Washington D.C., Apr 29, 2017 / 05:27 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Catholic leaders have found cause for both praise and concern after the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s presidency.
“Catholics have reason for optimism. But like the first 100 days, the road ahead remains difficult,” Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org, said on the organization’s scorecard for the first 100 days of the Trump presidency.
Abortion
Pro-life leaders have found a lot to like from the Trump administration so far.
“President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have been game changers for the pro-life movement,” Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser stated. “Not only have there been several pro-life victories within the first 100 days of their administration, we are confident that pro-life progress will continue. This is a new era.”
A week after Trump was inaugurated, Vice President Mike Pence addressed the 44th annual March for Life on the National Mall, the first time a sitting vice president has done so. Senior advisor Kellyanne Conway also addressed the pro-life rally.
“Life is winning in America,” Pence insisted to cheering attendees, as he exhorted them to “let this movement be known for love, not anger” and “let it be known for compassion, not confrontation.”
On Jan. 23, Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy which bans U.S. funding of international non-government organizations that promote or perform abortions.
This is traditionally one of the first policy decisions a new president makes and serves as a signal of the administration’s policy on abortion. President Reagan first introduced the policy in 1984. It was repealed by President Clinton when he took office, reinstated by President Bush in 2001, and repealed again by President Obama in 2009.
In April, the Trump administration pulled its funding of the UNFPA over its involvement in China’s infamous two-child policy, formerly a one-child policy, which has resulted in mass forced sterilizations and abortions. Funding was redirected to USAID for family planning purposes.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, chair of the U.S. bishops’ pro-life committee, called the funding withdrawal a “victory for women and children across the globe.”
Shortly afterward, the administration signed a joint resolution passed by Congress that nullified an Obama administration rule that pro-life leaders had called a “parting gift to Planned Parenthood.”
That rule forbade states from withholding federal Title X funds to health providers simply because they performed abortions. Now with the rule nullified, states can once again block Planned Parenthood and other abortion groups from Title X funding. Cardinal Dolan also approved of that rule change, calling it a reversal of “very bad public policy.”
In addition to signing bills into law, “personnel is policy,” Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life, insisted to reporters on a Thursday conference call on Trump’s first 100 days.
She pointed to the picks of Vice President Mike Pence and senior advisor Kellyanne Conway as two examples of President Trump surrounding himself with persons with strong pro-life records.
Burch agreed that “President Trump has assembled a great Cabinet.”
He pointed to the pro-life appointments at the Department of Health and Human Services as examples of this. Former pro-life congressman Dr. Tom Price was tapped to be Secretary of Health and Human Services; Dr. Charmaine Yoest, former CEO of the pro-life group Americans United for Life, has been named to be assistant secretary of public affairs at HHS; and lawyer Matt Bowman, formerly of Alliance Defending Freedom, was also picked to join HHS.
“The Trump administration is staffed with thousands of high-caliber individuals like this,” Burch said.
Mancini also pointed to Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as another positive sign for the pro-life movement.
“Justice Gorsuch is a constitutionalist, committed to respecting the text and intent of lawmakers rather than legislating from the bench,” Burch stated, giving Trump an “A+” grade for the Supreme Court nomination.
CatholicVote provided a report card for Trump’s first 100 days. They gave Trump an “A” grade on the “sanctity of life” issues, noting that other achievements like the defunding of Planned Parenthood are still expected.
Although Gorsuch had not ruled specifically on an abortion case as judge, pro-life leaders have noted his dissent in a Tenth Circuit decision that overturned Utah’s defunding of Planned Parenthood.
Additionally, in his confirmation hearings, when asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) if a “super-precedent” existed for the Court’s Roe decision that legalized abortion, Gorsuch would not say that one existed, only saying that the Roe decision had “precedent,” according to EWTN’s Dr. Matthew Bunson.
Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate on April 7 after Democrats threatened a filibuster. Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) invoked the “nuclear option” to end the filibuster threat, whereby Gorsuch could then be confirmed with a simple majority vote. He was confirmed by the Senate 54-45.
