Missionaries of the Sacred

Many social justice activists rightly accuse the pro-life groups of being selective with their agenda because while they oppose abortion, many of them support the death penalty, strong anti-immigrant legislation, etc. On the other hand, social activists groups cannot be exempt from criticism. Noticeably lacking from these groups is the defense of the unborn. Indeed, many of them support the right to terminate the life of an unborn child, respecting the wishes of the mother’s choice. They also support embryonic stem-cell research as well as euthanasia. So one can safely assert that both groups--pro-life and pro-choice—are selective in their choices regarding who should live or who should die.

This article, however, is to affirm that abortion is a justice issue, which is having devastating effects on individuals and on society at large. Abortion is not only a matter of individual justice (the rights of the unborn child) but also a social justice issue. All individual choices for abortions have social consequences.

The late Pope John Paul II warned, “The history of our times has shown in a tragic way the danger which results from forgetting the truth about the human person.” He described our world as a culture of death, whereby we use death as a means to resolve our moral dilemmas. It has taken root in the mind and hearts of those who have false images of God and of the human being. It is neatly packaged in an “all encompassing vocabulary of dehumanization directed against society’s most vulnerable individuals, both before and after birth. It includes the language of contemporary society as well as past societies.”

A central element of morality is one’s vision of reality. A person’s vision of reality strongly influences and determines his/her understanding of who is a human being. Throughout human history the distortion of reality in identifying who is and who is not a human being has been tragic. Groups of all races, ethnic origins, nationalities, associations and individuals have been labeled as less than human or non-human. The unborn human child has no less suffered from this injustice since the Roe v. Wade legalization of abortion in 1973. Proponents of abortion continue to identify the unborn child as a non-human with labels such as “mere cells, material, tissue or nondescript matter…parasitic creature, virulent disease, infected body…noxious waste product…entirely subhuman, and cannibalistic…that feeds on the mother’s body.” Astronomer, Carl Sagan named the unborn child as a “parasite that destroys tissue and sucks blood from capillaries.”

Other excuses given to support abortion are the danger of the mother’s health, and the belief that the child will not develop physically, mentally and socially, especially those in a marginalized environment.

Since 1973, the statistics on killing the unborn child continue to be staggering. There is no doubt that it is one of our modern holocausts which accents the world’s culture of death. There are in the United States, 1.37 million abortions performed per year with 3,700 per day; on the world-wide scene, there are approximately 46 million abortions performed per year with 126 thousand per day. Only 1% of these are for rape. Catholic women account for 31.3% of abortions.

For some years now advocates against abortion propose a national public discussion on the abortion issue; however, there is a refusal for such a debate from those who support abortion because it would be difficult for them to defend their position in light of modern-day science. Children who are prematurely born or who for medical reasons must be removed from their mother’s womb at a very early stage are now able to survive. Some children even survive abortion procedures and continue to live today. In the realm of science it is thus difficult to justify that the child within the womb is not a human being.

From a theological vision, it is important for Catholics to understand clearly the Church’s position on the human person. The Catholic vision is fundamentally and essentially based on the person of Jesus Christ as given to the Church in Revelation, Tradition and Natural Law. For in Jesus, “we live and move and have our being.” (Acts 17:28) Jesus is “the cause and the final purpose, as from him all came, and so to him all was to be referred.” If our vision is Jesus, then the value of human life is raised to an insurmountable dignity and worth.

Following the vision of Jesus, the Church substantially affirms the goodness and holiness of the human being as an essential value of Jesus. Human life is created in the image and likeness of God. Human life is sacred. It is fundamentally based on the Person of Jesus Christ, who calls us to place people first and above things and to love all human beings as brothers and sisters. Human life begins from the moment of conception and continues to natural death, and it is to be held sacred at each moment. Human life has a dignity given by God and must be safe-guarded and protected at every stage and moment. (Cf. Genesis 1:27; Jeremiah 1:15; Job 10:8-12; Psalm 22:10-11; Matthew 35:31-46; Luke 4:18-19; 6:20-25) With this in mind, the protection of human life, based on Jesus Christ, must be inclusive; it cannot be selective defending the rights of a human at one stage, while forfeiting his/her life at another:

The right of the human person …. It does not belong to society, nor does it belong to public authority in any form to recognize this right for some and not for others; all discrimination is evil …. Any discrimination based on the various stages of life is no more justified than any other discrimination.... In reality, respect for human life is called for from the time that the process of generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the farther nor of the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his [her] own growth.

Pope John Paul II defines a procured abortion as the “deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth.” At no time is a willed, a deliberate killing of an unborn child morally justifiable. It is a “grave moral disorder since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being.” This norm applies to embryonic intervention, where there is the killing of embryos for experimentation.

Many Catholics who support induced abortions falsely interpret the Church’s position to protect and defend human life from the moment of conception. They do not hold that the Church has been consistent with this position since its foundation.

From scripture there is the intrinsic value of human life from the beginning. First, in Hebrew thought, the human person was a unit: union of body and spirit never separated until death. With this truth it is impossible to deny that the child in the womb was not a human being at the moment of conception. Secondly, it can be noted that the doctrine of the Incarnation affirms that Jesus took on human flesh by the power of the Holy Spirit at the moment of conception. Thirdly, it is “celebrated in the meeting between the Virgin Mary and Elizabeth and the two children whom they are carrying in the womb.” Jesus’ love for little children and his joy to be with them would furthermore strongly suggest that He would not be an advocate for abortion. The New Testament additionally employs the word, pharmakeia when condemning the practice and use of sorcery and magic potions (Galatians 5:20; Revelations 9:21; 21:8; 22:15). This may allude to the fact that the use of magic potions was used as an abortifacient.

Evidence continues to show that since the first century, the Church opposed the deliberate killing of the unborn. The first-century document, the Didache states, “You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.”

Those who support a procured abortion often cite the confusion in the Church, when the human soul joins the human body. They particularly point to the great medieval theologians, St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Before responding to these saints, it is very important to note that:

The earliest Christian writings on the issue declared simply, `you shall not murder a child by abortion': the embryo was held to be inviolable at every stage of its existence. The first Christian writings to consider the question of when human life began asserted that the spiritual soul was present from conception. As one account puts it: The Early Church adopted a critical attitude to the widespread practice of abortion and infanticide. It did so on the basis of a belief in the sanctity of human life; a belief which was in turn an expression of its faith in the goodness of creation and of God's particular care for humankind.'

Additionally it must be pointed out that “whatever their views about the precise moment when human life began, all Christians held that abortion was gravely wrong, an offence against God the Creator and either the killing of a child or something very like the killing of a child.” There were thus two thoughts in the early church and during the medieval period. First, the soul was united with the body at the moment of conception, thus constituting a full human being. Second, there was a period of time after conception when there was a union between soul and body.

Both Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas followed the second position. They made a distinction between an “animated fetus” (a human person) and a “non-animated fetus” (future human person). St. Thomas, e.g. believed that a male became an animated fetus (union with the soul) 40 days after the conception; 90 days after the conception of females. It is clear, however, that St. Thomas opposes abortion. He states, “He that strikes a woman with child does something unlawful; wherefore if there results the death of either of the woman or of the animated fetus, he will not be excused from homicide.” It nevertheless does not end here. What is lacking from the pro-choice groups is the fact that both St. Augustine and St. Thomas opposed the killing of a non-animated fetus. It was not only an animated fetus that warranted protection but the two saints also opposed the willful destruction of an unanimated fetus because the fetus was to become a future child of God. Thus, Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas did not contradict the Church’s already long-standing position on procured abortions. Indeed, scientific discoveries on microbiology were still in its simple/primitive stages during the medieval epoch. Today microbiology has since made tremendous advances to help us understand the nature of a human being. If these were well developed during the medieval period, it would have been a major help to clarify St. Augustine’s and St. Thomas Aquinas’ thoughts.

