The Devil's In the Details on the Choice Between Christ and the Government Cheese

[L] Kay Daly, Executive Director of Christian Family Ministry (photo: Suwaunee Valley Times)

Fox News Radio's Todd Starnes reported how Christian  Service Center of Lake City Florida is being forced between choosing Jesus or Government Cheese.  For 31 years, this north  Florida ministry had been providing food the the hungry without controversy.  But when a state government worker showed up to negotiate  an agreement , Christian Service Ministry Executive Director Kay Daley was told that a "slight change" in the contract.  Now the governmental guidelines about where USDA food is distributed, there can be no religious information under the premise of "the separation of church and state". 

The Executive Order for Equal Protection of Faith Based and Community Organizations is supposed to allow governmental assistance as long as the religious activity does not create a barrier to individuals receiving their governmental assistance.   Yet the Christian Service Center was told that they were prohibited from distributing Bibles but this ban religious information that included  religious decorations, like "Jesus is Lord" banners and a copy of the Ten Commandments, where ever  USDA food is distributed.  Hence Stern's characterization of choosing Jesus or government cheese.

The organization asked if they needed to change their name from the Christian Service Ministry to comply and they were told no, but no praying, mentioning of chapel, distributing Bibles or beign around religious decoration.  The Christian Service Ministry chose to forgo USDA assistance in their ministering to the hungry.  Kay Daly mused:

“If God can multiply fish and loaves for 10,000 people, he can certainly bring in food for our food pantry so we can continue to feed the hungry.”

The Christian Service Ministry decided that they were a Christian ministry, which included helping people in need by praying with them, providing the Good News, worshiping and providing physical nutrition without government "help" and interference.  Other churches are reportedly pitching in the fill the void from the governmental help in feeding the hungry was withdrawn.  

President George W. Bush

Media Matters sought to mollify this righteous indigation from the right by arguing that George W. Bush did it and provided links to the Executive Order.  While it is true that the original ExecutiveOrder 13279 from December 12, 2002 does provide some guidelines for faith based organizations receiving governmental aid, the progressive media "watchdog" failed to include a link to President Obama's extensiveamendment to the Executive Order in 2010.   The devil in the details is understanding what the streamlined new legislative language means

There were major changes in sections 2(e) which was the provision that mandated that faith based organizations must conducting religious activity at a separate time or place than the federallly funded social service program.  This clause reminded the governement that it had to abide by the Free Speech and Equal Protection Clause when administering Federal Programs. 

In the Obama Amended Section 2(e) the Federal government is tasked with monitoring and enforcing "standards regarding the relationship between religion and government in ways that avoid excessive entanglement between religious bodies and governmental entities.  So the emphasis is taken away from faith based organizations complying with the prohibition on proselizing to federal aid recipients to the Federal government acting as referee to ensure that

Excessive entanglements are avoided.  

So despite retaining the Free Speech and Equal Protection language, the avoiding excessive entanglement clause in the amended 2(e) makes moot a faith based organizations First Amendment rights, as a blanket prohibition of religious information treats all equally when operating as an agency of the government.

There were more significant changes in the amended 2(f) clause which originally prohibited faith base organizations from using federal funds for inherently religious activity.  The 2010 Executive Order re-write severed the connection with section 2(e) as well as dropping mentions of Free Speech and Equal Protection. While the revised section 2(f) is more concisely composed, it recasts the clause as a bright line rule for separate time or location, without  the clarifying examples or the intent to emphasis to protect the independent spiritual mission of faith based ministries which engage in social services. 

So the Christian Service Ministry was probably within their legal rights to conduct their social service ministry in their own space, but since a federal functionary did not probably interpret the lawcorrectly (and understands this Administration), it would cost big bucks to litigate to keep federal funds flowing to feed the hungry. No wonder why the Christian Service Ministry chose to forgo their cut of the Government Cheese.

