dealt with the pain and anguish that child has and will for the rest of her life.

But most of all ensuring such shame that others afflicted will remain victims or die.
I hope they have a well staffed Samaritans there.

BTW Any more proof required about how organization’s interests come before people? No doubt the hierarchy were making an example of the people involved for the sake of authority of the church…my sister in law …. She’s a nun.
Well said Yabby and foxy.

PS Foxy My SIL says that preist has broken several church rules including the trilogy and Mary's sanctity and deserved it. She regularly hurts my brain :-\

Dear examinator,

Tell your sister-in-law for me that she needs to pray more.
The Church will need her prayers - if they keep ignoring
the basic teachings of Christ - "Love one another
as I have loved you"
Fancy putting themselves above the people they're supposed
to serve! Urghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! I won't comment on your SIL
any further,
for fear of insulting someone I don't really know, and
hurting someone unintentionally, that I'm very fond of (you).

It all makes me so disheartened - and anti Church hierarchy!

I just had something of a revelation (though that's probably not a word I should use in this context).

A typical response to such events from devout dogmatists, is that the situation is a result of deviating from the teachings of the church.

In other words, "you buggered up, if you'd been holy and nice all along, you'd have been better off."

Which, of course, doesn't address the complexities of the situation after the event.

However, on further reflection, I then noted how much of a heinous concept 'original sin' is.

So answer me this, is this a fair summation?"

You're screwed because you weren't holy to begin with, but nobody's holy to begin with, so unless you sign up to our teachings you can just go to hell?

I have given my view of the appalling behaviour by the Catholic church regarding the nine year old girl on the "Catholic Belief" thread.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8616&page=0#136596

The Catholic Church continues to shoot itself in the foot with its inhuman and absurd actions. Which could prove to be a 'godsend'; the more lacking in credibility of the church the more people will think for themselves and apply reason rather than dogma.

I am sure that the doctor and mother of the poor child in question used to be devout Catholics. Devout Catholics who behaved with more love and compassion than exists in the entire Papal City.

Dear TRTL,

You've summed it up rather well.

"Unless you sign up to our teachings -
you will go to hell!"

Or at least that's what I was taught as a
Catholic.

I remember this joke:

Sister Mary Virgilius was teaching her class
of girls and asking them the old question:

"What do you want to be when you grow up?"

One, by one, the girls replied,- Teacher, Nurse,
Doctor, Lawyer, and so on, until it came to
Danielle's turn.

"Well, Danielle, what do you want to be when
you grow up. You haven't answered my question?"
asked Sister Mary.

"I want to be a prostitute!" replied Danielle clearly.

"What?" cried Sister Mary.

"A prostitute!" Danielle repeated sweetly.

"A prostitute?," exclaimed Sister Mary.

"Yes," said Danielle.

"Thank God, my child," smiled Sister Mary,
patting Danielle on the head.

"I thought you said you wanted to be a Protestant!"

Just one more reason to ignore the rantings of these superstitious nutters.

I'm waiting for Frank Brennan to make a post.

Frank Blunt

It was a warm and comforting feeling.
Letting the world go by knowing God would fix it.
Down runner that was in my time lost and miss spent as a born again fool.
Nothing wrong with the ten commandments, even almost every rule of the church, most Church's many religions.
My reality lesson came early.
We are alone, we are responsible for our own actions.
Every religion, every church of those differing religions, has the best and the worst of mankind in them.
None may truthfully say it is not true.
Every one of them has rules that enforce doctrines on members, like this assault of an already assaulted child.
No woman, victim of rape should be told you must bare the child of such a man.
Yes we fear some religions more than most, but look deep into this matter, is it in any way different than the treatment of females we love to highlight in another religion?

Exterminator,

Are you asking did it really happen?

If so I believe there is some truth in it. Indeed there must be a Bishop somewhere in the world who would do exactly as it sounds. Every Catholic diocese in the world has one.

I believe some obscure bishop over in Brazil was the culprit. Most media stories state words to the effect that he excommunicated them which is a particularly unhelpful description for expressing an opinion on Code 1398 of Canon law in relation to whether automatic excommunication applied to the mother and doctors in that case. He also opined that it did not apply to the daughter. How much was a media ambush and how much was the Bishop volunteering his opinion is unclear. Obviously the latter would sound worse but it is surprising that the Bishop would even know about the incident unless the media approached him about it. That of course raises the issue of how the media knew about it.

Belly,

You asked if anyone has heard of a paedophile priest being excommunicated. That seems like a strange question to me. As canon lawyer Pete Vere has pointed out

'The priest-pedophile argument is a red herring, at the very least a misunderstanding of the purpose of excommunication. As a censure, excommunication is considered a medicinal penalty. That is, it's not designed to be permanent, but to bring about repentance so ...”

To excommunicate a paedophile priest to encourage them to behave better would seem no better an approach then the mishandling which occurred between the 60s to 80s. You don’t suppose that stopping them from working as priests and assisting the victims might be a better option than just encouraging them to change their behaviour in that way?

mjpb

Am I correct that you are excising the Catholic Church from any responsibility by claiming the the excommunication is merely the errant idea of a single bishop?

