lifesitenews--2020-02-08--French Senate passes bioethics law allowing lesbians to artificially procreate

February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The French Senate adopted the draft bioethics law currently under discussion in that body by a relatively small margin of 10 votes on Tuesday .
One of its most spectacular elements , the legalization of access to artificially assisted procreation for single women , including those in lesbian relationships , was confirmed , as well as the widening of possibilities for research on human embryos .
Other articles of the law were modified by the Senate , which canceled some of its more shocking propositions .
Although the higher chamber in France @ @ @ @ @ @ @ text , which remains deeply transgressive , obtained 153 votes in its favor , while 143 senators voted against and 45 abstained .
The voting was not uniform right and left — 97 of the 144 “ Les Républicains ” mainstream right-wing senators rejected the law presented by Emmanuel Macron ’ s left-wing government , while 25 voted for the text , thus bearing responsibility for its adoption .
The presidential party “ La République en marche ” ( LREM ) , created for the last presidential election and not very strong in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ six of its 24 senators voted against the text .
Almost all the 348 senators were present , a sign that the revision of France 's bioethics laws is being taken seriously .
The first such law was adopted in 1994 and was already transgressive because it legalized artificial procreation and embryo selection .
From the start , it was decided that the bioethics law would be revised every five years in order to take medical and scientific progress and new techniques into account .
As a matter of fact , the laws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time , new possibilities for embryo research , pre-implantation diagnosis , and other such transgressions were added .
The draft bioethics law now being discussed has been substantially amended by the Senate and will therefore return before the National Assembly , probably in April .
Laws are adopted definitively without a second reading in France only when adopted by both chambers in exactly the same terms .
While tens , probably even hundreds of thousands of French citizens have demonstrated twice already in Paris over the last four months against “ artificial procreation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presidential promise to feminist and LGBT activists was upheld in the text .
The proposition had also been rejected during the nationwide “ consultation ” through official public meetings and via an internet platform : about 80 percent of the participants were against allowing in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination outside a stable man-woman couple .
In its amended version , the draft law has rejected an addition made by the members of the National Assembly and supported by the government : artificial procreation , the senators voted , should not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security system , save when responding to a situation where infertility is medically verified .
This measure would exclude single women , including those in lesbian couples , who are not medically infertile .
Among other dispositions , the Senate amended and rejected the possibility for women to freeze their eggs .
The Senate also modified the way filiation will be noted in civil registers for lesbian couples .
Instead of allowing both women to appear as “ mothers ” of the child , only the mother , who carried and delivered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while the “ parent by intention ” would be required to adopt her partner ’ s child .
The pro-life Fondation Jérôme-Lejeune listed other welcome changes wrought by the senators .
They include the scrapping of the possibility to further select among test-tube embryos according to their chromosomal characteristics and the banning of transgenic embryos or “ chimera ” embryos using both human and animal material , also when using induced pluripotent human stem cells ( iPS ) .
The senators also voted against egg-freezing and the fabrication of embryos using reproductive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two donors .
They rejected the canceling of the obligation for egg and sperm donors to obtain consent from their spouses .
Also on the positive side , the Senate , as the National Assembly had already done , confirmed the banning of surrogacy , including through the transcription of foreign birth registration acts into French civil registers .
It must be added that if artificial procreation is extended to lesbians , the principle of equality will most probably lead to the jurisprudential approval of surrogacy for male homosexual couples .
And while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is already bad enough .
Firstly , the National Assembly will be free to reintroduce the modified dispositions of the draft law .
Under French constitutional law , the assembly has an edge on the Senate when the two disagree .
Several solutions exist : either the government can hasten the procedure in its favor or a second reading takes place at the Senate , and , in case of continued disagreement , the two chambers vote together , giving a certain majority to the left .
In its present amended state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-life .
For instance , it maintains one of the law ’ s innovations , which is to allow embryo research in principle , with researchers being obliged only to declare their work to the competent authorities .
This is a step worse than in the current law , which requires researchers to obtain prior permission , albeit from the pro-research “ Agence de la biomédicine.
” Under this situation , the Fondation Jérôme-Lejeune has obtained declarations of illegality for several such projects .
The same “ Agence de la biomédicine , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longer check whether parents agree that their surplus in vitro embryos be used for research .
Other transgressions include the possibility of doing research on human embryos up to 21 days of life , which the Foundation sees as an open door to research on the artificial womb .
“ Medical ” abortion , which is legal up to birth in case of malformation of the unborn child or danger to the mother 's health , is also being trivialized with the scrapping of the one-week “ cooling-off ” period before the abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conscientious objection clause associated with it will disappear from the health code .
It will no longer be necessary to consult with the parents of underage girls undergoing such a “ medical ” abortion .
Partial abortions in the case of multiple pregnancies are also being made legal .
According to propositions voted for by both the National Assembly and the Senate , prenatal diagnosis , potentially leading to abortion , will be extended to cases where genetic anomalies become apparent .
During the discussions at the Senate , regular demonstrations were held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially against embryo research .
A new national demonstration against “ artificial procreation without a father ” is to take place on March 8 .

The bill passed by the Senate is watered down but still extremely transgressive.
Analysis
February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The French Senate adopted the draft bioethics law currently under discussion in that body by a relatively small margin of 10 votes on Tuesday. One of its most spectacular elements, the legalization of access to artificially assisted procreation for single women, including those in lesbian relationships, was confirmed, as well as the widening of possibilities for research on human embryos. Other articles of the law were modified by the Senate, which canceled some of its more shocking propositions.
Although the higher chamber in France still has a right-of-center majority, the text, which remains deeply transgressive, obtained 153 votes in its favor, while 143 senators voted against and 45 abstained. The voting was not uniform right and left — 97 of the 144 “Les Républicains” mainstream right-wing senators rejected the law presented by Emmanuel Macron’s left-wing government, while 25 voted for the text, thus bearing responsibility for its adoption.
The presidential party “La République en marche” (LREM), created for the last presidential election and not very strong in the Senate, was itself divided: six of its 24 senators voted against the text.
Almost all the 348 senators were present, a sign that the revision of France's bioethics laws is being taken seriously. The first such law was adopted in 1994 and was already transgressive because it legalized artificial procreation and embryo selection.
From the start, it was decided that the bioethics law would be revised every five years in order to take medical and scientific progress and new techniques into account. As a matter of fact, the laws were revised over larger intervals. Each time, new possibilities for embryo research, pre-implantation diagnosis, and other such transgressions were added.
The draft bioethics law now being discussed has been substantially amended by the Senate and will therefore return before the National Assembly, probably in April. Laws are adopted definitively without a second reading in France only when adopted by both chambers in exactly the same terms.
While tens, probably even hundreds of thousands of French citizens have demonstrated twice already in Paris over the last four months against “artificial procreation without a father,” Macron’s presidential promise to feminist and LGBT activists was upheld in the text. The proposition had also been rejected during the nationwide “consultation” through official public meetings and via an internet platform: about 80 percent of the participants were against allowing in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination outside a stable man-woman couple.
In its amended version, the draft law has rejected an addition made by the members of the National Assembly and supported by the government: artificial procreation, the senators voted, should not be funded by taxpayer funds via the social security system, save when responding to a situation where infertility is medically verified. This measure would exclude single women, including those in lesbian couples, who are not medically infertile.
Amnesty International France called it “discrimination prohibited by international law.”
Among other dispositions, the Senate amended and rejected the possibility for women to freeze their eggs. The Senate also modified the way filiation will be noted in civil registers for lesbian couples. Instead of allowing both women to appear as “mothers” of the child, only the mother, who carried and delivered the child, would be known as such, while the “parent by intention” would be required to adopt her partner’s child.
The pro-life Fondation Jérôme-Lejeune listed other welcome changes wrought by the senators. They include the scrapping of the possibility to further select among test-tube embryos according to their chromosomal characteristics and the banning of transgenic embryos or “chimera” embryos using both human and animal material, also when using induced pluripotent human stem cells (iPS).
The senators also voted against egg-freezing and the fabrication of embryos using reproductive cells, male and female, from two donors. They rejected the canceling of the obligation for egg and sperm donors to obtain consent from their spouses.
Also on the positive side, the Senate, as the National Assembly had already done, confirmed the banning of surrogacy, including through the transcription of foreign birth registration acts into French civil registers.
It must be added that if artificial procreation is extended to lesbians, the principle of equality will most probably lead to the jurisprudential approval of surrogacy for male homosexual couples.
And while the situation could be much worse, it is already bad enough.
Firstly, the National Assembly will be free to reintroduce the modified dispositions of the draft law. Under French constitutional law, the assembly has an edge on the Senate when the two disagree. Several solutions exist: either the government can hasten the procedure in its favor or a second reading takes place at the Senate, and, in case of continued disagreement, the two chambers vote together, giving a certain majority to the left.
In its present amended state, the draft law is still increasingly anti-life. For instance, it maintains one of the law’s innovations, which is to allow embryo research in principle, with researchers being obliged only to declare their work to the competent authorities. This is a step worse than in the current law, which requires researchers to obtain prior permission, albeit from the pro-research “Agence de la biomédicine.”
Under this situation, the Fondation Jérôme-Lejeune has obtained declarations of illegality for several such projects.
The same “Agence de la biomédicine,” under the new law, will no longer check whether parents agree that their surplus in vitro embryos be used for research.
Other transgressions include the possibility of doing research on human embryos up to 21 days of life, which the Foundation sees as an open door to research on the artificial womb.
“Medical” abortion, which is legal up to birth in case of malformation of the unborn child or danger to the mother's health, is also being trivialized with the scrapping of the one-week “cooling-off” period before the abortion can be performed, and the specific conscientious objection clause associated with it will disappear from the health code. It will no longer be necessary to consult with the parents of underage girls undergoing such a “medical” abortion. Partial abortions in the case of multiple pregnancies are also being made legal.
According to propositions voted for by both the National Assembly and the Senate, prenatal diagnosis, potentially leading to abortion, will be extended to cases where genetic anomalies become apparent.
During the discussions at the Senate, regular demonstrations were held near the Palais du Luxembourg in Paris, especially against embryo research.
A new national demonstration against “artificial procreation without a father” is to take place on March 8.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-08--Pope Francis has ‘final word’ on releasing Vatican report on sex abuser ex-cardinal

ROME , February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The Vatican is poised to release its long anticipated report on the disgraced former cardinal , Theodore McCarrick , but the final word is up to Pope Francis .
Cardinal Pietro Parolin , the Vatican secretary of state , told reporters on Thursday that while the report on McCarrick , the former archbishop of Washington D.C. , can be expected soon , the timing of the release is up to Pope Francis .
Cardinal Parolin said : “ I think it will come out .
I can ’ t tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to speed things up in order to publish it in the near future.
” The number-two man at the Vatican added , “ But the publication depends on the pope .
The work has been done , but the pope has the last word.
” Catholic clerics and laypeople have been expecting the report on McCarrick .
Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing , Michigan , for instance , told EWTN that he had asked the pope in December about McCarrick .
He said he was happy to learn that the report was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Texas told reporters in January that he had also asked the pope about the report during his ad limina visit to the Vatican .
In the U.S. , there has been much anticipation for the Vatican report and whether it may reveal how McCarrick was able to rise through the hierarchy despite decades of rumors of sexual misconduct involving adult male seminarians .
There had long been stories circulating that he used his authority to coerce seminarians to sleep with him .
Despite allegations by one of his victims that came to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexual misconduct involving minors but admitted to the pope that he did occasionally share a bed with seminarians .
Pope Benedict XVI had ordered McCarrick to live in seclusion , but Pope Francis appeared to rehabilitate him and sent him on papal missions abroad .
Francis stripped McCarrick of his cardinalate only after media revelations .
Following a canonical process , McCarrick was expelled from the priesthood a year ago .
The highest-ranking Catholic churchman in the United States was found guilty by Church investigators of abuse of power and sexual abuse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has not yet faced criminal charges .
In February 2019 , McCarrick was dismissed from the clerical state when the Vatican ’ s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith found him “ guilty of the following delicts while a cleric : solicitation in the Sacrament of Confession , and sins against the Sixth Commandment with minors and with adults , with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power.
” This came after Pope Francis announced in October 2018 that McCarrick was under investigation .
Now living in seclusion at an undisclosed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absolutely no recollection ” of abusing boys .
So far , he has not admitted to sexual predation of men .
The credibility of the pope with regard to cases of sexual abuse has been questioned , despite affirmations from some that he is focused on the issue .
Cardinal Seán O ’ Malley of Boston , for example , told a Spanish interviewer this week in Madrid that the pope has “ prioritized ” the fight against sexual abuse .
In November , O ’ Malley told his colleagues of the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the McCarrick report had been drafted in Italian and that an English translation was due soon .
Questions have arisen over Pope Francis ’ s handling of accusations of sexual misconduct in several important cases .
For example , Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta , a friend and fellow Argentine , was one of the pope ’ s first episcopal nominations .
During Zanchetta ’ s time in a diocese in the north of Argentina , he was found to have pornography on his phone and was accused of sexual harassment of seminarians .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ruins and went briefly into seclusion .
After accepting Zanchetta ’ s resignation , Pope Francis created a job for him , allowing Zanchetta to manage Church finances and properties .
Zanchetta is now facing accusations before an Argentine court , to which he shuttles from time to time from his residence in Rome .
In 2009 , Fr .
Julio Grassi , an Argentine celebrity priest who had worked with impoverished children , was convicted of committing a sex act on a boy , who was just one of several victims .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Francis , was dean of the Argentine bishops , the bishops ’ executive committee commissioned a report to smear Grassi ’ s victims , reportedly on his orders .
The Executive Committee was headed by Archbishop Estanislao Karlic of Paraná , while his two vice presidents were Archbishop Eduardo Miras and Cardinal Bergoglio .
Grassi claimed throughout his trial to have support from various bishops , especially Cardinal Bergoglio , who , he said , “ never let go of my hand [ and ] is always at my side.
” However , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s defense after the latter ’ s arrest .
The eventual pope said in 2006 that “ justice will determine ” Grassi 's innocence but added that “ there is a media campaign against him , a condemnation in the media.
” Grassi received a commuted 15-year sentence for his crimes but may be released as soon as 2021 .
In May 2019 , Pope Francis said , “ I didn ’ t know anything ... nothing , nothing ” when asked by reporters about what he knew about McCarrick ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a whistleblower and former papal diplomat , however , directly accused the pope of lying .
“ What the pope said about not knowing anything is a lie .
...
He pretends not to remember what I told him about McCarrick , and he pretends that it wasn ’ t him who asked me about McCarrick in the first place.
” The pope ’ s denials came at the time when correspondence among the pope , Cardinal Parolin , and then-cardinal McCarrick confirmed that the Vatican had placed restrictions on McCarrick as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McCarrick traveled widely during Francis ’ s pontificate and played a key role in the controversial secret accord with China that was ultimately negotiated by Cardinal Parolin .

ROME, February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican is poised to release its long anticipated report on the disgraced former cardinal, Theodore McCarrick, but the final word is up to Pope Francis.
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state, told reporters on Thursday that while the report on McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington D.C., can be expected soon, the timing of the release is up to Pope Francis.
Cardinal Parolin said: “I think it will come out. I can’t tell you exactly when. We are trying to speed things up in order to publish it in the near future.” The number-two man at the Vatican added, “But the publication depends on the pope. The work has been done, but the pope has the last word.”
Catholic clerics and laypeople have been expecting the report on McCarrick. Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing, Michigan, for instance, told EWTN that he had asked the pope in December about McCarrick. He said he was happy to learn that the report was “coming.” Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas told reporters in January that he had also asked the pope about the report during his ad limina visit to the Vatican.
In the U.S., there has been much anticipation for the Vatican report and whether it may reveal how McCarrick was able to rise through the hierarchy despite decades of rumors of sexual misconduct involving adult male seminarians. There had long been stories circulating that he used his authority to coerce seminarians to sleep with him. Despite allegations by one of his victims that came to light in 2017, McCarrick has denied sexual misconduct involving minors but admitted to the pope that he did occasionally share a bed with seminarians.
Pope Benedict XVI had ordered McCarrick to live in seclusion, but Pope Francis appeared to rehabilitate him and sent him on papal missions abroad. Francis stripped McCarrick of his cardinalate only after media revelations. Following a canonical process, McCarrick was expelled from the priesthood a year ago. The highest-ranking Catholic churchman in the United States was found guilty by Church investigators of abuse of power and sexual abuse of boys and adult men. The 89-year-old has not yet faced criminal charges.
In February 2019, McCarrick was dismissed from the clerical state when the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith found him “guilty of the following delicts while a cleric: solicitation in the Sacrament of Confession, and sins against the Sixth Commandment with minors and with adults, with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power.” This came after Pope Francis announced in October 2018 that McCarrick was under investigation.
Now living in seclusion at an undisclosed location, McCarrick said he has “absolutely no recollection” of abusing boys. So far, he has not admitted to sexual predation of men.
Papal credibility in doubt
The credibility of the pope with regard to cases of sexual abuse has been questioned, despite affirmations from some that he is focused on the issue. Cardinal Seán O’Malley of Boston, for example, told a Spanish interviewer this week in Madrid that the pope has “prioritized” the fight against sexual abuse. In November, O’Malley told his colleagues of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops assembled in Baltimore that the McCarrick report had been drafted in Italian and that an English translation was due soon.
Questions have arisen over Pope Francis’s handling of accusations of sexual misconduct in several important cases. For example, Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, a friend and fellow Argentine, was one of the pope’s first episcopal nominations. During Zanchetta’s time in a diocese in the north of Argentina, he was found to have pornography on his phone and was accused of sexual harassment of seminarians. He also left the diocesan finances in ruins and went briefly into seclusion.
After accepting Zanchetta’s resignation, Pope Francis created a job for him, allowing Zanchetta to manage Church finances and properties. Zanchetta is now facing accusations before an Argentine court, to which he shuttles from time to time from his residence in Rome.
In 2009, Fr. Julio Grassi, an Argentine celebrity priest who had worked with impoverished children, was convicted of committing a sex act on a boy, who was just one of several victims. While Cardinal Bergoglio, the future Pope Francis, was dean of the Argentine bishops, the bishops’ executive committee commissioned a report to smear Grassi’s victims, reportedly on his orders. The Executive Committee was headed by Archbishop Estanislao Karlic of Paraná, while his two vice presidents were Archbishop Eduardo Miras and Cardinal Bergoglio.
Grassi claimed throughout his trial to have support from various bishops, especially Cardinal Bergoglio, who, he said, “never let go of my hand [and] is always at my side.” However, Bergoglio said little in public in Grassi’s defense after the latter’s arrest. The eventual pope said in 2006 that “justice will determine” Grassi's innocence but added that “there is a media campaign against him, a condemnation in the media.” Grassi received a commuted 15-year sentence for his crimes but may be released as soon as 2021.
In May 2019, Pope Francis said, “I didn’t know anything … nothing, nothing” when asked by reporters about what he knew about McCarrick’s immoral behavior. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, a whistleblower and former papal diplomat, however, directly accused the pope of lying. “What the pope said about not knowing anything is a lie. … He pretends not to remember what I told him about McCarrick, and he pretends that it wasn’t him who asked me about McCarrick in the first place.”
The pope’s denials came at the time when correspondence among the pope, Cardinal Parolin, and then-cardinal McCarrick confirmed that the Vatican had placed restrictions on McCarrick as far back as 2008. Nevertheless, McCarrick traveled widely during Francis’s pontificate and played a key role in the controversial secret accord with China that was ultimately negotiated by Cardinal Parolin.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-08--Trump ed secretary praises admin’s work protecting freedom to ‘practice faith without fear’

February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — U.S. secretary of education Betsy DeVos reiterated the Trump administration ’ s commitment to religious freedom recently with a new op-ed about the threat to religious expression in public schools across the country .
“ Too many students and too many teachers are separated from their faith while they are in school , ” DeVos writes in a USA Today op-ed , citing cases in which a Utah fourth-grader was told to wipe the ashes off his forehead , a Kentucky high school superintendent forced the closure of a student-operated prayer locker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coach was forced out of his job for silently praying after games .
“ These incidents indicate that too many champion the part of the First Amendment that bars an ‘ establishment of religion ’ but choose to ignore the clear admonition against ‘ prohibiting the free exercise ’ of religion , ” DeVos argues .
“ In fact , the First Amendment doesn ’ t exist to protect us from religion .
It exists to protect religion from government.
” The secretary goes on to detail the Trump administration ’ s efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , such as a recent guidance on school districts reporting and certifying their schools ’ compliance or lack thereof with federal protections for student prayer .
“ We are not enforcing unconstitutional prohibitions on school districts contracting with tutors , counselors or other similar secular services simply because of their religious affiliation , ” DeVos says .
“ We took down the previous administration ’ s list , which publicly shamed faith-based schools for requesting assurance of an exemption from Title IX , a 1972 law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the same topic during his State of the Union address earlier this week , declaring that “ in America , we don ’ t punish prayer .
We don ’ t tear down crosses .
We don ’ t ban symbols of faith .
We don ’ t muzzle preachers and pastors.
” To conservatives , judicial nominees committed to upholding the Constitution have been a highlight of Trump ’ s presidency , with most of his picks greatly pleasing pro-life and pro-family advocates .
Religious liberty has also been a priority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama administration ’ s contraception mandate to establishing a White House office tasked with fielding the concerns of religious Americans and monitoring threats as they arise .

'The First Amendment doesn't exist to protect us from religion,' wrote Secretary Betsy DeVos. 'It exists to protect religion from government.'
February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — U.S. secretary of education Betsy DeVos reiterated the Trump administration’s commitment to religious freedom recently with a new op-ed about the threat to religious expression in public schools across the country.
“Too many students and too many teachers are separated from their faith while they are in school,” DeVos writes in a USA Today op-ed, citing cases in which a Utah fourth-grader was told to wipe the ashes off his forehead, a Kentucky high school superintendent forced the closure of a student-operated prayer locker, and a Washington high school football coach was forced out of his job for silently praying after games.
“These incidents indicate that too many champion the part of the First Amendment that bars an ‘establishment of religion’ but choose to ignore the clear admonition against ‘prohibiting the free exercise’ of religion,” DeVos argues. “In fact, the First Amendment doesn’t exist to protect us from religion. It exists to protect religion from government.”
The secretary goes on to detail the Trump administration’s efforts to strengthen religious freedom protections in education, such as a recent guidance on school districts reporting and certifying their schools’ compliance or lack thereof with federal protections for student prayer.
“We are not enforcing unconstitutional prohibitions on school districts contracting with tutors, counselors or other similar secular services simply because of their religious affiliation,” DeVos says. “We took down the previous administration’s list, which publicly shamed faith-based schools for requesting assurance of an exemption from Title IX, a 1972 law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex in education.”
President Trump himself touched on the same topic during his State of the Union address earlier this week, declaring that “in America, we don’t punish prayer. We don’t tear down crosses. We don’t ban symbols of faith. We don’t muzzle preachers and pastors.”
To conservatives, judicial nominees committed to upholding the Constitution have been a highlight of Trump’s presidency, with most of his picks greatly pleasing pro-life and pro-family advocates. Religious liberty has also been a priority of this administration, from lifting the Obama administration’s contraception mandate to establishing a White House office tasked with fielding the concerns of religious Americans and monitoring threats as they arise.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-08--Catholic universities in Belgium to help train Muslim imams

LEUVEN , Belgium , February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Two prestigious Catholic universities will offer programs for the first time in Belgium to help train imams who serve as prayer leaders and preachers in mosques .
Announced at the end of 2019 , the programs of study grew out of the work of an official commission “ launched after Islamist attacks in Brussels in 2016 , ” reported weekly newspaper The Tablet .
The aim is to provide university-level education for prospective imams .
In Belgium , certain ministers of religion are paid by the government .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholic universities , this also will be possible for imams , as the courses will be recognized by the state .
Flanders Today indicated that another goal of the new programs is “ to persuade people with an Islamic vocation to study at home rather than abroad.
” “ We are building a Belgian training program for ministers in the Islamic faith in order to reduce foreign influence , ” explained Koen Geens , Belgium ’ s minister of justice and a member of the Christian Democrats .
“ It ’ s important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” According to Flanders Today , the programs are not only directed at educating imams but at preparing people “ for other roles in the Islamic faith , such as counselors , pastors and theologians .
The goal is to make sure that their religious knowledge is accompanied by an appreciation of Belgium ’ s laws and social values.
” The Catholic University of Leuven and the Catholic University of Louvain , which help to offer training for future imams , have the same history .
In 1968 , because of tensions between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two separate universities were established .
The distinct universities are now located roughly 30 kilometers apart .
As Flanders Today reported , the program of study consists of two sections , the first scheduled to last at least two years .
During that part of the program , which will take place in Leuven for those who speak Dutch and in Louvain for all French-speaking applicants , students will attend “ courses on law , political science , religious psychology and sociology , Arabic philosophy , ethics and the history of the Middle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the establishment of a program of study to prepare imams for their service , both Catholic universities had all of the courses available to their students , according to IslamiQ .
In a second and longer step , Flanders Today continued , students will have to undergo theological formation in their religion , “ including study of the Koran and some kind of internship.
” Responsible for the theological component of the program will be a new institute called AFOR , which was set up in conjunction with the government and the Executive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholic universities no longer play a role .
Salah Echallaoui , president of AFOR , told Belgian news source 7sur7 that he was satisfied to see the project launched in 2016 come to a conclusion .
“ This is part of our desire to implement an Islam of Belgium , ” he said .
“ Our wish is to no longer use imams from abroad .
And if we still have to do so in the future , we will be able to demand an equivalence of diploma or even complementary training.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as saying , “ It ’ s a bit of a dream come true .
I have seen many young people interested in the course.
” Some of them , he said , were afraid “ to have a diploma that is not recognized in Belgium .
Here , the academic side of the course is all the more important as it meets all the requirements of our universities.
” Flanders Today mentioned the Catholic University of Leuven was expecting around 30 students to start their six years of preparation for becoming an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Catholic University of Louvain , which is French-speaking , had suspended a professor for challenging his students on abortion in 2017 .
As reported by LifeSiteNews at the time , Stéphane Mercier had distributed a paper during a lecture that “ challenged the concept of a ‘ right to choose ’ and referenced abortion as murder.
” “ The murder of an innocent person capable of defending himself is revolting , but to attack someone who does not have the strength or the resources to defend himself is even more dreadful , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Catholic university issued a statement declaring its support for a woman ’ s “ right to choose.
” In the administration ’ s own words , “ The Catholic University of Louvain recalls that , in the spirit of the law decriminalizing abortion passed in 1990 , it respects the autonomy of women to make this choice , in the circumstances specified by the legislator .
”

LEUVEN, Belgium, February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Two prestigious Catholic universities will offer programs for the first time in Belgium to help train imams who serve as prayer leaders and preachers in mosques.
Announced at the end of 2019, the programs of study grew out of the work of an official commission “launched after Islamist attacks in Brussels in 2016,” reported weekly newspaper The Tablet. The aim is to provide university-level education for prospective imams.
In Belgium, certain ministers of religion are paid by the government. Following the new programs supported by two Catholic universities, this also will be possible for imams, as the courses will be recognized by the state.
Flanders Today indicated that another goal of the new programs is “to persuade people with an Islamic vocation to study at home rather than abroad.”
“We are building a Belgian training program for ministers in the Islamic faith in order to reduce foreign influence,” explained Koen Geens, Belgium’s minister of justice and a member of the Christian Democrats. “It’s important that we know what they are studying.”
According to Flanders Today, the programs are not only directed at educating imams but at preparing people “for other roles in the Islamic faith, such as counselors, pastors and theologians. The goal is to make sure that their religious knowledge is accompanied by an appreciation of Belgium’s laws and social values.”
The Catholic University of Leuven and the Catholic University of Louvain, which help to offer training for future imams, have the same history. In 1968, because of tensions between the Dutch-speaking and the French-speaking part, two separate universities were established. The distinct universities are now located roughly 30 kilometers apart.
As Flanders Today reported, the program of study consists of two sections, the first scheduled to last at least two years. During that part of the program, which will take place in Leuven for those who speak Dutch and in Louvain for all French-speaking applicants, students will attend “courses on law, political science, religious psychology and sociology, Arabic philosophy, ethics and the history of the Middle East and North Africa.”
Even before the establishment of a program of study to prepare imams for their service, both Catholic universities had all of the courses available to their students, according to IslamiQ.
In a second and longer step, Flanders Today continued, students will have to undergo theological formation in their religion, “including study of the Koran and some kind of internship.”
Responsible for the theological component of the program will be a new institute called AFOR, which was set up in conjunction with the government and the Executive of Belgian Muslims. Here, the Catholic universities no longer play a role.
Salah Echallaoui, president of AFOR, told Belgian news source 7sur7 that he was satisfied to see the project launched in 2016 come to a conclusion.
“This is part of our desire to implement an Islam of Belgium,” he said. “Our wish is to no longer use imams from abroad. And if we still have to do so in the future, we will be able to demand an equivalence of diploma or even complementary training.”
Imam Franck Hensch was quoted by 7sur7 as saying, “It’s a bit of a dream come true. I have seen many young people interested in the course.” Some of them, he said, were afraid “to have a diploma that is not recognized in Belgium. Here, the academic side of the course is all the more important as it meets all the requirements of our universities.”
Flanders Today mentioned the Catholic University of Leuven was expecting around 30 students to start their six years of preparation for becoming an imam. Courses begin this month.
The Catholic University of Louvain, which is French-speaking, had suspended a professor for challenging his students on abortion in 2017.
As reported by LifeSiteNews at the time, Stéphane Mercier had distributed a paper during a lecture that “challenged the concept of a ‘right to choose’ and referenced abortion as murder.”
“The murder of an innocent person capable of defending himself is revolting, but to attack someone who does not have the strength or the resources to defend himself is even more dreadful,” Mercier wrote.
The leadership of the Catholic university issued a statement declaring its support for a woman’s “right to choose.” In the administration’s own words, “The Catholic University of Louvain recalls that, in the spirit of the law decriminalizing abortion passed in 1990, it respects the autonomy of women to make this choice, in the circumstances specified by the legislator.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-08--13-year-old fights UK school policy allowing ‘trans girls’ into girls’ changing rooms

February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A 13-year-old UK girl is taking her local council to court after it issued guidance that would allow boys who identify as “ transgender girls ” to access girls ’ bathrooms , changing rooms , and dormitory rooms on student trips .
The guidance was issued last year as part of the Oxfordshire County Council ’ s “ Trans Inclusion Toolkit for School 2019 ” project .
The teenager , known as Miss A , is calling for a judicial review of the guidance .
In a statement published by the Safe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is supporting her legal challenge , she said , “ The toolkit has a very significant impact on me as a girl .
I am very surprised that the council never asked the opinion of girls in Oxfordshire about what we thought before they published the toolkit.
” “ Under these guidelines I have no right to privacy from the opposite sex in changing rooms , loos or on residential trips , ” she continued .
“ Sports could end up being unsafe as I am a really small teenage girl and boys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be used in any educational establishment in Oxfordshire , which possibly includes sports clubs.
” “ The guidance makes me feel that my desire for privacy , dignity , safety , and respect is wrong .
Regarding toilets , the “ toolkit ” reads : “ Children and young people are supported through the Equality Act 2010 to access the toilet that corresponds to their gender identity ; so trans girls because they are girls , can use the girls ’ toilets and trans boys the boys ’ toilets.
” “ Single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or young people who do not identify with a gender binary such as boy/girl.
” Regarding changing rooms , it states , “ In all cases , trans children and young people should have access to the changing room that corresponds to their gender identity.
” And regarding occasions when children go on overnight school trips , it states : “ As far as possible , trans children and young people should be able to sleep in dorms appropriate to their gender identity.
” Tanya Carter , spokeswoman for SSA , said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all safeguarding protocols.
” “ This guidance fails to take into account all protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010 , and will see schools and other educational settings being compelled to allow male pupils to share changing rooms , toilets and dorm rooms on residential trips with female pupils -- without parents ’ knowledge or permission , ” she said .
“ It also allows males to take part in sports alongside females , ” Carter continued .
“ This is in direct opposition to all safeguarding protocols which recommend that single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the age of eight when sleeping , using toilets and changing , and that contact sports should be segregated after puberty for safety reasons.
” Paul Conrathe , Human Rights Solicitor from Sinclairs law , the legal firm that is bringing the action , described the guidance as “ confused.
” He said it “ misrepresents the law and exposes children and young people to the potential of harm.
” Speaking of the decision to file an application for a judicial review of the guidance , Conrathe said , “ This toolkit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offer best practice guidance to educational settings .
Gender identity is not protected under the Equality Act .
“ This toolkit raises significant safeguarding concerns for children .
We will now commence proceedings in the High Court for an order setting aside the toolkit and declaring it unlawful.
” When public challenges began last year , the council defended the guidance and rejected the idea that they were failing to safeguard children .
A spokesperson for the council said last year that the “ toolkit will provide helpful guidance to schools looking to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people.
” The council acknowledged that this was “ a difficult and emotive area , ” but said they “ utterly refute the suggestion that we are failing to safeguard children.
” LifeSite contacted the council earlier today asking for comment and was provided the statement issued last year .
Victoria Edwards , an Oxford-based mother of a 12-year-old boy , had previously begun taking action against the guidance and is now crowdfunding to support Miss A ’ s case .
Edwards , who identifies as a lesbian , said the guidance “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rights of all other children and staff.
” Edwards ’ crowdjustice page continues : “ It ( the guidance ) encourages staff to affirm the chosen gender identity of any child who wishes to identify into the opposite sex while closing down avenues for staff to uphold basic safeguarding principles within schools .
It also encourages parental alienation and suggests that any parent who doesn ’ t affirm their child ’ s chosen gender identity may be a safeguarding risk and causing harm to their child.
” Dr. Tom Rogers , education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Society for the Protection of Unborn Children , told LifeSiteNews that is “ an appalling indictment of the UK education system that it ’ s now left up to children to defend themselves against the ever more dangerous excesses of political correctness.
” “ 13-year-old girls should not have to spend their time seeking judicial reviews just to ensure their own personal safety , privacy and dignity , ” Rodgers continued .
“ Oxfordshire County Council need to take a serious reality check - children can not change their sex any more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to share toilets , change and shower with the girls at school is one of the most reckless and irresponsible things you could expect the authorities to do.
” '' Labeling a child ‘ trans ’ and pushing them towards making irreversible and devastating life choices is also an act of abuse .
Schools are rapidly being turned into places where it ’ s no longer safe to leave your children , but through our Safe at School campaign we 're working with the thousands of parents all across the country who have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now standing up to challenge this madness .
”

'The guidance makes me feel that my desire for privacy, dignity, safety, and respect is wrong,' the teen said in her legal challenge.
February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A 13-year-old UK girl is taking her local council to court after it issued guidance that would allow boys who identify as “transgender girls” to access girls’ bathrooms, changing rooms, and dormitory rooms on student trips.
The guidance was issued last year as part of the Oxfordshire County Council’s “Trans Inclusion Toolkit for School 2019” project.
The teenager, known as Miss A, is calling for a judicial review of the guidance. In a statement published by the Safe School Alliance (SSA), which is supporting her legal challenge, she said, “The toolkit has a very significant impact on me as a girl. I am very surprised that the council never asked the opinion of girls in Oxfordshire about what we thought before they published the toolkit.”
“Under these guidelines I have no right to privacy from the opposite sex in changing rooms, loos or on residential trips,” she continued. “Sports could end up being unsafe as I am a really small teenage girl and boys are bigger than girls. This guidance could be used in any educational establishment in Oxfordshire, which possibly includes sports clubs.”
“The guidance makes me feel that my desire for privacy, dignity, safety, and respect is wrong.
“It makes me feel sad, powerless and confused.”
Regarding toilets, the “toolkit” reads: “Children and young people are supported through the Equality Act 2010 to access the toilet that corresponds to their gender identity; so trans girls because they are girls, can use the girls’ toilets and trans boys the boys’ toilets.”
“Single gender toilets can cause issues for children or young people who do not identify with a gender binary such as boy/girl.”
Regarding changing rooms, it states, “In all cases, trans children and young people should have access to the changing room that corresponds to their gender identity.”
And regarding occasions when children go on overnight school trips, it states: “As far as possible, trans children and young people should be able to sleep in dorms appropriate to their gender identity.”
Tanya Carter, spokeswoman for SSA, said the guidance was “in direct opposition to all safeguarding protocols.”
“This guidance fails to take into account all protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010, and will see schools and other educational settings being compelled to allow male pupils to share changing rooms, toilets and dorm rooms on residential trips with female pupils — without parents’ knowledge or permission,” she said.
“It also allows males to take part in sports alongside females,” Carter continued. “This is in direct opposition to all safeguarding protocols which recommend that single sex provision should be made for children over the age of eight when sleeping, using toilets and changing, and that contact sports should be segregated after puberty for safety reasons.”
Paul Conrathe, Human Rights Solicitor from Sinclairs law, the legal firm that is bringing the action, described the guidance as “confused.” He said it “misrepresents the law and exposes children and young people to the potential of harm.”
Speaking of the decision to file an application for a judicial review of the guidance, Conrathe said, “This toolkit significantly mistakes the law whilst purporting to offer best practice guidance to educational settings. Gender identity is not protected under the Equality Act.
“This toolkit raises significant safeguarding concerns for children. We will now commence proceedings in the High Court for an order setting aside the toolkit and declaring it unlawful.”
When public challenges began last year, the council defended the guidance and rejected the idea that they were failing to safeguard children. A spokesperson for the council said last year that the “toolkit will provide helpful guidance to schools looking to support this potentially vulnerable group of young people.” The council acknowledged that this was “a difficult and emotive area,” but said they “utterly refute the suggestion that we are failing to safeguard children.”
LifeSite contacted the council earlier today asking for comment and was provided the statement issued last year.
Victoria Edwards, an Oxford-based mother of a 12-year-old boy, had previously begun taking action against the guidance and is now crowdfunding to support Miss A’s case. Edwards, who identifies as a lesbian, said the guidance “places the rights of trans-identified children above the rights of all other children and staff.”
Edwards’ crowdjustice page continues: “It (the guidance) encourages staff to affirm the chosen gender identity of any child who wishes to identify into the opposite sex while closing down avenues for staff to uphold basic safeguarding principles within schools. It also encourages parental alienation and suggests that any parent who doesn’t affirm their child’s chosen gender identity may be a safeguarding risk and causing harm to their child.”
Dr. Tom Rogers, education manager for UK pro-life and pro-family group Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, told LifeSiteNews that is “an appalling indictment of the UK education system that it’s now left up to children to defend themselves against the ever more dangerous excesses of political correctness.”
“13-year-old girls should not have to spend their time seeking judicial reviews just to ensure their own personal safety, privacy and dignity,” Rodgers continued. “Oxfordshire County Council need to take a serious reality check – children cannot change their sex any more than adults can, and encouraging adolescent boys to share toilets, change and shower with the girls at school is one of the most reckless and irresponsible things you could expect the authorities to do.”
“Labeling a child ‘trans’ and pushing them towards making irreversible and devastating life choices is also an act of abuse. Schools are rapidly being turned into places where it’s no longer safe to leave your children, but through our Safe at School campaign we're working with the thousands of parents all across the country who have said enough is enough, and are now standing up to challenge this madness.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-08--EXCLUSIVE: Vatican bishop defends giving Communion to pro-abortion Argentine president and mistress

ROME , February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A Vatican bishop has defended giving Holy Communion to the pro-abortion president of Argentina and his mistress during their recent visit to the Vatican , saying it is a “ problem ” only for U.S. Catholics and Cardinal Raymond Burke .
The bishop accused this journalist of being a “ fanatic ” for challenging him on it .
In comments to LifeSite on February 6 , Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo , chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences , vigorously argued that canon law “ obliges ” a priest to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who present themselves for Communion .
The Argentine prelate said that only someone who has formally been excommunicated can be refused the Sacrament .
“ The [ Argentine ] president is not excommunicated , so I can give him Communion , ” Bishop Sorondo insisted .
His pro-abortion policies have “ nothing to do with it , ” he said .
Other positions are only “ the opinion of some bishops of your country , ” Bishop Sorondo told this correspondent , singling out U.S. cardinal Raymond Burke .
Canon 915 of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.
” In February 2007 , Cardinal Burke wrote an extensive , 55-page article for Periodica De Re Canonica titled “ Canon 915 : the discipline regarding the denial of Holy Communion to those obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin.
” He went on to serve as head of the Vatican ’ s highest court for over a decade ( 2008–2014 ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on social media of Argentine president Alberto Fernández , 61 , and his mistress , Fabiola Yáñez , 38 , receiving Holy Communion at a Mass celebrated by Bishop Sorondo in the crypt of St. Peter ’ s Basilica .
Following the Mass , Fernández had a 45-minute meeting with Pope Francis during which the issue of abortion was reportedly not raised .
The new Argentine president has made the legalization of abortion one of his political priorities .
At a presser following his meeting with the pope , Fernández confirmed that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and said the proposed legislation will be sent to Parliament on March 1 .
Fernández divorced his wife in 2005 and has been living with 38-year-old actress Fabiola Yáñez since 2014 ( having lived with another woman for nearly 10 years ) .
After his election in December 2019 , Yáñez moved to the Presidential Palace in Buenos Aires and acts as first lady despite their not being married .
The video of the couple receiving Communion caused an international scandal among Catholics .
One high-ranking prelate told LifeSite that several Argentinians had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ actions .
In the wake of the controversy , LifeSite sat down with Bishop Sorondo at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences ( PAS ) headquarters in the Vatican , during a two-day workshop on the Global Education Compact — Pope Francis ’ s May 2020 initiative aimed at promoting a “ new humanism.
” During the back-and-forth ( see full exchange below ) , Bishop Sorondo said refusing Holy Communion to a pro-abortion politician runs contrary not only to the “ common interpretation of the Church , ” but also to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States , Italy , and Argentina — and the pope.
” When it was pointed out that bishops ’ conferences have little authority in the matter , the Argentine prelate pivoted , justifying his position based on Pope Francis ’ s predecessors .
“ Pope John Paul II gave Communion to all the people who are in favor of abortion — all the presidents , ” he said .
The PAS chancellor also claimed that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger ( who went on to become Pope Benedict XVI ) , as prefect of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sent a “ second letter ” to U.S. bishops “ agreeing with the conclusion ” that “ we can give Communion to [ pro-abortion politicians ] because they are not excommunicated.
” Weighed against the facts , the bishop ’ s claim about Cardinal Ratzinger appears rather light .
In fact , the cardinal ’ s main text on the issue strongly opposed giving Communion to pro-abortion politicians .
In 2004 , Cardinal Ratzinger sent a letter titled “ Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion : General Principles ” to the U.S. Conference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were discussing the issue of Communion for pro-abortion politicians given the presidential candidacy of John Kerry , a pro-abortion Catholic Democrat .
He sent the letter to former cardinal Theodore McCarrick , then-archbishop of Washington , D.C. and chairman of the USCCB Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians , and Bishop Wilton Gregory , then-president of the USCCB , to clarify the Church ’ s doctrine and assist the bishops at their June 14–19 meeting in Denver .
In the letter , Cardinal Ratzinger stated , based on Canon 915 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Having received Ratzinger ’ s letter , McCarrick withheld it from his brother bishops , tempered its force , and distorted its contents .
“ I was at the meeting , we never saw it , ” Cardinal Burke told LifeSite in comments on February 7 .
At the conclusion of the June 2004 meeting , the USCCB issued a statement titled “ Catholics in Political Life.
” The relevant passage concerning pro-abortion politicians states that the “ prudential decision ” for denying them Communion rests “ with the individual bishop in accord @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The statement , while admittedly weak , notes that a bishop ’ s decision must be “ in accord with established canonical and pastoral principles.
” Cardinal Ratzinger had provided those principles in his letter .
Cardinal Ratzinger reportedly sent a second memo to the USCCB affirming that the bishops ’ statement was “ in harmony with ” his initial letter .
Yet he did not agree , as Bishop Sorondo suggested , that bishops and priests “ can give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians.
” Bishop Sorondo further downplayed the Fernández @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like former Vice President Joe Biden , telling this journalist : “ It ’ s your problem — again ; it ’ s a problem of your bishops , but it ’ s not a problem of the Church.
” Pressed on the grave public scandal caused by a pro-abortion president and his mistress receiving Communion in the heart of Christendom , the Argentine prelate said he organized the Mass because Fernández wanted to offer his people an “ example ” during his visit to Rome .
Suggesting that he might have spoken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said : “ I don ’ t have the opportunity to speak.
” “ You ’ re a priest .
You could make the opportunity , ” this correspondent replied .
“ For the good of his soul — and for the good of her soul .
St. Paul is very clear about how we can eat condemnation ” ( cf .
1 Cor .
1:29 ) , I said .
“ Yes , ” Bishop Sorondo retorted , “ but St. Paul is also very clear and said ‘ my only judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he didn ’ t .
He said that the Lord is my judge , ” ( cf .
1 Cor .
4:4 ) , I responded .
To this , Sorondo replied : “ The Lord is my judge , but the Lord is in my conscience.
” “ But if you don ’ t have a well formed conscience , where divine grace is actually active , then your conscience is probably lying to you , ” I said .
“ It ’ s the darkness of the intellect.
” Bishop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only my “ interpretation , ” and said he no longer wished to speak .
Earlier in our interview , Bishop Sorondo and I talked about why he has allowed American globalist and climate change guru Jeffrey Sachs to openly and repeatedly criticize U.S. president Donald Trump in Vatican-hosted meetings since his election .
Returning to the topic of President Trump , at what proved to be the end of our discussion , Bishop Sorondo suggested that Cardinal Burke be told that at least the Argentine president “ goes to Mass ” — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not Catholic , ” I said .
“ But he was the first president ever to go to the March for Life with thousands and thousands of young people.
” “ Yes , to have the votes of the Catholics , ” he responded .
With that , it was suggested that this correspondent seek to “ understand Catholic ideas , ” not be “ fanatic , ” and “ try to use reason.
” Bishop Sorondo then returned to his workshop on the Global Education Pact .
Here below is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sánchez Sorondo .
Diane Montagna ( DM ) : [ Archbishop Sorondo ] , why is Jeffrey Sachs allowed to criticize so much – it ’ s not the first time , I heard it back in 2017 — criticize President Trump so much ?
He says terrible things about President Trump in this room [ where Pontifical Academy of Sciences meetings are held ] , when President Trump is the most pro-life president we ’ ve had .
He is for school choice , for helping young black children .
Bishop Sorondo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticized for this .
He is criticized for other things .
DM : Or what else ?
BS : For climate change and because he doesn ’ t have any collaboration in the dialogue with the other cultures .
BS : Well I don ’ t know , it ’ s not my problem .
DM : Well , I ’ m saying this because as soon as he was elected president one of the first things he did , actually it was right before he came to visit the Pope , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders of the Muslim world about terrorism , in order to work with them to decrease terrorism .
So , there are plenty of things … it would be better to have a positive attitude .
All you hear here is negative things about President Trump when , in many respects , he ’ s been a very good president for everyone , for the poor — for everyone .
You can disagree with him on climate … BS : I don ’ t want to make an opinion about the question of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know things… BS : But Jeffrey Sachs is an American , and yesterday… DM : I heard about what he said yesterday .
BS : It was in the same line .
BS : Yes , it was worse…so it ’ s not my problem .
But there are many Americans who criticize him .
DM : This is true .
I want to ask you about another matter and that is the recent visit of the Argentinian President to the Pope .
It caused scandal that you gave him and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s known to be pro-abortion and it ’ s known he ’ s not married to that woman — but they live together .
They received Communion .
BS : This is another discussion of your country .
We don ’ t have this problem .
DM : How can you give them Communion ?
It ’ s Jesus .
It ’ s Jesus .
They ’ re living openly in adultery and he supports abortion .
BS : Sorry , sorry , do you know the canon law ?
Do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to follow canon law , not the opinion of some bishops .
And the canon law says that you can not not give – you are obliged to give Communion if somebody asks you for Communion .
Only in the case that he is excommunicated .
The President is not excommunicated , so I can give Communion if he asks me for Communion .
DM : But if he is pro-abortion… BS : Nothing to do [ with it ] .
They don ’ t say that we shouldn ’ t give Communion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is the opinion of some bishops of your country , but it is not the opinion of the bishops ’ conference .
DM : But the bishops ’ conference doesn ’ t have any authority .
BS : The Pope doesn ’ t say this .
Pope John Paul II gave Communion to all the people who are in favor of abortion – all the presidents .
So… this is the opinion only of Burke .
DM : No… there are others .
BS : Maybe two or three , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bishops ’ conference of Argentina .
It ’ s not the opinion of the bishops ’ conference of Italy .
It ’ s not the opinion of the Pope .
DM : So anyone , even someone who is living in open and grave public scandal , can go up to Communion , and you as a priest can ’ t say “ I ’ m sorry , but… ” BS : Only if he is excommunicated !
DM : But what if he has excommunicated himself by his public act of scandal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ excommunicated !
Excommunicated is a very important sentence and it needs to be communicated that he is excommunicated .
You can ’ t excommunicate a person .
DM : No , I know that .
DM : I know , but he ’ s living with this woman , they are living in open adultery … BS : It ’ s a problem of his conscience .
It ’ s not my problem .
I don ’ t have the possibility of saying no .
DM : But wouldn ’ t it be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soul … BS : You have the same problem in your country with the Vice President of Obama , no ?
DM : Exactly , and Pelosi .
Pelosi openly promotes abortion and she calls herself Catholic .
BS : So , it ’ s your problem — again .
It ’ s your practice .
It ’ s a problem of your bishops , but it ’ s not a problem of the Church .
DM : But the Eucharist is Jesus .
How can you give Jesus … BS : I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If the people ask me for Communion ; I don ’ t know if he is really in sin , or not .
I don ’ t have the possibility to say .
Maybe this day they went to confession , and he doesn ’ t want to have relations with his lady .
So , there are many questions that are impossible to resolve in this form .
DM : I know , it ’ s just this was a publicly … it went all over social media that the Argentine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pass pro-abortion … BS : It was an example that the first thing that he says and does while he was here in Rome was to speak to the Pope and in the morning , he wanted to go to the Mass , and I organized this Mass .
DM : It ’ s wonderful that he goes to Mass .
BS : And I didn ’ t know if he wanted to go to Communion .
He asked me for Communion , and I didn ’ t have reason to say no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s pro-abortion and wants to pass pro-abortion legislation .
BS : No , it ’ s not a reason to say no for Communion according to canon law .
DM : Do you know which canon it is ?
BS : Yes , I can give the canons .
There are three canons .
The first canon says we are obliged to give Communion to persons who ask for Communion .
There is only one exception and the exception is when he is excommunicated .
Of course , there are some cardinals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the opinion of the Cardinal .
DM : Well , but he knows what the canon law says .
I mean , he was the head of the Apostolic Signatura .
BS : Yes , but it ’ s an interpretation of the canon .
It ’ s not the common interpretation of the Church .
It ’ s only his interpretation and it ’ s also against the American Bishops ’ Conference .
DM : But everybody knows , and Benedict XVI said , that the bishops ’ conference doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that matter .
BS : Benedict , when he was cardinal , said “ I agree with the conclusion of the American Bishops ’ Conference.
” Yes !
Yes !
This is the question .
DM : I ’ ll look it up .
I ’ ll look it up .
If you tell me that , I ’ ll look it up .
BS : Yes , look at these things .
DM : You ’ re saying that Benedict XVI agreed that a pro-abortion… BS : This was a question that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the declaration of Cardinal Ratzinger , Cardinal Ratzinger sent a second declaration to say : “ I agree with the conclusion of the bishops ’ conference from America .
We can do this .
We can give Communion if they ask for Communion because they are not excommunicated.
” DM : Well , I ’ ll look that up .
BS : Yes , so only Cardinal Burke .
DM : There are others too .
BS : Yes , maybe two or one bishop .
But it ’ s not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem in Italy .
It ’ s not a problem with the Pope .
St. John Paul II gave Communion to [ inaudible ] , to all people , who promote abortion .
This is the practice [ inaudible ] Maybe I ’ m not happy with this .
DM : But it would be an opportunity .
This was a public scandal .
The fact that a pro-abortion president who ’ s sleeping with his mistress ... DM : Everybody knows .
She lives with him .
She acts like the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not know ?
You ’ re Argentinian .
BS : Look , this is his problem .
It ’ s not my problem .
And I don ’ t have any reason , any canonical reason , to say no .
So , what can I do ?
DM : Would you ever take an opportunity like that to speak to him , before the Mass or after the Mass ?
Before the Mass , if he wants to go to Mass .
This was all organized ... BS : No , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak .
DM : You ’ re a priest .
You could make the opportunity .
It was organized… BS : I don ’ t say more , I don ’ t say more .
Maybe I have in the future an opportunity to speak .
DM : Because these things are organized .
He didn ’ t just show up and want to go to Mass .
BS : Okay , thank you for that .
DM : I ’ m just thinking of the good of his soul – and for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paul is very clear about how we can eat condemnation upon ( cf 1 Cor .
1:29 ) … BS : Yes , but St. Paul is very clear also to say , “ my only judge is my conscience.
” St. Paul said it .
DM : No , no he didn ’ t .
He said that the Lord is his judge .
He said : “ Not even I can judge myself .
The Lord is my judge ” ( cf .
1 Cor .
4:4 ) .
BS : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lord is in my conscience .
DM : The Lord isn ’ t necessarily if we don ’ t have … BS : He ’ s not in the conscience of the bishop or the cardinal… DM : But if you don ’ t have a well-formed conscience where divine grace is actually active , then your conscience is probably lying to you .
The darkness of the intellect… BS : This is your interpretation .
Sorry , I don ’ t want to continue to speak with you because you are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polemics .
You need to be very happy and to say to your Cardinal Burke , “ Look the president [ of Argentina ] goes to the Mass.
” This is the important fact .
And your president did not go to the Mass .
DM : What do you mean , my president ?
DM : My president in terms of President Trump ?
BS : Yes .
He does not go to the Mass .
DM : But he ’ s not Catholic .
He ’ s not Catholic .
BS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difference .
DM : He ’ s not Catholic .
But President Trump went in January ... he was the first U.S. president ever to go to the March for Life with thousands and thousands of young people .
BS : Yeah , to have the votes of the Catholics .
To have the votes of the Catholics .
Say this to Cardinal Burke .
And in fact , I heard that Cardinal Burke is against President Trump .
DM : Or he went to see him ?
BS : He is against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
DM : Well , you don ’ t have to agree with everything President Trump does .
But he ’ s saving babies .
He ’ s saving babies .
BS : Please , lady , understand the Catholic ideas and do not be fanatic , do not be fanatic .
BS : If you continue to speak with me , do not be fanatic .
Try to use reason .
DM : I am .
Okay .
Thank you very much .

It’s a ‘problem’ only for U.S. Catholics and Cardinal Raymond Burke, Bishop Sánchez said.
ROME, February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A Vatican bishop has defended giving Holy Communion to the pro-abortion president of Argentina and his mistress during their recent visit to the Vatican, saying it is a “problem” only for U.S. Catholics and Cardinal Raymond Burke.
The bishop accused this journalist of being a “fanatic” for challenging him on it.
In comments to LifeSite on February 6, Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, vigorously argued that canon law “obliges” a priest to give the Eucharist to openly pro-abortion politicians who present themselves for Communion. The Argentine prelate said that only someone who has formally been excommunicated can be refused the Sacrament.
“The [Argentine] president is not excommunicated, so I can give him Communion,” Bishop Sánchez insisted. His pro-abortion policies have “nothing to do with it,” he said.
Other positions are only “the opinion of some bishops of your country,” Bishop Sánchez told this correspondent, singling out U.S. cardinal Raymond Burke.
Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law states: “Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”
In February 2007, Cardinal Burke wrote an extensive, 55-page article for Periodica De Re Canonica titled “Canon 915: the discipline regarding the denial of Holy Communion to those obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin.” He went on to serve as head of the Vatican’s highest court for over a decade (2008–2014).
The scandal
On January 31, a video circulated on social media of Argentine president Alberto Fernández, 61, and his mistress, Fabiola Yáñez, 38, receiving Holy Communion at a Mass celebrated by Bishop Sánchez in the crypt of St. Peter’s Basilica. Following the Mass, Fernández had a 45-minute meeting with Pope Francis during which the issue of abortion was reportedly not raised.
The new Argentine president has made the legalization of abortion one of his political priorities. At a presser following his meeting with the pope, Fernández confirmed that he will not back down on legalizing abortion and said the proposed legislation will be sent to Parliament on March 1.
Fernández divorced his wife in 2005 and has been living with 38-year-old actress Fabiola Yáñez since 2014 (having lived with another woman for nearly 10 years). After his election in December 2019, Yáñez moved to the Presidential Palace in Buenos Aires and acts as first lady despite their not being married.
The video of the couple receiving Communion caused an international scandal among Catholics. One high-ranking prelate told LifeSite that several Argentinians had expressed shock and dismay at their compatriots’ actions.
A frank exchange
In the wake of the controversy, LifeSite sat down with Bishop Sánchez at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (PAS) headquarters in the Vatican, during a two-day workshop on the Global Education Compact — Pope Francis’s May 2020 initiative aimed at promoting a “new humanism.”
During the back-and-forth (see full exchange below), Bishop Sánchez said refusing Holy Communion to a pro-abortion politician runs contrary not only to the “common interpretation of the Church,” but also to “the bishops’ conferences of the United States, Italy, and Argentina — and the pope.”
When it was pointed out that bishops’ conferences have little authority in the matter, the Argentine prelate pivoted, justifying his position based on Pope Francis’s predecessors.
“Pope John Paul II gave Communion to all the people who are in favor of abortion — all the presidents,” he said.
The PAS chancellor also claimed that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who went on to become Pope Benedict XVI), as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, sent a “second letter” to U.S. bishops “agreeing with the conclusion” that “we can give Communion to [pro-abortion politicians] because they are not excommunicated.”
Weighed against the facts, the bishop’s claim about Cardinal Ratzinger appears rather light. In fact, the cardinal’s main text on the issue strongly opposed giving Communion to pro-abortion politicians.
In 2004, Cardinal Ratzinger sent a letter titled “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles” to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) as they were discussing the issue of Communion for pro-abortion politicians given the presidential candidacy of John Kerry, a pro-abortion Catholic Democrat.
He sent the letter to former cardinal Theodore McCarrick, then-archbishop of Washington, D.C. and chairman of the USCCB Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians, and Bishop Wilton Gregory, then-president of the USCCB, to clarify the Church’s doctrine and assist the bishops at their June 14–19 meeting in Denver.
In the letter, Cardinal Ratzinger stated, based on Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law:
[W]hen a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.
Having received Ratzinger’s letter, McCarrick withheld it from his brother bishops, tempered its force, and distorted its contents.
“I was at the meeting, we never saw it,” Cardinal Burke told LifeSite in comments on February 7.
At the conclusion of the June 2004 meeting, the USCCB issued a statement titled “Catholics in Political Life.” The relevant passage concerning pro-abortion politicians states that the “prudential decision” for denying them Communion rests “with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles.”
The statement, while admittedly weak, notes that a bishop’s decision must be “in accord with established canonical and pastoral principles.” Cardinal Ratzinger had provided those principles in his letter.
Cardinal Ratzinger reportedly sent a second memo to the USCCB affirming that the bishops’ statement was “in harmony with” his initial letter. Yet he did not agree, as Bishop Sánchez suggested, that bishops and priests “can give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians.”
Sparring about St. Paul
Bishop Sánchez further downplayed the Fernández scandal by pointing to pro-abortion U.S. politicians like former Vice President Joe Biden, telling this journalist: “It’s your problem — again; it’s a problem of your bishops, but it’s not a problem of the Church.”
Pressed on the grave public scandal caused by a pro-abortion president and his mistress receiving Communion in the heart of Christendom, the Argentine prelate said he organized the Mass because Fernández wanted to offer his people an “example” during his visit to Rome.
Suggesting that he might have spoken with President Fernández before Mass, he said: “I don’t have the opportunity to speak.”
“You’re a priest. You could make the opportunity,” this correspondent replied. “For the good of his soul — and for the good of her soul. St. Paul is very clear about how we can eat condemnation” (cf. 1 Cor. 1:29), I said.
“Yes,” Bishop Sánchez retorted, “but St. Paul is also very clear and said ‘my only judge is my conscience.’”
“No, he didn’t. He said that the Lord is my judge,” (cf. 1 Cor. 4:4), I responded. To this, Sánchez replied: “The Lord is my judge, but the Lord is in my conscience.”
“But if you don’t have a well formed conscience, where divine grace is actually active, then your conscience is probably lying to you,” I said. “It’s the darkness of the intellect.”
Bishop Sánchez stood up, claimed this was only my “interpretation,” and said he no longer wished to speak.
A fanatic?
Earlier in our interview, Bishop Sánchez and I talked about why he has allowed American globalist and climate change guru Jeffrey Sachs to openly and repeatedly criticize U.S. president Donald Trump in Vatican-hosted meetings since his election.
Returning to the topic of President Trump, at what proved to be the end of our discussion, Bishop Sánchez suggested that Cardinal Burke be told that at least the Argentine president “goes to Mass” — unlike President Trump.
“He’s not Catholic,” I said. “But he was the first president ever to go to the March for Life with thousands and thousands of young people.”
“Yes, to have the votes of the Catholics,” he responded.
“He’s saving babies,” I said. “He’s saving babies.”
With that, it was suggested that this correspondent seek to “understand Catholic ideas,” not be “fanatic,” and “try to use reason.” Bishop Sánchez then returned to his workshop on the Global Education Pact.
Here below is the transcript of our conversation with Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo.
Diane Montagna (DM): [Bishop Sánchez], why is Jeffrey Sachs allowed to criticize so much – it’s not the first time, I heard it back in 2017 — criticize President Trump so much? He says terrible things about President Trump in this room [where Pontifical Academy of Sciences meetings are held], when President Trump is the most pro-life president we’ve had. He is for school choice, for helping young black children.
Bishop Sánchez (BS): He is not criticized for this. He is criticized for other things.
DM: For his climate change policies?
BS: For example.
DM: Or what else?
BS: For climate change and because he doesn’t have any collaboration in the dialogue with the other cultures.
DM: That’s not true.
BS: Well I don’t know, it’s not my problem.
DM: Well, I’m saying this because as soon as he was elected president one of the first things he did, actually it was right before he came to visit the Pope, he went and had a meeting with the leaders of the Muslim world about terrorism, in order to work with them to decrease terrorism. So, there are plenty of things … it would be better to have a positive attitude. All you hear here is negative things about President Trump when, in many respects, he’s been a very good president for everyone, for the poor — for everyone. You can disagree with him on climate …
BS: I don’t want to make an opinion about the question of your country, because I don’t know things…
DM: Yes.
BS: But Jeffrey Sachs is an American, and yesterday…
DM: I heard about what he said yesterday.
BS: It was in the same line.
DM: It was worse.
BS: Yes, it was worse…so it’s not my problem. But there are many Americans who criticize him.
DM: This is true.
BS: Many intelligent Americans.
DM: This is true. I want to ask you about another matter and that is the recent visit of the Argentinian President to the Pope. It caused scandal that you gave him and his mistress [Communion] — because he’s known to be pro-abortion and it’s known he’s not married to that woman — but they live together. They received Communion.
BS: This is another discussion of your country. We don’t have this problem.
DM: How can you give them Communion? It’s Jesus. It’s Jesus. They’re living openly in adultery and he supports abortion.
BS: Sorry, sorry, do you know the canon law? Do you know the canon law? We need to follow canon law, not the opinion of some bishops. And the canon law says that you cannot not give – you are obliged to give Communion if somebody asks you for Communion. Only in the case that he is excommunicated. The President is not excommunicated, so I can give Communion if he asks me for Communion.
DM: But if he is pro-abortion…
BS: Nothing to do [with it]. They don’t say that we shouldn’t give Communion to a politician who is pro-abortion. This is the opinion of some bishops of your country, but it is not the opinion of the bishops’ conference.
DM: Cardinal Raymond Burke …
BS: Cardinal Burke!
DM: But the bishops’ conference doesn’t have any authority.
BS: The Pope doesn’t say this. Pope John Paul II gave Communion to all the people who are in favor of abortion – all the presidents. So… this is the opinion only of Burke.
DM: No… there are others.
BS: Maybe two or three, but it’s not the opinion of the bishops’ conference of Argentina. It’s not the opinion of the bishops’ conference of Italy. It’s not the opinion of the Pope.
DM: So anyone, even someone who is living in open and grave public scandal, can go up to Communion, and you as a priest can’t say “I’m sorry, but…”
BS: Only if he is excommunicated!
DM: But what if he has excommunicated himself by his public act of scandal?
BS: He’s not excommunicated! Excommunicated is a very important sentence and it needs to be communicated that he is excommunicated. You can’t excommunicate a person.
DM: No, I know that.
BS: Only the bishop.
DM: I know, but he’s living with this woman, they are living in open adultery …
BS: It’s a problem of his conscience. It’s not my problem. I don’t have the possibility of saying no.
DM: But wouldn’t it be the opportunity for the sake of his soul …
BS: You have the same problem in your country with the Vice President of Obama, no?
DM: Biden
BS: Biden
DM: Exactly, and Pelosi. Pelosi openly promotes abortion and she calls herself Catholic.
BS: So, it’s your problem — again. It’s your practice. It’s a problem of your bishops, but it’s not a problem of the Church.
DM: But the Eucharist is Jesus. How can you give Jesus …
BS: I believe in the conscience of the people. If the people ask me for Communion; I don’t know if he is really in sin, or not. I don’t have the possibility to say. Maybe this day they went to confession, and he doesn’t want to have relations with his lady. So, there are many questions that are impossible to resolve in this form.
DM: I know, it’s just this was a publicly … it went all over social media that the Argentine president, who everyone knows wants to pass pro-abortion …
BS: It was an example that the first thing that he says and does while he was here in Rome was to speak to the Pope and in the morning, he wanted to go to the Mass, and I organized this Mass.
DM: It’s wonderful that he goes to Mass.
BS: And I didn’t know if he wanted to go to Communion. He asked me for Communion, and I didn’t have reason to say no.
DM: Not even if he’s pro-abortion and wants to pass pro-abortion legislation.
BS: No, it’s not a reason to say no for Communion according to canon law.
DM: Do you know which canon it is?
BS: Yes, I can give the canons. There are three canons. The first canon says we are obliged to give Communion to persons who ask for Communion. There is only one exception and the exception is when he is excommunicated. Of course, there are some cardinals like Cardinal Burke, but it is the opinion of the Cardinal.
DM: Well, but he knows what the canon law says. I mean, he was the head of the Apostolic Signatura.
BS: Yes, but it’s an interpretation of the canon. It’s not the common interpretation of the Church. It’s only his interpretation and it’s also against the American Bishops’ Conference.
DM: But everybody knows, and Benedict XVI said, that the bishops’ conference doesn’t really have any authority, not in that matter.
BS: Benedict, when he was cardinal, said “I agree with the conclusion of the American Bishops’ Conference.” Yes! Yes! This is the question.
DM: I’ll look it up. I’ll look it up. If you tell me that, I’ll look it up.
BS: Yes, look at these things.
DM: You’re saying that Benedict XVI agreed that a pro-abortion…
BS: This was a question that the American Bishops’ Conference posed and after the declaration of Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Ratzinger sent a second declaration to say: “I agree with the conclusion of the bishops’ conference from America. We can do this. We can give Communion if they ask for Communion because they are not excommunicated.”
DM: Well, I’ll look that up.
BS: Yes, so only Cardinal Burke.
DM: There are others too.
BS: Yes, maybe two or one bishop. But it’s not a problem. It’s not a problem in Italy. It’s not a problem with the Pope. St. John Paul II gave Communion to [inaudible], to all people, who promote abortion. This is the practice [inaudible] Maybe I’m not happy with this.
DM: But it would be an opportunity. This was a public scandal. The fact that a pro-abortion president who’s sleeping with his mistress…
BS: So you say…
DM: He’s living with his mistress!
BS: I don’t know. I don’t know.
DM: Everybody knows. She lives with him. She acts like the first lady.
BS: I don’t know.
DM: How can you not know? You’re Argentinian.
BS: Look, this is his problem. It’s not my problem. And I don’t have any reason, any canonical reason, to say no. So, what can I do?
DM: Would you ever take an opportunity like that to speak to him, before the Mass or after the Mass? Before the Mass, if he wants to go to Mass. This was all organized…
BS: No, I don’t have the opportunity to speak.
DM: You’re a priest. You could make the opportunity. It was organized…
BS: I don’t say more, I don’t say more. Maybe I have in the future an opportunity to speak.
DM: Because these things are organized. He didn’t just show up and want to go to Mass.
BS: Okay, thank you for that.
DM: I’m just thinking of the good of his soul – and for the good of her soul. St. Paul is very clear about how we can eat condemnation upon (cf 1 Cor. 1:29)…
BS: Yes, but St. Paul is very clear also to say, “my only judge is my conscience.” St. Paul said it.
DM: No, no he didn’t. He said that the Lord is his judge. He said: “Not even I can judge myself. The Lord is my judge” (cf. 1 Cor. 4:4).
BS: The Lord is my judge, but the Lord is in my conscience.
DM: The Lord isn’t necessarily if we don’t have …
BS: He’s not in the conscience of the bishop or the cardinal…
DM: But if you don’t have a well-formed conscience where divine grace is actually active, then your conscience is probably lying to you. The darkness of the intellect…
BS: This is your interpretation. Sorry, I don’t want to continue to speak with you because you are completely… and you want only to make polemics. You need to be very happy and to say to your Cardinal Burke, “Look the president [of Argentina] goes to the Mass.” This is the important fact. And your president did not go to the Mass.
DM: What do you mean, my president?
BS: Say this.
DM: My president in terms of President Trump?
BS: Yes. He does not go to the Mass.
DM: But he’s not Catholic. He’s not Catholic.
BS: Exactly! This is a great difference.
DM: He’s not Catholic. But President Trump went in January… he was the first U.S. president ever to go to the March for Life with thousands and thousands of young people.
BS: Yeah, to have the votes of the Catholics. To have the votes of the Catholics. Say this to Cardinal Burke. And in fact, I heard that Cardinal Burke is against President Trump.
DM: Is against?
BS: Yes. Yes.
DM: Or he went to see him?
BS: He is against many things that [Trump] says.
DM: Well, you don’t have to agree with everything President Trump does. But he’s saving babies. He’s saving babies.
BS: Please, lady, understand the Catholic ideas and do not be fanatic, do not be fanatic.
DM: Okay…
BS: If you continue to speak with me, do not be fanatic. Try to use reason.
DM: I am. Okay. Thank you very much.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-07--Federal office hit with 180k-strong petition supporting girl forced to race with boys who say they’r

Federal office hit with 180k-strong petition supporting girl forced to race with boys who say they’re girls

PETITION : Biological males do n't belong in girls ' sports !
# IStandWithSelina !
Sign the petition here .
February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – LifeSiteNews delivered a petition with nearly 200,000 signatures to the U.S. Office for Civil Rights ( OCR ) in Washington , D.C. , supporting Selina Soule 's complaint against a Connecticut state policy mandating boys who claim that they are girls to play in girls ' sports .
LifeSite ’ s Director of Advocacy , Gualberto Garcia Jones , and one of LifeSite ’ s Campaign Coordinators , Scott Schittl , hand-delivered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the OCR earlier this week .
“ This is a case of basic fairness for women in sports , ” Garcia Jones said after the petition delivery .
“ Title IX was never meant to be used to discriminate against women .
Quite the opposite , in fact .
And , until now , it has allowed women to achieve near parity in participation in sports .
That ’ s why new Title IX guidelines , which will both safeguard girls ’ competition , for girls only , as well as girls ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationwide.
” Soule is a high school senior from Glastonbury , Connecticut , who lodged a complaint with the federal Department of Education ’ s Office for Civil Rights along with two other female athletes who remain unnamed because of their fear of retaliation .
The complaint alleges that the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference ( CIAC ) discriminated against biological girls and violated their Title IX rights .
Title IX was implemented in 1972 to help ensure that girls would have the same opportunities in sports as boys , and most observers agree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Title IX never anticipated that boys would seek to compete as girls and does not mention “ gender identity.
” “ Most people know , deep down , that allowing biological boys to play in girls sports is wrong because it is unjust , ” Schittl said .
“ Not that they have anything against gender-confused boys , as people .
But it ’ s just that they want the effort – put in by the girls and women in their lives – to be vindicated by fair competition.
” “ People still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that ’ s why so many people have signed the petition , ” he added .
In Connecticut and 19 other states , girls are now forced to compete against biological boys claiming to be “ girls , ” and these policies unfairly deprive biological girls of the right to a level playing field in competitions that they can never win despite their best efforts .
As of now , a new guidance ruling by the Office for Civil Rights has not yet been issued .
During the petition delivery , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the OCR ’ s Confidential Assistants ( her official title ) , Chelsea Henderson , and she confirmed the ongoing investigation into the complaint .
CLICK HERE to sign and share this petition .

LifeSite delivered the petition backing Selina Soule to the U.S. Office for Civil Rights in Washington, D.C.
PETITION: Biological males don't belong in girls' sports! #IStandWithSelina! Sign the petition here.
February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – LifeSiteNews delivered a petition with nearly 200,000 signatures to the U.S. Office for Civil Rights (OCR) in Washington, D.C., supporting Selina Soule's complaint against a Connecticut state policy mandating boys who claim that they are girls to play in girls' sports.
LifeSite’s Director of Advocacy, Gualberto Garcia Jones, and one of LifeSite’s Campaign Coordinators, Scott Schittl, hand-delivered five 1.5-inch-thick binders full of signatures to the OCR earlier this week.
“This is a case of basic fairness for women in sports,” Garcia Jones said after the petition delivery. “Title IX was never meant to be used to discriminate against women. Quite the opposite, in fact. And, until now, it has allowed women to achieve near parity in participation in sports. That’s why new Title IX guidelines, which will both safeguard girls’ competition, for girls only, as well as girls’ safety in sport, will be welcomed nationwide.”
Soule is a high school senior from Glastonbury, Connecticut, who lodged a complaint with the federal Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights along with two other female athletes who remain unnamed because of their fear of retaliation.
The complaint alleges that the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) discriminated against biological girls and violated their Title IX rights.
Title IX was implemented in 1972 to help ensure that girls would have the same opportunities in sports as boys, and most observers agree that it has been successful.
But Title IX never anticipated that boys would seek to compete as girls and does not mention “gender identity.”
“Most people know, deep down, that allowing biological boys to play in girls sports is wrong because it is unjust,” Schittl said. “Not that they have anything against gender-confused boys, as people. But it’s just that they want the effort – put in by the girls and women in their lives – to be vindicated by fair competition.”
“People still understand basic fairness in the United States, and that’s why so many people have signed the petition,” he added.
In Connecticut and 19 other states, girls are now forced to compete against biological boys claiming to be “girls,” and these policies unfairly deprive biological girls of the right to a level playing field in competitions that they can never win despite their best efforts.
As of now, a new guidance ruling by the Office for Civil Rights has not yet been issued.
During the petition delivery, Garcia Jones and Schittl spoke to one of the OCR’s Confidential Assistants (her official title), Chelsea Henderson, and she confirmed the ongoing investigation into the complaint.
CLICK HERE to sign and share this petition.
Share