Washington D.C., May 6, 2020 / 12:08 pm (CNA).- During a week in which the Supreme Court heard arguments via telephone for the first time, the case of the Little Sisters of the Poor came back before the justices on Wednesday.
The court decided to hold oral arguments via conference call as Washington, D.C., is under a stay-at-home order and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends gatherings of no more than 10 people during the coronavirus pandemic.
Oral arguments in the case of the Little Sisters of the Poor, originally scheduled to be held in-person at the Court on April 29, were rescheduled and held remotely on May 6.
Justices heard from attorneys representing the Trump administration, the Little Sisters, and the state of Pennsylvania, as the nuns were back at the Supreme Court four years after their case against the Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate was first considered.
“For nearly a decade, we have been in a battle for the soul of our ministry,” said Sister Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor, in a telephonic press conference after the arguments.
“We could not comply with the mandate. To do so would undermine our most important belief: that all life is valuable,” she said. “We cannot hold the hands of the elderly dying, while at the same time facilitating the ending of unborn life.”
The case dates back nearly a decade when, in 2011, the Obama administration finalized rules requiring employers to offer cost-free contraceptives, sterilizations, and emergency birth control in employee health plans under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Later, the administration announced an “accommodation” for objecting religious non-profits that involved them notifying the government of their objection to providing the contraceptive coverage; the government would then direct their insurer or third-party plan administrator to provide the coverage.
The Little Sisters and other Catholic groups, including Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh, sued in 2013, saying that the accommodation still substantially burdened their free exercise of religion.
Mark Rienzi, president of Becket which represents the sisters, explained on Wednesday why the accommodation was still a “substantial burden” on the nuns’ religious mission.
“Signing the piece of paper is what authorizes the government and authorizes other parties to use your plan in a way that violates your religion,” he said, and by signing the form stating their objection the sisters were essentially giving a “permission slip” for the provision of contraceptives to employees in their health plan.
In 2016, a divided Supreme Court sent the case back down to lower courts and instructed both the objecting Catholic groups and the Obama administration to come to an agreement upholding both the government’s “compelling interest” of offering cost-free contraceptive coverage and the Catholic groups’ desire to remain free of objectionable participation in such coverage.
During oral arguments on Wednesday, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Stephen Breyer both expressed confusion as to why an accommodation had not been reached in the case.
“I didn’t understand the problem at the time of [the first hearing], and I don’t think I understand it now,” Roberts said. Later on, Breyer echoed his confusion, “I don’t understand why this can’t be worked out.”
Paul Clement, representing the Sisters, responded to Roberts that by filling out the form expressing their religious objection to the government, the nuns were essentially giving a “permission slip” for birth control to be provided to employees. Given the threat of heavy fines if they didn’t comply with the accommodation, this put a substantial burden on their religious practice, he said.
There was no mechanism, outside of a religious exemption, to come to an agreement, Clement said, because the requirement of the ACA mandate for “seamless” contraceptive coverage through the Little Sisters’ health plans.
The Trump administration in 2017 offered a religious and a moral exemption to the mandate, but the states of Pennsylvania and California subsequently sued, saying that the administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act in carving out the religious exemptions which they said contradicted the compelling state interest in providing contraceptive coverage.
In 2018, the Supreme Court allowed the Little Sisters to intervene in the cases in California and Pennsylvania; both the Third and Ninth Circuit Courts ruled against them, and in January the Supreme Court agreed to hear the matter.
The states “dragged us back to court to defend our hard-won religious exemption,” Sister Loraine said on Wednesday, noting that for seven years, the legal battle over the mandate has “hung over our ministry like a storm cloud.”
Clement told the court on Wednesday that there is a lack of injury from the sisters refusal to comply with the mandate, noting that “we have not heard of even a single employee who views this as a problem.”
Michael Fischer, chief deputy attorney general for the state of Pennsylvania, said the sisters’ health insurance plans were not “being hijacked” by the state, noting that the order is protected by an injunction, and that the state’s case was against the Trump administration’s religious exemptions which put a cost on the states.
Fischer argued for a more restrictive view of religious exemptions than the Obama administration’s original mandate which initially exempted churches and their integrated auxiliaries. Fischer argued that health plans of church ministers could be religiously exempt from the mandate, but not those of church employees like janitors.
Some justices were critical of the religious exemption and the nuns’ argument.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the Trump administration’s religious exemption “tossed to the wind entirely Congress’ instructions” that women receive “seamless, no-cost, comprehensive coverage” for contraceptives and sterilizations.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Clement whether an employer could refuse to provide mandatory COVID-19 vaccine coverage if they had a religious objection to vaccination. Clement replied that they could.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
New Haven, Conn., Nov 3, 2020 / 04:00 am (CNA).- The beatification of Blessed Michael McGivney was a much smaller affair than many had hoped. But despite the pandemic, people still came from across the country and across the world to honor the founder of the Knights of Columbus.
