1. The bishops of Camden and Trenton, New Jersey issued a letter, dated August 26 but not reported until September 5. Their contribution urged that New Jersey's congressmen should work to prohibit funding of abortion and to uphold conscience protections. The bishops said that health care reform is needed.
COMMENTARY: Note that the bishops took the stand of urging congressmen to work to do things. How's that for militancy. They can't even bring themselves to oppose something that violates their beliefs. Their idea of politics is to cravenly plead with their representatives not to do something bad.
In the craven vein, the bishops stated that health care reform is needed!! This puts them at odds with the great bulk of the public who made it very clear in the 'town hall' meetings that they wanted nothing to do with health reform that includes death panels, government-prioritized treatment options, and ton of debt.
2. Two Kansas City bishops have chimed in. They issued a joint pastoral statement which discusses apparent flaws in health care and points to how Catholic social teaching can bear on the topic. They credited US leaders like Obama and those of both political parties for trying to address flaws in health care. They advocate some 'proper moral principles.' And they too emphasized the necessity of excluding abortion and of protecting conscience rights.
COMMENTARY: All one really needs to know about these bishops is that they gave credit to Obama and both parties (!) for trying to improve health care. This orientation shows that they have no understanding of what is going on the world. As usual, they cannot recognize an attack when it occurs. Obama and the others are quite simply endeavoring to radically revolutionize health care from a compassionate basis to a government-directed cost-cutting basis. This effort is a major turning point in American history, and all these bishops can do is compliment the enemy and hope that bad things are not included in the legislation.
Of course, it is useful to call for no funding to abortion and for protection of conscience rights. But, they entirely miss the point by zero-ing in on those issues when the legislative package as a whole should be completely unacceptable to those who are supposed to defend the legacy of the Church. And the legacy of compassionate health care is one of the Church's great contributions to humanity.
3. The bishop in Tucson, Arizona spoke out after a meeting with US Representative Giffords of Arizona. His contribution was that the 'complexity of the proposals' for health care reform has caused 'a great deal of misunderstanding and fear.' He urged the Representative to fight [!] to 'simplify and clarity' the issues.
COMMENTARY: Could a bishop be more out of touch with the sentiments of the American people than this? The public is fearful because this legislation is fearful and represents an attempt to drastically alter their standard of living and quality of life. That fear has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'complexity of the proposals.' To the public it is very simple: the legislation seeks to transform health care to an de-humanizing government-directing cost cutting basis. Is that so difficult for the bishop to understand? Apparently.
Incidentally, this bishop doesn't even recognize when he is being used. The public uproar has sent the proponents of the legislation scurrying for authoritative support. And so, Representative Giffords called together 20 southern Arizona faith leaders (Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, and Jewish) for a private meeting. And lo and behold what happened as a result: the bishop's 'simplify and clarify' riff just happens to coincide with Giffords' desire 'to talk more concretely and be sure people understand.' Well, they can simplify and talk more concretely all they want, but it will have very little effect on the perception of the public that they are in great danger.
4. The bishop of Charleston, South Carolina issued a letter. He is quoted as saying, "Our representatives and senators need to hear our voice and we have a voice that is credible because it...is a moral voice and one that has centuries of experience in health care."
COMMENTARY: He came oh so close to getting it right. If he would have elaborated on his statement, it would have been a tremendous contribution to the public discussion. He might have pointed out that it was the Church who first championed universal health care regardless of circumstance. He might also have emphasized that it was the Church who first invented hospitals. And he might have underlined that the Church's legacy on health care flows very concretely from the teachings of Jesus. He might have added that Jesus never said anything about cost-effectiveness.
5. The bishops who chair the US Conference of Catholic Bishops committees on Domestic Justice and Human Development and on Pro-life Activities issued letters. Their approach is to outline what a health care system ought to look like.
COMMENTARY: It seems pathetic to have to say that the problem is not to draw a picture of what a health care system ought to look like. The problem, which a big percentage of the American people understand, is to defeat this terrifying legislation that threatens to change lives forever! Ivory tower statements only divert attention from the very immediate task at hand. When this attack is defeated, then we can talk about health reform should look like.
6. The archbishop and three officials of Archdiocese of Cincinnati issued a statement. They said the present moment offers 'an opportunity that should not be buried by partisan politics or misleading exaggerations of what the emerging legislation does or does not include.' 'We hope that civil dialogue will produce an affordable method that provides ready access to quality, comprehensive and affordable health care for every person living in the United States.'
COMMENTARY: This statement represents a new low point in the intervention of the bishops. They actually in effect attack the outrage of the public over the legislation. Who else but the public can be making 'misleading exaggerations?' Can the call for 'civil dialogue' be anything but an attack on the well-deserved rowdy-ness of the public meetings?
Need it be said that these bishops should be on the other side of the divide? Their stance is yet another instance of craven subservience to those who are out to completely change health care.
By the way, what is this bit about 'access to...health care?' Is it so hard to say the public should have health care, not just access?
7. Cardinal O'Malley of Boston reported that he had told Obama that the US bishops "are anxious to support a plan of universal health care, but we will not support a plan that will include a provision for abortion or could open the way to abortions in the future."
COMMENTARY: Surprisingly O'Malley's statement is not horrendous. He actually used the words 'will not support' (why not 'oppose'?), a series of words that seems to be anathema to the bishops. It is also useful that he told Obama that abortion is a deal-breaker. But, once again, the focus is too narrow. He has nothing to say about what is actually occurring: an attempt to totally change the nature of health care.
8. The bishop of Rapid City, South Dakota said health care reform "is not just a task facing the government" but is also related to "our need to take personal responsibility for our health."
COMMENTARY: If this doesn't beat all!!! At a time when the American people are facing a historic set back, this bishop chooses to lecture them on taking care of themselves. What can one say about such stupidity?
CONCLUSIONS:
**The bishops give no indication of comprehending that an unprecedented attack is occurring.
**In fact, the bishops come down on the wrong side of the divide with their apparent stance of giving critical support to the legislation if a couple of conditions are met.
**The bishops mention nothing on the legacy of the Church on health care and do not quote Jesus as the basis for
compassionate health care.
**The bishops are supposed to be sheperds of the faithful.
Instead they are cozying up to the politicians.
**Taking a principled stand and fighting for it seems
completely alien to the bishops. Where is the spirit of Joan of Arc?
**Surprisingly the bishops have nothing to say about the
death panels in the legislation, even though the Church
characterizes the nation as the culture of death.
**If the legislation is defeated it will be no thanks to the
bishops.
**Heaven help us!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment