Further Thoughts on the Archbishop's "Providence Hospital Statement"

I wanted to further explain what I think about the Archbishop's statement on the Providence Hospital situation. I wrote my response right after reading the Anchor's article, and while my off-the-cuff remarks captured my response to the statement it didn't elucidate where I think the situation stands overall.

First, I want to say this: I fully respect the Archbishop as my Catholic shepherd and guardian of the faith in this diocese. I never want to make his job more difficult, or to appear to call into question anything he says or does unless I have a moral duty to actually question something. Furthermore, I want to say that I do not envy his role in this situation, or any other that raises debate and heated discussion amongst the faithful.

Second, I want to re-iterate the fact that I think that the statement is an overall victory for Catholics in the Archdiocese, the Pro-Life movement, and for Providence. The Archbishop is courageous to admit there is a problem, that it is a troubling situation, and that he will now do what it takes to correct the problem and ensure that moving forward there is full adherence to Catholic teaching by a Catholic entity under his 'watch.' You honestly can't ask for anything more than that. Since Friday, there have been those that have commented that I took it too 'easy' or too 'hard' on the Archbishop and his statement. To those, on both sides, I would say, maybe I was "too" something but ultimately the Archbishop and myself, and the Pro-Life community are on the same team and want the same thing: a culture of life built up through the authentic witness of Providence Hospital as a beacon of Catholic identity, to all.

Next, there are those that have suggested that the Archbishop and the Archdiocese appear not to have "known" about the situation. To this I respond: so what? I didn't know about it until someone emailed me. It isn't as if the Archbishop is supposed to be watching every move Providence makes. In fact, Providence has a duty, based on the ERDs, to inform the Archbishop of certain decisions before they are implemented, for his approval. This situation was one of those, and it appears that they did not reach out. You can't blame the Archbishop one bit for that, and so this accusation is unfounded.

Some have suggested the Archbishop should "suspend" or "pull" the Catholic title from Providence until they are in compliance. To this I would say, that isn't how Canon Law works, at least to my understanding. Also, I don't think it serves anyone any good to use a gimmick or threat to compel Providence to act in a certain way. Hospitals are complex entities, and while I am not making any excuses here, as I said in my original post way back when I first wrote about this: these things take time to sort out. The truly positive thing is that everyone knows about it now, and the entities that need be are working on its resolution. The goal, in my mind, has always been to ensure Providence is a hospital that provides services that are fully within the moral spectrum of Catholic teaching. In that they are Catholic they are a "Pro-Life" hospital, and should be doing things that build up the "Culture of Life". Anything contrary to that understanding places such actions into the realm of "non-compliance" with the ERDs and thereby Catholic teaching. Ultimately, Providence should be an entity that is a visible symbol of Catholic teaching and ethical practices.

Finally, some were disappointed that I addressed some of the negative technical aspects of the statement and article. While I do admit they didn't necessarily affect the substance of the statement, they did paint the presentation of it in a poor light. I have always said, and will continue to say, that I would be more than willing to assist the Archdiocese directly in issues such as these. In this situation alone, I reached out the Archdiocese through multiple channels. My goal is not to paint them in a negative light but to act as "iron sharpening iron." We are on the same "side" and we are working towards the same goal - the Kingdom of God. Therefore, while I may criticize certain aspects of this situation, I repeat: the Archbishop appears to be taking a very courageous and positive stance on the situation. He seems to be fully committed to upholding Catholic teaching, as well as ensuring that Catholic entities are heralds of Catholic identity and virtue.

In conclusion, I want to make sure that I once again say that I am happy the Archbishop is tackling this head on. It isn't an easy situation to work within, and I know that "fixing" this problem isn't going to be an easy process. Hopefully, my criticism will be seen as a positive force in making sure that precise actions are taken to correct a "troubling situation." Ultimately, my goal is to be a critical mind willing to discuss difficult topics and navigate tough waters to find Truth and to uphold the Church and its teachings.

Link:
Diane at Te Deum has posted about Bishops and Holy Boldness. Not directly on point, but clearly relevant.

†††

Archdiocese of Anchorage Responds to the "Troubling Situation" at Providence Hospital

Archbishop Schwietz

Well, I found out about 2 minutes ago, 4:58pm, that the Archdiocese of Anchorage has finally responded to the Providence Hospital partnership and lease of space to Alaska Women's Health Clinic (Click for original report). The Catholic Anchor seems to be the only source of the statement and so I will post for you what they have:

The Sept. 16 statement from Archbishop Schwietz reads as follows:

“Archbishop Schwietz takes this troubling situation very seriously, He has been in dialogue with Providence leaders who do understand the gravity of this matter. The Archbishop continues to work with the leadership at Providence Alaska Medical Center to be certain that requirements for compliance with The Catholic Healthcare Directives are fully implemented and that Providence be a clear witness to Catholic values in all it does.”

