Crisis of courage or conviction?

Is it fear that motivates people like President Jenkins of Notre Dame when it comes to their attitudes toward Church and state? Someone thinks not -- and suggests that, rather, the problem is something closer to indifference (toward the Magisterium).

Referencing Michael Bradley's article, "Between Magisterium and Magistrate: Notre Dame’s Choice on Marriage’s Meaning" (Public Discourse, October 28, 2014), a reader writes:

This is [what is] at the heart of all of the current tug of wars in the Church, including those involved in and emblematic of the division at the Synod.

Cowardice means abandonment or lack of courage.

But what if the problem is not fear of offending the world, but a vague feeling that the point of contention is not especially significant? That is certainly what is conveyed when, in discussing homosexuality, we think someone is articulating the key point in the marriage debate if they say something akin to, "Gay partnerships can in no way be viewed as equivalent to heterosexual marriage." You don't day!

So when someone writes, "Notre Dame signaled, with this decision, true cowardice," I can't help but think that is not at all what's going on with folks like President Jenkins. They are not operating out of fear, but out of their own convictions. The only fear at play seems to be of straight talk.