Profile: Louisiana Representative Bobby Jindal

Today, my faith in Jesus Christ is central to who I am, and I pray regularly for God's wisdom in all the parts of my life. –Bobby Jindal

"There are 154 Catholics in the new Congress—an all-time high—including 87 Democrats and 67 Republicans," reports Kevin Ekstrom, Religious News Service. "While Democrats hold their traditional lead among Catholics, Republicans are gaining, with two-thirds of new Catholic members coming from the GOP." One of their number is Rep. Bobby Jindal, (R-LA), a convert from Hinduism, narrowly defeated by Catholic Democrat Kathleen Babineaux Blanco in Louisiana's 2003 gubernatorial contest.

"The Church is bigger than any one political movement or party," said Jindal, who succeeded Republican David Vitter, a Catholic who moved to the Senate. "It's a healthy thing that there are Catholics on both sides of the aisle."

It would be even healthier, if they all upheld the moral doctrines of their faith in the public square and defended the sanctity of innocent human life and the God-ordained institution of marriage.

"Who will make the biggest political splash of 2005?" Duncan Currie introduces his list of "politicians to keep an eye on during the coming year?" in The Weekly Standard. "Will it be an Indian-American Rhodes Scholar from Louisiana?"

Republicans rave about Bobby Jindal, the incoming representative from Louisiana's first district. And why not? It isn't every day Republicans get to boast an Indian-American Rhodes Scholar and health care policy whiz as president of the GOP House freshmen. Jindal, 33, is only the second Indian American ever elected to Congress. Shortly after he won his seat—with 78 percent of the vote—House majority whip Roy Blunt tapped him for assistant whip. Jindal, a deeply religious Catholic conservative, barely lost the 2003 Louisiana governor's race. He's now one of the Republicans' brightest young lights.

Nor is The Weekly Standard alone in praising Jindal, as Jeff Crouere notes in The Bayou Buzz:

Jindal's coverage from the Washington D.C. press corps has been embarrassingly positive. Fred Barnes credits his "stunning resume." Robert Novak calls Jindal "Rookie of the Year."

"Jindal is destined to be a star in Washington," writes Weekly Standard executive editor Barnes, who adds, "It's quite an advantage for a newly elected House member to know the president personally."

• Jindal on Life and Family

On September 21, 2003, The Times-Picayune profiled the views of Louisiana's gubernatorial candidates on a host of issues life and family-related issues from abortion to sex education.

On abortion, Jindal told the paper, "I am 100 percent anti-abortion with no exceptions. I believe all life is precious." On sexuality education, Jindal said, "It is best handled in the home, by parents....We should not have our schools teach 'how-to' courses on sex to young children."

As previously reported on Catholics in the Public Square, Blanco used "aggressive advertising" attacking Jindal for his principled opposition to abortion "without exception" to turn a double-digit gap into a close victory in the governor's race, according to The Times-Picayune. "Protecting life, strengthening marriage and families, supporting faith-based solutions to societal problems, and defending Louisiana values" were four main themes of the faith and values vision of Jindal's gubernatorial candidacy. Rep. Jindal is a strong supporter of a constitutional amendment to protect the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, as he declared in his congressional campaign:

Overzealous judges and others have tried to bypass our legal system by disregarding current laws to push their own agenda. The sanctity of marriage, which is the foundation of families, should not be cheapened by special interest groups.

As I observed over a year ago on Catholic Pundits:

We will watch this rising star out of the East with considerable interest and, perhaps, just a bit of hope.

Update (January 14, 4:30 pm): You'll want to read RedState's interview with Jindal, referenced by my editorial colleague Christopher Blosser in the comments below.

"A Respite from Politically-Oriented Blogging"

As you may have noticed, 'Catholics in the Public Square' has been quiet of late. There are a number of reasons:

What started out as a collective blogging project has, over the years and for various reasons, diminished in size, frequency and membership. (By no means am I faulting other contributors: we each have our respective blogs and priorities in life).

