I’m wondering if this is being done so that the Archdiocese does not have to adhere to providing abortion and abortifacients to employees.
Get rid of the government dollars and the strings attached to them.
I was wondering the same thing. A two-fer: gain more solvency and rid the diocese of burdensome regulation.
I've been preaching that message for a long time.
35 years ago, my wife and I decided to put our children in a Baptist church school, one of the first things the Pastor/superintendent told us was what he tells all parents, that if any parent ever accepted government money or subsidizes, of any kind, their children would no longer be able to attend the school. We agreed with that policy whole heartedly.
Another example which we support is, Illinois Baptist Children's Homes, various states have them. They have never accepted any government money in their history, as a result they only adopt children into Christian homes, that consist of a man and woman as husband and wife. They are never under threat of losing government (tax payers) money, they exist and even thrive without it, relying solely on donations from individuals and churches.
Thank God for them.
Their fees are on a sliding scale, you don't have to be wealthy to adopt a child but as in most adoption agencies, babies are in small supply and much demand.
As I already noted, many states have these homes, they are more common in the mid west. If anyone is interested, just Goggle (or Bing) - insert the state desired with "Baptist Children's Home"
And by the way, they adopt to any Christian family, not just Baptist.