Church's teaching on abortion

Partial-birth abortion is one of the most horrendous procedures practised by some doctors. It envisages the killing of an almost full-term baby. The baby, having been turned around in the mother's womb, is delivered feet first leaving the head inside. The base of the skull is then punctured and the brain is sucked out. Once the head collapses the dead baby is fully delivered.

The reason for this is that unless the baby is killed before it is born the whole operation would amount to infanticide and for this, in our increasingly hypocritical society, the doctor would be charged with a criminal offence. US President-elect Barack Obama wholly supports this procedure and voted against a law which would have banned it.

In another scenario, abortions are sometimes unsuccessful and the baby, especially if it has already passed 24-week gestation, just manages to stay alive. In some states of the US, the baby is then taken to a room and left to die.

A law was presented to have this horror banned and to enable doctors to revive the baby. Obama was one of a number of politicians who objected and voted against it. Can a Catholic who is fully aware of the President-elect's views about abortion, besides his opinions on embryonic stem-cell research or homosexual relationships, among others, vote for him and then serenely go to Communion before going to Confession? The answer is a resounding 'no'.

Catholics are duty-bound to follow the official teachings of the Church as embodied in the numerous documents which Rome routinely promulgates and especially as embodied in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The fact that some churchmen, including eminent theologians, bishops and even cardinals, give conflicting and sometimes contrary views is totally irrelevant. They are expressing their personal opinions and, while respecting them for their position in the Church, the faithful are not obliged to follow their teachings, especially in important matters concerning faith and morals, unless these conform completely to the Church's Magisterium.

This has been commonplace since the early days of the Church and in later times; in England, for example, during the Reformation, the great majority of churchmen sided with Henry VIII in his conflict with the Church of Rome while Thomas More, a layman, was one of the few eminent Catholics to express his loyalty to the Church. He, of course, with Bishop John Fisher and other martyrs paid with their lives for their loyalty towards the See of Peter and how we admire them for this today.

To sow doubt and confusion among the faithful, the majority of whom are devoid of any theological preparation, by presenting conflicting views as if it were morally legitimate to choose either one or the other, is not only irresponsible but also goes against that foremost of Christian virtues - love of one's neighbour.