Excommunication was wrong. Or misinterpreted. Or . . . something

There's been a reversal in the case of the raped nine-year-old in Brazil whose mother and doctors were to be excommunicated.

According to Radio New Zealand (the only source I could find):

Brazilian bishops have cancelled the excommunication of the mother and doctors of a nine-year-old girl who had an abortion after being raped.

They said the decision to excommunicate was wrong and would not be applied.
. . .
In an effort to mitigate the archbishop's declarations, CNBB president Geraldo Lyra Rocha said his colleague had been misinterpreted.

"Archbishop Sobrinho did not excommunicate anyone," he said. "I am sure he did not mean to harm anyone but rather wanted to draw attention to a certain permissiveness (over abortions)."

Well, which is it? Was the decision wrong or misinterpreted? How about just plain evil?

And what will the Poop have to say, having already backed this monstrous decision? Was he wrong? Misinterpreted?

And yes, of course, blogging on this story is -- SHRIEEEEEK!!! -- Anti-Catlick Bigotry! Start the countdown.

UPPITY-DATE: Vatican Backtracks:

A senior Vatican official has criticized the excommunication of a Brazilian woman whose nine-year-old daughter had an abortion after being raped, as well as the medical team who performed it.

"Before thinking about an excommunication it was necessary and urgent to save the innocent life" of the girl "to bring her back to a level of humanity of which clerics should be the experts and master," said Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Academy for Life.

"This was not the case," Fisichella said in an article to be published by the Vatican's Osservatore Romano newspaper today.

"Unfortunately the credibility of our teaching took a blow as it appeared, in the eyes of many, to be insensitive, incomprehensible and lacking mercy."

Yup.