The Cause of the Canonisation of John Henry Cardinal Newman

Print This Post Email This Post

Conflict and Hope at the University of Notre Dame: the voice of Cardinal Newman

Categorised as Featured and published Saturday, June 13th, 2009
A Meditation for Corpus Christi: the eyes of all hope in Thee
A Meditation for the Twelfth Sunday of the Year: the New Things of Christ

Father Robert Imbelli, Associate Professor of Theology at Boston College, provides an original analysis of the recent presence of Barack Obama at Notre Dame University: was an echo of Cardinal Newman’s voice to be heard during the ceremony?  The article first appeared on the Chiesa site, where it is also available in other languages:

This year’s commencement exercises at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana were the most contentious in the distinguished history of that eminent Catholic university. The reason was the invitation to the new President of the United States, Barack Obama to address the graduates and to receive the degree of Doctor of Laws honoris causa. It was, in particular, the awarding of an honorary degree to a President whose policies support the right to abortion and promote embryonic stem cell research that provoked the critical outcry.

In an unprecedented public rebuke, more than seventy United States Catholic bishops severely criticized Notre Dame for violating the guidelines of the Bishops Conference with regard to awarding honors to those who in fundamental ways stand opposed to Catholic teaching. The bishop of the diocese where Notre Dame is located boycotted the ceremony in protest. Moreover, Mary Ann Glendon, former American Ambassador to the Holy See and Professor of Law at Harvard University, who had been chosen to receive the Laetare Medal, Notre Dame’s highest award, refused the honor because of Notre Dame’s disregard of the Bishops’ directive.

The debate raged for weeks prior to the commencement and thereby insured that it would receive enormous coverage in both the secular and religious media. The debate has since continued unabated on Catholic websites and in newspapers and periodicals. I offer some reflections prompted by the President’s Commencement Address as well as by the Laetare Address given by the Honorable John Noonan, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals, former Notre Dame Law Professor, and distinguished author of a number of works on the development of Catholic moral teaching.

As was expected, President Obama gave a rhetorically powerful and effective speech. He combined moving references to his own personal history with a passionate plea for civility and dialogue especially when fellow citizens espouse different beliefs and positions. He saw this as a prerequisite for constructive exchange in a democracy and for achieving some “common ground.” He particularly warned against the temptation to demonize those with whom we disagree.

Obama said that, when he was a young community organizer in Chicago, he had been inspired by the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin whom the President called “a kind and good and wise man.” He also mentioned how impressed he was by Christian churches in the Chicago area working together to serve the needs of the poor and marginalized. Indeed, their witness led him to become a church-member in one of the Protestant parishes.

Even those who criticized Notre Dame’s invitation to the President and his speech acknowledge that he did offer some gestures towards the concerns of his critics. He spoke of a common effort to reduce the number of abortions, to promote adoptions of infants, and to protect by a “conscience clause” doctors and nurses who oppose abortion. These would be meaningful steps if enacted.

But critics insist that the President’s call to dialogue, while strategically shrewd, serves to camouflage issues of considerable substance. For them his appeal to civil discourse masks an unyielding espousal of the right to abortion that attacks the right to life of the most vulnerable of God’s creatures. And, clearly, the exhortation to continuing dialogue can be an easy expedient when ultimately the power of decision making and implementation lies solely in the hands of the one issuing the appeal – the one who wields the awesome power of the presidency.

Where, then, in this apparent stalemate, does hope lie? I would like to call attention to three elements of the President’s address that have been less commented upon. First, he did not merely say that, through the witness of socially concerned Christians, he became a member of a church. More remarkably, he said: through their witness “he was brought to Christ.” Coming to Christ, of course, entails moral consequences; but it moves beyond morality to relationship and ongoing conversion.

Second, is it in light of this coming to Christ that President Obama could speak, in almost Augustinian fashion, of “original sin?” I do not remember the concept of original sin issuing from the mouth of a previous American President – certainly not with the force and conviction that Obama exhibited. He spoke of “our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos.” These afflict us all and darken our understanding and diminish our love.

Finally, President Obama appealed to “the law that binds people of all faith and no faith together … It is, of course, the Golden Rule – the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. The call to serve.” And, though he did not use the term, it is what the Catholic tradition would affirm as the natural law inscribed in human hearts by their Creator.

Thus, though on one level the President appeared primarily focused on respectful dialogue and “fair-minded words;” on a deeper level he seemed to be in search of binding principles that were, perhaps, at variance with his own stated positions. Indeed, these principles, if given full scope, might even lead the President (not without personal cost) to reconsider some of the practices he currently endorses.

In a generous tribute, President Obama called Notre Dame “a lighthouse that stands apart, shining with the wisdom of the Catholic tradition.” A fine representative of that Catholic wisdom tradition is Judge John Noonan who gave the Laetare Address, replacing Ambassador Glendon. It is unfortunate that his measured address received hardly any mention in the media accounts, obsessed as they are with celebrity and conflict. But his remarks, brief and respectful, yet pointed, deserve close attention. His was a soft, gentle voice, like the whisper of conscience.

Judge Noonan referred to the development of human moral sensitivity that has led the civilized world to denounce genocide, torture, and slavery as unspeakable moral evils. But he made clear that this moral clarity stemmed from centuries of conflict, experience, suffering insight, and “the light radiating from the Gospel.” And he insisted that, though “conscience” was ever to be respected and never to be coerced, not every conscience was equally morally informed and upright.

Significantly, Noonan chose a striking example as illustration: the dispute between President Abraham Lincoln and the former slave, Frederick Douglass. It was Douglass’ moral clarity and conviction that helped guide Lincoln’s own moral compass to the point where he issued the “Emancipation Proclamation,” freeing the slaves in the secessionist states. The implication, subtly but unmistakably put forward, was that, like Lincoln, whom he reveres, President Obama may also come to greater clarity regarding the pressing moral issue of abortion.

A further dimension of Judge Noonan’s talk, missed even by those who bothered to advert to his speech, was the silent appeal to John Henry Newman. In a sentence that echoes Newman both in substance and cadence Noonan said: “By conscience we apprehend what God asks of us … This mysterious, impalpable, imprescriptible, indestructible, and indispensable guide governs our moral life.” For both Newman and Noonan conscience is not atavistic urge, not emotional impulse, not the creation of man, but the voice of God. It is conscience so understood that is, in Newman’s compelling phrase, “the aboriginal vicar of Christ.” As Newman writes in his famous Letter to the Duke of Norfork: “Conscience has rights because it has duties; but in this age, with a large portion of the public, it is the very right and freedom of conscience to dispense with conscience, to ignore a Lawgiver and Judge, to be independent of unseen obligations.”

The issue at stake in the clash concerning abortion in the United States and elsewhere is: which notion of conscience shall prevail: conscience as God’s will or as self-will? The hope which sustains those formed in the Catholic wisdom tradition is the hope inscribed on the Laetare Medal itself, which Judge Noonan quoted in concluding his talk: “Magna est Veritas et praevalebit” – “Great is Truth. It will prevail!”

But there is a further hope: one almost imperceptibly woven into the fabric of Notre Dame’s academic gowns, including the one worn by President Obama in receiving his honorary degree. Three Latin words: Vita, Dulcedo, Spes. They come, of course, from the ancient prayer to Our Lady, the “Salve, Regina.” Mary is life, tenderness, and hope. And all these are incarnate in the fruit of her womb, and of every mother’s womb: “benedictum fructum ventris.” May the Mother of God, Seat of Wisdom, guide and inspire her University so that the Truth of the Gospel may, indeed, prevail.

(reproduced with permission)