Questioning NOW's Dirty Labeling

During a tough interview with Megyn Kelly on Fox News Channel, Patricia Ireland speaking on behalf of the  National Organization for Women (NOW)  sought to justify NOW's labeling of the Little Sisters of the Poor as part of the "Dirty 100" in light of the recent Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014) Supreme Court ruling.

Ireland deflected the denigration of the Catholic nuns as being like the "Dirty Dozen" with other corporations, presumably for fundraising efforts.  But Kelly does not let her off than easily, suggesting that the nuns be considered "Groups with whom we disagree".

The former NOW President kept insisting that the Little Sisters could "opt out" of the Obamacare contraception mandate.  Except the alleged work around forces the Sisters to sign the Form 700 document permitting others to provide the abortifacients which are anathematic to their faith. 

Ireland offered patronizing lip service to the nuns' living their faith and helping the indigent infirmed. But what she does not realize is that if the Little Sisters of the Poor are eventually forced to pay for such unwanted services ordered by former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius then they will move out rather than contravene their consciences.  

Ireland insisted that I.U.D.s, which is one of the abortifacients in question, does not kill eggs in the uterus.  Well, that's not quite true.  Generally, inter-uterine devices act as spermicide to prevent fertilization but copper I.U.D.s are touted as an emergency contraceptive for five days after intercourse.  Most sperm dies within two days after ejaculation (even in the uterus), thus the emergency contraceptive quality of such I.U.Ds intimates that it prevents the implantation of the blastocyst thereby killing a fertilized egg. 

Ireland incorrectly asserted that the Supreme Court had ruled on the "opt-out" provision.  Hobby Lobby covered closely held corporations with conscience objections but Obamacare opt-outs for non-profits has not been decided yet (although SCOTUS has offered a unanimous injunction pending appeal on January 24th, 2014). 

Ireland's fatal rhetorical faux pas was her bon mot that Supreme Court decisions do not affect the reality.  The hostess of the Kelly Files jumped in and asked if Roe v. Wade affected the reality. T o borrow an oft uttered Ireland phrase from the interview "Bless her heart."

Bye Bye to Brutalist Bunker Church Between the Beltways

One of the world’s ugliest church structures was the Third Church of Christ, Scientist in Washington, DC, just blocks away from the White House.  This octagonal shaped building was designed by Araldo Cossetta, an associate of I.M. Pei, in a brutalist architectural style and was completed in 1971.

Academics often voiced approval of Modernist Architecture like brutalism.  Randall Ott, the dean of architectural design at Catholic University, waxed philosophically:  "Modernism was a fairly austere, fairly confrontational style, and the Third Church is an obvious example of that style."  But outside of academia, there usually are not warm feelings about austere and confrontational buildings.

La Verne Hill, a woman who worked nearby the brutalist behemoth, opined:  "It's awful. It looks like they just dumped a bunch of concrete down here and shaped it into a box." Church members had long long disliked the design of the building.  Longtime church member Darrow Kirkpatrick articulated: We think it says, 'Stay away.' Something goes on in here that they don't want to get outside, which is exactly wrong for all Christianity. We don't think the architecture conveys taking the Word to the people...  Brutalism is not our religious expression.”

Darrow Kirkpatrick 

Membership in the Third Church of Christ, Scientist dropped to 50 members.  But the congregation was stuck with an ugly architectural white elephant.  The brutalist building was not well suited for re-purposing.  It was a 60 foot tall concrete bunker that was hard to heat and harder to cool. There were structural defects in many spots.  And in order to change lightbulbs, a scaffolding needed to be erected in the sanctuary which would cost betweeen $5,000 to $8,000.  These were costs which  the congregation neither had the funds nor the inclination to pay.

Yet in 2007, the DC Historical Preservation Board unanimously voted the Third Church of Christ, Scientist as a Historical Landmark, thereby protecting it from demolition or alteration.  This had the fascinating dynamic of having the government tell a religious group where to worship and how to spend their funds.

Due to the shepherding of former Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty’s Planning Director Harriet Tregoning,  the zealotry of the Historical Planners was overturned.  Tregoning ruled that Cosetta design was an experiment which failed badly.  The city approved of razing the building in May, 2009 citing hardship of maintaining the building and the risk of the demise of the church if the Historical Landmark status continued.

 Yet it took until February, 2014 for the District to issue a permit to raze the building.  Little time was lost by Celtic Demolition to start to take down the structure.  And there was much rejoicing among ordinary District denizens.

William Newton, who writes the Blog of the Courier, put it poetically:

The more you are able to study and look at exactly why such hideous things as the Third Church of Christ Scientist came to be, the more you will realize why your gut reaction to their readily apparent ugliness is correct, because these buildings often reflect a wider, even uglier philosophy about human nature and man’s place in the universe.  Without knowing exactly why, you can cheer the demolition of this terrible building.

