Complying with Contraception Mandate

  • Thread starter Thread starter CrossofChrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CrossofChrist

Guest
Is it remote material cooperation for an employer to comply with a contraception mandate? I previously thought it would be a sin, but I discovered that before the HHS Mandate the diocese of Madison already was providing contraception coverage to comply with a Wisconsin state law.

I’m not sure if the Wisconsin law mandated abortifacient coverage but would that impact whether it is remote material cooperation or not, if it is in fact remote material cooperation to comply with a contraception mandate?
 
CrossofChrist said:
Is it remote material cooperation for an employer to comply with a contraception mandate? I previously thought it would be a sin, but I discovered that before the HHS Mandate the diocese of Madison already was providing contraception coverage to comply with a Wisconsin state law.

I’m not sure if the Wisconsin law mandated abortifacient coverage but would that impact whether it is remote material cooperation or not, if it is in fact remote material cooperation to comply with a contraception mandate?
Click to expand...
I think that fits into the idea of remote material cooperation with sin but so remote to make it doubtful that it is sinful. If done to comply with the law, culpability would be mitigated.

There is no way to live in society and avoid all remote cooperation with sin. We pay taxes, taxes support multiple organizations that deliver products/services such as contraception, abortion, assisted suicide, sterilization, etc.
 
Check out this report of an interview Cardinal Burke did in 2012:
In an interview with Thomas McKenna, the head of the American lay group Catholic Action, Cardinal Burke was asked whether an employer who provided birth-control coverage as part of a health-care plan for employees would be guilty of cooperating in the sin of contraception. The cardinal replied:
Click to expand...
It is not only a matter of what we call “material cooperation” in the sense that the employer by giving this insurance benefit is materially providing for the contraception but it is also “formal cooperation” because he is knowingly and deliberately doing this, making this available to people. There is no way to justify it. It is simply wrong.
Click to expand...
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=13960

I’m confused in relation to these comments the fact that the diocese in Wisconsin did have contraception coverage because of cost.

According to the following article, the Wisconsin diocese did require employees to have signed a contract that they would ‘abide by Catholic teaching’: google.co.uk/amp/wcfcourier.com/news/local/wisconsin-diocese-offers-birth-control-insurance-but-warns-employees-not/article_0b904262-a4e4-11df-bde9-001cc4c002e0.amp.html?client=safari
 
Corki said:
I think that fits into the idea of remote material cooperation with sin but so remote to make it doubtful that it is sinful. If done to comply with the law, culpability would be mitigated.

There is no way to live in society and avoid all remote cooperation with sin. We pay taxes, taxes support multiple organizations that deliver products/services such as contraception, abortion, assisted suicide, sterilization, etc.
Click to expand...
Okay, but then why was there the huge outrage with complying with the HHS Mandate? Maybe it’s because I haven’t always been Catholic, but I’m not aware of there being similar outrage over other mandates before the HHS mandate in states that didn’t have religious exemptions.
 
_Abyssinia said:
Check out this report of an interview Cardinal Burke did in 2012:

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=13960

I’m confused in relation to these comments the fact that the diocese in Wisconsin did have contraception coverage because of cost.

According to the following article, the Wisconsin diocese did require employees to have signed a contract that they would ‘abide by Catholic teaching’: google.co.uk/amp/wcfcourier.com/news/local/wisconsin-diocese-offers-birth-control-insurance-but-warns-employees-not/article_0b904262-a4e4-11df-bde9-001cc4c002e0.amp.html?client=safari
Click to expand...
The Cardinal’s explanation isn’t really satisfactory to me because doesn’t formal cooperation require someone to intend, i.e want, the mandate to happen? Of course it’s hard to completely explain yourself in an interview, but it still doesn’t seem like formal cooperation.
archphila.org/HHS/pdf/CoopEvilChart.pdf
 
CrossofChrist said:
The Cardinal’s explanation isn’t really satisfactory to me because doesn’t formal cooperation require someone to intend, i.e want, the mandate to happen? Of course it’s hard to completely explain yourself in an interview, but it still doesn’t seem like formal cooperation.
archphila.org/HHS/pdf/CoopEvilChart.pdf
Click to expand...
Although the Cardinal knows more than me so I could very well be wrong, but it seems…off…if the Diocese of Madison were formally cooperating with sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top