Washington D.C., Dec 10, 2019 / 07:00 pm (CNA).- A Uighur-American whose mother has been held captive in a Chinese detention camp was one of several witnesses to testify on Tuesday before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on the unfolding human ri… […]
Washington D.C., Dec 10, 2019 / 04:55 pm (CNA).- A violent attack at “Mary’s Shrine” in Washington D.C. on Tuesday shook the community and prompted prayer and solidarity among staff and regular attendees.
“It was evil, it was t… […]
Steubenville, Ohio, Dec 10, 2019 / 03:05 pm (CNA).- A Catholic university in the U.S. has partnered with an Iraqi Catholic college to promote opportunities for scholarship, collaboration, and understanding between the two countries.
Franciscan Univers… […]
Peoria, Ill., Dec 10, 2019 / 02:38 pm (CNA).- Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria is inviting the faithful to pray a novena beginning Dec. 12 to "petition God unceasingly" that Archbishop Fulton Sheen’s sainthood cause may move forward.
Shee… […]
Raleigh, N.C., Dec 10, 2019 / 01:43 pm (CNA).- A pregnancy resource center in Raleigh, North Carolina will be allowed to move into a house next door to an abortion clinic following a settlement in a federal lawsuit, three years after the city council d… […]
Washington D.C., Dec 10, 2019 / 09:35 am (CNA).- Police have ended a standoff with a suspect after an attack at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception left two people injured.
Two security guards at the shrine are r… […]
Sacramento, Calif., Dec 10, 2019 / 03:31 am (CNA).- A small case study on the safety of the abortion pill reversal procedure that was cut short due to safety concerns does not accurately represent the safety and efficacy of the procedure to the public, a pro-life group has said.
“Pro-abortion researchers would rather continue to mislead women about the real risks of the abortion pill regimen Mifeprex than protect them from the risks of this dangerous drug,” Dr. Tara Sander Lee, senior fellow and director of life sciences for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, said in a statement.
Earlier this year, a group of researchers from the University of California at Davis attempted to study whether administering high doses of the hormone progesterone can successfully override the effects of the progesterone-blocking drug, mifepristone, the first of two pills taken in a medically induced abortion. The second drug, misoprostol, is taken up to two days later and induces labor.
This abortion pill reversal procedure is administered to women who have taken the first pill, mifepristone, but have changed their minds and do not want to continue with the abortion. Creators of the protocol say it has saved hundreds of babies whose mothers changed their minds about aborting.
According to an NPR report, while the researchers at UC Davis were hoping that 40 women would enroll in the study, only 12 did. Of those 12, three women were transported to the hospital for serious vaginal bleeding – one of those women had been given progesterone, the others had received a placebo.
Of the remaining participants, six of the women had a fetal heartbeat detectable on their subsequent ultrasounds, evidence of a continued pregnancy – four of them in the progesterone group, and two in the placebo group. Two women left the study and had surgical abortions.
The researchers stopped the study in July due to the lack of participants and safety concerns.
“Encouraging women to not complete the regimen should be considered experimental,” Dr. Mitchell Creinin, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at UC Davis and the lead researcher on the study, told NPR. “We have some evidence that it could cause very significant bleeding.”
“It’s not that medical abortion is dangerous,” he added. “It’s not completing the regimen, and encouraging women, leading them to believe that not finishing the regimen is safe. That’s really dangerous.”
Creinin, who has a long history of performing abortions, also told NPR that because the study was smaller than expected and cut short, it cannot answer the question it was intended to answer.
“Does progesterone work? We don’t know,” he said. “We have no evidence that it works.”
Lee, however, said in her statement that the UC Davis study does not prove the dangers of the progesterone protocol, but rather the dangers of mifepristone, as two of the three women who experienced bleeding had not even been given progesterone.
“Long before this study was published, it was a known fact that Mifeprex (brand name of mifepristone) can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections, excessive bleeding, and incomplete termination requiring follow-up surgery. This study does nothing but further prove these serious, life-threatening risks when taking the abortion pill,” Lee said.
