The following is an excerpt of a blog written by Monsignor Charles Pope appeared August 7 on the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., website.
…A couple of years ago a former Speaker of the House, whose name need not be mentioned here at all, showed herself an amateur theologian lacking in even basic knowledge by claiming (on what she called Jesuitical authority) that the Church teaching on abortion was no older than the 1950s. The usually cautious American bishops lost no time in issuing vigorous correction. And rightly so, of course, as quotes like these will show.
The Didache (“The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles”) ca 110 AD. Thou shalt not murder a child by abortion. (2:2)…The Way of Death is filled with people who are…murderers of children and abortionists of God’s creatures. (5:1-2)
Letter of Barnabas, circa 125: You shall not kill either the fetus by abortion or the new born
Athenagoras the Athenian (To Marcus Aurelius), ca 150 AD: “We say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder, and will have to give an account to God for the abortion…, [For we] regard the very fœtus in the womb as a created being, and therefore an object of God’s care… (# 35).
Clement of Alexandria: (circa 150 – 215 AD) Our whole life can go on in observation of the laws of nature, if we gain dominion over our desires from the beginning and if we do not kill, by various means of a perverse art, the human offspring, born according to the designs of divine providence; for these women who, if order to hide their immorality, use abortive drugs which expel the child completely dead, abort at the same time their own human feelings. Paedagogus, 2
Tertullian circa 160-240 AD: For us, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter when you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth. That is a man which is going to be one: you have the fruit already in the seed. Apology 9:6
Tertullian (circa 160 – 240 AD): …we are not permitted, since murder has been prohibited to us once and for all, even to destroy …the fetus in the womb. It makes no difference whether one destroys a life that has already been born or one that is in the process of birth. Apology (9:7-8)….
Hippolytus (circa 170-236 AD): Whence certain women, reputed believers, began to resort to drugs for producing sterility and to gird themselves round, so as to expel what was conceived on account of their not wanting to have a child either by a slave or by any paltry fellow, for the sake of their family and excessive wealth. Behold, into how great impiety that lawless one has proceeded, by inculcating adultery and murder at the same time. From “Refutation of all Heresies” 9:7….
St. Basil the Great (330 – 379 AD): The woman who purposely destroys her unborn child is guilty of murder. With us there is no nice enquiry as to its being formed or unformed. In this case it is not only the being about to be born who is vindicated, but the woman in her attack upon herself; because in most cases women who make such attempts die. The destruction of the embryo is an additional crime, a second murder, at all events if we regard it as done with intent. The punishment, however, of these women should not be for life, but for the term of ten years. And let their treatment depend not on mere lapse of time, but on the character of their repentance. Letter 188:2
St. Ambrose: (339 to 397 AD) The poor expose their children, the rich kill the fruit of their own bodies in the womb, lest their property be divided up, and they destroy their own children in the womb with murderous poisons. and before life has been passed on, it is annihilated. Hexaemeron”, (5, 18, 58)….
To read entire posting, click here.
THANKS for these excellent quotes about abortion!
Best article I have seen on this site. Bravo.
Please pray for these “Catholic” Whited Sepulchers
A view that dawned on me as I read these holy pronouncements is the story of St Juan Diego, as told by himself and translated on a literalist level, where the simplicity of the miracle shows through most greatly. It is a portrayal of the birth of the Church, the birth of truth and told by God in a series of steps. First the great Mother of God, second a symbol of the blossoming of the Impossible (a sign of contradiction) in the face of the bishop, and thirdly the birth of Catholic Mexico. But this reflected the birth of the Church fifteen centuries earlier. There is always some opposition to birth, and it always reflects on mammon vs God. A society that can institutionalize killing itself, can institutionalize killing God. Anyone caught in the middle is of no consequence to the eyes of the state. Suppose all those saints paid lip service to abortion while putting all their marbles in feeding the poor. BTW, I notice that St Paul did not call for diverting funds for feeding the poor in India, China, Africa. Rather he preached the Gospel of life and kept financial issues rather low on the totem pole of Catholic priorities. His influence converted several continents but not by feeding the poor, yet by informing them that life is worth living for God. The Poverelo showed the world how a poor man could live a blessed life without becoming rich. When the bishops get their priorities straight, and no longer emphasize the poor over the Gospel, then the world may no longer focus on the miseries of poverty and rather the glories of God.
I recently had a priest tell me that Jesus never said anything about abortion when I was expressing concern about the HHS mandate forcing employers to fund abortion drugs against their conscience. He also said that his taxes funded the war, which he disagrees with, as an argument against my concerns. I mentioned that abortion was one of the five non-negotiables, but that didn’t seem to phase him.
While it is true that Jesus never referred to the practice of abortion, He never addressed rape, either. I doubt Nancy Pelosi along with her fellow abortion advocates would condone rape because “Jesus didn’t talk about rape.” Jesus admonished the Pharisees as following the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. It seems that some priests are the equivalent of the Pharisees of Jesus’ day.
