Strange and tricky situation . . . HELP!!!

[AGBF]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:01:32 PM
Author: gemgirl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:52:11 AM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:47:18 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
My mom was raised catholic and she got engaged to an episcopalian boy who agreed to marry in the catholic church and raise the children catholic. They were going to the pre-marriage counseling and he was made aware of some of the (now possibly antiquated? not sure) rules he would have to agree to and one of them was that if there was a problem during childbirth and a choice had to be made between the mother and the child, that the catholic church''s stance was to save the child.

Whoa! That seems awfully harsh! I had no idea that the Catholic church expected that. I know . . . absolutely, unequivocally KNOW . . . that DH would NEVER, EVER agree to that under any circumstances. So, if that rule is still in place, I guess we couldn''t have been married in the Catholic church anyway.

That thought is way off base. The life of the mother is always considered first.

gemgirl, The "thought" isn''t off base; it was taught Catholic doctrine for many years. The beauty of Catholicism is that it is interpreted, however. It is not a static religion. It is, therefore, possible that doctrine has changed as canon law has evolved. I am certainly no expert in canon law! I get my news of Catholic policy strictly third and fourth hand: through friends and newspapers! I have heard no one in recent years discuss the issue of sacrificing the life of the mother for the child and, since this would be a hot issue, perhaps the policy has changed.

AGBF

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Everyone, thank you so much! All of these responses have been SO helpful to me!

Gemgirl ~ Thank you for posting all of that great information! I do have one question about communion, though: I did go through Confirmation in the Lutheran church when I was about 13 or so, and had my first communion shortly after that. (I remember being SOOO excited about that . . . we use real wine! LOL!) Lutherans do receive communion, but usually not at every service. (Our church does it once a month, on the first Sunday of the month.) I would imagine that I''m still not "officially approved" to receive communion at a Catholic church though, correct? I''m not sure what the requirements are.

 

[Cehrabehra]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:01:32 PM
Author: gemgirl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:52:11 AM

Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:47:18 AM

Author: Cehrabehra

My mom was raised catholic and she got engaged to an episcopalian boy who agreed to marry in the catholic church and raise the children catholic. They were going to the pre-marriage counseling and he was made aware of some of the (now possibly antiquated? not sure) rules he would have to agree to and one of them was that if there was a problem during childbirth and a choice had to be made between the mother and the child, that the catholic church's stance was to save the child. He could not, would not agree to that, the church refused to marry them, my grandmother refused to attend a marriage that wasn't in a catholic church, they were forced to separate. (she ended up marrying him 20 years later but by then he'd turned into a raging alcoholic and she was too blind to see anything other than their peaches and cream 'reunited and it feels so good' 2nd chance) But I digress... my father was raised LDS and when my parents got married both were disgruntled and got married at a UU church (which my grandmother did condescend to attend). I was raised flower child free and neither ever went back to church on a regular basis... my mother however did ask for a priest on her deathbed. In the end she needed that from the church. She asked if she was forgiven - like three times. She didn't believe it could be so easy lol 'Are you sure?' it's a little funny to hear your dying mom continue to ask that - mom what did you DO?? haha My dad doesn't practice LDS at all but when he had my brother 18 years ago he suddenly wanted him to be raised in that church so he has and my brother is planning to go on mission etc.


I think for most of us our spirituality is an evolution, even if we remain in the same faith for a lifetime. What you are going through right now is another step in it and I think the more you can make these steps with your husband, hand in hand, the better off you will both be and the fewer issues may pop up ugly heads in the future

Whoa! That seems awfully harsh! I had no idea that the Catholic church expected that. I know . . . absolutely, unequivocally KNOW . . . that DH would NEVER, EVER agree to that under any circumstances. So, if that rule is still in place, I guess we couldn't have been married in the Catholic church anyway.

That thought is way off base. The life of the mother is always considered first.

This was in like 1960-62, somewhere in there. I have no idea if this is still the case, but it certainly was at that time. The Catholic church does move slowly, as you said, but it does continue to evolve so it very well may be antiquated at this time. I'd be curious to know the current stance.

ETA: I did some searches and I cannot come up with anything addressing this.

 

[princesss]

Irrish,

I believe part of the reason why non-Catholics cannot take communion is that in the Catholic Church they believe in transsubstantiation - that is, Catholics believe that the wafer and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. Since that is a core belief, they don''t allow anybody that does not believe this to partake. I received my first communion as an Espiscopalian but am not able to take communion in a Catholic church because I believe it is a symbol rather than the actual physical body and blood.

