April 18, 2007 Bishop Sheridan's statement on the U.S. Supreme Court decision to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act On April 19, Colorado Springs Bishop Michael Sheridan issued the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act on April 18: "The Supreme Court decision to uphold the ban on partial birth abortion in our country is a most welcome affirmation of what all sensible people know: Partial birth abortion is infanticide and infanticide is murder. "Although the "right" to abortion at other stages of pregnancy remains the law of the land, this recent decision will, I hope, move forward in our country the discussion about just what is at stake in any abortion, namely, the destruction of a human life as well as the inflicting of untold grief on the mother who comes to realize that she has allowed her child to be killed. "I pray that this court decision will be the beginning of the end to all abortions." +Most Reverend Michael J. Sheridan
Bishop of Colorado Springs February 1, 2007 Colorado bishops issue a joint statement on proposed emergency contraception legislation February 1, 2007 Many Catholics around Colorado have asked us for more clarity about the Church's view of state Senate Bill 07-060. If passed, SB 07-060 will govern the distribution of information on emergency contraception to rape victims. Under normal conditions, Catholic teaching views contraception as a distortion of the purpose of human sexuality, and therefore seriously wrong. In the case of rape, however, emergency contraception is morally acceptable for women as an act of self-defense. Catholic hospitals already provide emergency contraception to rape victims in a morally sound way as part of their medical care, and have done so for years. The problem with "emergency contraception" comes in two forms. First, contraception means literally "against conception." Human life begins at conception. This is a biological fact. Preventing the conception of a new life is very different from killing it once life begins. Procedures that destroy a human embryo after conception but before implantation in the uterus are not "emergency contraception." They amount to a very early stage abortion, an act which Catholics and Catholic institutions regard as gravely wrong and therefore cannot support. Second, religiously affiliated medical institutions should not be coerced into violating their principles by being forced to provide services that clash fundamentally with their beliefs. As it currently stands, SB 07-060 is not "good" legislation. We applaud the act's conscience clause for individual medical professionals -- but we also strongly urge state legislators to consider including a similar conscience clause for institutions as a matter of justice. Unlike similar proposed legislation in the past, SB 07-060 gives some flexibility to institutions in meeting the requirements of the law, thereby allowing Catholic medical facilities to cooperate without violating their Catholic character. Therefore, while we do not regard this legislation as ideal, we do believe that Catholics can accept and work with it in good conscience. +Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
+Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, D.D.
+Most Rev. Michael J. Sheridan, S.T.D. April 28, 2006 Statement by Colorado bishops regarding May 1st walkout In recent months national concern over immigration has grown. Not only is it an issue that is politically, socially and economically charged; it also sparks in many people a desire for action that results in change. But as emotions rise, they have the potential to do more harm to the community than good. As we near May 1, some are calling for a job and school walk-out. We, the bishops of Colorado, urge the community to not take part in this "Day without Immigrants." Real immigration reform requires reasonable dialogue and positive actions that persuade our elected officials. Walk-outs, as well-intentioned as they may be, do not serve that end. Walk-outs will hurt many business owners and employers who already support fair immigration reform. They endanger the very jobs that immigrants have come so far to fill and work so hard to maintain. They also frustrate those who are undecided. We urge all people affected by the immigration debate to go to work, to go to school and to show the state and country the contributions that immigrants bring to Colorado. While immigrants have long felt overlooked, America’s eyes will be open on May 1. This day is an opportunity to demonstrate the many ways in which you contribute to this community. Workers, we urge you to go to work. Devote time to helping employers and communities understand the dignity of work through your contribution to our economy and your respect for your employer and your job. Students, we urge you to stay in school. Demonstrate your understanding of the value of education so we might count on your leadership in years to come. Parents and teachers, we urge you to lead by example and motivate young people to stay in school by instilling in them the value of education. Give students an opportunity in school to show solidarity with immigrant communities. Catholics and all people of good will, we urge you to take part in positive actions that lead to real solutions. Write to legislators and encourage employers and business owners to write also, demanding immigration reform that includes secure borders, paths to permanent residency, temporary worker programs, family reunification, labor protections for all workers, and wages and benefits that do not undercut domestic workers. We invite all Catholic communities -- parishes, schools, families and associations -- to make the month of May a month of prayer for justice for immigrants. During May, the month of Mary, we ask Our Lady of Guadalupe, Queen of the Americas, to pray for us. +Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
+Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, D.D.
+Most Rev. Michael J. Sheridan, S.T.D. Equality under the law? On some issues, it depends. An open letter to the faithful of northern Colorado from their Catholic bishops January 30, 2006
In recent days, State Representatives Rosemary Marshall (D-Denver) and Gwyn Green (D-Denver), along with State Senator Joan Fitz-Gerald (D-Golden) and State Representative Alice Madden (D-Boulder), have offered various related bills to the Colorado General Assembly. Each would eliminate or modify statutes of limitation so that a childhood sexual abuse victim could wait 30 years, 40 years, or even longer before filing a suit for damages against Catholic institutions and other private entities in Colorado.
These bills need to be considered in light of stories like the one aired in the spring of 2005 by a leading Colorado news channel. According to the news report, a young boy had been severely injured on public school property in a supervised program. The public school district never disputed that the children weren't properly supervised. But when the victim's family sought compensation for medical bills, the school district declined, citing the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Worse, attorneys for the school district indirectly threatened to counter-sue for legal fees if the family pursued a suit. We all agree that the sexual abuse of a minor is a serious crime and a grave sin. The proposed pieces of legislation, whatever their final form, and whether they're pulled from consideration or move forward, have sparked an important discussion. What should Colorado's public policy be on civil lawsuits arising from such sexual abuse? And should two unequal kinds of justice apply a soft version when the sexual offender works for a public entity, and another, much harder version when the offender works for a Catholic or private institution? Nationally, the evidence is now irrefutable that sexual abuse and misconduct against minors in public schools is a serious problem in fact, more serious than anywhere outside the home, including churches. Since most Catholic children in Colorado attend public schools, this should seriously concern the whole Catholic community. Colorado's application of sovereign immunity sharply limits a family's ability to sue a public school district, or similar public institutions, for the sexual abuse of their child or any other damaging activity. But the real situation in our state is even more troubling than that. Under Colorado law, even if there were no sovereign immunity, the victim of a public school teacher's misconduct must initiate his or her claim by filing a formal notice no later than 180 days after the incident. Moreover, the damages for such claims against government defendants are capped at $150,000. For Catholics and any reasonable person, that raises two questions. First, why can a victim of teacher or clergy abuse in a Catholic school or parish wait a lifetime before initiating such litigation, while the victim of exactly the same and even more frequent abuse in a public school setting loses his or her claim by waiting 181 days? Second, why should a Catholic institution that is sued for such conduct be liable for massive, community-crippling damages, while guilty public institutions even if sovereign immunity were waived would face a mere $150,000 damages? There' s a very good reason why SESAME, a national public-school abuse-victim group, has had difficulty organizing in Colorado. Our state law makes it useless for any such group to organize or act. Catholics have learned about the national scope and human impact of sexual abuse the hard way. As bishops, we are wholeheartedly committed to helping victims heal and doing everything we can to protect our families in any Church-related environment. Every victim of sexual abuse suffers deeply and deserves our compassion. But the facts clearly show that the sexual abuse of minors is in no way a uniquely or even disproportionately “Catholic” problem. The facts also show that too many public authorities have had too little accountability on the issues of sexual misconduct and abuse for too long. As a society, if Coloradans are really serious about ending the sexual abuse of minors, that needs to change. For the sake of justice and common sense ' and for the sake of their own children Catholics need to demand from Colorado lawmakers an end to our state's legal inequities in dealing with childhood sexual abuse. On a matter as ugly and grave as the sexual abuse of minors, exactly the same civil and criminal penalties, financial damages, time frames for litigation and statutes of limitations should apply against both public and private institutions and their agents. That' s fair, that' s just, and it serves the ultimate safety of all our young people. +Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
+Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, D.D.
