Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Pray for Catholic brothers and sisters, and look over your shoulder- Update


Now is the time to stand up for our Catholic brothers and sisters. And while we are at it we might cast a look over our shoulders at the antics of some Presbyterian folks who want to put their arms around secular worldliness and death. Catholic writers of blogs and columns are writing today of a very bigoted and vile article in the U.S.News and World Report's opinion section. The article, “The Catholic Supreme Court's War on Women” by Jamie Stiehm, is nothing but an ugly attack on the Catholic Church and the Catholic women who are faithfully attached to their faith.

Stiehm clearly places her own feminism above religious freedoms in this country. She slams Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor for authorizing a temporary stay for the sake of the Little Sisters of the Poor to keep them from being fined for refusing to sign a paper concerning their beliefs about contraception and abortion. The effect of signing would allow a third party to provide birth control and abortifacients for the sister's employees—but it still means that the nuns are providing what they do not wish to provide. The injunction is only temporary, but it has angered many progressive and radical feminists to the point that they are willing to step beyond past liberal views of tolerance.

Stiehm's attack is toward Christian women since she writes, “Sotomayor's stay is tantamount to selling out the sisterhood.” In other words women are only allowed one position, that is a radical feminism which is open to the sacrifice of unborn children. Otherwise they are, evidently, just bowing to men.

But Stiehm's attack is also definitely against Catholics:
“Sotomayor's blow brings us to confront an uncomfortable reality. More than WASPS, Methodists, Jews, Quakers or Baptists, Catholics often try to impose their beliefs on you, me, public discourse and institutions. Especially if "you" are female.”
And:
“Catholics in high places of power have the most trouble, I've noticed, practicing the separation of church and state. The pugnacious Catholic Justice, Antonin Scalia, is the most aggressive offender on the Court, but not the only one.”
There is more but that is enough. I remember the old question which I will try to paraphrase. “If you were being accused of being a Christian would there be enough evidence to convict you.” Our Catholic brothers and sisters are loaded down with convicting evidence at this moment.

Presbyterians are struggling with the same issues but ours is a different battle. In the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) we are struggling against the Church leadership, against radical feminists and against affinity groups who keep mixing up social justice with oppression and death.

Just this day on the Facebook page of Presbyterian Voices of Justice there was conversation and debate around an article they had linked to, “7 Facts About Birth Control that Conservatives Don't Won't You to Hear.” This was the PVJ's answer to my comment that this was about religious freedom:

“Presbyterian Voices for Justice welcomes diverse opinions on this page, but people need to know that we stand firmly with other mainline Protestant denominations in supporting access to contraception and legal abortion. While we haven't done polling among our members and supporters on this particular issue that's before the courts, Presbyterian policy respects both religious freedom and the rights of individuals to determine their health care needs -- particularly women, who have been subject to legal regulations preventing their private decision-making. It seems like a dangerous precedent for an employer to be able to opt out of providing employees with health care coverage of things with which they disapprove. Churches are already allowed to opt out for religious reasons, and groups like the nuns merely have to sign a paper asking to opt out. [See above what this really means] (1) One's religious rights should indeed be protected, unless they interfere with another person's rights -- in this case, to health care. As the co-moderator of PV4J, I think I speak for a majority of our group in hoping that the Supreme Court rules in favor of accessible reproductive health care for all who want it.”

The problem here is that the issue isn't about birth control, it is about religious freedom; being forced to act against your own beliefs. This is really persecution, because if you stand up for your faith you will have to pay heavy fines which will destroy your ministry or your business if you are a Christian owning a business. And contrary to what may happen to religious freedom,  women are free to use and purchase birth control, it isn't against the law to do so. No one will fine them.

When a denomination aligns with the state in encouraging laws which damage Christian faith we are entering a terrifying time—except--the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church.

Pray for and encourage brothers and sisters in the Catholic Church. Pray for the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) that she will remove herself from the culture of death.

