Boston, Mass., Sep 11, 2018 / 04:00 pm (CNA).- The Archdiocese of Boston has announced changes to the way it will process and respond to letters addressed to Cardinal Séan O’Malley on matters related to sexual abuse.
A statement dated Sep… […]
Jefferson City, Mo., Sep 11, 2018 / 01:09 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Missouri’s health department announced Monday that it will immediately being enforcing state laws regulating abortion clinics and doctors, after a US appeals court ruled that the state may do so.
The 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 10 in Comprehensive Health v. Hawley to overturn a 2017 decision which blocked enforcement of state laws that required abortion clinics to have the same standards as similar outpatient surgical centers, and mandated that doctors who perform abortions have hospital privileges.
“In its opinion, the court noted that the good faith of state officers and the validity of their actions are presumed,” Randal Williams, director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, stated.
“As the Director of DHSS, a board-certified obstetrician/gynecologist for thirty years, and a defendant in the case, my commitment and that of the department is to act in good faith to follow the law and protect the health and safety of all women in Missouri, including those seeking abortions.”
The health department stated: “now that the injunction has been vacated, DHSS will immediately begin enforcing the hospital privileges and physical plant requirements for abortion facilities.”
The appellate court ruling comes in a case filed by Planned Parenthood affiliates in 2016 after the US Supreme Court struck down similar abortion restrictions in Texas.
In April 2017 a federal judge issued an injunction against the Missouri law, citing the Supreme Court’s Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt decision.
The appeals court vacated that preliminary injunction, saying that Hellerstedt “did not find, as a matter of law, that abortion was inherently safe or that provisions similar to the laws it considered would never be constitutional,” and that the undue burden standard requires a weighing of regulations’ benefits and burdens.
In its 2017 decision the district court “explicity refused to ‘weigh [] the asserted benefits’”, Judge Bobby Shepherd wrote for the appellate court, and thus “in light of Hellerstedt the district court erred in so ruling.”
The appeals court judges remanded the case to the district court, saying it “should, at the very least, weigh the state’s ‘asserted benefits.’”
It added that the Hellerstedt decision did not find that provisions similar to those in Texas would never be constitutional, precisely because its analysis of the purported benefits of the law at issue related to abortion in Texas, and that “no such determination about abortion in Missouri was made.”
“Perhaps there was a unique problem Missouri was responding to,” the appeals court wrote. “Such a problem may required a different response than what was needed in Texas, and the Hospital Relationship Requirement may be appropriate given ‘[Missouri’s] legitimate interest in seeing to it that abortion, like any other medical procedure, is performed under circumstances that insure maximum safety for the patient,’” quoting Hellerstedt, which was in turn quoting Roe v. Wade.
“Invoking the Constitution to enjoin the laws of a state requires more than ‘slight implication and vague conjecture,’” the appeals court wrote. “At a minimum, it requires adequate information and correct application of the relevant standard. Because we conclude that the preliminary injuction in this case was entered based on less than adequate information and an insufficient regard for the relevant standard, we vacate the preliminary injunction and remand.”
Planned Parenthood currently provided abortion services at only two locations in Missouri, in St. Louis and Columbia.
In 2017, Missouri passed further regulations which granted the attorney general more power to prosecute violations, and required stricter health codes and proper fetal tissue disposal.
Washington D.C., Sep 10, 2018 / 05:00 pm (CNA).- Opponents of Judge Brett Kavanaugh have suggested that a reference to birth control pills as “abortion-inducing drugs” during Senate confirmation hearings last week represented the judge’s own view on contraceptives.
During last week’s hearings, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) asked Kavanaugh about a 2012 lawsuit filed by the pro-life organization Priests for Life against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) over the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate. Kavanaugh wrote a dissenting opinion in response to a lower court’s refusal to re-hear the case.
The mandate obliged insurers to include chemical contraception in a list of medications that would be covered without a copay. Cruz asked Kavanaugh to explain the case, and his opinion on the matter.
“Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the question was, first, was this a substantial burden on the religious exercise? It seemed, to me, quite clearly, it was,” said Kavanaugh.
