www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Number one supporter of abortions to speak at Notre Dame Commen..

... and some excellent commentary [ncregister.com] on Prof. Glendon's decision by Fr Raymond J. de Souza.

Our Lady embarrassed [pittsburghcatholic.org]

Column by Bishop David Zubik of the Latin Diocese of Pittsburgh

Mary Ann Glendon Letter To Notre Dame (Full Text): “I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.”
April 28, 2009 — james mary evans
HT/FIRST THINGS



Mary Ann Glendon

Declining Notre Dame: A Letter From Mary Ann Glendon

By Mary Ann Glendon

Monday, April 27, 2009, 9:32 AM

April 27, 2009
The Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C.
President
University of Notre Dame

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 U.S. 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

Mary Ann Glendon is Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. A member of the editorial and advisory board of First Things, she served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican from 2007 to 2009.

This letter from Professor Glendon says it well with clarity, integrity, and intelligence. Thank you for posting it.

prayefully,

Porter

It's a good letter. I am grateful for her boldness.

From what I caught today on Fox News, this is *really* heating up with the Bishops taking a stand against him being given an honorary award there...

Can't the local Bishop just order the priest to uninvite Obama for lack of a better word?

Altar Server,

While many bishops are against President Obama being invited in the first place, a fewer number are in favor of disinviting him once he's already been invited. Why? I'm not sure, but that's just the way it is. Maybe Bishop D'Arcy is in that camp.

Alexis

Probably and I find it dispicable he's already showed he's not willing to work with us when he made his pledge to planned parent hood why should we bother offending him?

Sisters and Brothers,

Who among us is without sin? We hope God loves us, despite our many sins, and we try to love our brother Barack as ourselves.

I am glad a Catholic university invited our first African American President to speak. This morning I took a look at the names of American bishops who protest the event, and compared it to the list of African American Bishops (sadly so few). Only one bishop on the National Black Congress website (http://www.nbccongress.org/aboutus/congress-directory/ ) was among the protestors. Nor, so I've read, has the Vatican chosen to [publically] protest this.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09050403.html [probably needs updating]

Hopefully this anger isn't just another proxy for latent racism. Besides unacknowledged racism, some folks are just so upset of the drop in their 401-k's and the admittedly unnerving economic situation that they just can't find enough reasons to push their anger outwards, sometimes towards the President though he inherited this mess.

Reading the bios of the Black Catholic Bishops on NCCB site, one sees a bishop who is national chaplain of Knights and Ladies of St. Peter Claver, formed in part because the Knights of Columbus councils were not admitting African Americans.

A good read on some related issues is "Catholics in the old south: Essays on church and culture," Miller, Randall and Wakelyn, J.L. (eds.), Mercer University Press: Macon, GA, 1999. The editors were scholars from St. Joseph's University and Kent State University. Among other things, they document how the Catholic Georgetown University was funded during the era of slavery by Maryland plantations worked by slaves owned by the religious community, rather deplorable.

How many American Catholic bishops during those years went public with their disdain (if any) for the institution of slavery? Thousands and thousands of innocent black children were born into a world where their temporal destiny was "locked into life as a slave" from birth till "natural" death. It's easy to protest our first Black President on some of his views - let's look at where his personal history and that of the American's and "Catholic Americans" he serves intersect. My European ancestors came after slavery, but they acknowledge that they could quickly move from immigrant status to the best of jobs. This is unlike many African Americans whose families have labored for generations, and may sadly still face disdain on the streets of this great nation.

I think the Black Catholic Bishops DO GET IT. And thankfully I didn't see any Byzantine Catholic Bishops on the list of those protesting the President's invitation to Notre Dame today.

May our President succeed in serving America well, may we work with him and our fellow citizens to share our view on "pro-life issues" and may we celebrate the ways his vision of economic and social justice may coincide with that of our Christian communities.

-Pustinik
"Acquire a peaceful spirit, and thousands around you will be saved." –St. Serafim of Sarov

I humbly disagree! I think this issue has nothing to do with race. Talk that this has something to do with race is an attempt to "divert and distract" from the issue of abortion. Pres. Obama is a real(no disagreement on this ) supporter of abortion. There is a Litmus tests to being Catholic or what the Church should support and being pro life is one of them. This has been said again and again on this forum, but by inviting the President to speak, Notre Dame is honoring him!

This is all really about racial hatred ??? I guess that's why Alan Keyes has been at the forefront opposing Barack Obama's appearence.

I was seriously considering going to South Bend today, but unfortunately will be unable to make it. I plan on saying a rosary at 2pm in support of those opposing Mr Obama.

Misunderstood,...now I understand. My apologies to you!

This is not just about personal sin. It is about the public identity of the Catholic University and its obligation bear witness to the truth. It is about their choice to not only have the President speak (giving him a platform is certainly not ideal, but I would not be absolutist in this regard) but to give him - the most anti-life, pro-abortion, pro-infanticide President ever to reside in the White House - an honorary doctorate. The bestowal of this honor to me is the main issue and is in fact a betrayal, as many good Catholic bishops have pointed out.


You know, it is what you do not say here that is the problem. I do not believe that half of his racial background, while certainly a worthy milestone for the country, should constitute a "pass" on the critical issue of abortion. (Especially considering that the majority of victims of abortion are also African American.) So he is part African in his heritage. Great. Can we move on to more substantive issues, please?


It is difficult for me to remain calm in view of this positively absurd and mean spirited statement, an insult couched in terms of "the hope" that is only meant to infer ill motive. It is nothing short of soft-pedaled slander. Please spare us such "hope" if you will. I will point out that the only person bringing up the issue of race here is, well, you. No one that I know or have seen publicly who is opposed to Obama and his policies and his appearance and reception of the honor does so because of his racial makeup.

Since we are on the topic of racism, here is one for you - "hopefully" the birth control/abortion machine is not just a vehicle for the extermination of racial minorities. Oh wait, according to Margaret Sanger the foundress of Planned Parenthood, it is.


So if we oppose this man and his policies we are emotionally irrational, racist and recently impoverished lemmings all directing our 3 minutes hate towards the President? Perhaps you have not taken the time to really consider that there is possibly, just POSSIBLY an inkling of something more substantive at issue here than race and money.

Again, you write softly, but you insult...deeply.


So the failure of some to act 100-200 years ago is reason for them to be silent now? Again, I think you are implying that our shepherds are racist, or at least struggle with that "latent racism" you referenced above. This seems to be a predictable and slanderous theme of yours.


Again, what about the white bishops who did protest. Do they suffer from a latent racism too? Do they not "GET IT"?

I hate racism with a passion. I also hate abortion and believe it to be more pernicious than racism since while racism denies the right to opportunity, abortion denies the right to existence.

I think you ascribe racist motives to whites who are not racist. Again, the only one who has made race an issue here is YOU. I personally think you owe many of us here an apology. I hope that one will be forthcoming.

ebed,

I fully concur with your comments. It may come as a surprise to Pustinik but one of my best friends a Black colleague who is a Catholic, who is opposed to abortion, who is a Republican would disagree with him most strongly.

CDL