Archbishop José Gomez said Tuesday evening that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is setting up a team to deal with policies the future president may put in place which diverge from Church teaching.
He announced the move at the conclusion of the public portion of the USCCB Fall plenary assembly, which was held online on 16-17 November.
Archbishop Allen Vigneron of Detroit, USCCB vice president, will lead the special working group.
The team will be composed of the chairmen of various committees, including those covering doctrine and communications.
Joe Biden is set to become the second president who professes the Catholic faith in America’s history. The first was John F. Kennedy.
Speaking to US Bishops, Archbishop Gomez said the Church in the country is facing a “unique moment”, which “presents certain opportunities but also certain challenges.”
He added that President-elect Biden “has given us reason to believe his faith commitments will move him to support some good policies.” Archbishop Gomez counted immigration reform, aid to refugees and the poor, racial justice, capital punishment, and climate change among the list.
President-elect Biden has “also given us reason to believe that he will support policies that are against some fundamental values we hold dear as Catholics.”
Archbishop Gomez said these include the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which bans the use of federal funds to pay for most abortions, and the preservation of Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion. “Both of these policies undermine our preeminent priority for the elimination of abortion,” said Archbishop Gomez.
Other potential issues include “unequal treatment of Catholic schools” and the Equality Act.
‘Confusion among the faithful’
“These policies pose a serious threat to the common good whenever any politician supports them,” said Archbishop Gomez. “We have long opposed these polices strongly and we will continue to do so.”
“When politicians who profess the Catholic faith support them there are additional problems,” he added. “And one of the things it creates confusion among the faithful about what the Church actually teaches on these questions.”
He called it a “difficult and complex situation.”
Enhance collaboration
Concluding his remarks, Archbishop Gomez said the USCCB responded similarly four years ago when President Donald Trump was elected, establishing a committee to address “critical issues”.
“Then as now,” he said, “committees already existed to address those issues and the goal was to emphasize our priorities and enhance collaboration.”
“This great achievement shows that together we can overcome any health challenge”, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO Director General, wrote in a tweet.
The outbreak in DRC’s northwestern Equateur Province emerged in early June and caused 130 Ebola cases and 55 deaths.
A key part of the response – with potential lessons for the global fight against COVID-19 – was the vaccination of more than 40,000 people at high risk of falling sick from the frequently fatal haemorrhagic disease, the WHO said in a statement. Like one of the COVID-19 candidate vaccines, the Ebola vaccine needs to be kept at super-cold temperatures to keep it from spoiling.
#Ebola outbreak in Equateur Province, ?? is over. This followed the end of the most complex Ebola outbreak in North Kivu in June. I invite you to read these powerful stories of those working to end the latest outbreak, including #healthworkers & survivors. https://t.co/WnvLG5ysFq
“Overcoming one of the world’s most dangerous pathogens in remote and hard to access communities demonstrates what is possible when science and solidarity come together,” said Dr. Matshidiso Moeti, WHO Regional Director for Africa.
‘Transferrable’ to COVID
“The technology used to keep the Ebola vaccine at super-cold temperatures will be helpful when bringing a COVID-19 vaccine to Africa. Tackling Ebola in parallel with COVID-19 hasn’t been easy, but much of the expertise we’ve built in one disease is transferrable to another and underlines the importance of investing in emergency preparedness and building local capacity.”
The response to both diseases involves finding, isolating, testing, and caring for every case and relentless contact tracing. The innovative Ebola response includes special ARKTEK freezers that can store vaccines in the field for up to a week, enabling responders to vaccinate people in areas without electricity.
The Ebola outbreak was the 11th on record in DRC and its spread raised fears that it could reach the capital Kinshasa before being brought under control. The challenge of containing the disease was complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic and exacerbated by the spread of Ebola cases in remote areas in dense rain forests.
Many affected areas were accessible only by boat or helicopter and had limited telecommunications capacity, and the response was also slowed by a strike among health service providers over pay.
Funding shortage
There was also a shortage of international funding for Ebola, forcing the WHO to turn to emergency funds to support epidemiological and public health interventions.
The outbreak began just as the country was winning a nearly two-year battle with Ebola in the restive eastern part of the country, the world’s second-deadliest outbreak in which 2,280 people died.
David McLachlan-Karr, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in DRC, congratulated the government and health partners on ending the outbreak and said the engagement of communities had made it possible to stop the outbreak quickly. He also hailed the close cooperation between DRC and neighbouring Republic of Congo, which he said had prevented the disease crossing the river.
Learn the lessons
Mr. McLachlan-Karr said DRC’s Government should try to foresee the kind of pitfalls that had hampered the response effort and prevent them from recurring in future response efforts. He said that there was still much to do to, including taking care of orphans and supporting survivors, and there needed to be an efficient and effective system for surveillance and issuing alerts.
The virus was first discovered in 1976 and the worst outbreak on record hit west Africa in 2014-2016. Although that outbreak killed more than 10,000 people, it also gave rise to the development of a highly effective vaccine and several treatments for Ebola virus disease.
A plastic sheet separates a mother from her son at an Ebola treatment centre in Beni, North Kivu province, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Children will need special attention – UNICEF
“Though the outbreak is over, children affected by the Ebola epidemic will still require special attention and care, as communities affected begin to return to normal life,” said Edouard Beigbeder, the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Representative in the DRC.
The agency has provided care and psychosocial support to hundreds of children whose parents or caregivers have fallen ill or died due to Ebola. Such support is critical for children who are especially vulnerable to isolation, stigma, malnutrition or poverty.
“Throughout the latest epidemic to hit DRC, we have worked with our partners to meet children’s unique physical, psychological and social needs. This includes caring for the wellbeing of surviving parents and family members so that they can better look after their children,” he added.
The agency said that it would continue to reinforce the national health care system to make it more effective in responding to future epidemics. It is also working on programs for Ebola survivors in the DRC.
In addition, UNICEF plans to work with the local health authorities in Equateur to ensure that mothers and children in the areas previously affected by Ebola continue to receive quality essential health care. This includes improving water and sanitation in health centres, promoting hygiene practices in affected communities, provide psychosocial support to Ebola survivors, as well as children affected by the epidemic.
Last week, Saudi Arabia’s Council of Senior Scholars issued a defamatory statement against the Muslim Brotherhood, claiming that the movement is one of the worst organisations and a threat to Islamic orthodoxy. The Brotherhood, claimed the Saudi scholars, “…is a terrorist group that does not represent the approach of Islam… It is a perverted organisation that disobeys legitimate rulers, stirs up discord, conceals foul doings under the cover of religion and practices violence and terrorism. The brotherhood did not show keenness to follow the teachings of Islam or the Sunnah and hadith, but aimed rather to reach power.”
At the same time, the statement accused what is quite possibly the most moderate Muslim organisation in the world of being the incubator for many “terrorist” organisations. Even after Muslim scholars around the world expressed their shock at the statement, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh, insisted that what was mentioned in the statement is accurate, and claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood “is a stray group”.
Unsurprisingly, the movement denied these outrageous allegations. “The Brotherhood… is far from acts of violence and terrorism, and the dissemination of division within the [Muslim Ummah],” said spokesman Talaat Fahmy. “It is a reformist advocacy group that calls for obedience to Allah through sharing wise and pious advice without excess or negligence.”
In response to the statement of the Saudi Arabian scholars and Al-Sheikh’s remarks, activists circulated a fatwa (religious opinion) of the late scholar Sheikh Abdul Aziz Bin Baz (1910-1999), who was the respected Chairman of the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Iftaa in Saudi Arabia: “The most righteous Islamic groups and the closest to the teachings of the Prophet are Ahl Al-Sunnah, including Ahl Al-Hadith, Jamaat Ansar Al-Sunna and then comes the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Bin Baz’s opinion represented the view of the official religious bodies in Saudi Arabia and thus the official view of the Kingdom itself about the Muslim Brotherhood. So too, does the statement of the Council of Senior Scholars, so why is it so negative today when it was extremely positive in the past?
