Frequently denied according to who? Are Saint Thomas ’s views on abortion (or prostitution or torture for that matter) some arcane esoterica that the church has diligently suppressed, as it has with regards to Pope Joan, the “divine feminine” and the Xenu chronology? Provide some evidence if you would — other than Gerald’s authority, or yours. We’ve already seen what that’s worth.

In any case, when you find any church document approving the murder of babies born alive after an abortion, by all means, do get back to us. Until then, Gerald should probably hold off on Obama’s canonization papers – that’ll give him even more time to keep striving, striving, striving for that abortion legislation. Let’s hope he doesn’t get a hernia from all that striving. The same goes for you, seeing how diligently you keep digging yourself in, when there’s really no need. I think we all get what you’re trying to say: the Vatican should be more forward-looking except when it’s more convenient for you that they look to the past — in particular, to a “wiser” time when people had no clear idea when life began so that theologians could spout most whatever they wanted with no fear of being shown up as fools. Ah yes, what a golden age that must seem for you. There was no Google back then either, so I suspect Gerald might feel the same way.

We have to understand, the discussion of medicine at the time and what was possible vs what is possible now is different.

I think Alphonsus Liguori held that abortion could be permissible in the case where a brother’s marriage prospects might be threatened by the scandal of his sister’s pregnancy. There seems to have been a great welter of permissive views out there.

Kurt von Schussnigg was the Austrian Chancellor just prior to the Anschluss. He spent his post WWII years teaching history at SLU.