Holy See Says Morning After Pill "Direct Attack" on the Unborn

Holy See Says Morning After Pill “Direct Attack” on the Unborn


*The so-called Morning After Pill, often called “emergency contraception” by the medical establishment, is not a “life-saving commodity,” the head of the Holy See delegation told the 66th World Health Assembly in Geneva this week. Such drugs are in reality “a direct attack” on the life of the unborn child.

In his address, Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski responded to the World Health Organization’s Resolution EB132.R4, which urges member states to improve the quality, supply, and use of 13 “life-saving commodities.”

The list includes “emergency contraception.”

Archbishop Zimowski said the Holy See “strongly agrees with the need to achieve further reductions in the loss of life and prevention of illness through increased access to inexpensive interventions” but insisted that they must all be “respectful of the life and dignity of all mothers and children at all stages of life, from conception to natural death.”

While some of the WHO’s recommendations, he said, “are truly life-saving, that of ‘emergency contraception’ can hardly be labeled as such since it is well known that, when conception already has occurred, certain substances used in ‘emergency contraception’ produce an abortifacient effect.”

“For my delegation, it is totally unacceptable to refer to a medical product that constitutes a direct attack on the life of the child in utero as a ‘life-saving commodity’ and, much worse, to encourage ‘increasing use of such substances in all parts of the world,’” he said.*

Its good to see the Vatican start to speak out on this issue, as it has been in the Catholic arena quite a bit recently, with various bishops, etc. talking about it. While this is hardly magisterial in authority, it does perhaps give us some indication as to the direction that the Holy See is likely to go on this particular issue.

Hopefully, some clearer guidelines and direction of a more official nature will be forthcoming soon.


**Thank you for posting this and your comment. I process many cultural currents - it’s just the way my mind works - and have seen develop a real drag on my consciousness from this processing - but I can’t abandon truth which I can usually sense when I find it, and the best I can do is attempt to concentrate on one ‘thing’ at a time, instead of several. I’ve started to make changes in my internet habits out of necessity.

I see what I do expect: back up when we need it. a counter push… and not just about this issue. We are going against all powers and principalities: the EU and the United States are as one. However what I see coming out of Russia is FANTASTIC. They have just announced they are sending anti-missile support to Syria!

To keep on this subject: Russia is showing the effects of the successful consecration, for SURE. A greatly upped number of vocations, large numbers of monestaries opened, etc., etc., etc.

God 'has our back" so to speak. We just have to keep this in mind. **

Actually, I would humbly suggest that an archbishop expressing the teachings of the Church on behalf of the Church on an issue of faith and morals is very much magisterial in authority. :slight_smile:

When the remainder of the episcopate chimes in, or His Holiness, I will agree with you. However, not more than a few weeks ago, we had other bishops saying that the morning after pill was acceptable in some cases as there was evidence which showed that it was not abortive in nature. So, to suggest that there is some sort of consensus in the magisterium at this point on this issue seems a bit premature.


I’m not sure how anyone could know for sure. It may or may not be abortive. It depends, I guess, on whether the woman ended up pregnant. How would anyone know for sure that she did or not?

In pharmacology you look for mechanism of action at the cellular level, and below if necessary. Many drugs act in multiple ways and if you understand how they act, you can determine whether they have the potential to be abortive or not. An IUD for example, is a contraceptive that is used a great deal overseas, but is also becoming more popular in America. Its primary method of action is contraceptive in nature, but there is the potential that conception could occur, in which case the IUD would also prevent implantation, thus aborting the pregnancy.

This process will have to be understood more completely with the morning after pill before the Church can definitively rule whether it is to be understood as a contraceptive only or whether it’s actions are also abortive in nature.

I agree with the Holy See.

The problem then is knowing what to do when you do not have access to all the facts. From what little I have read on questions of doubt, there seems to be several schools not condemned by Holy Mother Church as to what to do. Look up the Catholic Encyclopedia article on Probabilism for more information.

Ok… I came here looking to see if it was a sin, which it apparently is. Here is the situation… a younger friend of mine had unprotected sex with someone and asked me to take her to a clinic to get the morning after pill. Would driving her there be a sin? Actually, I am sure that it would be because it would be consciously causing her to sin. But how grave of a sin would that be? I doubt that I will do it, as this disturbs my soul in so many ways. But I am curious as to what would happen if I said “Yes” that I would give her a ride.

Drive your friend instead to a crisis pregnancy center that can counsel her with full information and the truth on choosing life. She doesn’t even know whether she is pregnant yet, but she will need all the support she can get.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.