For His Friends

First, a confession. I spent all day in a clinic and in doctors’ offices for regular post-op visits. All went very well on that front. What I was not able to do was watch the live video of the second day of the annual Fall meeting so for these reflections, I am dependent on news reports from CNS and other sources. As you know, EWTN is not carrying the bishops’ meeting this year, gavel to gavel, so it was not possible  for me to record the meeting and watch it this evening. Anyway, here goes.

Most all the action items passed with sizable majorities. While almost every action item had one or two votes against, this preventing a unanimous action of the assembly, I have always held that if the Nicene Creed  (the one we recite and pray at Mass) were placed before the bishops, it too would garner two or three negative votes.

One item which had the largest number of “no” votes was a proposed pastoral letter on marriage. Although the bishops’ National Advisory Council encouraged a “yes” vote on the proposed pastoral, bishops who spoke today felt that while there was nothing wrong with the proposed text, there were some issues and passages which could have been rendered better . The pastoral received five more votes than necessary for passage. The bishops also overwhelmingly approved a revision in the “Ethical and Religious Directives” which guide local bishops, health care facilities, doctors and nurses in hard decisions about medical treatment in an age when technology allows life to be maintained and sustained for years. The Pro-Life Committee saw their work product, a statement on life and birth in a technological age pass by a wide margin. All of these actions are available to you now on the USCCB web site.

The long work on a new translation of the Roman Missal is over and now Rome’s approval is awaited. Sometime in 2011, the new Missal will be implemented in the English speaking world. We will have to get use to some new language and there will be a period of catechesis in 2010 and early 2011 which I and our priests will lead to get you ready for the changes.

Finally, several bishops came to the defense of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development whose collection will be taken up this coming week-end in churches throughout the U.S. Founded about 30 years ago, CCHD has given grants to many organizations and agencies and sponsored an education program on the roots of poverty. Conservatively oriented Catholics have beeb taking shots at CCHD since its inception. Several years ago it was learned that a grant recipient was ACORN which was involved in projects not in accord with Catholic teaching. Several years ago before the US Government and Congress became aware of ACORN’s malfeasance, CCHD had dropped all support for this organization. I personally believe in and support CCHD and feel that our bishops’ committee  has acted responsibly with regard to this challenge.

That’s it from m perspective. Some final thoughts and notes on the meeting tomorrow.

+RNL

After an opening Mass in the hotel, the bishops began their annual Fall plenary assembly by spending the morning in what are called “regional meetings.” Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina are all in “Region XIV” so the bishops of the twelve dioceses of those four states comprise the regional grouping. I know that one of the topics which the bishops were asked to discuss is the number of seminaries spread across the United States at this time. This discussion comes at a moment when it appears that vocations are on the rise and seminary enrollment is increasing. As I mentioned earlier here, St. John Vianney College Seminar opened in September with about 80 seminarians (the highest ever) and St. Vincent de Paul Regional Seminary in Boynton Beach opened with about sixty seminarians but a total enrollment of eighty is not more than a year or two away. Seminaries are expensive operations but there are strong regional arguments to be made for them (training future priests for ministry in Spanish to Hispanics, for example.) No one wants to close their seminaries in this country so I wonder tonight what suggestions may have come from the regional meeting discussions this morning.

The Plenary opened with an hour and twenty minutes of formalities including an address by Cardinal Francis George, our President, and the papal nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Pietro Sambi. These two talks have always been a part of the opening “ritual” for the meetings. Cardinal George began by speaking about the importance of priests to the ministry of bishops and painted a fine picture of what the Church might be like if there were no priests. He did this largely in the context of this being “the year for priests” as declared by Pope Benedict XVI. It was a fine reflection for we bishops about how important and vital our priests are not just to the Church which is obvious to all of our people, but to our own ministry as bishops.

The Papal Nuncio’s talk spoke about the qualities needed of the bishops in light of love for the Church. He opened with a long quotation from Pope Paul VI prior to his death about the gift of love from Christ to the late Pope in the Church. He then outlined three necessary qualities for bishops: fidelity (allowing here for some application of creativity in addition to preserving the treasury of the faith), prudence, and hope. He paid special tribute to a national meeting of Diocesan Vocation Directors recently held in Newark, finding the Directors to be impressive, resourceful and full of hope. Our own Father Len Plazewski is the President of the National Vocation Directors and God knows he reflects all those adjectives. The Nuncio ended his remarks by sharing a letter which he received from a priest asking for the appointment of “more positive” bishops. “Check, Archbishop. And thanks for your remarks.”

The rest of the afternoon was given over to the introduction of the “action items” which the bishops will begin to debate and vote tomorrow morning. The assembly had only ninety minutes, max, to submit formal amendments to the Action Items.

Finally, my successor as Chairman of the Board of Catholic Relief Services, Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, gave the assembled bishops a wonderful picture of CRS today, along with a stirring four minute video. The archbishop noted that only 22% of Church-going Catholics could identify CRS as the Church in the US’s overseas disaster relief and development agency.

Cardinal George asked the bishops assembled to support a statement which he wished to make on health care reform. We’ll download that statement for you here as soon as it is available.

+RNL

Update: Cardinal George’s Statement is now available at the USCCB website for this year’s November meeting, or you can access it directly.

I am very grateful that the Gator’s game with Vanderbilt turned out never to be close and was somewhat boring since it allowed me to watch intently the debate in the U.S. House of Representatives last night on the Stupak anti-abortion amendment to the House Health Care Bill. I stayed with the U.S. House for the rest of the night until finally the vote on the whole health care proposal. It was an interesting exercise in civics and political science. Just before midnight, the House voted (1) to accept the Stupak amendment adding even strong language to proscribe any use of taxpayer funds to pay for abortion under the House Health Care bill, (2) rejected a Republican counter health bill proposal, and (3) pass by the narrowest of margins the omnibus Health Care proposal.

First, the Stupak amendment: I was proud of the almost sixty Democrats who joined a solid, unanimous corp of Republicans to insert this language and generally proud of the rhetoric surrounding this approach. The pro-choice members offered their usual statements of opposition and of course it was embarrassing to listen to some members of the pro-choice caucus in the House speak who were probably born Catholics, may still be Catholics for all I know, but still do not grasp the moral implications and the teaching of the Church of their baptism on the dignity and protection of all human life. I have far more patience with those outside of our faith community who at least struggle with this issue.

It appears that on Friday night a deal which would have met the requirements of the Stupak wing fell through and representatives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops attending the meeting indicated that our Conference would oppose the whole bill if it did not include the more restrictive language of “Stupak.” Speaker Pelosi then did the only thing she could do knowing that without the Stupak langauge she would not muster sufficient votes for the omnibus health care bill allowed the matter to come before the House for limited debate and vote. I suspect that the Speaker hopes in her heart of hearts that if there is ever a conference committee to reconcile the House version with anything that might come from the Senate, this language which again I suspect she finds odious will the negotiated out. But for the moment, this was a victory for the pro-life cause and the number of Democrats who joined with their colleagues from the other side of the aisle suggests that the polls-confirmed shift in the country from tolerance for “abortion-on-request” to a greater level of uncertainty and even distaste is having its effect even on Congress. Until the health care debate is over, I still consider this “one small step for human life.”

The nation’s bishops and I support health care reform of whatever type will reduce the number of uninsured in the country and assist in covering all people within our boundaries who are currently denied access. I would confess to some personal concerns about the range and scope of the Bill passed by the House last night but it is still “a long way to Tipperary” and this hunt for equity in access and reduced cost is far from over. We will see. All of our Congressional representatives except the very predictable Ms. Castor voted for the Stupak amendment and they deserve our thanks which I will communicate to them tomorrow. They always hear from us when we want something but seldom hear “thanks” when they perform for us. If you have the time to thank them, join me.

+RNL

Today’s issue of the Los Angeles Times has an op-ed piece by James Oliphant in which he indicates that roughly forty moderate Democrats in the House of Representatives are ready to hold up debate and vote on the Health Care legislation unless and until stronger wording prohibiting any reform money for paying for any abortions under the reform plan is inserted. This group wants the strong language of what for 33 years has been referred to as the “Hyde Amendment” inserted into the law here as it has been. Hopeful sign to be sure.