+Most Rev. Michael J. Sheridan, S.T.D. For more information on the proposed pieces of legislation and the inequities of Colorado law in addressing the sexual abuse of minors, contact the Colorado Catholic Conference, 303-894-8808 November 6, 2005 Statement Supporting New State Voucher Program Dear Brothers and Sisters: Last spring, Colorado lawmakers passed, and Gov. Bill Owens signed, HB 1160, the Colorado Opportunity Contract Pilot Program. This new, historic legislation offers low-income families in 11 public school districts in Colorado the opportunity to choose the school that best meets the education needs of their children. We, the Catholic bishops of Colorado, believe that the Opportunity Contract Pilot Program creates a vital, meaningful new way to help private and public school students throughout Colorado. The mission of Catholic schools and programs of educational choice fit together naturally. Both serve the proper rights of parents. In 1965, Pope Paul VI wrote that:
Parents who have the primary and inalienable right and duty to educate their children must enjoy true liberty in their choice of schools. Consequently, the public power, which has the obligation to protect and defend the rights of citizens, must see to it, in its concern for distributive justice, that pubic subsidies are paid out in such a way that parents are truly free to choose according to their conscience the schools they want for their children. The Catholic Church in Colorado has served children in her schools for more than a century. During the 2002-2003 school year, more than 18,000 students attended 57 Catholic schools throughout our state. In fact, Catholic schools educate more children than any other organization in Colorado outside the public school system. Catholic schools offer an invaluable service not only to the Church, but also to the greater Colorado community, by forming students in academic excellence and strong moral character. Catholic schools have always worked hard to bring quality education to all children. Two examples that illustrate this mission in action are Annunciation and Loyola Catholic Schools, both in Denver. Annunciation Catholic School has a student population that is 85 percent Hispanic. At Loyola Catholic School, more than 95 percent of the students are African-American and more than 70 percent are not Catholic -- but all benefit from a quality of education found in Catholic schools. Similar stories mark other Catholic schools throughout the dioceses of Denver, Colorado Springs and Pueblo. The goal of the Opportunity Contract Pilot Program is to draw parents into a deeper, more fruitful involvement in their child's education. The legislature realizes that regardless of economic status, race or religion, children will decide our nation's future. They need to be our highest educational priority. We, the Catholic bishops of Colorado, salute the Colorado Legislature for recognizing this need. Whatever legal challenges lie ahead, we believe educational choice serves the whole community. We commit ourselves to that goal. We look forward to contributing even more fully to Colorado's common good through our schools. +Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
+Most Rev. José H. Gomez, S.T.D.
+Most Rev. Michael Sheridan
+Most Rev. Arthur Tafoya May 14 , 2004 Statement of Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, Bishop of Pueblo Faithful Citizenship As Catholics, we believe that life is sacred from conception to death. Abortion is an affront to life. Respect for life is also confronted by hunger and poverty, the death penalty, euthanasia, war and, as we see today, torture. As Catholics, we are called to protect life, to stand with the poor and vulnerable, and to work for peace and justice. All of these are elements of the gospel of life. In today's social climate, facing important election year decisions, Catholics and people of good will can easily feel politically homeless. In the Diocese of Pueblo we are presenting Catholic teaching through the document, “Faithful Citizenship: A Catholic Call to Political Responsibility.” I encourage anyone looking for guidance to read, discern, and reflect on this document, as they prepare to carry out the important responsibility of a faithful citizen in this election year. I pray for and respect all Catholics and people of good will who struggle each election year to select leaders and take positions on issues that have direct impact on our nation and world. I understand and share that struggle. As we prepare for the 2004 elections, may we all be guided by that conscience written in human hearts by God. Therein lies our greatest freedom. +Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, D.D.
