What's really incredible is how insanely counter-productive this is. "If they disagree, they're not Catholics," says the Archbishop. "Abortion is worse than murder." This stuff is insane. The hierarchy seems to be on the verge of writing off the vast majority of the world's Catholics.

This is like the Syllabus of Errors:

Condemned statement number 80: "the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with, progress, liberalism and modern civilization."

They still haven't come to terms with that one yet, seemingly.

People are--or should be--justifiably outraged by stories like these.

However, there is still an enormous number of people in this country who would willingly subject women to situations like the ones they have to deal with in Brazil and in Guatemala (where even miscarriages can be subject to prosecution).

Of course, it is the tone-deaf response of the RCC in Brazil that is the most bizarre part of this story. If they're going to cling to their rigid orthodoxy, they're going to end up like the GOP--a rump denomination.

Speaking of abusing children - what's the moral standing of the Catholic Church when they slacked so on the endemic molestation in their "professional" ranks? And are they as militant in condemning those who practice the death penalty (also claimed to be immoral by them)?

What's really twisted is that the unborn child, being unbaptized, is going to Hell forever and ever according to the Church that's so concerned about its death.

Now that's a culture of life you can believe in!

Notice the rapist was not excommunicated. I suppose the church is so used to rape they can not see a problem. Or perhaps they would loose too many priests if rape was a excommunicable crime.

Now would be an excellent time to initiate a global boycott of the RCC. Do not give them your money; your time; your services and skills. They're quite willing and able to say:

"We know that people have other ideas, but if they do, then they are not Catholics. We want people who adhere to God's laws."

...until they realize that the money-coffers are running on empty, and they no longer have the funds to purchase their membership indulgences from Rome. Hit them where it hurts, and hit them until they are no more.

Attack. Attack. Attack.

This is what's to be expected with a reactionary Pope who finds Vatican II distasteful. It's no accident that Catholicism is losing ground to the charismatics in the Americas.

and if the stepfather had raped a nine-year-old boy, he would have been made a bishop.

Another point too: Catholic philosophy and theology books talk about the sometime need to make moral trade-offs because we literally can't always satisfy all the moral demands: so maybe you have to steal to save life, kill yourself to save many others, etc. (not necessarily the actual examples they'd agree with, best of memory.) So why can't they decide that the 9-yo girl is more to be valued than her unborn fetus? Are they posturing in more absolutest fashion than their intellectual tradition allows for?

Good riddence. I'm sure they will survive just fine without the church.

The Archbishop apparently has it wrong - according to St. Augustine unbaptized infants are not "innocent" but have original sin and will go to hell when they die.

Of course this is above all an argument for the importance of the Catholic Church - in effect only its priests can give a person (including an embryo) a ticket to heaven. And absolutely unrestrained breeding also extends the Church.

These things by the way are true examples of adaptive memes as the concept was proposed by Richard Dawkins.

"Abortion is much more serious than killing an adult. An adult may or may not be an innocent, but an unborn child is most definitely innocent. Taking that life cannot be ignored."

That sounds like they don't really believe that the innocent go to heaven when they die. Purgatory has been eliminated, so what happens to these innocent unborn after they die?

Has the good bishop been doing anything about excommunicating all the child molesters among his priests? The Catholic Church needs to straighten out its own sins, an unlikely event under the reign of Ratzi the Nazi.

so what happens to these innocent unborn after they die?

Whether unborn or newly born but not yet baptized, they go to limbo, which has no moral judgment. At least, that is what I was taught.

Religions like the Catholic, Fundamental Christians and Muslims have at one thing in common: Blame the victim and, if the victim is female all the better.

That sounds like they don't really believe that the innocent go to heaven when they die. Purgatory has been eliminated, so what happens to these innocent unborn after they die?

Well, babies, fetuses, and embroys aren't innocent, because they have original sin. Beyond that, Purgatory has not been eliminated - Limbo, which is where unbaptized babies used to go, has been. I think it was eliminated without clearly explaining what the alternative was.

Alas, Mr. Benen... at its heart this is EXACTLY what "pro-life" is all about. The generation of more human beings regardless of any circumstances.

