So every time Notre Dame invites someone to speak who supports the death penalty I assume the bishops will be celebrating Masses of Reparations to make amends for sins against God? Hey Bishop Wenski, how many Masses of Reparations did you celebrate to make amends for hundreds of years of pedophilia? Inquiring minds want to know.
Hey, thanks for saying what I've been thinking (REALLY LOUDLY) this week. I was so disappointed in Glendon's "thanks but no thanks" letter; she had an opportunity to make actual points and essentially said, You know, I still work with all those bishops and don't feel like standing up to them for accepting an award in an inconvenient year. I hope those pats on the head felt as good as a medal and last as long.
Anyway. So glad to find you online as I have stalked your writing for some time now. Much easier to find it all here in one place. :)
Comment created on May 4, 2009 at 4:05 PM
I don't see why you linked the pedophile scandal to the Notre Dame issue.
(scandal is too mild a word -- anger at what a pedophile priest(s) did is more than justified -- their actions are hypocritical, and clearly sinful and evil - including actions by administration to quiet the issue - for perhaps reasons of pride, money (lawsuits), lack of courage...)
back to the commencement -- Bishop Wenski is not saying don't let the President speak, the bishops are saying don't give an honorary degree to someone who so clearly supports a position that is the opposite of the Church's on an issue that is PARAMOUNT to the Church. I don't see a problem with the Church or any organization doing that.
If in fact Notre Dame did give an honorary degree to someone who had an opposite stand on another issue paramount to the Church then you could use the word hypocrite
Comment created on May 6, 2009 at 7:18 AM