Cardinal McCarrick reportedly lived on IVE seminary property during retirement

CNA Staff, Feb 19, 2021 / 07:01 pm (CNA).- A federal judge has temporarily blocked South Carolina’s heartbeat-based abortion ban just days after its passage, in response to court filings from Planned Parenthood. However, the South Carolina Attorney General’s Office has argued that Planned Parenthood can’t be sure the U.S. Supreme Court will reject the law.
 
Lawyers for Planned Parenthood said the state is “openly flouting” federal precedent allowing abortion.
 
In court papers filed Feb. 19, the state attorney general’s office cited the three justices appointed to the Supreme Court under President Donald Trump as reason to believe the court could overturn Roe v. Wade and other precedents mandating legal abortion nationwide.
 
“My office will vigorously defend this law in court because there is nothing more important than protecting life,” South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said Feb. 18.
 
Judge Mary Geiger Lewis placed a 14-day temporary restraining order on the law Feb. 19, an order that is renewable until a more substantial hearing on March 9, the Associated Press said.
 
She said it was not her role to determine whether the Supreme Court would change abortion precedent. Rather, she must follow current precedent, and the state’s new law is more strict than this precedent.
 
Gov. Henry McMaster had signed the bill Feb. 18, calling it “a major step forward in the pro-life movement here in South Carolina.”
 
The Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act restricts abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, as early as six weeks into pregnancy. It requires doctors to check for a heartbeat before an abortion. Exemptions would allow abortions in cases where the child was conceived in rape or incest or where the mother’s life is in danger.
 
The state currently bans abortion after 20 weeks into pregnancy.
 
If the heartbeat-based abortion ban survives legal challenge, doctors who are found guilty of violating the law could face a felony charge, up to two years in prison, and fines of up to $10,000.
 
Women seeking abortions would not be subject to criminal prosecution.
 
The Diocese of Charleston supported the legislation.

The director of the state’s Catholic Conference, Michael Acquilano, called the passage of the bill “a historic day for the pro-life movement in South Carolina,” according to The Catholic Miscellany.

The Catholic conference drafted a sample message for voters to send to legislators in support of the bill. The message said that, given changes at the supreme Court, “it is our sincere hope that the legislation will withstand constitutional challenge and be implemented in order to save innocent, unborn babies’ lives when a heartbeat is present.”

“As we know, abortion stops a beating heart,” the message continued.
 
In court papers seeking a restraining order on the law, Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights said more than 75 women were scheduled to have abortions in the state over the next three days.
 
Charleston, Columbia, and Greenville each have abortion clinics, none of which perform abortion after the first trimester. Two of the clinics perform abortion twice a week.
 
Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit said the abortion ban would hurt low-income women the hardest as they could not travel to a nearby state with more lax abortion laws.
 
Critics of the law have objected that many women don’t know they are pregnant six weeks into pregnancy, and the law doesn’t give them time to consider an abortion.
 
Other states have passed “heartbeat” abortion bans, including Georgia, Missouri, Louisiana, Ohio, Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Dakota. However, they have not prevailed in court.
 
In other states, pro-abortion legislators have acted to strengthen legal abortion at the state level in case federal precedent on legal abortion is changed or overturned.
 
A heartbeat-based abortion ban had passed South Carolina’s House of Representatives several times in previous years, but the legislation lacked the votes to overcome a procedural vote in the Senate, the Associated Press reports. After Republican candidates won three more Senate seats in the 2020 elections, their party held a 30-16 advantage.
 
Sen. Sandy Senn of Charleston was the only Senate Republican to vote against the bill.
 
The House passed the legislation by a 79-35 vote Feb. 17.
 
During legislative debate over the bill that day, Democrats walked out of the state House chamber in protest.
 
However, two South Carolina House Democrats voted in favor of the bill, including Rep. Russell Ott.
 
“I feel like I need to continue to be consistent,” Ott told CNA Feb. 17. “An unborn child is still a human being,” he said, adding that “I can’t separate myself from that.”
 
Ott said the life issue “has always been an internal struggle for me.” He emphasized other needs including education reform, the lack of affordable quality food in areas known as “food deserts,” and the lack of broadband access in rural areas.
 
Acquilano said litigation was expected.
 
“However, the battle to preserve life must include the courts in our system of government. We welcome litigation to continue to build a culture of life,” he said, according to The Catholic Miscellany.

[…]

Washington D.C., Apr 26, 2017 / 03:02 am (CNA/EWTN News).- When the leader of the Democratic party pulled an about-face this week, claiming that support for abortion was a non-negotiable part of the platform, pro-life Democrats were utterly dismayed.  

“It was just stunning to see,” Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America, told CNA.

Day was referring to DNC chair Tom Perez supporting a Democratic mayoral candidate in Nebraska who had in the past embraced pro-life positions – and then the next day saying there was no room in the Democratic party for pro-life politicians.

