|
|
May 18, 2013
|
|
Catholicism Is Not the Tea Party at PrayerPosted on Mar 11, 2012The nation’s Roman Catholic bishops will make an important decision this week: Do they want to defend the church’s legitimate interest in religious autonomy, or do they want to wage an election-year war against President Obama? And do the most conservative bishops want to junk the Roman Catholic Church as we have known it, with its deep commitment to both life and social justice, and turn it into the tea party at prayer? These are the issues confronting the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ administrative committee when it begins a two-day meeting on Tuesday. The bishops should ponder how they transformed a moment of exceptional Catholic unity into an occasion for recrimination and anger. When the Department of Health and Human Services initially issued rules requiring contraceptive services to be covered under the new health care law, it effectively exempted churches and other houses of worship but declined to do so for religiously affiliated entities such as hospitals, universities and social welfare organizations. Catholics across the political spectrum—including liberals like me—demanded a broader exemption, on the theory that government should honor the religious character of the educational and social service institutions closely connected to faith traditions. Advertisement The compromise was quickly endorsed by the Catholic Health Association. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the president of the bishops’ conference, reserved judgment but called Obama’s move “a first step in the right direction.” Then, right-wing bishops and allied staff at the bishops’ conference took control. For weeks, Catholics at Sunday Mass were confronted with attacks that, at the most extreme, cast administration officials as communist-style apparatchiks intent on destroying Roman Catholicism. You think I exaggerate? In his diocesan newspaper, Cardinal Francis George, archbishop of Chicago, wrote: “The provision of health care should not demand ‘giving up’ religious liberty. Liberty of religion is more than freedom of worship. Freedom of worship was guaranteed in the Constitution of the former Soviet Union. You could go to church, if you could find one. The church, however, could do nothing except conduct religious rites in places of worship—no schools, religious publications, health care institutions, organized charity, ministry for justice and the works of mercy that flow naturally from a living faith. All of these were co-opted by the government. We fought a long Cold War to defeat that vision of society.” My goodness, does Obama want to bring the Commies back? Cardinal Dolan is more moderate than Cardinal George, but he offered an unfortunate metaphor in a March 3 speech on Long Island. “I suppose we could say there might be some doctor who would say to a man who is suffering some sort of sexual dysfunction, ‘You ought to start visiting a prostitute to help you, and I will write you a prescription, and I hope the government will pay for it.’ ” Did Cardinal Dolan really want to suggest to faithfully married Catholic women and men who decide to limit the size of their families that there is any moral equivalence between wanting contraception coverage and visiting a prostitute? Presumably not. But then why even reach for such an outlandish comparison? Opposition in the church to extreme rhetoric is growing. Moderate and progressive bishops are alarmed that Catholicism’s deep commitment to social justice is being shunted aside in this single-minded and exceptionally narrow focus on the health care exemption. A wise priest of my acquaintance offered the bishops some excellent questions about the church. “Is it abandoning its historical style of being a leaven in society to become a strident critic of government?” he asked. “Have the bishops given up on their conviction that there can be disagreement among Catholics on the application of principle to policy? Do they now believe that there must be unanimity even on political strategy?” The bishops have legitimate concerns about the Obama compromise, including how to deal with self-insured entities and whether the wording of the HHS rule still fails to recognize the religious character of the church’s charitable work. But before the bishops accuse Obama of being an enemy of the faith, they might look for a settlement that’s within reach—one that would give the church the accommodations it needs while offering women the health coverage they need. I don’t see any communist plots in this.
Previous item: 10 Myths About Iran—and Why They’re Dead Wrong Next item: Supreme Court Likely to Endorse Obama’s War on Whistle-Blowers New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By Arcelio Martinez, April 1, 2012 at 10:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
It is not the tea party at prayer for sure BUT there is one huge disconnect between the clergy, the Pope, the priests, and the laity. The Catholic church has lost the validity of the high ground on this one. According to surveys, it is agreed that fully 98% of Catholic women use some sort of contraception. That alone really negates the holy bravado of the opposition to contraception, and it has been as such for years, actually since the introduction of the ‘pill.’ There are many nuancess to real benefits to women’s health also. The effort that the church is putting into this should have been matched by efforts to protect children from sexual abuse by the clergy for ages. Of course the cover up is worse and goes all the way to the top. The millions the church paid for legal fees and settlements could surely have been used to really do “God’s work and could come in handy now, instaed of lining the pockets of lawyers as rogue priests were being shuffled from parish to parish to continue doing harm to children. Now the ‘sanctity’ of the church comes to the fore ‘protecting’ religious freedom?? It just doesn’t match. And women have a right to the control of their own bodies. AND BENEFITS OF THE WORK PLACE UNDER FEDERAL CONRACT should include what is best for women as well as men.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, March 15, 2012 at 3:50 am Link to this comment
The Catholic Church has always been schizy as hell, divided between those that really believe in “suffer the little children” and feeding the poor, helping the sick and dying…and those who think like Rick Santorum and the evangelical fundamentalists on the Right, and that the Church is totally non answerable to society at large.
