Prince of Peace Parish

Hungary’s President, Tamás Sulyok, is received in private audience in the Vatican by Pope Francis.

Read all

 

Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin discusses key issues roiling the Church during the presentation of the new book, “Five questions agitating the Church”, by noted Vaticanist Ignazio Ingrao.

Read all

 

Meeting Hungarian pilgrims in the Vatican, Pope Francis encourages them to be men and women of peace and to continue to safeguard their Christian identity, and thanks the Hungarian Church for welcoming Ukrainian refugees fleeing the war.

Read all

 

Archbishop Gabriele Caccia, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, speaks at the General Debate of the ECOSOC Forum on Financing for Development (FfD), and encourages working in concrete solidarity to reverse growing economic imbalances and to help developing nations.

Read all

 

Pope Francis addresses Italian Catholic Action and emphasises the importance of embracing others through reflections on missing, saving, and life-changing embraces.

Read all

 

In an interview with CBS, Pope Francis calls for an end to the wars in Ukraine, Gaza, and around the world. He says there is room for everyone in the Church pointing out that if a parish priest doesn't seem welcoming, one can look elsewhere: “There is always a place, don't run away from the Church.”

Read all

 

ACI Prensa Staff, Apr 24, 2024 / 17:45 pm (CNA).

Father Augusto Meloni Navarro, a priest, physician, and former vice president of the World Health Organization (WHO), urged prayers for the soul of Ana Estrada, the first person to undergo euthanasia in Peru. Meloni also emphasized the importance of protecting life and providing palliative care in these kinds of situations.

As a Church “we stand in solidarity, we sympathize with every human person in all their circumstances. And, of course, at the moment of transition to a new life, which in cases of desperation, as in the case of this person, our sister, and her family, probably calls for more prayer,” Meloni said in an interview with “EWTN Noticias,” the Spanish-language broadcast edition of EWTN News.

Estrada was a 47-year-old Peruvian psychologist and activist who suffered from polymyositis — an incurable disease that left her confined to a wheelchair — and who underwent euthanasia on Sunday, April 21. The procedure was carried out in accordance with a plan approved by Peru’s Social Health Insurance (EsSalud), but it was not specified whether she died by direct euthanasia or medically assisted suicide.

Euthanasia is not legal in Peru. However, in 2022 the judiciary ruled in favor of Estrada so that in her case Article 112 of the current Penal Code “would be unenforced.” The code punishes anyone who “out of pity, kills an incurably ill person” with a prison sentence of no more than three years.

Meloni said he has personally committed to praying for the family, and especially for Estrada’s soul, appealing “to the infinite mercy of God.”

“I pray that in those last mysterious seconds of slipping away and the passage from the present life to a new life” that this person could be saved “so that she could truly find life.”

“We are also going to pray that the Lord increase the faith, if they have it, of those people who in some way have been involved in this very painful outcome, as well as of all the people who may mistakenly think that some progress is being made here, some progress in freedom, for the good, and we know from experience that these issues can often be manipulated and [people] not even being treated with respect. And that is why we are going to pray,” he added.

In early April, the Vatican published the declaration Dignitatis Infinita, which warns of 13 grave violations of human dignity, one of which is euthanasia. 

The document, which encourages palliative care for patients, emphasizes that “suffering does not cause the sick to lose their dignity, which is intrinsically and inalienably their own” and points out that “helping the suicidal person to take his or her own life is an objective offense against the dignity of the person asking for it, even if one would be thereby fulfilling the person’s wish.”

Meloni noted that when we lose “sight of the dignity of the human person, [who is made in] the image of God and loved by Jesus Christ, we tend to treat people as things.”

“We also tend to view human pain and suffering superficially. Life goes beyond the biological. It’s a dimension that is revealed in Jesus Christ, who shows us the meaning of suffering and human dignity,” he explained.

He assured that, as a doctor and priest, he understands “that life goes beyond what is taught at the university.”

“Life is Jesus Christ, and he shows us that pain does not destroy our dignity but is part of the path to its fulfillment [in eternal life],” he said.

The importance of palliative care

The former vice president of the World Health Organization acknowledged that Estrada faced for decades a serious illness “not yet understood by science and without a cure.” However, he noted that there is palliative care available for this type of illness.

“Palliative care helps people cope with these difficult situations. Science, technology, and medicine have advanced a lot in this field,” he commented, while adding that it is also “insufficient.”

The reason, according to Meloni, is that palliative care must include a spiritual dimension: “spiritual assistance, everything that the Lord has left us through his Church so that we can have all the means precisely to face these extreme situations and recognize that love of God.”

This assistance, he said, should not only “be offered to the person who is directly facing pain but also to their family members so that they can understand and help effectively and not believe that eliminating the human person is the solution.”

