Sunday, May 17, 2009

"Jane Roe" - Norma McCorvey is Arrested at Notre Dame

Norma McCorvey, the woman who went by the name "Jane Roe" in the case Roe v. Wade, has been arrested on the campus of Notre Dame for trespassing.

Norma converted to Catholicism back in the late 90's.

Yesterday I questioned whether it was helpful for people to get arrested for the pro-life cause. I did not think so. However, I am seeing a difference here from what I expected. I must confess that seeing the elderly priest arrested without a fight or resistance, and seeing Norma McCorvey is indeed significant.

I am not in favor of tactics that use intimidation. These arrests do not involve intimidation and if it brings big names like Alan Keyes, Norma McCorvey, and a priest in collar, then I would say it does have an impact.

Te Deum Laudamus! Home

The obedient are not held captive by Holy Mother Church; it is the disobedient who are held captive by the world!


JoyfulMom7 said...

I watched Norma's interview moments before her arrest. What a sweet, gentle woman.God bless her. If only CNN would broadcast her words. Women need to know the truth about how she was used in Roe v. Wade.

Stan Williams said...

Diane, I want to tweak you in a friendly way and challenge you. In this post you cite that you could see the benefit of the quiet protests that caused Keys, McCorvey, and the 80 year old priest to be arrested, and then you say you're not in favor of intimidation... no doubt referencing the words of Randal Terry and his louder protest. But Keys, McCorvey et al were being intimidating... that's why they were arrested.

And then in a later post you write these very intimidating words, words that Randall Terry would say about Church leaders...and you echo his sentiment. You write:

"Perhaps it is not just the leadership that should be removed. Perhaps the religious order which has responsibility for Notre Dame should be relieved of this obligation and let another order in there that will run it with the mind of the Church, rather than with the polls. They can start by cleaning house of the so-called theologians who have been given a free-ride to promote clear dissent. The only "magisterium" these professors follow is the pseudo-magisterium of other dissident professors and journalists who are giving people the idea that it's ok to make Catholicisim into some kind of a designer religion."

If you're going to attack those religious order priests and officials for not following Church teachings, why not the bishops that ignore it?

Terry's saying the same thing. Glad to see you are coming over to his side of the issue. (Love ya)

On the otherhand, as much as I was against Obama's degree granting escapade, the coverage on TV with able spokespersons such as Fr. Jonathan (on Fox), and Raymond A. (on CNN) would never have happened, nor would there have been the on-going debate EVERYWHERE on the issue, without the Obama-Jenkins tag team. And what I saw and heard on TV today, made much clearer to the nation what is going on with the debate. Increased awareness increases critical thought. And we needed to protest for that salience to be raised.

To God be praised.

Diane M. Korzeniewski, OCDS said...

Stan says: Terry's saying the same thing. Glad to see you are coming over to his side of the issue.Sorry Stan, I'll never be on Terry's end of the issue entirely. I'm with him on wanting a pro-life society. I am with him on the fact that people need to get involved. For each of us it is a different level of involvement.

On the removal of the CSC at Notre Dame vs. Terry's efforts to have two bishops removed from their thrones: This is night and day. The bishops are apostolic successors, the CSC are not.

Further, I don't advocate trickery as is used by Randall Terry (for example, as he did with archbishop Burke, which you and I both already disagreed on).

As for intimidation: For someone to quietly step across a line is civil disobedience if they have been warned not to trespass, but it does not necessasrily involve the kind of initmidation to which I was referring.

I have seen many images of protestors getting arrested and it is often a violent, hostile thin, with much resistance. This is the kind of initimdation to which I was referring. When people said they were going there to get arrested, this is what I envisioned, not people quietly stepping over a line, accepting with docility, the consequences.

There is a big difference - a very big difference.

Much of our disagreements on this centers on our respective definitions of different things.

I started yesterday being opposed to any kind of arrests. Today, I am lukewarmly supportive in the way it was handled by those I saw on the news: Norma McCorvey and Fr. Weslin.

Bottom line is that I think Fr. Frank Pavone has won more people over than anyone and I don't see him getting arrested on a regular basis.