Why can't Fr. Jenkins be fired?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scoobyshme
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The things you say are good considerations. However, the Vatican did instruct that pro-abortion polticians should not be honored at Catholic schools. And too the Catholic bishops of the United States jointly issued a statement that pro-abortion politicans should not be honored, a statement issued at the time of the 2004 election when the same issue appeared of honoring pro-abortion politicians.
Robert_Calimer said:
Com-on folks, chill a little. So you say the speech wasn’t a dialogue, OK that was a misscall on the part of (adowcday). I was not in favor of the invite at first, but the fact is that the speech was nothing short of diplomaticly renmarkable.

To be Catholic is to be against abortion ( and I agree ). That is heard loud and clear, so stop the antiabortion chest pounding and look at the real reasons behind the invite. To open a dialogue that will invoke peace, diplomacy and understanding. This is good for the church not bad. We may be able to win some over by being understanding and good listeners.

Did Jesus not break bread with the tax collector ?

Peace be with you,

Guido ---------- Go Penn State ----------
Click to expand...
 
Robert_Calimer said:
Com-on folks, chill a little. So you say the speech wasn’t a dialogue, OK that was a misscall on the part of (adowcday). I was not in favor of the invite at first, but the fact is that the speech was nothing short of diplomaticly renmarkable.

To be Catholic is to be against abortion ( and I agree ). That is heard loud and clear, so stop the antiabortion chest pounding and look at the real reasons behind the invite. To open a dialogue that will invoke peace, diplomacy and understanding. This is good for the church not bad. We may be able to win some over by being understanding and good listeners.

Did Jesus not break bread with the tax collector ?

Peace be with you,

Guido ---------- Go Penn State ----------
Click to expand...
He broke bread to call to conversion, not bestow honors. What ND did was a scandal.
 
"The things you say are good considerations. However, the Vatican did instruct that pro-abortion polticians should not be honored at Catholic schools. And too the Catholic bishops of the United States jointly issued a statement that pro-abortion politicans should not be honored, a statement issued at the time of the 2004 election when the same issue appeared of honoring pro-abortion politicians. "

Got it, point understood about Honorary Degree. I wasn’t aware of that and did not address the issue, but I agree.
My message was engaging the negative remarks regarding the ( invite ) and to here out someone who you may not agree with, but having the self discipline and the patience to listen to conflicting ideas. The more you open the gates of civil communication the better we can move forward avoiding overt rudeness and ignorance. Some of the remarks are just over the top and narrow minded.
 
elts1956 said:
I guess I have missed a post. What 3 Catholic Universities ae you writing about? I have read the names of a couple which folks claim stick to Church doctrine, but I didn’t write down their names. Thanks.
Click to expand...
In the USA there are three universities chartered by the Vatican, owened by the Vatican and governed by the Vatican.
  1. The Catholic University of America
  2. The Pontifical University of Puerto Rico
  3. The Josephehum School of Theology
Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Hi, Robert,

I think your remarks and questions are kind, but this is really not a straight forward issue.
Robert_Calimer said:
Got it, point understood about Honorary Degree. I wasn’t aware of that and did not address the issue, but I agree.
My message was engaging the negative remarks regarding the ( invite ) and to here out someone who you may not agree with, but having the self discipline and the patience to listen to conflicting ideas. The more you open the gates of civil communication the better we can move forward avoiding overt rudeness and ignorance. Some of the remarks are just over the top and narrow minded.
Click to expand...
Here are some reasons why it is not straightforward…

The very format of a commencement exercise is to speak, a monologue if you will - NOT to debate an issue. There were no arguments for unborn children presented here - he acknowledged that we have unresolved differences - and they will remain unresolved - and then he pressed forward. This is not dialogue. This is monologue

When he was the US Senator for IL, Barack Obam’s views on abortion were well know to all who would listen. Here is a link: nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Jan08/nv012908.html

When he was the US Senator or IL, Barack Obam’s view on INFANTICIDE were also well known to all who would listen. Here is a link: citizenlink.org/content/A000007034.cfm

Under most circumstances, it is an honor and privledge to have the President of the United States visit a school for its graduation. The school is recognized for beating out their competition (the President can only speak at so many school at any given time) and the President normally has an admiring audience (not the usually gang from the Capitol Press Corps)! These were exceptional circumstances. Let me explain.

This newly elected President has established that he has no respect for un-born OR born life. Here is one link with multiple hyperlinks backing up this point: catholicleague.org/obama&infanticide.php No one, to the bes of my knowledge has been this extreem in his contempt for life… and now he is our President.

Notre Dame University (NDU) claims to be a Catholic University, is run by the Holy Cross Fathers and (at least up to now) has not publicly defied the US Catholic Bishops. NDU did more then RECOGNIZE President Obama and his assorted policies - because of his specific endorsement for abortion (and there is no getting away form it - INFANTICIDE) this Catholic university ENDORSED THEM by giving the President an honorary doctorate.

“Chilling out”… sounds reasonable … but, there is a raging fire going on and the US President has decided to pump gasoline on it! Make no mistake about it - our President is a gifted speaker, he is sharp, eloquent and nimble on his feet … he is also wrong. Just what do you think is the ‘middle ground’ between life and death? There is no “Twilight Zone” for the conceived. These pre-born children will either be protected or they will be murdered in a manner that would be immediately called “…cruel and unusual…” if done to someone facing execution by the State. And, those are just the facts.

God bless
 
I realize that this has nothing to do with the question whether Fr. Jenkins should be fired or not. Since our opinion on that question does not really count, because none of us has a voice in that and the Board is not going to do it, I think the original question is a moot one, in other words, a question that has no bearing.

There is another point that Tom has eloquently brought to the table, that is the fact that President Obama was given a captive audience to market his agenda. This action, if not totally wrong, was at best a risk not worth taking.

The reason it was not worth taking is because it did not open the door for dialogue. President Obama did not invite pro-life leaders to the table. He did not ask for additional information on the issue. He did not invite the university to represent the other side of the issue at a simposium or on Capitol Hill.

He spoke a half-truth that almost sounded reasonable. He said that we have to find ways to reduce the demand for abortion. Any person of faith, any faith, is going to agree that we have to reduce violence against women, poverty, increase opportunities for women to get an education and get ahead in the workforce, provide appropriate and affordable healthcare for mothers and children and many other social programs. We must also create opportunities for families to own their own home, provide more family leave in the workforce so parents can spend time with their children and more.

The problem is that he never said that we have to reduce the demand for abortion to zero. He never said that we can begin by reducing the conditions under which a woman can get an abortion. This is not the solution, but it’s a beginning. He did not say that we have to respect the conscience of healthcare workers who do not want to provide abortion services. He didn’t even address the fact that medicaid will not pay for elective plastic surgery, because the states believe that these is not paliative medical care, but abortion is and paid for with public funds.

With the many geniuses that graduate from a university like Notre Dame, you’d think that the President of the USA would honor them by inviting the graduates to engage in finding solutions to some of the problems that lead many people to abortion clinics. This is not an end to all abortions, but it’s a sign of good faith of someone who really wants to reduce the demand.

I saw no desire to engage in a dialogue. The man had some of the nation’s brightest and eager scholars in front of him and he deliberately ignored their potential to help.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
fix said:
He broke bread to call to conversion, not bestow honors. What ND did was a scandal.
Click to expand...
Amen to that. Interesting how people imply that Jesus broke bread with sinners and thus he approved of their sins and did not call anyone to any sort of repentance. They want to make the Blessed Lord complicit in evil!
 
BobCatholic said:
There are other good orthodox Catholic colleges too.

dads.org/choosingagoodcatholiccollege.asp
Click to expand...
Yes there are many. I was just answering someone’s question as to which three are owned and operated by the Church itself.

There are some that are owned and operated by dioceses. I don’t know all of them.

The ones owned by religious orders are in another group.

The ones staffed by religious, but owned by a lay board are another group.

There are others like Christendom, which is owned and staffed by a lay group.

Among each of these there are some very orthodox schools.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
tqualey said:
Hi, Elts1956,

I failed you on this one … I could not find them…:o

Sorry - I bet someone else on this thread will provide us with the names and make our day!

God bless,
Click to expand...
Thank Tom. Now that I think about it, I “think” the Cardinal Newman Society has a list of such teaching establishments. 👍
 
Robert_Calimer said:
Com-on folks, chill a little. So you say the speech wasn’t a dialogue, OK that was a misscall on the part of (adowcday). I was not in favor of the invite at first, but the fact is that the speech was nothing short of diplomaticly renmarkable.

To be Catholic is to be against abortion ( and I agree ). That is heard loud and clear, so stop the antiabortion chest pounding and look at the real reasons behind the invite. To open a dialogue that will invoke peace, diplomacy and understanding. This is good for the church not bad. We may be able to win some over by being understanding and good listeners.

Did Jesus not break bread with the tax collector ?

Peace be with you,

Guido ---------- Go Penn State ----------
Click to expand...
Hi Robert!

Are you an advocate of gradualism? Do you think that by inviting Obama etc ND is taking a step towards “winning Obama” to a pro-life approach? Because if you do believe that then what would be the timeline? I think gradualism is a bit like evolution. We won’t see it in our lifetime! We cannot afford to wait so long.

And who is to say that the opposite does not occurs ie the pro-life side gradually yielding?

Obama is a master orator, his speeches are well crafted, his delivery convincing. However, what good fruit has he produced? Before and after his presidency.

I am inclined to be very negative about Obama. He doesn’t convince me. And yet, here is a man who, if his philosophy were pro-life and pro-poor, could turn things around. Maybe more is required than that. How is he going to turn around the medical health system? I think it requires a mature approach and a willingness to listen to what all parties have to say and then have the courage to do what is right even if it doesn’t make him popular.

I believe that the problems of today should be addressed in collaboration of all Americans Republicans, Democrats, Greens and Independants. There should be a co-operation

The problems of America are also the problems of humankind.
 
QUOTE=adowcday;5233394]For more context, here is the response to Obama’s speech by L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper. It serves to show just how out of touch with the rest of the world (including the Vatican!) many U.S. Catholics (including many U.S. bishops) are. No surprise: the Vatican has differed markedly with the U.S. episcopate over such issues as war, capital punishment, etc.

Rome, Italy, May 20, 2009 / 06:24 pm (CNA).- The Editor-in-chief of the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano explained today to Paulo Rodari, a Vatican analyst for the daily “Il Riformista,” that President Barack Obama’s speech to graduates of Notre Dame was very respectful and that he “is not a pro-abortion president.”

In the interview with Rodari, Editor-in-chief Gian Maria Vian discussed his thoughts on President Obama at the University of Notre Dame. “Obama has not upset the world,” he said. “His speech at Notre Dame has been respectful toward every position. He tried to engage the debate stepping out from every ideological position and outside every ‘confrontational mentality.’ To this extent his speech is to be appreciated.”

Vian continued, “Let me be clear, L’Osservatore stands where the American bishops are: we consider abortion a disaster. We must promote, always and at every level a ‘culture of life’.”

“What I want to stress is that yesterday, on this precise and very delicate issue, the President said that the approval of the new law on abortion is not a priority of his administration. The fact that he said that is very reassuring to me. It also underlines my own clear belief: Obama is not a pro-abortion president,” he told Rodari.

adowcday!

Please explain to me how on earth can anyone, let alone L’Obsservatore, claim that Obama is not a pro-abortionist? How can one qualify such a statement? I have heard from Obama’s lips on TV that Roe vs Wade will remain. He has taken steps to make funds available for abortion in America and overseas. What he says is not always what he does.

I heard an ex-professor of Obama say that he always gives the impression that he agrees with the people with whom he dialogues. He is a master diplomat. A very intelligent manoeuverer, very charming, very convincing. Mr Slick!

So? do you believe also that he is not pro-abortion? Since he definitely is not pro-life, what is he then? Pro what?

Thank you
Cinette:)
 
You make excellent points
Cinette said:
QUOTE=adowcday;5233394]For more context, here is the response to Obama’s speech by L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper. It serves to show just how out of touch with the rest of the world (including the Vatican!) many U.S. Catholics (including many U.S. bishops) are. No surprise: the Vatican has differed markedly with the U.S. episcopate over such issues as war, capital punishment, etc.

Rome, Italy, May 20, 2009 / 06:24 pm (CNA).- The Editor-in-chief of the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano explained today to Paulo Rodari, a Vatican analyst for the daily “Il Riformista,” that President Barack Obama’s speech to graduates of Notre Dame was very respectful and that he “is not a pro-abortion president.”

In the interview with Rodari, Editor-in-chief Gian Maria Vian discussed his thoughts on President Obama at the University of Notre Dame. “Obama has not upset the world,” he said. “His speech at Notre Dame has been respectful toward every position. He tried to engage the debate stepping out from every ideological position and outside every ‘confrontational mentality.’ To this extent his speech is to be appreciated.”

Vian continued, “Let me be clear, L’Osservatore stands where the American bishops are: we consider abortion a disaster. We must promote, always and at every level a ‘culture of life’.”

“What I want to stress is that yesterday, on this precise and very delicate issue, the President said that the approval of the new law on abortion is not a priority of his administration. The fact that he said that is very reassuring to me. It also underlines my own clear belief: Obama is not a pro-abortion president,” he told Rodari.
Click to expand...
adowcday!

