As summer plays itself out on the beautiful campus by the lake where the young Holy Cross priest, Edward Sorin, C.S.C., pitched his camp 177 years ago and began his great adventure, we must clarify the situation that so sundered the church last spring: What it is all about and what it is not about.
It is not about President Obama. He will do some good things as president and other things with which, as Catholics, we will strongly disagree. It is ever so among presidents, and most political leaders.
It is not about Democrats versus Republicans, nor was it a replay of the recent general election.
It is not about whether it is appropriate for the president of the United States to speak at Notre Dame or any great Catholic university on the pressing issues of the day. This is what universities do. No bishop should try to prevent that.
The response, so intense and widespread, is not about what this journal called “sectarian Catholicism.” Rather, the response of the faithful derives directly from the Gospel. In Matthew’s words, “Your light must shine before others, that they may see your good works, and glorify your heavenly Father” (5:13).
Public WitnessDoes a Catholic university have the responsibility to give witness to the Catholic faith and to the consequences of that faith by its actions and decisions—especially by a decision to confer its highest honor? If not, what is the meaning of a life of faith? And how can a Catholic institution expect its students to live by faith in the difficult decisions that will confront them in a culture often opposed to the Gospel?
Pope Benedict XVI, himself a former university professor, made his position clear when he spoke to Catholic educators in Washington, D.C., on April 17, 2008:
Teachers and administrators, whether in universities or schools, have the duty and privilege to ensure that students receive instruction in Catholic doctrine and practice. This requires that public witness to the way of Christ, as found in the Gospel and upheld by the Church’s magisterium, shapes all aspects of an institution’s life, both inside and outside the classroom.
In its decision to give its highest honor to a president who has repeatedly opposed even the smallest legal protection of the child in the womb, did Notre Dame surrender the responsibility that Pope Benedict believes Catholic universities have to give public witness to the truths revealed by God and taught by the church?
Another serious question of witness and moral responsibility before the Notre Dame administration concerns its sponsorship over several years of a sad and immoral play, offensive to the dignity of women, which many call pornographic, and which an increasing number of Catholic universities have cancelled, “The Vagina Monologues,” by Eve Ensler.
Although he spoke eloquently about the importance of dialogue with the president of the United States, the president of Notre Dame chose not to dialogue with his bishop on these two matters, both pastoral and both with serious ramifications for the care of souls, which is the core responsibility of the local bishop. Both decisions were shared with me after they were made and, in the case of the honorary degree, after President Obama had accepted. For the past 24 years, it has been my privilege to serve as the bishop of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend. During this time, I have never interfered in the internal governance of Notre Dame or any other institution of higher learning within the diocese. However, as the teacher and shepherd in this diocese, it is my responsibility to encourage all institutions, including our beloved University of Notre Dame, to give public witness to the fullness of Catholic faith. The diocesan bishop must ask whether a Catholic institution compromises its obligation to give public witness by placing prestige over truth. The bishop must be concerned that Catholic institutions do not succumb to the secular culture, making decisions that appear to many, including ordinary Catholics, as a surrender to a culture opposed to the truth about life and love.
The Local BishopThe failure to dialogue with the bishop brings a second series of questions. What is the relationship of the Catholic university to the local bishop? No relationship? Someone who occasionally offers Mass on campus? Someone who sits on the platform at graduation? Or is the bishop the teacher in the diocese, responsible for souls, including the souls of students—in this case, the students at Notre Dame? Does the responsibility of the bishop to teach, to govern and to sanctify end at the gate of the university? In the spirit of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, which places the primary responsibility on the institution, I am proposing these questions for the university.
Prof. John Cavadini has addressed the questions about the relationship of the university and the bishop in an especially insightful manner. He is chair of the theology department and an expert on the early church, with a special interest in St. Augustine. His remarks were a response to Father Jenkins’s rationale for presenting the play mentioned above.
The statement of our President [Father Jenkins] barely mentions the Church. It is as though the mere mention of a relationship with the Church has become so alien to our ways of thinking and so offensive to our quest for a disembodied “excellence” that it has become impolite to mention it at all. There is no Catholic identity apart from the affiliation with the Church. And again, I do not mean an imaginary Church we sometimes might wish existed, but the concrete, visible communion of “hierarchic and charismatic gifts,” “at once holy and always in need of purification,” in which “each bishop represents his own church and all of [the bishops] together with the Pope represent the whole Church...” (Lumen Gentium, Nos. 4, 8, 23).