For me, personally, blogging in general has taken a back seat to other affairs -- parenting and other family matters; increasing responsibilities at work; reading and other passions. And in what little time I do have to blog, it is preferably on less political matters -- and more often than not at venues such as: First Things, American Catholic, the Benedict (fan club) Blog or my own personal blog, Against The Grain.

Also, specifically in terms of "politically-oriented" Catholic blogs -- there are so many these days with doing such good work and possessing such great potential, that the visibility (and perhaps worth) of this own one has diminished. I refer here to the following excellent examples, which I recommend wholeheartedly and are worth visiting daily:

• Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate by our own contributor Jay Anderson, which is predominantly focused on political matters.
  
• The American Principles Project, founded by Robert P. George with organization blog headed by Thomas Peters.
  
• CatholicVote.com with a blog headed by Joshua Mercer and company.
  
• The American Catholic, a Catholic blogging collective who I have the honor of being a part of.
  
• Creative Minority Report by Patrick and Matthew Archbold. ("Believing Christians should look upon themselves as such a creative minority and ... espouse once again the best of its heritage, thereby being at the service of humankind at large." --Joseph Ratzinger)
  

Five years is a long time for a blog. Looking back, I'm pleased to see what Catholics in the Public Square has accomplished -- no small thanks in part to my fellow contributors (past and present); our readers and those who took the time to comment as well.

Perhaps I will resume contributing to this project in the future -- for now, at least, I hope you will understand my need for a respite.

God bless and good night,

Christopher Blosser

Who got to Stupak?

Catholic pro-life Rep Bart Stupak (D-MI) has stated he will vote for a health care bill which includes funding for abortion. I hate what politics does to people like him.

Two Letters.

I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith I have tried to right my path. I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office, I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination, and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty, and fought to end war. Those are the issues that have motivated me and been the focus of my work as a United States Senator.

I also want you to know that even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health field, and I'll continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone.

Excerpt, Letter of Senator Edward Kennedy to Pope Benedict XVI, which President Obama delivered to the Pontiff in July, 2009.

* * *

While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old. [...]

I share in the confidence of those who feel that America is willing to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. I also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society's problems -- an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

Excerpt, Letter of Senator Edward Kennedy to Thomas E. Denelly, August 1971.

Edward M. Kennedy 1932-2009

Edward M. Kennedy, R.I.P.

Robert D. Novak 1931-2009

• Catholic convert and political commentator Robert Novak passes away Catholic News Agency.
  
• Our Friend, Bob Novak and "A Prince of Darkness Heads toward the Light ", by Deal Hudson InsideCatholic.com
  
• Robert Novak, RIP: "Faith, Freedom and Free Enterprise", by Larry Kudlow. National Review
  

Update Jay Anderson has a roundup of reflections from around the 'net.

Catholic college faces lawsuit over refusal to provide contraception

The president of a small Catholic college said Friday he would rather close the school's doors than violate the church's teachings on contraception -- Ben Conery of the Washington Times has the story:

The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has determined that Belmont Abbey College violated discrimination laws because the school's employee health insurance plan does not cover contraception, according to a letter the EEOC sent to the school.

"I hope it would never get this far," college President William K. Thierfelder told The Washington Times, "but if it came down to it we would close the college before we ever provided that."

The factual conclusion reached by the EEOC could be a precursor to the commission filing a federal discrimination lawsuit against the college. (More).

Further details from LifeSiteNews:

Eight BAC faculty members filed a complaint against the college for removing coverage for abortion, sterilization, and contraception from their employee health insurance, supplied by Wellpath. The faculty first complained to the North Carolina Department of Insurance that BAC was required to cover contraception under state law because it did not qualify for the religious employer exemption. Both the state department and Wellpath, however, disagreed with the complainants.

"If you ever came on this campus, the first thing you see is the Basilica of Mary Help of Christians," said Thierfelder. "That basilica is connected to a monastery. That monastery is connected to the main administration building."

