Australian Cardinal George Pell leaves after being released from Barwon Prison near Anakie, some 70 kilometers west of Melbourne, on April 7, 2020. / Photo by WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Aug 25, 2023 / 10:05 am (CNA).
The Catholic Church on Friday suffered a loss in an Australian appeals court after a panel of judges said an abuse case brought by the father of an alleged victim of Cardinal George Pell could proceed.
The cardinal allegedly abused the boy in the 1990s; his father brought suit against the Catholic Church and Pell in 2022, shortly before Pell’s death in January of this year. The alleged victim himself died of a heroin overdose in 2014.
Church officials responded to the filing by arguing that the father was not the direct victim of the alleged abuse and therefore lacked standing to sue.
The Victoria Supreme Court ruled last year that the lawsuit could proceed. On Aug. 25 the Court of Appeal agreed with the Supreme Court’s ruling from last year, ordering that the father could continue with his suit.
Brisbane-based Shine Lawyers confirmed the decision in a LinkedIn post on Friday, with Senior Associate Gabrielle Verhagen calling the order “a significant outcome for relatives of abuse victims who have suffered psychological trauma as a result of the abuse their loved ones endured.”
“When a child is sexually abused, their whole family suffers the consequences as they grapple with things like new family dynamics, changed behaviors, substance abuse, and a life derailed as a result of this life-altering crime,” Verhagen said.
“For all abuse victims and their surviving relatives, today is a reminder that the courts will make institutions answerable for the harm they have caused,” he continued.
Prior to 2018, the Church in Australia had been able to cite what in the country’s legal framework was known as the “Ellis defense,” a principle that shielded unincorporated institutions from lawsuits. That rule was abolished in 2018.
Pell was found guilty of sexual abuse that same year, though those convictions were ultimately quashed in 2020 by the Australian High Court.
An Australian royal commission in 2020 said it had determined that Pell was aware of sexual abuse by Catholic clergymen by the 1970s but failed to adequately stop it. Pell disputed those findings.
The cardinal died Jan. 10 from cardiac arrest shortly after hip surgery in Rome.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Washington D.C., Feb 12, 2021 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- Members of Congress on Thursday debated abortion funding restrictions in a proposed COVID relief package, with one member comparing abortion coverage to cancer treatments.
“Abortion is health care, and excluding abortion from COBRA coverage makes as little sense as excluding cancer coverage,” Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) said of an amendment to bar funding of abortion coverage in health coverage subsidies for unemployed workers.
In response, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, tweeted that “[r]eal healthcare in the case of a difficult pregnancy looks like addressing the illness of the mother or unborn child; not eliminating the child. Real doctors heal; they don’t harm.”
Several House committees convened on Thursday to consider and advance measures for a massive COVID-19 relief package. President Biden had proposed nearly $2 trillion in funding of health care and economic relief in response to the pandemic.
Democratic leadership have already signaled that they will pass a coronavirus relief bill with or without Republican support in the House and Senate. Pro-life groups have warned that the relief proposals do not include sufficient pro-life protections—and thus could fund abortions, abortion coverage, and abortion providers in a number of ways.
The House Democrats’ proposal released this week includes $750 million in funding of global health, and billions of dollars for community health centers. It also includes expanded subsidies towards health plans and COBRA coverage.
Within the committee hearings themselves, members debated the ethics of abortion funding.
In the House Energy and Commerce Committee, members discussed the $50 million in additional funding of the Title X family planning program. Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) introduced an amendment redirecting the funding to youth suicide prevention, as the Title X funds could go to abortion providers.
The Trump administration in 2019 required Title X grant recipients to neither refer for abortions, nor be co-located with abortion facilities. This resulted in Planned Parenthood withdrawing from the program and forfeiting an estimated $60 million in annual funds, rather than comply with the new mandates.
President Biden has already begun the process of reversing that rule, and some Republicans on the committee thus did not want additional funding of Title X if abortion providers would benefit from the program.
“We know that Title X has been used to fund abortion providers,” Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) stated.
However, committee Democrats accused Republicans of being anti-contraception and hurting women’s health.
Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas) defended the access of abortion providers—such as Planned Parenthood—to the Title X program. “For many women, the only doctor they see in a year is someone who works at Planned Parenthood or at another clinic that gets Title X funds,” she said on Thursday.
Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), a Chaldean Catholic, also opposed the pro-life requirements for the Title X program and said it is about family planning, not abortion.
Eshoo said she often asks new committee members about their families. “I don’t know one member of our committee that has 8, 10, 12, 14 children,” she said. “This isn’t about abortion. This is about family planning.”
Rep. Lesko said that for many pro-life members, their beliefs on life are “part of our faith” and “ingrained in us.”
“So when you say that we’re attacking women, I totally disagree. Because half of the babies that are aborted are going to be women,” she said to fellow members. Lesko’s amendment failed in a 31-26 vote.
During a markup of COVID relief in the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-Ill.) introduced an amendment to ensure protections against funding of abortions in health coverage.
The relief measure would fund COBRA health insurance premiums for unemployed workers, and Walorski’s amendment would have ensured that federal subsidies could not pay for abortion coverage.
“I believe every human life is precious, and taxpayers should not be forced to pay for the destruction of life,” Walorski said on Thursday. Her amendment failed in committee.
Rep. Chu opposed Walorski’s effort and compared funding abortion coverage with funding coverage for cancer treatments.
In a hearing of the House Education and Labor Committee, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) responded to accusations that pro-life members were just trying to “score cheap political points” with their amendments.