I don’t know but I’m guessing there isn’t another Christian church that’s nearly as charitable as the Catholics. Ironically, my father died of cancer in a Catholic hospice, and one of his nurses, a very kind lady, was a nun suffering from breast cancer herself, which was going to kill her soon, too.
I remember in the ‘80’s when John Paul II, in one of his worst moves, shut down a whole SLEW of socialist priests in Latin America working against dictatorships.
And who can forget the Berrigans, Daniel and Phillip? Though forced to leave the priesthood and even the Church, their marty-like dedication to morality was Catholicism at its best.
So it’s a really divided church between the moral people and the power-control people. Still puts it miles above Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham’s unadulterated hate-filled preachings.
Report thisBy CassandraSpeaks, March 14, 2012 at 9:14 pm Link to this comment
The bishops have seized upon contraception, which is nowhere mentioned by Jesus or elsewhere in the Bible, but have chosen to leave protests in favor of Church teachings on social justice, capital punishment and nonviolence, which are directly based on Jesus’ teachings, to a handful of old, radical Jesuits and activist nuns.
Report thisBy italianmama, March 13, 2012 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment
when the nuns start running the church, i “might” come back to the fold.
Report thisBy Airborne855, March 13, 2012 at 11:29 am Link to this comment
This society has it exactly backwards. Jesus paid his taxes specifically to avoid any entanglements with the government. He explained this carefully to Peter. Tax exempt institutions are de facto subsidized by the federal government and are therefore subject to its rules of conduct.
Report thisBy LenG, March 12, 2012 at 9:20 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
In this country, we have a long tradition of respecting the beliefs of pacifist religions. We do not draft Quakers, Seventh Day Adventists or Jehovah’s Witnesses into the military. However, we do not allow them to reduce their income tax obligations by 25% just because 25 cents of every dollar in our national budget goes to fund the military. We make them pay for it along with everyone else, even though they think it is immoral. Why should the Catholic Church think they should be treated differently? They don’t pay taxes; the least they can do is allow the employees of the schools, hospitals and charities that they run to follow their own consciences. Remember, actual churches/parishes are exempt, so the priest’s housekeeper isn’t going to have contraception covered in any case. The problem is that if we let the Catholic Church dictate what is or is not going to be covered in employee health plans, where does it stop? Is your boss a Jehovah’s Witness? Well, no blood transfusions for you. A Christian Scientist? The only medical care that is covered is from a Christian Scientist Practitioner. Need heart surgery to replace a defective valve? Not so fast if your employer is Jewish or Muslim because replacement heart valves usually come from pigs. Diagnosed with high blood pressure? Better make sure that your medication does not have a gel coating derived from cattle because your company was recently bought out by a firm from India run by devout Hindus. The possibilities are endless. Of course, the whole “Don’t make the Church pay for it” argument is mute, anyway, because covering contraception does not increase premiums. In fact, it saves insurance companies money in the long run.
Report thisBy Blueokie, March 12, 2012 at 9:04 pm Link to this comment
When he speaks of Catholic unity, Dionne is talking about himself and Shields agreeing with Pat and Bebe Buchanan.
When a group of Catholic Bishops, Priests, Nuns and Laity decided to make the Church live up to its advertised “Social Justice” mandate, Cardinal Ratzenberger and President Reagan killed them in mass in a war of eradication. When it was
revealed that a significant part of the clergy was no more than a pedophile ring, the Church spent a great deal of effort to cover up, obfuscate and deny its existence, even to the point of claiming the exposure of the activity was “religious discrimination. This effort was lead by the same Cardinal Ratzenberger, for his success he was given the top job in the Corporation.
As far as the Church’s “charitable work”, it seems disingenuous to claim you shouldn’t be required to follow the rules of the institution (the government) that provides most of your funding, while attempting to get that same institution to force your ideas on everyone else. They even wish to help destroy public education to get government money for vouchers. This issue has nothing to do with contraception, as ridiculously expressed by RCC apologists, it has to do with an employer being able to dictate what you think, feel, and believe.
The USCCB could see that they were losing “the battle” a few years ago and decided to adopt a strategy of claiming religious discrimination to force their views on the public, allying themselves with the AFC, Focus on the Family and other reactionary groups that hide behind religion.
Dionne is a joke, if he isn’t shilling for ethics free Democrats, he shills for ethics free outdated institutions. He is as much a Tea Bagger with this opinion as any other Koch Brothers/Dick Armey operative.
Report thisBy Jimmy1920, March 12, 2012 at 7:55 pm Link to this comment
“The bishops have legitimate concerns about the Obama compromise, including how to deal with self-insured entities…”
Aren’t we talking about health plans in the insurance exchanges? That means insured plans with fewer than 50 employees. And groups of 50 or even 100 don’t or shouldn’t self-insure.
This is a tempest in a tea pot.
Mr. Dionne, I expect more.
Report thisBy EmileZ, March 12, 2012 at 2:47 pm Link to this comment
How about the concept of you are being an asshole.
Report thisBy Big B, March 12, 2012 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment
Obviously, JoshuaM dooesn’t understand the concept of the shared liability of all insurances. You have made another classic christian fundamentalist assumption that any (woman) on birth control is sexually active or promiscuous (a slut). Check your stats, most young women take birth control pills to regulate their hormone levels. Most others take them to not get pregnant. Troglodytes like you need to place your club on the ground, takes the bones out of your hair, and EVOLVE.
Report thisBy JoshuaM, March 12, 2012 at 11:31 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
While sexual behavior may have medical consequences, I agree with the Catholic bishops that sexual behavior is not a medical act. It is a life style choice. We may want, as a public policy matter, to finance contraception in order to forestall medical and social consequences both medically and socially undesirable. However, for law students to assert both a “human right” to have sex at will (and being outraged at the suggestion that they try holding an aspirin between their knees), and a “medical right” to have others pay for their contraceptives is absurd.
Report thisActually, it is worse than prostitution. If I pay for the sexual behavior of a prostitute, at least I get to receive the sexual behavior of the prostitute. With the indignant law students, I do not get to have sex with them, and I had better not even look at them like sexual objects (unless they are looking at me like a sexual object—not too likely).
By Edgar, March 12, 2012 at 10:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I stopped reading here: “...Roman Catholic Church as we
have known it, with its deep commitment to both life
and social justice”
2 words: LATIN AMERICA
Report thisBy joseph, March 12, 2012 at 10:37 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Religion, and sexual moral and matters in particular,
are obviously a never ending source of conflict.
It is also possible to do a bit of reading on such
matters. Two books, among many, are pretty worthwhile
to know:
Uta Ranke Heinemann: Eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven.
It was a bestseller in the 90’s and has lost none of
its relevance. It tells the history of the Catholic
sexual moral, the reasoning and arguing behind it.
It is not about atheism, etc.. The reader reviews on
amazon are really great, they give a first good
insight.
Shaji George Kochuthara: The concept of sexual
pleasure in the Catholic moral tradition.
A generous insight is possible via Google books
Report thisand that’s better than a review, etc..
http://books.google.ie/books?id=ZFbjyIn6j4oC&pg=PA522&lpg=PA522&dq=The+concept+of+sexual+pleasure+in+the+Catholic+moral+tradition++By+Shaji+George+Kochuthara&source=bl&ots=vE3az5-dpc&sig=8mj6lvFy_q4wNFmiJngZgGo_01k&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dzNeT9ORNoSZhQfio5mpBA&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The concept of sexual pleasure in the Catholic moral tradition By Shaji George Kochuthara&f=false
By EmileZ, March 12, 2012 at 7:49 am Link to this comment
@ firefly
There have been many operating within the Catholic church committed to social justice, often, but not always to the great consternation of the Vatican.
Report thisBy Mike Strong, March 12, 2012 at 7:27 am Link to this comment
This is about compensation for services, not about religion. Health insurance is compensation, payment. If they are not allowed to control how you spend your regular paycheck the employers should not be allowed to control how you spend your heath insurance.
Remember, companies “providing” health insurance coverage was started in WWII when offering higher salaries or wages to compete for labor supplies was not allowed as compensation was capped by war time regulation. So, as an alternative compensation to attract workers they started offering to add health insurance to the pay package.
The only religious freedoms being violated come from those employers who demand that workers follow the practices of the church or church-connected outfit they work for when spending their compensation (pay) package.
Report thisBy allan, March 12, 2012 at 6:58 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The ignorance of and bigotry against the Catholic Church among the respondents here is pretty incredible. To quote what Michael Moore once stated on Oprah, “You can blame my views on the nuns for teaching me the social teachings of the Catholic Church when I went to parochial school.”
