What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.

About

What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

William McGurn's Talk: "A Notre Dame Witness for Life"

As I noted elsewhere, Wall Street Journal columnist Bill McGurn was scheduled to speak this evening at the University of Notre Dame. I just returned from the talk. It was outstanding and powerful. Mr. McGurn, who I had the privilege to speak with after his lecture, offered a principled defense of his point of view while being charitable to those with whom he disagrees.

The Notre Dame Center for Ethics & Culture has published the text of the talk online, which you can find here. The following are some excerpts:

The precipitate cause of our gathering tonight is the honor and platform our university has extended to a President whose policies reflect clear convictions about unborn life, and about the value the law ought to place on protecting that life. These convictions are not in doubt. In July 2007, the candidate spelled them out in a forceful address to a Planned Parenthood convention in our nation’s capital.

Before that audience, he declared that a woman’s “fundamental right” to an abortion was at stake in the coming election. He spoke about how he had “put Roe at the center” of his “lesson plan on reproductive freedom” when he was a professor – and how he would put it at the center of his agenda as president.

He invoked his record in the Illinois state senate, where he fought restrictions on abortion, famously including one on partial-birth abortion. He said that the “first thing” he wanted to do as President was to “sign a Freedom of Choice Act.” And he ended by assuring his audience that “on this fundamental issue,” he, like they, would never yield....


In the past few weeks, we have read more than once the suggestion that to oppose this year’s speaker and honorary degree is to elevate politics over the proper work of a university. In many ways, we might say that such reasoning lies at the core of the confusion. As has become clear with America’s debates over the destruction of embryos for scientific research, over human cloning, over assisted suicide, and over other end-of-life issues, abortion as a legal right is less a single issue than an entire ethic that serves as the foundation stone for the culture of death.

With the idea that one human being has the right to take the life of another merely because the other’s life is inconvenient, our culture elevates into law the primacy of the strong over the weak. The discord that this year’s commencement has unleashed – between Notre Dame and the bishops, between members of the Notre Dame community, between Notre Dame and thousands of discouraged Catholic faithful – all this derives from an approach that for decades has treated abortion as one issue on a political scorecard. This is not the road to engagement. This is the route to incoherence, and we see its fruit everywhere in our public life.

Twenty-five years ago, on a similar stage on this campus, the then-governor of New York used his Notre Dame platform to advance the personally opposed-but defense that countless numbers of Catholic politicians have used to paper over their surrender to legalized abortion. Eight years after that, the school bestowed the Laetare Medal on a United States Senator who had likewise long since cut his conscience to fit the abortion fashion.


You can ride the whole thing here.

(Cross-posted on Southern Appeal and Return To Rome)

Comments (3)

It's this type of "hidden in plain sight" evidence that makes me all the more sure that mankind is susceptible to being blinded and thus bound/not free. I'm not inclined to see a boogy man behind every bush or little devils whispering in the ear since I think the flesh is evil enough in itself. Having said that, there is no other more reasonable answer to me than that there are agents of evil blinding men when people of faith cannot see clearly the inconsistency in the thoughts the purport to hold true. Intellectual argumentation seems futile, this wrestling with men might well be better put aside in order to wrestle in the spiritual realm. I have a hard time coming to terms with that.

In the past few weeks, we have read more than once the suggestion that to oppose this year’s speaker and honorary degree is to elevate politics over the proper work of a university.

The very fact that people have said such a thing shows the incredible power of self-deception. How can anyone make such an argument with a straight face? Is anyone under the illusion that Barack Obama has done some incredible _academic_ work that earns him an honorary doctorate on purely academic grounds? *At a minimum*, this argument would require that his honorary degree is academically justified in some apolitical realm--that he had made some great discovery in physics or chemistry, that he had written some lengthy and learned work, showing work equivalent to that required for a doctorate, in history or some other field in the humanities, etc. Otherwise, how in the world can one even begin to imply that ND is offering him an honorary doctorate as part of its "proper work as a university," with no connection to politics? Is it the "proper work of a university" to give every President of the United States an honorary doctorate? Is ND's offer to Obama not itself *blatantly* political? Please. This is just pathetic.

Hi. I just noticed that your website looks like it has a few code errors at the very top of your site's page. I'm not sure if everybody is getting this same bugginess when browsing your site? I am employing a totally different browser than most people, referred to as Opera, so that is what might be causing it? I just wanted to make sure you know. Thanks for posting some great postings and I'll try to return back with a completely different browser to check things out! Also, I put a link to your blog at my site,hope you dont mind?

Post a comment


Bold Italic Underline Quote

Note: In order to limit duplicate comments, please submit a comment only once. A comment may take a few minutes to appear beneath the article.

Although this site does not actively hold comments for moderation, some comments are automatically held by the blog system. For best results, limit the number of links (including links in your signature line to your own website) to under 3 per comment as all comments with a large number of links will be automatically held. If your comment is held for any reason, please be patient and an author or administrator will approve it. Do not resubmit the same comment as subsequent submissions of the same comment will be held as well.