Every year on the August 14 feast of St. Maximilian Kolbe, one or another social media acquaintance posts these words attributed to him: “The most deadly poison of our time is indifference.”
My conscience stings every time I read that. Am I indifferent? Am I not doing enough stuff? Maybe, but there’s more to the saint’s statement. This is the part that doesn’t make it onto the memes.
“…And this happens, although the praise of God should know no limits. Let us strive, therefore, to praise Him to the greatest extent of our powers.”
He wasn’t talking about indifference to the news or politics. I wish he had been; that’s easier for me to remedy. If that were the case I could just keep doing what I do, only more of it.
But instead there’s this: the praise of God should know no limits.
I’m busy. I do stuff. I have a family. There’s a pandemic going on. I have bills to pay and work goals to meet. I make my Morning Offering and then move on from there. Some days that’s the only spiritual box I check, but at least I check it.
Box-checking looks feeble – downright indifferent – in the face of praise that “should know no limits.”
The U.S. Supreme Court tiptoed its way through a jungle of administrative law to hand another victory to the Little Sisters of the Poor. Some people just can’t stop insisting that nuns help provide birth control. In this case, it was the state of Pennsylvania, which deservedly lost on a 7-2 vote.
Or, in the words of a headline from CNBC (a business network, mind you): “Supreme Court says Trump administration can let religious employers deny birth control coverage under Obamacare.”
Let me fix that for them: “Supreme Court tells Pennsylvania to get its hands out of nuns’ pockets,” or “Supreme Court recognizes religious liberty interests of Catholic women,” or “Supreme Court says government cannot impose ruinous fines on Little Sisters of the Poor,” or even “Supreme Court lets employers stay out of employees’ private decisions involving sex.”
CNBC, and other media outlets with the same approach, had lots of options. They went with “deny birth control.” Posted with this photo is a screenshot of the Facebook preview of the CNBC story, but I’m not going to provide a direct link. I’m not going to share lousy coverage.
CNBC’s misleading headline. (CNBC photo; screenshot from Facebook)
Here’s a news flash that CNBC may or may not have had time to notice: the decision in Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania was about as narrow as it could be. So was Hobby Lobby, come to think of it, another prominent anti-mandate decision.
Broadly, the Obamacare contraceptive mandate requires that contraception be a covered expense under health insurance. Employers with religious objections to helping anyone procure contraception have had to fight to escape the mandate, even though such employers care enough about their employees to offer health insurance as a benefit in the first place. The Hobby Lobby decision protected privately-held companies. Other entities, like the Little Sisters, have had to wage their own fight.
In the most recent Little Sisters case, the Court hewed closely to the administrative objections raised by Pennsylvania: did the federal government have a right to grant the Little Sisters an “accommodation” – i.e. an exemption – from the Obamacare contraceptive mandate? The Supreme Court has spoken: yes, the federal government does have such a right, under laws and regulations currently in effect.
Of course, if Congress changes those laws and regulations, the Little Sisters will be right back in court.
I would have loved to see a broad and uncompromising affirmation of the First Amendment rights of people who on religious grounds want nothing to do with anyone’s contraception. The Court chose to be less sweeping, but a weakly-founded win is still a win.
The federal government’s ability to issue “accommodations” is intact. That’s something to tolerate, not celebrate.
Religious freedom deserves constitutional protection, not little carve-outs. I’ll save my wholehearted celebration for the day when the First Amendment trumps the contraceptive mandate decisively, beyond the whims and opinions of legislators, bureaucrats, and even the headline writers at CNBC.
It’s Good to Be Here by Christina Chase (Sophia Press, 2019)
Christina Chase’s book “It’s Good to Be Here” is as straightforward and challenging as the subtitle promises: “a disabled woman’s reflections on God in the flesh and the sacred wonder of being human.” This is not a book for the bedside pile, to be picked up at odd moments. I tried that, but “It’s Good to Be Here” demanded more from me. Chase drew me into sharing her reflections, not just observing them. Each chapter provoked thought as well as prayer.
The declaration “it’s good to be here” is strong stuff, coming from a woman living with physical challenges in a culture that devalues disability. Fortunately for herself and her readers, Chase doesn’t look to culture for validation. “When we think of living divine lives in a sanctified place, we may think of a world with no imperfections…[n]o suffering. However, that is not the definition of a sanctified place, of a holy place in which God dwells. For Christ dwelt here.”
This is neither a memoir nor a how-to manual for dealing with adversity. The book jacket calls Chase a “twenty-first century Thérèse of Lisieux,” and while the comparison is apt in some respects – chronic illness, profound faith in God, appreciation of The Little Way – Chase’s voice is very much her own. As I pondered her words, I felt as though I were with a down-to-earth mystic filled with warm good humor (though not flippancy).
Take time with this book. Haste will not do it justice.
Ellen Kolb 