It turns out the Pope is Catholic

Pope Francis: Abortion ‘cries out in vengeance to God’; Church will never change teaching

VATICAN CITY, November 26, 2013 ( – In a high level teaching document released this morning, Pope Francis has firmly responded to those who have expressed hope that the Catholic Church may one day change its teachings on abortion, writing, “the Church cannot be expected to change her position on this question.”

“I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or ‘modernizations’,” he added.

“I want to be completely honest in this regard. This is not something subject to alleged reforms or ‘modernizations’,” the pope said.

Entitled “Evangelii Gaudium” (The Joy of the Gospel), the Apostolic Exhortation – a document which, while important, is of less weight than an encyclical – noted, “Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenceless and innocent among us.”

He lamented that, “Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this.”

“Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defence of unborn life is closely linked to the defence of each and every other human right.”

“It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development,” he said. “Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defence of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be.”

The document marks the pope’s most in-depth discussion of abortion since his election.

The pope added that it is important to do more to more to “accompany women in very difficult situations, where abortion appears as a quick solution to their profound anguish, especially when the life developing within them is the result of rape or a situation of extreme poverty.”

It turns out that the pope still teaches what anybody with an ounce of common sense knew he taught all along. The only people who managed to convince themselves otherwise were members of the MSM and hysterical Reactionaries who seriously believed the MSM hype that he was somehow abandoning the Church’s teaching on the sanctity of human life.

On the bright side, nobody is pretending that this is a translation error and that it is totally impossible to even know *what* the heck the pope is talking about here. When the pope is saying what Catholics want to hear, all of a sudden he’s clear as a bell. They Definition Games only begin at the moment the Church starts saying stuff dissenting Catholics wish very much she didn’t.

It will be interesting to see how the dissenting Left ties to spin this bit of the exhortation.

It would be intriguing to see what happened if people attempted to listen to the whole exhortation, instead of emphasize the bits they like and explain away the rest.

"Also, when someone is seeking asylum, it is generally because their life is at risk ..."

The Catholic Both/And
"The answer is “no, both”. Maybe not as certain in individual cases. But in aggregate? ..."

The Catholic Both/And
"Oh, I'm sorry. Someone tossed you into a jail cell after you fled for your ..."

The Catholic Both/And
"Democrats and Republicans are not the same. I'm not saying that. I am saying that ..."

The Catholic Both/And

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • orual’s kindred

    Slightly related: I was pleasantly surprised to see this on Buzzfeed –

  • ivan_the_mad

    Regarding the CeT link: Yes, I’ve encountered similar dodges of the social doctrine, e.g. what we have isn’t really capitalism (liberal economics, free markets, whatever might be the preferred denomination). My favorite one of them all is that we’ve yet to see a true free market, since I’ve heard much the same about communism. The barque of Peter will navigate the many and various instances of Scylla or Charybdis; cling to that, not to sterile ideologies!

    • orual’s kindred

      what we have isn’t really capitalism

      I’m not sure I want to see what ‘really capitalism’ is.

      • ivan_the_mad

        The realization of ideologies which supplant God and subordinate man, whether subtly or frankly, have everywhere had the same result. Russell Kirk warned us in The Conservative Mind that “we can make our own Terrestrial Hell through infatuation with ideology”, and so it would be.

      • Mariana Baca

        It depends who you ask. I shudder at the definition given by objectivists who think it should be an all explaining theory of everything with no room for solidarity or charity.

        But I agree with Chesterton’s view of things that as long as those with a lot of money work with the government to give themselves market incentives outside the normal functioning of things, things will get more and more distorted. That isn’t real capitalism because it is not market forces determining the success of failure of a business.

        I would say a real capitalist system would not have government incentives (financial or legal) for certain businesses and not others based on economic interest. The government would instead try to ensure things like fraud and theft were not happening.

        But real or fake capitalism should not be the determining force for how we treat those in need, nor should be treat labor as a fungible commodity. That is the peril of “too much” capitalism.

    • Stu

      I believe there is another challenge when discussing this subject as well and that is what people call “capitalism.” There are so many different definitions and understandings that it often makes discussing such things difficult. Chesterton certainly saw this and took effort to define what he meant when talking about capitalism but it might be beneficial for the effort to SOMETIMES avoid the term and simply point out what is wrong in the current paradigm.

      It is interesting that of late we see people critiquing so-called “crony-capitalism so at the very least even “capitalists” can see things wrong with capitalism. Maybe the next step is pointing out to them that truly free markets don’t necessarily equate into laissez-faire economics nor capitalism.

      • Mariana Baca

        Yes — like when Chesterton says the problem with Capitalism is that there are too few capitalists (e.g. wealth concentrated in hands of the few). Or saying Hudge is is bed with Gudge (I think those are their names) that the big government dude is in cahoots with the plutocrat. When those with a lot of money make the playing field extra unlevel by enlisting the help of the government, there is no end to the distortion.

        That said, I think people do well to remember that Capitalism should only be an economic theory/method of distributing goods and services, *not* an all explaining theory of everything, ala Objectivism. We need to pair the best way of creating productivity with solidarity for our fellow human beings.

  • Andy, Bad Person

    What I like about Francis is that he is a Whole Faith kind of guy. Abortion (murder) is one of the sins that cries to heaven for vengeance. Many people forget that sodomy isn’t the only one of those.

    Francis has been spending quite a bit of time working on the other two neglected StCtHfV, too.

  • Elmwood

    The other big issue the church needs to address better besides the ills of trickle down capitalism is modern warfare (arms race, military spending… etc.). As far as I can tell, all modern popes say no to war (modern) period. Of course there are hypothetical scenarios where war is justified, like with capital punishment, but modern warfare is much different than when St. Augustine and St. Aquinas penned the first concepts of what constitutes a “just war”, that today it’s probably never justified.

    Fr. Swetland, in the NC register, calls the deaths of innocents during the “War on Terror” tragic, but theoretically justified. Funny, I thought intentionally killing innocent people was a grave sin? The more important the target, the more acceptable it is to have civilian casualties.

    Catholic Answers has a particularly awful neocon tract on the concept of just war. To think, that this is the first link that comes up when you do a google search on “Catholic Just War”.