Update on Notre Dame's Fr. Jenkins' trip to DC

UPDATE, 4/23, 7a: Per American Papist, Notre Dame's plane flew back to South Bend last night, according to FlightAware:

Aircraft Cessna 560 Citation 5
Origin Washington Dulles Intl
Destination South Bend Rgnl
Date Wednesday, Apr 22, 2009
Duration 1 hours 24 minutes
Scheduled Actual/Estimated
Departure 09:58PM EDT 09:58PM EDT
Arrival 11:22PM EDT 11:22PM EDT

An AmP reader wondered if the prodigal son were returning home. The prodigal son in Jesus' parable only realized he was a prodigal when he ran out of money. So we shall see, because while speculation was Jenkins flew to DC to meet with President Abortion, AmP reported yesterday:

Now an informed source tells me that Fr. Jenkins is in town for a multi-day seminar/symposium for high level Notre Dame donors, which has been planned for some time now and involves several speakers and events. Because the activities are private, they were not "advertised" to the wider public.

What timing. Hopefully some of those donors closed their checkbooks.
_______________

UPDATE, 4/22, 8:20a: The Notre Dame Observer News is denying on Twitter that Fr. Jenkins met with Barack Obama at the White House yesterday:

nd news.jpg

Fabulous reporting and corroboration, Observer.

[HT: American Papist]
_______________

UPDATE, 4:25p: From Joseph Lawler (Phil's son) at the American Spectator:

... This is still merely a rumor, but indeed FlightAware shows the ND jet flying to Dulles this morning....

That Fr. Jenkins would rescind the invitation seems unlikely given that on Saturday Fr. Jenkins reaffirmed his invitation to a crowd celebrating black student-athletes at Notre Dame that "shook down the thunder" with applause. But then what could they be talking about? If there is any change in the status of Obama's invitation, it's big news.

_______________

From Phil Lawler at Catholic Culture an hour ago...

off the record.jpg

Developing story...

[HT: Arina]


Comments:

Well this is very interesting. Could it be possible that Barry won't attend after all?

Posted by: Joanne at April 21, 2009 5:00 PM


Maybe someone pulled rank on Padre John. "Sorry Barry, my boss won't let me."

Posted by: Ed at April 21, 2009 5:17 PM


Imagine if Obama is the one who ends the controversy by "declining the invite so as not to upset the thousands of people." Worst case scenario IMO. He's the peacemaker and pro-lifers are the spoiled children that got their way.

Posted by: Alex at April 21, 2009 6:20 PM


I don't think I care if he speaks there or not. I wonder, however, what would be accomplished if he backed out.

Would there be less abortions than if he spoke?

Posted by: Hal at April 21, 2009 6:23 PM


Would there be less abortions than if he spoke?
Posted by: Hal at April 21, 2009 6:23 PM

That would be wonderful, but that isnt the motive for not wanting him to speak at ND.

It's because no TRUE Catholic can support abortion. Barry is the biggest abortion enabler
we've ever seen.

Posted by: Joanne at April 21, 2009 6:38 PM


Alex, that wouldn't be the worst case scenerio...

Posted by: Lauren at April 21, 2009 6:40 PM


NO HAL!
But it would give ND back some of the respect that it has lost in the eyes of millions of Catholics.

I just read this today about how Fr. Jenkins continues to "gush" over the fact that he got Obama to speak at ND:

"I think it's unfortunate that the great event of President Obama coming to this campus has been a little clouded by that controversy," said Jenkins, "but we believe what we believe, and we're clear on that, but at the same time, we recognize this remarkable leader and this remarkable person who has accomplished so much.

A LITTLE CLOUDED? ya think so Fr. Jenkins? only a LITTLE?

And what has Obama accomplished, Fr. Jenkins, in his first 100 days in office that you as a Catholic and as a Catholic in a very public position, can be so proud of?

Tonight on my drive home from work I heard about how Obama stated that America has lost it's "moral direction" in the torturing of terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. America didn't lose it's moral direction in torturing terrorists. It lost it's moral direction in 1973 when it sanctioned the ripping and dismembering, the burning, the suctioning and the scraping out of millions of unborn babies. Now that's a loss of moral direction.
Some people simply have no sense of perspective.

Posted by: angel at April 21, 2009 6:42 PM


Some people simply have no sense of perspective.
Posted by: angel at April 21, 2009 6:42 PM

Some people don't think abortion is immoral.

Posted by: Hal at April 21, 2009 7:05 PM


I don't read too much into any meeting with Jenkins and O, if one indeed took place. I'm more interested in what happened between O and Cardinal George when they met privately last month.

Posted by: Fed Up at April 21, 2009 7:25 PM


Hal,

Did you ever check out the video? You know I'm gonna stay on you like white on rice.

www.abortionNO.org

Posted by: Ed at April 21, 2009 9:50 PM


Perhaps they'll compromise and let Obama speak but withold the honorary degree.

That would be cool. We'd still have a great platform to show the world the reality of abortion through the great pics and banners of CBR. And the Catholic Church would save some face by denying the degree.

Still, I hope they rescind the invitation and all us pro-lifers show up anyway with all our signage to celebrate the victory.

I'm not holding my breath

Posted by: Ed at April 21, 2009 10:11 PM


Like Angel, I also was alarmed when Obama made the reference to morality in regard to torture. There are many examples of this President manipulating discourse by using the morality argument when it is politically convenient and saying the question is "above his pay grade" when it is not politically convenient.

