And if I go before ye, play this at my funeral...and remember all those who made a difference

This is from a 1997 tour of Ireland of the Notre Dame Folk Choir and it was their last song of the tour. I'm not a grad but I've always admired the student's and their dedication to the liturgy. You can see the realization from some of the seniors that it's all over--they won't be singing together after this moment. Look at the faces of these young lads and see the exchanges of hugs and the hand holding and the tears shed. This is a Campus Minister's dream to forge such a bond.

In many ways they bring me back to my own college days at Fordham when I was part of the Emmaus Retreat Team with their campus ministry. I'm beginning to put together retreat teams in Buffalo and I hope I can create a similar bond like the one that was created amongst my classmates. I can remember after leading a year's worth of retreats (6 in total), that our student team members travelled up to our retreat house for one final evening together. We held hands as we prayed and sang and laughed and remembered a great year, a year that would not have been the same without the experience of being "on the road to Emmaus."

While the miles separate me from many of those people, I'm in touch with almost all of them to this day. They clearly made a difference in my life as a Catholic, as a minister today and as someone who hopes to make a difference in the lives of others. I've been a retreat director for years and have had strong bonds with many of the team members but none could ever equal the kind of bond that we had that wonderful Senior Year of college at Fordham. It's hard to equal the kind of bond we had living in close proximity and then sharing on such a deep level with one another.

Have you had a group like that in your life? A grouo that was so tightly connected that you almost couldn't think of doing something without calling at least one of them and even today when you get back together with them, it is like the hours were few since you last got together. Who are those people in your life that touched you so deeply and brought you to that place where you realized that not only were you there with one another but you were there with Christ?

"Cautiously Optimistic"

After seeing what the fallout has been regarding President Obama's speech I've seen several people who would never think about being supportive of the President speaking at a Catholic school now saying that they are "cautiously optimistic" about the possibility of Catholics working alongside him to limit abortions. I find this to be sound discernment and even mature. Let's face facts, we really don't have much history of any President really helping us change the minds of women--even though some have worked on the legislative element of this issue. President Obama's overture seems to be breaking new ground--and that, as Catholics, should give us hope.

Thoughts?

Vatican Paper: Obama invites us to work in common effort

David Gibson quotes L'Osservatore Romano today:

The newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, said the president also confirmed that pushing for a more liberal abortion law would not be a priority of his administration. The comments came in a L'Osservatore report May 18, the day after Obama spoke at the university in Indiana.

"The search for a common ground: This seems to be the path chosen by the president of the United States, Barack Obama, in facing the delicate question of abortion," the newspaper said.

It said Obama had set aside the "strident tone" of the 2008 political campaign on the abortion issue.

"Yesterday Obama confirmed what he expressed at his 100-day press conference at the White House, when he said that enacting a new law on abortion was not a priority of his administration," it said.

The newspaper, which was reporting on the Notre Dame commencement for the first time, acknowledged the controversy caused by the president's appearance at what it called "the most prestigious Catholic university in the United States."

"Yesterday, too, as could have been predicted, there were protests. But from the podium set up in the basketball arena, the president invited Americans of every faith and ideological conviction to 'work in common effort' to reduce the number of abortions," it said.

I guess the Pope's paper is run by a bunch of heretics too? Would anyone dare to say that they are a bunch of people who are "killing our children?"

More moderate voices are arising. Thank God for that. After all, if President Obama is suggesting that we stop women from aborting by offering them viable alternatives than I think it's time we took him up on the help he's offered--as opposed to stating that he's trying to hoodwink us.

President Obama's Big Speech

One word: WOW! Even some very staunch pro-lifers who disagreed with President Obama's speaking at Notre Dame had to admit that he made a great speech today. Even engaging the abortion issue directly in it and Catholicism's influence on his own life. You can see that portion of the speech below as describing it or even quoting it does not capture its power.



