Summary
1 Introduction
2 Abortion in a Church that is both Teacher and Mother
3 The Church as Teacher: defending life
4 The Church as Mother: growing in welcome
5 Final considerations
6 Bibliographical references
1 Introduction
Abortion, understood as the removal of the fetus before it can survive outside the womb, is one of the most debated topics in the history of the Church and continues to divide opinions today. It is necessary to clarify that when we talk about abortion in the context of moral and ethical reflection, we refer to induced abortion. Spontaneous abortion, which occurs for various reasons, does not involve moral issues, no matter how painful it may be for those involved.
Addressing the topic within the scope of theology becomes necessary to have a more complex view of the problem. We want to go beyond the poor dichotomy that has settled on the subject: “being for or against.” Certainly, Bernard Häring’s warning, voiced four decades ago, is very relevant and suitable for the Catholic Church in our days:
The Church’s condemnation of abortion is fully acceptable only if at the same time every possible effort is made to eliminate the main causes of abortion. These efforts should include a true pastoral application of the doctrine, as well as all kinds of social actions in favor of those who are especially exposed to the danger of “solving” their difficult problems by abortion (1970, p.35).
We have recently published articles that addressed the theme of abortion from a pastoral perspective[1] where we pointed out that a more complete view of the Church’s position on abortion is possible if we do it from a dual perspective: the position of the Church as Teacher and the position of the Church as Mother. The proposal does not suggest a conflict between these two positions but shows that whenever one is emphasized to the detriment of the other, the Church’s teaching on the subject is seriously harmed. We understand that the lack of a joint view of these positions occurs because abortion has not been thought of in a pastoral dimension, reflecting the difficulty of perceiving that when we discuss abortion, we are evaluating two realities: the act itself and the person who committed it. These realities are different: one thing is to evaluate the morality of the act of abortion, another is to think about the best pastoral attitude towards the person who committed the act and who is inserted in well-determined social, historical, and personal conditions. We need to be aware that in Catholic theology we distinguish between the level of moral theology and the pastoral level (HÄRING, 1970, p. 139).
2 Abortion in a Church that is both Teacher and Mother
Addressing these two realities is extremely important to do justice to the Catholic Church’s view on abortion. To this end, we emphasize that the Church often presents itself as Teacher and Mother[2]: as a teacher, she faithfully teaches the message she received from her founder and cannot be condescending with occasional truths; as a mother, she is aware of the conflicts and conditions that involve the lives of her sons and daughters and does not take a condemnatory attitude, knowing that this attitude would not help them grow and fulfill the high mission to which they are called.
Therefore, we see that it is possible to indicate – and we will do so below – that the Church understands that the issue of abortion, in most cases, is not an act of an isolated person, but of a network of relationships, and therefore, before blaming the woman, the Church attributes the responsibility for abortion to the man and the social environment, especially in a macho, hedonistic, permissive, and aggressive society against women.
We are proposing, therefore, that presenting a complete view of abortion in the Church is only possible from this delicate balance: firmly rejecting the act itself and welcoming with mercy the woman who committed the act. On the one hand, Christian mercy cannot be confused with false pity. It means all the effort to seek the “lost sheep” and not to create mechanisms of justification to leave her in exclusion. It means promptly welcoming all who seek forgiveness and not denying the gravity of the conflict. On the other hand, mercy in the Church cannot be seen as something that the strong dispense to the weak, taking the posture of those who, in society, have the power to distribute privileges. Bringing the good news to the poor (Lk 7:22) is the essence of the Church’s mission, and we cannot soften the prophetic strength of the Gospel, because if we truly seek the Kingdom, we need to put ourselves at the service of the excluded, aware that salvation is always communal, as Benedict XVI affirms: “No one lives alone. No one sins alone. No one is saved alone” (Spe Salvi n.48).
3 The Church as Teacher: defending life
The Church’s position on abortion – from this perspective of what we are calling the Church as Teacher – has been very well defined in recent pronouncements of the Magisterium. Pius XI, in 1930, in the Encyclical Casti Connubii, notes that some people demanded abortion as a woman’s right, while others considered it acceptable to save the mother’s life or as population control. The Pontiff affirms that the lives of both mother and child are equally sacred and that no one, not even public authority, has the right to destroy them, thus rejecting the arguments that sought to justify abortion in these situations.
Grisez (1972), in his grand work on abortion, emphasizes that Pius XII also tirelessly repeated the traditional Catholic doctrine – to doctors, biologists, midwives, and politicians of his time – rejecting the direct killing of the fetus, stating that one can never take the life of an innocent and that social peace depends on the inviolability of human life. Pius XII rejects the “either the mother or the child” in favor of both, “the mother and the child.” Carrying this out belongs to medical technique; when this fails, divine providence must be resorted to, not human choice of one life over another.
