This afternoon, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops released its report on the causes of the sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests from 1950 through 2010. The study was conducted by the John Jay College Research Team at the request of a National Review Board, which was implemented by the USCCB Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.

The report, some 152 pages in length, is “the second of two studies produced by researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice about sexual abuse by Catholic priests.” The first report, the Nature and Scope study, was issued in February 2004 and focused on the extent of the cases involving the abuse of minors by priests.

This most recent study has determined the following:

• There is no single “cause” of sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests. However, the report recognizes that there were significant social and cultural changes in the 1960s and 1970s that resulted in greater levels of deviant behavior throughout society, including among Catholic priests.
• The vast majority of abuse cases occurred in the 1960s and 1970s with a noticeable decline beginning in late 1980s, which continued thru the 1990s to the present day.
• Many individuals who would later abuse minors as priests attended major free-standing seminaries; however, there is no direct correlation between the occurrence of abuse and the type of seminaries the individuals attended.
• There is no significant empirical evidence to suggest that certain personality traits were linked to the abuse of minors.
• Most of the priests who had been accused of sexual abuse are not pedophiles.
• No evidence supports the claim that celibacy has played a significant role in the abuse of minors.
• There is no evidence to support the claim that homosexuality is the cause of child sexual abuse by priests.
• Situational factors and the opportunity to abuse played a considerable role in the onset and continuation of sexual abuse of minors.
• In the mid-1990s, the Church established Five Principles to guide diocesan response to reports of sexual abuse. However, in many dioceses, the implementation of these Five Principles was rather inadequate.
• In the past, the response of diocesan officials to an allegation of abuse was to focus on the priest-abuser. However, as more cases have come to light in the past couple of decades, the Catholic Church has undergone significant organizational change in an effort to promote increased transparency and accountability.

Most of the information above was gathered via the USCCB Live feed on Twitter.

As the release of this report has been publicized in many media outlets over the last few days, many have already expressed their criticisms of the bishops’ findings. However, as Archbishop Dolan has remarked in a statement on the release of the study, the findings of this report are not from the USCCB; rather, the findings are a report to the US episcopal conference.

It must be clearly understood that this report, in no way, is attempting to make excuses for the instances of sexual abuse by Catholic priests. Furthermore, the report does not take responsibility away from bishops and local dioceses for failing to confront the problem of sexual abuse by priests. The report is simply an effort to help the Church understand the reasons for the abuse. In the end, the Causes and Context study will allow the Catholic Church to continue to adapt formation programs in an effort to ensure that the future occurrence of sexual abuse by priests will be eradicated.

Please click here to view the report in its entirety [PDF].

Source: USCCB | The above document is the official release from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and was used with permission.

Credit: AP | Julie Jacobson

This morning, in a much anticipated election day, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops surprised all of us by electing Archbishop Timothy Dolan (New York) as the next conference head.

Over recent weeks, it was made clear that there was quite a bit of division within the bishops about who would be the choice to lead the conference. Most of us assumed that tradition would continue, meaning the present Vice-President, Bishop Gerald Kicanas (Tuscon), would be elected President. I guess the bishops aren’t as predictable as we thought.

Archbishop Dolan bested Bishop Kicanas, winning the third ballot by a vote of 128-111.

Shortly after the election, Bishop Kicanas issued the following statement:

A priest’s life is all about service – service to the People of God, service to the Church and its mission. I have been honored these past three years with the opportunity to serve our Church, its mission and the People of God as the vice president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. I have grown in my regard for the staff of the Conference, especially Msgr. David Malloy and the senior staff, for the untiring work they do on our behalf.

Serving as vice president has been a marvelous experience.

I respect the wisdom of my brother bishops in choosing their new president and vice president. I greatly appreciated their expressions of thanks to me for my service as vice president. Archbishop Timothy Dolan has been a long time friend since our seminary work together. I know of his great wit, jovial spirit, keen ability to relate to people in a deeply personal way and his exceptional leadership qualities. These will certainly serve the Conference well as he begins his term as president.

I look forward to continuing to do whatever I can to further the work of the Conference. I really look forward to being able to focus on the needs of our Diocese – supporting our priests, women and men religious, deacons and lay people in the Diocese of Tucson, whom I have grown to love deeply.

