Former Abortion Provider Speaks at Loyola U. Chicago
— Posted by John (October 11, 2006 at 1:17 pm)
I’ve heard some pretty outrageous things about Women’s Studies programs in my day, but this one takes the biscuit.
Judith Arcana was recently invited by the Loyola University Chicago Women’s Studies Department to be a guest lecturer in a bioethics class (Bioethics 395: The Ethics of Human Reproduction), and to do a performance of her own work.
Who is Judith Arcana, you ask?
For two years, she was a member of The Abortion Counseling Service of the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union — which was better known by its nickname, “Jane”. Its history spanned a roughly five year period prior to the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court decisions in 1973. (The picture of Arcana at the top of this post was taken during her time with Jane.)
According to the CWLU Herstory Editorial Committee:
Jane was the CWLU’s underground illegal abortion provider that performed over 11,000 safe abortions, many performed by Jane members themselves. [source]
Yes, you read that correctly. Jane wasn’t your garden variety “pro-choice” organization; it wasn’t even an abortion referral service. The members of Jane actually performed abortions.
In a talk given in London in 1999, Arcana described how Jane — which she referred to as “The Service” — functioned:
Women joined the Service through periodic orientation meetings, and learned the necessary tasks from those who had come before them. Once their counseling skills had been developed in new recruits, and the group had come to trust them, they could learn more – doing everything from basic record keeping to becoming a medic, one who performed abortions.
Ultimately, we learned to do abortions in all three trimesters. Although we did only a handful in the third, as you may imagine, there were many in the second, no doubt because illegality forced women and girls to take so much time searching for abortionists and saving up money. The methods that we learned, we primarily learned from one man. He was not a doctor, but he was the best. Once we understood that many of the people doing abortions at that time were not doctors, we realized that we could do it too. This would mean women would not have to be charged a lot of money, could even come through the Service free.
So we pressed this man to teach us, as he had been taught. He was an extraordinary man in many ways, had been doing this work, and maybe other illegal work, virtually all of his life.
She also noted:
‘Our’ abortionist liked us, thought we were cool (which we were!), and we liked him, so it was a good arrangement all around. He eventually taught one of us, and then let others watch.
Eventually, the one he had taught then taught others.
Loyola University Chicago student Alicia Torres recently e-mailed us with a report on Arcana’s lecture to the bioethics class last week. Curiously, it seems, Torres reports that Arcana was “very much against artificial reproductive technology” — but she still has no problem with abortion:
Dr. Arcana believes that abortion can and should be done with grace, compassion and care. She said that giving life can be just as compassionate as taking life away. She accepted that abortion is the taking of a human life, and justified it by means of compassion.
This is entirely consistent with this response Arcana gave in the aforementioned London talk (which, rather interestingly, runs directly contrary to most mainstream “pro-choice” argumentation):
I think there is a need for us to talk more about what it is we are doing, when we carry out or support abortion. We – in the states – have dealt heavily, up to now, in euphemism. I think one of the reasons why the ‘good guys’ – the people in favor of abortion rights – lost a lot of ground is that we have been unwilling to talk to women about what it means to abort a baby. We don’t ever talk about babies, we don’t ever talk about what is being decided in abortion. We never talk about responsibility. The word ‘choice’ is the biggest euphemism. Some use the phrases ‘products of conception’ and ‘contents of the uterus,’ or exchange the word ‘pregnancy’ for the word ‘fetus.’ I think this is a mistake tactically and strategically, and I think it’s wrong.. And indeed, it has not worked – we have lost the high ground we had when Roe was decided.
My objection here is not only that we have lost ground, but also that our tactics are not good ones; they may even constitute bad faith. It is morally and ethically wrong to do abortions without acknowledging what it means to do them. I performed abortions, I have had an abortion and I am in favor of women having abortions when we choose to do so. But we should never disregard the fact that being pregnant means there is a baby growing inside of a woman, a baby whose life is ended. We ought not to pretend this is not happening.
It’s bad enough when a Catholic university gives a platform to a pro-abortion politician or other public figure — that in itself is prohibited by the U. S. Catholic Bishops. Loyola, like so many other Catholic universities, has done that before.
But the fact that a Catholic university has given a platform to someone who actually facilitated abortions, has no regrets about having done so, and who, by her own admission, understands that abortion is the taking of a baby’s life — takes the word “scandal” to a whole new level.
It is with a heavy heart that I write this post. As many of you know, both Annie and I are graduates of Loyola University Chicago. Both of us received an excellent education there, and were privileged to encounter many Jesuits there who have an undying love for the Faith.
Sadly, however, an increasing sense of disloyalty has crept its way into the Society of Jesus. This sense of disloyalty allows for an environment in which even the viewpoints of an unapologetic former abortion provider are tolerated out of a horribly misguided understanding of “academic freedom”.
