Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USCCB President says Obama offered next to nothing; expresses disappointment with Sr. Keehan
Te Deum ^ | February 14, 2012 | Francis X. Rocca

Posted on 02/14/2012 4:25:31 PM PST by NYer

ROME (CNS) -- Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan of New York said Feb. 13 that President Barack Obama's proposed revision to the contraceptive mandate in the health reform law did nothing to change the U.S. bishops' opposition to what they regard as an unconstitutional infringement on religious liberty.

"We bishops are pastors, we're not politicians, and you can't compromise on principle," said Cardinal-designate Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "And the goal posts haven't moved and I don't think there's a 50-yard line compromise here," he added.

"We're in the business of reconciliation, so it's not that we hold fast, that we're stubborn ideologues, no. But we don't see much sign of any compromise," he said.

"What (Obama) offered was next to nothing. There's no change, for instance, in these terribly restrictive mandates and this grossly restrictive definition of what constitutes a religious entity," he said. "The principle wasn't touched at all."

Obama's proposed revision of the Department of Health and Human Services' contraceptive mandate left intact the restrictive definition of a religious entity and would shift the costs of contraceptives from the policyholders to the insurers, thus failing to ensure that Catholic individuals and institutions would not have to pay for services that they consider immoral, Cardinal-designate Dolan said.

For one thing, the cardinal-designate said, many dioceses and Catholic institutions are self-insuring. Moreover, Catholics with policies in the compliant insurance companies would be subsidizing others' contraception coverage. He also objected that individual Catholic employers would not enjoy exemption under Obama's proposal.

"My brother-in-law, who's a committed Catholic, runs a butcher shop. Is he going to have to pay for services that he as a convinced Catholic considers to be morally objectionable?" he asked.

Cardinal-designate Dolan said he emailed Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity who heads the Catholic Health Association, on Feb. 10 to tell her that he was "disappointed that she had acted unilaterally, not in concert with the bishops."
Read the rest at CNS: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1200596.htm

Further Reading:




TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Moral Issues; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: birthcontrol; carolkeehan; contraception; dolan; keehan; obamacare; srkeehan

1 posted on 02/14/2012 4:25:40 PM PST by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 02/14/2012 4:26:30 PM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I appreciate Dolan standing up not only for Catholic institutions but also for the trampled rights of business owners.


3 posted on 02/14/2012 4:29:34 PM PST by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer; JPG; Graewoulf; VinceASA; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; pieces of time; Warthog-2; Tzar; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


4 posted on 02/14/2012 4:30:24 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Obama has met his match in Archbishop Dolan. Here is a man who won’t be steamrolled.


5 posted on 02/14/2012 4:41:29 PM PST by CASchack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CASchack

I’m glad to hear that.

I also think the Vatican has to back him on this, to the Supreme Court if necessary.


6 posted on 02/14/2012 4:47:05 PM PST by SaxxonWoods (....The days are long, but the years are short.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CASchack

Amen! And we will ALL be praying for him....and our nation.

We are also ready to roll up our sleeves and fight this in a unified effort that Obama has never yet seen!


7 posted on 02/14/2012 4:49:05 PM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"What Obama offered was next to nothing."

Amen Cardinal-designate Dolan, amen. Stick to your guns, we all have your back.

8 posted on 02/14/2012 4:52:28 PM PST by Jeff Head (Liberty is not free. Never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SaxxonWoods
I also think the Vatican has to back him on this, to the Supreme Court if necessary.

The Bishops from the Southeastern US were on their ad limina visit with the Pope when the mandate news first broke a few weeks ago. They were all outraged at what Obama had done. Don't think the Pope was any too pleased with it either. The Vatican won't be a party to any legislation; it will be the USCCB, as it should be.

9 posted on 02/14/2012 5:01:02 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SaxxonWoods
I also think the Vatican has to back him on this, to the Supreme Court if necessary.

Pope Benedict XVI has just spoke about this to the Bishops in their Ad Limina visit.

10 posted on 02/14/2012 5:03:49 PM PST by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYer
the only thing that I disagree with in this article is this:

Cardinal-designate Dolan said he emailed Sister Carol Keehan, a Daughter of Charity who heads the Catholic Health Association, on Feb. 10 to tell her that he was "disappointed that she had acted unilaterally, not in concert with the bishops."

I think he needs to be a little more stern than "disappointed". I get disappointed when I miss a green light. When someone undermines my authority I get angry.

11 posted on 02/14/2012 5:07:14 PM PST by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

This. This is the key issue for the church now.

