Legislation

Why Pakistan’s bishops doubt government will act on minor’s forced marriage #Catholic LAHORE, Pakistan — The head of the Catholic Church in Pakistan has expressed a guarded response to government committees formed to review a recent ruling by the country’s top constitutional court that upheld the marriage and conversion of a Christian minor.Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar announced on Easter Sunday, April 5, that the government had constituted a committee to examine the March 25 judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court validating the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz to 30-year-old Shaheryar Ahmad. A protest for Maria Shahbaz outside Hyderabad Press Club, organized by the Catholic Bishops’ National Commission for Justice and Peace, on April 4, 2026, in Pakistan. | Credit: Bishop Samson Shukardin Bishop Samson Shukardin of Hyderabad, president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference (PCBC), voiced skepticism about the initiative.“These issues often subside by the time such committees make their reports public. The process is deliberately delayed so that people forget,” he told EWTN News.“This is fundamentally a religious freedom issue. Consent is often coerced from minors. We await a genuine response from the government. Many Muslim clerics support us but have avoided joining public protests,” he added.A father’s accountAccording to Maria’s father, Shehbaz Masih, his daughter was abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and married without consent.A certificate issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) submitted by the family states that Maria was 13 at the time of the marriage — below the legal minimum age of 18. The family has since taken refuge in a shelter and was unavailable for comment.The case dates back to July 2025, when Masih, a resident of Lahore, reported that his daughter had been abducted by a Muslim man after stepping out to a nearby shop.Dismissing a petition filed by the father seeking custody, the court ruled that the marriage was valid under “Muhammadan law” and that the husband held lawful guardianship.Protests and backlashThe judgment triggered widespread reaction on social media, along with protests, press conferences, and conventions across the country. At least three Catholic bishops, along with the PCBC, issued statements urging authorities to review the ruling.The backlash prompted government engagement with the concerns of the country’s Christian minority, estimated at 1.37% (3.28 million people).Addressing an interfaith Easter gathering in Lahore, Tarar assured Christian leaders of his support, saying the committee’s recommendations would be submitted to the Ministry of Law and Justice within a week. Archbishop Azad Marshall, moderator/president bishop of the Church of Pakistan, a united Protestant denomination, meets with ecumenical leaders and Christian politicians following an April 6, 2026, consultation on the Maria Shahbaz case at Waris Road, Lahore. | Credit: Church of Pakistan Legal dimensionsMeanwhile, Punjab Minister for Minorities Affairs Ramesh Singh Arora said his department was forming a parallel committee to examine the legal dimensions of the case.Mary James Gill, a Christian lawyer, former lawmaker, and executive director of the Center for Law and Justice who serves on the committee, welcomed the move as a “genuine concern to find a way forward.”“It is highly encouraging that a state representative personally took up the issue. However, we are still in a consultative process,” she told EWTN News, noting shortcomings in both the lower courts and within the affected community.“The petition was filed under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertains to habeas corpus, and not to determining the exact age of the girl — a question that remains disputed,” Gill said.“Regrettably, no such verification was carried out in the lower courts. In cases where documentation is ambiguous, magistrates and sessions judges tend to rely on in-person statements, consent, and their own observations.”She noted that the Christian Marriage Act of 1872 governs the solemnization of marriages involving one or more Christians.“Similarly, the personal laws of both Christianity and Islam in Pakistan remain silent on the age of conversion. Church leaders need to revisit and update these frameworks. At the same time, parents must place greater emphasis on the ideological and moral formation of their children,” she added.In an April 6 letter to the law ministry, Anthony Naveed, deputy speaker of the Sindh Assembly, urged the federal government to address “serious legal gaps” exposed by the ruling and called for uniform amendments aligning provincial laws with Balochistan’s legislation, which explicitly invalidates child marriages.A pattern of abuseFor decades, rights advocates have called for stronger legal and administrative measures to prevent the abduction and forced religious conversion of girls from minority communities.At least 515 cases of abduction and forced conversion of minority girls and women were reported between 2021 and 2025, according to the Center for Social Justice. Hindu girls accounted for 69% (353 cases), followed by Christian girls at 31% (160 cases). Most victims were under 18, with cases concentrated in Sindh and Punjab.Shukardin said courts in the Muslim-majority country are not consistently applying laws prohibiting marriage under 18.“The Church is not in favor of marriages involving conversion under such circumstances. We demand safety for our daughters and will continue to raise our voice for underage brides of any religion,” he said.
Read More

