The Catholic News

US President Barrack Obama was invited to deliver the Commencement Address at the famed Notre Dame Catholic US institution of learning on Sunday (17 May 2009). The very invitation to speak, let alone be conferred an honorary doctorate of Law, was rife with controversy. Despite the strong Catholic vote that supported his election from primary to presidency, this popular President was also swift at the commencement of his term to "put the United States government back into the business of abortion abroad: He has ordered public funding of embryonic-destructive research (while dismissing much more promising scientific alternatives that don’t involve destroying embryos)".

His pro-Choice, anti-Life, pro-abortion rights stance was not the only reason for the moral contention that marked Notre Dame's decision to invite him to speak but more particularly, the institution's decision to confer the doctorate upon his person. This appears to be much at odds for what the institution and its Catholic character represents, which is not limited to the American diocese or national church, but includes the whole Catholic family which shares its moral life and heritage, message and mission, as well.
Listening to the 30 minute address by President Obama, there is very little to fault the thoughtful, moderate eloquence and considerate message. It was clearly a "great homily" to inspire dialogue between opposing factions, which is the perfect tone for a moderator involved in the debate concerning the matter of "culture of life" but a false pedestal for someone in office and whose work at law have taken a clear liberal stance to provide statutory means that advocate abortion rights alongside the funding and legalisation of use and destruction of human embryos, whatever the source.

His choice to quote an un-named pro-Life Illinois constituency doctor to use "fair-minded words" and "change the tone" of the current debate between abortion rights lobby was brilliant. Beneath the tactic and eloquence where the President sounded like a moderator in the debate, he was in fact a "wolf in sheep's clothing" appearing at the invitation of the shepherds at Notre Dame, among the eager "lambs" about to graduate, to offer seductive words that might be pulling wool over their eyes.

Consider this next point he made on stem cell research on the "sacredness of life", that one may need to also be mindful of "the parents of the child with juvenile diabetes with the conviction that the hardships of their child might find relief" (through stem cell therapies). What relevant point did he deliberately omit here? that there are stem cell therapies available using the cells of the patient themselves without need for use of embryonic cells from destroyed human foetuses or embryos created specifically for such purposes; that in the Christian tradition, despite what may be medically available for relief, one's faith addresses hardship as a call to witness faithfully the love of God in life by providing care and love to those in need, but not at the expense of faithfulness to the Teaching of Jesus in the gospel of Life; and, the fundamentals of moral reasoning supports the profound appreciation that Life from its very conception has a basic right, and this right is intrinsic, without evolving from embryonic stage to birth; for from the very moment of conception, the human embryo has all the chromosomes and identity of being human.

This identity has nothing to do with the potential of the human person, but is part of its whole make-up and substance. FOX News Religion Contributor Rev Fr Jonathan Morris quotes Pope John Paul II in offering this perspective: “Above all the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights–for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture – is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with the maximum determination.”

President Obama goes on to touch on avoiding caricature and “demonization” between both camps, quoting the words of Notre Dame's Rev Fr Jenkins in his introduction. He drove this point further by emphasising the "presumption of good faith to others... to open up our hearts and minds to those who do not believe, we open up the possibility of common ground". Surprising, in the brief words that follow, he did not lay out the common ground on matters of limiting the exercise of those "legal rights", instead, offering an agenda for action that promotes more "choice". It is enticing at first, sounding very fair-minded indeed, that working together to "reduce abortions", "reduce unintended pregnancies" include the Left-wing agenda of condom usage and liberal sexual education.

That the suggestion to "make adoption more available" includes the agenda to allow same-sex couples to create a basic family unit outside the norms of sacramental marriage, and by extension, promote the right of same-sex marriage. Did anyone under the "dome of Our Lady" - also known as the "patroness of America" and "protectress of the unborn" present at the Commencement Address that so readily applauded his words, understand the full extent of subtlety and cunning that would play out in the years to come? This is not prophecy; deceit is usually very plain for those who care to observe and reflect on the meaning of events, words and actions playing out before us.

President Obama then reflected on the drafting of a "sensible conscience clause" - already in force in some US states - on the ethics of limiting abortions while retaining "respect for women", in fact contradicts the whole point of the clause, which is intended to respect the right of the unborn. He is right to admit by suggestion that "the discussion" does not "go away". It will not be by his hand or words that it will remain high on the moral agenda that will test the rectitude of his Presidency in both domestic and foreign policy where these same rights by extension affect the communities at large.

He seems to have escaped having to make any concessions at the Notre Dame event towards the Catholic pro-Life lobby, which is a significant political victory for the White House. Instead, he used the pedestal offered him to soften the hard stance of the Left-wing pro-Choice lobby with palatable and beguiling words, which the "sheep and lambs" were quite gullible feeding on. As eloquent and brilliant a campaigner he is for the Left, he cleverly referenced his post-graduate experience working with Catholic social aid to build up the poor communities in south Chicago. He matched his good humour about being "broke and fed" with touching recollection of the words of Cardinal Bernadine - the much loved, liberal past archbishop of Chicago: "you can't really get on preaching the gospel until you touch the hearts and minds" of others. It is a well qualified quotation, but the context can hardly be more different. To preach the Gospel of Life, that is, and not evangelise a message of "death".

It is salient that an evangelist of the right to abortion and embryonic destruction should be so apt in "touching the hearts and minds" of the faithful; but where is the true Christian witness among the Left-wing campuses to hear the message of the Gospel of Life? There is enough voices in the popular media and forum that reflect "political correctness", but we need voices of conscience to meekly present the basic truth about the right to Life, and that the Left-wing camp would even listen as attentive as the Notre Dame audience, and applaud with "fair-mindedness".

The best thing which can come out of the debacle in the Catholic camp(us), is for its graduands and students, and faculty and Board, to openly witness their fidelity to the Gospel of Life despite the subtleties of Obama's message, and expound the moral grounds of Catholic teaching. This will prove that the conservative Catholic camp can listen raptly. But in moving forward "together" - without compromise on one's conscience - but aim to more effectively be heard, so that those confronted with the choices of abortion or the use of embryonic destruction, will have the education necessary to desist from acting with such violence.

By Thomas TB Tay