The crisis of a second Obama administration

President Obama’s re-election and the prospect of a second Obama administration, freed from the constraints imposed by the necessity of running for re-election, have created a crisis for the Catholic Church in the United States. In the thought-world and vocabulary of the Bible, “crisis” has two meanings: the conventional sense (a grave threat) and a deeper sense (a great moment of opportunity). Both are applicable to the Church in America these next four years.

The immediate threat, of course, is the HHS (Health and Human Services) mandate requiring Catholic institutions and Catholic employers to include coverage of contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortifacient drugs in the health insurance offered to their employees. The legal challenges mounted against this obvious violation of the first freedom, religious freedom, may well be vindicated. But with Obamacare now seemingly set in concrete, the Church will face a host of such implementing “mandates” and it will be imperative to contest those that are morally unacceptable, time and time again. Authentically Catholic health care in America is now in mortal danger, and it is going to take a concerted effort to save it for future generations.

Read more . . . GEORGE WEIGEL COLUMN.

Catholic Bishop Promises Civil Disobedience if ObamaCare Abortion Mandates Enforced « News for Catholics

In Catholic News on November 13, 2012 at 9:23 pm

It appears that the Catholic Church is gearing up for a showdown against the Obama Administration, especially when it comes to the ObamaCare mandates concerning abortion. Gateway Pundit has more…

Catholic.org reported:

Martin Luther King’s “Letter from the Birmingham Jail” (April 16, 1963) is one of our nation’s elegant testimonies to the political implications of our Declaration of Independence:

“One may want to ask: ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’ The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.’”

Indeed, there may be more theological letters written from the confines of jail cells in the near future, as the Catholic bishops quickly approach the end of a one-year deadline given to them by the Obama administration to obey the HHS mandate or face the consequences. Not a single bishop has signaled any other intention than to embrace the consequences with the joy of serving Christ.

Was Archbishop Chaput predicting the future in the interview when he concluded,“This has been the story of the martyrs through the centuries”? We know it has crossed his mind: At Chester Springs, he said, but only half-jokingly, “I don’t want to go to jail.”

If the election affirms the Obama administration’s HHS mandate, there is a 100 percent chance that there will be civil disobedience in the Catholic Church, led by its bishops. Whether jail will follow is anyone’s guess.

I wonder how the media will cover this? Will the Catholics be portrayed as “dangerous radicals?” Will they be accused of all the things that OWS actually did, and was given cover for? I think we all know the answer to that. Though, there is a possibility that Obama will relent, if to only take some of the pressure off.

We’ll see what happens.

via Catholic Bishop Promises Civil Disobedience if ObamaCare Abortion Mandates Enforced.

A God-acknowledging party- if we strive to build it, will you come? | Loyal To Liberty

by loyaltoliberty on November 11, 2012

FOR THE LORD’S DAY

24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but is coming to an end. 27 But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house. (Mark 3:24-27)

To make sure that it serves its intended purpose (which is the overthrow of Constitutional self-government, of, by and for the people) the elitist faction’s script for the 2012 election included a post-script.  No matter how the election turned out, the moral of the story was always going to be the same- in order to win American politicians must embrace elitist socialism.  Of course, this lesson especially targets the GOP.

This is so because the GOP’s role in the elitist faction’s orchestration of the political process is to befuddle and demoralize the conservatives with results that

…move the government toward greater consolidation of socialist politics.  In the process the term “conservative” gets progressively (pun intended) redefined to encompass more and more of the features of socialism.  What is more important, those who articulate and insist upon approaches that actually correspond to conservative principles and institutional goals (like respecting unalienable rights, preserving the natural family, encouraging morally responsible individual  entrepreneurship and competitive free enterprise) are put in the false position of being unrealistic “purists” and rigid opponents of “the possible”. (Is Romney to lead conservatives to self-extinction?)

Had Romney won the election, conservative principles would have been abandoned in order to “reach across the aisle” in a bipartisan spirit of unity.  Such was the theme of Romney’s speeches in the closing days of the campaign.  But Obama won. So, like a teenager on prom night, GOP Speaker of the House John Boehner can’t wait to drop his abstinence only conservative date at her outdated home. He’s ready to shed the formal wear put on for the campaign season.  He’s almost frantically eager to cast off the GOP’s façade of phony conservative inhibitions (against tax and spend government policies,)  and get down with the newly elected Prom King in an orgy of bipartisan socialist relations, aimed at proving that a lame duck still has one leg to paddle with.

Such is “the culmination of more than twenty years of…stupidly destructive…”conservative pragmatism.”  In terms of politics it “represents the successful “transvaluation of values” (as the Nazi’s muse, Friedrich Nietzsche called it. That’s the political equivalent of a sex-change operation.)

Many GOP leaders dutifully played their role in the elitist faction’s election farce.  They were the supposedly conservative chorus,  luridly portraying Obama as the last act of America’s play, and “reluctantly”(?) touting Romney as the “less evil” (because somewhat longer?) alternate version of the same ending.  As the elitist faction media launches into the post-script phase, these leaders are coming forward to react against the notion that conservatism had anything to do with Romney’s defeat.  This requires, of course, implicitly contradicting the notion that Romney is a conservative, making all their actual or implied statements to the contrary during the campaign seem rather like, well, lies.

That’s the problem with making expediency your political standard.  It’s especially a problem for self-professed conservatives in the GOP who want people to believe that they still embrace the “self-evident truths” on which the U.S. was founded.  People who show no respect for factually observable truths have little or no credibility when they claim to respect truths that require sound reasoning as well as observation.  After all, reason ultimately derives its force from a moral commitment to its discipline, i.e., a willingness to acknowledge, the truth, in principle, and to follow its logic, whether or not it serves our passionate interests.

By encouraging people to let their fear of Obama drive them to Romney, these supposedly conservative prophets of “lesser evil” lent themselves to corrupting the mind and character of the electorate.  Such corruption is the definitive cause of the destruction of Constitutional self-government in the U.S.  Uninformed by principle, passionate self-interest can no more provide a basis for human self-government than the random interaction of uninformed matter provides for the orderly relations of material things. I made this point back in February (Santorum’s Ave Maria U. Speech “off message”? ), in a discussion of the “divided against itself” passage quoted from Scripture at the opening of this post:

A rational thinker as renowned as Immanuel Kant thought it reasonable, by exploring the limits of purely human understanding, to preserve a basis for moral reasoning that secures the salutary effects (especially in the political sphere) of acknowledging this Being of beings, beyond the limits of our self-conscious knowledge, which we must nonetheless assume in order to exist, no matter what conviction we hold with respect to its reality.

Read more . . .

CNS STORY: Four years later, Vatican takes a different approach toward Obama

By Francis X. Rocca

A woman arrives early to vote at a polling place at the Ukrainian Catholic National Shrine in Washington on Election Day, Nov. 6. (CNS/Nancy Phelan Wiechec)

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — The day after Barack Obama won the presidency in 2008, the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, hailed his election as a “choice that unites,” exemplifying America’s ability to “overcome fractures and divisions that until only recently could seem incurable.” Pope Benedict XVI sent the president-elect a congratulatory telegram the same day, noting the “historic occasion” of his election.

Four years later, the Vatican’s reaction to Obama’s re-election had a markedly different tone.

“If Obama truly wants to be the president of all Americans,” said L’Osservatore Nov. 7, “he should finally acknowledge the demands forcefully arising from religious communities —
above all the Catholic Church — in favor of the natural family, life and finally religious liberty itself.”

Speaking to reporters the same day, the Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, voiced hope that Obama would use his second term for the “promotion of the culture of life and of religious liberty.”

The statements alluded to Obama policies favoring legalized abortion, same-sex marriage and a plan to require nearly all health insurance plans, including those offered by most Catholic universities and agencies, to cover sterilizations and contraceptives, which are forbidden by the church’s moral teaching.

The insurance mandate in particular, which U.S. bishops have strenuously protested for the past year, has proven an even greater source of division between the church and the Obama administration than their previous disagreements and threatens to aggravate tensions between Washington and the Vatican during the president’s second term.

From the beginning of Obama’s presidency, his support for legalized abortion and embryonic stem-cell research inspired protests by the church and controversy within it. Some 80 U.S.
bishops publicly criticized the University of Notre Dame for granting Obama an honorary degree in 2009.

