Pro-life

Dear Father Jenkins,

When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame’s most memorable commencement speeches. So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.

Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.

First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions “should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles” and that such persons, should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution’s freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.

Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event: …

Good for her. The fact that they were using this as cover is certainly a good reason to take this step. Previously Bishop John D’Arcy had asked her to accept this and to use it as a opportunity of teaching. Though I am sure the Bishop understands her decision.

Now it will be interesting to see if Notre Dame decides to award this to someone else or to just not issue it this year. I think they would have a hard time finding somebody authentically pro-life that would accept this as she has declined it. So I would guess that it is not issued this year. It would add another scandal if they picked someone nominally pro-life as they did last year with Martin Sheen. I protested his pick last year since while he calls himself pro-life he does nothing to advance the cause and solidly supports pro-abortion Democrats. So will they be calling Doug Kmiec? — I hope not.

Update: 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.

Update: “President Obama is disappointed by former Ambassador Mary Glendon’s decision,” said spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki, “but he looks forward to delivering an inclusive and respectful speech at the Notre Dame graduation, a school with a rich history of fostering the exchange of ideas. While he is honored to have the support of millions of people of all faiths, he does not govern with the expectation that everyone sees eye to eye with him on every position, and the spirit of debate and healthy disagreement on important issues is part of what he loves about this country.” [reference]

Inclusive except of course for the millions of children who have been murdered and can’t hear his “inclusive and respectful” speech.

Via a reader

We the students of the University of Notre Dame have called for a Rosary Crusade in response to the recent announcement of the honoring of President Obama on our campus. During the Rosary Crusade, which began on Wednesday of Holy Week and will last until Sunday May 17th (the day of President Obama’s commencement address at ND), we will be praying the Rosary each day for the following three intentions:

1) The conversion of heart of President Obama regarding the sanctity of life.

2) For the Catholic character of the University of Notre Dame.

3) For a greater respect for the dignity of human life from conception until natural death around the world.

We truly believe we can have 1,000,000 Rosaries prayed by May 17th, but we need people to know about our campaign in order for that to happen. We at Notre Dame realize that the scandal given by the honoring of President Obama extends much further than the Notre Dame campus and we recognize that we, the students, have been given the great opportunity to be leaders (at least for this small portion of time) in the Catholic Pro-life movement around the world. Please encourage your readers to join with us in praying the Rosary for these intentions and logging the number of Rosaries they have prayed on our website at http://ndresponse.com/counter/ . Facebook users are encouraged to join our event. If any good is going to come from this situation, that good will be motivated and brought about by prayer, especially the prayer of the Rosary.

No mission or cause is too great for God, least of all the cause of those who are the weakest amongst us. We trust Our Lady will watch over us and recommend our prayers to Her Beloved Son.

The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center, Georgetown University, and a Jesuit priest, says the guidelines “will not satisfy those who want no embryonic stem cell research,” (including the Catholic Church) although “they do show the administration takes seriously the need for ethical guidelines for scientific research.”

Reese was particularly pleased, by “strong rules for informed consent,” and that “research will be limited to stem cell created from embryos that would have been destroyed anyway because they are no longer needed for (in vitro fertilization) purposes.” These rules match up with several of the criteria that Reese mentioned in March as ones he hoped to see when Obama lifted the research restrictions.[reference]

When you kill one innocent person you do not give a whit for ethical guidelines – you only care to show that you pretend to have such a scruple. Say for example there was a decision that a 100 prisoners were possibly slated to be harvested for their organs so as to save plenty of other people. Then they decided to restrict this to only five prisoners – would you say they had an ethical guideline? To be ethical is not to restrict the evil you do – but not to do any evil in the first place.

Of course there is one major problem with all the people in both sides of the political aisle who have talked about restricting embryonic stem-call research to use so-called leftover embryos from IVF. If there is every an actual breakthrough in ESCR then they will need a supply of embryos much larger than this to supply the demand because of tissue match problems and problems getting permission from the parents. So this type of “ethical” rule would be quickly tossed aside with such an event. To pretend that this is any kind of ethical restriction is a lie – it is purely political and will change in the future if they want it to. Fr. Reese is once again a useful idiot for the most pro-abortion administration ever.

