Catholic Social Teaching

A place to discuss Catholic topics and issues

Moderator: Moderators

WinePusher

Catholic Social Teaching

Post #1

Post by WinePusher »

Catholic Social Teaching can be summed up in an ethic called "the consistent life ethic." This ethic says that life, from conception to natural death should be preserved and protected. Therefore, the Catholic Church is opposed to:

-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
-Abortion
-Economic Injustice
-Euthanasia

and the Church supports:

-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants
-Universal Healthcare
-Programs such as Welfare

1) Do you agree with Catholic Social Teaching as it is presented above? Why or Why Not?
Last edited by WinePusher on Tue Jan 04, 2011 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jonah
Scholar
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:32 pm

Post #11

Post by Jonah »

I think you have already allowed there is a continuum of Jewish positions. You are sticking with a particular strain.

You limit the Catholic theologian's position on "potential life" to the context of your concern for endangered lives of mothers. That is a choice you make. But, clearly his point can just as well, and more than likely refers more to situations where the mother's life is not endangered. And yes, I anticipate your point...who is to say or to judge any woman's feeling of endangerment.

And I did not allude to the Catholic theologian's point in any context of the legal structures forcing anyone to do anything. I tend to think of values that can be taught, and the resultant influence/persuasion that teaching renders. That would be the Jewish view from a conservative Jewish point of view. Not that I am a conservative by label, but tend to be on abortion....emphasis on tend.

As an intersexual, I have lived every day of my life knowing that I have no widely accepted right to exist, and every reason to have been aborted. Then. I am supposed to stay in the closet. There is danger to mothers, yes. There is danger in being human. The world is a very very dangerous place. That should change.

User avatar
Jrosemary
Sage
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:50 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post #12

Post by Jrosemary »

Jonah wrote:I think you have already allowed there is a continuum of Jewish positions. You are sticking with a particular strain.
On the contrary, I've said that as far as I know, there is no argument in Judaism that a woman should have an abortion if the pregnancy has put her life at risk. That is the feeling of every branch of Judaism, and has been the opinion since at least Rashi's time.

You limit the Catholic theologian's position on "potential life" to the context of your concern for endangered lives of mothers. That is a choice you make.


Because the Catholic position is that a woman should not have an abortion even if the pregnancy has put her life at risk. Winepusher and I discussed this at length above.
But, clearly his point can just as well, and more than likely refers more to situations where the mother's life is not endangered. And yes, I anticipate your point...who is to say or to judge any woman's feeling of endangerment.
All I've said about when a mother's health or well-being is at risk, as opposed to her life, is that it's a complicated issue, halachically speaking. There is no 'one-size-fits-all' answer. Woman who want a halachic answer for their own circumstances get a case-by-case answer--and if they consult different rabbis, they're going to find different opinions.
And I did not allude to the Catholic theologians point in any context of the legal structures forcing anyone to do anything.
Nonetheless, I think my point remains. Especially in light of Catholic hospitals' refusal to perform abortions in the US (though that has come legally under attack), even when deemed medically necessary. (They generally give referrals to non-Catholic hospitals that will perform the procedure.) And the Catholic Church speaks openly against legalized abortion.
As an intersexual, I have lived every day of my life knowing that I have no widely accepted right to exist, and every reason to have been aborted.
I've never heard of anyone aborting a child for being intersexual--I was following your lead and referring to abortions of fetuses that display Down Syndrome. I personally find such abortions extremely problematic and, as I said above, many rabbis do not find Down Syndrome a reason for abortion. (I tend to agree, but I'm not ready to commit myself 100% to that.)

I certainly wouldn't support the abortion of a fetus because it's intersexual. Nor would I refer to intersexuality as a birth defect. (Actually, I dislike the term 'birth defect' on principle.)

Jonah
Scholar
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:32 pm

Post #13

Post by Jonah »

I typed a rather lengthy response and lost it because the thing timed out.

I'll try to be succinct. Your final statement about Jewish law I agree with and appreciate...the first statement may have omitted a word...I'm not sure, but it was unclear to me. I also agree that Catholic policy indeed carries the legal applications you are concerned with. Beyond policy, I pay attention to Catholic theology in its humanist framework (and how that does or doesn't get carried out in application.)

My personal point is not rocket science. My mother's life was endangered by my existence. Yeah, you don't hear about intersexuals at all hardly. You're not supposed to.

