The current artificial crisis over the draconian HHS mandate has been manufactured by the Administration even though or perhaps because it tramples 1st Amendment freedoms. It's difficult to believe that the Administration's conflict with the Catholic Church was unanticipated and unintentional; it is one more instance of them being either complete idiots or wholly evil. Of course, it's also possible that they're both.
In 2008, the majority of Catholics in the US voted for Obama. The Catholic hierarchy, though less blindly committed to Democratic policies than their predecessors, maintained a generally favorable view toward Democratic social welfare schemes. They have a long history of supporting the concept of universal healthcare. Until it became clear that Obamacare would be used to advance abortion and contraception, the bishops supported it. HHS could have easily crafted a regime of mandates that provided cover for Catholics and Catholic institutions who support Obama and Obamacare but who want to maintain the appearance of adherence to Catholic doctrine: Fr. Jenkins of Notre Dame, Sr. Keehan of the Catholic Health Association, the Campaign for Human Development, America and Commonweal magazines, etc. While events have shown that some members of this motley crew have placed allegiance to their Progressive ideology over their obedience to their bishops and the teachings of their church, the Administration could have gotten much broader support from prominent Catholics and Catholic organizations with little if any real cost in support from radical feminists and the Abortion industry.
Nevertheless, the Administration's political calculus and/or blind ideology led them to make a very public, very resolute and very radical stand on 'women's health issues,' AKA: contraception, sterilization and abortifacient drugs.
The Administration very publicly announced an extreme policy on the only issue that the bishops might balk at. And they left no room in it for sophistry or Jesuitry by the administration's Catholic lap-dogs. They refused to waver from a policy that directly puts the bishops and faithful Catholic organizations in a position where they must either choose to serve Caesar or to serve God.
So far, the bishops have hewn to St. Thomas More's example of being "the kings good servant, but God's first." Lord preserve us from having to follow too far in his footsteps.
On March 2nd, Cardinal Dolan of NY, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, issued a
letter to his brother bishops. He made it clear that the conflict is not about contraception but about religious freedom and the relationship between the secular society and religious associations in a free society:
"How fortunate that we as a body have had opportunities during our past plenary assemblies to manifest our strong unity in defense of religious freedom. We rely on that unity now more than ever as HHS seeks to define what constitutes church ministry and how it can be exercised." "Since January 20, when the final, restrictive HHS Rule was first announced, we have become certain of two things: religious freedom is under attack, and we will not cease our struggle to protect it. We recall the words of our Holy Father Benedict XVI to our brother bishops on their recent ad limina visit: 'Of particular concern are certain attempts being made to limit that most cherished of American freedoms, the freedom of religion.'” "We have made it clear in no uncertain terms to the government that we are not at peace with its invasive attempt to curtail the religious freedom we cherish as Catholics and Americans. We did not ask for this fight, but we will not run from it."
Cardinal Dolan made one observation, however, that gave me pause - as if the Obama administration's assault on religious freedom and its radical anti-family and anti-life agenda weren't enough.
Cardinal Dolan described "a recent meeting between staff of the bishops’ conference and the White House staff, our staff members asked directly whether the broader concerns of religious freedom—that is,
revisiting the straight-jacketing mandates, or broadening the maligned exemption—are all off the
table. They were informed that they are. So much for “working out the wrinkles.”
Instead, they
advised the bishops’ conference that we should listen to the “enlightened” voices of
accommodation, such as the recent, hardly surprising yet terribly unfortunate editorial in
America.
The White House seems to think we bishops simply do not know or understand
Catholic teaching and so, taking a cue from its own definition of religious freedom, now has
nominated its own handpicked official Catholic teachers."(emphasis mine)
That remark reminded me of something: The
Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association.
Nah, couldn't be. Certainly, in a country whose Constitution contains the explicit words, "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion nor the free exercise thereof" the government would never consider mandating what is or isn't a religious organization, prescribing what religious organizations may or may not do or deciding who does or does not speak for a particular religion. That is too great a violation of the Constitution and the long tradition of religious freedom in this country. But that is exactly what Cardinal Dolan shows that the Obama administration is doing. That is also exactly the official policy of the Communist regime in Beijing.
But what would lead a reasonable person to suspect an American president of aspiring to have the sort of totalitarian control exercised by Hu Jintao?
Maybe the president's on comments?
Jonah Goldberg observed recently, "
He's even reportedly expressed envy for Chinese President Hu Jintao. "Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China," the New York Times reported last year. "As one official put it, 'No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao's words in Tahrir Square.'"
I haven't read "Dreams from My Father," but I half expect to see a pocket-sized version with a red cover to hit the streets if Obama wins a second term.