Another misconception of the Catholic Christian teaching is that many believe that the Church teaches that when there is a life-threatening situation of the mother or the child within the womb, the woman must sacrifice her own life so that the child may have life. Such teaching may have been expressed in pastoral situations by some; however, the statement is false. In truth, “Never and in no case has the Church taught that the life of the child must be preferred to that of the mother … No, neither the life of the mother nor that of the child can be subjected to an act of direct suppression. In the one case as in the other, there can be but one obligation: to make every effort to save the lives of both.” Neither the child, nor the mother can be subjected to direct killing. If attempting to save the mother’s life—independent of her pregnancy—and by consequence the fetus dies, but in no way desiring or attempting to kill the fetus, then the action is not immoral. Here the moral Principle of Double Effect is implied.

There are many unforeseen consequences of abortion. Abortion leaves deep physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual scars on the individual. On the physical side, it is known to bring about damage of the uterus, sterility, miscarriages, stillbirths, infections, blood loss, coma, physical pain, loss of appetite/eating disorders, weight loss, exhaustion, gastro-intestinal disturbances, even death. The physical effects also include bladder and bowel injury, breast cancer, as well as ectopic pregnancies. These and many other physical injuries emerge from having an abortion.

The deepest pains of an abortion seem to be from the mental and spiritual despair. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is quite common, as well as sexual dysfunction, insomnia, withdrawal, thoughts/attempts of suicide, anger, drug and alcohol abuse, increased smoking, and low self-esteem. Research has pointed out that people falsely believe that God and others will never forgive them from the sin of abortion. This can bring deep spiritual wounds, even to the extent of losing their faith completely.

It is impossible to realize the social consequences of abortion. Marital breakdown is common among post-abortion couples. Maintaining a stable relationship becomes difficult among married couples when the spouse has an abortion. There is gradual withdrawal from one another. This may be due to the above physical and psychological effects from an abortion. There may be also the neglect of children.

Abortion brings about a widespread domino effect. It is the initial step of a secular logic which extends to rationally justify the death of a human being at each human stage. If an unborn is considered to be nonhuman, then questions would naturally emerge, whether or not the newborn is a human or nonhuman. If, the entity within the womb is considered to be nothing more than a parasite, dependent on the mother’s body for sustenance, it would logically follow whether or not the same concept can be attributed to birth outside the womb. After all, the newborn is totally dependent on others for survival—an extended parasite. Consequently, since the legalization of abortion, a group of doctors and scientists propose that each newborn should go through a series of tests to determine whether or not the child is human or non human. In this mode of thinking, parents would be allowed to choose whether or not their son/daughter lives or forfeits his/her right to life. Some medics go a step further declaring that parents are incapable of making such a decision because of the emotional impact it has on the parents, thus the incapability of making a judgment. Included in this scheme are not only the death of infants but it also extends to end the life of the mental and terminally ill, the social incompetent and social misfits by means of euthanasia, assisted suicide and the death penalty.

From this mentality of choosing life or death it would reasonably follow for the State to be given the secular power to monitor the progress of humans throughout each stage of growth and development, forfeiting an individual’s right to life if he/she does not meet the State’s arbitrary and utilitarian criteria of 1) Who is or who is not a human being? 2) At what moment is someone no longer considered to be a human being? 3) Who earns the right to live and who does not? In its extreme form, there is a proposal that once a person reaches a certain age, death will automatically be imposed, regardless of his/her physical and mental state because of his/her future burden on the State. Certainly, the contradiction in all of this is that our human society defends the rights and protection of turtle eggs and other such animals and defends their rights to a complete full life, yet the very same society wants to kill its own human species. Such is a “culture of death.”

St. Augustine, wrote, “What are kingdoms without justice but large bands of robbers.” In reality, the “culture of death” is symbolic of these “bands of robbers,” which extinguishes life, especially that of the human being. It strips individuals from the “seamless garment” of the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception to natural death. Abortion is the first stage within the culture of death. It immediately defeats the right to be a human being.

Catholic Social Teaching first and fundamentally rests upon the “life and dignity of the human person.” The life and dignity of a human being is essentially at the onset for fostering and developing a culture of life—the “heart of Jesus’ message.” A culture of life substantially hinges on the belief that:

God’s love does not differentiate between the newly conceived infant still in his or her mother’s womb and the child or young person, or the adult and the elderly person. God does not distinguish between them because he sees an impression of his own image and likeness (Gn 1:26) in each one. He makes no distinctions because he perceives in all of them a reflection of the face of his Only-begotten Son, whom ‘he chose…before the foundation of the world… He destined us in love to be his sons [daughters] according to the purpose of his will’ (Eph 1:4-6).

God said, “I have set before you life and death, the blessing and curse. Choose life then, that your and your descendents may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19) A culture of death ignores this mandate. In its worst scenario, it could lead to a zero population. To reverse this movement, it is necessary to focus on life which affirms the dignity and worth of each human being in each of his/her stages of human development. The message for a culture of life is that the Resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate victory and declaration of life over death. Its point of reference rests upon respect for each human being from the moment of conception. The unborn, therefore, is no less a human person as is any child or adult outside the womb. He/she is made in the image and likeness of God and has the same human rights as does the immigrant, laborers, the widow, the orphan, the sick and elderly, and those in prison. At all times, the unborn child has a complete right to food, to medical care, to shelter and to justice.

Today the clamor to heaven and to the human community continues to emerge from the wombs of mothers. It is the unborn children who are proclaiming their humanity. They are the voices of the living, defending their right to live: “We are human beings, created in the image and likeness of our Creator. We are called to life, to love, to live in peace and to live a full life in harmony with our human brothers and sisters and with all of God’s creation. To this end God calls us.” Justice requires us to respond to their pleas and to defend their right to life.

May The Sacred Heart Of Jesus Be Loved Everywhere.

Warren Perrotto, MSC

Sources:

Respect for Human Rights: the Secret of True Peace. 12/8/98.

Brennan, William, “Challenging the Language of the Culture of Death,” http:///www.lifeissues.net /writers/air/airvol8no2,1995.html.

Brennan, William, “”Anti-Fetal Rhetoric: America’s Best-Loved Hate Speech, htt://soli.inav.net/-jfscher/may99/williambrennan.html, p. 1.

Ibid, p. 2

http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/fastfacts.html.

Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, 1891, #22

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration on Procured Abortion, 1974, #12.

Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae [EV], March 25, 1995, #58.2.

EV, #62.3

EV, #45

Gratsch, Edward J. (Edt.), Principles of Catholic Theology. NY: Alba House, 1981, p. 330.

Didache, #2.2 as quoted from The Catechism of the Catholic Church, United States Catholic Conference, Inc., Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 1994, #2271.

Theologians’ Brief, “On the Place of the Human Embryo Within the Christian Tradition and the Theological Principles for Evaluating Its Moral Status.” http://www.linacre.org/atheol. html#anchor5981.

Ibid. #8

Summa Theologica, II. Q. 64, Reply to Obj. 2.

Lawler, OFM Cap., Ronald (Edt.), The Teaching of Christ. Huntington, Our Sunday Visitor, Inc. 1976, (2^nd edt.), pp. 309-310.

Ibid., p. 310.

http://www.emmerich1.com/ABORTION%20HURTS.htm, p. 1.

http://www.abortionfacts.com/literature/literature_928YC.asp, p. 1

http://www.pregnancycenters.org/Fact%20Sheet%20on%20abortion-emotional%20risks.pdf.

Ibid, p. 4.

Pope John XXIII, Pacem In Terris, #92.

EV, 1.1.

Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Participants at the 12^th General Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Congress on “The Human Embryo in the Pre-implantation Phase. February 27, 2006. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/february/ documents/hf_ben-xvi_ spe_20060227_embrione-umano_en.html, p. 2.