Nevertheless, as Bob Dylan put it: "You don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows." The Obama Administration has been hostile for respecting the free exercise of religion, as has been seen in the HHS Qualified Health Plan(Contraception) Mandate arguing that the Freedom of Religion means the Freedom of Worship--so believe whatever you want in the pews but that respect ends at the church doors. Ministers are now routinely barred from mass casualtysituations like the Boston Marathon bombing, for fear of the separation of church and state.  This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Church of 1802 and is a reaction to aggressive atheism in small segments of the American polity.

Fanfare for the Fortnight For Freedom 2013

NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan

Today is the start of the second Fortnight for Freedom as urged by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops.  It is a period of  prayer, fasting, education and action to preserve the fundamental natural right that is enshrined in the Bill of Rights–the Freedom of Religion.  This effort was started last year by USCCB President New York Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan






Appreciating the First Amendment is particularly poignant as there are so many challenges to religious liberty and the freedom of conscience, such as the HHS Qualified Health Plan Mandate (a.k.a. the Contraception, Sterilization and Abortifacient rider), the exclusion of non-compliant adoption organizations who will not service same-sex couples, states which have approved , states co-ercing traditional marriage believers to conform to same-sex so called marriage, the military labeling Catholics and Evangelicals as extremist groups for upholding their moral beliefs, military chaplains being forced out of service if they did not tow the new Politically Correct line on homosexuality.

When President Obama marked Religious Freedom Day in 2013, he framed religious liberty as the “freedom to worship as we choose.”  That might have been acceptable public policy shorthand, but such a charitable assessment is not borne out by the actions of the Obama Administration.   This is especially exemplified in the HHS contraception mandate.

 After the initial hue and cry when the Obama Administration aborted religious liberty with the Obamacare requiring free contraception, Mr. Obama supposedly backtracked by rescinding this reviled regulation.  But as it turned out, the Obama Administration was just obfuscating authority regarding religious liberty.  The rule for “free” contraception  supposedly would not be applied to objecting churches themselves but would be effectively passed along by the insurance companies who were forced to pick up the tab for the unconscionable inclusions.  However, this so called contraception compromise did not cover religiously affiliated groups, like religious orders, parochial schools etc...  Moreover many of these organizations self-insure, so it still passed along these contraception costs for them.  Furthermore,  the same day that President Obama gave the public remarks about the contraception compromise, the Federal Register published the final rule for the Qualified Health Plan mandate with language that was unchanged from August 11, 2011.  Mr. Obama’s contraception compromise did allow religious organizations to delay implementation for one year, or as Cardinal Dolan joked that: "We were given an extra year to change our morals."

Pope Francis

While some may dismiss the contraception controversy as it seems like a Catholic thing, those who care about religious liberty need to delve deeper.  These regulations are defining what qualifies as a church in a narrow and strangling manner To receive First Amendment protections, the Obama Administration believes that an entity serve only who hold the same creed and serve only those professing the same faith.  Aside from the absurdness of having a government bureaucrat defining what “Church” is, this understanding of freedom of worship misses the point.  As Baltimore Archbishop William Lori points out : "Religious freedom protects more than the freedom to worship on Sunday; it also  protects our ability to live out our faith the other six days of the week."  Pope Francis also extolled: “We are not called to be part-time Christians...[W]e’re called to live our faith at every moment of every day.”

Religiously affiliated adoption agencies in three states and DC- the District of Calamity (sic)  have been forced out of business because their organizations will not work with same-sex couples. Catholic charitable organizations have been criticized for withdrawing from immigrant programs which endorse Gay Marriage.   Religious hospitals who maintain their ethical values will either need to serve their own flock or close down if they do not accede to the abortion requirements of Obamacare.

But it is not just faithful Catholics who are under assault for upholding their faith in America.  The Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School had to go to the United States Supreme Court to receive approbation to fire a called minister.  Despite the 9-0 ruling from the nation’s high court in January 2012, the Obama Administration foisted the contraception clause on America the next week.

The assault on religious liberty is being waged by more than the Obama Administration.  New York City instituted a new policy which prevented the Bronx Household of Faith and other small religious groups from renting space in public schools on weekends even though other non-religious groups could do so. Christian groups on college campuses are being denied recognition (and funding) when they require their leaders to be Christians and strive to live a chaste life as being discriminatory.

