The letter begins:  “Six years ago, Congress voted overwhelmingly to protect vulnerable communities within our country as well as the integrity of professional sports by stopping the expansion of gambling on the internet.  Unfortunately Congress’ clear intent in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Act of 2006 (UIGEA) is now under assault and we are writing to urge you to work once again to protect those most at risk from the proliferation of illegal internet gambling.”

The letter was signed by American Values, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council Action, WallBuilders, Religious Freedom Coalition, Christian Coalition, Catholic Advocate, Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, Let Freedom Ring, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, 60 Plus Association, and Concerned Women for America. It was sent today to Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Cantor, Senate Republican Leader McConnell, and Senate Republican Whip Kyl.

For more than 50 years, the 1961 Wire Act was interpreted by Justice Departments for both Republican and Democrat Administrations to prohibit gambling over wires, which ultimately came to include the internet. After intense lobbying by states like Illinois that wanted to expand state lotteries to offer online ticket sales, Attorney General Holder issued a surprise new interpretation of the Wire Act on December 23, 2011 that only prohibited sports betting online. Since that decision states have moved to sell lottery tickets online and some are considering proposals to begin offering online casino games.

The letter concludes: “Congress still has an opportunity to act to reassert its authority and re-establish its intent to prevent the proliferation of online gambling in the U.S.  By reinstating the more than 50-year old interpretation of the Wire Act and actually strengthening UIGEA, you can protect our children and families from the erosion of safeguards Congress has previously established.”

Click here for a copy of the letter sent to Speaker Boehner.

Franciscan University might be the first but they will certainly not be the last.

Visit Catholic Advocate’s Action Center and tell Congress to support conscience protections.

Continue to read the full announcement from Franciscan University:

Campus Health Insurance Policy

The Obama Administration has mandated that all health insurance plans must cover “women’s health services” including contraception, sterilization, and abortion-causing medications as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Up to this time, Franciscan University has specifically excluded these services and products from its student health insurance policy, and we will not participate in a plan that requires us to violate the consistent teachings of the Catholic Church on the sacredness of human life.

Additionally, the PPACA increased the mandated maximum coverage amount for student policies to $100,000 for the 2012-13 school year, which would effectively double your premium cost for the policy in fall 2012, with the expectation of further increases in the future.

Due to these changes in regulation by the federal government, beginning with the 2012-13 school year, the University 1) will no longer require that all full-time undergraduate students carry health insurance, 2) will no longer offer a student health insurance plan, and 3) will no longer bill those not covered under a parent/guardian plan or personal plan for student health insurance. The current student health insurance plan will expire on August 15, 2012.

We encourage you to decide how you are going to provide for accidents or illnesses requiring visits to physicians, health clinics, or the hospital emergency room while you are a student here. As always, our Health Center on campus will be staffed by a certified nurse practitioner Monday – Friday during normal business hours. No insurance is necessary to receive basic health-related services at the Health Center, and the visits cost only $5 at the time of service. However, if you are referred off campus for further lab testing, physician specialists, X-rays, etc., you will be responsible to pay for those services.

While Studying Abroad

Those who study for a semester in Austria while students at Franciscan will be covered under a different plan—contact the Study Abroad Director for further information. Students will need to waive this plan to avoid being charged for it automatically.

Athletics

Students who participate in intercollegiate sports will be covered under a different plan during all activities related to that athletic endeavor. This plan does not incur a separate fee of its own; it is covered by the fee charged for participation in intercollegiate sports.

Cardinal Wuerl, our eminent chancellor;

President Garvey, officers of the administration and distinguished faculty; especially rightly radiant class of 2012, with your family and friends, now proud alumni of this venerable and renowned university:

Thanks for your gracious invitation and warm welcome; thanks for the honor you bestow upon me, in company with Father Julian Carrón, Giuseppe Mazzotta, Carmen Ana Casal de Unanue, and Joseph A. Unanue; thanks especially for being true to the noble mission of this great university; and thanks, class of 2012, for the hope and promise you give all of us. Congratulations!