Bishop of Pueblo May 1, 2004 A Pastoral Letter to the Catholic faithful of the Diocese of Colorado Springs on the duties of Catholic politicians and voters Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,
This coming November we Americans will participate in one of the most important national elections in recent history. The president, senators and congressmen who are placed in office by our votes will serve at a time in which issues that are critical to the very survival of our civilization will be at the top of the political agenda. As we prepare for these elections I consider it my duty as your bishop to write to you about these matters so that you might go to the polls this fall with a well-informed conscience. The Church teaches that "man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions." (1) Often we hear people claim that they are making decisions in accord with conscience even when those decisions defy the natural law and the revealed teachings of Jesus Christ. This is because of a widespread misunderstanding of the very meaning of conscience. For many, conscience is no more than personal preference or even a vague sense or feeling that something is right or wrong, often based on information drawn from sources that have nothing to do with the law of God. The right judgment of conscience is not a matter of personal preference nor has it anything to do with feelings. It has only to do with objective truth. "Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings." (2) All people have a grave obligation to form their consciences by adhering to the truth, precisely as that truth is found in the natural law and in the revelation of God. As Catholics we have the further obligation to give assent to the doctrinal and moral teachings of the Church because "to the Church belongs the right always and everywhere to announce moral principles, including those pertaining to the social order, and to make judgments on any human affairs to the extent that they are required by the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls." (3) In other words, as people who profess the Catholic faith, we must "have the mind of Christ" in every judgment and act. Among the many distortions and misrepresentations that prevail in the current debates about the relationship between religion and the social order (politics) is the assertion that faith and politics are to be kept separated. This, apparently, is based upon the American doctrine of the separation of church and state. In fact, the wall that separates church and state is the safeguard against both the establishment of a state religion and the imposition of sectarian religious beliefs and practices, such as particular denominational forms of worship or theological tenets. In no way does the American doctrine of separation of church and state even suggest that the well-formed consciences of religious people should not be brought to bear on their political choices. The Second Vatican Council was abundantly clear on this matter. "Nor, on the contrary, are they any less wide of the mark who think that religion consists in acts of worship alone and in the discharge of certain moral obligations, and who imagine they can plunge themselves into earthly affairs in such a way as to imply that these are altogether divorced from the religious life. This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age. Long since, the Prophets of the Old Testament fought vehemently against this scandal and even more so did Jesus Christ Himself in the New Testament threaten it with grave punishments. Therefore, let there be no false opposition between professional and social activities on the one part, and religious life on the other." (4) When Catholics are elected to public office or when Catholics go to the polls to vote, they take their consciences with them. Pope John Paul II has consistently taught this as, for example, when he said that those who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a "grave and clear obligation to oppose" any law that attacks human life. (5) The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has declared that, "in this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals." (6) Anyone who professes the Catholic faith with his lips while at the same time publicly supporting legislation or candidates that defy God's law makes a mockery of that faith and belies his identity as a Catholic. In November we will once again have the privilege of exercising our most precious right as citizens - the ?right to vote. Our choices will be made from among an array of candidates who take a variety of positions with regard to many important issues. In the midst of what could be a difficult and confusing exercise it is very important to remember that not all issues are of equal gravity. As men and women of good will we strive to achieve true justice for all people and to preserve their rights as human beings. There is, however, one right that is "inalienable", and that is the RIGHT TO LIFE. This is the FIRST right. This is the right that grounds all other human rights. This is the issue that trumps all other issues. The November elections will be critical in the battle to restore the right to life to all citizens, especially the unborn and the elderly and infirm. As a result of the pro-life efforts of countless Americans the number of abortions performed in our country is now declining for the first time since the appalling Supreme Court decision of 1973 that made it "legal" to kill our children. We cannot allow the progress that has been made to be reversed by a pro-abortion President, Senate or House of Representatives. Neither can we permit illicit stem cell research that makes use of aborted babies. Any movement to promote and legalize euthanasia must be halted. Our votes have the power to stop these abominations. There must be no confusion in these matters. Any Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem cell research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside full communion with the Church and so jeopardize their salvation. Any Catholics who vote for candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences. It is for this reason that these Catholics, whether candidates for office or those who would vote for them, may not receive Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled with God and the Church in the Sacrament of Penance. In recent months another issue has reached the level of our legislatures. It is so-called "same sex marriage." Those who now promote this deviancy often present it as a human right denied homosexual persons and thus illegally discriminating against them. But, in fact, no one has a right to that which flies in the face of God's own design. Marriage is not an invention of individuals or even of societies. Rather it is an element of God's creation. It is God who created us male and female. It is God who joined man and woman so that they could be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Every