Why Pakistan’s bishops doubt government will act on minor’s forced marriage #Catholic LAHORE, Pakistan — The head of the Catholic Church in Pakistan has expressed a guarded response to government committees formed to review a recent ruling by the country’s top constitutional court that upheld the marriage and conversion of a Christian minor.Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar announced on Easter Sunday, April 5, that the government had constituted a committee to examine the March 25 judgment of the Federal Constitutional Court validating the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz to 30-year-old Shaheryar Ahmad. A protest for Maria Shahbaz outside Hyderabad Press Club, organized by the Catholic Bishops’ National Commission for Justice and Peace, on April 4, 2026, in Pakistan. | Credit: Bishop Samson Shukardin Bishop Samson Shukardin of Hyderabad, president of the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference (PCBC), voiced skepticism about the initiative.“These issues often subside by the time such committees make their reports public. The process is deliberately delayed so that people forget,” he told EWTN News.“This is fundamentally a religious freedom issue. Consent is often coerced from minors. We await a genuine response from the government. Many Muslim clerics support us but have avoided joining public protests,” he added.A father’s accountAccording to Maria’s father, Shehbaz Masih, his daughter was abducted, forcibly converted to Islam, and married without consent.A certificate issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) submitted by the family states that Maria was 13 at the time of the marriage — below the legal minimum age of 18. The family has since taken refuge in a shelter and was unavailable for comment.The case dates back to July 2025, when Masih, a resident of Lahore, reported that his daughter had been abducted by a Muslim man after stepping out to a nearby shop.Dismissing a petition filed by the father seeking custody, the court ruled that the marriage was valid under “Muhammadan law” and that the husband held lawful guardianship.Protests and backlashThe judgment triggered widespread reaction on social media, along with protests, press conferences, and conventions across the country. At least three Catholic bishops, along with the PCBC, issued statements urging authorities to review the ruling.The backlash prompted government engagement with the concerns of the country’s Christian minority, estimated at 1.37% (3.28 million people).Addressing an interfaith Easter gathering in Lahore, Tarar assured Christian leaders of his support, saying the committee’s recommendations would be submitted to the Ministry of Law and Justice within a week. Archbishop Azad Marshall, moderator/president bishop of the Church of Pakistan, a united Protestant denomination, meets with ecumenical leaders and Christian politicians following an April 6, 2026, consultation on the Maria Shahbaz case at Waris Road, Lahore. | Credit: Church of Pakistan Legal dimensionsMeanwhile, Punjab Minister for Minorities Affairs Ramesh Singh Arora said his department was forming a parallel committee to examine the legal dimensions of the case.Mary James Gill, a Christian lawyer, former lawmaker, and executive director of the Center for Law and Justice who serves on the committee, welcomed the move as a “genuine concern to find a way forward.”“It is highly encouraging that a state representative personally took up the issue. However, we are still in a consultative process,” she told EWTN News, noting shortcomings in both the lower courts and within the affected community.“The petition was filed under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which pertains to habeas corpus, and not to determining the exact age of the girl — a question that remains disputed,” Gill said.“Regrettably, no such verification was carried out in the lower courts. In cases where documentation is ambiguous, magistrates and sessions judges tend to rely on in-person statements, consent, and their own observations.”She noted that the Christian Marriage Act of 1872 governs the solemnization of marriages involving one or more Christians.“Similarly, the personal laws of both Christianity and Islam in Pakistan remain silent on the age of conversion. Church leaders need to revisit and update these frameworks. At the same time, parents must place greater emphasis on the ideological and moral formation of their children,” she added.In an April 6 letter to the law ministry, Anthony Naveed, deputy speaker of the Sindh Assembly, urged the federal government to address “serious legal gaps” exposed by the ruling and called for uniform amendments aligning provincial laws with Balochistan’s legislation, which explicitly invalidates child marriages.A pattern of abuseFor decades, rights advocates have called for stronger legal and administrative measures to prevent the abduction and forced religious conversion of girls from minority communities.At least 515 cases of abduction and forced conversion of minority girls and women were reported between 2021 and 2025, according to the Center for Social Justice. Hindu girls accounted for 69% (353 cases), followed by Christian girls at 31% (160 cases). Most victims were under 18, with cases concentrated in Sindh and Punjab.Shukardin said courts in the Muslim-majority country are not consistently applying laws prohibiting marriage under 18.“The Church is not in favor of marriages involving conversion under such circumstances. We demand safety for our daughters and will continue to raise our voice for underage brides of any religion,” he said.

unitedyam

Bishop Samson Shukardin said government committees are often delayed so people forget, as protests continue over the marriage of 13-year-old Maria Shahbaz.

Read More
Quebec secularism law is ‘anti-religious ideology,’ bishops tell Canada Supreme Court #Catholic Canada’s bishops told the Supreme Court of Canada that Quebec’s secularism legislation Bill 21 “denies the divine” going well beyond provincial jurisdiction by imposing an anti-religious ideology on the province.The bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law. The hearing, one of the longest in the court’s history, ran from March 23–26. The court reserved its decision, with a ruling expected later this year.The secularism law, which lower courts have twice upheld, prohibits certain public employees — such as teachers and police officers — from wearing religious symbols while at work.Toronto lawyer Phil Horgan, president and general counsel of the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL), argued on behalf of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), summarizing a factum that argued the “purpose and effect” of Quebec’s legislation is to “amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”Such a “drastic” change can only be made by the federal government using its authority over criminal law or its constitutional “peace, order, and good government” powers, according to the bishops’ argument.Quebec preemptively invoked the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it drafted Bill 21 to shield it from judicial review.Federal and provincial governments can invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution to temporarily prevent courts from invalidating legislation as unconstitutional.The timing and impact of the use of Charter Section 33 became a significant issue during the four days of hearings and will likely be central in the court’s analysis, Horgan told The Catholic Register.The appellants challenging Bill 21 include individual teachers directly affected by it as well as advocacy groups including the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), and the Legal Committee of the Coalition Inclusion Québec. They argue Bill 21 is “ultra vires,” beyond the powers of provincial jurisdiction.In a five-minute oral argument, Horgan told the seven justices that “Canada’s existing federal constitution is pluralist and pro-religion.” Although “the doctrine of state neutrality is well established, Canada has never adopted laicity or an absolutist separation of church and state,” he said.Justice Malcolm Rowe questioned Horgan on the point, asking: “Other than the reference to the supremacy of God in the preamble to the Charter, would you direct me to the provision in the Constitution which is pro-religion?”Horgan cited Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which protects denominational school rights and privileges, and noted federal charity law recognizes religion as a public good.Horgan said he wasn’t concerned by the pushback, noting judges often ask questions “not so much to get the answers from counsel but to help … persuade other members of the bench on some of the merits of the argument.”In its factum, the CCCB said Bill 21 “turns the expression of religious belief, through the wearing of symbols, into something to be punished because such expression now conflicts with the dominant philosophical posture of laïcité.”Just as religious symbols are an illustration of underlying personal faith, “the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook from the provincial government that denies the divine,” the bishops said.Quebec has argued the notwithstanding clause disqualifies courts from weighing in on matters deemed political debates. Isabelle Brunet, a lawyer for the Quebec government, told the justices: “It is not up to a court to answer a question that doesn’t concern the courts.”Quebec received support from the attorneys general of Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who maintain the courts should not interfere once the notwithstanding clause is invoked.Alberta and Ontario take a contrary position, arguing there is nothing in the notwithstanding clause that precludes judicial scrutiny of legislation.Guy J. Pratte, a lawyer for the attorney general of Canada, said Section 33 gives legislatures the power to override Charter rights but does not nullify the rights altogether or prevent judges from issuing an opinion if freedoms are violated.‘Imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology’The following excerpts are from the factum submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada by the Canadian bishops:“The purpose and effect of the act is unilaterally to amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”“When a province makes itself laïc, it is adopting a non-neutral stance on religion. The provinces do not have that power.”“Québec is attempting to impose an atheistic posture on religious believers.”“Our constitution is founded on a political theory that sees fundamental rights and freedoms as God-given. To adopt an expressly anti-religious viewpoint, as the act purports to do, is an amendment of our existing federal constitution.”“In the place of a genuinely neutral, pluralist, and pro-religious approach, the act substitutes an anti-religious constitutional settlement where symbols of religion worn by individuals are not permitted.”“Just as religious symbols manifest an underlying personal faith, the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook … that denies the divine.”This story was first published by The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission.
Read More