Some thoughts: I agree totally with President Obama's words here about working for common ground with those who disagree with us. I would also say we have but no other choice but to do this as there is a diversity of opinion out there on many issues, not merely abortion. A colleague and I were speaking after mass today and I thought he made a good point about reducing these arguments to mere opinion. That somewhere there is a need for us to identify where we are being led by what we believe is truth. Some will say that all truth is subjective --that things differ in essence based on their context. I would say that we can cite several examples where that is most certain--but also we can cite at least a few where it is far from the truth as well. Therein lies the difficulty in working on issues of life with people who hold differing ideas about truth's objectivity.

So where does that leave us? I think President Obama's words about doubt and about certitude ring somewhat true here. While I know that I truly believe in many of my convictions, I also know that I have been humbled by thoughts and ideas where I was clearly mistaken. In the moments where I believe my more rooted convictions have held and led by the teachings of my church where I have found the fullness of truth residing, I've also found another principle at work. That principle is humbleness.

Truth doesn't need ME. Truth will be revealed despite whether I defend it or not. Truth comes to all people, albeit more slowly to some, and often slower to me and God's mysterious revelations remind us that we are not God. That we do not know everything. As Merton famously said: "The fact that I believe I am doing your will does not mean I actually am doing it."

However, people of good will can take some comfort in the mystery, in the knowing of our own imperfect knowledge, in the knowing that we are not God by following more of Merton's famous words.

"I believe that the desire to please you (God), does in fact, please you."

Today I pray that we all, despite the courage we all have in following our convictions in the desire to please our God, may be able to more graciously listen to one another in humbleness, express ourselves in charity and forgive one another with love.

As the graduates of Notre Dame head into the big bad world, may they know of my prayers for their lives as young adults and beyond. And as the President heads home after inspiring all of us with his words may he find peace and continue to have the desire to please God--and may that lead him to see all human life as sacred. Amen.

All eyes on South Bend

Today's the day. Notre Dame's commencement ceremony in which President Obama will give the address and receive an honorary doctorate of Laws. Devout Catholics of all different persuasions are split on this item. Some, like myself, believe that President Obama should be allowed to speak at Notre Dame despite his pro choice viewpoints. Others think he should be shown the door. Still others have no problem with him speaking but detest that he's getting an honorary degree.

The sideshow is sure to be in full effect as the nutty end of the pro-life faction is sure to be out in full force. They unfortunately always steal the show from those who do the real work of the pro-life cause and who do it quietly and still effectively.

Regardless some thoughts:

I always respected the fact that Catholics--and most especially, the Bishops, would target issues they abhor over individuals. We always seemed to welcome conversation even with those who disagree with us. Bill McGarvey did a good job of pointing that out in his column on BustedHalo recently.

The controversy surrounding Obama at Notre Dame that rages on among Catholics has made that point painfully clear. Admittedly, as a Georgetown graduate, my first thought was, “If Notre Dame is no longer sufficiently Catholic to do this, what institution is?” Initially, those who made the distinction between inviting the pro-choice President to speak and giving him an honorary degree seemed like a good compromise, until I discovered that in 2007 Pope Benedict himself honored the twice-divorced, pro-choice French President Nicholas Sarkozy by bestowing the title of honorary canon of the Basilica of St. John Lateran. Even pro-choice Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico was honored by the Pope in Rome this past April on the occasion of his state abolishing the death penalty.

Are we now more Catholic than the pope? Are we incapable of sharing a stage with those we are in disagreement with? Have we grown — as the former New York State Capital Defender Kevin Doyle has said — too comfortable in our bunkers?

Indeed, my esteemed colleague makes a valid point here. If President Obama shouldn't be invited to speak at Notre Dame, and Catholics should not hear a message given by him then what else should we ignore? Should Catholics also stop reading newspapers that print President Obama's words in them? Should they also pass on listening to the state of the union address? How about even turning a blind eye to Supreme Court decisions since they have upheld Roe v Wade for the past 35 or so years?

This sounds a whole lot like book burning to me--and that my friends is a very dangerous precedent.

What may have been a good option for Notre Dame is something that nobody has even come close to suggesting yet...prayer.
Sure, some of the protesters have gathered for prayer services for the unborn but they have served more as protests than as anything that would move people into transcendence. Has anyone even thought of asking President Obama to come and pray with them? It would do him good to hear their prayers and to ask for him to offer some of his own. It would place us together in a place where we all admit that we struggle to hear God's voice but try our best anyway.

