Cardinal DiNardo ups the ante

posted at 11:15 am on March 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The protest over Notre Dame’s invitation to Barack Obama as a commencement speaker has grown to include four bishops and now a cardinal.  Andrew Malcolm reports that Cardinal Daniel DiNardo has added his considerable voice to the effort to convince Rev. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, to withdraw the invitation, or failing that, the honorary degree:

I find the invitation very disappointing. Though I can understand the desire by a university to have the prestige of a commencement address by the President of the United States, the fundamental moral issue of the inestimable worth of the human person from conception to natural death is a principle that soaks all our lives as Catholics, and all our efforts at formation, especially education at Catholic places of higher learning.”

The President has made clear by word and deed that he will promote abortion and will remove even those limited sanctions that control this act of violence against the human person.

The Bishops of the United States published a document a few years ago asking all Catholic universities to avoid giving a platform or an award to those politicians or public figures who promote the taking of unborn human life.

Even given the dignity of Office of the President, this offer is still providing a platform and an award for a public figure who has been candid on his pro-abortion views.

Particularly troubling is the Honorary Law Degree since it recognizes that the person is a ‘Teacher,’ in this case of the Law. I think that this decision requires charitable but vigorous critique.

The speaking gig could be rationalized as keeping with an open debate policy.  The university will also have Mary Ann Glendon speak at the same commencement.  Langdon served as US Ambassador to the Vatican and who just received the Laetare Award from Notre Dame for her tireless effort on pro-life causes.  The commencement could serve as a teaching moment, although it’s probably more accurate to say that it will send a very mixed message from the university about its view of the Catholic mission in public life.

Notre Dame has no ground on which to stand over the award of the honorary degree, however.  Barack Obama used his influence in law to pursue a path that allowed the maximum latitude in destroying innocent life, which is anathema to the Catholic Church and should be to Notre Dame as a part of it.  Giving him an award in recognition of his service to the law honors actions like blocking the Illinois Born Alive Protection Act on multiple occasions, which allowed abortion clinics to continue their practice of infanticide.  How can a part of the Catholic Church honor that?

More than 120,000 people agree, and have signed the petition demanding that Notre Dame withdraw the invitation or at least revoke the honorary degree.  The bishop of that diocese has already declared that he will boycott Notre Dame’s commencement activities.  Hopefully, the alumni will impress on Fr. Jenkins that the damage may go much further than just a truckload of petitions and a severe loss of prestige among the nation’s Catholic faithful.

Update: Divine intervention, via hockey?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

-First abortion
-then death penalty
-then molesting priests
-now divorce…

Chekote….

The bottome line here is; don’t let your confusion over religion get in the way of your relationship with God.

You’re wasting precious energy.

Later…

katy on March 29, 2009 at 2:25 PM

So, to construct an argument here: When bureaucrats act directly opposite to Church doctrine, that is hypocrisy. So, there is no conceivable reason President Obama, as the most pro-abortion POTUS ever, not to mention an advocate for infanticide at one point, should be honored and given a platform by a Catholic university.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:25 PM

Hopefully Fr. Jenkins just had a brain cramp when he issued the invite

No brain cramp on the part of Fr. Jenkins. Obama was invited for one reason: HE IS POTUS. Nothing to do with politics, policies. NOTHING. The people having the brain cramp are Cardinal DiNardo.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM

The bigger issue is why do the Catholics support and vote for Obama in HUGE NUMBERS? However, it’s easier for Catholics to feign outrage in this instance because they get more press this way than say. . . merely voting against the people on principle in the first place.

ThackerAgency on March 29, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Schools like Notre Dame and the so called Catholics that run them are the reason why Catholics voted for Obama in the first place. They offer a kind of permission for these Catholics to vote for these leaders by refusing to condemn their behavior and by celebrating them with honorary degrees and adulation. When the Church leaders say what they mean and mean what they say, we will not see so many Catholics voting for the Pro abortion leaders. The Pope never should have met with Pelosi. It sends the wrong message to those who are true Catholics.

bloggless on March 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM

Is this the same staff who goes around the world and beats its chest about protecting children?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:23 PM

According to you, they don’t. Get your story straight.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:27 PM

-First abortion
-then death penalty
-then molesting priests
-now divorce…

Yep, Katy. The Catholic Church as shown hypocrisy in all those areas.
There is your list everyone.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM

No. My beef with the Catholic Church is that they are hypocrites.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM

No, your beef with the Catholic Church is that you are an arrogant little clown with no interest in using your God-given brain for anything other than slander and libel.

If you were comfortable being outside the Church you would not be resorting to such rudeness and provocation.

Man up, go to confession, and get right with the Church already, and quit being such an obnoxious and ignorant jerk around here. What was the big sin that led you out the door in the first place? Go tell your priest.

tcn on March 29, 2009 at 2:29 PM

Obama was invited for one reason: HE IS POTUS. Nothing to do with politics, policies. NOTHING.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM

* Barack Obama passed in his first 50 days the funding of foreign abortions with your tax dollars.
* Tax payer money will also go to the killing of Embryos

Catholics need to keep their eye on the ball. Elections have consequences. If he gets a second term, look out for FOCA.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:29 PM

Chekote @2:28
The Catholic church did not molest priests!

Vince on March 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM

As Obama would read from the Teleprompter:

“Let me be clear”…

A man with faults believes abortion is barbaric.
A man with faults believes abortion is an absolute right.

The relativist thinks the second man is virtuous because the first man has faults.

The relativist is an ignorant fellow. Don’t expect reason from him.

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM

Yep, Katy. The Catholic Church as shown hypocrisy in all those areas.

There is your list, everyone.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Add to it “inviting Obama to give the commencement address to the graduating class of Notre Dame.”

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM

The Pope never should have met with Pelosi. It sends the wrong message to those who are true Catholics.

bloggless on March 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM

That’s what the Pope did for centuries. Excommunicate, banish, ban anyone who disagreed with the Catholic Church. The end result was: empty churches all over Western Europe. So don’t be looking for the Pope to stop meeting with PRO-CHOICE politicians.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM

The Catholic church did not molest priests!

Vince on March 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM

You don’t expect your dog to recite poetry, yet you expect chekote to assent to the laws of reason.

I admire your optimism.

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM

No brain cramp on the part of Fr. Jenkins. Obama was invited for one reason: HE IS POTUS. Nothing to do with politics, policies. NOTHING.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM

I know you didn’t intend it, but that is, precisely, the problem.

His decision/invitation *should* be based on more than Obama simply being POTUS. His faith requires it.

Midas on March 29, 2009 at 2:32 PM

“Even given the dignity of Office of the President…”

Ppffftt … Funny if it wasn’t so sad.

KS Rex on March 29, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Again, just because the Catholic Church chooses to enforce one more than the other does not change the fact that its opposition is based on the same principle. The exemptions are both based on the notion of no other alternative is available to save, protect life. Those are the facts. Nothing to correct.

[Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:08 PM]

Quit citing Catholic doctrine, will ya? You don’t know what you are talking about. Beyond your probable citing of the ten commandments, you don’t even know what principles apply.

“Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: ….”

There is no such admonition wrt to capital punishment.

The difference has nothing to do with enforcement of same principles but the application of different principles. But you wouldn’t know that because you are an idiot who talks his ass rather than look things up and consider what you read before pontificating. I know it sounds good and works well for you in the shower but let me tell you that out here in the real world, you’re still wet behind the ears.

Dusty on March 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM

Excommunicate, banish, ban anyone who disagreed with the Catholic Church.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM

That is exactly what the Church should be doing when hypocrisy comes to light. If these individuals had moral courage or intellectual honesty, they would have left voluntarily.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM

The Catholic Church as shown hypocrisy in all those areas.

There is your list, everyone.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Again with the hypocrisy fetish.

As logical as my saying you’re wrong because you have a pancreas.

Everyone has a pancreas.
Everyone is a hypocrite.

There is no differential relevance to your increasingly queer appeal to “hypocrisy.”

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:34 PM

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM

Very well put.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:35 PM

It’s hard to go to church every Sunday. It’s hard to make your Holy Day obligations. It’s hard to be a pratical Catholic.

It is much easier to find fault elsewhere in order to justify what you do or don’t do. There is good news however Chekote. The church will welcome you back and help you to understand what you are having difficulty with now.

Vince on March 29, 2009 at 2:37 PM

That’s what the Pope did for centuries. Excommunicate, banish, ban anyone who disagreed with the Catholic Church.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM

Mathematicians have a nasty practice of rejecting publications of authors who claim that 2 + 2 = 5.

You’re a moral relativist. It’s fine. Just admit it so others know where you’re coming from.

I bet you’re one of those who thinks that both teams in the soccer tournament should get a first place trophy.

Am I right? I can smell it a mile away.

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM

It’s your list Chekote… Own it.

These are your issues that you and you alone need to reconcile within yourself not just about the Church but with humanity. Don’t simply blame the Church. That’s easy.

You seem to have a lot of anger at this institution.

Is that a good place to pour it out on?

What have you done personally to correct these flaws in the RCC?
What will you do to help those who have been hurt by these flawed instituions?
When will you… you take responsibility for your part in a flawed world other than hating it and pointing out its every detestable hypocrisy?
It’s all about you Chekote…
By not acting to right these wrong you despise, you are the hypocrite.
Matt 23:27. Do some reading and less ranting.

We are all but filthy rags before the Lord…..

Every part of humanity has it’s flaws. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. The C

katy on March 29, 2009 at 2:41 PM

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:34 PM

You are assuming that everybody is hypocritical. So your analogy doesn’t hold. Try again.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:46 PM

Hmmm Matthew 23:27…. Are you talking about the Catholic Church, katy?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM

There’s something inside of you chekote that you hate.
Until you see it and face it… all you will ever see is hate and hypocrisy in everything you come across.

Churches are made up of individuals and until you see the good that comes from those individuals in the church who are trying to make it better and you only focus on the bad… your life will be nothing but chaos and…. well.. hypocrisy.

katy on March 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM

You are assuming that everybody is hypocritical. So your analogy doesn’t hold. Try again.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:46 PM

We’re waiting for the name of a person who has never lapsed into hypocrisy.