“It was a technical matter of filling out a form, in that case. But they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to.”
In 2015, the Supreme Court agreed to review the Priests for Life suit along with six others, in the consolidated case Zubik v. Burwell, eventually remanding the individual cases back to the lower courts. In 2016 the government settled with Priests for Life, agreeing not to enforce the mandate and its associated fines, and to pay Priests for Life’s legal fees.
Kavanaugh’s remarks referred to the organization’s description of the contraceptives; he did not characterize them as his own views. However, many opposed to Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court have said the exchange illustrates pro-life bias by the nominee.
The Women’s March called the statement an “emergency, all-hands-on-deck moment for women” and said that “now we know he thinks birth control is abortion.” A statement issued via email did not clarify that Kavanaugh had been offering a summary of the case, not a personal view.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), who is considered to be a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2020, said via Twitter that while Kavanaugh “chooses his words very carefully,” his response to Cruz was a “dog whistle for going after birth control.”
Harris also said that Kavanaugh “was nominated for the purpose of taking away a woman’s constitutionally protected right to make her own health care decisions,” and that his nomination was “about punishing women.”
The tweet included a video of Kavanaugh saying: “Filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objected to.” The video left out the part of the exchange where the judge clarified that it was the group that believed this, not himself. The fact-checking website PolitiFact rated Harris’ characterization as “false.”
Kavanaugh, a practicing Catholic, has not publicly stated his thoughts about birth control or the Church’s teaching on the topic. He has rather affirmed his commitment to judicial precedent and the need for judges to apply the law to each case with dispassion.
Washington D.C., Sep 10, 2018 / 04:38 pm (ACI Prensa).- The U.S. State Department announced Monday it will close the Palestinian Liberation Organization office in Washington because it says Palestine has failed to take “steps to advance the start… […]
Harrisburg, Pa., Sep 10, 2018 / 04:28 pm (CNA).- An allegation of misconduct has been filed against Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend and is being investigated by the district attorney’s office. The nature of the alleged misconduct is not clear.
“Bishop Rhoades adamantly denies any validity to this accusation and the insinuation of inappropriate behavior. He did nothing wrong, and is confident any investigation will bear this out,” the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend said.
According to PennLive, the Harrisburg diocese – where Rhoades served as bishop from 2004-2009 – reported the allegation to the office of District Attorney Fran Chardo and to the child protective services program, PA ChildLine.
The district attorney said the accuser, who died in 1996, was a male and about 18 years old when the alleged incident occurred. He said there is no first-hand account of the incident, but that the report received by his office “alleged that they perceived the relationship as odd” but “did not witness any inappropriate conduct.”
According to PennLive, the district attorney’s office is investigating the allegation against Rhoades, who has not been charged.
“We would stress that this is an allegation,” Mike Barley, a Harrisburg diocesan spokesman, told PennLive. “We will have no further comment until the investigation of the Office of the District Attorney is concluded.”
The alleged incident involving Rhoades took place before he became a bishop. His previous work in Harrisburg included serving as assistant chancellor, pastor of Saint Francis of Assisi Parish, and a faculty member and later rector at Mount Saint Mary’s Seminary.
The diocese of Harrisburg was one of the six dioceses covered in the Pennsylvania Grand Jury Report that was released last month. The report found more than 1,000 allegations of abuse at the hands of some 300 clergy members in six dioceses in the state. It also found a pattern of cover up by senior Church officials.
Bishop Rhoades said last month that he would release the names of priests in his Ft. Wayne-South Bend diocese who have been accused of child sexual abuse.
“As leaders, we have an obligation to protect the vulnerable who cannot protect themselves. As a bishop, I have worked to expose and punish those responsible for abuse,” Rhoades said.
“If the Pennsylvania grand jury report taught us anything, it’s that victims deserve to see the names of their abusers made public for all to see. For everyone to know the pain caused by these priests.”
Baltimore, Md., Sep 10, 2018 / 02:28 pm (CNA).- The Baltimore Orioles teamed up with Catholic Relief Services last weekend to help feed the hungry in Burkina Faso.
