Bear in mind that this is an outsiders’ perspective, but my Protestant denomination has had similar sort of problems with its educational auspices promoting lifestyles and beliefs antithetical to the denomination and Scriptural practices.  In our case, it was my local denomination that brought the Calvin’s board of regents back in line and to issue a statement of belief aligning itself with denomination.  I can only hope that CHW has the same response.

Rest assured, CHW is not the only religiously-affiliated organization that has been astray from its institutional foundation beliefs.

I don’t know the details of St. Mary’s (Reno, NV and CHW), but when we were being prepared for our second child’s birth (C-section) the nurse said, “So are you getting the tubes tied too?  Snip Snip!”  So apparently, that sounds like a common practice for c-sections.  You know, since they’re already in there.

“The bureaucracy is spent and tired ... It is sad that there are what you might call professional Catholics who make a living on their Catholicism, but in whom the spring of faith flows only faintly, in a few scattered drops.”

Scribes and pharisees or hirelings.

They all need to go.

My aunt was starved to death in a Catholic nursing home. St. Mary Manor Lansdale, PA.  They didn’t “have time” to feed her, but they could certainly take the medicaid check.

It was at this line when I stopped reading this piece: “It will take some time to drill down into all the citations [ALL’s] report provides and see how well the research holds up….”

First, ALL is not a trustworthy source. Many pro-lifers jumped that ship long ago. Miss Brown has time and again embarrassed this movement and done far more harm than good. She’s a loose canon and has never hesitated promoting misinformation just to further HER cause.

Second, for you to base your entire piece on something from Brown’s ALL—and to even go so far as to say “we don’t know if it’s true, but they said it, so let’s take that ball and run—either puts you firmly among her ilk or shows that you aren’t very familiar with her.

Do good by your fellow Christians. Don’t sink to other people’s lows.

Andy points out something that’s been on my mind a lot lately. The game of “gotcha Catholicism” is certainly running strong. I think we’re more concerned with rooting out others’ evils than worrying about our own. What was it Jesus said about planks and splinters? Now I’m not condoning any immoral acts that this hopsital is accused of doing, but the vehemence that is expressed in editorials like this makes one want to tell all his friends, “we’re not all this hate-filled.”

I don’t know if this is shocking, and I think the characterization of San Francisco is rather silly.  There is a law passed in 2007 in San Francisco called “Healthy San Francisco.” 

But I don’t think that this is limited to this health system.  I recently had a baby at a area hospital that is Catholic.  After the baby was born I was asked several times by my midwives what type of contraception I wanted. 

I always felt that it was up to the individual to decide to take it or not.

I wouldn’t describe it as “hate-filled.”  There’s a big problem with a large entity (or anyone for that matter) claiming a Catholic identity and then not living up to that. It’s a serious, widespread problem and needs to be dealt with swiftly by the Bishops. The scandal causes confusion for not only the faithful, but for everyone. If you don’t obey the teachings of the Catholic Church, you’re not really Catholic.

Andy B.
Having conducted the research myself, making certain that every single assertion is absolutely documented, I will be more than happy to make alterations should you find any inaccuracies.
—Michael

Michael, even Jimmy himself doesn’t seem too eager to stand behind your “findings.” That’s probably why Andy zeroed in on that part of the editorial.

Kind of hard to blame him. I am familiar with J. Brown. She is a piece of work.

I think Jimmy is all too eager to get behind ALL’s findings. He threw in that line simply as an escape route. If (when) ALL’s expose is found to be all hooey, he can point to his little line of caution and say, don’t blame me, I wasn’t even sure myself. He’s got to know ALL’s track record. Hence, the safety clasue.

Andy B.,

Why not go through the research and point out the hooey?  You would be doing all of us a great service.

