School of Athens

The Trouble with Charter Schools

/in , , /by

In the last few decades, many alternatives to public schooling have become popular, including charter schools of a “classical” framework. However, despite their impressive results in many important areas, we cannot forget what can only be accomplished at an authentic Catholic school – one that embraces its identity and mission with gusto.

At The Catholic World Report, Dr. Dan Guernsey writes:

As principal of a “classical” Catholic school and a lifelong advocate for the liberal arts, I am excited by the growing classical school movement—which now has reached even many public charter schools. Catholic families are understandably attracted to charter schools’ free tuition and classical schools’ commitment to established curricula, teaching methods and virtue development.

But a secular school can never be a worthy substitute for authentic Catholic education and some parents seem to be either unaware or unconvinced of the Church’s reasons for requiring them to choose Catholic education if it is available.

Continue reading at The Catholic World Report…

Fr Theodore Hesburgh

Pride on Full Display in ‘Hesburgh’ Documentary

/in , /by

The mere fact that the laudatory, even triumphal, documentary Hesburgh will enjoy a limited release in theaters beginning today would no doubt have been deeply satisfying to the late Holy Cross Father Theodore Hesburgh, who led the University of Notre Dame (1952-1987) to enormous growth and prestige.

From beginning to end, the film makes the obvious point that Father Hesburgh was important and accomplished much on a human scale. Notre Dame’s enrollment, public reputation, academic standing, physical campus and donor support all improved considerably under his leadership.

He was also an influential leader on some of the most important issues of his time, especially civil rights for African Americans. The film’s images include a myriad of leaders — popes, U.S. presidents, celebrities and others — with whom Father Hesburgh associated, collaborated and sometimes clashed.

But the documentary largely glosses over important questions about Father Hesburgh’s thinking and impact and his conflicts with Church leaders, doctrine and the mission of Catholic education. It simply reports — without any real analysis and in a decidedly favorable way — his leadership in crafting the Land O’ Lakes Statement that declared the independence of Catholic colleges from the bishops and magisterium of the Church, his legal separation of the university from the Holy Cross order (thus increasing his own independence from religious superiors), his embrace of a radicalized “academic freedom” in the manner of modern research universities, and his delight in Notre Dame’s 2009 commencement honors for pro-abortion President Barack Obama.

Even while the film champions Father Hesburgh’s determination to engage with all viewpoints, the filmmakers shy away from any serious examination of charges that he had in some ways betrayed the Church and the mission of Catholic education. It’s not even acknowledged that 83 Catholic bishops publicly opposed the Obama honors.

The film also fails to address the morally serious concern that Father Hesburgh, through his work with the Rockefeller Foundation, and together with his Notre Dame colleagues, quietly advanced a population control and family planning agenda. Or that he relied on Father Richard McBrien to reform the Notre Dame theology department as a center of liberal theology. Or that, when Cardinal John O’Connor of New York publicly scolded New York politicians, Gov. Mario Cuomo and congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro, both Catholics, for their public advocacy of abortion rights, Father Hesburgh welcomed the New York governor to Notre Dame for a landmark speech that claimed a “latitude in judgment” within Catholic teaching that permits a Catholic to privately hold that abortion is unjust killing while publicly championing laws that keep it legal, out of respect for others who disagree with our beliefs. These facts, highly relevant to Father Hesburgh’s pursuit of a “great Catholic university,” are simply ignored in more than two hours of film.

Rather, the documentary features multiple tributes from mostly “progressive Catholics” who include former students and colleagues at Notre Dame, writers from the National Catholic Reporter, and even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It all has the feel and the gloss of an episode of Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. Viewers are invited to indulge in awe and envy.

‘A Great Catholic University’

A deeper and more honest assessment would have acknowledged that Father Hesburgh’s legacy is complicated and has in fact done significant damage to the university that he strove to build and to the Church in the United States to which he gave his life in service.

Father Hesburgh was driven to transform Notre Dame into a “great Catholic university” built on human “excellence,” as the film mentions briefly. But how that pursuit evolved over his 35 years at the helm of Notre Dame — and influenced subsequent University leaders — is far better explained in the new biography, American Priest: The Ambitious Life and Conflicted Legacy of Notre Dame’s Father Ted Hesburgh (Image, 2019) by Holy Cross Father Wilson Miscamble. Father Miscamble has taught at Notre Dame for more than 30 years and is a vocal advocate for restoring what he and many perceive as Notre Dame’s lost Catholic identity, and so he searches for clues to why that identity slipped under Father Hesburgh’s leadership. But as a serious historian, he also is careful to report facts objectively and thoroughly.