Somebody please correct me if I''m wrong. That''s what I was taught, at least.

 

[gemgirl]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:26:39 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/9/2009 2:01:32 PM
Author: gemgirl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:52:11 AM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/9/2009 11:47:18 AM
Author: Cehrabehra
My mom was raised catholic and she got engaged to an episcopalian boy who agreed to marry in the catholic church and raise the children catholic. They were going to the pre-marriage counseling and he was made aware of some of the (now possibly antiquated? not sure) rules he would have to agree to and one of them was that if there was a problem during childbirth and a choice had to be made between the mother and the child, that the catholic church''s stance was to save the child.

Whoa! That seems awfully harsh! I had no idea that the Catholic church expected that. I know . . . absolutely, unequivocally KNOW . . . that DH would NEVER, EVER agree to that under any circumstances. So, if that rule is still in place, I guess we couldn''t have been married in the Catholic church anyway.

That thought is way off base. The life of the mother is always considered first.

gemgirl, The ''thought'' isn''t off base; it was taught Catholic doctrine for many years. The beauty of Catholicism is that it is interpreted, however. It is not a static religion. It is, therefore, possible that doctrine has changed as canon law has evolved. I am certainly no expert in canon law! I get my news of Catholic policy strictly third and fourth hand: through friends and newspapers! I have heard no one in recent years discuss the issue of sacrificing the life of the mother for the child and, since this would be a hot issue, perhaps the policy has changed.

AGBF

No, sorry, still off base. There was no Church doctrine that ever said that. Church "doctrine" comes in two forms- "Canon Law" and "Cathechesis", and as far as I know or have ever read about, there was nothing ever written into doctrine that said that. The only change to Canon Law comes from Vatican Council Encyclicals (of which few are issued) which don''t in essence change, but rather updates and evolves Canon Law.

The Cathechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The Code of Canon Law:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

 

[gemgirl]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:41:04 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Everyone, thank you so much! All of these responses have been SO helpful to me!

Gemgirl ~ Thank you for posting all of that great information! I do have one question about communion, though: I did go through Confirmation in the Lutheran church when I was about 13 or so, and had my first communion shortly after that. (I remember being SOOO excited about that . . . we use real wine! LOL!) Lutherans do receive communion, but usually not at every service. (Our church does it once a month, on the first Sunday of the month.) I would imagine that I''m still not ''officially approved'' to receive communion at a Catholic church though, correct? I''m not sure what the requirements are.

Irish, that decision is one of conscience for you alone to make.

We''re only seven when we receive First Holy Communion. There have no wine at ours! LOL!

 

[princesss]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:59:50 PM
Author: gemgirl

Date: 11/9/2009 2:41:04 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Everyone, thank you so much! All of these responses have been SO helpful to me!

Gemgirl ~ Thank you for posting all of that great information! I do have one question about communion, though: I did go through Confirmation in the Lutheran church when I was about 13 or so, and had my first communion shortly after that. (I remember being SOOO excited about that . . . we use real wine! LOL!) Lutherans do receive communion, but usually not at every service. (Our church does it once a month, on the first Sunday of the month.) I would imagine that I''m still not ''officially approved'' to receive communion at a Catholic church though, correct? I''m not sure what the requirements are.

Irish, that decision is one of conscience for you alone to make.

We''re only seven when we receive First Holy Communion. There have no wine at ours! LOL!

I didn''t know that! Guess I was misinformed. Man, I''m learning a lot. Thank you, gemgirl!

 

[gemgirl]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:50:57 PM
Author: princesss
Irrish,

I believe part of the reason why non-Catholics cannot take communion is that in the Catholic Church they believe in transsubstantiation - that is, Catholics believe that the wafer and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. Since that is a core belief, they don''t allow anybody that does not believe this to partake. I received my first communion as an Espiscopalian but am not able to take communion in a Catholic church because I believe it is a symbol rather than the actual physical body and blood.

Somebody please correct me if I''m wrong. That''s what I was taught, at least.

The sacred hosts, once consecrated at a Mass by a priest are considered to be the body and blood of our Lord.
The hosts however, are not sacred until they are consecrated. I just bought a box of a thousand to be used at all of our Retrouvaille Masses for the next two years. Until a priest consecrates them? You can spread peanut butter or jelly on them. They''re just wheat wafers. But yes, for us it''s more than symbolism, and in fact there have been accounts of miracles (not many, but yes on record) happening during the consecration to support the idea of wine and wafer being converted to sacred body and blood.