Quebec secularism law is ‘anti-religious ideology,’ bishops tell Canada Supreme Court #Catholic Canada’s bishops told the Supreme Court of Canada that Quebec’s secularism legislation Bill 21 “denies the divine” going well beyond provincial jurisdiction by imposing an anti-religious ideology on the province.The bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law. The hearing, one of the longest in the court’s history, ran from March 23–26. The court reserved its decision, with a ruling expected later this year.The secularism law, which lower courts have twice upheld, prohibits certain public employees — such as teachers and police officers — from wearing religious symbols while at work.Toronto lawyer Phil Horgan, president and general counsel of the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL), argued on behalf of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), summarizing a factum that argued the “purpose and effect” of Quebec’s legislation is to “amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”Such a “drastic” change can only be made by the federal government using its authority over criminal law or its constitutional “peace, order, and good government” powers, according to the bishops’ argument.Quebec preemptively invoked the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it drafted Bill 21 to shield it from judicial review.Federal and provincial governments can invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Constitution to temporarily prevent courts from invalidating legislation as unconstitutional.The timing and impact of the use of Charter Section 33 became a significant issue during the four days of hearings and will likely be central in the court’s analysis, Horgan told The Catholic Register.The appellants challenging Bill 21 include individual teachers directly affected by it as well as advocacy groups including the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), and the Legal Committee of the Coalition Inclusion Québec. They argue Bill 21 is “ultra vires,” beyond the powers of provincial jurisdiction.In a five-minute oral argument, Horgan told the seven justices that “Canada’s existing federal constitution is pluralist and pro-religion.” Although “the doctrine of state neutrality is well established, Canada has never adopted laicity or an absolutist separation of church and state,” he said.Justice Malcolm Rowe questioned Horgan on the point, asking: “Other than the reference to the supremacy of God in the preamble to the Charter, would you direct me to the provision in the Constitution which is pro-religion?”Horgan cited Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which protects denominational school rights and privileges, and noted federal charity law recognizes religion as a public good.Horgan said he wasn’t concerned by the pushback, noting judges often ask questions “not so much to get the answers from counsel but to help … persuade other members of the bench on some of the merits of the argument.”In its factum, the CCCB said Bill 21 “turns the expression of religious belief, through the wearing of symbols, into something to be punished because such expression now conflicts with the dominant philosophical posture of laïcité.”Just as religious symbols are an illustration of underlying personal faith, “the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook from the provincial government that denies the divine,” the bishops said.Quebec has argued the notwithstanding clause disqualifies courts from weighing in on matters deemed political debates. Isabelle Brunet, a lawyer for the Quebec government, told the justices: “It is not up to a court to answer a question that doesn’t concern the courts.”Quebec received support from the attorneys general of Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, who maintain the courts should not interfere once the notwithstanding clause is invoked.Alberta and Ontario take a contrary position, arguing there is nothing in the notwithstanding clause that precludes judicial scrutiny of legislation.Guy J. Pratte, a lawyer for the attorney general of Canada, said Section 33 gives legislatures the power to override Charter rights but does not nullify the rights altogether or prevent judges from issuing an opinion if freedoms are violated.‘Imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology’The following excerpts are from the factum submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada by the Canadian bishops:“The purpose and effect of the act is unilaterally to amend Canada’s federal constitution by imposing an anti-religious, non-neutral ideology, which goes beyond Québec’s jurisdiction.”“When a province makes itself laïc, it is adopting a non-neutral stance on religion. The provinces do not have that power.”“Québec is attempting to impose an atheistic posture on religious believers.”“Our constitution is founded on a political theory that sees fundamental rights and freedoms as God-given. To adopt an expressly anti-religious viewpoint, as the act purports to do, is an amendment of our existing federal constitution.”“In the place of a genuinely neutral, pluralist, and pro-religious approach, the act substitutes an anti-religious constitutional settlement where symbols of religion worn by individuals are not permitted.”“Just as religious symbols manifest an underlying personal faith, the prohibition of religious symbols manifests an outlook … that denies the divine.”This story was first published by The B.C. Catholic and is reprinted here with permission.

unitedyam

The Catholic bishops were among more than 50 intervenors presenting arguments at a landmark Supreme Court of Canada hearing into the constitutionality of Quebec’s 2019 secularism law.

Read More
Bishops’ commission considers social, cultural, and pastoral factors behind polygamy in Africa #Catholic NAIROBI, Kenya — In addition to theological reflections on marriage and the sacraments, the final report addressing the pastoral challenge of polygamy in Africa, which members of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) issued on March 24, draws attention to a wide range of social, cultural, and pastoral realities shaping the practice across the continent.While reaffirming the Christian ideal of monogamous marriage, the 25-page report compiled by the SECAM commission — made up of selected theologians and professionals from relevant ecclesiastical disciplines — emphasizes that understanding the persistence of polygamy requires careful analysis of social change, legal frameworks, gender relations, and pastoral strategies within African societies. SECAM president Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo. | Credit: ACI Africa The report is a direct response to the mandate that the multiyear XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops — known as the Synod on Synodality — gave Catholic bishops in Africa: “to promote theological and pastoral discernment on the issue of polygamy.”Polygamy in a changing African social landscapeIn the report, the SECAM commission members note that polygamy cannot be understood solely through the lens of traditional culture. African societies have undergone profound transformation in recent decades.“The traditional environment has crumbled,” they said, leading to a climate in which many long-standing institutions and values are increasingly questioned. This transformation has also affected the dynamics of marriage and family life. Sociological studies cited in the report identify infertility as one of the principal motivations behind contemporary polygamy, though the report emphasizes that the reasons are complex.Despite modernization and evangelization, it notes that the practice of polygamy has not disappeared. Instead, “it remains alive and well” and, in some contexts, has even regained popularity.One notable development the SECAM commission members highlight in the report is the changing role of women in African societies. They observe that women increasingly occupy key economic roles, particularly within the informal sector.Legal frameworks across AfricaIn the report, commission members also highlight the legal status of polygamy across the continent.They note that roughly 30 African countries have legal frameworks that permit polygamy — either through civil law, customary law, or religious legislation. The list includes countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Morocco, and South Africa.However, the report points out that legal recognition of polygamy does not necessarily indicate broad societal consensus. In many countries, women’s movements have increasingly challenged these laws.“More and more women are speaking out against legislation in favor of polygamy, which is considered unfair and disrespectful of gender equality,” the report says. Members of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) meet at the 20th Plenary Assembly held in Kigali, Rwanda, from July 30 to Aug. 4, 2025, under the theme “Christ, Source of Hope, Reconciliation, and Peace.” | Credit: ACI Africa This tension between cultural tradition, legal frameworks, and evolving social values forms a significant part of the pastoral context in which the Catholic bishops in Africa must address the issue of polygamy, the SECAM commission says in the report.The question of women’s dignityA central theme in the report is the dignity of women within both cultural and ecclesial contexts.Pastoral responses to polygamy must explicitly seek “to enhance the dignity of women,” the report says. The report acknowledges that women sometimes choose polygamous arrangements for practical or cultural reasons — however, it raises theological questions about whether such choices correspond to God’s plan for human relationships.From a biblical perspective, polygamy “does not promote the development of women as intended by God,” according to the report. Therefore, pastoral strategies that help Christian communities reflect critically on cultural assumptions about gender roles and marriage are important.Economic vulnerability and the practice of polygamyThe report also links polygamy to economic vulnerability, particularly among widows.One example the SECAM commission members highlight is the traditional practice of levirate marriage, in which a widow marries a relative of her deceased husband in order to secure protection and support for herself and her children.While acknowledging the social security function of this practice, the report questions whether it can also lead to forms of exploitation and whether such arrangements risk reducing women to objects of exchange within family structures.For this reason, the commission members highlight the importance of pastoral care directed specifically toward widows. Ensuring their “material and moral security” can help prevent situations in which women feel compelled to enter polygamous relationships for survival, the report states.Hidden or ‘veiled’ forms of polygamyAnother issue raised in the report is what the SECAM commission members call “veiled polygamy.”This term refers to situations in which individuals maintain multiple sexual relationships outside formal marriage, resulting in families in which children are born to parents who are not married to one another.Although such situations do not present the same doctrinal challenges as formal polygamy, the commission members say they consider this harmful both to society and to the Church.One difficulty, they note, is that social stigma often falls disproportionately on women raising children outside marriage. The absence of fathers also raises concerns about the well-being of children.In response, the report calls for stronger pastoral formation within Christian communities so that believers can accompany families facing these realities with maturity and responsibility. Members of the SECAM in 2025 | Credit: ACI Africa Preparing couples for Christian marriageThe commission members in the report repeatedly emphasize that prevention is as important as pastoral accompaniment.Many cases of polygamy among baptized Christians arise from cultural expectations about fertility. In many African contexts, the inability to bear children can place intense pressure on a marriage, the report notes.Therefore, the report calls for rigorous marriage preparation programs that help couples understand the Christian meaning of marriage. While the desire for children is recognized as a legitimate cultural value, the reports stresses that biological fertility is not essential to the sacramental reality of marriage.Christian marriage, the SECAM commission members state, must be understood primarily as a covenant of love and fidelity rather than simply a means of producing offspring.A broader question of inculturationThroughout the report, commission members frame the issue of polygamy as part of a broader challenge of inculturation — the process of expressing Christian faith within diverse cultural contexts.They acknowledge that the Church’s engagement with African cultures has evolved significantly since the missionary era.While earlier pastoral approaches often treated polygamy primarily as a moral problem to be eliminated, today the Church must combine fidelity to the Gospel with attentive listening to cultural realities.In their concluding reflections, SECAM commission members call for continued dialogue among Catholic bishops in Africa, theologians, and pastoral workers to evaluate existing pastoral models and, where necessary, “propose other paths, with the aim of offering to all the possibility of an encounter with Christ and his Gospel.”In this way, the issue of polygamy is not simply a disciplinary question but part of the broader task of shaping an authentically African expression of Christian family life.This story was first published by ACI Africa, the sister service of EWTN News in Africa, and has been adapted by EWTN News.
Read More

