Posted by: Fr. C. | February 12, 2012

One Way or Another

A Wall Street Journal Outlook piece late last week noted,

“Here’s a conundrum: The White House wants to impose its birth-control ideology on all Americans, including those for whom sponsoring or subsidizing such services violates their moral conscience. The White House also wants to avoid a political backlash from this blow to religious freedom.”

The writer correctly observed that these goals are irreconcilable.
Now, President Obama has floated: “The government will now write a rule that says the best things in life are ‘free,’ including contraception. Thus a political mandate will be compounded by an uneconomic one—in other words, behold the soul of ObamaCare.”

Behold the soul (or lack thereof) of ObamaCare, indeed. One way or another, the mandate is forced down the throats of Christions who object. In the arrogance of the administration, they have “compromised” on the the original Health and Human Services regulation, which mandated that all religious institutions except for houses of worship would be  required to cover birth control, including hospitals, schools and
charities.

Now, under the new, improved, rule, which the White House stresses is
“an accommodation” and not a compromise, nonprofit religious
organizations won’t have to directly cover birth control and can opt
out.

Aha! Shazam! No problem–except that the insurers they retain to cover their employees can’t opt out. In the words of the immortal Blondie, “One way, or another, I’m gonna’ getcha’, getcha’, getcha!”

Here’s the deal: St. Swithun’s Hospital decides not to cover birth control for employees on moral grounds. Nevertheless, a nurse on staff wants the coverage. So, the Obamandate will then require the insurerr required to offer contraceptive benefits in any event, at no cost to the nurse, or to any other worker. This is to nsure “access” to contraceptives. The costs will be passed along, somewhere, you betcha; and those with an objection will have the choice forced on them at not-so-arm’s length”

For the true believer in socialism in any of its forms, language means only what is necessary to accomplish the goal-the remaking of society to fit the socialist ideal. Marx, Lenin, Mao and a bunch of other humanitarians all articulated this principle.
So it is that, “if you like your health care, you can keep your health care” actually means that “you will accept the health care that we, the vanguard, have deemed appropriate.” An administration official admitted in a conference call with reporters that this was the goal all along.

The legal and moral standpoint, failure to resist this stuff is the death of the Constitution and of free exercise of conscience in this nation. This gets lost because we have been sold the desirability of “sexual freedom” (trans. “sex without responsibility”) through contraception.

From a societal and religious perspective, John Paul II of blessed memory warned of this. Thanks be to God, the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox bishops in the United States resisted the original plan, and the Roman Catholic bishops took a pass on the sequel late today.

The statement released by the Catholic Bishops conference said the proposal requires “careful moral analysis,” saying it did not appear to offer clear protection for self-insured religious employers or religious and secular for-profit and non-profit employers. The “compromise” proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deploy held convictions,” the Catholic bishops’s statement said. Pretty clear, that. No surrender.

The Episcopal church, of course, embraced the modernist dream-indeed, offering up a clergywoman and “theology professor” last night on the news to talk about the “blessings of abortion”. One need only to compare the Roman Catholic Church (1.4 billion and growing) and the Episcopal sect (maybe 700,000 left) to see the result.

Continuing Anglican bishops? Still a stunning silence-with the exception of the new Anglican Church in North America which supported the Roman Catholics’ right to freedom of conscience. At least that’s something. Remember: contraception on demand has been a part of the Anglican/Episcopalian ethos since the 1930s. This already was engrained in many Episcopal clergy even before the 1978 split and has carried over into traditionalist Anglican moral theology, whatever that is. The declining birthrate, paralleled in “mainstram” Protestant denominations, is evident in the miniscule and declining membership rates of these groups.

In the meantime, the Western and Eastern Churches are left to defend the Christian standard and with it, the Constitution, while other religious leaders await the spring catalogues from vestment sellers.

Let us hope and pray that this fall we can say to the would-be-robbers of conscience, Christianity and Constitutional rights, “One way or another I’m gonna lose ya…” (With apoligies to, and appreciation for, Blondie)

Posted by: Fr. C. | February 3, 2012

Roman Catholic Church Rejects Surrender Terms from Obama

An absolutely outstanding article. I am very heartened that there are leaders in the Church willing to take a clear stand on this assault on freedom of religion/conscience. (We are still looking for a statement from our own “front office” on this, or any other major moral issue of the last few years. I have reprinted the article in its entirety.