“The study was ended early because of severe hemorrhage in 25% (3 out of 12) of women, requiring emergency ambulatory care, because they took the abortion pill. Even the authors highlight that this is a rate much higher (42% higher) than previously reported. In fact, the bleeding was so bad for one woman, described as ‘significant brisk bleeding,’ that she needed a blood transfusion. She also developed hypotension and tachycardia.”
The progesterone protocol for an abortion pill reversal is available at several pro-life clinics throughout the United States. While the procedure has not been approved by the FDA, many pro-life medical professionals consider it safe, as progesterone is a hormone that naturally occurs in and helps sustain pregnancy, and is used to treat some pregnancies at high risk of miscarriage.
Teresa Kenney, a women’s health nurse practitioner with the Sancta Familia (Holy Family) Medical Apostolate in Omaha, Nebraska, previously told CNA that because progesterone is safe for pregnant women and their unborn babies, and the benefit of reversing a medical abortion is so great, the procedure “makes complete sense” from a scientific standpoint.
“If I give a medicine that decreases or blocks progesterone to stop a pregnancy, then it makes perfect logical medical sense to give progesterone to help reverse that,” Kenney told CNA in September.
She added that the benefits are “overwhelmingly positive,” as the procedure in a sense saves two lives – that of the unborn child, and that of the mother who regretted her decision to have an abortion.
“Just because there hasn’t been a randomized controlled double-blind study on abortion pill reversal doesn’t mean that it doesn’t make sense to implement it in medicine, because there is already scientific support for progesterone in early pregnancy in the prevention and miscarriage,” she said.
“Do we need more research? Absolutely. But to withhold treatment when, again, we know that it does no harm…we know that it medically makes sense, it scientifically makes sense, and the benefits are overwhelmingly positive, why wouldn’t we do it?”
Dede Chism, a nurse practitioner and co-founder and executive director of Bella Natural Women’s Care in Englewood, Colorado, told CNA in 2018 that a recent case study had shown that the progesterone protocol was significantly more effective in helping women keep their pregnancies after taking mifepristone than if nothing was done.
That study, published in Issues in Law and Medicine, a peer-reviewed medical journal, examined 261 successful abortion pill reversals, and showed that the reversal success rates were 68% with a high-dose oral progesterone protocol and 64% with an injected progesterone protocol.
Both procedures significantly improved the 25% fetal survival rate if no treatment is offered and a woman simply declines the second pill of a medical abortion. The case study also showed that progesterone treatments caused no increased risk of birth defects or preterm births.
That study was authored by Dr. Mary Davenport and Dr. George Delgado, who have been studying the abortion pill reversal procedures since 2009. Delgado also sits on the board of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Medical abortions make up a significant portion – roughly 30-40% – of total abortions in the United States. At least seven states, including Nebraska, Utah, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Arizona, Idaho and South Dakota, have laws mandating that women undergoing medical abortions or who are questioning their decision in the process be informed in some way of the option for a medical abortion reversal.
A North Dakota judge in September granted a temporary injunction against a proposed law in the state that would have required doctors to tell their patients that a medically-induced abortion could be reversed if the patient acted quickly.
Buffalo, N.Y., Dec 9, 2019 / 08:19 pm (CNA).- Efforts to recover from clergy sex abuse scandals in Buffalo require listing to victims and others affected by the diocese’s handling of abuse, the apostolic administrator of the Buffalo diocese Bishop Edward Scharfenberger has said.
“I know there’s a lot of pain. I know that pain sometimes presents itself first as anger,” Bishop Scharfenberger said in opening remarks at a Dec. 7 symposium at Canisius College in Buffalo.
“We can’t deny the fact that there is a lot of anger and frustration. Maybe in our personal lives but also in those who expect much of us as leaders to be able to help them find a way out of the darkness that they have experienced,” he continued.