Hey Jimmy,

Is there more info on the abortion case? I am wondering because pulmonary hypertension can lead to eclampsia and though the baby was only 11 mths there may not have been time to wait if the mothers condition was unstable enough.

here is a direct link to ALL’s report in case you missed it above: http://www.all.org/pdf/CHW_ALL_REPORT_20101220.pdf

Gordon, I think you’ve come to the wrong place if you think actual facts of the case matter. We’ve got bad people to condemn!

Sadly, the insurance market does not always provide Catholic entities with the bargaining power to negotiate health plans that do not cover contraception.  Many dioceses do so because they have no other financially feasible alternative. The key moral question is whether the entity has tried to negotiate for such a package.  Hospitals usually have more employees than dioceses, so you would think they would have more leverage.  On the other hand, insurance companies often dictate the reimbursements to hospitals, so one would wonder how much negotiating power they actually have.

I have been a reader (fan even) of NCReg for many years, but the title of this article is so offputting I don’t even know what to say. I don’t even want to read it. Even if the hospital went against Church teaching, is this really the kind of response we want to make? Is this what the body of Christ does? Maybe the bishop should strip the word Catholic from NCR, too. That was uncharitable. See what you made me do? It’s contageous.

The attitudes of the CHW hospitals aren’t confined to just CHW.  My wife,an Obstetrician/Gynecologist who strictly follows our Catholic teaching in her medical practice - no tying of tubes, no birth control whatsoever - was told upon inquiring about an available position at a Catholic hospital in Minnesota that they have no need for an OB/GYN of her kind.  When my wife responded by pointing out the fact that the hospital’s website had a direct link to the Catholic Church’s documents on medical bioethics, she was politely told, “Well, we don’t let that get in the way of patient care.”  I’m not surprised, though I am saddened, by other Catholic-in-name-only healthcare facilities. I hope and pray more bishops stand up for the truth and put an end to the shenanigans.

Direct abortion is never permitted, even to save the mother’s life.

What do I think, Jimmy? Well I think you are making a major mountain out of a very minor molehill. If you think that CHW is major source of evil in the world, you need to have your priorities adjusted. Not all CHW hospitals are Catholic. Many are secular both in name and in nature. Not all employees at CHW hospitals are Catholic. Not all physicians practicing at CHW hospitals are Catholic. It is very difficult to find a health insurance policy designed exclusively for Catholics. Even my personal Blue Cross Blue Shield policy has coverage for vasectomies. But no one is being forced to undergo sterilization or to use unapproved methods of birth control, are they?
Of course, statistics show that proportionately the number of married catholic couples using birth control is the same as that in the general public in the USA. But let’s not let reality get in the way of our moral outrage.
Have a happy Christmas.

What do I think, Jimmy? Well I think you are making a major mountain out of a very minor molehill. If you think that CHW is major source of evil in the world, you need to have your priorities adjusted. Not all CHW hospitals are Catholic. Many are secular both in name and in nature. Not all employees at CHW hospitals are Catholic. Not all physicians practicing at CHW hospitals are Catholic. It is very difficult to find a health insurance policy designed exclusively for Catholics. Even my personal Blue Cross Blue Shield policy has coverage for vasectomies. But no one is being forced to undergo sterilization or to use unapproved methods of birth control, are they?
Of course, statistics show that proportionately the number of married catholic couples using birth control is the same as that in the general public in the USA. But let’s not let reality get in the way of our moral outrage.
Have a happy Christmas.

Thanks, Daniel, we were all wondering. Hey everyone…Daniel just cleared up the issue for us. We can go home now.

Richard,

The USCCB ERD’s state that even non-Catholic “affiliated” hospitals a Catholic system runs should not be providing sterilization and contraceptives.  Its all about participation and cooperation.

If Catholic Healthcare West wants to keep providing these sorts of services, they should change their name and status as a “Catholic” health system. Simple.

Where did everyone go? I wasn’t serious in my comment above.