The ancient Gnostic heresy developed an elitist intellectual tradition which eschewed connection to the “fleshly” church of the bishop and devalued or spiritualized the sacraments. Are we in danger of developing a gnosticized version of the “Catholic intellectual tradition,” one which floats free of any norming connection and so free of any concrete claim to Catholic identity?
The full letter can be found on the Web site of the Notre Dame student newspaper, The Observer: www.ndsmcobserver.com.
It has been a great privilege and a source of joy to be associated with Notre Dame in the past 24 years as bishop. In so many ways, it is a splendid place. Part of this is because of the exemplary young men and women who come there from throughout the country. It is also because of its great spiritual traditions. The lines of young people preparing to receive the sacrament of reconciliation at the Basilica of the Sacred Heart, the Masses in the residence halls, the prayerful liturgy at the basilica and the service of so many young people before and after graduation in Catholic education and catechetics, and in service to the poor in this country and overseas, is a credit to the university and a source of great hope. The theology department has grown in academic excellence over the years, strengthened by the successful recruiting of professors outstanding in scholarship, in their knowledge of the tradition and in their own living of the Catholic faith. This growth is well known to Pope Benedict XVI. It is notable that a vast majority has been willing to seek and accept the mandatum from the local bishop.
Developments on CampusYet the questions about the relationship of the university as a whole to the church still stand, and what happened on campus leading up to and during the graduation is significant for the present debate about Catholic higher education. I released a statement on Good Friday, asking the Catholic people and others of good will not to attend demonstrations by those who had come avowedly to “create a circus.” I referred to appropriate and acceptable responses within the Notre Dame community led by students. Titled “ND Response,” and drawing a significant number of professors, these responses were marked by prayer and church teaching, and they were orderly.
This journal and others in the media, Catholic and secular, reporting from afar, failed to make a distinction between the extremists on the one hand, and students and those who joined them in the last 48 hours before graduation. This latter group responded with prayer and substantive disagreement. They cooperated with university authorities.
In this time of crisis at the university, these students and professors, with the instinct of faith, turned to the bishop for guidance, encouragement and prayer. This had nothing to do with John Michael D’Arcy. It was related to their understanding of the episcopal office—a place you should be able to count on for the truth, as Irenaeus contended in the second century when he encountered the Gnostics.
I attended the Baccalaureate Mass the day before graduation, for the 25th time, speaking after holy Communion, as I always do. Then I led an evening rosary at the Grotto with students, adults and a number of professors. We then went to a chapel on campus. It was packed for a whole night of prayer and eucharistic adoration.
It was my intention not to be on campus during graduation day. I had so informed Father Jenkins and the student leadership, with whom I was in touch nearly every day. This is the kind of deference and respect I have shown to the Notre Dame administration, to three Notre Dame presidents, over the years. I found it an increasingly sad time, and I was convinced that there were no winners, but I was wrong.
As graduation drew near, I knew I should be with the students. It was only right that the bishop be with them, for they were on the side of truth, and their demonstration was disciplined, rooted in prayer and substantive. I told the pro-life rally, several thousand people on a lovely May day, that they were the true heroes. Despite the personal costs to themselves and their families, they chose to give public witness to the Catholic faith contrary to the example of a powerful, international university, against which they were respectfully but firmly in disagreement. Among those in attendance were many who work daily at crisis pregnancy centers on behalf of life.
The Silent BoardIn the midst of the crisis at Notre Dame, the board of trustees came to campus in April for their long-scheduled spring meeting. They said nothing. When the meeting was completed, they made no statement and gave no advice. In an age when transparency is urged as a way of life on and off campus, they chose not to enter the conversation going on all around them and shaking the university to its roots. We learned nothing about their discussions.
I firmly believe that the board of trustees must take up its responsibility afresh, with appropriate study and prayer. They also must understand the seriousness of the present moment. This requires spiritual and intellectual formation on the part of the men and women of industry, business and technology who make up the majority of the board. Financial generosity is no longer sufficient for membership on the boards of great universities, if indeed it ever was. The responsibility of university boards is great, and decisions must not be made by a few. Like bishops, they are asked to leave politics and ambition at the door, and make serious decisions before God. In the case of Notre Dame, they owe it to the Congregation of Holy Cross, which has turned this magnificent place over to a predominately lay board; they owe it to the students who have not yet come; they owe it to the intrepid missionary priest, Edward Sorin, C.S.C., and the Holy Cross religious who built this magnificent place out of the wilderness. They owe it to Mary, the Mother of God, who has always been honored here. Let us pray that they will take this responsibility with greater seriousness and in a truly Catholic spirit.
