Skip to main content

NY Times: Bishop [Gracida] Excommunicates 2 In Texas for Abortion Stance & Bp. Gracida: "I can only attribute the silence of those cardinals & bishops to their embarrassment because they surely had abortion clinics in their own dioceses"

Bishop Excommunicates 2 In Texas for Abortion Stance

Bishop Excommunicates 2 In Texas for Abortion Stance
Credit...

The New York Times Archives

As a Catholic in public office, the individual can never favor or condone a right to abortion, but to the contrary, must strive to limit and revoke pro-choice

Oct 4, 2004 — Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas, ... Bishop Gracida explains why pro-abortion Catholics must be excommunicated.

Bishop Rene Henry Gracida's 100th birthday is coming up on June 9 so I am reading his autobiography in preparation for the great day. 

Bishop Gracida tells of asking "Cardinal O’Connor if [he] could speak about...the abortion clinics and the excommunications. At the end... After what seemed an eternity of silence in which not a single member of the Committee asked any questions or made any comment... I was stunned!  I can only attribute the silence of those cardinals and bishops to their embarrassment because they surely had abortion clinics in their own dioceses and what I had done in Corpus Christi showed them up for their failure to stand up for the sanctity of innocent human life" 

Here from the book is some background on his talk to the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Pro-Life Activities on excommunicating pro-abortion Catholics which lead to "the silence of those cardinals and bishops":

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...