One most acknowledge their consistency. Quality of those lives or any level of suffering is secondary. If you want to be devoutly Catholic, that much of life is simple.

My main concern is when pro-life people force others to adhere to their faith. Brazil does just this except where rape or life of the mother is concerned. That Brazilians are horrified that the Catholic church is SLIGHTLY more strict makes me smirk. Expect this kind of confusion; this psychological disconnect when religion dictates law.

it is the tone-deaf response of the RCC in Brazil that is the most bizarre part of this story.

Particularly given that the Catholic church in Brazil has been facing a steady erosion in favor of protestant/pentacostal groups which their citizens have been embracing over the past couple of decades. The Catholic church has had a hard enough time of it keeping their flock from "going over to the other side," as it were, and it seems their reaction has been to become even more extreme and more tonedeaf.

Horrifying.

It is this sort of Imperial attitude that makes me an Anglican instead of Roman, Catholic.

Speaking to the facts of the matter, from New Advent, the Catholic encyclopedia, on Limbo:

... these souls enjoy and will eternally enjoy a state of perfect natural happiness; and this is what Catholics usually mean when they speak of the limbus infantium, the "children's limbo."

on Purgatory:

...is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.

Both doctrines are still fully in force though rarely discussed.

On the lack of excommunication of the rapist, that point does not appear to be in the information given, but it would hardly be a surprise.

I don't understand how men who are supposed to shepherd the people and most esp. protect children can act in this manner.

May God have mercy on us all.

I believe 'god' was a conscious being, non-carnate, who evolved after the birth of this universe (there are many other universes in which 'god' does not form or evolve), but after incarnating, he fell off the dinosaur he was riding and was trampled and eaten. This happened about 6000 years ago.

Can I get a cable show and wear a funny hat and make other people's lives miserable, now?

How is an insult to be disowned by such an institution?

I'm glad that President Lula thought this was too much, too bad the Pope, the supposed moral leader of the Catholics, along with the bishops throughout the world, failed in their duty to make a rational, moral decision here.

The greatest enemies of the Catholic Church are its bishops.

A lively discussion on the disposition of aborted fetuses according to Catholicism and Catholics is here:
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=241866

The Catholics say that abortion is a sin. And why did Jesus die? Wasn't it for the forgiveness of sin? If Jesus died to forgive the sins of the believers, and the people who performed and received the abortions are believers, then aren't they forgiven as well?

How is an insult to be disowned by such an institution?

The people have been brainwashed into believing that the Roman Catholic Church is the way to Heaven and that they are in danger of Hell if they are not part of the Church. It's a great con and the Church has become very rich and powerful running it for centuries.

You have to get people to realize that there is no evidence to back up the claims of the Church before they realize that the Church is a waste of resources and humanity.

"Beyond that, Purgatory has not been eliminated - Limbo, which is where unbaptized babies used to go, has been. I think it was eliminated without clearly explaining what the alternative was."

Heaven. Basically, they get in because they may have original sin, but they never actually performed sin of their own volition.

Limbo was never part of official Catholic comology. It was created unofficially to eplain where unbaptized babies went, and had been part of popular theology for so long (many, many centuries) that people just treated it as if it was official. The Vatican just clarified that Limbo wasn't part of the Church's view of existence - and then said where unbaptized babies went to answer the obvious question everyone would ask. Which is a damn spot better than where baptized babies go, i.e. Cardinal Law's personal harem.

It's not just in Brazil. A US newspaper, the Examiner, has a story headlining that the girl is "forced to have an abortion." The only "force" the story mentions is the rape, but this right wing newspaper seems to think abortion is "forced" but rape is just fine. They removed my comment on this, no surprise there.

http://www.examiner.com/x-704-Pop-Media-Examiner~y2009m3d1-9-year-old-Brazilian-girl-pregnant-with-twins-is-forced-to-have-an-abortion

The Catholics say that abortion is a sin. And why did Jesus die? Wasn't it for the forgiveness of sin? If Jesus died to forgive the sins of the believers, and the people who performed and received the abortions are believers, then aren't they forgiven as well?

