“Washington is Worth A Mass!” Italians speak out on Obama and Notre Dame
This story is getting more interesting all the time. It seems that the recent strange editorials about Obama in L’Osservatore Romano can be traced directly to the personal opinions of its recently appointed editor-in-chief, Gian Maria Vian, who gave an interview defending his policy on May 19 to an Italian newspaper. I found this late last night at the Mirror of Justice blog:
If for Time Magazine the Pope was “sidestepping Notre Dame” , it may be worth to have a look at what Gian Maria Vian, editor in chief of L’Osservatore Romano said today during an interview with Paolo Rodari for the daily Il Riformista. Here are some quotes:
“Obama has not upset the world (…) His speech at Notre Dame has been respectful toward every position. He tried to engage the debate stepping out from every ideological position and outside every “clash logic”. To this extent his speech is to be appreciated.” (…) “Let me be clear, the Osservatore stands where the American bishops are: we consider abortion a disaster. We must promote, always and at every level a “culture of life”. What I want to stress is that yesterday, on this precise and very delicate issue, the President said that the approval of the new law on abortion is not a priority of his administration. The fact that he said that is very reassuring to me. It also underlines a my own clear belief: Obama is not a pro-abortion president”.
Rodari stressed that judgement on the President’s record is not exactly the same that the USCCB has. Vian answered: “This is our policy, the way we inform. If a national bishops’ conference says something , we report it. But we believe that it is appropriate to give also other relevant elements to judge concerning international information”.
The Osservatore Romano article, was to be sure, a news article, not an editorial. Many Catholics are calling it biased in favor of Obama. Whether it is or not, it’s certainly completely inadequateas reporting.
This was actually the first time the Vatican paper actually commented at all on the Notre Dame controversy. It published the opinions of the American bishops only belatedly, and the latest article made no mention of the massive response of over 75 U.S. bishops individually denuouncing the Notre Dame invitation or that the “predictable” protest actually consisted of an “alternative” graduation ceremony at the Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes on the Notre Dame campus with some 3,000 people in attendance.
Vian didn’t make it clear in the interview what “other relevant elements” his paper uses in making judgments, but none were observable in the article. For instance, it speaks of how Obama “chose” Notre Dame to address the subject of abortion, and of how he himself made the announcement at his press conference that he was stepping back from his commitment to FOCA (nowhere mentioned by name). Nowhere was it mentioned that throughout the controversy, Obama was forced to take these steps because of the outcry of Catholics across the country. His answer at the press conference was specifically to a question about the Notre Dame controversy. American news sources seemed to be agreed that Obama would have to speak about abortion during his speech at Notre Dame because of the outrage and the bishops’ statements and the protests. He is certainly not as much in control as it seems in the OR article.
But there’s more. Rodari put the interview with Vian on his blog, and there have been over a dozen comments so far. I’ve translated a few.
Luigi wrote:
May 19th, 2009, at 9:46 am.The wait-and-see “tactic” of Vian does not convince me at all . . we will see what it leads to, I’m only afraid of disorientation and confusion. . . (why in the world is it in Italy that embryonic life is a “non-negotiable value,” while in the USA “let’s wait and see?”)
Paolo D wrote:
May 19, 2009, 12:05 pm.In February, I cancelled my subscription to L’Osservatore Romano. I consider the direction that Vian has given to L’Osservatore completely negative. You can’t make the Pope’s newspaper a newspaper open to unbelievers who with their disquisitions and philosophies adverse to the Catholic Church, confuse, disorient and scandalize Catholics.
I am just as opposed to the personal and political opinions of Vian which do not reflect the action of the Church, the Pope, and in this case in regard to the support he gives to the most unbelieving and radical President the United States has ever had, pro-abortion, pro gay marriage, a president who limits the religious liberty of a great country, in which I have lived , and which we have always recognized as “The Land of the Free.”
The personal sympathies of Signor Vian for Obama, expressed in L’Osservatore Romano in these past few days, have created a great bewilderment and strong complaints among American Catholics and the majority of their bishops.
Vian should see the preceding post by Rodari in regard to the arrest and brutal and shameful treatment of an elderly 80-year-old American priest, Father Norman Weslin, for having prayed on the campus of the Catholic(!) University of Notre Dame because it gave an honorary degree to Obama.
