Deal Hudson writes about the recent talk given by Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, the prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, at InsideCatholic.com's 14th Annual Partnership Dinner:
"Neither Holy Communion nor funeral rites should be administered to such politicians," said Archbishop Burke. "To deny these is not a judgment of the soul, but a recognition of the scandal and its effects."
With obvious reference to the Kennedy funeral, he argued that when a politician is associated "with greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, his repentance must also be public." He added, "Anyone who grasps the gravity of what he has done will understand the need to make it public."
It's not uncharitable to point out the scandal caused by these Catholic politicians. "The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth in love. This does not destroy unity but helps to repair a breach in the life of the Church."
Archbishop Burke rejects all the standard arguments made by Catholic politicians and their apologists who support abortion and same-sex marriage. For example, the defense of the unborn and traditional marriage is not strictly a matter of religious faith. "The observance of the natural law is not a confessional practice -- it's inscribed in every human heart."
Archbishop Burke describes the latest tactic of pro-abortion Catholic politicians, who talk about finding common ground, as a form of "proportionalist moral reasoning." "Common ground is found rather on 'the ground of moral goodness,' and not in a compromise of certain moral truths, like the rejection of abortion and euthanasia."
He warned against allowing this kind of false reasoning to enter the health-care debate. A Catholic cannot accept the attainment of universal health care if it includes abortion and other evils "just because it achieves some desirable outcomes."
With obvious reference to the Kennedy funeral, he argued that when a politician is associated "with greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, his repentance must also be public." He added, "Anyone who grasps the gravity of what he has done will understand the need to make it public."
It's not uncharitable to point out the scandal caused by these Catholic politicians. "The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth in love. This does not destroy unity but helps to repair a breach in the life of the Church."
Archbishop Burke rejects all the standard arguments made by Catholic politicians and their apologists who support abortion and same-sex marriage. For example, the defense of the unborn and traditional marriage is not strictly a matter of religious faith. "The observance of the natural law is not a confessional practice -- it's inscribed in every human heart."
Archbishop Burke describes the latest tactic of pro-abortion Catholic politicians, who talk about finding common ground, as a form of "proportionalist moral reasoning." "Common ground is found rather on 'the ground of moral goodness,' and not in a compromise of certain moral truths, like the rejection of abortion and euthanasia."
He warned against allowing this kind of false reasoning to enter the health-care debate. A Catholic cannot accept the attainment of universal health care if it includes abortion and other evils "just because it achieves some desirable outcomes."
Speaking of Catholic health care, NRO has a lengthy and informative interview with Leonard J. Nelson III, a professor at the Cumberland School of Law at Samford University and author of a new book, Diagnosis Critical: The Urgent Threats Confronting Catholic Health Care (OSV 2009):
KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: Why should anyone who is not Catholic care about the future of Catholic health care in America?
JACK NELSON: Catholic hospitals are the primary alternative to government-owned and for-profit hospitals in the United States. There are approximately 600 Catholic hospitals in the United States. At their best, Catholic hospitals offer a distinctive product by combining traditional health-care services with a commitment to serving the poor and promoting the sanctity of life. If Catholic hospitals disappear, there will be even a greater likelihood that health care in the United States will become a unitary governmental system. This would lead to a vast increase in the power of the federal government and a concomitant decline in the role of intermediate groups that enhance social cohesion and humanize health care. It would also deprive consumers of an attractive option in the health-care marketplace: quality health-care services provided within the normative framework established by the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health-Care Services (ERDs).
<snip>
LOPEZ: Why does it make economic sense for Catholics to oppose universal government-run health care?
NELSON: It is appropriate for Catholics to oppose universal government-run health care under the principle of subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity has been frequently mentioned in papal encyclicals as a basic principle of Catholic social teaching. It requires that matters such as health-care reform be handled in a decentralized fashion by local authorities or intermediate groups where feasible. Recently, in Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI noted:
A particular manifestation of charity and a guiding criterion for fraternal cooperation between believers and non-believers is undoubtedly the principle of subsidiarity, an expression of inalienable human freedom. Subsidiarity is first and foremost a form of assistance to the human person via the autonomy of intermediate bodies. Such assistance is offered when individuals or groups are unable to accomplish something on their own, and it is always designed to achieve their emancipation, because it fosters freedom and participation through assumption of responsibility. Subsidiarity respects personal dignity by recognizing in the person a subject who is always capable of giving something to others. By considering reciprocity as the heart of what it is to be a human being, subsidiarity is the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state. [footnotes omitted]
LOPEZ: What is wrong with the heath-care system in America today, and how would you make it different?
