Washington D.C., Sep 7, 2017 / 09:25 am (CNA/EWTN News).- A Catholic nominee to a federal circuit court faced hostile questions about her faith from U.S. senators on Wednesday, prompting outrage from Catholic leaders.
“This smacks of the worst sort of anti-Catholic bigotry,” Dr. Chad Pecknold, a theology professor at The Catholic University of America, told CNA of questions asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) of Amy Comey Barrett, a Catholic lawyer nominated to be a federal circuit court judge.
“Senator Feinstein’s shockingly illegitimate line of questioning sends the message that Catholics need not apply as federal judges,” added Ashley McGuire, senior fellow with The Catholic Association.
WATCH: Sen. Feinstein to appeals court nominee Amy Barrett, @NotreDame law prof/#Catholic mother of 7: “The dogma lives loudly within you.” pic.twitter.com/mpDgNZGRsa
— Jason Calvi (@JasonCalvi) September 6, 2017
Barrett, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday at her confirmation hearing to be a United States Circuit Judge for the Seventh U.S. Court of Appeals.
In the past, Barrett had clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and has twice been honored as “Distinguished Professor of the Year” at Notre Dame.
However, as she appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, some of the pointed questions directed at her by Democratic senators focused on how her Catholic faith would influence her decisions as a judge on cases of abortion and same-sex marriage.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), ranking member of the committee, told Barrett outright that her Catholic beliefs were concerning, as they may influence her decisions as a judge on abortion rights.
“Why is it that so many of us on this side have this very uncomfortable feeling that dogma and law are two different things, and I think whatever a religion is, it has its own dogma. The law is totally different,” Feinstein said.
“And I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that’s of concern.”
Feinstein began her round of questions by personally complimenting Barrett that she was “amazing to have seven children and do what you do,” but then called her “controversial” when she began to address Barrett’s record in law, “because you have a long history of believing that your religious beliefs should prevail” over the law.
“You’re controversial because many of us that have lived our lives as women really recognize the value of finally being able to control our reproductive systems,” she said. “And Roe entered into that, obviously.”
Barrett repeatedly said that as a judge, she would uphold the law of the land and would not let her religious beliefs inappropriately alter her judicial decisions.
At the beginning of the hearing, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chair of the committee, asked Barrett: “When is it proper for a judge to put their religious views above applying the law?”
“Never,” Barrett answered. “It’s never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions, whether they derive from faith or anywhere else, on the law.”
Feinstein’s “anti-Catholic bigotry” in her questions to Barrett “is especially chilling because it defames and slanders such an accomplished woman in the legal guild,” Pecknold said.
Feinstein “reveals herself to be the sort of ideologue who never considers the substance of her interlocutor’s actual legal decisions, but rather projects false ideologies onto everyone who disagrees with her party on any point,” Pecknold charged.
In 1998, Barrett co-authored an article in the Marquette Law Review with then-Notre Dame law professor John Garvey, now the president of The Catholic University of America. The article focused on Catholic judges in death penalty cases.
Catholic judges, if their consciences oppose the administering of the death penalty, should, in accordance with federal law, recuse themselves from capital cases where a jury recommends a death sentence, Garvey and Barrett wrote. They should also recuse themselves from cases without a jury where they have the option of granting a death sentence, they wrote.
On Wednesday, Barrett was asked repeatedly about this article, published 19 years ago, and whether she still agreed with it today. Barrett answered that she was still a third-year law student during the article’s publication, and “was very much the junior partner” in writing it with her professor.
“Would I, or could I, say that sitting here today, that article in its every particular, reflects how I think about these questions today with, as you say, the benefit of 20 years of experience and also the ability to speak solely in my own voice? No, it would not,” she answered Senator Grassley’s opening question on the article.
She added that she still upholds “the core proposition of that article which is that if there is ever a conflict between a judge’s personal conviction and that judge’s duty under the rule of law, that it is never, ever permissible for that judge to follow their personal convictions in the decision of a case rather than what the law requires.”
Senator Grassley asked her later how she would recuse herself as a judge in a case, if necessary.
