Matters of Church and State

RIDING THE TIGER

         Washington Post columnist Melinda Henneberger had an interesting column (“Contraception Contretemps”) in today’s (May 23) edition of the Post.  It has to do with the law suit recently filed by some Catholic institutions alleging the Affordable Care Act requiring employers to provide contraceptive coverage in their health care plans violates the Church’s religious freedom.

         New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd had a similar column (“Father Doesn’t Know Best”) in today’s (May 23) Times.  Both columnists dispute the Church’s claim that this issue is about “religious freedom.”  Interestingly, both columnists are Catholic besides being – obviously - women.  When it comes to sexual politics in the Church, Catholic women are particularly able to spot a side show – especially one starring old white men in medieval/renaissance hats and capes.

         To be fair, the Obama Administration made an egregious political error in the way it framed the mandate on contraceptive services.  Even many politically liberal and centrist Catholics, despite being strong supporters of health care reform, objected to it on religious freedom grounds.  The blunder was particularly puzzling given that one of the major architects of the legislation, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius, and Vice President Biden are practicing Catholics.  Maybe they based their calculation on the fact that an overwhelming majority of Catholics – 82 percent in the latest Gallup poll, according to Dowd – believe that contraception is morally acceptable.

         What the Administration initially didn’t take into account was the political power of the U.S. Catholic bishops.  While the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has not formally joined in the lawsuit, one doesn’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to spot the mitered hand behind the litigation.  Even when the Obama administration did back flips offering a compromise solution, the bishops were having none of it.  They had a tiger by the tail, they thought, and they were going to ride it out.

         As Dowd points out in her column, Catholic parishes all over the U.S. have been forced to put alarmist messages in their Sunday bulletins “warning of apocalyptic risk” to the Church’s social mission if the health care mandate dealing with contraceptive service remains.  How ironic this is considering the Archdiocese of Washington, for example, threatened to cut back its commitment to social services in the District and environs unless the DC City Council rescinded its approval of gay marriage.

         Even before health care reform was passed in 2009, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops objected to the legislation because they believed it would lead to the government paying for abortions.  That was a bogus issue, but even after the bill was passed President Obama tried to further reassure it by issuing an Executive Order specifically forbidding the use of government funds to pay for abortion.

         Nonetheless, the Church hierarchy thinks it can convince enough Catholics that their Church is being attacked.  Maybe they can, but I am hoping that enough Catholics will see this issue for what it really is and ignore the hierarchy’s scare tactics.

         The bishops should be careful about getting so involved in partisan politics while insisting on their own protection and rights under the separation of Church and State.   As my longtime friend Tim Sprehe recently pointed out, “If the Catholic bishops keep messing around in politics and urging ‘the faithful’ to vote for this candidate and not that one … civil authorities [may] begin issuing subpoenas for church records.  If and when that happens, I believe many members of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy are going to jail for decades of aiding and abetting criminal activity, such as priestly pedophilia.”

         As the saying goes, sometimes those who ride the tiger’s back end up in the tiger’s stomach instead.

Gerald E. Lavey