Scheidler: Jenkins Remains Utterly Immovable on ND 88 Says talking to Jenkins about the issue like talking to a "stone"

[canadianguy1143]

For those of you who don’t know me, I’m a Domer: BA '99, JD '02. I’m pro-life and faithful to the Church. This whole ordeal pulls at my heartstrings, as I’m sure it does to everyone here, especially the other Domers. But I’m going to try to be as objective and fair as possible.

In Charlie Rice’s letter, he states:

“Those 88 persons, 82 of whom are represented by Tom Dixon, ND ’84, ND Law School ’93, were arrested not because they were there, but because of who they were, why they were there and what they were saying. Other persons with pro-Obama signs were there but were not arrested and not disturbed. Serious legal and constitutional questions are involved, arising especially from the symbiotic relationship between the Notre Dame Security Police, who made the arrests, and the County Police. This letter is not a legal brief. Rather I merely note that it is disingenuous for Notre Dame to pretend that this is merely a routine trespass case.”

I wish Dr. Rice would have gone into greater detail on this, but since I personally know and greatly respect Dr. Rice, I fully trust that he has basis for these remarks. I encourage all to read the rest of the letter, but unfortunately there isn’t a better extrapolation of the point I’ve quoted.

Like Dr. Rice, I share in the mutual concern for Notre Dame and her university. I also will pray for Father Jenkins, and wish him success in the performance of his obligations to the University.

Thank you Havard for posting this. Having read what Dr. Rice has written, there is no way that anyone can legitimately criticize the Notre Dame 92. Randall Terry is a loon but to characterize him as the ring leader of this group is akin to saying that all pro lifers are akin to shooting abortionists.

In the article it mentioned how the Pro-Obama supporters at Notre Dame who didn’t get permission either, were not arrested is very telling of the REAL motives of Notre Dame.

If Notre Dame was so beautifully Catholic, how could they keep Father Richard McBrien teaching there. It doesn’t matter that he is no longer teaching now. What would be the reaction if it was Bishop Richard Williamson?

Finally, if I really wanted to, I am sure I could find that despite what is being told about confession lines, that Notre Dame is no different in the Campus lifestyle than UCLA or any other.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Actually, I disagree with the opinion that the arrests were related to ideology. From what I have read and seen, that is just not so.

 

[unafraid]

The last thing that the American Roman Catholic Church needs from Her clerical leaders, in this era of what I call, “The post-sex scandal time of healing”, is a lack of humility. Father Jenkins offends the faithful in this sensitive time of healing, and does so throughout the whole of this process, by his seemingly unrepentent embrace of the “capital” sin of pride. Yet, here we are, in the aftermath of his stubborn decision to pay homage to a President who holds the distinction of being the most radically militant pro-abortion leader this nation has ever seen (this is unrefutable, documented fact). Someone should remind Fr. Jenkins of what St. Augustine, in a forceful statement, had to say regarding this subject, he said, “As for proud ministers, he is to be ranked with the devil”. This “utterly unmovable” cleric needs to be reformed…or replaced. His stance is inappropriate for this era, or any other in truth of fact. The trivial issue of trespass being foisted to the foreground doesn’t shield Fr. Jenkins from the much larger, much more grave consequences of his “prideful” decisions.

 

[Havard]

Actually, I disagree with the opinion that the arrests were related to ideology. From what I have read and seen, that is just not so.

I was not there, however I do know that Dr. Rice wouldn’t make up the bit about uninvited pro-Obama demonstrators also walking on campus and not being arrested. Dr. Rice is not the only person who’s reported this, but he’s the only one I know personally, and to be honest I couldn’t ask for a more credible source.

 

[Darryl1958]

youtube.com/watch?v=iiz4tfjSuPc

Just a priest acting the part of a clown I guess, cares not a wit about the issue, but just hamming it up for the cameras.

When it comes to being Catholic, ‘we’ is a phrase I no longer use.

There is no ‘we’ when it comes to Catholics in America.

youtube.com/watch?v=DpepuXN0WOM

Agree or disagree with his methods, ‘we’ don’t got his back in this battle.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

The last thing that the American Roman Catholic Church needs from Her clerical leaders, in this era of what I call, “The post-sex scandal time of healing”, is a lack of humility. Father Jenkins offends the faithful in this sensitive time of healing, and does so throughout the whole of this process, by his seemingly unrepentent embrace of the “capital” sin of pride.

Do you see pride in protesters who state in advance what they are going to do, perform for the cameras and then continue political theater in the courts objecting to the charges? Surely there are ways to protest the actions of Notre Dame without getting arrested!

 

[Darryl1958]

T

he last thing that the American Roman Catholic Church needs from Her clerical leaders, in this era of what I call, “The post-sex scandal time of healing”, is a lack of humility. Father Jenkins offends the faithful in this sensitive time of healing,

 

[reggieM]

It’s important to understand what a protest is and what it should accomplish.

Do we scold Martin Luther King and the many black Americans who broke the law with sit-ins and refusals to move when commanded by police?