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:41:04 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

I would imagine that I''m still not ''officially approved'' to receive communion at a Catholic church though, correct? I''m not sure what the requirements are.

I''m in the choir in my Protestant church, which has strong ties with the nearby Catholic church. My church has an open communion, so when my choir recently joined the Catholics to sing a Requiem mass in their cathedral, the director of the Catholic choir reminded us that as non-Catholics, we should not take part part in their eucarist/communion.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it''s spelled) too.

At communion, when a Lutheran pastor hands out the bread and wine, (s)he says "the body of Christ given for you" and "the blood of Christ shed for you" or something to that effect.

And in fact, in a Lutheran service, you often hear the Apostles'' Creed recited, which says in part: "I believe in the holy Catholic church." There are quite a lot of similarities between the Catholic church and the Lutheran church. QUITE a lot.

But, having said that, I don''t think I would feel comfortable receiving communion at DH''s church. I would worry that I was stepping on toes, and I really, REALLY don''t want to offend!

 

[princesss]

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it''s spelled) too.

At communion, when a Lutheran pastor hands out the bread and wine, (s)he says ''the body of Christ given for you'' and ''the blood of Christ shed for you'' or something to that effect.

And in fact, in a Lutheran service, you often hear the Apostles'' Creed recited, which says in part: ''I believe in the holy Catholic church.'' There are quite a lot of similarities between the Catholic church and the Lutheran church. QUITE a lot.

But, having said that, I don''t think I would feel comfortable receiving communion at DH''s church. I would worry that I was stepping on toes, and I really, REALLY don''t want to offend!

Interesting! I was raised in the Espiscopal church, and there are also a lot of similarities. Probably something to do with both branching off from the Catholic church way back in the day (in the Nicene creed, which is said in the Episcopal church, we say, "We believe in one holy Catholic and Apostolic church").

This has been a really enlightening thread, IG. Thanks for starting it, and to everybody who has been contributing.

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it's spelled) too.

At communion, when a Lutheran pastor hands out the bread and wine, (s)he says 'the body of Christ given for you' and 'the blood of Christ shed for you' or something to that effect.

And in fact, in a Lutheran service, you often hear the Apostles' Creed recited, which says in part: 'I believe in the holy Catholic church.' There are quite a lot of similarities between the Catholic church and the Lutheran church. QUITE a lot.

But, having said that, I don't think I would feel comfortable receiving communion at DH's church. I would worry that I was stepping on toes, and I really, REALLY don't want to offend!

Most Protestant faiths believe that the bread and wine are symbols of the body and blood, as opposed to being the body and blood. I can't speak to how they're viewed in the Catholic faith. The reference to Catholic in the Applostle's Creed is a reference to the universal Christian church rather than the Catholic branch of the church as we think of it today.

While the broad principles of the various faiths might be fairly straightforward, as they say... the devil is in the details!

BTW, per my earlier post, I wouldn't take communion either.

 

[somethingshiny]

Church is a place you should feel comfortable and happy at.

Talk to your DH to see if it would alleviate any misgivings, but if you're still uncomfortable perhaps consider more of a Bible Church where the bible is taught but no particular Religion is dominant.

And for what it's worth, I completely understand not wanting to go to a church where your marriage isn't recognized. You were married before God and that should be enough.



btw- In my Methodist church we don't "take" communion, we "receive" communion. It feels completely different to me when you talk about TAKING the body and blood rather than RECEIVING it.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/9/2009 2:55:18 PM
Author: gemgirl

No, sorry, still off base. There was no Church doctrine that ever said that. Church 'doctrine' comes in two forms- 'Canon Law' and 'Cathechesis', and as far as I know or have ever read about, there was nothing ever written into doctrine that said that. The only change to Canon Law comes from Vatican Council Encyclicals (of which few are issued) which don't in essence change, but rather updates and evolves Canon Law.

The Cathechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The Code of Canon Law:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

gemgirl,

I am interested in religion and its history, so one day I would like to understand all the things that you do about how Catholicism works. It is a very complex and fascinating religion and I know that many scholars have written treatises about and debated many aspects of it (and that it has spawned many strange heresies) over thousands of years.

Today, however, I am sticking with what I think I know. I think I know that Roman Catholics were taught, when my mother was growing up, that when a woman went into childbirth if there had to be a choice between the life of the mother or the child that the child was to be saved. Since I think I know that, I have looked for evidence that such policies existed. I have found some evidence on the Internet so far:

In Caesarean birth: experience, practice, and history by Helen Churchill on page 47 under "The role of the Church-Part II" she writes, "As late as 1935 Papal authority approved the publication in London and St. Louis of the fifth edition of the book Moral Problems in Hospital Practice which advocated the sacrifice of the mother rather than saving her life through the destruction of the child".

I will leave it to you to discover, if this is not the current stance of the Roman Catholic Church, how that stance came to change. It is, of course, possible that many Roman Catholics did not understand Catholic doctrine and that it was always-as you say it is now-the policy of the Roman Catholic Church to save the life of the mother first. Sometimes members of a religion do not understand their own religion. That is possible. It just does not seem probable in this instance. And , as you can see from the citation above, I easily found at least one source that corroborated my view.

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it's spelled) too.

No, Lutherans do not!!! Lutherans believe in consubstantiation. They believe that God is present in spirit when the minister prays over the bread (or wafer) and wine (or grape juice). This is one of the main points over which Martin Luther broke with the Roman Catholic Church (of which he was an ordained priest). Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation: that the priest turns the bread (or wafer) and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Calvinists (like members of the United Church of Christ who attend a Congregational Church), by the way, do not believe that the minister has any power to summon up God in body or spirit; they believe that the minister blessing the bread and wine and the congregation partaking of it is simply an act of commemoration.

AGBF

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 3:42:10 PM
Author: princesss

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl
Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it''s spelled) too.

At communion, when a Lutheran pastor hands out the bread and wine, (s)he says ''the body of Christ given for you'' and ''the blood of Christ shed for you'' or something to that effect.

And in fact, in a Lutheran service, you often hear the Apostles'' Creed recited, which says in part: ''I believe in the holy Catholic church.'' There are quite a lot of similarities between the Catholic church and the Lutheran church. QUITE a lot.

But, having said that, I don''t think I would feel comfortable receiving communion at DH''s church. I would worry that I was stepping on toes, and I really, REALLY don''t want to offend!

Interesting! I was raised in the Espiscopal church, and there are also a lot of similarities. Probably something to do with both branching off from the Catholic church way back in the day (in the Nicene creed, which is said in the Episcopal church, we say, ''We believe in one holy Catholic and Apostolic church'').

This has been a really enlightening thread, IG. Thanks for starting it, and to everybody who has been contributing.

Princesss, we say the Nicene Creed too. I think it just depends on which service it is, as to whether we use the Apostles'' Creed or the Nicene Creed.

And I agree . . . this has been VERY enlightening and helpful to me! Thanks to everyone for contributing, and keeping it within the spirit of PS!

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:09:44 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it''s spelled) too.

No, Lutherans do not!!! Lutherans believe in consubstantiation. They believe that God is present in spirit when the minister prays over the bread (or wafer) and wine (or grape juice). This is one of the main points over which Martin Luther broke with the Roman Catholic Church (of which he was an ordained priest). Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation: that the priest turns the bread (or wafer) and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Calvinists (like members of the United Church of Christ who attend a Congregational Church), by the way, do not believe that the minister has any power to summon up God in body or spirit; they believe that the minister blessing the bread and wine and the congregation partaking of it is simply an act of commemoration.

AGBF

Deb, I''ll defer to you here since you are much more well-read when it comes to religion than I am! As you mentioned in your post above (directed to Gemgirl), it is possible that practitioners of a religion may not fully understand their own religion. I think I''m a case in point, at least in this instance! Or maybe I just got my "substantiations" confused? Who knows?

 

[ladypirate]

Technically in the apostles/nicene creed when it refers to the catholic church, it''s not talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but the Christian Church as a whole (catholic means univeral/broad/comprehensive). At least that''s what I''ve always been told.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 3:55:49 PM
Author: somethingshiny
Church is a place you should feel comfortable and happy at.

Talk to your DH to see if it would alleviate any misgivings, but if you''re still uncomfortable perhaps consider more of a Bible Church where the bible is taught but no particular Religion is dominant.

And for what it''s worth, I completely understand not wanting to go to a church where your marriage isn''t recognized. You were married before God and that should be enough.



btw- In my Methodist church we don''t ''take'' communion, we ''receive'' communion. It feels completely different to me when you talk about TAKING the body and blood rather than RECEIVING it.

