Thoughts on the Brazilian case of the nine-year-old rape victim.

[Matilda]

I don't want to go into the LBN threads regarding this case, for obvious reasons, but I do find the attitude of the
Church to be very disturbing.

The Church needs to have certain rules in place or it would never have survived as long as it has. And it has to be
said, when it comes to the preservation of human life, the Church is consistent - it is not only against abortion
and contraception, it's against war and the death penalty.

But when upholding the rules overrrides simple humanity, has it gone too far? The thought of forcing a nine-year-old
girl (and a small girl at that) to bear not one but two babies, both the result of rape/incest, is dreadful to
contemplate. The chances of her carrying the twins to term would be small, I'm sure, and the birth would have to
have been by ceasarean section. Even then, there could have been a high risk that both mother and babies could have
lost their lives. It was this consideration that led a Brazilian judge to grant an abortion, illegal in Brazil,
and normally attracting a life sentence. In this case, the fact that giving birth would endanger the mother's life
gave the judge the right to issue the permission for an abortion to be carried out.

For a girl so young to have to undergo an abortion is a terrible thing, and one wonders just how much of the awful
situation she comprehended. But to be forced to undergo a birth in such dreadful circumstances, at an age when she
should still be wrapped in cotton-wool and protected from the uglier side of life, is far, far worse.

For myself, I truly cannot understand how Church officials can really believe they're doing the right thing in this
case. It would have been easier, and more sensible, to distance themselves from this case on the grounds that the
judge acted within the law, and the doctors and the mother would also be protected by the court order. A "no
comment" would have been much better PR, and certainly more humanitarian. If an exception to the rules against
war can be granted in the case of a "just war", surely there can be exceptions to the rules regarding abortion
and contraception, when a mother's life is endangered.

And meanwhile, the stepfather goes on his merry way, free to carry on with whatever perversion he likes. Not a word
of condemnation from the Church.

This whole episode is very distressing, and while I understand the principle, I cannot agree that the Church has
acted in the best interests of anybody involved.

[hedgehog]

1. The child had no good options. Aborting the twins doesn't

remove the original rape and in and of itself may cause distress. Even if she doesn't understand what abortion is, other people are interfering with her body and she may have felt like she was being raped again. My personal aversion to abortion is so innate that I think I would bear a child conceived in rape, but that's my personal reaction. (It would be my baby, not the rapist's!)

In this particular case, there is apparently legitimate concern that she is too small to carry the twins to term and may be harmed or killed by the attempt.

I looked over some of the discussion of ectoptic pregnancy. Some strict moralists hold to the notion that the only acceptable treatment is to remove the swollen Fallopian tube to protect the mother. This means that the fetus is removed as a secondary effect, therefore abortion isn't intended so morality is preserved even if the mother's fertility is lost. Other moralists allow the pregnancy to be terminated with the standard practice of using methotrexate. The drug ends the pregnancy and the remains are absorbed or expelled by the body without further harm to the body. The thinking here is that there is no way to save the fetus, so the action of directly causing the fetus's death is balanced against the good of preserving the mother's health and fertility. Some people get really technical here and maintain the methotrexate kills the outer layer of cells that would actually become part of the placenta rather than the fetus itself, so the law of indirect action again applies. My reaction is that clearly there is no hope for the fetus and that the mother's health becomes the primary concern. The straining to jump through all the hoops to do the right thing suggests to me that there is a basic misunderstanding here.

So, if in effect this corresponded more closely to an ecliptic pregnancy than to a normal pregnancy, I would have to say the right thing was done.

What if the girl had been ten year's older and physically able to carry twins to term? I know what I would do, but I am willing to be humble enough to say that I don't know what is right for another person.

The comparison of right-to-life issues to just war theory actually came up in one of the references I came across. I have to say, it hit me right between the eyes. There is something wrong when the Church accepts a wide range of opinions about the US invasion of Iraq but insists on a single "NO" to every troubled pregnancy.
\

[47of74]

2. Pastor at my church remarked this evening that there were 30 million ex-Catholics

The Pastor at my church remarked this evening that there were about 30 million ex-Catholics in this country, and said that there were 30 million reasons that people fell away from the church. No doubt some of it was because of stuff like this. Every time I hear of stuff like this I shake my head with sadness over what men like Sobrinho and Re are doing to the church.

[Dorian Gray]

3. I have similar issues regarding this case

If doctors testified that carrying the twins to term could endanger the 9 year old little girl's life, I don't see what other choice her mother could have taken.

Her innocence was stolen. She was raped and abused by her stepfather. The idea that her mother, who probably was horrified to learn about the abuse that her daughter had suffered, is being vilified by the archbishop while the stepfather's role is being pretty much ignored is really horrible to me.

I think that they Church should have remained silent and allowed the situation to be discussed between the mother and her confessor/pastor, if she is even a church goer.