Update: The Presbyterian Voices for Justice just took down their link with all of the comments including their own. They of course have not stated whether they thought it was a bad article or whether they didn't want others to read many of our opinions including those of  Marie Bowen of Presbyterian Pro-Life. Now at least three people, including myself, have been banned from writing comments on their Facebook page.


(1) Here is how my daughter Penny Juncker, using a quote, explained the problem of just signing the paper:

"When the contraception mandate first caused an uproar, the administration contrived a so-called accommodation for religiously oriented groups (actual churches have always been exempt). But whoever crafted it had a sick sense of humor. The very same document by which a group registers its moral objection to contraceptives and abortifacients also authorizes the insurer to cover them for the group’s employees. What the accommodation gives with one hand, it takes away with the other." from a piece written by Rich Lowry.

Some excellent Catholic articles about the article in the U.S. News and World Report are:

Fisking Stiehm’s Bigotry at US News

Dear Jamie Stiehm & US News: Leave Jefferson Out of Your Know-Nothing Screed {The "Know-Nothing" party was an American  political party in the 19th century which opposed Catholicism.}

Great moments in journalism: the shocking bigotry of U.S. News & World Report

9 comments:

Reformed Catholic said...

One of the facts that these radical feminists outside and inside the PC(USA) don't mention is that the Catholic position is if a woman needs to use a prescription birth control pill for a medical reason, not just for contraception, the Catholic Church position is to pay for the prescription.

There is no objection for such use, women's health is not being risked by this position.

Anonymous said...

Well, at least she got the part about Rush Limbaugh right. But I wonder, how far are you willing to go to protect religious rights against women's rights? Because there are other religions out there that suffer from much greater misogynist tendencies than the Roman Catholic Church.

Jodie Gallo, Los Angeles, CA

Viola Larson said...

Thanks Reformed Catholic, I didn't know that and I have a hunch a lot of other people don't either.

Anonymous said...

What if the Hobby Lobby folks were Jehovah's Witnesses and their plan would not pay for blood transfusions?

John McNeese
Ponca City, OK

Anonymous said...

If the government wants everyone to have free birth control they can distribute it in other ways. They do not actually have to force a Catholic (or other Christian) entity or business to provide that in any way. This is not about access to birth control. It's about power and control by the state over all parts of civil society.

John Erthein
DeFuniak Springs, FL

Viola Larson said...

John M. I have several thoughts on your question, and it is a good question. First of all, although I do not know why, no JW, that I know of has asked for a plan for employees free of blood transfusions.

But more importantly this is a case where those asking to have a relief of conscience must do so or be fined out of either ministry or business. The Catholic Church and other Christians are providers of so much good which is not done by anyone else: hospitals, schools, all kinds of charities and in fact the nuns who are a part of this story take care of the elderly. They will all eventually lose their ministries because of the fines they must pay if they are not given relief. That is not only horrific for them it is a terrible thing to happen to society.
I do not think there is that kind of problem for JWs although I suspect that they also believe that abortion is sin.
Another thought is that all Christians in their stand against abortion are not just standing for themselves; they are standing for defenseless life, for someone weaker and smaller and helpless.

Viola Larson said...

Also, I just have to say that the anger shown by so many radical feminist against pro-life women is so in contradiction to the verse in Micah that progressives keep quoting-"And what does the Lord require of you, but to do justice and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God."

Anonymous said...

Viola,

Obviously the "so many radical feminist against pro-life women" are not cut of the same cloth as the progressives who regard Micah's call as the Word of God.

Just because they hold in common things which they are not, does not mean they hold in common things which they are.

These are two radically different movements.

Jodie Gallo

Anonymous said...

Viola,

Obviously the "so many radical feminist against pro-life women" are not cut of the same cloth as the progressives who regard Micah's call as the Word of God.

Just because they hold in common things which they are not, does not mean they hold in common things which they are.

These are two radically different movements.

Jodie Gallo