SS, thank you for understanding this! I realize that no one at DH''s church will know where/how we were married unless they ask, and it''s very unlikely that anyone would ever ask. But I would know, and I would know that our wedding wasn''t "good enough" in the eyes of the Catholic church. Maybe it''s an over-reaction on my part, but that just CHAFES me!!!

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:18:41 PM
Author: ladypirate
Technically in the apostles/nicene creed when it refers to the catholic church, it''s not talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but the Christian Church as a whole (catholic means univeral/broad/comprehensive). At least that''s what I''ve always been told.

LP, I believe you''re correct. I just always thought it to be very ironic that Lutherans, as the "original" Protestants, mention believing in the Catholic church during their services! Even though that''s not really what we mean when we say it, still!

 

[ladypirate]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:23:46 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/9/2009 4:18:41 PM

Author: ladypirate

Technically in the apostles/nicene creed when it refers to the catholic church, it''s not talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but the Christian Church as a whole (catholic means univeral/broad/comprehensive). At least that''s what I''ve always been told.

LP, I believe you''re correct. I just always thought it to be very ironic that Lutherans, as the ''original'' Protestants, mention believing in the Catholic church during their services! Even though that''s not really what we mean when we say it, still!

LOL--I know what you mean! I''m episcopalian and it used to confuse me so much when I was a kid.

 

[princesss]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:18:41 PM
Author: ladypirate
Technically in the apostles/nicene creed when it refers to the catholic church, it''s not talking about the Roman Catholic Church, but the Christian Church as a whole (catholic means univeral/broad/comprehensive). At least that''s what I''ve always been told.

Makes sense. I just always assumed that the word was pulled in there because that was, originally, the one, unifying church (until the Schism with the Orthodox church in....the 1100s? And then the futher changes with Martin Luther, Henry VIII, etc.) and because of the meaning of the word was kept in there. So the word orginally meant "all-encompassing" and was used in the naming of the church, and then as more churches splintered off, the meaning evolved to include other branches of Christianity. But when it was written in 325 AD, the second meaning would not have evolved yet.

Does that make sense or am I talking in circles? Either way, I get your meaning, I''m just interested in the way your meaning took on it''s meaning through the development of the meaning of the word "catholic."

 

[princesss]

Interesting wiki about that part of the Nicene Creedhttp://interesting/

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:16:57 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Date: 11/9/2009 4:09:44 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/9/2009 3:32:05 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Princesss & Gemgirl ~ Lutherans actually believe in transsubstantiation (or however it's spelled) too.

No, Lutherans do not!!! Lutherans believe in consubstantiation. They believe that God is present in spirit when the minister prays over the bread (or wafer) and wine (or grape juice). This is one of the main points over which Martin Luther broke with the Roman Catholic Church (of which he was an ordained priest). Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation: that the priest turns the bread (or wafer) and wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Calvinists (like members of the United Church of Christ who attend a Congregational Church), by the way, do not believe that the minister has any power to summon up God in body or spirit; they believe that the minister blessing the bread and wine and the congregation partaking of it is simply an act of commemoration.

Deb, I'll defer to you here since you are much more well-read when it comes to religion than I am! As you mentioned in your post above (directed to Gemgirl), it is possible that practitioners of a religion may not fully understand their own religion. I think I'm a case in point, at least in this instance! Or maybe I just got my 'substantiations' confused? Who knows?

Hi, Emm-

I don't deserve your deference! I just wanted to be helpful and I love discussing topics like these into which I can sink my teeth! Here is a piece on consubstantiation that describes it rather well, a lot better than I ever could .

Hugs,
Deb

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:36:05 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/9/2009 4:16:57 PM
Author: Irishgrrrl

Deb, I''ll defer to you here since you are much more well-read when it comes to religion than I am! As you mentioned in your post above (directed to Gemgirl), it is possible that practitioners of a religion may not fully understand their own religion. I think I''m a case in point, at least in this instance! Or maybe I just got my ''substantiations'' confused? Who knows?

Hi, Emm-

I don''t deserve your deference! I just wanted to be helpful and I love discussing topics like these into which I can dig my teeth! Here is a piece on consubstantiation that describes it rather well, a lot better than I ever could .

Hugs,
Deb

Oh, Deb, of course you do! You''re one of the most intelligent people I know and I always enjoy reading your posts!

And thanks for the link! Interesting stuff!