Bishops’ commission considers social, cultural, and pastoral factors behind polygamy in Africa #Catholic NAIROBI, Kenya — In addition to theological reflections on marriage and the sacraments, the final report addressing the pastoral challenge of polygamy in Africa, which members of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) issued on March 24, draws attention to a wide range of social, cultural, and pastoral realities shaping the practice across the continent.While reaffirming the Christian ideal of monogamous marriage, the 25-page report compiled by the SECAM commission — made up of selected theologians and professionals from relevant ecclesiastical disciplines — emphasizes that understanding the persistence of polygamy requires careful analysis of social change, legal frameworks, gender relations, and pastoral strategies within African societies. SECAM president Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo. | Credit: ACI Africa The report is a direct response to the mandate that the multiyear XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops — known as the Synod on Synodality — gave Catholic bishops in Africa: “to promote theological and pastoral discernment on the issue of polygamy.”Polygamy in a changing African social landscapeIn the report, the SECAM commission members note that polygamy cannot be understood solely through the lens of traditional culture. African societies have undergone profound transformation in recent decades.“The traditional environment has crumbled,” they said, leading to a climate in which many long-standing institutions and values are increasingly questioned. This transformation has also affected the dynamics of marriage and family life. Sociological studies cited in the report identify infertility as one of the principal motivations behind contemporary polygamy, though the report emphasizes that the reasons are complex.Despite modernization and evangelization, it notes that the practice of polygamy has not disappeared. Instead, “it remains alive and well” and, in some contexts, has even regained popularity.One notable development the SECAM commission members highlight in the report is the changing role of women in African societies. They observe that women increasingly occupy key economic roles, particularly within the informal sector.Legal frameworks across AfricaIn the report, commission members also highlight the legal status of polygamy across the continent.They note that roughly 30 African countries have legal frameworks that permit polygamy — either through civil law, customary law, or religious legislation. The list includes countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Morocco, and South Africa.However, the report points out that legal recognition of polygamy does not necessarily indicate broad societal consensus. In many countries, women’s movements have increasingly challenged these laws.“More and more women are speaking out against legislation in favor of polygamy, which is considered unfair and disrespectful of gender equality,” the report says. Members of the Symposium of Episcopal Conference of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM) meet at the 20th Plenary Assembly held in Kigali, Rwanda, from July 30 to Aug. 4, 2025, under the theme “Christ, Source of Hope, Reconciliation, and Peace.” | Credit: ACI Africa This tension between cultural tradition, legal frameworks, and evolving social values forms a significant part of the pastoral context in which the Catholic bishops in Africa must address the issue of polygamy, the SECAM commission says in the report.The question of women’s dignityA central theme in the report is the dignity of women within both cultural and ecclesial contexts.Pastoral responses to polygamy must explicitly seek “to enhance the dignity of women,” the report says. The report acknowledges that women sometimes choose polygamous arrangements for practical or cultural reasons — however, it raises theological questions about whether such choices correspond to God’s plan for human relationships.From a biblical perspective, polygamy “does not promote the development of women as intended by God,” according to the report. Therefore, pastoral strategies that help Christian communities reflect critically on cultural assumptions about gender roles and marriage are important.Economic vulnerability and the practice of polygamyThe report also links polygamy to economic vulnerability, particularly among widows.One example the SECAM commission members highlight is the traditional practice of levirate marriage, in which a widow marries a relative of her deceased husband in order to secure protection and support for herself and her children.While acknowledging the social security function of this practice, the report questions whether it can also lead to forms of exploitation and whether such arrangements risk reducing women to objects of exchange within family structures.For this reason, the commission members highlight the importance of pastoral care directed specifically toward widows. Ensuring their “material and moral security” can help prevent situations in which women feel compelled to enter polygamous relationships for survival, the report states.Hidden or ‘veiled’ forms of polygamyAnother issue raised in the report is what the SECAM commission members call “veiled polygamy.”This term refers to situations in which individuals maintain multiple sexual relationships outside formal marriage, resulting in families in which children are born to parents who are not married to one another.Although such situations do not present the same doctrinal challenges as formal polygamy, the commission members say they consider this harmful both to society and to the Church.One difficulty, they note, is that social stigma often falls disproportionately on women raising children outside marriage. The absence of fathers also raises concerns about the well-being of children.In response, the report calls for stronger pastoral formation within Christian communities so that believers can accompany families facing these realities with maturity and responsibility. Members of the SECAM in 2025 | Credit: ACI Africa Preparing couples for Christian marriageThe commission members in the report repeatedly emphasize that prevention is as important as pastoral accompaniment.Many cases of polygamy among baptized Christians arise from cultural expectations about fertility. In many African contexts, the inability to bear children can place intense pressure on a marriage, the report notes.Therefore, the report calls for rigorous marriage preparation programs that help couples understand the Christian meaning of marriage. While the desire for children is recognized as a legitimate cultural value, the reports stresses that biological fertility is not essential to the sacramental reality of marriage.Christian marriage, the SECAM commission members state, must be understood primarily as a covenant of love and fidelity rather than simply a means of producing offspring.A broader question of inculturationThroughout the report, commission members frame the issue of polygamy as part of a broader challenge of inculturation — the process of expressing Christian faith within diverse cultural contexts.They acknowledge that the Church’s engagement with African cultures has evolved significantly since the missionary era.While earlier pastoral approaches often treated polygamy primarily as a moral problem to be eliminated, today the Church must combine fidelity to the Gospel with attentive listening to cultural realities.In their concluding reflections, SECAM commission members call for continued dialogue among Catholic bishops in Africa, theologians, and pastoral workers to evaluate existing pastoral models and, where necessary, “propose other paths, with the aim of offering to all the possibility of an encounter with Christ and his Gospel.”In this way, the issue of polygamy is not simply a disciplinary question but part of the broader task of shaping an authentically African expression of Christian family life.This story was first published by ACI Africa, the sister service of EWTN News in Africa, and has been adapted by EWTN News.

unitedyam

The final report addressing the pastoral challenge of polygamy in Africa draws attention to a wide range of social, cultural, and pastoral realities shaping the practice across the continent.