Please explain to me how on earth can anyone, let alone L’Obsservatore, claim that Obama is not a pro-abortionist? How can one qualify such a statement? I have heard from Obama’s lips on TV that Roe vs Wade will remain. He has taken steps to make funds available for abortion in America and overseas. What he says is not always what he does.

I heard an ex-professor of Obama say that he always gives the impression that he agrees with the people with whom he dialogues. He is a master diplomat. A very intelligent manoeuverer, very charming, very convincing. Mr Slick!

So? do you believe also that he is not pro-abortion? Since he definitely is not pro-life, what is he then? Pro what?

Thank you
Cinette:)

You make excellent points Cinette! And “Mr. Slick” is very apt. Re: Gian Maria Vian, sounds like the reincarnation of Neville Chamberlain to me.
 
I realize that this is really off topic, because it has nothing to do with Fr. Jenkins, who is the subject of this thread.

I read what was posted and I’m walking away with a different take. What I’m seeing here is that in this intervierw it is not the Vatican who is speaking. It is the Editor of L’Observatore Romano.

He’s giving his opinion on the speech and based on the speech that President Obama made at ND he did not come off as pro-abortion… I believe that’s what he’s saying.

He’s not saying that L’Observatore Romano agree with Obama or that the Vatican does. He’s merely stating his take on the speech.

That’s OK. He’s allowed to have his take on the speech. He’s right on one point. Obama did make an effort to be very non confrontational, which to the public would make him look very respectful. He did say that there he recognized that pro-abortion and pro-life were irreconcileable. He said it as a fact, not really accusing anyone of being good or bad. Again, in that sense he comes off looking respectful.

The speaker does not say that he is speaking for the Vatican or even for L’Observatore Romano. He’s speaking for himself.

What I believe that he does not understand is how Pro-Choice people manipulate the issue in such a way that they do not give the Pro-Life people a chance to speak and be heard in a formal forum. But many people outside the USA do not realize that or do not understand it, because it is not their experience.

Fraternally,

Br, JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
I realize that this is really off topic, because it has nothing to do with Fr. Jenkins, who is the subject of this thread.

I read what was posted and I’m walking away with a different take. What I’m seeing here is that in this intervierw it is not the Vatican who is speaking. It is the Editor of L’Observatore Romano.

He’s giving his opinion on the speech and based on the speech that President Obama made at ND he did not come off as pro-abortion… I believe that’s what he’s saying.

He’s not saying that L’Observatore Romano agree with Obama or that the Vatican does. He’s merely stating his take on the speech.

That’s OK. He’s allowed to have his take on the speech. He’s right on one point. Obama did make an effort to be very non confrontational, which to the public would make him look very respectful. He did say that there he recognized that pro-abortion and pro-life were irreconcileable. He said it as a fact, not really accusing anyone of being good or bad. Again, in that sense he comes off looking respectful.

The speaker does not say that he is speaking for the Vatican or even for L’Observatore Romano. He’s speaking for himself.

What I believe that he does not understand is how Pro-Choice people manipulate the issue in such a way that they do not give the Pro-Life people a chance to speak and be heard in a formal forum. But many people outside the USA do not realize that or do not understand it, because it is not their experience.

Fraternally,

Br, JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
Absolutely correct. It is NOT the Pope speaking. It is a journalist of a newspaper. 👍
 
adowcday said:
…and he won’t give in to pressure from right-wing Catholics to turn Catholicism into a one-issue religious sect that shrinks from engagement with those who disagree with us.
Click to expand...
I don’t promote the idea that this forum is the place to propose that a priest be removed from a role that he has. However, generally speaking, the purpose of the law is justice. Abortion is a grave injustice therefore it makes no sense do give an honorary law degree to one who supports grave injustice. Catholics are not “right-wing” and we are not “conservative”. The truth of Jesus Christ is sometimes labeled to fall in these categories but His truth is above these categories. He is the final power and authority in all of creation.
 
Coder said:
I don’t promote the idea that this forum is the place to propose that a priest be removed from a role that he has. However, generally speaking, the purpose of the law is justice. Abortion is a grave injustice therefore it makes no sense do give an honorary law degree to one who supports grave injustice. Catholics are not “right-wing” and we are not “conservative”. The truth of Jesus Christ is sometimes labeled to fall in these categories but His truth is above these categories. He is the final power and authority in all of creation.
Click to expand...
adowcday said:
Jenkins won’t be fired and he shouldn’t be. Like every recent NDU president before him, he invited the President to the commencement. Every recent president has been invited, and Jenkins did not break with that tradition. Notre Dame is a private university and Jenkins reports to his Board, which apparently agrees with his decision. Although this is not adequately represented on CA forums, most Catholics do not agree with you that Jenkins should be fired and Notre Dame punished. Jenkins is not a clown – he is a leader, and he won’t give in to pressure from right-wing Catholics to turn Catholicism into a one-issue religious sect that shrinks from engagement with those who disagree with us. I applaud his decision. I also applaud Obama for a remarkable speech, one of his best. Obama is willing to engage in reasoned, fair-minded dialogue and to find common ground on which to move forward together. That should be our desire as well.
Click to expand...
adowcday said:
Let me clear up a few misconceptions: I agree with the Catholic position on abortion. I am a faithful Roman Catholic. Nothing that I said previously was contrary to Catholic teaching. We can dialog with Muslims. Why can’t we dialog with the President of the United States, a dedicated Christian and, from all appearances, a good, thoughtful man? We can work with atheists in the Kremlin to reduce the threat of nuclear warfare. Why not work with President Obama?

Like many faithful Catholics, I think that this President (like most of our Presidents) is a mixed bag. We should respectfully criticize him when necessary and work with him when we can. There are lots of areas where we can work together. In most areas, I think this President is a dramatic improvement over Bush in areas that should matter to Catholics: war, capital punishment, equitable distribution of wealth, care for the poor and disadvantaged, care for the environment, peaceful relations with other nations, etc. It’s just stupid and counter-productive if we focus only on this one issue, where there is obviously a conflict between Catholic teaching and our President (and the majority of Americans for that matter).

The criticism of Obama that I hear among conservative Catholics is not respectful. I think it makes Catholics look ignorant and mean-spirited. It smacks of politics more than faith. The approach espoused by those who would snub Obama and fire Jenkins will only lead to Catholics being marginalized in the public arena.

The fact is that a majority of Catholics (yes, faithful Catholics) voted for Obama and continue to agree in the main with his leadership. I did and I do.
Click to expand...
That is a paradox. You CAN’T be Catholic and be pro abortion OR for ANYONE who promotes abortion.

As another poster has said, “How can you dialogue with someone giving a monologue”? As far as bo’s intentions and support of abortion, have you looked at the laws he has done away with since he has been in office. Again, the people he has appointed to serve in his administration? Again, ALL pro aborts, although some claim they “personally” are not, but “must” uphold the decisions of their peers and the law. How does this help the advancement of a society of LIFE?

How can we be respectful of a man who DOES NOT respect life from conception to NATURAL death. You watch, the next law he will initiate will be assisted suicide. There is no safety for ANYONE with this man forming the society of the US. The sooner you understand that, the sooner you will understand the necessity of standing up to bo and his agenda of death.

How many times do these facts need to be presented to tree huggers in order for them to understand? The 60s are long gone. A new era is at hand. An era of evil and diabolical disregard for human life. That includes yours.
 
elts1956 said:
You watch, the next law he will initiate will be assisted suicide.
Click to expand...
Or universal health care with hidden regulations that those who are not wanted by the government will be denied or delayed care.
I’m sorry Mr. Limbaugh, Obamacare does not cover lung cancer caused by years of smoking cigars, and your permission to seek care in a foreign country is denied as your passport has been confiscated by DHS for being on the right wing watch list. We’ll wheel you over to the Omega machine, now, where you have the ability to make the right CHOICE - we’re pro-choice, you know.*
 
TQUALEY----------- Your out of control, gas inducing rage has read far too much into my post as I did not suggest a middle ground for life or death and I did not say that Obama was right on the issue and I did suggest that the speech was a monologue, so chill and stop reading more into it than is. We should try to win over some of the other side by extending a hand, by CALMING DOWN a bit as we’re not getting anywhere like this ! It is straight forward to me. You can maintain your confictions and also be humanistic about it. I see the point that ND should not have extended an honor, but I think they did a honorable thing by the invite, despite the unrest on the issue. You’ll not going to change your opinion and I mind, but we are monologuing - I think — anyway I finished with this.
 
BobCatholic said:
Amen to that. Interesting how people imply that Jesus broke bread with sinners and thus he approved of their sins and did not call anyone to any sort of repentance. They want to make the Blessed Lord complicit in evil!
Click to expand...
Where did you read that anyone wrote or suggested that ??? READ the post before responding
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top