Former Vatican Ambassador Won't Speak at Notre Dame Over Obama Controversy

  • Thread starter Thread starter sertelt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
adowcday said:
“Satanic attack”…“IGNORANT Catholics”…“promote the Culture of Death”…“mere pawns in the Pro-Death agenda”…“modern-day Judas’s”…“dishonorable traitors of Jesus Christ”

I really have no idea how we could think that inviting the President of the United States to a Catholic University should result in such outrageous rhetoric, even if he does support pro-abortion policies. When Catholics spew such venomous hatred for President in the name of religion, why should we wonder why the world just ignores us as irrelevant or fears us as violent sectarians armed with a gospel of hate. I’m watching the beginnings of a Catholic jihad, fomented by a number of our bishops, and it frightens me.
Click to expand...
You’re right… perhaps we should use more biblical terms, such as “blind guides”…“snakes”… “brood of vipers”…“evildoers”…“white-washed tombs full of dead men’s bones”… “hypocrites”…“murderous and immoral at heart”…

Wow adowcday, how could Jesus spew such venomous hatred?
 
adowcday said:
“Satanic attack”…“IGNORANT Catholics”…“promote the Culture of Death”…“mere pawns in the Pro-Death agenda”…“modern-day Judas’s”…“dishonorable traitors of Jesus Christ”

I really have no idea how we could think that inviting the President of the United States to a Catholic University should result in such outrageous rhetoric, even if he does support pro-abortion policies. When Catholics spew such venomous hatred for President in the name of religion, why should we wonder why the world just ignores us as irrelevant or fears us as violent sectarians armed with a gospel of hate. I’m watching the beginnings of a Catholic jihad, fomented by a number of our bishops, and it frightens me.
Click to expand...
Today, we often have a skewed and truncated view of being Christ-like. We leave out, whether intentional or not, where Christ admonished sinners, and at times was quite harsh. That being the case, harshness does not preclude one from being considered Christ-like nor does it necessarily have anything to do with hate.

Christ also said to “go and sin no more,” “Repent, or you will all likewise parish,” “How are you to escape the judgment of hell,” “It would be better for this man if he had not been born,” “Let him [your brother who refuses to heed admonishment] be to you as a heathen,” “You have turned my Father’s house into a den of thieves,” etc. Was it done in love? Of course it was. Even righteous indignation is done in love. So don’t presume that harshness and love are mutually exclusive.

And what about Paul: Paul passed judgment on a man when Paul was not even there in Corinth – based purely on a report of a man’s conduct (not his interior life). Also, Paul includes in his list of grave evils in Galatians factions and dissensions. Notice that these are in the same category as sexual immorality and idolatry and that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Was Paul being hateful? When Paul preaches against false teachers, one of the reasons that he clearly annunciates is that these false teachers are destroying the faith of some.

Again, I am not arguing against admonishing gently in order to lead others to repentance and bring them back. I am talking about the difference between persistent and public dissent and those who, out of genuine sincerity, seek to know the truth.
 
irenaeus1 said:
Today, we often have a skewed and truncated view of being Christ-like. We leave out, whether intentional or not, where Christ admonished sinners, and at times was quite harsh. That being the case, harshness does not preclude one from being considered Christ-like nor does it necessarily have anything to do with hate.

Christ also said to “go and sin no more,” “Repent, or you will all likewise parish,” “How are you to escape the judgment of hell,” “It would be better for this man if he had not been born,” “Let him [your brother who refuses to heed admonishment] be to you as a heathen,” “You have turned my Father’s house into a den of thieves,” etc. Was it done in love? Of course it was. Even righteous indignation is done in love. So don’t presume that harshness and love are mutually exclusive.

And what about Paul: Paul passed judgment on a man when Paul was not even there in Corinth – based purely on a report of a man’s conduct (not his interior life). Also, Paul includes in his list of grave evils in Galatians factions and dissensions. Notice that these are in the same category as sexual immorality and idolatry and that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Was Paul being hateful? When Paul preaches against false teachers, one of the reasons that he clearly annunciates is that these false teachers are destroying the faith of some.

Again, I am not arguing against admonishing gently in order to lead others to repentance and bring them back. I am talking about the difference between persistent and public dissent and those who, out of genuine sincerity, seek to know the truth.
Click to expand...
Well said, Irenaeus. I wish I could speak and write like this or recall things like this when needed the most. You have explained yourself well to the above comments of the priors persons comments using the Bible and Jesus’ words. 👍
 
I am disappointed that Ambassador Glendon won’t be at my commencement, but I respect and applaud her decision. I was especially surprised by this because Bishop D’Arcy (of Fort Wayne-South Bend) advised her to accept the honor and use her speech at Commencement for good. Did you all know that President Obama was actually her student while at Harvard? An opportunity to lecture (and perhaps chasten) him once again!