The beatification of McGivney on Saturday was celebrated with a weekend of events. In addition to the Mass of beatification at the Cathedral of St. Joseph in Hartford, Connecticut, on Oct. 31, there was a “McGivney Festival” at the priest’s former parish in New Haven on Friday, featuring Mass, adoration, a panel discussion, a Eucharistic procession around Yale University’s campus, and testimony about McGivney’s life.
Emily Lomnitzer attended the McGivney Festival. She told CNA that while a student at the Catholic University of America, she learned about McGivney, and that the event was a big moment for her and her friends, telling CNA they were “really into venerable, now-Blessed McGivney.”
“I’ve known about him for a long time. We never thought he would get beatified, so this is a really big deal,” she said. “I didn’t know about him growing up, I learned about him at [The Catholic University of America], and it’s really nice to see that he’s being recognized.”
She said that she thinks McGivney will serve as a great inspiration to young priests and seminarians, as he was “an example of someone who did a lot of great work at the beginning of their ministry.”
“Even not living a terribly long life, he was able to do such good things, even from a very young age,” she said.
McGivney, a Connecticut native, spent his entire priestly ministry in what is now the Archdiocese of Hartford. Future priests of the archdiocese played an important role in the weekend, including Colin Lane, a seminarian in first theology year, who was one of the altar servers at the beatification Mass.
Lane told CNA that knowing his archdiocese produced a blessed was an “incredible joy,” and that while in high school, he had attended St. Mary’s–McGivney’s former parish.
“Being around Fr. McGivney, being around his tomb–to be there last night at the vespers, and to be here [at the beatification Mass], it’s really quite surreal,” he said.
“Somebody who ministered in our parishes, in New Haven and in Thomaston, who walked many of the same paths that our priests do today, is being raised to the altar of ‘blessed,’ it really is a great inspiration and a great encouragement,” said Lane.
He added that McGivney’s beatification was a reminder to him and the other seminarians that “holiness is possible, even amongst priests of the archdiocese, even in the state of Connecticut, there’s someone who lived a holy life.”
McGivney’s beatification shows that “The little, daily acts of a parish priest can lead one down the path to sanctity,” Lane said.
Julie Buonasera, a member of Frassati New Haven, a young adult group at St. Mary’s Church, was a volunteer at the McGivney Festival. She said that she did not know much about McGivney before his beatification, although her grandfather was a fourth-degree Knight.
She said the day was “beautiful,” and that she “felt a lot of grace.”
“Just the beauty of being here together with peers and young adults from around the state and beyond is awesome,” she said.
Unlike other pilgrims, Nathan Schaechle, 20, did not have too much of a choice in attending the beatification. His brother, Mikey, 5, was the reason why the beatification was happening in the first place – being the recipient of a miracle attributed to McGivney’s intercession.
Schachle told CNA that when his mother was told her pregnancy with his brother Mikey had “no hope” he had “kind of just resigned [himself] to what felt like the inevitable.”
“It was like, ‘hey, he’s gonna die,’ and then all of a sudden he’s ready to be born,” said Schacle. His brother Mikey was delivered prematurely via emergency c-section after doctors realized that there was an issue with the placenta.
The gravity of the situation was not apparent to the then-teenage Nathan.
Nathan told CNA that at the time his brother was born, he was mostly upset that his mother’s emergency delivery meant that he was unable to attend the Diocese of Nashville’s diaconate ordination Mass like he had planned.
“I really didn’t realize the magnitude of what had happened until it was approved [by the Vatican],” he said.
He was aware that the Vatican was investigating the circumstances leading up to his brother’s birth, and that his parents had been involved in a diocesan tribunal that had progressed to the promoter of McGiney’s cause in New Haven. But he did not know that his brother’s recovery had been a confirmed miracle until it was announced by Pope Francis.
“We found out with the rest of the world that [the miracle] had been approved,” he said. Nathan told CNA that he woke up early the morning the pope approved the miracle to “probably about 20 texts” on his phone.
“The human moment for me was that, ‘wow, our name’s been on the pope’s desk,’” he said. “And really, I don’t think it’s completely sunk in yet, even now. It’s just kind of been a blur since then.”
The Tennessee resident described the experience in New Haven as “very cold” (temperatures for the weekend hovered in the mid-40s), “very surreal,” and “a little bit frightening.”
Nathan said his family is “not really attention-seeking people, but this is what God wants for us.”
“He wants to glorify Himself in the world through it, and He wants others to come to Him through us,” he said. “So we’re doing the best we can in that respect.”
Savannakhet, Laos, Jan 3, 2019 / 03:19 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Seven Christians in a Laotian village were arrested and detained for several days for holding a church service deemed illegal.
They were arrested Dec. 29 and released Jan. 2, according to Radio Free Asia, which aims “to provide accurate and timely news and information to Asian countries whose governments prohibit access to a free press.”
The detainees are from Nakanong village in the Phine District of Savannakhet Province. Three of those arrested were church leaders, and the rest were members of the church.
Human Rights Watch for Lao Religious Freedom told BosNewsLife that local authorities “demolished the [church’s] stage, cut off the power line, destroyed the sound system, and seized three mobile phones.”
Laos is a communist country of southeast Asia. Its constitution provides citizens the freedom to believe in religion, but religious groups must register with the government. The US State Department’s 2017 International Religious Freedom Report said that “freedom of religion tended to decline in the rural areas.”
It added that “government restrictions on registered or unregistered minority religious groups, particularly Protestant groups, remained disproportionately limiting in certain remote regions. Reports continued of authorities, especially in isolated villages, arresting, detaining, and exiling followers of minority religions, particularly Christians.”
Laos is a majority-Buddhist country, and less than two percent of the population is Christian.
The Ministry of Home Affairs must give permission for religious practice, and it can order the cessation of any religious activities or beliefs not in agreement with policies, traditional customs, or laws.
The International Religious Freedom Report also said that the decentralization of Laotian government contributes “to abuses by local officials, some of whom reportedly were unaware of laws and policies protecting religious freedom or unwilling to implement them. Religious groups stated that most, if not all, instances of abuse occurred in remote villages.”
RFA reported that four Christians were detained for a week in November in Savannakhet’s Viraboury District for holding services without permission.
A defining theme of Pope Francis’ papacy has been his urging of humanity to better care for the natural environment, which he has done most prominently in his landmark 2015 encyclical Laudato Si’ and numerous subsequent writings and speeches.
The pope’s emphasis on this topic — especially his foray into climate science via his recent encyclical Laudate Deum — has variously drawn both praise and consternation from Catholics in the United States, about half of whom do not share Pope Francis’ views on climate change, according to surveys.
In Laudate Deum, which was released in October as a continuation to Laudato Si’, Francis wrote that the effects of climate change “are here and increasingly evident,” warning of “immensely grave consequences for everyone” if drastic efforts are not made to reduce emissions. In the face of this, the Holy Father criticized those who “have chosen to deride [the] facts” about climate science, stating bluntly that it is “no longer possible to doubt the human — ‘anthropic’ — origin of climate change.”
The pope in the encyclical laid out his belief that there must be a “necessary transition towards clean energy sources, such as wind and solar energy, and the abandonment of fossil fuels.” This follows a call from Pope Francis in 2021 to the global community calling for the world to “achieve net zero carbon emissions as soon as possible.”
He further lamented what he called “certain dismissive and scarcely reasonable opinions [on climate change] that I encounter, even within the Catholic Church.”
In light of the new encyclical — which extensively cites the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) — Pope Francis was invited to speak at this week’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, known as COP28. Though the 86-year-old pope was forced to cancel his trip due to health issues, the Vatican has indicated that he aims to participate in COP28 this weekend in some fashion. It announced today that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin will represent the pope at the conference.
While various Catholic groups have welcomed the pope’s latest encyclical, some Catholics have reacted with persistent doubts, questioning whether the pope’s policy prescriptions would actually produce the desired effects.
How do Americans feel about climate change?
According to a major survey conducted by Yale University, 72% of Americans believed in 2021 — the latest available data year — that “global warming is happening,” and 57% believe that global warming is caused by human activity.
More recent polling from the Pew Research Center, conducted in June, similarly suggests that two-thirds of U.S. adults overall say the country should prioritize developing renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, over the expansion of the production of oil, coal, and natural gas. That same survey found that just 3 in 10 adults (31%) say the U.S. should completely phase out oil, coal, and natural gas. The Yale study found that 77% of U.S. adults support at least the funding of research into renewable energy sources.
Broken down by party affiliation, Pew found that a large majority of Democratic and Democratic-leaning independents — 90% — favor alternative energy sources, while just under half, 42%, of Republicans and Republican-leaning adults think the same. Within the Republican cohort, however, 67% of Republicans under age 30 prioritize the development of alternative energy sources, compared with the 75% of Republicans ages 65 and older who prioritize the expansion of oil, coal, and natural gas.
