As we are seeing in Europe authoritarians demands for austerity have led to a strong backlash. A volatile response is never the desired result and yet it is predictable. I am not saying that the Church should not remain silent, I am saying that the manner it is doing so is destructive. There is little humility and much muscle flexing. What does it prove?

Contraceptives are a way of life. The Church has chosen to bundle contraception and abortion together. It equates one with the other. The fact that one precludes the other appears to have no bearing. This policy has it’s partial origins in the idea of out procreating non-Christians and for this reason women were seen as little more than Catholic baby factories.  But does this policy make sense in a world with seven billion people and growing. Overpopulation is it’s own evil. What causes war? Power, money, greed, conflicts over resources, overpopulation? What causes famine, or pestilence? I submit that many of the above cited reasons are also responsible.  The list could go on and on as to the causes of men’s inhumanity to the human race. My point being that the sacredness of life takes many forms. Abortion must not be tied to a woman’s right to control the size and manageabilty of her family. We live in a world where woman are forced into the marketplace and no longer are they exclusively present to raise good Catholic boys and girls. Everyone suffers from this neglect, the parents, schools, society, religious organizations but mostly the children. The brunt of the burden is placed upon mothers, not the husbands, or the church. This policy of bundling the abortion with contraceptives is a result of a egocentric male view of women and their place in the world and the family. It doesnot help anyone and is ultimately destructive to everyone. Catholic men must also stand-up and take responsibilty for the rights of their wifes and mothers. It unfortunate but we donot value and take care of what we have, let alone to be continually procreating ad nauseam.

To continue to bundle abortion with contraception is rejecting a reasonable and pragmatic good solution in favor of a view of the world that in the long run will be ruinous to all. Some will not see the forest for the trees. The overtones have become political and the muscle flexing is a symptom. As evidence I ask why is the one child policy ignored. To me that is speaking out on one side and no the other. One of my definitions of politics.

Reposting here, with a few minor revisions, my comment to another blog on this same subject:

Our beloved Pope Benedict XVI is a true intellectual giant. He understands that the West is in grave danger, that we are in dire need of authentic voices of Truth, and that our Catholic institutions of higher learning must serve as voices of Truth, cultivating the minds of the next generation of young people and equiping them to do battle with the secular relativists. Note the Pope’s comments on higher education just this weekend to American bishops in Rome for their ad limina visit, cited above. Unfortunately, many American Catholic colleges and universities have long-since been coopted by the moral relativists.

Nevertheless, there are some very good Catholic universities in the United States. We should send our kids to those schools instead of the supposedly “academically elite” name brands who stand in open dissent and opposition to the very idea of Truth. It’s easy to identify the ones we should acknowledge and support - just figure out whether they are adherents of the Land O Lakes Statement or if, on the other hand, they are truly attempting to comply with Ex Corde Ecclesiae. These represent two very different concepts of what a Catholic university should be.

Unfortunately, most Catholic high school students applying to college, and their parents, have no idea what dens of dissent and open rebellion against the Church, and against the very concept of Truth, many of our formerly great Catholic universities have become - all in the name of “academic freedom” and “independence.”

The Land O Lakes Statement was issued in 1967, signed by a group of Catholic educators led by University of Notre Dame president Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, CSC, and had as its purpose defining the relationship between the modern American university and the Church. Characterized by historian Philip Gleason as a “declaration of independence from the hierarchy,” the statement provoked a decades-long debate over the character of American Catholic higher education. For supporters, it was a long overdue statement of Catholic educators’ agreement with the tenets of American academia, such as “academic freedom.” For critics, the manifesto dangerously divorced the Catholic university from the life of faith and set in motion a deplorable decline in the Catholic identity of American institutions of higher education.

Ex Corde Ecclesiae was issued by Pope John Paul II in 1990. Its aim was to define and refine the Catholicism of Catholic institutions of higher education. Ex Corde Ecclesiae was viewed as a rebuttal to the Land O Lakes Statement. The document cites the Code of Canon Law which instructs Catholic educational facilities to respect norms established by local bishops. Ex Corde underscores the authority of the bishops and states that canon law (canon 812)requires all teachers of theology in Catholic colleges and universities to have the mandate of the local ecclesiastical authority (normally the local bishop). 

