Punditry

Georgetown University alumni, students and others are preparing a canon law suit to be filed with the Archdiocese of Washington and the Vatican, seeking remedies “up to and including the possible removal or suspension of top-ranked Georgetown’s right to call itself Catholic or Jesuit in its fundraising and representations to applicants.”

The effort is being led by the distinguished Georgetown alumnus William Peter Blatty, who won an Academy Award for his screenplay and book The Exorcist and has been honored by Georgetown with its John Carroll Medal for alumni achievement.

Blatty is urging Georgetown alumni, students, parents, faculty and anyone associated with Georgetown to join the lawsuit at <www.gupetition.org>. The website includes an inspiring letter by Blatty and a description of Georgetown’s historical ties to the Jesuits, the Washington Archdiocese and the Vatican. (Source)

I like the letter from Mr. Blatty and especially like what he quotes from a Georgetown grad who wrote him.

Unfortunately, I found that Georgetown today lacks the integrity to consistently live the Catholic identity it claims. While faith and spirituality are embraced at Georgetown, they are respected only so long as they are either confined within the walls of Dahlgren Chapel, or diluted to appease the dictatorship of relativism which is sweeping our civilization. My Catholic manner of worship was always accepted, but my Catholic lifestyle and convictions were sometimes attacked by student organizations and staff members, themselves underpinned by tacit and even explicit university endorsement. Far beyond nuanced scrutiny or respectful debate, my convictions, especially those regarding the dignity of human life, were instead the subject of sweeping condemnation, even at university-sponsored events. My cultural identity was insulted; my intellectual autonomy and personal agency were denied in order to render my voice inconsequential. On those occasions I came to wonder why, at a Catholic institution, I was so ridiculed for my Catholicism. I sometimes felt betrayed by a campus culture which discouraged faithfulness, even while banners everywhere touted the ideal of “faith in action.”

Not an uncommon diagnosis of the state of Catholic eduction where Catholic identity is boasted of, but with the fruits predominately secular and often in a way that opposes the faith. Dr. Jeckle could not live the dual personalities of Dr. Jeckly and Mr. Hyde and Catholic institutions that try to do the same thing will also fail at it or have Mr. Hyde predominate.

There is also something cool about the author of The Exorcist as an alumni calling out the university. I can easily imagine a group of priests surrounding the President of the University and some of the faculty while chanting “The Power of Christ compels you!” Though considering the university there just might be a flood of pea soup involved.

How do you tell if a Catholic university is possessed? When suddenly it stops speaking in Latin.

Though the action of Georgetown and other Catholic educational institutions don’t require diabolic possession as an explanation. More like possession by the spirit of the age which seems even harder to drive out until it dies its own natural death. No doubt much prayer and fasting is required.

Bishop Jeff Miller

As a certified Catholic pundit that means I was ordained into the internet bishopric or the e-piscopacy. This means I get to second-guess priests, bishops, cardinals, etc. A flurry of keyboard presses and my anathemas are there for all the world to see. If only bishops would read my blog, take my advice ,and solve all their problems or at least the ones I deign to comment on. Want a comment on Canon 915? I am there for you, after all I read a blog post or two on the subject at one time and I got the Canons on my hard drive – somewhere. Want to know how to deal with wayward Catholic educational institutions? I got opinions galore and they include interdiction. Want to know how to deal with dissident Catholic politicians? Aren’t excommunications pastoral?

Plus I am not alone in my vocation to the e-piscopacy and I am quite annoyed that some other Armchair Bishops don’t always agree with me. Though due to collegiality I don’t always pronounce them as heretics. There seems to be a good amount of vocations to the Armchair Bishophood and in some cases the Armchair Papacy. But I am humble enough to only aspire to the e-piscopacy.

Now what is this blog post about? Well sometimes some people need their egos deflated and unfortunately sometimes that person is me.

I’ve been quite critical about the Archdiocese of Washington in regards to the handling of the Georgetown invitation to Sec. Sebelius. It is quite easy to critique somebody who has the care of souls when you don’t have the same responsibility for those souls. When your only sources of information pass through the media and you don’t know what is going on behind the scenes, it is quite amazing the conclusions you can come to based on such evidence.

I was thinking what really should be done in regards to Georgetown or whatever Catholic-Educational-Institution-Scandal-of-the-Week? Some would just have the Cardinal pull Georgetown’s designation as a Catholic institution. Kind of the nuclear-option in this regard. I can certainly see occasions when this should be done when there is pretty no hope of influencing the school. When they have so departed from Catholic teaching on the whole that they only serve to cause further scandal. I don’t see this as the situation in Georgetown myself and while they are quite maddening as so many schools are, there are still some very Catholic elements and instructors (who haven’t yet packed their bags). Though it kind of reminds me of the conversation between Abraham and God in regards to Sodom and Gomorrah. “Lord what if there is one instructor who still teaches the faith.” Kind of the “Go ahead and Brimstone Boston College, if it wasn’t for Peter Kreeft” argument.

Considering that the President of Georgetown seemed to do this quite deliberately (or at least my Armchair Bishop-senses tell me so), what could the Archdiocese do to get the invite canceled? Is this something that would really rise to the level of excommunication? Excommunication over an invite? Part of me yells “yes, yes, yes.” Of course with an understanding as excommunication used as a medicinal remedy as a call for repentance. In that light possibly. In the Culture of Death we certainly need to pick our fights, not sure if this is the one that should be picked.

Or how about Sec. Sebelius? While her bishop already told her that she should not receive Communion until she repents, isn’t it time to take the next step? I would certainly be inclined to think so since what she has done as in regards to Obamacare and the stripping of the Catholic conscience is quite serious. But on a technical point I do wonder about Catholic Politicians who maintain residence in both D.C. and their home state as to what bishop has jurisdiction? Or do both bishops have jurisdiction in this case. Though it is easier to ponder this than to realize I have jurisdiction in regards to prayer for her.

Maybe I just want the Cardinal to be vocal about this and what an outrage it really is. I don’t think the university is going to change its mind regardless of even such an outcry or the number of people that sign the petition against the invite. Notre Dame’s invite of President Oboma garnered repeated condemnations by their Bishop and a 300,000 plus petition signers. Catholic schools that do such nonsense seem to be immune to outside pressure or at least immune to pressure from faithful Catholics.

Mostly I think it is a case of us having to slowly take back our Catholic institutions and not just write them off. Though often another news story makes me want to type up another flurry of anathemas in frustration. Though like the parable of the barren fig tree, after years of producing no fruit it does come time to cut it down. Being an optimistic-pessimist I hope it is the case that as usual dissenters will die out and be replaced by people who don’t think a Catholic institution is just one that mentions it’s Catholic in its mission statement. That we can see a revival generally as what happened at the Franciscan University of Stuebenville. If note I will simply put my Armchair Bishop mitre back on.

During the past week there has been much in the national and local news regarding the controversial selection of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, to be a featured speaker at an awards ceremony at Georgetown University’s Public Policy Institute. Yesterday, the President of the University, John J. DeGioia, issued a public statement in response to the concerns, objections and even outrage that have been expressed.

The Archdiocese of Washington reserved public comment to permit Georgetown University and its sponsor, the Society of Jesus, the opportunity to address the controversy. While the explanation of how this unfortunate decision was made is appreciated, it does not address the real issue for concern – the selection of a featured speaker whose actions as a public official present the most direct challenge to religious liberty in recent history and the apparent lack of unity with and disregard for the bishops and so many others across the nation who are committed to the defense of freedom of religion.

Contrary to what is indicated in the Georgetown University President’s statement, the fundamental issue with the HHS mandate is not about contraception. As the United States Bishops have repeatedly pointed out, the issue is religious freedom. Secretary Sebelius’ mandate defines religious ministry so narrowly that our Catholic schools and universities, hospitals and social service ministries do not qualify as “religious enough” to be exempt. This redefinition of religion penalizes Catholic organizations because they welcome and serve all people regardless of their faith. Ironically, because of Georgetown’s commitment to open its doors to Catholic and non-Catholic students alike, the university fails to qualify as a religious institution under the HHS mandate.

