The Supreme Court and the HHS Mandate

The Supreme Court and the HHS Mandate

Like everyone interested in the freedom of religion and with an understanding of the potential impact on the future of our country, I was greatly relieved to see Hobby Lobby vindicated by the Supreme Court Monday in its battle against the HHS mandate.  By the narrowest 5-4 margin, sanity held the day, but there are many things that still concern me greatly.

            The first is the limited scope of the court’s decision.  Fox News reported that:  “The court stressed that its ruling on Monday applies only to corporations that are under the control of just a few people in which there is no essential difference between the business and its owners.” Why?  How can the court justify any business being forced to pay for the services demanded by the HHS mandate?  And upon whose judgment will we rely to determine which companies qualify?

            The dissent sounds at times as though the sky is falling, and that civilization is under attack by the ruling.  Is it not true that contraception / abortifacient coverage has never been required until Obamacare’s putrid mandate?  Somehow women were not left on the streets to die.  Framing this whole debate around the issue of women’s health is incredibly misleading to begin with.  The claim that the court’s ruling will somehow have disastrous consequences is simply ridiculous.  The one part of the dissent which I pray is true is the statement: “Although the Court attempts to cabin its language to closely held corporations, its logic extends to corporations of any size, public or private. Little doubt that RFRA claims will proliferate.”

            The biggest problem with the decision is that the court gave any credence to the idea that the government can force any employers to provide morally objectionable coverage for its employees.  Don’t get me wrong, I am elated that Hobby Lobby won its case.  But to think that we have won a decisive blow for religious freedom is naïve.  The battle is far from over.

Link - The War on Men

Link - The War on Men

     The article at the following link has gotten a lot of attention lately, but with Fathers' Day just behind us, it is worth considering.  If manhood is under attack, not only will our children suffer from a lack of mental and emotional development, but spiritual as well.  It is our duty as fathers to introduce our children to their true Father in Heaven.

http://www.saveamericafoundation.com/2014/03/09/the-war-on-men-10-ways-masculinity-is-under-attack-by-paul-joseph-watson/

Remembering Tony Gwynn

Remembering Tony Gwynn

Image from http://www.seattlepi.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Baseball-Legend-Tony-Gwynn-Dead-At-54-5555832.php

Growing up as a baseball fan and player in the 1980s, I loved Tony Gwynn.  As a baseball “purist,” I always appreciated his game.  But one of the great things about Gwynn was that with him, you really had a sense that he was as good a man off the field as he was on it.

          This Hall of Famer, with his .338 lifetime batting average, the highest for anyone born after 1900 or who did not play before World War II, died Monday of oral cancer at the age of 54.

          Tony Gwynn was very visible and accessible in his community, so many people have Tony Gwynn stories.  If you live in Southern California like I do, you have been treated to them for the last couple of days on the radio.  I would like to share two of my favorites in this article for the benefit of those who live everywhere else, as a tribute to “Mr. Padre.”

          One of my favorites was called in to a local radio show on Monday.  The caller said that her family used to travel to Yuma, Arizona for Spring Training.  One spring her family was staying in the Days Inn in Yuma and three doors down was Tony Gwynn with his family.

          Shortly after her family got settled in their room, she found her son, along with about half a dozen other kids, playing catch with Gwynn in the motel courtyard.  Years later, her son went to San Diego State University, where Gwynn was the head baseball coach after his playing career was over.

          The caller’s son did not play baseball for the university, but decided to stop in at Coach Gwynn’s office one day and ask him to sign a baseball for his younger brother.  Not only did Gwynn stop what he was doing and sign the ball, he invited the young man to sit down and proceeded to ask him about his major and his family.

          The other story I would like to share occurred in 2013 when a San Diego Little League team made it to the finals of the Little League World Series.  The community was hoping for a big celebration when the team returned home, but they had lost to Japan in the final game, and the kids were going to be welcomed home mostly by family and friends.

          But Tony Gwynn, still recovering from a recent surgery, was there.  He wanted to welcome the kids and celebrate with them personally.

          Even as he faced his life-threatening condition, Gwynn was courageous.  He said publicly that he attributed it to his use of chewing tobacco.  “I did this to myself,” he said, never seeking pity, but wishing that his suffering would spare others the same fate.

          The city of San Diego will long miss Tony Gwynn.  Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him.  Through the Mercy of God, may he rest in peace.  Amen.

Saving Secular Marriage

Saving Secular Marriage

We have seen the redefinition of marriage repeatedly defeated at the ballot box, yet repeatedly enforced by judges.  In truth, marriage can not be redefined in either venue.  But many people are beginning to wonder, “Is it even worth the fight for us as Catholics to try and defend marriage in the secular sphere?”  After all, we are concerned with Sacramental marriage, which will not be touched, and society has long recognized as valid many unions which, in the proper sense, are not valid marriages.