I was just about to make that point. Who Would Jesus Excommunicate? Seems to me the only people who pissed JC off were the bishop analogues of his time, and all he did to them was point out their hypocrisy (and turn over some tables in the temple).

Religion is a good thing when it espouses universal virtues, such as thou shalt not kill or love your neighbor as yourself, but becomes utter rubbish when it cleaves to rules and myths that only bureaucratic humans could make up.

That the church could stand in such awful judgement of a horrific tragedy and get it all so very wrong is an abomination. Instead of being a force for good, they took a pet issue and wrought untold additional misery.

The church committed its own worst sin by playing God and worshipping their own power to stand as judge, something their own faith said is reserved for the real God. The church would be a better institution if it took the advice of the medical field realized its first objective should be to first do no harm.

Honestly, the reaction of the Catholic Church should surprise no one. Horrify, shock, disgust - but not "surprise."

What amazes me is that a nine-year old was sexually mature enough to be impregnated. Is this a new record? How is it even possible? I find it hard to imagine a 3rd grader who has reached puberty.

Actually, killing a fetus is the best thing for it rather than being "more serious." The fetus is totally innocent and so will surely go to Heaven (now that Limbo is out of the picture, if not Limbaugh?) But an adult takes the chance of not being saved and thus going to Hell (or Purgatory for awhile, I'm not sure.) So we are insuring a life of bliss for the infant's soul if we terminate its miserable earthly existence early.

The RCC has never come to terms with its loss of temporal power. Yes, it was once the glue that held much of Western civilization together, but no longer, not since the Reformation, and Henry VIII. They are very slow to catch up, and perhaps never will.

The RCC thrives in pverty stricken, backward areas, where educational levels are low. As soon as educational levels increased its influence wanes quickly, as it should. It seems the Brazilian population is coming to its senses. Ultimately common sense may triumph in some heinous situations as this one, but the self-emasculating women haters parading around in fancy dresses and abusing little boys don't seem to have any.

If the unbaptized spend eternity in torment, then it is God who is a monster. Why would anyone want to worship such a being? If I believed in such a God, I would choose to go to Hell out of protest.

I long ago gave up on the management of the Catholic Church. Nothing will change until more of us do.

I am sick of these men from the misogynistic male dominated Catholic Church who claim to know "God's Laws." These men are not pro-life, they are pro-power. They couldn't care less about the suffering of this child. All they care about is retaining their power, not matter the outcome.

Let's stop this myth of their being pro-life. And a myth it is. They are pro-power for themselves. Nothing else matters.

i sincerely hope that the girl and her fmily are receiving the love and care they need.

As for Sobrinho & co.
if there is any entity worthy the name: god damn their shit-filled souls to hell.

Spike - I'm no Examiner fan, and their characterization of the girl's being "forced" to have an abortion doesn't seem borne out by either their story or Time's. Neither am I at all sympathetic to the RCC, or more specifically, Bishop Sobrinho's, hard-line approach to this issue. (In some odd psychosomatic way, I find myself feeling actual pain and nausea at the thought of what this poor girl is going through, and the callous disregard for her well-being her step-father, and her church, have demonstrated.)

But the Examiner's use of the word "forced" does raise interesting questions for both the pro-choice camp and the anti-abortion faction. How much "choice" should a raped 9-year-old be given? I would saw that a 9-year-old lacks the capacity to understand the implications of either an abortion or of carrying her pregnancy to term, be they physical, medical, moral, religious, financial, or social. A 15-year-old would understand them better, but hell, I'm not sure most 23 year-olds, or 30 or 40 year-olds, fully understand those implications either. So, here, I think the staunchest of pro-choicers among us must admit that in this case, the 9-year-old is unlikely to have gotten a meaningful "choice," no matter what the outcome was. Someone else made these choices for her, and the best her mother and her doctor could do was to try to ameliorate a tragic situation. And so it makes the pro-choice stance in this situation complicated. The anti-abortion absolutists, on the other hand, get to bask in the purity of their positions. Misguided and outright wrong as I believe they are, many would certainly envy the clarity that comes from being able to outsource complicated, personal, moral decisions to an angry bishop or a callous church.

