Christians Have as Many Abortions as Everyone Else, Catholics Have More (1 Viewer)

[aps]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. Hypocrites tend to be the worst offenders.

Christians Have as Many Abortions as Everyone Else, Catholics Have More
Compiled and Edited, Edward T. Babinski

A new study by The Center For Reason (www.CenterForReason.com) finds that Christians have just as many abortions as their non-Christian counterparts. The study concludes that in the year 2000, Christians were responsible for 570,000 abortions. Catholics were found to be the worst offenders, with abortion rates higher than the national average. . . .

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/articles/christianity_abortion.html

 

[1069]

No surprise there.
Christians also comprise the vast majority (over 75%) of the population of US prison inmates, with various other religions making up the remainder, and atheists comprising only 0.2%. link
But if you point these facts out to Christians, they'll only respond that those- the ones who have abortions and the ones who commit crimes- aren't True Christians™.
:roll:

 

[talloulou]

No surprise there.
Christians also comprise the vast majority (over 75%) of the population of US prison inmates, with various other religions making up the remainder, and atheists comprising only 0.2%. link
But if you point these facts out to Christians, they'll only respond that those- the ones who have abortions and the ones who commit crimes- aren't True Christians™.
:roll:

A vast majority of the country when asked proclaims to be some type of christianity. And the jails are filled with illegal aliens from South America that tend to be Catholic. Also alot of very non-religious people find God when they go to jail! :rofl

In any case there are lots of christians who are prochoice. And I'm sure many of them are or have been at some point Catholic.

 

[Felicity]

No surprise there.

But if you point these facts out to Christians, they'll only respond that those- the ones who have abortions and the ones who commit crimes- aren't True Christians™.
:roll:

No...A person living his faith as Christ would like him to would say--those are the ones who are sinners--and he would also admit that 100% of us are sinners.

BTW--the title is misleading--Catholics ARE Christians. I'm one of 'em--and a sinner to boot!

 

[Jerry]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. Hypocrites tend to be the worst offenders.

Oh, and because all Christians have the exact same view on abortion.....:roll:

Does this poll take into account pro-choice Christians? You know, those who say that early abortion is okay for everyone....or those who say that a fetus doesn't have a soul until it's born and literally breathes in the "breath of life"?

There would be hypocrisy if the article said "Pro-Life have as many abortions as Pro-Choice", but since Christian does not automatically mean Pro-Life, there is no hypocrisy.

I could just as easily stand this on it's head and say "everyone refrains from abortion just as much as Christians do", and that statement would be true to the same extent, and equally misleading as well.

 

[jallman]

I am Catholic and proudly pro-choice. In fact, at one time, the Catholic Church did not take a stand on abortion at all.

 

[Felicity]

I am Catholic and proudly pro-choice. In fact, at one time, the Catholic Church did not take a stand on abortion at all.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Abortion

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72


Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:


You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83

"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84

"Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.



Jallman, not that I think you value my opinion much, but I think it would do you well to speak to a priest about this. You are Catholic, yes, but if you are pro-choice, you are not practicing the faith you profess and those like yourself are the Catholics that make up probably a large percentage of the Catholics described in that article.

The Catholic faith is VERY clear on what it holds to be true.

 

[jallman]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Abortion

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72


Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:


You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83

"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84

"Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.



Jallman, not that I think you value my opinion much, but I think it would do you well to speak to a priest about this. You are Catholic, yes, but if you are pro-choice, you are not practicing the faith you profess and those like yourself are the Catholics that make up probably a large percentage of the Catholics described in that article.

The Catholic faith is VERY clear on what it holds to be true.

The Catholic church has also flip-flopped twice in the last hundred years on this issue. Further, because I am Catholic does not mean that forego scientific evidence...Lets just say I am a Galileo Catholic.

 

[Felicity]

The Catholic church has also flip-flopped twice in the last hundred years on this issue.