Another thing is that that this is further cover for politicians. Outside of federal funding there are pretty much zero restrictions for other researchers. They can continue to attempt to clone embryos and experiment with embryos from other sources. There are no restrictions on them fertilizing eggs and creating their own embryos for experimentation.

MARYSVILLE, PA (APRIL 2, 2009) – On this fourth anniversary of the death of Pope John Paul the Great, the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, a national association of 600 priests and deacons, urges the University of Notre Dame to honor the memory and legacy of this faithful son of church by rescinding the invitation to President Obama to be Commencement Speaker for this year’s graduation.

As we eagerly await the day when, God willing, JP2 will be beatified and then canonized, we also unequivocally profess our support for his papal letter, Ex Corde Ecclesiae (1990) which requires Catholic colleges and universities to conform, defend and adhere to Magisterial teaching. The decision, however, to afford an openly pro-abortion politician the privilege of speaking to graduating seniors at the commencement violates every principle of Catholic education insofar as it violates both Divine and Natural Law. Pope John Paul II boldly, bravely and unambiguously challenged presidents and prime ministers, congresses and parliaments, capitalists and communists, to defend the inalienable right to life of the unborn and to permanently end the evils of abortion and euthanasia.

While the Confraternity is proud that the first African-American has been elected to the highest office in the land, we also regret and disavow his persistent pro-abortion policies and appointments. It is precisely because of his efforts to undo all the progress of pro-life legislation since the notorious Roe v. Wade decision that we strongly feel he has made himself ineligible for such an invitation as commencement speaker for a Catholic school. As President of the United States of America, he deserves every honor due his office and we totally respect him as our legitimate national civil leader. Nevertheless, the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Moral Law condemn the intentional killing of innocent human lives and therefore any and all politicians, regardless of their level of authority, are ethically obligated to defend the unborn who are the most vulnerable and immanently endangered by the evil of abortion.

We are therefore saddened and outrages that any Catholic institution, let alone a prestigious university like Notre Dame, would afford a public gesture of acceptance and endorsement to a politician who openly supports the so-called legal ‘right’ to ‘choose death’, i.e., the direct killing of an unborn human being. The argument that this invitation merely extends and continues dialogue with those who disagree is a non sequitur. Notre Dame approached President Obama, not vice versa. Speaking at Commencement is not an open debate, it is a monologue. Parents did not pay tuition for celebrities to speak at their son or daughter’s graduation, they paid it to ensure a Catholic education.

The CCC welcomes a respectful debate between opponents and proponents of alleged ‘abortion rights.’ A real disputation will allow logic and reason to demonstrate and prove that the pro-life position is the only moral, ethical and human choice citizens and governments truly have.

A Christian education is rooted in the Divine and Natural Laws as known by faith and reason, both of which affirm the right of the unborn to live after conception. It is an oxymoron at best and an outrageous insult at worst to ask a politician, even a president, who is openly pro-abortion to be Commencement Speaker at a graduation from a Catholic school. President Obama is not only ideologically but also legislatively and administratively proactive in perpetuating and proliferating abortion. Honor the office and respect the man but repudiate and denounce his policies and appointments which endorse and promote the injustice of abortion. Honor the memory of JP2 and keep Catholic colleges and universities faithful to the Magisterium.

“There are some ideas and some causes that a Catholic college campus cannot treat pleasantly,” wrote the outraged editors. “Doesn’t deliberate opposition to Catholic social doctrine come close to being anti-Catholic?”

