Yep, Catholic Church still pro-life

prolife_catholic_tshirt-p2356234363669023973oib_400We’ve been complaining a bit about the meager inclusion of religion angles in some of the political coverage of the various legislative efforts to reform health care and health insurance. So David Kirkpatrick’s piece in the New York Times this week was welcome. Headlined “Some Catholic Bishops Assail Health Plan,” here’s how it began:

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has been lobbying for three decades for the federal government to provide universal health insurance, especially for the poor. Now, as President Obama tries to rally Roman Catholics and other religious voters around his proposals to do just that, a growing number of bishops are speaking out against it.

Except the story never shows that the bishops changed their position on universal health insurance. Some bishops are simply being quite vocal about the way abortion would be funded in the current legislation. Others are concerned about the premium government efforts might place on efficacy at the expense of the chronically ill.

The story quotes from Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput’s newspaper column and other letters and statements from Catholic leaders around the country. He explains that the opposition of bishops has already been getting around and will be reported in a Catholic newspaper being distributed this weekend at churches throughout the country. He calls it another setback for President Obama and says it reflects a struggle and tension within the church over how heavily to weigh opposition to abortion against other concerns.

Kirkpatrick puts that question in context:

The same question, [Notre Dame] Professor [Cathleen] Kaveny said, set off the debates over whether conscientious Catholics could vote for Mr. Obama despite his support for abortion rights, whether he should be invited to speak at Notre Dame, or whether Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, like Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., should present themselves for Communion.

I wanted to highlight this to point out how well Kirkpatrick handled the Communion issue. So many times this issue is discussed in terms of barring abortion rights communicates from Communion. But when the bishops speak about it, they tend to discuss it in terms of whether someone who publicly supports abortion rights should present themselves for Communion. Kudos to Kirkpatrick for phrasing that more accurately.

The article discusses some of the debate over how abortion would be paid for under various legislative proposals. That could — and will — be another post entirely.

But there was another problem with the piece. It comes in the section where Kirkpatrick tries to balance out the abortion concerns with the support of various “liberal” Catholic groups. He quotes the Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and others:

On its Web site this summer, the bishops’ conference published a commentary by the Rev. Douglas Clark of Savannah, Ga., arguing that the country now rationed “health care on the basis of wealth.” Father Clark cited an encyclical last month from Pope Benedict XVI about the evils of global economic inequality.

Catholic Charities and the Catholic Health Association endorsed the president’s plan without reservation.

The only problem is that neither Catholic Charities nor the Catholic Health Association have endorsed the particular legislation currently under debate. As Our Sunday Visitor‘s Daily Take blog report, they both have, well, reservations. This is from a July 31, 2009 letter written by Father Larry Snyder, the president of Catholic Charities:

I am writing to clarify that Catholic Charities USA does not support any plan to reform health care and/or any proposed legislative provision that allows or promotes the funding of abortions or compels any health care provider or institution to provide such a service. In fact, Catholic Charities USA will continue to work with the Catholic Health Association and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to ensure that any health care reform legislation will not include such provisions.

Catholic Charities USA will continue to work to reform health care in a way that is consistent with the teachings of our faith.

And here is the statement on the Catholic Health Association website:

CHA has not endorsed any of the health care reform bills, but our message to lawmakers is clear: health care reform should not result in an expansion of abortion, and it must sustain conscience protections for health care providers who do not want to participate in abortions or other morally objectionable procedures.

Looks like a correction is in order.

Print Friendly

  • Dave

    The Catholic position on health care reform is moderately but not impenetrably complicated. If the MSM can’t get it right, how can they deal with issues, religious or secular, that are really complex?

  • Davis

    Yep, Catholic Church still pro-life

    Seems the better journalistic question is: Does the Catholic Church stand for anything else?

    As you described, the story never really explains whether the Catholic bishops have changed their position on universal health insurance. I wonder if it’s because they didn’t ask, or if no wonder answered. No journalists seem to ask people like Chaput questions, only report his monologues. Is that good reporting? Shouldn’t some reporter ask, “We know how you stand on abortion, but what about the poor. Can you talk about your position on health care reform without referencing abortion?”

  • http://www.archny.org/news-events/columns-and-blogs/blog---stepping-out-of-the-boat/ Ed Mechmann

    You’re expecting journalists to uncover what the Catholic Church says and does for the poor?

    These are the same guys who couldn’t find the Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities statements, even though they’re right on the front page of their websites. You actually expect them to locate, say, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Website, and find the “Domestic Social Development” department, or the “Social Development and World Peace” department? That would take at least, maybe, a ten second Google search and three clicks of the mouse. Or maybe a phone call to the USCCB Media Relations Office. That would require a New Yorker to dial what, 11 digits on the phone?

    Obviously too much for the elite J-School grads at the Times.

  • dalea

    Bishop Nickless:

    “The Catholic Church does not teach that government should directly provide health care,” Bishop Nickless of Sioux City wrote, adding, “Any legislation that undermines the vitality of the private sector is suspect.”

    Where is this found in the catechism? No one is proposing that the government should directly provide. The issue before the public and the churches concerns insurance. And the reporter does not seem to comprehend what insurance is. He keeps confusing insurance with providing.

    What the subject needs is someone with a business or economics background to look at the matter. Reading the Southern Cross article, it struck me that Fr Clark clearly does not understand the situation. His simple contrast between rich and poor does not describe the situation at all. There is a lot of work needed here.

  • Julia

    Neither in the Sermon on the Mount or any other place in the New Testament does it say that providing health care or taking care of the poor, etc. is the job of government – whether directly or by other means. Nor will you find anything saying it is not the goernment’s job.

    Figuring out the best and most efficient way to help those who need assistance has no one Bible or Church mandated method. Of course, some people’s opinions are weighed more heavily than others. Looks like Bishop Nickless may believe that the current proposals will inevitably lead to government directly providing health care. He’s not alone in thinking that. You are probably going to find bishops all over the spectrum in regard to their views on health care, but not so much on abortion.

  • Davis

    Neither in the Sermon on the Mount or any other place in the New Testament does it say that providing health care or taking care of the poor, etc. is the job of government – whether directly or by other means. Nor will you find anything saying it is not the goernment’s job.

    Of course, the exact same thing could be said about abortion, which is never mentioned in the Scriptures nor is the idea that an early-stage fetus is a life.

    Yet, the bishops have no trouble crafting policy statements based on interpretation instead of actual words when it comes to abotion.

  • Chris Bolinger

    Nice try, Davis. Try Psalm 139, among many other passages. Stick to comments on journalism, please.

  • Jay

    Well Golly! The NYT actually ran a correction:

    An article on Friday about an increasing number of bishops who are speaking out against President Obama’s health care plans overstated the support of Catholic Charities and the Catholic Health Association for the president’s plan

  • http://www.getreligion.org Mollie

    Jay,

    Thank you so much for letting us know. I think that correction is quite the understatement . . . but glad they got it in there.