Read More
Scottish bishops say ‘prayer moved hearts’ after Scottish Parliament rejects assisted suicide #Catholic In a final vote, members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs) have rejected a bill that would have made assisted suicide legal — a dramatic turn of events that Scotland’s Catholic bishops are attributing to the power of prayer.Reacting to the result immediately after its announcement on March 17, Scotland’s bishops told EWTN News: “Prayer is what moved hearts on this important issue. We are over the moon. Glory be to God that life has triumphed tonight!”Bill sponsor Liam McArthur and his supporters were confident of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill becoming law. In the first vote in May 2025, Parliament voted 70 to 56 in favor of the bill progressing to Stage 2. The bill was then amended at Stage 2 before moving to Stage 3 for a decisive vote. in the end, however, MSPs rejected it, voting 69 to 57 against the bill. Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said the vote against the assisted suicide bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland After an emotional debate, 12 MSPs changed sides, moving from supporting the Bill at Stage 1 to opposing it. Notable MSPs who swapped sides included Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party), Daniel Johnson (Labour), and Brian Whittle (Conservative), who publicly announced their decisions during the debate. This followed other notable announcements in the buildup to the vote by Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay and Scottish National Party MSPs Audrey Nicoll and Collette Stevenson, who had initially supported the bill and then shared their decisions to vote against it.Commending MSPs for voting against the legislation, Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said after the vote: “I would like to express my gratitude to all MSPs for their serious engagement with this issue and for the thoughtful and considered attention they have given to the bill. I am especially grateful to those who upheld the principle of human dignity and advocated on behalf of the vulnerable.”The Catholic Church teaches that assisted suicide is inherently immoral. In advance of the final vote, Keenan commented that a vote against the bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.”“Every human life possesses inherent value,” he said. “Genuine compassion is not expressed through ending a life but through accompanying those who suffer and ensuring they receive the medical, emotional, and spiritual support that recognizes their dignity.” Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of Right To Life UK Pro-life groups opposing the bill also highlighted the importance of the vote for the vulnerable. In a message to EWTN News, Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.”Hungerford-Morgan told EWTN News: “People nearing the end of their lives, no matter what their condition, need love and support, not a pathway to suicide, which is exactly what the Scottish assisted suicide bill would have done."The vote followed an intense and long debate over five sessions, culminating in the final debate and vote on March 17.Hungerford-Morgan said: “If this bill had passed in the Scottish Parliament and gone on to become law, it would have ushered in an irrevocable change that would have put the vulnerable at risk and seen the ending of thousands of lives through assisted suicide in Scotland.”He added: “After two years of debate, and the most intense scrutiny that the question of assisted suicide has ever received in Scotland, Holyrood, which is widely regarded as one of the world’s most socially and politically progressive legislatures, has come to the conclusion that introducing assisted suicide is unsafe and dangerous.”Paul Atkin, pro-life officer at the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, highlighted “the strength of engagement across our archdiocese” due to the fact that, from the 12 MSPs who changed their votes to opposing the bill, eight represent constituencies within the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh.Atkin told EWTN News: “The defeat of this bill is a welcome result, reflecting the strength of engagement across our archdiocese. From the archbishop’s leadership to parishes who organized hundreds of letters, this was a united effort which made the difference.”Praising the “remarkable contribution” of the archdiocese, Atkin paid tribute to the “polite, persistent engagement from the Catholic community,” which helped “shape outcomes and protect the most vulnerable.”Opponents of the bill called for attention to now move away from assisted suicide toward investment in palliative care. “Our next priority must be to strengthen palliative care by ensuring that it is properly funded and accessible to all who require it,” Keenan said. Echoing this viewpoint, Hungerford-Morgan urged MSPs to “unite to focus on renewed efforts to promote and improve palliative care.”Following the defeat of the bill, Hungerford-Morgan turned his attention to a separate bill currently being debated in the House of Lords in London that would legalize assisted suicide in England and Wales, initiated by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.Calling on the Leadbeater Bill’s sponsors to “reject assisted suicide,” he said: “This victory will have an impact far beyond Holyrood as the Leadbeater Bill is being debated in the House of Lords. Instead of pushing ahead with this dangerous bill, its sponsors should follow Scotland’s example and reject assisted suicide.”
Read More