Let me be clear: Abortion is an abomination and I have always detested it. I remember having a long-winded argument with a news director in radio about the issue and grew increasing more frustrated at her lack of charity for my view and for her seemingly inane argument that "Women should have the right to abortion because if they don't it's the children in the end that end up getting hurt by a life in the system."

So her argument was essentially "Let's kill the babies so they don't get hurt."

Sigh. Arguments from the opposing side are just as tedious. Calling people baby-killers is a sure-fire way to get them to ignore you. It's a threat essentially that says "If you kill your baby, bad things are going to happen to you." While psychologically and spiritually that may be true, it still doesn't mention anything about the baby nor the mother being valuable to our community. I don't ever hear people screaming "I love you and your baby" from an abortion protest line. I almost never see mothers with their babies in their arms on those lines either. Perhaps they might have a lot of silent persuasion by their simple presence. Moreover, people who support women in unwanted or unexpected pregnancies often do this anonymously and even worse--the media almost never covers these stories--focusing on the less lucid protests that often end or even start with violence.

Tomorrow I plan to watch the Notre Dame commencement to listen to what the President has to say and to what Judge Noonan also says--but I also plan to pray. I pray for the safety of our President, for the students who are graduating, for Fr Jenkins and for cooler heads to prevail. Of course I also pray for those who die in abortion and for the women who feel they have only abortion as a recourse. Know that the church offers you refuge and that we will always support you and help you serve your child and keep you safe.

Perhaps if President Obama could see those kinds of prayers in action more often, we wouldn't be spending our time arguing whether he should be on the podium tomorrow.

Glendon's Failed "Hail Mary"

Amen, amen I say to Daniele Crittenden

Many conservatives -- especially those at National Review Online's "The Corner" -- are praising Glendon for her "leadership." This isn't leadership but the opposite: it's burying one's head in the sand. Here we have yet another example of religious conservatives opting out of engagement with the larger political culture, even that within their own church.

Even if you view President Obama's stance on abortion -- which this is about -- as wrong, or even appalling, wouldn't you want to take this opportunity to address the president directly -- or as the old saying goes, "Speak truth to power?"

Notre Dame has not, after all, invited the head of Planned Parenthood, or a doctor who performs abortions, or even a pro-abortion activist, which the language of Glendon's letter suggests.

Rather it has invited the president. Of the United States. For whom many Catholics and non-Catholics alike voted. Glendon's words suggest that Obama may be president but he is not HER President, or the Catholics' president -- a highly divisive and anti-democratic sentiment.

Glendon should have accepted the award graciously, and seized this rare chance to articulate her principles directly to Obama. As the university rightly points out: it is a "good thing" to advance your causes with political leaders.

And it's exactly the point I've made all along. I have the greatest respect for Ms. Glendon and for her principles, I wish she'd just take the time to share them with a President and inspire graduates as they leave the biggest Catholic University in the country.

I get Glendon's point that she believe the University's invitation is a slap to the Bishops (I would argue that allowing him to speak is not, but perhaps the honorary degree may be), but it's happening anyway. There are so many people who have dismissed the Catholic voice in our country and I fear that she's just made it easier for them to do so.

Podcast: Hayes Delivers ND Commencement Speech and More

On this week's Busted Halo Cast...

We answer a question about the Eucharist and Episcopalians.

And then I decided that if Mary Ann Glendon wasn't going to speak, perhaps I'd take a crack at it, going one step beyond Fr Jim Martin's article earlier this week.

The popup box will launch when you click the link here

Breaking: Pinch-hitting for Glendon...

Short story is that no award will be given, a former winner to give the speech.

From ND's PR plant

Judge John T. Noonan Jr., the 1984 recipient of the Laetare Medal, has accepted an invitation to deliver an address in the spirit of the award at Notre Dame’s 164th University Commencement Ceremony on May 17. His speech will be in lieu of awarding the medal this year.

