Great job, TC, thank you!!!!

Whether it was the administration’s early shift toward the anemic language of “freedom of worship” instead of the more historically grounded and robust concept of “freedom of religion” in key diplomatic discussions…(emphasis mine)

The phrase Freedom of Religion is indeed “historically grounded” and has come to have a very definite meaning in practice — and practice is the key here. If I have Freedom of Religion it means I not only have the right to choose my religion and practice that religion within the confines of my home and/or my place of worship — it also means I have the right to practice my religion outside of those places, what we speak of as the Public Square.

On the other hand, Freedom of Worship also has a very definite meaning in practice — a much more limited meaning. “Worship” in this context is seen as a strictly private activity; therefore I only have the right to acknowledge my beliefs within the privacy of my home and/or place of worship. The result is what Fr. Richard John Neuhaus described as “The Naked Public Square”.

Make no mistake about it — President Obama’s repeated usage of the phrase “freedom of worship” is very deliberate. For many of us, at first glance, the two phrases seem to be talking about the same thing; but we have to accept the Truth – they are very different things, and each time anyone uses “freedom of worship”, they are doing so to send a message to a very particular constituency. Language is critical!! Our Founding Fathers knew this. The “other side” today knows this – so should we.

“God will not hold us guiltless.
To not speak is to speak.
To not act is to act.”
                  Dietrich Bonhoeffer

There is so much packed into Dr. Rahe’s piece, so much that needed to be said, and I for one am very grateful that someone finally pointed out the elephant in the room. My mind is going in a thousand different directions – and over the next few days I will comment on this piece, which is why this post is titled “Part 1”. I hope many, both Catholic and non-Catholic benefit from a careful reading of the essay – because its message applies well beyond the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, some of the latest developments in the battle between Religious Freedom and the Administration:

First, the USCCB website has the latest official response from the bishops to both the First and Second Accommodations. It appears that this response may address one of Dr. Rahe’s problems with the earlier responses, namely the narrow universe the Church was attempting to protect. In this document, the Bishops declare that there are many types of “stakeholders”:

But we note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer’s plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.

Next, also from the USCCB site, a response to Jay Carney’s statement concerning the Bishops support (or lack thereof) for Obamacare. Maybe Church leaders will finally become concerned about the continual rewriting of history that has been so common for many years in this country.

Finally, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput has for many years been an outspoken supporter of Catholic orthodoxy. His latest statement, Obama HHS Mandate “Insulting, Dangerous, can be read here. A brief excerpt:

Many Catholics are confused and angry. They should be.

Quite a few Catholics supported President Obama in the last election, so the ironies here are bitter. Many feel betrayed. They’re baffled that the Obama administration would seek to coerce Catholic employers, private and corporate, to violate their religious convictions.

But it’s clear that such actions are developing into a pattern. Whether it was the administration’s early shift toward the anemic language of “freedom of worship” instead of the more historically grounded and robust concept of “freedom of religion” in key diplomatic discussions; or its troubling effort to regulate religious ministers recently rejected 9-0 by the Supreme Court in the Hosanna Tabor case; or the revocation of the U.S. bishops’ conference human-trafficking grant for refusing to refer rape victims to abortion clinics, it seems obvious that this administration is – to put it generously – tone deaf to people of faith.

From left to right, Sophie and Molly – Are they normal?

I have often read that the normal cycle for cats is “play — eat — sleep“. For my two, the cycle goes “sleep — eat — play”. Their best playtime occurs just after a meal. In that sense, I guess they are not “normal”.

My next thought was a little item I had caught, don’t even remember where, TV, radio, I don’t know — but it was something about some Psychiatric group revising the manual of mental disorders to add a few more conditions — among them, grieving and shyness. I did some research, and the revisions have not been approved yet — but yes, consideration was being given to expand the list. Not the first time this has happened — and over the years some of us have been quite disturbed at certain conditions or behaviors coming under the umbrella of a mental disorder when, to us, they often seemed merely to represent differences in the human population that add to the richness of human life. We are, after all, not all the same — and I for one appreciate the many personalities, skill sets, points of view, etc. that I find in both friends, acquaintances and others known only through various media — books, TV, radio, internet, etc.

I’m not quite sure where our Elites are headed with all this — just exactly what kind of person they eventually would consider fully “normal” — but I have a feeling that our lives would be very un-human if we were all the same — God did not choose to make automatons — but it seems many men would do so. And further, any that did not conform to their vision would receive treatment to change them into conforming creatures. If you think this is the attitude of a paranoid, I remind you that under the totalitarianism of the Soviet Union, those who disagreed philosophically with the Regime were sometimes classified as mentally ill and institutionalized and “treated” until compliance was obtained. I would also remind you that there is some truth in the old saying “just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you“.