Critical QuestionsAs bishops, we must be teachers and pastors. In that spirit, I would respectfully put these questions to the Catholic universities in the diocese I serve and to other Catholic universities.
Do you consider it a responsibility in your public statements, in your life as a university and in your actions, including your public awards, to give witness to the Catholic faith in all its fullness?
What is your relationship to the church and, specifically, to the local bishop and his pastoral authority as defined by the Second Vatican Council?
Finally, a more fundamental question: Where will the great Catholic universities search for a guiding light in the years ahead? Will it be the Land O’Lakes Statement or Ex Corde Ecclesiae? The first comes from a frantic time, with finances as the driving force. Its understanding of freedom is defensive, absolutist and narrow. It never mentions Christ and barely mentions the truth. The second text, Ex Corde Ecclesiae, speaks constantly of truth and the pursuit of truth. It speaks of freedom in the broader, Catholic philosophical and theological tradition, as linked to the common good, to the rights of others and always subject to truth. Unlike Land O’Lakes, it is communal, reflective of the developments since Vatican II, and it speaks with a language enlightened by the Holy Spirit.
On these three questions, I respectfully submit, rests the future of Catholic higher education in this country and so much else.
For more on President Obama's appearance at Notre Dame see America's archive on the controversy.
Comments
He's taken many actions already during his presidency that will increase the number of abortions performed around the world. He's done nothing so far to reduce them.
And to those of you who claim that the bishops are using abortion as a political tool, shame on you. Do you really hold millions of human souls in such disregard? Of course the repeal of Roe v. Wade would reduce the number of abortions performed.
If it helps you sleep at night to believe that your votes for Obama were really the pro-life thing to do, then I can't stop you from deceiving yourselves, but you can't deceive God.
http://www.richardsipe.com/Docs_and_Controversy/2008-04-20-Statement_for_Pope.html
Not a word from Bishop D'Arcy faulting the decision to award a degree to McCarrick. Bishop D'Arcy, like most of his peers and superiors, is dishonest and dishonorable.
Bishop D'Arcy asks' "Where will the great Catholic universities search for a guiding light in the years ahead? Will it be the Land O'Lakes statement or Ex corde Ecclesia?" In 1999 the Catholic Bishops of United States approved The Application of Ex corde Ecclesiae. The Decree of Promulgation by the U.S. Bishops is based on John Paul II apostolic constitution on Catholic higher education entitled Ex corde Ecclesia. It describes the identity and mission of Catholic colleges and universities and provides general norms to help fulfill it vision.
Briefly, the document begins by discussing the ecclesiological concept of communion amongst the individual faithful and communites in the Church. Ecclesial relationships of both individuals and communities are linked together by one and the same Spirit forming one theological reality, the Catholic Church. "Unity of faith" universally expressed in the sacrament of baptism is the dynamic principle that keeps these ecclesial relationships together. This theological reality makes the Church one, holy, catholic and apostolic and is the reason and basis of unity in the Church.
By virtue of their Catholic identity, colleges and universities share "the Church's universal teaching mission" according to their own distinct and special charism. The Church's position on abortion is clearly spelled out in the Catechism as an "abominable crime." As John Paul II said at the Catholic University of America, "...The term Catholic will never be a mere label either added or dropped according to the pressures of varying factors." Notre Dame shamefully compromised itself and made a mockery of its Catholic identity by awarding an honorary degree to the President of the United States, the most powerful pro-abortion advocate in this country.
Ex corde Ecclesiae declares that "Bishops have a particular responsibility to promote Catholic Universities, and especially to promote and assist in the preservation and strengthening of their Catholic identity, including the protection of their Catholic identity in relation to civil authorities." Given the charade at Notre Dame Bishop D"Arcy should rephrase the question in the form of an imperative. If Notre Dame is unwilling to function as a Catholic university according to the principles and norms spelled out in Ex corde Ecclesiae it should lose the honor of calling itself Catholic.
I completely disagree with the opinions in this article. I am convinced that too many of our Catholic prelates are primarily interested in scoring political points, by using the abortion controversy as a wedge issue to generate donations and to influence elections. I take this position for two reasons.
First, most people think that reversing the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade will stop all abortiions. This is incorrect. Reversing this decision will end the federal right to an abortion. States will then have the right to determine if abortions will be allowed or forbidden.
I am certain that several states will outlaw all abortions. However, most states will not. I cannot fathom California, Illinois, New York Massachusetts, and other similar "blue states" outlawing all abortions. It would take an amendment to our US Constitution to outlaw all abortions in all states, and the likelihood of this occurring approaches zero.