By Cliff Kincaid, Director, AIM Center for Investigative Journalism

My Catholic priest, Father Larry Swink, delivered a homily on Sunday that I told him would make headlines. In the toughest sermon I have ever heard from a pulpit, he attacked the Obama Administration as evil, even demonic, and warned of religious persecution ahead. What was also newsworthy about the sermon was that he cited The Washington Post in agreement—not on the subject of the Obama Administration being evil, but on the matter of its abridgment of the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is extraordinary and unprecedented. The Catholic Church is in open revolt against the Obama Administration, with Fr. Swink noting from the pulpit that priests across the archdiocese were joining the call on Sunday to rally Catholics to resistance against the U.S. Government. He said we are entering a time of religious persecution and that Catholics and others will have to make a final decision about which side they are on.

The issue is what the Catholic Bishops have called a “literally unconscionable” edict by the Obama Administration demanding that sterilization, abortifacients and contraception be included in virtually all health plans.

At a time when the media are full of reports about who is ahead and behind in the polls, and who will win the next Republican presidential primary, this incredible uprising in the Catholic Church is something that could not only overshadow the political campaign season, but also may have a major impact on the ultimate outcome—if Republicans know how to handle it. This matter goes beyond partisan politics to the growing perception of an unconstitutional Obama Administration assault on religious freedom. To hear the Catholic Bishops and Priests describe it, our constitutional republic and our freedoms hang in the balance.

The administration claims there is a religious exemption in the mandate, but the bishops say it is so narrow that it fails to cover the vast majority of faith-based organizations, including Catholic hospitals, universities and service organizations that help millions every year. “Ironically,” they say, “not even Jesus & his disciples would have qualified.”

The bishops go on, “Now that the Administration has refused to recognize the Constitutional conscience rights of organizations and individuals who oppose the mandate, the bishops are now urging Catholics and others of good will to fight this unprecedented attack on conscience rights and religious liberty.”

Interestingly, The Washington Post, as Father Swink indicated, agrees with the bishops. The paper said, “In this circumstance, requiring a religiously affiliated employer to spend its own money in a way that violates its religious principles does not make an adequate accommodation for those deeply held views. Having recognized the principle of a religious exemption, the administration should have expanded it.”

So why would the administration pick a major fight with the Catholic Church? There are two main reasons. (1) The administration wants to please its progressive and feminist, secular pro-abortion base. (2) The administration believes Catholics are divided on the issue and will ignore their leaders and follow Obama.

Support for the latter explanation comes in the form of the Obama Administration’s efforts to co-opt the Catholic Church, primarily through appointing nominal Catholics to high-level positions in government and keeping funding going to the church for “social justice” causes. Another player in this effort is the hedge-fund billionaire George Soros, an atheist who nevertheless has found groups that are “Catholic in name only” to accept his financial largesse. These groups, including Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, are designed to give the impression that Catholics are less concerned about issues like stopping abortion and protecting the sanctity of traditional marriage than passing government health care. The Obama/Soros gamble may be backfiring.

It’s true that the bishops went along with Obama’s health care scheme, even lobbying on its behalf. But now they seem to be realizing that the plan was a Trojan Horse designed to force population control measures on the people of the United States. It will be difficult for the bishops to continue working with the administration on other issues, like immigration. They have drawn a line in the sand. They cannot back down.

Father Larry Swink of Jesus The Divine Word Catholic Church in Huntingtown, Maryland, is not alone in his tough language. Pittsburgh Bishop David A. Zubik posted a letter on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh’s website that said, “It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States, ‘To Hell with you!’ There is no other way to put it.” He added, “This whole process of mandating these guidelines undermines the democratic process itself. In this instance, the mandate declares pregnancy a disease, forces a culture of contraception and abortion on society, all while completely bypassing the legislative process.”

You know it’s serious when the bishops are talking about heaven and hell.

Indeed, Fr. Swink opened his discussion of what he described as the evil nature of the Obama Administration by reading from scripture about Jesus casting out demons. He saw the order on health care coverage as the start of religious persecution. The congregation joined him in calls of “Amen” when he challenged them to stand tall with the church.

You cannot expect the secular Washington Post to go along with such rhetoric. But even its liberal editorial writer saw the ramifications of the health care order, perhaps anticipating the confrontation that we now see developing. From the point of view of this liberal paper, the Obama Administration is not only undermining religious freedom but risking a major backlash to its overall “progressive” agenda and even a second term in office.

