Cardinal Dolan, Obama, And The Al Smith Dinner

[LittleWaySoul]

Has anyone started a thread about this already?

[url="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-dolan-asks-more-scandal-by-obama-invite-or-none-invite"]http://www.lifesiten...-or-none-invite[/url]

[quote][color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]NEW YORK, August 13, 2012 ([/font][/color][url="http://www.lifesitenews.com/"]LifeSiteNews.com[/url][color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]) - New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan has for the first time [/font][/color][url="http://blog.archny.org/index.php/al-smith-dinner/"]personally responded[/url][color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif] to what he refers to as “stacks of mail protesting the invitation to President Obama.” The strongly pro-life Archbishop and head of the USCCB says he takes seriously the charge of scandal, and apologizes “if I have given such scandal.” He wonders however, “would I give more scandal by inviting the two candidates, or by not inviting them?”[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]When Pope Benedict received Obama in July 2009, however, the circumstances were very different. The Pope did not ask Obama to come to speak at a Catholic fundraiser. Moreover the Holy Father took the opportunity to speak to Obama about abortion and conscience rights and made his talking points known publicly - a scenario unlikely to unfold at the jovial [url="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive/ldn/2009/jul/09071002"]Al Smith dinner[/url].In his defense, the Cardinal notes that Pope Benedict XVI received President Obama. Cardinal Dolan says he and his fellow bishops are similarly “open to dialogue” with the administration.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]The papal meeting was also not just 19 days before a U.S. presidential election. The Vatican Secretary of State is acutely aware of the need to avoid such politically sensitive situations.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]Cardinal Dolan commences his letter speaking of the need for ‘civility’ in political life, praising the Al Smith dinner for fostering such civility. “What message would I send if I refused to meet with the President?,” asks the Cardinal.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]The question is a sensitive one since it could be seen by some as a criticism of former New York Cardinal John O’Connor, founder of the Sisters of Life, who did exactly that - he refused then-President Clinton an invite to the Al Smith dinner, reportedly over Clinton’s veto of the partial birth abortion ban. Dolan fails to mention [url="http://www.nytimes.com/1996/08/23/nyregion/at-archdiocesan-gala-no-room-for-clinton-or-dole.html"]Cardinal O’Connor’s action[/url]. [/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]Obama has proven to be even more extremist on abortion and a far greater threat to Christianity and the Catholic Church than Clinton ever was.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]LifeSiteNews has followed a policy in all our reports on this controversy of being respectful, civil and acknowledging of the many positive actions by Cardinal Dolan. We have avoided any criticisms of the person of the cardinal or questioning of his motives. The emphasis has been on questions about the wisdom, at this time in U.S. history, and only a few weeks before perhaps the most critical of U.S. elections ever, of having the current president speak at this very prominent Catholic fundraising event.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]LifeSiteNews also strongly encourages others engaged in this discussion to avoid what the cardinal refers to as “negativity, judgmentalism, name-calling, and mudslinging”. But respectfully expressing opinions that suggest there could be serious negative ramifications with the Obama invite are none of these, although some are unfortunately characterizing them as such.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]The New York Archbishop concludes his letter saying: “In the end, I’m encouraged by the example of Jesus, who was blistered by his critics for dining with those some considered sinners; and by the recognition that, if I only sat down with people who agreed with me, and I with them, or with those who were saints, I’d be taking all my meals alone.”[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]Addressing that point in a column last week, Catholic World News editor [url="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/yes-jesus-had-dinner-with-sinners-but-private-ones-not-photo-ops"]Phil Lawler wrote[/url]: “When Jesus sat with tax collectors, the dinners were private. They were not ‘photo ops’ for political candidates. The Lord could speak directly to the hearts of his dining companions, and convert them. Remember, St. Matthew left the tax-collecting business to follow Christ. Does anyone believe that after the Al Smith dinner, Obama will decide to rescind the contraceptive mandate?”[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]Regardless of the many reports and expressed concerns about the invitation to the president, we must emphasize that LifeSiteNews has a [url="http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/cardinal-dolan-wsj-interview-is-very-big-news/"]high regard[/url] for Cardinal Dolan. He has recently played a major role, along with some of his notable brother bishops, in leading and motivating the U.S. Catholic population to publicly challenge the anti-life, anti-family culture. He has been boldly fighting the attacks on religious freedom that have been exponentially growing in recent years. And for all that everyone should be grateful.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]As for the current controversy, it concerns prudential judgment on an issue that has potentially significant ramifications for the entire American public. It could send seriously confusing signals to a public that has been convinced by the bishops and others about the great dangers to faith, morals and freedom of a second Obama term. Politically, Obama has much to gain and nothing to lose from speaking and telling jokes at this function.[/font][/color]
[color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, sans-serif]Considering what is at stake in this election, respectful, even emphatic dialogue is appropriate. It is about much more than a dinner.[/font][/color][/quote]

What do you guys think? I've heard almost nothing but negative opinions, and I'm curious to see how everyone here responds.

