Georgetown University invites Kathleen Sebelius to speak at commencement - Page 5

Dirt · #61 May 10, '12, 1:55 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe 5859

If the bishops chose to go that route and start stripping the "Catholic" from every questionable entity that bears the name, I would give them my support. But I really think that should be a last resort. Why should we let the secular culture steal away from us our universities, hospitals, and social service agencies? It's probably a weak analogy, but God did not abandon Israel when they repeatedly turned to other gods. Where would we be if He had? I think the Church has certain obligations towards those ministries She founds. The day may come when we have no choice but to cut our losses, but I don't think we've reached that point just yet. Perhaps I'm being overly idealistic.

I'm just glad I'm not a bishop, so I don't have to make these sorts of difficult decisions between two undesirable choices.

Agreed!

CaptFun · #62 May 10, '12, 6:29 pm

Who's going to throw out the first unborn baby?

bobtater · #63 May 10, '12, 7:37 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JReducation

You can't excommunicate someone unless they commit an excommunicable offense. None of these things are strong enough causes for excommunication. Any bishop who attempts to do so will find the pope unwilling to uphold the excommunication. To excommunicate you have to violate one of the seven laws in Canon Law that carry an excommunication or you have to offend the bishop or the pope directly. These are not offenses against the bishop or the pope. They are certainly inappropriate positions that Catholics should never take, but not enough to put them outside of the institutional Church. We have to be careful not to use excommunication as a punishment. It was never meant to be a punishment. It was always meant to be a medicine for the benefit of the person. According the Catholic theology they have not ceased to be members of the Mystical Body. They are not apostates.

The Church rarely subscribes to public excommunication, because of the glee that it triggers in some people. That does just as much harm to the soul as the actions of these individuals.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Some excommunications, however, are automatic (effective at the moment the act is committed) and without the intervention of the Church. Catholics are automatically excommunicated for committing these offenses: One of the reasons is Heresy: The obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth, which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith. So I submit Brother wouldn't Some of or pro abortion politicians be guilty of the sin of heresy??

Crescentinus · #64 May 10, '12, 10:55 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LisaA

YES! Deacon Burke Sivers is from Portland I believe. I saw him on EWTN and was so impressed!

I think the point is that there are SO MANY wonderful faithful Catholics who could inspire the graduates, why did they pick this horrible woman, particularly at this time of such contention and frankly when she was exposed as a completely ignoramus about the Constitution she swore to uphold. The woman is an embarrassment. She is hardly a good example for the graduates to follow
LIsa

Indeed, he is awesome.
Another suggestion would be Father Robert Barron.

The idiocy of Sebelius makes me sick.

Follower · #65 May 11, '12, 7:36 am

Many have expressed the view that this development is not surprising; that, while disappointing, it's par for the course and it's what we've come to expect from Georgetown. In fact, however, this represents an escalation, and a dramatic one. It constitutes a transition -- a "graduation" if you will -- from merely dissenting from the Church, to participating in actually persecuting the Church. Why? Because Secretary Sebelius's HHS mandate in fact constitutes persecution of those within the Church (admittedly, and sadly, a minority) that actually, and with full conviction of conscience, believe in and adhere to the Church's teachings on abortion, sterilization and contraception, and that choose to live their lives in fidelity and witness thereto. The media has virtually ignored the fact, but there are at least 10 lawsuits (and counting) now pending in federal courts around the country challenging the HHS mandate as a violation of the First Amendment and of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (a federal statute). The plaintiffs in the various lawsuits include Ave Maria University, EWTN, Belmont Abbey College, Priests for Life, and two practicing-Catholic owned businesses (one in Denver and one in St. Louis) -- but also include 8 state attorneys general and at least three evangelical christian colleges (Colorado Christian University, Geneva College and Louisiana College). The publicly available papers filed in those lawsuits are astonishing: the arguments made by the plaintiffs are overwhelmingly supported by detailed factual allegations and citations to binding case law precedent -- while the administration, to date, has not even attempted to defend on the merits but has instead tried to get the suits dismissed or postponed on "ripeness" grounds -- using arguments that have already been resoundingly rejected by the Courts (such as, "we have promised that we might change the rule at some unspecified point in the future, therefore the plaintiff's case can't be heard now" or "this rule doesn't go into effect for another year or more - therefore the plaintiff can't be heard now"). The media is chock full of misinformation about the whole controversy, uncritically repeating as "fact" White House talking points that are, in truth, materially misleading or downright false. Any objective person who reads the attached brief from the Denver case can only come away with the conviction that the HHS mandate is an unconstitutional and illegal persecution of believing, practicing Catholics.

By inviting the public official who issued this very mandate to speak at graduation, a substantial majority of Georgetown's faculty and administration is saying it condones her persecution of practicing Catholics. Thus, Georgetown no longer merely disagrees with practicing Catholics on matters of sexual morality and protection of nascent human life; it now joins in persecuting them by condoning that persecution. This is not old news. This is a new development, and a dramatic one. One can only hope those at Georgetown responsible for inviting Sebelius to speak at graduation were misinformed and that, if presented with the facts, would change course. Is it too late to hope for, to ask, that all those dissenting Georgetown faculty members and administrators to simply take a step back, and say, "Whoa, wait a minute. I'm on board with dissenting, but I'm not on board with persecuting"?