Why oh why are Catholic media sinking to the level of secular media? To create headlines, to manufacture stories, w/all the ifs, but, perhaps, etc. that the piece of info can bear. What happened to Catholic principles in Catholic media. Admittedly we must compete w/secularism for the minds/hearts of the people in these times,  as even the Holy Father states, but w/Catholic principles, i.e., cardinal virtues;reason and faith and particularly TRUTH. There are too many Catholic media sources which now have become mirror images of their secular counterparts w/innuendos, here say, and pure fabrication, even falsehoods.

It may well be that our Catholic Institutions need purification but I believe our Catholic media does as well.

Sorry about the double posting above.
The reason associations like CHW came into existence in the first place was to simplify and decrease overhead costs by negotiating reimbursement contracts with 3rd party payees as a group. The same goes for employee benefit packages.
No one here is attempting to intentionally subvert catholic moral teaching.

Richard, stop trying to inject intelligence into this conversation.

Did those supporting CHW eat a bowl of “evil tolerance” this morning for breakfast?  Did you SEE the organizations CHW directly granted money to?  CHW gave money to the San Francisco Health Project, which provides birth control and abortions to little girls as young as 12 without notifying parents in any way whatsoever!  CHW’s CEO co-chaired the council that created the Healthy San Francisco program, which performs elective abortions.  Hello???  Direct participation, anyone?

I understand why you are getting frustrated, Michael H. I get frustrated too when it seems that everyone except the loons take me seriously.

The National Catholic Register ought to consider changing its name to the National Catholic Inquirer, or perhaps Inquisitor.  This is the season of Advent.  These journalistic autos-da-fe are out of season.

Yeah, Jimmy, how can you be upset over this little issue? We’re just talking about potential wide-spread violations of basic Church teachings. Did you have to interrupt advent? What’s the deal?

Remember how Jesus responded to those money changers in the Temple? I mean, those guys were helping people get ready for their religious observances, right? Jesus was understanding of their point of view and agreed with their ends. He cut them some slack. He certainly didn’t get angry or do something drastic. Jesus let them go about their business. Can’t you?

Right on, Michael & David!

Jesus told sinners to REPENT of their sins when he forgave them.  He did not say keep sinning and I will understand the difficult situation you are in.  He said `Go, and sin no more.` 

I get so frustrated when I am called `too Catholic`....  There is only one way to be Catholic…...  You either are or you aren`t…..

Please check in the Sacramento,CA Area with an organization entitled SOHLNET. It stands for Sanctity of Human Life Network and is a Christian pro life evangelical group that attempted to expose a number of practicing abortionist doctors with privileges at CHW hospitals. I don’t believe they were able to get very far with their expose. Personally, I was aware years ago of at least one abortionist on staff at a Mercy Hospital. When I attempted to identify this doctor, I received a very threatening letter from the CMA, California Medical Association stating they planned to sue me if I pursued my allegations any further. The Culture of Death has indeed penetrated CHW and the Diocese really does not want to acknowledge this fact. Believe me, our Diocese has been notified more than once about this.

I have to say, I’m a little shocked at the comments insinuating that Jimmy is a muckraker. He’s about as fair as a human being can be, and not only in this article, but in just about everything I’ve ever read of his and everything I’ve ever heard him say on the radio.
Did you notice the question mark in his headline? Look at what he does with each one of these allegations: he goes out of his way to imagine a scenario in which CHW is not at fault. And even then, he notes that the allegations might not be true to begin with. I wouldn’t be surprised if, when you look up “hermeneutic of charity” on Wikipedia, there’s just a picture of Jimmy Akin. He would be fired on his first day as an Inquisitor.

I can’t believe these comments are being made about an article in The National Catholic Register.  They sound more like comments made by readers of the National Catholic Reporter - you know - the one that thinks that the teachings of the Church are negotiable because they’re not sympathetic to the ‘feelings’ and ‘needs’ of people.