Given the dramatic impact this mandate will have on Georgetown and all Catholic institutions, it is understandable that Catholics across the country would find shocking the choice of Secretary Sebelius, the architect of the mandate, to receive such special recognition at a Catholic university. It is also understandable that Catholics would view this as a challenge to the bishops.

It is especially distressing to think that the university’s Public Policy Institute would be unaware of this national debate since the mandate was published last August. Such a radical redefining of ministry should prompt Georgetown, as a Catholic and Jesuit university, to do more to challenge the mandate and speak up for freedom of religion.

This is the statement released by the Archdiocese of Washington’s “Office of Media and Public Relations”. This is the usual method the Archdiocese employs when commenting on matters embracing the political sphere. Though in this case I think it would be much more effective that Cardinal Wuerl had issued the statement himself. Bishop Robert C. Morlino of Madison, Wis. had spoken up about this. Though no doubt even a statement from him would fall on the purposely deaf ears of the administration of Georgetown University.

The selection of Secretary Sebelius was intended as an eye-poke to the U.S. Bishops and they knew the response it would engender. I just wish Cardinal Wuerl would take a rubber hammer to the President of Georgetown University.

(Via Cardinal Newman Society), (Statement)

Kathleen Sebelius to Speak at Georgetown Commencement Ceremony

In what can only be interpreted as a direct challenge to America’s Catholic bishops, Georgetown University has announced that “pro->choice” Catholic Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and lead architect of the Obama >administration’s assault on religious freedom through the HHS contraception mandate, has been invited to speak at one of Georgetown’s >several commencement ceremonies. Via Fr. Z

Ho hum. Not exactly surprising and in fact I should have expected exactly such silliness. Considering the recent invite and speech by Sandra Fluke this is just par for the course. Of course it makes perfect sense for a woman barred from receiving Communion (until she hopefully repents) to give a commencement speech at a Jesuit institution. Remember this is the same university that covered the IHS monogram sign for the President when he spoke there.

So I am not exactly outraged? No, saddened by the continue decline of a Catholic university – certainly, but dissent is so boring and predictable.

So will Cardinal Wuerl speak out about this? Unlikely based on his previous silences on scandalous invites in his jurisdiction. No doubt Georgetown would ignore any such criticism by their bishop just as Notre Dame did, but it needs to be said anyway.

In the meantime the Cardinal Newman Society has a petition concerning this http://www.georgetownscandal.com/

I have come to believe that liberals have a a high irony deficiency.  This kind of prove it.

Via Frank Weathers who added the appropriate bolding:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release May 01, 2012
Presidential Proclamation — National Day of Prayer, 2012

NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER, 2012
– – – – – – –
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION

Prayer has always been a part of the American story, and today countless Americans rely on prayer for comfort, direction, and strength, praying not only for themselves, but for their communities, their country, and the world.

On this National Day of Prayer, we give thanks for our democracy that respects the beliefs and protects the religious freedom of all people to pray, worship, or abstain according to the dictates of their conscience. Let us pray for all the citizens of our great Nation, particularly those who are sick, mourning, or without hope, and ask God for the sustenance to meet the challenges we face as a Nation. May we embrace the responsibility we have to each other, and rely on the better angels of our nature in service to one another. Let us be humble in our convictions, and courageous in our virtue. Let us pray for those who are suffering around the world, and let us be open to opportunities to ease that suffering.

Let us also pay tribute to the men and women of our Armed Forces who have answered our country’s call to serve with honor in the pursuit of peace. Our grateful Nation is humbled by the sacrifices made to protect and defend our security and freedom. Let us pray for the continued strength and safety of our service members and their families. While we pause to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice defending liberty, let us remember and lend our voices to the principles for which they fought — unity, human dignity, and the pursuit of justice.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 3, 2012, as a National Day of Prayer. I invite all citizens of our Nation, as their own faith directs them, to join me in giving thanks for the many blessings we enjoy, and I call upon individuals of all faiths to pray for guidance, grace, and protection for our great Nation as we address the challenges of our time.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-sixth.

BARACK OBAMA

Though maybe the worst thing is that the President probably really sees no appropriate parallels with his own actions. How about letting us abstain from being forced to pay for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs? Well two out of three ain’t bad since we are still allowed to pray and worship (for now), just not act on our conscience.

A Catholic priest in Australia has publicly admitted that he has been married for a year and claimed “there are more like me.”

“So I’ve fallen in love and I’ve got married and it’s outside of most people’s awareness, but I’m sure people within the church could have had a suspicion,” Father Kevin Lee told Australia’s 7News, a partner of NBC News.

Lee, a priest for 20 years, told his congregation that he had been living a secret double life with his wife Josephina, breaking the Church’s rule that priests should remain celibate.

He said there were others like him around the world.

“That’s one of the reasons that’s motivated me to make public my admission that I’m one of those people who’s been a pretender: To draw to the attention of the public that there are more like me, in fact most of them,” he said.

Other priests do it so there! What a rich theological explanation.

So brave to when you disagree with a discipline that you just ignore it. Now I have much sympathy for priests that fall, those that fall and deny they fell – not so much.

In an update to its original report, 7News reported that Lee had been removed from his position as parish priest and then excommunicated by the church.

Well media reports of excommunication are usually wrong. No doubt he has had his faculties removed, but I haven’t seen a statement by the bishop on this.

“I think celibacy has to go as a prerequisite for being a minister in the Catholic religion,” he added.

Kind of like a married man after being caught in adultery saying “I think fidelity has to go as a prerequisite for being married in the Catholic religion.”

“That’s one of the reasons that’s motivated me to make public my admission that I’m one of those people who’s been a pretender: To draw to the attention of the public that there are more like me, in fact most of them,” he said.

Most of them? I call bs on that.

[Source]

I doubt Bishop Anthony Fisher, who is a Dominican, bought Father Lee’s defense.

I have received some complaints about allowing a specific atheist commenter free-reign in my comments box.  I can appreciate the concern and the annoyance.  I am rather libertarian as far as my comment boxes go in that as long as people are not especially vulgar I pretty much don’t delete them.   Over the last almost ten years there have been few instances where I have deleted comments.

I have had occasional eruptions of atheist commenters over the years and really I don’t pay them much attention.  It does kind of amaze me that anybody who thinks that this life is all there is is going to spend so much time in my comment section.  Why they want to dialog with insane religious believers is a bit beyond me. Though I also say this being thankful that blogging was not really around when I was an atheist, thus preventing me from leaving rather inane comments on religious blogs.  I certainly disdained religious believers for being so foolish, just not sure I would argue with people who I thought had a belief system similar to belief in Leprechauns.

Though no doubt some people really enjoy such comment box battles.

And not just atheists.

Thomas L. McDonald had an excellent post on the subject of comment box atheist dialogs in which I am pretty much in alignment.  Like him they also bore me.  Not in the “I am so superior to them” boredom, but the “been there, believed that, rejected that” boredom.  When my atheist faith was slipping I tried to renew it reading what I could find on atheism in the library. Unlike those that had their Ayn Rand phase in college, my Ayn Rand phase was in my later 30’s. Though the more I read of atheist arguments to boast my beliefs, the more problematic I started to see them. They implied such a massive stupidity of religious believers that did not match what I observed of believers I respected, but could not join with. Seeing this I also started to see how my own attitudes were equally  if not more arrogant. It’s nice to think of yourself as a “freethinker” or a “bright”, less nice to realize the egoism of it. I had always been proud of my life-long atheism and never having believed in God even as a child.  But I started to find that I was not proud of my pride. Regardless, those years of renewed atheist reading and subsequent decade and a half of seeing the other side has left me rather bored with most atheist comments.

It does not though leave me bored with atheists.  While I don’t really try to engage in comment threads that develop on my blog, I do try to engage in prayer for conversion.  I don’t expect my comment engagement will convert atheists with my “brilliant” arguments even as I know the reason that underlies my faith.  I have a fondness for atheisst that comes from my long years of atheism. Thus I don’t have to impute bad motives to them and I pray that they can receive the same gift of faith that even such as I received.   I do know conversions happen.  They can even happen in comment boxes as evidenced by Jennifer Fulwiler’s conversion story.  That God can even bring good out of comment boxes amazes me.  I remember one early commenter on my blog “The Raving Atheist” who ran a popular atheist site and forum  which later became  the “Raving Theist” and dedicated his site “to Jesus Christ, now and forever.”