The brief in support of a practicing-Catholic owned business in Colorado's motion for a preliminary injunction against the HHS mandate is attached.

Fact-check the administration's HHS Mandate talking points here:
http://www.becketfund.org/fact-check...e-hhs-mandate/

SusansChoice · #66 May 11, '12, 8:15 am

You may sign the petition to stop this at:

http://www.georgetownscandal.com/

dfp42 · #67 May 11, '12, 10:08 am

When exactly is this taking place?

GraceSofia · #68 May 11, '12, 10:45 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by dfp42

When exactly is this taking place?

Quote:

Kathleen Sebelius
Georgetown Public Policy Institute Tropaia
Friday, May 18, Leavey Center Ballroom, 11 a.m.

Sebelius was sworn in as the 21st secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 2009. Since taking office, 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, including young children, those with disabilities and the elderly. As part of the historic Affordable Care Act, she is implementing reforms she says have ended many of the insurance industry’s most discriminatory practices and will help 34 million uninsured Americans get health coverage. She is also working with doctors, nurses, hospital leaders, employers and patients to implement policies aimed at slowing the growth of health care costs. Sebelius served as governor of Kansas from 2003 until her cabinet appointment and was named one of America’s Top Five Governors by Time magazine.

From http://www.georgetown.edu/news/comme...-speakers.html

LisaA · #69 May 11, '12, 2:12 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GraceSofia

From http://www.georgetown.edu/news/comme...-speakers.html

GOOD HEAVENS! Is that what they call spin? Obamacare is a nightmare. The HHS Mandate is a travesty. Sebelius was a huge proponent of the most horrible form of abortion, killing unborn full term babies before they emerged from the womb. She's suspected in covering up a Planned Parenthood scandal.

I think some people live in alternate universe. The spiel on Sebelius would have done an Orwell novel proud
Lisa

_Abyssinia · #70 May 12, '12, 1:21 am

Why hasn't Cardinal Wuerl denounced Sebelius's invitation?

USSCB said in 2004: 'Catholic Institutions" to not give honors or platforms to 'those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.'

jwinch2 · #71 May 12, '12, 6:09 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Abyssinia

Why hasn't Cardinal Wuerl denounced Sebelius's invitation?

USSCB said in 2004: 'Catholic Institutions" to not give honors or platforms to 'those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.'

If Cardinal Wuerl is not comfortable (his words) preventing a politician who openly supports abortion from receiving Holy Communion, there is no way he is stepping into this one publicly. I suppose it is possible that he is working behind the scenes to get it changed.

gus · #72 May 12, '12, 8:56 am

I wonder what the Cardinal response would have been if they invited Russ Limbaugh. Just a thought

Crescentinus · #73 May 12, '12, 9:41 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by gus

I wonder what the Cardinal response would have been if they invited Russ Limbaugh. Just a thought

I'm guessing outrage. PLENTY of outrage at the mere thought of inviting Rush Limbaugh.

Marauder · #74 May 14, '12, 7:32 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Abyssinia

Why hasn't Cardinal Wuerl denounced Sebelius's invitation?

Actually the Cardinal has indirectly just done that. The Archdiocese newspaper, has just published the following:

Catholic Standard link

Articles in the Catholic Standard are always run through the Cardinal's office before publishing.

Here is a commentary from a priest in the Archdiocese on the Archdiocese's web page. Another location where things wouldn't appear without the Cardinal's backing.

Archdiocese of DC web page

Quote:

Originally Posted by gus

I wonder what the Cardinal response would have been if they invited Russ Limbaugh. Just a thought

Let us support our Bishops instead of armchair quarterbacking them.

jwinch2 · #75 May 14, '12, 8:41 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marauder

Actually the Cardinal has indirectly just done that. The Archdiocese newspaper, has just published the following:

Catholic Standard link

Indirectly, at best. Vetting an article like that through his office is not even remotely the same thing as the Cardinal making a personal statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marauder

Let us support our Bishops instead of armchair quarterbacking them.

You are certainly right in that throwing out hypothetical cases such as 'what would they do if Rush Limbaugh was invited...' is a waste of time. However, this particular Bishop also has a long history of not speaking out regarding Catholic politicians who do not live their faith in the public sector. He has publicly stated that he will not deny Holy Communion to Catholic politicians who persist in open support of abortion via their policies and actions because such confrontation makes him 'uncomfortable'. In his recent address where new Cardinals were created, Pope Benedict reminded us all why Cardinals wear red.

Quote:

...to be witness to the Gospel to the point of sacrificing their own life: this is the meaning of the red color in their clothes.

I will gladly support our Bishops when they do the right thing. I will however, not blindly support them when they do not. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but someone who is not willing to make themselves uncomfortable does not seem to equal what our Holy Father is saying.

Don't get me wrong, Cardinal Wuerl has done many fine things for the Church and the Faith but defense of the Holy Eucharist has been one issue where he has repeatedly let the pitch go by without taking a swing. The current situation at Georgetown does not involve Holy Communion thankfully and I can only hope that in absence of his public statement, he is working behind the scenes to address it.