Ummmm....Catholic dogma has flip-flopped? Would you please provide evidence of this? Evidence of Catholic Dogma--not just some theologian postulating ensoulment or the like...please and thank-you.

Further, because I am Catholic does not mean that forego scientific evidence

Nope--that's true. But the "Faith" does not contradict science. It merely presents a position on the MORAL aspect of abortion. The Church's pronouncements are only binding in matters of faith and morals.

...Lets just say I am a Galileo Catholic.

CCC159 Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth."37 "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. the humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."38

 

[talloulou]

Lets just say I am a Galileo Catholic.

I'm a recovering Catholic. It's almost completely out of my system at this point except when you put me on a plane with wild turbulence in which case I will start Hail Marying and Our Fathering like a deranged loon.

 

[Felicity]

I'm a recovering Catholic.

I'm curious since I converted TO Catholicism...what aspect are you "recovering from?"

It's almost completely out of my system at this point except when you put me on a plane with wild turbulence in which case I will start Hail Marying and Our Fathering like a deranged loon.

Kinda like the saying "there are no Atheists in foxholes." Maybe the Vatican should invest in a fleet of ancient 747s, load 'em with priests and fallen away Catholics, and take a few day trips around the Burmuda Triangle! They could call it the "New-New Evangelization!"

 

[Psychoclown]

I'm tempted to just respond with a simple "So?", but I'll try to add more.

Many people do identify themselves as Christian in this nation, that does not mean they are practicing any particular Christian faith or belief. A general belief in God is the default setting in this nation. Some go against it and convert to anther religion, or atheism or agnosticism. Others become practicing members a particular church or denomination.

A more insightful poll would be about the number of abortions among either church going or practicing Christians (who tend to be pro-life, though even here its not a monolithic stance) or pro life Christians or pro-lifers in general. Another relevant factor to consider is when they had the abortion were they a pro-lifer/practicing Christian/ect. I have a feeling that very few abortions in this country are undergone by pro-life advocates or practicing Christians.

All that said, even if practicing Christians or commited pro-lifers have the same abortion rates as the rest fo the nation, that does not invalidate their position. All groups have their share of hypocrites. And any Christian can tell you that all Christians are sinners. Being a Christian means accepting that you are a sinner, accepting Christ's sacrifice on our behalf, and asking for forgiveness. It doesn't mean you suddenly become perfect. (Yes, I know some Christians act like they are)

 

[talloulou]

I'm curious since I converted TO Catholicism...what aspect are you "recovering from?"

I no longer consider myself religious. That doesn't mean I'm no longer "spiritual" but I just dislike organized religion. I find most religions require a mind a bit more closed than mine and I dislike the many restrictions and judgements that in my opinion are handed down by man vs. god.

Also I have studied in depth a variety of ancient religions and while I'm somewhat awed by the similarities I also find it impossible not to believe that much of Catholicism and even the old testament contain stories plagerized from even older faiths. So at this point I'm not quite certain that I even believe Jesus ever existed at all. I don't have what many refer to as "faith." If Jesus appeared before me or I met him upon death I'd be the first one to bend down and wash his feet but I'm also open to the possibility that he's no more real than Santa. The Bible never made any sense to me as a complete book. The God of the old testament doesn't seem like he could even be the same diety that Jesus refers to as his father. I don't get why God would send his son to die for our sins. I don't believe babies are born sinners, ect ect the list goes on and on.

It took me along time to be comfortable just letting religion fall away but once I had children it was a no brainer. I couldn't bring myself to indoctrinate them into all that dogma. I do teach them about God and a variety of different faiths but it's always with the understanding that many people believe many different things and I for one am in no place to discern what is true and what is not when it comes to "God."

 

[jamesrage]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. Hypocrites tend to be the worst offenders.

Every group has it's fakes.Christianity is no different.

 

[Spencer Collins]

No...A person living his faith as Christ would like him to would say--those are the ones who are sinners--and he would also admit that 100% of us are sinners.

BTW--the title is misleading--Catholics ARE Christians. I'm one of 'em--and a sinner to boot!

