The outrage grows. As well it should. Tens of thousands have signed petitions. That number increases each day.

The furor surrounds Notre Dame’s invitation of President Obama to deliver the commencement address to graduates next Sunday, and the awarding of an honorary Doctor of Laws degree upon him.

For some, their reaction to the invitation is, “What’s the big deal?” But, for others, especially Catholics and practicing Christians, there is outrage because they see it for what it is: a big deal.

After all, Notre Dame is, or is supposed to be, a Christian Catholic institution. Thus, inviting anyone, including an American president, who has stated beliefs and initiated policies that, as the Cardinal Newman Society correctly asserts in an online petition (at www.notredamescandal.com), that “directly contradict fundamental Catholic teachings on life and marriage” and is, in a word, wrong.

Specifically, the outrage flows from President Obama’s stated beliefs and vigorous policy support for revising laws, that “directly contradict fundamental Catholic teachings on life and marriage.” That’s the assertion contained in the online petition posted by the Cardinal Newman Society. That assessment is correct.

But, instead of correcting their mistake, the Notre Dame administration issued a reactive political-like statement intended to spin public perception and quell the growing distaste. University President Rev. John Jenkins discloses what may be his own elitist rationalization: “Obama will be honored as an ‘inspiring leader’ at the commencement. Of course, this does not mean we support all of his positions … The invitation … should not be taken as condoning or endorsing his positions on specific issues regarding the protection of human life, including abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Yet, we see his visit as a basis for further positive engagement.”

Is Jenkins suggesting that the opportunity of having contact that day with President Obama and bestowing an honorary degree on him will have such a “positive” effect upon him that Obama will change political attitude, and rescind his policy-change directives that undermine Christian religious doctrines protecting human life, expanding abortion funding, etc.?

It’s unlikely the Notre Dame president would dare claim that.

Thus, the probability increases that the original invitation and subsequent posturing were not simply mistakes by the “unthinking” Notre Dame administration. Rather, those actions may be, as Notre Dame professor Ralph McInerny stated, a “deliberate thumbing of the collective nose” at the Catholic Church by university elites. Regrettably, that seems to be the case.

What can, and should, be done about it?

While all concerned people should speak out, it is incumbent for all Christian leaders to do so now. But too often, church officials across the denominations do not speak out when they should. In those instances, the absence of leadership casts laity adrift in the sea of social secularism.

Even when church officials do speak publicly on an issue, their message, sometimes, is less than clear and specific. That’s a problem because it confuses their church members, other believers and everyone else. Laity, and the public, deserve better. And, religious doctrine requires it. That’s why effective leadership requires thoughtful, clear and concise communications from every institution within every venue.

In the unfolding Notre Dame situation, Bishop John D’Arcy (Fort Wayne-South Bend diocese) does it right. He started his statement indicating that he “will not attend the commencement ceremony.” That’s clear, and to the point.

Equally clear, specific, and informing to everyone is what Bishop D’Arcy noted next: “President Obama has recently reaffirmed, and has now placed in public policy, his long-stated unwillingness to hold human life as sacred. While claiming to separate politics from science, he (Obama) has in fact separated science from ethics and has brought the American government, for the first time in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent human life.”

The situation surrounding the wrongful invitation to President Obama can still be resolved, either by Notre Dame or Obama.

The president could, indeed should, withdraw. If he does, that would be the act of a political unifier. However, if Obama fails to withdraw, before noon this Saturday, Notre Dame should act to publicly rescind the invite, apologize to faithful Christians everywhere, and publicly request Mary Ann Glendon, professor at Harvard Law School, who had previously withdrawn after Notre Dame officials said she would “balance” Obama’s appearance, to reconsider and be the sole commencement speaker this year.

These actions are some of the essential steps that must be undertaken now by university officials in order to restore traditional Catholic doctrine at Notre Dame.

P. S. There might be one other solution. Here’s the line for delivery by a late night comedian:

“Well, folks, did you hear they resolved the controversy about President Obama speaking at the Notre Dame graduation. They compromised. The president will stay in Washington to shoot hoops. But, the presidential teleprompter will still be setup on stage.”

They say within all humor there is always an element of the truth. Perhaps, at Notre Dame, the teleprompter operator should be invited onstage to read to the graduates. After all, he already knows more than we ever hear.

Richard Olivastro is a professional member of the National Speakers Association, president of Olivastro Communications and founder of Citizens For Change. He can be reached at Rich@Olivastro.NET or 877.RichSpeaks.