“Pro-life Democrats are deeply concerned about this extreme position that the Democratic Party has taken and this non-negotiable position,” she said.

Last week, former Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and DNC chair Tom Perez publicly supported the Democratic candidate for mayor of Omaha, Neb., Heath Mello.

Mello had supported abortion restrictions in the past as a state senator. According to The Nation, Mello co-sponsored a bill in 2009 that mandated doctors to inform pregnant women of their option to view an ultrasound, and also voted for a 20-week abortion ban, a ban on abortion funding in health plans on the exchanges of the Affordable Care Act, and a law requiring the consent of one parent for minors to have abortions.

Mello was previously endorsed by the group Nebraska Right to Life in 2012, but he had also received a 100 percent rating from Planned Parenthood Voters of Nebraska in 2015, his campaign manager pointed out to the Huffington Post.

A Catholic, Mello said in a statement to the Huffington Post that “while my faith guides my personal views, as Mayor I would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care.”

Saint John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae states that “laws which legitimize the direct killing of innocent human beings through abortion or euthanasia are in complete opposition to the inviolable right to life proper to every individual; they thus deny the equality of everyone before the law.”

The encyclical continues, “abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection.”

Yet the abortion rights advocacy group NARAL harshly criticized Perez and Sanders for their “politically stupid” show of support for a candidate who had supported abortion restrictions in the past.

“It’s not possible to have an authentic conversation about economic security for women that does not include our ability to decide when and how we have children,” NARAL said.

On Friday, Perez said that there was no place for pro-life politicians in the party. “Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman’s right to make her own choices about her body and her health,” he said. “This is not negotiable and should not chance city by city or state by state.”

NARAL then issued a statement praising him for his defense of the “core values” of the Democratic Party.

“It was stunning,” Day said of Perez’s about-face. “He goes out, and the DNC is behind this pro-life candidate, which is necessary to be a big tent party if we’re going to win. So they rally behind this guy (Mello), and then less than 24 hours later he (Perez) puts a statement out saying ‘just kidding. We don’t want you in the party at all.’”

Perez made the abortion issue “non-negotiable” for Democrats, Day continued, and was “strong-arming” party members “to step away from their conscience and not support the pro-life position anymore.”

Democratic political leaders had mixed reactions to Perez’s comments. On NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was asked if she thought there was room in the Democratic Party for pro-life politicians, she answered “of course.”

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), meanwhile, said on CNN on Sunday that he and the party were committed “to reproductive rights,” and added that “I know within the ranks of the Democratic Party there are those who see that differently on a personal basis, but when it comes to the policy position, I think we need to be clear and unequivocal.”

The 2016 Democratic Party platform featured a strong pro-abortion plank, calling not only for abortion access but also for the overturning of decades-old policies that prohibited direct taxpayer funding of abortions both at home and abroad – the Hyde Amendment and the Helms Amendment.

“We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion – regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured,” the platform stated.

“We will continue to oppose – and seek to overturn – federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.”

Pro-lifers, meanwhile, have countered that NARAL’s pro-abortion strategy alienates millions of Democratic voters.

“Pro-life Democrats have been leaving in droves,” Day said of recent elections. Perez’s total support for abortion rights “may be popular in California or New York,” she said, but “these values don’t play well in the heartland.”

“There is an enormous disconnect between Democrat and Independent rank and file voters and national leaders like DNC Chairman Tom Perez and Senator Dick Durbin on the issue of abortion,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List.

Dannenfelser was one of the pro-life advisors to the Trump campaign in the 2016 election, heading the campaign’s pro-life task coalition.

Perez “drew a line in the sand” with his comments on Friday said Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, adding that he was “decisively alienating the 23 percent of Democrat voters who identify as pro-life and 44 percent of Democrats oppose taxpayer funding of abortion.”

“The March for Life has a 44-year track record of uniting people of all backgrounds in defense of the inherent dignity of all human life,” she said.

“We have welcomed and will continue to welcome pro-life Democrats like Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) to speak at the March, and will continue to support all whom fight for the right to life until the culture of abortion is unthinkable to every person and party alike.”

[…]

Norfolk, Virginia, Jul 4, 2017 / 03:41 am (CNA).- An immigrant parish, burnt down, with only the crucifix remaining. A parish rebuilt, transformed and a key part in giving back to the community. In a sense, one parish’s story of struggle, pressure and rebirth is metaphor for the American Catholic experience.

St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception in Norfolk, Virginia, is the only black Catholic church in the United States that is also a basilica. Its dramatic history captures both the broader American Catholic history of persecution, growth and acceptance, but also a witness to the unique challenges faced by black Catholics over the centuries.