Report thisHere is a statement from Pope Leo XIII in 1891, “Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that the working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hard heartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition . . . . to this must be added that the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay on the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than slavery itself.” I could go on for hundreds of pages documenting Church encyclicals and statements that have advocated for the rights of workers, attacked unrestrained capitalism, spoken up for the rights of immigrants, condemned our invasion of Iraq, advocated for environmental stewardship, pushed for universal health care and many more progressive causes. However, there are people here who just can’t process the concept because it doesnt coincide with their own preconceived ideas.
By antrosie, March 12, 2012 at 6:57 am Link to this comment
This issue is merely political. If it had come up at
Report thisthe very beginning of Obama’s term in office, I’m
sure Catholics would have been totally ok with it.
But those who are politically-minded instinctively
want to make (the contraception requirement for
medical insurance coverage)it an election year issue.
It happens every election cycle. Remember the gay-
marriage eruption just prior to the 2008 presidential
election. I think that Americans had better re-think
the whole tax exemption thing for churches. They’re
more like political organizations and they meet
weekly at least.
By firefly, March 12, 2012 at 6:25 am Link to this comment
Catholic Church committed to social justice????
When?
What nonsense.
The Vatican is a sexist, fascist institution who has
Report thisdedicated its entire existence to the subjugation of
women and children.
By balkas, March 12, 2012 at 1:11 am Link to this comment
all religions can be viewed as ideologies or as thinkings. so, i cannot see why some thinkings
Report thisare exempt from any given rule and others are not.
and if some thinkers have god in their lives, what else then do they need? for if you possess or
have god, allah, mohammed, moses, or jesus, in your life, don’t you have everything you
need? so what more do you want? isn’t god almighty to believers?
if a believer’s god needs defending [by law, rule, regulations] that believer is contradicting
him/herself.
such people, then, accept a limited god, yet call or deem it/him/her almighty.
if i had god in my life, would i speak for IT? defend IT? read her/his/its mind?
didn’t i try—oh how much—to get my jesus or god, and what happened? nothing happened.
its all just utopian thinking—and regardless whether god exist or not!
By balkas, March 12, 2012 at 12:48 am Link to this comment
catholic church in europe had always been profascist, anti-equality, bellicose, etc.
Report thisi do not know much about catholic church in US, but venture to say it does not
differ much from european catholic church.
by catholic church [or any other christian org or church] i mean its leadership. this
leadership [structured like army] had not ever been committed to social justice,
peace in the world, modesty, honesty, etc.
By EmileZ, March 11, 2012 at 10:44 pm Link to this comment
Mr. Dionne…
I wish you would have elaborated a bit further on “this moment of exceptional Catholic unity”.
I didn’t see any moment of Catholic unity.
Perhaps you are speaking of the unity between Mark Shields and yourself (and a few well placed others no doubt).
It is OK to feel guilty (or even just plain stupid) about that little moment by the way.
We all have our moments.
Report thisBy ReadingJones, March 11, 2012 at 10:33 pm Link to this comment
Money is miscible.If an entity that wishes to do
something evil is given funds to do something not
evil
then that part of their budget is freed up to do the
evil thing.
Pharmacists are being required to provide the morning
after pill or lose their job. Many forms of
contraception are abortifacient.
There are arguments about when a new human being is
created, that is, is there a new human at the moment
of conception or at implantation or when the baby
utters its first cry when birth occurs. My Church
holds that when the sperm meets the egg a new human
being is created. This not a matter of science but a
matter of definition. Such matters are matters of
faith. Our government has no business interfering in
matters of faith.
There are Doctors and Nurses and accountants and
janitors and receptionist who work at faith based
hospitals who want not even the smallest involvement
with this evil business.
Incidentally Natural Family Planning has a higher
success rate than any other form of contraception and
no side affects that harm the human body. The
discipline involved increases the intimate commitment
of the couple and strengthens marriage.
The divorce rate began to shoot up when the pill
arrived.
Do you want all faith based institutions whether
schools or food banks or distributors of clothing or
provision of housing to the poor or medical care to
be shut down or lose the contributions of people of
faith? If this great harm is allowed to stand your
taxes will go up and the poor and sick will become
much worse off.
This is not so much about contraception or abortion
Report thisas it is about freedom of conscience and freedom of
religion and attacks on these freedoms are even more
important than attacks on the right to due process
and respect for the law by the powerful as well as
every one else.
By Arcelio Martinez, March 11, 2012 at 9:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
I am a former devout Catholic who is now an ATHEIST
Report thisfor my own reasons ..BUT shame on the church for not
collaring Santorum AND for accepting GINGRICH as a
member of the faith despite his blatant hypocrisy ..
and for pretending that 98% of the female faithful take
the pill or other means of contraception.. After
decasdes (centuries??) of abusing children they
suddenly become vagina and uterus police