Religious Freedom
Gorsuch’s appointment is expected to impact religious freedom cases for years to come. One of the first major cases he heard from the Supreme Court bench was the religious freedom case of Trinity Lutheran, a preschool in Columbia, Mo. operated by Trinity Lutheran Church. That case is expected to be the premier religious freedom case of the Spring 2017 term.
Gorsuch sat over high-profile HHS mandate cases while he was on the Tenth Circuit, ruling both times with plaintiffs – Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor – in favor of their religious freedom to not comply with the birth control mandate and the supposed “accommodation” offered by the government to objecting non-profits.
Another significant move by Trump administration was to stop fighting in court for the Obama administration’s “transgender mandate.” That policy had directed schools to let students use the bathroom of their current gender identity and not their birth gender.
Leading U.S. bishops had criticized the mandate as infringing on the “privacy concerns” of young students and said it “contradicts a basic understanding of human formation so well expressed by Pope Francis: that ‘the young need to be helped to accept their own body as it was created’.”
After the administration announced it would drop its appeal for the policy in court, the Supreme Court sent a Virginia transgender bathroom case back to the lower courts.
However, the administration’s accomplishments in upholding religious freedom have ultimately been mixed, advocates argue, and one large reason why is that Trump has not issued a broad executive order upholding religious freedom and the rights of conscience as expected.
This is vital, Dr. Jay Richards of the Busch School of Business at The Catholic University of America said, because for any entity contracting with the government – or institutions receiving federal funding like Christian schools that provide federal student loans – they could be subject to actions from the government stemming from Obama-era orders on LGBT status.
Thus, charities or schools that uphold traditional marriage as part of their mission could be subject to actions from the government, unless a new executive order protects them.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops tried to get support for such an executive order, insisting that “any Executive Order should make it clear that religious freedom entails more than the freedom to worship but also includes the ability to act on one’s beliefs. It should also protect individuals and families who run closely-held businesses in accordance with their faith to the greatest extent possible.”
CatholicVote gave Trump a “C-“ grade on religious freedom issues, noting that “a leaked draft of an excellent Executive Order” on religious freedom “was stymied, according to reports, by Jared and Ivanka Trump along with outside left-wing groups.”
“Catholics are patient, but want action on religious liberty. And soon,” Burch said.
Refugees and Immigration
Early in his first 100 days, Trump issued an executive order to temporarily halt refugee admissions into the U.S. for four months and indefinitely suspend the admission of Syrian refugees. The order also halted visa admissions for most persons from seven countries: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
The order was ultimately halted from going into effect by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court. A revised executive order that was released later left out the indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and left Iraq off the list of countries from which most nationals would be barred from entering the U.S. It still halted refugee admissions for four months and capped the overall intake for FY 2017 at 50,000 refugees.
Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, Tex., the chair of the U.S. bishops’ migration committee, was “deeply troubled” at the revised order and said that the refugee admissions program was already well-vetted and secure. Catholic Relief Services said that since global forced displacement is at its highest levels ever recorded, the U.S. must not shut off its refugee admissions program.
The order was ultimately halted from going into effect by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland.
Trump also signed an executive order in January that would bar federal funding of “sanctuary cities,” or cities that publicly did not follow through with federal laws on deportation of undocumented immigrants. The chair of the U.S. bishops’ migration committee, Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin, Tex., stated that the move “would force all jurisdictions to accept a one-size-fits-all regime that might not be best for their particular jurisdictions.”
In February, the Department of Homeland Security, enforcing the immigration orders, released new rules that did away with protections for unaccompanied children and asylum seekers coming to the border, created new detention centers, sped up the deportation process, and increased the punishments for undocumented parents who have their children smuggled into the U.S.
Bishop Vasquez warned that the new rules “greatly expand the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border.”
CatholicVote, meanwhile, rated Trump’s immigration policies so far a “B,” saying that “his poorly drafted and delivered order on restricting refugees from dangerous countries was revised and continues to face legal opposition,” but “his stepped-up enforcement has rightly focused on hardened criminals while moderating on those who immigrated illegally as children (Dreamers).”