“In thinking about who could bring a compelling voice, a passion for dialogue, great intellectual stature, and a deep commitment to Catholic values to the speaking role of the Laetare Medalist – especially in these unusual circumstances – it quickly became clear that an ideal choice is Judge Noonan,” said Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., president of Notre Dame. “This commencement ceremony, more than anything else, is a celebration of our students and their families. Judge Noonan will join with President Obama and other speakers in that celebration, sending them from our campus and into the world with sound advice and affirmation.

“Since Judge Noonan is a previous winner of the Laetare Medal, we have decided, upon reflection, to not award the medal this year.”

Read more on Noonan here

Fr James Martin, S.J. as Possible Replacement for Mary Ann Glendon?

Well, not really...but...

Fr James Martin, S.J. has created a masterpiece here with his open letter to Notre Dame's President. He has his tongue planted firmly in his cheek..well..sorta.

Now that Mary Ann Glendon has announced that she would not accept Notre Dame’s prestigious Laetare Medal, because she was “dismayed” by the university’s awarding of an honorary degree to President Obama, the search is undoubtedly on for another recipient. Let me suggest one candidate you may have otherwise overlooked: me.

Now, I know many more notable and famous and accomplished and, well, deserving names may spring to mind. Names that would probably draw more of a crowd, names of people with a lifetime of service behind them, or names that would probably pose fewer problems in terms of Catholic orthodoxy. Say, Pope Benedict XVI. (Though draping a medal on top of his papal pectoral cross seems a little like overkill.) Or, say, Susan Boyle, that awesome YouTube singer, who is not only super-Catholic but would be a huge hit when she belted out the Notre Dame fight song. Or Mother Teresa, who everybody likes, though being dead might be a strike against her if a speech is expected.

Anyway, I think there are plenty of good reasons to offer me the now in-play Laetare Award. Let me list just a few.

1.) I don’t have one.
As it turns out, I've only received a few real “awards,” like one from Plymouth-Whitemarsh Senior High School, and a Christopher Award, which is really nice, and just last week an award with the longest name yet: “The Loyola Institute of Spirituality’s Hearts on Fire Writer’s Award in Spirituality,” and, let me tell you, that’s a lot of words to fit on a chunk of crystal: it must weigh five pounds. I could kill someone with that award. (But I won't of course: I'm pro-life.) But the last time I checked I didn’t have a Laetare Award. I’ll bet it’s nice, too. Is it a real medal? With a ribbon? Cool. I could wear it over my vestments at Mass. In fact, I would be so happy to have that sitting on my shelf that…

Read the rest for more--hysterical.

Upcoming--my own Laetare Medal speech...putting the finishing touches on this one and will you tube it.

Clarifying to Be Clear on Glendon

I also added this on Facebook. I wanted to make sure I was clear on what my opinion of Glendon's decision is and am not accusing her of being a bad Catholic, an idiot, or someone who has no principles.

Glendon is of course standing up for Catholic principles with her silence but I think it would be a BETTER option to actually speak as opposed to not speak and that her decison not to speak is based more on what she's comfortable doing politically than it has to do with making a statement of pro-life. Now that last part may indeed be conjecture on my part but I think that most people would really like to hear what she has to say--and to not say anything is a lot easier than to stand up there and disagree publicly with the leader of the free world in front of a whole lot of people.

I also wasn't suggesting that HER stand had anything to do with "calling people names" but in the argument to restrict President Obama from speaking there has indeed been a lot of name calling. Fortunately Glendon has taken the high road here and that is something many of us can learn from.

Additionally, I'd like to say that we need to do both--talk loudly and work for a change in grassroots ways like working with young mothers, which I do on occasion. But for many it's all about changing the law--which I'd like to do too...but even if we do, it merely changes the law from a federal to a state issue. An important step undoubtedly, but one that still needs us to counter what remains and to be used to doing that.

As I've repeatedly said on the blog--and Bishop Chaput says similar things--if we all really cared this wouldn't be an issue because we'd spend every last moment working to end it. But most people don't--some only yell at politicians to the point that they stop listening (which does us no good) and some only work in the grassroots.
Most, I might add--do nothing at all.