NELSON: The health-care system is definitely broken. Cost inflation for health-care premiums continues at a rate that is well in excess of the [Consumer Price Index]. And there are a large number of people without health insurance. The basic problems are the lack of competition among health-care plans and providers due to the role of third-party payers, the link between employment and insurance, and the current tax treatment.
Health insurance essentially consists of two coverage components: (1) pre-payment of annualized routine health expenses, and (2) catastrophic coverage for protection against major medical expenses. The current tax exclusion should be changed so that consumers would receive a tax credit to assist them in purchasing their own health-care coverage. This tax credit could be used to fund a health-savings account for routine expenses and to purchase high-deductible catastrophic coverage. This would provide incentives for consumers to shop around for the best deals. These tax credits would be refundable and advanceable so that low-income persons could participate in the system. Catastrophic coverage could be purchased from any insurer, including a faith-based group that would base its coverage on Catholic principles. I believe this approach is consistent with Catholic social teaching and the principle of subsidiarity. It is essentially the health-care reform proposal endorsed by the Catholic Medical Association.
JACK NELSON: Catholic hospitals are the primary alternative to government-owned and for-profit hospitals in the United States. There are approximately 600 Catholic hospitals in the United States. At their best, Catholic hospitals offer a distinctive product by combining traditional health-care services with a commitment to serving the poor and promoting the sanctity of life. If Catholic hospitals disappear, there will be even a greater likelihood that health care in the United States will become a unitary governmental system. This would lead to a vast increase in the power of the federal government and a concomitant decline in the role of intermediate groups that enhance social cohesion and humanize health care. It would also deprive consumers of an attractive option in the health-care marketplace: quality health-care services provided within the normative framework established by the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health-Care Services (ERDs).
<snip>
LOPEZ: Why does it make economic sense for Catholics to oppose universal government-run health care?
NELSON: It is appropriate for Catholics to oppose universal government-run health care under the principle of subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity has been frequently mentioned in papal encyclicals as a basic principle of Catholic social teaching. It requires that matters such as health-care reform be handled in a decentralized fashion by local authorities or intermediate groups where feasible. Recently, in Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI noted:
A particular manifestation of charity and a guiding criterion for fraternal cooperation between believers and non-believers is undoubtedly the principle of subsidiarity, an expression of inalienable human freedom. Subsidiarity is first and foremost a form of assistance to the human person via the autonomy of intermediate bodies. Such assistance is offered when individuals or groups are unable to accomplish something on their own, and it is always designed to achieve their emancipation, because it fosters freedom and participation through assumption of responsibility. Subsidiarity respects personal dignity by recognizing in the person a subject who is always capable of giving something to others. By considering reciprocity as the heart of what it is to be a human being, subsidiarity is the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state. [footnotes omitted]
LOPEZ: What is wrong with the heath-care system in America today, and how would you make it different?
NELSON: The health-care system is definitely broken. Cost inflation for health-care premiums continues at a rate that is well in excess of the [Consumer Price Index]. And there are a large number of people without health insurance. The basic problems are the lack of competition among health-care plans and providers due to the role of third-party payers, the link between employment and insurance, and the current tax treatment.
Health insurance essentially consists of two coverage components: (1) pre-payment of annualized routine health expenses, and (2) catastrophic coverage for protection against major medical expenses. The current tax exclusion should be changed so that consumers would receive a tax credit to assist them in purchasing their own health-care coverage. This tax credit could be used to fund a health-savings account for routine expenses and to purchase high-deductible catastrophic coverage. This would provide incentives for consumers to shop around for the best deals. These tax credits would be refundable and advanceable so that low-income persons could participate in the system. Catastrophic coverage could be purchased from any insurer, including a faith-based group that would base its coverage on Catholic principles. I believe this approach is consistent with Catholic social teaching and the principle of subsidiarity. It is essentially the health-care reform proposal endorsed by the Catholic Medical Association.
Comments