As some here may've heard, President Obama will be speaking at my alma mater's commencement on Sunday. As some may've also heard, there are those who oppose his being allowed to speak. Today's NYT has a story on this controversy, in which Alan Keyes, unsurprisingly, has gotten involved.
The public debate has been framed as one over the thorny issue of abortion. That framing obscures the larger issue. As I previously noted, Gov. Reagan signed a bill greatly liberalizing CA abortion law in 1967, yet no one in the Church hierarchy objected to his speaking at the 1981 commencement. The real issues here are religious pluralism and the extent to which intrachurch dissent will be tolerated.
Since Obama is not a Catholic, he really doesn't have much to offer on the latter issue. He could, however, say a great deal about the former issue. In doing so, he could refer to a Papal Mass that was held in Grant Park in 1979 and to a battle that took place between Notre Dame students and KKK members in 1924.
I already addressed the former topic in detail a few weeks ago. Borrowing John Paul II's theme from his Grant Park homily would be perfect for this occasion. I do not know if there is any other American who can better relate to the "E Pluribus Unum" theme that the Pontiff used that day. Having grown up in Hawaii and Indonesia as the son of a white mother from Kansas and a father from Kenya, Obama understands the concept of "Out of many, one" far better than most of us ever will.
The 1924 fracas, in some ways, goes even more to the core of the real issue at stake on Sunday. Notre Dame was not always the comfortable and widely respected institution that it became in the postwar era. There was a time when it was distrusted in some quarters as a bastion of an oddly alien strain of "Papism." The nighttime fisticuffs between students and invading Klansmen was merely the most obvious manifestation of a distrust that persisted in some quarters for decades. Well into the 1970's, Notre Dame football teams still occasionally faced barrages of fish, bottles, and other objects at road games.
Obama has always prided himself as a student of history. There is plenty of history to be mined for Sunday's speech. The Al Smith presidential campaign of 1928 reminds us that it took many years for Catholics to be widely accepted in this country. JFK had to overcome that lingering distrust in 1960. Obama had to face similar issues last year.
There have been many struggles in this country's long and difficult history, and many of them (e.g. the relative power of labor and capital and the relative power of Congress and the Executive) will never really be resolved. There seems, however, to have been considerable progress over time in moving towards our national ideal that all of us are created equal. It took 9 score and 4 years for this country to elect a Catholic president, and it took another 2 score and 8 years after that before an AA president was elected.
That progress would never have taken place had there not been a gradual willingness of Americans to accept, however reluctantly, this country's incredible diversity. The essential progress on this front that still needs to take place will not occur if there is not further willingness to accept diversity. Having our first AA president speak at this country's most well-known Catholic university is an obvious step forward in such acceptance. Having him politely but firmly remind us of a need for greater tolerance could be an even more obvious step.
To put it another way, Obama has a golden opportunity on Sunday to demonstrate the small-mindedness and the foolishness of one sector of his detractors. He has been blessed w/ uniquely inept political opposition, and this speech offers him the chance to demonstrate their small-mindedness and their foolishness. Obama has skillfully played the art of political jujitsu in the past, and he should do so now.
I have no advice to offer on whether or how Obama should address the abortion issue. I know, however, that he needs to expressly address the tolerance issue. A university that prides itself in its national scope can and must be a place in which a president who differs from Church teaching on a volatile issue can and must remind us that our society will never come close to meeting its founding ideals unless those of divergent views are given a chance to express themselves.
I hope and I pray that Obama takes advantage of this opportunity.