The Society of Jesus is the same order whose founder — for whom Loyola University is named — wrote:
To be right in everything, we ought always to hold that the white which I see, is black, if the Hierarchical Church so decides it, believing that between Christ our Lord, the Bridegroom, and the Church, His Bride, there is the same Spirit which governs and directs us for the salvation of our souls. Because by the same Spirit and our Lord Who gave the ten Commandments, our holy Mother the Church is directed and governed.
The Society of Jesus is also the same order that gave us numerous martyr saints who were killed specifically for their loyalty to the Catholic Church’s teachings. Now, universities run by the order have openly adopted abortion-friendly policies, and one has gone so far as to give a platform to an actual former abortion provider.
The hanged, drawn, and quartered body of the great English Jesuit
Saint Edmund Campion must be turning over in his grave.
This entry is filed under Abortion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Christopher Culver says:
I am an alumnus of LUC as well. It’s unfortunate that since I now live outside the U.S., I’ll never get a call from fundraisers which I can use as an opportunity to express my discontent about the direction the school is going in. The things I saw and heard at that school, not least from the campus ministry itself.
I can only hope that other alumni are able to put some positive pressure on the school. However, because the school has opened itself up to so many non- or nominal Christians, it can’t return to the values on which it was founded without irking its current student body and threatening profitability. It’s a shame.
Comment posted October 12th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
Sunnyday says:
John,
This is truly saddening. But at least one alumnus is speaking out (you) plus another (Annie) about these things. Getting together with other LUC graduates who think the same way could bear fruit, so that is one good option for you.
I’ll admit I was confused while reading your post, trying ot figure out where the former abortion provider stood on the issue…until I read her quotes. I made the mistake of assuming that FORMER abortion providers logically have a change of heart when they stop killing babies.
Comment posted October 13th, 2006 at 3:56 am
Marielle says:
This is a grotesque, yet not suprising, peek into what Loyola U and so many other ‘Catholic’ Universities have become. As a Loyola grad I’m ashamed (if not shocked) to call myself an alumni of this wayward school. But can anyone who went there (and especially those who lived in campus housing….) say they are suprised? This kind of garbage is rampant on campus and the admin turns their cheek.
Heck, there is a big Planned Parenthood accross the street from Rogers Park campus and I have never seen or heard of anyone at the University offer a Catholic hand to the women going in there.
With the tuition they chrage they have a moral obligation to give their students what their name says they will; a REAL Catholic education This is neo-pagan rediculousness.
Shame on them.
Comment posted October 13th, 2006 at 9:10 am
Patrick Reilly says:
Are the LUC alumni ready for an organized alumni campaign to restore Loyola’s Catholic identity? We stand ready to help with advice, resources, contacts, whatever is needed. Notre Dame, Holy Cross and other alumni are doing the same. Contact Patrick Reilly, President, Cardinal Newman Society, preilly@cardinalnewmansociety.org.
Comment posted October 13th, 2006 at 11:55 am
lauren says:
I’m very happy to go to Loyola University. Whether you agree with it or not, there are many Catholics in the world that disagree with the church’s stance on abortion and contraception (a lot on contraception). There are many of us that attend Loyola. I guarantee if the conservative ideology gets shoved down the students’ throats you will have a lot of disagreement on campus. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be presented, it should BE. In fact, it should be taught quite a bit. However, this is a university and on college campuses there must be tolerance of opposing views to remain vigorous and intelligent.
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
mary kay says:
Lauren,
Anyone who has had an abortion is automatically excommunicated from the Catholic church.
Using contraception with knowledge of the Catholic churches teaching is a grave sin. Grave sin means no longer in a state of grace. No state of grace…no Eucharist.
Just because people say that they are Catholic doesn’t mean that they are. I can say I’m a peach, but I’m not. To be a practicing Catholic you must practice. Enough practice and you may even get it right one day…
That said, A Catholic school has no business teaching things (or offering things like poetry readingsby former abortionists) that endorse non-catholic thinking. If I’m willing to pay the extra dollar for a Catholic Education, then I expect to get a Catholic Education…If a secular school wants to dance naked under the moon light while eating twinkies, they can go right ahead. But the minute you put the word Catholic in front of the word Education, then you represent an institution that must live up to the title. I say to you and all the students and educators at Loyola and and to the school itself: If you can’t live up to the Catholic name, then remove it. Stop calling yourselves Catholic and stop claiming to be a Catholic school. Then you can do whatever you want.
MK
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 6:17 pm
lauren says:
Is that true? you get excommunicated? Wow, talk about forgiveness.