When it is necessary to choose between the life of the mother or the child, traditional moral theology clearly distinguished direct and indirect abortion, condemning the former and accepting the latter. However, indirect abortion can only be licit when it is not an abortion in the moral sense. The accepted cases without question have been ectopic or tubal pregnancies – when the pregnancy is located outside the uterine cavity, which is the normal site of its implantation and development – and cases where the uterus needs to be removed due to some disease, such as cancer. In these cases, the goal of the medical action is the mother’s health, and abortion occurs as a secondary effect. On the other hand, Noonan observes that the sacrifice of one’s own life will always be an act of generosity, a fruit of freedom and never a moral obligation (NOONAN JR, 1970, p. xi).
The Second Vatican Council directly addresses the issue of abortion. The Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes refers to it in two situations: in number 27, abortion appears among the crimes against the human person, alongside homicide and other crimes. In number 51, the other reference to abortion is in the context of marriage and formally indicates that abortion is a crime from the moment of conception, in clear dialogue with current scientific knowledge and abandoning the distinctions between inanimate or animated embryos – often present in abortion debates throughout history (GS, n.51).
In 1968, Paul VI repeated the traditional condemnation of abortion in Humanae Vitae, and John Paul II became the pope who emphasized the Church’s position on the subject, speaking on the theme at various moments of his pontificate and more clearly in the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae (EV), where abortion is classified as an abominable crime (n.58), in clear reference to the divine commandment: thou shalt not kill (Dt 5:17). In this document, John Paul II expresses himself – with full awareness and responsibility of a successor of Peter: “I declare that direct abortion, that is, willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, as the deliberate killing of an innocent human being” (EV n.62).
One of the aspects of the Church’s vision that society does not always understand is that, along with the concept that life is a gift, human dignity is also gratuitous. Life is a gift, and the recognition of its value is based on the fact that it is a gift from God, an aspect highly emphasized in the Document of Santo Domingo (SD n.215). The value of each person is based on how God himself creates them: as his image and likeness (Gn 1:27). This is precisely why dignity is not a human achievement, it is not something that is added, lost, or gained, but it is gratuitous and is established in the simple existence of each human being, for each exists by an act of the Creator who calls them into existence. The mystery of the person of Jesus Christ – human and divine – places an even more tangible foundation for human dignity, as each human being is co-human with all other humans and equally co-human with Christ, destined to participate in divine life.
It is well known in theology that this position of the Church’s Magisterium in the 20th century on abortion is the result of a long and well-defined Christian tradition on the subject. Finally, this position of the Church as Teacher represents a prophetic force in our times when the value of human life is undergoing a process of relativization. The legalization of abortion is both a cause and a consequence of a paradigmatic shift in contemporary society, where the well-being of some is achieved at the cost of the sacrifices of many. It is worth noting that the Church’s position is not isolated, as many other Christian churches and other religions jointly assume the position that abortion is unacceptable and constitutes a serious moral problem.
4 The Church as Mother: growing in welcome
The same study of Church documents that reveals a clear position of condemnation of abortion also indicates that the Church clearly expresses its pastoral concern by explicitly stating a welcoming stance towards those who have had abortions. Although this posture of the Church – which we call here the Church as Mother – is expressed in numerous declarations of the Magisterium, our societies seem not to receive this message clearly, or perhaps we are not insisting enough on this perspective.
To develop the position that reveals this Church as Mother, we can start with a recent document of the Church in Latin America and the Caribbean – the Document of Aparecida (DAp) – which, in line with the Supreme Pontiff, exhorts all to “welcome with mercy those who have had abortions, to help them heal their serious wounds and invite them to be defenders of life” (n.469). This exhortation to “welcome with mercy those who have had abortions” arises from the understanding that the woman who had an abortion is often a victim – and as such, she suffers from the situation more than she promotes it – or becomes a victim of her act by committing it. “Abortion has two victims: certainly the child, but also the mother” (n.469). The Church in Latin America is aware that it offers a “service of charity” (n.98) to the peoples of this Continent and, in concrete situations, needs to be quick to provide service and slow to judge, manifesting an awareness that it is inserted in a dramatic context, as it is estimated that in Latin America and the Caribbean there are annually 18 million pregnancies, of which 23% end in abortion, and in Brazil, the estimated rate is 31% (BRASIL, 2005, p.7).
Pope John Paul II, in the same document where he confirms the position of condemnation of abortion, the Evangelium Vitae, demonstrates knowledge of the drama surrounding it, assuming the face of the Church as Mother, and thus expresses himself:
A special thought I would like to reserve for you, women who have had abortions. The Church is aware of the numerous conditions that may have influenced your decision and does not doubt that in many cases it was a difficult, perhaps dramatic decision. Probably the wound in your spirit is not yet healed (EV n.99).