What amazes me is that a nine-year old was sexually mature enough to be impregnated. Is this a new record? How is it even possible? I find it hard to imagine a 3rd grader who has reached puberty.

The youngest on record was actually five years old. The average age to begin puberty in the US is ten years old, so nine isn't as crazy as it first sounds.

Total up the benefits and detriments of organized religion throughout human history. A hard look suggests that organized religion has been a brake on human advancement -- and the cause of wars, misery, delayed social change, emnity, and suffering, all far outweighing whatever good one can argue for on the plus side. Why are we surprised that leaders of the Catholic Church, in Brazil or Boston, act in such a retrograde fashion? It is the nature of the beast.

How unChristian and cruel. Hasn't this girl and her mother suffered enough? My prayers go out to them.

I'm betting that Jesus would not approve of the decision of these heartless people.

It's nonsense like this that inspired me to leave the Catholic Church for the Episcopal Church (Catholic-plus, not Catholic-lite), a church I've grown to love.

There seems to be some confusion over what ex-communication is in the Catholic Church. It is not shunning. The person remains Christian and Catholic (because of the indelible mark of baptism). They are welcome and expected at Mass, but cannot directly participate in the liturgy (reader, cantor, Eucharistic minister, etc.) and cannot receive the sacraments. However, one may still present oneself to the priest for a blessing.

In the case of involvement with direct abortion, excommunication is automatic. Abortion is one of 7 cases in Canon law where excommunication occurs automatically at the act. So it is not a case of the local bishops passing judgement, but simply upholding Canon law as written.

The Latae Sententia can be lifted by a bishop, and is readily done so in the case of repentance of the act. In the US, most priests are empowered to lift the punishment in confession.

What is interesting to me is that the Catholic position is completely consistant. That is, each human life is a gift directly form God, and is loved infinately by its creator. That infinite love makes the distnictions we draw ourselves meaningless. So "every stage", "every condition", we are all afforded certain inalienable rights as a human person.

This would generally be a humanist point of view. Disabled children should not be subjected to eugenics (sterilization, termination), the weak and sick should be afforded care... The difference is that the Catholic position runs to the difficult extremes of the beginning and end of life.

You can disagree, but it is hardly hypocritical. If you believe in a principle, then you have to apply it when it is difficult as well as easy.

Peace

Abortion is one of 7 cases in Canon law where excommunication occurs automatically at the act.

Interesting. What are the other six? Do they include, say, voting for a death penalty bill as a voter or legislator, imposing the death penalty as a judge, signing a death penalty order as a governor, or participating (as guard, warden, etc.) in an execution? Does it include wilfully killing another human being, even as a soldier in wartime? If not, why not? And if yes, shouldn't there be millions of automatically excommunicated American Catholics?

What amazes me is that a nine-year old was sexually mature enough to be impregnated. Is this a new record? How is it even possible? I find it hard to imagine a 3rd grader who has reached puberty.

Not really, 9 or 10 is on the early side of onset but not that uncommon. What is amazing is the that the church clearly sided with unborn twins over the living, breathing abused 9-year old. The horror of the rape and paternity aside, allowing her to stay pregnant with twins very well could have killed her-- for pete's sake, the average weight of a 9-year old girl is 60 pounds!!!!

You can disagree, but it is hardly hypocritical. If you believe in a principle, then you have to apply it when it is difficult as well as easy.

If principles are more important to you than living, breathing human beings, then I suppose you have an argument. But you must realize why people back away from you in horror when you argue that a 9-year-old rape victim should have been forced to continue a pregnancy that would have permanently damaged her body because your principles demand it. Particularly when your principles don't seem to include giving the same punishment to a man who repeatedly raped a 9-year-old child as you do to the mother who made that difficult choice and the doctors who supported her in making it.

It's easy to stand on your principles when doing so doesn't cost you a thing. Try standing on your principles when it's your child whose life and health are at risk and we'll take them a little more seriously.

I have no truck with the Catholic Church because, to my mind, their teaching is based on ignorance. This cruel and ridiculous story confirms my opinion. While I respect everyone's right to follow the religion of their choice, I am constantly puzzled why so many people are taken in by the Church's jumbled nonsense.