Members of the Baltimore baseball team were among hundreds of volunteers at Catholic Re… […]
Washington D.C., Sep 9, 2018 / 01:00 pm (CNA).- When speaking to their children about sexual abuse scandals in the Church, parents should listen to their children’s concerns and be careful to not to make assumptions, experts told CNA.
When discussing the issue of abuse, “the first step is to be sensitive [to] the age and stage the child’s in,” Dr. Gregory Popcak, founder and executive director of the Pastoral Solutions Institute, told CNA.
“Certainly, a kindergarten age child would not need to know as much as an adolescent would, or even a middle schooler.”
When broaching the issue, Popcak said that parents should ask their children about what they understood about what they had heard, or what they think had happened.
Parents should determine what their children actually know before they ask them what they think about the situation, explained Popcak. He suggested parents ask questions to help frame the discussion, giving examples like “When you heard that, what does that mean to you?” and “What did you make of that?” to try to discern where to begin discussing sexual abuse.
Younger children especially may not know how to put their feelings into words. Popcak suggested that parents should provide multiple choices of answers, such as “scared,” “sad,” or “confused.” It is paramount in this type of conversation to identify a child’s knowledge, understanding, and reaction to a situation, he said, so a parent can address the child’s main concern.
Parents, he explained, tend to “get really anxious and sometimes try to over-solve for the child,” and that this is why it is important to determine what exactly a child needs from his or her parents.
Instead of attempting to over-explain or resolve a problem, Popcak said the most important thing a parent could do is to reassure their child that while they may be afraid or confused, their parents will be there to look out for them and to protect them. Small children should also be reminded that they can and should go to their parents to talk about things that upset them or make them uncomfortable.
Roy Petitfils, a licensed professional counselor who has worked with teenagers for the past 25 years, agreed with many of Popcak’s points. He told CNA that he would advise parents to carefully consider their children’s age before beginning to discuss the abuse crisis, saying that younger children simply don’t need or want to know more than is necessary, or they may be oblivious to everything.
“Not everything that can be said should be said. Just because it’s happened or is happening doesn’t mean they need to know all about it,” Petitfils said to CNA.
“As parents our role is to allow our kids access to age-appropriate information.”
Petitfils also said that parents should not attend therapy sessions with their children, as adults handle feelings and emotions differently than children. Adults “should not process [their] feelings with young people, because it will only add to their anxiety and confusion,” he explained.
Parents should instead strive to validate the thoughts and feelings of their children, Petitfils said. They could say things like, “It makes perfect sense to me that you’re angry, scared and confused about all of this,” and explain that these feelings are normal.
Coming to terms with the trauma of sexual abuse in the Church affects Catholics of all ages. But while parents may themselves be upset by reading graphic accounts of some cases, it is very important that they keep their emotions in check when talking about it with their children, Petitfils said. Otherwise, this may make the situation worse.
“Telling your child you’re angry in a calm, but serious tone is helpful. Screaming, stomping and slamming things while you’re angry will only frighten and confuse your child even more.”
Portland, Ore., Sep 8, 2018 / 04:20 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- For some 70 years, Catholic Charities in Oregon has helped refugees settle into their new life – assisting with everything from housing to English classes.
But with recent changes to vetti… […]
St. Petersburg, Fla., Sep 8, 2018 / 04:15 am (CNA/EWTN News).- A recent event in a Florida diocese is seeking to help Catholics overcome a lack of awareness about the ongoing problem of racism in America today, said organizers of the initiative.
“We who do not experience racism are often blind to it and want to deny that it exists,” said Sabrina Burton Schultz, the Diocese of St. Petersburg’s director of Life, Justice and Advocacy Ministry.
“Changing hearts and minds is really more of a marathon than a sprint, and we are excited to continue to look at new ways to help people apply their experiences, their faith and the teachings of the Church to this very challenging issue,” she told CNA.
Close to 200 people attended the Diocese of St. Petersburg’s first listening session, held Sept. 5 at St. Lawrence Parish in Tampa.
