The chips were down at Notre Dame yesterday, and I was there, having done some consulting work for ND's communication people, and begged a press pass to see President Obama deliver the most angst-ridden commencement address in history.
I drove past smiling people holding posters of bloody, dead fetuses onto a sunny and peaceful campus.
Inside the arena, I saw bellowing people stand and try to disrupt the speech. They were drowned out by most of the 1,200 graduates, shouting back, "We are ND," in defense of the president.
Young, mostly white midwestern Catholics, fiercely defending the African American president of the United States.
The president of the United States, who communicates like this:
… I stand here today, as President and as an African American, on the 55th anniversary of the day that the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
Now, Brown was of course the first major step in dismantling the
"separate but equal" doctrine, but it would take a number of years and
a nationwide movement to fully realize the dream of civil rights
for all of God's children. There were freedom rides and lunch counters
and Billy clubs, and there was also a Civil Rights Commission appointed
by President Eisenhower. It was the 12 resolutions recommended by this
commission that would ultimately become law in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
There were six members of this commission. It included five whites and
one African American; Democrats and Republicans; two Southern
governors, the dean of a Southern law school, a Midwestern university president, and your own Father Ted Hesburgh, President of Notre Dame.
So they worked for two years, and at times, President Eisenhower had to
intervene personally since no hotel or restaurant in the South would
serve the black and white members of the commission together. And
finally, when they reached an impasse in Louisiana, Father Ted flew
them all to Notre Dame's retreat in Land OLakes, Wisconsin—where they eventually overcame their differences and hammered out a final deal.
And years later, President Eisenhower asked Father Ted how on Earth he
was able to broker an agreement between men of such different
backgrounds and beliefs. And Father Ted simply said that during their
first dinner in Wisconsin, they discovered they were all fishermen. And
so he quickly readied a boat for a twilight trip out on the lake. They
fished, and they talked, and they changed the course of history.
I will not pretend that the challenges we face will be easy, or
that the answers will come quickly, or that all our differences and
divisions will fade happily away—because life is not that simple. It
never has been. But as you leave here today … remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all
children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another;
to understand that we all seek the same love of family, the same
fulfillment of a life well lived. Remember that in the end, in some way
we are all fishermen.
If nothing else, that knowledge should give us faith that
through our collective labor, and God's providence, and our willingness
to shoulder each other's burdens, America will continue on its precious
journey towards that more perfect union.
After the speech, I overheard the mother of a graduate tell a reporter she walked out and stood in the lobby while Obama spoke.
"He speaks no truth to me at all," she said.
I tried to muster the usual fear and loathing. It wouldn't come. Instead, I shrugged, out of pity for a poor old woman who's been pushed to the side by progress. By legitimate, honest-to-goodness progress.
My habit is to look at everything and see how much better it ought to be. On this sunny Sunday I couldn't help but look at everything and see how much better it already is.
“Inside the arena, I saw bellowing people stand and try to disrupt the speech. They were drowned out by most of the 1,200 graduates, shouting back, “We are ND,” in defense of the president.”
I applaud the students for acting like the adults, while the adults apparently acted like children.
In my opinion, this should have been about inspiring these graduates to go forth and make something of themselves versus it being turned into a political event.
I recognize free speech, so I’m not attacking that either.
If we want the country to grow and evolve and have our children innovate, create and succeed, let’s encourage them, not ruin their moment in the sun.
Their moment wasn’t ruined, Susan. Think of it this way: Their graduation ceremony was a major event in the history of the American Catholic church. How many of them would have wanted it any other way?
How was it a “major event” in the history of the Catholic Church? Will it start a debate over abortion? Will it change the views of the Church? Will it open any minds?
Of course not. It wasn’t a major event in the Catholic Church . . . it was just another major embarrassment for the Catholic Church . . . an institution which seems to be getting better and better at embarrassing itself.
To have a chance to have one of the great speakers of our time, and a sitting president no less, address your graduates . . . and to have that tainted by an organization that is so ass backwards that they want to pull all of the condoms out of Africa and instead stop the spread of AIDS there through “abstaining from sex” is just shameful.
Church leaders should spend more time rooting out the pedophiles that still run rampant through their ranks, and less time trying to impose their morality on others.
Steve C.
How was it a “major event” in the history of the Catholic Church? Will it start a debate over abortion? Will it change the views of the Church? Will it open any minds?
Of course not. It wasn’t a major event in the Catholic Church . . . it was just another major embarrassment for the Catholic Church . . . an institution which seems to be getting better and better at embarrassing itself.
To have a chance to have one of the great speakers of our time, and a sitting president no less, address your graduates . . . and to have that tainted by an organization that is so ass backwards that they want to pull all of the condoms out of Africa and instead stop the spread of AIDS there through “abstaining from sex” is just shameful.
Church leaders should spend more time rooting out the pedophiles that still run rampant through their ranks, and less time trying to impose their morality on others.
Steve C.
“How was it a “major event” in the history of the Catholic Church? Will it start a debate over abortion? Will it change the views of the Church? Will it open any minds?”
The conversation showed that there already are lots of Catholics who have moderate views–like, all the ones who voted for a pro-choice candidate and raised the roof of the Joyce Center at his arrival on Sunday.
Oh . . . now I see your confusion, my friend. You’re confusing “Catholics” with “The Catholic Church.”
Most Catholics I know in this country at least are Cafeteria Catholics . . . they pick and choose what to believe in.
They’ll take a little of that papal infallibility, but leave the pro-life stuff alone.
They widely ignore the rule against any kind of contraceptives (thank God), but still take communion and go to mass.
They think priests should be allowed to marry and women should be priests . . .but they don’t raise a fuss when the Church refuses to allow that to happen.
Those are the folks who cheered for Obama. It may have been a major event for THEM . . . but there was nothing major about it for the Catholic Church, who will go on about its medieval way . . .
Steve C.
Oh . . . now I see your confusion, my friend. You’re confusing “Catholics” with “The Catholic Church.”
Most Catholics I know in this country at least are Cafeteria Catholics . . . they pick and choose what to believe in.
They’ll take a little of that papal infallibility, but leave the pro-life stuff alone.
They widely ignore the rule against any kind of contraceptives (thank God), but still take communion and go to mass.
They think priests should be allowed to marry and women should be priests . . .but they don’t raise a fuss when the Church refuses to allow that to happen.
Those are the folks who cheered for Obama. It may have been a major event for THEM . . . but there was nothing major about it for the Catholic Church, who will go on about its medieval way . . .
Steve C.
First, David I’m insanely jealous that you got to be there for this speech. I really hope someday to get to hear your President speak live. As a communicator, as a Liberal, and simply as a citizen of the world, I think he rocks.
But I couldn’t help but smile when I read Susan’s comment: “In my opinion, this should have been about inspiring these graduates to go forth and make something of themselves versus it being turned into a political event.”
Is it truly possible for any event that includes the President of the United States to be anything BUT a political event, ever?
I’m not so sure that mother has been pushed aside by progress, David. That happens to some. But when she stepped outside she willingly stepped aside from progress – she wasn’t pushed.
There are those who know full well the bus is leaving the station and yet they would still rather be left standing on the platform than share a seat. “He speaks no truth to me” – I guess that goes to show sometimes truth is just as dependent on the listening as it is on the speaking.
To be fair here, I can just as easily see someone at a graduation speech that George Bush gave saying “He speaks no truth to me” and would we be so hard on that person? In fact, we may nod in agreement. Just something to think about.
I think it’s easy to see this is black and white, right and wrong, and it’s not that easy. Never will be.
First, Eileen, I believe Barack Obama simply cares more about the truth and tries harder to speak it than did George Bush, so already I’m not quite on board with your idea.
Secondly, I’d be pretty hard on a prig who walked out and pouted in the lobby during a Bush speech because “he speaks no truth to me.”
That’s just not my style. Me, I liked to get high and laugh at Bush speeches, all the way through.
I’d like to weigh in on the “would we be so hard on someone who stepped outside during a Bush speech?” because, I, at least absolutely would.
Eileen is absolutely right – it will never be that simple. I have long believed it to be imperative that we listen to, and at least attempt to be clear on – if not agree with – the positions of those we are opposed to. In fact, it’s more important to hear the opinions of those we don’t agree with, than those we do.
So, yes, I’d be hard on that Mother either way. I fail to see what is accomplished by sticking your fingers in your ears and refusing even to hear a speech – particularly one directed to your graduating child – just because the speaker’s politics differ from yours. It sounds like the Mother is the one who requires some educating to me.
Precisely, Kristen – to dismiss a voice once you’ve listened to what it has to say is one thing. But to decline to listen is something else – no matter whose voice it is.
And yes, I’d feel the same if it was Bush speaking.
“I believe Barack Obama simply cares more about the truth and tries harder to speak it than did George Bush.”
Your comment is subjective, which is my point. It’s all relative.
Yes, my comment is subjective. But how does that mean “it’s all relative”?
Relative meaning nothing is black and white.
No, but some things are dark gray and some things are light gray.