Source: Diocese of Tuscon | PDF

Here are the results of the results from all of today’s elections:

• Vice-President: Archbishop Joseph Kurtz (Louisville): elected 147-91 on a third ballot run-off with Archbishop Charles Chaput (Denver)
• Treasurer: Bishop Michael Bransfield (Wheeling-Charleston): elected 123-114 vote over Bishop Paul Bradley (Kalamazoo)
• Chair of the Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance: Archbishop Timothy Broglio (Military Services)
• Chair of the Committee on Catholic Education: Bishop Joseph McFadden (Harrisburg
• Chair of the Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs: Bishop Denis J. Madden (Auxiliary of Baltimore)
• Chair of the Committee on Evangelization and Catechesis: Bishop David L. Ricken (Green Bay)
• Chair of the Committee on Child and Youth Protection: Bishop Daniel Conlon (Steubenville)
• Chair of the Committee on International Justice and Peace: Archbishop Edwin O’Brien (Baltimore)
• USCCB General Secretary: Monsignor Ronny Jenkins (priest of the Diocese of Austin)

]]> http://www.thomaspringle.com/2010/11/dolan-elected/feed/ 0 http://www.thomaspringle.com/2010/10/usccb-presidential-nominees/ http://www.thomaspringle.com/2010/10/usccb-presidential-nominees/#comments Sat, 30 Oct 2010 15:58:52 +0000 Tom Pringle http://www.thomaspringle.com/?p=2117

USCCB November 2009 Meeting

Back in September, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) released the names of American prelates who had been selected as nominees for various leadership positions within the conference. This week, the nominees for the conference president and vice-president were released.

According to the USCCB statement, the “new president will succeed Cardinal Francis George, OMI, of Chicago, who completes his three-year term at the meeting. His successor assumes the presidency at the end of the meeting.” Below are the names of those candidates (in alphabetical order by last name):

• Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond of New Orleans
• Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, California
• Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, OFM, Cap., of Denver
• Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of New York
• Bishop Gerald F. Kicanas of Tucson, Arizona (currently Vice-President of the USCCB)
• Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky
• Bishop George Murry, SJ, of Youngstown, Ohio
• Archbishop Edwin F. O’Brien of Baltimore
• Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron of Detroit
• Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City

According to conference by-laws, “the election the president will take place first from among the list of 10 candidates,” followed by the election of the  vice-president, who is “elected from the remaining nine candidates.” If a nominee does not secure more than 50 percent of the vote, the conference will take a second vote. In the case of a third vote, only two nominees will appear on the ballot.

In the end, it is expected that Bishop Gerald Kicanas will be elected to the presidency, as is the historical trend. So, all the attention will be on who is selected as the next Vice-President. We’ll have to wait and see. Stay close!

Source: USCCB | http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-194.shtml

2009 Annual Meeting of the USCCB

This afternoon, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a press release detailing the upcoming annual meeting of the conference. This year’s conference gathering will take place in Baltimore, Maryland from November 15th to November 18th. Throughout those four days together, the U.S. bishops will elect several new heads of committees and some key positions within the conference.

According to the news release, the following committees will receive new heads this year:

• Committee on Canonical Affairs and Church Governance: Archbishop Timothy Broglio, Archbishop for the Military Services, and Bishop Randolph Calvo, Bishop of Reno, have been nominated for this position.
• Committee on Catholic Education: Bishop Joseph McFadden, Bishop of Harrisburg, and Bishop David O’Connell, Coadjutor Bishop of Trenton, have been nominated to lead this post.
• Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs: Nominated for this position are Bishop Ronald Gainer, Diocese of Lexington, and Bishop Denis Madden, Auxiliary Bishop of the Baltimore Archdiocese.
• Committee on Evangelization and Catechesis: Nominated for this ever important post are Bishop Paul Coakley of the Diocese of Salina and Bishop David Ricken, Bishop of the Green Bay Diocese.
• Committee of International Justice and Peace: Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn and Archbishop Edwin O’Brien of the Archdiocese of Baltimore have been nominated to lead this position.
• Committee on Child and Youth Protection: The bishops will elect either Bishop R. Daniel Conlon of Steubenville or Bishop Patrick Zurek of the Diocese of Amarillo to this position.

