Two prayers....

God's will be done and may He have mercy upon us all.

About Me

My photo
A Catholic who follows Rome & the Magisterium. I'm against gay "marriage", abortion, embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia, human cloning. Altar girls, Communion in the hand, Eucharistic Ministers and "Protestant" music in the Church doesn't bother me at all. A proud American retired submarine sailor. Our borders should be secured with a 10 ft. high fence topped by concertina wire with minefields out to 20 yards on both sides and an additional 10 yards filled with warning signs outside of that Let's get energy independent NOW! Back Israel to the max, stop appeasing followers of the Pedophile Prophet. Pro 2nd Amendment, pro death penalty, Repeal all hate crime legislation. Back the police unless you'd rather call a hippie when everything hits the fan. Get government out of dealing with education, childhood obesity and the enviornment. Stop using the military for sociological experiments and if we're in a war don't micromanage their every move. Kill your television, limit time on the computer and pick up a book. God's will be done and may He have mercy upon us all.

Thursday, February 09, 2012

"Assessments" = recusant fees = religious persecution

Found at :

Twenty-first Century Recusants

Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate evokes bitter memories of past persecution.

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

The Obama administration's recent decision to require Catholic institutions to provide contraceptives through their health care plans has been met with firm resistance from Catholic leaders, and incredulity even from the president’s own supporters, who warn that the administration is walking into a political minefield.

"One of Barack Obama’s great attractions as a presidential candidate was his sensitivity to the feelings and intellectual concerns of religious believers," writes the Washington Post's E.J. Dionne. "That is why it is so remarkable that he utterly botched the admittedly difficult question of how contraceptive services should be treated under the new health care law." The president "threw his progressive Catholic allies under the bus," he adds.

The president's allies in the press, who share his socially liberal love of all things contraceptive, have good reason to be concerned about the administration's Quixotic jab at the Catholic Church. The president has managed to offend the religious sensibilities of the largest voting bloc in the United States, and is evoking bitter memories of historic persecution in the process.

Intentionally or not, the administration's policy smacks of the methods established by England's Queen Elizabeth against Catholic "recusants," who refused to participate in the worship services of the Anglican Church during the late 16th century. Although Elizabeth's regime, and those that followed for the next two hundred years, did not provide a penalty for Catholic belief as such, they found a simple and devastating way to coerce Catholics to violate their consciences: the recusancy fine, which was levied against those who absented themselves from Sunday Anglican worship or failed to receive communion once a year.

The fine, which began as a few shillings, was eventually raised to 20 pounds a month, a devastating penalty that few could afford. After being impoverished by such levies, family members would be thrown in jail for failing to pay, and sometimes expelled from the country. Only the wealthiest Catholic families, generally of the aristocracy, could avoid persecution by paying the fines and maintaining a Catholic existence in the privacy and secrecy of their estates.

Although it is far removed from the severity of Britain's old recusancy measures, Obama's policy bears an uncomfortable similarity to them. Catholics will not be directly forced to repudiate their moral principles, but some of their most important institutions will be fined handsomely for refusing to do so. For each employee not provided with contraceptive insurance coverage, a Catholic university, charity, or other institution will be required to pay the government $2,000 annually.

As under the old recusancy system, some larger and wealthier institutions might be able to sustain the financial burdens, but smaller ones will simply go bankrupt and be forced to fold, or will publicly violate their religious beliefs to remain in existence. The outcome will be painfully similar to that of other policies that impose morally offensive requirements on Catholics, such as requiring adoption agencies to give children to homosexuals. As a result of such measures, Catholic agencies in some states have been forced to close or have renounced their Catholic identity to continue operating.

However, the Obama administration's decision to impose the contraceptive mandate on Catholic institutions throughout the nation, takes the offense to a breathtaking new level. What is the president thinking?

Is he venting his fury over the Catholic bishops' opposition to his health care plan with a vengeful blow against a group that has historically voted Democrat in national elections? If so, he is likely to hurt himself in a cheap attempt at political payback. Is he counting on the Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities USA to continue to support him in opposition to the bishops, as they did over abortion coverage? If that is his hope, it is being dashed before his eyes: both groups are balking, and the CHA says it feels “jolted.”

American Catholics are famous for their political divisions, but the Obama administration's decision to strike so directly and deeply at the moral conscience of the Church could mark 2012 as a turning point for the Catholic Church in electoral politics. If President Obama manages to unite American Catholics in defense of their Church, he will have achieved something that has so far eluded the efforts of Catholics themselves, and could have lasting implications for the future of the Democratic Party.

(End of story, my comments follow.)

The above article was copied and posted in order to fully explain just WHY the current Administration's efforts to coerce Catholic businesses & institutions is tantamount to religious persecution. Any questions? If so, fill the comm box.


Old Bob said...

Thanks very much for this, Subvet! I should have remembered recusancy fees: had a course in English history at the U ages ago and learned that anti-Catholic laws were on the books in England for anout 300 years, from the 1530's to the 1820's or so.
I can't resist mentioning that the English government treated Irish Catholics even worse, far worse.

ignorant redneck said...

Straight up, if they lose this round, they progressives and their minions in the press will try again.

We are in this for the long haul, because we have nowhere to go. It's time to look to resistance movements tht persisted for generations, and realize that is our choice. That, or surrender our cstholicity.

Anonymous said...

The BO is probably counting on the 80% of contracepting Catholics to applaud this move, and thus increase his voting base.

Doug Indeap said...

Thank you for making the best case you can. So if I understand you, here is the "religious persecution" you think employers face:

1. Employers are free not to have abortions or take contraceptives.

2. Employers are free not to perform abortions or provide contraceptives to others.

3. Employers are free not even to provide their employees with health plans that afford the employees with the choice of having abortions or using contraception.

4. Employers who choose not to provide the foregoing health plans must instead pay assessments to the government. The amount of those assessments is substantially LESS than the cost of the health plans the employers would otherwise provide. They thus not only avoid having to provide the offensive health plans, they reap a financial windfall by doing so.

5. Even though the law provides that the amount of the assessments will be adjusted annually to reflect the growth in national insurance premium costs, employers worry that the government might someday increase the amount of the assessments to a point where the employers might be tempted instead to provide health plans affording their employees with choices the employers deem immoral.

OMG! What a nightmare!

Subvet said...

Old Bob, I believe there are still some anti-Catholic laws on the books in England. If memory serves me correctly, no English monarch may marry a Catholic.

Subvet said...

IR, I've said it for a while that it isn't an "Obama thing" or a "government thing", it's cultural and we've a lot of work ahead of us. For proof, just read the comments of "Doug Indeap" further down.

Subvet said...

Cliff, I don't know. But such a seemingly stupid move by a politically savy type makes me wonder if something else may be in the works.

Subvet said...

Doug Indeap, congratulations. You're evidently so besotted with the Kool-Aid that I'm now using you as an example of the mindless drones we're up against.

Blog Archive

THIS is depressing!!

THIS is depressing!!
Our education system must have REAL problems!

Proper Care of The Koran

Proper Care of The Koran
A place for everything and everything in it's place

Our Lady of America, pray for us (we need it!)

St. Gabriel Possenti, (unofficial) patron saint of handgun owners, pray for us.

Humane blogger award

Humane blogger award