Here is a bit more. A militant Catholic priest or ex priest on the Free Republic site (I know the man well, and he believes that anyone who performs an abortion should be executed, and even I think that someone who kills someone who performs an abortion should not be prosecuted, but I am not sure about the latter) has this to say:
"I wasn’t referring to guilt, but to the gravity of the sin. The gravity of the sin is the same in both cases.
You don’t seem to be familiar with the Principle of Double Effect.
It is NEVER permissible to perform/procure an abortion—for any reason whatsoever.
If a woman has a life-threatening illness, she may choose to undergo treatment for that illness, even if the treatment may have the side effect of killing an unborn child.
That is NOT an abortion.
Procuring an abortion is NEVER licit; it is always a crime; it is never permitted, not even to “save the life of the mother.”
So maybe the answer is that the mother can be treated short of an abortion with the side effect of killing the fetus (at which time I assume removing the dead fetus is OK), but if such treatment will not kill the fetus, and the only thing that will save her is an abortion, then both the fetus and the mother have to die, if that is the consequence of not having an abortion. Sometimes I just hate being a lawyer, to be honest, because I just can't help my mind spinning its tangled webs of analysis. It happens almost effortlessly these days. Maybe I need therapy.
Yeah, the Catholic Church is a big believer in the Doctrine of DE.
(Franzl, I was confused first as well but Torie thinks this other guy has this opinion, he doesn't think the opinion himself
)