In spite of this fact, our bishops and cardinals have pushed, sometimes relentlessly, to reverse Roe v Wade. Why? I am convinced that they do it as a means to raise money and to send a clear signal to Catholices for whom they should not vote.
If any bishop or cardinal told his congregtation for whom to vote, the diocese would lose its 501(c)(3) charitable organization status, and donations would not be eligible for a tax deduction by the donor. But they send a clear signal on this very point by trumpeting loudly to whom they would not give Holy Communion, because of his or her position on the abortion issue. And every Catholic recognizes the significance of that edict. The bishops are indirectly, but clearly, signaling whom we should and should not support.
And so it is ture with respect to the "slap in the face" to President Obama by denouncing the honorary degree given to him by the University of Notre Dame. Do we think that a single abortion will be halted by insulting the Present of the United States? No, I perceive that this is another attempt on the part of our hierarchy to play "king makers," by using this influence over the "Catholic vote" to point to which political party we should support.
Second, I am convinced that the major reason, not the only reason, but the primary one, for the unconscionably high number of abortions is the economic inequality in our country. I believe that most pregnant women, along with the fathers and other significant persons involved in the pregnancy, choose abortion as the last resort in a desperate situation. For instance, they cannot afford the health care costs for the prenatal check-ups and the doctor and hospital charges for the birth. Or their family needs the income from the prospective mother, which would be lost during portions of the pregnancy and the new born care. Or the mother is overwhelmed with the responsibilities of working, raising her other children, and caring for her new born.
I think that most abortion decisions are made out of desperation, primarily financial, and not because it is a preferred birth control method. This means that we "pro life" Catholics should be investing our scare time, effort, money, and political capital in securing reasonably priced health care for all Americans, in increasingt the income of low wage workers, in giving direct financial contributions to every family giving birth to new life, and increasing the help and support for all new mothers.
If the bishops and cardinals truly want to reduce the number of abortions, they should denouncing and refusing Holy Communion to every politician who votes against health care reform, or the minimum wage, and child welfare and support. The very last thing they should be doing is insulting our existing president by denouncing the honorary degree given to him, when he is prepared to do these very acts which will do more to reduce the number of abortions than any effort to reverse Roe v. Wade.
We "pro life" Catholics know the importance and sanctity of all life, especially new life "in the womb." These are powerful precepts, which can move our country to a better and more just environment. We do not need to condemn and outlaw those choosing abortions. We need to understand what their needs and then act upon that understanding, so that they do not "have" to choose that desperate option.
I know that it is much easier to pass a law to force people to do what we think is right, and how much harder, more time consuming, and eventually more expensive it is to convince them to change their behavior willingly. Yet, I am convinced that Jesus Christ wants us to help all those who are faced with the abortion decision in our present economic situation. We "pro life" Catholics do not need to pass a law or reverse a Supreme Court decision to make abortions illegal. We "pro life" Catholics need to have our politicians adopt Catholic social justice principles which make them unnecessary.
May the Peace of Jesus Christ be with us all!
Philip J. Butzen
Observing just the sacramentals while seeking the gnosis (knowledge). Believing the "Church" to be a spiritual ideal only, ignoring the real part of the Church (you and I) right here on earth.
Yes, it is nice that both Universities do good works, but you do not have to be Catholic to do good works.
The Ordinary has identified areas of Catholic identity and witness in which the University has been weak. He might consider the need of revoking NDs use of "Roman Catholic" when discribing its mission, programs and faculty.
The Bishop might request specific corrective action, or consultation with the Ordinary in certain areas, a declaration of intent to follow offered guidelines, or actions that must be avoided.
Unfortunately, if there is never a loss of public Catholic identity, all senior leaders at Catholic colleges that direct or permit public actions that confuse or contradict central gospel values will probably continue to do so. If so, this may be a type of deceptive advertising for students, parents, the Church and the public.
Not to put a too fine point on it, ordinaries are the ones that act to correct this lack of truth, justice and witness. After all, bishops are called not only to teach, but to govern.
Put the two articles on the President Obama’s visit to Notre Dame in the context of the recent death of Sen. Edward Moore Kennedy and you feel like saying to both bishops “Cut the Crap.” To have denied “Ted” a catholic funeral because he was married twice and had two living wives or did he get an annulment before John Paul II made them impossible to get? Just as denying him the same rites because of his stand on abortion or even gay rights would have not only scandalized the Nation but also bitterly divided the people of God the Catholic laity in America.
