Staying at the Domus

By Sister Mary Ann Walsh

Well, I'll be dining out on the fact that like Pope Francis, I too have stayed at the Domus Sanctae Marthae, the guest house at the Vatican that the pope has opted for over the papal apartments. He'll get a two-room suite. I had a single room when I stayed there about a year ago while at meetings in Rome.

The Domus means still more simple living for Pope Francis, who is making simplicity the hallmark of the start of his papacy. (I just called a colleague who is slated to be at the Domus in the spring to alert her to the fact that the diner in all white at the next table [or maybe hers] will likely be the pope.)

Vatican reports say the pope chose the Domus for community -- he can share meals with Vatican staff who live there and with visitors, for example. It has a nice size chapel and also is walking distance to his church, St. Peter's Basilica. The phones work well, which may be no small matter for the man who continues to call old friends and aquaintances despite his recent promotion. Security used to be tight at the Domus because of its location inside the Vatican. It will be tighter now, for sure.

The pope's plans for Holy Thursday will be simple too. Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, Vatican spokesman, said the Mass of the Lord's Supper that the pope will celebrate at a penitential institute for minors will have but two concelebrants, the institute's chaplain and Cardinal Agostino Vallini, vicar general for the diocese of Rome. Around 10 girl and 40 boys will take part in the Mass and the pope will wash the feet of 12 of them. About 150 people in all are expected to attend. The youth will give the pope a wooden crucifix and kneeler they made in a workshop, and the pope will bring them Easter eggs and a traditional Italian Easter cake shaped like a dove.

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco stopped by the USCCB today for an interview with Catholic News Service. He was in town to speak at a march on the U.S. Suprerme Court, which today heard arguments on Proposition 8, the California law that said marriage was defined as between a man and a woman. Tomorrow the Court hears arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the law which states that for federal government purposes, marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. We can expect decisions on these cases in June, at the end of the term.

Met with media relations staff to discuss what's on the agenda for after Easter and it's immigration, with an audio press conference slated for April 3, featuring Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles and Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City. Archbishop Gomez chairs the bishops' Committee on Migration and Bishop Wester, the Committee on Communications.

Looks Like Leno, Letterman Setting Tone at HHS, Justice Department

Late night comics who mock the church may have set the tone of the government's current salvos against religious freedom. Who would have thought that the disdain for religion by the cheap-laughs crowd would become part of the federal agenda?

At least it seems that way. NBC lauds Jay Leno, who once joked that a news report of a priest violating celibacy with a woman was received at the Vatican with, "A woman? Thank God." David Letterman, who once said a report on the priest shortage proved "there is some good news in the world," still stars at CBS. Both comics feel free to diss the church, and the government follows their lead as it works to dismantle longstanding guarantees of freedom for religion.

For example, new regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. health care reform) mandate coverage of contraception (including abortifacients) and sterilization in almost all private health insurance plans. HHS offers a religious exemption for some employers but only when most of the employees are of the same faith, when they serve primarily others of the same faith, and are proselytizing.

For Catholics, that means that feeding the poor counts as a religious ministry only when the hungry are co-religionists. One out of six people who need hospital care in the U.S. go to a Catholic facility - but HHS would qualify the hospital for a religious exemption only if it employed mostly Catholics, served mostly Catholics and, I suppose, taught the Ten Commandments in between sutures. When the government determines what is and is not a church ministry you have big-time interference with the exercise of religion.

Freedom for religion means that government cannot interfere with the internal governance of religious institutions. Whatever you think about sterilizations, for example, it means the government should not force Catholic organizations to pay for them, and therefore, promote them, through their insurance programs.

Unfortunately, the problems don't end with health care. In the effort to redefine marriage, we see the government threatening religious discrimination in the name of--you guessed it--preventing discrimination. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton, declares that marriage is between one man and one woman. But the Department of Justice, which is charged with defending Acts of Congress like DOMA against constitutional challenge, declared in March that it would stop doing so. In July, Justice went further and started filing briefs that attack DOMA's constitutionality. Most disturbing in this flip-flop is its rationale: DOMA's definition of marriage must be abandoned and then attacked because it is motivated by bias and prejudice, comparable to racism. That is, the Justice Department simply writes off as bigots those with longstanding support for traditional marriage. And if the Justice Department gets its way in court, those considered bigots by the federal government will be marginalized with the full moral, economic and coercive power of the state.

For example, an employer who provides unique employment benefits to the actually married risks being disqualified from government funding - and most other government cooperation - and likely being sued for "discrimination." A government clerk who expresses a conscientious objection to cooperating with same-sex civil union ceremonies risks a pink slip.

In short, this is what happens when the view that marriage is between a man and a woman becomes a violation of the U.S. Constitution. And this is what the Justice Department urges--apparently forgetting that imposing special disabilities on people and groups because of their religious beliefs offends the First Amendment at its core.

Comics draw laughs when they mock the church, stereotype nuns and scorn priests both for adhering to celibacy rules and occasionally flouting them. They may be playing for laughs, but it is something more when the government abandons its centuries-old truce with religion. Toying with freedom for religion bodes ill--not just for Catholics, but also for the Constitution and anyone who lives under it.