As a case in point, the contention voiced by Archibishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho that "An adult may or may not be an innocent, but an unborn child is most definitely innocent." is pernicious rubbish. We are all born with the karma we bring from our previous lives. We don't know what that karma is, even for ourselves, until it manifests as our lives progress. To contend that an unborn child is 'innocent' may be convenient for Catholic doctrine, but it cannot withstand scrutiny on the basis of an understanding of our true nature.

Karma is commonly misunderstood as fate or destiny. It is nothing of the sort. It is the term given to the consequences of all our previous actions, both in this life and all our countless previous ones. As such, it is within our power to control, improve and purify it. But, as an unborn child, we haven't yet had the opportunity to do so. If we are fortunate enough to have access to a proper understanding -- which the Catholic Church appears unqualified to offer -- we will have the opportunity, and motivation, to ameliorate our situation through virtuous conduct.

Is that not a better, more realistic and humane approach than persecuting those who are perversely denied a meaningful understanding?

"Abortion is much more serious than killing an adult. An adult may or may not be an innocent, but an unborn child is most definitely innocent."

Ah, FINALLY the Holy Mother Church has figured out just EXACTLY (or nearly so) when original sin attaches to a person. Seems to be the moment of birth (or in this case, the moment of operational removal of the fetus, cause you can't really call if "birth" if the baby doesn't travel down the birth canal).

But a bit more needs to be done. Is it when the placenta detaches from the mother's womb? Is it when the placenta is cut? Is it when light first shines on the baby?

Still, I thought there was NOT any doubt that adults were not innocent. We ALL have original sin, don't we?

Inquiring minds NEED to know.

I can't make copy and paste work on this comment program, but InsideCatholic today has an article explaining that in Catholic doctrine, women are actually inferior to men. I suggest reading it for the strong of stomach.

Another reason that I am pleased not to be a christian.

It is a wonder that it took literally dozens of posts before anybody put up a comment that actually bothered to understand what the Church's position is -- which was then promptly distorted, since actually knowing what you object to is somehow beneath discussion. Nice job, Fitz.

Since somebody asked, these are the offenses that automatically trigger excommunication:

1) Apostasy from the faith, heresy, or schism (Canon 1364)

2) Profanation of the Eucharist (Can. 1367)

3) Physical attack against the Roman Pontiff (Can. 1370) (that is, you can't punch the Pope and then take communion. Seems reasonable to me, gotta draw a line somewhere.)

4) Absolution against an accomplice in a sin against the sixth Commandment, e.g., adultery (Can. 1378, 977) (This means a priest can't give an adulterer absolution UNLESS the adulterer stops the infidelity.)

5) Consecration of a bishop without a pontifical mandate (Can. 1382) (I dunno how many of us will find this a temptation.)

6) A priest who violates the sacramental seal of confession (Can. 1388) (There is actually a fair amount of secular law around this one.) And finally

7) A person who procures a completed abortion (Can. 1389)

And here are the loopholes:

Can. 1323 The following are not subject to a penalty when they have violated a law or precept:

1. a person who has not yet completed the sixteenth year of age;
2. a person who without negligence was ignorant that he or she violated a law or precept; inadvertence and error are equivalent to ignorance;
3. a person who acted due to physical force or a chance occurrence which the person could not foresee or, if foreseen, avoid;
4. a person who acted coerced by grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or due to necessity or grave inconvenience unless the act is intrinsically evil or tends to the harm of souls;
5. a person who acted with due moderation against an unjust aggressor for the sake of legitimate self defense or defense of another;
6. a person who lacked the use of reason, without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. 1324, §1, n. 2 and 1325;
7. a person who without negligence thought that one of the circumstances mentioned in nn. 4 or 5 was present.

So the whole idea that, for example, there is a parallel between the excommunication of an adult (NOT the 9 year old) involved in an abortion and the failure to excommunicate a rapist, just shows you guys haven't bothered to learn what these automatic examples of excommunication are FOR.

To a fair-minded person, these make it pretty clear that what this Brazilian case is about, from the Church's point of view, isn't the specifics of the poor little kids involved (BOTH of them), but the essentially authoritative nature of the Roman church.