…My gut tells me Doug Kmiec will be the new Laetare recipient.

And now DH and I need to go back to deciding whether or not to attend our own commencement, coming up here quickly. UGH!
 
Professor Glendon is a role model for so many - women, lawyers, academics, and down to earth people who want to do the right thing! She was the speaker at the Pro Life Legal Defense Fund Dinner in Boston last Friday, and gave a marvelous speech on the Holy See in international law. And not a hint of what was to come! She is gracious, classy and pro life!
 
Notre Dame chose the wrong person to give its Commencement address! What a courageous decision!
 
peregrinus_WA said:
Here is a link with the actual letter.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting a link to the actual letter. Unlike the statement in the OP, the decision was not based simply “because pro-abortion President Barack Obama will be giving the commencement address the same day.” As she notes in the letter, ND apparently contacted her last month and she said she would need to revise her planned speech. So, her reasons for backing out now are due to something more than the mere fact that the President is giving the commencement address.
 
diggerdomer said:
Thanks for posting a link to the actual letter. Unlike the statement in the OP, the decision was not based simply “because pro-abortion President Barack Obama will be giving the commencement address the same day.” As she notes in the letter, ND apparently contacted her last month and she said she would need to revise her planned speech. So, her reasons for backing out now are due to something more than the mere fact that the President is giving the commencement address.
Click to expand...
Tworeasons: 1) she thinks their conferring the degree on him is spitting in the face ofthe bishops and 2) she did not want to provide "cover; for their poor decisions.
 
diggerdomer said:
Thanks for posting a link to the actual letter. Unlike the statement in the OP, the decision was not based simply “because pro-abortion President Barack Obama will be giving the commencement address the same day.” As she notes in the letter, ND apparently contacted her last month and she said she would need to revise her planned speech. So, her reasons for backing out now are due to something more than the mere fact that the President is giving the commencement address.
Click to expand...
As cited clearly in her letter, Prof. Glendon states that 1.) she is dismayed by the honorary degree to be awarded Pres. Obama in opposition to the U.S. bishops “express request” about giving honors to those who oppose “fundamental moral principles” and 2.) feels strongly that a brief acceptance speech is neither the appropriate time, nor an adequate opportunity, in which to address the very serious issues she feels needs addressing.

How very said that Prof. Glendon, who so richly deserves the Laetare Medal, will not receive it, because someone who in no way deserves an honorary degree is being honored. In the eloquent words of Bishop D’Arcy, Prof. Glendon has chosen “truth over prestige.” Too bad Notre Dame didn’t.
 
By refusing this honor, she clearly demonstrates her worthiness to receive it. And that is worth more than any medal or decoration.

I know of a Catholic university president who would be wise to study her example.
 
Awesome! I wish that Obama would do the right thing and call off his visit to Notre Dame.
 
OKCatholic said:
By refusing this honor, she clearly demonstrates her worthiness to receive it. And that is worth more than any medal or decoration.

I know of a Catholic university president who would be wise to study her example.
Click to expand...
Excellant comment.

.
 
irenaeus1 said:
Today, we often have a skewed and truncated view of being Christ-like. We leave out, whether intentional or not, where Christ admonished sinners, and at times was quite harsh. That being the case, harshness does not preclude one from being considered Christ-like nor does it necessarily have anything to do with hate.

Christ also said to “go and sin no more,” “Repent, or you will all likewise parish,” “How are you to escape the judgment of hell,” “It would be better for this man if he had not been born,” “Let him [your brother who refuses to heed admonishment] be to you as a heathen,” “You have turned my Father’s house into a den of thieves,” etc. Was it done in love? Of course it was. Even righteous indignation is done in love. So don’t presume that harshness and love are mutually exclusive.

And what about Paul: Paul passed judgment on a man when Paul was not even there in Corinth – based purely on a report of a man’s conduct (not his interior life). Also, Paul includes in his list of grave evils in Galatians factions and dissensions. Notice that these are in the same category as sexual immorality and idolatry and that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. Was Paul being hateful? When Paul preaches against false teachers, one of the reasons that he clearly annunciates is that these false teachers are destroying the faith of some.

Again, I am not arguing against admonishing gently in order to lead others to repentance and bring them back. I am talking about the difference between persistent and public dissent and those who, out of genuine sincerity, seek to know the truth.
Click to expand...
This was a very well thought out comment. Sometimes Christians forget that it is a great act of mercy to admonish sinners - even if the admonishment is severe. Christ demonstrated this Himself. Of course the way we conduct ourselves given the audience we want to reach ought to be taken into consideration as you appear to be implying (rightfully so) in your last paragraph.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top