A Catholic Perspective on the Unfairness of Noahide Law Regarding Feticide: A Failure of Justice Contrasted with Catholic Moral Consistency (Code Purple)
See Home Page
SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com
This article is "Code Purple": Courts of Justice
A Catholic Perspective on the Unfairness of Noahide Law Regarding Feticide: A Failure of Justice Contrasted with Catholic Moral Consistency
From a Catholic perspective, rooted in the teachings of the Church as articulated by the Council of Trent, the Roman Catechism (1566), and papal encyclicals such as Pope Pius XI’s Casti Connubii (1930) and Pope John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae (1995), the sanctity of human life from conception is an inviolable principle grounded in the imago Dei (Genesis 1:26–27) and the commandment “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:13; CCC 2270). The Noahide Laws, derived from Genesis 9:1–7 and codified in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 56a–b) and by Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 9:1), claim to uphold universal morality, including a prohibition against murder that ostensibly protects the unborn. However, as articulated by Michael E. Dallen in The Rainbow Covenant, Noahide Law permits a stark disparity: while both Jews and non-Jews can be punished for deliberately causing a woman to miscarry, a non-Jew may face capital punishment for this act, whereas a Jew cannot. This essay, incorporating Dallen’s full quote, demonstrates that this disparity is fundamentally unfair, failing to uphold the Noahide ideal of just courts, and contrasts it with the Catholic sense of justice, which consistently protects all human life without ethnic distinction.
Dallen’s Quote on Noahide Feticide Laws
The following quote from Michael E. Dallen’s The Rainbow Covenant outlines the differing treatments of Jews and non-Jews under Noahide Law for causing a miscarriage:
Where the Noahide law and Israel's law in the matter seem to diverge most strongly is in an area, oddly, of clear Scriptural instruction. God declares to Israel, for Israel, in the Written Torah, that the murder of a living human constitutes a capital crime, but that feticide does not.
If a Gentile deliberately injures a pregnant woman, intentionally causing the fetus within her to die, is he guilty of murder? The Torah provides that a Jew guilty of the same act cannot be held liable by any Torah court for murder, but only for assaulting the woman. This is true even though he has killed the mother's unborn child by causing her to miscarry.
Possibly, as most Torah authorities believe, the Jew in this case will later inevitably be punished by "death at the hands of Heaven." But no Torah court could find him guilty of the unborn child's murder.
By God's will, a Torah court has only one — a capital — penalty for murder. Before it can impose that sentence the court must find, among other things, that the killer's victim was a genuine living person. A fetus is only potentially a living person. Noahide courts, on the other hand, have not just the right but the obligation to treat any such deliberate feticide as a criminal act — as an abomination that they have an obligation to forbid.
Everyone who studies the Noahide law must eventually agree on that point. But this doesn’t mean that Noahides must treat every wrongful feticide as murder — that is, as the most despicable and destructive of all felonies. Neither does it suggest that Jews possess any right that Gentiles lack, either to perform abortions or to have them performed.
Noahides must determine the details of their own laws for themselves, including enforcement schemes, and schedules of penalties. Without punishing feticide as murder, they have the power to delegitimize it. So do the Jews. Feticide is a form of homicide that cheapens human life; it isn’t all that distantly related to plain murder. The absence, in Scripture, of a specific legal penalty for feticide doesn’t mean that Israel must tolerate wholesale fetus-slaughter in its midst. It just means that Jews, like Noahides, have the freedom to legislate their own enforcement schemes against it. It also means that Israel’s Torah courts, unlike Noahide courts, lack even the hypothetical power to impose any capital penalty for feticide.
Source: Dallen, Michael E. (2003). The Rainbow Covenant. Light Catcher Books & The Rainbow Covenant Foundation, pp. 196–197.
If a Gentile deliberately injures a pregnant woman, intentionally causing the fetus within her to die, is he guilty of murder? The Torah provides that a Jew guilty of the same act cannot be held liable by any Torah court for murder, but only for assaulting the woman. This is true even though he has killed the mother's unborn child by causing her to miscarry.
Possibly, as most Torah authorities believe, the Jew in this case will later inevitably be punished by "death at the hands of Heaven." But no Torah court could find him guilty of the unborn child's murder.
By God's will, a Torah court has only one — a capital — penalty for murder. Before it can impose that sentence the court must find, among other things, that the killer's victim was a genuine living person. A fetus is only potentially a living person. Noahide courts, on the other hand, have not just the right but the obligation to treat any such deliberate feticide as a criminal act — as an abomination that they have an obligation to forbid.
Everyone who studies the Noahide law must eventually agree on that point. But this doesn’t mean that Noahides must treat every wrongful feticide as murder — that is, as the most despicable and destructive of all felonies. Neither does it suggest that Jews possess any right that Gentiles lack, either to perform abortions or to have them performed.
Noahides must determine the details of their own laws for themselves, including enforcement schemes, and schedules of penalties. Without punishing feticide as murder, they have the power to delegitimize it. So do the Jews. Feticide is a form of homicide that cheapens human life; it isn’t all that distantly related to plain murder. The absence, in Scripture, of a specific legal penalty for feticide doesn’t mean that Israel must tolerate wholesale fetus-slaughter in its midst. It just means that Jews, like Noahides, have the freedom to legislate their own enforcement schemes against it. It also means that Israel’s Torah courts, unlike Noahide courts, lack even the hypothetical power to impose any capital penalty for feticide.
Source: Dallen, Michael E. (2003). The Rainbow Covenant. Light Catcher Books & The Rainbow Covenant Foundation, pp. 196–197.
Unfairness and Failure of Noahide Justice
Dallen’s exposition reveals a profound injustice in Noahide Law: a non-Jew who deliberately causes a miscarriage may face capital punishment, while a Jew committing the same act is liable only for assault, with no earthly court imposing a death penalty. This disparity is rooted in the Torah’s distinction (Exodus 21:22–25), where injuring a pregnant woman causing miscarriage incurs a fine for Jews, interpreted as assault rather than murder (Sanhedrin 79a; Rashi on Exodus 21:22). Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Rotzeach 1:9) clarifies that a Jewish fetus before 40 days is “mere water” (Yevamot 69b), and even post-40 days, feticide is not murder in Torah courts, though divine punishment may apply. For Noahides, however, Sanhedrin 57b extends the murder prohibition to feticide, potentially warranting death.
This differential treatment is unfair, as it imposes a harsher penalty on non-Jews for the same act, violating the principle of equal justice. The Noahide ideal of establishing courts (Sanhedrin 56a) aims to ensure fairness, yet this disparity privileges Jews, suggesting their fetuses are less legally protected than non-Jewish ones, while non-Jews face disproportionate consequences. Such inconsistency undermines the Noahide claim to universal morality, as justice should apply uniformly, regardless of ethnicity (Leviticus 24:22; CCC 1934–1935). The notion that Jews face only divine, not human, punishment (Sanhedrin 79a) introduces a speculative element that evades earthly accountability, further eroding trust in Noahide courts.
Catholic Justice: A Fair and Consistent Alternative
Catholic moral theology offers a superior model of justice, rooted in the absolute sanctity of life from conception (Evangelium Vitae 60). The Church teaches that every fetus, regardless of ethnicity, bears the imago Dei (Genesis 1:26–27) and is protected under the Fifth Commandment (CCC 2271). Deliberately causing a miscarriage is a grave sin, equivalent to murder, with no exceptions for gestational age or the perpetrator’s identity (Casti Connubii, 1930). Unlike Noahide Law’s ethnic disparities, Catholic justice applies equally: a Jew or non-Jew committing feticide faces the same moral condemnation and, in legal contexts, should face equitable penalties (Gaudium et Spes 27). The Roman Catechism (Part III, on the Fifth Commandment) emphasizes universal accountability, ensuring no group is exempt from earthly justice, unlike the Noahide reliance on divine punishment for Jews.
Catholic courts, historically guided by canon law, prioritize proportionality and mercy, balancing justice with redemption (CCC 2266–2267). This contrasts with Noahide Law’s potential for capital punishment against non-Jews, which lacks nuance and fairness. The Church’s consistent ethic—protecting all life equally—upholds the Noahide ideal of just courts better than Noahidism itself, aligning with natural law and divine revelation (Romans 2:14–15). By rejecting ethnic privileges, Catholic justice fosters trust and equality, fulfilling the Gospel’s call to love all as neighbors (Matthew 22:39).
Conclusion: Catholic Resistance to Noahide Injustice
The Noahide Law’s disparity in punishing feticide—capital punishment for non-Jews but lesser penalties for Jews, as detailed by Dallen (The Rainbow Covenant, pp. 196–197)—is profoundly unfair, failing to uphold the Noahide ideal of just courts (Sanhedrin 56a). This ethnic double standard, reinforced by supremacist ideologies, reveals a moral inconsistency that undermines Noahidism’s claim to universality. Catholic justice, rooted in the sanctity of all life (Evangelium Vitae 60) and equal accountability (Roman Catechism), offers a fairer model, protecting every fetus without distinction (CCC 2270). Catholics must resist Noahide Law’s imposition, proclaiming Christ’s universal salvation (Acts 4:12) and the Church’s mission to defend life (Matthew 28:19). Trusting in Our Lady, we uphold the Gospel’s call to justice and truth, rejecting systems that cheapen human dignity.
Comments
Post a Comment