Posted on 11/17/2011 7:43:56 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o
“It is with deep regret that we have decided to relinquish our appeals in the litigation concerning the provision of foster care and adoption services by Catholic Charities of the Dioceses of Joliet and Springfield in Illinois and by Catholic Social Services of Southern Illinois in the Diocese of Belleville,” the bishops of the three dioceses said in a joint statement.
“This lawsuit had sought clarification as to whether the Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act passed at the end of last year protected the freedom of faith-based agencies to provide foster care and adoption services in accord with their religious beliefs.”
“The decision not to pursue further appeals was reached with great reluctance, but was necessitated by the fact that the State of Illinois has made it financially impossible for our agencies to continue to provide these services and the courts have refused to grant a stay for these operations to continue while further appeals are pending,” the bishops continued
“Since we now need to close offices and lay off employees, further appeals would be moot.”
“Because the State of Illinois has put an expedited process in place to transition to other agencies the foster children under the Charities’ care, any relief ordered by the Appellate Court would come too late to save the Charities’ foster care ministry,” the Thomas More Society, which represented Catholic Charities, stated in a press release announcing the end of the litigation. “Both the Circuit and Appellate Courts denied the Charities’ emergency motions to prevent the transition.”
So am I, but these issues affect all churches’ ministries vis a vis the ever controlling state. If they come for the Catholics and you don’t speak up, next they’ll come for the Lutherans and Baptists.
That's a good question.
I don't have any experience with adoption, but it seems as if domestic adoptions, and particularly foster care, are very much under the control of the government. Children in foster care are usually seized by the county or state because of abuse or neglect (or what the government considers abuse or neglect).
Regarding adoptions other than through the foster-home system, I don't know to what extent it's possible to make a completely private adoption placement.
Right now the pervs are going for coast-to-coast coercive: Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand's "Every Child Deserves a Family" Bill. It would make it ILLEGAL for a foster care or adoption agency ANYWHERE IN THE USA to "discriminate against" gay adoptive couples.
Comin' at us like a freight train.
Not a surprise, given the actions of HHS. I hope the Bishops are reading the New Testament "for comprehension," because it's going to get really ugly.
They can bring it on. The church will just raise up more saints to stand up for her teachings.
This is just the beginning of Catholic institutions shunning federal funds. When Obamacare is in full implementation, they will use those funds to try to force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions and other medical procedures that are contrary to Catholic beliefs.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
An excellent article and comment by Jeff Mirus quoted by Mrs. Don-o. Well worth reading for Catholics and non-Catholics alike. I especially like this part:
One final thought: When people rely primarily on the State for their needs, they become increasingly dependent on the State. A cycle of dependency is perpetuated and seldom escaped through State programs. Yet such programs invariably increase the power of the State in a way which reduces the influence of other institutions which make for a more vibrant social order. By contrast, when a person’s extraordinary needs are met with charity, there will generally be a natural progression of assistance which addresses the root causes of the visible misfortune. People can get “back on their feet”, and then they often become new agents of charity in their own right.
Through this process, the intermediary institutions which provide such sacrificial service gain stature in the minds and hearts of those they serve, attracting others to the same values and service. A whole tapestry of good habits, and organizations which foster them, will emerge to enrich the social order. People will be able to find their place in communities of genuine concern which affirm their dignity and worth. The State, with its frequently corrosive impact on initiative and self-reliance, will shrink as society grows healthier in this way.
My only small disagreement would be that it is the duty of the state to take care of the needy. I see nothing unconstitutional for states or counties or local communities to enact some sort of help for the needy if they desire, but not the federal government. The best help is private charity, as explained so well above. And cutting off the umbilical cord to the fedgov monies gives great freedom. States should do it, too!
A freight train laden with irony, because this would scare a lot of traditional families out of the idea of adopting.
That’s bad news.
“WE WILL SUPPORT CATHOLIC CHARITIES.”
For sure! We’ll do it ourselves. We found out what happens when we get “help” from the govt. - they try to control us.
Except that charity work has ALWAYS been the responsibility of the individual believer and the church. I don't see anywhere in Scripture that it is supposed to be farmed out to or funded by the government.
The government is singularly incapable of showing the love of Christ, which is what all the charity and good works are meant to do.
If the church (and by this I mean ANY church) were doing the work it was supposed to, then there wouldn't be any need for government handouts. But when it let the government take over, it abdicated its responsibility before God and will have to answer for it. Handing the job off is not doing it yourself.
As I understand it from a friend who lives in Ill, both. Not only was the State telling the Church how to spend monies it received from State and Federal grants, it was also demanding compliance even if there were no government many of any sort involved. Otherwise they wouldn't grant the licenses and certifications required to operate an adoption service or child care related charity.
My friend has heard that the groups behind this maneuver next want to refuse all Catholic schools the right to operate unless they agree to teach that abortion and aberrant sexual behaviors are not immoral but just secular matters. We'll see if they go that far yet or not, but after the 2012 elections I expect Illinois to try very hard to eliminate Catholic schools within the state.
AMEN! Your Excellency. The state will come after you, anyway, and try to intrude, but if you are not taking their money you are in a stronger position. Concentrate on evangelization and taking care of Catholics first.
I disagree. The government welfare system was not initiated because there was a need, but because there was a desire on the part of ideologues to take charitable works out of private hands. This was done intentionally both in the United States and in England.
I agree. That's the way it has always been.
To elaborate (now that I’ve made some yelling byo go away ... was that Pat again?), look at the government takeover of education. It didn’t happen because people weren’t being educated: large parts of the United States had near 100% literacy through private-pay or private-charity education.
Ideologues orchestrated the government takeover for power and control, over the massive objections of the general public.
I’m reminded of what Crockett once said.
It’s not yours to give.
“http://www.juntosociety.com/patriotism/inytg.html";
I see your point.
And the government did make it harder for churches to continue their charity work by regulating it, IIRC.
Yes, things like needing a commercial kitchen to cook for the homeless, or requiring hotel standards for a shelter. Then there are these "anti-discrimination" rules, which made it hard for church organizations to employ their co-religionists, and led to many of the issues now arising with homosexuals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
