Every bishop in the country, representing all 180 dioceses, has publicly denounced the federal government’s contraceptive mandate, and the bishops have jointly called for it to be rescinded. But even if the Health and Human Services requirement for contraceptive coverage in health plans disappeared tomorrow, many of those same bishops would still have a problem in their own back yards.
Not only are state-level mandates in place, but many insurance companies are unwilling to offer plans without contraceptive coverage, particularly for smaller institutions. The result is that Catholic institutions that want to eliminate contraceptive coverage in their health plans have found it increasingly difficult to do so.
President Obama asserted that an equivalent of the federal mandate is already in place in 28 states. However, the federal mandate is modeled after the strictest among them and closes off recourse previously found in federal law. The vast majority of those 28 states have religious exemptions broader than the federal mandate. Because state mandates only require insurance providers to include contraceptive coverage, conscientious objectors could previously self-insure, which placed them under the jurisdiction of federal regulations. Those guidelines — outlined in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), a federal law that sets minimum standards for pension and health plans — do not require contraception coverage
But self-insuring can be a risky venture, again particularly for smaller institutions, and other nuances of state laws can force Catholic groups to comply with the law before finding another option. Such is the case with the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in Merrimack, N.H.
Catholic Identity
William Fahey, president of Thomas More College, reported that, before his tenure, the college accommodated state law. Upon his arrival, the small college investigated other legal options and discovered that self-insurance offered the best solution.
With self-insurance, the college would no longer be required to provide contraception, though costs would be somewhat higher. Since the school only has 14 full-time employees, it will be joining a block of self-insured Catholic organizations.
Unfortunately, the remedy may be temporary, given the federal mandate, which faith-based groups must comply with by Aug. 1, 2013.
“It will be no later than the end of April, even if that means we have a year. Right now, that’s all it would mean,” Fahey said.
Patrick Reilly — president of the Cardinal Newman Society, a Virginia-based group that seeks to strengthen the identity of Catholic colleges — said that it was incumbent on every Catholic organization to not allow its Catholic mission to be compromised. He also recognized the practical obstacles that exist, especially for Catholic institutions of higher learning.
The society brought to light the fact that Boston College, a Jesuit institution in Newton, Mass., provides contraception through both its employee and student health plans. Reilly said that self-insurance only avoids state regulation for employee plans, so there is no way around the contraception mandate for student plans. Though the college is not necessarily required to cover students by law, the NCAA requires schools to provide plans for athletes.
In the federal law, student plans are also required to offer contraception, but there is no penalty for non-compliance. However, Reilly is concerned about possible indirect consequences for non-compliance, such as ineligibility for federally backed financial aid or the loss of accreditation , making it difficult for alumni to pursue graduate studies at another university. Ultimately, it could cause faithful Catholic colleges to shutter, Reilly said.
“This whole question of the HHS mandate for us has been as much a question of Catholic identity as religious liberty,” he said. “The left has been clubbing the Church over the fact that there is a real lack of compliance with Catholic teaching in the Church. On the one hand, that’s no argument for violating the rights of faithfully Catholic institutions, but it does embarrass the Church.”
Reilly argued that the public is less sympathetic to Catholic conscience in part because Catholic legislators and institutions willfully violate Church teaching.
“They endanger the rest of the Church by causing the public to turn a deaf ear to our concerns,” he said. “No Catholic institution should be engaged in this willingly. Period.”
Robust ‘Culture of Death’
Fahey insisted that the problem is much deeper and “grimmer” than the current debate about the federal mandate implies. Not only are there local government problems, but insurance companies are pushing mandates as much as the state.
Some insurance companies, he charged, “have made a simple calculation. They would rather be financing birth control than financing birth.”
“Even if President Obama said, ‘Oops, mistake. We’re just going to drop this one,’ the reality on the ground is that we have a pretty robust culture of death that is using the state but doesn’t necessarily need the state to achieve its ends,” he added.
He contended that the state should protect, rather than threaten, the conscience rights of those opposed to contraception.
“Every individual has the right not to be coerced into a plan that provides those things that violate his conscience,” he said. “This has made it clear that protection is actually needed here.”
Many of the faithful support protection for Catholic institutions as well as Catholic health insurers, Catholic employers and individual Catholics currently required to pay for policies that include coverage for morally objectionable services.
Michael O’Dea, founder and executive director of Christus Medicus Foundation in Southfield, Mich., said that, for years, his organization has advocated legislation that would protect conscience rights in the health-care arena.
The foundation has backed a federal bill — the Respect for Right of Conscience Act, H.R. 1179, introduced by Rep. Jeffrey Fortenberry, R-Neb., and Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo. The Senate voted against the bill March 1. O’Dea said the legislation would allow insurance purchasers and individuals to negotiate a health plan that is consistent with their moral and religious convictions.
Christus Medicus also supports a nationwide Catholic health-care plan that would allow all Catholic groups to remain in conformity with Church teaching.
O’Dea said he hopes the current debate highlights issues that have been a problem for years. “This is a gift from the Holy Spirit,” he said, “because it has awakened the sleeping giant.”
Register correspondent Christine M. Williams writes from Quincy, Massachusetts.
View Comments
Comments
Join the Discussion
Kudos to Patrick Reilly and William Fahey for standing up to the Culture of Death and speaking out against injustice. This is a time for us to stand together, support each other, and fight the good fight.
Recently Dr. George Harne, President of the College of Saint Mary Magdalen in Warner, NH (http://www.Magdalen.edu) also took a stand when he testified before a legislative committee in NH.
Harne was quoted as saying, “The state of New Hampshire is interfering with our ability to be fully Catholic and violating our religious freedom.” He went on to say, “Our commitment is firm. We will not compromise the Catholic identity of our College.”
For those interested, please read the links below:
http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=4957
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/313467/committee-okays-birth-control-bill?SESSce2f0563cff9007f7f0fc035ea123ba2=google&page=full
Wow Mr. “Jesuitical graduate of Boston College”. Do not know about other readers but it seems to me that you may be a lot of things but surely you are not a “graduate” of Boston College. Surely the Jesuits of Boston College; even the heretical ones, would not hand out a Degree to someone who exhibits such a poor command of the English language. Surely they would not hand out a Degree to an ungrateful franey whose “...heart’s as cold as a wet Christmas.” Surely standards have not fallen that far; or have they? A word of advice: Dump your “lefty” friends. Should you care for a “real” education dump the silver haired “pony tails” and instead get with some silver haired grandmothers with Rosary beads. Ingratitude is such an ugly and unbecoming vice. Do not denigrate Holy Mother Church. Even pagans know better that that.
I think we need to also consider the fact that it is also unconstitutional to mandate that every Insurance Company must provide contraception coverage which is neither Life-affirming or Life-sustaining, even if an Insurance Company, for Religious or moral reasons does not want to provide contraception coverage.
Jesuitical graduate of Boston college: How insulting. So only those who have left the Catholic Church think for themselves? Rather arrogant, and most definitely not true. From my point of view, you are letting the secular media and the church of secular humanism do your thinking for you. From my point of view, people like you leave the Catholic Church because you want to define truth to suit yourself - rather like Adam and Eve. Comments like yours indicate a critical lack of thinking about why the church teaches what it does.
You must be an Obama shill, as you are tossing out that red herring - trying to make the issue contraception rather than First Amendment Religious Freedom rights.
I find little evidence of critical thinking in the Jesuitical graduate’s convoluted remarks. Why does he find it hard to understand that the Bishops are not trying to outlaw birth control devices. They don’t want to be forced to pay for devices which go against their conscience. It would be helpful for him to read the Constitution, which guarantees freedom to practice religion without the interference of the State. And his pretense of loving the Church and the liturgy,but not the archaic Bishops sounds as phoney as Obama’s accomodation.
In regard to individuals buying or receiving health insurance coverage after the mandate, or even now in those cases where contraception, sterilization, and etc. are already part of the coverage, can someone please explain to us what degree of remote, direct, or material cooperation there is/ and will be in all this? Thank you!
This is not “progressive” but regressive. Let’s not hold our breath waiting for these social engineers to uphold, protect, and defend the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution, because the President only chooses to acknowledge the particular law that fits into his idea of what America should be! Come oh Holy Spirit!
You have brought to mind some information which I did not know about institutional mandates which offend the conscience. Truly we have much to work and pray for; however what is probably more disheartening for me is that the NCCB continues to fund CCHD which has and continues to funnel money into radical organizations that militate against the very tenant of liberty and freedom enshrined in the Constitution of our beloved Country. CCHD’s funding of ACORN and like minded anarchists for 20 years has fostered ideas and ideologies antithetical to our Faith. It is incoherent to fight the offender on one end then support him financially on the other.
Obamacare is every one and every business must by health insurance. Coffee shops and reataurant will have raise prices or go out of business. Soon there will no no place to go out to eat because of obamacare..
Catholics, who take pride in critical thinking insist that their brain not be checked onto the mantel. Those who refuse to knuckle under have left the church in droves. That might be a mistake, since those who refuse to be numbed into mindless acquiescence require their support. Many of us who fight the ‘right’ continue to love the church liturgy, and refuse to allow a medieval hierarchy to define us and what is catholic. Recently, the president signed into law a bill which mandated all be covered in health insurance for contraception. The church considers contraception along with abortion and masturbation as ‘intrinsic evil’. Although catholics use birth control equally with other religions that is not a factor to the hierarchy. The bishops think the religion is persecuted and are in a war-like jihad mood. What is important is the unbending will of the episcopacy. Its refusal to realize this nation is culturally divesified and home for all civil thought and belief. Of importance is that the law allows to all access to birth control. Many catholic institutions employ non catholics and its hospitals and charities are open to all persuasions. Its position on contraception is no different than its position on gay/lesbian unions. Whereas the church’s stance is crying foul that it is under seige; the truth is its intolerance to others, dismissal of civil rights in the DOMA, and firmly held conviction that contrary thought is evil, and minimally ‘objectively disordered’. If there is any doubt to the church’s intransigence, one only need read the defense from the church’s hard right. As scary as what is being said in this political year; this is worse. If you don’t believe in bith control; don’t buy condoms. If you don’t believe in same sex marriage; don’t do it. But to interfere with others right to choice, others right to exercise and participate in civil rights enjoyed by others, and to prohibit and interfere with such is bigotry and prejudicial…prepare to be scared.
Thanks so much for this article….we need to just keep praying that Obama will do the right thing even as anti-Catholic as he is. Why not provide free dental, free chemo for cancer patients, free insulin - these things actually are essential to health.
For the old Movie buffs out there the last 40 years feels like we have been stuck in a version of “Anti-Catholic” Groundhog Day; with the Bill Murray like progressive politicians “perfecting” their same old tired bag of ersatz “Social Justice” sounding issues and suckering a bunch of nice but gullible Catholic com-padres ... feeling like a properly anesthetized “Catholic” version of Rick in Casablanca every election day mumbling ... “I bet they’re asleep all over America!”
Sure hope that finally enough Catholics and others of conscience are finally connecting the “progressive” dots and finding that the picture of “Barry Obama” they draw is not a very pretty one. Time for some more prayers ... St. Jude please help us out.
Join the Discussion
We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words. By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines. Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words. Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.
Comments are no longer being accepted on this article.