History can be humbling. The editors eager to censor views they disagreed with were the Jesuits at America. The object of their ire was the outspoken conservative William F. Buckley Jr. The year was 1961, and the dispute erupted over an editorial in Buckley’s magazine, the National Review. Pope John XXIII’s encyclical Mater et magistra, the editorial claimed, “struck many as a venture in triviality.” The National Review editors speculated that the new encyclical would, like Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors, “become the source of embarrassed explanations.” Buckley had judged Mater et magistra insufficiently alarmed over the threat of communism, and in turn America’s editors judged Buckley insufficiently docile in his reception of doctrine, and urged that he be banned from speaking at Catholic colleges. The National Review is “a journal which, in our opinion, seriously and consistently undercuts positions which we judge to be central to our faith, the natural law, or the explicit and long established social doctrines of the church,” wrote America’s editors. Thus what might have been an honest and useful dispute over the interpretation and scope of church teaching quickly degenerated into a show trial regarding Buckley’s Catholic loyalties. (See Garry Wills’s Politics and Catholic Freedom.)

Commonweal is trying to setup a parallel here when it comes to Notre Dame, they do have one real problem. The fuller quote is:

“Whatever its final effect, it must strike many as a venture in triviality coming at this particular time in history” since “there is scant mention” of the successes of the Communists and “insufficient notice is taken (of) the extraordinary material well-being” of countries like Japan, West Germany, and the United States.

In fact in later issues of NR that year Buckley also said:

“National Review (29 July 1961) 38.Actually, National Review has made no substantive criticism of Mater et Magistra. Simplistic interpretations in secular terms are notoriously unwise. It merely pointed out that ‘coming at this particular time in history,’ parts of it may be considered as trivial.”

William F. Buckley, Jr. National Review (23 September 1961) 188. “The editorial in question spoke not one word of criticism of the intrinsic merit of Mater et Magistra. Our disappointment was confined to the matter of emphasis, and timing, and by implication, to the document’s exploitability by the enemies of Christendom, a premonition rapidly confirmed by the Encyclical’s obscene cooption by such declared enemies of the spiritual order as the New Statesman and the Manchester Guardian, which hailed the conversion of the Pope to Socialism!”

Pundits commenting on the timing of Vatican documents is rather common and in fact this is often a common complaint that the Vatican will issue a document on a subject that seems to be years late in response. Interestingly the part that Commonweal quotes can be found on the internet only on Commonweal and a George Will book. There was a quite common urban legend that Buckley had said “Mater si, Magistra no” and George Will quotes this as being the article title that had the initial criticism. This was totally false and in fact Buckley said that George Wills was the source of this quip that was briefly mentioned in “For the Record” section containing Multiple items. It is not something that was ever a NR column title or something that Buckley ever said. But this has been used for years as an example of conservative disloyalty to the Church. But I guess it says a lot that the example they use was no such thing.

The Buckley and Obama incidents are not, of course, strictly analogous. Obama is not a Catholic, and his support for legalized abortion is a more serious problem than Buckley’s alleged rejection of papal teaching.

Yeah not strictly analogous or even in the same ballpark or that matter same moral universe. Have to love the complaining about the timing as an “alleged rejection of papal teaching.” Funny how Commonweal can actively deny papal teaching on so many subjects and find that Buckley’s case could be considered as rejection of papal teaching.

Prudential judgment was also needed in assessing Pope John’s encyclical. In both cases, however, the real issue is how the motives of those with whom we disagree about the application of church teaching are put in the dock. In the Buckley case, the papacy’s outraged defenders could imagine only two options: either Buckley accepts the encyclical in its entirety, or he is an apostate. In Notre Dame’s invitation to Obama, the university’s critics see a similar betrayal on the part of the university’s administration. Thus the invitation to Obama has been damned as a symptom of the school’s craven desire for recognition and prestige, its slavish obedience to “elite” liberal opinion, and its perverse determination to betray its Catholic identity.

Was there really such an outrage over Buckley’s comment about encyclical’s timing when it came out? Notice how Commonweal gives the basis of the motives a strawman that has not been the thrust of the argument made by so man. I can hardly remember anybody giving this as the motive, and the argument was about the invite itself and how it was scandalous, not an attribution of motives to Fr. Jenkins and his administration.

