LifeSiteNews.com

News

HLI Leader Says: “I don’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job”

LifeSiteNews.com

By John-Henry Westen

CNS photo/Paul HaringWASHINGTON, DC, January 16, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Perhaps it was a bad omen when at the installation Mass for the new Archbishop of Washington Donald Wuerl last June, pro-abortion Democratic Senator John Kerry was given Holy Communion and caught on camera in the act.  During the entrance procession, Archbishop Wuerl shook hands with Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06062605.html ) 

  Now, Archbishop Wuerl, who replaced Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, has said publicly that he would not discipline or direct priests to deny communion to pro-abortion Catholic politician Nancy Pelosi who was just made speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Archbishop Donald WuerlDespite her staunch stands in favour of abortion, embryonic stem cell research and same-sex ‘marriage’ Pelosi went on a publicity stunt in early January to portray herself as an Italian Catholic mother. Part of that campaign was her publicized attendance at a Mass at her alma mater, Trinity University, on January 3.  Prior to that Mass, American Life League had urgently requested that Archbishop Wuerl intervene to halt the public scandal that would ensue.  Archdiocesan spokesman Susan Gibbs told LifeSiteNews.com that the Archbishop did not intervene in the Trinity Mass.  She said the University, although within the archdiocese, was under the control of a religious order, the Sisters of Notre Dame. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07010811.html )

  Pope Benedict, prior to his election to the pontificate, intervened in the US Bishops deliberation on the question of Holy Communion for pro-abortion politicians.  The intervention letter titled "Worthiness to receive Holy Communion" pointed out that obstinately pro-abortion Catholic politicians, after being duly instructed and warned, "must" be denied Communion (see the document: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/apr/050419a.html).

  On Saturday, California Catholic Daily reporter Allyson Smith conducted a brief taped interview with Archbishop Wuerl focussing on the new pro-abortion speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi.  LifeSiteNews.com has reviewed the tape and can confirm this accurate transcription of the main portion of the interview:

  Smith: "Did you make any statement about Nancy Pelosi last week going to Mass at Trinity University?" Did you issue any statement about that?

  Wuerl: "That was a matter between the university and Nancy. They were offering their location, and the Mass was celebrated by a priest with faculties, and there was no, there was no reason to make any comment about it."

  Smith: "Do you intend to discipline her at all for being persistent and obstinate about supporting abortion and same-sex marriage?"

  Wuerl: "I will not be using the faculty in that, in the manner you have described."

  Smith: "Will you issue a statement to your priests and deacons, I’m sorry, to priests and deacons to warn her not to allow her to receive if she presents herself for Communion?"

  Wuerl: "You’re talking about a whole different style of pastoral ministry. No thank you."

  Smith: "No? Okay. Thank you."

  In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Judie Brown of American Life League reacted to Archbishop Wuerl’s statements saying, "One of the reasons why we asked Archbishop Wuerl to take definitive action with the speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, is because of the scandal she is creating and the souls that she is literally jeopardizing by her refusal to adhere to Church teaching and yet use her Catholic identity in a way that is in fact scandalous."  Brown continued, "I am appalled that Archbishop Wuerl not only is not going to do anything about this but has publicly said so, I find that absolutely outrageous." 

  The position of the Catholic Church on the matter is defined in canon law. Following the Scriptural principle found in 1 Corinthians 11:27, the Church’s canon law states at canon 915 that those "who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion."

  Brown conluded, "I mean no disrespect to the Archbishop at all, but as an Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Church he has an obligation to enforce canon law and I simply do not understand this."

  Human Life International President Fr. Tom Euteneuer concurred.  Fr. Euteneuer told LifeSiteNews.com, that rather than ‘pastoral style’, "In actual fact we are talking about the exercise of Episcopal oversight.  I don’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job.  The clear directives from the Vatican in addition to canon law indicate that a woman whose (pro-abortion) position is of a high profile nature is a public scandal to the faith. Not only should she be refused Communion by the legitimate authority of the diocese, but she should be excommunicated. Period." 

  The new Archbishop of Washington is, in this respect, following in the footsteps of his predecessor.  In 2004, as the US Bishops were discussing the matter of Communion for pro-abortion politicians, Pelosi told the media that she would continue to take Holy Communion despite her pro-abortion position.  She went so far as to misrepresent the Catholic faith as supporting her pro-abortion stance.  "I believe that my position on choice is one that is consistent with my Catholic upbringing, which said that every person has a free will and has the responsibility to live their lives in a way that they would have to account for in the end," she said.

  Responding in the media, Cardinal McCarrick who was heading up the bishops’ task force on the communion question, said, "I have not gotten to the stage where I’m comfortable in denying the Eucharist."  In fact, Cardinal McCarrick has been on something of a campaign to conceal Rome’s insistence that pro-abortion politicians be denied Holy Communion. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06102310.html )

  McCarrick has even spoken of Pelosi in his retirement.  In comments to the Catholic News Service last week, Cardinal McCarrick said he considered Pelosi, "a very thoughtful and committed defender of human rights." (see coverage: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0700087.htm )

  Commented Fr. Euteneuer,  "I don’t have words for that."

  Calls to the Archdiocese of Washington for clarification were not returned by press time. 

See the original California Catholic story at http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=dbc84fb0-aacd-4dad-bfb5-2b27538150cd 

To contact Vatican Offices

  CONGREGATION FOR BISHOPS
  Piazza Pio XII 10
  00193
  Rome, Italy
  Phone: 011.39.6.69.88.42.17
  Fax:  011.39.6.69.88.53.03



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
A photo of Kim Tucci at 25 weeks gestation Erin Elizabeth Photography
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

News,

‘Little miracles’: Mom gives birth to naturally-conceived quintuplets after refusing ‘selective reduction’

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
Image
An ultrasound of the five different compartments, each with its own baby, inside Kim's womb.

