Mexico approves abortion - & gets excommunicated

[Mooks]

The church is getting tough, I'm shining my chain mail for when the call to retake the holy land comes.

[Duke of Gloucester]

Leave abortion to one side - we've done that before.

We have two views put here both critical of the Catholic Church rather than criticising the church's view on abortion. One states that the church is trying to turn the clock back to the middle ages and the other that the church's position on abortion is demographic rather than moral. Either these views are based on evidence or the are the product of anti-Catholic mind set.

If the Catholic church is trying to turn the clock back to the middle ages then you would expect modern pronouncements against the other developments since then such as the rise of nation states, democracy, female suffrage, abolition of slavery, legalisation of usury, advancement of science etc. etc. If it is a demographic rather than moral issue then you expect the church to condemn abortion for Catholic women and just leave the others to get on with it, maybe even encourage them. You would also expect some documentary evidence of statements about the number of believers. Anyone who holds these views care to back them up with such citations? Or am I right in attributing them to anti-Catholic bias?

The emergence of abortion as a moral issue for the Catholic church is nothing to do with increasing its numbers, neither is it connected with the cult (note the pejorative language here) of Mary. In the late 19th century and before the mainstream view on abortion (and even contraception) was in line with a teaching of the church. Once mainstream views and Catholic teaching diverged then the church had the need to promote its pro-life views.

[Adrian II]

Anyone who holds these views care to back them up with such citations? Or am I right in attributing them to anti-Catholic bias?

These days it seems people aren't allowed to have different views, only different prejudices. This appoach spells the end of reason in human discourse. My bias or yours, that seems to be the question.

Once mainstream views and Catholic teaching diverged then the church had the need to promote its pro-life views.

The Church changed its stance on abortion in 1869 (declaring it a deadly sin under all circumstances) as part of a wider drive to restore its demographic, social and political position. This was a response to previous decline in all these areas, and the rise of anti-Catholic sentiment (French Revolution, Bismarck's Kulturkampf, Italian secular nationalism, etcetera). As for the role of physicians in the anti-abortion drive of the nineteenth century, this role is expressly acknowledged and praised by Catholic sources. So much for 'bias'. Now let's get back to exchanging views.

[Duke of Gloucester]

These days it seems people aren't allowed to have different views, only different prejudices. This appoach spells the end of reason in human discourse. .

Your posts contain some assertions and some facts. Fact: Canon law was changed in 1869 so that those who participate in abortions would be excommunicated. Assertion: this was part of a response to anti-Catholic sentiment and an attempt to increase its demographic, social and political position. Both of these are clearly your views. I am interested in where these views come from. Do you have some objective evidence to back them up or are do they come from some anti-church bias? By asking you this question I am not seeking to stifle debate. Neither am I asking a rhetorical question to accuse you of bias. If you have something to back up your assertions then I am interested to see it. Exchange (and development) of views are important, but all of our views are, to a greater or lesser extent, affected by our prejudices. Acknowledging this fact promotes rather than hinders discussion.

Your link, I think, supports my view rather than yours. The inclusion of abortion in "Apostolicae Sedis Moderationi" seems to be in response to a social situation. Of course the need to re-frame church discipline at that time was an attempt to increases the church's spiritual power as a response to the Pope's decline in temporal power and can be linked to other decrees, changes and religious movements. However church teaching on abortion can be traced back to the 4th century so it is difficult to sustain the view that pro-life teaching per se is an attempt to increase numbers or influence.

[Adrian II]

Fact: Canon law was changed in 1869 so that those who participate in abortions would be excommunicated. Assertion: this was part of a response to anti-Catholic sentiment and an attempt to increase its demographic, social and political position. Both of these are clearly your views. I am interested in where these views come from.

I could muster a veritable genealogy of historical textbooks to support my position. Instead I give you the Catholic Encyclopedia's entry on Pius IX:

The loss of his temporal power was only one of the many trials that filled the long pontificate of Pius IX. There was scarcely a country, Catholic or Protestant, where the rights of the Church were not infringed upon. (..) It is astounding how fearlessly he fought, in the midst of many and severe trials, against the false liberalism which threatened to destroy the very essence of faith and religion.

[Duke of Gloucester]

I could muster a veritable genealogy of historical textbooks to support my position. Instead I give you the Catholic Encyclopedia's entry on Pius IX:

The loss of his temporal power was only one of the many trials that filled the long pontificate of Pius IX. There was scarcely a country, Catholic or Protestant, where the rights of the Church were not infringed upon. (..) It is astounding how fearlessly he fought, in the midst of many and severe trials, against the false liberalism which threatened to destroy the very essence of faith and religion.

Perhaps I need to remind you what you have claimed:

• Abortion was not an issue for the Catholic church until about 1870
• The church's interest in abortion was primarily demographic rather than moral
• The Catholic church changed its position on abortion

It is true that Pius IX introduced took steps to increase his spiritual influence and react to liberalism and demographic and political considerations would have been part of this. His steps included formalising Papal infalibility and the doctrine of the immaculate conception and calling the First Vatican Council. Apostolicae Sedis Moderationi was part of his strategy; it formalised disciplinary procedures (and yes, this did formalise a punishment for participating in abortion). If you read my previous post, you will see I agree that this is what happened. If the Bull dealt with abortion only or even primarily, then your case is made. However this is not so.

You do need to consult that veritable genealogy of text books to find some evidence that the church's teaching abortion specifically (rather than Apostolicae Sedis Moderationi in general) was motivated by demographic considerations. I think you might even struggle to find evidence that ASM was a response to demographic issues rather than political and social considerations. You might also want to check whether the church changed its teaching on abortion in 1869 or whether it changed the penalty to be applied. While you're at it you might like to try and find when the church changed its actual teaching on abortion if it did at all (btw I think it has but not in 1869 and for scientific rather than demographic reasons).

[Adrian II]

Perhaps I need to remind you what you have claimed:

• Abortion was not an issue for the Catholic church until about 1870
• The church's interest in abortion was primarily demographic rather than moral
• The Catholic church changed its position on abortion

I claimed that abortion was not a problem until about 1870. It had always been an issue. In 1869 the Vatican scrapped the hitherto accepted view that abortion was not a deadly sin before 'ensoulment' or quickening. That marked a change, whether you like it or not. And physicians played an important role in it as I demonstrated.

Abortion became a problem - along with other moral, social, political and hierarchical issues - because the Church lost much of it temporal power and sought to reaffirm its spiritual power. Where the Church could no longer rely on kings and emperors as guarantors of the faith, it had to rely on social and political movements and institutions. The control of social life (through corporatism) was one aspect of this spiritual Aggiornamento, the control of Catholic family life and reproduction was another. Political interference (for instance through the Catholic Movement in Italy) was a third.

The stance against abortion, contraception, divorce, premarital sex and other forms of sexual liberation fits right in, just as the Immaculate Heart drive or the resurgence of Thomism which put faith over reason (meaning the Vatican turned its back on all intellectual progress).

Interestingly, the Vatican would soon demand a 'family wage' in order to keep women off the labour market.