“I would like to emphasize first of all the need for us as a society, as a community, as a country, as families, as the Church, that we attend to people’s faith. Let us take care of the gift of new life that we have received in Christ Jesus in baptism, so that those who are not baptized will be baptized and those who are already baptized find that treasure that is the new life that we have received in Christ,” he concluded.

This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Apr 24, 2024 / 17:15 pm (CNA).

The Arizona House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to repeal a law protecting unborn babies from abortion throughout pregnancy.

The narrow 32-28 vote passed an “abortion ban repeal” bill designed to overturn the pro-life law. Republicans have a narrow majority in the Arizona House, but the bill was able to pass as three Republicans joined the Democrats against the pro-life measure.

The repeal bill will now be considered by the Arizona Senate where Republicans also hold a narrow 16-14 majority. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs has already signaled she will sign the bill into law if it is passed by the Arizona Senate.

Even if the repeal bill is signed into law it will likely not go into effect until 90 days after the legislative session closes, meaning the pro-life law may be in effect for a short time. The pro-life measure is currently set to go into effect on June 8.

This comes after Democrats launched several unsuccessful attempts to repeal the pro-life law after a controversial Arizona Supreme Court decision ruled that the law — passed in 1864 — could go into effect.

Dormant since being invalidated by Roe v. Wade in 1973, the 1864 law protects all unborn life from conception and imposes prison time for those who “provide, supply, or administer” an abortion. The court ruled that since the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Roe in the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision, there were no legal reasons to keep the law from being enforced.

On Tuesday, President Joe Biden criticized the Arizona pro-life law as backward, blaming former President Donald Trump for the Supreme Court overturning Roe and “literally taking us back 160 years.” 

Abortion is currently legal in Arizona until the 15th week of pregnancy. If the 1864 law takes effect, however, all abortion will be illegal, except in cases in which the mother’s life is in danger.

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Apr 24, 2024 / 16:15 pm (CNA).

A divided Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a case that will determine whether federal law requires pro-life states to have broader exceptions for women who seek abortions in emergency situations. 

The crux of the case focuses on whether Idaho’s Defense of Life Act conflicts with a federal rule that requires hospitals to provide stabilizing health care that is consistent with standard medical practice in certain emergency situations.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit that argues Idaho’s law prevents hospitals from providing this care in some situations because it only allows abortions in cases of rape, incest, and when “necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman.”

The lawsuit, Moyle v. United States, is based on the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which Congress enacted in 1986 to ensure that everyone has access to emergency medical care even if they can’t afford to pay for that care. 

Under EMTALA hospitals that receive Medicare funds must provide stabilizing care when the absence of care could put the patient’s health in serious jeopardy or cause the impairment of bodily functions or serious dysfunction of bodily organs. The law does not specifically reference abortion, but the Department of Justice is arguing that an abortion will sometimes be the standard care necessary to meet these rules.

According to the DOJ, Idaho’s threshold for when it permits abortion is too strict, because it only permits abortions when necessary to prevent the death of the mother and does not include any exceptions that would cover the other health risks considered in EMTALA.

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could have far-ranging effects on protections for unborn children in Idaho and more than 20 other states that have passed pro-life laws in the past few years.

Idaho claims there is no conflict

In oral arguments presented to the justices, Idaho’s lawyer Joshua Turner said Idaho’s law does not conflict with EMTALA in any way and claimed the DOJ is “misreading” the statute when it makes that assertion.

Turner argued that states can legally regulate the practice of medicine and that they frequently impose such regulations. As an example, he noted that states control medical licensing and the legality of certain treatments. He referenced the different approaches among states related to how long a doctor can prescribe opioids to someone who is dealing with chronic pain and said there are “countless examples” of this.

The DOJ’s interpretation, according to Turner, would prevent the state from enforcing any of these regulations because it “lacks any limiting principle” and essentially “leaves emergency rooms unregulated under state law.” He further said that proper “professional standards” change from day to day and that it is limited to available treatments, according to the text: “Illegal treatments are not available treatments.” 

Turner added that the provisions in EMTALA have never been used to challenge a state regulation or criminal statute. He claimed that for EMTALA to override a state’s criminal law, it would need to be very clear. 

“Congress must speak clearly,” Turner said. “It has not done so here.”

Some of the judges challenged Turner on his interpretation and probed him with questions about when abortions would be allowed under Idaho’s law. Justice Elena Kagan argued with Turner about whether EMTALA was clear, claiming “the federal government has plenty to say about [when care must be provided] in this statute.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pressed Turner with questions about whether Idaho’s law would permit an abortion in various hypothetical situations. Turner said the law permits an abortion when the life of the mother is threatened, which is based on “the doctor’s good-faith medical judgment” but was repeatedly interrupted when he sought to explain further.