Later this afternoon, Speaker Pelosi said she had the necessary support to move the House version to the floor for debate and vote but the article which noted this indicated that there was still a strong minority of Democrats who want the abortion funding language made stronger. Decision time is near but this legislation will soon find that “it is a long way to Tipperary.” Write those letters, good people or better yet call or e-mail.

+RNL

As one who worked at the national level for fifteen years representing the Church in the “public policy” arena, I have become somewhat astute as to when to call out the cavalry. My parents early on taught me that you cannot and should not yell “wolf” or “fire” too often or you lose all credibility. Last January when there were cries for postcards to Congress on the “Freedom of Choice” Act, I and most of our pastors did not call out the troops for a number of reasons, primary among which was that there was as yet and still is not as far as I know any serious proposed “Freedom of Choice Act” under consideration by this Congress. Generally one waits for the right moment before calling up the troops.

Well the time is now to stop the inclusion of federal monies for abortion services, procedures, etc., read that yours and my tax dollars, in any Health Care legislation under consideration. Unfortunately all the present proposals for health care reform contain expansion of abortion services and coverage and therein lies the deal breaker for we who value the protection and right to life of the unborn. Now I wish to be clear at what the Church is seeking – maintain the status quo which does as the President promised in his address to Congress – no federal funds will be included in any bill he signs into law which earmarks  money for abortion and the freedom of conscience of health care workers must be maintained according to the present proscription. Some voices are beginning to suggest that the proposed legislation should be used to further roll back the rulings of the U.S.  Supreme Court and I can guarantee you that will not happen in this Congress and with this President. We will have to be satisfied in my judgment with holding the status quo – imperfect legislation perhaps but care of the poor and uninsured is also a basic human right and we need to demonstrate that we as a Church are also interested in the quality of life after birth (remember the Gospel description of final judgment day).

So now is the time friends for a “call to arms.” The bishops have asked every parish in the country to include information in next Sunday’s bulletins and I have asked all of our priests to find the best way next week-end to solicit your assistance in giving life to a ground-swell in support of NO on abortion coverage and YES to some form of health care reform. On the latter, a reasonable Catholic who embraces the concept of universal health care can take exception to certain provisions of any proposed legislation, but on the former, no weaseling please – WE ARE PRO-LIFE!

You can access the materials which you should be seeing in your parishes here:

• Memo to all Pastors of Parishes in the Diocese
• USCCB Parish Information and Resources
• USCCB Healthcare Website

Thanks for standing tall on what may be one of the most important legislative moments in our lifetime.

+RNL

If you read or stay current with “Church news” you have probably already read that Congressman Patrick Kennedy representing 66% Catholic Rhode Island in the U.S. House of Representatives in an interview accused the nation’s Catholic bishops of fanning the flames of opposition to universal health care reform by insisting that federal monies in the plan to pay for abortion are a “deal killer” in which the bishops whom the Congressman calls allegedly pro-life would be willing to see the nation’s uninsured remain that way. How can we claim to be pro-life and oppose health care reform even if it contains new taxpayer monies for “abortion on request”, the Congressman asks. Easy, Mr. Kennedy,  just listen to your own bishop and accept his invitation to meet and discuss the grave moral dimensions of this consequence. Bishop Tobin, the bishop of Providence, in his response to you has succinctly laid out the Church’s (not just the bishops’) opposition to such an inclusion, and I stand ready to campaign heavily against the legislation if it includes money for abortion and to support it equally strongly if it does not and truly makes access to health care a possibility for all Americans.

I have written letters to our Congressional Delegation from this diocese, namely Congress persons Castor, Brown-Waite, Young, Putnam, Bilirakis. (As a sample, here is the letter to Congress person Castor.) May I invite you to do the same for Senators Nelson and LeMieux and your Congressman. Maybe it will help one or the other to understand why this means so much. By the way every Florida bishop is writing to their delegation and the Archbishop in our name to Senator LeMieux and Bishop Wenski to Senator Nelson.