-255x255.jpg "Getty Images")
WASHINGTON — Catholic leaders have joined the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to protest new rules that mandate contraceptive services for employee health insurance. And they are seeking to avoid an impasse that could force a drastic resolution.
The USCCB has asked the Department of Health and Human Services to broaden the rule’s religious exemption, characterizing it as too “narrow.” HHS has not signaled whether it will review the exemption; it has provided a 60-day period to register comments.
The definition of what constitutes a religious organization that could be exempted from the coverage requirements is a main cause of concern for Church leaders.
Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, archbishop of Galveston-Houston and chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities, issued a statement that underscores the Church’s key objection.
“Although this new rule gives the agency the discretion to authorize a ‘religious’ exemption, it is so narrow as to exclude most Catholic social-service agencies and health-care providers,” stated Cardinal DiNardo.
Meanwhile, as the bishops’ conference lobbies for the passage of a bill that strengthens religious freedom in the context of the new health law — the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R. 1179), introduced by Reps. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., and Dan Boren, D-Okla. — Church leaders have stepped forward to join the chorus of protests.
Making their concerns public, they hope to forestall the unthinkable: If the exemption isn’t broadened, they could be forced to choose between paying for services that violate Church teaching or halting health benefits for employees. Challenging the HHS standards in court would be another option.
In a move that could signal the beginning of a more intensive lobbying campaign, Sister Carol Keehan, the president of the Catholic Health Association, issued a carefully worded statement that began with praise for mandated co-pay-free breast exams, then segued into the contentious issue of contraceptive services.
“As it stands, the language is not broad enough to protect our Catholic health providers. Catholic hospitals are a significant part of this nation’s health care, especially in the care of the most vulnerable. It is critical that we be allowed to serve our nation without compromising our conscience,” she said in the statement, released after HHS approved the new standards.
Sister Carol’s decision to issue a public statement was especially significant. In the bruising final weeks of the passage of the Obama administration’s signature
health-insurance reform bill, she endorsed the measure in the face of USCCB opposition. She received one of the pens Obama used to sign the health bill, signifying her critical role in preparing the ground for its passage.
Abortifacient Drugs
This time, Sister Carol, a member of the Daughters of Charity, threw her weight behind the USCCB and its campaign to broaden the religious exemption, underscoring her membership’s fears about the new policy’s impact on their operations.
“HHS is accepting comments on its definition of ‘religious employer’ and has invited alternative definitions. We will be submitting written comments to HHS and will continue our dialogue with government officials on the essential need for adequate conscience protections,” Sister Carol’s statement continued.
Some opponents of the new standards criticized Sister Carol’s statement because it seemed to suggest that the mandated contraception services would not include abortifacients.
In her statement, Sister Carol said: “We appreciate that the administration does not intend to include abortifacient drugs as covered contraception. Our comments will address our concerns about the mechanism of action of certain FDA-approved contraceptive drugs.”
In fact, it was hard to tell whether her statement sought to create the impression that abortifacients would be excluded from Food and Drug Administration-approved birth control covered in the mandated services, or if her remarks were designed as a friendly warning to HHS. Sister Carol was traveling and could not be reached for further comment.
Candy Hill, senior vice president of social policy and government affairs for Catholic Charities USA, said her organization is working closely with the USCCB, which has spearheaded the Church’s response to the new HHS standards.
“We’re connected with the activity that is going on at the bishops’ conference and have communicated with our membership,” said Hill, who noted that Catholic Charities USA did not speak for individual agencies and was not a lobby, but focused on federal policy dealing with poverty issues.
What Is Catholic Charities’ Stand?
So far, Catholic Charities USA has not taken a public stand on the controversy. For now, Hill has worked behind the scenes, but that strategy could change soon.
“We have messaged to our members, providing them with a copy of Cardinal DiNardo’s letter. We are making our own calls to the White House and HHS and encouraging them to adopt a broader definition of a religious-affiliated organization,” she said.
Across the nation, Catholic Charities agencies serve an estimated 10.2 million people. Approximately 65,000 full- and part-time employees could be affected by any change in benefits.
Hill stressed that HHS is still “welcoming comments, and we hold out hope they will listen to us. If we feel we need to be heard in a broader way, we will ask all our agencies’ directors to make calls.”
She did not speculate on what individual agencies will do if the exemption isn’t broadened, noting that each local bishop directs the policy of agencies under his jurisdiction.
In the recent past, when state or local statutes have threatened the religious freedom of local Church agencies, some bishops have discontinued programs rather than accommodate illicit practices. Several Catholic adoption agencies closed, for example, rather than accommodate rules that required them to place children with same-sex couples.
In 2010, when Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., was required to provide benefits for the spouses in same-sex unions, following the legalization of same-sex “marriage,” the Church agency discontinued health benefits for the spouses of new hires and those not already enrolled in the benefits program.
Catholic Universities
Catholics universities, which educate and employ many non-Catholics, could also be affected by the rules. John Garvey, the president of The Catholic University of America, and the former dean of Boston College Law School, registered his alarm in an “open letter,” posted on the website of the Jesuit magazine America , the day HHS approved the new standards.
“[T]he issue before HHS is not whether to allow sterilization, contraception and abortion. It is whether to order insurance companies to cover these services, and employers and employees to pay for them, even if they view them as morally wrong. It is in just this situation that the respect for religious freedom comes into play,” wrote Garvey.
Asked to explain his decision to speak out on the issue, Garvey noted that he had both an academic and an institutional interest in a just resolution to the impasse.
“As an academic, I have had a strong interest in religious liberty and wrote a book on religion and the Constitution. Closer to home, Catholic University of America has a health-care plan for our faculty and staff and another for our students that will be affected by the new rules,” said Garvey in an interview.
Catholic educators like CUA’s president have only begun to grapple with their options should HHS refuse to alter the religious exemption. For now, few seem prepared to openly confront the unthinkable — a collision between federal policy and Catholic doctrine that could produce a classic moral dilemma, just the kind explored in ethics courses at CUA.
While Garvey states that “it would be wrong” for CUA to be forced to cover co-pay-free abortifacients, he did not seem prepared to call the HHS’ bluff.
Asked if the university would consider adopting the path chosen by Catholic Charities in Washington — modifying or discontinuing health benefits — Garvey said, “We have many more students and employees, so that’s a big step for us to take.”
His measured response underscored the competing obligations of a modern Catholic university leader, and thus signaled the vital importance of resolving the latest threat to the religious freedom of Catholic institutions.
Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond writes from Chevy Chase, Maryland.
Dan Burke: Call to Prayer: Seven Resources for your Lenten Journey
Comments
Post a Comment
If President Garvey, and others like him, would publicly declare a refusal to provide insurance for contraception, sterilization, abortion, and whatnot, perhaps the government would get the message that, no, we’re not just going to pout and go along with this catastrophe.
So,Sister Keehan, who spoke UNILATERALLY in support of ObamaCare, under the cloak of President The Catholic Health Association, now, SORT OF questions this aspect of the law?
Is it that difficulty for adults, supposedly sophisticated adults at that,to admit they were wrong?
Now we know for certain why some of the details were missing from the Health Care Bill.
When did “Sister” Carol Keehan start following Church law? She was downright gleeful about supporting the abomination known as Obamacare, even though she knew abortion would be covered under the highly undesireable law. She is almost the sole reason that Obama was able to crow about having the support of Catholics for his terrible legislation.
This woman should not be praised. She should be excommunicated for misrepresenting the Catholic Church and Her flock.
The mere sight of this woman causes me to break multiple Commandments.
I’m glad if Sister Carol is doing the right thing this time around. I’m not sure from the article if she is, but I hope so. As a Catholic, I am stung to the heart that she helped in any way to get Obama “Care” passed, to the point that she was given a ceremonial signing pen; many, many pro-life legislators repeatedly explained well ahead of time that the huge, health-care-nationalizing plan covered abortion. Being from Minnesota, I saw what happened when, as the communications coordinator for Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (affiliate of National Right to Life), I worked as part of a team that tried to explain that MinnesotaCare would in fact cover abortion and force other insurance companies to do so. Around the same time, Doe v. Gomez (1995) mandated that Minnesota began paying for abortions for women receiving benefits from the state. To date, millions of Minnesota taxpayer dollars have gone to fund abortions. This is what happens when government takes over health care. This is what happens when government mandates contraception and abortion as “solutions.” I remember when, as a reporter covering the Health Sciences Unit at the Minnesota Daily, a MN DOH administrator told me it was routine for them to order that long-acting contraceptives be implanted in 14-year-olds. Awful.
“She received one of the pens Obama used to sign the health bill, signifying her critical role in preparing the ground for its passage.” Nifty little souvenir, hey?
Not to mention that since this was not part of the initial Health Care Plan that was voted on, how can this be added to Obama Care without approval?
When 98% percent of married Catholics use some form of contraception, it should not surprise us that the government pay little heed to the USCCB. This is simply not a moral issue for the vast majority of Catholics, even practicing ones. I believe in the Church’s teaching and love “Humanae Vitae”, but honestly, no one is listening.
We should pray that this is the first step in Sister Carol’s journey back to faithfully supporting Church teaching. Give her some credit and a lot of prayer. Yes, she should publicly recant and repent but we need to be ready to encourage her change of heart and forgive her. Yes, it was terrible that she went against the Church and supported the health care law. Let us pray that she is blind no more and sees the Light.
I am tired of listening to these phony Catholics. They do not deserve respect or attention. They bring scandal to the Church.
And what about us private individuals who have to pay health insurance out of pocket because we’re unemployed?
It’s bad enough my insurance (BCBS) covers it in the first place. Have called and the option to opt out offending care is not available…it’s get it all or none. There are no other private individual policies available to me.
“Sister Carol’s decision to issue a public statement was especially significant. In the bruising final weeks of the passage of the Obama administration’s signature health-insurance reform bill, she endorsed the measure in the face of USCCB opposition. She received one of the pens Obama used to sign the health bill, signifying her critical role in preparing the ground for its passage.”
So why does she have a problem with this, since she obviously is unaware of the basic precepts of Catholic Social Teaching? This is the same woman who helped Nancy Pelosi “Romewash” the bill at the last minute. I think the fictional Sister Carlotta in the novel “Ender’s Shadow” has the best words of wisdom for Sister Carol: “When you worship Moloch…you get no answers but the ones your chosen god provides.”
The time is coming when Catholic leaders such as Mr. Harvey will have to decide whether to offer a pinch of incense to Caesar or to be faithful fully to God.
The path to compromising one’s beliefs totally starts with seemingly small steps such as these.
I never thought the cattle cars would return so soon. The death rattle of the holocaust echoes more loudly with this administration everyday. I remember so many survivors saying “We assumed we were dealing with rational human beings” it was only the few who walked away from the death camps who understood truly the depths of deprivation humanity was capable of and the breadth of a single lie.
The “reproductive system” contributes materially in bringing human life into this world. This wonderful dance of fertility is where the soul takes on life. This is where God’s fingerprint lies in all creation. The wholesale distribution of free contraception will sterilize a generation of fertile wombs who will bear no life for country, for home, or for heart, and certainly not for heaven. Our God came to us literally once in the flesh, and in a sense continues through every gift of human life. Why do we are try to prevent that from happening. We are human beings, we have the duty to propagate our species, and now our government in the land of the free is proposing what? We all partake equally in the sterilization of humanity. Don’t be fooled again, there is nothing rational or human about this proposal, and it has to do with eliminating our power to reproduce. Why would our government for the people want to neuter itself?
Sister Carol knew what she was backing with the health care bill and she knew the Bishops reasons for opposing it.
Now she “appears” to oppose it sort of. So what? If she makes her feeble protests to the government, it just looks like she is opposing it and is standing with the Bishops.
Politicians often have used the same “soft approach” when opposing some bill they know is not going to change no matter what they say. It just looks good to oppose it.
At least if the government won’t budge on this broadening of the definition for Catholic health care providers , the bishops may think, she is on their side, when she really isn’t.
Catholic leaders are being fooled into protecting their institutions; colleges, hospitals, charitable organizations. The leaders should be focusing on protecting the rights of the faithful to opt out of immoral laws. The focus should be on the rights of the individual conscience to object. It is like the wolf has walked up to the gate and the shepherd says to the wolf it is ok to take the sheep just leave the farm house alone. That is not what Jesus would do.
We need to keep up the pressure to find the so called Obamacare unconstitutional. It in it’s encompassing nature fails in so many ways to protect our moral consciences. Socialism as a means for government to obtain power over it’s citizens, throughout history, has proven to reduce our freedom to practice Christianity. But they sure sound good, you know, promise them anything then blame the opposition when it fails.
I just have one question for the government and the surgeon general and others who think this is such a wonderful step forward in women’s healthcare. Since when is it good healthcare to provide women with a class 1 carcinogen? If you really want to decrease the rate of breast cancer in this country how about removing this carcinogen from the market? Other chemicals and drugs that are proven to do harm by causing cancer or heart problems or other things have been removed and yet artificial contraception which has been proven to cause cancer in humans and has been declared by the world health orginization as a class 1 carcinogen remains on the market and is promoted as the be all and cure all for evry female problem. As for our freedom from the tyranny of this ruling, well guess what, we no longer live in a free democratic nation. The communists have taken over. We now live in George Orwell’s 1984 with a splash of Animal Farm thrown in. Bishop Sheen had a very prophetic telecast about all of this. We sure could use him now.
Adding exemptions just doesn’t cut it. This order is undemocratic and illegitimate; the assumptions it relies upon are utterly wrong; it needs to be REVOKED.
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.