Fighting Irish Thomas

Weis on way out? Navy's anchors blow Irish BCS hopes away, 23-21

2009-11-08T14:46:00.011-06:00

It was an eerily warm November morning when I arrived in South Bend yesterday with my son, Gary, to attend the Notre Dame-Navy battle. "What a beautiful day for a game!" I exclaimed to my son as we listened unsuspectingly to the band's pre-game rendition of the Notre Dame Victory March. Little did we know that we were not about to witness a football game, but a funeral.

For not only did the Naval Academy's efficient yet stunning 23-21 victory, their second in three years against the Irish after Notre Dame had defeated them 43 years in a row, dash the Irish BCS Bowl hopes, but it awakened the echoes for Weis' departure to a deafening roar. Indeed, this game was a microcosm for what went wrong under Weis; despite the fact Charlie's trio of offensive stars, Jimmy Clausen, Michael Floyd and Golden Tate, put up their amazing numbers, when the breaks went against the offense, the defense could not bail them out.

For if (on paper) Clausen's numbers yesterday against the Midshipmen (a Notre Dame record 37 completions on 51 attempts for 452 yds and 2 TDs) were the stuff of Heismans, then the stats of Floyd (10 catches 141 yds) and Tate (9-132) weren't far behind. But because the Irish defense yielded over 350 rushing yards to a far less talented but better prepared Navy team (including 158 yds on a mere 14 carries to a cadet named Nick Murry, a mere mortal whose size and speed was more reminiscent of Rudy than a major college All-American), when the battered and courageous Irish QB uncharacteristically coughed it up in his weekly game of catch-up, Clausen and company's numbers just weren't enough.

Sure, you can't blame Charlie for Clausen's two rare turnovers, or the two missed field goals by Nick Taush, who had just made a school record 14 kicks in a row, but you can blame Weis for shoddy defense. For while Weis (who was of course the offensive coordinator for Super Bowl champ New England before he became the head coach of Notre Dame) has brought (with the exception of 2007) both a fairly consistent and dynamic offense to his alma mater, his defenses have left much to desire. "We played our hearts out, but they out-schemed us," said Irish nose tackle Ian Williams of yesterday's opponent--and if a smaller, less gifted team can often (because of better coaching) defeat the Notre Dame "D," Lord knows that a more gifted foe will continue to beat it like a drum. True, running the defense was never Charlie's specialty, but it is the head coach's responsibility to find someone who can, and five years (and four defensive coordinators) into his tenure, Weis has yet to do so.

If yesterday's loss was Weis' deathblow, as the alumni Board of Directors' ever-increasing murmurings seem to indicate, know that there is much positive in Charlie's eulogy also. Besides his offensive expertise, Charlie is both a Notre Dame graduate and a practicing Catholic, and as such brought both the mystique and spiritual aspect back to Notre Dame football after it had become dormant under Davie and Willingham. Although not as devout as Holtz, Weis nevertheless frequented the grotto, and focused needed attention on all special needs kids by openness in talking about his autistic daughter, Hannah. In addition, Weis started a great new Marian Irish football tradition by having his players sing to "Notre Dame Our Mother" after every home game, which, coming at a time when the very president of Our Lady's University displayed a dubious commitment to Catholicism, was especially poignant. I will always be indebted to Charlie for this open show of faith, but in the end, losing, especially on a consistent basis to teams with lesser or equal ability, is not inspiring, and will eventually tarnish the positive Christian witness you have wrought.

Still, if Weis' New Jersey bravado once struck some alumni as arrogant, the Notre Dame Board of Directors' canning of Tyrone Willingham before they landed Urban Meyer (who instead spurned their overtures and took his services--and the National Championship--to Florida) was even more so. If the Board could hire a proven winner and moral leader along the lines of Jon Gruden or Brian Kelly to become the next head coach of the Irish (and maybe keep Weis on as offensive coordinator), I'd be all for it. But even if consecutive home losses to Navy proved to be Weis' undoing, we still have to secure someone better before we bury him, or we'll wind up with a team that neither plays nor prays, a "Notre Dame" in name only.

Of Illegal Saints, Banned Blogs, and Bishop-Elects: WWJD

2009-11-01T16:14:00.019-06:00

"Those were the days when the Irish and their wise monks saved Western civilization, back when mentioning saints wasn't illegal" --John Kass, Chicago Tribune

Sitting here on this All Saints Day, having (due to two jobs and a college class) not blogged on FIT in months, I figured it was time to, if not get caught up, at least get current. First, to all the Fightin' Irish fans, despite the fact I was definitely at the forefront of the "Dump Jenkins" movement after Notre Dame's dishonest president invited (and honored) our nation's pro-death president at last May's commencement, I still follow and root for Fighting Irish football. Indeed, while I respect those loyal sons who, after the ND-Obama debacle, decided to disassociate themselves from all things Notre Dame, I believe that the prayer and song offered
to Our Lady by Weis' charges before and after every game (which, thanks to some amazing comebacks, NBC is now showing to the nation along with QB Jimmy Clausen's dramatics), is proof enough that the team is still a great part of what is good and true at Notre Dame. And although the team's devotion (like its defense) is far from perfect, I believe its praying and playing can serve as inspiration for those of us who wish to lead the University of Notre Dame's comeback too.

For in these heady days of "Death Panels," government-paid (and sponsored) abortions, and Obama's dripping new "Hate Crimes" (or is it "Hate Catholics?") Bill, we have to get our inspiration any way we can. If the above quote from Mr. Kass' hilarious Halloween article is humorous exaggeration, he also knows the anti-administration blogs that have mysteriously disappeared since Barack signed this gay activist bill on the Feast of St. Jude is no laughing matter. And, since FIT tends to be the "Fox News" in the fight for Catholic orthodoxy, I realize that, while I might be the next blog to be banished, I too have to fight while I still can. For just as Beck and the boys have succeeded not only exposing Obama for the Messianic socialist that he is (not to mention forcing Barack into getting rid of a few of his more bizarre czars) Our Lady's loyal fighting writers have pressured Notre Dame into creating a new master's program in "Pro-Life Leadership," and have even humiliated the not-so-Holy Cross leader Jenkins into joining the Notre Dame pro-life coalition in the annual Roe v Wade protest march on Washington--and his friend, Obama.

Finally, I'd like to congratulate our pastor, Fr. Joseph Siegel, on his election to Auxiliary Bishop of the Diocese of Joliet. Being a humble, faithful servant of Visitation Parish, he neither sought nor desired the position--which is no doubt precisely why Pope Benedict chose him. True, Father, you are only an auxiliary now, but many, including Bishop D'Arcy of South Bend (who, due to his age, never really had the strength to take on Jenkins) might soon be retiring. "Never wish [the bishop's office] upon me!" my brother, Father Bill O'Toole (echoing the words of Christ at Gethsemane) once warned me--and now I think you know why. For in these days of death and dissension, WWJD no longer just stands for "What Would Jesus Do," but what would John Kass and Jimmy Clausen and Joseph Siegel do--with your decisions now even more important than those of a national newspaper journalist or the quarterback of the Fighting Irish. But do not be afraid!

After all, it's not All Saint's Day for nothing.

Roeder was wrong: condemning Tiller's killer

2009-06-01T08:33:00.009-05:00

It was wrong—ironic and wrong on so many levels. Dr. George Tiller, the hardcore abortion doctor who killed so many babies (and a few women) worshiping in a so-called Christian church on one of the holiest days of the year, struck down by a single bullet, struck down so fast he seemingly had no time to repent. In the end, it was so like the unwed woman, realizing her unborn child came not from an act of love, tries to eradicate this sin by killing the baby, thus committing a greater evil.

Scott Roeder (expected to be charged today) was wrong. He could have followed Gandhi, who saved India from British Imperialism without a single bullet. He should have followed Martin Luther King, who finally freed the blacks from inequality without a single act of violence or brutality. And if these men weren't "Christian" enough, he needed to follow Christ, who when betrayed by a friend into the hands of violent men, instead said to Peter, "Put your sword away, for all who live by the sword shall die by the sword" (Matt. 27:52).

It was wrong, because by killing Tiller, Roeder left the path of life and lowered himself to their level. And by lowering himself to their level, Roeder became the enemy, for he was now one of (and one with) them.

Mary "marries" the Holy Spirit: will a "Pentecost Visitation" lead to bishop boldness?

2009-05-31T16:11:00.003-05:00

As a daily Mass Catholic who always pays close attention to feast and holy days, I am really intrigued when a "major" saint's feast day falls on a Sunday, and the Church celebrates a holy kind of "daily double." And speaking of major celebrations, what could be more magnificent than Our Lady's Visitation falling on the day of Pentecost?

In these dramatic days of end-times drama, where a great awakening of faithful laity daily battles the formidable forces of the Culture of Death, it cannot be a coincidence that Mary's visit of Elizabeth coincides with the Holy Spirit's visit to the apostles. For Elizabeth's acknowledgement that the babe leapt in her womb (Luke 1:40) in the presence of her holy kinswoman is the pro-life's proof that the child is already alive and kicking. Like the crowds who witnessed the apostles' bold "breakout" Pentecostal preaching, the unborn patiently await the day they can leave the womb, to see their Savior (in the Holy Eucharist) in person, and become baptized in His Holy Name.

Thus my wish and petition on this last day of the month of Mary and the first day of the 2009 summer of the Holy Spirit is this; that the true bishops of the Church, like their apostolic forefathers, go forth and boldly proclaim the Gospel of Life. May they both commend those who stay true to the Church's teaching against abortion, euthanasia and the other life issues, but also condemn (by first laicizing or withholding Communion, and finally excommunicating) those Catholic priests, teachers and politicians who don't.

Come Holy Spirit! Fill the hearts of your faithful and enkindle in them the fire of your love!

O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.

A Song of Sue

2009-05-25T13:09:00.002-05:00

The following poem is from my Notre Dame college days, written about my first love. I had to revisit it for a term paper I'm doing for teacher certification (see The O'Toole Papers) and of course it brought the pain (and joy!) right back. Sue, if a search engine somehow hooks you up to this, I wish you once again, "The Greatest." –Tom

It was a day or two or so ago
Accompanied only by my radio
When I heard those songs so strong and sad
About a kind of love I too once had
And I remembered those days when love looked true
Just Sue and me and me and Sue
Til there seemed one thing left that I should do
I wrote a song of love of you

You weren't that cute; I don't know why
But somehow you sure caught my eye
Your smile perhaps, and now that I think
You also had one hell of a wink
You talked and laughed and played the game
So well I made damn sure I knew your name
And when you left, I followed you
"Hey; wait a second! Wait for me ... Sue."

You were a girl who did strange things
Wore bongs for bracelets, beer tabs for rings
You partied late and long and often
Were always smokin', and always coughin'
But many a moment your mood would mellow
And then it was magic to be your fellow
With the sky our roof and the grass our floor
I promised you all this and more

I'd ruin it too with worn out words
Like proverbs from out the mouths of nerds
For when you kissed me, I could not tell
My rhetoric was as trite as hell
For when you kissed me, I could not see
I'd lose sight of all but Sue and me
For when I held you then so close
I could forget; I could -- almost

For I woke up one misbegotten dawn
Awoke to find my Sue was gone
To find she wasn't my Sue at all
Sue couldn't fit in a space so small
I wanted her (some day) to be my wife
But I was just a long day in her short life
Note said she left me for no other man
She left me just "'cause I still can"

In the end, God was the only guy
With the guts to show my dream a lie
Sue was too young to look ahead that far
Still, when I look up and see that star
I'll ask, when you grow up my friend
Come back and be my girl again
Til then, my Sue is just a song
And all who remember will sing along

Tom

Saving Notre Dame: Looking back at Jenkins, Barack—and "the crying baby"

2009-05-23T12:44:00.035-05:00

In my last of a series of reflections on Barack Obama's Notre Dame appearance, I will focus on the speech itself and Fr. Jenkins' words (and lies) leading up to it. While many pro-lifers now seem sad that there was no one in the arena (save a few brave hecklers) to counter the cleverly deceiving abortion addresses by the priest and the president, I contend their lies were subtly undercut by the most poetically appropriate protestor possible—the cries of a baby.

As expected, many mainstream newspapers and online publications agreed with the Chicago Tribune's pro-Jenkins', "gotta love Obama" review of the event. After saying that Jenkins was unfairly "scorched for weeks by some [try over seventy!] bishops and members of the faith" for honoring Obama, this Tribune editorial added, "Jenkins spoke with passion about the Church's opposition to abortion, and about why Notre Dame was acting in the Catholic tradition when it invited the president and gave him an honorary degree," concluding, "Fr. Jenkins and Notre Dame in turn earned a great deal of respect." What the paper didn't say is that while Jenkins used cool Catholic papal quotes like John Paul II's "a Catholic university should be a primary and privileged place for a fruitful dialogue between the gospel and culture," and that the brave soul Obama came to Notre Dame, "though he knows full well that we are fully supportive of the Church's teaching on the sanctity of human life, and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research," there was really no dialogue—or opposition—because Jenkins never said why the Church—or he—opposed them. And so when Obama gave his well-written, wonderfully delivered, and (to the average ill-informed student and viewer) highly believable pro-abortion/embryonic stem cell research commencement address, no one was there to "dialogue" except for three or four pro-life hecklers, who were swiftly and brutally hustled out of the stadium, if not the country (you see, Mr. President, there is a reason to keep Guantanamo open!) and they were gone long before phrases like, "Human life must be respected and protected from the moment of conception," and "every abortion is a gravely, moral evil ... the Church attaches the penalty of excommunication to ... formal cooperation to this crime" (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2270-2272), could be uttered.

But if these reasons aren't enough to explain why Father shouldn't have invited Obama to give Notre Dame's commencement (and why Jenkins should be excommunicated) let the Tribune and all fair-minded critics once again examine how this so-called respecter of "Catholic Tradition" and "the Church's teaching" totally ignored—then mocked—both of them to get the President of these Abortion States to come in the first place. Speaking of Church teaching, not only Catholics, but many non-Catholics are now aware, due to the Notre Dame decision, of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops' statement entitled, "Catholics in Political Life."

After saying that not only abortion is "always intrinsically evil and can never be justified [and] to make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong," they conclude with the rather staightforward teaching that "Catholic institutions should not honor [their emphasis] those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not [my emphasis] be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions." Now, if Father had read this statement and (openly) said, "To hell with those bishops! Having Obama here will bring me—and of course, the University—honor in the eyes of all those who really matter," and then invited him, I suppose I could at least have respected him as a man. Of course, Jenkins wouldn't have lasted long as University president then either, and, wanting to have it both ways, came up with the following plan. In order to justify himself, he said that he interpreted the bishops' statement about Catholic institutions not honoring pro-abortion politicians as only applying when the politicians were Catholic, since the document was called "Catholics in Political Life." Having taught grade school, I can assure you that the average fifth grader can tell you with complete confidence that in this case, the word "Catholic" describes the word right next to it, "institutions," and not the phrase up on top of the paper. So either Fr. Jenkins is not smarter than a fifth grader, or he is a complete and utter liar. Of course, the fact that Father Jenkins is less moral than the average fifth grader is beyond question; for any student knows that if they have any doubt about which answer is right or wrong, all they need do is ask their teacher, but rather than ask his own bishop the question, Jenkins instead said he found several lawyers (lawyers?!) who agreed with his decision. This point cannot be emphasized enough; while faithful Catholics know that ignoring your bishop is inexcusable, all men of good will must realize that justifying something with a lie is just plain wrong. In addition, since every Bible-believing Christian knows that Satan is "the father of lies" (John 8:44), they too would have a hard time believing that Jenkins' "un-truth" (I forgot that Homeland Security considers the word "liar" hate-speech!) was inspired by the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Speaking of John 8:44 ("When he tells a lie, he speaks in character,") Barack Obama's ND speech was as witty, welcoming ... and as full of baloney as we have come to expect. While there were a few parts of the talk I actually agreed with; for example, his admiration of intramural Irish basketball (the president actually would be a good fit on the "Barack O'Ballers" team) I, like most pro-lifers, was initially depressed that he delivered his pro-death speech at "the flagship Catholic university" virtually without a hitch. Yet, when he started talking about coming together about lessening abortions (which is, considering what his first 100 days' abortion record has been, a huge joke, although not the funny kind) I could have sworn I heard a baby cry. Wondering if it was my imagination, I later listened to the speech online, and I heard it again, coming almost at the exact time Obama began to promote abortion. "It wasn't us," said Randall Terry's Operation Rescue spokesman, Joe Landry. "The baby was legit." Indeed, while the timing was so perfect that I have a hard time believing it wasn't a recording, none of the various pro-life groups took responsibility. In the end, whether the cries came from a real baby, a well-placed sound system ... or heaven, doesn't really matter. What is important is that just as the thousands of peaceful (which included an alternate graduation for 26 pro-life Notre Dame seniors) and not so peaceful protests (over 40 arrests, including former Obama Senate opponent Alan Keyes and Norma "Ms. Roe v Wade" McCorvey) stole Obama's thunder outside, a single baby wrecked the president's messianic persona from within.

For just as an ultrasound dampens the desire to have an abortion for most would-be mothers, even the most impressive pro-choice speech doesn't sound quite right over the strains of a peacefully moaning infant. True, Barack's guys could erase the baby's cries off the official Internet sites (just as they did the Homeland Security report that called pro-lifers "terrorists") but I'm sure there are more than enough bootleg recordings to keep it alive forever. In the final analysis, the millions of prayers to Mary for Her University not only worked this wonder, but kept the campus' many Christian monuments and symbols from being covered up, while at the same time covering the president in robes that proclaimed Mary, the patroness of the pro-life movement, "Our Life, Sweetness, and Our Hope"—a minor miracle in itself. And so, though the war may be far from over, when the smoke cleared on the battlefield of this day of reckoning, it was Notre Dame, not Obama or Jenkins, who won over all.

Saving Notre Dame: Looking back at the CNN charade

2009-05-22T09:43:00.027-05:00

Having had time now to look back at the events leading up to, as well as President Barack Obama's actual appearance (or shall we say "performance") at the University of Notre Dame's graduation ceremony, I now feel a gradual hope growing out of a great sadness, a new life for the pro-life movement arising out of the shadow of death. And though much glory should be given to those brave adults who forsaked reputation to defend Mary's honor over Obama's onery honorary law degree that Fr. Jenkins unjustly awarded to Barack that fateful day, it was a cry from the mouth of a babe that seemed to lead the way ...

My personal multimedia defense of Our Lady began in earnest that Thursday, as the token conservative in the so-called balanced Notre Dame debate held on CNN.com. I'm not positive what those initials stand for, but after appearing on its "Blogger Bunch" segment, I'm pretty sure they stand for the "Christ Negation Network" or something to that effect. Honestly, I suppose some of the uneveness of the event was my own doing, for after being told I needed to have a Webcam to participate on the show, me and my wife, Jeanette, scrambled around town at nine o'clock that morning trying to find one compatible to our home computer, only to find out after hooking it up that our machine would explode into the blue "warning!" screen whenever my face appeared on camera. Deducing even my dubious mug was not ugly enough to cause such a violent technological reaction, the "doubting Thomas" in me figured this was an ominous omen of the dire things to come. "Obama's going to drop all pretenses Sunday, arrest all the Notre Dame protestors, and declare himself 'King of the World!'" I thought as both our labrador and the CNN cameraman barked out instructions in an attempt to make my face reappear, all to no avail. Finally it was showtime, and the lone voice of reason that day would have to be just a voice.