Great Maryland Seal

Rhode Island 1st Gov. Seal

The Puritans were Englishmen who were self-exiled to Holland at the beginning of the Seventeenth Century so that they could have religious liberty.  They decided to come to America so that they could raise their children as Englishmen who could have religious liberty in the New World. Roger Williams was a theologian forced out of the Massachusetts Bay Colony who founded what became “Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” in 1636 which separated church authority from religious authority.  Maryland was settled by Cæcilius Calvert, the 2nd Lord Baltimore and others as a refuge for English Catholics.  The Maryland Religious Tolerance Act of 1649 was  first law ever to guarantee the right to worship regardless of denomination.

Secular society has been championing a concept that America was founded on a separation of church and state and that religion was ancillary to education of the times.  While it is true that there is not a state religion, history shows the profound motivation of our founders to pursue religious liberty.   The Fortnight for Freedom should remind us of our proud history of religious liberty and point out how state incursions are strangling this fundamental freedom.  Part of this education about religious liberty should include how sweeping state regulation of secular values will end vital social services in adoption, immigration, adoption, feeding the destitute and health care by religious groups which are serious about their core beliefs.

America's New State Religion?

In the wake of the Obama Administration’s HHS Qualified Health Plan Mandate (a.k.a. the Contraception Mandate), mainline churches have to come to terms with a Federal government which narrowly construes the First Amendment Freedom of Religious Expression.

While the Obama Administration exempts parishes from these objectionable regulations, no such leeway is given to religiously affiliated organizations, like Catholic colleges, religious orders, Catholic Insurers etc.  from paying for abortions, sterilizations and abortifacients.  But such groups were given a year’s reprieve from complying. As New York Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan quipped that they were given an extra year to figure out how to violate their consciences.

President Obama claimed a work around which would force a farce that insurers would give away these services so religious organizations would not have to pay.  Of course, this is a ruse as insurers would simply raise their premiums to everyone to cover these free services.  But Obama’s announcement came on the same day that the Federal Register published the original rules unchanged, so the ameliorations were a rhetorical chimera.

This move by the Obama Administration has awakened a sleeping giant.  This summer, the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops promoted the “Fortnight for Freedom”,  a coordinated nation-wide effort of prayer, fasting and educating American Catholics on the importance of preserving Americans’ First Amendment rights to the unfettered exercise of religious beliefs.

Some pastors have picked up this mantle to drive this crucial point home.  On the “Pastor’s Page of St. John the Evangelist of St. Paul (MN), Fr. George Welzbacher published this thought piece on the establishment of a nationwide first state religion–secular humanism.

It would seem that, for the first time in the history of our republic, we are witnessing here in the U.S.A. the establishment of a state religion, a religion so crafted as to delight the heart of a secularist, a religion with clearly defined dogmas, compliance with whose demands is to be enforced with all of the coercive powers at the disposal of the federal     government.  Here are the dogmas of this new faith. 

Dogma #1: A woman has the right, the unrestricted right, to make arrangements for the killing of her unborn child whenever such course of action is convenient.
Dogma #2: The chief purpose served by the institution of marriage is the securing of social recognition for romantic attraction, together with the panoply of benefits accruing to such recognition. The begetting of children, together with such subsequent upbringing as will equip them to contribute responsibly to the society in which they will spend their lives, can be dismissed as of  marginal importance. Thus every man, should this be his bent, has the right to marry another man, just as every woman, should she be so disposed, has the right to marry a woman. To suggest otherwise, to imply, for example, that a man's realigning of his reproductive powers to adapt to another man's digestive tract is in any way abnormal is to be guilty of a hate crime, in exculpation of which no appeal to the rights of conscience shall be allowed,  this being an intolerable crime, properly punishable with fines and/or imprisonment.
Dogma #3: The sovereign pontiff in this new state religion is the people's hero, Barack Hussein, now reigning gloriously in the White House.

Dogma #4: Enemy Number One of the new state religion is, by and large, the Christian faith and, with special intransigence, the Catholic Church. Measures must accordingly be taken to compel the recusant authorities of the Roman Catholic faith to genuflect at the new religion's altar. (Thus the new Health and Human Services mandate).

 All of this represents at least one way of looking at President Obama's arrogant trampling upon the First Amendment, not to mention his repudiation of God's Commandments.

If this is the case, I hope that I’m losing that religion come the first Tuesday in November.

h/t: Jerry Breen

Grading Obamanomics on a Curve?

It seems quite remarkable that the Obama 2012 campaign effort has the temerity to argue for re-election with 8.2% unemployment, yet that is one of the few policy arrows in their quiver. Alas, Obama’s economic argument is far off the mark.

 To sway Congress to approve the $837 Billion Stimulus legislation, the Obama Administration vowed that the unemployment rate would not exceed 8.0%. Obviously that Obama promise was inoperative as the official unemployment rate hit 10.1% in the summer of 2009 and currently the U-3 number is 8.2%, but this does not include discouraged workers which is 14.9%

[L] Austan Goolsbee & President Barack Obama

Austan Goolsbee, the Obama Administration’s former Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, has tried to temper any criticism concerning Porkulus.by essentially blaming Bush and claiming that the problem was worse than anyone in the Obama Administration understood in February 2009.  Goolsbee points to the official CEA report from late 2009 which shows that June 2012 unemployment was predicted to be 8.2%, leading people to believe that everything is going according to plan.

The problem with pointing to this revised economic forecast is that the same report anticipated that stimulus spending would vault American economic growth to 4.3% in both 2011 and 2012.  Those rosy scenarios have not panned out and the American economy has significantly underperformed.  In 2011, the GDP grew by only 1.7%.  In the first quarter of 2012, economic growth “skyrocketed” to 1.9%.  Economic analyst anticipate that economic growth with be below 2% in the second quarter of 2012.  Oops.  How is it that Obamanomics can demand an over $800 Billion Keynsian spending spree, garner only half the growth that it promised yet have the same unemployment rate than if Porkulous was not approved?

Playing with the unemployment numbers had mainly been the domain of the Department of Labor.  On Thursday mornings, the DOL would release unemployment numbers which are not as robust as expected, which will be chalked up to holidays or bad weather.  Some weeks, numbers would hint at the right direction and the Lamestream Media along with minions of the White House will crow that the recovery is continuing.  The problem is that unemployment numbers seem to be routinely revised upwards a couple of weeks later, without any fanfare.

The other trick to minimizing employment rates is through workers dropped from the unemployment rolls.    As the ninety nine weeks of  unemployment benefits expire, the people are dropped off the U-3 unemployment rate and such discouraged workers become part of the underreported U-6 roll.  Dropping long term unemployment benefits has accelerated has been accelerated as economic conditions are not as dire in individual states.  So if state unemployment rates does not spike over 10% during a three year period, the long term unemployment benefit disappears.  Since January, over 400,00 people have lost several weeks of the extended unemployment benefits, particularly in key battleground states such as Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado and North Carolina.

Bill Clinton signing Welfare Reform, 1996

This inconvenient truth about unemployment benefits may have partly inspired the Obama Administration’s ukase which ignores President Bill Clinton’s landmark achievement in "changing welfare as we know it."  The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act required that welfare recipients to work two years after starting to receive assistance, but some states enacted additional requirements to gain wider latitude over the program.


The Obama Administration recently issued “an official policy directive” which HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to wave workfare requirements.  Unfortunately, such flexible authority in Welfare Reform is not authorized in the Public Law, but if the First Amendment did not stop Sebelius or the Obama Administration from threatening the free exercise of religion through the Contraception Mandate, why should the lack of authority in legislation slow them down?

Conservative Constitutional observers opine that it is likely that Obama’s workfare waiver will probably lose in court, adjudicating the infraction will take time and will not be concluded by the election.  If a couple of large “Blue” states, like California, New York and Illinois, avail themselves to the waiver, this regulatory legerdemain will have the serendipitous effect of tempering rising unemployment statistics through the election.

