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.

The defense of the actions of the LCWR seem to me to have some interesting parallels.  Especially concerning the defense of the good works they do and the heritage of women religious in the United States.

First lets make some distinctions.  While on paper the LCWR represent 80% of women religious in the U.S., this does not mean that the leadership’s views are perfectly attributable to the religious they represent.  I have seen examples in even the most dissenting of orders of sisters and nuns totally orthodox in their faith who have quite a difficult time of it in the climate of their orders.   The points I will be making apply mainly to the leadership of the LCWR and those who follow in their false footsteps.  I also think it is not right for them or others to claim the mantle of all the good that vowed women religious have done historically.  No doubt some of these women would be quite appalled at the actions of the leadership of the LCWR.

One of the talking points that came out of the Protestant “Reformation” was that Catholics believed in salvation by works alone.  There is the famous example of Martin Luther inserting the word “alone” after faith in his translation and taking a dim view of the Book of James when that word combination actually occurs, but is preceded by “Not by”. The Catholic view follows the standard template of “both/and” of works informed by faith.  As St. James puts it “Yea, a man will say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith.”

So in the proper understanding there is no divorce or chasm between faith and works.  Though in practice there can certainly be a chasm between the two.  The practice of good works can be done by those with no faith at all and as an act of love to some extent.  The motives for doing good works can be quite mixed as evidenced by Jesus’s example of the Pharisee’s bragging about their contributions publicly in contrast to the widow’s mite.

The problem with the leadership of the LCWR is that while they can certainly point to good works, what is the faith they point to?  When you have talks about going “beyond Jesus” and have a new age keynote speaker at your conference exactly what faith are they proclaiming?  You can visit the websites of many vowed religious women in the U.S. and look at their “About” page or “Mission Statement” and find no reference to Jesus at all. The Virgin Mary also seems to have gone missing.  In most cases you are more likely to find a link to the United Nations than to the Vatican.  You are also more likely to find out information about Reiki than the Rosary.  It was not glitch they had a new age keynote speaker as new age practices are fairly common, though disguised behind such things as centering prayer and the Enneagram.  A Franciscan convent offers “enlightenment” classes that include Wicca (witchcraft), I Ching (Chinese fortune-telling), and Oriental meditation. The sisters staff “The Christine Center for Meditation,” teaching yoga, astrology, and Tarot card readings.  These may or may not be isolated examples, but they are indicative of what you will find. The masters of the contemplative life such as Doctors of the Church St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila strangely do not have the same presence as regards to classes.

Jesus told the Apostles “He who hears you, hears me” and the leadership of the LCWR seems to be a bit hard-of-hearing.  Repeatedly they have been in opposition to the Vatican, not just on prudential matters, but dogmatic ones. The Resource Center for Religious Institutes, an arm of the LCWR actually helped some Benedictine women set up a non-canonical order outside the Church  and keep all the property.  They actually held a workshop later for helping other orders go non-canonical. Sr. Joan Chittister a past president of the LCWR actually recommends that the LCWR also goes non-canonical to escape Vatican interference.  Really non-Canonical seems to be code words for non-Catholic.  The Gospel has become a limited set of social work and not the Good News of Jesus Christ.  There are many that confused Blessed Mother Teresa as just a prominent social worker or a social or social activist. Yet all that she did flowed out of her love for Jesus and his Church.  That same accusation towards the LCWR leadership seems to me to have more weight.

Blessed Mother Teresa’s love for the poor and work for them also led to many conversions to the faith.  This is not a claim I believe the LCWR can make.  Not only can they not bring others to the faith, the orders they represent are shrinking  giving proof to the adage that dissent is akin to spiritual mules unable to reproduce.  From a pragmatic point of view you could almost just wait for the LCWR to die out rather than having the CDF intervene.  But pragmatic points of view ignore the human person and the good that correction brings to conformity to truth – truth himself Jesus Christ. It is quite easy to take the point of view that really that the actions and policies of the LCWR are indistinguishable from modern-day Anglicanism and really they should just leave and quit the pretense of being Catholic.  That point of view also quits the  pretense of being Catholic.  Though the CDF working with the LCWR is almost a form a ecumenical outreach.

What will come of LCWR under the guidance of the CDF is hard to tell.  There are competing factions within the LCWR and some that will welcome what others call an intrusion.  Jimmy Akin’s interview with Ann Carey is quite interesting considering the research she has done on the LCWR and vowed religious women in the United States.  She also does not predict what is going to happen here.  Taking the pessimistic view is the easy route for me, praying for them, which I must do, comes less easily — as most worthwhile things tend to be.

Notes: Transcript of Jimmy Akin Podcast “Sisters in Crisis” with Ann Carey