London, England, Jan 10, 2020 / 02:23 pm (CNA).- Carla Lockhart, a Member of Parliament for a Northern Irish constituency, urged Wednesday that the British law dealing with abortion provision in the region be repealed so that the local government can legislate on the topic.
“I want today to make the point to this House, on behalf of the many thousands of people across Northern Ireland who take a pro-life stance, that we want to repeal section 9 with immediate effect and allow for the Northern Ireland Assembly to debate, discuss and evidence-gather on this emotive issue,” Lockhart said Jan. 8 during her maiden speech in the House of Commons in Westminster.
Lockhart, a member of the Democratic Unionist Party, was elected MP for Upper Bann in the 2019 UK general election on Dec. 12.
Section 9 of the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019 decriminalized abortion in Northern Ireland and placed a moratorium on abortion-related criminal prosecutions, and obliges the UK government to create legal access to abortion in the region by March 31.
The legislation took effect in part because the Northern Ireland Assembly, which has been suspended nearly three years due to a dispute between the two major governing parties, was not able to convene for business by Oct. 21, 2019.
The law has drawn some objections that it violates the letter or spirit of devolution agreements that grant the Northern Ireland Assembly power over important matters.
“It is imperative that I speak on this to attempt again to highlight the anger, disappointment and frustration concerning the change in abortion laws that have been foisted upon the people of Northern Ireland,” Lockhart stated. “These changes came in the most roughshod way, with complete contempt for the devolved Administration and the views of the people of Northern Ireland.”
She charged that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland “has not intervened to assist in our crumbling healthcare system, or to fairly reward our healthcare workers or to avert the mental health crisis we are facing. He hasn’t done that because, in his own words, he has said that these are ‘devolved issues’. Abortion was and should be a devolved matter, yet this House has imposed on Northern Ireland the most extreme measures of abortion anywhere across Europe.”
Some 9,000 Northern Irish healthcare workers are on strike over pay and staffing levels, according to the BBC.
Lockhart noted that Northern Ireland “has always supported life-affirming laws.” The region rejected the Abortion Act 1967 that legalized abortion in England, Wales, and Scotland, and bills to legalize abortion in cases of fatal fetal abnormality, rape, or incest failed in the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2016.
“The DUP are a pro-life party, but this actually crosses traditional boundaries and there is widespread cross-community support across Northern Ireland,” she maintained. “We have an evolving political landscape, and I say let the people of Northern Ireland have their say on this matter.”
Indeed, a draft deal to restore power-sharing at the Northern Ireland Assembly has been backed this week by both the DUP and Sinn Féin.
Lockhart stated: “I want a society in Northern Ireland that values life, and I want to see services that will help women choose life … help us create a culture of choosing life.” She asked for government provision of a perinatal palliative care center, a maternal mental health unit, and better childcare services.
Prior to the NI EF Act abortion was legally permitted in the region only if the mother’s life was at risk or if there was risk of long term or permanent, serious damage to her mental or physical health.
The British government held a public consultation on a proposed framework for the legal provision of abortion in Northern Ireland in November and December 2019. It proposed that elective abortions be available up to 12 or 14 weeks gestation.
It also proposed that “the gestational time limit in circumstances where the continuance of the pregnancy would cause risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or girl, or any existing children or her family, greater than the risk of terminating the pregnancy” be either 22 or 24 weeks. It notes that abortion under these circumstances is lawful in England and Wales up to 24 weeks, though “with advances in medicine and healthcare, it could be possible that a fetus having reached a gestation of 22 weeks (21 weeks + 6 days) is viable and thus capable of being born alive.”
In cases of fetal abnormality, the government proposed that abortion without time limit be available. It also proposed that abortion without time limit be allowed where there is risk to the life of the mother or it is necessary to provent grave permanent injury to her physical or mental health.
Lockhart responded to the proposed framework saying that “it is incomprehensible that the Government, knowing that abortion was a devolved matter, has published consultation proposals to introduce changes which go far beyond what has actually been required by Parliament.”
She charged that “in Northern Ireland, abortion on request for any reason will be legalised to the point at which a baby is ‘capable of being born alive’.
“It is my understanding that no consultation will take place on the legislative text of the regulations,” Lockhart said. “With regard to abortion, it is well known that the detail of the text is crucial.”
She asked that MPs, at least, be consulted before the specific text of the regulations is drafted.