Instead of grading Obamanomics on a curve, maybe the electorate ought to offer a participation ribbon  and send someone “home” to Chicago.

h/t: AEI

Launching the Fortnight for Freedom

In January 2012, as the Obama Administration began to bureaucratically buckle down to implement Obamacare, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius imposed a Qualified Health Plan mandate which basically required all qualified plans to offer “free” contraception, sterilzations, and abortofacient drugs.  In addition, the clerical exception was so narrowly construed which does not extend beyond the Church’s sanctuary.  In response to the public outroar that accompanied this Obama ukase, the Obama Administration claimed that conscientious objectors would not have to pay for repugnant treatments but insurance companies would pick up the bill.  This laughable fudge was given the same day that the Federal Register published the original HHS mandate with no revisions.

Some polling indicates that Catholics do not appreciate that religious liberty is under assault.  So the US Council of Catholic Bishops launched a Fortnight of Freedom, a coordinated nationwide effort of prayer, fasting and instrution to educate the Catholic laity as well as the general public on the importance of preserving Americans’ First Amendment rights to the unfettered exercise of religious beliefs.

Liberal leaning Catholics launch into tirades against the UCCB efforts, accusing the Bishops of unfairly involving themselves in politics.  Such rantings about not mixing church and state are laughable as the LCRW inspired Nuns on the Bus Tour is out protesting the Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st) budget proposal for suggesting changes to social service spending. Perhaps advocating for the Social Justice inspired acts of charity are not recognized as even being religious in nature but appeal to  Social Gospel believers who are strong on social but queasy about gospel.

George Soros is funding a “Catholic” shadow organization “Faith in Public Life” to be the devil’s advocate working behind the scenes against the UCCB Fortnight of Freedom efforts. Prominent dissonant Catholic voices, like the outsed America editor Fr. Tom Reece and prominent feminist theology professor Lisa Sowle Cahill, have associated themselves with the “Faith in Public Life” front group. Expect the media to be fed questions by Faith in Public Life  about conflating health policy quarrels with religious freedom, bluster about the fake HHS compromise and questioning if Catholics would stop social justice programs if they do not receive religious accommodation.

The Fortnight for Freedom kicked off with a mass at the America’s oldest Catholic Cathedral, the Basilica of the National Shrine of Assumption of the Virgin Mary.  Newly named Baltimore Archbishop William Lori, a staunch spokesman for the UCCB on religious freedom, presided and gave the homily.

St. Thomas More

Archbishop Lori noted that the Fortnight for Freedom was launched on the eve of the feast of St. Thomas More, a Catholic Lord Chancellor of England  who sacrificed everything, including his life, to keep faithful to communion with the Catholic Church in the face of King Henry VIII Act of Supremacy.  Lori also invoked the example of St. John Fisher, who also shares the feast day with St. Thomas More, as Fisher was Catholic Cardinal who was martyred by a tyrannical English crown anxious to control the practice of faith in the nation.   Archbishop Lori also noted that Charles Carroll (brother of first US Bishop John Carroll) the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence, risked his life and thwarted unjust law which legally prevented Catholics from being Maryland office holders.

Archbishop Lori’s homily also touched upon Catholic organizations affected by the narrow HHS construing of a religious exemption. Lori declares that organizations can have moral character and should not be forced to participate in practices that are repugnant to the group’s founding principles. Liberals have invoked the argument that it is all well and good for individuals to have moral positions, corporations can not take moral stands.  This strain of thought posits that organizations like the Knights of Columbus must participate in what they believe is evil.  Or Catholic Insurers need to offer coverage for contraception abortions and sterlizations because institutions can not have religion.  This flight of fancy leads liberals to argue that Georgetown Law must offer contraceptives because most of their students and faculty are not Catholic, so damn the Catholic connections.

 But this Fortnight for Freedom raising of consciences is not just coming from the clergy.  Embodying the New Evangelizaton, the Catholic Association made a media buy to dispel the secular myth that one should confine their expressions of faith to the pews in church or cowering at home.



New York’s Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan will offer a Mass for the Fortnight of Freedom at St. Patrick’s Cathedral.   The Archdiocese of Washington is sponsoring a rally amongst other activities throughout the country.   The Fortnight of Freedom will conclude with a noon Mass at the Basilica National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC on Independence Day celebrated by Philadelpia’s new archbishop Charles Chaput.

During this Fortnight of Freedom, the faithful are offered an appropriate prayer:

Almighty God, Father of all nations, For freedom you have set us free in Christ Jesus.We praise and bless you for the gift of religious liberty,the foundation of human rights, justice and the common good.Grant to the leaders the wisdom to protect and promote our liberties;By your grace, may we have the courage to defend them,for ourselves and for all who live in this blessed land.We ask through the intercession of Mary Immaculate, our patroness,and in the name of your Son, our Lord Jesus Christ,in the unity of the Holy Spirit,One God, forever and ever. Amen.

Pelosi's Bull on Authentic Catholicism

Pope Benedict XVI (vested in white) greets then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (ironically dressed in purple), on the Papal pilgrimage to Washington, DC in 2008

House Minority Leader (and former Speaker of the House) Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th) prides herself on being an ardent Catholic but she seems quite confused about her faith, yet she continues to foist her heresy in the realm of politics.

A couple of years ago, at a Capitol Hill conference, Rep. Pelosi offered that her favorite word was “The Word” and stressed how it was crucial to give voice to that scriptural word when conducting public policy. However, when a reporter during the former Speaker’s weekly press gaggle followed up on when the Word became flesh, suddenly the concept was only fit for church. Perhaps Pelosi did not want to reconcile her beliefs with the inconvenient truth that her faith teaches about human life beginning at the moment of conception.



After then Senator Obama’s (D-IL) appearance at the Saddleback Civil Forum where the successful Presidential candidate deflected a question about abortion as being “above my pay grade”, Pelosi was pressed about abortion, she insisted that the doctors of the Church had been unable to make that definition.



Maybe Nancy was relying too much on Senator Augustine, uh Saint Augustine's, 4th Century notion of quickening instead of acknowleding Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968 which makes it quite clear that the Catholic Church believes that life begins at the moment of conception. It might give context as to why the American Catholic Sees are seething about the contraception mandate embedded in Obamacare.

Minority Leader Pelosi dismissed American Bishops objecting to the HHS mandate as imposing on religious freedom, noting that she respects her pastor not when these Shepherds of the Faith act as lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Instead of confining herself to be a hypocritical politico, Pelosi has annointed herself as a theologian. Pelosi pontificated that it was not entire Catholic Church was against the HHS mandate, just 43 Catholic organizations, such as the Archdiocese of Washington. Pelosi embellishes her bull by noting that they had not spoken ex cathedra.

 

So by Pelosi's train of thought, the Cardinal Bishop in her Archdiocese between the beltways is not speaking authoritatively on matters of faith for Catholic Church or she bears false witness about respecting her pastor.

But to correct the record as either Pelosi's religious education at Trinity College was inadequate or it was an instance of invincible ignorance, ex cathedra statements are solemn and formal papal pronouncements on matters of faith and morals. Before the Congresswoman from California takes solace that the Humanae Vitae encyclical was only a papal teaching, she should consider what Pope Blessed John Paul II stated in a 1993 papal audience:

When the Roman Pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in exercising his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians he defines with his supreme apostolic authority that a doctrine on faith and morals is to be held by the whole Church, through the divine assistance promised him in the person of St. Peter, he enjoys that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished to endow his Church in defining a doctrine on faith and morals.

But the lawsuits from 43 Catholic institutions protesting forced participation in contraception, sterlizations and abortion are rooted in natural law hence it is part of the unaltered Magesterium (teaching) of the Catholic Church. The same is true for the Catholic Church's opposing same sex so called "marriage". The same is true of opposition to homosexual "marriage", which trumps Pelosi's puerile justification supporting same sex marriage as her Catholic faith (allegedly) teacher her that that she must oppose all forms of discrimination.

