The liturgical crimes committed at the University of Notre Dame on Sunday reached an historical apex with the appearance of the president. Simply stated, the university abandoned its long held prestige as America’s premier Catholic University and exemplar of the faith. It offered a platform to espouse toleration, diversity, reconciliation, ideological problem solving, change, fair-minded words, and not least; a defense of efforts to abate global warming.
All of this was offered in a venue noted for single minded devotion to the one true God. God, who has stated, in written language, his concepts of life as He requires. From that platform we heard instead, a political thank you to those, who in denial of their faith, offered support for a man diametrically opposed to the principals which have formed the identity of the church for centuries. We observed a purely secular figure allowed to insert his opinions into the internal workings of an allegedly viable faith and put, by his presence, his imprimatur on doctrine clearly in opposition to that church’s teachings. Teachings well covered not just in the Catholic Church, but in the history of God Almighty.
By offering his laundry list of pop culture phrasing, as noted above, he urged the audience to take the easy path and compromise. Where was the speaker’s “open heart” when millions of unborn children were mercilessly slain in the mother’s womb as he pushed legislation to continue the practice? What “fair-minded” words did he offer to prevent the late-term slaughter of innocents? Most important, where is the word “compromise” in the Bible? It is alien to that noble work. It does not appear in any verse, in any chapter, in any book. (ref. “Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance”) In short, compromise is not a part of the Christian ethic.
Glib speech, with a teleprompter assist, is a secular accomplishment which should not be confused with an inner spiritual disposition. Common currency of the progressive leftist is to use the weasel words of deception to paint a picture of compassion, caring, acceptance of every view to appease and gain support for their own personal agenda. One would think that it would be readily recognized in an academic setting and rejected. One would be wrong since the audience apparently gullibly accepted every word with applause and awe. The “awe” is misplaced to describe any thing other than reverential fear. Those who willingly applauded his remarks should be in awe; not of the speaker but of God who was the object of the offense.
There is no such thing as a “twenty-first” century Christian. God does not measure time. If you have taken on the name of Jesus Christ you have assumed His beliefs, principals, grace, mercy, and should be on a constant search to expand your knowledge of His desire for you. If you lack wisdom, you are directed to ask Him and He has promised to furnish it without criticism. (See James 1:5) Situational ethics are not appropriate to second guess the intent of the Master. In this case they are simply a tool in the traveling case of a snake oil salesman.
The principal ingredient in a recipe for a “bloodless coup” is capitulation. It is the soul of politics but an anathema to faith which requires unswerving devotion. Those who offered their presence and their lives in protest to the travesty at Notre Dame are worthy of our praise and our deep respect. Directed by a proper higher power, they went the distance to express their disgust and attempt to educate others on that which is true. They chose not to ignore the verities of their belief. To capitulate then becomes a denial. Those who carefully read their scripture realize that denial of previously acknowledged acceptance constitutes the unforgivable sin. May God extend His mercy to Notre Dame.
In His abiding love,