Another Catholic Blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Obama & Notre Dame: Providing Hope that Bishops are ready for Change

As many of you are aware, this afternoon President Obama will be receiving an honorary law degree from the University of Notre Dame and giving a commencement address to graduating students. When this decision was announced, it received a firestorm of criticism from the Catholics faithful.  Seventy-nine U.S. Bishops have spoken-out against the decision and over 360,000 individuals signed an online position stating that it was inappropriate to bestow such an honour on a politician who has already dealt devastating blows to the sanctity of life in America.  

Fr. John Jenkins, the President of the University, refused to either withdraw his invitation or even admit that it was in error. In a May 11th letter to graduating students, Fr. Jenkins remarked:

“Notre Dame has a long custom of conferring honorary degrees on the President of the United States. It has never been a political statement or an endorsement of policy. It is the University’s expression of respect for the leader of the nation and the Office of the President. In the Catholic tradition, our first allegiance is to God and Christ, yet we are called to respect, participate in, and contribute to the wider society. As St. Peter wrote (I Pt. 2:17), we should honor the leader who upholds the secular order.”

As I expanded upon in a previous posting on May 11, Fr. Jenkins is correct in stating that Catholics must participate in society and political life in particular. However, discharging this obligation is neither a trivial exercise nor something which may be done in an ad hoc manner.  At all times, Catholics must undertake political and social action which announces the authentic truth of the Gospel and builds the kingdom of God. Anything less is a subversion of the secular order.   

Given the strong outcry of so many Bishops against Fr. Jenkins’ decision, it is not surprising that he misconstrues St. Peter’s words in claiming that I Pt. 2:17 suggests that “we should honor the leader who upholds the secular order.”

In The Douay-Rheims Bible translation of I Pt. 2:17 the passage states that we are to honour the king.  The New Revised Standard Version reads differently, directing us to bestow honour on the emperor:  

Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king. (DRB)

Honour everyone. Love the family of believers. Fear God. Honour the emperor. (NRSV)

In the original Greek, the passage reads “τὸν βασιλέα τιμᾶτε”.  Βασιλέ or “basileus” is the word for king and to the ancient Greeks was often used to refer to the king of Persia.  The basileus was a hereditary king, obtaining his authority through birth.  Democratic Athens did not have a basileus.

A king is neither elected by the people nor democratically answerable.  Therefore, the basis for honouring a king differs from that for which we would honour a democratically elected politician.  Aquinas observed that an essential aspect of hereditary kingship is God’s determination of who occupies the office - God forms a future king within the mother’s womb:

“This people was governed under the special care of God: wherefore it is written (Deuteronomy 7:6): “The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be His peculiar people”: and this is why the Lord reserved to Himself the institution of the chief ruler. For this too did Moses pray (Numbers 27:16): “May the Lord the God of the spirits of all the flesh provide a man, that may be over this multitude.” Thus by God’s orders Josue was set at the head in place of Moses; and we read about each of the judges who succeeded Josue that God “raised . . . up a saviour” for the people, and that “the spirit of the Lord was” in them (Judges 3:9-15). Hence the Lord did not leave the choice of a king to the people; but reserved this to Himself, as appears from Deuteronomy 17:15: “Thou shalt set him whom the Lord thy God shall choose.“ (Summa Theologica, Vol 1, 105, Art. 1)

A democratically elected official is not divinely appointed but permitted, chosen by and answerable to the citizens.  As the office of President is not permanently held by a person, the two may be separated.  When Obama ceases to be President, he will still hold an honorary law degree from the University of Notre Dame.  As such, Obama’s honourary doctorate attaches to the man and not the office.  I Pt. 2:17 simply does not support the bestowing of an honorary doctorate upon Barack Hussein Obama II.

Sadly, the Notre Dame debacle is another example of a Catholic presenting an unauthentic witness of who we are and what we stand for. Yet many Catholics stood up proudly in defence of the truth. Perhaps most importantly, this incident gives further evidence that each day more and more Bishops are beginning to walk the way of the apostles. Matthew 9:36 reflects that when Jesus saw the crowds “He had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.” (ESV) Notre Dame’s faux pas may be a fait accompli, but let us give thanks that those truly chosen by God to lead His people are responding to their call.

Sources:

Special thanks to Andrew D. Stefanelli, my housemate and Greek Scholar in residence. Please visit his blog here:

An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon founded upon the Seventh edition of Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999) at 148.   

Obama’s First 100 Days: The anti-life plan is now established:

The Response of Bishops

2 comments

1 AndrewBoldman { 06.04.09 at 8:04 pm }

Hi, good post. I have been woondering about this issue,so thanks for posting. I’ll definitely be coming back to your site.

2 Theodoric { 06.04.09 at 10:47 pm }

Good stuff - much appreciated. Fr. Frank had a good article on this. One of his comments stood out in particular: Referring to the uproar of over 80 U.S. bishops and 360,000 petitioners against the Obama honor at Notre Dame, Fr. Pavone noted: “Some people say that all of this stuff going on dishonors the office of the President of the United States… “I have news for them. It is the president who is dishonoring the office of President of the United States by taking a pro-abortion position. Every elected official on any level of government who takes a position in which they fail to recognize and work for the protection of the right to life dishonors the very meaning of their office,” Full article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09052016.html

Leave a Comment