“ALL’s Record??”  Whatever!  ALL has done nothing but fight to defend our faith and the unborn and our Faith and did I say the Unborn!!  All you armchair quarter backs, stop fence sitting and get with the program.  It’s irritating to have to continually see and hear the crap that you American Catholic Trolls spew.  Not one of you are willing to spend one moment of time to save the lives and souls of anyone, not even your own.  Lead, Follow or the the HELL out of the way!!

Speaking of “moral outrage” and being “hate filled”... interesting how morally outraged and filled with hate some people get when someone tries to shed some light on what a Catholic healthcare network is doing. Why do some people get so angry with the messenger and not with the message? Doesn’t seem very “rational” to me.

So many “Catholic” institutions give lip service to Catholicism, because the label brings in customers. Notre Dame, and now this. Forty years of “progress” since the Council, forty years and heading for the cliff.

Can anyone substantiate Andy B.‘s claims of ALL’s misinformation and lack of trustworthiness?  From what I’ve seen and read, Judie Brown is right on the nose with her allegations - including the hornet’s nest last year regarding the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD).

So, if anyone can back up the allegations against the American Life League, please note them here, so we may all be informed. (That’s how debate is *supposed* to work - not with ad hominem attacks, but with facts.)

Curiouser and curiouser. Jimmy’s carrying a story that is being lead by a local bishop. The bishop appears to be doing all he can to bring a particular hospital back into the fold. Inquisitor? Auto-da-fe? (By the way, those were conducted by local civil authorities.) Nobody is going to be put in jail let alone burned. This is a branding issue not a criminal investigation. If the hospital started Catholic but is no longer Catholic, the Church should no longer support it. Pretty simple, I think. If an Apple Store starting selling Zunes or Wintel computers, how long do you think Apple would support it?

What’s very interesting is the lack of support he’s getting from his fellow bishops. They know—and I suspect he does also by now—that he took this a couple steps too far. We’ve seen the same thing happen to Burke, Chaput and Bruskowitz. The only people who cheer them on when they make one of their ill-conceived pronouncements are the extremist Catholics. Most of their fellow bishops are smart and pastoral enough to avoid such scandalous behavior, and are not about to let one of their fellow, less savy, brothers drag them down.

There are a lot of “charity” cards being thrown out there, despite the demonization of Brown and ALL (the charity double-standard is always par for the course for the “charity” card throwers), but I haven’t seen anyone come out with evidence that the data compiled by ALL is false.  Just a ton of “Jimmy Akin and NCReg, ya’ll a bunch a meanies!  Judy Brown is a lying b*tch, but Jimmy is participating in character assassination for daring to say that CHW, which already has a bad reputation from the Arizona incident, may actually have more widespread difficulties following Catholic teaching”.

Spare me the planks/specks talk until you straighten up your own act people.  It’s more than likely that CHW is participating in this stuff as the cosmetic research was done by strictly pulling the information from the websites of their affiliates.

“We’ve seen the same thing happen to Burke, Chaput and Bruskowitz. The only people who cheer them on when they make one of their ill-conceived pronouncements are the extremist Catholics. Most of their fellow bishops are smart and pastoral enough to avoid such scandalous behavior, and are not about to let one of their fellow, less savy, brothers drag them down.”

Hey Preston, you’ve mistaken NCRegister for NCReporter… go back to your side of the block.  The logic of the liberal “catholic”: Bishop leading his flock in the teachings of Christ = scandalous behavior.  Brilliant.

Apparently Preston W thinks standing out from the herd is “scandalous”. I always thought that might well be leadership depending on what is being done. And those who think he is leading are “extremist”. Empty innuendo is just that, empty. Do you have something of substance to say, Preston?

Bishop Olmsted Pulled Support from St. Joseph’s Hospital, citing the following:

“They have not addressed in an adequate manner the scandal caused by the abortion,” Olmstead said. “Moreover, I have recently learned that many other violations of the ethical and religious directives have been taking place at Catholic Healthcare West facilities in Arizona throughout my seven years as bishop of Phoenix and far longer.”

http://www.kpho.com/news/26206651/detail.html

The bishop’s office just announced that he is withdrawing his recognition of St. Joseph’s as a “Catholic” hospital.
I’m sure he’ll soon discover the diocese needs St Joe’s more than the hospital needs him.
This year my donation to the CDA will go to St. Joe’s instead.

Right on, Mr. Akin!

Obviously you will be attacked. Bernard Shaw said, when he found one of his enemies agreeing with him: “Where did I go wrong?”.

There is much confusion caused by not realizing that Church simply states natural law; much as it might say that objects unless prevented fall to the ground, or 2 + 2 equals 4, or that male and female are complementary throughout nature. Jump out of 3rd story window, and the ground below will not turn into a soft mattress because you want to jump out of the window.

It is only too obvious that many medical people are doing what they do for the money. It is why Galileo’s mother pushed him to become a doctor: “That’s where the money is!”. Hippocrates long ago warned against that disease called thirst for lucre.

Richard, help me undersdtand that logic, please….  Do healthcare organizations of any sort really need donations?  Seriously, you are going to take money AWAY from a legitimately Catholic non-profit entity that at least tries to follow the teachings of Christ as understood by the Church and give it to an organization that obviously has beliefs and practices antithetical to His teachings?
  Please help me understnad the rationale.

For those unaware of ewaht the CDA is:

“The Charity and Development Appeal (CDA) is the one Diocesan appeal that asks every Catholic family to financially and prayerfully support the more than 70 charitable, educational, and spiritual organizations which counsel, feed, clothe, house, educate, and comfort those in need throughout the four Arizona counties (Mohave, Maricopa, Coconino and Yavapai) within our Diocese. We are a family and the CDA serves the needs of our people beyond the boundaries of any one parish. As a result, more people are served across the community as well as within the parishes.”

taken directly from Diocese of Phoenix’s website….

I was not refering to ALL’s report, merely the facts of the case with the women suffering from pulmonary hypertension.  Danial Latinus if it is true that you can not terminate a pregancy even if the mother’s life is in danger, what is the other option?  Eclampsia is serious and a baby is not viable until ~24 weeks gestational age.  You don’t save the life of the child by allowing the mother to die.  Is there a canon law regarding this?

I get confused when my church says oral contraception, diaphragms, vasectomies and getting the tubes tied are immoral and then it applies it’s name, moral and financial support to institutions that profit from those things. It seems to be SOP for most bishops, and that makes me very sad.
I am encouraged by Bishops Olmsted Burke, Chaput and Bruskowitz when they separate morality from popularity. THANK YOU BISHOP OLMSTED!

Marybeth,
I must admit my issue is with this particular bishop rather than the CDA itself.
Certainly healthcare organizations, especially hospitals, are in need of donations. They are required to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars of emergency services for treatment of patients who cannot pay for these services. This is particularly true in Arizona with its large numbers of undocumented immigrants. They need money for capital expansion as well and this is rarely covered by collections for services rendered. The Barrow Neurological Institute is also a part of St Joe’s hospital. This nationally known research center is also in need of funding for its various medical research projects.
In regard to the current controversy, I believe that there are many situations in which innocent human lives are lost other than abortion (and I do not accept the bishop’s conclusion that recent events at the hospital constituted a direct abortion). Unjust wars with countless non-combatant casualties. Extreme poverty resulting in death from malnutrition and exposure. Lack of basic medical care. The unfortunate immigration system in this country.  Etc., etc.
Yet in the face of the great financial crisis of 2009, with food bank shelves empty and homeless persons wandering the street, this bishop saw fit to donate $50,000 of diocesan funds to a political campaign to fight legalization of same sex marriage in the state of Maine.
Sorry, but I would much prefer to donate my money directly to Catholic Charities, St. Mary’s food bank, Maggie’s place, and so forth rather than trust it in the hands of this incompetent ordinary.

“I must admit my issue is with this particular bishop rather than the CDA itself.”

You are siding with the wolves against the shepherd, then. Bishop Olmstead is defending the foundational tenants of the Faith from being watered down by moral relativists. One cannot do evil that good may come of it. This is Catholicism 101. This is the Bishop’s, and the Church’s, mission.

@Richard Grant.

I can read your politics just by looking at the causes you favor.  In any case. stick to the point. You personal opinion about what is, or is not moral, is a a matter for you to decide.  The bishops speaks for the universal Church, and in this case he has decided that the facts lead to the conclusion that it was a direct abortion.  My guess is that you really don’t accept that the unborn child is a person.

David B.

Too many Catholics have got into the habit of thinking that their opinions—whatever their validity—have any authority.

Gordon McDougall, et al;

The issue isn’t about whose life to take or save, the issue is that the Church deems it illicit to intentionally take *ANY* life, period.  To decide one life is more valuable than another not only devalues the dignity of those lives involved, but it also deprives the woman and her baby of the possibility for the intercession of God’s divine grace. With God there is always hope.  To define that life as valuable merely because it has reached the stage of viability outside the womb only complicates things further.  A fully developed new born baby cannot live on its own outside the womb without the aid of a caregiver.  Should we then decide it’s okay to terminate children if the mother dies of some other complication because it’s not viable, at least not of its own power?  The reason the church is so adamant about not taking any life is because of the slippery slope we begin to descend if we start making exceptions to the rule.  Peace and blessings to all this coming Christmas season.

@Gordon MacDougall,

Dude?!  Like there’s no treatment for pulmonary hypertension?  What are you some sort of medical determinist, a pessimist, or just some guy who wants to find any lame excuse to oppose Church teaching?  Because the mother (ex) had pulmonary hypertension, it does not follow that she WILL suffer from eclampsia.  Come on, bro.  You can do better than repeating that same ol’ ignorant line.  I know you can.

For instance you can go with the logic of some of the other NCReporter readers who have left comments here like: a bishop loyal to Church teaching = scandal; a faux Catholic hospital losing its official “Catholic” designation = they deserve more donations and the Catholic Charities that are loyal to Church teaching deserve less.

@ToddC,

Gordon is taking a different approach to his dissent.  He’s claiming that pulmonary hypertension will absolutely result in eclampsia in pregnant women… there is no possible treatment in his view (at least if he doesn’t want his logic to fall apart, that is what he must imply).

So, Gordon must be a hypochondriac at best.  If he catches a cold, he is guaranteed to catch pnuemonia, because there is nothing he can do to stop it.

Richard Grant has the flawed “seamless garment” outlook where he believes that abortion is on par with children not receiving their school lunches.  He also somehow revealed that he thinks gay marriage is part of that garment… so apparently he’s weaved his own seamless garment instead of just using the one that his patron saint Bernardin weaved for him.

Onward, Richard!  Back to Vox Nova or NCReporter!

@Joe.

I see your point, but Gordon is advocating the taking of an unborn life in order to (potentially) save the life of the mother.  At the end of his post he asked what canon law was applicable and I gave the gist of it to him.

ToddC,

Right… he’s doing alot of things to justify taking the life of an unborn child, he just doesn’t make any rational sense… so he has to fall back on “show me the canon law” as if he’s not aware of the Church’s teachings and everyone here is a canon lawyer.  Gimme a break.  That’s the equivalent of saying, “LOOK!  What’s that in the sky?!”, then breaking into a sprint the minute you turn to look at the phantom he was pointing at.

Anyway, if the mother did indeed have eclampsia, then the situation could have been different (because, at that point, the mother’s life is in danger and the child could not survive without the mother so it may, in that case, be just to abort the child to save the mother).  But that isn’t the case here.  The only way for Gordon’s logic to pass is for eclampsia to always and everywhere be the inevitable result of pulmonary hypertension for pregnant women if the pregnancy is allowed to continue… and that simply isn’t true.  That’s why you can basically write off Gordon with the rest of his pals and their silly logic that have been spamming Akin’s blog because their nickers are in a twist that another ally of theirs has gotten their comeuppance, publicly I might add.  While Gordon and his pals still receive Holy Communion in spite of the Church and their current state of material heresy.

No surprise here CHW is an health care organization that is rotten to the core.

the nun was excommunicated, this was a good move.

@John Schuh: It’s not that Catholics have gotten into the habit of being their own authority. God created us that way. We are judged individually. It’s rather that they have gotten out the habit of taking responsibility. If you hear something tell you it is all someone else’s fault, think of Adam and Eve in the Garden.

@Kat Malone: The nun was not excommunicated. She excommunicated herself which the bishop pointed out. Some people think this is some kind of punishment when it is a call to the Church’s teaching, “Come back, you’re not with us anymore.” Non-Catholics cannot excommunicate themselves as they are not in communion with us in the first place.

@Richard Grant: You are welcome to disagree with the bishop! You are not welcome to condemn him for not agreeing with you. He carries a responsibility that you do not.

@Mike Melendez

You are confusing free choice with authority to speak.  As a Catholic I have the right to criticize bishops but I do not have authority to say definitively what is, or is not Catholic doctrine.  My opinion is just that, no more and no less. Speak out, by all means. But don’t assume that your opinion is authoritative. What binds bishops is not popular opinion but the teachings of the universal Church. And you do not speak for the universal Church, in fact you do not even appeal to them.

Good new article on the whole situation:

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1005213.htm

.

I just think that it’s swell that we finally got bishops who are manning up to their duty as pastors.

Deo gratias!

Preston, you might want to watch the Passion and read the Passion in your side table bible, Jesus was an extreme Catholic.  We are to live and act in His image and likeness.  If all of us “Catholics” would take the word of God seriously, there would be no such thing as “extreme” Catholics, just faithful Catholics.  It’s a disgrace that the Luke Warm refuse change, but continue to label the faithful.

Bottom line, I would like to ask any mother in this situation who has four children waiting for her at home, with an innocent in the womb… Line up your four children at home, look into their eyes and choose which you want to sacrafice for your own life instead of picking on the defenseless. 

Because these children are hidden in the “protection” of their mother’s womb they are discarded like trash. Why?  Because the mother cannot look into her child’s eyes. 

We have removed the value of a Mother’s sacraficial love by supporting and encouraging a mother to choose her own life over the life of her innocent child.  DISGRACEFUL!

Gordon: Evangelium vitae 62: “Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops-who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine-I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being.”  (Pope John Paul II, 1995

Regardless of how serious ecclampsia can be, the act of direct abortion is never justified, as it is MURDER.  Murder, in case you forgot, is always and everywhere condemned.

It has been my understanding that no evil act can be peformed, even if it leads to a positive end.  What is being said here is that if the positive end is good, then the Church says it’s OK.  I don’t understand this.  This sounds like the Church is saying the ends justify the means.

@ToddC, I’m sorry about your wife’s experience but I am heartened by her dedication to follow Church teaching.  I’ve often wondered how an OB/GYN would function in the world of today, where abortion for convenience is considered a right by so many people.

@LisaG:
Nice holiday spirit.  What you wrote made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.  Ah, Advent.
Actually your post makes me think that somebody needs a nap.

“Kind of hard to blame him. I am familiar with J. Brown. She is a piece of work.”

Yeah, the best peace.. She has dedicated her life to tirelessly shining the light on this evil, and defending and bringing peace to the unborn, all in the name of Her Saviour who was born on this day. Who knows how many lives she has touched and saved with her efforts.. we would be blessed to have 1000 more like her.

@Jurrine
Thanks for your kind thoughts.  When my wife had her epiphany the local medical community(only the female MD’s, actually)had a collective fit about it.  Once we were shown the truth there was no way of going back, though.  It cost us everything we had, but in the end we got it all back—plus persecution! Peace in the New Born King!

I recently saw a report that tells how a British soldier took a bullet, deliberately not firing, because if he had he would probably have hit a young child standing in the way. Not his child, BTW.  True Grit.

good point,jim..but could you use fewer words to make it, please? It might not be so off-putting. Most importantly:pregnancy termination is not a remedy for pulmonary hypertension & anyone calling such an abortion therapeutic for the gravida is simply unqualified to be a health-care provider. Period. (yes, I graduated from medical school!) Peace.

St. Joseph’s hospital is not in line with Catholic ideologies, therefore
Bishop Olmstead had no choice, but to strip St. Joseph’s of their Catholic affiliation.

http://pblosser.blogspot.com/2011/01/sin-against-holy-spirit.html

The following is a synopsis of a bulletin insert entitled “Those Who Defend Evildoing,” by Fr. Robert D. Smith:
... It is possible to think of a sin against the Holy spirit, the sin which Christ says will never be forgiven (Matt. 12:32), as an obscure and rare sin ... But is it really so rare?

What is it? Christ identifies it quite clearly. It relates essentially to a commitment to identifying a good action as having an evil source or else evil actions as having a good source ....

... The person who defends his own sins in a public way in conversation of some kind, is often admitting not just the sin but also that he is committing a sin against the Holy Spirit. What we hear most often is not a statement such as “I arranged for an abortion. I know it is wrong, but I did it out of human weakness.” No, rather we often hear, “I arranged for an abortion and did so out of the goodness of my heart to help those close to me and to help humanity.” ...

What such a person is defending is what Christ Himself identifies as a sin against the Holy Spirit. “Adulterous conduct, fornication, stealing, false witness, blasphemy” do not come from a good heart, but “make a man impure” (Matt. 15:18-20). Such actions by no means constitute evidence of goodwill.

This is why all sin is so dangerous. And any delay of repentance leads strongly away from the initial sense of wrongdoing, into the increasing, naturally human conviction that one must, after all, still mean well even in the sin itself. The person who does not go this far and who keeps his sense of his own wrongdoing has retained a strong position from which to repent. Not so with the person who has allowed himself to slip into the kind of self-righteousness which involves calling himself good for his very evil acts themselves.

Can it be that when Christ dispatches His angels on Judgment Day to gather all evildoers to hurl them into the fiery furnace (Matt. 13:41-42), it will turn out that many if not most of these evildoers heading directly and headlong for damnation will have somehow, during life, in addition to their iniquity itself, committed themselves to some kind of sin against the Holy Spirit, become involved long-term in the defense of their evildoing as good?

I believe St Joseph’s President and CEO Linda Hunt said it best:

“We will always try to save both lives. In this case it was impossible. Rather than let both the mother and the baby die, we saved the only life we could.”

To Ms. Hunt I say, “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!” And, no, I did not graduate from medical school.  I do follow the facts. Bishop Olmsted did not make a hasty decision. Many experts in the medical field have said that what was done did not change and/or improve the physical condition of the mother. It did change and did not improve the physical condition of the child. Mr. Ahlstrom, if you believe Ms. Hunt ‘because she said so,’ I hope you haven’t ever and never will have to decide whether a teenager is telling you the truth.

@SAMHK:

So the Bishop weighed the evidence and made his decision.  Ms. Hunt did not make her case, and now she is complaining about losing. It happens.  The problem is that she is refusing to accept the decision, and in effect denying the authority of the bishop to make it.

RE: John Ahlstrom

Ms. Hunt’s statement is factually incorrect.  They intentionally took the life of the child, an illicit act of murder.

This is my first post on the National Catholic Register, and I have 2 general comments:(1) It’s troubling how quickly some commenters (on both sides of the issue) go for ad hoc attacks related to the original piece or other commenters and (2) to those complaining of the Register covering this issue, I’m reminded of a Protestant radio evangelist’s comment: “Sometimes silence isn’t golden; sometimes it’s just yellow.”