Some of the objections to the invitation have been more reasonable. Some say that a Catholic university might legitimately invite President Obama to give a talk or to engage in a colloquy, but giving him an honorary degree is tantamount to an imprimatur. Yet university officials have made no secret of Notre Dame’s disagreement with the president about abortion and stem-cell research, and certainly the president and the public cannot be in doubt about the church’s opposition to his policies in those areas. Honorary degrees signify an institution’s admiration for the accomplishments of the recipient. They do not signify blanket moral approbation

Thanks a lot that you acknowledge that “some” of the objections are reasonable. Sorry though you just can’t make noise about being pro-life and then pass out honors. If an honorary medical degree was given to a doctor who assisted in suicides you could not just use the excuse that you are against suicides. When you give an honorary law degree to a supposed Constitutional scholar who believes that abortion is shrined in the Constitution your are honoring his legal views – no two ways around that. Of course as the USCCB stated they are not to receive honors at all in the first place.

The church is not simply the prolife movement, and to the extent that every interaction between the church and our political system is held hostage to the demands of the most confrontational elements of that movement, the church’s social message, including its message about abortion, will be marginalized and ineffectual.

What! “The church is not simply the prolife movement” – wow we didn’t know that. I think it is a law that dissidents must bring up the single issue thing at every chance. Sorry the Church message about abortion is marginalized and ineffectual when so-called social justice types are not bothered by it and people who support murder of the innocent are seen as an acceptable pick to honor. Every time pro-abortion advocates are picked out as being acceptable you are saying that there belief is not beyond the pale. If they advocated the death penalty for the homeless they would be shunned at every level. But advocate the murder of the innocent in the womb, then it is just one issue of many. We must never forget the evil of abortion and must never minimize it – unfortunately when we coddle the supporters of the culture of death we are forgetting exactly that. But of course Commonweal did not spend any time being outraged about the President removing the Mexico City policy or federally supporting embryonic stem-call research and removing federal funding for adult stem-cell research. No they keep their ire for pro-life Catholics being upset about what the Notre Dame invite means.

[reference]

Creative Minority Report does an excellent fisk on the reply letter by St. Joseph University regarding the Chris Matthews invite.

The reply is no real surprise and I think I could have wrote it for them. Not just a single issue – check. Can’t please everybody – check. He is a respected journalist – check. Once you throw in that diversionary template you don’t have to give any real answers.

I guess big deal that he called pro-lifers terrorists for opposing Catholic abortion supporter Gov. Sevelius. But hey you can’t please everybody. Besides he has a wealth of experience being a host of a second rate news show on a third tier cable news network. We can’t all be as smart as Jesuit educated Matthews who thinks when human life begins is a “metaphysical” questions as he said before. So what if he also opposes the church on homosexual acts and contraception since he covered the fall of the Berlin wall. Timothy R. Lannon, S.J. the President of the university goes on to say:

Chris Matthews is also a proud, Jesuit-educated Catholic, who attended The College of the Holy Cross. In 2003, that school granted Matthews an honorary degree but came under fire because of his view on abortion. In my conversations with Chris, he told me that he has never questioned the teaching authority of the Church. He is an active member of his parish in Washington, D.C. He is a political commentator who raises issues on how intrusive government should be. Matthews has also received honorary degrees from eight other Catholic universities.

Yes, other people did it is an acceptable excuse for a Catholic university president. Besides if you don’t follow what the Church teaches on abortion you sure as Hell are questioning the teaching authority of the Church. Such as phrase can only make sense with a view of teaching authority that means absolutely nothing, more like tolerance in that they are allowed to teach, but that you have no responsibility to follow the teaching.

Manassas, Va. – Bishop William Lori of the Bridgeport Diocese, chairman of the Board of Trustees of Sacred Heart University (SHU), will boycott the university’s Discovery Awards and Scholarship Dinner on April 22 because it will honor Kerry Kennedy, a pro-abortion Catholic, the Fairfield County Catholic reports. The bishop also expressed his disapproval of the University of Notre Dame’s decision to honor and host President Obama at commencement.