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:32:34 PM
Author: princesss
Interesting wiki about that part of the Nicene Creedhttp://interesting/

Princesss, thank you for this one! I''m learning so much here today . . . you guys are awesome!

 

[gemgirl]

Date: 11/9/2009 4:00:25 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 11/9/2009 2:55:18 PM
Author: gemgirl

No, sorry, still off base. There was no Church doctrine that ever said that. Church ''doctrine'' comes in two forms- ''Canon Law'' and ''Cathechesis'', and as far as I know or have ever read about, there was nothing ever written into doctrine that said that. The only change to Canon Law comes from Vatican Council Encyclicals (of which few are issued) which don''t in essence change, but rather updates and evolves Canon Law.

The Cathechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

The Code of Canon Law:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

gemgirl,

I am interested in religion and its history, so one day I would like to understand all the things that you do about how Catholicism works. It is a very complex and fascinating religion and I know that many scholars have written treatises about and debated many aspects of it (and that it has spawned many strange heresies) over thousands of years.

Today, however, I am sticking with what I think I know. I think I know that Roman Catholics were taught, when my mother was growing up, that when a woman went into childbirth if there had to be a choice between the life of the mother or the child that the child was to be saved. Since I think I know that, I have looked for evidence that such policies existed. I have found some evidence on the Internet so far:

In Caesarean birth: experience, practice, and history by Helen Churchill on page 47 under ''The role of the Church-Part II'' she writes, ''As late as 1935 Papal authority approved the publication in London and St. Louis of the fifth edition of the book Moral Problems in Hospital Practice which advocated the sacrifice of the mother rather than saving her life through the destruction of the child''.

I will leave it to you to discover, if this is not the current stance of the Roman Catholic Church, how that stance came to change. It is, of course, possible that many Roman Catholics did not understand Catholic doctrine and that it was always-as you say it is now-the policy of the Roman Catholic Church to save the life of the mother first. Sometimes members of a religion do not understand their own religion. That is possible. It just does not seem probable in this instance. And , as you can see from the citation above, I easily found at least one source that corroborated my view.

AGBF

There was a belief in the Church during medieval times that given the choice to save either mother or child, the child would be saved because the mother was already Baptized and her soul would go to heaven, but the unborn child''s was not and therefore the child would automatically go to hell. That was medieval times and the piece you quoted was from a book for mid-wives. That is an uneducated, misinformed and antiquated point of view. It''s so sad the mistruths that are believed by so many and are passed around as gospel.

As far as me not understanding my own practice of faith, no, that''s highly unlikely since this is what I am, this is what I breathe every day, this is what runs through my veins, this is what I do. But I can take a smack down just as Christ took a beating from His accusers that tore the very flesh from his body. I can take mere words..... they''re just words. Insult away! It only makes the faithful stronger!

Don''t look for evidence on the Internet, look for evidence in Church law if you''d like to prove something about the Church, and if such a law exists, it would certainly be on the Vatican website in one of the two links I sent.
Anyone from anywhere can write a book on anything, including renegade priests. That doesn''t make it truth and it doesn''t make it accurate.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 11/9/2009 5:00:38 PM
Author: gemgirl


As far as me not understanding my own practice of faith, no, that's highly unlikely since this is what I am, this is what I breathe every day, this is what runs through my veins, this is what I do. But I can take a smack down just as Christ took a beating from His accusers that tore the very flesh from his body. I can take mere words..... they're just words. Insult away! It only makes the faithful stronger!

gemgirl,

Please reread what I wrote. I did not mean to imply that you might not understand the ideas of The Roman Catholic Church. I meant that people whom my mother had encountered might not have understood the ideas of the Church and that other Roman Catholics (including her doctors) might not have understood them.

I do not believe in "smacking down" other people here on Pricescope or in real life.

AGBF

 

[JulieN]

I go to RC mass, as that is what my father is. I also attended Lutheran school as a child. You will find the services to be VERY similar, and you should not feel uncomfortable at all.

 

[Cehrabehra]

I think the issue at question is no longer as much of an issue because of increases in medical technology making the situation far less likely to come up. I do not think the common belief of it is as antiquated as you may think though and that 50 years ago these issues did come up much more frequently and there had to be a plan and this was it. And I believe in cases such as severe PIH where the only way to save the life of the mother is to deliver a child not yet ready to be born, there still is this issue but we begin to cross into a dangerous philosophical territory difficult to explore further without crossing a line.