The Cathoholic

Boston's Caritas Christi Deal--What's for Sale?

This spring, when I reported on the Caritas Christi sale to one of the nation's top private equity firms, my story noted that the new buyer would maintain the Catholic identity of the hospital network. At least, that's what I was told at the time. Now, we learn that the deal includes this option: the buyer could pay an additional $25 million to dismantle all vestiges of the network's Catholic identity, including adherence to Catholic moral teaching.

The recent controversy in Phoenix over the morality of a direct abortion at a Catholic hospital underscores the fact that mainstream health care ethics doesn't necessarily conform to Catholic teaching. Critics of the Caritas deal charge that the $25 million opt out fee suggests that even the church's commitment to the sanctity of life is for sale. An additional concern is how this opt out clause--if executed-- would affect the pro-life physicians and nurses who now serve patients through the network.

Catholic and Pro-life Leaders: Health Bill Postmortem

Here's my article on reactions to the bill's passage by Catholic and pro-life leaders.

They give high marks to the USCCB and vent frustration regarding the Catholic Health Association's endorsement.

Catholic Church's Healthcare Debate/War

Capital Hill has endured months of wrangling over health care reform. Now the debate has moved to the Catholic Church, as we face the cathartic moment of an extended, deeply frustrating political drama. As this battle within the Church plays out in real time, a friend of mine who works at the highest levels of "Catholic health care" wrote this message:

"The Church and shadow-Church and the Magisterium and parallel-magisterium are finally, after 45 years, on public display with a clarity that no Catholic can ignore.  If the health bill passes, with "Catholic health care" support, we will have moral crisis the likes of which we have not seen since slavery since every Catholic will be paying to provide abortion."

From the beginning, the U.S. bishops wanted to make universal health insurance a reality. That was clear. They offered just a handful of preconditions: no federal funding of abortion and robust conscience protections. President Obama said he would honor those concerns. The hierarchy was heartened by the Stupak amendment, which imposed an outright ban on federal funding of abortions. The Senate chose a different path. More wrangling, more closed door meetings. By last Friday, the Democratic party leadership walked away from negotiations with Stupak, and the USCCB had to walk away from a tempting, if flawed solution to the mounting red ink that has forced the closing of many Catholic hospitals throughout the country.

Then Sister Carol Keehan, the president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association backed the Senate bill, a move that prompted Archbishop Charles Chaput, O.F.M.Cap. of Denver, the USCCB President, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, and Archbishop Dolan of New York to reaffirm the USCCB position--and Cardinal George explicitly  took  aim at Sister Keehan's stance. A few days pass, and two House Democrat holdouts signal their willingness to climb on board the Obamacare train.

Yesterday, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, already smarting from Rome's decision to launch an apostolic visitation that will review the practices of progressive-minded U.S.women's congregations, issued a statement of support for the Senate bill. Will the statement provide cover for a few more Democrats to back the Senate bill? We'll know the answer to that question very shortly.

Today, the orthodox Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious  jumped into the fray with a statement backing the U.S. bishops as the authoritative voice for the Catholic Church.  Meanwhile,  the USCCB has issued yet another statement that provides further ammunition for pro-life opponents of Obamacare.

I've posted the USCCB response in full below:

