Saturday, January 21, 2012

Notre Dame and the Obama Administration's Morality

Since the president decided to start to curtail our Constitutional rights to freedom of religion, I have received a very timely piece about the total loss of Catholicism at our "Catholic" institutions of higher learning ( if you want to call them that).  Does this look familiar as history unfolded about 75 years ago?

Please remember that this is the "anniversary" of legalized murder of the un-born.  If you need a reminder, just look at the pictures on the side of the Blog.

The following piece is reprinted with permission.:

Among his reasons for bestowing a Doctorate of Laws upon Mr. Obama during the May 2009 graduation ceremony, Fr. Jenkins stated that the University would have a "dialogue" with Mr. Obama, as if Notre Dame could -- and would -- influence the Obama pro-abortion record. Clearly, that dialogue between Mr. Obama and Notre Dame (if, in fact, it ever occurred) was, at best, a futile, naive endeavor from the outset. Indeed, Notre Dame's actions at that time gave a warm and smiling facade to Mr. Obama's ongoing record of hostility to, and disregard for, the rights of the unborn.
Now we see that the Obama Administration's disregard for moral rights has been officially extended to religious institutions and individuals.
In his May 2009 speech at the University's graduation, President Obama spoke of extending good will to others. He mentioned developing a sensible conscience clause based on "clear ethics and respect for women." He spoke, to the applause of the assembly (including, to be sure, Frs. Hesburgh and Jenkins), of common ground about reducing abortions and unintended pregnancies, again to much applause. And, as he discussed abortion, he asked if it were not possible "...for us to join hands in common effort...?" 
As if now answering his own question, it seems abundantly clear (as it has for years) that Mr. Obama's reference to a "common effort" was -- and remains -- nothing but hollow political rhetoric. Clearly, Mr. Obama and members of his Administration have no authentic regard for the Catholic Church's concern about abortion and other conscience issues.
What is troubling to some members of the Notre Dame community is that Fr. Jenkins' response (below) contains no forthright moral clarity (not to mention well-merited outrage). Fr. Jenkins merely seeks some sort of now-weary "dialogue," even as Archbishop Dolan candidly states that, “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.” 
Sadly, Fr. Jenkins' statement is noteworthy not for his readily seizing the moral high-ground, not for his intelligent expression of the Catholic moral principles involved, not for his proud and forceful articulation of Catholic social teaching. Rather, Fr. Jenkins' statement is noteworthy for his total lack of any such prophetic commentary or moral energy. Fr. Jenkins offers no proud clarification of Catholic moral standards. He makes no forthright comments about the Obama Administration's abuse of power. He does not even comment on the conflicting content of Mr. Obama's Notre Dame speech and its impact on the University's weakened reputation as (according to a now-outworn phrase) "...the place where the Church does its thinking." Fr. Jenkins makes not even one reference to fundamental Christian morality. He is merely "deeply disappointed," and mounts a call for still more dialogue.
One is moved to wonder just how much "dialogue" it takes to see and admit what is now, and has been for years, glaringly obvious.
In May 2009, Notre Dame bestowed upon Mr. Obama its highest academic accolades. Unquestionably, the University's official approbation and enthusiastic inclusion of Mr. Obama into its ranks did a very great deal to psychologically legitimize and morally whitewash Mr. Obama's position as the world's most powerful spokesperson for moral equivalence and the leading agent for the furtherance of grave evil in our world. The message that Fr. Jenkins and his Administration then confidently sent to the world was that Mr. Obama is our President; his role as our President even trumps Notre Dame's responsibility to stand as a strong moral exemplar in our society and to act forcefully in accord with the Mind of the Church for the rights of the unborn. 
Some people will say that Fr. Jenkins is, for several reasons, being prudent and cautious in his brief response. But to other observers, Fr. Jenkins' response is a tepid reaction to the Obama Administration's duplicitous disregard for morality and personal conscience -- and to the University's role (even if unintentional, but nonetheless highly significant) in furthering Mr. Obama's morally destructive agenda.
Some observers still hold that supporting such grave evil as abortion -- even indirectly or obliquely, even with excuses of building dialogue and honoring political celebrities  -- is not the work of a truly Catholic institution. It is not the work one would ever expect of Notre Dame.
Given the grave nature and escalation of these issues, Notre Dame graduates once more wonder what has happened at the highest levels of University governance to diminish the prophetic clarity of the University's Catholic mission and leadership.
Daniel M. Boland, PhD

The following is the actual statement from Fr. Jenkins, President of ND:

“I am deeply disappointed in a decision by the administration that will place many religious organizations of all faiths in an untenable position.