Gaurev, I think where we agree strongly is that we both think something needs to be done to end this terrible murder. How we go about that might look a bit different.

Members of Communion and Liberation weigh in on Notre Dame and President Obama

Gaurav Shroff a seminarian from the Atlanta Archdiocese and I have been having a great conversation on Facebook and he smartly pointed me to this outstanding article from Communion and Liberation:

Two snippets I'll highlight but it is a very moving article and you should read the whole thing here

The University of Notre Dame has been reprimanded by many for what seems to be a myopic decision to invite president Barack Obama—44th president and often staunchly opposed to the Church’s political positions—to give the commencement address at graduation and receive an honorary degree. The invitation has sparked outrage from many students and alumni, the former writing a petition protesting the president’s visit, and the latter withholding donations from the school. None of this, however, seems to me to be the fundamental problem, and I doubt whether these ancillary issues can be viewed correctly until the essential problem is addressed. This essential problem is that Christianity, to many people—including Christians—is nothing more than a moralistic, political ideology.

I haven’t mentioned much about Obama, because I think the issue his visit to Notre Dame has raised is ultimately: “What is Christianity? What about it is so worth defending?” This question remains unanswered unless we arrive to a true recognition of Christ, on the cross, giving us everything. In a sense, this is all that is asked of us. What upset me so much about the whole issue is how devoid of a recognition Christ’s presence the whole of popular reaction has been. If the essence of Christianity is power, as it is being portrayed both by the media and by those utterly outraged at the invitation, then I am not interested in being a Christian. I am interested in what made Zaccheus a protagonist; I am interested in the man who is able to call me down from the tree.

Facebook comments on Mary Ann Glendon

We've been burning up the Facebook comments today. So I thought I'd share some thoughts on the reactions that folks had to my posts on Mary Ann Glendon:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Snatchko at 11:29am April 27
You can see the sadness in her letter. It's unfortunate that it came to this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Hayes at 11:38am April 27
True. But it's a dumb decision I think
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Huesing at 11:41am April 27
Mary Ann Glendon is many things, but dumb she is not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gaurav Shroff at 1:13pm April 27
She rocks. Good for her! And dumb she is not. Nor is this decision dumb. And yes it is profoundly sad as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer D'Amico Frankenbach at 2:27pm April 27
Why is it dumb Mike? She's standing up for her convictions which, as we all know, is not easy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Schweiger at 3:19pm April 27
Did the same folk who oppose Obama speaking at ND oppose Sec. Rice speaking at Boston College? Or is torture a lesser evil than abortion these days? I think this whole boycotting of speakers is deeply unhelpful. Makes the church look like just another political group, no more special or worth listening to than any other special interest.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike Hayes at 5:23pm April 27
If she really wanted to stand up for her convictions she'd challenge the President on his viewpoints and would tell the story of why she is so convicted. That would change the lives and probably the opinions of lots of people.

BTW--I didn't say that Glendon was dumb--that's putting words in my mouth at best and a lame attempt to paint me with a broad stroke at worst.

But her decision is downright awful. She takes herself out of the game here. Hundreds if not thousands of people have no idea who she is nor what she stands for. She had a captive audience waiting for her and it probably would have received a lot of press coverage. but she stood down because the view from the cheap seats is a lot more comfortable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Hayes at 5:25pm April 27
BTW--I am 100% against abortion. But I don't think that anyone is ever going to change their opinion on the matter because we start calling people names, outsiding them from conversations or creating ghettos that silence debate.

Lastly, if we really cared, we wouldn't care who was speaking anywhere. We'd all be too busy trying to help mothers choose an alternative.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and for keeping the comments as always, charitable.

Notre Dame responds to Glendon rejection

With a big hat tip to American Papist

Statement by Father John Jenkins on the Laetare Medal

The following statement from Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., president of the University of Notre Dame, is in response to the decision by Mary Ann Glendon to decline acceptance of the University’s Laetare Medal:

“We are, of course, disappointed that Professor Glendon has made this decision. It is our intention to award the Laetare Medal to another deserving recipient, and we will make that announcement as soon as possible.” (University of Notre Dame Office of News & Information)

Pssst...Archbishop Sheehan and Bill Richardson...show the world that Catholics can indeed work with Pro-choice politicians.

As the Papist rightly mentions, I would like to see the Preisdent engage Ms. Glendon in some kind of dialogue.

Mary Ann Glendon declines Latare Medal from Notre Dame

The circus continues at Notre Dame--hat tips to Deacon Greg, Rocco, Amy Welborn and First Things who all got the early word on this.

Former Vatican Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon has declined receiving the Laetare Medal from Notre Dame in light of the hoopla surrounding President Obama's commencement speech. A snippet alongside some commentary from yours truly.

A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.

Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.

OK two things here:

If you think it's not the right venue than let's get the right one and have her come and let her voice the church's cause so that the President and everyone else for that matter will hear it.

Secondly, I disagree that it's not the right venue. After 4 years, graduation is not merely about celebrating an achievement of making it through the tough grind but it's also about inspiring students to stand up for justice, for their moral principles, for engaging the world's problems. They are heading into a world where many of them will be doing exactly that. Commencement speeches should have in their tone a sense of "as you leave here...keep this in mind. Don't forget about the unborn, the poor, the world beyond not just this school but this country."

I think that it a shame that Ms. Glendon will not be gracing the students at Notre Dame with her remarks. I do wonder if there is some way to salvage this. The groundswell has started and it seems to me that at this point Notre Dame is facing a public relations disaster. I would offer the following solution:

Give the Laetare medal to New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Archbishop of Santa Fe Michael Sheehan who just ended the death penalty in their state. The topic we can ask them to address is: How can we dialogue together, despite our disagreements in order to influence each other to create change.

Because that's what everyone is missing here.

Fr. Jenkins trip to DC to visit Obama?

Yesterday some reports spun around the net regarding Notre Dame's President Fr. Jenkins taking a trip to Washington, DC on the Notre Dame Charter.

OK, as an aside I find it hysterical that Notre Dame has their own plane.

Many sources assumed that Fr. Jenkins was there to meet with President Obama.

American Papist reports that this is not the case, or at least not the initial purpose of his visit to our nation's capitol.

Now an informed source tells me that Fr. Jenkins is in town for a multi-day seminar/symposium for high level Notre Dame donors, which has been planned for some time now and involves several speakers and events. Because the activities are private, they were not "advertised" to the wider public.

Of course, just because Fr. Jenkins has good reason to be in DC besides meeting with Obama, doesn't mean he might not have attempted to meet with him while he was in town. I'm trying to track down that possibility next.

Indeed a good journalistic point. Even if he does meet with him, so what? What does that mean? Is he recinding the offer? Giving him dos and don'ts for the speech? Providing him with the secret recipe for making the perfect Notre Dame shamrock waffle? Hoping to make Bo the new Notre Dame mascot? (Fighting Portugese Water Dogs doesn't really roll off the tongue though!) Or is the first step in Notre Dame's attempt to take over the world?

Maybe he's also got ideas on who that Vatican Ambassador should be?

As shrewd as snakes and innocent as doves...

Some Great Expectations from Fr Brian Cavanaugh, TOR at the Franciscan University of Stubenville regarding Catholic participating in the political process.

This means that Catholic leaders in today's society must properly equip themselves to learn all the necessary skills to be competent in the arena of public affairs, i.e., rhetoric, debate, economics, civility and law, to name just a few. As well, they are to be enlightened through the teachings of Christian doctrine and faith. Simply put, Catholic leaders are to become competent and capable with all the tools necessary to perform their tasks in a qualified manner.

Jesus, likewise, prepares his disciples for the trials of ministry when he tells them, "I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves" ( Matthew 10:16 [NIV])[10].

You've got to admire that advice. To "be as shrewd as" means you need to recognize all the skills and the wiles involved in the public arena; yet, enlightened with faith and Christian doctrine, you need to remain civil and calm in the discourse of public affairs.