But it will take up to eight weeks to totally demolish the edifice, as the lower walls are six foot think walls of concrete.  The demolished scraps will be sent for recycling.

For any fans of brutalist architecture in the District of Calamity, they can still admire the F.B.I. Building, the H.U.D. Building, the Department of Energy’s Forrestal Building and the East Wing of the National Gallery of Art.

The property where the brutalist building once stood is slated to become another glass and metal shoebox office building, but it will have an economical space where the congregation can worship.

Aside from aesthetic issues, the battle over the brutalist bunker also brings to a forefront salient issues on religious liberty.  Perhaps the eventual triumph of the Third Church of Christ, Scientist over a government dictating how religious institutions must act might serve as a framework for future judicial decision regarding the H.H.S. Qualified Health Plan (Contraception Mandate) issue.

h/t: NPR
     Real Clear Religion
    Washington Post
    William Newton

A Bit About Choosing Between Christ and Government Cheese

[L] Kay Daly, Executive Director of Christian Family Ministry (photo: Suwaunee Valley Times)

Fox News Radio's Todd Starnes reported how Christian  Service Center of Lake City Florida is being forced between choosing Jesus or Government Cheese.  For 31 years, this north  Florida ministry had been providing food the the hungry without controversy.  But when a state government worker showed up to negotiate  an agreement , Christian Service Ministry Executive Director Kay Daley was told that a "slight change" in the contract.  Now the governmental guidelines about where USDA food is distributed, there can be no religious information under the premise of "the separation of church and state". 

The Executive Order for Equal Protection of Faith Based and Community Organizations is supposed to allow governmental assistance as long as the religious activity does not create a barrier to individuals receiving their governmental assistance.   Yet the Christian Service Center was told that they were prohibited from distributing Bibles but this ban religious information that included  religious decorations, like "Jesus is Lord" banners and a copy of the Ten Commandments, where ever  USDA food is distributed.  Hence Stern's characterization of choosing Jesus or government cheese.

The organization asked if they needed to change their name from the Christian Service Ministry to comply and they were told no, but no praying, mentioning of chapel, distributing Bibles or beign around religious decoration.  The Christian Service Ministry chose to forgo USDA assistance in their ministering to the hungry.  Kay Daly mused:

“If God can multiply fish and loaves for 10,000 people, he can certainly bring in food for our food pantry so we can continue to feed the hungry.”

The Christian Service Ministry decided that they were a Christian ministry, which included helping people in need by praying with them, providing the Good News, worshiping and providing physical nutrition without government "help" and interference.  Other churches are reportedly pitching in the fill the void from the governmental help in feeding the hungry was withdrawn.  

 [***}

So the Christian Service Ministry was probably within their legal rights to conduct their social service ministry in their own space, but since a federal functionary did not probably interpret the lawcorrectly (and understands this Administration), it would cost big bucks to litigate to keep federal funds flowing to feed the hungry. No wonder why the Christian Service Ministry chose to forgo their cut of the Government Cheese.

Nevertheless, as Bob Dylan put it: "You don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows." The Obama Administration has been hostile for respecting the free exercise of religion, as has been seen in the HHS Qualified Health Plan(Contraception) Mandate arguing that the Freedom of Religion means the Freedom of Worship--so believe whatever you want in the pews but that respect ends at the church doors. Ministers are now routinely barred from mass casualtysituations like the Boston Marathon bombing, for fear of the separation of church and state.  This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Church of 1802 and is a reaction to aggressive atheism in small segments of the American polity.

SEE MORE at DCBarroco.com 

Some Fanfare for the Fortnight for Freedom 2013

NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan

Today is the start of the second Fortnight for Freedom as urged by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops.  It is a period of  prayer, fasting, education and action to preserve the fundamental natural right that is enshrined in the Bill of Rights–the Freedom of Religion.  This effort was started last year by USCCB President New York Archbishop Timothy Cardinal Dolan






Appreciating the First Amendment is particularly poignant as there are so many challenges to religious liberty and the freedom of conscience, such as the HHS Qualified Health Plan Mandate (a.k.a. the Contraception, Sterilization and Abortifacient rider), the exclusion of non-compliant adoption organizations who will not service same-sex couples, states which have approved , states co-ercing traditional marriage believers to conform to same-sex so called marriage, the military labeling Catholics and Evangelicals as extremist groups for upholding their moral beliefs, military chaplains being forced out of service if they did not tow the new Politically Correct line on homosexuality.

When President Obama marked Religious Freedom Day in 2013, he framed religious liberty as the “freedom to worship as we choose.”  That might have been acceptable public policy shorthand, but such a charitable assessment is not borne out by the actions of the Obama Administration.   This is especially exemplified in the HHS contraception mandate.