You’re welcome. I was in charge of the weather. This is the first time I have worn red since I was made a cardinal. I forgot my red sash. Luckily Cardinal Wuerl has an extra … well, two extras.

I came to this University the same year Colonel Brooks Tavern opened. I may have spent more time there than Mullen Library.

I do this quite a bit — speaking at commencements. I enjoy it. This spring alone I have or will give three university commencement addresses, two at our high schools, one at an eighth grade occasion, and even an address at Pre-K graduation. Bring ‘em on! I love them!

But this one this morning is especially meaningful for me, as I myself am a proud and grateful alumnus of this institution of highest learning, having left here thirty years ago . . . and just finished paying my tuition . . . sorry to bring that up! . . .; and because I am deeply grateful, as a Catholic, and as an American, for the iconic value of this, The Catholic University of America.

Just six days ago, Pope Benedict XVI, in addressing bishops from Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Wyoming, spoke warmly of Catholic education here in the United States, and of the need of our Catholic colleges and universities “ . . . to reaffirm their distinctive identity in fidelity to their founding ideals and the Church’s mission in service to the Gospel.”

The Holy Father showed a somber realism, though, when he expanded that need to include “ . . . ecclesial communion and solidarity in the Church’s educational apostolate, becoming all the more evident when we consider the confusion created by instances of apparent dissidence between some representatives of Catholic institutions and the Church’s pastoral leadership . . .”

Is not a big part of our gladness and pride this happy morning of graduation a grateful recognition that this university does indeed exude such “ecclesial communion and solidarity?” That this university is both Catholic and American, flowing from the most noble ideals of truth and respect for human dignity that are at the heart of our Church and our country? That a university’s genuine greatness comes not from pursuing what is most chic, recent, or faddish, but what is most timeless, true, good, and beautiful in creation and creatures? That the true goal of a university is to prepare a student not only for a career but for fullness of life here and in eternity?

Some might wonder if Pope Benedict’s description of a university is way too impractical; if a university can be really Catholic and American; if the genuine freedom a university demands can flourish on a campus whose very definition includes a loyalty to Holy Mother Church . . . well, to them I say, as you and I did, “Let them come to Brookland!” This university you can now, with me, call alma mater, at the heart of our nation, is also ex corde ecclesiae, at the heart of the Church. For that I am most proud.

The Holy Father mentions not only truth as being at the core of the mission of a Catholic university, but also love. And so I want to tell you about a wonderful woman named Clara Almazo. Just a little over a month ago, Clara and her little eight year old grandson, Michael, were walking home from Holy Thursday Mass at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Parish on Staten Island. As they crossed the street, a car barreled toward them, with little Michael in the crosshairs. His abuela, Grandma Clara, pushed her grandson away to safety, taking herself the whole force of the car, and was instantly killed.

Clara’s selfless act of heroic love was, as you might imagine, the tearful talk of New York over the Easter weekend. No one failed to note that her life-giving act was made the more poignant as it came on the night before Jesus died, returning from the Mass of the Lord’s Last Supper, when He predicted His own sacrificial death, and where he gave the touching example of selfless service in washing the feet of His apostles.

When I celebrated her funeral on Easter Tuesday, every one of her 13 children and 23 grandchildren were profoundly sad; but not one of them was surprised, for through their sobs, they told me she was a woman of constant, heroic, selfless giving.

Jesus Christ . . . His Church . . . this university . . . Clara Almazo . . . truth . . . love . . . the words of Pope Benedict . . . the achievement and the hopes of the Class of 2012 . . .

Let me try to bring all of these together with the coherence I learned at this University.

Might I suggest these all coalesce in what we call the Law of the Gift.

“Greater love than this no one has, than to give one’s life for one’s friends.” There’s the Law of the Gift as defined by the Son of God Himself.

“It is in giving that we receive, it is in pardoning that we are pardoned, and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.” There’s the Law of the Gift as chanted by St. Francis.

“I know Jesus Christ, who sacrificed His life for others. I understand well the meaning of the cross. I am ready to give up my life for my people.” There’s the Law of the Gift as stated by Shabaz Bhatti, a Catholic who served as federal minister for religious minorities in Pakistan.

“For we are at our best, we are most fully alive and human, when we give away freely and sacrificially our very selves in love for another.” There’s the Law of the Gift as described by Blessed John Paul II.

Not long ago at a dinner I sat next to Admiral Mike Mullen, a Marine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, himself a Catholic, who asked me, “What percent of the American population is Catholic?”

I replied, “I’m not sure exactly but I think about 24%.”

“But do you realize,” he went on, “that 40% of the Marine Corps identify themselves as Catholic?”

I did not realize that, but I was not surprised, nor was Admiral Mullen, for at the heart of the Church’s ethos is the Law of the Gift, and it would be tough to be a Marine — or to be an abuela like Clara Almazo — if you didn’t believe in that.

Or, as the head of the department of pediatric oncology at a leading hospital recently told me, “Cardinal Dolan I’m not even a religious believer, but, when I hire doctors, nurses, attendants, or staff for this grueling work of trying to heal kids with cancer, the applicants who are alumni of Catholic school have a leg up.”

I didn’t know that either, but, I’m hardly surprised, for, while it’s sure not listed in any catalogue, the course on the Law of the Gift is part of the DNA of any Catholic school, this sterling one included.

So, I conclude that all of you, at this university where every classroom features the most effective audio-visual aid of them all, the crucifix; and where the entire campus is overshadowed by the dome of the shrine devoted to the Jewish woman who whispered, “Be it done unto me according to your will, not mine,” that I’m looking out at graduates who have majored in this Law of the Gift.

Now, let’s be clear: I’m hardly claiming that Catholics have sole “bragging rights” on fostering, protecting, and obeying this Law of the Gift. The exaltation of selfless, sacrificial love and service is at the marrow of every religion, and, as a matter of fact,on the ground floor of most purely humanistic values.

However, even our critics admit that a particularly pointed contribution that religion, that the Church, that faith makes to any enduring culture, society, or nation is that it has a honed talent to foster, protect, and obey the Law of the Gift.

Without the Law of the Gift we have no Marines, fewer effective pediatric oncologists, and no Clara Almazos or Shabaz Bhattis. Religion, faith, the Church promote a culture built on the Law of the Gift. Thus, wise people from Alexis de Tocqueville to John Courtney Murray — both of whose work I was forced to read while a student here — have observed that an essential ingredient in American wisdom and the genius of the American republic is the freedom it allows for religion to flourish. Thus would I predict that a challenge you, class of 2012, will inevitably face is the defense of religious freedom as part of both our American and creedal legacy.

Now, one final thing: You all had a head-start in learning the Law of the Gift and the importance of faith to sustain it.

For, see, the Law of the Gift is most poetically exemplified in the lifelong, life-giving, faithful, intimate union of a man and woman in marriage, which then leads to the procreation of new life in babies, so that husband and wife, now father and mother, spend their lives sacrificially loving and giving to those children. That union — that sacred rhythm of man/woman/husband/wife/baby/mother/father — is so essential to the order of the common good that its very definition is ingrained into our interior dictionary, that its protection and flourishing is the aim of enlightened culture.

And your tutelage in the Law of the Gift, class of 2012, was only refined here at this Catholic University, for it began in the most sublime classroom of them all, your home and family, under the most significant of all professors, your mom and dad. Congratulations, parents of our graduates!