Three sources for you to check out:

First, this article deals with the latest proposed changes.

Second, the book Way to Inner Peace by Bishop Fulton J. Sheen is a collection of short essays first copyrighted in 1949 and reprinted many times since then. Many of them deal with the real and potential impact of the evolving influence of the Psychiatric profession — some of which he predicted would have a very negative effect. This book should be in everyone’s spiritual library for the wisdom it contains on this and other topics.

Third, a really terrific book that looks at our culture and society today and assesses the impact of the psychological profession is One Nation Under Therapy by Christina Hoff Sommers and Sally Satel, M. D.

You probably recall that Accommodation 1 gave the Church an extra year to figure out how to violate its conscience. For a really good piece and an excellent analysis on this, take a look at this article on catholic.org. When all Hell broke loose, the Administration worked furiously to come up with an answer that would satisfy those who raised boisterous objections.

I tried, really I did, to understand what was different about Accommodation 2– see both text and video here. I used my God given powers of logic and analysis and came away very confused and with a crashing headache. For the life of me, it seemed that there was no real difference; it seemed that the Church was left in the exact same position — that the so-called difference led to the same outcome. But then maybe I was missing something, after all I’m no where near as smart as the President, whom we have been assured is the smartest person who ever walked the earth — perhaps my humble little brain was just not up to the task.

But then I saw Charles Krauthammer sum everything up on Special Report — watch the video here. And now it’s all very clear — that is, clearly, there is in fact no difference between the position the Church was left in following Accommodation 1 and the position the Church was left in following Accommodation 2. Whew, thank you, God, for giving me a working brain!

And there is a further problem with Accommodation 2 – there’s this thing called “being self-insured“. So, if there is no insurance company involved, how does that work?

And so the saga continues….

Really??

I don’t even care what the terms are — do you?

Do you not realize you have been lied to all along?? If you didn’t see it sooner, ok, I won’t say I told you so (ooops, I think I just did, oh well) — but do you realize it now???

Archbishop Timothy Dolan says he received assurances from Obama, and now the opposite is occurring — with all due respect, your Eminence, welcome to the club.

Look to the past lies

We have seen the true beliefs of this President

We have seen what he will try to get away with

We have seen the disdain for any views but his own

We have seen a perfect example of the arrogance and the dangers of leaving the arrogant words and actions unchallenged

And what does it mean, exactly, to have the “exceptions” that the Church sought from the Administration. Are we saying that the ability to practice religion is dependent upon the wishes of the Federal Government? Really? I thought that there were certain basic rights granted by God — you know, that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” thing in the Declaration of Independence. And to make double sure that any future Government of this great land respected these basic rights, many of them were spelled out in the first ten amendments to the Constitution. The questions we are considering now are very clearly covered by the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (emphasis mine)

If any are fooled again it is because they willingly allow themselves to be fools — which of you will be among them?

The day before yesterday, over and over again, the talking heads cited a poll of Catholics in which 52% agreed with the statement that medical plans obtained through an employer should provide all forms of birth control free of charge to the employees. I’m not going to look at the poll itself to see if it was fair, how the question was worded, etc. — because it really doesn’t matter — IT’S THE WRONG QUESTION — and the results are totally IRREVELANT to the discussion.

Why? Let’s start with the poll question itself. In order to address the real issues, the question to ask would be something like:

“Does the Federal Government have the right to force a religious body to engage in activities that violate it’s teachings?”

Let’s try that one, shall we??

Now let’s look at the relevance of the result. Is Catholic Church doctrine determined by the whims of a majority of it’s membership? That would really be messy, wouldn’t it? Imagine — as popular culture swings from one thing to another, Church doctrine should change too? Does Jesus change??

“Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”
Hebrews 13:8, NIV

No, Catholic Church doctrine IS NOT DETERMINED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Thank God!! There are some absolutes — they are TRUE forever and ever in all times and all places.

The Church, actually every body of Christians, contains those who are do not always follow the basic rules of their faith — hence Catholics state at the beginning of the Mass:

“I confess to Almighty God and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have greatly sinned, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault…”

Seems to me Jesus said he came to save sinners — seems to me he was heavily criticized by the religious authorities of his time for hanging out with sinners — seems to me one of the basic Christian TRUTHS is that we are all sinners. The doctrine of our Churches should be there to teach us what is required to be more like Jesus — to move away from sin.

