CAMPUS

Dialogue with Obama?

University tightly controls “debate” on commencement invite

The invitation of President Barack Obama to be Notre Dame’s commencement speaker this year has sparked not just a campus discussion, but a national controversy. Rev. John Jenkins, C.S.C., has justified his decision to invite Obama for many reasons, but most notably that extending the invitation will serve as a basis for engaging Obama in dialogue about life-related issues.

According to Father Jenkins’ press release, “The invitation…should not be taken as condoning or endorsing [Obama’s] positions on specific issues regarding the protection of human life, including abortion and embryonic stem cell research. Yet, we see his visit as a basis for further positive engagement.”

Instead of engaging Obama on issues of human life, the invitation ignited a different debate about whether hosting Obama is an appropriate way for a Catholic university to engage these issues. Is abortion the most important moral issue in modern society, such that when deciding whether or not to host Obama, his pro-choice stance outweighs his stance on other social justice issues? Or does Obama’s stance on other social justice issues outweigh his support of abortion? How should Notre Dame balance a commitment to academic freedom with a refusal to compromise on certain moral issues?

The Notre Dame campus, according to the Notre Dame Mission Statement, should be a place where these questions are answered: “As a Catholic university, one of its distinctive goals is to provide a forum where, through free inquiry and open discussion, the various lines of Catholic thought may intersect with all the forms of knowledge…”

Notre Dame’s administration is tightly controlling the release of information because of the onslaught of responses by students, alumni and Catholics around the country. The Rover contacted seven members of the Department of Development, the Office of News & Information, and the Office of the President, and each one was unable to be reached, did not respond, or refused to comment when asked questions concerning the commencement invitation. Each person directed the Rover to University Spokesman Dennis Brown for the official University position.

In an interview with the Irish Rover on Friday, Brown was asked to confirm or deny whether an outside public relations firm was hired by the University to help address the situation and to produce talking points for the University’s departments, the Office of Development, and faculty members. Brown refused to comment on the matter saying, “I don’t comment on rumors.” He was unwilling to entertain other questions on the subject. However, an email was circulated throughout the Mendoza College of Business containing such talking points. It is unclear whether the talking points originated from the Office of News & Information itself or from an outside party.

The email was designed to help professors deal with calls and emails they receive about the announcement that Obama would speak at commencement. Recipients of this email were told to ignore general correspondence—“blast emails…can be deleted without response”—and to direct phone calls from the general public to Dennis Brown. They were told to direct the sender to Father Jenkins’ statement: “E-mails…sent to you as an individual can be answered with a short message: ‘Thank you for your thoughtful letter regarding the University’s invitation to the president of the United States to speak at Commencement and receive an honorary degree. Please visit the following link to view Father John Jenkins’ statement: [link included].’”

Professors were also told to “keep a record of names, affiliations and contact information of the individuals calling and e-mailing, and forward the information” to Carol L. Elliott, the Director of Newswriting for the Mendoza College of Business. If correspondents requested to speak with Carolyn Woo, the dean of the College of Business, they were told to “respond that she is not available,” and that they should “NOT give out [Dean Woo’s] main address.”

If a personal correspondence required a more in-depth response, these professors were told to respond with a statement based on the following: “…the invitation recognizes the president for his historic election, for his concern for the poor, for his efforts to improve educational standards, his respect for the role of faith and religious institutions, and for his commitment to ending war. These issues are dear to the heart of Notre Dame and all Catholics. We believe there is an opportunity to build a relationship, create dialogue and find more commonalities in the hope of shaping public debate,” followed by, “But I understand your position, and appreciate that it comes from a deep commitment to your faith and beliefs.”

Despite the call for a creation of dialogue in the prepared statement, the e-mail to the Mendoza College of Business included a bulleted list of advice to faculty members, quoted below:

• Do not engage in a debate, agree or disagree; just let them talk
• Do not offer any information that is not required (i.e., number of complaints we’ve received, why the decision was made, etc.)
• If the caller tries to engage you in a debate, try something like “I’m not here to try to convince you, but I will listen.”
• Do not offer a call back or other response; if they insist, get a name and number

When asked by the Rover to elaborate on what the administration meant by “dialogue” and for examples of ways the administration is going to engage Obama, Dennis Brown would not give specifics. He responded only that: “[Father Jenkins] has some things planned relative to engagement as a whole, not necessarily directly with the President while he’s here. That’s the beginning or rather the basis of an engagement going forward. While he’s here three or four hours on a Sunday afternoon, that’s the beginning of what we hope will be ongoing contact with the Obama administration…on life, but also many other issues.”

On the subject of dialogue inside the University, Brown said, “We think that dialogue and conversation about various issues is healthy on a University campus, and we encourage it,” referring to the March 25 press release (See Page 5) from ND Response, a student coalition focused on organizing a pro-life student response to the invitation. Brown did not comment about any particular issues raised in the press release.

ND Response is composed of ten student groups at Notre Dame that oppose the invitation to Obama. Many groups outside the University, however, have also vowed to protest Obama’s visit. The Cardinal Newman Society, founded in 1993 to strengthen the Catholic identity of America’s Catholic universities, has a petition signed by over 210,000 people at the time of this publication imploring Jenkins “to halt this travesty immediately.” Operation Rescue, run by founder Randall Terry, has opened an office in South Bend and says that he will “turn over tables until the traitors surrender.”

In ND Response’s press release, they separated themselves from outside groups that have no direct connection to the University: “We request any groups who are committed to respectful actions to support our efforts, thereby ensuring a unified front and a more compelling public witness,” believing that any response should be initiated and driven by students.

In addition to declining comment about the University’s hiring of a public relations firm, Dennis Brown also did not comment about several other issues. When asked about the response the University has received from benefactors or how the Development Office has been responding to donors who claim to be withdrawing their support from the University, Brown remarked that, “We don’t discuss our relationships with benefactors. That’s not the policy of the University.” When asked for even a general comment, he cited University policy again. Then when pressed about long-term financial fallout or consequences from the situation, Brown said: “You’re asking me to speculate on something? I don’t speculate on such things.”

Brown was also asked how Father Jenkins might draw the line between honoring, on the one hand, and entering into an academic dialogue, on the other, with a political leader who acts in ways contrary to the fundamental moral principles of the Church—does giving Obama an honorary degree blur that line? This is one of the many points of contention in the dialogue about the commencement invitation that Jenkins has not addressed. Yet in response to the question, Brown was unwilling to comment further and directed the Rover to Jenkins’ previous press release on the issue.

D’Arcy will not attend the commencement, believing that in inviting Obama, “Notre Dame must ask itself, if by this decision it has chosen prestige over truth,” according to his March 24 press release. D’Arcy also said in the statement, addressing Obama’s approval of federal funding embryonic stem cell research, “While claiming to separate politics from science, [the President] has in fact separated science from ethics and has brought the American government, for the first time in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent human life.”

The University responded to Bishop D’Arcy’s statement on the matter with only a one-sentence statement of regret: “Bishop D’Arcy has been a long-time friend and supporter of Notre Dame, and we’re sorry he will not be there,” according to an Observer article.

As part of his decision, Bishop D’Arcy referenced the statement from the U.S. Catholic Bishops in 2004 that “…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.” D’Arcy went on to comment that, “the measure of any Catholic institution is not only what it stands for, but also what it will not stand for.”