That a raped and pregnant nine year old obtaining an abortion a mere media beat-up?

And finally, that paedophile priests be exempted from punishment? By retaining said priests within the church and still allowed contact with children? You stated "stopping them from working as priests and assisting the victims might be a better option than just encouraging them to change their behaviour in that way". In the secular world paedophiles are jailed.

In those immortal words: "Please explain."

mjpb,

I agree that sensationalism (and vested interests) of the media should not be overlooked. However, unfortunately it was not only an "obscure bishop over in Brazil": even Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Congregation for Bishops, felt bound by the Cannon Law to endorse Archbishop Sobrinho's explicit refusal to see the case as an exception to the "latae sententiae" excommunication connected with abortion (as strange as it is, since no such automatic excommunication is connected with other killings, e.g. in an aggressive war).

I am not an expert on Canon Law, but there could hardly be a clearer case of exemption to the rule than this: saving the life of a nine year old by an action that - according to medical experts (of which neither the Archbishop nor the Cardinal are one) - changed nothing on the survival prospects of the twins.

I am afraid the Archbishop and Cardinal will enter Church history along Cardinal Roberto Bellarmino (Galileo's adversary), and worse, since this case is much more sad and incomprehensible than the Galileo case, that could - at least partly - be explained within its historic context.

Fractelle,

"Am I correct that you are excising the Catholic Church from any responsibility ...?"

No I'm pointing out that he is interpreting a rule rather than issuing a positive decree. That doesn't absolve responsibility given who's rule it is. I was also hinting that there might be different interpretations but that appears wrong.

"That a raped and pregnant nine year old obtaining an abortion a mere media beat-up?"

No that is the accurate bit. But the Bishop was interpreting a rule and all but one news report I've read makes it sounds like a positive decree. In addition it is strange that an Bishop would know about it. If those involved had gone to confession or something the excommunication would be gone.

"And finally, that paedophile priests be exempted from punishment?... still allowed contact with children?"

You have it back to front. If they were simply excommunicated they could still have contact with children in their role as a priest.

"You stated "stopping them from working as priests and assisting the victims might be a better option than just encouraging them to change their behaviour in that way". In the secular world paedophiles are jailed."

Yep. Clearly when the priest is convicted and goes to jail the distinction between excommunication and stopping him working as a priest loses significance. The relevant time is after the accusation and prior to going to jail. At that time urging him to seek forgiveness rather than stopping from working as a priest isn't in my opinion the best approach.

George,

Yes the issue has developed.

At first blush I would also think that anything produced at a geographical location with a history of simplicity in law leaving nuances to be dealt with by way of common sense would allow for an exception. However your new information indicates that the Bishop interpreted correctly. In any case I would shrink from locating the rule and expressing an opinion on canon law or assuming I know the medical facts based only on media reports which are misleading in other ways or indeed the medical opinion made by an abortion activist who was hired to do the job.

It seems that abortion activist Dr Rivaldo Albuquerque and another Doctor at his clinic aborted the child and were (re?)excommunicated. Is it possible that another doctor concerned solely with the child's welfare not hired to do an abortion might give a different medical opinion? Is it a fair bet that excommunication wouldn't be Albuquerque etal's primary concern in life in their line of work? Regardless of how you might answer it would be horrible if the pregnant girl's mother became surprised and hurt reading the Archbishop's interpretation after finding out her daughter was raped. So how did the media know? Albuquerque might have wanted to seize the media opportunity but could he have done so without the informed consent of the mother? Would you differentiate between an already traumatised mother reading in the paper that she is excommunicated and the same person agreeing to allow an abortion activist go to the media hoping that she can make the Bishop and his anti-abortion stance look bad?

mjpb,
I do not want to disagree and I certainly I do not want to defend abortion activists and associated media sensationalists, but a raped nine year old pregnant with twins is newsworthy on its own, abortion or no abortion. I agree that there are extenuating circumstances regarding the bishop's public statement (which in my opinion he did not have to make so blunt, Cannon Law or not), however I also believe there are much stronger extenuating circumstances regarding this "latae sententiae" excommunication that he could at least have mentioned.

I am not familiar with Canon Law's rulings on abortions but I would think they cannot be that much different from other cases of manslaughter or murder, where many extenuating circumstances (e.g. for a war combatant) or difficult to decide situations (kill person A to save person B's life, or kill person B to save person A's life, or do nothing and cause the death of both).

I think it was the former Melbourne Archbishop Frank Little who once said - after the journalist who interviewed him about Humanae Vitae (contraceptives) did not want to accept his explanations and qualifications, and kept on pressing - something like: "If you are unable to understand any other answer only yes or no, then the answer must be no". Something like this would have been more diplomatic and - which is more important - also more charitable than Archbishop Sobrinho's reaction. And it was much harder to explain the freedom of conscience case vis-a-vis an encyclical than the exceptionality of this Brazilian case.

This seems to come close to what I have been trying to say:

>> 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. ...

(B)ecause 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. ... He told the young girl in his written article: "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," <<
(http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/church-credibility-harmed-hasty-excommunication)