civilization known to mankind has understood marriage as the union of a man and a woman for the procreation and rearing of children. And yet now, in 21st century America, there are those who would want us to believe that all people of all times have been mistaken about the true nature and purpose of marriage. No one can simply redefine marriage to suit a political or social agenda. Once again, we must be clear about this matter. The future of our world depends upon the strength of the family, the basic unit of society. The future of the family depends on the state of marriage. The family - father, mother and children - reflects the nature of God Himself, who is a communion of selfless and self-giving love. For this reason marriage and family life cannot be whatever we want them to be. They are only and always as God has created them. As in the matter of abortion, any Catholic politician who would promote so-called "same-sex marriage" and any Catholic who would vote for that political candidate place themselves outside the full communion of the Church and may not receive Holy Communion until they have recanted their positions and been reconciled by the Sacrament of Penance. The Church never directs citizens to vote for any specific candidate. The Church does, however, have the right and the obligation to teach clearly and fully the objective truth about the dignity and rights of the human person. These teachings, in turn, must inform the consciences of voters. "By its intervention in this area, the Church's Magisterium does not wish to exercise political power or eliminate the freedom of opinion of Catholics regarding contingent questions. Instead, it intends -- as is its proper function - to instruct and illuminate the consciences of the faithful, particularly those involved in political life, so that their actions may always serve the integral promotion of the human person and the common good." (7) Dear friends in Christ, I exhort you with all my heart to take courage and proclaim the Gospel of Life to those who will stand for elected office this fall. It is by your prayers and by your votes that politicians who are unconditionally pro-life and pro-family will serve our country. Conversely, if our voices remain silent or if, God forbid, we vote contrary to our informed consciences, we will see our country led down a short path to ruin. We want freedom for all, but there can be no freedom without truth. In the words of our Holy Father: "When freedom is detached from objective truth it becomes impossible to establish personal rights on a firm rational basis; and the ground is laid for society to be at the mercy of the unrestrained will of individuals or the oppressive totalitarianism of public authority." (8)
Let us all pray for those politicians who claim to be Catholic yet continue to oppose the law of God and the rights of persons that, by the grace of God, they will be converted once again to the full and authentic articulation and practice of the faith. Finally, I wish to affirm my brother bishops who have proclaimed the truth of these critical matters and who have admonished those Catholic politicians who place themselves at odds with the truth of God. May that truth which is the foundation of genuine freedom prevail in our country. Given at the Chancery on this first day of May 2004, the Feast of St. Joseph the Worker. +Most Reverend Michael J. Sheridan
Bishop of Colorado Springs Endnotes
(1) Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1782.
(2) ibid., 1783.
(3) ibid., 2032 and Code of Canon Law 747.2.
(4) Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modem World ( Gaudium et spes ), 43.
(5) John Paul II, The Gospel of Life ( Evangelium vitae ), 73.
(6) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Doctrinal Notes on Some Questions Regarding the Participation of Catholics in Political Life", 4.
(7) ibid., 6.
(8) The Gospel of Life, 101. El Pueblo Plaza, August 15, 2005 Statement of Most Rev. Arthur N. Tafoya, Bishop of Pueblo on the Commemoration of the 70th Anniversary of the Social Security Act Thank you for the opportunity to offer a few words to you on this day, celebrating 70 years of the Social Security Act of the United States. I commend you for taking the time to come together to remind us of the importance of this program. What is it we have to celebrate? What is so important about Social Security?
Social Security is the single most successful anti-poverty program the United States has ever undertaken. 70 years ago, with the enactment of the Social Security Act, millions of the elderly in our country came out of poverty, almost overnight. Many of our ancestors were given greater opportunity to live out their lives with dignity. It is hard to find any other single act that accomplished so much so quickly. That, alone, is enough to celebrate and to learn from. In the intervening years, millions more elderly have been spared dire poverty. Children too, have been helped after losing their working parents. The disabled, who are in a particularly vulnerable situation, have been able to lift themselves up in ways they might not have been able to do without Social Security. And today, most of us can count on Social Security in our senior years or if we are disabled. We can count on some nominal help for our children if we die. For Social Security is far more than a retirement plan. It is an insurance program, a safety net, for the people of our nation. It gives those in need added security and hope. Social Security is an example of the positive role of government. However, there are those who say that the government should not be in the business of providing this security to its people, that it is the responsibility of individuals. There are people of faith that echo this belief, with a narrow reliance on individual responsibility. From a Christian moral perspective, it is right and good that we as a society serve the most vulnerable among us. It is about social responsibility. It is a proper role of government. Today there is a lot of discussion about a crisis with the Social Security Trust Fund and that it needs “fixing.” The facts, however, show no immediate crisis. What they do show, is the need to make the program more sustainable into the years beyond 2042. As we debate how best to do this, we must do so openly and with all the facts before us. The solutions must leave partisan politics aside and put the common good in the forefront. The solutions must demonstrate justice, sustainability, and integrity of the program. They must not undercut the very integral role of social security as we have come to celebrate it today. Again, thank you for the opportunity to offer my thoughts for this celebration. I hope that we can all work together to ensure that Social Security remains its best and is sustained into the future for all of our people. God Bless you all. Delivered for +Most Reverend Arthur N. Tafoya, Bishop of Pueblo by Larry Howe-Kerr, August 15, 2005
|