Some may see this battle as just another church-state dust-up that will be resolved through litigation. But when apocalyptic imagery is used, such as what I heard at my church on Sunday, one must wonder if there is an awakening on the part of the Catholic community and if there is something else going on here besides politics as usual. In short, is the Catholic Church beginning to finally recognize the real nature of the Obama Administration?

Posted by: Fr. C. | February 1, 2012

A Modest Victory

From the National Association of Scholars

Victory for Freedom of Conscience in Ward v. Polite
January 27, 2012
PRINCETON, NJ (January 27, 2012)—The National Association of Scholars applauded the ruling today by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Julea Ward and in defense of freedom of conscience.

Julea Ward was a student in the counseling program at Eastern Michigan University who was expelled from the program after she asked permission to refer a gay client to another counselor. Ms. Ward, citing her Christian beliefs, was willing to counsel the client but not to “affirm” his homosexual behavior.

The National Association of Scholars filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case just over a year ago, which states, “In a society where people—both counselors and clients—hold very different moral and religious views, it makes perfect sense that referrals would be a legitimate and valuable option for counselors who foresee a potential conflict with the client‘s goals.”

Today’s court decision corresponds with this concept. “Tolerance is a two-way street. Otherwise, the rule mandates orthodoxy, not anti-discrimination,” the opinion states. “A reasonable jury could find that the university dismissed Ward from its counseling program because of her faith-based speech, not because of any legitimate pedagogical objective. A university cannot compel a student to alter or violate her belief systems based on a phantom policy as the price for obtaining a degree.”

Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, said “The Sixth Circuit’s ruling is an important victory for freedom of speech and freedom of conscience in American higher education. Increasingly, students who dissent from the social views that prevail on liberal campuses are marginalized and in some cases stripped of their opportunity to pursue their education. The Court recognized that this is what happened to Julea Ward and it decided the case in a manner that should serve as a warning to other universities that discriminate against individuals under the pretext of upholding ‘non-discrimination’ principles.”

NAS advocates for excellence in higher education by encouraging commitment to high intellectual standards, individual merit, institutional integrity, good governance, and sound public policy. To learn more about NAS, visit http://www.nas.org.

Posted by: Fr. C. | January 17, 2012

An Anglo-Catholic Revival?

All,
With the Ordinariate in place in the Roman Catholic Church and a growing Western Rite in Orthodoxy especially in the Russian Church Outside of Russia, the question of the day is whether there remains a role for traditional Anglo-Catholicism?
The numbers, certainly among the continuing churches, are not encouraging. For example, the Anglican Catholic Church, arguably the “big dog” in the continuing Anglican constellation, announced that it had declined to a mere 3,800 souls in the United States (albeit growing in Africa and India).
As well, there appears to be a doctrinal incoherence in these groups that ranges from an odd form of neo-Calvinism, to reinvented Protestant Episcopalianism, to an ultra-montaine, ornate “show” catholicism with little behind ritual and the pagentry.
Are Anglo-Catholics headed the way of the Shakers, or is there a group out there with a core understanding of English Catholicism and the dedication to spark a revival?
With blessings for a happy and healthy 2012!
CHN+

Posted by: Fr. C. | August 17, 2011

Orthodoxy and Islam Conference

“Orthodoxy and Islam: Crisis and Opportunity” is a conference Saint Stephen’s is hosting Friday, Saturday and Sunday, August 19th – 21st.

This unique conference is designed to provide Orthodox Christians with new resources, perspectives and understanding on the complex topic of Islam, both to educate as well as to equip the faithful to engage with Muslims they meet, with the goal of sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ.

Featuring respected authors, speakers and pastors:

Fr. Daniel Byantoro, founder of the Indonesian Orthodox Church, author and convert from Islam

Raymond Ibrahim, author of “The Al Queda Reader: The Essential Texts of Osama Bin Laden’s Terrorist Organization,” Assoc. Director of the Middle East Forum

Anthony Davar, convert from Islam and Orthodox writer/missionary

Ralph Sidway, author of “Facing Islam”

Session one begins with brief Vespers Friday, August 19th at 7:00pm.

Sessions two through five begin with brief morning prayers Saturday, August 20th, at 10:00am.