[KitSileya]

4. I was so glad when I saw my bishop's press release on the issue

He said that while he didn't have first-hand knowledge of the situation, he couldn't understand that this was grounds for automatic excommunication. He said that this had to be a case of self defence on the girl's part, insofar that she would be injured or risk death if she carried the twins to birth. "It is a central principle in moral theology that one has the right to self defence." Even though he also regard any abortion as an evil, in this case it was a choice between two evils, and the Church should look first to their pastoral responsibility for the girl and her mother, and not exclude themselves from giving such care. He added that the mother only followed the doctors' advice and could not be held morally culpable for the results. He finished by claiming that the stepfather was in no way going scot free from this, that his sins were great and he was excluded from the sacramental life of the church until he repented, and the whole terrible situation lay on his conscience and he would bear the blame for it.

In other words, my bishop pretty much said what I feel about this issue, and I wish the bishop in Brasil had his humanity and wisdom. SO, not all the bishops of the Church agrees with the behavior of the Brasilian bishop.

[hedgehog]

5. Which bishop?

He's going to need a lot of prayers!
:)

[KitSileya]

6. Nah, he's not. I think most of the other bishops agree with him here.

My bishop is Bishop Bernt Eidsvig of the diocese of Oslo in Norway. The Catholic Church in Norway is a world church in miniature, my parish alone has over 40 different nationalities, with 7000 parishioners. The diocese has closer to 150 different nationalities, with large groups of Vietnamese, Chileans, Tamils and, due to recent work immigration, Poles. We're used to having divergent opinions, but we're also a lot more tolerant than, say, American Catholics. And like most of Europe, we aren't fanatical about abortion - I think American Catholics are much more like their protestant fundamentalist neighbors in that respect rather than the rest of their own church.

[Matilda]

7. Your bishop is a wise and humane man.

The mother acted to protect her young daughter's life - what mother would not? I simply cannot understand how
anyone in their right mind could condemn her for that. At the worst, an expression of regret that it had to happen
at all would have been sufficient, but to excommunicate her is way over the top.

Similarly, the doctor, who acted according to a legal directive from a judge - in obeying the law of the land, I
don't think there should be condemnation.

To his credit, the head of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life, Archbishop Rino Fisichella, has been quoted
as saying the girl "should have been above all, defended, embraced, treated with sweetness to make her feel we
are on her side". There speaks a Christian man.

[hedgehog]

8. Here in the US no bishop would dare say anything so opposed

to the orthodoxy. Cardinal Egan of New York waited until after his successor was appointed before suggesting that there may be room for even considering married priests.

[Matilda]

9. I wonder if Archbishop Fisichella is about to retire?

Either that, or he's a brave man.

[47of74]

11. They had the story in the local Archdiocesan paper

The Witness - the Dubuque Archdiocese's paper - had reprinted story in today's paper about how Archbishop Fisichella criticized the handling of the Brazilian abortion case.

Here's the story from the CNS web site: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0901197.htm

Fisichella was born in August 1951, so he'd only be a relatively young 57 - which wouldn't be close to retirement age. Nevertheless I think he's probably deep in more than one Vatican area doghouse right about now.

[KitSileya]

13. Well, considering I've lived in a parish with a married priest,

I dunno if I agree with married priests. (He was a married Lutheran priest before he converted, and got the Pope's dispensation to be ordained.) Besides, most of the priests I've met have belonged to an order, so marriage would have been out of the question anyway.

However, when it comes to speaking against orthodoxy, hasn't the Vatican basically stated that the Brasilian bishop was way too hardline on the issue?

[47of74]

10. My feelings on Bishop Eidsvig

My feelings on Bishop Eidsvig

A) He is a good and faithful servant of the church and her people.
B) He has earned my own personal thumbs up for his stance.
C) And if there were more men like him in positions of authority in the church it would not have so many of the problems it does today.

[KitSileya]

12. You are quite right.

I haven't talked to him, only said hello to him once, but I understand from people who know him, amongst others my parish priest who belonged to the same monastery as him (they're both augustinian canons) the press release is indicative of what kind of person he is. For example, since he became our bishop, the number of priestly vocations has been on the rise, and we now have 9 seminarians in our small diocese (apparently we're the envy of many a diocese further south.)

I must say that I find it disheartening whenever there are cases like the Brasilian one in the media. I definitely think that the media should report these cases, and put pressure on the Church, so it's not the fact that they are reported that dishearten me. It's that there are shepherds in the Church who disregard the Lord's example and admonitions, and who lack empathy. I am going to pray not only for the child and her family, and her doctors, that they be met with support, not condemnation, but also for this bishop, and all the other hardliners in this issue, that they realize the commandment is to love one another, not judge.

[Joe Chi Minh]

14. The Pope roundly condemned the action of the bishop concerned,

acknowledging of course that the little girl was a most pitiful victim who deserved to be cherished and comforted, and should have been. I wouldn't want to be in that bishop's shoes on Judgment Day. But, then, it's South America, isn't it?

Although the proscription against abortion is central to traditional mainstream Christianity, as well as Roman Catholic teaching, this is clearly a case where blame has been misattributed to the little victim in a particularly hideous and brutal way. Quite akin to the cultural distortion in some Moslem countries whereby female rape victims are blamed, instead of the male rapist or rapists. Indeed, I think the girl was nine years old and a multiple rape victim.

[hedgehog]

15. The child was considered innocent, it was her mother and the doctors who were excommunicated.

[Joe Chi Minh]

16. Thank you for that information. In that case, I agree with your post #1 in its entirety.