But then he was a Kennedy. Kennedy funerals are almost always marked by the presence of an American Cardinal and the singing of Schubert’s Ave Maria during the mass.(was it sung Saturday, not at mass it seems) The latter being a musical piece frequently denied to ordinary Catholics because it is considered more operatic than religious. The American bishops are effectively indifferent to all grave evils other than abortion. Still which bishop would have denied the Kennedy family the rites of the church for their elder son? I’d like to hear Darcy and Quinn weigh in on these issues. Talk about a cauldron of controversy for the American Catholic Community.
Weigh all the issues which their Excellencies D’Arcy and Quinn raised over giving a degree to Obama against giving Kennedy a full catholic funeral in a Basilica in the heart of Roxbury MA and you see the laity speaking truth to power. Quinn comes to the meat of the issue in the closing paragraph on cordiality. When he acknowledges that even Rome has signaled several times in the last few years that the American hierarchy needed to trim its extremist sails or risk losing the loyalty of all but the extreme Catholic right which together with extremist elements of the evangelical movement cling so ardently to the Republican Party. Bishop Quinn makes reference to this appearance and the dangerous position in which the American hierarchy finds it selecting which Catholic politician can be publicly chastised, or which university can be slapped about by a bishop for some matter of academic freedom in which the church can only seem to be creating a Syllabus of Confusion rather than clarifying doctrine.
Both bishops here would have done well to have moved on rather than cater to the extremist support the Catholic Leaguers who love to besmirch other Catholics questioning their orthodoxy. D’Arcy, please your feigning ignorance of the degree before hand is more than just a little hollow when tradition dictates the bestowal of degrees on important speakers at convocations. Are you saying you didn’t know the President was going to speak at Notre Dame? If you wanted to exercise your mandatum there seems to have been ample time to have done so before the event. As you know, to have done so would have depicted you as a petty mid western provincial cleric. You come out swinging after the fact. It’s really apparent you didn’t have the ball’s to do it beforehand knowing it would have pushed you into a corner from which you could not have emerged ever. The face saving thing is to complain ex post facto. Was Ted entitled to a Catholic funeral? Who among the American hierarchy could have dared to say no to the Kennedy family if the answer was actually, no.
To some extent the situation is similar to the late Judge Leander Perez who went to communion every Sunday in Plaquemine Parish after Archbishop of New Orleans, Rummel had excommunicated him for so bitterly opposing integration in the churches and schools of the archdiocese of New Orleans in the early sixties.
Rome has signaled to the American bishop’s that caution is needed here. Could it be that they are too simple to read in between the lines. Or is the success of American parochial schools and Catholic universities that we now have a laity which is better educated than the priests and bishops who serve us?
As Arsenio Hall use to say, things that make you go, HMMMMMMMMMMMMM.
Billy C. Beal
Meridian MS
The most horrendous act in the history of all mankind is abortion. A million innocent lives are snuffed out every year. This exceeds any war or other man caused deaths. The Catholic Church and its institutions along with the other Faiths who also abhor abortion must stand by their committment to abolish it by every means possible including through our universities. Most Rev. John M. D'Arcy mentions several times that a Catholic University has the responsibility to give witness to the Catholic Faith. That this witness shapes all aspects of an institution's life. This doesn't mean as Most Rev. John R. Quinn suggested for the Catholic Church to confine itself to one single issue. But, I feel, it is a primary issue. Just because Barack Obama is the first African-American President doesn't mean he should be honored by a Catholic University in spite of his pro-abortions stand. Would he be honored if he promoted "snuffing out" the elderly sick who cost too much to care for? Where do we draw the line?
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Scoran, Fairfield, CT
Yes, this was political motivated. Notre Dame "won over" all the Obama lovers of the world for "standing up" to the Bishop. Well done Notre Dame! Enrollment should be up right about now... Money...
ABORTION is KILLING babies. Abortion is wrong. His intention to reduce the number of killings should not be a "pacifier". I'm sorry, I cannot give this president an "attaboy" for his "good intentions" of reducing the number of babies to kill. Even ONE baby killed is wrong.
The president is charismatic,no doubt about it. Even I like the man! but I will not compromise my soul on this one. I thank God for Bishop D'Arcy's faith and I thank Bishop D'Arcy for being a true Catholic. For not being politically correct.
At the end of the day, it gets reduced to enrollment. Lets not polarize anybody or they will not come to our school. Well, simple solution. Do not call yourselves a Catholic school...
My prayers with and for Bishop D'Arcy and for Notre Dame. God Bless...
