We have this running joke in our family that priests and bishops save their fanciest hats for when they are meeting behind closed doors. Forget witnessing marriages or administering first Holy Communion, if you want to see fancy duds, watch EWTN when the US Conference of Catholic Bishops meets. Collegiality is the rule among the bishops. I suppose it helps to grease the wheels of progress among all the different strong personalities at these meetings. But, from what I can tell (and I am just a little catholic home-schooling mom from CT), collegiality just cost us Plan B in the legislature this session.When asked why they voted for Plan B this session, 8 out of 10 legislators* responded, in some form or another, that the Catholic bishops were unsure of what their position was, so they just voted for it. The bishops alternately said a compromise was feasible (roll the tapes of Archbishop Mansell at Catholic Concerns Day), or they were waiting for an expert ethics opinion (see Haas OpEd in Courant), or, to top all others, that it was a matter of "faith" among the different bishops (see below). Sigh.
I hate to criticize Archbishop Mansell - he is a holy man with an awesome memory - but, what happened with Plan B this session? Only now are we starting to see a little life in the Archdiocese and Connecticut, organized by the faithful flock. And, honestly, that horse has left the barn. I am struck by the statements made by the spokesperson for the Connecticut Catholic Hospital Association, Barry Feldman:
"You're talking about religious beliefs and not facts. The bishops of New York have religious beliefs that they interpret in one way, and the bishops in Connecticut view the moral analysis differently,"HeSaid already commented on this in an earlier post. But, what is going on here? Do the remarks, and the lack of perceptible action by our Archbishop, come down to the Connecticut Conference of Catholic Bishops being more concerned about collegiality among their fellow bishops than they are about fighting hard about Plan B here in Connecticut? I think so.
How is that, you ask? Only 1 state didn't fight Plan B because they determined it wasn't
abortion. Unwilling to criticize Cardinal Egan of New York for their decision not to fight a Plan B bill, our bishops got all weak-kneed up at the Capitol. Unable to state clearly that Plan B was against Catholic teaching, lest they offend their NY brethren, they sunk into a kind of Catholic relativism, simply saying that it was a matter of "faith" and interpretation. Good grief, did they want the legislature to win? In the meantime, we the sheep are left to defend the Church ourselves in hand-to-hand water cooler combat. Sure, our bishops will file a lawsuit and spend $65 to $100 thousand of our weekly contributions fighting this battle in court. But, why not spend a little of your own "Archbishop Capital" getting dirty at the Capitol fighting for your sheep. Submit OpEds. Have letters read from the pulpit. Organize rallies! This isn't only about saving lives, its about defending our faith, making this a teaching moment, and giving your best to your flock.I know the Archbishop is doing a lot behind the scenes - working with lobbyists, making phone calls, praying - but a public education campaign, that is sure of it's message and aimed at the flock, is desperately needed.
*as assertained by me reading the morning papers.
4 comments:
I'm all for bishops doing the right thing courageously. Archbishop Burke is a hero for his action on the Sheryl Crow thing.
But ...
The problem with Plan B is a scientific one. Here's the problem: In a case of rape where fertilization has not ocurred, it is okay to use Plan B. In that case it acts as a contraceptive.
The Church wisely sees the immorality of contraceptives. They deny the unitive and procreative meaning of a loving act. You can see the divorce rate rising with the use of contraceptives and connect the dots. However, in rape, there is no loving act to protect; so the Church wisely sees that contraception isn't a problem in the context of rape.
This has led some Catholic hospitals (and other arms of the bishops) to say: If the pregnancy test says she's not pregant, go ahead and use Plan B.
The problem: Pregnancy tests only tell you when implantation has ocurred. The pregnancy starts earlier. Before the new little boy or girl (for the DNA already makes him or her one or the other -- and the DNA also already says whether he'll be a better first baseman or pitcher, too) travels down the falopian tube and implants in the wall of the uterus, we have no way of knowing that mom is pregnant.
In such a case, Plan B will cut short the life of the little first baseman.
So, there is a forseeable legitimate use of Plan B in the future. And Catholic theologians have stressed that aspect of it, in order to show the Church's compassion in such a heart-rending scenario.
But you are right that Feldman's words are indefensible. I can only hope he is being misquoted. We are indeed talking about facts -- and facts have moral content. They are right and wrong in the same way everywhere.
Wow, thank you for your comments. I believe the Connecticut protocol was to administer an ovulation test prior to dispensing a Plan B pill. If the test indicated ovulation, then no pill. Two problems with that, one scientific, one political.
The scientific problem is that ovulation tests are not always determinative of ovulation. So, it's possible for ovulation and fertilization to have surreptitiously occurred - then the Church dispenses Plan B, and whalla they have facilitated an abortion.
Problem 2, is that it unnecessarily adds to the confusion and perception at the Capitol of an uncaring Church. Believe me, they legislate based on sound-bites up there, so when they simply hear the church requires an ovulation test - they freak and it plays into all their preconceived notions of the church wanting to get everyone pregnant. Requiring this test at such a sensitive time, well, makes the Church seem, insensitive (the exact opposite of what they intended with this protocol). Add that to the fact that giving Plan B if there is no ovulation, is, well, mostly unnecessary. I would, in my ideal Plan of Action on Plan B for the Connecticut Conference of Catholic Bishops and the hospitals - have scrapped the whole ovulation test and stand strong against Plan B as an abortafacient and insulting women who wouldn't want to partake in more violence by killing their unborn child on top of being sexually assaulted.
If I were the bishops I would have:
1. Found five women who were conceived in rape. There are not many of them, but the ones who are alive among us are, understandably, almost unanimously pro-life.
2. Get a DNA expert who is pro-life.
3. Get them together for a press conference. The DNA expert could introduce each one of them by saying, "When she was only the size of the point of a pin, her DNA already determined that she would be a brown-haired tall woman, that she would be good at playing the banjo, and even that she would prefer denim skirts and mocha ice cream. What it didn't determine is that she would choose to be here with us, so give her a big hand."
4. Then she would get up and say "It is painful to think of the way I was conceived. But it is much more painful to think of the way so many like me end up dying -- snuffed out before they can love, dance, enjoy the sun or curse the rain. And why? Because their mothers and their communities don't trust the science that says a person is a person, no matter how small -- and no matter how heinous the crimes of the one who conceived her."
Says Bishop Lori:
"Every citizen in Connecticut should be concerned and disappointed that Governor Rell has signed the Plan B legislation into law. This is a serious violation of religious liberty in our Constitution State.
"Two fundamental principles are being violated by this law: respect for human life at all stages, and religious freedom.
"Catholic hospitals always have provided compassionate care to sexual assault victims. Emergency contraception (Plan B) always has been offered when the medication in question acts truly as a contraceptive by preventing ovulation. Catholic hospitals do not provide Plan B when this medication would induce an early abortion, which is a direct violation of Catholic Church teachings. This is why we administer the ovulation test.
"This new law will not allow this test to be given. This new law will require a third party to administer the drug on Catholic hospital premises in circumstances when the drug may act as an abortifacient. This in no way resolves this law's violation of religious liberty, as was explained to the Governor by the Catholic bishops of our state.
"We stand on the principle that faith-based institutions should be able to operate according to their beliefs.
"We reject this law and are considering our options. We hope, in ongoing discussions with Connecticut lawmakers, that this issue will be revisited and that, as has happened in other states with similar legislation, a way will be found to protect the conscience rights of all religious institutions."
Post a Comment