“This unnecessary intervention by the government into religion disregards our nation’s commitment to the rights of conscience and the longstanding work of religious groups to help build a more compassionate society and vibrant democracy. I find that profoundly troubling on many levels.

“Moving forward, we call for a national dialogue among religious groups, government and the American people to reaffirm our country’s historic respect for freedom of conscience and defense of religious liberty.”

I really feel sorry for Fr. Jenkins...once again he is made to be the laughing stock and 'yes man' to Obama

Please pray for all of us.
Jesus Is Lord!
Tim M.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Just A Quick Note...

We have received a comment on one of our posts that really doesn't apply to the post it was sent to.  However, the comment was one which I feel merits a reply, and since replying on a comment goes largely unnoticed, I felt this one should be made totally public.

The author of the comment did send it with an address attached, but I'm not going to put that here so they don't get inundated with junk or "spam".  Here is the comment:

"I know this has nothing to do with your article, but the pictures on the side of your webpage are horrific."

The pictures on the side are meant to be just that...horrific and factual...that is what ABORTION is all about...murder of the unborn.  If this is something that offends you, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!   We are approaching the 39th "anniversary" of the legalization of murder of the unborn in the US.  Don't you think it's time to stop killing 1.6 million babies a year?

Jesus Is Lord!
Tim M

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Sycamore Trust of Notre Dame: Is The School Still "Catholic"?

As is our practice, we are proud to post the new bulletin for The Sycamore Trust at Notre Dame.  Please read the bulletin and then if you would please, comment on it to them.  Tahey can always use your support.
Jesus Is Lord!
Tim M.

SOUTH BEND, IN — This bulletin is an important preface to a coming bulletin in which we will review comprehensively the weakening of the Catholic presence on the faculty so radical that, as we have shown before, the school no longer meets its own test of Catholic identity.
Here, our principal subject is the damaging and ominous decision of the Administration to withhold the information on Catholic faculty representation that had been disclosed for decades. We have referred to this decision briefly in the past. As you will see, it merits full attention.
Until this decision, reported initially in The Irish Rover, these data had been published annually for decades in the so-called “Fact Book,” a massive compilation of data providing an illuminating profile of the University. The entire Notre Dame community as well as all with a “need to know” had access to the Fact Book. We were supplied with the information pertinent to Catholic faculty representation.
That information permitted an illuminating analysis of the shrinking of the Catholic faculty representation overall as well as of the notably disparate records of the various schools.
Thus, for example, from 1987 to 2007:
  • The overall University Catholic faculty representation declined from 64.5% to 53.3%.
  • In Arts & Letters — where it counts the most because of departments such as Theology, Philosophy, History, Political Science, English and History — the decline was the sharpest, from 71.8% to 54.2%.
  • In Science — also important because of increasingly serious bio ethical issues and the historic question of the compatibility of faith and reason — from 49.2% to a strikingly low 37.4%.
  • In Engineering, from 63.2% to 52%.
In contrast:
  • In the robustly Catholic Law School, Catholic representation increased from 72% to 83.3%.
  • In Architecture, from 44.4% to 52.9%.
And in Business, Catholic representation remained steady at a solid 64%.
With the discontinuance of the annual publication of the Fact Book, there is no guaranty that any information at all will be provided. At best, it appears, some university representative or publication will occasionally mention a university-wide rounded off figure. If, at least, there has not been a decline. We do not know what might happen then.
Even if this single figure is regularly disclosed – 53% is the last we have seen — it will not permit an informed judgment as to the true state of affairs. Obviously, one will not know what is happening among the various schools — whether, for example, there is a further decline in Arts & Letters perhaps offset by increases in other schools. More, there are other serious problems respecting the reliability and significance of such a representation that we describe in the “Notes” below rather than here because of their somewhat technical nature.
But the most troublesome question that immediately springs to mind is why the Administration, after all these years, suddenly decided to suppress this important information.
The most obvious explanation is that the data, which were publicized for the first time by Sycamore Trust, were thought too embarrassing and that it was feared they could become even more so.

The Administration insists, though, that it is simply trying to protect the privacy of the faculty. The data, the University spokesperson claimed, might “reveal the religion of a faculty member against his or her wishes.”
Consider the plausibility of this explanation:
  • The alleged privacy concern evidently never occurred to anyone for decades.
  • The University spokesperson declined to say whether any faculty member had complained.
  • The alleged risk is exceedingly remote and could easily have been eliminated altogether without major change. As the University spokesman seemed to concede in the Rover article and as we demonstrate in the Notes below, the risk could materialize only with respect to a new hire in a small academic unit. Accordingly, if privacy were the concern, it could easily have been secured from such improbable sleuthing by merging the data from the one or two smaller schools with the larger.
But quite beyond these factors, consider who might be the beneficiary of the University’s solicitude that no one know whether he or she claimed to be Catholic.
Surely it would not be a practicing Catholic who checked the Catholic box, or a non-Catholic who didn’t. They would have no concern whatever whether anyone knew they had, or hadn’t, claimed to be Catholic.
Who, then, might be concerned? First, a non-Catholic applicant who checked the Catholic box thinking it a plus. Second, a non-practicing Catholic who doesn’t want it known he or she claimed to be Catholic.
Even if there were anyone like that on Notre Dame's faculty, protecting them against a remote risk that his or her duplicity might be uncovered would hardly warrant the canceling of a decades-long policy of transparency respecting important faculty data.
This is a deeply troubling move by the University.
We conclude with a heartfelt thanks to those many of you who responded to our recent request for contributions. Due to your generosity and that of those who have contributed earlier, we will be able to sustain and expand our work. We are grateful indeed.
  • The Irish Rover special offer. As we noted, The Irish Rover broke this story, as it has many others. Please consider supporting these fine students by acting on a special offer: the Internet edition for the balance of this year plus next year for the price of a year’s subscription: $15.00. Subscription instructions are given on the Rover’s web site. Mention “Sycamore Trust” to show you are responding to this special offer.
  • The Business School honored. For the second consecutive year, Notre Dame’s Mendoza School of Business, especially noted for its stress on ethics, has been awarded the #1 spot in Bloomberg’s ranking of undergraduate business schools, As we noted above, the Business School has maintained a Catholic faculty representation of 64% throughout the 20-year period of the radical overall shrinking of Catholic faculty representation. All owe a deep debt of gratitude to Dean Carolyn Woo, who has just departed to assume the leadership of Catholic Relief services.
  • The Student Right-to-Life newsletter. If you haven’t signed up for “Footprints,” the free Internet newsletter of the student Right to Life club, take a minute to examine the current issue with its report on the RTL events and the bonus of a fine prize-winning story by third-year student Elizabeth Everett. We hope you will be moved to join the Footprints mailing list, which you can easily do through the Internet site.
  • Pro-life alumni & friends Facebook group. You might also be interested in joining a new Facebook discussion group, “Pro-Life Alumni, Students, & Friends of the University of Notre Dame.” The more members, the more vibrant and instructive the site will be.
  • Further detail on the University’s flimsy rationale and deficiencies in reporting only a University-wide rounded off percentage of Catholic faculty.

    • If an increase in Catholic faculty is reported, it will be impossible to know if it is genuine or simply the result of including a more Catholic group of employees. That is exactly what may have been foreshadowed several years ago, when the University included in the Fact Book for the first time an additional table that included a group of employees such as adjunct instructors and professional specialists relatively more of whom were Catholic.

    • The rounding off of the overall number means that a reported increase (or decrease) could mean no more than a .1% shift (e.g., 53.4% to 53.5%). Thus, should an increase from 53% to 54% be reported, it could mean no more than one additional Catholic in a faculty of around 900.

    • An increase in the overall percentage could be the result of increases in the already robustly Catholic Law School faculty or the relatively strong Business School faculty while the Arts & Letters percentage, say, could have declined. Or the increase could have been in the very depressed Science faculty while, again, there might have been a decrease in the A&L faculty.

    • As we noted above, a theoretical risk of disclosure was possible only in a school with a small faculty. Probably the only example is Architecture, with a faculty of 17 in 2006-07 of whom 9 had checked the “Catholic” box. If the next year the total number and the number of Catholics had both risen by one and there were no departures, the new member would presumably have marked “Catholic” on the form.
Since this sort of improbable sleuthing would be impossible in other schools with large faculties and substantial turnovers and additions each year, Architecture could have been merged for these purposes into Arts & Letters. Out of a superabundance of caution, Engineering with its larger faculty could have been merged into Science. Plainly enough, the Administration was not seeking a way to continue disclosure.

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Does Your School Serve "Aborted Babies"?

This is something that your school is doing if they serve PepsiCo products and others as listed below.  We have posted this on our sister blog as well, but it has a special significance here because of the schools that claim to be "Catholic" and don't investigate the products they use.  Think about this the next time you go to the school cafeteria or buy something from the school vending machines.  Eating and drinking "baby parts"... 

Does that sound like something you would do if you had the choice?  Well, here is the list of products from Children of God For Life that shows you that's exactly what you are doing.  This is something that has finally made the "Mainstream Media".  Kind of a surprise, huh?  Please thing seriously about joining the boycott.

What brought this up for me today was the announcement that PepsiCo is laying off 4000 workers.
Gee...maybe they will get the message, ya think?  Naaa...they don't really care what people think.  As long as they make a buck, what does it matter how?  Here is the list as published by the COG website:

Aborted Fetal Products
Pepsi Beverages on the Boycott

• All Pepsi soft drinks
• Sierra Mist soft drinks
• Mountain Dew soft drinks
• Mug root beer and other soft drinks
• No Fear beverages
• Ocean Spray beverages
• Seattle's Best Coffee
• Tazo beverages
• AMP Energy beverages
• Aquafina water
• Aquafina flavored beverages
• DoubleShot energy beverages
• Frappuccino beverages
• Lipton tea and other beverages
• Propel beverages
• SoBe beverages
• Gatorade beverages
• Fiesta Miranda beverages
• Tropicana juices and beverages
At this time we are formally boycotting PepsiCo
products, however many have asked us for lists of
the other companies involved with Senomyx and
what products are involved. Unless we know a
certain product or brand name specifically, we
intend to boycott all of the company’s products.

N estles Products
• All coffee creamers
• Maggi Brand instant soups, bouillon cubes,
ketchups, sauces, seasoning, instant noodles
Kraft - Cadbury Adams LLC Products:
• Black Jack chewing gum
• Bubbaloo bubble gum
• Bubblicious bubble gum
• Chiclets
• Clorets
• Dentyne
• Freshen Up Gum
• Sour Cherry Gum (Limited)
• Sour Apple Gum (Limited)
• Stride
• Trident
Cadbury Adams LLC Candies
• Sour Cherry Blasters
• Fruit Mania
• Bassett's Liquorice Allsorts
• MaynardsWine Gum
• Swedish Fish
• Swedish Berries
• Juicy Squirts
• Original Gummies
• Fuzzy Peach
• Sour Chillers
• Sour Patch Kids
• Mini Fruit Gums
Other Cadbury Adams LLC Products
• Certs breath mints
• Halls Cough Drops
Other Senomyx Partner Products
This company produces anti wrinkle creams that
contain cells from a 14 week gestation aborted male
baby. Following is the list of the creams, but we
recommend a full boycott of all Neocutis Products.
Bio-Gel Prevedem Journee
Bio-Serum Lumiere
Bio Restorative Skin Cream
Vaccines Containing Aborted Fetal Cells
And the Manufacturers:

MMR II (Merck)
ProQuad (MMR + Chickenpox – Merck)
Varivax (Chickenpox – Merck)
Pentacel (Polio + DTaP + HiB – Sanofi Pasteur)
Vaqta (Hepatitis-A – Merck)
Havrix (Hepatitis-A – Glaxo SmithKline)
Twinrix (Hepatitis-A and B combo – Glaxo)
Zostavax (Shingles – Merck)
Imovax (Rabies – Sanofi Pasteur)
Other medicines:
Pulmozyme (Cystic Fibrosis – Genetech)
Enbrel (Rheumatoid Arthritis – Amgen)
Note: Moral options exist for Rabies, Polio,
Rheumatoid Arthritis. Separate moral options
currently not available for Measles and Mumps.
For more information visit our website at

These products and manufacturers use Aborted Babies in their products.  Not using their products can and will dissuade the use of Aborted Babies and may indirectly cut down on abortions.  If the financial incentive isn't there for the baby parts, maybe they won't want to kill as many of the unborn...Well, we can always hope and pray, can't we?

Jesus Is Lord!
Tim M