Call to Action on Father Jenkins

[LRThunder]

Do not take this as a support of ND’s invitation. However, others have brought up George W. Bush’s support of the death penalty. Any thoughts on why his invitation to speak was not considered a scandal?

A couple of reasons:

1. The death penalty is not a mortal sin. While the Church teaches there are certain criteria that should be met before the death penalty could be applied, Catholics can still disagree with one another re: the death penalty. Abortion, on the other hand, is a non-negotiable.
2. Bush never tried to push the death penalty down Americans’ throats. He never required doctors and nurses to learn how to operate electric chairs or injections (for the sake of executing via lethal injection). Obama, on the other hand, has either eliminated or is about to eliminate the conscience clause that would’ve protected medical personnel from having to do abortions.

While Bush may have supported the death penalty, he was never gung ho about it the way Obama is about abortions.

 

[the_phoenix]

Again, I would have applauded Notre Dame for not inviting Obama given the gravity of the abortion issue. My point is simply that inviting presidents to commencement is apparently something ND routinely does. The remarkable thing would have been *not *to invite him.

Me too. I also would have applauded Notre Dame for not inviting Obama given the gravity of the abortion issue. Too bad Notre Dame opted to be routine and unremarkable.

~~ the phoenix

 

[sonofourlady]

Of course. Notre Dame apparently invites the sitting President as a matter of course. Not inviting Obama is singling him out, and that is insulting. Again, I think we need to be willing to insult the powerful when necessary. I’m simply pointing out that that would have been an extreme action, and the degree of vitriol Fr. Jenkins is getting for failing to take such a strong stand seems excessive.

Okay I see what you are saying about it being an insult. I like what you say about we need to be willing to insult the powerful when necessary. I do disagree with you about the “vitriol Fr. Jenkins is getting” because scandal and outrage is a legitimate feeling. Jesus spoke about it in scripture.

I’d like to see Notre Dame and other Christian institutions question the basis for issuing such invitations in the first place. We ought to be giving honorary degrees to people who have made intrinsically worthy accomplishments, rather than simply people who are famous and powerful.

Edwin

I like to see that happen but sadly I don’t see it happening.

 

[Lycoming]

Agreed. It is no better or worse than Dubbya, or GWB. or JFK, or FDR. in the Oval Office, and now we have BO in the Oval Office.

.

Poppycock! W, JFK and FDR were all terms of respect/endearment! When you hear any of the three today you know specifically what people are talking about. “BO” is an acronym commonly used to denote body odor.

You’re not fooling anyone and you’re being offensive to think you are.

 

[sonofourlady]

Poppycock! W, JFK and FDR were all terms of respect/endearment! When you hear any of the three today you know specifically what people are talking about. “BO” is an acronym commonly used to denote body odor.

You’re not fooling anyone and you’re being offensive to think you are.

Since I am the creator of the BO acronym I will address my reasons for this. While W, JFK, FDR are initials for different Presidents, I doubt any of them were as agressive for abortion on demand as Obama.

You have a President, who supports the wholesale slaughter of unborn by vote and speech. You have a President, who supports the killing of newborns who survived abortion by vote and speech. That is evil. That is pure evil and you are critical of him being called B.O.?

 

[MrS]

Poppycock! W, JFK and FDR were all terms of respect/endearment! When you hear any of the three today you know specifically what people are talking about. “BO” is an acronym commonly used to denote body odor.

You’re not fooling anyone and you’re being offensive to think you are.

Who is trying to fool anybody? There is a stench coming from the Oval Office. Higher taxes, higher spending, higher attacks on morality… they stink. And the cause is Barack.

The things he is doing have a bad odor that should give us early warning that the real stench of the inacted policies of BHO are going to do great harm to us, our children, and their children.

Who will write a “memoir” on that?

.

 

[fix]

Poppycock! W, JFK and FDR were all terms of respect/endearment! When you hear any of the three today you know specifically what people are talking about. “BO” is an acronym commonly used to denote body odor.

You’re not fooling anyone and you’re being offensive to think you are.

Why are his initial off limits? I have read GB, W, LBJ, and much else over the years with no complaints. Suddenly, with this one man’s initials we need special consideration?

