CBS Sunday Morning News Story: "The Catholic Church: A House Divided?"

  • Thread starter Thread starter HappyAtHome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HappyAtHome

Guest
The CBS Sunday morning news show cover story was “The Catholic Church: A House Divided?”

Here is a link to the actual news story and video: cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57336316/the-catholic-church-a-house-divided/

The story is one-sided and paints a sad picture of conflict and mean, power-hungry bishops. I am so troubled by this story that I chose to devote a two-part series on my blog to it. If you would like to read my opinion, please read my blog post at: hallelujahismysong.blogspot.com/2011/12/cbs-news-catholic-church-house-divided.html

I am very interested to know what other Catholics think about this “news” story.
 
HappyAtHome said:
The CBS Sunday morning news show cover story was “The Catholic Church: A House Divided?”

Here is a link to the actual news story and video: cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57336316/the-catholic-church-a-house-divided/

The story is one-sided and paints a sad picture of conflict and mean, power-hungry bishops. I am so troubled by this story that I chose to devote a two-part series on my blog to it. If you would like to read my opinion, please read my blog post at: hallelujahismysong.blogspot.com/2011/12/cbs-news-catholic-church-house-divided.html

I am very interested to know what other Catholics think about this “news” story.
Click to expand...
The doctors SAID the heart problems were because of the pregnancy. Im no OB/GYN, but Ive never heard of anything like that. At worst Ive heard stuff like ectopic pregnancy, or various ovarian or uterine infections, but never it causing heart problems. But then again, Im no doctor so I cant say. I think more should have been done to PROVE definitively, that it was indeed the pregnancy causing the problems. But thats another issue. Just skeptical is all Im saying.

the choices we face…😊

choice 1:
opt for the pro-life answer. okay so if you dont terminate then the mother and child die. it says she’s already a mother of four. So if the father is not in the picture (the article doesnt say, so lets assume not), then the kids would have to stay either with a relative or friend. Failing that, they would mostly like end up in the system (foster care). Thats bad enough. Not to mention theyd be losing their mother.

choice 2:
take the baby and hope like everything that it can survive. but that procedure, its doubtful the mother would make it. so the outcome would be more or less the same as choice 1.

choice 3:
terminate (or kill) the baby in order to save the mother. the mother would be still alive to recover the ordeal. she could try again a few years down the road. but it will obviously put a heavy psychological and emotional trauma to try and concieve again (if she even recovers the will to do so). even then itd still be difficult to justify as you would be trading one problem for another.

I would regrettably have to say that choice 3 may be the best option. its hard to choose. the baby hasnt done anything wrong to the point of it being put to death (which terminations are just that). at the same time, you must protect and save the mother. the lesser of two evils. the third choice in my opinion would be the lesser one, though not by much. its a difficult situation no matter how one slices it.

As for the Bishop and his ruling, I cant say. Im not aware of how much power the Bishop holds, or of any other extra powers he may hold. ie. if being a member of a certain committee or conference, if those would grant him any further powers I dont know. So assuming he does indeed hold such power, then he would be within legal boundaries. the decree to declare the hospital no longer Catholic, I dont know if thats just over this one incident, or if the hospital was on thin ice to begin with, I dont know. but as long as he acted within legality and with satisfactory reflection before the action was made, I think it would still hold. the same for the excommunication. if she had “priors” so to say, that wouldnt have helped her chances. again I plead ignorance as to history and other factors. it would seem that harsh as the Bishops judgements were, it appears that he was still within legal limits. in other words, he may be a “hanging judge”. its harsh - but still within legal limits and boundaries. but to go so far as to corruption charges? who’s to say :shrug
 
HappyAtHome said:
The CBS Sunday morning news show cover story was “The Catholic Church: A House Divided?”

Here is a link to the actual news story and video: cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57336316/the-catholic-church-a-house-divided/

The story is one-sided and paints a sad picture of conflict and mean, power-hungry bishops. I am so troubled by this story that I chose to devote a two-part series on my blog to it. If you would like to read my opinion, please read my blog post at: hallelujahismysong.blogspot.com/2011/12/cbs-news-catholic-church-house-divided.html

I am very interested to know what other Catholics think about this “news” story.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a bunch of people who want to run the Church as their own. I got one thing to say to them. The Church is not yours. She belongs to the Living God. You are only let in the Church by Grace of God. you are called to obey and not rule over the Church.