The group of complainants, who joined forces with the National Women's Law Center, then made a gender discrimination complaint to the EEOC, which in March informed the Abbey that it had closed the issue. Two months later, the EEOC reversed its decision.

"By denying prescription contraception drugs, Respondent [the college] is discriminating based on gender because only females take oral prescription contraceptives," wrote Reuben Daniels Jr., the EEOC Charlotte District Office Director in the determination. "By denying coverage, men are not affected, only women."

College president William Thierfelder is insistent that the school maintain its fidelity to Catholic teaching:

"[I]t is absolute, unequivocal, impossible for us to go against the teachings of the Catholic Church in any way. There is no form of compromise that is possible."

U.S. Bishops launch website in support of 'truly universal' health care

U.S. bishops launch website on health care reform (Catholic News Agency):

As the American health care debate continues, the U.S. Catholic bishops have launched a webpage to promote support for a “truly universal” health policy that respects human dignity.

The page on the website of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) -- http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/ -- includes letters for bishops to Congress, videos, facts and statistics, frequently asked questions, and links for contacting members of Congress.

Related

• Cardinal Rigali tells Congress health bill "unacceptable" without changes Catholic Key August 11, 2009.
  
• Section 1233 authors are major proponents of euthanasia, assisted suicide, by Jill Stanek. August 12, 2009. (Further analysis here).
  

Americans United for Life launches 'Keep Abortion Out of Health Care' website

Americans United for Life issued a condemnation of the House Committee's vote defeating an amendment that would have ensured that taxpayers would not be forced to pay for abortion under the House’s health care bill:

House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), a longtime beneficiary of Planned Parenthood donations who has a 100% favorable voting record from NARAL Pro-Choice America, engineered a series of late-night shenanigans to kill the pro-life amendment by Reps. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).

First, Waxman voted for the amendment, which would have prohibited the federal government from requiring any insurance plan — including the “public option” — to provide coverage for abortion (with exceptions in cases of rape, incest, and danger to the life of the mother). Then, just minutes after the amendment passed 31-27, Waxman took advantage of a House rule that allows supporters to bring an amendment back for consideration later. This time, Waxman managed to strong-arm others on the committee to join him in defeating the amendment, 30-29.

The organization has also launched a new website: Keep Abortion Out of Health Care, asserting that legislation on health care reform be evaluated on the following principles

1. Health care reform must expressly exclude mandates of any kind for abortion. In addition, health care reform must not alter prohibitions on federal funding of abortion contained in the Hyde amendment or other provisions of law.

2. Health care reform must provide broad protection for the freedom of conscience of all Americans, whether or not they are health care providers or religious entities. No person or entity should be compelled to act contrary to their conscience in the payment for, provision of, or performance of health care.

3. Health care reform must not contain provisions that mandate or encourage the withdrawal or curtailment of effective life-sustaining treatment to the terminally ill, the chronically ill, or the permanently disabled.

Cardinal Rigali Urges Support for Pro-Life Amendments to Health Care Reform Bill

Cardinal Rigali Urges House Committee to Support Pro-Life Amendments to Health Care Reform Bill United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. July 30, 2009:

Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the U.S. Catholic bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, wrote on July 29 to the members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee urging them to amend “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act” (H.R. 3200) to retain longstanding government policies on abortion and conscience rights.

Cardinal Rigali reiterated criteria for “genuine health care reform” set forth by Bishop William Murphy, Chairman of the bishops’ Committee on Domestic Policy, in his letter to Congress on July 17. He described health care as “a basic right belonging to all human beings, from conception to natural death” and said that “the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is working to ensure that needed health reform is not undermined by abandoning longstanding and widely supported policies against abortion funding and mandates and in favor of conscience protection.”

The Cardinal enumerated several problems with the bill as introduced: It would be used to mandate abortion coverage in private health plans, expand abortion funding, override state laws that limit or regulate abortion, and endanger existing laws protecting the conscience rights of health care providers.