The line of questioning and frequent interruptions provoked the ire of Justice Samuel Alito, who commented that Turner was presented with quick hypotheticals and “asked to provide a snap judgment of what would be appropriate” and “hardly given an opportunity to answer.”

DOJ asserts abortion is covered under EMTALA

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who provided the legal arguments on behalf of the DOJ, said Idaho’s law conflicts with the text of EMTALA, which has real implications for what is “happening on the ground.” She asserted that Turner is “gravely mistaken” in saying that there is no conflict. 

“This case is about how [EMTALA] applies to pregnant women in a medical crisis,” Prelogar said. 

Prelogar challenged Turner’s interpretation that the DOJ’s position would threaten all state medical regulations, asserting that EMTALA is “textually very narrow.”

According to Prelogar, if abortion is necessary to provide stabilizing care for a woman under the conditions set in EMTALA, “the statute protects her and gives her that choice.” She said the patient must “be offered pregnancy termination [when it is] the necessary treatment.”

Some of the justices challenged Prelogar’s interpretation of the law. Justice Clarence Thomas noted that EMTALA imposes a rule on hospitals as a condition to receive Medicare funding but that the law does not make demands of the state. 

“In this case, you are bringing an action against the state, and the state’s not regulated,” Thomas said.

Thomas and other judges noted that EMTALA concerns spending and questioned Prelogar on whether it would preempt a state’s criminal laws. 

“Congress has broad power under the spending clause to impose [these rules],” Prelogar responded. 

The judges also questioned Prelogar about whether EMTALA respects conscience objections made by doctors and hospitals who have moral objections to providing abortions, and she said those protections are still in place. They also asked her whether a mental health crisis could ever permit an abortion under EMTALA, to which she replied that abortion is “not the accepted standard of practice to treat any mental health emergency.”

Ann Arbor, Michigan, Apr 24, 2024 / 15:45 pm (CNA).

Muslim extremists set on fire several homes of Christians in Minya, a province in southern Egypt, in a continuation of anti-Christian violence less than two weeks before Orthodox Christians celebrate Easter. 

According to The New Arab, when anti-Christian fanatics failed to dispossess Christians of their homes in retribution for attempting to build a church in Al-Fawakher village, they proceeded to burn down the houses on the evening of April 23.

On his official Twitter account, Coptic Orthodox Bishop Anba Macarius wrote on April 24 that Egyptian security forces “brought the situation under control, arresting the instigators and perpetrators,” and that the government “will compensate those affected and hold the perpetrators accountable.” 

After noting that calm now reigns in Al-Fawakher, Macarius added: “May God protect our dear country, Egypt, from all harm.” 

CNA reached out to authorities of the Coptic Orthodox Church but did not receive a response by the time of publication. Video of the burning homes was shared on social media that featured celebratory music and Arabic lyrics.

Christianity in Egypt dates to the very beginnings of the faith and nearly 10% of the country’s population of 111 million are Christian. Most Egyptian Christians belong to the Coptic Orthodox Church, while about 2.5% belong to the Coptic Catholic Church and other particular churches. 

Christians constitute the largest minority in Egypt, and Macarius leads the Coptic Christians of Minya Province, where approximately one-third of the country’s Christians live. He narrowly survived an assassination attempt more than 10 years ago. 

The Open Doors organization, which monitors persecution against followers of Christ, ranks Egypt as the 38th most dangerous country in the world to be a Christian. In 2018, seven Christians were killed by Muslim terrorists who attacked a bus carrying pilgrims. In 2017, Islamic State terrorists bombed two Coptic Orthodox churches, killing over 40 people. And in December 2016, a terrorist detonated a bomb killing himself and 189 worshippers at Sts. Peter and Paul Church, injuring more than 400 others. 

On his 2017 visit to Egypt, Pope Francis celebrated a Mass for the small Catholic community and called on Christians to forgive the atrocities. Relations between the Vatican and the Coptic Orthodox Church, the leader of which is Pope Tawadros II, have improved in recent years. 

Earlier this year, Pope Francis recognized the Coptic Orthodox Church’s canonization of 21 Coptic Orthodox Martyrs of Libya. 

Last year, Pope Tawadros II celebrated a Divine Liturgy at the Archbasilica of St. John Lateran, where he delivered a homily on Christian unity. Since then, however, Tawadros II has reduced relations with the Vatican following the December 2023 publication of Fiducia Supplicans.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), while noting that President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s government has appointed the first-ever Christian to the Supreme Constitutional Court and also sentenced a extremist Muslim murderer of a priest, has criticized the “slow pace of approvals for the backlog of legalization applications,” which would allow the construction of new churches. Egypt is on the USCIRF Special Watch List for tolerating severe violations of religious freedom.

In 2016, Egypt’s legislature passed the Church Construction Law, ostensibly to legalize such construction with permits.