The is some good and some not so good news in the Anchor's report of the Archbishop's statement. Let's start with the not-so-good first, and I am going to be just as critical of the bad, as I am praiseworthy of the good because this situation is so important and it has been so long since we first reported on it, 40 days actually - how ironic.

The Bad

··°†°··

I really don't want to slam this release, but there are some big issues with it, and I will try and be as objectively critical, without being nit-picky, as possible.

There are "technical" issues with this release. It came out at 4:58pm, on a Friday, and on the Anchor blog; the timing and method of releases is a big deal. There are also grammatical issues with it, for instance they call the Ethical and Religious Directives: "The Catholic Healthcare Directives", and other small points. These don't affect the substance of the statement per se but they do point to the fact that the Archdiocese needs to better understand how they communicate with the faithful. Details are important... as they say, "the devil is in the details." We shouldn't linger on these too much.

The statement from the Archbishop himself doesn't say much. It says that he is continuing to work with Providence, but the statement t doesn't say what that means, what the timeline is, or what he views as the most glaring problem. He says it is a "troubling situation" but doesn't point to any real specifics beyond that. I wish that he would have spoken to what he saw as the biggest problem or two, but he didn't and that is his prerogative. Yet, pointing to something might have given us a glimmer of understanding of how he sees the issue. I put this as a problem with the statement, only because he appears to have written the statement as a response to inquiries, and I would think that the best way to respond is to be specific.

The biggest issue though, is this: the Archbishop's statement, and the Anchor's analysis of the situation,  misstate the major problem with the Providence-AWHC relationship. It is hard to determine if the Anchor or the Archbishop is the source of the confusion, but the statement of concern is this:

While AWHPC as part of its lease agreement with Providence Alaska agreed not to provide abortion services (or any ethically prohibited services) on the Providence premises the presence of this clinic is for many, including Archbishop Schwietz, a cause of grave concern.

This makes it sound as if no ethically prohibited services are provided on the premises of Providence. THIS IS UNTRUE. While no abortions take place on Providence's grounds, there are prohibited services that do. Abortion referrals, contraceptive services, and sterilization procedures do occur on the premises and are prohibited by the ERDs (see, Why the Providence Situation Isn't Just About Abortions).  We feel confident in saying this for a few reasons: 1) AWHC advertises those services on their website. 2) There are confirmed reports from Pro-Life leaders that hospital administrators have admitted that they occur. 3) We have private first hand accounts that they occur.

We have always said this isn't just about abortion or the presence of AWHC on the premises, that this was about Catholic identity and the full spectrum of Catholic teaching. This statement is troubling and we hope for further clarification from the Anchor or the Archbishop on this point. This really is the crux of our issue with the whole situation. Yes we are dismayed that Dr. Whitefield is there, but that is secondary to the fact that actual procedures that are contrary to Catholic teaching are occurring on the premises. 

The Good

··°†°··

First off, I must applaud the Archbishop for calling the situation "troubling" and to admit that Providence sees the "gravity" of the overall situation. The first step to correct a problem, is to admit there is a problem and they have done that. While I have taken issue with how they have framed the issue, the fact that the Archbishop is taking a lead role in this situation is fantastic. We need our Bishops to be willing to lead and teach the faithful what it means to be Catholic.

Next, the Archbishop's personal statement says that he is working to ensure that Providence implements the ERDs fully, and for Providence to be a "clear witness to Catholic values." While I think virtues would be a better word here, the fact that he wants FULL implementation of the ERDs AND wants Providence to be a witness of Catholic identity is AWESOME! This sentence seems to capture the problem, even though it sounds more aspirational than actual. The problem I stated above, regarding the fact that the article insinuates that no services are provided currently that are contrary to the ERDs, is troubling, but ultimately this statement shows that the Archbishop has the right goal in mind. The key will to match the facts to the goal.

Finally, there seems to be an ongoing conversation occurring. I have heard from many people that the upper echelon of the hospital's administration, the Archbishop, and even Pro-Life leaders are continuing to find a way for Providence to fully realize and reflect Catholic teaching. These types situations are not solved over-night, I recognize that. At the end of the day Providence must not allow AWHC perform any ethically prohibited services, if they are to be a Catholic hospital. This isn't my opinion, this is the statement of the Church via the USCCB and the ERDs. It sounds as if this conversation is heading in that direction. 

