It has been eight days since the Department of Health and Human Services has issued its latest attempt at regulations covering what is called the “contraceptive mandate” as contained in the Affordable Health Care Act (“Obamacare”). The regulations are some eighty pages in length but two thirds of those pages outline the management of the funds for the program once fully implemented. Every bishop in the country now has access to legal opinions on how these revised regulations will effect the Church’s approach and response to the “mandate.” I and almost every other bishop have waited while our own attorneys have studied the “regs” in detail. I also have the added assistance as a member of the Catholic Health Association Board of Directions, having listened to their General Counsel’s careful opinion of what influence these new regulations would have on Catholic Health Care interests. The wise and prudent approach has suggested not rushing into comments without the assistance of those more skilled in reading and understanding government “legalese” than most bishops. So what follows are my personal impressions of the Administration’s latest proposals.

1. Clearly, the Administration has been desirous of listening to and accommodating the concerns of Catholics and other people and institutions of conscience, like myself, who had real worries about the regulatory language in possession up till last Friday. There has been a serious effort to accommodate some of the conscience concerns of the Catholic bishops and I feel some expression of gratitude is due to the Administration.

2. One would be hard put to find any other segment of the American public whose concerns about the Affordable Health Care Act have attempted to be dealt with than those of the Catholic bishops and other like-minded people on this very important matter. There have been moments when I think we should consider ourselves lucky that they are still talking to us.

3. The result has been that many of our concerns, about religious freedom and conscience have been attempted to be met. For me the first attempt of the government to define religious ministry outside of our houses of worship has been addressed in the removal all together of the first three prongs of the prior definition and I am personally at peace with this aspect of the challenge.

4. By opening again, for the third time, a comment period (all must be submitted by April 8th), the Administration has offered an invitation to all interested parties, the Catholic bishops included, to raise any additional concerns which this new draft may have given birth to. There are no promises and anyone who has worked in Washington, as I have, should be prepared for the reality that whatever finds it way into law eventually will be “imperfect” in some way, but so was the much missed “Hyde Amendment.” Cardinal Dolan has made it clear subsequent to the statement issued by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that the USCCB has not rejected the HHS draft but seeks to continue to explore progress on some points which would lead to improvement.

5. As a former teacher of English (long ago), I find any discussion of the difference between exemption and accommodation to be interesting because as I look them both up in the OXFORD DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE I am led to believe that it is a distinction without a difference. I find this especially true when studying the manner in which HHS would allow other religious entities for whom the mandate presents an issue of “conscience” to decide that they were worthy of the accommodation. Not many other entities of American life are treated with this level of trust (and this would be especially true of the tax code) and some thanks should also be due to the Administration for trying to find a solution which might satisfy us and other constituencies who think otherwise.

6. In the last eight days or so, I have found myself wondering who speaks for the Church? Cardinals, archbishops and bishops are certainly entitled to their opinions (as I hope I am amply demonstrating in this blog post) but since the Second Vatican Council, our collegial voice has almost always been the elected leader of our episcopal conference, currently Cardinal Dolan. His opinion is certainly not binding on every Catholic, but should be accorded greater respect than any of us. But he speaks for the bishops who elected him, as did his predecessors and as will his successors, not necessarily for the whole Church.

7. Which brings me to my final point. As far as I know, at no time up to yesterday (Friday)since the new HHS regs were made available for review and public comment, has anyone from the conference structure consulted with legal counsel for other entities in the Church (hospitals, college and universities, Catholic Charities)to ask their read on how this proposal will affect their ministry. Yet the USCCB statement, it seems, would have one believe that the above mentioned entities might fairly have their “noses out-of-joint” because they are being given consideration under the “accommodation” and not the “exemption.” I did not leave this week’s Board of Director’s meeting of the Catholic Health Association thinking that all those CEO’s of systems and related members felt they were being treated as second class citizens by these new regulations. Perhaps we bishops need a little more humility from time to time, recognizing that we are not the only “game in town” but that there are other players, women and men of great faith who also love the Church, and who can speak for themselves and their organizations, on what effect legislation, proposed legislation, regulations will have on their ministry. A more collaborative effort might lead to greater results.

We still have time to work to smooth out some of the rough waters which lie ahead. As one member, I would hope that our episcopal conference might be as open to listening to the issues and challenges which government seems to face as I believe they have been so far in hearing our concerns. But in the end, everyone must prepare themselves for what is likely to be imperfect regulations drawn from imperfect legislation. I still am grateful that that more universal health care coverage will be the first fruit of the Affordable Care Act and I am beginning to feel that I can say to my diocesan self-insured employees, all 1400 of them, that their moral right to health care coverage will survive this moment.

+RNL

Just a few thoughts about the Supreme Court ruling a week ago today, being neither a lawyer nor  court watcher, so my thoughts tend to be those of an extremely interested observer. I was happy that the court found the concept of universal coverage for health care constitutional. 55 million uninsured and many with no access to health care was a national shame. Even with the so-called “Affordable Care Act,” there would remain about 20 million uninsured with no access to health care, many of whom would be undocumented. Our diocesan Catholic Charities knows firsthand the reality of the horror many of these people face when they desperately need medical attention and assistance but are too afraid to approach the avenues which are open to most other people. Thank God for the dedicated doctors, nurses, and volunteers who help with La Clinica Guadalupana in Clearwater and the Catholic Mobile Medical van which visits the migrant camps in eastern Hillsborough County. How the Court arrived at its decision and why is interesting, always, but the reality is that the concept itself is not so weak as to be unconstitutional.

The Administration still has not played its hand yet in how it will respond to the deep problems which all Catholics should have in the HHS regulations implementing the Affordable Care act. It is my understanding that there will be some “fix” and that it will be satisfactory. Time will tell and the sand in the hour glass is rapidly emptying. One would think that if there was the genuine good will toward “conscience protection” of which President Obama spoke two years ago at Notre Dame, it would not be taking this long, but, alas, this is an election year and one can only suppose that someone is delegated with the challenging task in the re-election committee of counting votes gained and lost depending on what they do. Sounds cynical I am sure, but I would bet it is not far from the truth if not the truth. Some said that it would need to await the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case before it, but that argument is now hocus pocus.

Finally, yesterday concluded the “Fortnight for Freedom” observance in many of the parishes and institutions of the diocese and throughout the Church in this country. I have heard of many of our parishes doing clever and appropriate things throughout the fortnight. Interestingly, St. John Vianney parish in St. Pete Beach has a bell tower but no bells so the parishioners there were encouraged to come to Church yesterday at noon with their own bells which they rang at the suggested tolling moment. There were many holy hours and prayerful observances throughout the diocese. I would go to the bank that not every parish did as much as they might and that not every pastor was himself convinced enough that this was a matter of pastoral importance. Sometimes, I am asked if that bothers me, and my answer is “yes” and “no.” “Yes” in that I have asked for very little in things like this during my time as bishop and when I do it means that I believe deeply in it. “No” in that I know that this matter like some others cuts close to the political around which there can be a divergence of opinion. All my priests know that we preach and talk ideas and issues and do not instruct how to cast votes come election day. That I would not like. Sometimes I get letters complaining about individual pastors who seem not to be cooperating. You can blame me if you wish (it happens in a lot of other things and is part of the job description of being a bishop) because my men know at the end of the day, they too were given a brain and have a pastoral sense so they are quite capable of deciding that which is appropriate or will work. I know that if this was a matter in which I would gladly die in the ditch for, they would be there for me and for the Church. My sense is that in the case of the fortnight for freedom, they used their best judgment and most did beautifully.

Finally, I shall long remember the full St. Paul (Tampa) church for our diocesan Mass of commemoration on the Solemnity of the Feast of SS. Peter and Paul. It was simple but the Church at its best at prayer. Thanks to the over 1100 who came and listened and prayed.

+RNL

Tim on the Puget Sound Ferry prior to departure east from Seattle

Seattle is history. So is Spokane and Glacier Park. No matter whether I look east or west, north or south, there is nothing out there but “amber waves of grain.” The grain is interrupted occasionally by cattle, but east of the Rockies, there is only miles and miles and miles of grain to be seen . The Empire Builder left Seattle yesterday on an afternoon which quite suddenly and unexpectedly turned sunny and blue. In an effort to find something which Tim could do and might enjoy in the afternoon awaiting the 440pm departure of the “Builder,” we settled on a round trip Washington State Ferry ride across Puget Sound to Bremerton. It seemed like a good idea when I bought the ticket at 1215pm for the 1235pm ferry, but then it began to rain and rain and rain. When we arrived back at the ferry dock in Seattle at three, it was still sprinkling but by the 440pm departure of the “Builder” blue skies prevailed and the first hour running along the shoreline of Puget Sound was spectacular. Three cruise ships were sailing north to Alaska abreast of us and the Olympic mountain range to the west and along the coast were majestic.

At Everett, Washington, the train heads southwest and climbs the Cascades. Since it was two days after the longest day of the year, we had daylight for the entire climb and descent into central Washington’s apple growing area along the upper reaches of the soon to be mighty Columbia River, flowing south and southwest.

Dinner in the diner tonight brought us together with a two men from the coach section, one of whom it took all of two nanoseconds for him to figure out that I was a bishop. The ring gave me away. He is attending Sacramento State College and regularly attends the Newman Center and knows Bishop Jaime Soto and the long retired Bishop Francis Quinn of Sacramento who wears the same Council ring, which I wear. To make the world even smaller, he has a cousin who lives in Plant City and his own mother who lives in California has been on trips and pilgrimages with our Father Carlos Rojas. Tim kept the other young man entertained. Good dinner followed by a challenging first night of sleep – only three more to go in these AMTRAK sleeping cars.

For the first hour leaving Seattle, the EMPIRE BUILDER travels along the shore line of Puget Sound with the Olympic mountains in the distance. Sharp eyes can see Holland America's MS ZUIDERDAM heading both to Alaska.

Since Tim would not easily be able to climb into the upper bunk, I volunteered. Mistake. I should have probably secured two of the smaller roomettes so we could both have lower beds, but like many a football game, which is won on Monday, hindsight is always 20-20. Too bad there was no film of this 230 lb. monster climbing up steep stairs and then trying to crawl into a space of about three feet of headroom. I should win an award as a contortionist.

We awakened on purpose around 630am (having lost an hour due to the change from Pacific Daylight Time, to Mountain Daylight Time), in time for Tim to detrain in Whitefish, the station at which the Builder begins to climb to the top of the continental divide and enters Glacier National Park. Once again the weather was beautiful on the west side of the Rockies but it has been overcast on the east side. About fifty people detrained at the West Glacier Station and the same number boarded. At East Glacier, within walking distance of the National Park Lodge, the same number left the train and slightly less boarded. Clearly the National Parks are in their busy season. Tim entertained three people at a table for breakfast in the diner as I kicked him out. I had breakfast with a young woman from Corvallis, Oregon who was going to East Glacier and the Lodge with her family. She was very pleasant.

Traveling with one’s brother is not always easy. Tim chose the middle of Puget Sound to tell me how he thought I and the other bishops were looking pretty darn stupid (not exactly his choice of adjective) on the HHS matter. He could not believe that in this age of enlightenment, anyone in his or her right minds could be raising any kind of ruckus about contraception. I used all my best and every argument that I had that it was not about contraception but religious liberty but he was not buying. And he was vehement enough that had I not expended thousands of frequent flyer miles and AMTRAK Guest Rewards miles for this trip, I might have thrown him overboard in the middle of Puget Sound. Probably the testiest moment on this trip and in years. He has been quiet since then!

Lunch was with a husband and wife from Rhode Island who clearly like to ride trains. They came west on the train and are now heading home. They also like the Queen Mary III, which they have taken on a quick trans-Atlantic voyage three times since she entered service. They have a short connection tomorrow in Chicago and are already worried that perhaps they will not make it (this train has been averaging 140 minutes late the last two weeks into Chicago). The Lynch boys have their second and final hotel night tomorrow in the Windy City.

Tim is beginning to reminisce and rhapsodize about the trip which begins Tuesday night on what was once the Chesapeake and Ohio. He worked for them for twenty-four years after returning from Vietnam and there has been all kinds of talk emanating from him that he intends to bribe the sleeping car attendant into opening the top part of the Dutch doors in Montgomery, West Virginia and Clifton Forge, Virginia to allow he and his camcorder to record houses we used to live in and places we used to frequent. We will see. Now it’s back to those “amber waves of grain” and towns like Malta, Montana; Saga, Montana; Wolf Point, Montana. Come to think of it, Montanans have probably never heard of Frostproof, Florida, or Lokey either.

+RNL

I just left the Grand Ballroom of the Hyatt Atlanta Downtown, my daytime prison cell for the past two days. We just concluded our Spring Meeting of the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB), which is distinguishable from the Fall meeting in several respects: it travels (which means that we never meet in the same city two years in a row), it is shorter (two days instead of three), it is slightly less well attended by the membership, and it usually results in nothing startling,  controversial, or seismic. A new innovation attempted this year, quite successfully I would say, was to spend an entire afternoon listening to and responding to presentations on an issue of importance (this year the HHS Mandate debate). Quite frankly, I enjoyed the opportunity to spend some time in a matter of great importance to me, with insights and presentations given by experts in the field of religious liberty.

Dr. John Garvey, the President of the Catholic University of America and himself a lawyer, spoke about recent incursions into the freedom of religion. Citing five recent incidents in recent years, Dr. Garvey made a compelling case for the USCCB doing what it is doing relative to the Affordable Health Care Act and their attendant regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services. You may read Dr. Garvey’s talk to us by clicking here. A second presentation on the topic of international religious freedom was given by Ambassador Thomas Farr, currently on the faculty of Georgetown University and entitled “The Church and the Global Crisis of Religious Liberty” and it can be accessed by clicking here. The final presentation of the day was the most compelling to me and was given by Bishop Shlemon Warduni, a Catholic bishop of the Chaldean Rite from Iraq. Quite frankly, the bishop’s recounting of the cost to Christians in Iraq caused by the US invasion made me sick at my stomach. You may read Bishop Warduni’s brief talk here. Sometimes we bishops are accused of being the “Republican party at prayer” but this monstrosity was led by a Republican President. He ended by saying that the US had managed to get rid of one crazy dictator who has been now replaced by many crazy dictators. How sad and tragic and talk about an assault on religious freedom!

We spent a good deal of time dealing with the HHS regulations, the Conference’s response to them, the strategy of the lawsuits brought against the regulations, and where do we go from here. Starting next week, many dioceses throughout the United States will observe what is being called a “Fortnight for Freedom” which will end on July 4th. I will be celebrating Mass at St. Paul’s Church, just off Dale Mabrey in north Tampa, on Friday evening June 29, 2012 (The Solemnity of the Feasts of SS. Peter and Paul) and speaking in the context of the Fortnight for Freedom observance and I hope as many of you as possible can come that evening at 7:30pm. For more information on the June 29 Mass and to see how our Diocese is participating in the Fortnight for Freedom, please click here.

We talked about communications and how poorly we do it in the Church at the moment. Three bishops tweeted during the meeting and several posted to Facebook. There is wide-spread agreement among the bishops that the Church’s and the Conference’s communication efforts need to be improved and more use made of the modern means of social communication today – ah, like this blog! (Sorry, I could not resist.) There were some currents in the discussion which made me nervous as I feel the mantle of censorship coming to NC News which has since its founding enjoyed editorial freedom but may soon lose its “religious liberty.” I would rue that day. There is also a push for a spokesperson for the Conference (read that “easy to look at” and Walter Cronkite-ish in their credibility) and I would not want that job for all the proverbial tea in China. Nuance one thing in a way that upsets one bishop and that person’s livelihood would likely be at stake, a position Archbishop Wilton Gregory made on the floor in much kinder, gentler words.

We didn’t vote on anything except to authorize a statement to be written on the effects of the economy on people today. Today we spent ninety minutes in a regional meeting which is considerably longer than we are accustomed to doing. The day ended with an afternoon in Executive Session and then I am out of here and headed home tomorrow (Friday). If this blog has been less than scintillating, blame it on the fact that there is no train service from Atlanta to Tampa and I had to fly both ways. I tend in November to think better and perhaps even write better on the train coming home from Baltimore. It is always good to see friends at these meetings and the liturgies are well done in the morning. The Hyatt in Downtown Atlanta could, if it chose to do so, boast of the smallest hotel rooms for the steepest price on the eastern seaboard and while charging an arm and leg per night, there were no glasses in the room to be found and no room service from noon to five p.m. So that’s it from slumming it in HotLanta. Home sweet home awaits me.

+RNL

I think by virtue of circumstances it is time to revisit the matter of the Health and Human Services implementation plan (hereinafter “HHS Regs.”) which is a part of the Affordable Health Care Act and bring you up to date on what is the current state of the question. Two things in the last forty-eight hours suggest that this is a good moment. When last I wrote in this space about the matter in February, President Obama had announced a “fix” for most of the matters which concerned Church leaders like myself. After careful study, I found it not a “fix” but perhaps only a “first step.” While privately assuring some people in our Church with whom he was in personal contact that the Administration would address to our satisfaction the “self-insured” question later, it has not been done so far, at least publicly. Following that announcement, the public perception of the issue changed from what I am most concerned about “the freedom of religion to define its own self instead of the government” to a question solely of contraception/sterilization, painting the bishops as once again wishing to control women’s reproductive freedom. And there much of the public perception has sat for the last four months as one can witness from the op-ed piece in this morning’s TAMPA BAY TIMES.

On Monday, twelve different lawsuits were filed by forty-three entities including archdioceses and dioceses, Notre Dame University, and other Church institutions in thirteen federal court jurisdictions challenging the present HHS Regs. on religious freedom grounds. Is this judicial overkill? As I wrote in February, it looked at that time to me that only the judicial system could resolve with finality this issue and somewhere in this great land there must be judges, appeals court justices at the right time, etc. who agree enough to hear the case. We only have a window of sixteen months at this writing to settle this. So what exactly is at stake?

On the religious freedom question, the government wishes to define as “legitimate ministry of a Church” only those activities which pertain to, in our case, baptized Catholics (more simply put that which happens at Mass or within a worship place). So, for example, in this diocese, the following would not be “Catholic ministries” at least as defined by the HHS regs in their present language:

1. St. Joseph and St. Anthony Hospital – most patients are not Catholic and Catholic baptism is not required in either the hiring or admitting office.

2. Jesuit High School and the Academy of the Holy Names - approximately a third of their student bodies are not baptized Catholics and one’s religion has never been an admissions criteria.

3. Pinellas Hope and our ministry to people with HIV-AIDS  and most programs of Catholic Charities where we never ask a person’s religion before helping them. Would the people of this nation wish Catholic Charities to simply disappear or hide under the biblical bushel basket of anonymity?

4. Many of our high and elementary schools if their enrollment contains more than 10% non-Catholics and while the exact percentage remains to be defined it is clear that ten percent is about the most that would be required for an exemption.

While contraceptive/sterilization coverage is the issue the government has chosen to launch this new definition of what constitutes “Church ministry,” it could morph into abortion coverage at some time (abortifacients such as the morning after-pill are already to be included under the HHS regs. - so in some senses we are already there). Where does a demonination, a Church draw the line in allowing  government to define what is “legitimately Church ministry?”

I, as bishop, have no desire to control the contraceptive access of the general citizenry. As a bishop, I will continue to teach and affirm the beauty of Pope Paul VI’s total teaching on marriage and procreation in Humanae Vitae, while acknowledging that a part of that teaching can place great stress on a young couple beginning their married life. But that is a part of my teaching responsibility as a bishop. And quite honestly I think the Church has learned how to strongly affirm the teaching while respecting individual conscience  formation in the last forty some years, as well as provide an option with little to no cost. But, I also do not believe my government should ever force my Church to provide something for its own employees which is against its teachings and beliefs. This is a dangerous, steep and very slippery slope.

Neuralgic in this debate is the matter of defending the consciences of individual employers who seek to opt out of providing coverage because of their personal religious beliefs. To me, this can possibly appear as an opening for exceptions large enough to endanger the good that is clearly at play here – enlarging the health care coverage to more people and making it more affordable to access. The goal of universal coverage has been an important goal of the Catholic bishops of the United States for at least two decades. We should neither lose sight of this  goal nor ignore our serious concerns in the area of religious liberty. We remain strong proponents of care for the poor.

So we are currently in a state of “check” but not yet “check-mate” on this issue. Stay tuned, as the old Irish song goes, “It’s a Long Way to Tipperary” still.

+RNL

To bring you up-to-date on the latest regarding the regulations issued by the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington, what follows is a letter from Cardinal Dolan, our United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) President and Bishop William Lori, the chairman of our Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty to the bishops of the U.S. that was issued late last week. It says it all:                          

Office of the President
3211 FOURTH STREET NE WASHINGTON DC 20017-1194 202-541-3100 FAX 202-541-3166
Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan Archbishop of New York President

February 22, 2012

Dear Brother Bishops,

 
Since we last wrote to you concerning the critical efforts we are undertaking together to protect religious freedom in our beloved country, many of you have requested that we write once more to update you on the situation and to again request the assistance of all the faithful in this important work. We are happy to do so now.

 
First, we wish to express our heartfelt appreciation to you, and to all our sisters and brothers in Christ, for the remarkable witness of our unity in faith and strength of conviction during this past month. We have made our voices heard, and we will not cease from doing so until religious freedom is restored.

As we know, on January 20, the Department of Health and Human Services announced a decision to issue final regulations that would force practically all employers, including many religious institutions, to pay for abortion inducing drugs, sterilizations, and contraception. The regulations would provide no protections for our great institutions—such as Catholic charities, hospitals, and universities—or for the individual faithful in the marketplace. The regulations struck at the heart of our fundamental right to religious liberty, which affects our ability to serve those outside our faith community.

Since January 20, the reaction was immediate and sustained. We came together, joined by people of every creed and political persuasion, to make one thing resoundingly clear: we stand united against any attempt to deny or weaken the right to religious liberty upon which our country was founded.

On Friday, February 10, the Administration issued the final rules. By their very terms, the rules were reaffirmed “without change.” The mandate to provide the illicit services remains. The exceedingly narrow exemption for churches remains. Despite the outcry, all the threats to religious liberty posed by the initial rules remain.

Religious freedom is a fundamental right of all. This right does not depend on any government’s decision to grant it: it is God-given, and just societies recognize and respect its free exercise. The free exercise of religion extends well beyond the freedom of worship. It also forbids government from forcing people or groups to violate their most deeply held religious convictions, and from interfering in the internal affairs of religious organizations.

Recent actions by the Administration have attempted to reduce this free exercise to a “privilege” arbitrarily granted by the government as a mere exemption from an all encompassing, extreme form of secularism. The exemption is too narrowly defined, because it does not exempt most non-profit religious employers, the religiously affiliated insurer, the self insured employer, the for-profit religious employer, or other private businesses owned and operated by people who rightly object to paying for abortion inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception. And because it is instituted only by executive whim, even this unduly narrow exemption can be taken away easily.

In the United States, religious liberty does not depend on the benevolence of who is regulating us. It is our “first freedom” and respect for it must be broad and inclusive—not narrow and exclusive. Catholics and other people of faith and good will are not second class citizens. And it is not for the government to decide which of our ministries is “religious enough” to warrant religious freedom protection.

This is not just about contraception, abortion-causing drugs, and sterilization—although all should recognize the injustices involved in making them part of a universal mandated health care program. It is not about Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals. It is about people of faith. This is first and foremost a matter of religious liberty for all. If the government can, for example, tell Catholics that they cannot be in the insurance business today without violating their religious convictions, where does it end? This violates the constitutional limits on our government, and the basic rights upon which our country was founded.

Much remains to be done. We cannot rest when faced with so grave a threat to the religious liberty for which our parents and grandparents fought. In this moment in history we must work diligently to preserve religious liberty and to remove all threats to the practice of our faith in the public square. This is our heritage as Americans. President Obama should rescind the mandate, or at the very least, provide full and effective measures to protect religious liberty and conscience.

Above all, dear brothers, we rely on the help of the Lord in this important struggle. We all need to act now by contacting our legislators in support of the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, which can be done through our action alert on www.usccb.org/conscience.

We invite you to share the contents of this letter with the faithful of your diocese in whatever form, or by whatever means, you consider most suitable. Let us continue to pray for a quick and complete resolution to this and all threats to religious liberty and the exercise of our faith in our great country.

Timothy Cardinal Dolan                               Most Reverend William E. Lori
Archbishop of New York                                Bishop of Bridgeport
President, United States Conference     Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee for Religious
of Catholic Bishops                                             Liberty

The letter has also been posted on the diocesan website (www.dosp.org) and can be read as a PDF version in English or Spanish.

+RNL