It’s because they opposed the governmental policy that they broke the law - then they got arrested. Now the Fr. Jenkins supporters might say “they got what they deserved”. But this puts them on the side of the racist laws and not on the side of equality and justice.

If the State had said “you can protest in that building, behind closed doors, after getting a permit” – who would have known that there was a problem?

The fact that this topic is still alive, months later, is a tribute to Randall Terry, Fr. Weslin and the ND88. That’s why they faced arrest – to put a spotlight on the topic and expose the evil at work. Through the risks they took and the harm that was done to them, we see the injustice and we can learn how to overcome it in the future. We also see the depth of the problem.

If I said that I was conducting a “personal protest” at home in my living room – what would that have meant? Obviously, a protest has to be visible. It has to be serious and have a strong message. There has to be some kind of threat along with it (“we’re not going to stand for it”, etc).

The ND88 got arrested due to a risk that they took. They were appealing to the mercy of their fellow Catholics - especially, Fr. Jenkins. Would he file charges against them? Or would he bend the rules, as he did in allowing Mr. Obama to speak on campus?

Now we see that he’s willing to make an exception to protect a pro-abortion politician, even though many of his fellow bishops pointed out that he was violating the directives of the USCCB.

Then at the same time, when a fellow priest broke the campus regulations regarding protests, mercy and forgiveness were not shown to the ND88. So, where is the priority here? Who gets the favored treatment?

It looks like we will not be able to reconcile this situation with those who defend the actions of the ND administration. They think that the ND88 were “wrong” and are getting what they deserve.

There is really no way to correct this false understanding except to point to the many examples of civil disobedience which ended up changing minds and laws. Think about the black civil rights movement in the U.S. and then think about your condemnation of the ND88.

 

[reggieM]

youtube.com/watch?v=iiz4tfjSuPc

Just a priest acting the part of a clown I guess, cares not a wit about the issue, but just hamming it up for the cameras.

When it comes to being Catholic, ‘we’ is a phrase I no longer use.

There is no ‘we’ when it comes to Catholics in America.

youtube.com/watch?v=DpepuXN0WOM

Agree or disagree with his methods, ‘we’ don’t got his back in this battle.

I found those to very sad and tragic images. The cold arm of the law taking away a old priest who is saying prayers and walking quietly. A Catholic heart will be moved by that. “We” should have his back and not let it happen.

But I agree that there’s no “we” among Catholics in America now.
I also think that Pope Benedict knows this and is doing everything he can to turn it around. We can be encouraged that Fr. Jenkins was publicly rebuked by several American bishops. We just need the next step where he would receive appropriate ecclesiastical discipline. Freedom was granted to Catholic universities – but that freedom was based on the trust that they would be faithful.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Think about the black civil rights movement in the U.S. and then think about your condemnation of the ND88.

There are two very significant differences:

1. The civil rights protesters were protesting the fact of many laws and were taking part in civil disobedience. The law itself was an issue in their prosecution, much of the time. As for the ‘Freedom Riders’; they were breaking no laws at all!
2. The civil rights protesters were mainly liberal individuals.

I found those to very sad and tragic images. The cold arm of the law taking away a old priest who is saying prayers and walking quietly. A Catholic heart will be moved by that. “We” should have his back and not let it happen.

And that old priest nobly set himself up to be arrested, didn’t he? What did he expect when he was told to move?

A truly tragic image, which you may be too young to have seen, was in Cleveland in 1964 when a Protestant minister lay down behind a bulldozer to protest segregated schools at a construction site. The machine backed over him and he was killed.

Since we were talking about the civil rights era.

 

[canadianguy1143]

And that old priest nobly set himself up to be arrested, didn’t he? What did he expect when he was told to move?

Where does he state that he expected to be arrested?

 

[AnotherVoice]

I found those to very sad and tragic images. The cold arm of the law taking away a old priest who is saying prayers and walking quietly. A Catholic heart will be moved by that. “We” should have his back and not let it happen.

But I agree that there’s no “we” among Catholics in America now.
I also think that Pope Benedict knows this and is doing everything he can to turn it around. We can be encouraged that Fr. Jenkins was publicly rebuked by several American bishops. We just need the next step where he would receive appropriate ecclesiastical discipline. Freedom was granted to Catholic universities – but that freedom was based on the trust that they would be faithful.

I agree with you. This was a sad day on so many levels.

 

[reggieM]

There are two very significant differences:

1. The civil rights protesters were protesting the fact of many laws and were taking part in civil disobedience. The law itself was an issue in their prosecution, much of the time. As for the ‘Freedom Riders’; they were breaking no laws at all!
2. The civil rights protesters were mainly liberal individuals.

Those are differences have no significance - especially #2. It’s actually meaningless.

And that old priest nobly set himself up to be arrested, didn’t he? What did he expect when he was told to move?

As did the civil rights protestors. What did they expect? So, according to you, they got what they deserved. Perhaps, since the ND88 are not liberals or atheists – then they obviously deserve to be put in jail even more.

A truly tragic image, which you may be too young to have seen, was in Cleveland in 1964 when a Protestant minister lay down behind a bulldozer to protest segregated schools at a construction site. The machine backed over him and he was killed.

