Al Smith Dinner – FEAST OF ST. MAXIMILLIAN KOLBE -by Cardinal Dolan
[with HSH [comments] …]
Last week I was out in Anaheim for the annual Supreme Convention of the Knights of Columbus. It was, as usual, a most uplifting and inspirational event.
In his rousing address to the thousands of delegates, representing 1.8 million knights, Dr. Carl Anderson, the Supreme Knight, exhorted us to a renewed sense of faithful citizenship, encouraging us not to be shy about bringing the values of faith to the public square. This duty, he reminded us, came not just from the fact that we are Catholic, but also from the fact that we are loyal Americans.
He then went on to announce a promising initiative of the Knights of Columbus to foster civility in politics. Quoting a very recent study, he noted that over 80% of Americans are fed up with the negativity, judgmentalism, name-calling, and mudslinging of our election-year process, and eagerly want a campaign of respect, substance, amity — civility! [I don't think even one person has argued against this. And I'm not sure if the claim of K of C authority is warranted. We just want some respect for the millions of babies that are being killed. Calling abortion wrong both in season and out of season is not negativity or judgmentalism, etc.]
For seven decades, the Al Smith Dinner here in New York has been an acclaimed example of such civility in political life. As you may know, every four years, during the presidential election campaign, the Al Smith Dinner is the venue of history, as it is the only time outside of the presidential debates that the two presidential candidates come together, at the invitation of the Al Smith Foundation, through the archbishop of New York, for an evening of positive, upbeat, patriotic, enjoyable civil discourse ["discourse"]. This year, both President Obama and Governor Romney have accepted our invitation. I am grateful to them.
The evening has always had a special meaning, as it is named after Governor Al Smith, the first Catholic nominated, in 1928, as a candidate for president, who was viciously maligned because of his own Catholic faith. Smith was known as The Happy Warrior, because while he fought fiercely for what he believed was right, he never sought to demonize those who opposed him. [People can do that on their own. No help needed.] And, the dinner named in his honor is truly life-affirming as it raises funds to help support mothers in need and their babies (both born and unborn) of any faith, or none at all. [It has always been the policy of the Archdiocese to support, for instance, houses for unwed mothers, while at the same time giving abortion referrals. This is not a case of double-effect either. Nor is there any "duress".]
The Al Smith Dinner has never been without controversy, since, as Carl Anderson reminded us, politics can inspire disdain and negativity as well as patriotism and civility.
This year is surely no exception [But there is quite a difference this year, isn't there?]: I am receiving stacks of mail protesting the invitation to President Obama (and by the way, even some objecting to the invitation to Governor Romney).
The objections are somewhat heightened this year, since the Catholic community in the United States has rightly expressed vigorous criticism of the President’s support of the abortion license, and his approval of mandates which radically intruded [and continue to intrude] upon Freedom of Religion. We bishops, including yours truly, have been unrelenting in our opposition to these issues, and will continue to be. [Let's see...]
So, my correspondents ask, how can you justify inviting the President? Let me try to explain.
For one, an invitation to the Al Smith Dinner is not an award, or the provision of a platform to expound views at odds with the Church [But it is an honor, right?]. It is an occasion of conversation ["conversation"]; it is personal, not partisan. [We are always personal, never partisan. Nor is this a matter of Catholic "opinion". This is about the Natural Law.]
Two, the purpose of the Al Smith Dinner is to show both our country and our Church at their best: people of faith gathered in an evening of friendship, civility, and patriotism, to help those in need, not to endorse either candidate [That would be nice if the politicians were only politicians, that is, one arguing about the need for more infrastructure, and the other talking about the overriding need for fixing the economy. But this is about millions of innocent lives being killed off and the ongoing oppression of the Catholic Church, right here, right now.]. Those who started the dinner sixty-seven years ago believed that you can accomplish a lot more by inviting folks of different political loyalties to an uplifting evening, rather than in closing the door to them. [Post WWII wasn't about aborting the nation and world, was it? I think there was a baby-boom at the time.]
Three, the teaching of the Church, so radiant in the Second Vatican Council, is that the posture of the Church towards culture, society, and government is that of engagement [the constant rhetoric, even in the present note, is precisely that the engagement is lifted for the night] and dialogue [not only is there not dialogue on this night, the Obama administration called in Cardinal Dolan in the past only after all was said and done.]. In other words, it’s better to invite than to ignore, more effective to talk together than to yell from a distance, more productive to open a door than to shut one. [Hey! Great! But what's happening on this night? and what's otherwise happening?] Our recent popes have been examples of this principle, receiving dozens of leaders with whom on some points they have serious disagreements [Takes a lot of nerve to say that. Look, Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI receive such horrific people only to tell them what's what. Forget the jocularity and fun evenings and even dialogue. They are just told flat out what the truth is in all charity. Period.]. Thus did our present Holy Father graciously receive our current President of the United States [More to that than that. Really.]. And, in the current climate, we bishops have maintained that we are open to dialogue with the administration to try and resolve our differences. [Great!] What message would I send if I refused to meet with the President? [In other words, what the Cardinal saying, and this is very sad indeed, and I'm only recognizing this as I'm writing this now, is that the President has refused to dialogue about anything on any serious level with Cardinal Dolan, such an evening being as far as Obama will go. The Cardinal gets no dialogue. Nice words from Obama on that evening will just be spitting in the face of the Cardinal, and, through him, on the face of the Church. Meanwhile, Obama can claim to be great friends with the Catholic Church.]