In terms of the expansion of alternative energy sources, two-thirds of Americans think the federal government should encourage domestic production of wind and solar power, Pew reported. Just 7% say the government should discourage this, while 26% think it should neither encourage nor discourage it.
How do America’s Catholics feel about climate change?
Surveys suggest that Catholics in the United States are slightly more likely than the U.S. population as a whole to be skeptical of climate change, despite the pope’s emphatic words in 2015 and since.
A separate Pew study suggests that 44% of U.S. Catholics say the Earth is warming mostly due to human activity, a view in line with Pope Francis’ stance. About 3 in 10 (29%) said the Earth is warming mostly due to natural patterns, while 13% said they believe there is no solid evidence the planet is getting warmer.
According to the same study, 71% of Hispanic Catholics see climate change as an extremely or very serious problem, compared with 49% of white, non-Hispanic Catholics. (There were not enough Black or Asian Catholics in the 2022 survey to analyze separately, Pew said.)
One 2015 study from Yale did suggest that soon after Laudato Si’ was released, U.S. Catholics were overall more likely to believe in climate change than before. That same study found no change, however, in the number of Americans overall who believe human activity is causing global warming.
Pope Francis’ climate priorities
Beyond his groundbreaking writings, Pope Francis has taken many actions during his pontificate to make his own — admittedly small — country, Vatican City, more sustainable, including the recent announcement of a large order of electric vehicles, construction of its own network of charging stations, a reforestation program, and the continued importation of energy coming exclusively from renewable sources.
Francis has often lamented what he sees as a tepid response from developed countries in implementing measures to curb climate change. In Laudate Deum, he urged that new multinational agreements on climate change — speaking in this case specifically about the COP28 conference — be “drastic, intense, and count on the commitment of all,” stating that “a broad change in the irresponsible lifestyle connected with the Western model would have a significant long-term impact.”
The pope lamented what he sees as the fact that when new projects related to green energy are proposed, the potential for economic growth, employment, and human promotion are thought of first rather than moral considerations such as the effects on the world’s poorest.
“It is often heard also that efforts to mitigate climate change by reducing the use of fossil fuels and developing cleaner energy sources will lead to a reduction in the number of jobs,” the pope noted.
“What is happening is that millions of people are losing their jobs due to different effects of climate change: rising sea levels, droughts, and other phenomena affecting the planet have left many people adrift. Conversely, the transition to renewable forms of energy, properly managed, as well as efforts to adapt to the damage caused by climate change, are capable of generating countless jobs in different sectors.”
‘Leave God’s creation better than we found it’
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation think tank, told CNA that he has noticed a theme of frustration and confusion among many Catholics regarding the Holy Father’s emphasis on climate change.
A self-described outdoorsman and former president of Wyoming Catholic College, Roberts spoke highly to CNA of certain aspects of Laudato Si’, particularly the pope’s insights into what he called “human ecology,” which refers to the acceptance of each person’s human body as a vital part of “accepting the entire world as a gift from the Father and our common home.”
Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation. Courtesy of Heritage Foundation.
“I like to think [Pope Francis] personally wrote that, because I could see him saying that,” Roberts said of the passage, which appears in paragraph 155 of the encyclical. Roberts said he even makes a point to meditate on that “beautiful and moving” passage during a retreat that he does annually.
That portion of Laudato Si’ notwithstanding, Roberts said he strongly believes that it detracts from other important issues, such as direct ministry to the poor, when Pope Francis elevates care for God’s natural creation as “seemingly more important than other issues to us as Catholics.” He also said he disagrees with Pope Francis’ policy prescriptions, such as a complete phasing out of fossil fuels, contained in Laudate Deum.
“We of course want to pray for him. We’re open to the teaching that he is providing. But we also have to remember as Catholics that sometimes popes are wrong. And on this issue, it is a prudential matter. It is not a matter of morality, particularly when he’s getting into the scientific policy recommendations,” Roberts said.
Roberts said the Heritage Foundation’s research and advocacy has focused not on high-level, multinational agreements and conferences to tackle the issues posed by climate change but rather on smaller-scale, more community-based efforts. He said this policy position is, in part, due to the historical deference such multinational conglomerates of nations have given to China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases overall.
He said agreements within the U.S. itself, with businesses and all levels of government working together, have produced the best results so far when it comes to improving the environment. He also pointed to examples of constructive action that don’t involve billions of dollars, such as families making the choice to spend more time outdoors or engaging in local activities that contribute to environmental conservation and community life, such as anti-litter campaigns and community gardening. The overarching goal, he said, should be to “leave God’s creation better than we found it.”
