The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out


  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • TWT BLOGS: Latest
  • Staff blogs
  • Create a blog

Obama at Georgetown: The mystery of the missing sign

By Julia Duin on April 15, 2009 into Belief Blog

  • Subscribe

When President Obama gave his economics speech at Georgetown University on Tuesday, several folks noticed something was missing.

That "something" was an ancient monogram -- the letters IHS -- that symbolizes the name of Jesus. It was missing from a wooden archway above the dais in Gaston Hall where the president delivered his 45-minute speech. 

The gold-lettered monogram appeared near a painting of three female figures -- symbolizing morality, faith and patriotism -- and decorative edging along the wall that spelled out the Jesuit motto "Ad majorem Dei gloriam"—"To the greater glory of God." Georgetown was founded by the Jesuits.

Some of them may have been turning in their graves in the cemetery across campus at the sight of the missing monogram which looked like a blacked-out space above a blue backdrop and a row of American flags flanking the nation's chief executive. Was Georgetown selling short its Catholic heritage, we wondered.

I contacted the university this morning to ask why the monogram -- in this post-Easter season -- was hidden as its absence had been noted by several bloggers, including Dawn Eden -- formerly of the New York Post -- on her dawn patrol blog. 

Julie Bataille from the university's press office e-mailed me that the White House had asked that all university signage and symbols behind the stage in Gaston Hall be covered.

"The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they've done for other policy speeches," she wrote. "Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn't high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context."

I also noticed the Free Republic blog had photos comparing "before" and "after" depictions of the unfortunate monogram, which the university covered with what looks like a black cloth. 

Not every Catholic institution would have caved to quite this extent. Victor Nakas, spokesman for Catholic University, e-mailed me to say several presidents have visited CUA and the most recent administration official to speak there was then-Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I can’t imagine, as the bishops’ university and the national university of the Catholic Church, that we would ever cover up our religious art or signage for any reason," Mr. Nakas wrote. "Our Catholic faith is integral to our identity as an institution of higher education.

I called the Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Institute at Georgetown University, who was at the speech, as to what he thought.

"It is more for camera quality than anything else," he surmised. "They don't want distractions that would make the eye wander. I don't think this is motivated by theology, but by communications strategy."

Students "were dying to get into the hall," he added. "There is this great enthusiasm for Obama especially among Catholic young people. The conservatives don't know how to deal with this. 

"The audience wanted to cheer and cheer this very professorial address. He played Professor Obama. He's a damn good professor but not even he could make economics a barnraiser."

- Julia Duin, religion editor (with lots of help from deputy national editor Victor Morton)

 

  • Bookmark and Share
  • Comment

There are 2 Comments

CarholicCarol

As a Catholic, I am appalled that no one else has spoken out in reference to this article! All good Catholics should be angered over the evils of our new presidential administration, which to name a few; the appointment of 'pro-homosexual marriage advocate Harry Knox as faith-based organization's director, the implementation of the Mexico City Policy, the increased funding for abortions in our Nation's Captial and around the world, the nomination of "so-called Catholic" Justice Sotomayor-a La Raza radical, the appointment of Katherine Sibelus as health and human services director-another "so-called Catholic", the accepting of guest speaker roles and receipt of undeserved honorary degrees at Catholic Universities, and the statement that America is not a Christian nation. We should not only be full of righteous anger; but WE NEED TO SPEAK OUT and take action utilizing our First Amendment constitutional rights. After all, radical liberals love to utilize this right to furhter their own sin-sick ideals. Obama is out to destroy traditional Catholism; and, until 2012 when we elect Sarah Palin as our holy and honorable President, we should exercise our freedom of speech and freedom of religion!!!
Mark as offensive

carne75

You are a moron. First of all, that article clearly states that a member of the Catholic church who is in the employ of the university says that he does not believe this was a slight to Catholicism or religion at all; rather it was a decision by the communications director - one that is made at EVERY speech done by the President. The article clearly states "I called the Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Institute at Georgetown University, who was at the speech, as to what he thought. 'It is more for camera quality than anything else," he surmised. "They don't want distractions that would make the eye wander. I don't think this is motivated by theology, but by communications strategy." If the president was speaking about religion, it would have been a different story, but he was speaking about economic policy; hence the draped flags. The president doesn't have time to think about flags or no flags; that matter is too trivial. That's why they have other people who take care of these things. And trust me, they're not going to ask the president what he thinks about it. It's the communications people's job to know. Every president makes these decisions, including Bush, Jr. Speaking of which, are you proud, as a Christian, of Bush, Jr., who has the blood of nearly 5000 troops and hundreds of thousands of others on his hands? If you voted for him, you do too. And I'm pretty sure God is not smiling down on this behavior. And if you are such a Christian, what happened to the commandment "Thou shalt not judge"? Did you forget that in your blind self-righteousness? Get over yourself. The president said this is not a Christian country, a Jewish country, a Muslim country, a Buddhist country, etc. He didn't limit it to Christianity. And the president was right; according to the constitution, this is a country that is not bound by one religion, but by a freedom of religion. He was merely saying that we accept all religious beliefs, JUST LIKE THE CONSTITUTION DOES, WHICH YOU SHOULD READ SOME TIME. You don't have to like the constitution, but if you're going to cite it, cite it properly. You are a hypocrite to defend your freedom of religion, and then to claim that ours (Christianity) is the only one allowed to represent the country. And before you start talking about Catholicism, you should learn how to spell it. It makes you look like an idiot that you are so staunchly defending your denomination, which you can't even spell (seriously, "Catholism"??). Finally, I hate to break this to you, but Evangelical neocons like Palin do not even like Catholics. In fact, many of them think of Catholicism as a cult. And now you are bashing a Justice Sotomayor as a radical? Just listen to yourself? YOU are the radical!
Mark as offensive

Please login or register to post a comment

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.