Well if that’s true about the “grave sin” there’s a ton of people walking up to get Eucharist who are currently taking birth control.
I’m a cafeteria Catholic myself. I agree generally with the issues of tolerance, social justice, and charity. As far as other things go, we are at odds.
I can by the way, call myself what I want to call myself. You too can call me what you want.
Catholic schools do have the right to do offer thinking different from their own. Why shouldn’t they? Catholics don’t hold the patent on truth. You can choose to attend more conservative Catholic schools if you wish. I am going to Loyola and my mother teaches there because we believe in social justice. I love Loyola, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. I have scoffed at what some priests have said in my time at Loyola. That’s life. In fact, that’s what makes Loyola a university. It enables you to think, to disagree, and most importantly to challenge.
In the meantime, I’m fairly certain Loyola will still call itself a Catholic school despite your protestations.
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 6:26 pm
mary kay says:
I’m fairly certain that it will continue to call itself Catholic too, but that doesn’t make it right. Why should you and other “cafeteria” catholics pollute the faith? Why don’t you just leave? What keeps you here? It’s craziness.
As for forgiveness, you obviously don’t understand the word. The sacrament of confession is there for anyone, with any sin on their soul, including abortion, to seek forgiveness. Forgiveness, however, cannot be granted to someone who is not sorry.
Go to confession with a contrite heart, ask forgiveness, be absolved, go to communion.
And for the record, the Catholic church does hold the patent on truth. That’s why those of us who truly believe defend it so. Because it is the Truth, it must be protected at all costs lest it be watered down into a social program. Loyola is making grave errors and if it were a person instead of an institution it too would be excommunicated. Ignatius must be rolling over in his grave…
If the Catholic church bends to the ways of the world, then what good is it? It ceases to be unique and dies. The whole point of it is that it is a beacon of light in a dark, dark world.
It is in the world but not of the world. Changing the church is like telling Jesus that you are the teacher and He is the student…and I need lessons in humility?
MK
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 7:03 pm
lauren says:
I’m going to cite this article I read a little bit ago about religious truth.
http://world.christianpost.com/article/20061014/25263.htm
I don’t believe the church should bend to the ways of the world. It should bend to what is right however. It has done that for over 1000 years. I’m not making a judgement on abortion in regards to the church’s opinion. I’m just saying, truth is absolute and if the church does change its mind, which it has done and still does, they obviously aren’t entirely based in absolute truth.
I just dont think that this is the best way to have a discussion about the values of the church by having a bunch of dittoheads (ugh, i can’t believe i referenced rush) running around Loyola’s campus. Loyola’s campus is diverse and made up of people from various faiths and nonfaiths. The world and sadly nor the church will ever get anything done in terms of justice if it alienates allies who may not agree on all points.
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
mary kay says:
Lauren,
I agree. People of all faiths should enter into dialogue. But and institution that calls itself Catholic should still remain true to it’s name. You can discuss different faith systems without inviting people to speak at your school who represent behaviors that are completely anti-catholic. Can you see the difference.
If I was a Jewish school, I would never invite a former nazi who still believed that Jews should be killed to read poetry at my school. I might invite a Catholic to speak at the school if it was done respectfully, or a Muslim to explain why Muslims do what they do when they go extreme…but not a nazi sympathizer…
You see?
MK
Comment posted October 15th, 2006 at 8:39 pm
Pansy Moss` says:
I agree generally with the issues of tolerance, social justice, and charity.
The Church does not teach “tolerance”. The Church teaches loving others as you love yourselves.
Tolerance:1 : capacity to endure pain or hardship
Liberals use the word “tolerance” and “diversity” to mean “acceptable racism and classism. The Catholic Church teaches people to see everyone as God’s children, not to tolerate them like you do a colonsocopy.
If anyone has to “tolerate” me and my family because we are a different race than them, then they should not be breathing my air space.
It also does not mean you “tolerate” immoral behaviour. Social justice, which is a Catholic teaching, means you defend those who cannot defend themselves, not turn the other way when innocents are getting murdered.
Tolerance never had anyplace in any Catholic thought.
Comment posted October 16th, 2006 at 7:12 am
lauren says:
“the Catholic Church hopes all people will come to know the Gospel, but its primary approach to other religions and cultures must be one of tolerance and openness, Pope Benedict XVI said.
During a Sept. 28 meeting at his summer villa in Castel Gandolfo, south of Rome, Pope Benedict welcomed Hans-Henning Horstmann as Germany’s new ambassador to the Vatican.
Faith, the pope told him, increases people’s commitment to the common good, which is marked by defending the life and dignity of all people, including those of other faiths and cultures.