Unless they start taking down these people who claim to be Catholic and representing the RCC in policy matters (and I mean taking them down hard), the church is going to continue to be sold down a river here.

As I understand Canon Law, the Bishops (and certainly the Cardinals) can be doing a bit more than emailing their “disappointment” to the Sister who has headlined this nonsense.


12 posted on 02/14/2012 5:12:51 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"We bishops are pastors, we're not politicians, and you can't compromise on principle," said Cardinal-designate Dolan

oy. does he really not see what a politician he is?

I'm desperately looking for a reason to get over my visceral mistrust of this man, and he's not helping too much.

13 posted on 02/14/2012 5:22:07 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (religion + guns = liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CASchack
Obama has met his match in Archbishop Dolan. Here is a man who won’t be steamrolled.

izzat right?

14 posted on 02/14/2012 5:23:15 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (religion + guns = liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NYer

come on you freaking headline junkies. where was the archbishop when the matter was being debated? supporting it.


15 posted on 02/14/2012 5:24:22 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (religion + guns = liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

Well, he has dug in his heels and has taken a stand. I don’t think the Archbishop will back down. If he does, I’ll eat my words.


16 posted on 02/14/2012 5:57:49 PM PST by CASchack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NVDave
As I understand Canon Law, the Bishops (and certainly the Cardinals) can be doing a bit more than emailing their “disappointment” to the Sister who has headlined this nonsense.

That would be bishop (singular), not bishops. The only bishop that could discipline her would be the one in whose diocese she lives. That is not to say that Cardinal-designate Dolan and the other bishops could not bring some heavy pressure to bear.

17 posted on 02/14/2012 7:04:19 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CASchack
Well, he has dug in his heels and has taken a stand. I don’t think the Archbishop will back down. If he does, I’ll eat my words.

I hope you don't. He was a total disappointment to me. Let's see what he's made of. He and coterie were still, as far as I'm concerned, asleep at the wheel, with a couple of notable exceptions (Chaput and Nickless come to mind).

He's either very slow, very naive, or very, very political.

18 posted on 02/14/2012 7:21:03 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (religion + guns = liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

Exactly correct and a point that many non-Catholics don’t understand.

Anyone know who Sr. Keehan’s Bishop is?

Also can’t those in his diocese appeal to him to avoid scandal? Any freepers qualify here?


19 posted on 02/14/2012 7:39:11 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYer

20 posted on 02/14/2012 7:46:57 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CASchack

Indeed, Dolan is a brawler. Just what we needed.


21 posted on 02/14/2012 7:57:43 PM PST by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

OK then. Were I in their shoes, I would be doing such.

Because the way it appears from outside the church right now, this Sr. Keenan is being held up as the “authority” for Catholic charitable medical facilities by the Obama administration. She’s the one, more than any other I see in public, who is undermining the RCC’s doctrine and faith. The issue is that she’s trapping all employers who have faith-based issues into supporting whatever socialized medicine bureaucrats deem fit and necessary.

Including, in the future, euthanasia, because that’s where socialized schemes end up.

If I were working for a company (Let’s call it ABC Widgets Inc) and I were, let’s say, a senior manager of paint colors of widgets... and I started trying to negotiate something (like a merger) that needed the express approval and involvement of the VP’s and C-level people... I should be fired.

That’s how this comes across to me. Sr. Keenan is effectively trapping the RCC and their missions, hospitals, charities, etc into a policy which the highest levels of the organization do not support, condone or tolerate.

Why is she still in that position?


22 posted on 02/14/2012 8:13:25 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NVDave

I could not agree more but I think Cardinal-designate Dolan has made it clear that Sr. Keenan is not going to have the last word.


23 posted on 02/14/2012 8:27:39 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

True enough if we can take the Cardinal-designate at his word.

But it takes little change in doctrine to simply fire her. She doesn’t quit being a Catholic (which would require excommunication), or a Nun, (don’t know what that would take), the RCC could simply fire her from being head of the CHA. That’s not an ecumenical appointment, is it?


24 posted on 02/14/2012 8:31:44 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

True enough if we can take the Cardinal-designate at his word.

But it takes little change in doctrine to simply fire her. She doesn’t quit being a Catholic (which would require excommunication), or a Nun, (don’t know what that would take), the RCC could simply fire her from being head of the CHA. That’s not an ecumenical appointment, is it?


25 posted on 02/14/2012 8:31:44 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NYer

“My brother-in-law, who’s a committed Catholic, runs a butcher shop. Is he going to have to pay for services that he as a convinced Catholic considers to be morally objectionable?” he asked.


