Independent report claims priests told: deny Communion to TDs who support abortion?

The Irish Independent Feb 6^th published a report on the Cardinal Burke story we reported on Feb 4^th. The report under the title ‘Priests told: deny communion to TDs who support abortion’, quotes His Eminence as saying that in accordance with Canon Law, (1) priests should exclude politicians who support abortion from receiving communion, and (2) that the local bishop should "teach clearly in the matter" and (3) should encourage his priests to make sure that the church's discipline is observed.

Catholic Church teaching on issues, such as the right to life of the unborn, is not an 'a la carte' menu from which Catholics may pick and choose, it is an expression of truth that must be accepted by all Catholics in good standing, it is not an optional extra. Catholics who support abortion publicly or those who claim to be personally opposed to abortion, but nevertheless vote for it act contrary, not just to Catholic teaching, but also contrary to natural law. When Catholic legislators publicly support abortion they give grave scandal to others but also place their own souls in danger. Cardinal Burke in recommending the public sanction of denial of Holy Communion in these circumstances is acting in a pastoral capacity and urges the Irish Bishops to act in a similar manner. 

The Independent article reads:

A SENIOR Vatican cardinal has told priests not to give communion to politicians who support abortion. 

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke warned that legalising abortion creates a "culture of death" and that he fears for the future in Ireland.

The American, who is based in the Vatican, weighed in to the Irish abortion debate and said a diocesan bishop could directly reprimand a politician in certain circumstances.

And in accordance with canon law, he said priests should exclude politicians who support abortion from receiving communion.

"Those who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin should not be admitted to receive holy communion. There can be no question that the practise of abortion is among the gravest of manifest sins," he said.

"As long as (a Catholic politican) continues to support legislation which fosters abortion or other intrinsic evils, then he should be refused holy communion."

The local bishop should "teach clearly in the matter" and should encourage his priests to make sure that the church's discipline is observed, he added.

Cardinal Burke is prefect of the Apostolic Signatura – the supreme authority on justice in the church apart from the Pope. He made the comments in an interview with the Irish 'Catholic Voice' newspaper.

He discussed Catholic teaching in light of the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar and abortion in the US. Ms Halappanavar died after allegedly being refused a termination for an unviable pregnancy.

"Her request would not have made it right for the law to permit such an act, which is always and everywhere wrong," said Cardinal Burke.

Meanwhile, Health Minister Dr James Reilly promised his Cabinet colleagues to come back with draft abortion laws – but can't give a date.

Government tensions mean the heads of the bill are not yet finalised.

Dr Reilly only gave a verbal briefing to the Cabinet today on the proposed laws as a result.

And there was no detailed discussion among ministers on the issue.

The minister said the next time he comes back, he will have a draft in writing.

A Government spokesman did not have a timeline.

NOTE: The statement by Cardinal Burke is being misquoted he did not say that priests should not give Communion to politicians who support abortion, rather he addressed his remarks to politicians saying that they should not present themselves any more to receive Holy Communion if they support anti life policies.  The following is an extract from the Cardinal's statement
The Cardinal said "[...] those Catholic politicians who obstinately promote anti-life and anti-family legislation, for instance, who support and vote for legislation, who make procured abortion more readily available, … and other such violations of the Moral Law, this is a very grave sin and once they’re warned, they should not present themselves any more to receive Holy Communion until they have amended their ways.”

UK Parliament approve "Same Sex Marriage" Bill

The British government's Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, which was given a second reading in the House of Commons last night passed by 400 votes to 175.

John Smeaton in his BLOG tells us that pro-family MPs fought back courageously against the same-sex marriage agenda. The strength of the opposition to the bill was larger than expected, and came largely from the governments own back-bench MPs. The bill now goes to Committee for further scrutiny.

John Smeaton continues:

The debate lasting over six hours concentrated on the government's justifications for introducing the bill - equality and justice, and the issue of forcing churches to undertake same sex 'marriages'. MPs promoting same-sex marriage said that civil partnerships were not now a sufficient provision for same-sex couples, despite assurances given during legislation, they now wanted same-sex couples to have the legal status and terminology of 'marriage'. They argued that this was part of a long-term historical move. However, they also reacted against suggestions that there would be future moves to redefine marriage to include three or more people (polygamy).