For instance, Father Miscamble provides the surprising revelation that during Father Hesburgh’s first term in the 1950s, he publicly embraced a vision of Catholic higher education that resembled Blessed John Henry Newman’s Idea of a University. Nevertheless, Father Hesburgh’s actual emphasis in building up Notre Dame was on raising funds, building Notre Dame’s reputation through association with prominent academic and public figures, and transforming the university in the image of the secular research institution.

According to Father Miscamble, Father Hesburgh gave very little attention to ensuring an integrated Catholic curriculum and a faithfully Catholic faculty — resulting in a dramatic slide toward secular education that continues today.

Father Miscamble’s biography portrays a priest who had incredible natural leadership abilities but failed to rely on God’s grace and the Church’s timeless wisdom. It would have been a truly remarkable witness for Father Hesburgh to have brought Notre Dame to greater acclaim while also amplifying the university’s Catholic identity. After all, if the Catholic faith really is transcendental — true, beautiful and good — then doesn’t it have the power to attract?

Instead, Father Hesburgh’s career as president appears to have been an exercise of misplaced pride in human achievement, especially his own capabilities, and greater faith in state and secular institutions than the goodness of the Church.

Father Hesburgh was a prayerful priest who celebrated Mass daily and had a devotion to Mary, yet in his presidency he had this air of “going it alone” and failing to appreciate Catholic education as fundamentally an encounter with Christ.

In Hesburgh, he states plainly, “There had to be a way to balance faith and academics” — as if the two are in conflict. Again, he asks: “Was it possible to be both a great university and Catholic? I believed it was as long as there was balance.”

Because of his failure to acknowledge the Catholic faith as truth that is fundamental, not opposed, to the academic enterprise, Father Hesburgh’s impressive human achievements have today resulted in the sort of unintended confusion and lack of structural integrity that befell the builders at Babel.

Perhaps without intending to, director Patrick Creadon highlights Father Hesburgh’s unsettling certainty of the wisdom of his actions and opinions — even those in opposition to the Church — by including a voice-over by actor Maurice LaMarche, who pretends to be Father Hesburgh recounting his own tale using actual quotes from Hesburgh’s writings and recordings. The device is awkward for a film that is something of a congratulatory eulogy for the priest, who died in 2015. Right or wrong, LaMarche’s tone makes Father Hesburgh seem rather smug.

I am rather sure the makers of Hesburgh would not agree with Father Miscamble’s assessment of Father Hesburgh’s legacy, but at least an assessment is made in American Priest. In the documentary, there is no movement beyond the Hesburgh “hagiography” (a term suggested by Father Miscamble) that seems to prevail within the Notre Dame community.

Clearly Father Theodore Hesburgh had enormous influence across the Church and U.S. society. His choices had real consequences for Notre Dame and Catholic education nationwide.

While Hesburgh presents an intriguing look at the many important activities of an important man, his legacy is left to more serious biographers like Father Miscamble to straighten out.

This article was first published at The National Catholic Register.

Scandal Persists at Mount St. Mary’s University, President Defies Own Speaker Policy

/in /by

The Cardinal Newman Society is deeply saddened by the apparent decision of Mount St. Mary’s University President Timothy Trainor to violate the University’s own “Speaker Policy” and its Catholic mission by honoring Mark Shriver, a public advocate for abortion and contraception, as its 2019 commencement speaker. 

For details, see the Newman Society’s prior statement, dated April 5. 

President Trainor this week notified the Mount community by email that Shriver has “graciously declined” the Mount’s “offer to award him an honorary degree.” Not only is this not the principled decision that we had prayed for—Shriver declined the honorary degree, but the University took no action to uphold its Catholic identity and protect others from scandal—but it also leaves in place the invitation for Shriver to deliver the commencement address. 

Moreover, President Trainor again identifies Shriver’s illicit leadership at Save the Children, which actively promotes “family planning” to disadvantaged people, as the University’s reason for honoring Shriver and presenting him as a model for graduating students. 

“Mark Shriver was selected as our commencement speaker because of his groundbreaking work with Save the Children for the last sixteen years and his well-regarded biographies of his father, Sargent Shriver, and His Holiness, Pope Francis. We are looking forward to his remarks,” Trainor wrote in his email to students. 

The choice of Shriver as commencement speaker violates the Mount’s own “Speaker Policy,” found in the University’s governing documents. The policy reads, in part (boldface added, not in original): 

Occasionally the university invites a guest to campus for the purpose of honoring that guest. In addition to the considerations outlined above, the decision to honor a person must take into account his or her character as reflected in the actions he or she performs and supports. Mount St. Mary’s affirms the position, articulated by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, that “Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles;” especially those moral principles concerning the sanctity and dignity of all human life. Those whose actions show disregard for such fundamental principles “should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions” (“Catholics in Political Life,” USCCB, 2004). The president of the university will seek counsel from the Archbishop of Baltimore, whenever there is a question about the appropriateness of honoring someone. 