“Illegal immigration has plummeted, even without a wall,” Burch stated.
Health Care
Another major priority for Trump’s first 100 days was health care. A replacement for the Affordable Care Act was introduced in March with the goal of passing it on March 23, the seven-year anniversary of the ACA being signed into law.
The proposed American Health Care Act attempted to keep in place some policies of the original health care law like a ban on insurers denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, and young people being able to stay on their parents’ health plans until the age of 26.
However, it sought to replace other major parts of the law. The individual mandate – enforced by fines for people not having health insurance – would be replaced with a fine of up to 30 percent of one’s new premium for a significant gap in coverage. Federal subsidies would be replaced with tax credits for purchasing insurance.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had ultimately opposed the Affordable Care Act under Obama because of provisions they said allowed for abortion funding in health plans. They praised the original health care law’s expansion of coverage for low-income and sick groups, although they opposed its lack of coverage for immigrants.
With the new proposal, leading bishops praised its protections against federal funding of elective abortions, but expressed serious concerns with its lack of conscience protections for doctors and other health care providers against government mandates like the transgender mandate.
Additionally, Bishop Frank Dewane of Venice, Fla., chair of the bishops’ domestic justice committee, worried that the new legislation could result in less affordable coverage for groups that need it the most: the elderly, the chronically ill, and the poor. For instance, the tax credits replacing subsidies were not favorably written for the elderly, he said. The 30 percent fine for a gap in coverage could act as a deterrent for someone to purchase health coverage.
Groups like the Catholic health care ministry (CMF) CURO, however, supported passage of the new bill as a step in the direction of more patient-centered health care reform, as well as a law that would help reduce abortion funding in health care.
Ultimately, the American Health Care Act failed to even make it to the House floor for a vote, but has been amended and brought back to consideration in the House. Among the new additions is an amendment that allows states to do away with “essential health benefits” like coverage for maternity care and hospitalizations that were mandated under the Affordable Care Act.
Bishop Dewane issued a strong statement this week criticizing the revised health care bill for similar reasons as he opposed the original AHCA. Members of Congress should not vote for the revised bill, he said on Thursday.
Foreign Policy
On foreign policy, Trump ordered missile strikes earlier this month on a Syrian airbase in response to a chemical weapons attack in Idlib that killed around 100 and hospitalized hundreds. After the Syrian air force had bombed a neighborhood in the Idlib province, hundreds of civilians either died or were hospitalized with symptoms of exposure to sarin, a deadly nerve agent.
The U.S. said that forces of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad were responsible for the attack, and a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean launched Tomahawk cruise missiles against the airbase that was used by Syrian forces for the bombing.
Moral theologian Joseph Capizzi of The Catholic University of America told CNA that the response was “judicious” and was needed to uphold international agreements against the use of chemical weapons. Dr. Tom Farr of Georgetown University said “the strikes were fully justified, both as a means of punishing the evil acts that took place – especially (but not only) the slow torture and execution of babies by means of Sarin gas – and as a means of deterring the regime from further acts of evil like this.”
Meanwhile, Syrian clerics decried the attack, saying that an investigation should have been first conducted to prove who the perpetrators of the chemical attack were. Melkite Archbishop Jean-Clement Jeanbart of Aleppo told CNA he hoped the U.S. “would have done something toward peace and reconciliation and a political solution” in Syria.
[…]
Cookie?
Ya what’s that all about???? Says a lot!
I am afraid that in this age of atheistic, Catholic-hating, and violent outbursts of anti-social behavior, a stringent revision of guidelines about the reception of Holy Communion is in order. We live in a culture now that knows no shame and will seek any means to desecrate anything held sacred. Our bishops would do well to begin discussing new guidelines. Perhaps only those communicants who are known to the celebrant should be given Communion. Any visiting Catholics who wish to receive Communion ought to speak directly to the priest before Mass begins. If you tell me that no priest/pastor can possibly know all his parishioners, I’d tell you that therein lies the problem. The days of “Here comes everybody” at Communion time are clearly over.
