Let Malawi vote in referendum on abortion bill, says Catholic archbishop Msusa
Chairman for the Episcopal Conference of Malawi, His Grace Thomas Luke Msusa has challenged those that are pro-abortion and pro-life to give room for a referendum to take place in Malawi, so that the citizenry decides what is best for them as individuals and for the good of the society.
He said those that are for pro-abortion bill should not generalize that the majority is for abortion bill because Malawi as a God-fearing nation is against the bill.
Archbishop Msusa also categorically refutes that the Catholic Church in Malawi is particularly in support of the abortion bill as claimed by pro-abortion groups by saying that there was a representation of the Church in the special law commission when the bill was proposed.
He said as Catholic Bishops in Malawi, they already issued a Pastoral Statement in 2013 where, they consistent with the teachings of the universal Church, made their position very clear on abortion, homosexuality and population control.
“We note in particular that there are some worrisome trends in our democratization and emancipation that push for a worldview independent of and side-lining God, and making human beings dependent on their own intellect, determining for themselves what is right and what is wrong. We are saddened to read that religion should not regulate morals,” said Archbishop Msusa on Wednesday when he opened a two-day World Congress of Families for African Regional Conference in Lilongwe.
According to Archbishop Msusa, the recent campaign calling for termination of pregnancy or abortion law is contrary to the principle of human dignity and sanctity of life.
“We believe that life begins at conception; sacredness and sanctity of human life; both the mother and unborn child have the right to life and that all instances of direct abortions are a violation of the rights of the unborn because it is a willful killing of innocent life,” he said.
He said the mission and mandate of the Church is to protect and defend life hence the position of the Catholic Church has not changed. The Church cannot side with those agitating for the so-called sage abortion.
“Every human person is a social being and therefore, connected to others. Though every person is entitled to enjoy his/her individuality, he/she also has to be constantly sensitive to other people’s equal entitlements,”said His Grace Msusa who is also the Archbishop of Blantyre Archdiocese.
Earlier on Tuesday, President for the International Organization for the Families, Brian Brown told the press that the aim of the conference is to highlight the need to preserve the basic values of African Cultures, which follow the culture of life, and to resist the increasing secular influence in the world to follow the culture of death.
The theme for the conference which has attracted the academia, Clergy, Members of Parliament and the media among others is ‘The African Family and Cultural Colonization”.
Delegates have been drawn from all over Africa and the United States of America.
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
zazii…ansembe nde amene akubosholetsa azimayi mma location mu…why do you want to put up an issue concerning women for abortion. Who is a man to decide for a woman. Who is a roman catholic father to decide for a woman. munthu sunakwatirepo..sudziwa ndikupereka mimbayo komwe why kutsogolera zinthu zoti sukuzidziwa. osawasiya amuna eni eni akambirane bwa…
The Catholic Church and other chuches should SHUT UP! Women and girls need to have the right to abort because the burden of pregnancy lies with them. What has the church done to men who walk around with their un-zipped private parts and father children any how. These men don’t look after the children they father and most of these children suffer and die needlessly. The Catholic church and other churches are part of the western cultural imperialism – they are not African churhces, are they? By the way, our population is too high and becuase government cannot manage with little resources, people are dying due to poverty, diseases etc. What has the Catholic church and other churches done to eradicate poverty. Churches do not feed us norlook after our children. Let the men in robes leave us alone to make our decisions about our bodies and lives. Their role is on the puppet. By the way, priests are not married and therefore misguided in their advice on marriage and children.
Titherward, it could be explained that government ought not to abrogate its responsibility to provide leadership on issues that concern health and the economic viability of families, as well as the narrower moral issue. But government should walk a thin line with religious institutions without fluffing feathers.
For many years religious bodies has been mired in controversy with the abortion issue. For instance, Muslim jurists have always viewed the fetus as the precious origin of human life. The womb is perceived as a fragile vessel that carries a unique human soul, and hence deserves safeguarding and careful treatment. Jurists have also long debated when exactly certain red lines should be drawn. The debate over abortion as a whole begins with the discussion of when life begins. In Islam, aborting pregnancy in embryonic stage is forbidden as the embryo is now a fully sanctified human life. Islamically speaking, that would be murder – unless a physician determines that continuing the pregnancy would truly endanger the mother’s life. As for the views presented by Bishop SUSA on this forum which are not his own but those of the religious body, the Wikipedia document that many, and in some Western countries most, Catholics disagree with the official position of the Catholic Church, which opposes abortion and its legality, with views ranging from allowing exceptions in a generally pro–life position to acceptance of complete legality.
Thus the morality of practicing abortion has been debated by physicians, philosophers, and religious leaders for many years. The Hippocratic Oath is well known with its pledge “not to give a deadly drug to anyone if asked for it, nor to suggest it. Similarly, I will not give to a woman an abortifacient pessary. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.” Influenced by the authority attributed to the oath as the work of Hippocrates, some physicians during the first century refused to prescribe abortifacients for anyone. They had in mind that “it is the task of medicine to maintain and save what nature has engendered.”
Yet others like Soranos, a gynecologist in Greco–Roman era, prescribed abortion only where completion of the pregnancy would endanger the mother. Socrates in Plato’s “Republic” proposed abortion as a solution to prevent endangering the optimum population of the state. However, it is impossible to say with what seriousness Plato endorses this suggestion. Aristotle proposes abortion if a couple has too many children for the good of the state. But he does so with remarkable caution, saying it is to be done before there is “sensation and life,” and “what is right depends on the question of sensation and life,” a restriction which in his biology might have permitted only contraception.