Commenting on the debate, Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary  told the media:

"We are indebted to the pro-family MPs who fought back to defend marriage in this evening's debate. This was a dark day for marriage and the family, which will suffer severe and long-term effects if this legislation is eventually passed. Future generations of children would suffer as a result. So the fight to defend real marriage will and must go on. We call upon the millions of people who value marriage to continue to lobby parliamentarians to resist the bill.

Several MPs, notably Sir Roger Gale MP, pointed to the broken assurances given during the passage of the Civil Partnerships Bill in 2004. Parliament was assured that civil  partnership legislation was not a precursor to gay 'marriage.' MPs who had given those assurances are now saying that civil partnerships were part of a long-term shift in social views. However, those MPs rejected with vitriol any suggestion - before it was even mentioned in the debate -  that redefining marriage might lead to further changes such as legal polygamy.

MPs opposed to redefining marriage on this basis were compared to supporters of segregation and apartheid, and reference was even made to the concentration camps.

The critics of same-sex marriage were measured and effective in the debate. SPUC is encouraged that the relevance of marriage to the welfare of children was raised by a number of pro-marriage MPs. These included Robert Flello, Edward Leigh, Stephen Timms, Cheryl Gillan and  John Glen. They pointed to the unique capacity of a marriage of man and woman to generate children, and the advantage of children being raised by their natural parents. This was the first time that these issues have become prominent in the parliamentary debate, and it is important that MPs increase the attention paid to children in future stages of the bill.

Edward Leigh MP noted in the debate that the possibility of children was the rationale for the state supporting marriage. If children are left out of the picture, there is no longer any compelling reasons for the state to support marriage. That is the reason why the bill threatens to damage, not strengthen, marriage as an institution."

SPUC's position paper on why it campaigns against same-sex marriage can be read at this link

Say it with Flowers

 A colleague sent me a copy of this BLOG post by Russell Moore from his BLOG Moore to the point, which refers to the attempts of pro-life lobbyist Jeanne Head to persuade the former New York Mayor Ed Koch who died  last week to change his public policy and adopt a pro-life stance.

We reported in 2010 and again in 2011 on the award of the Gerard Foundation Life Prize to  Jeanne who is one of the truly pro-life heroines of our time

New York City’s iconic former Mayor Ed Koch died early this morning from congestive heart failure. Many things came to mind as I thought about the ebullient Jewish politician, who described himself as a “liberal with sanity.” But one anecdote sticks out, and even though I haven’t read the account since I was a high school senior. That story, recalled from Koch’s memory, is the tale of the pro-life activist who sent the pro-choice politician flowers.

Koch discussed his abortion position in a fascinating co-written book on faith and public life with John Cardinal O’Connor. As a man who likes a good title, this one works for me: “His Eminence and Hizzoner: A Candid Exchange.” In the book, Koch described his commitment to legal abortion, using all the standard arguments. He commented on the “shrill” tactics of some pro-lifers in marches and demonstrations.

But he took a very different tone when he described one prominent right-to-life activist: a nurse named Jean Head.

What impressed him most of all whenever the nurse came to persuade him, back when he was a United States Congressman, to support efforts to protect the unborn, she brought him roses.

Koch said he was amazed by the way Head would listen to his position and then calmly lay out her arguments for why he should change his mind, and his vote. Koch said he told her that the roses mystified him because he knew that if he ever changed his position on abortion, the abortion-rights lobby would be “crazed with anger.” They wouldn’t bring him roses, he said, but instead might send him cactuses.

Koch never, so far as I know, switched his position on abortion. But I can’t help but see in this pro-life activist’s example something noble and Christlike. There are always those who capitulate and call this “civility.” And there are always those who see listening to one’s opponents as itself a capitulation.

This woman, though, didn’t back down in her efforts to persuade. And that’s just the point. The roses weren’t a sign of weakness but of mission. She didn’t just want to make a point but to change a mind and a heart.

Her kindness was a signal of her confidence in the rightness of her position. It was also a sign of her consistency. She believed unborn children and their mothers were made in the image of God, and thus deserving of love and protection, regardless of stage of development, disability, or “wantedness.” Every person bore the full dignity of humanity, and was worthy of respect and honor.

She showed this by lobbying for the rights of the unborn, and she showed it by treating her opponent as a person, not as a cartoon villain to be vaporized.

That example won’t often get on cable news: sound and fury will do that. But persistence, and persistently kind witness, will stick in the memory and in the imagination.

Who knows whether some wavering congressman in the next office over, or some staffer accepting the delivery, were moved to rethink an issue because of the steely, courageous kindness of this activist?

UNJUST LAWS ARE SELF-DESTRUCTING: “The Infant in the Womb is not a Disease but a gift of New Human Life”

H. E. RAYMOND CARDINAL BURKE ON ABORTION:  UNJUST LAWS ARE SELF-DESTRUCTING

“The Infant in the Womb is not a Disease but a gift of New Human Life”

Ireland United for Life has welcomed recent comments on the abortion issue by His Eminence Raymond Cardinal Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura:  “The fight is certainly winnable” he said, pointing out that Catholic politicians have a responsibility to promote Life and Family, and that they should oppose abortion legislation and prevent legislation abandoning our Pro-Life position.  “A Nation with unjust laws becomes ever-more corrupt and ever-more threatened with self-destruction” he said.

Speaking specifically about Ireland, he warned that abandoning our Pro-Life position and decriminalising abortion will develop a culture against Life.  Catholics need to listen to Our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI, who has addressed this fundamental issue so frequently, His Eminence, one of the foremost Canon Lawyers of the Catholic Church, gave his comments during a recent interview on American station Ave Maria Radio.

In a separate interview with Irish Newspaper ‘Catholic Voice’ of 3rd February, Cardinal Burke is quoted:  “Abortion has nothing to do with healthcare, the infant in the womb is not a disease but a gift of new human life. ……The taking of an innocent and defenceless human life can never be right, can never be justified.  Therefore, to decriminalize abortion is a contradiction of the most fundamental principles of the legal system, the principle that human life is to be safeguarded and defended at all times”.

Canon 915 – For Those in Public Office:

Speaking in relation to Canon 915, which deals with those in Public Office, he stated “… and Catholic politicians have a particularly heavy responsibility in our Nation by their political activity, to promote human life and to promote the family -  and those Catholic politicians who obstinately promote anti-life and anti-family legislation, for instance, who support and vote for legislation, who make procured abortion more readily available, … and other such violations of the Moral Law, this is a very grave sin and once they’re warned, they should not present themselves any more to receive Holy Communion until they have amended their ways.”  He continued “It’s a very grave sin in itself, it risks their own eternal punishment for having committed so grave a sin …”

Speaking Specifically about Ireland, he said:

“Ireland has been steadfast in upholding the inviolable dignity of human life and one can’t help but also note that Ireland is  one of the safest countries in the world, if not the safest, for ….care of women and also for safe delivery of babies and so forth.  The medical field in Ireland especially in the area of gynaecology and obstetrics, is very advanced.  If through any bad decision, Ireland should abandon its strong position against abortion, it will simply go down a road that many countries have already gone down, including our own.

Once abortion is decriminalized it becomes an ever expanding reality in society and it generates a whole culture of death as we’ve experienced and it’s been experienced in other countries where abortion is possible ‘on demand’ as they say. So it’s a critical moment for Ireland, it’s not only for Ireland itself but it’ll also be a critical moment for Her to give a witness to the whole world with regard to this fundamental issue, which Our Holy Father has addressed so frequently, which the Bishops of Ireland are addressing to the people now and the good Catholics need to listen to Our Holy Father as the One who has received the Grace to be the Teacher of the Universal Church, and to their Bishops with regard to these important matters for the Common Good.”

Concluding, he added “I fear very much for Ireland should it accept abortion, or what it will mean for a Nation which, in fact, has been so much in the forefront in protecting human life ….”