Thank you, Father! Most especially for that last line. That's just a snippet of his long article complete with a lot of references. Check it out when you have the chance here

Obama and Notre Dame Insanity Continues

The lack of journalistic integrity in headlines at the Cardinal Newman Society is astounding. Their headline reads:

Notre Dame President refuses dialogue with students on Obama invitation.

But a quick perusal of their own stupid press release shows that this is hardly true.

The leaders of ND Response, a broad coalition of Notre Dame student groups founded to express the “deepest opposition” to the invitation to President Obama to speak at commencement, informed The Cardinal Newman Society that they wrote a letter to Father Jenkins confirming their interest in discussing concerns with him. The students expressed hesitancy at accepting the limited closed-door meeting which was at first suggested by Father Jenkins. They instead proposed to allow all student members of ND Response to attend.

Perhaps the headline should be:

Pro-lifers blow chance to influence University President because of their own arrogance. Although admittedly that's a bit long--albeit more accurate.

It's a simple algorithm. When people have disagreements they argue (in the best sense of that word) together about it. They do so with charity and civility.

The unborn are not being served by the arrogance of people who would rather host a side-show in which they can gang up on a University President, than to have an actual civil discussion of the issues.

Here's the main story: If these people can't even get a meeting with Notre Dame's President because he views them as either extremists, or at minimum uncharitable and unable to have a half-way decent discussion, then what shot do they have in gaining the ear of the President of the United States or for that matter, with anyone who disagrees with them?

My second point on this:
Would they be making similar objections to a pro-choice republican? Patrick Reilly the proported head of the Cardinal Newman Society sheepishly admitted that George W. Bush also shouldn't be invited to Notre Dame not that long ago--and then clammed up when he was invited to a lesser known Catholic institution as Joe Feuerhard pointed out in NCR:

In 2005 I pointed out to Reilly that should Bush be invited to speak at a Catholic campus, the Society would be compelled to outrage. “Bush, you see, supports embryonic stem cell research, though his policies limit it to existing stem cell lines,” I wrote. “That’s a position directly counter to church teaching.

“Similarly, despite his anti-abortion record, the president supports exceptions for abortion in cases of rape, incest or where the life of the mother is threatened. That alone should be enough to draw the wrath of the Virginia-based group ... ’”

Responded Reilly: “Certainly if his position is opposed to the church on those issues (stem cell research and abortion exceptions),” he would be treated “just like anyone else.”

That, I concluded, was “more than a little hard to believe.”

Two years later, Bush was invited by his old friend and former adviser Jim Towey, president of St. Vincent College in Pennsylvania, to give the commencement address at the small Catholic school.

Not a peep from Reilly – a silence that says more about Reilly and company than all the “outrages” and “scandals” he manufactures and exploits.

Bottom line: Mudslinging is not a gospel value. Learn how to come to the table with love and charity and maybe then you have a chance to influence decisions.

Until then...you're just another guy at the end of the bar.

The Anchoress on Obama and Fire Breathing Pro-lifers

A hat tip to Deacon Greg and Pajamas Media

For many pro-life Catholics, myself included, the thought of President Obama addressing the upcoming commencement exercises at Notre Dame just scalds.

It scalds, but as my email fills up with angry press releases from various pro-life groups and with appeals to sign anti-Obama petitions, I find all the fire-breathing just a bit scalding, as well.

I understand and support the duty of Catholic bishops to register strong disapproval of the president’s anti-life positions, and I further believe that teaching the truth is always imperative, but Catholic universities have never been intellectual ghettos, offering only narrow exposure to ideas. On the contrary, Catholic universities have been bastions of rigorous debate with the application of reason triumphant over trends, sentiments, or policies. Because I believe that, and because I believe in the rightness of the Catholic position on life and the ability of the Holy Spirit to use surprising people and circumstances to do God’s will, I keep thinking, “Why are the Catholics approaching all of this with outrage and apparent fear, instead of confidence in battle?”

The current administration has famously quipped “never let a good crisis go to waste.” Well, Catholics might take a page from the president’s book and see this situation as less a “crisis” than an opportunity.

Amen, Anchoress! That's exactly what I've been saying--which you've said much more eloquently.

