The Cathoholic

Notre Dame's Gerard Bradley: truth or prestige?

As President Barack Obama heads out to Notre Dame to deliver the commencement address and receive an honorary degree, Gerard V. Bradley, a law professor at the university issues this tough assessment that suggests the university's leadership was ill-prepared for the avalanche of criticism it received, and that it must now come to grips with the path on which it is well advanced. In National Review, Bradley writes:

"Notre Dame could not have expected the tidal wave of criticism it has received. Notre Dame did not foresee that its decision would elicit 60 (and counting) episcopal rebukes, that it would effectively pit the university against the Church’s teachers. Notre Dame could not have expected that its decision would become a national referendum, not only on the morality of abortion, but on whether — as some Catholic commentators say — any American Catholics are listening to the bishops. And whether any of them should.

"I rehearse these details, you can now see, because this whole episode has taken on a momentous life of its own. It has outrun Notre Dame’s original understanding of what was at stake. The stakes on the table now were not there on March 20. The matters at hand now were not then known. Notre Dame now faces a new and different decision, one that is not determined by anything it decided on or about March 20. It is not quite a do-over, but it is close to that — a fresh opportunity to make things right. Nothing but the free choice of the responsible university officials — mainly, at this late juncture, Father Jenkins — will settle it. And he should seize this second chance by withholding the honorary degree from President Obama on Sunday afternoon.

"Why? What is at stake now? What decision does Notre Dame face on Sunday? 

"At the heart of the matter is the immorality — the sin — of scandal. Scandal is, basically, leading others into sin, in this case by clouding others’ understanding of the truth about abortion. Here, we are talking about the scandalous effects portended by America’s leading Catholic institution when it honors the most pro-abortion president in history. The atmosphere at graduation will be festive, and a packed house will rock it with a standing ovation for Obama. Notre Dame dignitaries and faculty will be photographed beaming as Obama extends his hand to a smiling Jenkins. It will be a visual spectacle of the first order."

Bradley asks the university leadership to rethink its embrace of secular prestige:

"Notre Dame has realized its dream of preeminence by avid pursuit of prestige and by a cultivated indifference to those ordained by Christ to teach in his name. These two familiar features of Notre Dame’s business plan have been, as it were, the long arms of the ladder up which it has scrambled since 1967. Now, at the pinnacle, Notre Dame must kick that ladder aside, if it is to decide rightly this Sunday afternoon.

"The question to be answered on Sunday is whether Notre Dame will choose to put its prestige and, yes, its de facto power to shape America’s Catholics at the service of the Church. Or will the university invest these gifts in its own agenda? It is indeed a choice between prestige and truth. 

In "Beliefs," his weekly column in the New York Times, Peter Steinfels provides additional context to the debate over Obama's appearance at Notre Dame. Steinfels provides a balanced forum for liberal Catholics who believe that pro-life activists are unnecessarily escalating this confrontation, and he notes recent surveys confirming the shifting demographics of the church in America.

Bill McGurn at Notre Dame

On April 23, my friend, Bill McGurn, a former George W. Bush speechwriter, gave an inspiring pro-life address at the university. The speech was sponsored by  Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Cultureand  The Notre Dame Fund to Protect Human Life 

 Here is a portion of McGurn's speech:

"Those who say that as Notre Dame engages the world, she cannot expect her guests to share all her beliefs are right.  But that is not the issue. The issue is that we engage them.  Think of how we would have treated an elected Senator or President or Governor whose principles and actions were given over to seeing that segregation enjoyed the full and unqualified protection of American law.  We would have been cordial … we would have been gracious … we would have been more than willing to debate … but we would have betrayed our witness if ever we brought them here on the idea that all that divided us was one political issue. 

 "My friends, the good news is that the witness for life is alive at Notre Dame.  We see this witness in the good work of teachers here in this room.  We see this witness in the new Notre Dame Fund to Protect Human Life.  I have seen this witness in a very personal way, on the cold gym floor of a suburban parochial school on the outskirts of Washington – where 200-plus students spent a freezing January night just so they could raise the Notre Dame banner at the annual March for Life.  These are but a handful of the wonderful things going on at this campus.  And we know that this witness exists too in the other, unheralded acts of love designed to ensure that the unwed sophomore who kneels before the Grotto with an unexpected pregnancy weighing on her mind has a better choice than the cold front door of a Planned Parenthood clinic. 

"Unfortunately, people across this nation – and perhaps even here at this university – know little of these things.  And they do not know because the university keeps this lamp under a basket.  In her most public witness, Notre Dame appears afraid to extend to the cause of the unborn the same enthusiasm she shows for so many other good works here. 

 

"If, for example, you click onto www.nd.edu, you will often find a link for the Office of Sustainability, which happily informs you about all the things Notre Dame is doing to be green-friendly.  You will find another link that defines the university with a series of videos that ask, “What would you fight for?”  Each home game during the football season, NBC broadcasts one of these videos.  They are more than a dozen of them – each highlighting members of the Notre Dame community who are fighting for justice, fighting for advances in medicine, fighting for new immigrants, and so forth. 

 "Imagine the witness that Notre Dame might provide on a Fall afternoon, if millions of Americans who had sat down to watch a football game suddenly found themselves face to face with a Notre Dame professor or student standing up to say, “I fight for the unborn.”

 "Even more important, imagine the larger witness for life that would come from putting first things first.  So often we find support for abortion rights measured against decisions involving war, capital punishment, and so on.  All these issues deserve more serious treatment.  But the debate over these prudential judgments loses coherence if on the intrinsic evil of abortion we do not stand on the same ground.  What a challenge Notre Dame would pose to our culture if she stood united on this proposition:  The unborn belong to no political party … no human right is safe when their right to life is denied … and we will accept no calculus of justice that seeks to trade that right to life for any other. 

 "Now, there are different paths to this witness – and many who say they share it maintain their only problem is with the prolife movement itself:  It’s too Republican, it’s not effective, it’s too militant, and so forth.  We who are prolife must admit that some of these criticisms have an element of truth.  Yet those who advance them must also acknowledge that in practice such criticisms often serve not to strike out a bold new path for a more informed witness, but to rationalize a preference for remaining on the sidelines. 

 "Tonight I ask our prolifers to open up the dialogue to your professors and classmates.  Invite them in.  Say to them:  “Brothers!  Sisters!  We are not perfect, and we will be much improved by your participation.  We are holding a place for you on the front lines.  Come join us – and let us walk together in our witness for life.”

 "I appreciate that for some people, the idea of Notre Dame as an unequivocal witness for the unborn would be a limit on her work as a Catholic university. The truth is just the opposite.  The more frank and forthright Notre Dame’s witness for life, the more she would be given the benefit of the doubt on the many judgment calls that the life of a great university entails.  At this hour in our nation’s life, America thirsts for an alternative to the relativism that leaves so many of our young people feeling empty and alone.  This alternative is the Catholic witness that Notre Dame was created to provide – that Notre Dame is called to provide – and that in many ways, only Notre Dame can provide.

"Let me end with a story about one of our family.  His name is John Raphael; he belongs to the Class of ‘89; and he’s an African-American who runs a high school in New Orleans.  He’s also a Josephite priest.

 "In his ministry, Father Raphael knows what it is like to answer the knock on his office door and find a woman consumed by the understandable fears that attend an unplanned pregnancy.  He says that one of the greatest lessons he learned about how to respond to these women came from a friend of his, who had come to him in the same circumstances.  The woman was an unmarried college student, and she told him what had surprised and hurt her most was how many friends greeted her news by saying, “Oh, that’s terrible.”

 “That young lady taught me something,” says Father Raphael.  “She taught me that what these women need first and foremost is to have their motherhood affirmed.  For too many women, this affirmation never comes.  We need to let these mothers know what their hearts are already telling them:  you may have made a mistake, but the life growing within you is no mistake.  That life is your baby, waiting to love and be loved.”

"My young friends, this night I ask you:  Make yours the voice that affirms life and motherhood.  Be to those in need as the words of our alma mater:  tender … strong … and true. And in your every word and deed, let the world see a reflection of the hope that led a French-born priest in the north woods of Indiana to raise Our Lady atop a dome of gold."

Postscript: Just received an email from a friend of mine, a former Notre Dame grad whose son will graduate this year. Though upset about what has happened, she confirms there is a great deal of good on campus: "The flip side is that there is a large and noticeable and flourishing orthodox group of students and faculty at Notre Dame.  The basilica is routinely packed for mass.  The liturgy is traditional.  The South Quad is regularly marked by hundreds of white crosses with pink and blue flags symbolizing the number of male and female unborn children killed each day in the U.S.  So, we live with this reality.  But the Congregation of the Holy Cross has gone off the rails and they bear primary responsibility for this disaster."  

Glendon's Daughter Defends Decision

Mary Ann Glendon's daughter, Elizabeth Lev, an art historian and commentator from Rome,  defended her mother's decision to decline Notre Dame's Laetare Medal at its commencement exercises. Lev writes in response to an article that critiques her mother's decision.

The most interesting points raised by Lev, include the very important fact that her mother was given only five minutes for her speech, which Notre Dame's talking points suggested would provide balance for President Obama's much longer talk.  Another salient point: though media reports on the controversy have described Glendon as anti-abortion, Lev says that description hardly does justice to her mother's legacy. Interesting. 

Glendon Won't Attend Notre Dame Commencement

Mary Ann Glendon, the Harvard Law Professor and former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican, who was to be honored at Notre Dame's commencement next month, along with President Obama, has decided not to attend. Her letter to Father Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, explaining her decision follows:

                                                                                                          April 27, 2009

 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:

        "President Obama won't be doing all the talking.  Mary Ann Glendon, the former US Ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal." 

        "We think having the President come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the President and for the causes we care about."

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

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

        It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.       

        In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.

                                      Yours very truly,

                                      Mary Ann Glendon

Postscript: Upon receipt of Professor Glendon's letter, a friend of mine made this excellent observation with which I wholly agree: "Mary Ann Glendon did the principled thing.  She did not want to inject any politics or divisiveness into the graduation.  If Obama was as honorable he would stop driving a wedge into the Catholic community and gracefully decline the honorary degree.  Obama is causing division for his own political agenda."  

Update: Here is Father Jenkins' response. Though "disappointed, he will look for another worthy recipient. "IIt is our intention to award the Laetare Medal to another deserving recipient, and we will make that announcement as soon as possible.” Wonder who he'll pick? This story won't go away any time soon.

Notre Dame: The Randall Terry Show

Two years ago, I vetted a dynamic young man for a position at a non-profit, Theology of the Body group. He took the job, only to back out after receiving a last-minute offer from Randall Terry, the pro-life activist and Catholic convert. Nine months later, the young man had left his job with Terry and was back in town. "I've learned how not to do pro-life work," he said, by way of explaining himself.

In recent months, Randall Terry has returned to the spotlight and sought to establish himself as the arbiter of pro-life leadership, skirmishing with Archbishop Burke, and then criticizing Bishop D'Arcy, the South Bend ordinary who chastised Father Jenkins of Notre Dame for inviting President Obama to the university's commencement. 

Today, Catholic Culture published this strongly-worded assessment of Terry's agenda, and it should be read by the activist's many youthful followers.

Bishop D'Arcy's courageous leadership on the Notre Dame controversy has generated growing national support for the pro-life position in this conflict. Apparently, Terry disagrees with this careful strategy, and has called for an escalation of pro-life protests, a move that led D'Arcy to issue a cautionary statement:

"I urge all Catholics and others of good will to stay away from unseemly and unhelpful demonstrations against our nation's president or Notre Dame or Father John Jenkins."

"Bishop D'Arcy added: "Let us all work towards a peaceful graduation experience for the class of 2009 at our beloved Notre Dame."

So Terry turned on Bishop D'Arcy, equating his stance as an abandonment of the pro-life cause and Jesus Christ himself. "The Cock Crows for Bishop D'Arcy," is the title of Terry's attack on the good bishop. As I scanned Terry's diatribe, the half-forgotten words of that young man came to mind: "I've learned how not to do pro-life work."  

 

Jesuit University Presidents & Notre Dame

The National Catholic Reporter reports that leaders of an unspecified number of U.S. Jesuit universities have "privately expressed support"  for Notre Dame's decision to invite President Obama to its commencement.

The National Catholic Reporter bases this report on an interview with Father Charles Currie, SJ:

"The president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities said he has privately expressed support for the University of Notre Dame in its decision to invite President Barack Obama as commencement speaker and hopes the controversy that has erupted over the invitation leads to substantive talks among college presidents and bishops.

“I think that the bishops have the responsibility to protect the faith of their folks, and so I think this is the kind of thing that really has to be talked out in a conversation between bishops and university presidents. We have to raise the level of the dialogue beyond condemnations,” said Jesuit Fr. Charles Currie in an April 13 phone interview.

"He said he and the presidents of the association’s 28 member institutions have privately expressed support to Holy Cross Fr. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, who recently has come under attack from right to life groups and some bishops who perceive the invitation as an endorsement of Obama’s pro-choice views on abortion and his support of stem cell research.

"He also said he and other association members “have been talking to individual bishops to see if we can’t lower the volume and lessen the heat of the discussion.”

Father Currie's remarks will come as no surprise to the Cardinal Newman Society and other Catholic groups and individuals seeking to strengthen the religious identity of Catholic institutions of higher learning. The Cardinal Newman Society has led the petition drive to register protests regarding Notre Dame's decision to honor President Obama at its commencement. Some questionable development at Jesuit universities in recent months include:  Chris Matthews as the commencement speaker at St.Joseph's University, "Queer Week" at Xavier University, and "Sex Positive Week" at Georgetown University. More seriously, Jesuit universities have also lent credibility to theological dissenters like Father Charles Curran, who was dismissed from his post at the Catholic University of America. A few years back, the College of the Holy Cross hosted a speech by Curran, and Georgetown University published his recent work, Catholic Moral Theology in the United States. 

Father Currie argues that a less heated tone will promote dialogue, and his counsel might be more compelling if he offered specific examples of a serious and sustained exchange of views. But critics of Jesuit university polices on dealing with issues from abortion to gay rights argue that the "dialogue" phase has moved quickly to a fait accompli in which Catholic moral teaching is ignored or presented in an ineffective manner. Research by Cardinal Newman Society underscores the consequences of this pattern of "dialogue": declining numbers of students from "Catholic" institutions of higher education still believe in and defend the increasingly counterculture teachings of their church.

Notre Dame: More from University President & Cardinal George

After his comments on the Notre Dame controversy appeared to solidify entrenched positions on the university's decision to honor President Obama at its commencement, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, the USCCB president, followed up with additional comments at a public conference on April 3. Though he began by explaining that he hadn't intended his previous remarks about the controversy to be made public, he still stood his ground:

“Now unfortunately those discussions are complicated because of the publicity given, but the principle is true: no university, no bishop, no parish can take a decision unilaterally and be surprised by the reaction by everyone else who calls himself or herself Catholic might make to it, especially around a profoundly deeply divisive issue such as the protection of human life within mothers’ wombs.”

“In Catholic community, whatever anyone does affects anybody else,” he said. “We can think of scandals. We can think of problems. Therefore, no institution that calls itself Catholic can be unilateral.”

“So the decision in a sense corroborates our theology.” “What one of us does in Catholicism affects us all and I think that’s the question that has to be discussed.”

Since the controversy first surfaced in the news, a total of 31 Catholic bishops have come forward to register their opposition to Obama's visit. Many have called the university to task for violating the USCCB guidelines that direct Catholics institutions to avoid honoring pro-abortion public leaders. According to these episcopal critics, Notre Dame's invitation to a radically pro-abortion president directly violates the USCCB guidelines. 

 

But, in a recent letter to the Board of Trustees of the university (obtained and publicized by LifeSite News), Father Jenkins, president of Notre Dame, contested this interpretation of the USCCB guidelines. He insisted that the USCCB

"document has been used by all the people at Notre Dame who recommend speakers for commencement or others for honorary degrees since its publication.  We have tried to follow both the letter and the spirit of its recommendations.

"Two key sentences of the document have been frequently quoted regarding the invitation to President Obama:

"Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.  They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions."

Father Jenkins continued:

"Because the title of the document is "Catholics in Political Life", we understood this to refer to honoring Catholics whose actions are not in accord with our moral principles.  This interpretation was supported by canon lawyers we consulted, who advised us that, by definition, only Catholics who implicitly recognize the authority of Church teaching can act in "defiance" of it.  Moreover, fellow university presidents have told me that their bishops have told them that in fact it is only Catholic politicians who are referred to in this document.

"In addition, regardless of how one interprets the first sentence, the second is also important.  It reads: "They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions."  In every statement I have made about the invitation of President Obama and in every statement I will make, I express our disagreement with him on issues surrounding the protection of life, such as abortion and embryonic stem cell research.  If we repeatedly and clearly state that we do not support the President on these issues, we cannot be understood to "suggest support".

"Finally, the document states that "we need to do more to persuade all people that human life is precious and human dignity must be defended.  This requires more effective dialogue and engagement with all public officials...."  However misguided some might consider our actions, it is in the spirit of providing a basis for dialogue that we invited President Obama."

Meanwhile, Bishop D' Arcy of South Bend isn't letting up either. During a media interview, the bisihop argued  that the university's decision to honor Obama  "is giving a Doctor of Laws to a person whose only experience with laws, in the state legislature and here, has been anti-life laws,” said Bishop D’Arcy in an interview with a local television station. “It's saying to the young people, 'Well, it's okay, it really doesn't matter.”

The Catholic Culture story included this interesting bit: "Bishop D’Arcy added that “he does not believe Notre Dame should suffer a penalty,” according to WNDU-TV."

Today, Michael Novak also protested Notre Dame's stance, and suggested that the arguments of the university's defenders were not compelling: 

"Did the University of Notre Dame invite Sen. Stephen Douglas of nearby Illinois to receive an honorary degree in 1858? That was the year Douglas was defending the principle of choice: the right of western territories to make a choice between permitting slavery and maintaining liberty. His opponent in the most famous of American debates was Abraham Lincoln, also of Illinois. There and elsewhere, Lincoln made a simple point based on natural law and natural right: No man is in a position to will himself into slavery, so no one can commit another to slavery. On top of that, the Union itself cannot survive half-slave and half-free. Finally, the Declaration of Independence makes it brilliantly clear that every human being is endowed by his Creator with an inalienable right to liberty."

Novak asserts that Notre Dame would not invite a proponent of slavery to its commencement exercises for the purposes of "dialogue." He then addresses some of the arguments of pro-lifers who backed Obama during the presidential campaign, contending that his policies would ultimately "reduce" abortions. Countering this argument, Novak offers readers then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's comments on the primacy of abortion as the central life issue on which all other human rights depend. 

Stated Ratzinger:

"Not all moral issues have the same weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."

Postscript: Here's a critique from the First Things blog that takes note of Father Jenkin's apparent lack of concern that his decision roiled the church.

Bishop Lori Protests Honors for Kerry Kennedy

Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, CT has announced that he will not attend the commencement exercises for Sacred Heart University because it is honoring Kerry Kennedy, a supporter of abortion rights. Bishop Lori is a board member of the university.

Last year, I reviewed Kerry Kennedy's book, Being Catholic Now: Prominent Americans Talk About Change in the Church and the Quest for Meaning."  Here's a snippet from my review for Inside Catholic:

"When a Kennedy scion publishes a book about Catholicism in the final stretch of a hotly contested presidential campaign, skeptics might assume the well-publicized literary event is just a political tactic. Read this motley collection of personal testimonials, and the skepticism deepens. Being Catholic Now includes men and women who reject the existence of God, avoid Mass, and embrace abortion and same-sex marriage. "Cafeteria Catholics" are the rule here, not the exception."

Weigel Defends Cardinal George

The Chicago Tribune published an April 3rd editorial, along with an op-ed by William M. Daley, that attacked Cardinal Francis George, president of the USCCB, for protesting Notre Dame's decision to honor President Obama at its commencement. George Weigel strongly defends the cardinal in a National Review article. 

Archbishop Myers of Newark: Notre Dame & Obama

While Notre Dame has yet to rescind its invitation to President Obama, Bishop Myers adds his voice to the chorus of criticism regarding the university's decision to honor the president at its commencement. States Archbishop Myers:

"When we extend honors to people who do not share our respect and reverence for life in all stages, and give them a prominent stage in our parishes, schools and other institutions, we unfortunately create the perception that we endorse their public positions on these issues.   We cannot justify such actions, and the Bishops have stated so clearly and strongly."

Here, the archbishop is referring to the USCCB statement, "Catholics in Political Life," which opposes the honoring of public figures "who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions. "

Postscript: The Cardinal Newman Society, the Catholic group leading the petition campaign against Notre Dame's decision to honor the president at its commencement, announced that more bishops have supported their effort and that it now has 230,000 signatures for the petition.

The National Catholic Register also passed on the proposal of one Notre Dame alum suggesting that the university rescind its decision to given an  honorary degree to the president. This could be the middle way, as it would be difficult to disinvite him at this point.