For a professing "Catholic" to invite an open dissenter in matters of Catholic faith and morals to one's home for dialogue/conversation is far different from a public institution that professes to be "Catholic" inviting someone (in this case, the President of the United States) who publically takes positions contrary to grave matters of our Catholic faith and morals to give an address at a public ceremony and, in addition, conferring on them an honorary Law degree. Bishop D'Arcy would be remiss in his obligation as Bishop of the Diocese in which UND is established, if he didn't speak up publically re. the scandalous, defiant choice/action of UND's President and Board.
I haven't looked into this to verify..., but I think that a Catholic institution that publically ceases to uphold/profess Catholic principles of faith and morals as clearly set forth by the teaching of the magisterium of the Church in union with the Pope has an obligation to cease calling itself "Catholic." It seems to me that UND is in this precarious position. We fool ourselves when we call ourselves "Catholic" while we reject an exhortation/teaching followed by a remonstrance of our Bishop and/or the Vicar of Christ on earth in matters of faith and morals, whether by our words or actions. Jesus tells us still: "He who hears you, hears me and He who rejects you rejects me and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me." ( Lk 10:16) How could this be more clear? The Word of the Lord is forever "living and active!" (Heb 4:12ff)
I haven't looked into this to verify..., but I think that a Catholic institution that publically ceases to uphold/profess Catholic principles of faith and morals as clearly set forth by the teaching of the magisterium of the Church in union with the Pope has an obligation to cease calling itself "Catholic." It seems to me that UND is in this precarious position. We fool ourselves when we call ourselves "Catholic" while we reject an exhortation/teaching followed by a remonstrance from our Bishop and/or the Vicar of Christ on earth in matters of faith and morals, whether by our words or actions. Jesus tells us still: "He who hears you, hears me and He who rejects you rejects me and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me." ( Lk 10:16) How could this be more clear? The Word of the Lord is forever "living and active." (Heb 4:12ff) Let's pray for the President and Board of UND-that they come to their Catholic senses!
It appears that Catholic clergy, scholars and leaders worship their own intellect above all else. They are disobedient, arrogant and do not possess the "childlike humility" preached to us by our Lord.
Moreover, for a long time now, the entire American educational system, both public and private, has been promoting a permissive ideology. It is time to rectify this festering problem and call for a complete overall that ensures that students receive a well-balanced education so they can make informed decisions.
Meanwhile, we must pray for the conversion of Catholics to the Holy Mother Church restoring us all to the fullness of Her beauty and truth.
It is clear who will ultimately win this type of battle. I say that not only because we've read the end of the Book (Revelation) but also on natural grounds: those who are killing their kids are selecting themselves out of the population.
Fast forward to the current day and 36 years of legalized killing, something society calls "a woman's right to choose." We know it as abortion. 50 million dead babies. Millions of affected and traumatized women. A vicious attack on life.
The current president is supported by the very abortion industry that profits from the carnage. And it is most ironic that those who defend him are the same ones who oppose such other forms of violence and can be the loudest in their condemnation of war.
The Church's teachings are not complicated on the subject. Perhaps if certain people would stop apologizing for the evil and call upon all persons of whatever political stripe to protect and defend all innocent human life, born and unborn, we Catholics might not be the pawns of others who would just as soon destroy the Church as follow her teachings. Perhaps if all the 'peace and justice" types could take five minutes to realize that pro-abortion liberal friends are NOT their friends, then together with pro-lifers, we could be the block of Americans who stood up against the violence against women and children.
The Bishop here is acting in his role as teacher and defender of the Faith. Would that throughout history, more bishops stood firm in defense of the Truth. Would that we not fall to the siren calls of complicity, but address the real humanitarian aspects of all the issues of the day, be they economic or social. The point is that Notre Dame failed in acting as an observant Catholic school. Future generations will ask why in the same way that people asked what Catholics did during the 1930s.. Hopefully we can repent of the evil that has been done in the land and as is written in Holy Scripture, get on our knees, humble ourselves, ask God for forgiveness and perhaps He will heal this nation.
Have you thanked Bishop D'Arcy for illustrating for you what a genuinely Catholic worldview looks like?
Sincerely,
Frank Hannon
30 years ago the majority of Americans were pro-life. Now the majority are pro-choice. I think the reason for this is because there are now so many people like me who know someone who has been harmed by abortion either psychologically or physically or both. This is the most important social issue of our culture today and I thank God that the Catholic Bishops realize this.
Jesus said "know the tree by the fruit". Obama is proposing government funding of abortions. I wonder, does Notre Dame President Jenkins and theology professor Richard Obrien consider this good fruit? I don't. At least when Arizona State University invited Obama to speak at their commencement, they had the good sense to withhold the honorary doctorate noting that his body of work was "yet to come". But because Notre Dame and its theology professor Richard McBrien have a long history of controversy with the US bishops, in making their decision to grant Obama an honorary doctorate, they were more interested in snubbing those bishops than in caring for the sheep. Since they do not realize the importance of working together with the Bishops on the most important societal ill facing the US today, they should not be in positions of influence and I pray to God for their immediate removal and/or conversion of heart.
No one doubts the authority of bishops to pronounce on moral issues. Bishop John D'Arcy ("The Church and the University") goes beyond this point to claim a right to determine how Catholic institutions-and presumably individual Catholics-alter their conduct in light of such pronouncements. The bishop's complaint is that Notre Dame has "honored" the president of the United States, although he does not accept the Church's teachings regarding abortion. I note that Bishop D'Arcy does not charge the Notre Dame authorities with suggesting, by their receiving the president, that they themselves dissent from the Church's teaching-or that they intend to communicate this message to the broader public. Instead, he seems to argue that it is simply improper for Catholic institutions-and presumably individual Catholics-to rub shoulders with those who do not accept the Church's teaching.
I myself "honor" many opponents of the Church's teaching on abortion by inviting them to my home. In doing so, I do not express any dissent from the Church's teaching-on the contrary I am a strong supporter of that teaching. On occasion, while they are there, we discourse on the subject of abortion;; and this provides me with an opportunity to articulate the Church's position; and maybe, just maybe, seeing my resolve, they may soften their hearts.
I do not know whether Fr. Jenkins softened the heart of President Obama-and I do not know whether Pope Benedict softened his heart, when the pontiff received the president at the Vatican. But, in the interest of reducing abortions, we should be looking for more, rather than fewer, occasions to interact with "pro-choice" people.
James C. G. Conniff
Thank you Most Reverend Bishop. It is high time someone spoke out against the liberal policies that are engolfing our Universities and Colleges who claim to be Catholic. Thank you for doing it so eloquently. We pray that your admonition will fall on receptive ears by those making decisions. We pray to Mary and Her Son to give guidance to all.
I am stunned by the hatred and divisiveness that I sense in these responses. The subject of abortion has become so emotionally charged that it is driving a wall though our church.
During the Kerry/Bush election I ended up arguing with a priest about his sermons, in which he implied that Catholics could not vote for Kerry and receive the sacraments because of his position on abortion. When I confronted him after Mass about Bush's death penalty record and the war - he
insisted that abortion was the far greatest evil. I flippantly threw out the line that "if that's the case then maybe women who've had abortions should be subject to the death penalty". I was shocked when he said "well, maybe they should!"
Attitudes like this are going to get us nowhere. For those who don't understand or accept our beliefs, education and persuation are the important tools; confrontation and coersion never win hearts.
Abortion is the only significant issue that separates Obama's positions from key Church social doctrine. Are we going to squander this opportunity to educate and persuade a president who empathizes with our beliefs? Unfortunately it's a lot easier to fall head over heals for silver tongued politicians who will give lip service to their opposing abortion but trample over the body of
Church doctrine with nary a word raised.
If Fr. Jenkins had talked about his firm and unwavering commitment to racial equality while inviting a segregationist commencement speaker, his stance would have been justly derided by every thinking Catholic. I find it rather extraordinary that his statements about Notre Dame's "firm and unwavering" defense of the unborn are even taken seriously.
Many of us in the Notre Dame family have been saddened and embarrassed for years as the University's leaders have equivocated on important issues. One area in which they have remained steadfast, though, is in their commitment to academic freedom. Accordingly, with the same filial respect that Fr. Jenkins has shown for his local bishop, I offer my alma mater a new motto for the 21st century:
"I may disagree with what I say, but I will defend to the death my right to say it."
Eamonn Keane
You are the face of duplicity; say hi to Teddy in hell.
What's seamless about Tom's approach to life when millions of garments have been rent through the abomination of abortion? Easy for us whose mother's chose to give us a chance to say that others shouldn't.
Brenden, I agree with you Latin-as it applies to President B. Obama.
Bless the Catholics who are not only in the pews receiving the Light and the Truth and the nurture necessary to be strong and compassionate but also are taking this to the streets and to the pregnancy centers and building homes for the homeless and donating to and manning the food banks for the hungry and visiting the shut ins and bringing communion to the homebound and the list could go on and on. Catholic organizations world wide are always at the front and center of help and social justice. How can they be called a one-issue Church? Or is it just that those who call it that don't agree with that one issue and wish it wouldn't be talked about so they don't feel uncomfortable?