[Groo the Wanderer]

i think His Eminence should thwack Obama with an anathema at the dinne

[To Jesus Through Mary]

I have given this a bit of thought. I live in NYC, I am a crisis pregnancy counselor, and I happen to enjoy debating about politics with liberals (which I get plenty of opportunity out here!) So I definitely have opinions on the matter... At first I was aghast! I tried to imagine what kind of reaction the Church would have if Pius XII dined with Hitler. He says Jesus ate with sinners... but he never dined with Pilate or Herod and even more doubtful he would made them the guests of honor at his banquet, crack jokes, and pose for pictures with them. The media's praise of this move made me loathe it all the more.

But this morning as I was praying for Cardinal Dolan, I realized he is the shepherd, I am not. There maybe more to this then we know. At the very least, we should give his Eminence the benefit of the doubt. He is a good Bishop... he is pro-life... he is not a progressive... he loves his flock. He is not going to back down, the invitation has been extended. I don't agree with his decision. So what should my role be at this point? Silent prayer. I am not going to cause any additional scandal to the world by bashing my bishop. I am going to pray and beg God for good to come of this. Then we have to wait and see how this all plays out. Are the "Catholics" for Choice going to run with it? Is Obama going to use this as an endorsement? I still do not agree with and extremely saddened and disheartened his Eminence's decision. But what good is the *cough* Vortex *cough* doing by dogging on the Cardinal, other then giving the enemy more fuel for the fire. (Although I am glad Voris brought this to the light- he has taken it too far IMO)

[Gabriela]

I think the fact that this has elicited such a negative reaction is an excellent indication of how intolerant our society has become. Inviting a person to dinner or even to speak does not [i]ipso facto[/i] indicate approval of all their views. Why can't we invite people we disagree with to dinner, or to speak, just in order to better understand their views, foster dialogue, and announce to the world that we're all grown-ups who can play nicely together? Do we have to place a total ban on everyone who disagrees with us on one or a few matters? If so, I'm afraid there aren't many people we can talk to.

The problem is the confusion of the invitation extended to the PERSON with approval of all that person's views. They are not the same. In 1983, Liberty University (you know, Jerry Falwell's school...) invited Ted Kennedy to speak PRECISELY BECAUSE he disagreed with them on most things. See here how well-behaved their students were at his talk:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0AFOV1Fo_s[/media]

Remember when Obama spoke at Notre Dame a while back? Why is Liberty more civilized than Notre Dame? I'd like to know.

We should all be so decent.

EDIT: Sorry if that sounds aggressive. I feel very strongly about civilized public discourse!

Edited August 19, 2012 by curiousing

[LittleWaySoul]

[quote name='curiousing' timestamp='1345342639' post='2469937']
I think the fact that this has elicited such a negative reaction is an excellent indication of how intolerant our society has become. Inviting a person to dinner or even to speak does not [i]ipso facto[/i] indicate approval of all their views.
[/quote]
No, but I think what the fear is, is that the media will jump on it as a way to get some of the less-informed Catholics to vote for Obama. Without actually reading about it or learning Cardinal Dolan's beliefs, or even those of the Catholic church, some may see pictures of the two smiling and laughing together and assume that it's okay to vote for him.

As for me, I think that's a legitimate concern, but for the most part, I'm happy about Cardinal Dolan's decision. I just have a really good feeling about it. Cardinal Dolan is a very smart man, and I trust that he knows what he's doing

Edited August 19, 2012 by LittleWaySoul

[Gabriela]

[quote name='LittleWaySoul' timestamp='1345343129' post='2469948']
No, but I think what the fear is, is that the media will jump on it as a way to get some of the less-informed Catholics to vote for Obama. Without actually reading about it or learning Cardinal Dolan's beliefs, or even those of the Catholic church, some may see pictures of the two smiling and laughing together and assume that it's okay to vote for him.
[/quote]

I see your point, and not only less-informed Catholics, but also non-Catholics could be led to believe from a picture of the Cardinal smiling side by side with Obama that Catholics are AOK with Obama's policies, and then give pious Catholics a hard time when they say otherwise, "But your Cardinal's ok with him, so what's your problem?"

The basic problem is one of oversimplification, and the media is a prime culprit in that. Just like an invitation doesn't equate to all-out approval, a picture of two people smiling side by side doesn't equate to all-out approval. The way to battle this isn't to rescind the invitation or refuse to associate with everyone who disagrees with us, but to educate people about the complexities of the issues, about the fact that people are not their views/actions/votes, and about the importance of love and charitability and humility and civility in society.

I'm not arguing with you in particular, LittleWaySoul. I'm just sayin'... We have a prime opportunity in such cases to set an example of love, charitability, humility, and civility to our society, which is so grossly divisive and intolerant and oversimplifying in political and social matters. And davka as Catholics, we SHOULD BE the first to leap at this opportunity. If people misinterpret it or the media manipulate it, so be it. We have done the right thing, and we do our best to explain.

Edited August 19, 2012 by curiousing

[LittleWaySoul]

[quote name='curiousing' timestamp='1345345777' post='2469975']
We have a prime opportunity in such cases to set an example of love, charitability, humility, and civility to our society, which is so grossly divisive and intolerant and oversimplifying in political and social matters. And davka as Catholics, we SHOULD BE the first to leap at this opportunity. If people misinterpret it or the media manipulate it, so be it. We have done the right thing, and we do our best to explain.
[/quote]
You have just put into words why I agree with Dolan's decision! I couldn't before this, but this post was great! Thanks!

[Annie12]

this could either be a very good thing or a very negative thing...only time will tell...

[tinytherese]

[quote name='curiousing' timestamp='1345342639' post='2469937']


Remember when Obama spoke at Notre Dame a while back? Why is Liberty more civilized than Notre Dame? I'd like to know.


[/quote]

The differences are that Notre Dame had no intention to dialogue with Obama on his pro-abortion stance and that they gave him an honorary degree.

[Gabriela]

Then protest the honorary degree, not the invitation. Liberty didn't dialogue with Kennedy on that occasion, either. They invited him as a gesture of good will and heard him out—something not many evangelicals were doing back then. Everyone knew they'd never agree. It was just a civil thing to do. And they all laughed together. Which is never bad.

The same thing happened recently at Georgetown when they invited Sebelius to speak. It happens all the time in Catholic circles. Someone invites a liberal, and everyone gets their panties in a bunch. Extending an honor to someone you disagree with is a very noble thing to do, in my opinion. If we take issue with Notre Dame's and Georgetown's [i]agreeing[/i] with these people, that's a separate matter. We should protest [i]that[/i] and not the invitation. Protesting the invitation takes it to a personal level that's inappropriate. It makes it look like Catholics think, "We shouldn't be associating with these people." And that is not true.

Edited August 19, 2012 by curiousing

[4588686]

read the Economist. Dolan is a man of questionable moral fiber (look at drunk Hasan censoring himself!!!!). I'm referring to his shannigans with finances

[To Jesus Through Mary]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1345347510' post='2469998']
read the Economist. Dolan is a man of questionable moral fiber (look at drunk Hasan censoring himself!!!!). I'm referring to his shannigans with finances
[/quote]

Are you referring to when he was back in Milwaukee or since he has been in NYC?

[Norseman82]

The difference here is that Kennedy was not engaging in religious persecution as the Obama/Sebellius/Biden machine is now doing.

Perhaps Cardinal Dolan will use it as an opportunity to make a comment about religious freedom that would make Obama squirm. Maybe the audience will give him a chilly reception. Maybe the audience will groan or otherwise react negatively to him.

[Socrates]

I would say Cardinal Dolan's decision is imprudent, but I won't condemn him for it.

[Gabriela]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1345347510' post='2469998']
read the Economist. Dolan is a man of questionable moral fiber (look at drunk Hasan censoring himself!!!!). I'm referring to his shannigans with finances
[/quote]

Seriously? [i]Argumentum ad hominem?[/i] If the Pope invited Obama for a chat, would the issue be any different? I don't think so. The issue would still be whether we ought to extend invitations to "enemies". That's the issue regardless of who extends the invitation.