That we are at our best when we give ourselves away in love to another — the Law of the Gift — is I’m afraid, “counter-cultural” today, in an era that prefers getting to giving, and entitlement to responsibility; in a society that considers every drive, desire, or urge as a right, and where convenience and privacy can trump even the right to life itself; and in a mindset where freedom is reduced to the liberty to do whatever we want, wherever we want, whenever, however, with whomever we want, rather than the duty to do what we ought . . .well, the Law of the Gift can be as ignored as a yellow traffic light in New York City.

At one of the eighth grade commencements I attended, as referred to earlier, the fourteen year old student speaker called his classmates to pay attention to the words of John F. Kennedy, fifty-two years ago, observing that the temptations he and his classmates were facing now is to ask what your family, your friends, your church, and your country can do for you, rather than what you can do for them.

Not bad advice at all, leading me to conclude that this parish grade school was also granting degrees in the Law of the Gift.

So, I praise God that I look out at graduates in admiration, affection, and appreciation among whom are new Clara Almazos, children of beaming parents, alumni of a university where goodness, truth, and beauty reign and where every student majors in the Law of the Gift.

Congratulations, class of 2012!

Below is the editorial published in the latest issue of the Catholic Standard.

Editorial: “Disappointed But Not Surprised”

Late last Friday, Georgetown University announced that U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius is the featured speaker for an awards ceremony at the University’s Public Policy Institute. This news is a disappointment but not a surprise.

As is well known, Secretary Sebelius is the architect of the “HHS mandate”, now federal law, which requires all employers — including religious institutions — to provide health insurance coverage of abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization and contraceptives for its employees and redefines religious ministry to exclude Catholic social services, hospitals and universities if they serve or employ non-Catholics. Given her position, it is disappointing that she would be the person that Georgetown University would choose to honor.

Founded in 1789 by John Carroll, a Jesuit priest, Georgetown University has, historically speaking, religious roots. So, too, do Harvard, Princeton and Brown. Over time, though, as has happened with these Ivy League institutions, Georgetown has undergone a secularization, due in no small part to the fact that much of its leadership and faculty find their inspiration in sources other than the Gospel and Catholic teaching. Many are quite clear that they reflect the values of the secular culture of our age. Thus the selection of Secretary Sebelius for special recognition, while disappointing, is not surprising.

Blessed John Paul II, in his 1990 apostolic constitution on Catholic Universities, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, invites Catholic universities into a relationship of faith and excellence. He calls them to share in the Church’s task of bringing the Gospel and Christian values into the culture of our day.

He reminds us that a Catholic university is “a living institutional witness to Christ and his message, so vitally important in cultures marked by secularism….Moreover, all the basic academic activities of a Catholic University are connected with and in harmony with the evangelizing mission of the Church,” among them, “dialogue with culture that makes the faith better understood” (ECE I: B.4.49).

One can only wonder how the selection of Secretary Sebelius for such a prominent role as a featured speaker can be reconciled with the stated Catholic mission and identity of Georgetown University. Secretary Sebelius’ vision on what constitutes faith-based institutions presents the most direct challenge to religious freedom in recent history.

On the same weekend that the Georgetown announcement was made, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of the importance of Catholic education and the intellectual and cultural challenges of the New Evangelization in the context of contemporary American society. The Holy Father recalled that during his pastoral visit to America in April 2008, in his homily at the Mass at Nationals Stadium, he called on the Church in America to cultivate “a mindset, an intellectual culture which is genuinely Catholic”. Last weekend he reiterated the need for American Catholic institutions of higher learning to commit to “building a society ever more solidly grounded in an authentic humanism inspired by the Gospel and faithful to the highest values of America’s civic and cultural heritage”.

With all of the people struggling so hard to preserve freedom of religion, and with all that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has said in defense of this important value, Georgetown’s choice of the architect of the radical challenge of such freedom for special recognition can only be seen as a statement of where the university stands – certainly not with the Catholic bishops.

Georgetown University’s response to the commencement speaker decision is disappointing, but not surprising. When the vision guiding university choices does not clearly reflect the light of the Gospel and authentic Catholic teaching, there are, of course, disappointing results.