“Much-needed reform must not become a vehicle for promoting an ‘abortion rights’ agenda or reversing longstanding current policies against federal abortion mandates and funding,” he wrote. “In this sense we urge you to make this legislation ‘abortion neutral’ by preserving longstanding federal policies that prevent government promotion of abortion and respect conscience rights.”

Related

• Why Catholics Will Not Get Abortion Out of the Health Care Bill, by Deal W. Hudson. InsideCatholic.com August 3, 2009.
  

• NY Catholic Nurse Forced To Participate in Abortion Describes Ordeal LifeSiteNews. July 28, 2009. Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, a nurse at Mount Sinai Hospital who was forced to participate in the abortion of a late-term unborn child under the threat of losing her job and nursing license, has given a candid interview to the New York Post.
  

• Bishop: 'yes' to universal health care; 'no' to abortion funding , by Thomas c. Fox. National Catholic Reporter July 17, 2009. Bishop Murphy of Rockville, NY warned against the inclusion of abortion coverage in any reform plan, saying that Americans should not be forced to pay for the destruction of human life through government funding or mandatory coverage.
  

• Catholic Politicians Continue to Advance Abortion Lobby Agenda Pewsitter, July 19, 2009. While pro-life legislators in the House and Senate are working overtime battling attempts to broaden abortion policy in both appropriation bills and the healthcare reform bill, some Catholic politicians are leading efforts to advance the abortion lobby agenda making abortion universally accessible and funded by taxpayer dollars. (See also: Pelosi Accused of Muzzling Opposition to Taxpayer-Funded D.C. Abortions Jay Anderson, Pro Ecclesia July 20, 2009.
  

Recommended Reading

• The Abortion Administration: here comes federal funding for abortion, by Marjorie Dannenfelser. Weekly Standard
  
• The Catholic WFB: Bill Buckley made his faith look resplendently good, by Neal B. Freeman (National Review. Adapted from remarks delivered before a Portsmouth Institute session celebrating the life and faith of William F. Buckley Jr.
  
• Remembering Tony Snow's life, by Dana Perino (Politico). Memories of the former Catholic press secretary for President George W. Bush.
  
• William McGurn wonders Why was Samuel Alito's Catholicism so much more discussed than Sonia Sotomayor's? Wall Street Journal July 14, 2009.
  
• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Eugenicist, by George J. Marlin. The Catholic Thing.
  
• 19 Blue Dog pro-life Democrats have sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi advising her that they will vote against National Health Care if it does not exclude abortion funding (Creative Minority Report).
  
• George Weigel pens An Open Letter to Miguel Diaz, nominated by President Obama as ambassador to the Holy See.
  

Michael Sean Winters: No to Federally Funded Abortion

(Hat tip: The Catholic Key Blog)

Chris and I have both been somewhat critical lately of the writing of America Magazine contributor Michael Sean Winters, so I think we would be remiss if we didn't acknowledge Winters for writing something particularly praiseworthy:

To be clear: I have never voted for a Republican in my life. My mother told me my right hand would wither and fall to the ground if I did. But, if the President or my representatives in Congress support federal funding for abortion in any way, shape or form, I will never vote for them again and I might risk my right hand in the next election by voting for their opponent.

So, call your Senators and Representatives. Call the White House. Many of us pro-life Democrats have given the President the benefit of the doubt on the abortion issue because of his repeated commitment to trying to lower the abortion rate, a commitment he reiterated to Pope Benedict XVI last week. All the good will he has earned among Catholic swing voters, and all the arguments on his behalf progressive Catholics have mounted, all could be swept away if abortion is part of a federal option in health care. Politics is the art of compromise, but on this point, there can be none.

[Read the whole thing]

My Comments:
Well done!

President Obama selects rural Catholic doctor, Regina Benjamin, for Surgeon General

Rocco Palmo has the details.