Amen
Not practical at all.
Some might say that about Christ’s dying on the cross for our sins…not practical.
Priest’s gotta do what he gotta do to protect the Eucharist. What a story …
The women went to two different Masses at the same church a few hours apart. They were obviously trying to provoke an incident. The woman who did the talking doesn’t appear to be the brightest tool in the shed either.
Oh, my. The Angelic Doctor would have a thing or two to say about this transaction, assuming he could believe it actually took place.
We had a priest in our parish (not the pastor) who about 25 years ago now would have a box of Vanilla Wafers sitting on the altar while he said Mass. After Communion, he’d invite the kiddies who hadn’t yet received their 1st Communion to approach the altar to receive what I guess he thought was the next best thing to Christ’s Body and Blood – a cookie! If you don’t think that those children didn’t grow into the faith with a very perverse notion of the Eucharist, I have a bridge to sell you. I repeat what I said above, the rules governing who gets to receive Communion need to be reviewed and tightened.
I’m afraid this is a good example of the situation Pope Francis and his buddy have put all priests in – what they do not seem to understand is that the more open approach to homosexuals will sometimes, perhaps often, not result in a holy reconciliation, but in increased aggressiveness. Given an inch, they will try to take a mile. The Lbgt… movement is not simply a community of wounded, misled people needing healing, as much as that description may be accurate from one aspect for many of them, it is also an aggressive demonic-driven attack upon goodness. That faction will not rest, and the demands upon the rest of us will increase, as long as the simplistic “pastoral” approach does not take into account the demonic forces at work.
So true!!!
More media fantasies.
Bless Father Rodriguez and all our priests for protecting our most Holy Eucharist.
Father had his hands full so he used his teeth to defend the Holy Eucharist! Bravo Father! We need more like you to combat the forces of Satan all around us!!!!
Yes, cookie. I’ve heard it before. I’ve also heard “Get me some communion.” Sixty years without catechesis…without authentic evangelization…that’s what you get.
The situation described here has surely been fueled by the controversy surrounding the obsession in Rome with homosexuality and by Fiducia Supplicans. There will be more demonic activity as “hubris” month come into few next weekend.
One hopes the diocese brings a countersuit against this obscenity and defends Father Rodriguez forcefully.
Why do I doubt that will come to pass?
Amen
Bravo Father! We need more Priests like you to combat the forces of Satan all around us!
God help us all. The Holy Spirit guided the priest for sure
The woman is poorly educated, as any modern catholic knows that the correct phrase is “magic cookie”… and shows she is not a true believer in that ALL it takes is eating the magic cookie for a straight shot to heaven….it’s more than a sign of belonging to a catholic social club…it’s MAGIC.
You are to receive the Holy Eucharist with reverence and to think one can come up and try to receive the Body and Blood without reverence is a NO— The priest takes the place of our Lord–she should not have come up to receive Him in the manner she did, and only come to receive without Sin. The Priest was protecting Our Lord God. Amem.Makes me just sick to hear she wanted to make a scene…. many are doing that these days, so as a body of Christ I like that the priest protected Jesus!!!!
This should be an interesting legal test…
The state would hold that the priest was defending only property, force was not warranted, and why the current charges.
The Church would hold the priest was defending a person from assault, and force was warranted.
The state hopefully will drop the matter lest it be drawn into court and either forced to officially deny Catholic belief, or forced to officially certify Catholic belief.
I expect the priest WILL be charged with a misdemeanor battery. I don’t see any way around that. However, he should fight it in court, and he just might win, given the flakiness of the MAN who got bit, and the fact that HE appeared to be deliberately out to desecrate the Eucharist.
I really don’t think the charge will stick…firstly, the priest had a right to defend a person from assault, that person Jesus Christ, and this WAS a religious setting, not out on the street.
Secondly, once it sinks in to the AG office into what a jam that arrest of the priest for defending the Blessed Sacrament put the state in my above stated reasons, I am fairly sure this will all quietly disappear.