Recently, I read an article tracing the history of western myths about monsters...and killing them. The authors tied these myths to fear and demonization of intersexuals...many of the monsters in the myths having intersexual traits. The authors then used this history as an illustration of what they call biopolitics....in which the position of majority groups are pitted against that of minorities....and the authors cited that in the case of intersexuality, the left is as tyrannical as the right....in that the lesser beings will never have an equal footing in the tensions between they and those who feel endangered, in some way, by them.

There is only one time in my whole life that I outed myself publicly. It was when I was in seminary at a retreat. Our group was in a session that somehow devolved into a beating up on gay people. I got pretty mad. So, I outed myself and talked about the biological reality of the continuum of psycho-sexual identities in humanity. Guess I wasn't supposed to do that. The only response I got was one gay classmate coming up to me and hugging me and then he went off silently crying. The rest of the retreat, NO ONE would speak to me...not even my so called "friends".

My mother bore a lot. She was endangered. Her child was at times suicidal, and tried once. The chemicals and surgery that the closet doctors ordered up were all silent chambers of horror that some biopolitical majority somewhere up there deemed mandatory. Abortion would have been easier.

User avatar
Jrosemary
Sage
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:50 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post #14

Post by Jrosemary »

Jrosemary wrote:
Jonah wrote:I think you have already allowed there is a continuum of Jewish positions. You are sticking with a particular strain.
On the contrary, I've said that as far as I know, there is no argument in Judaism that a woman should have an abortion if the pregnancy has put her life at risk. That is the feeling of every branch of Judaism, and has been the opinion since at least Rashi's time.
To make my first sentence more clear: as far as I know, all branches of Judaism agree that a woman should have an abortion if the pregnancy has put her life at risk. That's been the case since at least the time of Rashi.

Jonah
Scholar
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:32 pm

Post #15

Post by Jonah »

I thought that might be the sense of the statement. So, from my standpoint, I pay very close attention when people insert the psychological dimension into the mother's life being at risk. Inherent in that is the concern for potential breakdown or self-harm on the mother's side of the tension. There is often not that concern at all for those in a biopolitical minority. And/or there is a biopolitical heirarchy of concern perhaps based on a group's success in tapping into some foothold on the beach of political correctness (a term which I do not denigrate).

got to go...later...

Jonah
Scholar
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 12:32 pm

Post #16

Post by Jonah »

...back.

I have a love-hate relationship with Catholicism. I have responded here in terms of the op "consistent life ethic". On one hand I have personal experience of how that life ethic works for good for people who are not societal winners. On the other hand, there is the furiously maddening dysfunctions of the Catholic institution and tradition that can look the other way during the Holocaust and oppress gay people. I would also rush to say that I have experienced quite a gap in the oppression factor between a lot of ordinary Catholics and those in the power structure. But, there also every day Catholic storm troopers as well. It's a big tent over there, and you can find about everything under the sun in it. My father was Catholic (by genealogy of anusim descent) and had a basic Catholic pro-life concern for "the poor" in all the meanings that word can have. I have a profoundly autistic nephew for whom I've been an independent provider social worker for in the past. In that role I interacted with all his other providers including a Catholic elementary school which took him on for absolutely no money, simply out of the goodness of their heart. And the thing that I was amazed at was that the children in the school not only tolerated the different one among them, they embraced him and adopted him out of instinct of the culture they had been brought up in. As a former public school teacher, I can certify this would not so easily happen in the public school.

My grave concern is this. We are entering a rapidly deteriorating global economy. When it comes to the push & shove of basic needs, the gloves come off, and we find out what people are really made of....of who they are willing to command to the bottom of the pile. In different ways, both the Catholic and Jewish traditions have been able at times to stand up to the slippery slope of dehumanization of "the poor". Abortion is often an economic issue. While I do not seek a change in the law permitting abortions, I am very concerned about how abortion and other ways of dealing with economic pressure can become too easy....culturally.

Draconian budget cutting is on the way. Neither the health care system or the social work sector will be able to bear the weight of millions of "poor" who cannot step up to the Corporate Republican self-reliance standard. Somebody is going to be deemed expendable. In the case of Arizona recently, we have the governor championing Arizona's decision to cut treatable persons off of medicaid. They just cost too much.

In general, when the life and condition of "poor" people is on the line, I have looked to both Jewish and Catholic family services types for aid and support because of the generally consistent life ethic one finds in both traditions, irrespective of the glaring failures and dysfunctions one can narrate with the Catholic tradition, not the least of which is the sexual abuse scandal.

User avatar
Lux
Site Supporter
Posts: 2189
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:27 pm

Re: Catholic Social Teaching

Post #17

Post by Lux »

WinePusher wrote:and the Church supports:

-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants
-Universal Healthcare
-Programs such as Welfare
I agree with (support) all of the above points, but I think welfare should be watched closely to make sure it doesn't become random and excessive handouts (which it might already be...)

WinePusher wrote:Therefore, the Catholic Church is opposed to:

-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
-Abortion
-Economic Injustice
-Euthanasia
I agree with the Church (oppose) economic injustice and abortion (morally, although I'm undecided about the legal aspect).

I'm fine with euthanasia, I've never been terminally ill (as you might have noticed), I can't imagine how terrible it must be and how hard it is for some people to deal with. I can't judge them if they choose not to endure it anymore.

About embryonic stem cell research, that's the most complicated issue here in my opinion. In order for the cells to be used the embryo has to die, but people could be saved from dying as a direct result, and the level of sentience that the person saved has is much, much higher than the embryo's.
[center]Image

© Divine Insight (Thanks!)[/center]



"There is more room for a god in science than there is for no god in religious faith." -Phil Plate.

User avatar
Lux
Site Supporter
Posts: 2189
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:27 pm

Re: Catholic Social Teaching

Post #18

Post by Lux »

WinePusher wrote:and the Church supports:

-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants
-Universal Healthcare
-Programs such as Welfare
I agree with (support) all of the above points, but I think welfare should be watched closely to make sure it doesn't become random and excessive handouts (which it might already be...)

WinePusher wrote:Therefore, the Catholic Church is opposed to:

-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
-Abortion
-Economic Injustice
-Euthanasia
I agree with the Church (oppose) economic injustice and abortion (morally, although I'm undecided about the legal aspect).

I'm fine with euthanasia, I've never been terminally ill (as you might have noticed), I can't imagine how terrible it must be and how hard it is for some people to deal with. I can't judge them if they choose not to endure it anymore.

About embryonic stem cell research, that's the most complicated issue here in my opinion. In order for the cells to be used the embryo has to die, but people could be saved from dying as a direct result, and the level of sentience that the person saved has is much, much higher than the embryo's.
[center]Image

© Divine Insight (Thanks!)[/center]



"There is more room for a god in science than there is for no god in religious faith." -Phil Plate.

S-word
Scholar
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 6:04 am

Re: Catholic Social Teaching

Post #19

Post by S-word »

WinePusher wrote:Catholic Social Teaching can be summed up in an ethic called "the consistent life ethic." This ethic says that life, from conception to natural death should be preserved and protected. Therefore, the Catholic Church is opposed to:

-Embryonic Stem Cell Research
-Abortion
-Economic Injustice
-Euthanasia

and the Church supports:

-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants
-Universal Healthcare
-Programs such as Welfare

1) Do you agree with Catholic Social Teaching as it is presented above? Why or Why Not?
-Embryonic Stem Cell Research.... I agree with any research that will help mankind.

-Abortion.... I believe every woman has the right to terminate the gowth of the egg that was in her body when she was born, I will leave it to the greater Judge to determine whether her actions were of righteousness or evil intent. ie, if she were raped, or if the growth is known to be deformed in some way, etc, etc. Or if she aborts, simply to spite her husband, whose greatest desire is to have children.

-Economic Injustice... With this I agree, and believe that the catholic church should cash in the billions of dollars of Art work that is gathering dust, and give the proceeds to the poor.

-Euthanasia.... If I refuse to put a dog down, which is suffering in great pain due to a terminal disease, and I am rightfully charged by RSPCA with undue cruelty, then I ask you; "Do you reckon I believe in Euthanasia?"

and the Church supports:

-Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants....... Does that apply also to any who are known, or suspect terrorist?

-Universal Healthcare, and Programs such as Welfare: these I agree with.

God does not classify the unborn feotus, as a human life, but only a potential human life, as he does with the semen that is washed out of my sheets every time I have a wet dream.

Exodus 21: 22; "If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she (A Human life) is not injured in anyother way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges. But if the woman herself (A Human life) is injured, the punishment shall be, life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, bruise for bruise.

lia15
Student
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:10 pm

Post #20

Post by lia15 »

[Replying to post 2 by LiamOS]

As Catholic's we are opposed to contraceptives because to "know someone" as in sexual intercourse without sin you must be within marriage, unitive and procreation and contraceptives are not procreation and I assume most often not within marriage.

Post Reply