U.S. BISHOPS PROVIDE RESOURCES EXPLAINING FLAWS IN SENATE HEALTH CARE BILL  WASHINGTON—The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has made available several new resources explaining its calls for essential changes to the Senate health care reform bill. In a March 15 statement, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, President of the USCCB, said that the U.S. bishops would, regretfully, have to oppose the final bill if these changes were not made.             The resources are available at: www.usccb.org/healthcare             Among them is an analysis of the abortion funding provisions of the Senate health care bill that highlights the bishops’ objections (www.usccb.org/healthcare/030410facts.pdf). Two pieces respond to recent criticisms of the bishops’ position on the health care bill, namely criticisms from Timothy Stoltzfus Jost of Washington and Lee University Law School (www.usccb.org/healthcare/jost-response.pdf) and the other regarding the funding of abortion at community health centers (www.usccb.org/healthcare/communityhealthcenters.pdf).             With so much of the health care debate focusing on the nature of the legal “status quo” of federal abortion funding, the page also features a backgrounder on current federal policy on abortion funding (www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/healthcare/abortion_funding_102309.pdf) and an analysis of the House health care bill’s Stupak Amendment (www.usccb.org/healthcare/StupakAmendmentFactsheet.pdf). Update: The USCCB just issued a sharply worded  "clarification," responding to a statement issued by the religious lobbing group, NETWORK, which sent a letter to every member of the U.S. Congress endorsing the Senate bill and purported to represent  tens of thousands of women religious. The USCCB clarification is offered in full here: "Washington—A recent letter from Network, a social justice lobby of sisters, grossly overstated whom they represent in a letter to Congress that was also released to media.  Network’s letter, about health care reform, was signed by a few dozen people, and despite what Network said, they do not come anywhere near representing 59,000 American sisters. The letter had 55 signatories, some individuals, some groups of three to five persons.  One endorser signed twice.  There are 793 religious communities in the United States.  The math is clear. Network is far off the mark." Most unusual! Hard to know where this debate/war is headed. Will it be papered over, once the dust settles? Or will the fissures revealed in these statements erupt into something more definitive--that much discussed, long anticipated schism?     Sister Mary Ann Walsh Director of Media Relations United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Brown Victory Cheers Catholic Pro-lifers

Last night's  Republican victory in Massachusetts' special election has thrilled pro-lifers worried about the effort to mandate federal funding of abortion through the passage of Obamacare. Here's my exclusive for the National Catholic Register that offers the Catholic, pro-life angle on Brown's sudden surge of support.

Update: Here's Phil Lawler's excellent analysis of the Scott Brown victory and what it means for the future of Democratic politics in the Bay State.d

Catholic Church and Same-sex Marriage in D.C.

It looks like same-sex marriage will soon be legal in the District of Columbia, barring some unlikely change of heart in the Democrat-controlled Congress, or, down the road, a Supreme Court ruling. The Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. has lobbied unsuccessfuly for a more robust religious exemption, but it has been difficult for the church to get past an unfair characterization of its stance as a kind of "threat" or "ultimatum." Let's hope Archbishop Wuerl get's his position into the public square while there is still some wiggle room--perhaps a week to a month remains before a final vote. In the Washington Post, the archbishop argues for a better balance of the competing interests of same-sex advocates in the D.C. council and the church's commitment to Catholic teaching on marriage.

"Conscience clause"-- Rep.Chris Smith's solution

On Time's "Swampland" blog, a post on President Obama's Notre Dame speech offers this startling observation: 

"And just as they might have wondered whether this was all just talk from the man who has spent the first few months of his presidency shoring up abortion rights, they heard Obama change his position on conscience exceptions for health care workers: "Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."

Yes, the President did say something about a "sensible conscience clause," but he didn't precisely say he had changed his position. 

No one on Capital Hill  would applaud a presidential turnaround on the issue more than Rep.Chris Smith, the House's number one pro-life advocate. And quite naturally, Smith jumped on President Obama's vow to establish a "sensible conscience clause."  Smith wants to nail down a solid commitment before the dust settles, and here's the congressman's suggestion: Mr. President, reverse your decision to rescind the Bush administration's conscience provision for healthcare personnel.

 I wrote a post for Touchstone Magazine's Mere Comments blog that points to one possible definition of a "sensible conscience clause" that pro-lifers will not support. Let's see how the White House follows through. 

Update: Today the USCCB President, Cardinal Francis George issued the following statement in response to President Obama's remark:

"I am grateful for President Obama’s statement on May 17 that we should all “honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion,” and his support for conscience clauses advancing this goal.

 

 "Since 1973, federal laws protecting the conscience rights of health care providers have been an important part of our American civil rights tradition.  These laws should be fully implemented and enforced.  Caring health professionals and institutions should know that their deeply held religious or moral convictions will be respected as they exercise their right to serve patients in need. 

 

"Catholic providers, in particular, make a large and essential contribution to health care in our society.  Essential steps to protect these conscience rights will strengthen our health care system and enhance many patients’ access to necessary life-affirming care.

 

"A government that wants to reduce the tragic number of abortions in our society will also work to ensure that no one is forced to support or participate in abortion, whether through directly providing or referring for abortions or being forced to subsidize them with their tax dollars.  As this discussion continues we look forward to working with the Administration and other policy makers to advance this goal."