No Laetare Medal This Year; Noonan to Speak

Notre Dame announced that it would not give a Laetare Medal this year. Instead, Judge John T. Noonan, Jr., the 1984 winner of the Medal, will give a speech at commencement. He is a judge in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which governs several states in the western part of the country. (Life tenure tends to make a person impervious to politics.)

For those not familiar with Judge Noonan, take a look at this announcement. His list of accomplishments is more than impressive. He was even a professor at Notre Dame's law school.

And since a lot of people will want to know -- yes, he is pro-life. He has served as the Director of the National Right to Life Committee.

ND's Response to Glendon

Fr. Jenkins issued a short response to Glendon's decision not to accept the Laetare Medal. It states in full:

“We are, of course, disappointed that Professor Glendon has made this decision. It is our intention to award the Laetare Medal to another deserving recipient, and we will make that announcement as soon as possible.”

Glendon Declines Laetare Medal

Former Ambassador to the Vatican and Harvard Professor Mary Ann Glendon has declined to accept the Laetare Medal and Notre Dame's invitation to speak at Commencement. The reason for her decision is found in her letter, which is copied in full below.

Dear Father Jenkins,
When you informed me in December 2008 that I had been selected to receive Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal, I was profoundly moved. I treasure the memory of receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame in 1996, and I have always felt honored that the commencement speech I gave that year was included in the anthology of Notre Dame’s most memorable commencement speeches.

So I immediately began working on an acceptance speech that I hoped would be worthy of the occasion, of the honor of the medal, and of your students and faculty.
Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors.

First, as a longtime consultant to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, I could not help but be dismayed by the news that Notre Dame also planned to award the president an honorary degree. This, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops’ express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions “should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles” and that such persons should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” That request, which in no way seeks to control or interfere with an institution’s freedom to invite and engage in serious debate with whomever it wishes, seems to me so reasonable that I am at a loss to understand why a Catholic university should disrespect it.

Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:

• “President Obama won’t be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal.”

• “We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about.”

A commencement, however, 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.

Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.

It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.

In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.

Yours Very Truly,

Mary Ann Glendon

Jenkins Talks to Alumni about Obama

University President Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., spoke to approximately 200 Alumni representatives from all parts of the country as part of the Alumni Senate on Thursday, April 23, 2009. The talk lasted for approximately 45 minutes with Fr. Jenkins speaking for about 10 minutes and taking questions for the remaining time. The talk was closed to the press. It was videotaped, but there were problems with the audio early in the presentation that may make the video unusable. In any event, the video is not online at this time. The following is a summary of his talk and the question-and-answer session that followed. It was prepared by our club’s representatives at the Alumni Senate who attended this talk in person. It is presented as an informational service to our club members and does not include interpretations, impressions, or reactions of the authors except when describing the tone and body language of Fr. Jenkins and the alumni. The links are to documents that were referenced but not quoted or read at the talk. We included the links to provide better context for the discussion.

Fr. Jenkins spoke without notes and without the use of a teleprompter. He spoke slowly and soberly. He gave no introduction to the Alumni Senate weekend as a whole, but rather jumped straight to the question about the invitation to President Obama. He began by stating that he wanted to be clear that the University was committed to Catholic teaching in support of life at all stages. The University is against “embryonic stem cell research” and against “encouragement of abortion.” He was “saddened that some are confused about Notre Dame’s commitment” on the life issues. He explained his own personal involvement in supporting life by working for a local organization that encourages young women not to have abortions.

The University has had eight U.S. Presidents speak at its commencement in the past; all have received honorary degrees. Fr. Jenkins said that asking Presidents to speak at Notre Dame was Notre Dame’s “way of expressing respect for the political order of this country.” He referenced the First Letter of Peter for the proposition that a Christian’s first allegiance was to God, but that Christians should “respect civil authorities” nonetheless. (Although Fr. Jenkins did not quote the passage in his speech, the text to which he referred may be found at 1 Peter 2:13-17.) He referenced the motto above the side entrance to the Basilica: “God, Country, Notre Dame.” “We offer the President respect because he is the civil authority in our country. When we offer respect to the civil authorities, we are not giving an endorsement of all of their views.”

Fr. Jenkins said that there was “much to admire in this President. Even Cardinal George has said that about 90% of President Obama’s views are views that we can celebrate.” Fr. Jenkins cited Obama’s positions on immigration, the economy, and the environment as support. He emphasized that President Obama was the first African-American President, which he described as “historic.” “Notre Dame has a strong record on civil rights issues as demonstrated by Fr. Hesburgh’s service on the Civil Rights Commission in the 50s and 60s.”

“I am saddened if people have felt hurt caused by the University’s decision. I ask for your help in communicating the University’s position on life and its intent in asking President Obama to speak at commencement. My hope for the event is that it will be a discussion about issues with life and death significance.”

Fr. Jenkins said that he had talked to the President and had communicated Catholics' concerns about the invitation. He said that he is “not guaranteeing what the President will say,” but that the President has been apprised of Catholics’ views.

Fr. Jenkins then opened up the discussion to questions. The first had to do with the incident at Georgetown University the previous week in which Georgetown covered up a symbol of Jesus at the request of the Office of the President. Jenkins thanked the person for the question and responded that Notre Dame would never cover up its most important symbols for President Obama.

The next question asked whether Fr. Jenkins believed abortion was as serious as genocide and slavery. He responded that all three were serious, but that the relative seriousness depended on the context in which they arose in the world. The questioner then asked whether the University would invite someone who supported genocide or slavery. Fr. Jenkins responded that Abraham Lincoln, when he campaigned for President, declared that he would not abolish slavery. "Would I have extended and invitation to Lincoln? Yes, I would have." The questioner then made a comment about the Lincoln-Douglas debates, and several alumni in the crowd began shouting him down. Fr. Jenkins repeated that the University was not inviting President Obama because of his views on abortion, but rather because he was the current President.

I asked, “What is the University’s response to the 2004 statement from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Bishop D’Arcy’s interpretation of that statement?” Fr. Jenkins replied, “You can read the newspapers about that. It is a technical interpretation that I won’t be able to get into in the time that we have. Basically, the University interpreted the statement as only applying to Catholics. Bishop D’Arcy has disagreed with that interpretation. We continue to discuss the matter with Bishop D’Arcy and will continue talking with him about this situation.”

Someone asked whether the University had consulted with Bishop D’Arcy before inviting President Obama. Fr. Jenkins admitted that he had not consulted with him, “but we never do.” At this point, some alumni in the room applauded. Fr. Jenkins stated that the University would continue to discuss the matter with Bishop D’Arcy.

Another alumnus pointed out that the University’s invitation and honorary degree might be misunderstood by “young people facing an unclear world.” Fr. Jenkins stated that to some extent, a University is about controversy, but that he was saddened to the extent people had misunderstood Notre Dame’s views on the life issues or misunderstood how importantly Notre Dame considered those issues. He mentioned that some of the people upset with the decision were upset for political reasons. In other words, they had not voted for Obama in the election.

Contrary to past statements, Fr. Jenkins admitted that the controversy, while not unexpected, had been “more intense than we had anticipated. I didn’t anticipate the Bishop’s disagreement on the 2004 statement.” He stated, “I most care about the Notre Dame family. I know this issue has been divisive. I hope that the attention that this issue has caused may in some way serve the cause of life.”

An alumnus asked what the University’s plan was to bring the debate to the rest of the country. Fr. Jenkins said that given all the press attention, he was not sure what more the University could do to draw attention to the matter.

Another alumnus and a parent of a graduating senior asked that the University think about not inviting speakers that would create situations that would take the focus away from the “kids and their graduation.” Fr. Jenkins thanked her for her comment and stressed that the University would do everything it could to keep protesters and the media outside of the center of campus so that the commencement would be focused on the students.

Someone asked why the University had to confer an honorary degree on President Obama since Arizona State was not conferring an honorary degree on Obama at its graduation. Fr. Jenkins said that Notre Dame had given honorary degrees to all of the other eight Presidents who had spoken at graduation, even President Carter who was pro-choice. It would be inappropriate not to award an honorary degree on the ninth President. He repeated that the University did not agree with all of the views of the past or current Presidents and that the University did not endorse Obama’s views on the life issues. Some members of the crowd applauded.

Another person noted the deep hurt among the alumni and friends that the University’s decision to award an honorary degree on President Obama has caused. He asked what the University’s plans were to heal that hurt. Fr. Jenkins thanked the person for the question and assured him that the University would take action to start the healing process. “We will work on that.”

Someone asked what the University was doing to engage the President in a dialogue about the life issues. Fr. Jenkins replied that the University was already in touch with the President’s office and that Fr. Jenkins “hope[d] to get time to speak privately with the President.” He said that his own speech and the speech of Laetare Medal winner, Mary Ann Glendon, would be another opportunity for dialogue.

Another alumnus emphasized how much hurt had been caused among the members of his club and asked for a conscious effort by the University to heal the situation. Fr. Jenkins gave his commitment to make that effort.

An alumnus then asked for Fr. Jenkins’s blessing. Fr. Jenkins obliged and asked for God’s blessing and healing. The blessing ended with the sign of the cross.