Bishop D'Arcy: "Terrible Breach" Caused by Scandal at Notre Dame 'Cannot Be Allowed to Continue

Note: The author of this blog is often critical of the bishops for not enforcing canons that address dissenting Catholic colleges and politicians. Often the front line of the battle against evil, pro-life leaders and students, are thrown under the bus to gain money, power and prestige. In the letter, below, the local bishop has taken a courageous stand and has thrown down the gauntlet. Father Jenkins must repent or resign and find refuge for contemplative prayer in a monastery somewhere where he can no longer scandalize the young people in his charge and disgrace the finest Catholic University in America. This bishop has gained our support and respect.

Bishop D'Arcy: 'Terrible Breach' Caused by Scandal at Notre Dame 'Cannot Be Allowed to Continue'

Bishop John M. D'Arcy of the Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese, in which the University of Notre Dame is located, has publicly released key points from a letter correcting Notre Dame President Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., who defended the decision to honor President Barack Obama at commencement on May 17, 2009. The bishop wrote that the "terrible breach" which has opened up between Notre Dame and the Church "cannot be allowed to continue."

"How much more evidence does Notre Dame need to understand that they have made a tragic mistake in honoring President Obama?" said Patrick Reilly, president of The Cardinal Newman Society, whose petition atNotreDameScandal.com has surpassed 330,000 signers. "Catholics nationwide are praying that Father Jenkins will submit to the rightful authority of Notre Dame's bishop and end this scandal immediately."

Notably, Bishop D'Arcy corrected Father Jenkins' contention that the 2004 USCCB document "Catholics in Political Life," which asks Catholic institutions not to honor pro-abortion leaders, does not apply to the decision to honor President Obama at commencement. Father Jenkins has said that the policy applies only to Catholic honorees, and that because Notre Dame does not support President Obama's policies on abortion and stem cell research, the honor poses no conflict for a Catholic university.

"I consider it now settled," wrote Bishop D’Arcy, "that the USCCB document, 'Catholics in Public Life,' does indeed apply in this matter."

Bishop D'Arcy has also asked Father Jenkins to issue a retraction of the talking points he issued to the Notre Dame Board of Trustees regarding the commencement invitation to President Obama.

"The statements which Father Jenkins has made are simply wrong and give a flawed justification for his actions," said Bishop D’Arcy.

Bishop D'Arcy earlier announced that he plans to boycott Notre Dame's commencement on May 17, 2009.

The content of the below statement from Fort Wayne-South Bend Bishop John D'Arcy is a summary of key points from a private letter he sent in response to Notre Dame's president, Father John Jenkins. [Emphasis added.]

My Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

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 lawgiver in his diocese. -- Canon 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, 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 lawgiver 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; and "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 widespread 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 lawgiver 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