|
UPSG -> RE: Acceptable Murder (3/5/2009 2:56:51 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29515505/
Do you agree or disagree with the Catholic Church on this matter?
Well... in answering that I think "Catholic Church" in this context needs to be placed in context given the zeal of the Brazilian Church's lobbying effort in this case.
The Catholic Church is extremely large and covers most the territorial world. Non-Catholics (and even some lesser informed Catholics) tend to think the Pope in Rome presides as a micro-manager over the Catholic Church in every clime and place. This is not so, and one will note that the article does not infer nor state the U.S. or Belgium Catholic Church was lobbying to stop that young girls abortion. Though not a perfect comparison, for sake of better understanding, one might think of the Catholic Church like the United States of America and the Pope like something of the U.S. President in comparison. The Pope (which is title that means "father" and is largely honorary) is the Bishop of Rome and not the Bishop of Detroit or Rio de Janeiro. The Pope is "first among equals" of "Patriarchs" and he is a brother Bishop among other Bishops. He does have a significant authority over other Bishops (increased under John Paul II to the discontent of many other Catholic Bishops around the world) - kind of like the U.S. President over the Governors (who are essentially Presidents of their individual states) of the 50 states of the Union.
So, do I agree with the Brazilian Catholic Church in this instance and or the overall teaching of the Catholic Church which led to Brazilian Bishops reasoned judgement? I'm not sure. While I can accept the Church's view point on the sancity of each life, no matter its stage in growth, nor the tragedy in its mode of creation or state in life (slavery, homeless, drug addicted, mentally retarted, physically disabled, a result of rape et cetera), I don't agree with the Brazilian Catholic Church choice of action in this case.
The heirachy of the Catholic Church is not without playing politics (and picking instances to use as political game) in fact it has centuries of skill at it and might be in possession of one of the better political (diplomatic) schools on earth. This case seems to register as a game of politics played by the Brazilian Church. I mean, there are millions of tragedies in Brazil so why single this case out as a Bishop?
On the other hand, the media is not without its little game of encouraging intrigue around the Catholic Church. Media and journalists like to craftly select what info or half truths of Catholic teaching they will present to the public. And let us be clear, many media outlets are owned by for profit persons or groups that are not without their own poltical and economic interests.
The Catholic Church does allow for abortions in the cases where the mother's life is thought to be endangered.
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0898.asp quote:
4. Medical necessity. What about the argument that the Church must make exceptions to its teaching when abortion is medically necessary for the mother’s health or a child’s disability?
First, while the Church opposes all direct abortions, it does not condemn procedures which result, indirectly, in the loss of the unborn child as a "secondary effect." For example, if a mother is suffering an ectopic pregnancy (a baby is developing in her fallopian tube, not the womb), a doctor may remove the fallopian tube as therapeutic treatment to prevent the mother’s death. The infant will not survive long after this, but the intention of the procedure and its action is to preserve the mother’s life. It is not a direct abortion. There also occur, very rarely, situations in which, in order to save the mother’s life, the child needs to be delivered early. But this can be done safely with a normal, induced delivery, or a caesarean section.
|
|
|
|
