So President Obama delivered the commencement address at Notre Dame and was honored with an honorary law degree, to be expected. But what I really enjoyed were some of the responses to his address.

Sure, most of the students went ape for him; but who’s really surprised about that?

Bill McGurn had a great response to the situation here, pointing out just how far from its mission and original identity ND has strayed. I especially liked his last paragraph:

In the National Portrait Gallery of the Smithsonian, there is a wonderful photograph of Father Ted Hesburgh — then Notre Dame president — linking hands with Martin Luther King Jr. at a 1964 civil-rights rally at Chicago’s Soldier Field. Today, nearly four decades and 50 million abortions after Roe v. Wade, there is no photograph of similar prominence of any Notre Dame president taking a lead at any of the annual marches for life.

Father Jenkins is right: That’s not ambiguity. That’s a statement.

Archbishop Chaput of Denver had this:

Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George has suggested that Notre Dame “didn’t understand” what it means to be Catholic before these events began.  He’s correct, and Notre Dame is hardly alone in its institutional confusion.  That’s the heart of the matter.  Notre Dame’s leadership has done a real disservice to the Church, and now seeks to ride out the criticism by treating it as an expression of fringe anger.  But the damage remains, and Notre Dame’s critics are right.  The most vital thing faithful Catholics can do now is to insist – by their words, actions and financial support – that institutions claiming to be “Catholic” actually live the faith with courage and consistency.  If that happens, Notre Dame’s failure may yet do some unintended good.

Laura Ingraham has a lively exchange with Bill O’Reilley here.

Bishop Yanta has a response here, specifically a letter to Fr. Jenkins. I found this remark especially poignant:

In conscience I can no longer support Notre Dame as a Catholic College. I am deeply offended how you treat my wife of 54 years, the Church I love whose head is Jesus Christ.

Bishop D’Arcy of South Bend attended a rally at Notre Dame on the day of the graduation. Watch the short video here. He talks about why he changed his mind and decided to attend the rally. He gives a beautiful witness to the office of the bishop.

The real issue, to my mind, is not the President’s speech but Fr. Jenkins decision to invite him. We know the President’s belief. But Fr. Jenkins has a responsibility to uphold the Catholic identity of his university and his bride the Church to whom he pledged fidelity when he became a priest. His speech at the commencement is here.

Some of the criticisms that has been leveled at the response of some Catholics is that pro-lifers only care about the baby at conception and that pro-lifers are angry/have bad strategies. Unfortunately, Fr. Jim Martin of America magazine gives us an example here.

REVEREND JAMES MARTIN, AMERICA MAGAZINE: Not exactly. I mean, I think first of all, if anyone deserves a degree in law, it’s this constitutional law scholar. I think that needs to be kept in mind. But also, I think the pro-life world is a lot broader than simply abortion. I don’t think you can just sweep the death penalty, torture — things like that under the carpet. The pro-life world is really what Cardinal Bernardin called ‘a consistent ethic of life.’ I think, unfortunately, for a lot of people in the pro-life movement, life begins at conception, but seems to end there. I mean, it just cannot be about simply abortion, and I really lament the fact that — that some of the bishops have turned the Gospel of Jesus Christ into simply abortion. And so, I think we need to look at a broader perspective here.

Sorry, but we can’t have a discussion of rights that depend upon the right to life if the right to life itself is not secure; that’s why it’s a fundamental issue, not just for Catholics but for humanity.

Let’s face it, there are currently more pregnancy resource centers in the US than there are abortion clinics. PRCs offer all sorts of assistance to women who decide to have their babies. Many, if not most, of these are largely staffed by volunteers. In addition, there are many medical professionals who offer pro-bono services to women at these centers. I know of a center where the director lined up a source of jobs so that the boyfriends/husbands of the girls coming in for help could find stable work and thereby contribute to the wellbeing of the unborn child as well as the mother.
With regard to accusations that the pro-llife movement is “angry” or that it needs to do things differently, I think it’s great that people see the potential for doing things in a different or better way and hope they assume the leadership roles to take their ideas forward. No one approach or strategy will suffice for the pro-life movement. Different strategies will reach different audiences. There’s a lot of room for authentic diversity here. I look forward to seeing new developments in pro-life efforts.