In the early 2000s, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops convened a task force to evaluate the frustrating and persistent dilemma of Catholic politicians who reject fundamental church teachings. You know the type — the Kennedys, Cuomos, Pelosis, Patakis, and Giulianis of the world. They are the “personally opposed, publicly supportive” pro-abortion brigade.
It’s a hard problem for the bishops to solve without appearing to endorse one political party over another. The Church likes to play politics down the middle when it can. Problem is, some issues don’t offer much of a middle ground.
In 2004, the task force issued an unequivocal message to Catholic colleges and universities: Don’t confuse the faithful on the vital question of life by giving awards and honors to pro-choice politicians. “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles,” the bishops urged. “They should not be given awards, honors, or platforms that would suggest support for their actions.”
Abortion is not just one issue among many in the eyes of the Church.
Given the lefty dispensation of most of academia — including most of Catholic academia — the bishop’s admonition has been more frequently honored in the breach than in the observance. Nevertheless, the message had the virtue of clarity. Abortion is not just one issue among many in the eyes of the Church. Politicians can be right on poverty and health care and immigration and war, but if they’re wrong on abortion, it’s a problem.
Recall that in 2004, when the bishops issued their statement, John Kerry was campaigning hard as a “personally opposed, publicly supportive” pro-choice Democrat. “I oppose abortion, personally, I don’t like abortion,” he was saying. But, he’d add, “I believe life does begin at conception.”
Talk about confusing.
The task-force document was approved by the full conference of bishops, but it bore the signature of three key prelates: Francis Cardinal George of Chicago, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver, and Bishop Donald W. Wuerl of Pittsburgh. Cardinal George has since died.
Chaput, who took over the Philadelphia archdiocese in 2011, has emerged as one of the sharpest voices for clarity and consistency in the American church. In 2014, he made waves with his comments about the Synod on the Family in Rome. At the time, the Internet and airwaves were full of reports that some bishops were pushing to allow divorced Catholics to receive communion. “I think confusion is of the devil,” said Chaput. “And I think the public image that came across was of confusion.”
Say — whatever happened to Bishop Wuerl?
In 2006, Wuerl was installed as the archbishop of Washington, D.C., and in 2010 Pope Benedict XVI gave him the red hat. In a few weeks, Cardinal Wuerl will travel to South Bend, Ind., to celebrate the commencement weekend baccalaureate Mass and pick up an honorary degree from the University of Notre Dame. Notre Dame will also honor Vice President Joe Biden and John Boehner, former speaker of the House, with its 2016 Laetare Medal.
The decision to present Biden with the Laetare Medal (“the oldest and most prestigious honor accorded to American Catholics”) has stirred controversy. The local bishop, Kevin Rhoades of the Diocese of Fort Wayne, Ind., has voiced his fear that honoring Biden will provoke scandal, in much the same way that Notre Dame’s invitation to President Obama in 2009 appeared to sanction his unflinching and extreme pro-choice views.
‘I believe it is wrong for Notre Dame to honor any “pro-choice” public official with the Laetare Medal.’ — Bishop Rhoades
“I believe it is wrong for Notre Dame to honor any ‘pro-choice’ public official with the Laetare Medal, even if he has other positive accomplishments in public service, since direct abortion is gravely contrary to the natural law and violates a very fundamental principle of Catholic moral and social teaching: the inalienable right to life of every innocent human being from the moment of conception,” said Bishop Rhoades. “I also question the propriety of honoring a public official who was a major spokesman for the redefinition of marriage.”
Given the local bishop’s unease with Notre Dame’s decision, why is Cardinal Wuerl helicoptering in and giving the proceedings his de facto seal of approval? As the liberal Catholic writer Michael Sean Winters has noted, Wuerl’s presence on campus “will spread a kind of imprimatur over the award the way the cold Indiana breeze will spread his red ferriola in the wind.”
The Archdiocese of Washington did not respond to a request for comment.
Even under the most charitable possible interpretation of Wuerl’s participation in the Notre Dame commencement, his attendance will surely sow confusion. The local bishop, who has authority in the diocese where Notre Dame is located, says that honoring Biden violates Church teaching — but an outside bishop doesn’t say this? Confusion is of the devil.
Exacerbating this muddle are Wuerl’s recent pointed comments directed at Georgetown University in D.C., where a student group has invited Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards to speak. “Students, faculty, and the community at large are all impoverished, not enriched, when the institution’s Catholic identity is diluted or called into question by seemingly approving of ideas that are contrary to moral truth,” Wuerl wrote in a blog post.
What is a faithful American Catholic to conclude? Cardinal Wuerl appears to object to pro-abortion public figures making waves on campus only when they do it in his own backyard. When it’s someone else’s backyard, however, he’s more accommodating.
Wuerl should explain why he’s chosen to undermine Bishop Rhoades and go to Notre Dame — but only if he can do it without adding to the confusion.