A brother deacon in the diocese passed this along, and it offers yet another point of view on the Notre Dame story, from the London Tablet:

Two questions arise, both of principle. First, is it correct to regard abortion as so crucial an issue to relations between Catholics and a secular government that no other consideration carries any weight? In America that seems to be the view taken, not least by many bishops but also, in even more extreme terms, by Catholic anti-abortion campaigners. It is equivalent to saying that a president, despite representing a social revolution in relations between the races, despite having a political agenda aimed at greater social justice and equality, and despite saying he favours measures designed to cut down the need for abortion, must nevertheless be regarded as tainted by evil and shunned accordingly, because of the issue of abortion. It is not a view that would find much sympathy in most Catholic circles in Europe.

The second question is about how the Church should engage in public controversy. Does it make progress for its ideals and beliefs by symbolic boycotts and gestures of dissent, or does that merely confirm the views of the already convinced while closing the ears of those who are not? Nobody in America seriously doubts the opposition of millions of Catholics to abortion, although they probably also know that those who shout loudest have a hard-line position that is by no means shared unanimously. But if abortion is ever to be restricted by law in America, or indeed any other democratic country, it will come about by means of the democratic process and not just because bishops demand it. That means winning the debate: it means producing better arguments, which in turn means giving due weight to contrary opinions and treating opponents with civility. In a country where separation of Church and State is almost a religion in itself, anything that looks like an ecclesiastical dictum is counter-productive.

The complete editorial is at the link.