Felicity..right you are..Catholics ARE Christians!

We Christians are not perfect..we are just forgiven!

Peace Be With You!

 

[Marilyn Monroe]

No surprise there.
Christians also comprise the vast majority (over 75%) of the population of US prison inmates, with various other religions making up the remainder, and atheists comprising only 0.2%. link
But if you point these facts out to Christians, they'll only respond that those- the ones who have abortions and the ones who commit crimes- aren't True Christians™.
:roll:

Do you want to go into race in prisons?

Atheists have small numbers because there are less of them.

Most of the US is technically Christian. So it would stand to reason that most abortions are done on Christians.

 

[Felicity]

I no longer consider myself religious. That doesn't mean I'm no longer "spiritual" but I just dislike organized religion. I find most religions require a mind a bit more closed than mine and I dislike the many restrictions and judgements that in my opinion are handed down by man vs. god.

Also I have studied in depth a variety of ancient religions and while I'm somewhat awed by the similarities I also find it impossible not to believe that much of Catholicism and even the old testament contain stories plagerized from even older faiths. So at this point I'm not quite certain that I even believe Jesus ever existed at all. I don't have what many refer to as "faith." If Jesus appeared before me or I met him upon death I'd be the first one to bend down and wash his feet but I'm also open to the possibility that he's no more real than Santa. The Bible never made any sense to me as a complete book. The God of the old testament doesn't seem like he could even be the same diety that Jesus refers to as his father. I don't get why God would send his son to die for our sins. I don't believe babies are born sinners, ect ect the list goes on and on.

It took me along time to be comfortable just letting religion fall away but once I had children it was a no brainer. I couldn't bring myself to indoctrinate them into all that dogma. I do teach them about God and a variety of different faiths but it's always with the understanding that many people believe many different things and I for one am in no place to discern what is true and what is not when it comes to "God."

Eh...So it's not "Catholicism" per se...but rather, religion in general that you're recovering from. I understand--I've sort-of been there too. When I converted, I immediately became one of the "fallen away" for some similar reasons. I was out (recovering like you--the airplane Catholic type--calling out when I needed something or was scared and then dismissing it all after the "crisis" passed) for around 15 years but I felt a hole there even if my brain couldn't make sense of it.

I think it's unfortunate that often times the people of religions get in the way of the truth of the religion. For instance, since I have come back to the faith, it wounds me to see it represented poorly by those that don't understand it or have false beliefs about its teachings and/or history ESPECIALLY when they also claim to be Catholic. It muddies the waters and makes real understanding more difficult since there are so many competing claims--how does one find what the truth is? People are wounded beings in general caused by all sorts of little and not-so-little struggles and I try to remember that when I take issue with something of a "Catholic" nature that I think is represented incorrectly (but again--I'm a wounded one too--I have my own scars that can affect my being "good" at that).

You mention that religion seems to require a mind that is less open than what you would like...I tend to think it's some (probably MANY) people in the religions that demonstrate that--not the religion itself. I hope you keep an open mind on that in particular.

BTW--(to anyone) I teach RCIA (the "convert classes") at my parish--feel free to PM me since this stuff isn't really "Abortion forum" matter.

 

[Felicity]

Peace Be With You!

...and also with you, brother! :smile:

 

[jallman]

Felicity,

Here is a time-line of the Catholic Church's stance on abortion:

In the second century, abortion was seen as murder because the idea of delayed ensoulment was condemned. This was enforced by figures like Barnabas, Clement of Alexandria, and St Basil.

The Apostolic Constitutions of 380 CE allowed for abortion if done early.

In the 5th Century, St Augustine returned the church to the delayed ensoulment. At this time, it was not considered a sin to abort within the first 90 days of pregnancy as the soul had not been animated with a true human soul.

He wrote in "On Exodus" that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated).