“The darkness of fear is absolutely chilling,” he said. “Remember, Jesus tells us that fear is useless. It’s faith that counts. The more we trust in him, that he’s with us…. He accompanies us wherever we go.”
“We can do this together,” he said, adding that Jesus Christ is the “ultimate healer.”
“People are not giving up,” he said. “And there are reasons for hope too, because God is with us, and we’re going to get through this.
Scharfenberger became apostolic administrator of the diocese December 4, following Pope Francis’ acceptance of the early resignation of 73-year-old Bishop Richard J. Malone of Buffalo, who has faced a year of controversy over his handling of sexual abuse by clergy.
In November 2018, a former Buffalo chancery employee leaked confidential diocesan documents related to the handling of claims of clerical sexual abuse. The documents were widely reported to suggest Malone had covered-up some claims of sexual abuse, an allegation the bishop denied.
Six months later, in April 2019, Malone apologized for his handling of some cases in the diocese, and said he would work to restore trust. The bishop particularly apologized for his 2015 support of Fr. Art Smith, a priest who had faced repeated allegations of abuse and misconduct with minors.
That was the background for the Dec. 7 symposium, held by the Movement to Restore Trust. The group’s organizing committee is comprised mostly of business and non-profit Catholic leaders.
“The biggest thing that we need is that trust,” Michael Whalen, a survivor of clergy sex abuse who advocates on behalf of victims, said at the symposium, the NBC affiliate WGRZ reports.
Whalen made suggestions for the bishop administering the diocese.
“How do we go about getting that trust back? I think by him making big changes in the diocese, getting rid of the old garb, people who’ve been there decades, who knew about the abuse, and didn’t do anything about it,” he said.
The bishop praised Whalen’s comments, Scharfenberger said to reporters, according to audio published by the Buffalo AM radio station WBEN.
“His heart is so full of a desire to help, and to help us heal,” Scharfenberger said. “I thanked him, because I believe that our victim-survivors are an essential part of our mission. They’re our family. Their experience and the experience of every one of us is very, very valuable.”
“We have to be able to feel that we have a safe space, that we can come together and talk about that and learn from one another, and hear our stories and share our pain, and our vision,” said the bishop.
For Scharfenberger, who will serve as both Bishop of Albany and apostolic administrator pending further decisions by the Vatican, the restoration of trust is ultimately a matter of proving oneself trustworthy and hoping that this is recognized. Though he thought the good faith displayed at the symposium was “heartwarming,” he compared it to a honeymoon period. Upcoming decisions might not be popular.
“I just want everybody to know that whatever I do, I will do with a spirit of justice and charity and openness and listening,” he said. “I don’t want to make any decision that does not take into account and does not show respect for all of those that these decisions affect.”
Whalen, the survivor of sexual abuse, has advocated for the release of the diocese’s confidential files.
The bishop pledged transparency but also said clarity was needed in the release of records which might not give the full context or accurate knowledge.
“I want to be transparent. I want everybody to know what they have a right to know but I want to do it in a way that is clearly understood,” he said.
The possible financial bankruptcy of the diocese was a topic at the symposium. University at Buffalo Law School Vice Dean Todd Brown said if the diocese filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy it would not liquidate, but rather reorganize.
The Movement to Restore Trust’s organizing committee members include John Hurley, the lay president of Canisius College, a Jesuit school in Buffalo.
Hurley said bankruptcy would represent “the fairest option” because court cases would be done all together. He said “everyone will be treated equitably and all at the same time, and it won’t be who has the better lawyer, or who can get the first trial.”
In comments to reporters, Scharfenberger said there are many different sides to the arguments for and against bankruptcy. He stressed the need to make the right decision and the need to help people to know why he made that decision.
“It has to be done with deliberation,” he said.
“Ultimately this is a spiritual crisis… People did unholy bad things, evil things, and the only way to eradicate evil is by returning to holiness and to return to God, and to live according to the way our faith teaches us to live,” the bishop continued.