Another thing I saw is that they are using the laity participationg as some kind of calling to rule over the Church.
 
dorrbell said:
I didnt see anything wrong. It was all true.
Click to expand...
What, is an “Independent” catholic pray tell:confused:

Independent = “not subject to another’s authority or jurisdiction; autonomous; free: an independent businessman.”

Catholic - The combination “the Catholic Church” (hē katholikē ekklēsia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnisans, written about the year 110. The words run: “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be, even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal [katholikē] Church.”

We, members of the Catholic Church are under the Authority of Christ, who gave his Authority to the Bishops. Passing the “Keys” of Authority along.

So how does independent fit, curious of your thinking:shrug:
 
wisdomseeker said:
Yeah, a bunch of people who want to run the Church as their own. I got one thing to say to them. The Church is not yours. She belongs to the Living God. You are only let in the Church by Grace of God. you are called to obey and not rule over the Church.

Another thing I saw is that they are using the laity participationg as some kind of calling to rule over the Church.
Click to expand...
Amen to what you said! 👍

I get so tired of people saying that the Church is ‘ours’; for example, when they say, ‘We have to take back our Church!’

Well, it’s not ‘our Church’ to begin with! It’s HIS CHURCH! In other words, OUR LORD! HE is the invisible Head of the Church!

How can people be so stupid, especially those in the mass media! There’s nothing that irks me than reading news stories about ‘things Catholic’. The reporters are so ignorant-I want to shout, ‘DON’T YOU EDITORS HAVE ANYONE ON YOUR STAFF WHO KNOWS A THING OR TWO ABOUT WHAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BELIEVES AND TEACHES?’

Sheesh…:mad:
 
I kept looking on the second page for the story about the abortion to continue, but it didn’t. Obviously it was a hit piece against the Catholic Church. However, the “priest” they quoted was so hostile, the article will not fool many people, but backfire. Only the people who have hatred in their hearts will agree.
 
barb_finnegan said:
Amen to what you said! 👍

I get so tired of people saying that the Church is ‘ours’; for example, when they say, ‘We have to take back our Church!’

Well, it’s not ‘our Church’ to begin with! It’s HIS CHURCH! In other words, OUR LORD! HE is the invisible Head of the Church!

How can people be so stupid, especially those in the mass media! There’s nothing that irks me than reading news stories about ‘things Catholic’. The reporters are so ignorant-I want to shout, ‘DON’T YOU EDITORS HAVE ANYONE ON YOUR STAFF WHO KNOWS A THING OR TWO ABOUT WHAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BELIEVES AND TEACHES?’

Sheesh…:mad:
Click to expand...
Have you not notice that they only interview the dissenters of the Church? Those who speak against the Church?
 
incense said:
I kept looking on the second page for the story about the abortion to continue, but it didn’t. Obviously it was a hit piece against the Catholic Church. However, the “priest” they quoted was so hostile, the article will not fool many people, but backfire. Only the people who have hatred in their hearts will agree.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

But then what else is new? My grandfather listened to the enlighted claim “the Catholics” were stockpiling arms in their church basements to start a “Northern Ireland” style evolt against the duly elected Protestant government in the US.
 
incense said:
I kept looking on the second page for the story about the abortion to continue, but it didn’t. Obviously it was a hit piece against the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
The abortion story is a year old. It occupied the bulk of the article, and seems to draw the most attention (at least judging by a similar thread about this article which is over in Popular Media.) However, the intent of the reporter seems to have been to depict the Catholic Church as being torn apart by opposing forces. Obviously, that isn’t true. That the reporter was unable to support his theme except in the most thread-bare manner shows that.

Eh… I was fairly upset by the article when I first saw it, because it was so misleading, but I guess CBS needed to gin up a controversy to keep people awake.
 
wisdomseeker said:
Have you not notice that they only interview the dissenters of the Church? Those who speak against the Church?
Click to expand...
Yes and have you also noticed the MSM tries to always profile “Catholics” like Nancy Pelosi who speak out against Church teachings? As if SHE were an authority…PUH-LEASE! Instead they could certainly find devout, practicing Catholics in Congress but no, it doesn’t feed into their agenda to diminish the Church and to promote moral relativism.