In St Jerome's letter to Aglasia: "The seed gradually takes shape in the uterus, and it [abortion] does not count as killing until the individual elements have acquired their external appearance and their limbs"

I know you said that you would not accept the words of scholar's and church writers, but these were saints...and as a good catholic girl, you must elevate their opinions. But, I am sure the inconvenience their words present will leave you with no choice but to dismiss them. So lets look at a couple of Pope's and their flip-flops:

Pope Stephen V (served 885-891) wrote in 887 CE: "If he who destroys what is conceived in the womb by abortion is a murderer, how much more is he unable to excuse himself of murder who kills a child even one day old." "Epistle to Archbishop of Mainz."

Pope Innocent III (?-1216) wrote a letter which ruled on a case of a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion. The Pope decided that the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not "animated."

Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening" - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull "Effraenatam" in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty.

Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull shortly after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the "quickening" test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).


Pope Pius IX reversed the stance of the Roman Catholic church once more. He dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" in 1869. Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 and to refer simply to "the fetus."

Hope thats the kind of information you wanted...

 

[Spencer Collins]

The Catholic Church has always condemned abortion as a grave evil. Christian writers from the first-century author of the Didache to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life") have maintained that the Bible forbids abortion, just as it forbids murder. This tract will provide some examples of this consistent witness from the writings of the Fathers of the Church.

As the early Christian writer Tertullian pointed out, the law of Moses ordered strict penalties for causing an abortion. We read, "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [Hebrew: "so that her child comes out"], but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot" (Ex. 21:22–24).

This applies the lex talionis or "law of retribution" to abortion. The lex talionis establishes the just punishment for an injury (eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life, compared to the much greater retributions that had been common before, such as life for eye, life for tooth, lives of the offender’s family for one life).

The lex talionis would already have been applied to a woman who was injured in a fight. The distinguishing point in this passage is that a pregnant woman is hurt "so that her child comes out"; the child is the focus of the lex talionis in this passage. Aborted babies must have justice, too.

This is because they, like older children, have souls, even though marred by original sin. David tells us, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5, NIV). Since sinfulness is a spiritual rather than a physical condition, David must have had a spiritual nature from the time of conception.

The same is shown in James 2:26, which tells us that "the body without the spirit is dead": The soul is the life-principle of the human body. Since from the time of conception the child’s body is alive (as shown by the fact it is growing), the child’s body must already have its spirit.

Thus, in 1995 Pope John Paul II declared that the Church’s teaching on abortion "is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his successors . . . I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" (Evangelium Vitae 62).


http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp

 

[jallman]

The Catholic Church has always condemned abortion as a grave evil. Christian writers from the first-century author of the Didache to Pope John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae ("The Gospel of Life") have maintained that the Bible forbids abortion, just as it forbids murder. This tract will provide some examples of this consistent witness from the writings of the Fathers of the Church.

As the early Christian writer Tertullian pointed out, the law of Moses ordered strict penalties for causing an abortion. We read, "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [Hebrew: "so that her child comes out"], but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot" (Ex. 21:22–24).

This applies the lex talionis or "law of retribution" to abortion. The lex talionis establishes the just punishment for an injury (eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for life, compared to the much greater retributions that had been common before, such as life for eye, life for tooth, lives of the offender’s family for one life).

The lex talionis would already have been applied to a woman who was injured in a fight. The distinguishing point in this passage is that a pregnant woman is hurt "so that her child comes out"; the child is the focus of the lex talionis in this passage. Aborted babies must have justice, too.

This is because they, like older children, have souls, even though marred by original sin. David tells us, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5, NIV). Since sinfulness is a spiritual rather than a physical condition, David must have had a spiritual nature from the time of conception.

The same is shown in James 2:26, which tells us that "the body without the spirit is dead": The soul is the life-principle of the human body. Since from the time of conception the child’s body is alive (as shown by the fact it is growing), the child’s body must already have its spirit.

Thus, in 1995 Pope John Paul II declared that the Church’s teaching on abortion "is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his successors . . . I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church’s tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church" (Evangelium Vitae 62).


http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp

Then explain the constant declaration and renunciation of papal bulls and accepted doctrines that say otherwise.