This is the most important argument, I think. The Constitution doesn’t grant freedom of religion to just priest, rabbis, ministers, etc. The government doesn’t have a right to impose this mandate on any single individual American who objects on grounds of religious conscience, any more than it can force a conscientious objector into combat duty. We need to shift the debate from simply Obama fighting with churches to Obama gutting the core of religious freedom for every single citizen of the nation.


26 posted on 02/14/2012 11:10:16 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Keehan didn’t act unilaterally: she acted in concert with her friends in the Obama administration.


27 posted on 02/14/2012 11:11:50 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
"We need to shift the debate from simply Obama fighting with churches to Obama gutting the core of religious freedom for every single citizen of the nation."

You bet, that's the REAL fight here. Keagan is on record as saying sexual rights (nowhere in constitution) must trump religious rights (1st Amendment) when the two conflict. They want to eliminate all rights of religious conscience. Contraception is just a trojan horse for abortion.

28 posted on 02/15/2012 4:07:07 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SaxxonWoods; frogjerk
I also think the Vatican has to back him on this, to the Supreme Court if necessary.

As freeper frogjerk noted, the pope has addressed this issue with the bishops. Here are his remarks.

Pope Shares Remarks on American Culture with Bishops; Issues Call to Laity

29 posted on 02/15/2012 6:29:05 AM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand; CASchack
come on you freaking headline junkies. where was the archbishop when the matter was being debated? supporting it.

In a private meeting at the White House, Obama assured Dolan that the conscience clause would remain in place. You can thank the feminazis for convincing O to do otherwise. You will also find the following article, enlightening.

Political Science 101: how the White House snookered the USCCB on the 'compromise'.

30 posted on 02/15/2012 6:34:17 AM PST by NYer ("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius
The only bishop that could discipline her would be the one in whose diocese she lives.

Incorrect. The Bishop, Archbishop Robert J. Carlson, where her order is headquartered, St. Louis, can also act, as can her Provincial Superior here in the States, Sr. Louise Gallahue DC, as well as the Superioress General of the Daughters of Charity, Sister Evelyne Franc, D.C., as well as Most Rev. Gregory Gay CM, Superior General of the Company of Daughters of Charity, as well as Rev. Patrick J. Griffin, C.M. Director General of the Company of Daughters of Charity. In addition Keehan makes annual vows not perpetual ones, since she is not a nun. She can be cashiered at any time for violating her vow of obedience.

31 posted on 02/15/2012 8:39:27 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

I am not sure if Archbishop Carlson would have any authority if Sr. Keenan resides outside of the Archdiocese of Saint Louis, perhaps but I think not. I believe that the jurisdiction over her as a member of a religious order would be with the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life rather than with any local bishop.

The others on your list, however, are not bishops. I was specifically addressing the fact that the bishops could not act as some sort of collective board in disciplining her.


32 posted on 02/15/2012 9:27:05 AM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ
The Vatican won't be a party to any legislation; it will be the USCCB, as it should be.

I think you mean "litigation", but I agree on the substance. This business must be handled by American bishops and American dioceses. The Pope's job is to encourage and support the American bishops in doing their jobs.

Americans call it "federalism".

Catholics (also) call it "subsidiarity".

It means the same thing: Do your job, let other folks do their jobs, do the job at the lowest appropriate level.

33 posted on 02/15/2012 9:35:42 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius
Sr. Keenan (sic)

Number one, it's Keehan not Keenan(sic).

Number two, Carlson does indeed have authority.

The names of the others were posted for your edification. There are a number of people who have both the authority and the responsibility to discipline her. Sadly they are all abdicating their authority and responsibility.

34 posted on 02/15/2012 10:28:58 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

You are right. No outrage here only disappointment that BO uses the Constitution for toilet paper.


35 posted on 02/15/2012 6:25:56 PM PST by Goreknowshowtocheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NVDave

I guess Rome lost the heresy form. It should be there somewhere.


36 posted on 02/15/2012 6:40:52 PM PST by Goreknowshowtocheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

The good sister’s organization occupies some high tone real estate.


37 posted on 02/15/2012 6:54:13 PM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Her business address is in DC, but she could LIVE and be a member of a parish in DC/MD/VA, with 3 separate church diocese to match. I can’t imagine the offices of the DC Archbishop (Wuerl) wouldn’t know at which parish she worships.

