Vatican notes Obama’s search for 'common ground'

What ? no condemnation for the Hitler's reincarnate nazi murderous evil speaking on the Church very own holy ground ? The Pope and the Vatican officials might have followed the footsteps of their predecessor during World war II.

So the Vatican officially slaps down those fascist U.S. bishops who are turning the American church into a big religious sect?

It was nothing short of delightful to see Notre Dame and President Obama succeed so brilliantly--and prevailing so gracefully over the right-wing conservative bishops who want so badly to have a monopoly on American Catholicism. The conservative Catholics and their blogs are aghast, of course, suggesting that some heretic must have captured L'Osservatore Romano. But they need to grasp what the Vatican daily already has: the pope does not agree with them, or with the one-fifth of the U.S. bishops who pledge allegiance to them. More on this at my blog, http://creativeadvance.blogspot.com/ .

To Rome, America is one of over 180 countries that it has to maintain cordial diplomatic relations in the world, the leadership of all of these countries is of diverse views. Happy Easter! Alleluia! Alleluia!

"The search for common ground: this seems to be the path chosen by the president of the United States, Barack Obama, to face the delicate question of abortion," said an unsigned article in the May 18 edition of L'Osservatore Romano."

I can see why it was unsigned! What exactly is "delicate" about the abortion question? It seems pretty clear to me, a Catholic layman; I would expect it to be even clearer for any Catholic priest. Although I must admit from the replies at this site, there appears to be much confusion on the abortion question here too.

What would Jesus say? How has Barack Obama mesmerized our Catholic leaders? Jesus would not say there is 'common ground' about murdering the unborn. Thou shall not kill! The Vatican, in Jesus' name, must speak the truth to all world leaders. There is no sugar coating when it comes to killing the unborn. We don't need a secular Vatican. The only thing common is common sense. Common sense says, the embryo is the beginning of a human being and will be born if given natural protection in the womb. There is no question about the delicate state of the embryo in danger of death. For years abortion advocates pushed for the debate on when life begins, even though it was already well known it begins at conception. God gives us life and God takes it away. The embryo is not a commodity at the supermarket or an inconvenience. It is God's precious gift. Obama stated if one of his daughters "got into trouble" he wouldn't want her to be given a punishment (meaning it is a punishment to carry her baby to birth!) So giving life is a punishment to Barack Obama, It's all about convenience to abortion advocates. Barack Obama is also fine with killing live babies from botched abortions. Is that the secular world we want? I am so happy that Jesus had the protection in the womb of his Blessed Mother Mary until his miraculous birth! If not, none of us would be granted salvation!

I respect those who protested Barack Obama receiving an honorary degree at Notre Dame. I was deeply ashamed to see the proceeedings. I saw true Catholics being escorted out of their university who protested his presence. I saw a smug Barack Obama smiling as he confidently took hold of the audience. It was despicable! Notre Dame has no right to call itself a Catholic university. Barack Obama is not the first clever man to pretend he cares about people, saying one thing and doing the exact opposite. As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, Barack Obama is indeed the AnitChrist. Jesus is not fooled by his false and outragious positions. We are Jesus' army to speak the truth and stand up for the helpless unborn. Let's do it.

Here is one paragraph, the most relevant, from George Weigel's article at National Review Online today...

"2. In the normal course of events, L’Osservatore Romano does not speak authoritatively for the Church in matters of faith, morals, or public-policy judgment. The exceptions are when a senior churchman offers a commentary on a recent papal document (an encyclical, for instance), or on those exceedingly rare occasions when an editorial in the paper is followed by three dots, or periods, a traditional convention signaling that the opinion being expressed is from “high authority.” No knowledgeable or responsible analyst of Vatican affairs would regard commissioned essays in L’Osservatore Romano, even if they appear on page one, as somehow reflecting an authoritative view from the Holy See or the Pope. The same is true for statements by the paper’s editors or editorials without the dots."

...I post this to counteract the general impression conveyed by this article here at NCR, which says...

"Known as the "pope's newspaper," L'Osservatore is under the direct authority of the Secretariat of State, which directs the Vatican's diplomatic relations, and reportedly vets articles on sensitive topics before publication.

The paper's coverage of Obama has been consistently friendly, and at times openly enthusiastic, since his election in November. Until Monday, the paper had published no reference to the controversy over Obama's appearance at Notre Dame."

I am disappointed that the Pope has decided that insults to the Church are acceptable (Re: Fr' Jenkins' rejection of Bishop D'Arcy); priestly celibracy is no longer an issue (Re: Fr. Cutie becoming an Episcopal); Anyone below the rank of "Ambassador" is too low on the totem-pole to acknowledge; and the "Catholic Church in America" is a spin-off from Rome.
Since it is clear that the Pope has caved-in to politics and that the rest of us are just twisting in the breeze left to decide for ourselves what we want to do, I think I'll follow the teaching that in Heaven, there are no religions.

As one of the graduates at the Notre Dame commencement ceremony, I supported the presence of my country's president and I take this opportunity to explain why.

The day's events, as many have noted, were more identifiable as a forum on abortion rather than a commencement ceremony, but there are two points to which I return. First, that it was my graduation; it was the doorway through which I walk into my future and it must be read as such.

Second, specifically relating to Obama's presence, was a point made by our president. Fr. Jenkins asked all of us to consider not only why Notre Dame invited President Obama to speak, but why he chose to accept. I asked myself, "Why did he bother to tackle such a controversial topic at a time when he has more than enough to keep him busy and in the public eye?" He could have ignored the issue and talked about the economy, but he didn't. I believe that the fact that he addressed the issue head-on was a sign of respect. I hope that he sees us, young Catholics, as important players in the future of this country, this world.

One comment above mentioned that Obama "took hold of the audience," but this is incorrect. Did we all stand up and say, "You have convinced us. We are now all pro-choice." Did those opposed rip the pro-life insignias from their mortarboards? No. I hope that we can be given a bit more credit than that. I heard his message as, "Can we work together to create a world more respectful of life?" For example, we need to improve the adoption process, ease it. We need to ensure health care for pregnant women, for children. We need counseling options that could help women who are facing this choice. Children who die through malnutrition of the mother are just as lost as those who have been purposely aborted. A woman should never choose to have an abortion because she fears that her child will suffer in this world if born. I hope that yes, we can work together on these issues. Personally, I stood up and applauded the future, one in which we will have a voice as well as a responsibility.

What did I gain from the "forum" of my commencement? That we shouldn't put disagreements aside, but they should be grounds from which we build. As as Catholic, I support life, but I need to make this belief accessible to others without pushing them away with polarizing rhetoric. I need to work with my government and community to show life as the better option.

We are a many-splendored creation, we humans, but we need to stop babbling around an issue and look at its core. Honestly, this debate isn't even about abortion, per se. It's about LIFE. How can we preserve LIFE? Prevent war, violence, self-hate. This isn't simply a Catholic issue; it is a catholic one. And when I realized that, I knew why we needed to have the president speak to us. I need to know what he thinks, what I can expect, with what I can agree and disagree. Now I challenge him, I will police him, so that he and the rest of the government work more to deliver on the promise to make our world better. After all, if life is better, love more prevalent, then why would we keep anyone, born or unborn, out of it?