AUSTRALIA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A 26-year-old Australian mom has given birth to five healthy babies, all conceived naturally, after refusing the doctor’s advice that she must abort three of them in order to give the remaining two a better chance at life. 

“After my initial ultrasound I was told I could consider the selection method to give 2 babies the best chance in life,” wrote mom Kim Tucci in a Facebook post last September. 

“I watched a YouTube video on the procedure and I cried. I could never do that! Was I selfish for not giving two the chance of 100% survival? All I knew is that I already love them and that every heart beat I heard I connect with them more. For me life starts when a heart starts beating and all I know for sure is that I will do whatever it takes to bring them into this world healthy,” she wrote. 

Last Thursday Kim and her husband Vaughn welcomed the five new members into their family — one boy and four girls —increasing the number of their children from 3 to 8. The babies were born at 30 weeks, 10 weeks early, due to insufficient space in Kim’s womb. They weighed on average about 2.5 pounds. 

The quintuplets’ story began last March, after Kim and Vaughn had been trying for six months to conceive just one more child for their family. Due to health complications, Kim wondered if she would ever become a mother again. 

After what she thought was an extra long cycle, she decided to take a pregnancy test. 

“I was feeling tired and a little nauseated and thought I would take a pregnancy test just to get the ‘what if’ out of my head. To my shock and utter excitement it was positive,” she wrote on a Facebook post.

The parents got the shock of their lives when doctors confirmed in an ultrasound examination that there was not one baby, but five. 

“After a long wait for the ultrasound we finally went in. The sonographer told me there were multiple gestational sacks, but she could only see a heart beat in two. I was so excited! Twins!”

“I was moved to another machine for a clearer view and had the head doctor come in and double check the findings. She started to count, one, two, three, four, five. Did i hear that correctly? Five? My legs start to shake uncontrollably and all i can do is laugh. The sonographer then told me the term for five is ‘quintuplets,’” Kim wrote.

Even though Kim began to feel stretched to the limit with all those human lives growing inside her, she chose to focus on her babies, and not herself, referring to them as “my five little miracles.” 

“It's getting harder as each day passes to push through the pain, every part of my body aches and sleeping is becoming very painful. No amount of pillows are helping support my back and belly. Sometimes I get so upset that I just want to throw my hands up and give in.”

“Sometimes my pelvis becomes so stiff I can barely walk and my hips feel like they are grinding away constantly. I'm finding it hard to eat as I basically have no room left in my stomach, and the way it is positioned it's pushed all the way back with the babies leaning against it.” 

“My skin on my belly is so stretched its painful and hot to touch. It literally feels like I have hives! No amount of cream helps relieve the discomfort. I have a lot of stretch marks now. Dealing with such a huge change in my body is hard.” 

“Is it all worth it? Yes!!!! I will keep pushing through,” she wrote in one Facebook post days before the babies were born. 

The newborns' names are Keith, Ali, Penelope, Tiffany, and Beatrix. They were born at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Subiaco, Western Australia. Mother and babies are reported to be doing well. 



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Jordanian Prince Zeid Ra'ad Zeid Al-Hussein, the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights UN Photo/Paulo Filgueiras
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

News

UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

GENEVA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads. 

The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution. 

“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters. 

UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.

“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.

But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it. 

The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”

Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.

“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said. 

While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms. 

“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added. 

Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born. 

“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.

“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
JStone / Shutterstock.com
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

News,

Hillary’s litmus test for Supreme Court picks: They must ‘preserve Roe v. Wade’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

DERRY, NH, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Hillary Clinton has a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees - several, in fact. At a Democratic event on Wednesday, Clinton unveiled her criteria in selecting a judge for the nation's highest court.

“I do have a litmus test, I have a bunch of litmus tests," she said.

"We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed,” she said.

There have been over 58,000,000 abortions since the 1973 court ruling legalizing abortion in all 50 states, according to National Right to Life.

That echoes her recent call to arms speech before Planned Parenthood last month, when she stated that taxpayers must fund abortion-on-demand in order to uphold the "right" of choice.

“We have to preserve marriage equality,” Clinton said, referring to last summer's Obergefell v. Hodges case, a 5-4 ruling that redefined marriage nationwide. “We have to go further to end discrimination against the LGBT community."

Her views differentiate her from the Republican front runners. Ted Cruz has called the court's marriage ruling "fundamentally illegitimate," and Donald Trump told Fox News Sunday this week that he would "be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things." Marco Rubio has said he won't "concede" the issue to the one-vote majority.

All Republican presidential hopefuls say they are pro-life and will defund Planned Parenthood.

Her husband, Bill Clinton, raised the makeup of the Supreme Court early last month in New Hampshire, saying it receives "almost no attention" as a campaign issue.

On Wednesday, Hillary said "the next president could get as many as three appointments. It’s one of the many reasons why we can’t turn the White House over to the Republicans again.”

Clinton said her judicial appointees must also reverse the Citizens United ruling on campaign finance and oppose a recent decision striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, justices struck down Section 4(b) of the act, which said that certain states and jurisdictions had to obtain permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.

At one time, most politicians frowned upon any "litmus test" for judicial nominees, emphasizing the independence of the third branch of government. "I don't believe in litmus tests," Jeb Bush told Chuck Todd last November.

But with the rise of an activist judiciary in the middle of the 20th century, constitutionalists have sought to rein in the power of the bench.



Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook