London, England, Jul 15, 2019 / 02:42 pm (CNA).- As the British parliament continues to consider a bill on Northern Ireland including amendments that would legalize abortion and same-sex marriage, a peeress from the region has warned the amendments are “not workable.”
The bill and its amendments will take effect only if the Northern Ireland Assembly, which has been suspended the past two years due to a dispute between the two major governing parties, is not functional by Oct. 21.
Last week the House of Commons voted to add amendments legalizing same-sex marriage and liberalizing abortion provision in Northern Ireland to the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill, which is designed to keep the region running in the absence of a functioning devolved government.
Thence the bill passed to the House of Lords, where it is now at the committee stage. It will remain in the upper house until July 17, when it will return to the House of Commons for amendments.
Nuala O’Loan, Baroness O’Loan, a member of the House of Lords from Northern Ireland, told BBC News NI July 15 that the amendments cannot work, and that it is wrong of the British government to “push it through in a situation where the people of Northern Ireland had no say.”
O’Loan said members of parliament had “hijacked” the Northern Ireland bill: “This was a bill that started its life in Parliament with the intention of allowing the secretary of state to postpone the date for an election… to enable the talks which are currently under way to restore the Northern Ireland Assembly to proceed. What happened was it was hijacked in the Commons… various amendments were put in and these should not have been accepted because they were outside the purpose of the bill.”
She added that the amendments don’t work, because “it says the secretary of state must make regulations – the secretary of state can’t.”
Introducing the bill into the House of Lords July 10, Ian Duncan, Baron Duncan of Springbank, said that “crucially, the amendments as drafted do not function properly and so do not enable the government to deliver on the instruction of Parliament.”
Similarly, John Larkin, attorney general for Northern Ireland, said the abortion amendment was not “drafted clearly or consistently” with human rights laws.
O’Loan noted that “100% of the Northern Ireland MPs who have taken their seat in Westminster voted against this.”
A letter opposing the bill was distributed at Masses held in Northern Ireland July 14. Authored by O’Loan and Robin Eames, who was the Church of Ireland’s Archbishop of Armagh from 1986 to 2006, it focused on the bill’s threat to devolution.
Addressed to British prime minister Theresa May, it said the overwhelming vote in the Commons “treats the people of Northern Ireland with contempt,” especially it was “voted for only by MPs who do not represent constituencies in Northern Ireland.”
May has said in the past that abortion should be a devolved issue for Northern Ireland.
The letter stated, “The imposition of this legislation on Northern Ireland in its current form … would represent a massive democratic deficit.”
It adds that the bill “has the capacity to undermine the delicate political calibration between Northern Ireland and Westminster and to cause significant damage to attempts to restore the Northern Ireland Assembly.”
O’Loan and Eames called on the government to withdraw the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill.
Failing this, they called for an amendment they introduced which would require public consultation and the support of a majority of members of the Northern Ireland Assembly before any change in the region’s legislation.
Bills to legalize abortion in cases of fatal fetal abnormality, rape, or incest failed in the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2016.
Both amendments to the were introduced by Labour MPs.
Stella Creasy, who represents a London constituency and who introduced the abortion amendment, has said the Commons “spoke clearly to say we wouldn’t accept the rights of women in Northern Ireland being ignored any longer”.
Earlier this year Creasy intended to propose an amendment to a draft Domestic Abuse Bill that would give the British parliament jurisdiction over abortion laws throughout the United Kingdom. However, the bill’s scope was restricted to England and Wales by the Conservative government.
She also introduced an amendment to the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation and Exercise of Functions) Act 2018 to repeal Northern Irish law on abortion and gay marriage, which was defeated.
Ahead of last week’s vote in the Commons, Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh registered his deep concern that the bill would be hijacked “to remove existing legal protection for unborn babies and to ‘fast track’ the legalisation of abortion on demand in Northern Ireland. How tragic it is for humanity that some legislators would ‘fast track’ the ending of the lives of the most defenceless in our society.”
Abortion and same-sex marriage are both legal in both the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Elective abortion is legal in the rest of the United Kingdom up to 24 weeks, while currently it is legally permitted in Northern Ireland only if the mother’s life is at risk or if there is risk of permanent, serious damage to her mental or physical health.
Northern Irish women have been able to procure free National Health Service abortions in England, Scotland, and Wales since November 2017.
In June 2018, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission challenged the region’s abortion laws in the UK Supreme Court. While the Supreme Court concluded that Northern Ireland’s abortion laws violated human rights law by banning abortion in cases of fatal fetal abnormality, rape, and incest, it threw out the case saying it had not been brought forward by a person who had been wrongfully harmed by the law.
[…]
Thus wrote Mahatma Gandhi: “The human voice can never reach the distance that is covered by the still small voice of conscience”.
Conscience means to act with knowledge. Cardinal Marx addresses the tension between reason and doctrine favoring doctrine with exceptions such as homosexuality. If reason is the rule of truth then revealed truth is not. “What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe ‘because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived’” (CCC 156). Man has the inherent capacity to identify truth that is the basis for forming conscience and responsibility for his actions. That is why Aquinas acknowledged that reason is the measure of truth not the rule.
I have ALWAYS believed that people making rules and judgemments must be a participant in the society in which they govern. Cardinals and Bishops and priests when they are MARRIED seem to have a better understanding and ability to govern on this subject! It is ludicrous to allow this. Much like a married couple should explain Marriage to Teens not a priest. Gosh this is quite a step in the wrong direction!
I suppose in your vision of Church governance Jesus need not apply.
According to CNA German and the German language portal kath.net, what Cardinal Marx has said smacks more of situation ethics than what appears in this current article. Following kath.net (‘Conscience decision of homosexuals must be respected’) the Cardinal warned against ‘blind rigorism’ in sexual morals. ‘Of course there must be a responsibility with regard to the gospel and the teaching of the Church, but (finally) the conscience decision made in freedom must be respected.’ Depending on CNA German the Cardinal stated that ‘questions of sexual morals are decided by your personal – though formed by Christian principles – conscience.’ And again ‘there must be respect for one’s decision made in freedom.’ The Kardinals assertions go well together with the ‘Königsteiner Erklärung’ in which the German bishops after ‘Humanae vitae’ put the decision of the ‘personal conscience’ above the norm of the encyclical regarding contraception. One is reminded of the guidelines of the Maltese bishops on ‘Amoris laetitia’ saying that a divorced and remarried person should be admitted to Communion if, “with an informed and enlightened conscience”, they believe they are “at peace with God”. These guidelines were reportedly acknowledged with gratitude by Pope Francis (http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-francis-thanks-maltese-bishops-for-amoris-laetitia-guidelines).
The post pedophilia era, if there is a post, places the church in a somewhat deleterious fall out. Promises made by Pope Francis to “clean house” of criminal hierarchy began with a tribunal that was short lived. Compounding that false start was a rare display of acknowledgement to two Cardinals that were criminally responsible for moving criminal priests in Boston and Los Angeles. How does a faithful lay person remain so in light of these atrocities against innocent young people? Then we hear all about how our conscience should be involved in sexual matters from clergy who are supposedly a-sexual.
When it comes to restricting the ordination of women, we are living in a netherworld of old manmade tales. Women would make better, less complicated priests. The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.
One day as he was driven up Riverside Drive William Sloan Coffin was asked what he, a Protestant minister, though of the current Catholic Church? He quipped… “they are still trying to steer the car based on what they see in the rearview mirror”. That is a saying any Catholic should remember.
“The church may not have spent $1.5 billion to lawyers and the injured children in retribution had there been female clergy.” The recent (and ongoing) spate of stories about female teachers engaged in sexual relations with teenage boys would indicate otherwise. But perhaps I underestimate the moral propriety of the fairer sex.
You need to stop perpetuating the “pedophilia” myth. The overwhelming majority of abuse cases in the Church involved homosexual ephebophiles – aka chickenhawks; intrinsically disordered sexual deviants masquerading as Catholic Priests.
As for the proposal to ordain women is concerned, we’ve all seen what a disaster that has been for the Anglican denomination. You think you’ve got problems now just proceed on that tangent.
No, the solution is to enforce the longstanding ban on the ordination of homosexuals; reaffirmed in February of 1961 during the Pontificate of Pope St. John XXIII. Furthermore, rid the seminaries, Diaconate, Priesthood, Episcopacy, Curia, College of Cardinals and consecrated religious life of homosexuals and return to a culture where virtues of discipline, obedience, humility and chastity are no longer paid lip service. That is the solution.
Exactly right could not agree w you more. Perfectly said. And to this I would add…religious should wear thier religious clothing Priest and Nuns…
You need a mystical understanding of the Mystical Body of Christ in order to understand the male priesthood. The relationship between Christ and His Church is said to be spousal. Christ is the Bridegroom and the Church is His Bride. When a husband and a wife enter into the one flesh union it is the man who enters into the woman. Likewise, in conception it is the male sperm that swims up to and enters into the female egg. It seems clear that the act of entering within is a male act. The male is the doer of intimacy. The female is the one who receives this intimacy. This explains why Christ came as a male, and why male terms like Father and Son are used to describe God, and why the Church is called Holy Mother Church.
*
Because of the Hypostatic Union, Christ is One Person in two natures, divine and human. The priest acts In Persona Christi, in the person of Christ. In Holy Orders during the ordination the priest is configured to Christ in a very special way. As such, Holy Orders is in the image and likeness of the Hypostatic Union. The priest is the living icon of Christ. Consecrated women religious are considered to be brides of Christ.
*
The priest acts In Persona Christi during the Consecration. In the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist during the Consecration the Real Presence of Christ enters into and becomes one with the bread and the wine. Transubstantiation at its core is a male act. The Body and Blood in a similar fashion enter into the communicant. The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament that is permeated with Christ’s maleness, and gives us a foreshadowing of the final nuptial union that is described in Revelation.
*
Women don’t have to be priests to have an impact on the Church. We can begin with the Blessed Virgin Mary and the women disciples. There are many important women saints: St. Teresa of Avila, St. Catherine of Siena, St Thérèse of Lisieux, and St. Faustina for starters.
*
Any woman who thinks that she has a calling from the Holy Spirit needs to study the works of St. Teresa of Avila, who is a Doctor of the Church. She wrote extensively about prayer and mysticism. St. Teresa was also a reformer who sought to restore a spiritual focus to the Carmelite Order that had fallen into lax spiritual practices. St. John of the Cross joined her in this reform effort. They both met with considerable opposition to their reform efforts. St. John was taken prisoner, jailed, and flogged.
*
The arguments that are being made in an attempt to redefine the priesthood are very similar to the arguments being used in an attempt to redefine marriage.
“On the question of ordaining women to the priesthood, which the German interviewers also raised, the Cardinal gave a short, definitive answer: ‘That really is not for discussion. The pope has spoken decisively on the matter.'”…With all the talk we hear about the importance of dialogue and informed conscience, does it bother anyone else that this is the Cardinal’s quick response to a question burning on the minds of many Catholics, not at all aware or convinced this cannot be changed in the name of, “guidance of the Holy Spirit”? Does it reveal that he does not agree? Is he suggesting he yields in fidelity to the Church’s teaching? #JustAsking