Thirdly, the chancery has already come out in defense of the priest for defending the Blessed Sacrament, which will mobilize the diocese, its members/voting citizens, and its legal team, and eventually the USCCB if the case persists, not to mention lay religious defense teams.
The arresting officer will be getting a talking to, as well as the chief of the department, for pushing this into wide public view, on what was a private religious matter, and perhaps them told they arrested the wrong person, if any arrest were to be made at all. The person claiming injury clearly was the troublemaker…who also likely will not be charged due to political sensitivity.
Yeah, I see this just going away.
Let’s go back to a Communion rail and Communion on the tongue.
Amen, Bernard. Our local NO parish did that a few years ago and of course the parishes that have the TLM also have altar rails.
Whatever we may think about this unfortunate, bizarre event, at least it can be said he’s a priest that’s not limited to empty barking.
It’s sort of a “priest bites dog” story.
St. Tarcisius and Blessed Carlo Acutis, pray for our Church during this time of persecution.
Several years ago, I heard that in India it was common for a couple of guys to stand on either side of the priest during Communion and act as “bouncers” (my term) if someone approached who was not known to the priest – usually this was someone looking for something to eat. I’m guessing the use of bodyguards during Communion could become a common occurrence as more radicals try to provoke incidents.
Known in many Dioceses as sentinels. They are supposed to make sure that the Eucharist is consumed and not spirited off for nefarious purposes. Frequently had to track an individual down and get them to return the Host which most did albeit reluctantly. However, every now and then you had a hard head who refused to comply until they were forced to.
Gary – Thanks for the response. Curious, where is this a common practice? I ask because I have never seen it here in the US.
I ministered at a noted North American shrine one summer. Each person distributing Communion had a guard with them to prevent “the faithful” from desecrating and/or stealing “the cookies.”
There has been very little authentic catechesis done since Vatican II. I place the blame squarely on the heads of we priests and bishops. If we don’t instruct our parishioners, who will? And how do priests who don’t believe in the Real Presence—and I have known many—teach people that truth?
The US bishops seem to think the Eucharistic pilgrimage will fix everything. It won’t. It’s just a finger in the dyke.
I’m sincerely grateful to Father Rodriguez for his witness and willingness to act. In former days people died to protect the Blessed Sacrament. How many priests would die to protect It today?
Let us broaden the perspective here. This woman is unidentified. Why? Is she assumed to be threatened by the priest so as to have her name withheld? Outrageous! It is she who assaulted the priest! This is a manifest hate crime even by modernist standards. If she ever had any connection to the Church in her life, then Father Rodriguez is the Pope and I am the College of Cardinals. Now then, having gotten that off of my chest let us be logical about what to do about it. If we put immense self-imposed restrictions on the Church then we will be sending ourselves back to the catacombs while the barbarians laugh. It is a rare human being who has a photographic memory to do what one poster suggested. The burden must be shifted to the criminals. I will made some proposals in my next post then we can brainstorm it.
There is no mention if Father Rodriguez announced that if “you have not been practicing your Catholic faith then you may approach for a blessing”. You can see in the video some crossing their arms for a blessing, but not clear if these too were visitors. Things like this are more apt to happen at funerals, weddings, and First Communions where people attending the Mass have not attended in some time. I knew a priest who never offered such blessings – it is after all a “Communion” line not a “blessing” line. The priest would instruct the visitors who had not been attending Mass to remain in the pew and pray for the deceased, etc. If there are no legal protections that can be used now by attorneys to protect clergy from such disruptive actions, there needs be. Just showing up a second time and grabbing at the ciborium should be disturbing the peace and/or disorderly conduct, if not a form of theft or assault. Let Little Miss Cookie Monster try taking something away from someone (say a child) in the park against that person’s will while in the proximity of a police officer and see what happens. And yet the Consecrated Host is more vital to the priest than a whole truckload of Little Debbie snacks to a vendor. But we can’t draw logical conclusions anymore in the law. “Victim sense” has taken over legal and common sense.