Pope Benedict XVI meets President Barack Obama

• Official press release the the Vatican published today after Benedict XVI received U.S. President Barack Obama in audience:

  his afternoon, Friday 10 July 2009, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI received in Audience the President of the United States of America, His Excellency Mr. Barack H. Obama. Prior to the Audience, the President met His Eminence Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of State, and also His Excellency Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, Secretary for Relations with States.
  

  In the course of their cordial exchanges the conversation turned first of all to questions which are in the interests of all and which constitute a great challenge for the future of every nation and for the true progress of peoples, such as the defence and promotion of life and the right to abide by one’s conscience.
  

  Reference was also made to immigration with particular attention to the matter of reuniting families.
  

  The meeting focused as well upon matters of international politics, especially in light of the outcome of the G8 Summit. The conversation also dealt with the peace process in the Middle East, on which there was general agreement, and with other regional situations. Certain current issues were then considered, such as dialogue between cultures and religions, the global economic crisis and its ethical implications, food security, development aid especially for Africa and Latin America, and the problem of drug trafficking. Finally, the importance of educating young people everywhere in the value of tolerance was highlighted.

Pope Benedict XVI speaks with U.S. President Barack Obama (R) during their meeting in the pontiff's private library at the Vatican July 10, 2009. Source: Reuters

• In addition to giving Obama a copy of his latest encyclical, the pope also presented a copy of the Vatican document on biomedical ethics, "Dignitas Personae" ("The Dignity of a Person") (Catholic News Agency):

  When presenting the gifts after their 35-minute closed-door meeting, the pope gave Obama a signed, white leather-bound copy of the encyclical, "Caritas in Veritate" ("Charity in Truth"), then indicated the light-green soft-cover instruction on bioethics issued last December by the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

  "Oh, what we discussed earlier," said Obama, referring to their closed-door discussions. "I will have some reading to do on the plane."

  Obama was given the instruction to help him better understand the church's position on bioethics, Msgr. Georg Ganswein, papal secretary, told journalists in the pool covering the visit.

  Carl Olson notes:"Some observers, I'm betting, will emphasize that since President Obama is not a Catholic, the gift of Dignitas Personae means little or nothing. That argument, however, is implicitly addressed in the opening of the document". Dignitatis Humanae addresses itself "to the Catholic faithful and to ALL who seek the truth,"

  [drawing] upon the light both of reason and of faith and seeks to set forth an integral vision of man and his vocation, capable of incorporating everything that is good in human activity, as well as in various cultural and religious traditions which not infrequently demonstrate a great reverence for life.

  Michael Denton (For the Greater Glory):

  Kmiec, who has stood up a lot for Obama's embryo stuff, has to be exceptionally embarrassed. That the pope felt the need to hand Obama his document on bioethics says a lot about the claim that Obama & the Vatican are close on these moral issues.
  

  I would also say that seems to put an end to the notion that somehow American bishops & Catholics are over-acting to Obama and the Vatican is preserving a sane pro-Obama stance. I think it's clear that Benedict has some serious problems with Obama's positions.

• "Pope presses Obama on pledge to reduce abortions", John Allen Jr. (National Catholic Reporter):

  When President Barack Obama came calling on Pope Benedict XVI today, the two men enjoyed a “truly cordial” encounter, according to a Vatican spokesperson, but at the same time there was no diplomatic silence from the pontiff about their differences over abortion and other “life issues.”
  

  Not only did Benedict press his pro-life case with his words to the president, but he even found a way to make the point with his gift, offering the president a copy of a recent Vatican document on bioethics. According to a Vatican spokesperson, the pope drew a repetition from Obama of his vow to bring down the actual abortion rate.

• According to the Catholic News Agency, "when President Barack Obama stepped into the pope's private library in the Vatican July 10, he became only the 12th U.S. president to do so."
  

Michael Sean Winters still doesn't get it. (Obama, Benedict and Notre Dame, revisited)

From the National Catholic Reporter, Michael Sean Winters replies to my prior post:

[Quoting my prior post]:

"The pope regularly receives heads of state all the time. It is simply one of the many things the Vatican does. To do so, even to exchange personal gifts as a matter of courtesy, does not imply endorsement of any or all of the policies espoused by that particular head of state."

But, Obama was also head of state when he went to Notre Dame. Indeed, inviting the sitting president to give the commencement is "one of the things the university does" and Fr. Jenkins made it quite clear that the conferral of the honorary degree upon the President did "not imply endorsement of any or all of the policies espoused by that particular head of state."

Fr. Jenkins stated in his commencement address, Notre Dame honored Obama "for the qualities and accomplishments the American people admired in him when they elected him."

However, as a good number of bishops and 367,000 Catholics wish to point out, the very act of bestowing an honorary law degree conveyed a rather conflicted message. In the words of Stephen Barr:

How can an institution that purports to be Catholic honor as a “doctor of law”—literally a “teacher of law”—a President who has made it very clear by word and deed that he intends to remove from the laws of this nation anything that defends unborn human life?

Michael Sean Winters continues:

If President Obama's views are so radical, perhaps the pope should set aside the tradition of receiving the president. After all, the pope could have simply said he was starting his vacation early. But, conservative Catholics can't really attack the pope for refusing to see Obama, can they? At least they can’t question the pope’s "Catholic identity" the way they did that of Notre Dame.

Sorry, but I don't see why Catholics would have any reason to protest. Fr. Z. reminds us, popes meet with the good and criminals alike. John Paul II met with Fidel Castro and Yassir Arafat. Paul VI met with Idi Amin Dada. What they don't do is bestow a formal honor on them.

Moreover, As Carl Olson points out:

Benedict XVI and President Obama, according to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, will discuss "their shared belief in the dignity of all people." Regardless of the spin (does "all people", for Obama, include the unborn? I think not.), it's fair to say this meeting with involve some sort of actual dialogue -- the sort of dialogue that didn't take place at Notre Dame, despite the spin (see a pattern here?) aggressively and shamelessly put into play by Fr. Jenkins and others.

Obama to visit the Vatican; the triumphant vindication of Michael Sean Winters?

From America magazine, Michael Sean Winters on the President's prospective audience with the Pope:

Pope Benedict XVI will receive President Barack Obama in audience at the Vatican on July 10. Let the gnashing of teeth begin.

Admit it, wasn’t your first impulse to call Dr. Mary Ann Glendon and ask, "If you were still the ambassador, would you show up or would you boycott?" The Cardinal Newman Society, which spent the better part of the spring telling the world that no Catholic could in good conscience share the stage with President Obama, perhaps now they will start issuing press releases entitled "Pope Creates Scandal" or "Outrage at the Vatican." The Catholic News Agency, which featured the headline "Vatican announces Pope’s vacation without confirmation of Obama visit" just a few weeks ago, has nary a mention of the visit on its website this morning. Cat got your tongue?

Obama’s Catholic critics need to re-calibrate their message and it is difficult to see how they will compete with the pictures of Obama in the frescoed halls of the Vatican, his beautiful wife and children in tow, shaking hands with the Holy Father. Actually, in addition to shaking hands, it is traditional that the Pope will present a gift to the President. Does that count as an "honor" of the kind forbidden by the bishops’ document "Catholics in Political Life"? Notre Dame, of course, has a tradition of conferring an honorary degree upon every new president that pre-dates presidential visits to the Holy See.

Michael Sean Winters -- intemperate snark or astonishingly thick-headed? Either way, America magazine could do a lot better.

The Pope regularly receives heads of state all the time. It is simply one of the many things the Vatican does. To do so, even to exchange personal gifts as a matter of courtesy, does not imply endorsement of any or all of the policies espoused by that particular head of state.

Were the Pope to present Obama with a gift, it would no more indicate his approval of Obama's support for unrestricted abortion or federally-funded embryonic stem cell research than the exchange of gifts with President Bush in 2008 indicated an endorsement of the questionable policies of his own administration.

Mr. Winters might argue the same point with Notre Dame's invitation to President Obama, but this is actually quite different.

The USCCB has stated quite clearly that Catholic institutions "should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions."

In the words of Bishop John M. D’Arcy -- to whom the USCCB recently affirmed their collective support -- in Notre Dame's conferral of honors upon the President, "we have here, however, the granting of an honorary degree of law to someone whose activities both as president and previously, have been altogether supportive of laws against the dignity of the human person yet to be born."

If Michael Sean Winters believes as I do, or as Cardinal William Keeler asserted, that Roe v. Wade

invented a constitutional concept that had never been envisioned; in doing so, they contravened two of our nation's most precious values: the recognition of a God-given, inalienable right to life, and the promise of equal protection under law.

Then surely it is not beyond him to grasp just how scandalous it may be to Catholics to witness the conferral of a law degree on a President who boasted his "100% pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America" and declared his furvent support of the decision.

And no, Michael -- the Catholic Bishops did not speak "only with their absence" at the commencement -- unless you're willing to ignore the statements of 77 Catholic bishops and 367,000 Catholics voicing their protest.

Update!

• Mr. Winters responds to my post ... predictably, with more obfuscation. See my response here.
  

Obama sends President Bush's Council on Bioethics packing; what does the future hold?

After disbanding the [President Bush's] Council on Bioethics, what kind of advisory body will Obama put together? -- Elenor K. Schoen (Catholic World Report):

According to Bush’s executive order, the President’s Council was created to “advise the president on bioethical issues that may emerge as a consequence of advances in biomedical science and technology.” The New York Times reported that White House press officer Reid Cherlin said President Obama will appoint a new bioethics commission, one with a “new mandate” which “offers practical policy options.”

Judging from Obama’s preliminary policies, the future reincarnation of the bioethics council will no doubt be decidedly different. Whether the new bioethics commission will function mainly as a mouthpiece for the president, or as an independent advisory board, will be made more apparent in Obama’s choices in picking a chair and members, and in creating its mandate for serving under him during his first presidential term.

See also Joe Carter's Lament for a Bioethics Council (First Things' "First Thoughts" June 18, 2009).

Catholic College Leaders Lobby Bishops to Withdraw 2004 Policy Banning Pro-Abortion Speakers

(Hat tip: Catholic Online)

LifeSiteNews reports:

June 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In the wake of the Notre Dame commencement scandal, Catholic college leaders representing some of the worst violators of the U.S. bishops’ 2004 ban on honoring public opponents of fundamental Catholic teachings are lobbying the bishops to withdraw their policy.

Yesterday the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities (ACCU), which represents more than 200 Catholic institutions, released its summer 2009 newsletter, including a report on the ACCU’s board of directors meeting last week. The ACCU directors concluded “that it would be desirable for the [U.S. bishops] to withdraw” their 2004 policy, according to the newsletter.

The policy in question is found in the U.S. bishops’ 2004 statement “Catholics in Political Life,” which reads in part:

“The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

The bishops gather today in San Antonio, Texas, for their biannual meeting.

***
“Why is it so hard for Catholic college leaders to understand that a Catholic institution does great harm when it honors or gives speaking platforms to those who work against core Catholic values?” said Patrick J. Reilly, president of The Cardinal Newman Society.

“The more than 367,000 people who signed The Cardinal Newman Society’s online petition and the scores of American bishops who publicly criticized Notre Dame’s honor for pro-abortion President Barack Obama clearly recognize that such actions by Catholic colleges are scandalous.”

The ACCU leadership suggests moreover “that juridical expressions of bishops’ or universities’ responsibilities should be kept to a minimum” in order to maintain a good relationship between the bishops and educators.

Reilly surmised that, in other words, Catholic colleges and universities would prefer that there are no clear rules to govern their conduct. He also pointed out that the statement implies that the educators believe that the bishops, and not college leaders, are responsible for tensions arising from scandalous activities on Catholic campuses.

“Catholic colleges and universities would like all of the privileges of being Catholic, but none of the responsibilities of being high-profile witnesses for the fullness of the Catholic faith,” Reilly said.

Allowing for the possibility that the bishops might not agree to simply eliminate the 2004 ban, but might instead draft a new policy concerning Catholic honors and platforms, the ACCU’s directors proposed that the policy “should acknowledge more clearly the differing roles of campus authorities and bishops.” Reilly said that this phrase appears to be an attempt to get bishops to refrain from commenting on internal decisions at lay-controlled Catholic institutions.

In May, ACCU President Richard Yanikoski told the South Bend Tribune that he saw a “degree of ambiguity” in the bishops’ 2004 policy. He claimed that the Church’s canon lawyers disagree whether the policy applies to speakers or honorees who are not Catholic, regardless of whether those individuals oppose Catholic teaching. Several bishops strongly rejected that same argument when it was made by Notre Dame president Rev. John Jenkins, C.S.C., to defend his decision to honor President Obama.

(emphasis added)

Meanwhile, Archbishop Burke is working in the opposite direction to prevent a repeat of the Notre Dame scandal:

VATICAN CITY, June 17, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Archbishop Raymond Burke, the highest ranking American prelate in the Vatican has given an interview in a Catholic magazine, in which he says that Notre Dame’s decision to honor President Barack Obama was not only “profoundly shocking,” but also underscores a grave situation requiring action to ensure the incident is never repeated.

Burke is the prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court of appeal in the Church next to the Pope, and an outspoken advocate for life and family values. He has made headlines repeatedly for his insistence that ministers of communion should deny the sacrament to publicly and obstinantely pro-abortion individuals, especially politicians. He told the Catholic periodical, Inside the Vatican, that a number of lessons must be taken from Notre Dame’s high-profile conferral of an honorary doctorate on Obama, the most aggressive pro-abortion president in American history.

Burke said that the “betrayal of the Catholic identity of Notre Dame University” grew out of the danger of “pursuing a kind of prestige in the secular world, which leads to a betrayal of the sacred aspect of its work, namely the fidelity to Christ and His teaching.”

“So I think everybody now realizes the gravity of the situation. Also I believe that the whole situation has sensitized more people with regard to the gravity of the practice of procured abortion in our nation, that is, they realize even more how far we have gone away from God’s will for human life,” continued Burke.

“That the premiere Catholic university in the United States would give an honorary doctorate of law to one of the most aggressive pro-abortion politicians in our history is profoundly shocking.”

“Now, we cannot forget what has happened at Notre Dame,” said Burke. “We need to take the measures that are necessary so that this is not repeated in other places. If it could happen at Notre Dame, where else could it happen?”

[More]

(emphasis added)

Michael Liccione on "Patching up the Seamless Garment"

"Patching up the Seamless Garment", by Michael Liccione (Sacramentum Vitae) June 12, 2009:

Since the late 1990s, the US bishops have on the whole been abandoning the seamless-garment approach. With increasing clarity, they have insisted on assigning greater weight to combating certain practices called "intrinsic evils" by the Magisterium, such as abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, and same-sex marriage, than on promoting certain social goods, such as universal health care and humane immigration policy, which reasonable Catholics can differ about how and how much to promote. That shift of emphasis is only logical given the clear content of Church teaching. But President Obama's having won the election with almost 54% of the Catholic vote has re-energized Catholic progressives to patch up a seamless garment that's become rather tattered. If only to vary my intellectual exercise routine, I had been hoping to hear fresh arguments from them. But the patching process exhibits precisely the same shoddy reasoning so long characteristic of the Catholic left. Herein I shall discuss two examples. ... [More]