I will be heading out shortly to a conference on religious liberty sponsored by the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Why these start these things so early, and all the way across town is beyond me. I will file a report early afternoon.

But, here is some food for thought on the issue.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl [1]has an article at the Washington Post explaining the archdiocese's decision to file a lawsuit against the HHS mandate. It is worth noting that Cardinal Wuerl focuses on the same objection Bishop Blaire highlighted - the still-extant, four-part definition of what is, and is not, a religious organization for purposes of exemptions from the new HHS mandate. I am sure there was some gnashing of teeth at the idea that bishops were taking different positions in public on this issue but I don't think the positions are that fundamentally different. The differences are ones of emphasis and context. All agree on the heart of the matter.

Also in the Post, E.J. Dionne hopes [2]Blaire's letter foretells a "Catholic Spring." My one qualification would be that this is not simply a fight between liberal and conservative bishops. There are some conservative Catholics - bishops, clerics and lay - who think the Church should be wary of appearing too partisan.

See you early afternoon.