Read some more comments from her here

CUA Law Commencement Speaker: Let Obama Speak

A hat tip to American Papist.

Mark Shields, the political columnist who will be addressing graduates as commencement speaker at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law next month, disagrees.

Shield’s syndicated column, published after the University announced him as speaker, goes against the stated opinions of O’Connell and several members of the board of trustees, including chairman Bishop William E. Lori.

“As a proud graduate of Notre Dame and, frankly, as an admirer of Father Jenkins, I am not a disinterested bystander in this controversy,” writes Shields. “My university likes to think of itself, not immodestly, as the place where the Catholic Church does its thinking. But the current rhubarb is already conspicuous for generating — mostly off the campus — more heat than light.”

“The reality is that Roe v. Wade is not going to be overthrown,” he continued.

American Papist noted sarcastically after quoting this: "Yes, defeatism is generally a feature of enlightened discourse." And I must say that the line made me chuckle (in a good way--funny is funny). However, I think he misses the point.

If the likelihood of Roe v. Wade is in fact that at least in the near future our likelihood is that the law won't be overthrown shouldn't we at least concentrate just as much on trying to serve the needs of pregnant teens who seek abortion as we do on trying to influence politicians to change the law? As one who is pro-life, I think that this is what Bishop Chaput was driving at when he said and I paraphrase: "we don't really care."

If we really cared the law wouldn't stop us from creating a solution that stops abortion. The law would make it harder for us to completely stop it altogether to be sure, but showing people great victories in changing the lives of these mothers, caring for them and their children and honoring the unborn as full persons who deserve not merely our PROTECTION but also our CARE. I've been to a few events at Malta House in Connecticut and was quite moved by the stories of the young women who they serve. They do this DESPITE the law and uphold our Catholic values greatly. They also hope that the law will one day change, but if it doesn't they're not going to close up shop. The Sisters of Life in New York do similar good works.

Why aren't these stories being told? What if we all told just one small story of how we saved a life and supported it for years beyond that first year each day? We know those stories are out there.

Or would we rather just complain about a speech by the President?

Archbishop Quinn on Notre Dame and President Obama

This is very clear-headed thinking in America Magazine

These questions are not negligible. Cardinal James Gibbons, when he received the "Red Hat," in a memorable sermon at the church of Santa Maria in Trastevere, strongly praised the tremendous benefit that came to the church in our country because of the separation of church and state. During our more than two hundred years of history, the American bishops have until very recently steadfastly held to the position of making judgments about policy but never judgments about persons in the political arena. One reason for this position was that the episcopate recognized that the greater good of the mission of the church would be served in this way.

Taking account of what serves the greater good of the mission of the church is not opportunism. It is what Catholic tradition calls prudence. The saints have used various words for this cardinal virtue: discretion, discernment, practical wisdom. The great teacher of discernment, St. Ignatius Loyola, points out in this context the serious evil of the temptation of the good. Not everything that seems good is in fact good. Weighing, discernment and discretion are necessary even in things that seem on the face of it to be good. There is always the twin issue of the objective itself and the means of achieving it. One may be good, the other not.

The bigger question though which Bishop Quinn addressed in the first few paragraphs of the article is a doozy: How do unborn get served in the end by either withdrawing the invitation or by allowing President Obama to speak? Which ends up serving their needs best? I agree with Bishop Quinn on this point:

But it does not improve the likelihood of making progress on this and other issues of common concern if we adopt the clenched fist approach. The president has given ample evidence that he is a man of good will, of keen intelligence, desirous of listening and capable of weighing seriously other views. The Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops, citing Augustine, points out that “ Certain situations cannot be resolved with asperity or hardness” and goes on to say “(B)ecause his daily pastoral concerns give the Bishop greater scope for personal decision-making, his scope for error is also greater, however good his intentions: this thought should encourage him to remain open to dialog with others, always ready to learn, to seek and accept the advice of others.”

There's a lot of good thoughts in the early part of the article as well which you should read by going here

Hat tip to Susan Franesconi who pointed this article to me on Facebook where there's a good conversation going on that was started by Jeremy Langford.