Professor Charles E. Rice on the Notre Dame Controversy
The invitation should be withdrawn. It implies no personal animosity to suggest that Fr. Jenkins and the other Fellows and Trustees responsible for this fiasco should resign or be removed.
Incidentally, Professor Mary Ann Glendon, the Laetare Medal recipient, would make a better use of her time at the Grotto than as a warm-up or wind-up act at Commencement.
PrintNOTRE DAME (Catholic Online) - We publish in its entirety the excellent letter of Pro-Life champion, constitutional scholar and Notre Dame Law Professor Charles Rice which appeared in the Notre Dame Observer on March 31, 2009:
Professor Charles Rice
Notre Dame is not a public utility. It has no commitment to honor at its capstone ceremony every politician whom the political process deposits in the Oval Office. Nor is there an unbroken custom that, if a president is invited, it must be in his first year.
Our leaders had to know that their invitation to President Obama would imply a general commendation of the man and his policies. In the conflicts over those policies, our leaders have committed, in perception but also in fact, the name and prestige of Notre Dame to the side that is hostile to the imperatives of faith and reason affirmed by the Catholic Church. Our leaders are not only dismissive but also contemptuous toward the Church. The first thing Bishop D'Arcy knew about it was when he was told that Obama had accepted the invitation.
President Obama is a relentless advocate of unrestricted abortion, including the Freedom of Choice Act, which would abrogate all state laws restricting abortion. On his fourth day in office, he overturned the Mexico City Policy that forbade organizations receiving federal funds to perform or promote abortions in other countries. He has restored to the UN Population Fund (the funding that President Bush had stopped because of the Fund's support for forced abortions.) Obama opposes continued federal funding for pro-life pregnancy help centers. He opposes the Hyde Amendment which denies public funding for most abortions.
At the other end of life, the Stimulus Package foreshadows the rationing of health care for the elderly and unproductive. "[T]he Obama Administration," said Cardinal Francis George, "intends to remove a … rule for the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] that [protects] doctors, nurses and others … who have objections in conscience to … abortion and other killing procedures … [S]uch … would be the first step in moving our country from democracy to despotism." Not surprisingly, Obama's nominee for Secretary of HHS, Governor Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic, has a strongly pro-abortion record, including persistent vetoes of restrictions on late-term abortions. The abolition of conscience protection could spell the end of Catholic hospitals and drive Catholics out of much of the medical profession. That prospect raises our leaders' honoring of Obama to a new level of scandal and even betrayal.
The definitive "life" issue arises from Obama's authorization of HHS " to fund and conduct human embryonic stem cell research" (ESCR). Adult stem cells, derived from bone marrow and other sources, have been used successfully in relieving various injuries and medical conditions. Embryonic stem cells have never successfully treated a human patient for anything. But federal funding would make ESCR a profitable, if useless, industry.
No moral problems arise in the use of adult stem cells. But every embryo is a living human being. To remove the stem cells kills that embryo. It is, in moral terms, a murder.
ESCR can be performed on embryos left over from in vitro fertilization. The excuse that "they are going to die anyway" does not justify intentionally killing them any more than it would justify involuntary lethal experiments on condemned criminals.
ESCR can also be performed on embryos created by cloning. In cloning, the nucleus of a somatic cell, which is any cell of the body other than a sperm or egg cell, is inserted into an egg (ovum) cell from which the egg cell's nucleus has been removed. The egg is then electrically stimulated to react as if it had been fertilized by a sperm cell. The result is a one-cell zygote which divides and develops. For the first eight weeks it is called an embryo. The cloned embryo is genetically identical to the donor of the somatic cell.
Cloning can be reproductive, in which the embryo is implanted in a woman's womb and carried to term, or therapeutic, in which the embryo is killed by removal of the stem cells for use in research. Both types are condemned by Catholic teaching. See Dignitas Personae (2008), nos. 28-30.
"[W]e will ensure," Obama said, "that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society." He opened the door for the worse evil of therapeutic cloning. The Dickey Amendment, which has denied funds for "creation of a human embryo … for research purposes" or for "research in which a human embryo is destroyed," is being removed. So the Obama Administration will fund the creation of new human beings by cloning for the purpose of killing them and using their stem cells for research. ...
Professor Charles Rice
Notre Dame is not a public utility. It has no commitment to honor at its capstone ceremony every politician whom the political process deposits in the Oval Office. Nor is there an unbroken custom that, if a president is invited, it must be in his first year.
Our leaders had to know that their invitation to President Obama would imply a general commendation of the man and his policies. In the conflicts over those policies, our leaders have committed, in perception but also in fact, the name and prestige of Notre Dame to the side that is hostile to the imperatives of faith and reason affirmed by the Catholic Church. Our leaders are not only dismissive but also contemptuous toward the Church. The first thing Bishop D'Arcy knew about it was when he was told that Obama had accepted the invitation.
President Obama is a relentless advocate of unrestricted abortion, including the Freedom of Choice Act, which would abrogate all state laws restricting abortion. On his fourth day in office, he overturned the Mexico City Policy that forbade organizations receiving federal funds to perform or promote abortions in other countries. He has restored to the UN Population Fund (the funding that President Bush had stopped because of the Fund's support for forced abortions.) Obama opposes continued federal funding for pro-life pregnancy help centers. He opposes the Hyde Amendment which denies public funding for most abortions.
At the other end of life, the Stimulus Package foreshadows the rationing of health care for the elderly and unproductive. "[T]he Obama Administration," said Cardinal Francis George, "intends to remove a … rule for the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] that [protects] doctors, nurses and others … who have objections in conscience to … abortion and other killing procedures … [S]uch … would be the first step in moving our country from democracy to despotism." Not surprisingly, Obama's nominee for Secretary of HHS, Governor Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic, has a strongly pro-abortion record, including persistent vetoes of restrictions on late-term abortions. The abolition of conscience protection could spell the end of Catholic hospitals and drive Catholics out of much of the medical profession. That prospect raises our leaders' honoring of Obama to a new level of scandal and even betrayal.
The definitive "life" issue arises from Obama's authorization of HHS " to fund and conduct human embryonic stem cell research" (ESCR). Adult stem cells, derived from bone marrow and other sources, have been used successfully in relieving various injuries and medical conditions. Embryonic stem cells have never successfully treated a human patient for anything. But federal funding would make ESCR a profitable, if useless, industry.
No moral problems arise in the use of adult stem cells. But every embryo is a living human being. To remove the stem cells kills that embryo. It is, in moral terms, a murder.
ESCR can be performed on embryos left over from in vitro fertilization. The excuse that "they are going to die anyway" does not justify intentionally killing them any more than it would justify involuntary lethal experiments on condemned criminals.
ESCR can also be performed on embryos created by cloning. In cloning, the nucleus of a somatic cell, which is any cell of the body other than a sperm or egg cell, is inserted into an egg (ovum) cell from which the egg cell's nucleus has been removed. The egg is then electrically stimulated to react as if it had been fertilized by a sperm cell. The result is a one-cell zygote which divides and develops. For the first eight weeks it is called an embryo. The cloned embryo is genetically identical to the donor of the somatic cell.
Cloning can be reproductive, in which the embryo is implanted in a woman's womb and carried to term, or therapeutic, in which the embryo is killed by removal of the stem cells for use in research. Both types are condemned by Catholic teaching. See Dignitas Personae (2008), nos. 28-30.
"[W]e will ensure," Obama said, "that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society." He opened the door for the worse evil of therapeutic cloning. The Dickey Amendment, which has denied funds for "creation of a human embryo … for research purposes" or for "research in which a human embryo is destroyed," is being removed. So the Obama Administration will fund the creation of new human beings by cloning for the purpose of killing them and using their stem cells for research. ...
Rate This Article
1 - 10 of 14 Comments
Leave a Comment
More College & University News
- Chart-Topping Sister Mary Josefa Reflects on Thomas Aquinas College
- UST Alumni Grant Funds to St. Thomas Students
- Faith, Truth Focus of Speakers at UST Commencement
- Dr. Beena George Named New UST Cameron Dean
- UST Honors Student Sings Her Way to Grad School
- Archbishop José H. Gomez at Franciscan University: In this Time of Mission
- Brother and Sister Plant It Forward at UST
- UST's Macias Accepted to Thomistic Seminar
- UST's Taco Tasting Raises $35,000 for Scholarships
Featured News
- Fr. Paul Schenck: Finding Living Faith on Catechetical Sunday
- The Movie Yellow: Incest as 'Normal' and Cassavates's Slides Into the World of Woes
- The Chicago School Teachers Strike Reveals the Need For School Choice
- The Sexual Barbarians and the Dissolution of Culture
- The Happy Priest Challenges Us to Ask: Who is Jesus to Me?
- Michael Coren on Canadian Public Schools: Teachers, leave those kids alone
- We Cannot Ignore Our Consciences: Cardinal Dolan On Religious Liberty
- In the Face of Danger, Successor of Peter Travels to Lebanon as a Messenger of Peace
- Reflections on the Dignity and Vocation of Women: Who or What?
The only effective response would be a massive demonstration that is "noticed" by all at Notre Dame.
I believe that only a personal request from the Holy Father himself can avert this coming catastrophe. God Help Us.
Eddie, There are several suits out there in Federal Court that will require BHO to produce a "valid" birth certificate stating he was born within the terrtorial boundries of the USA as required by the constitution. To this date his real BC has not been produced...Thats what Professor Rice was alluding to...
Father Jenkins is not going to resign nor are any of the rest of them that follow Father Jenkins. We must have a higher force to remove these people including any other from the Catholic universities that want to show their Leftest side.
Generally a great article, but I don't understand why he felt compelled to include the charge that President Obama may not be eligible for the presidency. I can easily see the other side reading the article and saying “Oh, he’s just another angry white man who can’t accept a black man as president so why should anyone take his opinions seriously”.
Father Jenkins should respect the Church enough to resign before the event so that the invitation can be withdrawn without further embarrassment to himself.
Its time for Catholics to step up not only to correct what is going on at ND but at all our Catholic Universities..The Leftist-Marxists would not hesitate one second to force a protest on the speaker at a comencment. Just look at what they did last week at the Univ. of NC by running off a speaker with violent attacks on not only him but the people who came to hear him speak... Maybe we (the orthodox) are being to naive when we say we'll only pray..Maybe we do need to Protest more loudly...Not like the L-M do, but at least let the MSM know we are there.Otherwise I bet the MSM will not even report on the prayers at the grotto...
This is a great article!!
Notre Dame should have its name removed from the Catholic directory and the Pope should be reprimanding these administrators that are violating the Churches teachings. I think all of the faculty that feel it is wrong for Obama to attend commencement and receive an honorary degree should take a stand and say they will not attend the commencement. This would make a big difference since I have heard that about 75% of the faculty are against Obama coming to the commencement. I do disagree with the author in that I think protesters would make a difference because it will show the both the President of Notre Dame and the univesity that many are outraged at the blatant slap in the face to all pro-lifers in having Obama at Notre Dame. He is the anthesis of what a Catholic should be. He is as anti-life as you can get and by Notre Dame giving him an honorary degree they are in effect applauding his accomplishments which in a large majority include the promotion of killing innocent human life. I have an article and a video expressing my outrage at Notre Damehttp://teresamerica.blogtownhall.com/ I hope you enjoy!!!
It seems that Father Jenkins would be bound by obedience to observe Catholic Church practices.
Did his Superior in the Holy Cross Community direct Father to rescind the invitation? I am aware that he is acting in contraindication of his local ordinary, Bishop D-Arcy and of His Holiness Benedict XVI.
I hope that Notre Dame would recognize the hugh political propaganda victory for anti-life Obama with this speech and with the Award of an Honorary Degree in Our Blessed Mother's name.
What a violation!! Notre Dame will have permanently tarnished its reputation and alienate faithful Catholics in my personal opinion.
Joanne L. Capone
Executive Director
Capone-DeSimone Institute for Peace and Social Justice
I have two degrees from Notre Dame. I took Professor Rice's course in Constitutional Law, and I have great respect for his many efforts over the years to defend our constitutional rights and principles. I agree with his letter. I regret that Father Jenkins extended the invitation. It was not something he had to do, as, for example, the United States must sometimes allow a dictator to enter our country to give a speech at the United Nations. Will Mary Ann Glendon speak at the Commencement? Perhaps she could present the case against legal abortion, in the interest of open discussion and not as a personal rebuke of Obama (who, after all, is entitled to his own opinions but should not expect other honorees to agree with him or remain silent about his policies). I would love to see Dr. Glendon and President Obama "dialogue" in Lincoln-Douglas style on the question of whether the unborn should have a constitutional right to life. A debate -- with cross examination but without teleprompters -- would satisfy all seekers of truth and be worthy of Notre Dame.