I ache for the babies, but I feel sorrow, also, for those who will suffer eternal wrath for their deeds. Does any single one of us desire that these people burn in hell forever? We need to pray for their conversion as well as an end to abortion.

"Anyone who wishes to frolic with the devil cannot rejoice with Christ."
--Saint Peter Chrysologus

Posted by: Lisa Graas at April 21, 2009 10:29 PM


"Tonight on my drive home from work I heard about how Obama stated that America has lost it's "moral direction" in the torturing of terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. "

Who is Obama's "moral authority" ? I'd like to know so we Americans can find our moral direction when we lose it the next time. It seems to be happening a lot lately. :(

Posted by: Janet at April 22, 2009 10:34 AM


I think Fr. Jenkins came to DC to check if the robe they made when they "honor" him fits him perfectly...they don't want him to look like a slob on National TV, right??

I'm actually worried on what the WH "response" is for the thousands of people that will be protesting in ND on May 17.

Posted by: RSD at April 22, 2009 3:11 PM


OK folks. For the most part, Obama is a coward.
He picks events that can be structured to validate his narcissistic pathways. He has Rahm and others do the difficult dirty work. He doesn't take open questions from an audience nor from reporters. I do not think he will show up. He would be visiting a Catholic school and not have control of pre screening all the ideologies of the attendees because they are grads. He couldn't tell the pro life grads they couldn't attend commencement.

Posted by: xppc at April 23, 2009 8:57 AM


I see, if he doesn't show up he's a coward, and if he does he's a narcissist. This guy can't win with you, can he?

Do you want him there or not?

Posted by: Hal at April 23, 2009 10:32 AM


I think we can rake Obama over the coals over abortion, but for opposing torture? Come on, you guys know better than that. War is something we should take seriously, and in order to hold up our just war (jus in bello) standards, torture is absolutely inexcusable. Now that these memos have been released we have learned more about the amount of torture we have been doing, and it's a bit appalling. IMO, you have some problems if you can look at pictures of abortion and don't flinch; but you have a similar level of problems if you can read about what we do to foreign people and shrug it off.

Posted by: PiP at April 23, 2009 11:34 AM


"This guy can't win with you, can he?"

Hal,

Obama's disregard for the unborn goes back years and this ND event brings the abortion issue to a head. IMHO, I think ND was short-sighted to have invited Pres. Obama and offer him an honorary degree at this early time in his Presidency for a few reasons.

1) He's not had sufficient time to have accomplished anything substantial while in office.
2) His ideology is contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
3) By inviting the President (Obama) they are diminishing the perceived role of the Catholic Church in their mission as a University.
4) ND is alienating many Catholics who might have considered sending their children to ND.
5) ND will most likely lose the financial support of many Catholics - alumni, current students, and others.
6) ND's Athletic programs - a source of pride for the University for generation - may suffer for lack of funds as well.
7) Their Catholic identity may erode further.

I don't wish any misfortune upon Notre Dame, but I believe the above are real issues they need to consider.
What President Obama will do between now and mid-May is anyone's guess.


Posted by: Janet at April 23, 2009 11:35 AM


So what do you think Obama should do Janet? Would you agree that calling him a coward for declining the invitation is no particularly helpful.

Posted by: Hal at April 23, 2009 11:39 AM


"So what do you think Obama should do Janet? Would you agree that calling him a coward for declining the invitation is no particularly helpful."


Hal,
No, I would NOT consider Pres. Obama a coward in the least, if he didn't attend. I think I've said all along that I think he should bow out gracefully, (he could say) due to the disruption his presence might cause at the graduation. It is a day for the graduates and their families after all.

I need to take a break, maybe we'll catch up later. Have a good day, Hal.

Posted by: Janet at April 23, 2009 11:46 AM


PIP I am not saying that it was okay to torture these prisoners.
But to state that America lost only its moral direction WHEN it began to torture terrorists is missing the mark by about 30 years.
America went down the toilet morally in 1973 when it legalized mothers being able to kill their babies under the guise of "reproductive freedom" and women's emancipation.
The fact that this doesn't even occur to Obama is pitiful and shows that this man who is leader of the world's greatest democracy is a moral pinhead.

Posted by: angel at April 23, 2009 2:55 PM


"I think he should bow out gracefully, (he could say) due to the disruption his presence might cause at the graduation. It is a day for the graduates and their families after all."
------------------------------

I love the idea..it would show that he's trying NOT to be divisive especially to the Catholics who voted for him and those who did not.

BUT that would be wishful thinking...cuz,
why would he care what happens? It's a basic divide and conquer strategy.


Posted by: RSD at April 23, 2009 2:57 PM


Okay Angel that sounds better :)

Posted by: PIP at April 23, 2009 3:06 PM


Moral pinhead. LOL

Posted by: Carla at April 23, 2009 7:04 PM


PIP,

How can you compare an unborn children to khalid Shield Mohamound (who cut off Daniel Pearls head?).

Shame!.

Posted by: Jasper at April 23, 2009 11:41 PM


Jasper,

your approval of torture is something you'll have to reconcile with your Church.

The Vatican has no problem condemning torture and abortion simulteneously.

Posted by: prettyinpink at April 23, 2009 11:54 PM