Asked why, when the majority of Catholics supported Obama, that I believed the president should not speak at Notre Dame, I replied that 'There is a recent bishops' statement that [forbids] Catholic universities from awarding honors or allowing a platform to speak to politicians who oppose the Catholic Church's views on human rights, which of course includes abortion. Fr. Jenkins directly disobeyed this [statement] and since Catholicism is a religion where obedience is required, this [disobedience] is a serious thing." Due to my less than ideal preparation for this event, I did not have the bishops' statement that I eluded to ("Catholics in Political Life") in front of me, so I could not quote from it directly. Still, given the format, one wonders if this really made a difference. For while I may not have been my most articulate, my lapsed Catholic opponent, a liberal blogger named Gina Cooper, did not exactly come off as highly literate by referring to the Web site NotreDameScandal.com as "BigFatFakeScandal.com." She then tried to justify her disobedience and cover up the truth by citing soggy statistics of all the Catholic "Cheasters" and other cheaters who supported Obama, ending her rather lengthy propagandizing by proclaiming Obama as the fulfillment of Matthew 25, one who will "feed the hungry, clothe the naked, welcome the stranger, and administer to the sick." Then, after talking to another pro-Obama blogger, a black woman, Lola Adesioye, who knew nothing about Catholicism or Notre Dame, the smug and smirking Christ negating hosts piled on another half dozen or so anti-Catholic viewer comments (along with the words of one pro-life mother who they more or less mocked) before they returned to the man who was blacked out in more ways than one.

After reminding Gina that in Matthew 25 Jesus also states "whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me," I warned the panel that since unborn babies "are obviously the least of his brothers, murdering them is not a good sign for our society." Then, turning to the host's slanted question about Notre Dame inviting the "death penalty" presidents, I agreed that while in almost every circumstance, the death penalty is condemned by the Church, there is almost "a complete difference between killing an innocent baby and someone who has committed a heinous crime." It was here that Gina's response somewhat surprised me, for there was actually some cleverness mixed in with her deviousness. Rather than denying abortion was murder, Gina answered angelically, "In my heart ... I do believe that a baby is a perfectly innocent life, but ... this is not really consistent with Catholic teaching, which says [because of] original sin we are not born innocent and we have to get babtized immediately." As you probably have guessed, CNN did not give me a chance to counter this henious half-truth, merely letting go several more democratic digs designed to make me look like a moron before signing off on the subject. Thus, unable to put me down merely with its usual bias, CNN had to kill Fighting Irish Thomas' message by concluding the segment with a lie.

It is interesting to note that, while in her opening statement Ms. Cooper seems to consider herself a good Catholic despite ignoring several Catholic doctrines, she ends her segment by suggesting she must not really be a Catholic because she disagrees with Catholic dogma. In reality, while the dogma of original sin is somewhat complex, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church does teach that "the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand" (CCC 404), Cooper severely (if not deliberately) twists the part of the teaching that is known to justify her position. For example, while the Church does say that baptism "erases original sin and turns man back to God" (CCC405), it also states that it "is called 'sin' only in an analogical sense; it is not a sin committed ... and does not have the character of a personal fault." And while Cooper is correct in implying that the Church urges infants to be soon baptized, since it "does not know of any means other than baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude" (CCC 1257), the Church not only "allows hope of salvation for children that died without baptism" (CCC1261) but "has always held the firm conviction that those who suffered death for the sake of the faith" (CCC1258) without baptism—a category many now conclude includes those who have died through abortion—will go to heaven. But if Ms. Cooper is truly worried about the aborted's eternal fate, as the doctrine does seem to still leave at least a little room for doubt, would this not be all the more reason to allow the children to be born—and baptized?

In the end, the mock debate held on CNN that Thursday was merely a foreshadowing of the pseudo-dialogue the demigods staged at Notre Dame last Sunday. But what then to make of the baby, whose voice now forever challenges Obama's?