In 1936, the founder of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, King Abdulaziz Al-Saud, agreed with Imam Hassan Al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, that the organisation should take responsibility for reforming the religious principles of the new Kingdom and lay down the curricula for schools and universities. At that time, the tribal religious principles proved to be insufficient for the foundations of a modern nation state.
King Abdulaziz also needed the Muslim Brotherhood’s scholars to gentrify the tribal mentality of the Saudi citizens in order to be able to deal with the modern life of the Kingdom after the discovery of oil. The King mobilised his followers against the Ottoman Empire in the early 20th century using the religious legacy of the companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and wanted to show his people that he was still committed to such principles while parts of the Arab world were plagued with different ideologies which blamed Islam for the difficulties in the region.
Taking up such an important responsibility in the new Kingdom was not free of obligations. King Abdulaziz set his conditions which led, during the reign of one of his many sons, for example, to the Muslim Brotherhood being asked to provide its expertise to help in the recruitment, fundraising and organisation of the Mujahideen who were encouraged by the United States and Saudi Arabia to fight the Soviet Union’s occupation of Afghanistan. According to Amin Mohammad Habla, the movement responded to this request “enthusiastically” on the basis of honouring their principle of Islamic “brotherhood”.
According to Habla, this made the Brotherhood very well respected in the Kingdom, which received its leaders and members warmly, many of whom had been released from Egyptian prisons during the rule of Gamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Al-Sadat.
In a paper for the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy, Mohamed Qandil wrote: “Saud Bin Abdulaziz followed the same path as his father, while the Brotherhood’s second Supreme Guide Mohammed Al-Hudaybi followed in Al-Banna’s footsteps, and the close relations between the two institutions continued. Those relations were clearly manifested in Faisal Bin Abdulaziz’s position in the organisation, as the king and his ‘Islamic unity’ project were in direct confrontation with ‘Pan-Arab nationalism’ and Nasserist ideology.”
The honeymoon did not last. After the assassination of King Faisal Bin Abdulaziz, the relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood was shaken as rulers of the Kingdom saw that the outcomes of the school and university curricula did not keep up with their ambitions. They wanted absolute obedience to the ruler, but the Brotherhood brought up generations on the principles of freedom of religious beliefs and expression, including being able to express opposition to those in government.
Researchers and observers more or less agree that the opposition of the Muslim Brotherhood to the Kingdom’s request for American help to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein in 1990, and the letter to King Fahd Bin Abdulaziz on this issue by the prominent late Saudi Scholar Sheikh Safar Al-Hawali, were the main reasons for the start of the demonisation of the movement. By then the Brotherhood had become the umbrella group for most of the moderate Muslim scholars around the world.
At the beginning of the 21st century, these doubts were translated into action. Under a lot of pressure, Saudi Arabia was obliged to change its policy with the Muslim Brotherhood after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington. The pressure came from other Arab leaders who already suppressed the group, as they claimed that the Brotherhood was responsible for the existence of Al-Qaeda, which was accused of carrying out the terrorist attacks.
The Saudi government cracked down on the Brotherhood’s funding sources and closed its charitable organisations. The then Saudi Interior Minister, Prince Nayef Bin Abdulaziz, had the responsibility of fighting Al-Qaeda in the Kingdom as part of the US “war on terror”, and claimed in an interview with Kuwait’s Al-Siyasa newspaper that the Muslim Brotherhood “is the source of the crisis.”
Saudi Arabia continued to distance itself from the movement when the Brotherhood came to global prominence after the rise of the Islamists in Turkey and Palestine, who won majorities in free and fair elections.