Roberts — who said he personally believes humans likely have “very little effect” on the climate — said he was discouraged to read other portions of Laudato Si’, as well as Laudate Deum, that to him read as though they had come “straight out of the U.N.” Despite his criticisms, Roberts urged his fellow Catholics to continue to pray for the Holy Father and to listen to the pope’s moral insights.
“I just think that the proposed solutions are actually more anti-human and worse than the purported effects of climate change,” he added.
‘A far more complex issue’
Greg Sindelar, a Catholic who serves as CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a conservative think tank that studies the energy industry, similarly expressed concerns to CNA about the potential impact of certain climate change mitigation policies on human flourishing.
Like Roberts, Sindelar spoke highly of certain aspects of the pope’s message while expressing reservations about some of the U.N.-esque solutions proposed in Laudate Deum.
“I think the pope is right about our duty as Catholics to be stewards and to care for the environment. But I think what we have to understand — what we have to balance this with — is that it cannot come at the expense of depriving people of affordable and reliable energy,” Sindelar said in an interview with CNA.
“There’s ways to be environmentally friendly without sacrificing the access that we all need to reliable and affordable energy.”
Greg Sindelar is CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a think tank in America’s leading energy-producing state. Courtesy of Texas Public Policy Foundation
Sindelar said TPPF primarily promotes cheap, reliable access to energy as a means of promoting human flourishing. The free-market-focused group is skeptical of top-down governmental intervention, both in the form of regulation and incentives or disincentives in certain areas of the energy sector.
When asked what he thinks his fellow Catholics largely think about the issue, Sindelar said many of the Catholics he hears from express the view that government policies and interventions rarely produce effective solutions and could potentially hinder access to energy for those in need.
“I think it’s a far more complex issue than just saying we need to cut emissions, and we need to transfer away from fossil fuels, and all these other things. What we need to do is figure out and ensure ways that we are providing affordable and reliable electricity to all citizens of the world,” he reiterated.
“When the pope speaks, when the Vatican speaks, it carries a lot of weight with Catholics around the world, [and] not just with Catholics … and I totally agree with him that we need to be thinking about the most marginalized and the poorest amongst us,” Sindelar continued.
“[But] by going down these policy prescription paths that he’s recommending, we’re actually going to reduce their ability to have access to that,” he asserted.
Sindelar, while disagreeing with Pope Francis’ call for an “abandonment of fossil fuels,” said he appreciates the fact that Pope Francis has spoken out about the issue of care for creation and has initiated so much public discussion.
“I think there is room for differing views and opinions on the right ways to do that,” he said.
Effective mitigation efforts
Susan Varlamoff, a retired biologist and parishioner at St. John Neumann Catholic Church in the Atlanta area, is among those Catholics who are committed to Pope Francis’ call to care for creation and to mitigate the effects of climate change. To that end, Varlamoff in 2016 created a peer-reviewed action plan for the Archdiocese of Atlanta to help Catholics put the principles contained in Laudato Si’ into action, mainly through smaller, more personal actions that people can take to reduce their energy usage.
Retired biologist Susan Varlamoff. Photo courtesy of Susan Varlamoff
The Atlanta Archdiocese’s efforts have since garnered recognition and praise, Varlamoff said, with at least 35 archdioceses now involved in an inter-diocesan network formed to exchange sustainability ideas based on the latest version of the plan from Atlanta.
“It’s fascinating to see what everybody is doing, and it’s basically based on their talents and imaginations,” Varlamoff said, noting that a large number of young people have gotten involved with their efforts.
As a scientist, Varlamoff told CNA it is clear to her that Pope Francis knows what he’s talking about when he lays out the dangers posed by inaction in the face of climate change.
“He understands the science, and he’s deeply concerned … he’s got remarkable influence as a moral leader,” she said.
“Part of what our religion asks us to do is to care for one another. We have to care for creation if we’re going to care for one another, because the earth is our natural resource system, our life support, and we cannot care for one another if we don’t have that life support.”
Responding to criticisms about the financial costs associated with certain green initiatives, Varlamoff noted that small-scale sustainable actions can actually save money. She offered the example of parishes in the Atlanta area that have drastically reduced their electric bills by installing solar panels.
“[But,] it’s not just about saving money. It’s also about reducing fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, and protecting the natural resources for future generations,” she said.
Moreover, Varlamoff said, the moral imperative to improve the natural environment for future generations is worth the investment. “When [Catholics] give money, for example, for a social justice issue like Walking with Moms in Need or special needs, the payback is improving lives. We’re improving the environment here,” she emphasized.
Leave a Reply