I guess by your evasion we can surmise it’s going to be a long wait?

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 2:50 PM

If you haven’t done it yet, would you please defend against Obama indecency by signing the petition at http://www.notredamescandal.com, whether you are Catholic or not.

Catholics don’t need any more criticism, but we sure could use some help from non-Catholics of good will.

Thanks.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM

I am finding this all so interesting. Not the obama speech thing so much as the insights I’m learning about the varied ways Catholics view themselves. Hope this does not cause anyone to see me as intruding where I don’t belong as it’s not meant to. It’s just that someone in my age group, that which grew up(a Protestant child) in the 40′s and 50′s, long considered decades of Catholic strength, it was and remains a subject of much interest to me.

jeanie on March 29, 2009 at 2:51 PM

I would follow up Dusty’s post with information from the actual Catechism, a book that Chekote seems not to possess, but is the Catholic source of doctrinal info (as opposed to americancatholic.org).

Contrast the treatment of abortion with the death penalty:

Abortion -
CCC 2270: “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.”
CCC 2271: “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.”
CCC 2272: “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life.”

Death penalty -
CCC 2266:”Assuming the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.” (The Catechism goes on to describe this possibility as “very rare, if not practically non-existent”).

The difference in emphasis and gravity applied to these two issues could not be clearer, The qualifier on the death penalty comes from the Church’s recognition that even if the death of the criminal would definitively remove any possibility of redemption, some criminals will freely choose evil. The innocent unborn have no choice and are dependent on the moral choices of their parents, which the Church seeks to guide in the direction of protection of life.

Just FYI: Trying to equate the actions of flawed men in protecting the pederasts (at least get that right) with the doctrines of the Church is nonsense.

inmypajamas on March 29, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Jeff

Stop making a fool of yourself by ascribing my politics.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:53 PM

You are assuming that everybody is hypocritical. So your analogy doesn’t hold. Try again.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:46 PM

You’re confusing hypothetical with hypocritical. His argument was that hypocrisy is human nature, not that all humans are necessarily hypocrites. The Church identifies seven deadly sins, I believe.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM

if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.” (The Catechism goes on to describe this possibility as “very rare, if not practically non-existent”).

Exactly my point. Catholic Church sees no reason for the death penalty. Just like abortion.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:56 PM

inmypajamas on March 29, 2009 at 2:52 PM

I look forward to seeing Chekote engage your logic, but I am not holding my breath.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:58 PM

No, you are being deliberately obtuse. The Church, explicitly and in a foundational document, allows for an exception. CASE CLOSED.

inmypajamas on March 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:56 PM

Oooooh, FAIL. :)

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM

Fr. Jenkins is facing the same test question given to John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Thomas More. While siding with the powerful and get invited to all the right cocktail parties seems more alluring than losing your head, the bonus question is:

What does it profit a man to gain the entire world…

BitterClinger on March 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM

Stop making a fool of yourself by ascribing my politics.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:53 PM

Anonymous commenter claims moral superiority over the Pope — accuses others of making fools of selves!

Does that about sum it up, old sport?

jeff_from_mpls on March 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM

What does it profit a man to gain the entire world…

BitterClinger on March 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM

Someone earlier covered this and summed it up well.

I hate to say this, but Notre Dame is simply doing what it started back in 1967 when it adopted a lay board of trustees which enabled them to get government funding, it typically receives $80 million in federal grants a year. It ended the control of the university by the Congregation of the Holy Cross in order to get the government funding. Today most of the faculty is Liberal and many are non-Catholic. And any loss of revenue from alumni over this incident will be more than offset by the school’s contract with NBC Sports. As far as I’m concerned Notre Dame is Catholic in name only, and they should just change their name to Our Lady of Greed.

Deanna on March 29, 2009 at 12:39 PM

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Chekote # 2:56PM
For crying out loud, inmypajamas put it right out there in black and grey and you still blew it!

Vince on March 29, 2009 at 3:07 PM

Hmmm Matthew 23:27…. Are you talking about the Catholic Church, katy?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Inviting Obama to address the graduating class of Notre Dame is hypocrisy on the school’s part, as well as the Church’s part if they don’t oppose this.

From the Notre Dame website on Faith and Service.

From its earliest days, Notre Dame’s distinctive mission has set it apart from other institutions of higher education. The difference lies not so much in terms of subject matter and academic disciplines as in the perception of how those disciplines ought to serve God and humanity. At the very heart of Notre Dame’s mission is its profound faith heritage and aspiration to be at the center of Catholic intellectual life—to be a bellwether institution in the pursuit of truth and knowledge, while remaining guided and elevated by the moral imperatives of the Catholic faith.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:11 PM

Chekote,
When Jesus spoke his concern was always about the individual. He spoke in metaphors, mysteries and types and shadows. So when he spoke in Matt 23. he was talking about the hypocrisy in each soul, each person.
When he proclaimed to his Apostles that the Temple would be destroyed and be rebuilt in 3 days the apostles thought he was nuts because it took 70 years to built it. But Jesus was talking about Himself. Dying and raising from the dead in 3 days.
So remember if/when you read the words of Jesus it was always in connection to the individual.
So Matt 23 was not about the church. It was about our own temples. Our own lives. Our own souls.

Like I said, the Bible is not a talking point, it’s infinite wisdom.

katy on March 29, 2009 at 3:12 PM

Until you see it and face it… all you will ever see is hate and hypocrisy in everything you come across.

Churches are made up of individuals and until you see the good that comes from those individuals in the church who are trying to make it better and you only focus on the bad… your life will be nothing but chaos and…. well.. hypocrisy.

katy on March 29, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Incredibly stated, I agree. Anger in a person can blind them and make one miserable and not look at both sides.

sheebe on March 29, 2009 at 3:14 PM

Fr. Jenkins is facing the same test question given to John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Thomas More. While siding with the powerful and get invited to all the right cocktail parties seems more alluring than losing your head, the bonus question is:

What does it profit a man to gain the entire world…

BitterClinger on March 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM

Exactly, well said. This is also a moment to clarify for all those who have not been taught, refused to hear or otherwise make up their own doctrine that the Church is opposed to abortion period. This is not a point up for debate or other moral equivocations. It is a teachable moment.

msmveritas on March 29, 2009 at 3:14 PM

I absolutely hate it when posters take a topic like this and use it to attack Catholics. The point of this post is that Christian people of faith are standing up to a President who does not value life. I don’t give a rat’s rear if you don’t agree with some of the precepts of Catholicism. The point is we all need to stand up for what is right. Sending our money overseas to fund abortions is not right. Partial birth abortion is not right. If you believe in supporting abortion, that’s your decision. The legality is not in question. The morality is. By the way, I am not Catholic, but I have had a lot of friends over the years who are.

kingsjester on March 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Edmund Burke supposedly wrote: “Evil happens when good men do nothing.”

Father Jenkins, where do you stand?

BuckeyeSam on March 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM

I think that enough of you have established that poster “Chekote” is a Democrat troll who is trying to justify the acceptance of Obama being honored at Notre Dame with the most spurious of arguments that alternate between the banal and the pernicious.

Taking a break from and a fresh approach, I would like to comment upon the main reason Notre Dame president Rev. John Jenkins gave for presenting Obama with an honorary doctorate degree during his May 17th appearance: that Obama has contributed to an unprecedented groundswell of “racial healing” in this Country.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Therefore, Father Jenkins is either unacceptably ignorant or he is a typical partisan Democrat BALD-FACED LIAR. I would imagine you can tell which one of these would be my personal choice.

Obama has not contributed to “racial healing” in the U.S.

Obama has used race as a political tool to silence his political opposition. Obama, through his political apparatus, has accused Catholics who criticize his abortion stances as being racially-motivated. During last year’s presidential campaign, Obama even branded ex-President Bill Clinton as a racist! Now I’m no fan of Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton has an especially noxious record on abortion. But a RACIST? Come ON!

That’s not “racial healing”. That is a DISGRACE! And Father John Jenkins is an insufferable liar who needs to be bounced out of Notre Dame on his Democrat ass.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 3:23 PM

CCC 2271: “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.

Really? From the 5th to the 16th century the belief was that the sould did not ever the body until “quickening”. So abortion was not treated as murder until the fetal stage. Pope Innocent III (circa 1161-1216)ruled that a Carthusian monk who had arranged for his female lover to obtain an abortion was not guilty of homicide if the fetus was not “animated.” St. Augustine argued that abortion early in pregnacy is not murder because no soul is destroyed. So the Catholic Church is not telling the whole truth.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

No it isn’t.

The only people who find in favor of abortions “to save the mother’s life” are abortinists. Everyone else knows there are other ways around abortion, such as C-sections, to “save the mother’s life”.

Church teaching is fairly exact on this point. Look in the Catechism — we know you have one because you have quoted from it. Read what the Church has to say on abortion, and then stop asking stupid questions.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM

Inviting Obama to address the graduating class of Notre Dame is hypocrisy on the school’s part, as well as the Church’s part if they don’t oppose this.

They have had many pro-choice politicians speak at the university. Why the outrage now? ND would be foolish to rescind the invitation.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM

I think that enough of you have established that poster “Chekote” is a Democrat troll who is trying to justify the acceptance of Obama being honored at Notre Dame with the most spurious of arguments that alternate between the banal and the pernicious.

Actually, you are very wrong. I am not a Democrat. I am a conservative, very active in local Republican politics. Just ask jeanie, artist and INC. I just happen to be pro-choice because I can see where reasonable, moral people can come to the conclusion that a fertilized egg or an embryo consisting of 1o cells (that’s what we are talking about when we deal with embryonic stem cell research) is not a person. Therefore, in order to allow people to exercise their personal beliefs about life, ensoulment, etc., the best public policy position is to permit abortion on demand in the early stages (1st trimester) and restrict it during the latter stages.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM

Look in the Catechism — we know you have one because you have quoted from it.

The Catechism is not telling the whole truth. Yes, the Church always said that abortion was immoral. However, through the centuries the church changed its position as the WHEN an abortion would be treated as HOMICIDE.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Maybe Oslime-a can abort a few babies to further the “public debate” on the issue?

There is no issue. It is a vile habit and Oslime-a is a despicable sack of shit for promoting it. The racists don’t care….more black babies are aborted than any other. I guess Oslime-a hates white America (floods) and blacks.

csdeven on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Bye Guys.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Therefore, in order to allow people to exercise their personal beliefs about life, ensoulment, etc., the best public policy position is to permit abortion on demand in the early stages (1st trimester) and restrict it during the latter stages.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM

I think you should offer up your stem cells first. Then you can promote the creation of life to simply destroy it. Oh wait, you wont be able to speak. Too bad for you.

csdeven on March 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Then you can promote the creation of life to simply destroy it. Oh wait, you wont be able to speak. Too bad for you.

csdeven on March 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

They are using excess embryos from IVF that are going to be destroyed anyway. There is no creating of life for the sole purpose of destroying. Do you know anybody who has had a IVF baby? Chances are several low grade embryos were destroyed during the process. Are you going to call them murderers?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

In an effort to help those who still don’t get what the fuss is over Notre Dame’s plans to honor Obama with an HDr and the commencement address invite, let’s take the religious and theological aspects out of this situation.

The Catholic Church has a very clear and rigid hierarchy. Father Jenkins’ boss is Bishop D’Arcy. The bishop communicates church policy through direct interactions with Jenkins as well as through documents issued through the USCCB. Four years ago the USCCB issued an instruction to Catholic institutions telling them to avoid honoring individuals who promote abortion. Through his regular contact with Notre Dame (by attending the commencement ceremony each year if nothing else), Bishop D’Arcy is certainly available to Father Jenkins for consultation on church policy. Hence, there is no excuse for Jenkins to be either unaware of or unclear about that policy. He can disagree with it, but he can’t claim he didn’t know what it was.

What did Jenkins do? He called the Bishop a few minutes before ND was about to make the public press announcement about Obama’s HDr and commencement address — and long after the process for nominating and approving Obama’s HDr degree began (trust me, these things take quite a while at any decent university) — and told him that ND was going to give Obama an honorary doctorate, the highest award universities award to individuals (special awards notwithstanding).

Basically, Jenkins ignored a direct order and the chain of command in his organization and thumbed his nose at his boss in the process.

Forget morality. Forget religion. If Jenkins worked at most large organizations he’d be fired.

But this is a university, you say. What about “academic freedom”? To that I encourage everyone to look up some of the past HDr recipients, as I did a couple of days ago. What you’ll discover is a pretty typical mix of folks who were awarded HDr’s based on their scholarly achievements (those folks were most certainly nominated by Deans in consultation with their faculty), others who were nominated based on their notoriety (including some famous painters, authors and the like; again, those were probably nominated by the academics with input from alumni and students), and people who received their HDr’s because of what they did for the University. For example, one of the most recent HDr recipients was the fellow who ran their last fundraising campaign. Another was a large benefactor to the college. So the argument that HDr’s are purely academic matters is bull-hockey. HDr candidates are carefully vetted, voted upon, and ultimately approved by the Board of Trustees.

Does this mean none of the HDr recipients are pro-abortion? Certainly not. But Obama isn’t just personally “pro-choice,” he has actively promoted the availability of abortion. Clearly he is not fit to receive an HDr at a Catholic university.

Y-not on March 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

csdeven on March 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

I think we can all agree on that.

And who believes anything he says about himself after he has clearly misrepresented so many other things throughout this thread of commentary?

Not me.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

The Catechism is not telling the whole truth.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Chances are several low grade embryos were destroyed during the process. Are you going to call them murderers?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

We are laughing at your ignorance.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:42 PM

The Catechism is not telling the whole truth. Yes, the Church always said that abortion was immoral. However, through the centuries the church changed its position as the WHEN an abortion would be treated as HOMICIDE.

[Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM]

Bye Guys.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

LMAO. What a dunce. If I engage Chekote on this subject again, please, just hit me with a stick.

Dusty on March 29, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Basically, Jenkins ignored a direct order and the chain of command in his organization and thumbed his nose at his boss in the process.

Forget morality. Forget religion. If Jenkins worked at most large organizations he’d be fired.

Y-not on March 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

This is good to know, and if Jenkins is fired, I’ll consider the Church’s moral authority restored at Notre Dame.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:45 PM

However, through the centuries the church changed its position as the WHEN an abortion would be treated as HOMICIDE.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

THAT is a LIE.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

They have had many pro-choice politicians speak at the university. Why the outrage now? ND would be foolish to rescind the invitation.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM

Enough is enough, time has come to just Stop and take a Stand, if it means looking foolish, so be it.

clarifides on March 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM

I could not help but take a look. My question is, What did Fr Hesburgh have to say about this?? I know that he has always been a social liberal but he always had the church’s best interest at heart and was a true Catholic as well as a patriot. I wonder if he was even consulted and what his reaction was.

retiredeagle on March 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM

When Pelosi said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” about the beginning of life:

I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition … St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said that’s just wrong.

“Since the first century the church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law,” the bishops said.

“Given the scientific fact that a human life begins at conception, the only moral norm needed to understand the church’s opposition to abortion is the principle that each and every human life has inherent dignity, and thus must be treated with the respect due to a human person. This is the foundation for the church’s social doctrine. … Conversely, to claim that some live human beings do not deserve respect or should not be treated as ‘persons’ … is to deny the very idea of inherent human rights,” the group said.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

THAT is a LIE.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM

A brief timeline:

Circa 100 to 150 CE: The Didache (also known as “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles”), was a document written for the guidance of Christians. It forbade all abortions.
Prior to 380 CE: Many Christian leaders issued unqualified condemnations of abortion. So did two church synods in the early 4th century:
Circa 380 CE: The Apostolic Constitutions allowed abortion if it was done early enough in pregnancy. But it condemned abortion if the fetus was of human shape and contained a soul.
St. Augustine (354-430 CE) accepted the Aristotelian Greek Pagan concept of “delayed ensoulment”. He wrote that a human soul cannot live in an unformed body. 3 Thus, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed (or, more accurately, only a vegetable or animal soul is terminated).
Pope Innocent III (1161-1216): He determined that a monk who had arranged for his lover to have an abortion was not guilty of murder if the fetus was not “animated” at the time.
Early in the 13th century, he stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of “quickening” – when the woman first feels movement of the fetus. Before that time, abortion was a less serious sin, because it terminated only potential human person, not an actual human person.

Pope Sixtus V (1588) issued a Papal bull “Effraenatam” which threatened those who carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and the death penalty.
Pope Gregory XIV (1591) revoked the previous Papal bull and reinstated the “quickening” test, which he determined happened 116 days into pregnancy (16½ weeks).
Pope Pius IX (1869) dropped the distinction between the “fetus animatus” and “fetus inanimatus.” The soul was believed to have entered the pre-embryo at conception.
Leo XIII (1878-1903): He Issued a decree in 1884 that prohibited craniotomies. This is an unusual form of abortion used under crisis situations late in pregnancy. It is occasionally needed to save the life of the pregnant woman.
He issued a second degree in 1886 that prohibited all procedures that directly killed the fetus, even if done to save the woman’s life.

Canon law was revised in 1917 and 1983 to refer simply to “the fetus.” The church penalty for abortions at any stage of pregnancy was, and remains, excommunication.

Love to continue this but I got to get some work done.

Bye for now. FOR REAL!

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM

Conservatives believe in the right to life, a strong national defense and fiscal responsibility. You are not even moderate.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM

They are using excess embryos from IVF that are going to be destroyed anyway.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Chekote’s “Freedom of Choice” for our pre-born brothers and sisters in humanity: EITHER have your brain cells vacuumed out of your tiny body OR have your entire body tossed into the waste bin.

Now THAT’S “choice” they may not believe in, but according to Chekote, there are no other possible choices.

BULL!

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Bye for now. FOR REAL!

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

I already beat you to the punch with an official church release from The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Barack Obama is anathema to the sacred nature of all life and the dignity of the human spirit. I encourage everyone to sign the petition.

davo on March 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Quoting Professor David Albert Jones:

Either way it’s still crap.

Why?

Because a) Aristotelian delayed ensoulment theory has never been accepted by the Roman Catholic Church as official teaching and b) the Church’s constant condemnation of abortion has never relied upon theories such as ensoulment for its binding force.

The Roman Catholic Church has consistently condemned abortion as a grave sin from the first century to the 21st. The Didache, an important Church document from the First Century said:

“You shall not kill the foetus by abortion, or destroy the infant already born,”

Tertullian (c160-240) said:

“For us [Christians] we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter when you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to birth. That is a man which is going to be one: you have the fruit already in the seed.” Apology 9:6

St Jerome c 342-420 said

“They drink potions to ensure sterility and are guilty of murdering a human being not yet conceived. Some, when they learn that they are with child through sin, practice abortion by the use of drugs. Frequently they die themselves and are brought before the rulers of the lower world guilty of three crimes: suicide, adultery against Christ, and murder of an unborn child.” -Letter 22:13

And there are multiple examples of abortion being condemned by the Church fathers, to name a few, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus and Cyprian as well as agreement among Jerome, Ambrose, Gregory and Augustine that abortion at any stage was a grave sin against emergent human life. Jerome and Aquinas speculated as to the moment of ensoulment but always denounced abortion.

The delayed ensoulment abortion canard was nailed back in the fourth century by St Basil the Great, who declared: “The hairsplitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us. Whoever deliberately commits abortion is subject to the same penalty as homicide.”

Or as Professor David Albert Jones wrote in The Soul of the Embryo: “The constant and consistent Christian tradition from the Early Church to the nineteenth century repudiated abortion at any stage of pregnancy while offering different penances as a means to reconciliation.”

The notion that abortion, at any stage, has ever been acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church is a barefaced lie.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

Chekote, whoever you are: you may be a Republican and you may even be conservative, but I’d bet you are not a Catholic. If you were, you would also oppose Notre Dame inviting the Not-So-One to speak……

chai on March 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM

They have had many pro-choice politicians speak at the university. Why the outrage now? ND would be foolish to rescind the invitation.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:27 PM

There has been increased focus, in recent years, to avoid lauding pro-choice politicians at commencements etc. I know Chris Matthews has been targeted in the past. I will grant you that Obama’s election may have served as something of a wake up call to the Church too. FOCA seems to have served as a rallying point much in the way the stimulus and spending is serving to rally the lost GOP.

In all honesty, I am not sure that the Church was as aware of how its members could disregard this important aspect of Church teaching. I still fault the Church for not making this clear prior to the election. I know my sister, a nurse in a Catholic hospital needles our Parish priests constantly to stay on the subject. Obama and FOCA is a line in the sand, sorry if you dont like that, but as a Catholic I believe any moment to teach is a good one.

msmveritas on March 29, 2009 at 4:09 PM

Given the fact that the Catholic Church has been complicit in covering up the rapes committed by its priests and complicit with the acts of Nazi Germany, (and these are only headline items) I find it highly entertaining that it tries to take moral stands and even more amusing that anyone takes it seriously.

But maybe that is just me.

Doubt it somehow.

Ares on March 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM

I am a Catholic and my Catholic faith is the greatest gift God has given me next to His son. But I am easily disillusioned by the hierarchy of the Church when they ignore Fr. Pfleger’s racism because he brings in government grants and turn a blind eye not only to abortion per se, but to promoting by not censoring pro-life politicians or giving awards to presidents who encourage infanticide. And don’t get me started on the cover-up of the sexual abuse scandal.

Still, I have to remember that the deposit of faith is strong, but the men who administer it are weak.

I would hope that the traditional Catholic alumni of Notre Dame (not the cafeteria variety) would stop donating to a college that no longer keeps the faith. And I would hope that some of the graduates will turn their backs on the president. It is about time that the Church stand up for what it believes in. And we are the Church.

BitterClinger on March 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM

And I would hope that some of the graduates will turn their backs on the president.

BitterClinger on March 29, 2009 at 4:18 PM

It is disappointing to read that more than 90% of the graduating class WANTS Obama to be there. But remember that these graduates have been subjected to non-stop Leftist propaganda during almost every moment of their “Catholic” education.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

chai on March 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM

Republican, perhaps, but Chekote admittedly voted for Obama and Clinton. Therefore, no way they’re conservative. Catholic — about as much as Ares.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:29 PM

No brain cramp on the part of Fr. Jenkins. Obama was invited for one reason: HE IS POTUS. Nothing to do with politics, policies. NOTHING. The people having the brain cramp are Cardinal DiNardo

You pro-abortion supporters just don’t get it. The greatest failure of modern society is the murder of the most innocent among us the unborn.

apoole on March 29, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Bye for now. FOR REAL!

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Given the fact that the Catholic Church has been complicit in covering up the rapes committed by its priests and complicit with the acts of Nazi Germany…

Ares on March 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM

LOL. Shift change?

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:32 PM

LOL. Shift change?

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:32 PM

Yup, union rules are a bitch don’t ya know? I guess we are supposed to get derailed now arguing what Pius XII should have done during WWII.

msmveritas on March 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

Obama was invited for one reason: HE IS POTUS. Nothing to do with politics, policies.

In fact, Father Jenkins has justified conferring an honorary Notre Dame doctorate degree upon Obama due to a variety of alleged political accomplishments, absolutely none of which Obama has actually achieved.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

ND pres. Jenkins will be further completely abashed, having handed Mr. Obama an honorary law degree, after Mr. Obama becomes only the 2nd man to occupy the office of POTUS to resign! – http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91317

bmac727 on March 29, 2009 at 4:39 PM

but I’d bet you are not a Catholic.

I was raised Catholic but I am non-practicing. See, no hypocrisy on my part.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Just another church heavyweight who doesn’t really do anything about opposing abortion until there’s a potential visit by the president and the chance to be all outraged on CNN. Then it’s back to more toothless do nothingness from the Catholic church.

Yawn yawn yawn.

Dave Rywall on March 29, 2009 at 5:07 PM

You pro-abortion supporters just don’t get it. The greatest failure of modern society is the murder of the most innocent among us the unborn.

apoole on March 29, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Quit with the pro-abortion nonsense. I am pro-choice. The insistance by pro-lifers of calling everybody that doesn’t agree with them as pro-abortion makes them look like cretins. If pro-choice groups were pro-abortion why did they oppose the Chinese forced abortions policy? Why do they push for contraceptive in order to avoid unplanned pregnecies? And the greatest failure of modern society is the ongoing oppression – especially of women and children – around the world.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:09 PM

The notion that abortion, at any stage, has ever been acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church is a barefaced lie.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

When did schtupping boys and nuns get official sign off? Because I am pretty sure the Church has been complicit in that for at least the last thousand years.

Apples and oranges maybe? Perhaps there are hairs to be split here – abortion vs. homosexual statutory rape.

Catholics are the very last people on earth who should be sounding off on moral issues.

“The mote in your eye” comes to mind.

Ares on March 29, 2009 at 5:10 PM

In fact, Father Jenkins has justified conferring an honorary Notre Dame doctorate degree upon Obama due to a variety of alleged political accomplishments, absolutely none of which Obama has actually achieved.

jay12 on March 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

Doesn’t Notre Dame confer degrees every year on students who support abortion rights? I don’t believe they have a disqualification for students or faculty based on the abortion issue.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 5:11 PM

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:32 PM

I am not posting as Ares. But good point. What about the Catholic Church cooperation with Mussolini and the Nazi? I am sure they did that in the name of the dignity of human life.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:11 PM

Doesn’t Notre Dame confer degrees every year on students who support abortion rights? I don’t believe they have a disqualification for students or faculty based on the abortion issue.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 5:11 PM

There isn’t. This is a phony, stupid, controversy that will only get Obama more sympathy.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:12 PM

The notion that abortion, at any stage, has ever been acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church is a barefaced lie.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

Read your history. It has been back and forth as to whether it was deemed murder depending on the stage of the pregnancy.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:13 PM

Republican, perhaps, but Chekote admittedly voted for Obama and Clinton.

I DID NOT VOTE for Obama. I voted for Clinton in ’92 because Bush I lied about raising taxes and was a big government Republican. I voted for Dole in ’96.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:16 PM

I want the Vatican to weigh in on this. American Catholicism is creeping into Post Modernist relativism, and the Pope has called them on it. Time to step up again Holy Father….

davecatbone on March 29, 2009 at 5:18 PM

I was raised Catholic but I am non-practicing. See, no hypocrisy on my part.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Except that part where you tried to misrepresent the Catholic Church position on abortion and the death penalty, eliciting a firm spanking from the site’s administrator.

Not as a matter of doctrine, as it does with abortion. In fact, the church specifically does not reject it entirely, as explained in paragraph 2267 of the Catechism. Maybe if you didn’t get your anti-Catholic talking points from Jack Chick tracts, you’d know that.

Ed Morrissey on March 29, 2009 at 11:39 AM

I guess you’re not a hypocrite, if you start with a flat out lie.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 5:21 PM

Beck and O’Reilly are wrong. This invitation should be revoked. And the people who invited the world’s biggest supporter of abortion should apologize to the Catholics in their midst.

Basilsbest on March 29, 2009 at 5:23 PM

Except that part where you tried to misrepresent the Catholic Church position on abortion and the death penalty, eliciting a firm spanking from the site’s administrator.

What are you talking about?

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:24 PM

I DID NOT VOTE for Obama. I voted for Clinton in ‘92 because Bush I lied about raising taxes and was a big government Republican. I voted for Dole in ‘96.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:16 PM

Monomaniacal.

Basilsbest on March 29, 2009 at 5:24 PM

Bye Guys.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 3:36 PM

*Goes to hit bong and listen to marching orders from Soros for tomorrow.*

bluelightbrigade on March 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM

Not as a matter of doctrine, as it does with abortion. In fact, the church specifically does not reject it entirely, as explained in paragraph 2267 of the Catechism. Maybe if you didn’t get your anti-Catholic talking points from Jack Chick tracts, you’d know that.

The same could be said about abortion. The Catholic Church does permit the termination of a pregnacy if the life of the mother is at risk. I don’t know who Jack Chick is.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:26 PM

How can a part of the Catholic Church honor that?

How indeed. I’m not usually in favor of protest actions at these types of events. The graduates worked too hard for too long for “their moment” overshadowed by politics. In this case, I think an exception is probably necessary. The teaching moment coming from those graduates seeing the Catholic faith stand up for what it believes.

Sadly all that is going to happen is the filthy liar will get a gushing reception by the “Catholics” at Notre Dame.

highhopes on March 29, 2009 at 5:28 PM

Read your history. It has been back and forth as to whether it was deemed murder depending on the stage of the pregnancy.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:13 PM

Let’s compare the history you cut and pasted with mine, and I cited my source, a noted authority on the subject.

Augustine thought that the embryo became a human being (homo) when it was “formed” which he thought was at 46 days. However, he also speculated that, even before that time, the embryo already had a human soul (anima) which he or she got from his or her parents. And like all early Christian writers, Augustine was opposed to killing the embryo at any stage.

chunderroad on March 29, 2009 at 5:29 PM

but I’d bet you are not a Catholic.
I was raised Catholic but I am non-practicing. See, no hypocrisy on my part.

Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 5:03 PM

I could have laid odds on that. LOL I can’t believe you’re still here ranting(yes it’s ranting when you spend the whole day going on and on about something and the comments will have no effect on anything or anyone.)

Your basic premise that the Catholic Church is trying to influence government is ridiculous. I assume it’s based on the fact that many officials in the Church have not only criticized, but also refused Communion to, politicians who support abortion.

Seee the thing is the Church has every right to tell it’s members that if they do something that goes against the tenets of the Church they will suffer the consequences. The member then has the right of free will to do as he/she chooses. If that influences the member’s actions as far as governing, again that is their own personal decision. The government has no right to tell the Church not to do so. And that is separation of church and state.

And as far as the fact that you think the Church is “hypocritical?” Well that’s comical since you claim to be a “non-practicing” Catholic. You are either a Catholic or you’re not. You fit into that category of people who want to complain and/or change their church rather then find one that has the same values/tenets as they do. After all it’s not like there aren’t alot to choose from.

I’m going to have a nice Sunday dinner. Take some advice, get rid of all that angst you seem to have and enjoy life a little. Or grow up, whichever comes first.

Deanna on March 29, 2009 at 5:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5