Since we were talking about the civil rights era.

Yes, very good example. Taking a cue from your comments – what did that minister expect? He nobly set himself up to be run over by a bulldozer, didn’t he? What is so tragic about that? He was protesting against legal segregation - the law of the land.

I hope you can see that you’re completely contradicting yourself here – unless you actually think the minister deserved to be killed.

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Those are differences have no significance - especially #2. It’s actually meaningless.

Says you.

As did the civil rights protestors. What did they expect? So, according to you, they got what they deserved. Perhaps, since the ND88 are not liberals or atheists – then they obviously deserve to be put in jail even more.

Folks went to ‘swim-ins’ to swim. The kids at the Woolworth counter went there to get food. The 88 folks at ND went there only to protest and get arrested. And they were successful.

Yes, very good example. Taking a cue from your comments – what did that minister expect? He nobly set himself up to be run over by a bulldozer, didn’t he? What is so tragic about that? He was protesting against legal segregation - the law of the land.

Actually, he was run over by mistake.

I hope you can see that you’re completely contradicting yourself here – unless you actually think the minister deserved to be killed.

Nope. There’s no contradiction. The preacher put himself in harms way for a nobler cause.

Now, the ND88 fear what? Probation? Community service?

I think you trivialize the civil rights struggle by comparing a protest of a graduation speech to it. The ND88 were not standing on Edmund Pettus Bridge.

 

[AnotherVoice]

I think you trivialize the civil rights struggle by comparing a protest of a graduation speech to it.

No, I believe it is you who are trivializing the struggle against abortion.

 

[canadianguy1143]

I think you trivialize the civil rights struggle by comparing a protest of a graduation speech to it. The ND88 were not standing on Edmund Pettus Bridge.

Honestly Beau, considered your continued support for Obama, your indifference to his abortion views, the fact you lived during the civil rights era (50s 60s), colors your perspective in this issue for anyone to consider you anything but unbiased. How is any of that related to this thread? By criticizing Notre Dame for honoring the President, we are criticizing the President’s character. And how dare we do that to him, seems to be your view.

I’m a University student who has been studying World History and one common theme that has emerged from the dawn of civilizations is that in every age, there has been a moral problem. Today’s problem is abortion. Sure there is no legitimate political party that is truly against abortion, but what Catholicism does require us is that WE be Pro-Life in all of our views. I can’t see how any Catholic can legitimately support Obama. So do the ND88!

 

[Beau_Ouiville]

Honestly Beau, considered your continued support for Obama, your indifference to his abortion views, …

I don’t think I’m indifferent. Let’s not personalize this.

…the fact you lived during the civil rights era (50s 60s), colors your perspective in this issue for anyone to consider you anything but unbiased. How is any of that related to this thread?

Hey! I didn’t try to compare this recent protest to the civil rights era, others did. Am I unbiased? Yes, more than most folks. But let’s not personalize this.

By criticizing Notre Dame for honoring the President, we are criticizing the President’s character. And how dare we do that to him, seems to be your view.

I said about nothing about the protest. What I commented on was the arrest and prosecution. Please do not state was ‘seems’ to be my views.

 

[Darryl1958]

The leftist/secularist view on aborton is that it is a woman’s right, and therefore an honorable thing. It frees women from the burden of childhood, frees her from the slavery of marriage.

This is Obama’s view, and Father Jenkins and ND chose to honor him. Life of the unborn was of too small an account in their view for ND and the Father to not to do so. It was not even a mitigating factor for them.

In contrast, the ND88 who actually choose to express their personal views against this seeming travesty are mocked as being out of line.

Silence speaks volumes too.

 

[Havard]

and Father Jenkins and ND chose to honor him.

I just want to correct you. The small collection of people who had a say in the decision do not equate to ND. Just as it is unfortunate that some people represent the United States in politics, it’s unfortunate that those people currently represent the ND community. As someone who is part of this community, I’m aware of over a dozen student organizations, and further that the majority of alumni, were opposed to honoring a pro-choice speaker.

 

[Darryl1958]

I just want to correct you. The small collection of people who had a say in the decision do not equate to ND. Just as it is unfortunate that some people represent the United States in politics, it’s unfortunate that those people currently represent the ND community. As someone who is part of this community, I’m aware of over a dozen student organizations, and further that the majority of alumni, were opposed to honoring a pro-choice speaker.

Bottom line, Havard, is that Obama** received** an honorary degree** from Notre Dame.** Those who have the power and the authority to do so may or may not be representative, but it was ND that chose to honor BHO not just with a speaking engagement, but with a degree.

I don’t know the faith and politics of each and every student at ND, nor the faith and politics of the individual alumni. I don’t think that I would even need to know that to make the simple statement that Jenkins and ND chose to honor President Obama with a degree. The fact is that is exactly what happened.

If it came to a vote though, rather than an executive decision, it would seem that most American Catholics and most people in the region did vote for Barrack as president. He is representative in that way for sure.

So there you go. That is what even the numbers are telling us too.