This article has been imported from our web archive. As a result, it may contain formatting errors, broken links or images, or other inconsistencies from the original publication.
Rescinding Obama's invitation would be un-civil
By Dorothy Cummings McLean
April 3, 2009
Dorothy Cummings McLean
The University of Notre Dame is an expensive private college in the United States. It is known best for its football team, but it is also a symbol of Catholic ambition in that country. As strange as this may sound to Canadians, the United States has a caste system based on the prestige of one’s college. In a land where Harvard is at the very top, Catholic schools duke it out for the position of “Catholic Harvard.” Notre Dame, rich, famous and old, is probably Catholic Harvard. It sells millions of t-shirts.
Notre Dame has invited every President of the United States to speak at its graduation ceremony since Eisenhower. Bill Clinton was the only one to turn it down. And now Fr. John Jenkins, C.S.C., has invited President Barack Obama to speak before the Notre Dame Class of 2009. He is to receive an honorary doctorate of laws.
Notre Dame has invited every President of the United States to speak at its graduation ceremony since Eisenhower. Bill Clinton was the only one to turn it down. And now Fr. John Jenkins, C.S.C., has invited President Barack Obama to speak before the Notre Dame Class of 2009. He is to receive an honorary doctorate of laws.
Catholics across the United States are horrified. Many have demanded that Notre Dame rescind its invitation. And this is nothing new. When Condoleeza Rice, the Secretary of State, was invited to Boston College’s commencement in 2006, the faculty began a petition that she be “disinvited.”
I refused to sign it. Indeed, I suggested that a Catholic college had no business “disinviting” a guest. Perhaps it was a mistake to honour an architect of the war in Iraq, but it was too late: she’d been invited and a Catholic school should be a model of hospitality. Unfortunately, my argument was mistaken for Republican partisanship. Such mistakes are not conducive to one’s happiness at Boston College.
Republicans demonize Democrats; Democrats demonize Republicans. It’s all too predictable, and the people involved are most incredibly rude. If there were an American Party for the Advancement of Civility, I’d root for that one. And, therefore, I am adamant that Notre Dame should not rescind its invitation to President Obama.
Yes, there are good reasons why Notre Dame should not have invited President Obama in the first place. There’s his proposed Freedom of Choice Act. There’s his blessing of scientific experiments upon embryonic human life. And then, most devastatingly, there’s the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 2004 document “Catholics in Public Life.” In this document, the American bishops firmly state that the “Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honour those who act in defiance of our fundamental principles. They should not be given awards, honours or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” Now as Obama is adamant in his support of a woman’s so-called “right” to have her unborn child killed, it would seem that Fr. Jenkins has disobeyed the USCCB.
Fr. Jenkins argues that by inviting the President of the United States to receive an honorary degree, Notre Dame is not showing support for Obama’s actions against the dignity of human life. But, sadly, we live in a society that finds its truth in visual impressions rather than in wordy qualifications. Many Catholics fear that by showing honour to America’s most pro-choice president, Notre Dame is indeed showing honour to his principles, good and bad.
And that’s too bad.
That’s too bad because having invited a guest, Notre Dame cannot, in civility, tell him to stay home. It must also discourage students, guests and trespassers from being rude to the President during his visit. Civilization depends on certain social codes, and one of the most ancient and most important is that of hospitality.
Back at Regis College, ethicist Ron Mercier always asked students to solve problems by asking, “Who is the most vulnerable person in this situation?” The very concept of hospitality was developed to protect the vulnerable. And in host-guest relations, it is the guest who is most vulnerable.
But who is the most vulnerable person in the Notre Dame scandal? Is it really Barack Obama, one of the most powerful men in the world? Personally, I think it’s the Notre Dame Class of 2009. Remember them? They’ve been invited to convocation, too.
Graduating classes are subject to the whims of the administration; they don’t get to choose who addresses them at convocation. And convocations are terribly long and boring. But the Notre Dame Class of 2009 have been presented with a speaker who is not at all boring. They have been given the chance to see and hear in person the President of the United States.
Having been promised the treat of hearing a talented orator, the Notre Dame Class of 2009 should have their treat. The spotlight should leave President Obama and Fr. Jenkins and go right back onto the Notre Dame Class of 2009. They’re the ones who have the most to lose from a “disinvitation.” It would be uncivil to ruin their day.
Then, after the party’s over and the kids have gone home, perhaps the American bishops and Fr. Jenkins will have a little talk about whether Notre Dame wants to be the prestigious “Catholic Harvard” or a faithful Roman Catholic institution.
Dorothy Cummings McLean