Bishop says Notre Dame is wrong to honor Joe Biden

[zz912]

No, morality should NOT be determined by majority opinion. I didn’t say it should.

Abortion should be illegal as is rape and murder but it isn’t and you can say that violent attacks on others should be outlawed but there are people out there WHO DON’T SEE ABORTION AS A VIOLENT ATTACK. To them it is just making their lives easier. In the early stages of the pregnancy, what is being aborted is just protoplasm. They don’t see that life begins at the moment of conception and how they can justify partial birth abortion is something I will never understand.

Abortion should be illegal, first because it upholds the dignity of the human person, and second, it helps to properly form the conscience of society to recognize the dignity of the human person.

Those who persist in rejecting such truth, such as Biden, are unfit to be honored by Catholic institutions.

 

[RUNE190]

Abortion should be illegal, first because it upholds the dignity of the human person, and second, it helps to properly form the conscience of society to recognize the dignity of the human person.

Those who persist in rejecting such truth, such as Biden, are unfit to be honored by Catholic institutions.

Well, regarding that last statement, zz912, we agree and I think this is what started this whole conversation.

 

[commenter]

Both those who support legal abortion, and those who oppose legal abortion, agree that Catholic social teaching is opposed to legalization of abortion. Both sides agree that Joe Biden disagrees with Catholic social teaching, and that this is a crucial issue.

This thread is not about whether abortion should be legal. It is about the 8th commandment. The administrators of Notre Dame are claiming something they know to be untrue, rejecting even the counsel of their own bishop. They also claim that they are administrating a Catholic institution. This is academic dishonesty.

Other forms of academic dishonesty, possible at a university, include students cheating to get a grade, and faculty faking research to get promotion. If the administration practices academic dishonesty in a blatant way, how effective will they be to instill academic honesty towards faculty and students?

 

[ARSpade]

How could you make a law that would make abortion a criminal offense. That would force what Catholics believe on everyone and you can’t do that. And what weight does A Roman Catholic priest carry.

All laws are the forcing of what one group believes on another.

 

[Ender]

This thread is not about whether abortion should be legal. It is about the 8th commandment.

No, this goes too far. It is not about lying. It is appropriate to challenge Fr. Jenkins’ judgment, but not his integrity.

The administrators of Notre Dame are claiming something they know to be untrue, rejecting even the counsel of their own bishop.

This is incorrect as well. They have made no statement that can justifiably be defined as a lie. Nor, as I pointed out before, did they reject the counsel of their bishop since Bishop Rhoades is in fact not the bishop they report to.

They also claim that they are administrating a Catholic institution. This is academic dishonesty.

You have no idea what you’re talking about with regard to Notre Dame. If you haven’t been there and seen what it’s like you cannot possibly know anything relevant about it.

Ender

 

[LittleFlower378]

You have to listen to Cardinal Arinze on pro abortion politicians and Holy Communion(linked under this). I love this Cardinal! If Joe Biden is not even in Communion (and publicly) with the Church how can he get an award for being an excellent Catholic!

youtube.com/watch?v=l36_zr9umdM

 

[zz912]

No, this goes too far. It is not about lying. It is appropriate to challenge Fr. Jenkins’ judgment, but not his integrity.
This is incorrect as well. They have made no statement that can justifiably be defined as a lie. Nor, as I pointed out before, did they reject the counsel of their bishop since Bishop Rhoades is in fact not the bishop they report to.
You have no idea what you’re talking about with regard to Notre Dame. If you haven’t been there and seen what it’s like you cannot possibly know anything relevant about it.

Ender

Notre Dame is conferring an award to the VP. They are publicly giving him acclaim as a good example of a Catholic. He is not a good example, objectively, because of his rejection and obstinate opposition to Church teaching. Notre Dame conferring an award on him is what the poster was saying was a lie.

 

[Ender]

Notre Dame is conferring an award to the VP. They are publicly giving him acclaim as a good example of a Catholic. He is not a good example, objectively, because of his rejection and obstinate opposition to Church teaching. Notre Dame conferring an award on him is what the poster was saying was a lie.

To presume a person is lying is to presume something about why the person is doing or saying what he does. In this case the assumption is that Fr. Jenkins knows that Biden is unworthy of this award and is giving it to him nonetheless. The assumption precludes the possibility that Jenkins simply made a (gross) error in judgment.