To BE the Roman church, to remain what it is, it cannot allow Brazilian bishops and priests to look at a godawful case like this one, and say 'well, this one exception is okay....'

You guys should stop and think (I know, you're not used to it), once in awhile when you go off on one of these anti-Catholic tirades, and consider whether what you are really objecting to is the specifics of any particular doctrine, or the idea that the Roman church even HAS doctrines.

Because when it is the latter, you exemplify precisely what you claim to condemn: you exercise an intolerant , ignorant groupthink that Pius IX or Gregory the Great would have welcomed as a brother.

"...To BE(sic) the Roman Catholic Church, to remain what it is..." posted by anonymous @ 4:38 PM.
Well, you see, right there is the problem. Why should the Roman Catholic Church remain authoritarian, anti-women, pro-pedophilia (at least going by results, if not intent), massively wealthy while proclaiming wealth to be immaterial and apparently more concerned about embryos as opposed to an actual, living 9-year old girl and still be considered worthy of anyone's respect and/or devotion?

The GOP and the RCC are gleefully marching themselves into obscurity with this fanatical purging of anyone they perceive to be ideologically impure. More power to 'em.

So the whole idea that, for example, there is a parallel between the excommunication of an adult (NOT the 9 year old) involved in an abortion and the failure to excommunicate a rapist, just shows you guys haven't bothered to learn what these automatic examples of excommunication are FOR.

No, it just shows that the Church is more interested in controlling women that they are in punishing crimes against them. I see the only way that a priest who raped someone could get himself excommunicated would be to then help his victim get an abortion.

Again. The child is NINE YEARS OLD. She is the victim of a horrible crime. Trying to carry the pregnancy to term could very well kill her.

And what's your concern? Fetuses. Fetuses are much, much more important than a nine-year-old crime victim's life and health. In fact, the fetus is more important than ANY woman's life or health -- a woman who gets an abortion for any reason, even to save her own life, is automatically excommunicated and must apologize for her horrible, horrible crime of not wanting to die needlessly in order to be allowed back into communion.

There's a reason I left the Catholic Church, and the fact that I was treated like an idiot child whose life was less important than any random man's was only one among many.

anonymous @4:38 PM is typical of most apologists for the Roman abomination, in that he doesn't understand the doctrines he has exchanged his freedom for.

Canon 1378 doesn't mean what you think it means, idiot. It doesn't provide that a priest is excommunicated if he absolves an adulterer who does not give up adultery. It provides that a priest is excommunicated if he absolves the woman (or the little boy) that he fucks of the sin of fucking a priest. (He needs to send them to a colleague, apparently.)

The more one learns about the RC church, the less unjustified tirades against it appear. Some organisations really are evil. This is one of them.

There have been millions of parents and families across the planet and through out time that have chosen to protect and defend their children from the arrogance and ignorance of the Catholic Church. The stupid arrogant fools never learn.

The child will heal with those who defended and protected her, not the Church. They were more like God than the Catholic Church. She will honor, respect, trust and be fiercly loyal to those who protected her. Her children and her children's children will know the strength, mercy, love and protection that her mother and family had for her. For generations.

The Catholic Church not so much. They tried to kill her. Force her to suffer. They were merciless and savage. They chose the sperm of a rapist over a child. They blamed their flaws and weakness on God. This too will be passed on for generations.

The Catholic Church damn near killed me, my brother and sister in their ignorance and arrogance. My mother chose her children over them too. There will be sorrow and bitterness for the abandonment and betrayal by those who were trusted in faith for aid and guidance. The fanatical never understand the human race nor God. They never ever understand love. Just empty dogma.

Nice to see plainly how welcome anti-Catholic ignorance and bigotry is with you guys.

More than a few of us are cradle-catholics who have earned the right to say any damned thing against the Roman apostasy that we so choose, and have no intention of ever apologizing for opposing the backward, misogynistic thugs of the so-called "Holy" Roman Church.

The position they take here is simply indefensible.

That organization is not concerned with your soul. They are concerned with control. That is how they keep the wallets of their members open and their pedophile priests in Jewish layers.