Finally, as Archbishop Wuerl pointed out to Meeka Brzezinski this morning on MSNBC’s Morning Joe program, when she stated that “many Catholics… use birth control”:

“There are Catholics that do things that they know their Church is opposed to … as they work out their conscience. But that doesn’t mean that they’re going to say ‘Because I don’t live up to all the rules of the Church, the government should be able to silence my Church.’ I think that’s where many, many Catholics are…”

This whole discussion on MSNBC this morning its well worth listening to, video can be found here…

I am primarily a Big Picture person, so let’s look at the Big Picture in this case, and what I clearly see is that this decision affects everyone! Core teachings of the Catholic Church are under attack this time – but any faith with any set of beliefs could be the next victims.

So even if you disagree with the Catholic Church’s position on this particular issue, you might consider putting that smug look away and WAKE UP…

The words of Martin Niemoller come to mind in this instance (actually, they have come to mind way too often the last few years). I won’t quote them here; rather, I’ll send you over to this post on TC Avey’s blog – and while you’re there, check out her other writings – good stuff!!!!

Anyone who lives with a chronic condition that can rear its worst ugly head at any time often unprovoked in a seemingly random fashion will appreciate what I’m talking about. Am I doing all I wanted to do for Lent? Or anything else, for that matter? No and no.

The last months have been difficult. After my dear husband Steve’s death, I entered  a long period of changes, decisions, activity when able, sometimes very physically challenging. A few months ago, I suddenly felt I had hit a mental and spiritual brick wall. The brain just did not want to engage. It wasn’t like depression, I know well what that is, I just could not put my finger on it. Talking it over with a wise friend, we realized I was tired – mentally tired – and the solution had to be small steps, prayer, and time.

I’m beginning to do a bit better now – but am also grappling with another situation not of my own making. As many of you who live with chronic pain know, the FDA in its infinite wisdom stupidity has pulled off the market a very old, reliable, and relatively mild pain relief medication. Don’t give us the facts and let each patient and doctor weigh the risks for each individual and let each individual decide – NO! – can’t have that going on! Those of us with FMS are quite sensitive to medications to begin with – so having to change to a stronger med can be a problem. Most of us also prefer to only take something when absolutely necessary – we tolerate a certain level of pain every day. First med the Dr. and I tried had side effects that were intolerable. Current med requires one to keep a certain level in the bloodstream – it will not be effective if one takes it when the pain is really high – great – now I have to take pills at times when I would have toughed it out in the past. I’m not happy. The whole pill dose in it’s lowest amount had bad effects. So now the experiments begin – the tablets can be cut in half so I am trying a half dose and extending the time between. Monday I was still suffering effects from the higher dose – yesterday, brought major Fibro Fog – Who am I? Where am I? — best not make any major decisions. (Sigh!!) Most likely not from the meds – but from the FMS itself – or not, time will tell.

Today, I finally feel OK – maybe the half pill formula will work – hope so.

I talked to my friend about the frustration we all feel when we are simply unable to do that which others can take for granted – I find this particularly difficult when it affects my spiritual life. Sometimes, I’m not sure what God really wants from me – what will please him – how can I show my love – and then I get into that place most of us know well, because most of us are Type A personalities – so the self questioning and self doubt begins – Am I really not able to do more? Am I just being lazy or taking the easy way out? – and on and on – until we come to our senses!

My very dear friend thought about our conversation and the other day she brought me a piece of writing she did for me – she has given me permission to post it, but wants to remain Anonymous – so here it is, hope it helps you, too – it came straight from her heart:

God calls us all in different ways. To some he gives more work than others. But I think we are all given challenging times in our lives. Now, how to handle it?

First, we need faith. We need to believe that we will make it to the end of the “yellow brick road” or whatever brick road we are aiming for – the afterlife. So, ya gotta believe that whatever comes, we’ll get through it and move past it (Faith).

And, there are some conditions of life that are chronic and aren’t going away, This situation is particularly challenging and, I think, requires periods of rest and meditation interspersed with periods of action and work. Prayer is always a big help in these times. I believe we must also have faith in ourselves as well as in God. Sometimes this “self-belief” (Hope) is the hardest thing to do because we are tired or hurting or just lose our way for a time. But we must continue to look ahead. 

So I think we all must do what we can with what we have and keep believing that it can get better – move on with Faith, Hope, and a smile – not always easy, but worth the try.

May God bless all of you out there who struggle with a chronic condition that radically alters your quality of life.