FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Supreme Court Decision: U.S. gov. now determines who is "church"-affiliated.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Although the Supreme Court now decided that the Little Sisters of the Poor are exempt from the HHS Mandate, certainly a temporary victory for them, Hobby Lobby, because it is not a "church" affiliated organization, is not exempt.

In other words: The U.S. government now defines who is and who isn't  a "church"-affiliated organization, and thus, by extension, who is and who isn't a "church"!

I'm really curious what they'd define the SSPX.
Quote:CHESAPEAKE, VA (Catholic Online) - In the wake of the full US Supreme Court [url=http://"http://www.becketfund.org/littlesisterswin/"]granting an Injunction[/url] to protect the Little Sisters of the Poor from the hostility of the Obama Administration while their case works its way through the Court System, there is another historic story related to the HHS Mandate involving Hobby Lobby, Inc.

The Lawyers of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, who represent the Little Sisters, also represent Hobby Lobby. The cases are different, but spring from the same fundamental root of Religious Liberty. Hobby Lobby is a for profit business dedicated to Christian principles in the operation of its business.

We have witnessed an ominous trend in the United States. Classical, faithful Christians who uphold the unbroken teaching of the Church and the scriptures concerning the dignity of every human life and the truth concerning marriage as solely between one man and one woman and formative of family, are being squeezed out of commerce.

This is not the first time in our two thousand year history as a Christian people that we have faced the reality of having to avoid some aspects of commerce because of the corruption of the cultures in which we live. It is not our first time facing the hostility of worldly Caesars demanding that we bend the knee. It is simply that few thought it would happen in the United States of America with its robust protection of religious freedom embedded in its founding documents.

The trend is ominous. We need to expose and oppose it by defending all of the Rights protected by the US Constitution, including the free exercise of religion, the right to free speech, free association and the right to participate in commerce. However, we also need to be aware that morally coherent Christians, who live a unity of life and believe that their faith informs every aspect of their life, are at the beginning of a period of growing persecution. We must pray, band together and act.

The hostility being faced by Hobby Lobby is an affront to all of us. It calls all faithful Christians, Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox, to solidarity. They filed a lawsuit back in September of 2012 which can be read in its entirety [url=http://"http://www.becketfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Hobby-Lobby-Complaint-stamped.pdf"]here[/url]. You can find an excellent update on the many cases challenging the HHS Mandate which seeks to compel Christian employers to (directly or indirectly) provide Chemical abortifacients, sterilization and contraceptives [url=http://"http://www.becketfund.org/hhsinformationcentral/"]here[/url].

This attempt by the Obama Administration to compel compliance with this unjust edit violates the Constitution and the fundamental right to Religious freedom. It is a blatant violation of the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. However, the Obama Administration has made it very clear once again in their responsive filing before the US Supreme Court in the Little Sisters of the Poor case that they are not backing down. They intend to use the police power of the State to compel compliance.

I present to our global readership a memorandum issued by Hobby Lobby which shows the integrity and heroic courage of the leaders of this business. Pray for them. Heroic Hobby Lobby should challenge all faithful Christians To courageous resistance and fidelity
(source)

Julian the Apostate, an emperor during the Arian crisis, incentivized being Arian over Christian when he "issued a decree that all titles to lands, rights and immunities bestowed since the reign of Constantine upon the Galileans, as he contemptuously called the Christians, were abrogated, and that the moneys granted to the Church from the revenues of the State must be repaid."

Similarly today: true Church doctrines like extra Ecclesiam nulla salus or the divinity of Christ are going to disqualify us a "church" status in the eyes of the U.S. government, whereas adherents to Modernism will monetarily benefit.

But, on the bright side, this only reaffirms what Pope Gregory XVI said, as Bl. Pope Pius IX reaffirmed in Mirari Vos, viz., that it is an "insanity" (delirium) that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society".

Oremus semper.
Well, to be fair, I don't think any reasonable person would define "Hobby Lobby" as affiliated with a church. Yes, the owners are Christians, but they hold no religious services, do no corporeal works of mercy, does not provide a fundamental service benefiting society such a health care or education, etc. They are not a church by any standard used.

I guess it poses the question concerning the HHS mandate, where does the line get drawn? How does one regulate who does and doesn't have exceptions?
The point I believe the Bishops refuse to make is that the institutions, businesses, etc., are in effect moot. Businesses and institutions do not go to hell for supporting evil. They are made up entities. The problem is the individual who is being (il)legally and unjustly forced into providing for the carrying out of evil.

It doesn't matter if it's a Catholic or a Hindu or Muslim or Jew or Agnostic or Atheist.

The regulation of drawing a line is beside the point, as it is not within the purview of anyone or any government to command a person to do that which is objectively EVIL.