The battle everyone agrees we must fight is that for religious liberty.  With courts trying to enforce our participation in same-sex “marriages,” there is much work to be done on that front.  So should we even care what secular society believes about marriage?

I believe the answer is “yes,” and something I saw recently hammered home the reasons why.  I was watching some game show and the exchange between the host and a contestant went like this:

Host: “You’re a married man?”

Contestant: “Yes, my wife and I have been married for 10 years.”

Host: “And you have children?”

Contestant: “We have three.  Our oldest daughter is 15, our son is 13, and our youngest daughter is 11.”

It was clear that the three kids are all from the contestant and his wife.  The youngest is 11, and they have been married for 10 years.  That means their oldest daughter was five years old, with two younger siblings before they decided to get married.  Now I’m not judging them personally; this is the culture in which we live.  The fact that they are still together, and the three children are with both of their natural parents, means that this family is actually ahead of the game, nowadays.

But I’ve known many people with similar circumstances.  The state licenses marriages in the first place because sociological studies (and common sense) overwhelmingly demonstrate that a married mother and father provide the best environment in which children can grow up.

Should we care about the state of secular marriage?  Yes, because as St. John Paul II said, “As the family goes, so goes the world.”  The problem is that we’re getting forced into a debate exclusively about same-sex “marriage.”  The redefinition of marriage began years ago with the acceptance of wide-spread divorce.  That had to come first; once a generation grew up without a true sense of marriage, they would be able to accept all other sorts of redefinitions.

The media try to keep us focused on the same-sex issue because they like to portray us as bigots, or at least out-of-touch.  Nothing is further from the truth.  It is we who don’t define a person by his or her sexual attractions, but rather by the fact that they are made in the image and likeness of God.

What we need to do is adjust the message.  Our culture has lost a true vision of marriage.  Instead of letting other people focus on what we say “no” to, we need to let people see the beauty of what we’re saying “yes” to.

It’s the same reason we lost the culture on chastity, in large part.  The “sexual revolution” portrayed the Church as only telling people, “Thou shalt not,” but the truth is that the beauty of chastity, and what it means for fruitful relationships far outweighs the darkness of the sexual revolution.  But until recently, we have been so much on the defensive against the darkness, people have not been able to see the light we bear as Catholics.

We need to present the culture with a true, positive, beautiful view of what marriage really is.  And that means first, we as a Church must be living it.  Is it too late to save the culture?  Perhaps.  But, then again, let us never forget, as St. Teresa of Avila said, “God plus one equals an army.”  

Link - Religious Liberty Loses Again

Religious Liberty Loses Again

A baker in Colorado is being forced to set aside his religious beliefs and participate in same-sex “weddings.”  His solution is the one we all must be prepared to adopt – peaceful civil disobedience.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/03/baker-forced-to-make-gay-wedding-cakes-undergo-sensitivity-training-after/

The Ascension

The Ascension

 

Image from http://whycatholicsdothat.com/ascension/

Yesterday we celebrated the Feast of the Ascension of the Lord.  This, of course, refers to Jesus’s ascending to Heaven 40 days after His Resurrection, as recounted in Acts 1:6-12.  We meditate on this Mystery every time we pray the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary, but I wonder how often we recognize the importance this event has in our understanding of the Incarnation.

Many times I hear converts say that they never really plumbed the depths of the mystery of the Incarnation until they became Catholic.  They had recognized that Jesus took on a human nature so He could die and atone for sin, but they never realized the full implications.

I do not pretend to plumb those depths here, but I would offer one thing to consider.  When Jesus Ascended to Heaven, He did so with both His Divine and Human Natures.  In other words, in Heaven, Jesus remains the God-Man.

Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, took on a human nature 2,000 years ago in the womb of his mother, and He still has it.  He did not divest Himself of that nature after the Resurrection.  He ascended into Heaven with it.  Archbishop Fulton Sheen points out that the Ascension is a clear indication that our human nature is not a barrier to Heaven.

Imagine God becoming Man.  Really, imagine it.  Though He remains God, He is truly man, and not only temporarily, not only as an actor might don a costume to perform a role; He truly becomes man.  God, who is completion, perfection, pure Being, ascended to Heaven, with a human nature, as we have a human nature, to prepare a place for us. 

We could meditate on this forever.  What does it mean, then, to be human?  How incredibly intimate our relationship with God can be!  How humble is our God, and what incredible Love must He have for us, that He would become one of us?  May this feast, and those beautiful ones upcoming - Pentecost, Corpus Christi, the Sacred Heart, the Most Holy Trinity – lead us to deeper prayer, understanding, and love of God.

 

Note: If you have a thought to add to this reflection, or if I have lacked precision or included any theological error in this post, please email me at servantofcharity@yahoo.com