There are also several important conference positions open. During the four day gathering, the bishops will elect a new Conference Treasurer, President and Vice-President. The two bishops nominated for Treasurer are Bishop Paul Bradley of Kalamazoo and Bishop Michael Bransfield of Wheeling-Charleston. The nominations for President and Vice-President of the Conference will be chosen during the assembly.

This year’s assembly will be interesting to say the least. One topic of discussion that is sure to emerge is the implementation of the Third Edition of the Roman Missal. The bishops have already begun their efforts to inform the laity about the upcoming changes to the Mass, which take effect the first week of Advent 2011. While some of the changes do not necessarily make sense, the new translation will “foster a deeper awareness and appreciation of the mysteries being celebrated in the Liturgy.”

As we move towards November, let’s continue to keep the bishops in our prayers.

Participants Carry American Flag at Immigration Rally

This Thursday, July 29th, the controversial Arizona immigration law is set to take effect. While the majority of Americans agree with the passage and enactment of this law, the Church has opposed it from the beginning.

In the most recent show of opposition, Bishop Gerald Kicanas testified before the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on July 14th. In his testimony, the bishop of Tuscon remarked on the Arizona law, calling it an example of the frustration the American people have with Congress for the legislature’s laxity in passing immigration reform…

To read the full post, click here.

WASHINGTON—Pope Benedict XVI has named Msgr. Timothy Doherty, 59, pastor of St. Catherine of Siena Parish, in Dundee, Illinois, as Bishop of Lafayette in Indiana, and accepted the resignation of Bishop William Higi, 76, from pastoral governance of the diocese.

The appointment and resignation were publicized in Washington, May 12, by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, apostolic nuncio to the United States.

Timothy L. Doherty was born in Rockford, Illinois, September 29, 1950. He attended St. Mary’s Minor Seminary, Crystal Lake, Illinois, 1964-1968; St. Ambrose College, Davenport, Iowa; 1968-1972; North American College, Rome, 1972-1976; and the Pontifical Lateran University (Academia Alfonsiana), where he earned a Licentiate in Sacred Theology in 1982.

He was ordained a priest for the Diocese of Rockford, in 1976.

He earned a Ph.D., in Christian Ethics, from Loyola University, Chicago, in 1995.

Assignments after ordination included Associate Pastor, St. Peter Cathedral, Rockford, 1976-1981; Chairman, Religious Studies, Boylan Central Catholic High School, Rockford, 1982-1986; Assistant Principal, Marian Central Catholic High School, Woodstock, Illinois, 1986-1991.

In 1995 he was named Diocesan Ethicist for Health Care, a position he holds presently.

Other assignments included Parochial Administrator, St. James Parish, Lee, Illinois, 1999; Pastor, St. Mary Parish, Byron, Illinois, 1999-2007; Pastor, St. Catherine of Siena Parish, Dundee and St. Mary Mission Church, Gilberts, Illinois, 2007 to present.

Bishop Higi was named Bishop of Lafayette in 1984. He was ordained a priest for that diocese in 1959. He served there as an associate pastor, secretary to the bishop, vice-chancellor, chancellor and vicar general. While he was vicar general he was elected administrator of the diocese after the death of his predecessor in 1984.

The Diocese of Lafayette has 9,832 square miles. It has a population of 1,296,384 people, with 99,773, or eight per cent, of them Catholic.

SOURCE: USCCB

Pope Benedict XVI has named Archbishop José H. Gomez of San Antonio, 58, as Coadjutor Archbishop of Los Angeles.

The appointment was made public in Washington, April 6, by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, apostolic nuncio to the United States. As coadjutor bishop, Archbishop Gomez is in line to succeed the current diocesan archbishop, Cardinal Roger Mahony, 74, upon his retirement.

José Horacio Gomez was born in Monterrey, Mexico, December 26, 1951. He attended the National University of Mexico where he earned a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting. In college he joined Opus Dei, an institution founded by Saint Josemaria Escrivá to help people turn their work and daily activities into occasions for growing closer to God, serving other and improving society. Opus Dei became a personal prelature in 1982. Archbishop Gomez studied theology in Rome and at the University of Navarre in Spain, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in theology and a doctorate in moral theology. He was ordained a priest of Opus Dei, August 15, 1978, in Torreciudad, Spain.

After ordination he pursued pastoral work with college and high school students in Spain and Mexico. In 1987, he was sent to what was then the Diocese of Galveston-Houston to minister for Opus Dei in several capacities in Texas. He became a U.S. citizen in 1995.

As a priest, Father Gomez held positions with several U.S. Catholic organizations. Between 1995-1999, he was president of the National Association of Hispanic Priests (ANSH) and its executive director, 1999-2001. He was treasurer of the National Catholic Council of Hispanic Ministry, 1998-2001.

In 1999, he became the Vicar of Opus Dei for the State of Texas. Pope John Paul II appointed him Auxiliary Bishop of Denver, January 23, 2001. On December 29, 2004 the pope appointed him Archbishop of San Antonio.

As a member of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Archbishop Gomez was first chairman of the Committee on Cultural Diversity in the Church, and now chairs the Committee on National Collections’ Subcommittee for the Church in Latin America and the Task Force on the Spanish-language Bible. He is chair-elect of the Committee on Migration and a member of the Committee on Doctrine.

Cardinal Roger M. Mahony was appointed Archbishop of Los Angeles July 15, 1985. He was elevated to the College of Cardinals, June 28, 1991. Prior to this appointment he served as Auxiliary Bishop of Fresno, California, 1975-1980, and Bishop of Stockton, California, 1980-1985.

The Los Angeles Archdiocese, the largest Roman Catholic diocese in the United States, includes 8,762 square miles. It has a population of 11,606,889 with 4,176,296, or 36 percent, of them Catholic.

SOURCE: USCCB

PHOTO SOURCE: Texas Catholic Conference

Shortly after President Obama signed the legislation into law on Wednesday, I made the following statement on my Twitter page because I was completely dumbfounded that Americans had stooped to this level of immaturity: “People have been sending death threats to those in Congress who voted for the HCR bill?!?!? Needs to stop!!!” When did we begin viewing our fellow Americans, our brothers and sisters in Christ, as enemies. Well, I was not the only one experiencing that disappointment in my fellow Americans.

Today, Sr. Mary Ann Walsh, Director of Media Relations for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, issued the following statement on the USCCB Media blog:

The heat in the aftermath of passage of health care reform reveals the depth of feeling among those for and against the landmark bill that affects all Americans. Such heat, however, cannot justify the verbal and physical violence that has ensued.

If we needed health care because of the crisis affecting the sick, especially the weakest among us, we need even more a move toward civility, if not for our own betterment then at least for the betterment of our children.

Politics has become a kind of blood sport. News junkies over the weekend heard reports of crowds shouting racist remarks and individuals spitting at African American lawmakers, including John Lewis, who suffered violence years ago when he marched for Civil Rights. Surely he – and all of us – has a right to expect that that chapter of despicable, racist violence long over.

We’ve seen reports of homes and offices of lawmakers vandalized and heard of death threats. Anonymous messages are being left on voicemails – I even got one from a nun, for goodness sake. If that isn’t proof that we’ve gone astray I don’t know what is.

The wonderfully unedited Web may share some blame as it gives free reign to those who say whatever suits their strategic purpose, truthful or not. Their presentations – usually anonymous – underscore a significant failing of the Web, lack of editors and accountability.

We’ve seen columnists write with vitriol as they demonize those with whom they disagree. There’s a viciousness which goes beyond what can be called acerbic writing.

We need to address this climate.

The intolerance and incivility did not begin with legislation passed Sunday night. It is not unrelated to the divisions that exist in our country and, sadly, even in our church.

It starts with how we view others – as enemies rather than as fellow travelers on the journey of life. It includes whether or not we’re willing to give another the benefit of the doubt, accepting that their intentions are good, even if their goals differ from ours.

It involves accepting the fact that each of us is a child of God and precious to Him and our brother or sister.

It involves how we speak and terms for one another.

Last Tuesday, March 23, Cardinal Francis George, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, noted the bishops’ disappointment that the health reform legislation did not include all they sought, especially adequate protection of rights of conscience and guarantees that federal funds would not go for abortion services. But he also noted that politicians on both sides of the aisle had worked nobly for the protection of life and decried those who would vilify them. Even in disappointment, the bishops were civil and generous. There position is worth emulating.

In 1959, Pope John XXIII, in his first encyclical, “On Truth, Unity and Peace,” in a Spirit of Charity, quoted a maxim attributed to St. Augustine, “In essentials, unity, in non-essentials diversity, in all things charity.”

In all things charity surely is the message we all need today. It’s not a bad start to Holy Week.

SOURCE: USCCB Media Blog

PHOTO SOURCE: Los Angeles Times

Catholic Relief Services (CRS) has been overwhelmed with the outpouring of support from Catholics across the U.S. in response to the needs of earthquake survivors in Haiti. So far, the special collection from U.S. dioceses raised over $55 million for emergency help, and other contributions have brought in an additional $50 million. The USCCB Subcommittee for the Church in Latin America is partnering with CRS in the response. CRS is focusing now on rebuilding efforts—such as moving people from makeshift camps to temporary housing as the rainy station draws near—while the Bishops’ Advisory Group for Haiti of the Church in Latin America Committee will help rebuild the Church’s fabric and infrastructure in the Caribbean nation. This video shows how CRS put those donations to action in the days immediately following the quake.

For the latest updates on CRS’ relief efforts for survivors of the earthquake in Haiti, please visit CRS’ Haiti emergency landing page.

For information on how to make donations to help rebuild the Church in Haiti and updates go to the Haiti page of the National Collections office of the U.S. Bishops.

For the article with CRS video, please visit the USCCB Media Blog.

SOURCE: USCCB Media Blog

PHOTO SOURCE: Los Angeles Times

For nearly a century, the Catholic bishops of the United States have called for reform of our health care system so that all may have access to the care that recognizes and affirms their human dignity. Christian discipleship means, “working to ensure that all people have access to what makes them fully human and fosters their human dignity” (United States Catechism for Adults, page 454). Included among those elements is the provision of necessary and appropriate health care.

For too long, this question has gone unaddressed in our country. Often, while many had access to excellent medical treatment, millions of others including expectant mothers, struggling families or those with serious medical or physical problems were left unable to afford the care they needed. As Catholic bishops, we have expressed our support for efforts to address this national and societal shortcoming. We have spoken for the poorest and most defenseless among us. Many elements of the health care reform measure signed into law by the President address these concerns and so help to fulfill the duty that we have to each other for the common good. We are bishops, and therefore pastors and teachers. In that role, we applaud the effort to expand health care to all.

Nevertheless, for whatever good this law achieves or intends, we as Catholic bishops have opposed its passage because there is compelling evidence that it would expand the role of the federal government in funding and facilitating abortion and plans that cover abortion. The statute appropriates billions of dollars in new funding without explicitly prohibiting the use of these funds for abortion, and it provides federal subsidies for health plans covering elective abortions. Its failure to preserve the legal status quo that has regulated the government’s relation to abortion, as did the original bill adopted by the House of Representatives last November, could undermine what has been the law of our land for decades and threatens the consensus of the majority of Americans: that federal funds not be used for abortions or plans that cover abortions. Stranger still, the statute forces all those who choose federally subsidized plans that cover abortion to pay for other peoples’ abortions with their own funds. If this new law is intended to prevent people from being complicit in the abortions of others, it is at war with itself.

We share fully the admirable intention of President Obama expressed in his pending Executive Order, where he states, “it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services.” However, the fact that an Executive Order is necessary to clarify the legislation points to deficiencies in the statute itself. We do not understand how an Executive Order, no matter how well intentioned, can substitute for statutory provisions.

The statute is also profoundly flawed because it has failed to include necessary language to provide essential conscience protections (both within and beyond the abortion context). As well, many immigrant workers and their families could be left worse off since they will not be allowed to purchase health coverage in the new exchanges to be created, even if they use their own money.

Many in Congress and the Administration, as well as individuals and groups in the Catholic community, have repeatedly insisted that there is no federal funding for abortion in this statute and that strong conscience protection has been assured. Analyses that are being published separately show this not to be the case, which is why we oppose it in its current form. We and many others will follow the government’s implementation of health care reform and will work to ensure that Congress and the Administration live up to the claims that have contributed to its passage. We believe, finally, that new legislation to address its deficiencies will almost certainly be required.

As bishops, we wish to recognize the principled actions of the pro-life Members of Congress from both parties, in the House and the Senate, who have worked courageously to create legislation that respects the principles outlined above. They have often been vilified and have worked against great odds.

As bishops of the Catholic Church, we speak in the name of the Church and for the Catholic faith itself. The Catholic faith is not a partisan agenda, and we take this opportunity to recommit ourselves to working for health care which truly and fully safeguards the life, dignity, conscience and health of all, from the child in the womb to those in their last days on earth.

SOURCE: USCCB

PHOTO SOURCE: Reflections of a Theology Geek

For more on the position of the USCCB, please visit:

• Bishops to House of Representatives: Fix Flaws or Vote No on Health Reform Bill
  
• Health Care for Life and for All
• Include Immigrants on Health Care Reform
• US Bishops Provide Resources Explaining Flaws in Senate Health Care Bill
• Bipartisan Action to Advance Health Care Reform that Protects Human Life and Dignity
  

PHOTO SOURCE: Tom Pringle

The Catholic Bishops of the United States have long and consistently advocated for the reform of the American health care system. Their experience in health care and in Catholic parishes has acquainted them with the anguish of mothers who are unable to afford prenatal care, of families unable to ensure quality care for their children, and of those who cannot obtain insurance because of preexisting conditions.

Throughout the discussion on health care over the last year, the bishops have advocated a bipartisan approach to solving our national health care needs. They have urged that all who are sick, injured or in need receive necessary and appropriate medical assistance, and that no one be deliberately killed through an expansion of federal funding of abortion itself or of insurance plans that cover abortion. These are the provisions of the long standing Hyde amendment, passed annually in every federal bill appropriating funds for health care; and surveys show that this legislation reflects the will of the majority of our fellow citizens. The American people and the Catholic bishops have been promised that, in any final bill, no federal funds would be used for abortion and that the legal status quo would be respected.

However, the bishops were left disappointed and puzzled to learn that the basis for any vote on health care will be the Senate bill passed on Christmas Eve. Notwithstanding the denials and explanations of its supporters, and unlike the bill approved by the House of Representatives in November, the Senate bill deliberately excludes the language of the Hyde amendment. It expands federal funding and the role of the federal government in the provision of abortion procedures. In so doing, it forces all of us to become involved in an act that profoundly violates the conscience of many, the deliberate destruction of unwanted members of the human family still waiting to be born.

What do the bishops find so deeply disturbing about the Senate bill? The points at issue can be summarized briefly. The status quo in federal abortion policy, as reflected in the Hyde Amendment, excludes abortion from all health insurance plans receiving federal subsidies. In the Senate bill, there is the provision that only one of the proposed multi-state plans will not cover elective abortions – all other plans (including other multi-state plans) can do so, and receive federal tax credits. This means that individuals or families in complex medical circumstances will likely be forced to choose and contribute to an insurance plan that funds abortions in order to meet their particular health needs.

Further, the Senate bill authorizes and appropriates billions of dollars in new funding outside the scope of the appropriations bills covered by the Hyde amendment and similar provisions. As the bill is written, the new funds it appropriates over the next five years, for Community Health Centers for example (Sec. 10503), will be available by statute for elective abortions, even though the present regulations do conform to the Hyde amendment. Regulations, however, can be changed at will, unless they are governed by statute.

Additionally, no provision in the Senate bill incorporates the longstanding and widely supported protection for conscience regarding abortion as found in the Hyde/Weldon amendment. Moreover, neither the House nor Senate bill contains meaningful conscience protection outside the abortion context. Any final bill, to be fair to all, must retain the accommodation of the full range of religious and moral objections in the provision of health insurance and services that are contained in current law, for both individuals and institutions.

This analysis of the flaws in the legislation is not completely shared by the leaders of the Catholic Health Association. They believe, moreover, that the defects that they do recognize can be corrected after the passage of the final bill. The bishops, however, judge that the flaws are so fundamental that they vitiate the good that the bill intends to promote. Assurances that the moral objections to the legislation can be met only after the bill is passed seem a little like asking us, in Midwestern parlance, to buy a pig in a poke.

What is tragic about this turn of events is that it needn’t have happened. The status quo that has served our national consensus and respected the consciences of all with regard to abortion is the Hyde amendment. The House courageously included an amendment applying the Hyde policy to its Health Care bill passed in November. Its absence in the Senate bill and the resulting impasse are not an accident. Those in the Senate who wanted to purge the Hyde amendment from this national legislation are obstructing the reform of health care.

This is not quibbling over technicalities. The deliberate omission in the Senate Bill of the necessary language that could have taken this moral question off the table and out of play leaves us still looking for a way to meet the President’s and our concern to provide health care for those millions whose primary care physician is now an emergency room doctor. As Pope Benedict told Ambassador to the Holy See Miguel H. Diaz when he presented his credentials as the United States government’s representative to the Holy See, there is “an indissoluble bond between an ethic of life and every other aspect of social ethics.”

Two basic principles, therefore, continue to shape the concerns of the Catholic bishops: health care means taking care of the health needs of all, across the human life span; and the expansion of health care should not involve the expansion of abortion funding and of polices forcing everyone to pay for abortions. Because these principles have not been respected, despite the good that the bill under consideration intends or might achieve, the Catholic bishops regretfully hold that it must be opposed unless and until these serious moral problems are addressed.

SOURCE: Whispers in the Loggia

PHOTO SOURCE: USCCB Media Blog

To Read Cardinal George’s letter, please visit: http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2010/10-043.shtml

This week the Church in the United States celebrates National Vocation Awareness Week; a week that the Bishops have set aside in which all Catholics are asked to pray for an increase in vocations. Cardinal Sean O’Malley of Boston who is the current chairman of the Bishops’ Committee on Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations said that, as Catholics, “it is our responsibility to encourage young people to be generous in their response as they discern the possibility of a call to service in the Church.”

As we begin this week, it is fitting that the Gospel reading from Mass this morning was on the call of the Apostles: Simon, Andrew, James, and John. Jesus asked all of them to leave everything they possessed behind to “Come after me.” Sometimes we don’t understand or we can’t clearly see where the Lord is calling us. In these instances, we must put all of our trust and hope in the Lord , asking Him to show us the path He wants us to follow that will best serve the church.

On other occasions, we clearly hear where the Lord wants us to go and we are fearful to respond to his call. In these times, it is important to remember the life of Mary, who, though filled with fear at the message of the angel declaring her to be to virgin Mother of God, answered with a yes. Let us not forget that, in Mary’s time, women who were not married and became pregnant were literally stoned to death. However, despite all of this uncertainty, Mary trusted that God would take care of her.

Throughout this week, please pray that the young men and women of the Church in the United States will consider what our Heavenly Father wants them to do with their lives. When they do hear the Lord’s will for their lives, pray that they will respond without fear or anxiety, no matter what vocation they are called to. Pray for those who are discerning the priesthood of Jesus Christ, the consecrated religious life, married life, and single life. Pray that the Lord will grant them peace and perseverance. Finally, encourage the young people of your parishes to seriously consider what the Lord is calling them to do–sometimes all it takes is a simple invitation.

“The observance of National Vocation Awareness Week (NVAW) began in 1976 when the National Conference of Catholic Bishops designated the 28th Sunday of the year as the beginning of NVAW. In 1997, this celebration was moved to coincide with the Feast of the Baptism of the Lord.

“The Feast of the Baptism of the Lord, which falls on January 10 in 2010, marks the initiation of Jesus into public ministry. At his baptism Jesus is named the beloved Son of God. With this celebration the faithful recommit themselves to follow in the footsteps of Jesus. They are also initiated through their own baptism to be the Beloved of God, commissioned to proclaim Good News with their lives.”

SOURCE: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

PHOTO SOURCE: National Coalition for Church Vocations

There has been some misunderstanding about what the Stupak Amendment actually does for the health care bill. To help Catholics understand the amendment more thoroughly, the USCCB put out the following statement:

What does the Stupak Amendment do?

1.   It applies to this legislation the longstanding policy of the Hyde Amendment, which has governed other federal health programs for over three decades: No funds authorized or appropriated under this Act (including the “affordability credits” used to help individuals purchase health coverage) may be used for elective abortions, or for benefits packages that include such abortions.

2.   This does not apply to abortions in cases of danger to the mother’s life or rape/incest.

3.   The amendment clearly states that it does not prevent the following:

a.   Any individual whose private coverage is not federally subsidized may purchase (or continue to be covered by) a plan that includes elective abortions, paid for with that individual’s premium dollars. This includes individuals who receive health insurance through their employers, and those who may want to purchase it individually on the new Exchange (where health plans will compete to sell insurance to those who lack employer based coverage).

b.   A private insurer participating in the Exchange may sell a health plan that includes elective abortions to non-subsidized individuals on the Exchange, but then must also offer the same plan without elective abortions (selling only the latter version to federally subsidized purchasers).

c.   Any individual, even someone whose overall health plan was purchased with the help of affordability credits, may use private funds to purchase a supplemental policy covering abortions; any private insurer may sell such a policy.

4.    All contrary provisions in the bill are deleted – provisions allowing the HHS Secretary to include elective abortions in the government-run “public plan”; allowing federal subsidies to support plans that include such abortions; forbidding health plans to “discriminate” between abortion facilities and other health facilities; etc.

For the entire explanation of the Stupak Amendment, please visit: http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/StupakAmendmentFactsheet.pdf

Upon the passage of the House version of the bill, the Senate took up negotiations and debate on its version of the Health Care Reform Bill. However, the Senate bill does not contain the Stupak Amendment. Many pro-life Republican and Democratic Senators are standing by their Christian principles and threatening to vote against a bill that does not contain an special amendment removing federal funding of abortions. (It is about time Senators start standing up for what they believe!!) These pro-life Senators, including Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE), Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Robert Casey (D-PA), have proposed an amendment to the Senate bill that would echo the Stupak Amendment in the House bill.

What does the Nelson/Hatch/Casey amendment do?

1.   It applies the longstanding policy of the Hyde amendment to this program: No funds authorized or appropriated under this Act (including the tax credits used to help individuals purchase health coverage) may be used for abortions, or for benefits packages that include abortion.

2.   This does not apply to abortions in cases of danger to the mother’s life or rape/incest.

3.   The amendment clearly states that it does not prevent the following:

a.   Any individual (including someone whose overall health plan was purchased with the help of federal tax credits) may use his or her own private funds to purchase a supplemental policy covering abortions; any private insurer may sell such a policy.

b.   Any individual whose private coverage is not federally subsidized may purchase (or continue to be covered by) a plan that includes elective abortions, paid for with that individual’s premium dollars. This includes individuals who receive health insurance through their employers, as well as those who may want to purchase it individually on the new Exchange where health plans will compete to sell insurance to those who lack employer-based coverage.

c.   A private insurer participating in the Exchange may even sell a health plan that includes elective abortions to non-subsidized individuals on the Exchange, but then must also offer the same plan without elective abortions (selling only the latter version to federally subsidized purchasers).

4.   All contrary provisions in the bill (allowing the HHS Secretary to include elective abortions in the government-run “community health insurance option,” allowing federal subsidies to support plans that include such abortions, etc.) are made consistent with this policy.

5.   A provision forbidding health plans to “discriminate” against health facilities that are willing to perform and provide abortions is deleted. If the public plan, and private plans receiving federal subsidies, will not provide abortions, there is no reason for the government to make them include abortion facilities in their network.

Personally, I usually do not get too involved with the political arena when writing  here on my blog. However, this case is a bit different because it is considering using the typical American’s hard-earned money to fund abortions. The culture of death that is present throughout our country and throughout the world needs to take a hit today! It is time for the people who represent us in Washington to start listening to their constituents. Americans do not want to pay for abortions!!! Please write your Senators and plead with them to vote for the Nelson/Hatch/Casey Amendment.

PHOTO SOURCE: Catholic Shirts