“We hold sincere beliefs that life is sacred from the point of conception to natural death, and we truly believe that violating that moral code is a stain on our entire society and our entire world,” Foxx said.
Lia Garcia, director of Hispanic Ministry at the Archdiocese of Baltimore, speaks at a panel discussion exploring the impact of U.S. Latinos on the 2024 election hosted by Georgetown University’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024. / Credit: Georgetown University/Art Pittman
Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Oct 10, 2024 / 06:00 am (CNA).
As a record number of Hispanic Americans will be eligible to vote this November, many are asking what impact Latinos — and Latino Catholics in particular — will have on the 2024 election.
Though acknowledging the great diversity in culture and thought among American Hispanic communities, the panelists posited that the overarching values of family, faith, and care for the poor will factor largely into Latinos’ decisions at the ballot box this November.
“We are big on family, family values … We want to be welcoming and be very attentive to the needs of others,” said Lia Garcia, one of the panelists and the director of Hispanic ministry at the Archdiocese of Baltimore.
“We throw big parties, we eat a lot of food,” she added, laughing. “Everybody is invited to our gatherings, so our faith teaches us that we are built to be in communion in relationship with God and in relationship with one another.”
Hispanics don’t fit into a box
Speaking with CNA after the panel, Garcia said that in her work with Hispanic Catholics, she has heard “a lot of anxiety about what is going to happen” and “about who is going to win” the presidency.
She said that many Hispanic voters “feel pinned” between conflicting priorities held by Trump and Harris.
“They feel that they have to choose between the issue of abortion and defending immigrants,” she said. “Latino Catholics are very much for life. You can see that in our big families. But they also have a concern about the immigration issues. Even if immigration doesn’t directly affect them because now they’re documented, but they know someone, they know a family member, they know a colleague … it’s really scary to people how Latinos are portrayed to the rest of the world as criminals.”
A member of the audience asks a question during a panel discussion exploring the impact of U.S. Latinos on the 2024 election hosted by Georgetown University’s Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life on Monday, Oct. 7, 2024. Credit: Georgetown University/Art Pittman
Hispanic voters have historically favored Democrats in national and local elections. The panelists noted, however, that Republicans have been faring better with Latinos in recent elections and polls, giving credence to predictions that the Hispanic vote is no longer a monolith.
Recent polling on Hispanics backs up this theory. Newsweek reported this week that while Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris is still leading among Hispanics by a wide margin, 56% to 38%, her lead has shrunk from the 59% Joe Biden held in 2020 and even further from the 66% held by Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Instead of loyalty to a party, panelists said Hispanics appear motivated mostly by their family values and concern for the poor and downtrodden.
Father Agustino Torres, a priest with the New York-based Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, said that in his ministry to young Latinos he has witnessed that Hispanic youth “have this fire” for caring for the downtrodden, especially for poor migrants.
“Sometimes we’re American Catholics rather than Catholic Americans. We allow our politics to inform our faith rather than our faith informing our politics,” Torres said. “But this is the reality: I’m responsible for you and you’re responsible for me. If I see someone falling down on the sidewalk, like, I am obligated because of my baptism, and this is a good thing … This is the Gospel.”
Father Agustino Torres, a priest and member of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, pointed out that
“sometimes we’re American Catholics rather than Catholic Americans. We allow our politics to inform our faith rather than our faith informing our politics.” Credit: Peter Pinedo/CNA
“When we teach this, they are just like, ‘yes,’ and it unites their worlds, family, faith, outreach,” he said.
To be clear, like most Americans, U.S. Hispanics are most concerned with the economy. EWTN published a poll of U.S. Catholics in September that found that most of the country’s Hispanic Catholics — 56.8% — said the economy (including jobs, inflation, and interest rates) is the most important issue deciding their vote this election cycle.
The next-highest priorities were border security/immigration at 10.5%, abortion at 9.7%, health care at 5.3%, and climate change at 5%.
Yet, according to panelist Santiago Ramos, a Catholic philosopher at the Aspen Institute, even when it comes to their approach to economic issues, Hispanics do not easily fit into the political right or left.
Ramos said Hispanics challenge the “nationalist, right-wing” as well as progressivist categorizations.
“There is a community aspect to our existence, family-oriented, dare I call it socially conservative aspect to our existence that doesn’t always mesh with mainstream liberal institutions,” he explained. “So, there are all sorts of ways that we pop up in American politics and force people to see things they don’t want to see.”
Among new voters, Hispanics loom large
Aleja Hertzler-McCain, a reporter on Latino faith and American Catholicism for Religion News Service, pointed out that half of the new voters who have become eligible to vote since 2020 are Hispanic.
According to the Pew Research Center, there will be 36.2 million eligible Hispanic voters this year, up almost 4 million from 2020. While noting that U.S. Hispanics historically have low voter turnout, Hertzler said the sheer volume of new Hispanic voters could have a “big impact” on the election.
Whatever the outcome of the election, Garcia said she is “really excited” to see the Hispanic community have its voice heard in the democratic process.
“I can’t wait to see that. I’m really excited about the election for that particular reason,” she said.
“The beauty of our culture,” Garcia went on, “is we can draw from our own experiences growing up with big families, big celebrations, and also with our faith that draws us to relationship with one another. And I think that is where we can sense how [concern for] the common good is not only something that comes from God but comes from our culture as well.”
Both the accuser and the accusee are dead and yet – they continue with this.
Pathetic