Invertebrate leadership
HARTFORD, Conn. - Roman Catholic bishops have agreed to let hospital personnel give emergency contraception to all rape victims, reversing their decision days before a new state law requires it.
The church had fought the state law by arguing it would force Catholic medical personnel to perform chemical abortions because they may be providing emergency contraception to women who are ovulating. The Catholic hospitals wanted to first perform ovulation tests, but lawmakers did not include such tests in the legislation.
The bishops now say that administering the drug, sold as Plan B, cannot be judged as an abortion.
Another story gives more details:
But Catholic Bishops of Connecticut and leaders of the Catholic hospitals said in a joint statement Thursday that "since the teaching authority of the church has not definitively resolved this matter and since there is serious doubt about how Plan B pills work," the hospitals will be allowed to provide Plan B to rape victims without first requiring ovulation tests.
"To administer Plan B without an ovulation test is not an intrinsically evil act," the statement reads.
I haven't been able to find the whole statement and there is no new information on the Connecticut Catholic Conferences' site other than older stories on why they have to fight this.
If the reporting is true I find this quite troubling. For one thing there is not serious doubt as to how Plan B works. Here is a graphic from the actual product label.
I also found "the teaching authority of the church" not definitively resolving this matter to be a bit of a red herring. The teaching authority of the Church already teaches that you can not kill an innocent human person under any circumstance. There is not going to be a deeper doctrinal understanding that will say that you can kill an innocent human person under some circumstances. There is not going to be a magisterial statement for all the ways doctors find to kill unborn children. Statements give us the principles on which to act on.
The main debate used by backers of Plan B is that it isn't an abortion until implantation. Surely a fertilized egg is a conceived human being?
I guess the Connecticut Bishops can also rewrite the hunters code. We don't need "when in doubt, don't shoot." Hey even if there is doubt you can go ahead and blast away at what might be a deer or maybe a child. Whatever happened to erring on the side of life?
"To administer Plan B without an ovulation test is not an intrinsically evil act."
Now one thing not mentioned in many of the stories is that the current policy is to conduct a pregnancy test first before using Plan B and this will continue. Though these tests are not reliable at the earlier stages of conception. I would think a certain degree of certitude would be required before possibly a conceived human being is starved to death.
"If it becomes clear that Plan B pills would lead to an early chemical abortion in some instances, this matter would have to be reopened,'' the statement said.
Well how about reading the label? Another question is if they think there is serious doubt that Plan B causes a chemical abortion then why even administer a pregnancy test? If there is doubt enought to require this test why not using more certain tests?
I also don't understand why they have backed down on this since their earlier statements? There has been no scientific research that changes any of the ethical problems. None of the basic facts have changed, so why a change in outcome?
In other news on the Catholic front.
Administrators at the university's Law Center reversed earlier this month a policy prohibiting funding for students at summer internships at organizations that promote abortion rights, after a widely publicized case in the spring which drew protest from hundreds of students.
Under the new policy, announced by Law Center Dean T. Alexander Aleinikoff in a letter published in the Law Center's student newspaper, the university will no longer consider the mission of each organization when determining grants provided by a student-run organization to students for summer internships.
So bankrolling a student working for Planned Parenthood to enable them to be an unpaid intern is about par for what passes as Catholic education.
Update: American Papist has more.
Known as 
As a resident of Connecticut I am dismayed and in turmoil by the decision of the Bishops in my state to ignore church teaching and do the bidding of the evil one.
If using contraceptives by a married couple is sinful, how is using a concentrated dose of that same chemical not also sinful? Through what looking glass are these Bishops looking?
JohnG,
It is not the contraceptive angle that is problematic. A rapist would have no right to force their sperm on a victim and methods may be used to prevent that sperm from causing conception.
It is after conception that Plan B becomes problematic.
If the reporting is true I find this quite troubling. For one thing there is not serious doubt as to how Plan B works. Here is a graphic from the actual product label.
While I think the bishops are definitely using that argument as a dodge, I don't think the product label statement proves there isn't serious doubt on the subject. The main purpose of that statement is to stop the company from getting sued, not to issue an infallible statement of scientific fact. I have no idea where the actual science is on the subject, but I would be reluctant to take the product label's word alone without reviewing the appropriate literature.
This is - if true - not only disturbing, but horrific. There is absolutely no doubt about this euphemistically called "pill" being abortifacient. The suggestion alone is laughable. Procuring an abortion is its only purpose. It's known - at least in Europe - as the "abortion pill".
In fact, I was appalled, when I first heard about it, that Catholic hospitals are distributing this "pill" at all. Even if there has not yet occurred an ovulation, this can still happen. There is no guarantee that the pill will effectively prevent the ovulation. And in that case, the egg might still be fertilized and an abortion occur.
That is why all, even "normal" (a perverse word to use in this context) "contraceptive pills" are in fact potentially abortifacient: Their primary effect is to prevent ovulation, but in case that fails they also prevent the nidation of the embryo and therefore potentially cause an abortion. This "unconvenient truth" was stated already in the 80s by now-Cardinal Caffarra, then president of the Pontifical Institute "John Paul II" for the study of Marriage and Family. This is why many dissident groups were very much protesting when he was raised to the cardinalate last year.
Amazing! If it's true, why don't the Connecticut bishops just declare that they are leading their flock out of the Catholic Church and joining the ECUSA?
Just another Church teaching being ignored in order to be 'pastoral'.
Jeff, please tell me this is one of your satire pieces. For a group of bishops erring on a matter of faith or morals... that would be inconceivable!
They fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never go in against the Vatican when life is on the line!
I'm at a loss for words on this. Et tu, Bp. Lori?
God have mercy on their souls. I think it was St. Bernard of Clairveaux who said that the road to hell is paved with the skulls of priests and bishops.
I too want to know, did Bishop Lori sign onto this?
As a pharmacist who left retail pharmacy rather than dispense birth control pills, and now after 8 years have returned because I have a conscience clause in place such that I do NOT dispense birth control pills nor plan b because of their abortifacient properties!
So these bishops now say the reason I put my career on the line is null?
If it is an 'emergency' , it is okay to give high doses of birth control?
Well, at the beginning of every week, we see young women coming in for 'emergency' contraception and it is not rape just the outcome of an immoral and permissive society that makes girls think they should be having sex outside of marriage and then 'just take care of' any little problem that might come up.
For the bishops to cave here is serious. We continue to not be able to trust our shepherds in a general sense and they make a mockery of those who have held fast. I am ashamed of them and most disappointed.
Maybe the conscience clauses will not be available because the secular world can point to our bishops and say that they say these activities are okay so who are we peons to refuse?
How could this happen when the science is so clear? God help us.
God Bless you for your courage, Magdalen.
You put your career on the line and these %!#@!s rendered your action null. And your last sentence is spot on. You could have written it about us out here in San Francisco.
Our Archbishop has let Catholic Charities supply staff to an adoption agency that proudly calls itself "the gayest adoption agency in the country." He called this "remote cooperation." Lo and behold, a couple months later the city of San Francisco ran a major ad campaign for this same agency, to help same-sex couples adopt. And what could the church say? As you said "the secular world can point to our bishops and say that they say these activities are okay" so who are we peons to differ?
Yet, we are right and they are wrong.
"You put your career on the line and these %!#@!s rendered your action null."
No they didn't. Her actions were and are still based on the Truth. The bishops in Connecticut can't change Truth.
We are proud of you.
What is so hard to understand about this:
"Consequently, from the ethical standpoint the same absolute unlawfulness of abortifacient procedures also applies to distributing, prescribing and taking the morning-after pill. All who, whether sharing the intention or not, directly co-operate with this procedure are also morally responsible for it."
-Statement from the pontifical Academy for Life, 10/31/2000 via the Vatican website - easy accessed even by Bishops....
One word: Millstone
One body part: Neck
However - there are two huge holes in this law.
First: it states that the hospital is not required to administer Plan B to a victim who has been determined to be pregnant by an FDA approved pregnancy test. All FDA test are not effective until 3 weeks after fertilization. Therefore it is perfectly legal to inform the victim that the law requires the hospital to have this test result before administering Plan B (sure - this is an absurdity - but that is how the law was written).
Second - the law states that the hospitals cannot use any medical tests (other than the pregancy test) to determine how they comply with this law (intended to prevent us from doing an ovulation test). This means that the hospital cannot do ANY tests to determine if the victim can take this drug. This is clearly an unworkable standard. A doctor can tell the victim "look - the law will not allow me to do any medical tests whatsoever before I give you a powerful hormone pill - will you agree that if you want this pill you go get it at Walmart? This will allow me to do some basic tests to make sure you are healthy. If you do not agree then you are really not agreeing to allow me to treat you - so you should go somewhere else..."
Will the bishops instruct the hospitals to do the above? For your ref. the law is Public Act No 07-24.
Here's what I want to know: if (God forbid) I get raped and turn up at a CT hospital, but want an ovulation test before I decide whether to take the pill, can they then give it to me? Or am I now effectively denied the right to make an informed decision that is consonant with my religious and moral beliefs?
Yes sir, that's my bishop (lori)! :-(
Good Lord! Can't say I'm surprised though given the shambles we're in at the Diocese of Bridgeport.
So, does this mean that the bishops consider a baby conceived by rape not worthy of life?
Mr. Flapatap:
Thanks for the correction. The anger in my heart blinded me to that.
God Bless you!
Gibbons in SF
Please say that this does not include Bishop Lori. He's the Supreme Chaplain of the Knights of Columbus. I am currently a 3rd degree Knight of Columbus. In my mind that leaves only 3 possibilities:
1. Bishop Lori publicly dissents from this ghastly error.
2. Knights of Columbus remove him as Supreme Chaplain
3. I leave the Knights
Burnt Marshwiggle,
How many Knights of Columbus are Freemasons? Is there any clear statement by Bishop Lori that KoCs are automatically excommunicated if they become Freemasons? Be honest.
Oops. I just thought of something. If Bp. Lori is complicit with the grave sin of abortion, widespread even, doesn't that mean he's automatically excommunicated as well? If that's the case, Burnt Marshwiggle, disregard that last question. It doesn't matter.
The evil one is slapping us in the face,
because we have launched an effective attack on the culture of death.
Check out the 40 days for life!
The timing is uncanny.
Keep fasting and praying!
40 Days for Life website: http://www.40daysforlife.com/about.cfm
I found Bishop Lori's blog where he clarifies his position on the Plan B decision http://www.bishoploriblog.org/
Bp. Lori:
Last time I read the CCC #2399 it calls contraception "morally unacceptable". There were no qualifiers.
Jeff
Bishop Lori to be Guest Preacher at Mass for the Health Care Professions
17th Annual ROSE MASS for the Health Care Professions
Sunday, March 2
10:30 a.m.
Church of the Little Flower
Bethesda, MD
Most Rev. Donald W. Wuerl
Archbishop of Washington
Principal Celebrant
Most Rev. William E. Lori
Bishop of Bridgeport, CT
Homilist
Stephen Ray Mitchell, M.D.
Dean of the School of Medicine, Georgetown University
Luncheon Speaker