 Faithful critics both instead and out of the Catholic Church grumble that former Speaker Pelosi should be excommunicated for her beliefs. Excommunication should never be used in a punitive secular sense, as it is intended to save the soul from eternal damnation. However, excommunication proclamation need not be issued by an ecclesial court under canon law ( ferendae sententiae). A Catholic's very actions may ipso facto result in a latae sententiae excommunication, which can include an apostate, a heritic or a schismatic. Often a bishop will convey this warning in private. For all we know, this may have already happened.

When former Speaker Pelosi visited the Vatican in 2009, she was granted a fifteen minute meeting with the His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, with no press or photographers present. Pelosi issued a press release which complimented the Roman pontiff for standing for religious freedom and praised the Church's leadership for fighting poverty, hunger and global warming. The Vatican press office had a chillier characterization of the brief greeting. The papal statement indicated:

His Holiness took the opportunity [of the brief greeting with Mrs. Pelosi -ed] to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoins all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.

It sounds like the Supreme Pastor of the Catholic flock was pretty clear about when life begins. This comes on top of the 2002 doctrinal note "The Participation of Catholics in Political Life," which states rather succinctly that politicians who profess to be Catholic have a "grave and clear obligation" to oppose any law that attacks human life. The brief greeting might have sotto voce also been a word to the wise.

Well, Mrs. Pelosi persists in purusing a public policies that is anathamatic to Catholics. Worse, the House Minority Leader justifies her progressive political positions in faith while misrepresenting the Magesterium. In this environment, Canon 915 seems applicable to this layman which denies the Eucharist to someone who obstinantly persists in grave sin. Even though Washington's Archbishop Donald John Cardinal Wuerl has recently been appointed to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Wuerl seems chary about keeping pro-abortion Catholic politicians from participating in Communion. Based on Monsignor Charles Pope's recent reflection, it is dubious that such action would be applied.

It is galling that a Cafeteria Catholic extols spiritual junk food for mass consumption instead of the Divine Feast under the illusion of obeying "The Word". In a pluralistic representative Republic, it is not uncommon for a politician to promote positions which an individual finds repugnant. What seems unjust is that leader lying about the moral underpinnings of these positions when it directly contradicts clear tenants of Catholic faith. If she wants to rationalize her positions on abortion, contraception and same sex "marriage" through a veneer of  religiosity, she would do well to swim the Tiber in reverse, as her secuclar humanist progressive political  positions would be welcomed with open arms among most Episcopalians or even Unitarians. But such a principled act would fail to pander to a large voting bloc of Catholics.

Forcing Catholics Institutions Out of Charity Not Fine with US

The HHS final rule on qualified health plans imposes a Contraception Mandate that poses a poison pill for faithful Catholic and other institutions that believe that life begins at conception. Mark Rienzi, the Becket Fund For Religious Liberty attorney who represents Ave Maria University, Belmont Abbey College, Colorado Christian University and ETWN , is confident that the outcome in federal courts will come out the right way and protect religious liberty in America. However, if Rienzi’s optimism is misplaced, he believes that Catholics could end up engaging in civil disobedience against an unjust law.

  The civil disobedience with religious liberty protestors will not be like the sit-ins of the civil rights movement. Instead, Rienzi anticipates institutions not paying for the contraception, sterilizations and abortifacients. This would lead to crippling fines which eventually would put the charitable and educational missions out of existence. 


In a perverse way, such a shuttering of Catholic identity might be the aim of the Obama Administration. The Obama Administration budgetary proposal for FY2013 sought to limit the deductability of charitable contributions for those making over $250,000 a year, exactly the demographic which makes substantial gifts to non-profit causes. As for Catholic hospitals, they make up 15% of all bed-space in America and they are often the only provider in rural regions. If conscientious Christians cede the field due to the Contraception Mandate (or being fined out of existence), the federal government will dominate the health-care playing field and be a major step towards a single-payer system. 

It is not fine to force charitable institutions from living their faith by penalizing them for not acquiescing. It may be time to recall the Man of All Seasons, St. Thomas More who was a martyr for not submitting to an unjust law proffered from English King Henry VIII, the secular power that be.






h/t: CNSnews