And he does this without denying the cruelty of abortion, but as an act of charity that welcomes and promotes people, offering them the Church’s most precious gift, forgiveness, at a time when they need encouragement and hope: “the Father of all mercy awaits you to offer you his forgiveness and peace in the sacrament of Reconciliation” (EV n.99). This position of the Church’s Magisterium reaffirms a central point of Catholic morality in its pastoral concern, which distinguishes between the morality of the act committed and the person who committed it, rejecting the error and welcoming the people. The welcoming attitude towards the woman who had an abortion can become an effective measure against abortion, as studies indicate that among women who had abortions, 12% had already had abortions before (ASANDI; BRAZ, 2010, p.135).
When the Church sees the woman who has an abortion as a victim, it shows a clear perception of the social reality that promotes a culture of death (EV n.12) with situations tainted by a culture of “hedonistic permissiveness and aggressive machismo.” It is in this context that John Paul II also speaks in the Letter to Women: “In these conditions, the choice of abortion, which remains always a grave sin, before being a responsibility attributable to the woman, is a crime that must be attributed to the man and the complicity of the surrounding environment” (CM n.5). This statement by John Paul II shows that the Church has a view of the complexity of the social contexts that lead to abortion and indicates that attributing the responsibility for abortion primarily to the woman who had the abortion would be unfair and would reflect a reductionist view that would hide – and by hiding, exonerate – the other moral agents involved in the abortion problem. Here the Church, along with many feminist movements, asks: Where is the man? Or did the woman get pregnant alone? What was the man’s attitude when he found out his partner was pregnant? Abortion begins to occur when a man does not take responsibility for fatherhood and tells his partner that “this is her problem.” This escape from responsibility on the part of the man has been denounced by scholars in Latin America (PESSINI and BARCHIFONTAINE, 1997, p.266), and John Paul II himself makes it clear that the responsibility for abortion – in such a situation – is more attributable to this man than to the woman.
What most scandalizes Brazilian society today in the context of the discussion about abortion is the unacceptable number of cases of sexual violence against women – unfortunately, a fact also present in other societies. Among the causes of abortion is gender violence and, particularly, domestic violence. This has been the reason that leads many women to seek abortion: when the consequence of rape is an unwanted pregnancy, which, according to studies, is also one of the causes of maternal mortality (MARSTON and CLELAND, 2004, p.15).
Other passages in Church documents have already demonstrated the recognition that women often abort under pressure. “Women are often subjected to pressures so strong that they feel psychologically compelled to give in to abortion” (EV n.59). This passage does not refer exclusively to the case of rape, but certainly, suffering sexual violence is a strong factor that constrains a woman to “give in to abortion,” recalling the reflection of moral theology that recognizes that there are situations where a person becomes unable to handle certain moral imperatives. The passage from Evangelium Vitae also concludes that in these cases, the moral responsibility for the abortion “weighs particularly on those who directly or indirectly forced her to abort” (n.59).
The Pope also speaks of the responsibility of the “surrounding environment” – thus bringing to the context of the abortion debate the role of the family, the community, and the State[3]. The family – especially the parents of the woman and the man who practice abortion – can take irresponsible attitudes in the face of the news of a pregnancy: indifference, non-acceptance, rejection, and even pressure for the abortion to occur to save the family’s honor.
The Church – as a community – is also calling itself to responsibility and wants to develop within itself a stance that actually allows “to support and accompany pastorally and with special tenderness and solidarity the women who decided not to abort” (DAp, n.469), hopeful that the development of welcoming with tenderness and solidarity will lead many women not to “give in to abortion.” Welcoming with mercy those who have had abortions can create, in them, conditions not to abort again. Furthermore, the Church believes that they can become pastoral agents in our communities, as authentic “defenders of life” (DAp, n.469).
This same perspective of mercy has been the main orientation assumed by Pope Francis in his pontificate. Already in the Evangelii Gaudium, he insists that the “Church is called to be always the open house of the Father” (EG n.47), a position also assumed pastorally in the Letter on the occasion of the extraordinary jubilee of mercy in 2015, where the issue of abortion was emphasized, and the pope grants “all priests for the Jubilee Year the faculty to absolve from the sin of abortion those who committed it and, repentant of heart, ask for forgiveness.”
5 Final considerations
We indicate that the position of the Church as Teacher and Mother invites action. This realization that the Church assumes a position of Teacher and Mother regarding abortion challenges us to think proactively about the role of each one in their family and community. Since we are avoiding reducing our possibilities to a dual position – being for or against – we realize that the greater challenge of society is to overcome the reality of abortion, if not entirely, at least those abortions that occur due to an unwanted pregnancy induced by socio-economic and cultural factors. We thus assume the awareness that, as the Church, we are also part of the “surrounding environment,” equally responsible, mainly because the causes are amenable to being worked on in an integral evangelization.