To assume he is lying is to make an uncharitable assumption. We have an obligation to interpret a person’s words or deeds in the way that is most favorable to him. This interpretation does not meet that requirement.

Ender

 

[RUNE190]

Notre Dame is conferring an award to the VP. They are publicly giving him acclaim as a good example of a Catholic. He is not a good example, objectively, because of his rejection and obstinate opposition to Church teaching. Notre Dame conferring an award on him is what the poster was saying was a lie.

Give it up, zz912, if you don’t make nice, you are going to lose. I like the fact that you are calling a spade a spade. So sorry that Ender can’t get it.

 

[irishpatrick]

**The term “pro-abortion” is a misnomer. The only politicians that actually think that it is a good idea for a woman to seek an abortion without a doctor’s advice that it is medically imperative for her to do so are in China where abortion is mandated by law.
That being said, one of the problems with US laws is that some doctors are willing to bend the rules in order to make a buck.
We see that in the so-called pain clinics where anyone can walk in and obtain a prescription for large quantities of narcotics.

I think that our USA politicians acknowledge that an abortion is always a tragedy. **

I disagree with this.

If politicians thought that abortion was a tragedy, they would do something about it. The pass all sorts of laws to help prevent things they feel are real life tragic events, but, in general, they fight to keep abortion legal–that is hardly a sign of people who think something is tragedy.

Also, there is no small percentage of people who are absolutely pro-abortion. They spend great effort to defend the procedure.

I am not sure how anyone, including Joe Biden, who really believes that abortion is a tragedy, could ever support it with a clear conscience. That means they are fighting for, and supporting, a genuine human tragedy and they know they are.

 

[zz912]

To presume a person is lying is to presume something about why the person is doing or saying what he does. In this case the assumption is that Fr. Jenkins knows that Biden is unworthy of this award and is giving it to him nonetheless. The assumption precludes the possibility that Jenkins simply made a (gross) error in judgment.

To assume he is lying is to make an uncharitable assumption. We have an obligation to interpret a person’s words or deeds in the way that is most favorable to him. This interpretation does not meet that requirement.

Ender

Fr. Jenkins is not ignorant of Church teaching, or of the USCCB and its teachings against giving pro-abortion politicians awards. He is not ignorant of the bishop of South Bend condemning this action. He is still proceeding with the award. Ergo, he’s obstinate in his rejection of the teaching of the bishops.

Give it up, zz912, if you don’t make nice, you are going to lose. I like the fact that you are calling a spade a spade. So sorry that Ender can’t get it.

 

[Ender]

Fr. Jenkins is not ignorant of Church teaching, or of the USCCB and its teachings against giving pro-abortion politicians awards. He is not ignorant of the bishop of South Bend condemning this action. He is still proceeding with the award. Ergo, he’s obstinate in his rejection of the teaching of the bishops.

This is not what I disputed. I don’t defend Jenkins’ actions; I believe they are egregiously misdirected. What I don’t believe - and the point I objected to - was calling his actions a lie. I will point out - again - that we have a moral obligation to interpret a person’s words or actions in the most charitable way that is reasonably consistent. Calling Jenkins’ action a lie is the least charitable way to interpret it.

RUNE190:

I like the fact that you are calling a spade a spade. So sorry that Ender can’t get it.

What I see is an example of rash and uncharitable judgment.2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Ender

 

[RUNE190]

This is not what I disputed. I don’t defend Jenkins’ actions; I believe they are egregiously misdirected. What I don’t believe - and the point I objected to - was calling his actions a lie. I will point out - again - that we have a moral obligation to interpret a person’s words or actions in the most charitable way that is reasonably consistent. Calling Jenkins’ action a lie is the least charitable way to interpret it.
What I see is an example of rash and uncharitable judgment.2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Ender

Sorry to be so ignorant, to what does 2478 refer?

 

[rmartensjr]

Sorry to be so ignorant, to what does 2478 refer?

I presume it’s a paragraph number in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[RUNE190]

I presume it’s a paragraph number in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Thank you.

 

[commenter]

If an accountant steals $10,000, we can call it theft. Now, we can’t judge the heart of the accountant. We can’t say it is automatically a sin, or what level of sin. We can’t judge the accountant to be a worse person than we are. But we can say the action is objectively theft, against the Commandments.

