Obama at Notre Dame

Re “Catholicism and politics,” editorial, April 1

The Times makes a poor case against well-founded Catholic criticism of Notre Dame’s decision to invite President Obama to speak at graduation.

A commencement speaker should embody the ideals and mission of the university. By reversing stem cell research and abortion-related policies, the president put himself in direct contradiction with important church teachings and is therefore not an appropriate choice.

No one is advocating the stifling of ideas. I encourage the university to promote debate by inviting Obama and others to the campus to speak at a separate time.

The Times rightly defends Columbia University’s decision to invite Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak on campus in 2007. Would you have defended Ahmadinejad as a choice for commencement speaker?

Nicholas Engler

Los Angeles

The Times’ editorial board presumes competency to determine what is an unwelcome intrusion of religion into academic life at one of the nation’s leading Catholic universities. To the contrary, Notre Dame’s decision to honor the most pro-abortion U.S. president in history -- note this is not an opportunity for dialogue but an honors ceremony -- is a betrayal of one of the most basic principles of Christianity and of civilization: respect for the dignity of human life.

Yes, Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, sent cordial congratulations to Obama upon his election. The cardinal also has urged Catholics to write, call and e-mail Notre Dame to protest the honor to Obama. You failed to mention that.

The Catholic bishops and Catholic faithful have every right to insist that Catholic institutions not betray their Catholic values.

Patrick J. Reilly

Manassas, Va.

The writer is president of the Cardinal Newman Society.

::

Re “Is Obama a bad choice for Notre Dame?,” Opinion, March 28

Thank you, Tim Rutten, for exposing the conservative Cardinal Newman Society for generating much of the flack surrounding Notre Dame’s invitation to Obama. The society may have a large megaphone, but it is a small group, hardly representing the views of the majority of Catholics.

We have to encourage dialogue to resolve our differences, not stifle it, as the Cardinal Newman Society proposes. Sadly, I worry that these cries over the president’s views on stem cell research and abortion are a red herring, to give cover to political differences over such issues as the Iraq war, taxes and the stimulus package -- or, even more sadly, what the protesters really don’t like about Obama but are unwilling to acknowledge. Yes, there are bigots in the Catholic Church.

Interestingly, in 2001, Notre Dame did invite and host a commencement speaker who sanctioned torture of human beings without regard to human rights: President George W. Bush.

Donald Bentley

La Puente

::

It has always mystified me how so many Catholics can ignore years of Catholic teaching addressing pro-life issues beyond the womb: child poverty, economic justice, environmental integrity and war and peace. Obama bonds with the church’s “preferential option for the poor,” which states that “the moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation.”

Past policies enriched the few and stifled the incomes of the poor and middle class. We now have a president who is changing the dynamic from a “preferential option for the upper crust” to one that focuses on the needs of those who struggle.

Can all of this have simply escaped these protesters, or don’t they care?

Dan Jiru

Long Beach