Scottish bishops say ‘prayer moved hearts’ after Scottish Parliament rejects assisted suicide #Catholic In a final vote, members of Scottish Parliament (MSPs) have rejected a bill that would have made assisted suicide legal — a dramatic turn of events that Scotland’s Catholic bishops are attributing to the power of prayer.Reacting to the result immediately after its announcement on March 17, Scotland’s bishops told EWTN News: “Prayer is what moved hearts on this important issue. We are over the moon. Glory be to God that life has triumphed tonight!”Bill sponsor Liam McArthur and his supporters were confident of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill becoming law. In the first vote in May 2025, Parliament voted 70 to 56 in favor of the bill progressing to Stage 2. The bill was then amended at Stage 2 before moving to Stage 3 for a decisive vote. in the end, however, MSPs rejected it, voting 69 to 57 against the bill. Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said the vote against the assisted suicide bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland After an emotional debate, 12 MSPs changed sides, moving from supporting the Bill at Stage 1 to opposing it. Notable MSPs who swapped sides included Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party), Daniel Johnson (Labour), and Brian Whittle (Conservative), who publicly announced their decisions during the debate. This followed other notable announcements in the buildup to the vote by Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay and Scottish National Party MSPs Audrey Nicoll and Collette Stevenson, who had initially supported the bill and then shared their decisions to vote against it.Commending MSPs for voting against the legislation, Bishop John Keenan, president of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland, said after the vote: “I would like to express my gratitude to all MSPs for their serious engagement with this issue and for the thoughtful and considered attention they have given to the bill. I am especially grateful to those who upheld the principle of human dignity and advocated on behalf of the vulnerable.”The Catholic Church teaches that assisted suicide is inherently immoral. In advance of the final vote, Keenan commented that a vote against the bill would “protect some of Scotland’s most vulnerable individuals from the risk of being pressured into a premature death.”“Every human life possesses inherent value,” he said. “Genuine compassion is not expressed through ending a life but through accompanying those who suffer and ensuring they receive the medical, emotional, and spiritual support that recognizes their dignity.” Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.” | Credit: Photo courtesy of Right To Life UK Pro-life groups opposing the bill also highlighted the importance of the vote for the vulnerable. In a message to EWTN News, Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan, chief executive of pro-life charity Right To Life UK, called the result “a great and deeply significant victory for the most vulnerable people in Scotland.”Hungerford-Morgan told EWTN News: “People nearing the end of their lives, no matter what their condition, need love and support, not a pathway to suicide, which is exactly what the Scottish assisted suicide bill would have done."The vote followed an intense and long debate over five sessions, culminating in the final debate and vote on March 17.Hungerford-Morgan said: “If this bill had passed in the Scottish Parliament and gone on to become law, it would have ushered in an irrevocable change that would have put the vulnerable at risk and seen the ending of thousands of lives through assisted suicide in Scotland.”He added: “After two years of debate, and the most intense scrutiny that the question of assisted suicide has ever received in Scotland, Holyrood, which is widely regarded as one of the world’s most socially and politically progressive legislatures, has come to the conclusion that introducing assisted suicide is unsafe and dangerous.”Paul Atkin, pro-life officer at the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh, highlighted “the strength of engagement across our archdiocese” due to the fact that, from the 12 MSPs who changed their votes to opposing the bill, eight represent constituencies within the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh.Atkin told EWTN News: “The defeat of this bill is a welcome result, reflecting the strength of engagement across our archdiocese. From the archbishop’s leadership to parishes who organized hundreds of letters, this was a united effort which made the difference.”Praising the “remarkable contribution” of the archdiocese, Atkin paid tribute to the “polite, persistent engagement from the Catholic community,” which helped “shape outcomes and protect the most vulnerable.”Opponents of the bill called for attention to now move away from assisted suicide toward investment in palliative care. “Our next priority must be to strengthen palliative care by ensuring that it is properly funded and accessible to all who require it,” Keenan said. Echoing this viewpoint, Hungerford-Morgan urged MSPs to “unite to focus on renewed efforts to promote and improve palliative care.”Following the defeat of the bill, Hungerford-Morgan turned his attention to a separate bill currently being debated in the House of Lords in London that would legalize assisted suicide in England and Wales, initiated by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.Calling on the Leadbeater Bill’s sponsors to “reject assisted suicide,” he said: “This victory will have an impact far beyond Holyrood as the Leadbeater Bill is being debated in the House of Lords. Instead of pushing ahead with this dangerous bill, its sponsors should follow Scotland’s example and reject assisted suicide.”

unitedyam

In a decisive vote, Scottish members of Parliament have rejected the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, a victory the bishops in Scotland are praising.

Read More
Cuban government to release 51 prisoners following Vatican talks #Catholic The Cuban government announced that it will release 51 people from prison because of its “smooth” relations with the Vatican — a move that coincides with the upcoming observance of Holy Week.“In the spirit of goodwill, and of the close and smooth relations between the Cuban state and the Vatican — with which communication regarding processes for the review and release of persons deprived of liberty has historically been maintained — the government of Cuba has decided to release, in the coming days, 51 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty [prison],” the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported in a March 12 statement.The director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, confirmed to ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News, on March 13 that “conversations regarding the release of prisoners have recently taken place.”The statement from the Cuban ministry notes that all these individuals “have served a significant portion of their sentences and have maintained good conduct in prison”; however, it does not indicate whether the group includes political prisoners.The communist regime states that since 2010, it “has granted pardons to 9,905 inmates, while — over the last three years, as part of Cuban practice and pursuant to the provisions of our legislation — another 10,000 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty were released based on certain conditions.”This announcement comes amid renewed tensions between Cuba and the United States, which began in January, and the recent meetings that representatives from both countries have held with Vatican officials.On Feb. 20, the U.S. chief of mission in Cuba, Mike Hammer, held a meeting at the Vatican with Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, the Holy See’s secretary for relations with states.Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin stated on March 9 that the Holy See has taken “the necessary steps” regarding the situation in Cuba, “always with a view to a solution to the existing problems through dialogue.”In January 2025, the Cuban regime also announced the release of 553 prisoners following mediation by Pope Francis and “in the spirit of the Ordinary Jubilee of 2025.”Victoria Cardiel, EWTN News correspondent in Rome, contributed to this report.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
Read More

Cuban government to release 51 prisoners following Vatican talks #Catholic The Cuban government announced that it will release 51 people from prison because of its “smooth” relations with the Vatican — a move that coincides with the upcoming observance of Holy Week.“In the spirit of goodwill, and of the close and smooth relations between the Cuban state and the Vatican — with which communication regarding processes for the review and release of persons deprived of liberty has historically been maintained — the government of Cuba has decided to release, in the coming days, 51 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty [prison],” the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported in a March 12 statement.The director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, confirmed to ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News, on March 13 that “conversations regarding the release of prisoners have recently taken place.”The statement from the Cuban ministry notes that all these individuals “have served a significant portion of their sentences and have maintained good conduct in prison”; however, it does not indicate whether the group includes political prisoners.The communist regime states that since 2010, it “has granted pardons to 9,905 inmates, while — over the last three years, as part of Cuban practice and pursuant to the provisions of our legislation — another 10,000 individuals sentenced to deprivation of liberty were released based on certain conditions.”This announcement comes amid renewed tensions between Cuba and the United States, which began in January, and the recent meetings that representatives from both countries have held with Vatican officials.On Feb. 20, the U.S. chief of mission in Cuba, Mike Hammer, held a meeting at the Vatican with Archbishop Paul Richard Gallagher, the Holy See’s secretary for relations with states.Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin stated on March 9 that the Holy See has taken “the necessary steps” regarding the situation in Cuba, “always with a view to a solution to the existing problems through dialogue.”In January 2025, the Cuban regime also announced the release of 553 prisoners following mediation by Pope Francis and “in the spirit of the Ordinary Jubilee of 2025.”Victoria Cardiel, EWTN News correspondent in Rome, contributed to this report.This story was first published by ACI Prensa, the Spanish-language sister service of EWTN News. It has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.