 

[Spencer Collins]

Then explain the constant declaration and renunciation of papal bulls and accepted doctrines that say otherwise.

Only God is truly perfect! Saint Peter denied Christ not once but three times and yet was made head of [his] church! Christ knew of Peter's weakness and still chose him. It is reasonable to come to the conclusion that Christ knew full well that his apostles would make errors from time to time yet he did not abandon his church. He had more faith in his church than today's observers do. He also [knew] that even Popes sin! God guides the Pope in a special way..if the pope [refuses] Gods guidance..the Pope is in error! If the Pope accepts the guidance he is infallible! Yes..even Popes are mortal and at times,make mistakes in the tradition of Peter. If it's ok for Christ to accept Peters [mistakes] it's ok for us to forgive as well.

Perfection will not be attained by any church or it's leaders until Christ himself returns. Until then..he leaves his sinners in charge of the church.Errors will occur and from time to time..errors will be corrected.

The tradition of Peter lives on...and so does the church!

 

[Felicity]

Then explain the constant declaration and renunciation of papal bulls and accepted doctrines that say otherwise.

Felicity,

Here is a time-line of the Catholic Church's stance on abortion:

In the second century, abortion was seen as murder because the idea of delayed ensoulment was condemned. This was enforced by figures like Barnabas, Clement of Alexandria, and St Basil.

The Apostolic Constitutions of 380 CE allowed for abortion if done early.

The keenest mind among the ancient philosophers, Aristotle, had conjectured that the future child was endowed at conception with a principle of only vegetative life, which was exchanged after a few days for an animal soul, and was not succeeded by a rational soul till later; his followers said on the fortieth day for a male, and the eightieth for a female, child. The authority of his great name and the want of definite knowledge to the contrary caused this theory to be generally accepted up to recent times. Yet, as early as the fourth century of the Christian era, St. Gregory of Nyssa had advocated the view which modern science has confirmed almost to a certainty, namely, that the same life principle quickens the organism from the first moment of its individual existence until its death (Eschbach, Disp. Phys., Disp., iii).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm

In the 5th Century, St Augustine returned the church to the delayed ensoulment. At this time, it was not considered a sin to abort within the first 90 days of pregnancy as the soul had not been animated with a true human soul. He wrote in "On Exodus" that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated).

In St Jerome's letter to Aglasia: "The seed gradually takes shape in the uterus, and it [abortion] does not count as killing until the individual elements have acquired their external appearance and their limbs"

Some of that is addressed above in the portion quoted from the New Advent Encyclopedia.

Still, St. Augustine and St. Jerome have no religious authority. They were brilliant theologians and great Saints, but they did not wield the power of the Chair of Peter. “The Church” is something beyond the people in it (see CCC 811-870). Even the Pope is not “The Church” although he alone is the one with the authority to pronounce a specific position of clarification of the Apostolic Teaching. This does not mean EVERYTHING a pope says is binding—only that which is promulgated from the Chair of Peter (EX CATHEDRA).

The early Christians are the first on record as having pronounced abortion to be the murder of human beings, for their public apologists, Athenagoras, Tertullian, and Minutius Felix (Eschbach, "Disp. Phys.", Disp. iii), to refute the slander that a child was slain, and its flesh eaten, by the guests at the Agapae, appealed to their laws as forbidding all manner of murder, even that of children in the womb. The Fathers of the Church unanimously maintained the same doctrine. In the fourth century the Council of Eliberis decreed that Holy Communion should be refused all the rest of her life, even on her deathbed, to an adulteress who had procured the abortion of her child. The Sixth Ecumenical Council determined for the whole Church that anyone who procured abortion should bear all the punishments inflicted on murderers. In all these teachings and enactments no distinction is made between the earlier and the later stages of gestation. For, though the opinion of Aristotle, or similar speculations, regarding the time when the rational soul is infused into the embryo, were practically accepted for many centuries still it was always held by the Church that he who destroyed what was to be a man was guilty of destroying a human life. The great prevalence of criminal abortion ceased wherever Christianity became established
{ibid.}

I know you said that you would not accept the words of scholar's and church writers, but these were saints...and as a good catholic girl, you must elevate their opinions.