My Thoughts

··°†°··

The take from this is that the overall landscape looks good, but is marred a bit by a poorly crafted statement. I am concerned with the one statement which insinuates that there currently aren't any prohibited services occurring, it is troubling. It is the essence and crux of this situation. This statement must be clarified. Certainly, if the rest of what the Archbishop states is happening, in terms of direction and dialogue, then it will be cleared up in the end, but it is a confusing landscape at this point.

We must continue to be diligent. We must continue to pray. In fact, I urge you all to commit to daily prayer until this situation is resolved. We must storm the gates of heaven asking for God to speak to the hearts of all those involved. Strength in courage are sometimes in short supply in these situations, and we can all use the help. We must also write the Archbishop and thank him for dedication to this issue, and to ensure him that we are praying for him and for the defense of the Church. Just as we write to voice our concerns, he is a human and needs our encouragement as well.

I will continue to monitor this situation, and will report anything new that I find. Hopefully there will be clarification coming down the pipes, and hopefully we will be privy to some of the developments and discussions that occurr concerning the unethical practices currently occurring at AWHC. Let us pray that this is the beginning of reform at Providence, which at the end of the day will leave a Catholic hospital that is a witness to Catholic values in all it does.


NB: Edited slightly for grammar and clarity.

†††

Perplexing Providence Hospital - Why isn't this Catholic hospital 'acting' Catholic?

When one thinks of the latest scandals surrounding Catholic hospitals, it is hard to ignore that these situations from a very object point of view are completely perplexing. In the case of Providence Hospital in Anchorage, Alaska allowing the Alaska Women's Health Clinic to become a clinic inside of Providence and granting notorious Dr. Jan Whitefield privileges at the hospital flies directly in the face of Catholic teaching and doctrine.

Unfortunately Providence isn't alone in their actions, Mercy Hospital in Durango, Colorado has an almost identical situation, to which Live Action and Lila Rose came to protest. Bishop Thomas Olmsted was forced to strip St. Joseph's Hospital in Phoenix, Arizona of their Catholic "identity." It was an example of an "end game" scenario but after years of deceit and insubordinate, he was left with no option. And in development, we  see a situation in the Archdiocese of Louisville, where pressure is being placed on those in power to manipulate the Ethical and Religious Directives (ERDs) to allow for a hospital merger.

So while some may view the Providence issue as a local Alaskan issue, they would be incorrect. This issue is much deeper than some localized blip on the radar, it actually strikes at the core of what it means to be a Catholic Organization.

What is perplexing about the Providence situation, as well as these other situations, is that Catholic hospitals should have a pretty straight-forward criteria for what clinics and the partners they associate with, especially ones that they physically have in their buildings or share services with. I admit that a person could imagine various complex relationships which could be developed between a Catholic hospital and a secondary partner, and when analyzed that relationship would be difficult to determine whether it was appropriate under Catholic teaching and doctrine.

Yet, the Providence situation is a rather blatant case of an improper relationship. This relationship appears so egregious, that there must be some ulterior motive driving the decision to partner with the state's most notorious abortionist, instead of operating based on Catholic teaching. This situation is a perfect example of the necessity for Catholic hospitals to adhere to the 'Ethical and Religious Directives' (ERDs). Not only for the sake of their Catholic identity but more importantly for the sake of what it means for an organization to be Catholic within the public sphere.

Browsing Providence's site, one can find a disclaimer called: 'Services Disclaimer' which is the legalese that a hospital publishes to explain what liability exists based on the information they have on their website. Essentially it is the "disclaimer" which attaches to the website. Oddly Providence's seems contrary to their action. The disclaimer says:

Providence Health & Services does not recommend, endorse or promote any procedure or intervention that may be discussed on this site, and which may be prohibited by Providence Health & Services’ Mission and Core Values and the Roman Catholic moral tradition as articulated in such documents as The Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services.

If this is the case, why did they let Dr. Whitefield and AWHS walk right in the building and set up shop? Not only that, but how can they reconcile the actions that Dr. Whitefield is infamous for with the ERDs they are required to follow? It is just so confusing and frustrating that this hospital isn't acting very Catholic. There must be a reason, but it still perplexes me. It is hard to imagine that there is some greater and almost infinite good that must exist to justify the decision to let the clinic open and operate out of Providence.

Over the next couple of days I plan to update you on the developments in this story, as well as highlighting what other people are saying about this issue. Some great Catholic thinkers and bloggers are talking about this issue in earnest and it is comforting to know that many of things I have been thinking and writing about regarding it all align quite closely to what these other Catholics have been saying. I also plan to talk a little more about ERDs and what they are supposed to do in terms of keeping Catholic hospitals... Catholic.

Lastly... don't forget to pray and write the Archbishop. Please let the Chancery know how you feel about this issue as a Catholic. Let them know that you are praying for an outcome to this situation that is centered in truth and protects the sanctity of life.

†††