Selection to deliver a commencement address is unmistakably an honor. It would insult the intelligence of the Mount community, were the University to claim that only an honorary degree is an honor, because it contains the word “honor.” A commencement address is a much-prized, highly publicized, ceremonial address holding up the speaker as an example to graduates. Rarely does it contain anything of academic merit, but instead draws upon the speaker’s character and accomplishments to give advice to students. In this respect, inviting Shriver to deliver the commencement address may be even more offensive and less consistent with Catholic education than bestowing an honorary degree. 

President Trainor seems to be aware that the invitation to Shriver is a mistake and violates the University’s policy. According to the Mount’s student newspaper, “Trainor apologized for the division and stress this issue has created for the Mount community, particularly the seniors. He also acknowledged that the research into the selection of a commencement speaker was not as thorough as it should have been. The Board and Trainor are working to refine the process to prevent this from occurring again.” 

The Newman Society has long recognized Mount St. Mary’s University as one of America’s most faithful Catholic colleges, and each year the Mount assures the Newman Society in writing that it complies with the U.S. bishops’ ban on honors and platforms for public opponents of Catholic teaching. That assurance, too, is violated by the invitation to Shriver. 

We are eager to know how the University will prevent such scandals in the future, when a policy is already enshrined in the governing documents. More urgently, we look to Mount St. Mary’s University to uphold its Catholic identity in the present and rescind the invitation to Mark Shriver to speak at commencement. 

Prayers for Fr. Sean Sheridan and Franciscan University

/in /by

For several years, The Cardinal Newman Society has had the honor and privilege of working closely with Father Sean Sheridan, TOR, president of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio. We ask Catholics to join us in prayer for Father Sheridan, who today announced his resignation, and for an outstanding successor to lead Franciscan University, which we are proud to recommend in The Newman Guide as one of America’s best Catholic colleges.

An expert in canon law and Ex corde Ecclesiae, the Vatican constitution on Catholic higher education, Father Sheridan has been steadfastly devoted to the Catholic mission of Franciscan University. Earlier this year, he invited all of the university’s faculty and staff to join in the Oath of Fidelity as an outward sign of their fidelity and commitment to faithful Catholic education.

Looking forward, we hope that the next president—whether another priest or one of the lay men and women whom Franciscan University has served so well—will continue to uphold the vision of Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman and Pope St. John Paul II for the Catholic university. We trust that Franciscan University will continue to unite faith and reason in the teaching and pursuit of truth, and that it will continue to hire mission-fit professors and staff who are role models for students inside and outside of the classroom.

May God bless Father Sheridan in his next steps, and may God bless Franciscan University as it continues to provide students a thoroughly Catholic education and formation.

Mount St. Mary’s University Urged to Rescind Commencement Honors Invitation

/in /by

The Cardinal Newman Society is shocked and dismayed to learn that Mount St. Mary’s University in Emmitsburg, Md.—an institution recommended in our Newman Guide for its faithful Catholic identity—plans to honor Mark Shriver as its 2019 commencement speaker and award him an honorary doctorate of humane letters.

The Newman Society has expressed our deep concern to Mount President Dr. Timothy Trainor, noting the possibility of scandal and the apparent violation of the U.S. bishops’ policy against such honors in the statement, “Catholics in Political Life.” We have urged that the University reconsider and rescind its invitation and stand strong in its Catholic identity, as it has done so well in recent years.

Nevertheless, President Trainor has responded that the honors will occur on May 11. We have therefore shared our concerns with Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore and Bishop Emeritus Paul Loverde of Arlington, who sit on the Mount’s board of trustees. We will also continue to express these concerns publicly, with our members, and with others in the Mount community.

The Newman Society urges all faithful Catholics to pray for a change of heart at Mount St. Mary’s University and the avoidance of scandal, which contradicts and undermines the purpose of Catholic education.

Cooperation in Abortion

The Mount’s press release notes that Mark Shriver is CEO of Save the Children Action Network and vice president for advocacy at Save the Children, and he will speak about “leading an ethical purpose-driven life.” Save the Children promotes “family planning” in coordination with the pro-abortion Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and sponsors “sexuality education” that is directly opposed to Catholic moral teaching on sexuality, marriage, and the dignity of human life.

Shriver was a pro-abortion rights politician who served in the Maryland House of Delegates from 1995 to 2003 and failed a bid for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2002. Shriver garnered a 100 percent rating by NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland. In a 2002 Washington Post interview, Shriver stated, “Women’s issues are critically important and I will continue to fight for a women’s right to choose; family planning funds; maternal and child health funding and education for girls both here and abroad.”