Abortion, according to contemporary observers, was practiced very generally in the Greco-Roman world. The law of the empire punished abortion committed without the father’s consent. It also punished the giving of drugs for abortion. But it is unlikely that the law was enforced unless the recipient died. The object of the law was not to protect the embryo as a human person, for it was regarded as part of the mother. The purpose was to restrain the bad example of giving magical potions which could cause death to the recipient. As pagan observations and Christian complaints indicated, parents’ freedom to dispose of their young offspring was taken for granted by the empire. However, if one may go by the statement “thou shall not kill” then the abortion is defeated. The fetus as human was a neighbour. Its life had parity with one’s own. The commandment gave life to what otherwise would have been only rational calculation. See “Abortion and the Catholic Church” as discussed by John Noonan Junior.
As the debate rages on, it will be of no use to call for a referendum just to merely endorse the choice of the people. It would be proper that each religious body should advise its followers what its doctrine on abortion is all about and what should be foolowed. To apply such a doctrine to all other people of a different faith is rather going too far. They have their own stand on the issue. In the Islamic ethical system, life is sacred, and hence must be honored and promoted. One Omar Suleiman put it in this way: “Having children is a shared right between spouses, and hence neither spouse should obstruct that right – before or after conception – without good reason. Contraception is permissible with safer methods being preferred”.
Most women who want this bill are prostitutes, how can you want sex without baring the consequences. Abstain or have a normal child in a marriage scenario not having sex anyhow. Woe to you satanic civil rights and other satanic pastors, you preach against the commandment of God by being pro terminists.
Abortion, life is a life, if you do abortion you are killer in the eye of God. And you will answer answer for it. Even if you didnt do abortion but if you say yes.in your spirit you did in the eye of God, . same as homosexual, if you is a life style you are a part of it, if the bill pass for it, always the Nation facing the Judgement from God. We are Godly people here not Satanism activities.
We Malawi we say no to Satan agendas no abortions no homosexuality bravo Msusa stick to your guns don’t compromise the word of God like the way the western have done. We say no to baal worship. Indeed life begins at conception no need of referendum.
Mungotengapo matembelero apa. Satsutsana ndi munthu wa Mulungu. I support you Archbishop.
No need for a referendum. Just do what is right and punish abortion and sodomy by death, case closed. Or don’t and watch Malawi turn into Sodom and incur God’s wrath.
Ask your children to vote for abortion you don’t have children to vote who are you asking to vote for useless thing you are evil people you Romans you don’t marry to pregnant and abote. Give pregnant to your sistery and tell them to abote.
Jaja have you read the story?? Do you know the Catholic Social Teaching on abortion and termination of pregnancy?? Your comment is full of unfounded hatred towards the Holy Catholic Church. May the Almighty God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit forgive you. AMEN
Za ziiii. Is abortion a thorny issue in Malawi? Osangowauza masisiter i plus ma choir mistress asiye kuboshola mimba za ansembe bwanji?
Mwasowa nkhani eti.
Well done Msusa, So you are saying just because there are many Moslems in Mangochi, other people should not eat pork there. That is dangerous. You probably do not know, but let me tell you. Catholic nuns who secretly get abortion will also be freed from the bondage of doing it secretly. If Catholics who are godly do not need abortion services, let those who are among the ungodly get the service if they need it. Thanks. If you want a referendum, go and tell your President to accept a 50+1 referendum.
If we want to examine cultural colonization, we need look no further than the activities of the Roman Catholic Church in Africa. What better example is there?
In laboring to be brief, I have perhaps obscured my point. I am not saying that the Roman Catholic Church is an agency of cultural imperialism and, therefor, a bad thing. It is indisputably the embodiment of cultural imperialism, (unless you wish to indulge in the subtle casuistry for which the Jesuits were once notorious). However, all but the most extreme cultural nationalist would agree that some of the consequences of cultural imperialism can be beneficial. See how the English benefited from centuries of being colonized by the Romans, for example. The Roman occupation advanced the material and civic cultures of the English enormously. It could be argued that the nations of the United Kingdom that did not fall to the might of Roman arms have been playing catch-up ever since.
If the English had had to fight for de-colonization, instead of having to accept it reluctantly from the hands of the withdrawing Romans, perhaps the history of British imperialism would have been different. They might have had a better understanding of — and empathy with — those who waged anti-imperialist wars of independence.
Having thrown both brevity and my point to the winds, let me now attempt to retrieve them.
There are two points that deserve consideration:
1. Is it reasonable to argue that all human life is equally sacrosanct and that, consequently, the life of a recently fertilized egg should not be sacrificed to save the life of a wife and mother of six children? Furthermore, should the answering of such questions be left to old men who have known neither wife nor children?
2. Should the government be encouraged to abrogate its responsibility to provide leadership on issues that concern health and the economic viability of families, as well as the narrower moral issue? This call for a referendum should be seen for what it is: a cynical, disingenuous ploy to exploit the ignorance and psychological dependence of many adherents to the Roman Catholic version of Christianity, and their eagerness to please their spiritual masters. If the spokesmen for the Roman Catholic Church feel that the achievement of their ends would justify the devious means be which they would achieve them, they have already abandoned the moral high ground, and have no right to assert moral leadership.