That priest was lying, attempting to deceive you. He does not know whether Jesus said anything about abortion. The Gospels tell us that Jesus said and did much more than is recorded. Also, Jesus says that anyone who harms one of His “little ones” would be better off being drowned … a reference to eternal damnation. “Little ones”: For this priest to exclude unborn babies from this category is demonic; I’d suggest splashing him with holy water. Thirdly, the Jews did not abort their babies … so a. what does this say about Mosaic Law, and b. there was no audience that included abortion activities for Jesus to directly address.
Amen! Suzanne, but this priest, if you heard him right, most probably is more like the sadducees, who did not believe in much of anything. They just wanted a cushy, easy job with the adulation of the public. The priest has his values backward. I, too, have had to pay for wars i did not like, including some of the ones of this President, but if one has not got life to begin with, one has nothing. Also, a greater woman than this priest, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta, said that abortion was one of the chief causes of wars.
You’re too nice, Anne. That priest is more like a wolf in sheep’s clothing!
Jesus has said much about abortion. As the head of the Catholic Church, he has said that it is a sin so offensive that should one have or help another have an abortion, they are immediately excommunicated. They can no longer receive His Body and Blood. They must confess their sins and have their excommunication lifted by the Bishop, the successor to His Apostles.
Report him forthwith to his Bishop and if he will do Nothing-then the Cardinal right up to the Papal Nuncio-you have the right and OBLIGATION to do so under Canon Law.
It is our responsibility as well as the obligation to report such nonsense to the leaders of the church. We can no longer afford to just sit quietly in pews and watch our church slip and slide away. Clergy who do not take their vocation seriously need to be put on notice that their “job” is not to be taken for granted. In the meantime, we honor and support priests such as Fr. Brian Costello, new pastor at Most Holy Redeemer, and our new AB Cordileone for their dedication and courage to do God’s work.
This priest I spoke about is in the Oakland diocese. As you know we are loosing our bishop to San Francisco.
Yes, SF is getting Bishop Cordileone, our gain, your loss, I know.
We desperately need a leader/ warrior like Cardileone to set things straight. Certain bishop may be jealous, intimidated and unhappy about the new leadership, we laity will be behind him and praying for him.
Well said good and faithful suzanne.
Abortion is the high sacrament of Satanism and the defining tenet of the Democratic Party.
Thank you Juergensen for reminding everyone who the evil author of abortion is.
Jesus “Cleansed” the Temple and Threw Out The Moneychangers.
Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, St. Basil the Great and St. Ambrose would have never invited that evil author to dine inside the Temple at an “Al Smith Dinner.”
Nancy Pelosi understands full well that her position is untenable. The woman is in total denial. Calling abortion “reproductive health” is the ultimate absurdity. Her grasp on Church History and the history of out faith is equally abysmal. Thank you for publishing these excellent reminders!
Can we get Pelosi’s e-mail and bombard her with this VALUABLE information?! D’ya think she ‘might’ get a tiny hint?
The will of God is as old as God, and supercedes anything else-no matter its’ age or when we came to know it.
God is not old.
Nancy Pelosi knows nil about the Bible and her Church and her Church hisbory and teaching. What on earth did they teach her in those parochial schools she attended if she did. No wonder many people are opting for homeschooling. I do not want to knock all Catholic schools because some are just wonderful, but certainly not the ones she attended if she listened to them at all.. Perhaps that is the problem she got through just because she was you know “advataged”. The very thing this Presdient preaches against.
The word should be “advantaged” in my last post.
I really love this article! Make known to the world the beauty of our faith, teach them the writings of great saints of our faith! Viva Cristo Rey!
If we were to be immersed in daily words of great saints, from the Bible, the CCC teachings etc etc, if we were to memorize the Psalms, scripture, we begin to develop a closeness in Jesus. We begin wisdom in Christ, we acknowledge His presence, His graces easily embraced in good will, in humility prayerfully, then we start to fear the Lord…Perhaps we may regain our innocence once again and approach Jesus like a little child. Like a little child letting go of what sins infirm us spiritually….oh what a beautiful gift it would be to obtain, the gift of approaching Jesus as a little child. I would love that, I hope we all can long for that……
Beautiful thoughts and words Abeca Christian!
Thank you Catherine. How are you doing? I hope you are well. God bless you!
Yes, and daily communion and holy hour and rosary.
Good luck in the after-life, Nancy.
The new Archbishop of SF is well read in this matter. I pray that, since SF is her home diocese, he calls her in and informs her about Church teaching and then tells her not to present herself for Holy Communion until she publicly states that she was wrong and has committed a grievous sin. She has excommunicated herself by her public scandal.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.
Has everyone noticed that “Your Fellow Catholic” has not commented here at all?
I wonder if ole ‘spooky’ Nancy will read this, but of course if she does, she will put a spin on it ,as she is a true feminist.