“Senator, I would fully and faithfully apply the law of recusal, including the federal recusal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 455, the canons of judicial conduct,” she replied, but added that “I can’t think of any cases or category of cases in which I would feel obliged to recuse on grounds of conscience.”
Garvey, in a Thursday op-ed in the Washington Examiner, explained the article’s conclusion in cases where judges face a conflict of interest between their own conscience and the law.
“Law professors less scrupulous than Prof. Barrett have suggested that sometimes judges should fudge or bend (just a little bit) laws that every right-thinking person would find immoral. In our article we rejected that course of action,” he said, pointing instead to the federal recusal statute.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) then grilled Barrett over her use of the term “orthodox Catholic” in the article, implying that she did not think persons who dissent from Church teaching on marriage to be real Catholics.
“I’m a product of 19 years of Catholic education. And every once in a while, Holy Mother the Church has not agreed with a vote of mine. And has let me know,” he told Barrett. “You use a term in that article – or you both use a term in that article — I’d never seen before. You refer to ‘orthodox Catholics.’ What’s an orthodox Catholic?”
Barrett pointed to a footnote in the article that admitted it was “an imperfect term,” and that the article was talking about the hypothetical case of “a judge who accepted the Church’s teaching” on the death penalty and had a “conscientious objection” to it.
“Do you consider yourself an orthodox Catholic?” Durbin asked Barrett, who replied that “I am a faithful Catholic,” adding that “my personal Church affiliation or my religious belief would not bear in the discharge of my duties as a judge.”
Durbin then said that “there are many people who might characterize themselves ‘orthodox Catholics,’ who now question whether Pope Francis is an ‘orthodox Catholic.’ I happen to think he’s a pretty good Catholic.”
“I agree with you,” Barrett replied, to which Durbin responded, “Good. Then that’s good common ground for us to start with.”
He also asked Barrett how she would rule on a case involving a “same-sex marriage,” given the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent from the 2013 Obergefell decision that legalized same-sex marriage.
“From beginning to end, in every case, my obligation as a judge would be to apply the rule of law, and the case that you mentioned would be applying Obergefell, and I would have no problem adhering to it,” she said.
Durbin’s questions of Barrett’s faith were also disturbing, Pecknold said.
“So faithful Catholic is interchangeable with Orthodox Catholic. The fact that one definition is acceptable to Sen Durbin but one is not tells you that he thinks one can dissent from the Church’s teaching and be orthodox and faithful.”
“But why is a politician interested in that question when the only concern should be whether the nominee is a superb interpreter of the law? How has this become a religious inquisition rather than an adjudication of legal competence for the bench?” he asked.
“I submit that the real dogmatists in the room are the ones mounting an inquisition against one of the nation’s great legal scholars.”
Other Catholic leaders decried the questioning of Barrett’s faith.
“Such bigotry has no place in our politics and reeks of an unconstitutional religious test for qualification to participate in the judiciary. What these Senators did today was truly reprehensible,” said Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org.
“Imagine the universal outrage had a nominee of a different faith been asked the same questions; there is clearly a double standard at work,” commented Maureen Ferguson, senior policy advisor with The Catholic Association.
Garvey, in his op-ed for the Examiner, wrote that “I suspect what really troubled” Durbin and Feinstein “was that, as a Catholic, her [Barrett’s] pro-life views might extend beyond criminal defendants to the unborn.”
“If true, the focus on our law review article is all the more puzzling,” he wrote. “After all, our point was that judges should respect the law, even laws they disagree with. And if they can’t enforce them, they should recuse themselves.”
[…]
Sure. It’s all about acceptance, compassion, inclusion and freedom from bullying. Give me a break.
Except when the “acceptance” and “inclusion” would include Catholics who want to actually be Catholic.
Mitre Dame celebrating Pride month is disgusting. They no longer a Catholic Institution.
NOTRE DAMN UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATORS admonish critics to consult the bible regarding homosexual activity. How about this:
Noah and Ham (Genesis 9:20–27), Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:1–11), Levitical laws condemning same-sex relationships (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13), two words in two Second Testament vice lists (1 Corinthians 6:9–10; 1 Timothy 1:10), and Paul’s letter to the Romans (Romans 1:26–27).
As for research findings, apparently not mentioned in the Notre Damn website puff piece, how about this “trinity” of findings:
FIRST, one recent study in the mix is a review of two hundred peer-reviewed studies on sexual orientation and gender identity. The conclusion: scientific evidence does NOT support the popular notion that “gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex” (Mayer/McHugh, The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology and Society, Ethics and Public Policy Center, No. 50, Fall 2016).
SECOND, more recent research into the genome itself points to some genetic markers—it does NOT find a gay gene—AND concludes that these markers do NOT account for same-sex behavior. https://news.yahoo.com/no-gay-gene-study-finds-180220669.html
From the news release:
Five of the genetic markers were “significantly” associated with same-sex behavior, the researchers said, but even these are FAR FROM being predictive of a person’s sexual preferences. “We scanned the entire human genome and found a handful – five to be precise – of locations that are clearly associated with whether a person reports in engaging in same-sex sexual behavior,” said Andrea Ganna, a biologist at the Institute of Molecular Medicine in Finland who co-led the research. He said these have “a very small effect” and, combined, explain “considerably LESS THAN 1% of the variance in the self-reported same-sex sexual behavior.”
This means that non-genetic factors – such as environment, upbringing, personality, nurture – are far more significant in influencing a person’s choice [!] of sexual partner, just as with most other personality, behavioral and physical human traits, the researchers said.
THIRD, even a relatively innocuous modern addiction—overindulgence in digital and virtual reality games—is found to produce corresponding neuro-chemical and possibly cellular changes in the brain itself, e.g., dopamine which is responsible for reward-driven behavior. A recent study completed at University College London (using MRI technology) strongly implies that a habit of lying [e.g., university website puff pieces?] tends to suppress the part of the brain (the amygdala) that responds emotionally to a “slippery slope” pattern of small and then larger lies (Garrett/Ariely/ Laxxaro, Nature Neuroscience Journal, October 24, 2016; reported by Erica Goode, New York Times, October 25, 2016).
Good observations, and if they were honest and open minded about considering how ideology reinforces habituated behavior, they would consider the significance of the fact that 98 percent of homosexuals are pro-abortion. And if they do not, they would do some soul-searching as to the ideological make-up of their beliefs that coaused them to not consider the meaning of this fact.
And one more comment about genetics. The self-evident fact that homsexuals have fewer children than non-homosexuals would provide evidence that genetic factors, if they ever existed, would diminish over time form the gene pool, not increase.
Edward, and yet this hasn’t happened. The mystery of sexual orientation continues. It must be more complex than we think.
Excellent, thorough response
“…God only created this binary.”
Desperation time in trying to find Bibical support for mental illness and lifeless sodomy.
The Holy Spirit has warned us about those who “tamper with God’s word” (2 Cor 4,2) or do “abide in the teaching of Christ” (2 John 9).
Question for Notre Dame and their alumni: What is more important, fidelity to the faith or the football team?
I am sickened and saddened to see the continual moral and theological decline of Catholic institutions, including the Church and its leadership. Wolves have entered into the sheepfold and are devouring the flock. Where are the shepherds of Christ who will defend and care for the flock? False shepherds have infiltrated the Church, leading the flock astray, abusing the flock, stealing from the flock. Demons appearing as angels of light have seduced the minds of shepherds and sheep, leading them away from the Truth that sets men free, the Truth that is the only way to the Father. They twist God’s Word to conform to the passions of the flesh and the god of this age, instead of choosing to be transformed by the pure Word of God into the image and likeness of God. With words and teaching disguised as Truth, they slowly poison the hearts and minds of the flock. Those who are poisoned remain within the flock, even leading it, destroying the Church from within, for a little leaven leavens the whole lump.
“For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools…. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” (Romans 1:18-32)
“But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you, ‘In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions. It is these who case divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.” (Jude 17-18)
“‘I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God. Remember, then, what you received and heard. keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you.'” (Jesus Christ to the Church in Sardis, Revelation 3:1-6).
“Where are the shepherds of Christ who will defend and care for the flock?” We have one here in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois.
Equality for the LGBTQ group? Why doesn’t the LGBTQ group start with an in-depth study of those who are like themselves? With such tendencies who feel trapped and don’t want that condition. And then those who love their situation which is condemned by the Creator. I remember a guy who I had often seen at Mass who committed suicide because he had these tendencies and didn’t want them. I know of a young boy at this time who has rejected God and says he plans to commit suicide because he doesn’t want to be gay. I know of two females who find themselves in this situation and have become totally reclusive being filled with anger and hate. I have heard horror stories of such people who think suicide is the only way out. With equality, the LGBTQ group should make a sturdy study on this and release it to the public, what do they have to fear, they claim it’s a great life. Maybe Notre Dame University can launch this study. The bottom line, when it comes to LGBTQ there are 2 types of people. Those who don’t want these attractions and feelings and then there are those who have them and in their vileness and wickedness are proud of it. May the Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on these poor souls.
Andrew Angelo, you are right, and the suicide rate is much higher among these people. It must be incredibly disheartening and confusing to know inside that you are conflicted with an inner struggle, but then all around you in the world people are telling you it’s a choice, or that it’s okay, and there’s nothing wrong with you. It’s a mental illness, and until the medical field classifies it as such (like they used to), there will be more unresolved depression and suicides. These people aren’t getting the necessary tools and help to deal with their disorder. Imagine knowing you have a sore toothache, but your dentist keeps telling you it doesn’t hurt, or the hurt is good, and that you chose it! Talk about gaslighting…
Andrew, thanks for witnessing the struggle of gay Christians. You do so much for gay people by sharing your persinal experiences. I can say that I thought I was royally f*ucked when I found that I was gay. I thought my life was over.
Notre Dame denigrated itself the day they awarded an honorary degree to pro-abortion Barack Obama. They continue to denigrate themselves by admitting that the Bible in the Book of Genesis claims that “God began by creating human beings of male and female sex,” then adding that, “there is nothing that indicates in Scripture that God only created this binary.” Wrong. The creation account declares binary (male and female) as the natural law without explaining it further, because natural law is what works. If Notre Dame desires to shame its name by advocating for the most deadly sin of Pride, they should include the explanation of Adam and Eve desiring to be God, which is the lack of humility in recognizing who they were made to be and wanting to be more. The alphabet people are imitating Adam and Eve in their desire to take God’s place by declaring His creation inadequate or incomplete. They attempt to make themselves above God by obliterating His natural law to “be fruitful and multiply.” That, people, defines binary.
To the point—and Notre Dame wears the crown of all the Catholic universities that
support and promote what is called “sexual reassignment” together with all the trimmings. Other institutions of higher learning(indoctrination) are more covert.
Great comment!
Why are Catholic parents still sending their kids here?
Sodom and Gomorrah Now. A take on Coppola’s Apocalypse Now. Our once livable culture is becoming fast dangerous. Obscenity celebrated in virtually all commercials, social gatherings. Churchgoing reduced to live streaming. If at all. Once proudly Catholic, Notre Dame home of beloved convert Norwegian born Knute Rockne perhaps best football coach ever. Now a feminized charade of what once was. Transformation has been so rapid and plenary most seem dazed [those still with normal sensitivities] angry or join the self indulgent orgy many angry as well. Anger is commonplace a form of discontent with it all not finding Nirvana in cancel culture. In olden times back when prophets prophesied about God angels appeared here and there on our Earth. During Sodom and Gomorrah Now, an alert must be given. Angels enter at your own risk.
Absolutely sickening to see the way ND has capitulated to the zeitgeist and abdicated its role as America’s foremost Catholic university (though the problem goes back even further to the Land O’ Lakes Statement) in the last 20 years.
When I was a student in the mid ’90s, ND refused to grant the “Gays and Lesbians of ND/SMC” group (The T and Q and + blah blah, hadn’t been added yet!) any official status (which would have allowed them to receive extracurricular activity funds, usage of certain buildings, etc.) Now the University itself openly celebrates homosexuality and “trans,” and endorses renaming a month after one of the 7 deadly sins.
Will never give another dime to ND.
P.S. Will people please stop saying “Notre Dame University”? It’s University of Notre Dame. Thanks.
Oh people. Fr. Jenkins didn’t write the article a marketing director named Cidni Sanders wrote the story. She is neither a theologian, professor, nor adminstrator, I don’t think she is even Catholic. But she is the nicest person ever and she has a job to do and it is to write about diversity and inclusivity. This year she also authored articles about North Korean immigrants, refugees from Africa…and God Forbid…Muslims at UND. If you are really concerned go and visit and talk to one of the many Holy Cross priests on the University of Notre Dame campus or do like Raymond Arroyo and I did and send your kid there. My son was the only one of his High School classmates with a big smile on his face at the end of his academic year because they were they only university to trust in God and open up, (Even though my wife and I were very concerned to hear he charged the field after the Clemson game). I don’t like it either but a top notch university should be about dialogue and dialectic about everything in the seen and unseen world.
Franciscan University opened up fully last fall. And no vaccinations required. ND disclaims liability for its decision because the student can choose to reject vaccination and go somewhere else (and give up their coveted spot at ND)
My son got a full scholarship to UND. We as a family are struggling to make ends meet in order to send our 2 other sons to Catholic High School, if the Lord has blessed us with not having to pay for a college education for my oldest son I think that is a good thing – even if it has its problems.
Oh, it was written by some non-Catholic PR flack – well, that’s ok then! Sorry, the University is responsible for what it’s PR people write in its name.
And the only outrage you can muster about anything is the idea that your son may have gone onto the field during the Clemson game!? Oh my God, what a crime! Hope you never saw the 1993 FSU game! We’d have given you a heart attack – even tore down the goalposts!
Cidni Sanders…”the nicest person ever.” But, it all happens on Jenkins’ watch.
The name of the game is stealth and compartmentalization. In the Navy the slogan is that “you can delegate responsibility, but you can’t delegate accountability.” The Administration has failed, and is accountable.
There are many of us whose children are attending UND who are praying a new dawn for UND with the resignation of VP of Student Affairs Ms. Harding and installation of Fr. Gerard Olinger. I trust in the Holy Spirit.
Notre Dame is apostate, and serves as the collegial flagship of the 50-year-long project that is the now the “McCarrick Establishment.”
Notre Dame owes its status as “apostate-power-house” to its progenitor frauds McCarrick and Hesburg, co-creators and co-signers of the 1967 “Land-of-Lakes Statement,” by which the co-signing apostates and apostate-sex-abusers, including McCarrck and Hesburg, declared their universities’ “freedom in the face of authority of whatever kind….”
Read it here:
http://sycamoretrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Land-OLakes-Statement.pdf
And notice on the last 2 pages the signatory apostate frauds, including the “Right Rev. Theodore E. McCarrick, President, Catholic University of Puerto Rico.”
So there you have it, the entire superstructure of the contemporay US Church establishment is founded by the sociopath sex abusing fraud McCarrick, and his fellow fruad apostates.
The Good Shepherd made this declaration: “I spew them out of my mouth.”
True that, Chris!
It is an error to cite the Bible. The opposition does not accept it as a viable source, indeed homosexual activists want to declare it hate literature. The argument must be based on nature where the primary law is perpetuation of the species. Homosexuality does not fit into nature’s plan, and must be regarded as an aberration. This separates the person from the act — a process disapproved by the activists.
So when are devout Catholic families going to stop fawning over the school? The appeal of reputation, beautiful campus, high competitiveness, and football is too great. Raymond Arroyo sent his child(ren) there. My own youngest daughter thinks it’s THE school to attend.
Franciscan University, as well as others, needs the support of Catholic families. My oldest son attends Franciscan and said in his freshman year, “everyone should come here.”