Schultz said the session aimed to bring together a diverse group of Catholics and “start by listening to people’s experience of racism, in our pews and beyond, to make everyone aware that racism does still exist in our communities and in our Church.”
“We were greatly encouraged by the diversity of our audience and the candid responses that were shared,” she said.
The session moderators were Dale Brown, director of the diocesan Lay Pastoral Ministry Institute and liaison for its Black Catholic Ministry; and James Cavendish, a sociology professor at the University of South Florida.
Cavendish said that the U.S. bishops have “called on the church to confront instances of racism within its own walls.”
Bishop Gregory Parkes of St. Petersburg was present, as was Bishop Shelton Fabre, chair of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee Against Racism. The special committee was launched by the bishops to focus on how to address racism and come together as a society after a major rally of white supremacist, neo-Confederate and neo-Nazi activists turned lethal in Charlottesville, Virginia last year.
Schultz said discussions about how to increase dialogue and education regarding racism have been underway in the St. Petersburg diocese for some time, but the bishops’ national move strengthened local resolve. The diocese’s Racial Justice Committee first met in January 2018.
Gerri Drummond, a member of the racial justice committee and the diocese’s Life, Justice and Advocacy Committee, was born in Jamaica. She said she had never experienced racism before she moved to the U.S.
Those who are suffering racism are “asking for their brothers and sisters in the majority to embrace and heal them,” she told CNA.
Attendees called for “a clergy that truly understands the plight of racism, how it affects the person of color, and how silence from clerics is felt as a lack of care.”
“There was a great desire to see our priests, pastors and bishops preach more forcefully against the sin of racism, Drummond reported. “In addition, there were calls for a more diverse clergy and leadership at the diocesan and parish level.”
Ahead of the event, moderator Dale Brown told the Tampa Bay Times said she and other black Catholics have discussed their feelings about whether they are treated differently at Mass. If a parishioner does not drink after them from the chalice of the Precious Blood at Mass, they wonder what the reason is.
“I have the experience of people not sharing the (sign of) peace with me, but sharing with others who are white,” she said.
Brown said she hopes the event will help people examine their biases and “begin to broaden their understanding of the difficulties and experiences of those that have felt not only discriminated against, but left feeling like second-class citizens in the Church and society.”
Both Drummond and Brown are parishioners at St. Peter Claver, a historically African-American parish in Tampa.
The Sept. 5 listening session took inspiration from a similar event in the Austin diocese, but there have been similar events in the Diocese of Brooklyn and the Archdiocese of St. Louis.
According to Schultz, the event aimed to help clarify “that racism did not die in the 1960s. It exists today.” She reported that a special matter of concern for some locals is the law enforcement response to a recent racially charged shooting.
“There is a great deal of discussion currently about Florida’s use and application of the Stand Your Ground law due to the shooting of Markeis McGlockton in Clearwater, Florida in July,” Schultz told CNA.
Surveillance video showed Michael Drejka, 47, confronting McGlockton’s girlfriend for parking in a handicapped space outside a convenience store, CBS News reports. McGlockton, whose three young children were also present, then shoved Drejka to the ground and backed away. Drejka, a white man, pulled out a gun and fatally shot the African-American man.
Drejka was initially not charged due to a Florida law that protects the use of lethal force in self-defense. He claimed he feared for his life. He was later charged with manslaughter.
Court documents show authorities citing other motorists’ reports that he had previously brandished a weapon, with one saying Drejka had previously confronted him over parking in the same handicapped parking space.
Drummond stressed the need to “keep the conversation going… as long as black people are being unjustly victimized, as long as black families are having to have challenging conversation with their children regarding why persons of color are treated differently, as long as white supremacists are holding rallies, as long as our nation’s leaders use derogatory terms to describe persons of color and specific countries.”
Vivi Iglesias, an Argentina-born relationship manager with the southeast regional office of Catholic Relief Services, said all Catholics must continue these discussions in “open forums that foster civil dialogues.” She noted the importance of the ability to reach across cultures in a way that fosters understanding and acceptance of others.
