As promised, if Bishop Clark spoke out on the Contraception Mandate, I would give him credit.  I’m surprised to see that His Excellency has joined over 150 other American Bishops in speaking out against this mandate.  Kudos, Your Excellency!  That said, let us examine precisely  what he said, what the standard form-letter states, and some of the more impressive  responses given by other Bishops.  I will let you be the judge of the quality of his…”speaking out on the issue,” but I, quite frankly, think it is exceedingly weak and, much like most of the fruits of his administration, rather emasculated.

Bishop Olmsted’s letter here is essentially the form-letter used by a great many Bishops.  Here is Bishop Clark’s letter.

The following text is from the form-letter.  The bold parts are those included by +Clark.  The [bracketed parts] were added by +Clark.  That which is neither bracketed nor bold was struck out by +Clark. That in (red) is my commentary

Dear Brothers and Sisters [Sisters and Brothers] in Christ, (always obsessed with women…)

[With a heavy heart,] I write to you [today to call your attention to an important development which] concerning an alarming and serious matter that negatively impacts the Church in the United States directly, and that strikes at [threatens] the fundamental right to religious liberty for all citizens of any faith. The federal government, which claims to be “of, by, and for the people,” has just dealt a heavy blow to almost a quarter of those people—the Catholic population—and to the millions more who are served by the Catholic faithful. (note the difference in opening paragraph.  +Clark refuses to acknowledge the fact that this is a direct attack on the Catholic Church and her people.)

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced [on January 20, 2012] last week that almost all employers, including Catholic employers, (won’t acknowledge the specifically Catholic problem…)will [now] be forced [mandated] to offer their employees health coverage that includes sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs, and contraception. Almost all health insurers will be forced to include those “services” in the health policies they write. And almost all individuals will be forced to buy that coverage as a part of their policies. (+Clark does not use the word “forced,” thus making it seem less problematic…mandated sounds less dictator-ish than “forced”)

In so ruling, the Administration has cast aside the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation’s first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. And as a result, unless the rule [ruling] is overturned, we Catholics must be prepared [will be required to] either to violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees (and suffer the penalties for doing so). The Administration’s sole concession was to give our institutions one year to comply. (+Clark refuses to implicate the Obama administration, does not note that there are penalties for dropping health coverage, nor acknowledge their absurd “concession.  Furthermore, his use of “ruling” makes it seem like an impartial judge, rather than an anti-Catholic bigoted President made this decision.)

We cannot—we will not—comply with this unjust law. People of faith cannot be made second class citizens. We are already joined by our brothers and sisters of all faiths and many others of good will in this important effort to regain our religious freedom. Our parents and grandparents did not come to these shores to help build America’s cities and towns, its infrastructure and institutions, its enterprise and culture, only to have their posterity stripped of their God given rights. In generations past, the Church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. I hope and trust she can count on this generation of Catholics to do the same. Our children and grandchildren deserve nothing less.

[As we have done in the past, so now we must make our voices heard on this important matter of religious freedom.] (So very inspiring! A true call to action…uh…nope!  He also does not suppose civil disobedience as a course of action, just suggests that we talk about it.  ONCE AGAIN, stripping the letter of any real courage.)

And therefore, I would ask of you two things. First, as a community of faith we must  [to] commit ourselves to prayer and fasting that wisdom and justice may [might] prevail, and [that true] religious liberty may be restored. (He really hates the word “must,” apparently.) Without God, we can do nothing; with God, nothing is impossible. Second, I [ask you individually to visit] would also recommend visiting www.usccb.org/conscience, to learn more about this severe assault (severe sounds mean, let’s skip that too!)on religious liberty, and how to contact Congress in support of legislation that would reverse the Administration’s [administrative] decision. (SEE! +Clark refuses to implicate the Obama administration in a way that might form our voting consciences in 2012!)

[May God Bless our efforts to do what is right.]