 ***

Secular society has been championing a concept that America was founded on a separation of church and state and that religion was ancillary to education of the times.  While it is true that there is not a state religion, history shows the profound motivation of our founders to pursue religious liberty.   The Fortnight for Freedom should remind us of our proud history of religious liberty and point out how state incursions are strangling this fundamental freedom.  Part of this education about religious liberty should include how sweeping state regulation of secular values will end vital social services in adoption, immigration, adoption, feeding the destitute and health care by religious groups which are serious about their core beliefs.

SEE MORE at DCBarroco.com 

SCOTUS Sartorial Stylings at Inauguration

While there has been a buzz in the Lamestream Media as to the sartorial stylings of First Lady Michelle Obama at the 57th Presidential Inauguration, some astute observers had admired unusual haberdashery on the dais.

[Front L. Justice Sotomayor, R.  Justice Scalia; Back L. Justice Thomas, R. Justice Kagan] 

Associate Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wore some distinctive head-wear to the public swearing in ceremony.  Scalia donned a hat which was a gift from the St. Thomas More Society from November 2010 that is a custom made replica based on the 1527 portrait of St. Thomas More by Hans Holbein.

What is more interesting than the fashionista question: "What are you wearing?" would be "Why are you wearing that hat?"  Was this just an opportune occasion to wear a stylish cap?  Or might the sartorial choice be subtle statement which echoes the inspiration for the Fortnight for Freedom?

[L.] . Justice Scalia at Inauguration [R] Detail of St. Thomas More portrait by Hans Holbein (1527)

Last summer, when the US Council of Catholic Bishops sought to educate the public about the encroachment of Obamacare into our foundational freedom of religion by the HHS Qualified Health Plan   (contraception) mandate.  The kick off mass celebrated St. Thomas More, a faithful Catholic who sacrificed his high position as Lord Chancellor (Prime Minister) as well as his own life when the secular sovereign demanded him to abandon his faith.

You be the judge.

h/t: First Things

Fairer Sex Binder

During the Second 2012 Presidential Debate at Hofstra University, Long Island NY, a supposed "undecided" voter asked about pay equity for woman.

   

 Democrats have comforted themselves on the Romney Binders Full of Women meme.

Circulated by Democratic Party Social Media

 

But George Takei took note of one internet wag who shared something on Facebook.

It is said that laughter is the best medicine. But while yucking it up, such partisans fail to acknowledge Ron Suskin's observation in Confidence Man which characterized the Obama White House as a hostile work environment for women. It also ignores the hard fact that in the Obama White House women are paid 18% less then their male counterparts.    But with Obamacare, women will get "free" contraception, even if it forces many religious employers to violate their consciences. 

America's New State Religion?

If secular humanism is America's new state religion, I hope that I'm losing my religion after November 6th 2012. READ MORE at the DC-LausDeo blog.

Launching the Fortnight for Freedom

To educate people on the importance of preserving religious liberty and showing how the HHS mandate encroaches on every American's First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion, the USSB has launched the Fortnight for Freedom campaign.

But between the normalcy bias, Nuns on the Bus, the Soros funding Faith in Public Life and a secular culture which mistakenly thinks that the First Amendment protects the public from the free expression of religion rather than guaranteeing that right, there is a lot of education to be done in a short amount of time.

READ MORE at the DC Barroco website

Pelosi's Bull on Authentic Catholicism

Pope Benedict XVI (vested in white) greets then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (ironically dressed in purple), on the Papal pilgrimage to Washington, DC in 2008

House Minority Leader (and former Speaker of the House) Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th) prides herself on being an ardent Catholic but she seems quite confused about her faith, yet she continues to foist her heresy in the realm of politics.

A couple of years ago, at a Capitol Hill conference, Rep. Pelosi offered that her favorite word was “The Word” and stressed how it was crucial to give voice to that scriptural word when conducting public policy. However, when a reporter during the former Speaker’s weekly press gaggle followed up on when the Word became flesh, suddenly the concept was only fit for church. Perhaps Pelosi did not want to reconcile her beliefs with the inconvenient truth that her faith teaches about human life beginning at the moment of conception.

After then Senator Obama’s (D-IL) appearance at the Saddleback Civil Forum where the successful Presidential candidate deflected a question about abortion as being “above my pay grade”, Pelosi was pressed about abortion, she insisted that the doctors of the Church had been unable to make that definition.



Maybe Nancy was relying too much on Senator Augustine, uh Saint Augustine's, 4th Century notion of quickening instead of acknowleding Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968 which makes it quite clear that the Catholic Church believes that life begins at the moment of conception. It might give context as to why the American Catholic Sees are seething about the contraception mandate embedded in Obamacare.