The former speaker, who was reelected the last time by 80+ percent is a person who has a hard time understanding that the laws of God should design and rule the culture rather than the culture dictating what the church should teach. Abaca Christian is right on with her comment, but alas, that will never happen. I read recently that catholisism is as much about a “culture” as it is about theology. We are Catholics and this is what we believe may not be the same thing as we are Catholics and this is what the church teaches. I remember, growing up, that when the Pope spoke even Protestants paid heed. Today, even Catholics, can be heard to say “that’s on his opinion” like it didn’t count for more than anyone elses opinion. The American culture of freedom of thought, freedom to create one’s own moral compass, etc. may easily be the most important fight that the church will experience in the next decade. A fellow parishioner, in his forties, asked the pastor the other day what Vatican II was all about. He had never heard of it. Not suprising, actually. WWII is now almost ancient history in the curriculum of our schools. How do we change all this?
Look up the story of Pelosi and her ghostly encounter at the White House , the wisdom of the saints and the teaching of the church have no sway on her . If some dead ghostly feminists were to make themselves known different story altogether. The fact that she publicly ( in a video ) discussed this should be a sign that her Catholicism is to be charitable in need of correction and her reaction to and commentary of a supernatural event is disturbing ( no thought of it being of a evil nature) . Pure conjecture on my part, perhaps the ghost feminists were really trying to correct her on her abortion stance, and other inconsistent and misguided views.
That was SATAN whispering in her ear.It certainly was not Susan Anthony who was a STAUNCH Pro-Lifer.
Amen! Gordon Campbell.
What else need one say, Nancy?!!
Of course, it is distinctly possible that Pelosi’s position on abortion, as horrendous as it is, is due at least in part to the failure of her bishops to teach the faith, rendering her at least partly not culpable.
So, culpability depends on knowledge and not on faith. I guess none of us are completely culpable and thus there is no need for Jesus after all. And to think that so many souls have wasted their time in the confessional! Pelosi has inadvertantly discovered this and should be made pope … oh wait, there would be no need for a pope now that we all know that we do not know enough to be completely culpable. Truly the age of Aquarius, wow.
the age of AQUINAS, you say?
First, my comment is intended not to exculpate Pelosi but rather to point out that blame rests also on those bishops who have failed to instruct her and enforce Church law (cf. Canon 915).
Second, the Church does in fact teach that “For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: ‘Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent’ . . . Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law” (CCC 1857, 1859). So, yes, culpability does depend in part on knowledge. It’s what the Church teaches.
“full knowledge” is not interpretable, as it’s meaning is subject to philosophical arguments. What the Church teaches regarding “culpable” is not completely codifiable and requires divine authority … one more reason a bishop who is not holy is worse than no bishop at all. The authority to reveal the culpability of a sin comes from God: Anyone can be sensitive to this, but those who have some hardening of the heart, so to speak, may not be sufficiently sensitive to recognizing sin. This is the condition of many and its solution requires holy bishops, without whom the sinners languish in their sins. This condition is beneficial to those who sell indulgences and drum up money off the doctrine of Purgatory. Hey, it’s a tough question I’m putting forth here, but tell me we do not live in spiritually tough times, which requires holy bishops.
Nonsense-she has been corrected innumerable times and justifies her murderous position by claiming to know Church teaching better than ANY Bishop.As party to abortion she has self-excommunocated and each time she receives the Eucharist she consumes damnation-her Bishop does too.
What about her parish pastor? What church does she go to when she is in town at home? Why doesn’t he just tell her? and put a stop to it?
The answer is money.
If a non-holy bishop admonishes a sinner, and the sinner does not see the problem, then what? Is the admonishment authentic then? If so, then there would be no need for holy bishops, none at all.
Thy shalt not kill! Enough said.
“…by claiming (on what she called Jesuitical authority) that the Church teaching on abortion was no older than the 1950s.”
even if nancy had been right (and she’s not), this means nothing.
the church teaches with authority about the situations it confronts NOW, in some cases situations that were not a problem hundreds of years ago, such as:
– the environment,
– nuclear arms,
– use of the internet,
– the ten commandments of driving.
on the subejct of abortion this is a very OLD problem that, as the author of this article demonstrates, the ch7urch has spoken on for ages and ages.
Are these “quotes” really accurate translations of what the saints and theologians said, or the writers interpretation in his/her modern terms and tongue of what the saints and theologians said? The terminology just seems to be so modern to me. What abortive drugs or drugs for sterility for example existed back in those days to kill fetuses? Although I agree with the overall message, the modern terminology causes me to cast doubt on the accuracy of the author regarding the saints and theologians position against abortion and thus credibility, which is exactly what we don’t want to happen, i.e., loss of credibility.
Realize that the stock-in-trade of politicians such as Ms. Pelosi is rhetoric, the classic Liberal Art of persuasion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivium_(education)
Success in rhetoric is measured by how many people can be persuaded to accept the speaker’s statements, regardless of the actual veracity of the statement itself. To accomplish such persuasion a variety of ‘rhetorical devices’ have been used. These rhetorical tricks and traps have been collected under the general title of “Fallacies”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
Abortion is an activity that predates written history. The sylphium plant of Cyrene, a plant similar to Asafoetida and popularly used for abortions, was driven to extinction by the Greeks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortifacient#History