“The church does not impose itself,” the pope said. “It does not force anyone to accept the Gospel message because faith in Jesus Christ, whom the church proclaims, can only happen in freedom. For this reason, encounters with others must be marked by tolerance and cultural openness.”
This came from the Vatican on September 28th.
Willfully classifying a group of people with intentions as good as yours Pansy, does not achieve what you are saying you are trying to achieve. I’m not really sure how liberalism tolerates racism. Racism to me is one of the things I find most ugly; and I’m fairly liberal. I think our ideas of what tolerance is and what tolerance means to us are different things. I meant tolerating other view points and other religions. The world will not continue to exist if we don’t to some degree tolerate. I’m not saying tolerance is indifference. However, I do believe that tolerating at the very least dissenting views is necessary. If you don’t tolerate dissenting views what should you do? Send them away? Brainwash them? I’m just having a hard time understanding what it is you think the Catholic Church should do. If the Catholic Church is really on God’s side, shouldn’t the word of the church or the Bible silence by default those that you view satanic anyways?
Comment posted October 16th, 2006 at 9:17 am
John says:
Mary Kay said: “Anyone who has had an abortion is automatically excommunicated from the Catholic church.”
MK,
There’s a need for clarification here. As with any other excommunicable offense, any Catholic involved with an abortion must know prior to going through with it that doing so has the penalty of excommunication attached to it.
If a Catholic is unaware that facilitating an abortion is excommunicable, he or she is not excommunicated.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2270-2272, discuss abortion. 2272 explains why involvement with abortion is excommunicable:
See also:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm#I
Comment posted October 16th, 2006 at 10:13 am
mary kay says:
John,
I said: Anyone who has had an abortion is automatically excommunicated from the Catholic church.
Using contraception with knowledge of the Catholic churches teaching is a grave sin. Grave sin means no longer in a state of grace. No state of grace…no Eucharist
I was writing really fast and thought that I had made it clear that “knowledge of the Catholic churches teaching” applied to both…
apparently I wasn’t very clear…Lauren and I covered quite a lot of boards last night and I’m afraid some of it was done in shorthand…that’s why I’ve asked her to talk offline. We exchanged e-mail addresses, so some of the more upsetting stuff should be kept off of the site. I hope. I really believe Lauren could benefit from this site, but we’re all going to have to be patient.
Thanks for the correction. I hope Lauren sees it and understands.
Wouldn’t it be awful if it got around Loyola that I said everyone was excommunicated? yikes!
MK
Comment posted October 16th, 2006 at 8:22 pm
Generations for Life » Blog Archive » More on Judith Arcana at Loyola says:
[…] Previous Coverage: Former Abortion Provider Speaks at Loyola U. Chicago […]
Comment posted October 17th, 2006 at 10:22 am
TheGarg says:
You cannot Love Jesus, and be in favor of killing babies.
Comment posted October 20th, 2006 at 12:32 am
ausblog says:
I’m 98% pro-life and 2% pro-choice, though the 2% didn’t come easy.
World estimations of the number of terminations carried out each year is somewhere between 20 and 88 million.
3,500 per day / 1.3 million per year in America alone.
50% of that 1.3 million claimed failed birth control was to blame.
A further 48% had failed to use any birth control at all.
And 2% had medical reasons.
That means a stagering 98% may have been avoided had an effective birth control been used.
Australia (with a population of 20 million) terminated over 100 thousand young people last year. I’ve done the figures and Australia do more per head.
Abortion has got to be by far the Mother of all holicosts, the most extensive crime against humanity the world has ever seen.
Though it pains me to say it but, there may always be a need for the 2% medical reasons and such, but that’s all.
So how do we get the other 98% to be responsible……………….
How do we get them to be honest with themselves, about when life begins.
Everyone knows it starts at conception, egg+sperm = human being
Sadly many frefer the odd termination over using birth control, they have all kinds of reasons, each of them selfish.
Then there’s the christian impossition,(all a bit talibanish), and their men in high places.(church and state should never entwine) their stance against b/c has only added to the numbers.
Sanity must provale, abortions should remain available and safe to the 2% and the rest need to have a good look at themselves and get their act together.
Have you seen ( HOT OFF THE SHOW! Throw-away babies )
It’s a blog by Sharon Hughes?
Comment posted October 22nd, 2006 at 9:05 pm
Generations for Life » Blog Archive » Pro-Life Bias in the Mainstream Media? says:
[…] [As an aside: Reading this reminded me of the time when a few friends and I attended an event sponsored by the Loyola Socialists. (Yes, there actually was, within the past decade, a Socialist chapter at my Catholic alma mater. Considering what happened there last month, you probably won’t find that hard to believe. For the record, however, as far as I know, the Socialist chapter there is now disbanded.) […]
Comment posted November 6th, 2006 at 12:45 pm