unitedyam

The regime stated the decision was made in a “spirit of goodwill” and because of its good relations with the Holy See, but did not indicate if any of those to be released are political prisoners.

Read More
Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.
Read More

Democratic lawmaker asks ICE director if he’s ‘going to hell’ in fiery hearing #Catholic A Democratic lawmaker asked U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd Lyons whether he believes he is “going to hell” in a contentious hearing with the House Homeland Security Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 10.Lyons — along with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow and Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott — testified before the committee as Congress negotiates potential reforms and funding for the agencies.On Feb. 3, Congress voted to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which operates the three agencies, until Feb. 13 to end a four-day partial government shutdown. A deal has not yet been reached to extend funding further.At the hearing, Democratic lawmakers accused ICE of terrorizing the streets, using excessive force, and lacking accountability. Republicans defended ICE and rebuked Democratic officials in certain states for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.One of the fiercest exchanges came from Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who praised protesters for “peacefully rejecting your cruel agenda in the streets.” She said ICE believes it is “the highest power who decides which people deserve dignity, protection, and due process” and said “you are wrong [and] we are here for answers.”“How do you think judgment day will work for you, with so much blood on your hands?” McIver asked Lyons, to which he responded that he would not entertain the question.“Do you think you’re going to hell?” she followed up, before being chastised by Committee Chair Andrew Garbarino, R-New York, who told her to avoid personal attacks on witnesses and maintain decorum.McIver said “you guys are always talking about religion here, and the Bible.” She changed the subject slightly and asked Lyons whether he could name agencies that “routinely kill American citizens and still get funding,” which he also said was a question he was “not going to entertain.”“Once again, questions that you cannot answer and that is exactly why … we should not be funding this agency,” McIver said. “The people are watching you; they are watching you. And this is why we need to abolish ICE.”Lawmakers debate ICE operations, future of agencyThe killings of two American citizens at ICE protests — Renée Good and Alex Pretti — were a focal point of the hearing, and two examples that Democrats used to accuse ICE of excessive force and lacking accountability.Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-California, referenced both killings and criticized DHS Secretary Kristi Noem for referring to those who died as “domestic terrorists.” He asked Lyons whether he would apologize to the families or reject that characterization.Lyons said he would not comment on an ongoing investigation but would welcome a private conversation with the families.Democrats are split on whether to reform ICE or abolish it altogether.Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-Rhode Island, brought up instances in which he believes ICE used excessive force and suggested reforms are necessary before Congress awards funding.“It’s not just the actions of the agents in the field,” he said. “It is the lack of accountability from the top that has caused public trust to erode, and there needs to be major reforms before we vote to give any of you any more funding.”Alternatively, Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Illinois, called for abolishing ICE and the entire DHS, which Congress formed to address terrorism threats after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Ramirez said DHS was created to “violate our rights under the pretense of securing our safety.”“I’m going to say it loud and clear and I’m proud to stand by what I say,” she said. “DHS cannot be reformed. It must be dismantled and something new must take its place.”Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, commented during the hearing that Democratic lawmakers “have called to abolish ICE [and] now they’re trying to shut it down” amid the negotiations and discussion during the hearing.He criticized the lack of coordination from Democratic-led “sanctuary” states and cities, which do not cooperate with ICE, saying the policies in Minneapolis “created a perfect storm for our officers being thrown into this situation.”Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, similarly expressed concern about ICE funding moving forward, based on the debates between the two parties.“It seems like one side of the aisle is in favor of open borders and wants to abolish ICE … and the other side of the aisle wants to enforce laws that are on the books,” he said.During the question and answer, Lyons expressed worry about the rhetoric from Democrats and noted that threats and assaults against ICE agents are on the rise. He said agents are trying to “keep America safe, restore order to our communities, [and] return the rule of law to this country.”“Those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable,” he said.Scott also showed concerns about the ongoing debate and expressed hope that DHS could receive support from both Republicans and Democrats.“I believe consistency and seeing support from the leadership on both sides of this building and the president is very important for our security,” he said. “I think the rhetoric and the … politicizing of law enforcement in general detracts from the general morale of our personnel.”Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, told “EWTN News Nightly” that he sees “much of [the Democratic threats to halt funding] as political theater,” noting that ICE will continue to operate regardless of whether Congress passes the funding bill.He said Democrats hope to take away an issue that made Trump popular during the 2024 election “and turn it into a bad issue for Republicans” in the midterms.Arthur said there may be some shifts in ICE’s approach in Minneapolis now that Border Czar Tom Homan is involved in seeking the “cooperation of state and city governments” that have been “reluctant, if not hostile” to immigration enforcement over the past year.The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in November 2025 approved a special message with a 216-5 vote that declared opposition to “the indiscriminate mass deportation of people.”Late last month, about 300 Catholic leaders — including 15 bishops — asked Congress to reject ICE funding if the legislation fails to include reforms that have protections for migrants.

unitedyam

Top U.S. immigration officials defended their policies during a contentious hearing as lawmakers continue to negotiate potential ICE funding and reforms.

Read More