He should start setting the example of not accepting Godlessness by not letting Obama give his speech at Notre Dame. Actions speak louder than words.
Agreed. If the Vatican can reject Zer0’s pro-abortion ambassadors, they can tell ND to refuse entry to President Infanticide.
The pope can reject an ambassador because the ambassador is sent to HIM. The pope is less likely to deal with a problem in America because that is left to the American bishops. He might do something, but it is doubtful. This is a problem for Catholics in America. We should be able to solve it on our own. That’s the principle of subsidiarity and the pope believes in it strongly.
Not a chance. This pope, like the last one, has more important fish to fry. If Notre Dame’s administration wants to engage in the newest dhimmitude, it embarrasses itself, not the religion it purports to teach or, in its own academic jargon, to “model.” The alums could make short work of this comedy if they had the will.
Note:
The Rev. John D'Arcy is Bishop of Ft. Wayne/South Bend.
Pope Benedict XVI is the Bishop of Rome.
Neither the Pope nor Bishop D'Arcy "own" or "run" or "make policy for" the University of Notre Dame. It is a separately-incorporated legal entity run by a Board of Trustees. Some, but not all of whom, are priests and members of the Congregation of the Holy Cross.
In that sense, the Pope doesn't run Notre Dame any more than he runs Harvard.
My own opinion is that lay people have a responsibility here, and that is to make the Obama commencement protest so loud, the situation so embarrassing, and the political cost so high, that neither Notre Dame nor Obama will try to pull off this kind of stunt ever again.
The Pope doesn’t run or own Notre Dame.