Archbishop John R. Quinn is the retired emeritus Archbishop of San Francisco. From what I can tell, he retired under fire at the relatively young age of 66, in the time of the priest sex abuse crisis. He was a diocesan priest of San Diego before being consecrated a Bishop. He wrote recently in the Jesuit periodical America: (with my emphasis and [comment]) (s0urce)
"What if the president is forced to back out of his appearance at Notre Dame either because he withdraws or the university withdraws its invitation?" asked Quinn. "If this happens, will that further the pro-life effort in our country?" [I think the answer might be yes. The better question might be: would it further the effort if the premier Catholic university ignores the bishops and invites the most idealogically pro-abortion President ever?]
The archbishop emeritus also wondered, "If the president is forced to withdraw, will that bring about fewer abortions in the United States?"[As if the pro-life movement was a numbers game. Would it be better for the country to halve the number of abortions, but still pay for them with public funds? Of course, this is the arguement that people made at election time, that the truly pro-life people should support Obama because he will address the reasons people seek abortion, thereby lowering the numbers, nevermind that this hasn't ever panned out in the past.]
Quinn also questioned whether a turnaround would be received as a way to "link the church with racist and other extremist elements in our country." [??? Could anyone be convinced that if, after all this fallout, it was a racial issue? Or does he mean that pro-lifers are extremist terrorists?]
"Will the banishment of the first African-American president from Catholic university campuses be seen as grossly insensitive to the heritage of racial hatred which has burdened our country for far too long?" he mused.
"We must step back and consider the limitations - prudential, moral and political - on the role of bishops in public issues," wrote Quinn. "We must weigh very seriously the consequences if the American bishops are seen as the agents of the public embarrassment of the newly elected president by forcing him to withdraw from an appearance at a distinguished Catholic university." [OR, get this, Bishops could teach! In season and out, that's what Bishop D'Arcy said, choose truth before prestige. And, Ex Corde Ecclesiae definately applies, and it says the Bishops have a special duty to ensure the Catholic identity of a Catholic university.]
The Archbishop also expressed confidence in Obama's character. "The president has given ample evidence that he is a man of good will, of keen intelligence, desirous of listening and capable of weighing seriously other views," he wrote. [Because seeking the removal of conscience protections fits that description.]