Many American Catholic universities have fought Ex Corde Ecclesiae tooth and nail, and very few of them are in compliance with it. Because of their power, wealth, influence, and stubborn insistence that they can in fact be “Catholic” without truly being so, they have been permitted to give lip-service to Ex Corde Ecclesiae while remaining out of compliance now for over 20 years.

Elite American academia, including much of Catholic academia, is morally and intellectually bankrupt. True Catholic universities have a chance to play a vital role in battling both the “dictatorship of relativism” and the “culture of death”, and to stand as bulwarks against the radical relativism and secularization that is sweeping away the foundations of Western Civilization. I firmly believe that it is time to draw some clear lines.

Just within the nation’s capital, the contrast between the Catholic University of America and Georgetown could not be more stark. We absolutely must support truly Catholic universities and either reject the Georgetowns and their ilk or demand that they reform.

Maybe one day if the Roman Catholic Church allows priest to married as they are in all other Catholic Churchs, it will reconsider it’s harsh prohibition on contraceptives. A priest with a wife and 11 going on 12 little mouths to fed and cloth would be a very burdensome blessing to manage. Something to think about.

I think that Sebelius is clearly in violation of her Catholic obligations. That being said, there is a least a nuanced difference between Georgetown having her speak at the Policy Institute and what Notre Dame did with President Obama.  Sebelius is not getting any award from Georgetown, and she is speaking to a segment that has a particular connection to the HHS policy discussion, not the main University Commencement.  It is maybe not like having a guest speaker in a class, but somewhat akin to that.  IF (and this is speculation) Georgetown is trying to cast this in the context of the Jesuit tradition of exposing its students to different view points, then this moves closer to the defensible.  I frankly would like to know if Georgetown is consciously trying to move away from a openly disobedient posture and at least trying to find an acceptable position.

Let us at least give this a moment’s pause before we condemn Georgetown out of hand.

Judas Priests ...

Jesus met with all types of people - the woman at the well, the rich man.  He talked with them in a loving way.  Georgetown is doing the same.  Let her participate in the discussion, and let us hear what she has to say. We have nothing to fear.

Either the President of Georgetown is stupid or he has willingly chosen to defy the Pope and U.S. bishops.  Either way he should resign.

“Both the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Archdiocese of Washington told EWTN News that they do not have a response to the invitation at this time.”

And therein lies the problem with the U.S. bishops which is producing people like Sebelius, Kennedy, Pelosi, Biden, Kerry, etc, which we unknown Catholics have to put up with year after year.  Yet, Catholic politicians like Cong. Paul Ryan gets criticized by Bishop Blair, Chairman of a USCCB committy, for a budget he proposed to save our country from becoming another Greece and Bishop Blair complains its not “fair to the poor.”  Meanwhile, no bishop has criticized the Democrats for not even proposing a budget in over three years and for refusing to even bring the Ryan budget up in the Senate for a vote.

Please, please, don’t allow this to happen.  This is an insult to all Catholics. These colleges are ruining our children. Don’t let it happen!

Unfortunately, Georgetown and our Jesuits would rather hide behind phoney liberal intellectualism than foster Catholicism. Might I suggest Paul Ryan as Catholic substitute for Subelius.

Archbishop Wuerl should take the following steps:
1. Expel the Jesuits from the Diocese, effective today.
2. Demand that the Jesuits relinquish control of Georgetown University.
3. Publicly denounce the invitation of Sebelius and President DeGoia.
4. Organize and lead a protest against Sebelius on the day of the event.
5. Wearing appropriate clerical garb, Archbishop Wuerl should lead a procession of the Corpus Christi displayed in Monstrance through the crowds at Georgetown, and walk right up to the speakers’ platform, defying Georgetown to have him and his compatriots arrested—if need be, staging a “sit-in”; and then demanding the opportunity to speak.
6. If not arrested, Archbishop Wuerl should take the speaker’s podium and proceed to address the attendees about the scandal of Secretary Sebelius’s life and positions; and to warn all present of the peril to their immortal souls for lending support to the legalized sanctioning of the killing of 53-million+ helpless babies.

John Boulet, you are exactly right.
Unfortunatly, I don’t think that weak Cardinal Wuerl has the spine to defend OUR church.

Indeed, I seem to have guessed correctly.  It looks like Georgetown is trying to de-escalate this by pointing out that she is only a speaker at a limited event.  Not perfect, but still better than what ND did.

http://blog.cardinalnewmansociety.org/2012/05/07/georgetown-edits-sebelius-announcement-backtracks-on-commencement-speaker/

Pesqueira: The Church is NEVER going to reverse course on contraception and abortion, so quit the misguided “wishful thinking” and get on board. It has become clear that the battle for the soul of the world will be fought on the life issues, and we are on the right side.

Sal: This invitation is far worse than Obama at ND.  Why?  1. Because she claims to be Catholic (Obama does not) but is strident supporter of abortion. 2. Because she is the architect of the HHS mandate, the timing and symbolism of this invitation constitues a deliberate “in your face” to the Bishops by Georgetown. 

stillbelieve: Ryan has been sorely mistreated by certain ultra-left Catholics who believe that the “preferential option for the poor” can only be satisfied by massive state-mandated wealth redistribution, even if that means immorally confiscating the property of others and/or saddling future generations with insurmountable debts. Ryan’s point is that either of those methods will ultimately “crash” the system, which will hurt the poor most of all. Moreover, note, all the wailing and nashing of teeth is over Ryan’s proposal to mereley slow the rate of growth of the already massive welfare state; spending continues to grow every year under his proposal.

John: I so wish the Cardinal would take a very strong stand, and draw a line in the sand as you suggest, but I agree there is either a lack of courage or perhaps a lack of appreciation of what is needed. 

Sam:

This change in semantics describing the event at which she is to speak is not good enough.  As I understand it, this is the equivalent of commencement for the graduate students at the PPI.  Regardless, she should not be welcome on campus, let alone given a platform to speak.

And I certainly hope this was not a “resolution” brokered with Cardinal Weurl.  All the negative symbolism of her appearance at a supposedly Catholic university is still there, plus it would then seem to have been approved by the Cardinal if that is the case.

“In announcing Sebelius as a speaker, Georgetown said that ‘she has led efforts to improve America’s health and enhance the delivery of human services to some of the nation’s most vulnerable populations’.”

...the unborn: THAT “vulnerable” population? Oh yeah, she’s “improved” their health and human services all right by making sure they don’t exist and thus not having to give them any services since they’re not around to reap any benefits. PATHETIC!!!!

Haven’t we heard enough of what Ms. Sebelius has to say?  I’m sorry, JGak, but how can anyone “discuss” with a brick wall?

Yes, Rafael, her strident advocacy for abortion should have been an absolute disqualifier, even without the HHS mandate. For goodness sakes, she was the featured speaker at a NARAL conference where she declared “we are in a war” against pro-life forces.

Catholics should avert their eyes, cross themselves, and say the St. Michael prayer when in her presence. This invitation is so scandalous, I just can’t believe it.

@Don

“Moreover, note, all the wailing and nashing of teeth is over Ryan’s proposal to mereley slow the rate of growth of the already massive welfare state; spending continues to grow every year under his proposal.”

That’s right.  Democrats call them “cuts” as if less money is going to be spent on the poor next year then is spent this year when in fact more money is going to be spent on them next year but not as much as would have been spent if some restraints were implemented.  Instead of a 10% increase in spending next year, it’s a 5% increase, which is 2% above inflation.  Who wouldn’t like to have a 5% raise in their paychecks next year which would enable you to continue to have your job as opposed to a 10% raise that would bankrupt the company and force them to file bankruptcy putting you out of work?

Catholics in name only. Welcome Kathleen Sebelius to the Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy club.

Don,

Amen, brother!!!

The church has done a great job of keeping an unwavering stand on TRUTH for over 2000 years, until now. Step up leaders and lead, or let me. Some people say, “kindness over truth.”  What is better is “truth with kindness.” Sometimes, to be truthful is being kind.  Pertaining to “JGak”‘s comment… Kathleen Sebelius has already spoken thru her actions. No, we are not afraid of anything, but she wasn’t invited to be in a “discussion” she was invited to have a monologue. That is wrong. She is wrong.