Daily Archives: May 1, 2009

Great KofC Site for Catholic Education

Advertisements

Would Obama accept an invitation to Christendom or Steubenville?

Not that they would, but let’s say that Franciscan University of Steubenville or Christendom College or Magdalene College offered an invitation to U.S. President Barack Obama to speak at a graduation or other event.

Would he accept it?

I keep insisting that the focus of the Obama/Notre Dame should be more about ex Corde Ecclesiae than it is about Evangelium Vitae. Most of my interlocutors don’t even seem aware ex Corde Ecclesiae exists, responding with questions like, “What’s your idea of a Catholic university? Bob Jones?”

So, the thought occurs to me: what about the scandal of Obama endorsing Notre Dame (or Georgetown, for that matter?)

Dollars to doughnoughts, we won’t be seeing him speaking at Ave Maria University.

What is *Obama* saying about Catholicism by choosing these two universities?

Is he not endorsing the kind of heterodox Catholicism they teach, in preference over the orthodoxy taught in other schools?

He is saying that, as a non-Christian president of a secular nation, he has no qualms about speaking at *certain* “Catholic” universities, so long as they are sufficiently secularized and cover up any references to Jesus in His August Presence.

A Catholic university should not be proud that it has strayed so far from its faith as to receive the endorsement of a man like Barack Obama, who doesn’t even believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior.

"Catholics" United Supports Notre Dame: Go figure

So, Chris Korzen’s latest venture is www.wesupportnotredame.org
Go figure that he supports a university that promotes dissent against Church teaching, refuses to implement Ex Corde Ecclesiae, and teaches in favor of artificial contraception.

"Catholics United" thinks Our Lord’s name is just a "stage decoration"

“Far-right Catholic groups have become so irrelevant that they’ve reduced themselves to complaining about the stage setting at Obama’s April 14th appearance at Georgetown University. “
So, now Catholics who revere the Holy Name of Our Lord are “far right” according to this “centrist” group of “Catholics” who claim to be not driven by ideology?

Their admiration for the secular, non-Catholic, president of a country founded by Freemasons overrides their respect for the Lord?

And . . .here it is

Vox Nova grasps at straws to join Cardinal Mahony in his “EWTN must be shut down” chorus.

All over a couple snippets of a priest saying that we have to distinguish whether certain practices constitute torture or not, and that, in his opinion, these practices do not constitute torture. He does not deny that torture is wrong; he just (wrongly) asserts that waterboarding does not constitute torture.

The second evidence–also attacking Judie Brown (funny; in today’s readings, I’ve seen several liberal posts make reference specifically to Judie Brown or Fr. Euteneuer, instead of vaguely condemning “pro-lifers”) when she says in an EWTN forum post from last fall that she really isn’t sure about whether torture is intrinsically evil, based upon her reading of the Catechism.

For this, they call for EWTN to be shut down and claim that Judie Brown is in league with the Devil.

The “reasoning” here baffles me. Torture is wrong. Waterboarding is wrong. Judie Brown–who is no fan of John McCain–tells a questioning voter that she doesn’t think that the torture controversy warrants a reason not to vote for McCain (emphasizing that it is her judgement). This priest, Fr. Sirico, and Raymond Arroyo call torture a “prudential judgement.”

For this, they’re screaming that EWTN should be shut down. Look over at National Catholic Reporteror Commonweal, and you’ll see direct attacks on dogmatically defined teachings of the Church, you’ll see columnists who are open heretics like Joan Chittister and Fr. Richard McBrien, and are they screaming for NCR to be shut down?

If these liberal groups who claim to be not liberal want to prove they’re not, they could at least do a better job of supporting those who are actively fighting abortion and contraception.

They protest greatly that they oppose abortion, but they do not offer such insistence about opposing contraception or divorce.

Fantastic Article on the US Government’s involvement in contraception

There are some really cool Catholic e-journals popping up. One such is Public Discourse, and, in this article, Daniel Patrick Moloney shows how entrenched the US government is, regardless of party, in contraception.

He emphasizes how Medicaid is req uired to provide contraception in all states, and how contraception is the most favored Medicaid program. Mary and I keep thinking about challenging that point, arguing, since Medicaid says you can get whatever “family planning” services you want, that Medicaid should pay for us to get NFP counseling and to see an NFP only OB/Gyn. (Also, in SC, at least, you can get Medicaid contraception without qualifying for anyother program. The income limits for getting government-sponsored contraception are *huge*).

One interesting fact he points out, that I never heard before:

4) Parents are prohibited from knowing if their children receive birth control:
because Medicaid extends to children the same right to doctor-patient
confidentiality that adults have, the states cannot protect parents’ rights to
be informed of or involved with the health care decisions of their children.