Likewise the situation with a priest and other leaders who caused these 2 actions at Notre Dame:

• Claiming it is currently in union with the Catholic Church and its teaching;
  and
• Awarding, (against the local bishop) a politician for consistency with Catholic teaching, when he directly opposes Catholic teaching on whether abortion should be legal, and other things;

We can’t judge if this priest is sinning. We can judge that maintaining these two positions is a lie, objectively against the 8th Commandment.

 

[Ender]

Likewise the situation with a priest and other leaders who caused these 2 actions at Notre Dame:

• Claiming it is currently in union with the Catholic Church and its teaching;
  and
• Awarding, (against the local bishop) a politician for consistency with Catholic teaching, when he directly opposes Catholic teaching on whether abortion should be legal, and other things;

We can’t judge if this priest is sinning. We can judge that maintaining these two positions is a lie, objectively against the 8th Commandment.

No, you cannot - at least not justifiably. You can assert that Fr. Jenkins’ action is inconsistent with church teaching. You can assert that it is an example of terrible judgment; but you cannot assert that it is a lie because that says something about what Fr. Jenkins believes, which you cannot know. His decision in this case can only be a lie if he believes as you do that his choice is in fact a violation of church teaching. If he doesn’t believe that then the worst he can be accused of is error, but error is not sin. You cannot presume to understand why he made this decision

Ender

 

[otjm]

There are many of us outside the Roman Catholic Church who see Joe Biden’s faith as something extremely positive. He talks openly about his Catholicism and how during times of personal crisis and grief, it gave him strength and comfort. Do you remember his interview with Stephen Colbert shortly after his son died? Two Catholics sharing what faith means. It was very moving.

I am very happy he is receiving this award; he is a strong symbol of your faith. Look at all the people who DO respect him and think of the positive ways he is representing you.

I don’t recall even a whimper out of him when the administration has been pushing the requirement that all health insurance policies have to have abortion coverage, abortifacients, and contraceptives, never mind that businesses - both profit and non-profit - have moral and religious objections to it.

Nor did I hear a whisper of objection from him concerning issues of gay marriage.

Not to mention, I have never heard a peep from him as to how government largess in the guise of welfare has worked the disintegration particularly, of the African American family, or any suggestion that the government needs to find ways to strengthen the family.

Maybe I just missed it…

We have a term for it: cafeteria Catholic. Pick and choose the “social justice” hot button Democrat issues; ignore the rest.

 

[otjm]

No, you cannot - at least not justifiably. You can assert that Fr. Jenkins’ action is inconsistent with church teaching. You can assert that it is an example of terrible judgment; but you cannot assert that it is a lie because that says something about what Fr. Jenkins believes, which you cannot know. His decision in this case can only be a lie if he believes as you do that his choice is in fact a violation of church teaching. If he doesn’t believe that then the worst he can be accused of is error, but error is not sin. You cannot presume to understand why he made this decision

Ender

Wrong. A lie is an untruth. One may lie because one does not know the truth. It is still a lie. It simply is an unintentional lie.

You may wish to call it an untruth; but the word of “untruth” is lie.

At the bottom of this is the issue of who has the authority at ND. Like most Catholic institutions of higher education, ND let the camel’s nose in under the tent flap in the 1960’s, when confronted with a series of very practical decisions, including going to lay boards of directors and accepting federal money under federal terms. It has gone not well ever since, and only compounds.

I don’t know the politics of ND and Father Jenkins’ position on this matter; if he is being told what he will do (and he would not be the first person faced with a board of directors who said “you will do this”) and putting an internal political spin on it, then it may be that the issue stems from somewhere else.

On the other hand, there is a need for witness, and he is not giving witness to the Church. Not that he does not have a lot of company.

Sadly, alumni and alumnae have not seen fit to organize and use the most effective leverage available - the pocketbook.

 

[Ender]

Wrong. A lie is an untruth. One may lie because one does not know the truth. It is still a lie. It simply is an unintentional lie.

You may wish to call it an untruth; but the word of “untruth” is lie.

All lies are untruths, but not all untruths are lies. Nor can there be such a thing as an unintentional lie given that a lie is “an intentionally false statement.” It is intent that distinguishes a lie from a mistake. Even you would not suggest that children are lying when they get answers wrong on their math tests. Even though their answers are untruths they are clearly not lies.

I don’t know the politics of ND and Father Jenkins’ position on this matter…

This is precisely why we cannot charge him with lying. Even though we may roundly condemn the decision we simply do not know what his thinking was.

Ender