Theological Notebook: Thoughts on the Controversy Re: President Obama's Invitation to Notre Dame

[novak]

Mom wrote and asked me about what I thought about all the controversy regarding President Obama's addressing the graduating seniors at the University of Notre Dame. I hadn't consciously articulated my thoughts until she asked, but now that I have, I thought that I would just copy it all down here. I would preface my comments by reassuring or

Comments

[mushfromnewsies]

In no way was anything I've said, or anything the Notre Dame administration has done to this point, been able to be construed as "silence" on the question of abortion.

Well, I just meant in general -- I agree that the whole tone of the conflict surrounding abortion needs to change at some fundamental level, on both sides, but translating that desire into our specific actions as each "event" or challenge comes our way, requires our paying a lot of attention. Certainly there is the risk that, by leaning too far back, especially in regards to specific legislation, much ground will be lost, perhaps indefinitely. It's a risk I'm willing to take, but carefully.

As far as this particular incident goes, I agree that this time at the beginning of Obama's administration is an important window. But I guess I'm confused as to how this event (without all this controversy) could open up dialogue. I don't know what really goes on at the social-connections level, during these kinds of high-profile appearances, but Obama isn't giving a lecture, or participating in a discussion, he's giving a symbolic address and receiving a symbolic degree/honor. If anything, I'd hope the negative response to his invitation will challenge him, but unless the administraion was already willing and ready to make abortion an issue when he was first invited, I don't see the opening for productive dialogue in the visit, itself. (I'm not doubting the ND administration; I really don't know their original intent.) I personally think it would be fascinating to see intelligent, faithful pro-life Catholics publicly invite Obama to an open debate about the issue, but I think we all know that will never happen.

Do you think that Obama will take the Catholic position more seriously, or open up new relationships with pro-life Catholics or Christians because of his visit? I don't really know what to think at this point, honestly. I don't know what might truly change Obama, or the political Left, or anyone who takes as uncompromising a stance as he has in the past. Of course this is not the only important issue clouded by ideology and political-social entanglements on both sides, but it's probably the biggest. I'm not hopeless, I guess I'm just stymied. We pray every Mass here at school for Obama's (and all others') change of heart, and for me at least, it is hard to know what else to do at this point -- besides, in the meantime, defending what ground we've already tried to stake out.

[novak]

Sorry about the delay in getting back to you: I was a bit fuzzy the last few days with a sore throat and I didn't want to be equally fuzzy in reading what you had written. I think you're right in highlighting the very indeterminacy of this encounter, particularly so early in a presidential administration. A few thoughts:

... to see intelligent, faithful pro-life Catholics publicly invite Obama to an open debate about the issue...

I don't know that debate is the correct term for this encounter, nor whether that would yet be a constructive format for such an encounter. If anything, debate as such means defending a position, and such an invitation to President Obama would be instructing him to not reconsider his position.

Do you think that Obama will take the Catholic position more seriously, or open up new relationships with pro-life Catholics or Christians because of his visit?

I am certain that simply snubbing him, posing over a line we draw in the sand, or making abortion the sole issue right off the bat would do nothing but encourage him to dismiss the possibility of relationship with pro-life Catholics or Christians. So in proclaiming our own righteousness over this issue we will then collaborate with him in guaranteeing his commitment to an abortion agenda. That's the short-sightedness I see here in the "line in the sand" position: insisting on an adversarial relationship effectively pushes forward an abortion agenda at the very time you claim to be forwarding a human rights agenda instead. Not so Pro-Life in the end, other than the self-satisfaction of having been publicly correct. Confirming the status quo profits no one other than those who would profit from the political status quo.