Please, can you let us non-Catholics know what the factual inaccuracies and distortions in the story are?
The story is confusing…
The Catholic nurse on the ethics committee approved the abortion, right?
Was she wrong to do so, even tho doctors said both mother and child would likely die? (Is it a rule not to do so, no matter what?)
If so, then that explains a lot…
… then the Bishop says he talked to that same nurse and she told him that the baby was not in danger at all and “what was directly intended was to kill the unborn child.”
That makes no sense. He’s unclear with what he’s saying and he admits he had “no charts” or anything.
Why would she approve the termination, and then say that to the bishop?
So…is the problem that:
… the nurse approved it wrongly?
Or is the bishop saying the doctors lied to to the nurse? (but would they then still excommunicate her?)
Or is everyone upset because she was ex-communicated? (that was too harsh, was it not? Is everyone in agreement on that?)
Or is the upset that the Bishop says the hospital can’t be Catholic anymore and that is not fair or right?
And…I don’t understand why they called up the “review” on the nuns but don’t tell them at all what is going on?..was it because of this incident? The Bishop says it’s just cause of “a decline of the number of religious ? in our country…”
(Ironically, we keep talking here on this site that fewer girls are allowed to be altar servers because the number of young men joining the priesthood has gone down…I wonder if they’ve done the same “review” in that area, too…)
As someone who works in the media, I have to tell you that it does looks like they tried to have a balanced interview line-up:
The Bishop himself
The Chief Medical Officer at the hospital
Priest specializing in church law and former Vatican employee
Prof of theology commenting on Vatican 2
A nun and prof of theology (since the nun in question would not talk)
And they did say they tried to interview several nuns, who canceled the interviews last minute. But when you do a story like this, a lot of people don’t want to talk to a reporter and it’s difficult to convince them…so you work with who you get and you are often scrambling.
They had the Bishop there himself defending his actions; the doctor defending his actions; the nun defending the nun’s actions…and then two Catholic “experts” added in the mix to comment on church law.
I must ask…who do you think they could have interviewed that would have made the story less “one-sided” and what would that person have said?