For my Catholic commenters who are engaging in conversations regardless how pointless they might seem, I applaud you for your patience.  For those annoyed by the comments I hope you understand my reasons for allowing them and join me in prayer.

There are many that say “Don’t feed the Troll”, now I would say “Pray for the Troll” –except I am not really that fond of the world Troll as it is another word that dehumanizes people so you can ignore them. Sure fervent commenters can be quite annoying, but most of us can be quite annoying and we are called to even love our comment box enemies by willing them good.

Cartoons modified from xkcd: Duty Calls

“This contraception fight in particular was illuminating. It was like being in a time machine,” Obama told the crowd, many of whom had purchased tickets that cost $1,000 to attend. “Republicans in Congress were going so far as to say an employer should be able to have a say in the health care decisions of its female employees. You know, for a party that prides itself on being rabidly anti-regulations of almost any kind, for folks who claim to believe in freedom from government interference and meddling, it doesn’t seem to bother them when it comes to a woman’s health.” [Via Gateway Pundit]

Well let’s get into a time machine Mr. President.

First off we could rock it old school.

Or go all flux capacitor at 88 mph.

Now we can travel back to the founding of our country. A country largely founded to escape religious persecution. The colonists didn’t get it all down as far as religious rights were concerned, but by the founding of this country the understanding of right to freedom of worship had coalesced. It is no coincidence that the first right enumerated was “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”. This means that even if you disagree or think outdated somebodies belief, Congress still can not prohibit the free exercise of religion. It doesn’t matter if you think opposition to contraception, sterilization, and abortion quaint. An actual human right such as free exercise of religion predates any government and does not change just because Tuesday has lapsed unto Wednesday to paraphrase Chesterton.

Mocking Catholics for their opposition to contraception, sterilization, and abortion as if they were some throwback to some phony idea of medieval times is rather a low thing to do.  The violation of human rights is now a talking point on the campaign trail.  Something to be bragged about in front of picked friendly groups.  “I’m responsibly for killing Osama bin Laden and I am laying some kick-ass on Catholic to boot!”  Funny though how careful the administration was with religious sensitivity in burying Osama while going on to have no sensitivity at all to the concerns of faithful Catholics.

Getting back into our time machine of choice we will find that in the history of Christendom that opposition to contraception was universal.  Even the Protestant reformers described it in terms of mutual-masturbation and virtual sodomy. It was the Anglican Lambeth conference in 1930 that first opened up the “morality” of contraception in regard to married couples. Soon pretty much most of Christendom had fallen to this novelty and either the Catholic Church is the most pigheaded of all institutions ever, or she truly is being guided by the Holy Spirit.

Now as we use our time machine to survey the founding of this country I don’t think we have to worry too much about time paradoxes and repercussions of affecting time.  After all what might be the worst that could happen – 60 million unborn children killed, assisted suicide, and the other emanations of the Culture of Death?  Instead of the killing your grandfather paradox we have the kill your own children paradox which is quite a paradoxical thing for a parent to do. Though by redefining the vocabulary you don’t get rid of the paradox, you just make it easier to swallow.

“Republicans in Congress were going so far as to say an employer should be able to have a say in the health care decisions of its female employees.”

No, they were saying employers should have a choice in what kind of health care plan they provide based on their right to freedom of religion. No employer should be forced to abide by somebodies else’s conscience, they should be able to abide by their own. Employees can buy for themselves any kind of health care coverage they want that is not provided. Sure everybody always wants somebody else to pay for something, but that is a preference not a right. An employer not providing healthcare benefits does not prevent the employee doing so. Sure there are costs involved – but really if you need birth control pills you can buy them at target for $9 a month unless you have the shopping sense of Sandra Fluke. There is just no right to employer subsidized healthcare insurance.  Employer subsidized healthcare was originally a perk to attract people – unfortunately it attracted the government.

But I guess listening to the President is illuminating and like being in a time machine harkening back to every government that curtailed religious freedom for their own reasons.