I would like Fr. Burroughs to release a statement on THIS!

Perhaps as the ND president did


www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2017/09/11/amy-barrett-judicial-nominee-religion-242550

delete "catholic dogma" and insert "any other dogma."

Then stand back and watch the blowback.

Too POLITICAL for Father B to comment.

Hope he's not waiting on his former school, Georgetown, to say something, Is he on the phone conferring with his peers ?
USNWR says we're a 'National LAC', so no time to consult with anyone about a story with national consequences.
I'm afraid he'll let Fr. Jenkins ND statement stand alone, Disappointing.

feel free to edit my misspelling of Fr Boroughs name.

I stand by the remainder of my posts.

I found the article to be a thoughtful one, even though the author had a particular point of view. The reality, of course, is that there is a dynamic tension here, between the laws of a pluralistic democracy where everyones views are allowed, and what the law itself has to say. I thought that this comment from "Lilou" in the Times said it well;

Not good for me, good for all of us! Muslim, Jew, Catholic, Conservative Christian, Wiccan - the issue is the same with all, even though our personal bias may lead us to a different conclusion.

Perhaps you ought to read about the nomination of Justice Brandeis, 
bir.brandeis.edu/bitstream/handle/10192/31435/LDB100Dalin.pdf?sequence=1

In which the President of Harvard is characterized as a virulent anti-Semite.  (Which he indeed was.  Perhaps Harvard ought remove his name from one of its residence houses.)

 

When I was a kid, my father was my Little League coach.  There was a kid on the team who was kind of annoying and some of the kids did not want to warm up with him.  My father told me I had to play catch with him because we were part of a team. NHteamer is on our team, and he is desperately trying to get people to play with him on this thread, so I'll join in just a bit.

NH--If we had a judicial nominee who practices Islam and has written that her faith should inform her decision making and, at times,  require recusal from cases, I think that we would expect Senators to question on that in a hearing if, for no other reason, than to make sure that the potential jurist will be available to hear a wide variety of cases.  Professor Barrett's almost thirty year old coauthored law review piece (which I skimmed) seems to say that a Catholic jurist cannot participate in many (but not all) parts of capital cases.  Reading the piece, one would conclude that the same thought process would apply to abortion cases.  I don't think that it is inappropriate to explore the issue of the types of cases that would necessitate recusal and to secure a commitment from the nominee that she would do so.  This is less of an issue on the Court of Appeals than on the Supreme Court as there are many judges in each circuit and a recusal does not work much mischief, but it ought to be questioned.  

Professor Barrett answered the questions deftly and committed to following precedent and the recusal rules. That should have been enough.  Senator Feinstein went too far and her after the fact explanations made the problem worse and exposed her to appropriate criticism.

Now to take us to your original topic, i.e. the need for our illustrious president to release a statement on this, having previously released a statement on Charlottesville.  I am sure that you agree that Father B cannot be expected to comment on every Washington dustup and I am certain that you are not suggesting that there is a moral equivalence between Senator Feinstein's over the line questioning and the actions of torch bearing, racist, anti Semites rioting (and causing death) in the streets of a college town in Virginia over the decision of the owner of a statue to take it down.

There would have been nothing wrong with Father B issuing a statement about the Barrett matter.  He could have taken the opportunity to issue a thoughtful piece about the intersection of religion and public duty in American life but that would be a little more complicated than simply condemning racism.

Finally, you did not say it, so let me remind you of one more thing.  You are looking for a Holy Cross official to stand up for a conservative Catholic judicial nominee.  I know one who did and I know that you believe that he was the greatest President in the history of the college.  

www.c-span.org/video/?21697-1/thomas-confirmation-hearing-day-6-part-2