Bishops rip HHS mandate That Forces Coverage of Birth Control, Abortion Drugs

[JimG]

Quote:
Originally Posted by pnewton
In this generation, I predict we will see priests and bishops jailed for free practice of the Catholic faith, though ostensibly it will be for violating some law such as this.

I don’t see it. I believe Catholics will always be able to freely practice their faith. But I do think they will be prevented from trying to hold others from being micromanaged into being held to the same expectations. Catholics will have to find different strategies to make people want to choose to avoid ABCs and look to things such as NFP.

But if the Church operates a hospital or a school or a charitable organization, it will be mandated to violate its conscience. It can no longer follow the teachings of the Church. That’s a violation of the first amendment.

The mandate requires that the Church as employer provide coverage for artificial birth control including abortifacients, and sterilization. No Catholic institution can agree to that and remain Catholic.

Would it be all right if the HHS mandates coverage of euthanasia and infanticide? Would it be acceptable for it to mandate coverage of assisted suicide? Because it has that power, through the regulatory process.

I agree with pnewton. We will see Catholics jailed and fined for not rejecting their Faith. We will be in the position of the English during the reign of Henry VIII: Reject your Catholic faith or be punished.

 

[Rence]

Then you weren’t working in a self insured system so your experience means nothing in relation to how a typical diocese sets up its health care plan. Sorry.

Self insured means that the premiums gathered pay for the services rendered until/unless the pool is exceeded and the reinsurance kicks in. You are arguing from inapplicable experience.

You may be right, but I was working for a small doctor’s office. I was responding to the folks complaining about the new mandate own small businesses and buy policies for their employees. So from that perspective, I believe I was arguing from applicable experience. When someone is self-insured, they buy policies for themeselves. I’m not talking about self-insured people.

The other surreal aspect of your argument is that it seems to assume that Jesuit storm troopers break in the doors of doctors and nurse and force them to work at catholic hospitals, so that justice demands that such hospitals offer them every medical technology approved of by secular technology. How about the health care workers just get a job elsewhere if they want abortive drugs covered?

The aspect of my arguement is related to whether or not the mandate moves forward and sticks. All of this is a moot point if it doesn’t stick, which some have said they don’t believe it will. If it does stick, it’s a matter of it being required. Of course healthcare workers can get a job in secular hospitals. I have no problem with that.

You know guys, you have to rememer, this isn’t my mandate. I didn’t mandate anything. I didn’t petition for it’s approval, I didn’t email anyone to approve it, I didn’t picket for it. In addition, I’ve always had such coverage in my insurance, even when I worked in a Catholic hosital, so all this drama is rather odd to me. It seems there’s always something to complain about. Also, I’ve never used the coverage. You don’t need to get all angry with me because I don’t have a problem with the mandate. If you have a problem with the mandate, put yourselves out there and petition to those who can actually do something about it. But I just don’t see all this perceived persecution of Catholics. And I don’t see any culpability on the part of employers who have to follow the mandate either. I feel that these employers are putting undue and unnecessary burdens on themselves. The real burden is on those who created the mandate.

 

[JimG]

Colorado Christian University, an Evangelical university, has now filed suit to stop this mandate. It’s not just a Catholic fight.

firstthings.com/onthesquare/2011/12/hhs-mandate-no-longer-just-a-catholic-fight

 

[Rence]

But if the Church operates a hospital or a school or a charitable organization, it will be mandated to violate its conscience. It can no longer follow the teachings of the Church. That’s a violation of the first amendment.

The mandate requires that the Church as employer provide coverage for artificial birth control including abortifacients, and sterilization. No Catholic institution can agree to that and remain Catholic.

I agree with pnewton. We will see Catholics jailed and fined for not rejecting their Faith. We will be in the position of the English during the reign of Henry VIII: Reject your Catholic faith or be punished.

Yeah, I realize that you agree with pnewton and that I’m in the minority It’s okay, we aren’t going to agree on everything. But I would hope we’d come out of a discussion thread at least trying to understand each other. Perhaps my perspective, as I’ve said many times, stems from the fact that I’ve worked in a Catholic hospital and ABCs were covered so that the employs only paid a $10 copay at their pharmacy. In addition, I’ve always had such coverage and I’ve never been tempted to use any of the coverage, so it really hasn’t made a difference at all.

Also, I disagree about the culpability of employers who are mandated to offer such coverage. If the law is tying employers’ hands, I believe the employers are the ones putting undue burdens on themselves. The mandate and the culpability is on the shoulders of those who created the mandate.

Does anyonw know what has the Vatican said about the culpability placed on the employers who are mandated to offer such coverage?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

You know guys, you have to rememer, this isn’t my mandate. I didn’t mandate anything. I didn’t petition for it’s approval, I didn’t email anyone to approve it, I didn’t picket for it. In addition, I’ve always had such coverage in my insurance, even when I worked in a Catholic hosital, so all this drama is rather odd to me. It seems there’s always something to complain about. Also, I’ve never used the coverage. You don’t need to get all angry with me because I don’t have a problem with the mandate. If you have a problem with the mandate, put yourselves out there and petition to those who can actually do something about it. But I just don’t see all this perceived persecution of Catholics. And I don’t see any culpability on the part of employers who have to follow the mandate either. I feel that these employers are putting undue and unnecessary burdens on themselves. The real burden is on those who created the mandate.

I think you’re misunderstandings against convering ABC. Yes, some “Catholic” institutions/employers cover ABC. Some Catholic employees are covered for ABC.

The issue is that some institutions or indidviduals want to make the call themselves instead of being forced to by the government.

Also, it sets a bad precident for other things. What’s next, abortion coverage? Physician assisted suicide?

 

[JimG]

Here’s a link to some information on the suit by Colorado Christian University:
becketfund.org/ccupressrelease/

 

[_Abyssinia]

Obamacare regulation tramples on religious freedom - Washington Examiner editorial

 

[JimG]

It may be true that some Catholics practice contraception. I don’t know how many use abortion inducing contraception.

But there’s a big difference between disregarding the teachings of one’s Church, and being forced to do so by the government.

 

[scipio337]

While I share your hope, I think the bishops owe the laity an accounting for their previous backing of this law. It is not sufficient for them to merely say now that they are affected they don’t like it anymore.

Amen!

 

[JimG]

The president of the Catholic Association of Latino Leaders speaks out against the HHS mandate. Source

 

[Joe_5859]

So sorry the bishop’s got cozy with all the important people, not excommunicating all the politically powerful apostates et cetera, now they got to live with them.

The bishops aren’t the ones who elected them and keep electing them. That dubious honor goes to we the people.

We all share the responsibility for the mess we’re in. We need to work together now to get out of it.

 

[jwinch2]

The bishops aren’t the ones who elected them and keep electing them. That dubious honor goes to we the people.

No, you are right, they didn’t, and we did. I have said it over and over again and I will continue to say it: we have exactly the government we deserve. We have not demanded better and we keep voting the same disingenuous and corrupt people into office. We are reaping what we have sewn. Of that, there can be no doubt.

However, the bishops and priests do have to shoulder some or rather, much of the load here. For decades now, they have allowed Catholic in-name only politicians to come and speak at Church events. They have stood shoulder to shoulder with them. They have allowed them to receive our Blessed Lord in the Eucharist despite their activities. Obviously, we could go on quite a while here. All of these things imply at least tacit approval for these particular politicians on the part of the clergy. What is a Christian who is trying to be faithful to think? “Well, the Bishop has no problem with them, so why should I.” When gay marriage was passed in New York largely through the help of “Catholic” politicians, one of the main guys involved got a great big hug from his priest when he showed up in the communion line right afterwards. How is a faithful Christian supposed to interpret that message?

No, we are much of the problem, but the clergy needs to stand up and: A) admit their mistakes and seek forgiveness; B) walk it back to that we can try to stop the bleeding; and C) LEAD us in the proper direction and stop writing wishy-washy statements on social issues.

 

[partypilot1]

Washington must make changes to healthcare mandates to exclude religious hospitals, colleges and social services from contraception requirements. Contraception mandates deprive the people of institutions of their ethical and inalienable right to protect life and physical integrity. Historically, Catholics attend rallies to protest the lack of government protection of life from womb to tomb. Millions have already died as a result of the direct violation of the sanctity of life. We’ve waited and prayed for the light of reason to align common law with natural law. We consoled the sick and injured who have been oppressed these intrinsic evils of our time. Now we must act as one body, one faith, one voice by tax resistance.
The means of tax resistance dates back to 1st century AD and has been used for conscientious objection. The legal and peaceful means of tax resistance in this protest is simply filing for extension. The overwhelming number of extensions filed will highlight the grave importance of this issue.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

It may be true that some Catholics practice contraception. I don’t know how many use abortion inducing contraception.

But there’s a big difference between disregarding the teachings of one’s Church, and being forced to do so by the government.

This is, I suspect, an understatement. The question that such Catholics are going to face is whether they support the state assuming a moral teaching role over the clergy, which is, I guarantee it, how secularists see this. It’s one thing to disagree with the Church on issues such as contraception, another thing entirely to sic the government on the Church as if it has been barring blacks at the door.

The bishops, I suspect, understand the spot they are now in. If they go along with this, even under legal duress, they will be be perceived as abandoning their teaching when it is inconvenient for them.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Washington must make changes to healthcare mandates to exclude religious hospitals, colleges and social services from contraception requirements.

No, Obamacare must be rooted out in its entirety. I see no reason that I should be forced to cover such practices merely because I am not a religious hospital.

And we have not even gotten to the death panels yet.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

No, you are right, they didn’t, and we did. I have said it over and over again and I will continue to say it: we have exactly the government we deserve. We have not demanded better and we keep voting the same disingenuous and corrupt people into office. We are reaping what we have sewn. Of that, there can be no doubt.