Lisa
 
BornAgain2010 said:
The doctors SAID the heart problems were because of the pregnancy. Im no OB/GYN, but Ive never heard of anything like that. At worst Ive heard stuff like ectopic pregnancy, or various ovarian or uterine infections, but never it causing heart problems. But then again, Im no doctor so I cant say. I think more should have been done to PROVE definitively, that it was indeed the pregnancy causing the problems. But thats another issue. Just skeptical is all Im saying.
Click to expand...
The doctors did not say that the heart problems were because of the pregnancy. They said that the patient’s underlying condition was exacerbated by the pregnancy, which of course happens everyday with various underlying conditions. Pregnancy brings about many changes that stress the body, and a body that is already compromised will be stressed more. She should have never gotten pregnant in her condition, which was severe pulmonary hypertension, which of course, will be worsened by the physiological changes that is brought about by pregnancy.

The article was correct in a sense because individual Catholics, even canon lawyers and theologians, were divided on this issue. But none of these individuals speak officially for the Church, and I don’t recall any statements from the Vatican on this issue.

As for the rest of the article, it was all politics so I don’t care to discuss Omstead or Sister Margaret. The article is playing on the emotions of both sides of the fence, and the case was difficult to begin with.

Here’s a “MORAL ANALYSIS OF AN INTERVENTION PERFORMED AT ST. JOSEPH’S HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER”, which was submitted by M. Therese Lysaught, Ph.D.Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Theology Marquette University

commonwealmagazine.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/St.-Josephs-Hospital-Analysis.pdf

It would be really interesting to read something as detailed as the above from the opposition because it would be helpful in undertanding their position for those who don’t.
 
wisdomseeker said:
Have you not notice that they only interview the dissenters of the Church? Those who speak against the Church?
Click to expand...
I didn’t see the program-no TV since things went ‘digital’ a few years ago-but yes, they always seek out the dissenters, never anyone who has anything positive to say about the Church, or who supports what the Holy Father and the Magisterium teaches. It’s the same old liberals, over and over again.

I remember that in 2005 after John Paul II died. The secular networks, with few exceptions, dragged out all the hoary old liberals like McBrien and Greeley. Those two guys (I can’t call them ‘priests’, sorry) kept saying that there was going to be a new Pope who will give the liberals what they want (married priests, priestesses, etc.). HA! Were they ever surprised when Cardinal Ratzinger’s name was announced!

There’s a little example here in my hometown’s paper. At the end of November, a Francsican Sister who headed the big Catholic hospital passed away, and all she merited was a short piece, off the front page. She did a lot of good, and was a long-time local presence for over 20 years. She was the last Sister-administrator save one, and she always wore her full habit and veil.

Now if there was a story about clerical sexual abuse, everything would be splashed all over the front page, with big black headlines.

Go figure…:mad:
 
HappyAtHome said:
The CBS Sunday morning news show cover story was “The Catholic Church: A House Divided?”

Here is a link to the actual news story and video: cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57336316/the-catholic-church-a-house-divided/

The story is one-sided and paints a sad picture of conflict and mean, power-hungry bishops. I am so troubled by this story that I chose to devote a two-part series on my blog to it. If you would like to read my opinion, please read my blog post at: hallelujahismysong.blogspot.com/2011/12/cbs-news-catholic-church-house-divided.html

I am very interested to know what other Catholics think about this “news” story.
Click to expand...
I’m concerned too. The CBS report is skewed when it gets to “bringing the Church into the 20th, and then the 21st Century.” And the stuff about “control within the hierarchy.” Nonsense, as they see it or would have us believe.

The nun is excommunicated. The Bishop acted rightly. The hospital needs to follow the Bishops directive in order to regain its status.

As to the actual scenario, my understanding is that pregnancy can lead to serious hypertension issues which was the original problem that the woman faced. I have no medical knowledge beyond that, but I expect that extreme hypertension could lead to serious heart problems. I do not deny that the woman’s life was also in danger - so I accept the medical diagnosis. The problem is what happens afterward and I just don’t accept the further attempt to “spin” this.