 

[TracyJ]

No it is quite appropriate!!! He is a public serpent and all public serpents need to be reminded they are no better than the least of us. Besides BO is mild when I think of what this administration is starting to resemble.

Besides this discussion was really about ND and Jenkins need to honor the countries new savior.

Did you MEAN to say serpent?
If that wasn’t a typo it’s going too far in my opinion.

 

[TracyJ]

We are Christians. No matter how we differ with someone, it is a sin against charity to mock them or hold them up to derision. President Obama is gravely, seriously wrong and misguided. We still owe him the respect and courtesy that is inherently his as a human being and that goes with his office. “B.O.” is inappropriate.

I’m with you.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

It’s my way of pointing out that they don’t seem to be as grateful as you say they should be.

The U.S. invasion may be the final blow that finishes off the Christian presence in Iraq. There may not be Christians there by the end of the century, because of this glorious “liberation” you support so blindly.

Now can you provide me with statements by Iraqi Catholic leaders saying that they supported the invasion and are grateful for it? If you can’t, isn’t your use of them disingenuous, arrogant, and even cruel?

Perhaps you ought not to have mentioned the Iraqi Catholics.

Edwin

Maybe the catholic presence in Iraq is dissapating, but i know first hand that reformed evangelic christianity is growing in leaps and bounds since 2004 our missions Pastor himself has baptised in the 1000 around and near bagdad. Our sister church is birthing almost 2 dozen seed churches throughout iraq. People are coming to the LORD in unprecedented accounts for the area.

 

[Contarini]

Maybe the catholic presence in Iraq is dissapating, but i know first hand that reformed evangelic christianity is growing in leaps and bounds since 2004 our missions Pastor himself has baptised in the 1000 around and near bagdad. Our sister church is birthing almost 2 dozen seed churches throughout iraq. People are coming to the LORD in unprecedented accounts for the area.

I was responding to SailorKenshin, who unwisely brought up the Iraqi Catholics’ need for “liberation” as a justification for the invasion.

That religious imperialism follows political imperialism is too trivial to be worth noting, and I wish that the implications of what you are jubilantly describing were not so totally lost on Catholic supporters of the war.

Edwin

 

[myfavoritmartin]

I was responding to SailorKenshin, who unwisely brought up the Iraqi Catholics’ need for “liberation” as a justification for the invasion.

That religious imperialism follows political imperialism is too trivial to be worth noting, and I wish that the implications of what you are jubilantly describing were not so totally lost on Catholic supporters of the war.
Edwin

On the liberation as justification excuse i agree with you… It isn’t one!
On a different note we had the oportunity to meet with Gen. Sada one of Husseines right hand men, the General acknowledges and confirms that there were prior to the invasion WMD’s that had been flown to syria in commercial jets with the seats removed. (neither here nor there at this point i guess)
Not quite understanding what your saying in the boldened area, i’m a little slow on the uptake today.

 

[JTinIndy]

Who is trying to fool anybody? There is a stench coming from the Oval Office. Higher taxes, higher spending, higher attacks on morality… they stink. And the cause is Barack.

The things he is doing have a bad odor that should give us early warning that the real stench of the inacted policies of BHO are going to do great harm to us, our children, and their children.

Who will write a “memoir” on that?

.

The stench can’t and won’t be worse than “dubya’s”. He lied and cheated about so many things that it is incomprehensible that he was voted in for a second term. And he sure did so much for the pro-life movement, didn’t he.

Will you ever learn??

 

[sonofourlady]

The stench can’t and won’t be worse than “dubya’s”. He lied and cheated about so many things that it is incomprehensible that he was voted in for a second term. And he sure did so much for the pro-life movement, didn’t he.

Will you ever learn??

Let’s consider your comments. Even if I agreed with everything you said about Bush about how he was a liar and cheated about so many things, you can’t deny that Obama has blood on his hands with his clear and open support for abortion on demand, and infanticide.

Obama has lied and broken so many promises that he made during the campaign, that he can’t be trusted.

Finally, for the pro-life movement, George Bush appointed 2 Pro-Life Supreme Court Justices. Those were 2 things that Bush could reasonably do, to help the Pro-Life movement, which for those in the Pro Life movement are grateful for. What are the odds that Obama will appoint a Pro-Life Judge?

Will you learn the real facts?

 

[BartBurk]

I agree. I think the torture issue is much clear-cut. And I do not condemn Bishop D’Arcy’s decision to boycott Obama rather than Bush. I can understand why he’d give abortion priority. But I still wish he had boycotted both.

It should be noted that Bush spoke at the University of Notre Dame prior to 9/11/2001.

But what you are missing is that Obama was invited as the President. Aren’t Catholics supposed to understand about respect for the office even if you have serious issues with the person?

Again, I would have applauded Notre Dame for not inviting Obama given the gravity of the abortion issue. My point is simply that inviting presidents to commencement is apparently something ND routinely does. The remarkable thing would have been *not *to invite him. They did not go out of their way to honor a pro-choice politician. They certainly did not invite him because of his policies regarding abortion.

Edwin

Bill Clinton never spoke at a Notre Dame commencement or any other Notre Dame function to my knowledge. I don’t know that he was invited to speak either.

 

[Janet_S]

Bill Clinton never spoke at a Notre Dame commencement or any other Notre Dame function to my knowledge. I don’t know that he was invited to speak either.

He was invited but did not accept.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

It’s my way of pointing out that they don’t seem to be as grateful as you say they should be.

The U.S. invasion may be the final blow that finishes off the Christian presence in Iraq. There may not be Christians there by the end of the century, because of this glorious “liberation” you support so blindly.

Now can you provide me with statements by Iraqi Catholic leaders saying that they supported the invasion and are grateful for it? If you can’t, isn’t your use of them disingenuous, arrogant, and even cruel?

Perhaps you ought not to have mentioned the Iraqi Catholics.

Edwin

So in your opinion, our decision to help our fellow man depends on the amount of gratitude he will display afterward?

Really, this Bush-lied-kids-died mantra was old even four years ago.

 

[Janet_S]

Do not take this as a support of ND’s invitation. However, others have brought up George W. Bush’s support of the death penalty. Any thoughts on why his invitation to speak was not considered a scandal?

Someone else pointed out that Bush was invited before 9/11/01-- before the Iraq War and before the 3 incidents of waterboarding at GITMO. So, war and torture were not issues at the time.

As far as George Bush’s position on the death penalty not being scandalous–the Church does not consider the death penalty intrinsically evil while abortion always is. There may be times when the death penalty is necessary to protect society; abortion is never necessary, nor can it ever be justified. Also, the death penalty is rare while abortion is commonplace (estimated at 4,000 per day in the US.) And, Obama supports the death penalty, too.

The more basic question is: What is Obama being honored for? He was elected president, but what else has he done to deserve an honorary doctorate in law from a Catholic University? The crux of the argument of those supporting Notre Dame’s decision seems to be “well, what about Bush?” But I’ve not heard the solid reasons for why a Catholic institution should honor Obama in the first place. Bush was not perfect, but does that mean since there was not widespread criticism of his invitation to speak at Notre Dame, there should be no widespread criticism of Obama, or anyone else?

 

[Contarini]

On the liberation as justification excuse i agree with you… It isn’t one!
On a different note we had the oportunity to meet with Gen. Sada one of Husseines right hand men, the General acknowledges and confirms that there were prior to the invasion WMD’s that had been flown to syria in commercial jets with the seats removed. (neither here nor there at this point i guess)
Not quite understanding what your saying in the boldened area, i’m a little slow on the uptake today.

My point is that MyFavoriteMartin is happy because the American invasion has opened up possibilities for evangelical Protestantism to spread in Iraq, even as the ancient Christian churches of Iraq crumble. Catholics who support the war ought to be sobered by this.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

So in your opinion, our decision to help our fellow man depends on the amount of gratitude he will display afterward?

Of course not. But the people being “helped” are the ones most qualified to decide if the “help” is really helpful. You seem to think that the American government knows better what helps the Iraqi people than the Iraqi people do. I think it’s astounding that you can maintain this with a straight face and not see how bizarre, ludicrous, and arrogant such a claim is.

Really, this Bush-lied-kids-died mantra was old even four years ago.

Old does not mean false. Any Catholic should know this. But you seem ignorant of many things that Catholics should know–such as what your fellow Catholics in Iraq think about being “liberated” by American armies.

Edwin