“It’s in God’s time when that happens. God has been trying to restore trust with the human race since the Fall of Adam and Eve,” he said. “We keep turning away. And God keeps coming back.”
Washington D.C., Dec 9, 2019 / 04:20 pm (CNA).- Catholics who say they accept all Church teachings are more likely than other Americans to say they are planning to vote for Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, according to a new nationwide poll.
In addition to asking about political viewpoints and priorities, researchers asked respondents about their faith tradition. The poll asked self-identified Catholics whether their faith plays a role in their life, and if they accept all, most, or some of Church teaching.
While it is easy to segregate the responses of self-identified Catholics from other voters, it is more difficult to determine which Catholics might be described as “faithful,” “observant,” or “orthodox.”
Almost 4 in 10 Catholics said they attend Mass at least once a week, and a similar number attend Mass a few times a year. About one-quarter of Catholics attend Mass once a year or less. Seventeen percent of Catholics said they accept all the Church’s teachings, but only 64% of those Catholics said they attend Mass at least weekly. At the same time, many Catholics who said they attend Mass weekly also said they do not accept all doctrinal teachings of the Church.
To understand one segment of the “Catholic vote,” CNA took a close look at answers from Catholics who told researchers they accept the teachings of the Church and try to live their lives according to them.
Fifty-eight percent of Catholics who say they accept all Church teaching also said they are “sure to vote” for Donald Trump in 2020, compared to 34% of all Catholics and 32% of respondents overall who gave the same answer.
Among Catholic voters who accept all of Church teaching, Trump enjoyed a significant lead in a hypothetical matchup against leading Democratic candidates. These voters favored Trump over Joe Biden by 18 percentage points, over Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders by 25 percentage points, and over Pete Buttigieg by 26 percentage points.
Issues of major concern to Catholics who say they accept all Catholic doctrine are religious freedom and immigration.
Sixty percent of all survey respondents say religious freedom is either “a major concern” or “a concern, but not at the top of my mind” in considering presidential candidates for the upcoming general election.
Among Catholics who accept all Church’s teaching, that number is 77%.
Asked about immigration, two-thirds of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said the issue is “a major concern,” compared to just over half of all respondents who answered similarly. Respondents were not asked to indicate specifics about their policy positions on immigration.
On other issues, Catholics who accept all of Church teaching were less likely to voice concern than other respondents.
The survey found that 35% of Catholics accepting all Church teaching listed the environment as “a major concern,” while 44% of all respondents said the same. Fifty-six percent of Catholics in that category listed climate change as either “a major concern” or “a concern, but not at the top of my mind,” compared to 65% of all respondents.
Catholics who accept all of Church teaching were slightly more likely than other respondents to be seriously concerned about national security, foreign policy, taxes, and China trade policy, while they were slightly less likely to list health care as a major concern.
On the issues of college affordability, income equality, and criminal justice, Catholics who accept all of Church teaching responded similarly to other respondents.
Gun control and late-term abortion were the two biggest issues considered “deal-breakers” by this voting demographic, with a little over half saying a candidate disagreeing with their views on these issues would automatically disqualify that candidate from receiving their support.
Forty-two percent in this demographic considered a candidate’s differing views on religious freedom to be a deal-breaker, and 47% said the same about immigration.
Just 25% of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said they would automatically disqualify candidates who oppose their views on same-sex marriage, 11 percentage points lower than the overall response to the question.
Thirty-one percent of Catholics who accept all of Church teaching said a candidate opposing their views on the death penalty would be a deal-breaker for them, compared to just 16% of overall survey respondents.
The poll’s entire data set can be downloaded here.
Washington D.C., Dec 9, 2019 / 04:10 pm (CNA).- Americans largely disapprove of the way the U.S. bishops have handled the sex abuse scandal in the U.S. Catholic Church, a new survey has found. A majority said their trust in the leadership of the Church… […]
© Catholic World Report