However, the bishops and priests do have to shoulder some or rather, much of the load here. For decades now, they have allowed Catholic in-name only politicians to come and speak at Church events. They have stood shoulder to shoulder with them. They have allowed them to receive our Blessed Lord in the Eucharist despite their activities. Obviously, we could go on quite a while here. All of these things imply at least tacit approval for these particular politicians on the part of the clergy. What is a Christian who is trying to be faithful to think? “Well, the Bishop has no problem with them, so why should I.” When gay marriage was passed in New York largely through the help of “Catholic” politicians, one of the main guys involved got a great big hug from his priest when he showed up in the communion line right afterwards. How is a faithful Christian supposed to interpret that message?

No, we are much of the problem, but the clergy needs to stand up and: A) admit their mistakes and seek forgiveness; B) walk it back to that we can try to stop the bleeding; and C) LEAD us in the proper direction and stop writing wishy-washy statements on social issues.

I agree.

I think part of the problem is that we’ve had weak leadership. In my dioscese at least, priests tend to shy away from homilies about abortion, contraception, gay marriage (or on marriage in general) IVF, subsidiarity/solidarity and other issues of the day.

I don’t think homilies that address these issues have to be political in nature. Simply saying that some issues are non-negotiable (i.e. always wrong - like abortion) and that other issues there can be legitimate disagreement over (war, death penalty)

I think the hesitation stems from the fact that priests don’t want to be seen as the “bad guy” and alienate the people in the pews. I know of a few cases where preists have talked about this have been slapped on the wrist. If we lose parishoners, so be it.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I think part of the problem is that we’ve had weak leadership. In my dioscese at least, priests tend to shy away from homilies about abortion, contraception, gay marriage (or on marriage in general) IVF, subsidiarity/solidarity and other issues of the day.

…

I think the hesitation stems from the fact that priests don’t want to be seen as the “bad guy” and alienate the people in the pews. I know of a few cases where preists have talked about this have been slapped on the wrist. If we lose parishoners, so be it.

I think you are closer to the truth in the second paragraph.

The fundamental scandal (and I don’t use that word lightly) is that the Church has been outsourcing it’s moral teaching duty to the state. Partly this is weakness, partly a reluctance to be the “bad guy” but largely, I think, it is the illusion that the state would be a faithful servant and not a fearful master.

So the US bishops have been backing socialized health care, welfare, minimum wages, etc. all under the guise of teaching charity and social justice and treating the variances here and there as a necessary evil.

Until now. Now they can no longer ignore the variance of government policy and Church teaching. Now they are the ones being given moral instruction. Of course they feel betrayed.

 

[caroljm36]

I heard there was supposed to be a message from the US bishops read at every Mass last weekend, but I did not hear it at mine.

Anyone else hear it?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I think you are closer to the truth in the second paragraph.

The fundamental scandal (and I don’t use that word lightly) is that the Church has been outsourcing it’s moral teaching duty to the state. Partly this is weakness, partly a reluctance to be the “bad guy” but largely, I think, it is the illusion that the state would be a faithful servant and not a fearful master.

So the US bishops have been backing socialized health care, welfare, minimum wages, etc. all under the guise of teaching charity and social justice and treating the variances here and there as a necessary evil.

Until now. Now they can no longer ignore the variance of government policy and Church teaching. Now they are the ones being given moral instruction. Of course they feel betrayed.

I surely hope and pray there will be some changes coming.

People will always decide to leave the church. I’d rather have them hear the (full) truth and leave than leave because they were poorly catechized and/or leave because we tip toe around the hard topics.

 

[Suudy]

People will always decide to leave the church. I’d rather have them hear the (full) truth and leave than leave because they were poorly catechized and/or leave because we tip toe around the hard topics.

Indeed. This is why I left the Episcopal church. My conversion story is too long to post here, but I grew up nothing (any religion was heavily discouraged by my father), attended an Assembly of God in high school, and on/off AoG and others until about 2001. I then searched again (the Catholic church never even crossed my mind), and fell in love with the liturgy at the Episcopal church.

But what drove me away from the Episcopal church wasn’t the service, the people, etc. It was their wishy-washy stance on everything. I remember in my pre-confirmation classes the instructor saying “We Anglicans define ourselves by the liturgy and fellowship. It is the center of everything, and we don’t get caught up in differences of opinion on political issues.” When I asked for clarification, he indicated that issues such as abortion, euthanasia, etc were “personal choices” and the church wouldn’t take a stance.

This position bothered me. I went to the rector, and she handed me a book called the Social Teachings in the Episcopal Church (see this link). In it, I found much more clarity. When I returned it to the rector, she told me not to get too caught up in it. I asked about the 39 articles at back of the Book of Common Prayer. Again, I was told not to put too much stock into them. What mattered was that we all participated in the liturgy.

I knew then the Episcopal church wasn’t for me. And the ordination of Eugene Robinson cemented the deal.

Now, if the Catholic leadership makes the same mistake as my rector, there will be no place for Catholics of conscience to find refuge. I am praying that the Bishops and all the clergy find the moral strength to stand up for the Truth regardless of any potential backlash.