Catholic Charities beliefs clash with contraceptive needs

[KathleenElsie]

That, we cannot do. If we do not exend our services to all who need them, we ceace to be Catholic in a very real way.

Instead of changing the way we carry out Christ’s mandate in order to conform to the secularist idea, let us strive to carry it out despite their resistance and sabotage.

The main world was “could.”

But, I wonder, what we gain if we win the world respect and loose their souls in the process.

I don’t have the answer. But, IMHO it is never wrong to teach the truth.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The main world was “could.”

But, I wonder, what we gain if we win the world respect and loose their souls in the process.

I don’t have the answer. But, IMHO it is never wrong to teach the truth.

We can never win respect by abandoning our principles.

The Emperor Julian the Apostate tried to convert the Empire back to a reformed Paganism around 350 AD. In a famous letter, he complained “The religion of the Greeks does not prosper” and explained why. “It is a disgrace to us that no Jew is seen begging, and as for the impious galileans, they not only care for their own poor, but ours as well.”

We “impous galileans” must care for everyone’s poor.

 

[OriginalJS]

With all due respect, the message from the chanceries, pulpits, schools and Rome was garbled, mixed and contradictory. As late as 2 years ago I was informed by a monsignor that Humanae Vitae did not prohibit the use of contraceptives - and was told an additional resident monsignor agreed… No my friend, don’t try to put this one off on a recalcitrant laity - Rome, Bishops, priests and catholic trachers including nuns and brothers undermined the teaching.

The clergy and especially Bishops, as a group, have been the direct source of most of the problems in the Church today, but still refuse to take responsibilty for it. They have largely failed for 40 years in their responsibility to the laity and Christ, IMHO.

I seem to have struck a nerve here in blaming the laity for the rejection of *Humanae Vitae. *Perhaps I am wrong. I am always ready to be corrected. But, if Rome, Bishops, priests and catholic teachers including nuns and brothers undermined the clear teaching of Paul VI in his encyclical, what caused them to undermine the teaching if it was not the unequivocal rejection of the laity? Why did it happen this way?

I agree with observations that some priests did tell parishioners that use of contraceptives was a matter to be decided by each person according to his or her conscience. I have heard this myself. But that does not answer why some of the clergy came to this conclusion.

 

[johnnykins]

I seem to have struck a nerve here in blaming the laity for the rejection of *Humanae Vitae. *Perhaps I am wrong. I am always ready to be corrected. But, if Rome, Bishops, priests and catholic teachers including nuns and brothers undermined the clear teaching of Paul VI in his encyclical, what caused them to undermine the teaching if it was not the unequivocal rejection of the laity? Why did it happen this way?

I agree with observations that some priests did tell parishioners that use of contraceptives was a matter to be decided by each person according to his or her conscience. I have heard this myself. But that does not answer why some of the clergy came to this conclusion.

Hubris

 

[vern_humphrey]

I seem to have struck a nerve here in blaming the laity for the rejection of *Humanae Vitae. *Perhaps I am wrong. I am always ready to be corrected. But, if Rome, Bishops, priests and catholic teachers including nuns and brothers undermined the clear teaching of Paul VI in his encyclical, what caused them to undermine the teaching if it was not the unequivocal rejection of the laity? Why did it happen this way?

I agree with observations that some priests did tell parishioners that use of contraceptives was a matter to be decided by each person according to his or her conscience. I have heard this myself. But that does not answer why some of the clergy came to this conclusion.

Much of it was due to the same reason many Bishops swept sexual abuse cases under the rug – we had timid leaders, who wantedt to take to easy way. They were simply afraid to do the right thing – and the more they put it off, the worse the problem got, and the more timid they were.

Another reason was that some seminaries were infected with some strange views. These people infected the people junior to them, who infected the next batch, and so on. We had priests (and ultimately bishops) who accepted some very disturbing things – including homosexual activity, ordaining women, and so on.

 

[bekalc]

The main world was “could.”

But, I wonder, what we gain if we win the world respect and loose their souls in the process.

I don’t have the answer. But, IMHO it is never wrong to teach the truth.

Yes, but a big part of Catholic teaching is that Catholics have a responsibility to go out to the entire world and help everyone, not just the people we like or who are Catholics like us…

If Catholics were to stop ministering to non Catholics because we want to keep the purity of our teachings, we would be like the Priest/Levite in the story of the Good Smaritian who left the injured person on the side of the road, because they wanted to keep their ritual purity.

As for this whole issue, I am of course against this law, but I do want to point out something. My mom isn’t a Catholic and she for a long time worked for a clinic… However, the clinic, which was secular in nature, was suddenly bought out by the Catholic Church… My mom and her collegues in this circumstance certainly didn’t choose to work for a Catholic company or sign up for it, and I remember my mom was quite sad for her boss who was getting ready to have her sister in law carry her baby (as a surrogate). Everything was set and then well the Catholic Church took over.

Now, I disagree with invitro and all of that, but I can see why a non Catholic might be a bit upset that their hospital was “bought out” by a Catholic organization and suddenly their life gets turned upside down.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes, but a big part of Catholic teaching is that Catholics have a responsibility to go out to the entire world and help everyone, not just the people we like or who are Catholics like us…

If Catholics were to stop ministering to non Catholics because we want to keep the purity of our teachings, we would be like the Priest/Levite in the story of the Good Smaritian who left the injured person on the side of the road, because they wanted to keep their ritual purity.

As for this whole issue, I am of course against this law, but I do want to point out something. My mom isn’t a Catholic and she for a long time worked for a clinic… However, the clinic, which was secular in nature, was suddenly bought out by the Catholic Church… My mom and her collegues in this circumstance certainly didn’t choose to work for a Catholic company or sign up for it, and I remember my mom was quite sad for her boss who was getting ready to have her sister in law carry her baby (as a surrogate). Everything was set and then well the Catholic Church took over.

Now, I disagree with invitro and all of that, but I can see why a non Catholic might be a bit upset that their hospital was “bought out” by a Catholic organization and suddenly their life gets turned upside down.

These laws make as much sense as requiring Seventh Day Adventists to conduct business on Saturday. They are aimed at the Church.

 

[bekalc]

I said in my post that I was against the laws…But I can see how hospitals being bought out by the Catholic Church can be a problem…

 

[vern_humphrey]

I said in my post that I was against the laws…But I can see how hospitals being bought out by the Catholic Church can be a problem…

But how is it a problem? The sole issue is contraceptives. Even people who believe contraceptives are moral cannot expect the Catholic Church to pay for them!

 

[tcraig]

"Currently the exception is specifically for religious employers, like seminaries. But two courts, including the Court of Appeals, have ruled that the organization doesn’t qualify because they* employ and serve ***those outside of their religion."

I found this part interesting. As an employer, I think Catholic Charities cannot discriminate in their hiring practices and hire only Catholics. And they cannot limit their services to only Catholics. And as a result, they have to pay for something that violates the tenets of our faith. It’s mixed up.

Catholic Charities cannot discriminate in their hiring practices because they receive substantial federal funding. Because of this, they are required by federal regulations to hire non-Catholics/nonbelievers. Government money always comes with strings attached. If they would cut themselves off from the federal teat, they would have the freedom to run as a truly Catholic entity. As it is, they’ve made their federally-subsidized bed and now are whining when told to lie in it.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Catholic Charities cannot discriminate in their hiring practices because they receive substantial federal funding. Because of this, they are required by federal regulations to hire non-Catholics/nonbelievers. Government money always comes with strings attached. If they would cut themselves off from the federal teat, they would have the freedom to run as a truly Catholic entity. As it is, they’ve made their federally-subsidized bed and now are whining when told to lie in it.

Who takes the King’s shilling is the King’s man. Which is why Catholic Charities should not take government money. We cannot sell our faith for a government grant.

 

[Saint_Sinner]

But how is it a problem? The sole issue is contraceptives. Even people who believe contraceptives are moral cannot expect the Catholic Church to pay for them!

Do you really believe that the Planned Barrenhold types do not expect everyone to bow down to their god?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Do you really believe that the Planned Barrenhold types do not expect everyone to bow down to their god?

There you have it – and we play right into their hands. Welcome to the Abortion and Birth Control Touchie-feelie Kumbayah (formerly known as the Catholic Church.)

 

[HailMary]

They can rule what they like, but they cannot control our consciences. We must stand up for what’s right and simply refuse to comply.

If we fail to stand up, how long will it be before some court orders Catholic hospitals to perform abortions? Or orders Catholic priests to officiate at “gay” marriages? Or orders seminaries to train and ordain women?

So true! Good post.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Who takes the King’s shilling is the King’s man. Which is why Catholic Charities should not take government money. We cannot sell our faith for a government grant.

 

[hasikelee]

What a joke. I thought we had reproductive freedoms in this country. Why do they get to shove their beliefs on me?

 

[KathleenElsie]

What a joke. I thought we had reproductive freedoms in this country. Why do they get to shove their beliefs on me?

We also have freedom of religion and the right to our moral code. To force someone to be part of something that they think is imoral is imoral in and of itself. Prior to having a procedure done or optional surgery you can speak to a Dr and the hospital to find if the procedure is available there. In the case of an emergency (immediate life or death) any Dr and hospital would provide procedures as needed.

 

[bekalc]

But how is it a problem? The sole issue is contraceptives. Even people who believe contraceptives are moral cannot expect the Catholic Church to pay for them!

No they don’t. I was mentioning though mergers in the health care field, where let’s say Catholic hospitals by out clinics or other hospitals.

This happened to my mom’s old place of work. When my mom went to work at this clinic it was just a regular clinic, however a couple of years later it got bought out by the Catholic Church (or some Catholic organization.

My mom is not a Catholic, and she and a lot of people were working there, were pretty unhappy that suddenly their health care coverage changed. It was particularly upseting in my mom’s office because the person in charge of the office was all set up for Invitro and surrogacy, had the doctors appointments and everything, and suddenly it was sorry we aren’t paying for it…

The point I was making, is that it wasn’t like my mom’s former boss and her fellow co-workers actually signed up to work in a Catholic hospital. It literally became Catholic (out from under their feet so to speak).

I don’t agree with invitro, and I still think the laws are wrong. My mom also thinks its wrong to force the Catholic church to pay for birth control, but well she also feels what happened at her former place of work was a bit unfair too.

 

[tcraig]

What a joke. I thought we had reproductive freedoms in this country. Why do they get to shove their beliefs on me?

Beliefs are not being shoved on Catholic Charities. This is a charity that accepts substantial federal grants. Go to their website, www.catholiccharitiesusa.org, and click on the Annual Report to see just how much money in federal grants they receive. Remember, too, that when looking at how much money is received from the Combined Federal Campaign that Catholics for Free Choice meets the same federally mandated guidelines to participate as Catholic Charities. Meh.

There are plenty of Christian charitable organizations that operate without federal funding. They know that when government gets involved, autonomy disappears. My son attends a Catholic college that accepts no direct or indirect federal aid in order to maintain control over their curriculum and hiring practices.

I have no sympathy for Catholic Charities, and refuse to contribute to them.