Some other Bishops’ responses include

Bishop Tobin of Providence, who stated, “The ruthless decision of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to impose mandatory coverage for sterilizations and contraceptives upon private insurance programs, including those offered by the Catholic Church, is an unprecedented, outrageous and unacceptable attack on religious freedom and the moral life and ministry of the Church.”

Bishop DiMarzio of Brooklyn noted, “As a Bishop, this troubles me because it indicates that we have failed to teach the truths of the Catholic Faith clearly and convincingly.”

Bishop Zubik of Pittsburgh, when his first impassioned response was met with complaints, responded to them.  His answer to  “The Church doesn’t care about women’s health.” follows:

“I think that is when my head nearly exploded. The truth be told, the Catholic Church throughout this country virtually created health care in the United States. In Pittsburgh, the first hospital, Mercy Hospital, was opened under Church auspices within a year of the founding of our diocese and long before the government responded. The Church’s health care ministry was built primarily by Catholic women and has served women of all faiths and no faith from its inception. What we don’t do, can’t do, won’t do is consider pregnancy a disease equivalent to the flu. Or to be “cured” by death.”

Finally, let us hear Bishop Slattery of Tulsa, who exclaims:

“As your bishop, I want to make it clear that I consider this mandate unconstitutional, unjust and evil.

This mandate is unconstitutional because it does not allow us the full and unfettered practice of our faith. The religious freedom guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution is not simply the freedom to worship God on Sunday morning, but also the freedom to worship Him by living moral lives. No Catholic can claim to live a moral life and at the same time support contraception, direct sterilization and abortion. The first amendment guarantees us the freedom not to participate in health care plans that would require us to insure and pay for actions that are gravely sinful.

Because this mandate is unconstitutional, we will refuse to comply with it.

This mandate is evil, because not only does it require that all Catholics cooperate in sin by providing for and paying for coverage for gravely immoral actions which have as their final end the destruction of human life, but also by requiring that Catholics who do not cooperate in this should be punished. Were we to comply with this law, we would offend God and imperil our souls. We will not comply.

This mandate is unjust because it imposes a secular definition of religious freedom that makes it a crime to practice our faith in the public square. It is the Church – not the government – which has the right to determine how and when we practice our faith. In this matter, President Obama’s administration has overstepped its authority. This is what Pope Leo XIII cautioned against when he wrote over a hundred years ago: “if the will of rulers is opposed to the will and the laws of God, then those rulers exceed the bounds of their own power and pervert justice. Nor can their authority be valid, since authority without justice is null.”

From the founding of our nation, we Catholic have always obeyed the laws. But this law, we cannot obey.”

Therefore, I ask you: What do you think about Bishop Clark’s response to this debacle?

When was the last time you heard contraception denounced from the pulpit?  How many parishes stress the importance of Natural Family Planning in their Pre-Cana classes?  Have you EVER heard your priest give a no-frills defense of the Church’s teachings on contraception?  In all of my years in all of the parishes I’ve attended, I have never once heard a homily that even broaches the subject.  Why not?  That answer, dear readers, is simple.  For the past forty-four years, (and, indeed, before that!) since His Holiness, Pope Paul VI promulgated Humanae Vitae, countless Priests, Bishops, Religious, and Laypersons have either ignored or openly dissented from the teachings contained therein.  This has been especially prevalent right here in the Diocese of Rochester.

For Reference, HV 14 states:

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good,” it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.

HV 17 prophetically continues,

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone.  (See: China) It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband 

Dear Bishops, Priests, Religious, and Laypersons:

THIS WHOLE DEBACLE WAS PREDICTED IN 1968.  44 YEARS AGO.  WAKE UP! PREACH THE TRUTH!