The closing session will follow the concelebration of the Divine Liturgy and lunch together on Sunday, August 21st, at 10:30am.

All sessions will be held at Saint Stephen the First Martyr Orthodox Mission, 3560 Shawnee Road, Lima, Ohio 45806.

A requested donation of $20 per person ($30 per family) includes refreshments Friday, and lunch Saturday and Sunday.

To register, email fr.mark.hodges@juno.com

Join us for a weekend conference of solid teaching and sure inspiration, as we confront one of the most pressing issues of our time.

Posted by: Fr. C. | August 17, 2011

An Infestation

World Net Daily reports that this week, a three-day conference hosted by the CIA on “homegrown radicalization” was supposed to have taken place at CIA headquarters. It did not. The conference was abruptly canceled – or, softening the blow, “postponed.” Was there pressure from what we might (and should) call a certain “homegrown radical” group – the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)?

Here are the known facts.

On Monday, July 18, CAIR issued a press release headlined: “CAIR Asks CIA to Drop Islamophobic Trainer.” CAIR national executive director Nihad Awad wrote a letter to now-former CIA Director Leon Panetta to that effect. The rest of the release is less transparent.

In referencing an NPR report that slammed one counterterrorism trainer by name, former FBI agent John Guandolo, for “allegedly smearing” an “Ohio Muslim” in a presentation, CAIR noted that an entirely different trainer, unnamed, was “scheduled to hold a similar session in August for the CIA.” (Guandolo was among 19 co-authors of “Shariah: the Threat to America.”) The August CIA “session” appears to be the driver of both the CAIR release and letter asking the CIA, as the headline put it, to “Drop Islamophobic Trainer.”

On Friday, July 22, an email from the CIA informed hundreds of confirmed attendees that the whole August “radicalization” conference was of. “The sponsors – in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security – have decided to delay the conference so it can include insights from, among other sources, the new National Strategy for Counterterrorism, in an updated agenda,” the email said. The goal “is to ensure that conference participants receive material that is as current and comprehensive as possible.”

This is pretty lame, even for the neutered CIA. But, waitm there is more.”Updated agenda” is Washington-speak for gutted agenda. With the new White House counterterrorism strategy as a source of insights du jour, the holes in the original conference lineup will be filled to the brim with the see-no-jihad mush that the strategy dishes up.

It gets worse. The reporter notes hearing from multiple sources that pressure brought by CAIR, as publicly announced by CAIR, played a crucial role in the CIA decision to pull the plug on its conference. This means, to repeat, that a “homegrown radical” group appears to be influencing what is known in the strategy world as the “information battle space” at the CIA. [Read more: West/WorldNetDaily/11August2011]

Who is manful enough to stand up against this nonsense? Or, will we simply give in?

Posted by: Fr. C. | August 16, 2011

Western Rite Conference

This Conference will be held over October 4-7, 2011 is sponsored by the Fraternity of St Gregory the Great of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. It will be held at Mt Alvernia Retreat Center. It is located in the village of Wappinger Falls, New York, on 204 acres overlooking the Hudson Valley in Dutchess County.

The Antiochian Western Rite Clergy will be invited to be with the ROCOR-WR clergy in this historic event which we pray will be the first of many. There will also be a gathering of Benedictines and possibly their Oblates at the same time.

The conference is open to clergy and laity.

You can get more information here http://westernorthodox.info/

Posted by: Fr. C. | August 9, 2011

A Note on Co-Ed Dorms

For you parents with children thinking about colleges (and grand-parents who wish to offer sound advice), Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of the National Organization for Marriage offers a good Christian analysis of the state of university housing.

The genesis of her story is the action by John Garvey, the new President of Catholic University, to return that to single sex dorms. She reports that, “Many feathers were ruffled. It is a measure of the unisex madness in which we have become enmeshed that a Catholic university’s decision to house unmarried young men and women in separate dorms could be described as ‘controversial.’”

Garvey announced his decision in a Wall Street Journal op ed. He cited his own experience as the father of five kids, and a handful of social science studies to affirm the obvious: When adolescents freed from the constraints of family life, are tossed into the same dorms, they are more likely to do dumb things. Garvey wrrote that, “Christopher Kaczor at Loyola Marymount points to a surprising number of studies showing that students in co-ed dorms (41.5%) report weekly binge drinking more than twice as often as students in single-sex housing (17.6%). Similarly, students in co-ed housing are more likely (55.7%) than students in single-sex dorms (36.8%) to have had a sexual partner in the last year–and more than twice as likely to have had three or more.”

