WASHINGTON —The U.S. bishops issued a firm response this evening to the White House’s proposed “accommodation” to the HHS contraception mandate: rescission as the “only complete solution.”
The statement makes clear the central reason why the mission of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops remains unchanged: The president “has decided to retain HHS’s nationwide mandate of insurance coverage of sterilization and contraception, including some abortifacients,” the conference statement notes. “We cannot fail to reiterate this.”
“We note that today’s proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions. In a nation dedicated to religious liberty as its first and founding principle, we should not be limited to negotiating within these parameters. The only complete solution to this religious-liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services,” said the USCCB statement.
“We will, therefore, continue — with no less vigor, no less sense of urgency — our efforts to correct this problem through the other two branches of government. For example, we renew our call on Congress to pass, and the administration to sign, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act. And we renew our call to the Catholic faithful, and to all our fellow Americans, to join together in this effort to protect religious liberty and freedom of conscience for all.”
Early Friday afternoon, President Obama announced a proposed “accommodation” designed “to find a solution that works for everyone.”
In a statement released by the White House, the administration said it would exempt religious organizations from being required to either provide “contraceptive coverage or refer employees to organizations that did provide that service.”
But the White House statement left many details of the new plan unanswered — perhaps until after the 2012 presidential election.
Shortly after the president’s statement, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of New York, the president of the USCCB, offered a muted response to the White House’s latest bid to tamp down the political backlash over its controversial rule requiring that all private employers provide contraception coverage.
Cardinal-designate Dolan said, “While there may be an openness to respond to some of our concerns, we reserve judgment on the details until we have them.”
In recent weeks, the New York Church leader has expressed skepticism about whether he could still trust the White House to effectively address the bishops’ objections to the federal rule.
However, Daughter of Charity Carol Keehan, the president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association, immediately applauded the White House’s action. Soon after, some other Catholic Democrats, who had made common cause with the bishops, appeared to back off from the fight.
Silver Lining?
Yet, for Church leaders, there has been an unexpected silver lining in this controversy: The escalating dispute has united an often fractious body of Catholic believers, and Cardinal-designate Dolan’s remarks today expressed a desire to strengthen, rather than dissipate, that sense of common religious identity and mission. But that unity also threatened the president’s commitment to advance and secure mandated contraception under the new health bill.
“The past three weeks have witnessed a remarkable unity of Americans from all religions or none at all worried about the erosion of religious freedom and governmental intrusion into issues of faith and morals,” said Cardinal-designate Dolan.
While Cardinal-designate Dolan’s initial response was cautious, some individual bishops reaffirmed their opposition to the mandate.
Archbishop Thomas Wenski called Obama’s move a “smokescreen.” Speaking with National Public Radio today, he added, “The president has decided to kick the can down the road” in the hope that the issue “will go away.”
In the Feb. 10 statement released by the White House, the administration noted several important changes in its modified rule dealing with the contraception mandate.
“Religious organizations will not be required to subsidize the cost of contraception,” the White House asserted.
Further, “contraception coverage will be offered to women by their employers’ insurance companies directly, with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception.”
“Insurance companies will be required to provide contraception coverage to these women free of charge,” the statement continued.
Michael Warsaw, the president and CEO of EWTN and publisher of the Register, expressed his dismay that the proposed modification did little to address his objections to the HHS contraception mandate. Yesterday, EWTN filed suit against the federal government, seeking to block the federal rule and challenge its constitutionality.
“I am certainly pleased to see that EWTN’s decision to file suit against the recent contraception mandate of the Department of Health and Human Services may have played some role in forcing the administration to revisit the application of these rules on religious institutions,” said Warsaw in a statement released today.
“However, we remain quite skeptical that the changes announced by President Obama will in fact address the concerns raised by EWTN.”
His statement noted that it was not clear whether the proposed modification would “actually apply to EWTN or actually give any relief to the network and other similar organizations. Like EWTN, many religious institutions self-insure their health-care plans, meaning that we will still be forced to pay for these services in violation of our religious beliefs,” he concluded.
Archbishop Wilton Gregory of Atlanta, in a statement issued shortly after the White House’s announcement, underscored the issue of self insurance. “The … mandate seems to require contraception coverage, including abortion-inducing drugs, to be offered to women by their employers’ insurance companies. The Archdiocese of Atlanta is self-insured, as are many Catholic institutions, so this is not a real solution,” said Archbishop Gregory.
Tonight, the USCCB statement emphasized these concerns: “We note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders — for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals — is unacceptable and must be corrected,” read the statement.
‘False Compromise’
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public-interest group that is representing pro bono EWTN and two other plaintiffs that have filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the contraception mandate, rejected the proposed “accommodation.”
“This is a false ‘compromise’ designed to protect the president’s re-election chances, not to protect the right of conscience,” said Hannah Smith, senior legal counsel for the Becket Fund. “Hundreds, if not thousands, of religious institutions are still left out in the cold and will be forced to violate their religious convictions.”
Judging from the White House statement, she said, some church-affiliated employers may be able to opt out of the federal rule, which now requires private employers to cover contraception, sterilization and abortifacient drugs. According to the outlines of this proposal, “insurance companies will provide that service free of charge.”
But an analysis issued by the Becket Fund states that three outstanding problems with this new proposal go unaddressed.
Like EWTN, thousands of religious organizations self-insure, so “they will still be forced to pay for these services in violation of their religious beliefs.”
Further, the White House statement today does not stipulate “which religious organizations are permitted to claim the new exemption and whether it will extend to for-profit organizations, individuals or nondenominational organizations.”
Finally, “money is fungible, and many religious organizations may still object to being forced to pay money to an insurance company which will turn around and provide contraception to its employees for free.”
But the Catholic Health Association’s Sister Carol Keehan issued a starkly different judgment of the modified plan.
In a statement released today, Sister Carol said she was “very pleased with the White House announcement that a resolution has been reached that protects the religious liberty and conscience rights of Catholic institutions. The framework developed has responded to the issues we identified that needed to be fixed.
“We are pleased and grateful that the religious liberty and conscience protection needs of so many ministries that serve our country were appreciated enough that an early resolution of this issue was accomplished.”
Sister Carol played a decisive role in the passage of the health bill, particularly during the bruising final weeks before it was passed by Congress, despite objections from the U.S. bishops and pro-life groups regarding potential problems with abortion funding and related issues. Sister Carol received a pen from President Obama when the health bill was signed into law.
And judging from a Feb. 10 New York Times story, “Rule Shift on Birth Control Is a Concession to Obama Allies,” she played a pivotal role in the president’s effort to break through the unexpected outcome of Catholics closing ranks against state intrusion in the internal affairs of church institutions.
The Times’ story states: “For the White House, the decision announced Friday ... was never really driven by a desire to mollify Roman Catholic bishops, who were strongly opposed to the plan.”
Faced with a mounting crisis, the president reportedly sought Sister Carol’s counsel, and she signed off on his modified plan.
“I felt like he had made a really bad decision, and I told him that,” Sister Keehan said of the president. “I told his staff that. I felt like they had made a bad decision on principle, and politically it was a bad decision. For me, another key thing was that it had the potential to threaten the future of health reform.”
Sister Carol and Bishop Kevin Vann of Fort Worth, Texas, a member of the CHA board, were contacted for further comment, but were not available. This week, the CHA held a board meeting, but it could not be confirmed whether board members had approved Sister Carol’s stance.
‘Peel Off Opponents’
Indeed, in late 2010 and early 2011, Sister Carol offered no public protest when Catholic groups, including the CHA, were not invited to public hearings designed to develop a list of approved preventive services for women, as mandated by the new bill. Thus, the final list of “preventive services for women” gave no credence to the position of Catholic health-care providers, who do not view pregnancy as a “disease” and morally object to contraception and sterilization.
During the past three weeks, Sister Carol kept a relatively low profile as the fight over the contraception mandate roiled Capitol Hill. She issued a couple of statements, and Catholic Democrats, who opposed the contraception mandate as a violation of the free exercise of religion, described it as a “betrayal” of her support for Obamacare.
Today, Sister Carol’s statement acknowledged that the public dispute between the administration and church leaders “has at times been uncomfortable, but it has helped our country sort through an issue that has been important throughout the history of our great democracy.”
Soon after Sister Carol publicly backed the “accommodation,” Tim Kaine, a Catholic and a Democratic candidate for a U.S. Senate seat from Virginia, welcomed the White House’s modification. Kaine’s likely GOP rival for the Senate seat has strongly criticized the contraception mandate.
Over the past week, Kaine, the former governor of Virginia, was among several high-profile Democrats that pressed the White House to change the policy. Pennsylvania Sen. Robert Casey, West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and Connecticut Congressman John Larson joined that small group of Democratic dissenters.
For the most part, these lawmakers haven’t challenged the need to require private employers to provide co-pay-free contraception services. Rather they opposed the narrow religious exemption that forced religious social service agencies, universities and hospitals to provide, and even facilitate, services they morally opposed.
The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue characterized the White House’s latest “accommodation” as “cynical: Its effect is to peel off liberal Catholic opposition to Obamacare. In other words, the old divide-and-conquer strategy is in play. But it won’t work as nicely as they think: There are too many practicing Catholics who will only be impelled to revolt.”
Donohue expressed frustration that some of the president’s allies, who recently broke ranks over the federal rule, had already backed the new plan without waiting for the bishops’ formal judgment.
Noting that Sister Carol Keehan had already endorsed the plan, Donohue said, “I am a team player and she would never be on my team.”
Election Year
The White House’s three-week campaign of damage control has played out during a hotly contested presidential-election year. Many commentators and Democratic Party leaders like Vice President Joseph Biden, a Catholic, reportedly suggested that the dispute could backfire against the president.
But critics of the contraception mandate have expressed the fear that the administration might float a political solution that would offer no substantive accommodation to church groups, let alone a full repeal.
Hannah Smith at the Becket Fund predicted that “the details of this supposed ‘compromise’ will likely not be announced until after the election.” Thus, the accommodation could provide the president with political cover without securing the First Amendment rights of religious employers.
EWTN’s Warsaw echoed that concern. He noted “that the proposed rules for non-exempted religious organizations will still not be finalized until later in the coming year. This leaves EWTN and other such organizations very uncertain about what the future may hold with regard to this mandate.”
Warsaw said he would “consult with our legal counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty to determine the implications of this revised approach; however, our legal action against the administration will continue.”
The White House’s statement is unlikely to alter GOP efforts on Capitol Hill, where Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is spearheading an effort to develop legislation designed to repeal the contraception mandate.
Obama’s plan, touted as a concession to freedom of religion and conscience, was immediately denounced by pro-life Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J. “The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else,” said Smith. “It remains a serious violation of religious freedom. Only the most naive or gullible would accept this as a change in policy.”
“The White House ‘Fact Sheet’ is riddled with doublespeak and contradiction,” Smith contended. “It states, for example, that religious employers ‘will not’ have to pay for abortion pills, sterilization and contraception, but their ‘insurance companies’ will. Who pays for the insurance policy? The religious employer.”
That harsh assessment was echoed in a statement signed by almost 100 high-profile academics, from a spectrum of religious communities, including John Garvey, the president of The Catholic University of America, Robert George of Princeton, Mary Ann Glendon of Harvard, Michael McConnell of Stanford, Thomas Farr of Georgetown, and O. Carter Snead, Richard Garnett and Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame, who said the White House had failed to effectively address the First Amendment concerns of religious institutions.
“This so-called ‘accommodation’ changes nothing of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on religious liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy. … The simple fact is that the Obama administration is compelling religious people and institutions who are employers to purchase a health-insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization,” read the statement. “This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand.”
Joan Frawley Desmond is the Register’s senior editor.
Edward Pentin: Images of Rome's 2013 March for Life
Tom Hoopes: Why Catholics Are Grateful to George W. Bush
Comments
Post a Comment
I excited to see that EWTN is fighting this grave injustice with a lawsuit. What else could we expect from the Obama administration? Just when we think it’s as bad as it could possibly be, he comes up with a way to make things worse, and even more oppressive. I am disturbed by the religious sister who is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Should she not be excommunicated for her actions? I wonder: why is there such disobedience to the Magesterium among so many religious sisters these days? How have they lost their way? When religious sisters were clothed in habits, was there such an issue with disobedience? These type of “Catholics” confuse society and present a strange image of Catholicism and of religious sisters. I think this public disobedience is a reason for the decline in religious vocations among women. I think that among those orders wearing the habit, there is more loyalty to the Magesterium. Yes, there are faithful good sisters who are not wearing the habit, but I think the lack of habit has caused some to abandon their faith.
I have a sincere question. Why have Nancy Pelosi and Kathleen Sabellius not been excommunicated from the Catholic Church.This in many ways is a scandal in itself.I am not trying to create a controversy but many Catholics ask this question of me because I have an M.A. in Theology.I know no one has been formally excommunicated from the Church since Fidel Castro,but by not condemning these actions are we not saying in effect,“It’s not important”? The church has become too feminne for men.
Ughh… Catholic Health Association. Can we stop calling her “Sister” Carol Keehan? Doesn’t she support contraception and abortion anyhow??
I really could care less what this woman feels about this “compromise”. She and Pelosi can go have their parties together and sing “hip hip hooray” all they want. When they decide to repent and act like Catholics I’ll start listening. Until then I have little respect for their views on anything.
So the bishops in their wisdom choose to “reserve judgment on the details until we have them”, but EWTN rushed to file a lawsuit?
The political types at the USCCB should have been able to anticipate Obama’s actions - there were only so many ways this could have played out. By their delay, they come across as having blinked.
The Church absolutely has been right on the issue of birth control.
For those who wish to learn why the Church is correct on this issue, an excellent commentary and further resource links can be found here:
http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-catholic-church-opposes.html
I feel my charity challenged here too- I received a one over the world email today from Cecilia Muñoz, Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council, who at one time like Kathleen Sebellius, Nancy Pelosi etc. was a Catholic. (I know this because my husband dated her in high school. Of course that was aeons before he became a Catholic himself, and the father of 13 children, or a business owner.) I am relying on some very astute observers to weigh in on whether this is truly a good faith gesture on behalf of the administration or whether or not the rank and file are being played. I don’t trust these women as far as I can throw them and I pray God will have mercy on their souls- if they are allowing themselves to be tools in the hand of the enemy of all life, who is especially the chief adversary of the ‘woman with child’.
This administration cannot be trusted! Government run health care is the issue here! If we win on this issue this time, there will only be another issue that comes up later on if Obama Care is not repealed.
Below is the text of the internal letter to the bishops—obtained tonight by Whispers in the Loggia—and signed by the aforementioned quintet: the conference president, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of New York, and the bench’s committee chairs for Pro-Life Activities, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston; Doctrine, Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington; Domestic Policy, Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton, and the newly-formed arm on Religious Liberty, Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport.
* * *
Dear Brother Bishops,
As you have heard, today President Obama announced an upcoming change in the federal rule requiring most private health plans in the U.S. to include coverage for contraception, sterilization and some drugs that can induce abortions.
The Administration’s stated intent is to protect a broader class of religious employers from being forced to pay directly for objectionable coverage or to list it in the plans they offer their own employees. But it does not meet our standard of respecting the religious liberty and moral convictions of all stakeholders in the health coverage transaction. Therefore we remain committed to rigorous legislative guarantees of religious freedom.
We remain fully committed to the defense of our religious liberty and we strongly protest the violation of our freedom of religion that has not been addressed. We continue to work for the repeal of the mandate. We have grave reservations that the government is intruding in the definition of who is and who is not a religious employer. Upon further study we are very concerned that serious issues still remain and we have found numerous problems which we will raise in this letter.
We heard of the change this morning. President Obama called our USCCB president, Cardinal-Designate Dolan, to tell him that significant changes would be made in the final federal rule in an effort to accommodate our concerns about the religious freedom of our institutions. He outlined these changes, and said the Administration would be in further dialogue with religious organizations to work out the questions that remain unanswered. He said White House officials were willing to meet with us to discuss the issue further. Later in the morning, senior White House staff came to our Conference headquarters to do so and to answer questions. Shortly after the announcement by President Obama, Conference staff held a conference call with staff from Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Charities, USA, Catholic Health Association, the University of Notre Dame and the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities.
At present our understanding of the new final rule, at least part of which is expected to appear in the Federal Register next week, is as follows.
The Administration has indicated it is retaining the narrow, four-pronged exemption for “religious employers” such as churches and houses of worship. There is a serious concern that the four-pronged exemption would become a precedent for other regulations. However, it will also offer a new policy covering “non-exempt” religious organizations such as charities and hospitals. Our concern remains strong that the government is creating its own definitions of who is “religious enough” for full protection. Secular employers must provide coverage for contraception, sterilization and abortion inducing drugs.
Non-exempt religious organizations that object to these services may offer a health plan without them – that is, they do not list the services in their plan and they do not pay directly for them. But the insurance issuer selling this plan must offer to add these services for each of the organization’s employees free of charge (that is, no additional premium and no co-pay or out-of-pocket expenses). We are told that this is not to be seen as a “rider” – rather, these items will simply be covered, but without the employer endorsing or directly providing them. However, it remains unclear as to how insurers will be compensated for the cost of these items, with some commentators suggesting that such compensation will ultimately be derived from the premiums paid by the religious employer. This lack of clarity is a grave concern.
These latter (religious but non-exempt) employers will have a year (up to August 2013) to work out final details of this, with a further rule to be issued by the Administration before the end of that period. The advantage is that we can take part in this dialogue; the down side is that we may not know the final actual details of some aspects of the policy until well into the New Year.
All insurers without exception are covered by the mandate to provide these services without charge. At this point it does not seem that a religiously affiliated health plan (e.g., one run by a Catholic health system) can be offered to the general public and exclude the objectionable services, since most of the public is supposed to have these services included by their insurers automatically.
We are presented with a serious dilemma regarding self-insured plans, where a religious organization is both employer and insurer, and regarding student health plans offered by religious colleges and universities. It appears that such plans will be required to offer the objectionable coverage.
It seems clear there is no exemption for Catholic and other individuals who work for secular employers; for such individuals who own or operate a business; or for employers who have a moral (not religious) objection to some procedures such as the abortifacient drug Ella. This presents a grave moral problem that must be addressed, and it is unclear whether this combination of policies creates a mandate for contraception, sterilization and abortion inducing drugs covering more of the U.S. population than originally proposed.
The indication from the Administration that this process will be worked out into the coming year is of grave concern. Prolonging the process of the protection of religious liberty over multiple months is not beneficial or effective for the clear principle of religious liberty and freedom from coercion. In particular, the clear assertion of religious liberty is a matter of justice for our employees.
As you can see we have a great deal of work ahead of us. We need to study the proposal quickly, carefully and with all legitimate viewpoints represented in order to come to firmer conclusions. The Catholic Church has been the leading voice for religious freedom and moral conviction on this issue, and we want to commend all the bishops for the good work that has been done to bring this urgent issue to the very peak of public awareness. Our task is far from over. We remain fully determined to work strenuously with our many partners in service to the full exercise of the right to religious liberty in our country.
Our brother bishops permit us to repeat the principles that are guiding us:
First, there is the respect for religious liberty. No government has the right to intrude into the affairs of the Church, much less coerce, the Church faithful individuals to engage in or cooperate in any way with immoral practices.
Second, it is the place of the Church, not of government to define its religious identity and ministry.
Third, we continue to oppose the underlying policy of a government mandate for purchase or promotion of contraception, sterilization or abortion inducing drugs.
Thank you, brothers, for your commitment to work with everyone concerned about religious freedom in our society and to advance our principled goals. We will continue to keep you informed as we study this issue and learn more about this policy and our opportunities for its correction. We heartily welcome your observations and continued prayers and support.
Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan
Archbishop of New York
President
Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo
Chairman
Committee on Pro-Life Activities
Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl
Chairman
Committee on Doctrine
Most Reverend William E. Lori
Chairman
Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty
Most Reverend Stephen E. Blaire Chairman
Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development
I suspect the bishops will reject it, but Obama will use the misled Catholics to portray the Bishops as “Right Wing Extremists” who won’t consider “reasonable” compromise.
On the other side, I’m sure we’ll continue to see people labeling the bishops as “left wing.”
The bishops certainly need our prayers as they’ll be taking the attacks from both sides
There may be a silver-lining in Obama’s accomodation to the Bishops. This accomodation may clearly split Catholics into faithful Catholics and liberal Catholics. This may make it clear to those bishops who are willing and able to discern the signs of the times, that liberal Catholics are a fifth-column more faithful to the secular culture than to the Catholic Church.
If “Sister” Carol is promoting it from the rooftops, then we can be sure the whole thing is a trojan horse…it is a smokescreen..a red herring…a ruse. None of these people can ever be trusted.
Carol Keehan does not represent my views as a Catholic nurse. Perhaps one positive of the recent events will be an awakening for those who want Catholic ministries especially hospitals to be Catholic.
I just can’t understand how anyone representing Catholic healthcare could not “read the writing on the wall” that to be for Obamacare would be for government control and all that implies i.e. mandatory contraception, abortion, & euthanasia.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on all of us, we are sinners.
Insurance companies don’t cover anything “for free.” Just ask anyone who works in insurance if anything is ever covered for “free.” The cost of contraceptive coverage will be included in the premiums charged to the Catholic employer. The only difference is that the employee will have to call the insurance company to get the coverage.
Oh my gosh it’s déjà vu all over again ... “We hope to work with the administration to guarantee that Americans’ consciences and our religious freedom are not harmed by these regulations.” did Archbishop Dolan really say that??? did he really really say THAT !!!
Are the Catholic laity and all others of Conscience to be thrown under the Democrat Obama/Pelosi/Biden Bus once again ??? ... is another “private meeting” in the works to be followed by yet another “I am shocked shocked that gambling is going on in this establishment moment AFTER YET ANOTHER Election??? Are these Bishops really THAT naive ???
Even by the the fraudulent math of “moral relativism” the body count now stands upwards of 53 Million Dead Babies and counting ... 3,000+ every day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year by a macabre coincidence the capacity of an Auschwitz oven operating at full tilt. Frost that “cake” with the dumping of DOMA ... the stacking of Federal Courts etc. etc.
Please Bishops; please God no more phony compromises—do not cut deals with these hollow men and hollow women who are so empty and so vacuous that they can not even recognize the cumulative enormity of this evil. Do not come back like some new Neville Chamberlain waving another piece of paper in the air promising “abortion peace in our time”.
I think I am going to be physically ill.
I was raised as a Catholic. But i strongly disagree with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops statement denouncing President Barack Obama’s attempts at compromise as “needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions” . On the contrary, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops comments are themselves a needless intrusion upon the proper functions of government. Someone should explain to them the concept of separation of Church And State. Perhaps if they moved to a county governed by Sharia law for awhile, they would be more enlightened? Just because a religious group in America claims to believe something, we cannot exclude or excuse them from obeying the law. They can legally attempt to change the law… not to deny it.
You can’t dance with the devil; if you do, you’re going to get burned!
I never cease to be amazed at how vastly the current President underestimates the intelligence and convictions of Americans who don’t agree with him. I am sending a check to the Becket Fund today.
So what happens when 1,000 non-Catholic workers at Catholic run corporations sue over unequal insurance coverage? They will make mincemeat out of the Bishops claims by pointing out that religious beliefs are inherently individual in nature and that a institutional corporation has no conscious as it is a paper legal entity. How can the Bishop’s insist that they can limit the coverage of legal birth control based on their reading of a 2000 year old book?
Thank God that we have Archbishop Dolan trying to get the USCCB on track. NOW he needs to have the new darling of “planned parenthood”, none other then that non-sister Carol Keehan removed from the so-called Catholic “Health” Assoc. or, maybe better yet, make them change the name to what it really should be Obama Health Assoc. & not be allowed to be associated with the Church that Jesus gave to mankind: the Roman Catholic Church. All of these “catholics” that promote killing of God’s unborn babies should be formally ex-communicated, now, not after the election (if the dictator will allow us to have one). Their salvation is much more important then whatever money the Church might lose from doing what is just & right. We will all meet Jesus face to face someday and each one of us will face the consequence of our actions/non-actions, including the Bishops. As Our Blessed Mother keeps telling us over & over at Medjugorje: Pray very much for our Priests as they are being attacked the satan. +JMJ+
This is an opportunity for the bishops to show contrition for what they have done to the Catholic Church in the United States. They must settle for nothing less. Any compromise would be another complete failure.
The good news is that President Obama has made a serious, and God willing, fatal mistake by including mandatory contraception, including sterilization, abortaficients,(sp.)as part of the health care dialogue. It is now up to Holy Mother Church to educate her faithful about Humanae Vitae. This encyclical is one of our Church’s gems and it needs to be taken out and “polished up” where it will be able to shine like it never has!
The more Sister Carol opens her mouth, the more harm is done and the issues become clouded even more. How can she herself justify that the Obama ‘compromise’ is an acceptable one, particularly when self-insured religious bodies will still have to offer services that contradict the Faith? As an American, she can say whatever she wants. As Catholic, she needs the humility to go with it.
The problem is self-rightous uncompromising religious belief. The Bishops want 100% of what they want, without regard to the public welfare, Science, woman’s health and the majority will of the people (62% of Americans favor health companies paying for contraceptives). In addition, the Catholic Church is the only religious institution that finds birth control immoral. The President has already shown a willingness to compromise. The orginal mandate excluded churches. His revsion does not require religious institutions to pay. But the bishops wnat 100% repeal, nothing less. Their view is very selfish and self-serving. They cannot get a majority of Catholics to comply with the Churches birth control mandate, now that want the government to impose their mandate for them on the rest of society.
Good for the Bishops and all who fight this unjust mandate. A pig with lipstick is still a pig - get rid of those who seek to trample the rights of the people!
Keehan, Pelosi, Sabeillus, Kaine, et. al., are traitors to the Catholic faith, the cause of scandal, and WRONG.
May we pick up our Rosaries, pray for forgiveness, repent of our fear and apathy, and beg God to give us discernment and courage to follow where He leads us!
What I would like to know is how Sr. Carol Keehan could support Obama’s, “accommodation” before he even released it?!?!?
We learn from the New York Times last night, that Obama’s interest was quieting the segment of the left which became unhinged along with the bishops.
I don’t normally link to “Hell’s Bible”, but there are some interesting details here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/health/policy/obama-to-offer-accommodation-on-birth-control-rule-officials-say.html?hp
What really offends me, as a Catholic, is that Keehan doesn’t care whether the US bishops are satisfied with Obama’s “accommodation”. No - she just goes ahead and signs on (I wonder if she got another pen), announces she is, “pleased”, before the bishops utter a word, and now finds herself - once again - in public opposition to them.
How long will our bishops take to deal with this pseudo-magisterium which works with government officials to pit Catholics against their own shepherds on matters of faith and morals?
Canon 915 for Keehan?
As for Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities, both of whom are “pleased” with Obama’s “accommodation”, I hope the bishops will strip them of their Catholic status because there really is no Catholic identity in institutions which oppose the bishops. They’ve done it to themselves.
@ The last man
I have also wondered why these cretinous politicians have not been excommunicated. I know that the reprehensible Sebelius has been told not to present herself for Communion but apparently it’s had no effect on her willful apostasy. If both of these evil, destructive women (and other “Catholic” pols) were sent packing I wonder what the reaction would be. Knowing their sinful pride and arrogance, they’d probably declare themselves “wymenpriests” and start their own “church”.
Don’t trust this man, he will more than likely change his mind if elected again to the be the president of our fine country. He speaks with a fork tongue. As far as Carol keehan I would not listen to her.
How many times can you fool Sister Carol?
The problem for President Obama is that he must function, willingly or otherwise, at the behest of intransigent left wing ideologues in his political base. There comes a point where Obama pushes people to make a choice of clinging to their religious beliefs or being forced into embracing the political and social beliefs of the adherents Marx, Mao, and
Guevara. The Catholic Church is like a sturdy tree that does not bend to fashionable social winds without disputation and contention. Have not Obama’s dimwitted “run-ins with religion” been as predictable as the fool who is soon easily parted with his money?
The perception lingers among many that Obama clings to religion in order to embrace a voter demographic that benefits him politically and to cloak himself in its votes.
His attempt at “accommodation” on the issue of contraception and abortifacients is merely a transparent political maneuver and even the more gullible will see that there is no free lunch when it comes to providing expensive drugs for “free.”
When the left wing drops the next footstep and forces him to extend the concept of making elective abortions “free” as part of everyone’s insurance coverage, the assertion of its being another issue of women’s “health” will not satisfy the church as well. Somewhere, lost in the costs of insurance benefits, the free lunch will be added to the premium bill. The Catholic Church is too far ahead of Obama
and is very reasonable in its opposition to subsidizing what clearly violates its religious principles. The church is not prohibiting availability of contraception for the public, but will not be
forced into having to subsidize it and should rightly oppose being mandated to do as an infringement on its religious teachings. Ultimately, the issue resolves around a haughty governmental behemoth trying to intrude into everyone’s lives with health benefit mandates that the market should control. In this sense it becomes an issue of freedom from government excess as well as an infringement on religious rights of not only the Catholic Church.
The accommodation that Obama makes should be one of withdrawing contraception coverage entirely as a mandate and letting people pay for their own beliefs.
“Sister” Keehan is definitely a mouthpiece and an apologist for the administration. Obviously, she was given advance notice of the latest effort to fool the public, so she could “get the word out” quickly upon release of the “compromise”. She can be trusted no more than Sebelius, Pelosi, etal. By her actions, she has demonstrated she has no credibility in Catholic circles. She should resign her CHA position and retire.
The Catholic Church has a double standard! They want freedom from government so they can impose their will on their congregations and workers. True “ Freedom” is also freedom from religion.
As a life-long Catholic who has worked close to the leadership of the Catholic Church, I have no illusions about them and their self serving positions. Bishops, who live in “BIG,” elaborate mansions, drive expensive cars and process around in their expensive garbs and jewelry, nothing that resembles the garb of Our Savior, want to dictate to poor women how to live their lives. Access to birth control will only be a challenge for poor women, not Catholic women b/c very few of them in the US live in poverty.
As someone who travels and works in the poorest neighborhoods in the state in which I live and across the country, I see very little evidence of the Church providing education , social services or any other assistance to these people. These are the same people who work in the cafeterias, custodial services, and perform all the menial tasks in the so called Christian Catholic hospitals. The Bishops care little how many mouths are at home to feed or clothe on the pauper salary received. Their only concern is they not have access to birth control for fear of their eternal damnation. I ask, who is more likely to be damned? Believe me not the mother who works for minimum wage and wants to use birth control but the arrogant bishop who denies her medical coverage!
The Catholic Church has a double standard! They want freedom from government so they can impose their will on their congregations and workers. True “ Freedom” is also freedom from religion.
As a life-long Catholic who has worked close to the leadership of the Catholic Church, I have no illusions about them and their self serving positions. Bishops, who live in “BIG,” elaborate mansions, drive expensive cars and process around in their expensive garbs and jewelry, nothing that resembles the garb of Our Savior, want to dictate to poor women how to live their lives. Access to birth control will only be a challenge for poor women, not Catholic women b/c very few of them in the US live in poverty. As someone who travels and works in the poorest neighborhoods in the state in which I live and across the country, I see very little evidence of the Church providing education , social services or any other assistance to these people. These are the same people who work in the cafeterias, custodial services, and perform all the menial tasks in the so called Christian Catholic hospitals. The Bishops care little how many mouths are at home to feed or clothe on the pauper salary received. Their only concern is they not have access to birth control for fear of their eternal damnation. I ask, who is more likely to be damned? Believe me not the mother who works for minimum wage and wants to use birth control but the arrogant bishop who denies her medical coverage!
Where are our bishops, if they had spoken the truth from the pulpit these many years and not worried about being politically correct, can’t offend anyone, do you think we would be going through any of this now.
I agree with Laura Ingram, if Planned Parenthood is happy with Obama’ decision, wre have to worry.
I don’t think that Sr. Carol is the proper person to be representing Catholic Health Association. How can she call herself Catholic if she is going to thwart the Bishops attempts to maintain Catholic beliefs in Catholic institutions? The Church cannot have rogue persons speaking for it while putting their own spin on things. If she does not care to uphold tenets of the Catholic Church, she is not fit to represent the Church in the public square.
As a life-long evangelical, well aware of all the bad press surrounding the Church, I entered the Catholic Church in 2008 because I came to the conclusion that it is the irrefutable embodiment of the full gospel truth. My approach to any theological or moral issue is to submit to the teaching of the Church knowing that thousands of the greatest minds in history (guided by the Holy Spirit) have done all the heavy intellectual work necessary for defining the truth. It takes all my intellectual abilities to merely discern the reasons behind the divinely established doctrines. As one who has found the pearl of great price, the worst words I could hear would be that through my beliefs or actions I have excommunicated myself from communion with the Seat of Peter and therefore be prevented from receiving Christ’s body, blood, soul and divinity in the Eucharist.
It is my impression that the time is far overdue for those politicians and public figures (including religious), who so openly proclaim their catholicity but blatantly flaunt the teaching of the truth by openly supporting abortion, should be required to publicly reverse their positions or be publically excommunicated and made an example of, for the sake of their own souls. I believe it was actually better for me to have been outside the Church my entire life until coming to the realization that there was only one source of Christian truth, than to have been comfortably inside the Church and effectively agnostic, as is the case for any number of cradle Catholics.
If the bishops have the resolve to take such action, those of us who attend and support the Church will still be there after the dust settles. Maybe some who are Catholic-in-name-only will leave the Church, but you can be assured that the offering plates, volunteer positions, Mass attendance and Adoration participation will continue to be full. I suspect the bishops will discover that many of the newly excommunicated will display their true colors by becoming some other faith that has affirmed God’s love for abortion and abortion doctors.
If the bishops allow this scandalous behavior to continue they are making themselves culpable for the sins of those who are misled and will bear accountability for the deteriorating spiritual and moral condition of the youth in our Church. By the sin of omission, some bishops are furthering the kingdom of Satan.
It does not matter if we “negotiate” a “compromise” OR repeal the entire contraception “mandate”. Here is the big picture: once we have accepted Nationalized Healthcare (which the bishops have urged as a “human right”) that means we AGREE TO LET BIG BROTHER, not our doctor, not even (as it is now) our Health Plan, determine our care, our procedures, our medicines. THE GOVT DECIDES! So you repeal contraception this year, and next year they simply reinstate it, and then abortion (mandatory, paid for by employer, free to all women). Why not? Why not anything and everything “free to all women” simply because the GOVERNMENT says so. It is not enough to strike down this one “mandate”.
Obamacare (Nationalized Health Care) is INTRINSICALLY DEHUMANIZING and also UN-Constitutional. It must be repealed on constitutional grounds. Anything less and we are just on a slippery slope. Look at any other nation in the world, Canada, Britain, who has it, and the atrocities, immorality, poor care and pro-death actions of GOVT-run health plans.
The Bishops have backed themselves into a corner by insisiting on free healthcare for everyone, now they cannot ask to have it repealed or they look like the bumbling naive fools they have proven themselves to be.
I wrote an email to the white house when the initial decision had been announced. Today I got an email response announcing this great compromise, featuring quotes from Planned Parenthood and NARAL, which pretty well showed this “compromise” was a joke and that the President (or his staff) really doesn’t get it.
To all our faithfull leaders in the church: stand firm and don’t be fooled again. Always keep in mind what happened in Illinois. Mother Bear is waking from hibernation and needs to stay awake to protect her cubs from the poachers that have surrounded us.
This is an *excellent* post and shows *clearly* how and why this is a violation of EWTN and other religious organizations freedom of religion. Bravo.
Sadly, I think all of the “catholic” institutions that have already complied with state laws that are nearly identical with this federal law—and organizations such as the CHN should be stripped of their “Catholic” identity. The Church, even at the loss of property, and prestige, should clearly disassociate with these organizations.
It weakens our moral authority and harms those institutions such as EWTN.
One day, the laws will be changed to allow the torture and abuse of prisoners and civilians. Young U.S. military recruits will be told by their commanders that they *must* abuse prisoners and torture civilians when ordered to do so by their officers. After all, it’s the law. It’s being ordered to save American lives and to make the world safe for democracy. It’s being ordered to win the war on Terror. The Catholic soldiers and some others will nevertheless balk at these commands, will refuse to obey them, and will be punished with prison sentences.
They will be prisoners of conscience.
Many who have posted on this very thread have given evidence that they will support punishing these soldiers for disobeying a lawful order.
Just as the Nazis did during World War II, they would demand that our soldiers ignore their own consciences, and “just follow orders” to mistreat their fellow human beings.
“Just follow orders.” Today, to pay for contraception and abortifacients. Tomorrow to torture and execute.
What has happened to the America our Founding Fathers fought and died for?
Apparently the “Catholics” who matter to the White House are Sr. Carol Keehan, former Ambassador Doug Kmiec, ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others who are ready to trade their Catholic heritage for the pottage of Administration blessings. It’s sad ... and time for our Episcopal leadership to show a little guts, not only towards the President but within our own ranks.
Paul Thuessen makes several insightful points. I will add the Bishops, too, in their naivety, liberal attitudes, and Democrat leanings gave Obama a false impression of what the Church values. By trying too often to ignore the clergy abuse scandals they presented an impression that we Catholics don’t value much. Add to that Fr. Jenkins foolishly rushing to give an honorary degree to Obama coupled with liberal Catholics in his administration could understandably lead Obama to the conclusion that Catholics have a shallow faith.
Whom shall I send? and who shall go for us? Abortion, Government Attacks on Humanity
Imagine Isaiah in the hall outside a boardroom waiting to be called in when he hears God talking to Himself as the Trinity in a closed session board meeting saying “Whom shall I send? and who shall go for us?” Now imagine Isaiah throwing open the board room doors presenting himself before The Board (Trinity) stating “Lo, here am I, send me.” -Greg Kelly Partner K2 Global Communications Llc
Admittedly, we have taken some liberty with the use of this text found in Prophecy Of Isaiah Chapter 6:8-13 however in light of the historical facts of Abortion and recent events centered on Amerikas government accelerated, intensified direct attack on Christians we found it fitting.
Who controls, manipulates Abortion data?
FULL TEXT: http://k2globalcommunicationsllc.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/whom-shall-i-send-and-who-shall-go-for-us-abortion-government-attacks-on-humanity/
Imagine Isaiah in the hall outside a boardroom waiting to be called in when he hears God talking to Himself as the Trinity in a closed session board meeting saying “Whom shall I send? and who shall go for us?” Now imagine Isaiah throwing open the board room doors presenting himself before The Board (Trinity) stating “Lo, here am I, send me.” -Greg Kelly Partner K2 Global Communications Llc Admittedly, we have taken some liberty with the use of this text found in Prophecy Of Isaiah Chapter 6:8-13 however in light of the historical facts of Abortion and recent events centered on Amerikas government accelerated, intensified direct attack on Christians we found it fitting.Who controls, manipulates Abortion data?http://k2globalcommunicationsllc.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/whom-shall-i-send-and-who-shall-go-for-us-abortion-government-attacks-on-humanity/
Apparently Barry Obama (surrounded by so many phony katholics) has acknowledged to his close associates that he miscalculated the reaction of real Catholics:
“My political adviser, David Plouffe, told me his polling had shown that people stopped clinging to their bibles in 2010,” Obama said. “I mean, I thought the small people had advanced in their thinking by now, after three years of listening to me.”
Not to worry though immigration and the gun thing will trump all of this with the lefty Catholics ... as Hitler said who remembers Armenia?
Wow. I am really disappointed in the reaction here. The anti-contraception folks have already lost this one. 98% of Catholic women use birth control. I don’t think that I have heard a peep about that anywhere except my pre-cana class.
Bridget H has it right. It is the pompous, righteous self absorbed elites of the Church that will have to recon with St. Peter as to why they fought birth control harder than fighting pedophilia, than working to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and end war.
I am still looking for the same outrage over the death penalty and over the capital gains tax.
So what the Bishops want is an exception carved specifically for Catholics. Only the Catholic Church finds the birth control immoral. Even the majority of Catholics do not. I think Nicholas Kristof said it best in today’s NYT: “do we really want to make accommodations across the range of faith? What if organizations affiliated with Jehovah’s Witnesses insisted on health insurance that did not cover blood transfusions? What if ultraconservative Muslim or Jewish organizations objected to health care except at sex-segregated clinics?The basic principle of American life is that we try to respect religious beliefs, and accommodate them where we can. But we ban polygamy, for example, even for the pious. Your freedom to believe does not always give you a freedom to act.
But let’s remember that there are also other interests at stake. If we have to choose between bishops’ sensibilities and women’s health, our national priority must be the female half of our population”.
Stan Chaz,
You seem to have forgotten who is working for whom. The government works for “WE THE PEOPLE.” Catholics are citizens. It is our tax money, our conscience rights, our first amendment, our constitution. Barack Obama is completely in the wrong.
His agenda is to derail the constitution and to institute a state religion of Secular Humanism. WAKE UP!!!!
Good - because this ‘revised’ mandate is NOTHING LESS THAN BEING FORCED TO HIRE A HIT MAN. And not just to be forced to be the one to make the contract, but then forced to pay the designated hit man’s fee—over and over and over. So wrong on so many levels. It is even akin to being forced to hire and pay a hit man to kill yourself. (I think I said that right!)
This mandate will cause a public health crisis by increasing promiscuity. This will cause a rise in the spread of disease, and sadly, will cause an increase in the number of infants born with diseases such as gonorhea.
Planned PArenthood puts out misleading statistics as to the effectiveness of various birth control methods, typically giving the “annual risk” of pregancy instead of the lifetime risk; and by giving the “perfect use” rate instead of the “actual rate”. If you use the “actual rate”, you will find out that over 40% of condom users will conceive a child over the course of four years. And anyone who has had enough contact with someone to conceive a child has likely had enough contact to contract a disease.
Please contact your Congressperson to put a stop to this public health threat.
How about the bishops simply saying “NO!” Let the administration take them to court and let fully informed jurors acquit them. Here’s the link to my article, “Excommunicate Pope Barack” in which I explain how jury nullification works. http://MyFirst30DaysAsPresident.com
people, this has to be completely turned back. the president knows what he is doing. by pushing this mandate on an issue that he is sure a large percentage of the population will agree with and will make us look unwilling to comprimise will make the catholic church eventually want to bend. However, the president also knows that he will set precedent. If y’all heard obama wanted to change the constitution with an ammendment, we would freak out. if he just wants to pass a simple mandate that everyone agrees with, no big deal. But he will set precedent which is another way to change the constitution. government controlled health care is going to change our world. In england, they are inserting contraception in 13 year old girls without parental concent or notification because they CAN! do you think that allowing 13 year olds a free ticket to have sex will lessen any of these diseases. How is that promoting women’s health. People, think. It is a ploy and we are fighting over what…Forget about women, men, and the church. Look what he is doing. He is a magician making us see what he wants while ignoring the important part.
Obama is trying to re-write the constitution through precedent because it would be too hard to pass an actual ammendment to the constitution. He wants us to fight about whether or not it is the churches right to pay for women’s contraceptive needs. He doesn’t want the Catholic church to close hospitals or schools, but if he makes us look unreasonable, he will force us to comprimise while still holding onto some core principals. Without having addressed the issue of whether or not he has the right to do this, we will have handed him victory.
What all Americans need to realize is the power that the National Healthcare Bill has put into the hands of the HHS and the President. This should be frightening to everyone, not just Catholics, or any other religion, but everyone. We all need to write our legislators, and voice our opinions. God Help Us!
EWTN didn’t rush to judgment. They proceeded based upon the facts, and filing suit is the only protection available to them. Would you have EWTN wait and rely upon the mercy of the Administration?
Bridget, you unfortunately sound bitter, and far off the mark. I’ll pray for you.
Michele, let’s try to stick to the basics. Unfortunately, you and Bridget would throw those out to sit at the table with the secularists.
we have to say no or we set up a dangerous precedent for the future…
Assuming that the percentage of contracepting American Catholics is as high as it is guestimated by various polls quoted in recent days, this figure is a scandalous indication not of the wrongness of the Catholic Church’s universal teaching on pharmacological contraception but on just how far American Catholics have surrendered to the contraception and abortion culture of our day. We are supposed to be the yeast that leavens the dough, the salt that does not lose its taste, and the counter-cultural agents whose fidelity to Christ and to His Church leads others to conversion. Instead, too many of us act like “the blind leading the blind” right into the pit where the rest of the culture is rotting from within.
Stedes is spot on. “Reasonable exemptions” is bases on your specific superstion. What is reasonable for you is not necessarily reasonable for me. My amish neighbors require a doctor that doesn’t have a phone or electricity, and their premiums shouldn’t be required to pay for them.
Once this is framed as anti-contraception instead of freedom of religion, the USCCB will lose big.
Obama has learned the tactics of the GOP well.
What about Catholic Charities? I saw the head changed his glowing praise of Obama’s latest decision to a more cautious one, but I still can’t agree with it. Catholic Charities began its appeal this weekend at our parish. Two weekends ago, our pastor had let us know that the appeal would be starting this weekend. My husband and I had talked about it and were considering making a donation of several thousand dollars. Now, we’re thinking of not donating at all. What does everyone think?
Rockport Pilot Tx Newspaper
Letters to Editor: February 11, 2012
Published:
Friday, February 10, 2012 2:05 PM CST
Dear Editor:
In 2009 Obama used Fr. Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, as his willing dupe and told the graduates of formerly-Catholic Notre Dame the USA should “honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion and draft a sensible conscience clause.” We have seen this before in history.
The movie “The Cardinal,” depicts the Catholic Archbishop of Vienna in 1938 going down a path of accommodation and conciliation with Hitler prior to and just after the Nazi takeover of Austria. Once the peaceful mini-invasion of Austria is complete, the Archbishop meets with Hitler for reassurance Hitler will honor his promises of religious liberty in the new Austria. Hitler says, “about those promises-never mind,” and the Archbishop realizes he has been had. Read the history books for the details of freedom of conscience and religious liberty in Austria under the Nazis.
Hello! USA, I am Obama; I rule. You Catholics will come to heel; you will violate your consciences, you will provide birth control, and sterilizations and the morning-after pill that is an abortafacient, i.e. it kills babies. You will obey. By the way, thanks for your support of me and of the Trojan horse legislation that makes this all possible.
Hello! Catholics … the over half of you who voted for Obama, without your support he would not have been elected; and later ObamaControlCare would not be law. Muchas gracias!
Obama violates the four most important principles laid down by the U.S. Catholic Bishops for not voting for a person: racism, abortion, marriage and religious liberty. For some reason, outrageous violation of the first three principles didn’t matter to many in 2008. Now the Democrat party has become the Party Of Death and the President is saying you must as required by law violate your consciences and, literally, “to hell with you.” Herod, Nero, Obama.
Guy McClung
With the HHS mandate, the health insurance companies will have to offer those anti-life services for free; we all will end up paying because the insurance companies are going to raise the premiums to subsidized those services, aren’t we?
The bishops have done a marvelous job of framing this debate by saying that church-affiliated institutions must either “must be prepared either to violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees.” That is a false choice, of course. It’s not an either or proposition. They could continue to provide health care that doesn’t include contraceptives. They would be subject to an assessment, of course, but that option doesn’t seem to find it’s way into their pronouncements.
Growing up I was taught that being Catholic often involved sacrifice. In fact, we were taught that we should be willing to die for our faith, if necessary. We’re to be ready to accept death but (heaven forbid) paying an assessment is asking too much?
Jim978, the assessment is currently $2000 per employee, the same as providing no insurance at all. And the Administration is free to increase that amount without Congressional approval. Dictatorship.
Gene,
You are absolutely correct. It’s still not an either or proposition though, is it? And, if the administration is free to increase that amount, then the administration also is free to reduce the amount. Have the bishops made any effort to seek a reduction in the fee or to find a compromise (my way or the highway is not compromise)? There is a difference between standing for your principles (they have found ways to deal with comparable rules in a majority of the states for more than ten years now) and demanding to have something your way. It seems to me that the bishops would prefer to play the victim here when there are better alternatives.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.