For many years Catholic universities and colleges have disgraced themselves by honoring pro-abort speakers. The indispensable Cardinal Newman Society has taken upon itself the onerous task of keeping track of this ongoing betrayal of the Church and their latest report may be read here. A prime example was Obama as commencement speaker at Notre Dame in 2009, a debacle which was covered in full by many posts here at The American Catholic. These affairs have often drawn protests by Catholics who realize that honoring pro-aborts is no part, or rather should be no part, of what it means to be a Catholic institution of higher learning.
Speaker of the House John Boehner, a pro-life stalwart and a Catholic, has been invited to deliver the commencement address at Catholic University of America on May 14. 81 professors at Catholic colleges and universities, organized by some CUA profs, have decided to try a little bit of payback by protesting Boehner speaking at CUA by claiming that Boehner, because he is in favor of budget cuts, is against the poor and therefore in defiance of Church teaching.
This is absolutely hilarious! These are the same people who have absolutely no problem honoring people who celebrate abortion as a constitutional right, but they draw the line at Boehner who thus far has made only a very minor effort to stop the government from spending money that we do not have! This is a common tactic of the Catholic Left: ignore an issue that the Church has spoken with one voice on since the time of Christ, and make a test of faith on purely prudential political decisions where Catholics legitimately may disagree.
Father Robert Sirico, President of the Acton Institute has written a response to the letter of the anti-Boehner academics, which may be read here at the National Catholic Reporter (surprise!), at National Review Online.
The specifics of the 2012 Budget proposed by the Speaker and his colleagues are, the letter’s authors contend, the result of either ignorance or “dissent.” I think they are neither; they simply reflect a different, and in many people’s estimation, more accurate and economically-informed way, of proposing how we achieve worthy goals. Indeed, it could be said that what these Catholic academicians are proposing is not a “preferential option for the poor,” but rather a preferential option for the State. They make the unfortunately common error of assuming that concern for the economically weak and marginalized must somehow translate into (yet another) government program.
That assumption is wrong, and flies in the face of another principle of Catholic social teaching — the principle of subsidarity. With good reason, this is something the Catholic Left — or whatever remains of it these days — rarely mentions or grapples with, because they know that it would raise many questions about the prudence of any number of welfare programs they support.
Indeed, what strikes me about this letter to Speaker Boehner is how reactionary it is. Instead of seeking to contribute to a creative discussion about how we best meet the needs of the poor in a time of economic difficulty, its authors cannot even begin to contemplate that there may be better ways to address such problems than government welfare programs. For a group of people who, I suspect, pride themselves upon having “progressive” views, their attachment to broken models from the past is rather perplexing and frankly, tiring.
Go here to read the rest. The Catholic Left: generally predictable, usually reactionary, almost invariably wrong and frequently a thin wrapper of Catholicism over a Leftist essence.