By Barb Shelly, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
Kathleen Sebelius was raised to be a Catholic and elected to be a governor. A church leader is turning that into an uncomfortable intersection.
Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann is requesting that Sebelius choose between his will and the oath she swore to govern the state of Kansas to the best of her ability.
Put another way, her choice is this: Sign anti-abortion legislation that is an affront to patient privacy, constitutional rights and good government, or cease receiving Communion.
Sebelius’s lot is to govern a state that is home to one of the few physicians who administers late-term abortions. Consequently, Kansas is the base for some of the nation’s most aggressive anti-abortion groups.
Their clout reaches into the statehouse, where lawmakers annually present the governor with measures loaded with obstacles for the state’s abortion providers.
Sebelius, a Democrat who supports abortion rights, has actually made life easier for legislators. Secure in the knowledge that she will veto their bills, lawmakers aren’t required to seriously consider the irresponsibility of their legislation.
In a column published in the archdiocesan newspaper The Leaven, Naumann chastises Sebelius for her recent veto of a bill which legislators titled the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act.
Naumann, of the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas, describes the bill as an attempt to “protect women” considering abortion by making sure they are well-informed about the development of the fetus they are carrying and alternatives to terminating their pregnancy.
But Kansas law already requires physicians to inform patients about those things. The purpose of the legislation Sebelius vetoed wasn’t to reduce the number of abortions in Kansas. The intent was to diminish women’s authority to make medical decisions and ease the way for lawsuits against providers.
The bill would have empowered siblings, parents, grandparents and spouses of pregnant women to seek court orders to stop abortions after the 21st week of pregnancy, and made it easier for county prosecutors to gain access to women’s medical records.
As Sebelius pointed out in her veto message, the bill, “allows a variety of individuals to seek a court order preventing a woman from obtaining an abortion, even where it may be necessary to save her life.
“I am concerned that the bill is likely unconstitutional or even worse, endangers the lives of women,” she wrote.
Her position is logical and responsible, but Naumann is having none of it.
“The governor has spoken to me on more than one occasion about her obligation to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions,” he wrote in his column. “I have asked her to show a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church.”
There’s nothing wrong with public servants using the tenets of their faith to guide their decisions in office. But Naumann is asking Sebelius to place his dictates above the law of the land. That’s a problem.
The archbishop also leaves Sebelius no leeway to follow “divine law” without subscribing to the agendas of Kansas’s radical anti-abortion groups. Her attempts to reduce abortion through measures such as adoption subsidies, better health care for pregnant women and sex education in the schools have left him unimpressed.
Naumann told The Kansas City Star that atonement for Sebelius would involve a confession, an apology and a promise to repair the damage caused by her “scandalous behavior that has misled people into dangerous behavior.” Until then, he has requested that she not receive Communion.
“I pray this pastoral action on my part will help alert other Catholics to the moral gravity of participating in and/or cooperating with the performance of abortions,” he wrote.
Perhaps. But Naumann’s harsh request is more likely to alert the public to an uncompromising stance that forces Catholic politicians to choose between ethical public service and participation in their church.
Barbara Shelly is a member of the editorial board. She can be reached at 816-234-4594 or at .








Delicious
Digg
Archbishop in politics
"I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant, nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source -- where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials -- and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all."
-- John F. Kennedy
Thanks Meadowlark
It's amazing how petty and dishonest the Catholic Church is coming across on this issue. Good recap.
Happy 60th Birthday, today, to Gov. Sebelius!
Does anyone remember Gov. Sebelius' 59th birthday? Do you remember the Planned Parenthood fundraiser in Kansas City last May 15th? http://www.ppkm.org/PDFs/ri_summer_07.pdf
"Friends of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and
Mid-Missouri gathered Tuesday, May 15th for a
truly star-studded affair. “I’ve Got Rhythm, I’ve Got Rights” showcased two champions of our cause, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and PPFA National President, Cecile Richards."
"The protestors didn’t dampen our good time.
We had another reason to celebrate - the Governor’s birthday! Along with her husband and son, Governor Sebelius celebrated her special day with close friend, Marcia Ball."
The Kansas City Catholic blog filed this report:
Gov. Sebelius Arrives to be honored at a Planned Parenthood Gala in KC and is met by pro-life protestors
http://kansascitycatholic.wordpress.com/2007/05/16/governor-sebelius-arrives-to-be-honored-at-a-planned-parenthood-gala-in-kc-and-is-met-by-pro-life-protesters/
And when the National Planned Parenthood President comes to Kansas City, where was one of her first stops? Yes, the Kansas City Star:
From http://www.ppkm.org/PDFs/ri_summer_07.pdf
Rhythm & Rights
11:11 PPFA National President, Cecile
Richards arrives in Kansas City.
2:30 Cecile and I meet with the KC Star
Editorial Board and have the chance to
proactively educate the press.
5:45 KS Governor Kathleen Sebelius
arrives. The Governor, Cecile and
150 patrons mingle in the Blue Room.
Happy Birthday, Kathleen!
The Archbishop of Kansas City in Kansas didn't start rebuke of Sebelius last week, or last year. In March 1992, the late Archbishop Stecker wrote this about State Rep Sebelius:
“The Silent and Suffering Church in Kansas,” The Leaven, March 27, 1992
http://www.kansasmeadowlark.com/Issues/ProAbort/Sebelius/ArchbishopStrecker.htm
"Rep. Kathleen Sebelius of Topeka led the death-march of the unborn to the abortion clinics in the House of Representatives. She was attempting to make the 'death-marches' to the abortion clinics as legal as the death-marches to the gas chambers of the World War II Holocaust."
...
"What assurance have we, their electors, that these same persons will not use this same legislative forum to vote away other human, social and legal rights that are a part of our 'inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'. How soon will these legislators vote a mandatory death sentence for the sick, the aging, the poor in society? How could we Kansans have elected such 'negative to life' persons to such responsible positions in our state government?"
Any why would Archbishop Stecker say this?
Do you remember the highly publicized Laci Peterson case from 2002 when the 8-month pregnant Laci disappeared? Her husband was later convicted of this crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laci_Peterson
In 1989 Kansas had its version of the Laci Peterson case. State Rep Sebelius did all she could to make sure the unborn did not have rights or legal protection in Kansas:
Killing fetus not crime, court rules
http://www.kansasmeadowlark.com/Issues/ProAbort/Sebelius/MomChildMurdered.htm
Why do we call infanticide in Kansas a "choice"?
Absolutely it's political
"It's hard not to see the timing as political."
Particularly when she's on the short list for a VP slot.
Wonder how many death penalty supporters the Archbishop has condemned lately.
Archbishop correct on bill & Communion
Instead of incessantly repeating the ProKanDo abortion lobby spin, try reading the vetoed bill [http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/389.pdf]
The Archbishop is accurate to say the CARA bill would "protect women considering abortion by making sure they are well-informed about the development of the fetus they are carrying and alternatives to terminating their pregnancy."
Allowing the woman to see the fetal ultrasound, to hear the heart tones, to receive a written diagnosis for a late-term pregnancy, and to be given free access to medical care to manage fetal abnormalities are all NEW provisions that would more fully inform the woman.[See bill-- section 4(b) & section 7(a)4,(a)6,(c),(h),(i)]
Kansas law adequately protects doctors who think they need an emergency abortion to save a woman's life. Interestingly, in 10 years of Kansas statistical reporting, NO SUCH abortion has ever been done.
Furthermore, late-term abortions are done over 3 to 4 days, hardly an emergency time-frame. 5000 such late-terms were done in Kansas since 1998.
Progressives would never back a governor who did not always try to limit and stop slavery, relying instead on 'changing hearts and encouraging positive incentives.' Yet that is exactly Sebelius' 'progressive' position on abortion.
Such progressives should be ashamed of themselves and stop trying to shame the Archbishop for defending the Body and Blood of Christ in Communion and guarding the immortal souls of his diocese.
Archbishop Naumann
This isn't the first time he has criticized her publicly. He wrote a similar column in September 2006. It's hard not to see the timing as political.
Thanks for the editorial.
Sebelius' leeway
What nonsense that Sebelius has no leeway. She has at least three options. One she can do what the Archbishop asked her to do multiple both in person and by letter and stop receiving communion. Two she can leave the Catholic Church. Three she can change her stand on abortion.
What should a religious leader do when a member of the congregation blatantly and publicly acts in direct disagreement with a known policy of their religion? Naumann tried very hard to reconcile Sebelius with the church and he did so privately not publicly. Sebelius is the one who challenged the Archbishop not the other way around.
Remember the Archbishop did what he did not just because of her stand on abortion. He had been trying to convince her of her error on that for a long time and did so privately. It took her refusal to follow the Archbishop's direction on receiving communion that was the final straw for the Archbishop. She forced him into a corner. She is the one he gave him no leeway, not the other way around.