Yet the Vatican itself remained largely aloof from such disputes, at least in public statements, and cooperated with the Obama administration on such common international goals as assisting migrants, working against human trafficking and preventing mother-to-child transmission of HIV/AIDS.

But seeing a threat to the freedom of the church itself, the Vatican changed its approach and chose to address matters more directly.

In January, Pope Benedict told a group of visiting U.S. bishops that he was concerned about “certain attempts being made to limit that most cherished of American freedoms, the freedom of religion,” through “concerted efforts … to deny the right of conscientious objection on the part of Catholic individuals and institutions with regard to cooperation in intrinsically evil practices.”

Any hopes that the administration might change its policy to the satisfaction of the church grew faint as the year wore on and the election drew nearer, to the increasingly vocal frustration of several U.S. bishops.

Two days before Americans went to the polls, the papal nuncio to the U.S. made it clear how urgent a priority the nation’s religious liberty had become at the highest levels of the universal church.

Speaking at the University of Notre Dame Nov. 4, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano devoted most of a speech about “religious freedom, persecution of the church and martyrdom” to the
situation of the United States today.

“The menace to religious liberty is concrete on many fronts,” Archbishop Vigano said, noting the insurance mandate, anti-discrimination policies that require Catholic adoption agencies to place children with same-sex couples, and mandatory public school curricula that present same-sex marriage as “natural and wholesome.”

Recalling persecution of Catholics in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, the archbishop said that the “problems identified … over six decades ago that deal with the heavy grip of the state’s hand in authentic religious liberty are still with us today.”

A government need not be a dictatorship in order to persecute the church, the nuncio said, quoting the words of Blessed John Paul II that a “democracy without values easily turns into openly or thinly disguised totalitarianism.”

If the mere timing of his speech was not sufficient to underscore its political implications, Archbishop Vigano concluded by lamenting the support of Catholic politicians and voters for laws and policies that violate church teaching.

“We witness in an unprecedented way a platform being assumed by a major political party, having intrinsic evils among its basic principles, and Catholic faithful publicly supporting it,” he said. “There is a divisive strategy at work here, an intentional dividing of the church; through this strategy, the body of the church is weakened, and thus the church can be more easily persecuted.”

Read more . . .

The American Spectator : We’re Not in 1980 Anymore

For months, conservatives have been likening the conditions of the 2012 presidential race to that which saw the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. The American Spectator‘s own Jeffrey Lord proclaimed that President Obama could be beaten handily “because the past four years really have been Jimmy Carter‘s second term.”

Read more . . .  

THE REMNANT NEWSPAPER: A Chance to Become Free Again

Tough to swallow, isn’t it! But did we really think we could somehow vote our way out of this—with homosexual “marriage” having become the law of the land and the slain bodies of millions of aborted babies clogging the sewers of American cities and consciences? All that was needed for us to be redeemed was another election? Please! Ideas have consequences—and so do the crime of infanticide and the other sins that cry to heaven for vengeance.

Barack Obama is not the problem, by the way. We are! Abortion is. Public schools are. A rotting pop culture is. Modernism in the Catholic Church is. Divorce and homosexual “marriage” are. Obama has been reelected because America, like any nation, will always get the leaders she richly deserves. We told God to go to hell a long time ago, and God is merely allowing us to see what life is like without Him. So lead on, Mr. Obama! Thou shouldst not have any power against us, unless it were given thee from above. Therefore, he that hath delivered us to thee, hath the greater sin.

Read more . . . THE REMNANT NEWSPAPER: A Chance to Become Free Again.

Obama’s “Equality” and “Liberty” for Women – Truth and Charity Forum

The Obama administration and the Democratic Party seem to abhor the fecundity of American women. They tout hormonal contraception, abortion, and sterilization as the trifecta of optimal women’s health. They are so zealous in their pursuit of an androgynous society (deliberate or not) that they are willing to trample on religious liberty to get it as they have unquestionably proven with the HHS mandate.

Read more . . . Obama’s “Equality” and “Liberty” for Women – Truth and Charity Forum.

“Womanhood is not a malformation. Fertility is not a disorder. Pregnancy is not a disease.” – from above article.