The big problem that the Church faces in a country like the U.S. is that the Church is not a democracy, such as we enjoy here in the secular. And so we confuse the two – or think that our secular ability to effect change through our vote can be extended to the Catholic Church. We don’t get to vote on what we like and what we want to change. So, the nun was wrong, the Committee was wrong, the Hospital was wrong and the Bishop acted in full authority with Church teachings.

And theologians are never infallible – even Catholic theologians, so they can bring out all the degrees in theology that they want as “experts.” It’s their opinion only – and it’s contrary to the teachings of the Church. Their value as a theologian is about as meaningful as my comparitive religion course I took in college. They can study but they do not “Know.”
 
In reply to Barb Finnegan. I just googled Nuns stories on the website. There is so much they have done over the world(especially in very dangersous places) in their mission to do charity. God bless them for their courage.
 
That’s my Bishop, my diocese, and that used to be my local Catholic hospital. When we were going to have our second baby we went an hour out of our way to receive care at Mercy Gilbert instead of St. Joseph’s because they were rightly censured by Bishop Olmstead.

Catholic Healthcare West as an association has been suffering under secular pressures about medical services. No affiliated hospital should be under any illusions that they are permitted to perform direct abortions to “save the mother” nor to perform voluntary sterilizations or distribute medications for the purpose of contraception. They should not ever be permitted to scandalize others by misrepresenting the Catholic Church’s teachings on ethical medicine.

It is really a shame that hospitals that were founded by faithful and obedient Catholics and dedicated to ministries in the Church have been divided from her by politicians, lawyers, and boards of trustees that do no share the Church’s values.
  • Marty Lund
 
BornAgain2010 said:
The doctors SAID the heart problems were because of the pregnancy. Im no OB/GYN, but Ive never heard of anything like that. At worst Ive heard stuff like ectopic pregnancy, or various ovarian or uterine infections, but never it causing heart problems. But then again, Im no doctor so I cant say. I think more should have been done to PROVE definitively, that it was indeed the pregnancy causing the problems. But thats another issue. Just skeptical is all Im saying.

the choices we face…😊

choice 1:
opt for the pro-life answer. okay so if you dont terminate then the mother and child die. it says she’s already a mother of four. So if the father is not in the picture (the article doesnt say, so lets assume not), then the kids would have to stay either with a relative or friend. Failing that, they would mostly like end up in the system (foster care). Thats bad enough. Not to mention theyd be losing their mother.

choice 2:
take the baby and hope like everything that it can survive. but that procedure, its doubtful the mother would make it. so the outcome would be more or less the same as choice 1.

choice 3:
terminate (or kill) the baby in order to save the mother. the mother would be still alive to recover the ordeal. she could try again a few years down the road. but it will obviously put a heavy psychological and emotional trauma to try and concieve again (if she even recovers the will to do so). even then itd still be difficult to justify as you would be trading one problem for another.

I would regrettably have to say that choice 3 may be the best option. its hard to choose. the baby hasnt done anything wrong to the point of it being put to death (which terminations are just that). at the same time, you must protect and save the mother. the lesser of two evils. the third choice in my opinion would be the lesser one, though not by much. its a difficult situation no matter how one slices it.

As for the Bishop and his ruling, I cant say. Im not aware of how much power the Bishop holds, or of any other extra powers he may hold. ie. if being a member of a certain committee or conference, if those would grant him any further powers I dont know. So assuming he does indeed hold such power, then he would be within legal boundaries. the decree to declare the hospital no longer Catholic, I dont know if thats just over this one incident, or if the hospital was on thin ice to begin with, I dont know. but as long as he acted within legality and with satisfactory reflection before the action was made, I think it would still hold. the same for the excommunication. if she had “priors” so to say, that wouldnt have helped her chances. again I plead ignorance as to history and other factors. it would seem that harsh as the Bishops judgements were, it appears that he was still within legal limits. in other words, he may be a “hanging judge”. its harsh - but still within legal limits and boundaries. but to go so far as to corruption charges? who’s to say :shrug
Click to expand...
Catholics must never choose to do bad for good reasons. We can never do direct abortions, it is against our principles. Abortion is murder, and murder is never justifiable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top