Oh...and I do...but still...they were mere men and not Divinely protected from error.

So lets look at a couple of Pope's and their flip-flops:

Pope Stephen V (served 885-891) wrote in 887 CE: "If he who destroys what is conceived in the womb by abortion is a murderer, how much more is he unable to excuse himself of murder who kills a child even one day old." "Epistle to Archbishop of Mainz."

Pope Innocent III (?-1216) wrote a letter which ruled on a case of a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion. The Pope decided that the monk was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not "animated."

Early in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of "quickening" - when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. After ensoulment, abortion was equated with murder; before that time, it was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human life, not human life.

These are not official pronouncements—they are the personal opinions of men who were popes—not OFFICIALLY ACTING AS POPE. (and I have not checked the varacity of the claims--I accept them at face value)

Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal bull "Effraenatam" in 1588 which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty.

OKAY—HERE WE GO... Yes...an official pronouncement concerning abortion.

Excommunication seems to indicate the Church was pretty much AGAINST it. I can’t find direct evidence that Effraenatam actually said that the death penalty was a punishment, but I highly doubt it since the Church has no authority to carry out such punishment. It is more likely that it may have suggested the “crime” warranted death rather than imposing any such punishment. The Church had lots of influence, yes, and to suggest such would be in effect giving the government the assent of the Church to punish as they see fit—but technically, it wouldn’t be the Church inflicting the punishment.

Pope Gregory XIV revoked the Papal bull shortly after taking office in 1591. He reinstated the "quickening" test, which he said happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).

Changing the punishment for those that abort or are involved in abortion does not change the stance—and the stance was as scientifically “modern” as the understanding of what happens in the womb allowed. You fault the Church for listening to the best science of the time period? Isn’t that interesting considering that the Church is accused of not being attentive to scientific discovery. Still—this is in no way a “flip-flop”—it is merely judicious and merciful.

Pope Pius IX reversed the stance of the Roman Catholic church once more. He dropped the distinction between the "fetus animatus" and "fetus inanimatus" in 1869. Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 and to refer simply to "the fetus."

Science compels advancement in definitions. The change in wording only serves to protect life as best we can. This again is no “flip-flop.”

The Church is consistantly PRO-LIFE and has always considered the killing of the occupant of the womb a killing of an innocent human being.

 

[jallman]

Only God is truly perfect! Saint Peter denied Christ not once but three times and yet was made head of [his] church! Christ knew of Peter's weakness and still chose him. It is reasonable to come to the conclusion that Christ knew full well that his apostles would make errors from time to time yet he did not abandon his church. He had more faith in his church than today's observers do. He also [knew] that even Popes sin! God guides the Pope in a special way..if the pope [refuses] Gods guidance..the Pope is in error! If the Pope accepts the guidance he is infallible! Yes..even Popes are mortal and at times,make mistakes in the tradition of Peter. If it's ok for Christ to accept Peters [mistakes] it's ok for us to forgive as well.

Perfection will not be attained by any church or it's leaders until Christ himself returns. Until then..he leaves his sinners in charge of the church.Errors will occur and from time to time..errors will be corrected.

The tradition of Peter lives on...and so does the church!

So wait...the Pope...who is infallible, is only infallible if the present pope agrees with everything the pope in question said. Because it sure sounds to me like you are making excuses for the at-the-time-infallible papal bulls that allowed abortion despite the pope now condemning them. So which is the pope that is accepting God's guidance? I am sure both make the claim that they are...

 

[jallman]

The Church is consistantly PRO-LIFE and has always considered the killing of the occupant of the womb a killing of an innocent human being.

Except where various doctrinal stances stated otherwise.