This is also a challenge for theology. Therefore, we would like to point out some of the points related to the reality of abortion that need to be better understood and thought through in the light of theological reflection, in dialogue with other sciences, especially in the field of bioethics: high rates of abortion in Latin American countries; motherhood in the context of women’s health and high rates of maternal morbidity and mortality; institutionalized violence against women; the role of the family and the Christian community as a space of welcome; the issue of sexual and reproductive rights; the male figure in family relationships. Some of these challenges point to areas where the Church has a historical presence that theology needs to learn to value more. Other challenges are new, where the Church’s presence is still unusual.
We can, in conclusion, point out that the fact that the Church takes a clear position against abortion – and will always do so, for the sake of coherence – has led many Christians to conclude that the Church condemns, excludes, and expels the woman who had an abortion from ecclesial fellowship. This is a hasty, simplistic, reductionist conclusion that does not reflect the Church’s teaching expressed in the documents of the Magisterium. For the sake of justice, we cannot cast stones at mothers who judged themselves unable to raise an unwanted child (PESSINI and BARCHIFONTAINE, 1997, p.270). The Church as Teacher always rejects abortion, and the Church as Mother wants to welcome the woman who had an abortion, just as a father and mother always welcome their children and show greater care, attention, and love in times of difficulty.
Mário Antônio Sanches[4], PUC Paraná
6 Bibliographical references
ASANDI, Stella de Faro; BRAZ, Marlene. Brazilian women and abortion: a bioethical approach in public health. Revista Bioética, 2010; v.18 n.1, Brasília: CFM, p. 131-53.
BRAZIL, Ministry of Health. Humanized Care for Abortion: technical standard. Brasília: Ministry of Health, 2005.
CELAM. Saint Domingo – conclusions. São Paulo: CELAM / Loyola, 1992.
______. Document of Aparecida. São Paulo: CNBB / Paulinas / Paulus, 2007.
GRISEZ, Germain G. Abortion: myths, realities and arguments. Ediciones Sígueme, 1972.
FRANCIS. Letter on the occasion of the extraordinary jubilee of mercy. Vatican, 2015. Available at: https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/pt/letters/2015. Accessed on: Jan 3, 2016.
______. Evangelii Gaudium. Vatican, 2013. Available at:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/pt/apost_exhortations/documents. Accessed on: Jan 3, 2016.
HÄERING, Bernard. A theological evaluation. In: NOONAN JR., John Thomas. The morality of abortion: legal and historical perspectives. Harvard University Press / Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970, p.123-45.
JOHN PAUL II. Evangelium Vitae. São Paulo: Paulinas, 1995.
_____ . Familiaris Consortio. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1992.
_____ . Letter to Women, São Paulo: Paulinas, 1995.
PESSINI, Leo; BARCHIFONTAINE, Christian de Paul. Current problems of Bioethics. 4th ed. São Paulo: Loyola, 1997.
MARSTON, Cicely; CLELAND, John. The effects of contraception on obstetric outcomes. Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, 2004.
NOONAN JR. John Thomas. The morality of abortion: legal and historical perspectives. Harvard University Press / Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970.
SANCHES, M. A. Abortion from a pastoral perspective. Revista Eclesiástica Brasileira. fasc.285, January, 2012, p.119-37.
VATICAN II. Gaudium et Spes (1965). Available at: https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents. Accessed on: Jan 3, 2016.
[1] SANCHES, M. A. Abortion from a Pastoral Perspective. REB – Revista Eclesiástica Brasileira, Fasc. 285, January, 2012, p.119 et seq.. SANCHES, M. A.; CASAGRANDE, C. H. V.; GOMES, E. M. D. Abortion in a Church that is both Teacher and Mother: from the perspective of pastoral agents. Atualidade Teológica (PUC-Rio), v.48, 2014, p.359 et seq..
[2] Mater et Magistra by John XXIII, in 1961, where he addresses the problem of overpopulation and refers to the inviolable and immutable divine laws that govern marriage and the transmission of human life. The expression appears in other Church documents, such as in Familiaris Consortium, by John Paul II, and is clearly related to the family context: “Also in the field of conjugal morality, the Church is and acts as Teacher and Mother.” (n.33)
[3] Also in Evangelium Vitae n.59, John Paul II extends the responsibility for abortion to the family, legislators, those who promote a hedonistic mentality, in short, to the whole society.
[4] Mário Antônio Sanches is a Doctor of Theology from EST/IEPG, RS, with post-doctorate in Bioethics (2011) from the Pontifical University of Comillas (Madrid). He is a full professor at PUCPR, where he works in the Graduate Program in Theology and coordinates the Master’s in Bioethics. Email: m.sanches@pucpr.br.