Professor Stephen Schneck, director of the Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies at Catholic University, has posted an analysis of the new conscience regulations for health care workers at the "Common Good Forum," published by Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. You can read Professor Schneck's analysis here.
Rocco Palmo has the text of Cardinal Sean O'Malley's sermon at the service of repentence held at St. Mary's pro-cathedral in Dublin this past weekend. The homily is stunning. Just as stunning is the image of Cardinal Sean and Archbishop Martin prostrate before the bare altar at the start of the service.
This is the stance the Church must adopt in the face of the on-going sex abuse scandal: Repentence, pure, simple repentence.
The latest episode of "The World Over" on EWTN featured host Raymond Arroyo and Acton Institute President Fr. Robert Sirico indulging in their usual apologias for GOP economic policies.
It is hard to know which is more offensive, the superficial quality of the analysis or the tendentiousness of the claims.
But at one point Arroyo raised the specter of higher taxes for a father of five children with two jobs, and asked if that was fair.
I have been paying a fair amount of attention to the budget battles, and I have not noticed anyone on either side of the aisle proposing higher taxes on the kind of man who needs a second job to pay the bills. Have you?
This is mere fear-mongering on Arroyo's part. Raising taxes on zillionaires is not going to affect the person in Arroyo's fancied scenario, so why raise it except to beat the anti-tax drum?
Fear-mongering at its worst.
In an effort to understand the legal and intellectual context on the Obama administration's new rules regarding conscience protections for healthcare workers, I reached out to Professor Timothy Lytton of the Albany Law School.
Lytton, who focuses on torts, administrative law, conflict resolution, and jurisprudence is also the author of Holding Bishops Accountable: How Lawsuits Helped the Catholic Church Confront Clergy Sexual Abuse .
Last week, I wrote about how Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were expressions of the Common Good, enacted with the support of the Catholic Bishops. Indeed, Msgr. John A. Ryan, the head of the Social Action Department of the bishops’ conference, was instrumental in developing both the policies that came to be known as the New Deal and in garnering political support for the Roosevelt program. Politicians and policy makers may present arguments for dismantling these “entitlement” programs, but those arguments will not be rooted in Catholic social teaching.
Historians and others like to rank presidents in terms of their greatness. The exercise has value insofar as it helps to clarify what we can and should expect from our political leaders and, as a parlor game, it is fun to hear why some people advocate for one president over another.
Greatness seems to require two things. First a great president must be a skilled politician, able to harness both public opinion and the intentionally distinct levers of political authority built into our constitutional framework, he must be able to get things done and to get the right things done. Second, the times must require greatness. As written, the Constitution does not vest extraordinary power in the executive and through much of the nation’s history, the key political players were in the Congress not the White House. It is easier to recall Clay and Calhoun and Webster than any of the presidential nonentities who governed in the antebellum era. Great president emerge when there is a systemic, profound crisis that requires greatness.
So, with these criteria, I submit there were four great presidents.
I am delighted to present an incisive look at the new conscience regulations from Professor Robert Vischer, law professor at the University of St. Thomas Law School in Minneapolis. Vischer is also the author of Conscience and the Common Good: Reclaiming the Space Between Person and State (Cambridge Univ. Press 2010). (The link brrings you to Amazon and, after reading Rob's essay, you will want to purchase the book!)
Here is Professor Vischer's commentary:
What do the new Obama regulations tell us about the
future prospects for conscience?
The USCCB today said it was "disappointed" about some aspects of the new conscience regulations issued by the Obama Administration, but also praised other aspects of the new rule. In a press release, Deirdre McQuade, of the USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat, said"
"The Administration’s action today is cause for disappointment, but also offers reasons for hope regarding an emerging consensus in Washington on the need for clear conscience protections for health care providers."
“It is very disappointing that the Administration has chosen to eliminate much of the existing regulation on conscience issued in December 2008. Among other things, the final rule issued today eliminates important clarifications that would have helped in interpreting and enforcing longstanding federal statutes protecting the conscience rights of health care providers. It also eliminates a regulatory requirement that recipients of federal funds certify compliance with those statutes.
Here is the statement issued by the Department of Health and Human Services announcing the new conscience regulations:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, February 18, 2011
Contact: HHS Press Office
Statement from the Department of Health and Human Services on the Regulation for the Enforcement of Federal Health Care Conscience Protections
The administration strongly supports provider conscience laws that protect and support the rights of health care providers, and also recognizes and supports the rights of patients. Strong conscience laws make it clear that health care providers cannot be compelled to perform or assist in an abortion. Many of these strong conscience laws have been in existence for more than 30 years. The rule being issued today builds on these laws by providing a clear enforcement process.
As sure as the sun rises in the East, you can bet that NARAL and NOW will be attacking the Obama administration’s failure to rescind the entire set of conscience regulations proposed by President Bush. But, NARAL and NOW seem not to know the history of liberalism, being busy hijacking liberalism. This is a time for liberals to get back to their roots. Here are some key quotes.
“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.” John Milton, Areopagitica, 1644.
“Although the magistrate's opinion in religion be sound, and the way that he appoints be truly Evangelical, yet, if I be not thoroughly persuaded thereof in my own mind, there will be no safety for me in following it. No way whatsoever that I shall walk in against the dictates of my conscience will ever bring me to the mansions of the blessed. I may grow rich by an art that I take not delight in; I may be cured of some disease by remedies that I have not faith in; but I cannot be saved by a religion that I distrust and by a worship that I abhor.” John Locke, A Letter concerning Toleration, 1689.