I would think that, if nothing else, the bishops could demand that the name be change to delete “Catholic” and that she be prohibited from in any way indicating that she and her organization speak for medical care providers and institutions affiliated with the Catholic Church.


38 posted on 02/15/2012 7:26:11 PM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA; D-fendr

oops on my last. It’s Cardinal Wuerl, and he’s probably in Rome now for the installation of the new Cardinals .. but his offices certainly would know about Sr. Keehan (not that they would necessarily respond to an inquiry of that nature).


39 posted on 02/15/2012 7:29:27 PM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

Thank you very much for your reply.

I noticed that she walked back her ‘endorsement’ with a new statement on the website. In it she asks for suggestions. I am very tempted to see if i can register and provide the suggestion not to be a tool for the enemy.

:)

thanks again.


40 posted on 02/15/2012 7:50:01 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

I would suggest that there are certain principles that cannot be compromised. That is what seems to have ‘gotten to’ her in the initial HHS regs. She one of those who swoons at every word out of Obama’s mouth, so if HE said he was compromising, she wanted to believe it.

I wonder who pays the fare for the organization? Is it really Catholic hospitals and other health-care institutions? Those offices are in the high-rent business/lobbying district, a block from the notorious “K Street.” They are not near any Catholic hospital. (Georgetown is across town, but you could walk to the GW Hospital from there). hahahah, maybe Cardinal Wuerl should suggest her organization move onto the Archdiocese’s property, better to control costs (and her!)


41 posted on 02/15/2012 8:06:39 PM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

Thanks for your reply. Curious to know the answers, I looked it up on wikipedia. Established in 1915 CHA is an association of Catholic hospitals. Keehan is the ninth president.

Here’s her latest ‘Something has to be fixed’ column:
http://www.chausa.org/Pages/Publications/Catholic_Health_World/Catholic_Health_World_Archive/2012/February_15/Something_has_to_be_fixed/

I think it’s clear from this that something changed or someone got the message to her. I pray it continues.

Below is a cut and paste from the Wikipedia entry for CHA that contains some information I was not aware of.

CHA created a firestorm within the Catholic Church when it defied the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and came out in support of Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.[1] The USCCB believes the overhaul provides for taxpayer funded abortion; the CHA said this was a “false claim”.[2] CHA was heavily criticized for subverting the bishops, who have doctrinal authority in the Church while nuns do not. At least one bishop, Thomas Joseph Tobin of the Diocese of Providence, withdrew his diocese’s hospitals from membership in the CHA, saying, “Your enthusiastic support of the legislation, in contradiction of the bishops of the United States, provided an excuse for members of Congress, misled the public and caused a serious scandal for many members of the church” and said it was “embarassing” to be associated with the CHA.[3] Archbishop Joseph Naumann said Keehan, who met with Obama before endorsing the bill,[4] was “incredibly naive or disingenuous” for saying that the bill prevented taxpayer funding of abortions.[5] Cardinal Francis George, who was president of the USCCB at the time, reported that he and other bishops tried to reach out to Keehan both before and after the vote; he also said that in choosing Obama over the Church, she had “weakened the moral voice of the bishops in the U.S.”[6]


42 posted on 02/15/2012 8:21:35 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr

Did you notice that the “Something needs to be fixed” article has a dateline of today, Feb. 15, 2012, but at the end she speaks of the subject as something that WILL be discussed at the board meeting of February 8? A little odd that they WILL discuss this last week, don’t you think? And, two days before Obama made his announced ‘compromise.’

Would be interesting to know the ‘story’ about the various board members. They serve 3 year terms and can only serve 2 consecutive terms. That pretty much vests what power there is in the permanent bureaucracy, in the person of its CEO. (link to board below) There’s one bishop, another clergyman, a couple of nuns, maybe 2 MD’s. The rest appear to be hospital administrators. In ‘normal’ times that might make sense. Nothing ‘normal’ about the present times.

http://www.chausa.org/Board_of_Trustees.aspx


43 posted on 02/15/2012 8:47:25 PM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

D’OH, yeah I meant litigation, but you figured it out! :o)


44 posted on 02/15/2012 10:10:18 PM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: EDINVA

Excellent catch, EDINVA!

Here’s what the note at the top says:
The following article appears in the Feb. 15 printed version of Catholic Health World. The actual statement was posted on Feb. 10, 2012.

Now this is still after the Feb 8 meet you caught; and, I believe, on the day Obama announced it, and she supposedly spoke favorably about it.

Very curious, something’s amiss here, or I’m missing something.


45 posted on 02/15/2012 10:32:36 PM PST by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson