The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Building a Catholicism That Can Win Again

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Building a Catholicism That Can Win Again

By W. James Antle, III on 5.4.09 @ 2:35PM

Patrick O'Hannigan has a fine piece up on the main site defending Mary Ann Glendon's decision to decline a Laetare Medal from Notre Dame the same day the Catholic school is awarding an honorary degree to President Obama. O'Hannigan defends her from the more substantive criticism of the Bush administration from the perspective of Catholic doctrine. But Glendon has also been criticized for "opting out of engagement with the larger political culture," denying "the moral legitimacy of the president of the United States," and being too angry to beat Obama politically.

Well. I'm actually a conservative Methodist, not a Catholic. But it seems to me that one can make a legitimate argument that Catholic institutions should not award high honors to people who support what the Church understands to be an intrinsic moral evil. To do so creates confusion as to whether the Church really believes what it claims to believe about abortion. Maintaining this witness without regard to station, office, or opinion polls is not the same as pretending Obama isn't really the president because his birth certificate supposedly says he was born on Mars.

Having said that, this objection to Glendon's non-appearance at Notre Dame has a certain heads-I-win, tails-you-lose quality to it. Meaning Glendon no disrepect, I'm willing to bet that if I walked into a bar -- even in D.C. -- and asked people who Mary Ann Glendon is, I'd get very few correct answers. Yet if she decided to use a college commencement ceremony to pick a fight with the president of the United States about abortion, it might be a bigger story. I'm further willing to bet that the tone of this coverage would not emphasize how nice it is that religious conservatives are fair-minded and engaged with the larger political culture.

So if Glendon actually did decide to argue abortion with Obama on graduation day and it created a minor controversy, would the people now criticizing her praise her for seizing "this rare chance to articulate her principles directly to Obama?" Or would they worry about how swing voters will react to a leading conservative lecturing our democratically elected president about divisive issues during what is supposed to be a happy occasion?

There is definitely more than one way to look at Glendon's choice, even outside a "Catholic frame of reference." But we get into all kinds of problems when our frame of reference for everything becomes: Is this good for the Republicans?

View all comments (9) | Leave a comment

Patrick O'Hannigan| 5.4.09 @ 3:47PM

Thanks for the kind words. I think you're right that Glendon is not a household name, even in DC, but wrong to suppose she hasn't already "used a college commencement ceremony to pick a fight with the president of the United States about abortion." She picked the fight by declining the medal. I bet her "non serviam" got more attention than any five-minute medal acceptance speech would have. Certainly the UND administration is now more aware of the stakes involved than it otherwise would have been. Glendon picked the ground to fight on, rather than letting herself be outmanuevered by Fr. Jenkins and President Obama.

If a martial arts metaphor applies, I think Glendon used jujitsu-- using an opponent's own moves against him-- rather than judo. Her witness is no less effective for that. And what would be the point of her articulating her views directly to President Obama, I wonder? He's heard Catholic objections to abortion from Cardinal George already. Rick Warren made the same case from a slightly different point of view back while Obama was still running for the Oval Office. The problem is not that the case hasn't been made, but that Obama bends an ear to sycophants like Doug Kmiec instead.

JP| 5.4.09 @ 3:59PM

Supporters of the President, Fr Jenkins, and the honorary degree come very close to advocating that Catholics should make loyalty oathes. Whatever happened to religious conscience and all that nuanced, sophisticated Niehbuhr theology?

Glendon, a Catholic, is only following what is mandated by the USCCB. After it became apparent to her that Fr Jenkins never consulted with Bishop D'Arcy, but actually was operating outside of Canon Law, she had little choice.

What the Left seems to be saying that Glendon owes her loyalties first and foremost to President Obama -forget about Church teaching and her standing with God. It's all about Obama!.

Also, I don't think for one moment if she did use her award to pick a fight with the President that the entire Democratic/MSM culture would come down on her with both feet. How dare she use a commencement to push her Far Right agenda! Oh the horror!

The amount of vitriol directed at her means her actions are having an effect. The ball is in Fr Jenkins court. Personally, I think his days are numbered. He has fired a direct shot at the USCCB. Cdl George and D'Arcy have a few friends in the Curia. Maybe not this year, but next year Fr Jenkins may find himself teaching English in a West African mission..

Dan| 5.4.09 @ 4:21PM

She should have pulled a T.E. Lawrence.

If you recall, Lawrence, {he of Lawrence of Arabia} was going to be publicly acknowledged and offered the Order of the British Empire, {an OBE, I think it was that, but what the specific award was I'm kind of vague on...}. Anyway, Lawrence was going to get the award PUBLICLY, and from the King himself.

So what did he do?

He refused it, not previously mind you, but he refused it while standing in front of the crowd, in front of the media and while looking the King dead in the eye.

NOW THAT'S A STATEMENT.

Glendon should have seized on the opportunity, and unleashed an intellectual hailstorm on Obama and on his radical anti-human agenda.

In short, she should have ambushed him.

Normally, I don't go for that type of thing. But in this case, Glendon was being used, she was being used by Notre Dame to escape some of the criticism that they expected to come their way.

So since Notre Dame was using her, she should have turned the table and used them, and seized on the opportunity to go after him, right there, to his face, in front of the crowd, in front of the assembed Catholic notables, and most especially, right in front Obama's sycophantic media cultists.

Instead, she issues this letter of declination, that outside of a few who frequent NR, nobody will eever hear of.

That's called going out with a wimper.

She should have SEIZED the moment.

Wlady Pleszczynski| 5.4.09 @ 8:07PM

I think in her letter Prof. Glendon made it very clear why she would not have wanted to challenge Pres. Obama during commencement:

"A commencement… is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision -- in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops -- to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice."

One can imagine too her not being given the time of day as Obama and his media turned her into the second coming of Joe the Plumber.

Roy| 5.4.09 @ 10:47PM

Yeah - a commencement address isn't a debate. Nobody would have any problem if Notre Dame were inviting Obama to campus to debate abortion with Mary Ann Glendon, a fact which ND supporters know darn well, which pretty much in my mind eliminates any possibility of their arguing in good faith.

ND did not have to make this a big deal - they could just have quietly not invited Obama. My opinion is they want to make it a big deal - to stick it to those fools who actually think the lives of the weak really matter - matter enough to trump, that is, allegiance to big government solutions to poverty or being "anti-war".

Michael Dooley| 5.5.09 @ 6:48AM

Whatever happened to the religious left's romanticism with "speaking truth to power"? Where are the stories saying that you may not agree with her but you must admire her courage? Where is the praise for her self-sacrifice in the name of what she believes in?

Oh, yes. Silly me.

TennesseeVolunteer| 5.5.09 @ 7:57AM

She understands the difference between 'right' and 'wrong'.
Using the commencement as a stage would take much of her righteous power in order to be a fake. She is better than that.

Catherine| 5.5.09 @ 8:58AM

Can we also take note of the fact that after ND’s initial statement that they would select another recipient for the Lataere Medal they later decided not to award the medal this year. My guess is that they correctly assessed the likelihood of further honorees also declining to accept thereby giving a louder voice to those of us opposed to a Catholic university honoring the most pro-abortion politician every to occupy the oval office.

Barb| 5.5.09 @ 9:45AM

You must remember that this day was to belong to the graduates. She even remarked on that fact and she didn't wish to be part of politicizing their day. It is bad enough that the grads have to decide whether to go to their own graduation because these crass liberals have decided to use it for their own political gain.

Fiat Voluntas Tua