With all due respect to Deacon Keith he should read Christopher Ferrara's, "Liberty The God That Failed." Separation of "Church and State" is the problem.

Pax,
Tarpeian
(01-27-2014, 11:18 PM)tarpeian Wrote: [ -> ]Deacon Keith
Who's Deacon Keith?
(01-27-2014, 04:56 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]The point I believe the Bishops refuse to make is that the institutions, businesses, etc., are in effect moot. Businesses and institutions do not go to hell for supporting evil. They are made up entities. The problem is the individual who is being (il)legally and unjustly forced into providing for the carrying out of evil.

It doesn't matter if it's a Catholic or a Hindu or Muslim or Jew or Agnostic or Atheist.

The regulation of drawing a line is beside the point, as it is not within the purview of anyone or any government to command a person to do that which is objectively EVIL.

Maybe I'm missing something? A corporation like Hobby Lobby is just that - a corporation. It is an entity onto itself, and legally a person onto itself. Just because the dude at the head of the Hobby Lobby doesn't want to comply doesn't mean that the person that is the corporation has the ability to refuse. They are not one in the same, in a strict legal sense.

Did that make any sense?
(01-27-2014, 11:54 PM)Geremia Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-27-2014, 11:18 PM)tarpeian Wrote: [ -> ]Deacon Keith
Who's Deacon Keith?


I'm sorry I though the article by Catholic Online was written by,  Deacon Keith Fournier.

Pax,
Tarpeian
(01-28-2014, 12:35 AM)PrairieMom Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-27-2014, 04:56 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]The point I believe the Bishops refuse to make is that the institutions, businesses, etc., are in effect moot. Businesses and institutions do not go to hell for supporting evil. They are made up entities. The problem is the individual who is being (il)legally and unjustly forced into providing for the carrying out of evil.

It doesn't matter if it's a Catholic or a Hindu or Muslim or Jew or Agnostic or Atheist.

The regulation of drawing a line is beside the point, as it is not within the purview of anyone or any government to command a person to do that which is objectively EVIL.

Maybe I'm missing something? A corporation like Hobby Lobby is just that - a corporation. It is an entity onto itself, and legally a person onto itself. Just because the dude at the head of the Hobby Lobby doesn't want to comply doesn't mean that the person that is the corporation has the ability to refuse. They are not one in the same, in a strict legal sense.

Did that make any sense?

But the people who pay into the policies will be paying, and the Bishops have not addressed this. They keep arguing for Catholic institutions and Orders, etc., but what of the individuals who are merely out in the workforce? What of the objective evil of it all? They won't address it, it seems. And that is a major problem. They're asking for preferential treatment for what essentially serves as a fundraising arm, but aren't addressing the actual evil being foisted on the population at large, regardless of religious status.
(01-28-2014, 01:19 AM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-28-2014, 12:35 AM)PrairieMom Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-27-2014, 04:56 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]The point I believe the Bishops refuse to make is that the institutions, businesses, etc., are in effect moot. Businesses and institutions do not go to hell for supporting evil. They are made up entities. The problem is the individual who is being (il)legally and unjustly forced into providing for the carrying out of evil.

It doesn't matter if it's a Catholic or a Hindu or Muslim or Jew or Agnostic or Atheist.

The regulation of drawing a line is beside the point, as it is not within the purview of anyone or any government to command a person to do that which is objectively EVIL.

Maybe I'm missing something? A corporation like Hobby Lobby is just that - a corporation. It is an entity onto itself, and legally a person onto itself. Just because the dude at the head of the Hobby Lobby doesn't want to comply doesn't mean that the person that is the corporation has the ability to refuse. They are not one in the same, in a strict legal sense.

Did that make any sense?

But the people who pay into the policies will be paying, and the Bishops have not addressed this. They keep arguing for Catholic institutions and Orders, etc., but what of the individuals who are merely out in the workforce? What of the objective evil of it all? They won't address it, it seems. And that is a major problem. They're asking for preferential treatment for what essentially serves as a fundraising arm, but aren't addressing the actual evil being foisted on the population at large, regardless of religious status.

Ah. I think I understand. It's similar to how my taxes here pay for everyone else's health care in addition to my own, including abortions (not for me, them), and I have no way of opting out.

:considering:

You make a point. Are individuals not able to opt in/out of certain kinds of coverage? In theory, if you could opt out of abortions and ABC in your own plan, then none of the money you're providing would fund those (on a practical level not so, but at least it's a sort of stand you could take).

Maybe the bishops have a plan? The institutional aspect certainly  needs to be addressed on a priority basis, and maybe they are hoping it will give them legal teeth to work on the other part? I can see that it's such an overwhelmingly large problem that is multi-faceted, and probably can't legally be addressed in a single, broad stroke as they truly are two separate, although interrelated, issues.