Gallagher asks the intuitive question, “Do we really need social science data to demonstrate this? Apparently so.”

She cites a well-designed 2009 peer-reviewed study by Brian Willoughby and Jason Carroll, “The Impact of Living in Co-ed Resident Halls on Risk-taking Among College Students” which confirms Garvey’s sense of the situation. The study, published in the Journal of American College Health, relied on data from Project R.E.A.D.Y., a multi-site research project dedicated to investigating various aspects of emerging adulthood development.

The sample consisted of 510 unmarried undergraduate students recruited during the 2004–2005 academic year from five colleges– a small, private liberal arts college, a medium-sized, religious university, and three large public universities.  No surprise in the results:

Students living in co-ed housing were more likely than students living in gender-specific housing to binge drink , consume alcohol, have more permissive sexual attitudes, and have more recent sexual partners. On-campus housing environments impact college student risk behaviors.

You can read the full article at the blog of the Ruth Institute-a fearless defender of traditional marriage and family. http://www.ruthblog.org/

I would echo the author’s plaudits to Garvey for courage, as well as common sense. Catholic University apparently is the very first university in the history of United States to return to single sex dorms, after abandoning them to go coed for no particular reason in 1982.

Garvey wrote, “I believe that intellect and virtue are connected. They influence one another. Some say the intellect is primary. If we know what is good, we will pursue it. . . . The goals we set for ourselves are brought into focus by our moral vision.” Amen!

The question, then, is who is addressing these issues?  Certainly not liberal Protestant denominations and the colleges and universities they support.  In the coming months, it will be interesting to see how things line up on the issue and who has the stomach to push back against the spirit of the world.

Posted by: Fr. C. | July 18, 2011

Of Sex and Students

The California State Assembly recently passed and Gov. Brown signed, SB 48, mandating homosexual-friendly instruction in all California public schools, K-12. The mandates the inclusion of the historical contributions of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans in the state’s textbooks.  Starting as early as the 2013-2014 school year, the FAIR Education Act, sponsored by state Senator Mark Leno, a Democrat, requires the California Board of Education and local school districts to include the curriculum in their lesson plans.

The Associated Press on Friday reported that the Sacramento-based group Capitol Resources Institute has started the process for a statewide vote to overturn the law.

In the meantime, Catholic University of America recently announced that they would abolish co-ed dorms and move to all single sex dorms.  Apparently, the co-ed dorms were ont fostering an atmosphere that was in harmony with the moral standards adhhrered to by the Church.  In the wake of that decision, a DC attorney announced that he will sue them for sex segregation which he claims violates the DC Human Rights Law.  Ed.-Let’s see whether the CUA attorneys cave on this one.

Posted by: Fr. C. | July 18, 2011

Who will stand up?

The folks at the Manhattan Declaration website report the following assault on faith in the public square.

Many of you may be familiar with the recent news of Texas Governor Rick Perry and his call to all state governors as well as President Obama to join him in declaring
August 6, 2011 as a Day of Prayer and Fasting. His urge is for our Nation to
seek God’s guidance and wisdom in addressing the issues facing our communities,
states and nation. A statement on the Governor’s website reads: 

“Given the trials that beset our nation and world, from the global economic downturn to natural disasters, the lingering danger of terrorism and continued debasement of our culture, I believe it is time to convene the leaders from each of our United States in a day of prayer and fasting, like that described in the book of Joel,” Gov. Perry said. “I urge all Americans of faith to pray on that day for the
healing of our country, the rebuilding of our communities and the restoration
of enduring values as our guiding force.”

Not to let any good deed go unpunished, the Freedom from Religion Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the governor’s proclamation violates the Establishment clause of the US Constitution by showing preference to evangelical Christian religious beliefs; yet another effort to diminish the foundation and culture of which this nation was founded on. Our founding forefathers have opposing reference for the institution of government and religion, and moreover, prayer. George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, Thomas McKean and others all made clear that religion was foundational to their leadership and life. It is important now that we as a unified body stand behind this charge to sanctify this August, 6
as one that God will have favor on.

The question of the day is whether there is a group of the faithful willing to stand up as a body to counterclaim against entities like the Freedom from Religion Foundation?  Who has the guts?

 

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories