“It is not Obama supporters who look on Father John Jenkins with contempt. Even if he singlehandedly gets the contraceptive mandate overturned, folks in certain quarters will still never forgive him for hosting Obama as the 2009 commencement speaker at Notre Dame and giving him an honorary degree. It would be interesting to tote up the number of comments that have been made here in the past about Notre Dame not being a Catholic school.”

What has happened to forgiveness of sins? This is a very serious question. Can your mind conceive of the possibility people, even Christians, can and do forgive others?

What the nation has witnessed with Father Jenkins’ spiritual journey of the last three years is nothing short of astonishing and moving. Our response to him should be nothing short of astonishing and moving.

Let’s recap, shall we?

In 2009, after the invite to Pres. Obama to be graduation speaker and receive an honorary law degree and the collective Catholic heads exploded across the country, Father Jenkins’ Bishop, Bishop D’Arcy, sent Father J a letter that
was made public because of the enormity of the scandal Father Jenkins had caused. It is such an awesome letter that here it is in full:

“Recently, Father John Jenkins, CSC, in a letter of response to Bishop Olmsted of the Diocese of Phoenix, who had written him, critical of the decision to invite President Obama to speak and receive an Honorary Degree of Law at Notre Dame, indicated that it was his conviction that the statement Catholics in Political Life (USCCB) did not apply in this matter. Father Jenkins kindly sent me a copy of his letter, and also at a later meeting, asked for a response.

“In an April 15th letter to Father Jenkins, I responded to his letter.

“Now the points made in his letter have been sent by Father Jenkins to the members of the Notre Dame Board of Trustees and have been publicized nationally, as well as locally in the South Bend Tribune. Since the matter is now public, it is my duty as the bishop of this diocese to respond and correct. I take up this responsibility with some sadness, but also with the conviction that if I did not do so, I would be remiss in my pastoral responsibility.

“Rather than share my full letter, which I have shared with some in Church leadership, I prefer to present some of the key points.

“1.The meaning of the sentence in the USCCB document relative to Catholic institutions is clear. It places the responsibility on those institutions, and indeed, on the Catholic community itself.
‘The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.’ (Catholics in Political Life, USCCB)

“2.When there is a doubt concerning the meaning of a document of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, where does one find the authentic interpretation? A fundamental, canonical and theological principal states that it is found in the local bishop, who is the teacher and law-giver in his diocese. (Cannon 330, 375 §§ 1 & 2; 380; 381 § 1; 391 § 1; 392, & 394 §1)

“3.I informed Father Jenkins that if there was any genuine questions or doubt about the meaning of the relevant sentence in the Conference’s document, any competent canonist with knowledge of the tradition and love for Christ’s Church had the responsibility to inform Father Jenkins of the fundamental principle that the diocesan bishop alone bears the responsibility to provide an authoritative interpretation.

“4.I reminded Father Jenkins that he indicated that he consulted presidents of other Catholic universities, [Georgetown?] and at least indirectly, consulted other bishops, since he asked those presidents to share with him those judgments of their own bishops. However, he chose not to consult his own bishop who, as I made clear, is the teacher and law-giver in his own diocese. I reminded Father Jenkins that I was not informed of the invitation until after it was accepted by the President. I mentioned again that it is at the heart of the diocesan bishop’s pastoral responsibility to teach as revealed in Sacred Scripture and the Tradition. (Lumen Gentium, 20; & Christus Dominus, 2) I reminded him that it is also central to the University’s relationship to the Church. (Ex corde ecclesiae, 27 & 28; Gen. Norm., Art. 5, §§ 1-3.)

“5. Another key point. In his letter to Bishop Olmsted and in the wide-spread publicity, which has taken place as the points in the letter have been made public, Father Jenkins declared the invitation to President Obama does not ‘suggest support’ for his actions, because he has expressed and continues to express disagreement with him on issues surrounding protection of life. I wrote that the outpouring of hundreds of thousands who are shocked by the invitation clearly demonstrates, that this invitation has, in fact, scandalized many Catholics and other people of goodwill. In my office alone, there have been over 3,300 messages of shock, dismay and outrage, and they are still coming in. It seems that the action in itself speaks so loudly that people have not been able to hear the words of Father Jenkins, and indeed, the action has suggested approval to many.

“In the publicity surrounding the points Father Jenkins has made, he also says he is ‘following the document of the bishops’ by ‘laying a basis for engagement with the President on this issue.’ I indicated that I, like many others, will await to see what the follow up is on this issue between Notre Dame and President Obama.

“6.As I have said in a recent interview and which I have said to Father Jenkins, it would be one thing to bring the President here for a discussion on healthcare or immigration, and no person of goodwill could rightly oppose this. We have here, however, the granting of an honorary degree of Law to someone whose activities both as president and previously, have been altogether supportive of laws against the dignity of the human person yet to be born.

“In my letter, I have also asked Father Jenkins to correct, and if possible, withdraw the erroneous talking points, which appeared in the South Bend Tribune and in other media outlets across the country. The statements which Father Jenkins has made are simply wrong and give a flawed justification for his actions.

“I consider it now settled – that the USCCB document, Catholics in Public Life, does indeed apply in this matter.

“The failure to consult the local bishop who, whatever his unworthiness, is the teacher and law-giver in the diocese, is a serious mistake.

“Proper consultation could have prevented an action, which has caused such painful division between Notre Dame and many bishops, and a large number of the faithful.

“That division must be addressed through prayer and action, and I pledge to work with Father Jenkins and all at Notre Dame to heal the terrible breach, which has taken place between Notre Dame and the Church. It cannot be allowed to continue.

“I ask all to pray that this healing will take place in a way that is substantial and true, and not illusory. Notre Dame and Father Jenkins must do their part if this healing is to take place. I will do my part.

“Sincerely yours in our Lord,
“Most Reverend John M. D’Arcy”

As the world knows since the photo of it was on the front page of the Washington Post, Father Jenkins honored his invite and hugged President Obama on stage, after the Prez received his degree. No healing of “the terrible breach, which has taken place between Notre Dame and the Church.” with that move.

Last summer, when the mandate first became a reality, Father Jenkins dutifully penned a letter to Sebelius asking for Notre Dame to be exempt from it. His concern for other Catholics who would be affected by it, was really not top of mind.

In February, the “HHS accommodation” was announced by the White House. It was not presented beforehand to Cardinal Dolan but sent to the O Administration’s favorite Catholic allies; Father Jenkins and Sister Keehan. Both “applauded” the accommodation. Father Jenkins’ statement:

“The widespread concerns expressed by Catholics and people from other faiths have led today to a welcome step toward recognizing the freedom of religious institutions to abide by the principles that define their respective missions. We applaud the willingness of the administration to work with religious organizations to find a solution acceptable to all parties.

“There remain a number of unclear and unresolved issues, and we look forward to joining the U.S. bishops and leaders from other religious institutions to work with the administration to resolve them.”

Late that same day, after the Bishops had been allowed by the White House to finally see the accommodation, they issued their own statement:

“1) There was no ‘deal’ with the administration and no ‘deal’ was possible under the terms laid out in Friday’s ‘accommodation.’

“2) The ‘accommodation’ failed to address the legitimate concerns of key actors in the heath-care system, including ‘self-insured religious employers,’ ‘religious and secular for-profit employers,’ ‘secular non-profit employers,’ and individuals, such that the proposed new regulations were, simply, ‘unacceptable.’

“3) The ‘accommodation’ continued the disturbing process of ‘needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions’ and threatened ‘government coercion of religious people and groups . . .’

“4) Thus the religious freedom of institutions and men and women of conscience remained gravely imperiled by the tweaked HHS mandate and ‘the only solution to this . . . problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services.”

And:

“We remain fully committed to the defense of our religious liberty and we strongly protest the violation of our freedom of religion that has not been addressed. We continue to work for the repeal of the mandate. We have grave reservations that the government is intruding in the definition of who is and who is not a religious employer . . .”

Father Jenkins was still doing nothing to “heal the terrible breach, which has taken place between Notre Dame and the Church.” He was only making it so much worse. Plus he wasn’t standing with the Bishops on the biggest threat to religious liberty in the country since its founding. More than that Father Jenkins was still providing much needed Catholic cover to the Obama Administration with their assault on religious liberty. Since that (sad) day in February, something momentous occurred — Father Jenkins grasped he was on the wrong side.

How he grasped this may only be known to God. But the fact remains, Father Jenkins has grasped it. And he has made known he has grasped it by launching Notre Dame’s law suit.

Father Jenkins, unlike Georgetown and Sister Carol Keehan, is standing unabashedly with the Bishops. Both he and his Bishop have worked hard to “heal the terrible breach, which has taken place between Notre Dame and the Church.” We are witnessing that healing. It is awesome.

And by doing this Father Jenkis has gone from being loved and applauded by the Left to Catholic Enemy No. 1. He is in need of prayers.

Also, this morning Professor Deenan must be delighted he left Georgetown for the more Catholic shores of Notre Dame.

No, he was just naive then, and now he realizes he was played for a fool.

They were careless people, Obama and his Democrats—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made….

A little forgiveness from everyone on all sides would be refreshing. The Father Jenkins who invited Obama to Notre Dame is the same Father Jenkins who is filing the lawsuit. He was not a villain before, and he’s not a villain now. Most people on both sides of these controversies are doing what they believe to be right. Here’s one Obama supporter who doesn’t think Father Jenkins is a traitor. It’s very easy to fall into the trap of concluding that people who disagree with you are evil. Sometimes they are, but usually they are not. It is rather sad that we have reached a point that the idea that people of good will can disagree is no longer given much credence. It’s all now good versus evil, and the idea of compromise to reach a common goal is heresy.

Nice try, my friend, but it is the Obama supporters who now look on Father Jenkins with contempt. Father Jenkins is a traitor to their cause. He no longer gives the President cover.

And as for myself, I find that I have forgiven him for honoring Obama speak at my nephew’s graduation. So I again I say, nice try.

Publius,

It is not Obama supporters who look on Father John Jenkins with contempt. Even if he singlehandedly gets the contraceptive mandate overturned, folks in certain quarters will still never forgive him for hosting Obama as the 2009 commencement speaker at Notre Dame and giving him an honorary degree. It would be interesting to tote up the number of comments that have been made here in the past about Notre Dame not being a Catholic school.