Mrs. M. Morgan-Dupré

Secretary:  Ireland United For Life

Belgian twin euthanasia story is just the tip of a chilling iceberg

Dr Peter Saunders in a BLOG POST on Christian Medical Comment, on Jan 28^th, outlines the horrific case of the 45 year-old Belgian twin brothers, who believed they had nothing to live for, were euthanised shortly before Christmas.

The case of the twin brothers euthanised in Belgium before Christmas is just the latest step in an escalation of euthanasia which is badly out of control.

In a case which attracted world attention, Belgian doctors announced earlier this month that a fortnight before Christmas they euthanised 45-year-old deaf identical twins who were going blind and thought that they had nothing to live for.

Marc and Eddy Verbessem (pictured) were born deaf. They never married and lived together, working as cobblers. When they discovered that they had another congenital disorder, a form of glaucoma, they asked for euthanasia.

According to the Daily Telegraph, their local hospital had refused to end their lives by lethal injection because doctors there did not accept that they were suffering unbearable pain.

However, the two brothers found doctors at Brussels University Hospital in Jette who accepted their argument that they were unable to bear the thought of not being able to see each other again.

Under Belgian law euthanasia is allowed if ‘the patient is in a medically futile condition of constant and unbearable physical or mental suffering that cannot be alleviated, resulting from a serious and incurable disorder caused by illness or accident’.

Critics point out that the Verbessem brothers were not terminally ill nor suffering physical pain, but Professor Wim Distelmans, a right-to-die activist and one of the doctors involved in the decision to euthanise the men, based his own assessment on their psychological suffering.

The case demonstrates graphically just how liberally Belgium’s euthanasia law is now being interpreted.

I have previously documented reports from Belgium showing that half of cases go unreported, half of Belgian euthanasia nurses have killed people without request, one third of euthanasia cases in at least one region are involuntary and that euthanasia cases are now being used as organ donors.

A report published late last year by the Brussels-based European Institute of Bioethics claimed that euthanasia was being ‘trivialized’ and that the law was being monitored by a toothless watchdog. After 10 years of legalised euthanasia and about 5,500 cases, not one case had ever been referred to the police.

But now we have new proposals aimed at extending the law even further.

On 10 January 2013 Senator Philippe Mahoux tabled in the Belgian Senate two documents.

The first, Proposition de loi modifiant la loi du 28 mai 2002 relative à l’euthanasie, is a proposal to amend the Euthanasia Law of 28 May 2002 as follows:

1.Provide for euthanasia requests from non-emancipated minors (minors as young as 15 can be emancipated under certain circumstances) who are judged by a doctor and a second doctor, child psychiatrist or other person with relevant expertise to have the capacity for discernment, that is for understanding the situation of their illness and the consequences of a request for euthanasia (One of the minor’s legal representatives (that is one of the minor’s parents or legal guardians) must also sign the request for euthanasia)

2.Advanced directives for euthanasia to be administered in certain conditions if the patient becomes incompetent and unconscious have been limited to 5 years duration – they are to be made of unlimited duration ;

3.Individual doctors with a conscientious objection to euthanasia must advise the patient within 7 days of a request and must within 4 days of the patient giving them the name of another doctor forward the medical file;

4.Institutional conscientious objection is disallowed and no contract may prohibit a doctor form practising euthanasia at an institution

The second document, Document législatif n° 5-1920/1, is a proposal for a resolution to establish an inquiry into euthanasia for patients suffering from degenerative mental conditions such as Alzheimer’s with a view to making advanced requests for euthanasia easier in these circumstances.

In summary we are to have euthanasia of minors, euthanasia of the mentally incompetent and erosion of conscience rights for individual doctors and institutions.

These latest developments are a chilling reminder of how incremental extension will happen inevitably once the law changes and the public conscience is eroded.

The lessons from Belgium for other jurisdictions flirting with a change in the law are clear – resist legalisation under any circumstances at all cost.

The twins case is also a grave warning not to look for medical solutions to existential problems, because if you do it quickly becomes very unclear when to stop.