The love of husband and wife enriches your Church with children, fills the world with a multitude of spiritual fruitfulness and service, and is the sign of the love of your Son, Jesus Christ, for his Church.

The grace of Jesus flowed forth at Cana at the request of the Blessed Mother. May your Son, through the intercession of Mary, pour out upon us a new measure of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit as we join with all people of good will to promote and protect the unique beauty of marriage.

May your Holy Spirit enlighten our society to treasure the heroic love of husband and wife, and guide our leaders to sustain and protect the singular place of mothers and fathers in the lives of their children.

Father, we ask that our prayers be joined to those of the Virgin Mary, that your Word may transform our service so as to safeguard the incomparable splendor of marriage. We ask all these things through Christ our Lord,

Amen.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Published by United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Bishop Cordileone’s statement is below followed by Bishop Burbidge’s:

WASHINGTON—The decision by the voters of North Carolina to define marriage in a constitutional amendment as the union of one man and one woman “affirms the authentic and timeless meaning of marriage,” said Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, California. Bishop Cordileone, chairman of the Subcommittee on the Promotion and Defense of Marriage of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), applauded the May 8 decision with Bishop Michael F. Burbidge of Raleigh and Bishop Peter J. Jugis of Charlotte, North Carolina.

“The success of this amendment demonstrates people’s awareness of the essential role that marriage, as the union of a man and a woman, plays for the common good,” said Bishop Cordileone. “Despite his comments yesterday, I would hope that President Obama would recognize this essential role as well. This is not a partisan issue, but a matter of justice, fairness and equality for the law to uphold every child’s basic right to be welcomed and raised by his or her mother and father together.”

He added, “I extend my gratitude to all of the people in North Carolina who worked tirelessly to make this a reality. The people of North Carolina join millions of other Americans in affirming the importance of marriage in our society.”

North Carolina is the 30th state to pass a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Bishop Burbidge’s statement following the results of the May 8 vote on the Marriage Amendment to the N.C. Constitution:

“I express my sincere gratitude to the people of North Carolina who voted FOR Marriage in the referendum completed today. Passage of the Amendment to the Constitution of our State has now ensured that the definition of marriage, as the faithful and exclusive union of one man and one woman, and one which is open to the gift of children, is in accord with God’s design and in keeping with the very nature of this sacred vocation.

“In moving forward, I ask that you join me in praying that whatever divisions may have occurred during this referendum process may be healed by the grace of God and a mutual renewed commitment by all people of good will, so that we may together build a society reflective of the unity that is ours as members of God’s family.”

During the closing of her weekly press conference she said:

“My religion compels me” to support gay marriage.

Watch the video for yourself:

From the transcript of the press conference:

Q:  Leader Pelosi, many of the people that are opposed to gay marriage cite their religion as the reason why they are opposed.  But you are a Catholic that supports gay marriage.

Leader Pelosi.  Yes.

Q:  Do you believe that religion and the idea that you can support gay marriage should be separated?  And how do you grapple with the idea that you support gay marriage as a Catholic?

Leader Pelosi.  My religion compels me, and I love it for it, to be against discrimination of any kind in our country.  And I consider this a form of discrimination.  I think it is unconstitutional on top of that.  So, I think that yesterday was a great day for America because the President in a very personal, as well as presidential way, made history.  And hopefully, this will bring people together on the issue.  It is a matter of time.  It is all about time.  And on these issues, what is inevitable to some of us is inconceivable to others.  And what we want to do is shorten the difference between the inevitable and the inconceivable.  And I think the President went a long way in doing that yesterday.

But we need to take a step back first to walk through how we got to the vote …

There was are some subtleties many in the media overlooked about President Obama’s May 9, 2012 “personal” “affirmation” for same-sex marriage during his interview with ABC’s Robin Roberts that appeared on “Good Morning America” Thursday, May 10, 2012.

The White House is “spinning” this is a “personal” decision by pointing to the following paragraph:

“…at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married…”

What is being forgotten in all of this “historic” news is that the President has already inserted his “personal” beliefs into the policy debate and therefore they are not just “personal” but rather the position of his administration. He also simply said yesterday that he was affirming that he thinks same-sex couples should be able to get married.

He went on to say in the interview:

“And I continue to believe that this is an issue that is gonna be worked out at the local level, because historically, this has not been a federal issue, what’s recognized as a marriage.”

The signal he is sending here is that the states should decide the definition of marriage.

There are two huge problems with these paragraphs being highlighted for reporters and voters reminiscent of how Obama tried to fool Catholic voters in 2008:

1)  He openly opposed Question 1 in North Carolina from the White House which received the support of over 1.3 million voters on Tuesday, May 8, 2012. Therefore, this is not a “personal” approach to same-sex marriage when you weigh in from the White House on a state vote.

2)  Knowing a handful of states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage, should the Defense of Marriage Act fail in any court it immediately does become a federal issue when all states are forced to recognize the marriages from those states.

President Obama declared on February 23, 2011 that he determined the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be unconstitutional and that the Department of Justice would no longer defend the law. DOMA was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress (80% combined) and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996.

DOMA defines the words marriage, spouse, husband, and wife wherever they appear in the U.S. Code as referring only to the union of a man or a woman. It also defends the right of each state not to be forced to accept the redefinition of marriage in a handful of other states as a result of state court decisions or laws.

When the Obama Justice Department abandoned DOMA, as a co-equal branch of our government, the House of Representatives began defending DOMA in the courts through an appointed counsel, Paul Clement.

This now brings us back to the President’s May 9^th affirmation of his belief in same-sex marriage.

At 11:30 p.m., just hours after the President’s announcement in the Oval Office, Rep. Tim Huelskamp offered an amendment to the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations bill for FY2013 that would prohibit the Department of Justice from using funds opposing the Defense of Marriage Act. The amendment seeks to ensure that DOJ will not begin litigating against DOMA in the future. This amendment passed by a vote of 245 to 171. 16 Democrats joined 229 Republicans in supporting the amendment. 15 members did not vote.

The President may try to say this is not a federal issue but the actions he has directed his administration to take in the courts are in fact a federal approach to make same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states.

Visit the Catholic Advocate Scorecard

Click here to see how your Representative voted on the Huelskamp amendment [Vote#10 in the scorecard].

Catholic Members of Congress Vote Summary:

• 60 Catholic Republicans were joined by 4 Catholic Democrats supporting the Defense of Marriage Act.
• 57 Catholic Democrats were joined by 2 Catholic Republicans opposing the Defense of Marriage Act.

“President Obama’s comments today in support of the redefinition of marriage are deeply saddening. As I stated in my public letter to the President on September 20, 2011, the Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by the President and the Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. However, we cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society. The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better. Unfortunately, President Obama’s words today are not surprising since they follow upon various actions already taken by his Administration that erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage. I pray for the President every day, and will continue to pray that he and his Administration act justly to uphold and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. May we all work to promote and protect marriage and by so doing serve the true good of all persons.”

Issued May 9, 2012.

“Once again, the President is spending time advancing an anti-Catholic agenda. Marriage was created long before any government came into existence. It is a settled issue in the eyes of the Catholic Church and should not be redefined.

“First, the Obama administration takes away grant money helping victims of sex-trafficking over the Church refusing to refer the victims for abortions. Then the Obama administration violates our religious liberties by forcing Catholic institutions to pay for contraception, abortifacients, and sterilization as the President’s health care law is being implemented. And now, should his advocacy for same-sex marriage succeed, Catholic institutions could be forced once again to violate our beliefs.

“Many faithful Catholics were fooled by clever political rhetoric in 2008. This year, the anti-Catholic record of the Obama administration should inform their vote.”