This idea of approaching the altar at the time for Communion and expecting a blessing is an abuse. A blessing is given to all in attendance at the end of Mass; that should be adequate. My dilemma when distributing Holy Communion is that I am left-handed and to give a blessing with my left hand seems inappropriate. I just ignore those with crossed arms at the Communion rail. But a larger issue is those receiving Communion when they should not- it makes a mockery of the Body of Christ.
It is clear from photos taken at the scene that this “woman” was actually a man pretending to be a woman. Many think he was there to steal a host for use in Satanic ceremonies, and the priest realized he was a prime candidate for that sort of thing. A good bite in defense of the Eucharist should be allowable under law, especially when the bitee appears to be a mentally ill person
People certainly have vivid imaginations. In the video clip at the police station, the woman pretty much looked like a woman trying to dress and talk like a man. “I’m not frontin”,” that sort of thing. I doubt she is mentally ill, she knew what she was doing. It is more likely likely that she and the other woman with her wanted to provoke a confrontation, given that they went to consecutive Masses at 10am and noon and approached the same priest at both Masses. Then they went to the police station together. That shows a degree of planning and intentionality that a mentally ill person wouldn’t have. If she was trying to steal a Host, then she went about it in a stupid way that only drew more attention to herself.
Good for you Padre!!
I want to know why this woman was not charged with a religious hate crime?? Cookie??? And then sticking her hand into the ciborium to grab a handful of hosts? Why was SHE not arrested? No person has a “right” to receive communion. But a priest has a right to decide a person is not properly disposed, even if Catholic. The priests usually go to great lengths at weddings and funerals where there may be numbers of non-catholics in attendance to say that simply being Christian is not sufficient to allow you to receive holy communion. You must be Catholic and believe as we do that Jesus is truly present in the host.So if she is calling the host a cookie and making demands, no, she is not entitled. And committing what is viewed as sacrilege in a Catholic Church is very much a hate crime.
It’s unfortunate the diocese gave such a tepid defense of the priest. They missed a teachable moment to make people understand what is required to receive communion PROPERLY.
I am not sorry the priest bit her. I am sorry he didnt have a free hand to slap her in the face.
Ron DeSantis is a faithful Catholic, holds a law degree from Yale University, and is Governor of the State of Florida. Could he weigh-in on this matter?
Judith I am sure that he could and likely would if he were urged to do so in a timely manner. Time is of the essence since gay pride day at Disney World is coming up soon. The regular media has slung this story out in a way that implied that the priest was simply crazy. Petitions by the faithful and Catholic organizations would get his attention especially during an election year. We might also ask why the police did no routine investigation since there were a crowd of witnesses. They had a duty to take the complaint but not to just leave it there. The alleged woman in question could possibly be charged with filing a false police report IMO.
I might add that in the case of repeated harassment and attacks restraining orders and peace bonds are options to pursue.
Let’s get back to basics: Receiving Communion presumes you are IN COMMUNION with the Catholic Church. How will the bishops determine WHO IS IN COMNUNION WITH THE CHURCH IN THEIR JURISDICTION?
If there is no way to distinguish between who is IN COMMUNION and who is NOT IN COMMUNION, then the entire fundamental notion of communion is a farce and the Eucharist has become just another expression of cheap sentimentality in the Church. If something isn’t done to safeguard the notion of communion then we will continue to witness the desecration of what is Most Holy.
Deacon, We have just seen in this case ample indicators of who was and was not in communion with the Church. We did not on the other hand see any discernment as to the potential threat present much less any preplanned responses. All around the country other Christian groups have been attacked in various ways and have been developing methods of self protection. Our little rural Alabama Parrish does basic things but they make sense. There is a prominent dress code sign at the entrance, a couple of greeters, handouts for guests and a nice presentation before Mass that “only Catholics in good standing., etc.” We have an altar rail. We have been lucky but it is a red state. So is Florida but the church that was attacked is only 21 miles from Orlando And “gay pride” time is coming up. Jesus protect them.
Most sorry for the niece whose First Communion must have been affected. Everyone will be talking about her family. Will she ever take communion again?