“The nearly quarter million people who have signed the petition opposing Notre Dame’s honoring of an abortion rights supporter will be thankful for Bishop Lori’s public boycott of Sacred Heart University,” said Patrick Reilly, President of The Cardinal Newman Society. “SHU and all Catholic colleges must learn from the mistakes at Notre Dame, where defiance toward the U.S. bishops’ speakers and honorees policy has provoked outrage from Catholics nationwide.”

Sacred Heart University is a Catholic university located in Fairfield, CT. The university will honor Kerry Kennedy at its 20th Annual Discovery Awards and Scholarship Dinner on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 in Old Greenwich, CT. Bishop Lori was an honoree at the 2004 dinner.

The Fairfield County Catholic reports that “Bishop Lori indicated that he will neither support nor attend Sacred Heart University’s Discovery Awards and Scholarship Dinner on April 22 because it will honor Kerry Kennedy, a longtime Catholic pro-choice activist.”

Kerry Kennedy has a personal commitment to supporting abortion rights. According to the Connecticut Post¸ she “has disagreed with the Catholic [C]hurch’s stance on many issues, including abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage.”

Do they have a booking agency for pro-abortion Catholics for commencements and awards for Catholic universities? It seems that way at times.

Please pray for Fr. Jaki who is still in the ICU in Madrid and likely to die soon since they are unable to operate on him.

Update: Fr. Stanley Jaki died this afternoon in Spain. R.I.P. Having read some of his books I will certainly miss him as a writer on science and theology. I really enjoyed his book “Science & Creation, from eternal cycles to an oscillating universe.” whose title might sound off-putting, but is really a fascinating history of science that explores why so man cultures never developed the scientific method.

“People are human beings, and one cannot expect people to be abstinent. I think the Pope justly could and should express the Catholic Church’s position; however, when he discusses it he can also discuss compassion for those that can’t follow the Church’s position, of course not everyone is Catholic in Africa.”

Comment made by Father Mark C. Aita, S.J., assistant director of St. Joseph University’s Institute of Catholic Bioethics in regards to Pope Benedict XVI’s recent comments against using condoms. So I guess only Catholics must follow Divine law by this faulty line of reasoning. You can always tell a dissenter when they use “Church’s position” as if the Church was a think tank that issued position papers and talking points. Funny how compassion has come to mean allowing people to do gravely evil acts. I guess I am just old fashioned since I though compassion meant “suffering with” and that it would lead to wanting people not to gravely harm their souls.

Good Jesuit, Bad Jesuit also includes this tidbit:

The director of student health services for St. Joseph University in Philedephia , Laura Hurst, believes that “the school’s location offers enough convenience and opportunity to encourage students to purchase” condoms. “We’re very fortunate that we’re not in a very rural pocket, we’re right here on City Avenue,” she said. “Students can just walk to Rite Aid to get condoms, so they are easily accessible if they need them.” She continued.

“It’s always a fine line between staying within the values of the University, which we completely respect, and offering services to the students. We are fortunate that there are other medical centers in the area, and that there are health care providers other than us.

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, April 3, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Undeterred by the Notre Dame scandal, another Catholic University has invited a pro-abortion celebrity to address the school and receive an honorary degree at this year’s graduation ceremony.

St Joseph’s University of Philadelphia announced in March that political commentator Chris Matthews, a vocal proponent of abortion, is due to offer the commencement address and receive an honorary doctorate in communications at the 2009 Commencement ceremonies on Saturday, May 16.

Despite his avowed identity as a Roman Catholic, Matthews is known for his strong support of legalized abortion.

Matthews recently sparked criticism on the March 2 edition of his program, MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews,” for a statement comparing pro-life advocates to terrorists.[reference]

Well if the most prominent Catholic university in the U.S. can bring in the most radically pro-abortion President – then big deal if another one brings in one of his supporters. Actually we need to get all of these culture of death Catholics together for an award ceremony. The Iscariot Awards would be the perfect ceremony for them especially on Spy Wednesday.