“After the spread of the 2011 Arab revolutions, the kingdom [under King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz] began to adopt a new approach towards the Brotherhood,” wrote Qandil, adding: “During this period, some demands for reform were adopted by Brotherhood affiliates, which pushed the Saudi regime to turn against them. This was especially the case regarding neighbouring Egypt, where the kingdom applauded the removal of the Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi and supported the current regime’s firm stance against them.” Following the 2013 coup against Morsi, Egypt blacklisted the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. Saudi Arabia took the same baseless decision.
After the death of King Abdullah in 2015, his aging brother Salman took the throne. He continued the same hostile approach towards the Muslim Brotherhood even though the late Saud Al-Faisal, the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, said soon after Salman’s accession: “We do not have any problem with the Muslim Brotherhood. Our problem is only with a small group affiliated with this organisation. They are the ones who bow their heads in homage to the Supreme Guide.”
Saudi Arabia’s King Salmanin Abdulaziz Al-Saud in Saudi Arabia on 1 June 2019 [Bandar Algaloud/Anadolu Agency]
That was the core of the issue. The Saudis used the Muslim Brotherhood to exploit religion when it suited them, and then wanted the movement’s affiliates to obey the government in Riyadh.
The movement’s affiliates in Yemen, who were strong on the ground during the revolution against the regime, were basically ordered to kneel down before the Saudi-led coalition which was interfering in the country. The Kingdom invited a number of Muslim Brotherhood officials, including the then leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, and asked them to mediate with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Al-Islah Party in Yemen on behalf of the Saudi-led coalition.
Following this, the now de facto ruler of the Kingdom, Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman, declared that the time for religious restrictions on Saudi life has ended so “the harmonious period between the Brotherhood and the Kingdom has [also] ended.”
When the Muslim Brotherhood was needed, it was praised and when it was not needed, it was demonised. This is the reason why the top religious institution in the Kingdom is defaming the moderate group in order to justify the open war against it. This approach has been hailed by Israel, which said, “We are in need for such approach.”
According to the Secretary General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, it is “impossible” that the aforementioned statement was issued by a religious commission. “It must have been issued by the interior ministry and signed by the religious commission,” insisted Dr Ali Al Qaradaghi.
There, in a nutshell, is the malaise affecting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under Bin Salman. Religion has become a tool to stay in power, and if that means denigrating organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood, so be it. Nothing must get in the way of the Crown Prince being able to befriend the Zionist enemies of Islam in the West and, increasingly, across the Arab world.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
Tibetans have even fewer civil and political rights than Chinese people also ruled by the Chinese Communist Party.
The Chinese government enforces its control on Tibet through the threat and use of arbitrary detentions and punishments, at times including severe violence. Any act deemed to threaten its rule can be made a criminal offence.
Amid rising criticism of China over its human rights abuses in Tibet, the Tibet Bureau Geneva has said that Switzerland needs to take a stronger stance on Tibet and include the concerns of Tibetans and Uyghurs in its Foreign Policy Strategy on China 2021-24.
According to a report by Tibet Bureau Geneva, Switzerland’s State Secretary Krystyna Marty held political dialogue via videoconference with China’s Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Qin Gang on November 9 focusing on economic relations, human rights situation in China as well as COVID-19 pandemic situation in a bid to foster “sustainable relations” between the two countries as noted in the press release.
During the discussions, Switzerland tabled its concerns about the “lack of respect for human rights in China”, especially the manner of treatment of Tibetans by the Chinese authorities.
The discussions were held in the backdrop of China-based Swiss Ambassador Bernardino Regazzoni’s visit to Tibet between September 7 and 11, which was the first official Swiss visit since 2017.
The Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs said in its statement that the Ambassador along with other 10 diplomatic missions visited Lhasa and Shigatse wherein they addressed issues such as human rights situation with the local government.
Expressing concern over the human rights situation in Tibet, the Foreign Affairs Department had assured that “the free access of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to Tibet and the protection of Tibetan human rights defenders remain core demands of Switzerland”, the Central Tibetan Administration said.
The Tibet Bureau Geneva has welcomed Switzerland’s move to include the promotion of human rights as a key component of the political dialogue and for raising the human rights situation in Tibet issue.
Switzerland is one of the first countries granting asylum to Tibetans fleeing China’s brutal annexation of Tibet. Switzerland has also been a supporter of dialogue between the envoys of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and China.
The Tibet Bureau Geneva has, however, opined that Switzerland needs to take a stronger stance on Tibet and include the concerns of Tibetans and Uyghurs in its Foreign Policy Strategy on China 2021-2024. Further, Switzerland needs to consider the calls against China hosting the Winter Olympic Games of 2022, dubbed as “Genocide Games” by Human Rights activists.
Despite reassurances by the authorities of non-implementation against Tibetans, Tibetans in Switzerland are concerned by the Swiss “secret-deal” on asylum and migration with China as under this agreement, Switzerland can invite Chinese officials to interview persons of Chinese origin to facilitate their deportation to China, the Tibet Bureau said.
It further said that this deal coincides with Switzerland’s change of stance in categorising Tibetans as “Chinese” nationals and the rejection of around 300 asylum applications by Tibetans.
Meanwhile, these asylum-seekers are also facing difficulties in their “hardship-case” applications despite submitting identity cards issued by the Central Tibetan Administration proving their ethnicity, Tibet Bureau added.
Since its forceful settlement of Tibet, the Chinese Communist Party has relentlessly pushed for the persecution of religion, especially Tibetan Buddhism. By employing its state machinery, it has executed campaign after campaign to meet its objective, each more brutal and oppressive than the last.
In the recent past, there have been reports of incidents of surveillance and censorship on Tibetans living in Switzerland by the Chinese authorities. This has been the case in New York and Sweden as well.
Samsung Bioepis and Biogen Announce FDA Filing Acceptance of SB11, A Proposed Biosimilar Referencing Lucentis® (ranibizumab) – Book Publishing Industry Today – EIN Presswire
European Commission Speech Brussels, 18 Nov 2020 Good morning. Our Autumn Package is based on the economic forecast we presented a couple of weeks ago.
Our view is that we are not having a “v-shaped&rdqu…
European Commission Speech Brussels, 18 Nov 2020 Now that Europe is caught up in the second wave of the pandemic, we are again facing a very deep socio-economic impact.
It is a difficult time for everyone. All…
Released on Wednesday, UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) report Geospatial Practices for Sustainable Development showcases examples from the region’s countries employing applications of space technology to advance sustainable development.
“Night-light” satellite images monitoring the impact of lockdowns, “heatmaps” to chart out communities vulnerable to the pandemic and its socio-economic consequences, real-time situational analysis, and dashboards integrating a wide gamut of critical information to support decisions are some of the practices cited.
The examples, according to the report, show how space applications and geospatial data have played an important role in providing essential location-based and temporal data to make an “overall data map” and snapshots on the COVID-19 pandemic for policymakers and the public.
In addition, combining spatial data from contact tracing, quarantining, and social distancing with digital solutions and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven risk analytics can help enhance community resilience.
Such applications can also help in the recovery phase to build back better, by providing an evidence base for decisions on the easing of lockdown and the resumption of economic and social activities, the report added.
“The effective integration of geospatial data, with existing statistics and ground-based information, will be key to delivering the timely data needed for governments, businesses, communities and citizens to make evidenced-based decisions”, said Armida Salsiah Alisjahjabana, Executive Secretary of ESCAP.
In addition to presenting an overview of the status along thematic areas such as disaster risk, natural resource management, connectivity, social development, energy, and climate change, the report also highlights the importance of multi-stakeholder partnerships.
“Many regional and country-based efforts are sparking innovations that attract both public and private capital, supporting start-ups and spinoffs from space applications research and pilots,” said ESCAP.
The report outlined seven key recommendations for policymakers to integrate applications of geospatial information into their planning and actions towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
These include investments to cultivate national experts; incorporating geospatial information into national institutions and platforms; integrating geospatial data with other data sources; employing geospatial data to create, implement and monitor policies; ensuring privacy, safety and ethics of data; providing open data access; and encouraging local to international collaborations.