Finally, an invitation to the Al Smith Dinner in no way indicates a slackening in our vigorous promotion of values we Catholic bishops believe to be at the heart of both gospel and American values, particularly the defense of human dignity, fragile life, and religious freedom. [Happy to hear that, but, I mean, it sure does seem to indicate a relativization of all important matters.] In fact, one could make the case that anyone attending the dinner, even the two candidates, would, by the vibrant [vibrant: abortion stops a beating heart. Dead. Cold. Not vibrant.] solidarity [with who? with what?] of the evening, be reminded that America is at her finest when people, free to exercise their religion, assemble on behalf of poor women and their babies, born and unborn, in a spirit of civility and respect. [There can be the exact opposite effect: "These Catholics really don't give a damn about life. They give a great pre-election photo-op though!"]
Some have told me the invitation is a scandal. [I agree.] That charge weighs on me, as it would on any person of faith, but especially a pastor, who longs to give good example, never bad. So, I apologize if I have given such scandal. [It's not scheduled until 18 October, very near Super Tuesday. You can still back out.] I suppose it’s a case of prudential judgment: would I give more scandal by inviting the two candidates, or by not inviting them? [In view of all the comments above, it would be a scandal to invite them.]
No matter what you might think of this particular decision, might I ask your prayers for me and my brother bishops and priests who are faced with making these decisions, so that we will be wise and faithful shepherds as God calls us to be? [Sure. That's what HSH is all about. Pray for me, too.]
In the end, I’m encouraged by the example of Jesus [Uh-oh...], who was blistered by his critics for dining with those some considered sinners [Can any true Christian think that Obama is a Christian in good standing? Let's just say it. The "sinners" Jesus ate with were no longer sinners. They converted and were His followers, repentant and now saints. They were not obstinately persecuting the Church and were not maniacs about aborting millions of children. Really.]; and by the recognition that, if I only sat down with people who agreed with me, and I with them, or with those who were saints, I’d be taking all my meals alone. [Just. Wow. Nobody but nobody is saying any of that. Ask what the evening is about. Ask what dialogue is about. It has been said a thousand times that the evening has nothing to do with serious dialogue or instruction in the truth in all charity for that matter. So, then, what is it about, a very credible photo-op for Obama? 18 October is the date. Plenty of time to rescind the invitation.]



Accompany me, Father George David Byers, S.S.L., S.T.D., as I begin life as a Catholic Priest-Hermit by choice. Holy Souls Hermitage is dedicated to the sanctification of my fellow priests, bishops, deacons & seminarians going through the purgatory of this life or the next. Prayer and sacrifice go up, of course, for both Benedict XVI and the next Successor of Saint Peter. 






So in the name of a Catholic politician who was “was viciously maligned because of his own Catholic faith” Dolan invites Obama – the Chief maligner of Catholics? Card Dolan’s red cap has carried a ? over it in my opinion. Once he did this. All question disappeared. I’m about ready to go sedevacantist up in here.
I don’t know about you but I’m sick of “dialogue”. Only when both parties have good will and are open to the truth can any dialogue be fruitful. Obama and as far as I’m concerned most politicians on the other side as well couldn’t care less about the truth and are not open to a real reasonable debate. Like Louis Veuillot said over a hundred and fifty years ago “reason” itself has basically been killed in the West. This ties directly in with natural law since outside of certain Catholic circles it is pretty much a quaint theory no longer considered valid or even provable at all. Reason is dead. We cannot win hearts with Reason and reasonable arguments until we convince them that reason itself is able to know the Truth up to a point.
I’m convinced the Church needs to be unapologetically Catholic, period, close the book. People are starving for the Truth and with Reason a dead letter the only way to win hearts is to show people saints; real living saints.
Question; will the media even notice that the Al Smith dinner has these two candidates present together at the same table? The media won’t even use the term “pro-life”, with them it’s “anti-abortion”.
Jesus saw it before you. Sedevacantism has nothing to do with this. We must stay the course in the Church. Yikes!
Hello Carolyn— I’m guessing they will make a huge deal out of it non stop for those few weeks between the dinner and the election. Watch for the editing of soundbites put all in a row.