Thank you, Your Excellency. My donated dollars continue to go to those organizations which promote life and helping the less fortunate. They won't be going to Catholic, in name only, Universities.
Abortion is NOT leagal under the US Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution or Bill Rights, Mr.Johnson, will you find "abortion" defined as one of our "Rights". Yet, 44 million of our fellow human beings have perished in the American Holocaust.
And, Obama continues on with his own version of "The Final Solution" in HR 3200, Obamacare, which will ration and deny health care to the most vulnerable: infants and the elderly.
Is this who you wish Georgetownand Notre Dame to pay homage to?
Exactly what had Mr.Obama accomplished as of April 2009 that was so noteworthy to be given an Honorary degree? Besides being a Community Organizer and Pro Abortion Advocate of the most extreme?
If Notre Dame wants to be genuinely Catholic and not just so in a vague cultural or historical sense then it will have to show greater respect for the hierarchy and a sense of responsibility to the Magisterium in its educational mission.
At the same time his wisdom was apparent for avoiding the immodest and sensationalist tactics used by some to protest.
article headlined “The Silent Board,” D’Arcy chides the Notre Dame Board of Trustees for irresponsibility in not intervening in the crisis over Obama’s invitation to receive an honorary degree. He states that the present moment “requires spiritual and intellectual formation on the part of the men and women of industry, business and technology who make up the majority of the board.” Leaving aside the implications of this observation for the lay members of the board, he fails to mention that the board also contains a significant number of members who are Holy Cross priest-professors and priest- administrators and one who is a Holy Cross Bishop who spent the last 20 years of his priesthood at Notre Dame before being appointed Bishop D’Arcy’s auxiliary bishop and, later, the Bishop of Peoria. With this kind of core membership, does the board deserve D’Arcy’s suggestion that it lacks the spiritual and intellectual formation to do its job? If D’Arcy had simply followed the suggestions in your companion article by Archbishop John Quinn…as N.D.'s President John Jenkins, C.S.C., has tried to do, this crisis would never have occurred.
The political activitism of the former university president who served on the civil rights commission fulfilled itself with the election of the nation's first black president. Rewarding the fruit of that labor with an honorary degree, even to an overtly pro-abortion politician, was too difficult for the university to resist. (Earlier, even Arizona recognized the symbolism and punted the first honorary degree to the first black president to Notre Dame.) Unfortunately, the liberation theology of the '60 and 70's was debunked long ago and is no longer relevant in our time. Nonetheless, Notre Dame succumbed to the temptation to once again mix national politics with religion and it exploded on them. We are still cleaning up another one of their the messes.
Your point on seeking consultation (and perhaps approval) from the local bishop is most important. It seems quite appropriate for a catholic college to seek the approval of the local Ordinary for conferring an honorary degree to a government official, especially a head of state. I would go further to suggest that heads of states must also be approved by apostoilic nuncios so that relations with the Vatican on global matters remain consistent and the Church speaks with one voice.
Notre Dame really does need to make up its mind: is it independent or is it catholic?
If it is independent, then simply take down all the catholic ornamentation, rid the campus of priests and their vestments, join the Big 10 and change the name to Indiana State University at South Bend.
If it is catholic, then a transparent return to an authentic catholic character needs to occur. The university can start by listening to its local Bishop and nearby Cardinal.
The ultimate in child abuse, abortion! Why is it I never hear that from anyone’s lips other than my own and when I do speak that truth; why do most people who hear it wince? It’s a mixed up and heartbreaking world when parents are not allowed to discipline their children with strategically placed swats on their backside but Doctors are legally condoned in sucking a defenseless Childs brains out its neck just because its head still resides in it’s so called Mother’s womb. Where are the voices of the leaders of the Catholic Church concerning the Catholic Congress members who vote for and condone abortion, but minimize and hide from their responsibilities by renaming it pro-choice? It is past due the Catholic Church starts being politically in-correct, start calling out the social injustices for what they really are and stop wondering if they will offend anyone. The Catholic Church is meant to offend sinners and non-believers! It’s not called sin anymore because the loud minority is fearfully close in silencing the leadership of the Catholic Church. Catholic dogma is etched in stone and should be a guiding light place high for it to be useful and be a benefit, not to be placed under a basket. I have pray the Catholic Church finds its footing and voice in this world and Rev. John M. D’Arcy’s questions offer a mustard seed glimmer of hope. Please continue and be fearless in Christ.
Pages