Fr. Charles Curran’s obstinate post-baptismal denial of the teachings of the Church on this very topic in 1986 caused then-Cardinal Ratzinger to ban him from the teaching of Catholic Theology and cost him his job as a tenured professor at the Catholic University of America in DC.  Curran, as many of you know, remains a priest in good standing of the Diocese of Rochester.  As far as I know, the reason for this is quite simple: Bishop Matthew Clark AGREES with him!  Of course, we all know the long story of His Excellency’s history of dissent on issues of sexual morality: his near-obsession with the promotion of the homosexual agenda, his implicit support of the use of a transgendered crucifix, his appointment of heretical Sr. Pat Schoelles as President of the French Road Heresy Factory, his 33 non-appearances at the March for Life, and the forcible removal of his imprimatur from the 1986 heretical book Parents Talk Love: The Catholic Family Handbook About Sexuality, as it approved of contraception, masturbation, and homosexuality.  The list goes on and on and on.

Thus, with over 116 American Bishops speaking out about this issue, Bishop Clark’s continued silence speaks volumes.  You may recall the last time American Bishops rallied together to defend the Faith: The Notre Shame Scandal.  The final count of those speaking out against the decision was 83.  Now, there is perhaps an argument of “pastoral sensitivity” or some such that could be reasonably defended when ignoring the events at Notre Shame.  THERE IS NO EXCUSE not to speak up and defend the TRUTH in this instance.  There is still time, after 33 years of failed leadership, for His Excellency to turn over a new leaf.  That time, however, is running shorter by the day.  The clock ticks down…170, 169, 168, 167, 166…

I once, when traveling, met a priest of another Diocese.  When he recognized me as a visitor (Pastoral Sensitivity!), he asked where I was from.  When I told him that I was from Rochester, New York, he exclaimed, “Rochester! Beautiful country up there!  It’s a shame they don’t have a CATHOLIC Bishop!” With this in mind, let us look for some guidance from the more courageous and orthodox among the American Episcopate:

Bishop Jenky of Peoria asked that the St Michael Prayer be prayed during the General Intercessions at EVERY MASS.

Bishop Zubik of Pittsburgh stated that, “It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States, “To Hell with you!” There is no other way to put it.”

Bishop Etienne of Cheyenne guides our voting consciences thus: “When an Administration, after seeking feedback on such a controversial ruling, still decides to act in a manner that violates our freedom of religion, it is quite telling…”

Bishop Olmsted of Phoenix, and dozens of other bishops implore us to “commit ourselves to prayer and fasting that wisdom and justice may prevail, and religious liberty may be restored.”

Bishop Paprocki of Springfield states that, ” the president was being either dishonest or delusional or he is incompetent” due to his claim last November that the concerns of Catholics were unfounded.

Bishop Bruskewitz of Lincoln noted that “in an act of mockery,” “Kathleen Sebelius, a bitter fallen-away Catholic, now requires that all insurance, even when issued privately, must carry coverage for evil and grave sin.”

Bishop Lori of Bridgeport explains how this mandate will directly harm the poor and vulnerable

Cardinal-Designate Dolan of New York explains that it is absurd to believe  that “we might suddenly be more willing to violate our consciences 12 months from now,” and goes on to explain that “This latest erosion of our first freedom should make all Americans pause. When the government tampers with a freedom so fundamental to the life of our nation, one shudders to think what lies ahead.”

The (Arch)Bishops of Washington DC, Kansas City, KS (Sebelius’ home diocese), Wilmington, DE (Biden’s home diocese), as well as our neighboring Bishops in Buffalo and Syracuse have spoken out on this mandate, as have the Bishops of Ogdensburg, Rockville Center, and Brooklyn. For those keeping score at home, every single Diocesan Bishop in New York State EXCEPT  +Clark and his heretical best friend, Bishop Hubbard of Albany, have spoken out on this mandate.  The silence is deafening.

**Disclaimer:  If, in fact, Bishop Clark speaks out about this issue, I will be exceedingly glad to rescind the parts of this post that speak ill of the man.  I am not holding my breath, but that is the outcome for which I am praying.  Note: This does not constitute His Excellency “speaking out” on the issue.**