“If the Government wants to maintain any commitment to devolution, I would implore them to rethink their coach-and-horses approach to a life-and-death piece of legislation,” Lockhart concluded.
Following the Upper Bann MP’s speech, Catherine Robinson, a Right To Life UK spokesperson, commented: “We share in Ms Lockhart’s disappointment and frustration concerning the imposition of extreme abortion laws in Northern Ireland by a Government who claims to support the devolution settlement.”
“We will support Carla and other MPs in their efforts to hold the Government to account on their words in regard to devolution, as doing so will help protect the lives of unborn babies in Northern Ireland,” Robinson added.
The amendment to the NI EF Act obliging the government to provide for legal abortion in Northern Ireland was introduced by Stella Creasy, a Labour MP who represents a London constituency.
In October 2019, the High Court in Belfast had ruled that the region’s ban on the abortion of unborn children with fatal abnormalities violated the UK’s human rights commitments.
Northern Irish women have been able to procure free National Health Service abortions in England, Scotland, and Wales since November 2017.
[…]
The Archbishop asked:
“How can we find the right attitude that does not force us to take one side to the detriment of the other? How can we keep the primary focus on the victims without forever rejecting the guilty?”
Allow me:
Remove Father Dominique Spina from the priesthood for raping a boy. Then Mr. Spina can do whatever. Problem solved.
Better still:
The Archbishop could remove himself from the episcopacy, thereby sparing himself the delicate task of rescuing a rapist.
Best of all:
Pope Leo removes Archbishop Guy from the episcopacy for gross negligence to act as a spiritual father. Perhaps the Pope can find a paper pushing job for him in the Secretary of State…
Yes, the Archbishop himself should be removed, but of course will not. It is horrible to see the Church hierarchy and many priests ignore and just dance around the straightforward commands of Scripture and great Christian thinkers like St. Augustine:
Romans 1:26-27
New International Version
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
New International Version
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
AND SAINT AUGUSTINE
“Those sins which are against nature, like those of the men of Sodom, are in all times and places to be detested and punished. Even if all nations committed such sins, they should all alike be held guilty by God’s law” (Confessions 3.8).
This is what normal thinking Catholic men say. But when they receive Holy Orders today, some seem to think it means pardoning evil AND PRETENDING LIKE IT NEVER HAPPENED. Until the Church gets real about expelling these men from the priesthood, NOTHING will be fixed. But I am beginning to think the bigger problem will be expelling these weak-minded men from the episcopate.
“Others in the end saw it as a sign of hope for abusers who had served their time and are experiencing the great trial of being totally shunned by society. For that I must ask forgiveness from the one I named and in whom I have confidence, for not having known how to find the right place to which he is entitled,” the archbishop further explained. 🤮
Speaking of “arousing suspicions,” bitter experience suggests that the Archbishop is not simply “weak-minded.” His simpering excuses are likely more than an act to survive. He chose to make a rapist his Chancellor. That’s audacious. Why? One reason would be blackmail. Another is that he and Fr. Spina are united, let’s say, at a minimum in their desire to normalize sex with children. 💋
It’s ecclesial idiocy that prompts me to make a move I’ve considered and studied
for the past few years: leaving the institutional Catholic Church and becoming
LCMS Lutheran.
How can a bishop be this incompetent and ignorant?
I think both the bishop and priest need to go.
It’s a disgrace.
In a healthy age of the Church, both would have been hung by outraged laymen.
“we have learned to look at these events first from the point of view of the people who were their victims and who suffer the consequences for the rest of their lives.”
Let us get this straight. So you contend that previously it was impossible to know that raping a child was an intrinsic evil? Or do you side with those “theologians” who say there are no intrinsic evils?
“Others in the end saw it as a sign of hope for abusers who had served their time and are experiencing the great trial of being totally shunned by society.”
Served their time?? How do criminal penalties absolve moral culpability and the need for repentance? And shunned by society? Anyone who embarrasses the Catholic Church has a great future in Hollywood.
“How can we find the right attitude that does not force us to take one side to the detriment of the other? How can we keep the primary focus on the victims without forever rejecting the guilty?”
I have an idea. Why not make an effort to discover the Catholic religion?
Too little, too late. Archbishop de Kirimel should fall on his sword and resign for even considering hiring a pedophile child rapist.