Minority Leader Pelosi dismissed American Bishops objecting to the HHS mandate as imposing on religious freedom, noting that she respects her pastor not when these Shepherds of the Faith act as lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Instead of confining herself to be a hypocritical politico, Pelosi has annointed herself as a theologian. Pelosi pontificated that it was not entire Catholic Church was against the HHS mandate, just 43 Catholic organizations, such as the Archdiocese of Washington. Pelosi embellishes her bull by noting that they had not spoken ex cathedra.

 

So by Pelosi's train of thought, the Cardinal Bishop in her Archdiocese between the beltways is not speaking authoritatively on matters of faith for Catholic Church or she bears false witness about respecting her pastor.

But to correct the record as either Pelosi's religious education at Trinity College was inadequate or it was an instance of invincible ignorance, ex cathedra statements are solemn and formal papal pronouncements on matters of faith and morals. Before the Congresswoman from California takes solace that the Humanae Vitae encyclical was only a papal teaching, she should consider what Pope Blessed John Paul II stated in a 1993 papal audience:

When the Roman Pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in exercising his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians he defines with his supreme apostolic authority that a doctrine on faith and morals is to be held by the whole Church, through the divine assistance promised him in the person of St. Peter, he enjoys that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished to endow his Church in defining a doctrine on faith and morals.

But the lawsuits from 43 Catholic institutions protesting forced participation in contraception, sterlizations and abortion are rooted in natural law hence it is part of the unaltered Magesterium (teaching) of the Catholic Church. The same is true for the Catholic Church's opposing same sex so called "marriage". The same is true of opposition to homosexual "marriage", which trumps Pelosi's puerile justification supporting same sex marriage as her Catholic faith (allegedly) teacher her that that she must oppose all forms of discrimination.

 Faithful critics both instead and out of the Catholic Church grumble that former Speaker Pelosi should be excommunicated for her beliefs. Excommunication should never be used in a punitive secular sense, as it is intended to save the soul from eternal damnation. However, excommunication proclamation need not be issued by an ecclesial court under canon law ( ferendae sententiae). A Catholic's very actions may ipso facto result in a latae sententiae excommunication, which can include an apostate, a heritic or a schismatic. Often a bishop will convey this warning in private. For all we know, this may have already happened.

When former Speaker Pelosi visited the Vatican in 2009, she was granted a fifteen minute meeting with the His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, with no press or photographers present. Pelosi issued a press release which complimented the Roman pontiff for standing for religious freedom and praised the Church's leadership for fighting poverty, hunger and global warming. The Vatican press office had a chillier characterization of the brief greeting. The papal statement indicated:

His Holiness took the opportunity [of the brief greeting with Mrs. Pelosi -ed] to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoins all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.

It sounds like the Supreme Pastor of the Catholic flock was pretty clear about when life begins. This comes on top of the 2002 doctrinal note "The Participation of Catholics in Political Life," which states rather succinctly that politicians who profess to be Catholic have a "grave and clear obligation" to oppose any law that attacks human life. The brief greeting might have sotto voce also been a word to the wise.

Well, Mrs. Pelosi persists in purusing a public policies that is anathamatic to Catholics. Worse, the House Minority Leader justifies her progressive political positions in faith while misrepresenting the Magesterium. In this environment, Canon 915 seems applicable to this layman which denies the Eucharist to someone who obstinantly persists in grave sin. Even though Washington's Archbishop Donald John Cardinal Wuerl has recently been appointed to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Wuerl seems chary about keeping pro-abortion Catholic politicians from participating in Communion. Based on Monsignor Charles Pope's recent reflection, it is dubious that such action would be applied.

It is galling that a Cafeteria Catholic extols spiritual junk food for mass consumption instead of the Divine Feast under the illusion of obeying "The Word". In a pluralistic representative Republic, it is not uncommon for a politician to promote positions which an individual finds repugnant. What seems unjust is that leader lying about the moral underpinnings of these positions when it directly contradicts clear tenants of Catholic faith. If she wants to rationalize her positions on abortion, contraception and same sex "marriage" through a veneer of  religiosity, she would do well to swim the Tiber in reverse, as her secuclar humanist progressive political  positions would be welcomed with open arms among most Episcopalians or even Unitarians. But such a principled act would fail to pander to a large voting bloc of Catholics

Forcing Catholics Institutions Out of Charity Not Fine with US

The HHS final rule on qualified health plans imposes a Contraception Mandate that poses a poison pill for faithful Catholic and other institutions that believe that life begins at conception. Mark Rienzi, the Becket Fund For Religious Liberty attorney who represents faithful institutions effected by the dictat, believes that if the courts do not defend religious liberty that Catholics could end up engaging in civil disobedience against an unjust law.

The civil disobedience with religious liberty protestors will not be like the sit-ins of the civil rights movement. Instead, Rienzi anticipates institutions not paying for the contraception, sterilizations and abortifacients. This would lead to crippling fines which eventually would put the charitable and educational missions out of existence.

READ MORE at the DCBarroco website