A day will come when it will no longer be possible to freely proclaim the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Churches. What happened on the campus of the University of ND, no longer Catholic but secularized, will also happen in our de-Christianized Europe. God bless men who are strong and ready for martyrdom like Father Norman Weslin.
One observation: who is that cardinal of the Curia that had the brilliant idea of promoting Vian as Editor in chief L’Osservatore Romano?
Shouldn’t we free ourselves from Vian as quickly as possible?
P.S. After all I would like to get my subscription to L’Osservatore Romano back - as long as it is the true mouthpiece of the Holy Father Benedict XVI.
Guglielmo wrote:
May 20th, 2009, 10:49 am.In regard to that fox Obama, what can I say?
Washington is worth a Mass!!
His speech at Notre Dame is a masterpiece of cerchiobottismo [don't know what this is, something to do with circling; it's not in the dictionary] and diplomacy . . . but it doesn’t convince me one little bit. . .
The reference to the Protestant Henri IV and his famous saying “Paris is worth a Mass” couldn’t be more perfect.
It’s interesting to note that PaoloD cancelled his subscription to OR back in February, even before the Obama flap began. So Italians have thought there was something fishy going on at OR longer than Americans have.
I would say that Italian Catholics are blowing their stacks over this. We here in the U.S. are not alone.
Update: evening of May 22
Here are a few more comments, some not actually about the Osservatore article or the interview, but certainly reflective of the minds of many Italians. They are interesting in light of the fact that a) people are agreed that Obama is (or was) very popular in Europe and b) the talk going around that European Catholics in general and the Holy See in particular are “more balanced and reasonable” on abortion than American Catholics are. I’ll have more to say about that in another post.
Iginio
May 21, 2009, 1:48 p.m.
And let’s learn from the American Catholics, from those who are really believers, I mean the ones who have not let themselves be taken in by a politician who is in vogue. Why is believing in Berlusconi (even when he “acts”), shameful, when believing in Obama is supposed to be meritorious? Let the [cattaotagliatellisti-no idea] answer that.
Montserrat wrote:
May 21, 2009, at 2:19 p.m.L’Osservatore Romano is the newspaper of a foreign state and should maintain a proper and sober style, as it does in an outstanding way under PROFESSOR Vian, especially when it deals with questions involving other countries, otherwise the Vatican would be accused of interfering in the politics of other states. There is the same great sobriety and emphasis on the essential in dealing with Italian affairs.
Luca wrote:
May 21, 2009, 3:00 p.m.There is also the usual meager knowledge in Italy of the American reality. In American universities there is a obligatory conviction that’s all the rage that the instructor should be a “facilitator” who smooths over all differences and helps the students reach a presumed point of convergence. An American girl who is a friend of mine who was studying there was reproved when, as they were discussing the subject of abortion, she insisted on defining it as unacceptable; she was reproved because, by persisting in her attitude, she would keep them from reaching a compromise. Here it was Political Correctness has led to, to not calling things by their name. When this has been said, we must doff our hats to all those American Catholics who have had the courage to oppose the usual Smiling Politician of the Day who presents himself with persuasive tones (Does this remind you of something? But why if it was Berlusconi who did this, he was the devil, and if Obama he is the Messiah? Can someone explain that to me?)
For signora Montserrat : no one doubts the worthiness of Professor Vian, but keep in mind that there are also other scholars, no less cultivated and prepared than he is, who, while being objectively Catholic, and “not of the left’ (and without flaunting it; enough to be suspected as such), are prevented from a career for which they are perfectly cut out. Of ambiguous people (and therefore NOT evangelical) there are even too many; people used to say that to be “progressives” the Gospel should be understood in a radical way and without compromises, now, instead, in order to be “progressives,” we must be relativists and opportunists. Enough with this ideological blackmail. It’s time to change. Dialogue is born from identity, not from becoming colorless.
guglielmo returns with:
May 20th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
[the first part of this post dealt with other matters, such as the complaints about posts in English on the site]
. . . I continue to say that Obama is a fox, he has duped so many Catholics in the United States by the color of his skin, and well-crafted little speeches, [but] you should know that in Italy he would not have won . . . not, note carefully, because of the color of his skin, but because the Italian people are tired of hearing the abortion is a right and the embryo is not a person, even those who don’t go to Church!
Italian and American Catholics don’t seem that far apart to me.