So, is C Dolan going to apologize to Kerry and Clinton, whom I believe were uninvited in years past because of their anti-catholic stances? Maybe in the interest of fairness he could send them invitations too so they don’t feel left out.
Prudential judgements should be exactly that, prudent. This term cannot be used to justify any action that is not intrinsically evil. The point is that many Catholics do not think it was prudent, but scandalous. Just as going alone to dinner with another man’s spouse, by itself is not intrinsically evil, it is not prudent, but scandalous. Having an official meeting with her at work on the other hand is appropriate. Cardinal Dolan did not choose the right forum for dialog and it is downright scandalous.
Fraternizing with the enemy at a dinner party is scandalous especially when you were the one who personally invited him. I believe the problem is that many Catholics don’t think President Obama is a enemy of the Church as evidenced by their voting in 2008. So what was the Fortnight of Freedom all about anyway? I believe many Catholics don’t try to practice their faith 100% and when the Bishops do things like this it somehow justifies their own personal lack of the virtue of prudence. Come on, Jesus dining with sinners cannot be compared to Jesus leaving the Disciples to attend a gala with King Herod.
+JMJ+
Does anyone know what proportion of Bishops(USCCB) voted for Obama in 2008?
Thanks.
I don’t know about that, Todd, but I would sure like to see an exit poll for bishops and priests and Catholic laity, and then also for all denominations, other religions, etc., for 2012. Yikes!
Fr.,
Thank you for the piece, I think Cardinal Dolan is gravely confused about several matters.
Regardless, I have a couple of questions.
You said “It has always been the policy of the Archdiocese to support, for instance, houses for unwed mothers, while at the same time giving abortion referrals.” Am I reading this correctly? It seems to say the Archdiocese of NY has supported organizations who refer women to abortion supporting groups/organizations. Is my understanding correct?
You also said “The “sinners” Jesus ate with were no longer sinners. They converted and were His followers, repentant and now saints.” I’d like to be able to point to some sources, preferably in the Magisterium, that I can use for support when pointing this fact out to others. Can you provide any help?
Thank you and God Bless
Thanks, Joe.
Reconciliatio et paenitentia would be a good one. This was a favorite theme of one of my favorite Supreme Pontiffs, Pope John Paul II. That particular piece was a follow up on Dives in Misericordia (which title always reminds me of the Redemptorist church just down the street from Saint Mary Majors on the Via Merulana.
You might want to read the story of the prodigal son in Luke 15,11-32 first, however, along with — to the point — the first few verses of Luke 15.
The prodigal was the topic for a term paper for a course on historical criticism at the Pontifical Biblical Institute with the ferocious, ever gentle, Augustinian scholar, Father Prosper Grech, O.S.A., and again the topic for another paper for an independent study on methodology with the dean for exegesis at the same insititute at the time, Father Jean-Noël Aletti, S.J., and then again the topic for the “tesina” for the licentiate in Sacred Scripture at the same Institute, this time with the Rector of the time, and then Secretary for the Pontifical Biblical Commission, the great Father Klemens Stock, S.J. I had intended to go on for the S.S.D. at the same institute with now Cardinal Albert Vanhoye, S.J., but that’s another, great story. Sorry about that. Got carried away with memories!
Note that the meal for the prodigal was one of celebration for a son already brought back to life by the Father. Note that the story is an answer to those who complain that Jesus is eating with, you know, sinners.
You might want to look up what is said by the little fellow in Jericho, and what Jesus says about him. Great story, that.
That same goes for what happens with the Apostle and Evangelist, canonized Saint Matthew himself, when Jesus calls him and dines with him.
Just to get you started. I’m sure you’ll find more references and cross references in those encyclicals and in any good Catholic Study Bible.
And remember, Joe, to read Dei Verbum 10. Great stuff about Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Sacred Magistium standing together like a tripod. Kick out any leg and the other two fall.
=====
On your other question, abortion referrals were the policy of the time. This goes back some years, when federal medicaid funds started to be funnelled through state regulations which demanded that abortion referrals be provided to women seeking those referrals from the Catholic hospitals. A key figure in all this told me that it was only material cooperation to provide a piece of paper on which was written the number of abortion friendly people. I said that, instead, this was precisely the occasion for a rescue to be done. Instead of pushing the woman toward an abortion (implying the Church’s blessing, formal cooperation), one should not back down, speaking of adoption, the preciousness of all life, etc. The respose to that was this: “Well, George, what do you want us to do? Close the doors of the hospitals?” But, hey! If you have information that regards an about-face, I would love to hear about it. I’m sure a number of other (arch)dioceses would be quite interested in that as well, not to mention the CDF.
Blech.
I’d like to see someone develop a “Dead Baby Ticker” (like the national debt ticker) to run during the entire time the good Cardinal is “dialogueing” with Herr Obama. Pray that God gives our bishops courage to stand up to this. Men & women were martyred when they faced evil…a “disinvite” to the president is in order…and it’s not even heroic to do so.