Arizona is causing quite a stir lately. This time it’s at the hands of an unlikely culprit: Sister of Mercy, Sister Margaret Mary McBride. She has not only been reassigned from her position at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, but she has been excommunicated as well.
For a nun to be excommunicated, something big must have gone down. What actually happened isn’t as “big” to critics to the excommunication, as it is controversial. Sister Margaret Mary (do I call her that still? I will because she’s still probably 10 million times holier than me), made a life and death call that resulted in the abortion of an unborn baby. A patient was 11 weeks pregnant and experiencing pulmonary hypertension. If the pregnancy continued, the hospital said the mother’s life was highly at risk. Sr. Margaret Mary concurred with the hospital’s ethics committee, and they decided to save the mother and get rid of the “problem” child.
Sound reasonable? Bishop Olmsted of Phoenix, the excommunicator, didn’t think so.
The direct killing of an unborn child is always immoral, no matter the circumstances, and it cannot be permitted in any institution that claims to be authentically Catholic.
We always must remember that when a difficult medical situation involves a pregnant woman, there are two patients in need of treatment and care, not merely one…The unborn child’s life is just as sacred as the mother’s life, and neither life can be preferred over the other.
The act was performed in a Catholic institution, and according to Bishop Olmsted, the decision to abort the baby was against the guidelines of the “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services.” Sr. Margaret was guilty of violating this, and her call to obedience…something that is a part of the mission of most, if not all religious orders. The Sisters of Mercy included.
Passing judgement on a religious woman was not on my agenda for the day. BUT not many people are defending the decision of Bishop Olmsted, who made the right call. Children should not be seen as illnesses or medical problems in any respect, and workers at Catholic institutions are called to recognize the dignity of all lives being dealt with.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Frannie,
I agree with you in that life cannot be considered an illness or medical problem, and that the aborted child had just as much a right to live as his mother. But the outrage against the incident lies not in the principle behind excommunicating the nun, but rather in the actions of the Roman Catholic Church in this “scandal” as compared to its actions in sex abuse cases.
According to the 2004 John Jay Report, at the time of 1,671 allegations deemed “credible” in which a priest was accused of sex abuse, only 31 priests were removed from the clergy. And for 1,872 “substantiated” allegations, 115 were removed from the clergy. Furthermore, The Diocesan and Order Profiles indicate that 298 priests were completely exonerated.
Countless priests are accused of sex abuse and continue uninterrupted in their ministries. And one Sister of Mercy makes a critical decision in the name of saving a life. And she’s excommunicated?
Who knew that thousands of creepy pedophiles are more valuable to the Church than a lone medical administrator?
Yo Valerie,
Very thoughtful response, with a great point. While I think you’re mixing apples and oranges here, the excommunication definitely appears to be an extreme punishment compared to what has been dealt in the past.
The Church has been stained by this issue, and we are paying dearly. I’m pretty sure Pope Benedict has made it clear where the Church stands on illegal acts of pedophilia. Nowhere has he spoken of the great “value” of creepy pedophiles. Situations in the past have been handled incorrectly, and the Church is paying for those and working to resolve as much as she can.
BUT just because individuals have misrepresented the Church and abused their positions doesn’t mean other members of the Church hierarchy, like Bishop Olmsted, can’t perform their duties.