Catholics must learn about and accept the diversity in the Church, Iglesias said. For instance, vocations teams should be culturally diverse, she said, and there must be “opportunities for gatherings to help us know one another, serve together, and learn from each other.”
The St. Petersburg diocese’s Racial Justice Committee is planning a broader initiative with several more events. A workshop on healing racial division in the Church and Society is set for Sept. 15, while a series of civil dialogues is also under development.
Washington D.C., Sep 7, 2018 / 05:01 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- After four days of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh has progressed closer towards eventual confirmation to the Supreme Court. The hearings, which began Sept. 4, included several disruptions by protestors, seemingly political lines of questioning by senators, and even a cameo appearance by the youth basketball team he coaches.
As was widely expected, the issue of abortion loomed large during parts of the questioning, despite Kavanaugh’s relative lack of a judicial track record, or even public statements, on the issue. The only recent case in which Kavanaugh ruled on abortion came last year, when he argued that an undocumented minor teenager in federal custody should not be permitted to have an abortion immediately.
Kavanaugh was questioned by both Republican and Democratic members of the Senate about his thoughts on the issue, and he offered no indication that he thought the landmark case of Roe v. Wade, which affirmed the legal existence of abortion rights, should be overturned,.
Kavanaugh was questioned about a 15-year-old email, in which he questioned the statement that abortion was “settled law.” The judge explained that he was actually questioning the claim that legal scholars generally agreed that abortion was “settled law.”
“I’m always concerned with accuracy,” he said, “I thought that was not quite an accurate description of all legal scholars because it referred to ‘all.’”
The judge then stated that he believed that Roe is “important precedent” which has repeatedly been reaffirmed by the Supreme Court.
This statement, however, did not do much to reassure those in favor of abortion rights, as activists continually, and loudly, protested Kavanaugh’s nomination throughout the four days of hearings.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) questioned Kavanaugh Sept. 6 “is there anything in the Constitution about a right to abortion? Is anything written in the document?”
Kavanaugh replied: “Senator, the Supreme Court has recognized the right to abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, has reaffirmed it many times.”
Graham pressed the issue, and Kavanaugh responded that the Supreme Court applied the liberty clause in its decisions regarding abortion: “The Supreme Court has found it under the liberty clause but you’re right.”
“The liberty clause talks about liberty,” Kavanaugh stated.
“Last time I checked, liberty didn’t equate to abortion,” Graham said. “The Supreme Court said it did, but here’s the point. What are the limits on this concept? You had five, six, seven, eight or nine judges. What are the limits on the ability of the court to find a penumbra of rights that apply to a particular situation? What are the checks and balances on people in your business, if you can find five people who agree with you to confer a right whether the public likes it or not, based on this concept of a penumbra of rights. What are the outer limits to this?”
Kavanaugh responded: “The test the Supreme Court uses to find unenumerated rights under the liberty clause of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, and that refers to rights rooted in the history and tradition of the country.”
The first day of the hearings saw several of women outside the hearing room protest his nomination by dressing in costumes from the book The Handmaid’s Tale, while several more individuals were removed from the hearing room after attempting to disrupt proceedings.
These interventions continued throughout the week, with the Women’s March even creating a “funeral procession” of women in funeral attire who marched towards the hearing.
Kavanaugh also came under fire for his comments regarding birth control.
In a summary of the argument presented by the pro-life Catholic group Priests for Life in the case Priests for Life v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services which was brought over the HHS contraception mandate, Kavanaugh stated that the priests “said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objecting to.”
While Kavanaugh did not say that he himself thought this about birth control, those opposed to his nomination sent out mass emails decrying Kavanaugh’s presence potential confirmation to the court as “dangerous” for women. The Women’s March went as far as to say that his nomination constituted “an emergency, all-hands-on-deck moment for women across America.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on a recommendation to confirm Kavanaugh in the near future. Assuming his nomination clears this hurdle, it would then be put to a vote before the entire Senate.
© Catholic World Report