Founded originally as St. Patrick’s Parish in 1791, it is the oldest Catholic parish in the Diocese of Richmond, predating the foundation of the diocese by nearly 30 years.

“Catholicism was not legal to practice” in Virginia when the colony was founded, said Fr. Jim Curran, rector of the basilica. In much of Colonial America, before the Revolution and the signing of the Bill of Rights, churches that were not approved by the government were prohibited from operating, he told CNA.

The land originally bought in 1794 for the parish is the same ground on which the basilica today stands. From the beginning, according to the parish’s history, Catholics from all backgrounds worshiped together: Irish and German immigrants, free black persons and slaves.

However, by the 1850s, the parish’s immigrant background and mixed-race parish drew the ire of a prominent anti-Catholic movement: the Know-Nothings.

Largely concentrated in northeastern states where the immigrant influx was greatest, the movement rose and fell quickly. Concerned with maintaining the Protestant “purity of the nation,” it worked to prevent immigrants – many of whom were Catholic – from gaining the right to vote, becoming citizens, or taking elected office.

“I consider the Know-Nothings to be a sort of gatekeeper organization, by which I mean that they were both anti-immigrant and anti-Catholic at the same time,” said Fr. David Endres, an assistant professor of Church History and Historical Theology at the Athenaeum of Ohio.

He told CNA that the Know-Nothing Party was able to bring together both pro- and anti-slavery voters in the mid-1800s, united in the common “dislike of foreign-born and Catholics.”

While most anti-Catholic activities took the form of defamatory speeches and public discrimination, the prejudice sometimes turned to violence and mob action, Fr. Endres explained.

The anti-Catholic discrimination and threats found their way to St. Patrick’s doorstep, where the Know-Nothings were unhappy that the pastor was allowing racial integrated Masses, said Fr. Curran.

The pastor at that time, Fr. Matthew O’Keefe, received so many threats directed against the Church and himself that police protection was required to stop the intimidation of the Catholics worshiping at the church, according to the locals.  

Despite the threats, however, Fr. O’Keefe did not segregate the Masses. In 1856, the original church building burned down, leaving only three walls standing. Only a wooden crucifix was left unscathed.

More than 150 years later, it is still unclear exactly who or what caused the fire, but since the days following the blaze, parishioners have had their suspicions.

“We don’t know for sure if they were the ones who burned it, but it’s widely believed, it’s a commonly held notion that it’s the Know-Nothings who burnt the Church,” Fr. Curran said.   

Fr. O’Keefe and the parishioners worked hard to rebuild the church, seeking donations from Catholics along the East Coast. A new church building was constructed less than three years after the fire and is still standing today.

After the church was rebuilt, the parish renamed itself in 1858 in honor of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, which was proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854. It claims to be the first church in the world named for Mary of the Immaculate Conception following the declaration.

In 1889, the Josephites built Saint Joseph’s Black Catholic parish to serve the needs of the black Catholic community, and the two parishes operated separately within several blocks of one another. However, in 1961, St. Joseph’s was demolished to make way for new construction, and the two parishes were joined, reintegrating – at least in theory – St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception.

But the merger was not popular with many of the white parishioners and conflicted with the segregation policies of local government institutions and public life, Fr. Curran said. “St Mary’s became a de facto black parish.”

During this demographic shift, many parishioners of St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception had to draw deeply upon their faith. Black Catholics had to be stalwart, facing prejudice from both some white parishioners, who did not view them as fully Catholic, and some black Protestants, who did not support their religious beliefs.

“They were devoted, and still are,” the rector said. “You have to be very devoted to be a Black Catholic.”

This devotion and witness of St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception was formally celebrated when, in 1991, Saint Pope John Paul II elevated the 200-year-old church to a minor basilica.

“Your black cultural heritage enriches the Church and makes her witness of universality more complete. In a real way the Church needs you, just as you need the Church, for you are a part of the Church and the Church is part of you,” Pope Saint John Paul II proclaimed at the elevation.

Today, St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception plays a vital role not only as the only Catholic basilica in Virginia, but also as an important anchor of the neighborhood. The basilica operates a “robust” set of outreach ministries to local families, including rent assistance and food aid, serving thousands of people.

“The Church standing proudly and beautiful in the midst of the poor is where we need to be,” Fr. Curran said.

He also pointed to the basilica’s history as an example of one way communities can aid churches affected by violence, such as the – such as the half dozen black churches across the South that have burned since late June.

“The reason why we were able to raise so much money so quickly was because there were so many people that were appalled at the burning of St. Patrick’s,” the rector said.

Tragic events like the burning of a church can actually help bring people together in a common cause, he continued.

“It unites people of faith. If people of faith who are appalled by this stand up and assist and let our voices be heard, we can do something wonderful.”

This article was originally published on CNA July 4, 2015.

[…]