Let me get this straight. A priest who breaks the seal of Confession is automatically excommunicated, but a priest who rapes maintains his faculties and gets selected as chancellor for an archdiocese as “a sign of hope for abusers.” Maybe the latter should receive the same consequence as the former; maybe then the Faithful, to say nothing of the world at large, will believe that Church hierarchs actually care about the victims of abuse.
“For that I must ask forgiveness from the one I named and in whom I have confidence, for not having known how to find the right place to which he is entitled,” the archbishop further explained.”
What an interesting statement from the bishop. I wonder what might be the right place to which the rapist might be entitled.
This “apology” is effectively a way of saying, poor me; I made an innocent error by making an unpopular decision. But this priest is a fine man, made especially stellar as a symbol to all abusers. Yep, abusers everywhere will learn that they can become venerated if their abuse eventually becomes high profile.
We all complain about how the secular world hates the Church. But I nonetheless hope someday a prosecutor will arrest, try, and send to prison a bishop for aiding and abetting. What will it take to wake them up?
Up until quite recently in our state people who abused children that way were eligible for residency on death row.
I’m not a fan of capital punishment but it demonstrates how seriously a society takes crimes committed against minors. That seriousness seems to be lacking in this particular French archdiocese.
As with so many bishops who tolerated abuse, even in the U.S., this is not a question of
forgiveness. It is a question of competence and fitness for office.
These high clergy always hang on to office, never having the integrity
or the decency to resign.
The gospel of Jesus Christ is built upon the firm foundation of divine forgiveness. While it is a foundational truth of our faith that God’s mercy is sufficient for the atonement of all our sins, this divine prerogative does not fall within the purview of human authority. This distinction is critical when confronting grave offenses, particularly the egregious violation of a young boy by one entrusted with the sacred office of the priesthood.
Such an act is a profound betrayal of the pastoral covenant and a spiritual violence that renders a priest unfit to serve in any pastoral capacity. The dignity of the sacred office demands that such a person be removed completely from it, either to a life of perpetual penance in a monastery or through definitive removal from the priesthood. This is not a matter of human judgment superseding God’s mercy, but rather of upholding the integrity of the priesthood and ensuring the safety of the flock.
The actions of Archbishop Kirimel represent a grievous failure of pastoral duty. By choosing to overlook the deep spiritual and emotional harm inflicted upon the victim(s) and the wider community who bore witness to this sin, he has wounded the Church’s witness and fractured the trust of the faithful. Such a dereliction of office undermines confidence in the Church’s pastoral care, which is intended to be a source of healing and not further injury.
Generally, aside from lack of conviction, there seems an underlying affinity with the abuser cleric. We’ve developed into an institution in which effeminacy and same sex attraction is a commonly accepted behavior trait. Not until that’s effectively addressed does it appear it will end. How to address it in our already effeminized culture is the difficulty. Perhaps another St Peter Damian elevated to supreme pontiff.
Agree wholeheartedly, Father Morello. The cancer within the Church must be excised. We all know what that cancer is; only some have the conviction of faith to say it aloud – homosexuality.
I did not want to comment that article because what to comment? Isn’t it all clear? One does not need to be a Catholic to know how to deal with this situation. And it is so shocking to see that a Catholic (archbishop) does not know that. This is a dead end.
But I will say this: you are right, a normal man (no matter of what faith or without a faith), when he deals with such a situation, intuitively knows that he must protect the weak and abused. He even does not know that, it is an instinct which makes a man a man. All those crimes are done by men who have no true maleness. They are pathetic. It is a very small comfort for victims to know that but nevertheless it may help some: those men are pathetic weaklings.
How much longer do the laity have to suffer the abuse by priests and bishops before the laity rises up and takes each offender out into the public square and tars and feathers them? How much longer? I know that I, for one, have reached my threshold of tolerance.
Bishops who are morally corrupt cannot even understand the optics of absolute corruption. This clown should be removed from the episcopacy and forced into penance and silence.
One of the previous letter writers said homosexuality is the problem. No, homosexual acts are the problem. Homosexuality is a cross for the bearer, and if embraced as a cross can lead to sainthood. This doesn’t, however, imply that homosexuals can or should be priests. Homosexuals should not be ordained.
Thomas Heenan: Agreed. When I say that homosexuality is the problem I mean acts that are homosexual in nature and/or a disposition to make homosexuality a normative variant of sexuality which it is not. Those who do carry this burden and for whom it might be the source of grace in the struggle against homosexual acts, I would say are “same sex attracted.”