Pretty much, yes. They placed their cares about quieting the scandal and keeping the boss in plausible denial mode over their concern for kids.
I’m only “defending” keeping the record straight about what was and wasn’t done. I think they’re a bunch of shitheels.
Yes, I do understand that.
The exact theological nitpicking I am interested in is, is there a specific difference, in canon law or doctrine or … whatever, in the Catholic church’s position on abortion v. capital punishment.
For example, has a Pope issued a Bull saying abortion was wrong, but only preached that capital punishment is? (Because I know I heard someone claim there was a difference; if I was lied to, I want to know.)
(I thought to church opposes the death penalty because it prevents repentance and penance, but we have already established that I am not an authority.)
The church has opposed abortion throughout its history. The earliest occasion was in the Didache (Teaching) of the Apostles from the first or early second century. Many early fathers of the church condemned it and it has been officially condemned by several councils, the Council of Eliberis in the fourth century, The Sixth Ecumenical Council of 680, the first Council of Mainz in 847, among others, and has been condemned by any number of papal declarations.
Official opposition to capital punishment occurred much more recently. There have been statements from various national conferences over the last 40 years. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops voted to oppose the death penalty at their 1974 meeting (at which time the death penalty had been suspended in the U.S. for seven years). Then, in 1980, they issued a formal letter opposing the death penalty, following the resumption of the death penalty in the United States. Partially prompted by that and similar actions of other national conferences, a consistory of cardinals, in 1991, called upon Pope John Paul II to issue a document addressing all matters of the sacredness of life. In 1995, the pope issued the encyclical Evangelium vitae, in which, among a number of isues addressed, he set forth a principle that the death penalty should only be reluctantly applied to defend society when no other method is available.
There has never been a council that officially condemned the death penalty and Evangelium vitae strongly argues against it rather than prohibiting it.
This is a misleading statement, because the church’s postion on abortion has not been uniform throughout history.
It was incomplete, perhaps, but not misleading. It would only have been misleading if I had attempted to claim that the church has always proclaimed that life begins at the moment of conception. Since the question had to do with the comparative histories of opposition to abortion vs opposition to capital punishment, simply noting when the opposition was voiced was legitimate.
The church has always opposed abortion. The point at which it considered life to have begun has changed from time to time.
Didache 2:2:
The separate prohibition against infanticide makes clear that aborting a preganacy, (at some point), has always been prohibited, which I believe answers j666’s question.
But it has not always been inherently evil.
Right. Abortion was opposed as simply something that the church found moderately displeasing.
As soon as the act was seen as taking a human life, it was murder. That is inherently evil. It is true that there have been several different interpretations of when life started, but as soon as human life is recognized, the church says that abortion is evil.
Actually, I think fear has answered my question; there was a (re-instated) Papal Bull on abortion, and an encyclic on capital punishment. If I remember correctly, a Bull trumps an encyclic, so this may be what I may heard, and misremembered.
Not to be rude, but … duh! That is the essential argument about terminating pregnancies; when is it ending a life. Quickening is a good practical dividing line.
The only differences between a bull and an encyclical is the technical form of the letter including the manner of the address and closing along with some nod to the particular audience for whom it is intended and a few other forms of protocol. They are of equal weight in presenting the the views of the pope. So, no, a bull does not trump an encyclical and beginning in the nineteenth century, encyclicals have become the more common method of expounding upon issues.
Well, since I was taken to task for not being overly literal and detailed when I provided you with the Cliff Notes version of the various church pronouncements on abortion and capital punishment, I figured that I ought to make clear that point as well.
So, if I understand you correctly, there is not a technical difference in the how Catholic church’s positions on the two issues akin to the difference between an Executive Order and a Supreme Court decision in the U.S?
The church has not spoken out against abortion in an entirely different and more … forceful means?
Sigh. I am never going to figure out what I heard or misheard on the radio that day.
I’m not sure what you are asking. I already noted that the church has issued condemnations of abortion, (at whatever point in development someone decides that a human life has been terminated), from more than one council of the church. Edicts from councils are pretty much the heaviest hitting documents that the church has. (Since 1869, the church has held that the pope can, in certain circumstances, issue a statement with as much force as a council, but we’ve only had two declarations ex cathedra and neither mentioned abortion.) I also noted, for completeness, that there have been papal declarations regarding abortion, but those statements merely emphasized the declarations of the councils.
I had thought that by listing the various types of church declarations regarding abortion and capital punishment–particularly the council declarations regarding abortion–I had, indeed, made it clear that the church has given much greater weight (so far) to the abortion issue. I apologize if that did not come across clearly.