Aside from these failings, Shriver has done good and admirable work which the Mount wishes to recognize and honor. But Shriver’s public actions and positions cannot simply be ignored, especially as they are fully integrated with his work at Save the Children and his public notoriety. Mount St. Mary’s would cause scandal by honoring Mr. Shriver, both among the Mount’s students and in the general public.

Apparent Violation of Bishops’ Policy

In honoring Mr. Shriver, the Mount would seem to violate the U.S. bishops’ policy in “Catholics in Political Life,” which reads:

“It is the teaching of the Catholic Church from the very beginning, founded on her understanding of her Lord’s own witness to the sacredness of human life, that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified. If those who perform an abortion and those who cooperate willingly in the action are fully aware of the objective evil of what they do, they are guilty of grave sin and thereby separate themselves from God’s grace. This is the constant and received teaching of the Church. It is, as well, the conviction of many other people of good will.

“To make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong. This is the point most recently highlighted in official Catholic teaching. The legal system as such can be said to cooperate in evil when it fails to protect the lives of those who have no protection except the law. In the United States of America, abortion on demand has been made a constitutional right by a decision of the Supreme Court. Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members of the human race is to sin against justice. Those who formulate law therefore have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good.

“…The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.” [Emphasis added.]

Further information on Church teaching related to Catholic honors and platforms can be found in this report on the Newman Society’s website.

Pivotal Moment for Mount St. Mary’s

What should we make of this? Tragically, we see cases like this too often at Jesuit and other Catholic colleges. Commencement honors are a public display of a University’s priorities. We would hope that a Catholic university that is committed to the truth of Catholic teaching would strongly prefer to invite good role models who conform to Catholic moral teaching.

Often when we raise concerns about honors and speaking platforms at Catholic colleges, there is an understandable reaction against restricting academic freedom. While we note that a commencement ceremony is not an academic forum open to dialogue, rarely is a commencement address an academic lecture, and never is an honorary degree an academic exercise; nevertheless, we appreciate the concern for freedom. We respond with this question: given the opportunity to choose a speaker and honoree that reflects upon the college, why would a Catholic institution ever freely and knowingly choose someone whose public actions and statements are in conflict with Catholic teaching on grave moral issues, thereby risking scandal and diminishing the character of the institution? What is Catholic education, if it chooses knowingly to confuse its students and the public on the Church’s clear moral teachings? It is not Catholic education.

The Mount would do well to remember its deep Catholic roots: it was founded in 1808 by French missionary Father John DuBois, a refugee of religious persecution, and sits on land once frequented by Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton, the first American-born saint and founder of the Sisters of Charity.

Today the Mount includes a University, a seminary, and the National Shrine Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes, the oldest American replica of the shrine in France. The Newman Society has been proud to highlight the Mount’s strong core curriculum, abundance of spiritual life opportunities, competitive Division I athletics with team chaplains for every sport, and wholesome student life activities.

It was at Mount St. Mary’s that the Newman Society’s former Center for the Advancement of Catholic Higher Education was housed for several years. It was led by Monsignor Stuart Swetland, former vice president for Catholic identity and mission, and strongly supported by Dr. Thomas Powell, former president of the University. The Center studied and promoted best practices for colleges to strengthen their Catholic identity.

We hope and pray that the University continues to be a model Catholic university by rescinding its commencement honor invitation to Mr. Shriver. We pray that the deep Catholic heritage of the Mount will be remembered, protected, and promoted.

The fact is that every Catholic college today faces a strong pull from the culture to compromise Catholic identity and secularize. Only those Catholic colleges that are intentional about remaining faithful to their Catholic mission will be able to avoid the temptation of compromise and hypocrisy.

A final note on The Newman Guide: Our recommendations in The Newman Guide are not written in stone, and we reevaluate every college in the Guide before every new edition is published at NewmanGuide.org. The Newman Society’s first priorities are to serve the needs of Catholic families and to promote the authentic mission of Catholic education, wherever and however it may be provided to our precious young people, who deserve genuine Catholic formation.

Catholics Should Be Wary of ‘Elite’ Colleges

/in , , , /by

Lately we’ve been hearing about a college admissions scandal and FBI raids of parents’ homes. But Catholic families may be being cheated by an even bigger fraud.

The news is abuzz about indicted celebrities who abused the power of their wealth to get children into prestigious colleges, ahead of deserving students. It’s a classic American scandal, pitting the wealthy against the little guy.

But there’s more to it than that. “If education is what the beast says it is, a mere means to the end of greater wealth and prestige, then what these parents did makes perfect sense,” writes scholar Benjamin Myers at First Things. “…Many of those outraged by the behavior of these celebrity parents share the foundational assumptions that make sense of such actions—that the point of education is not to ‘get wisdom,’ in the words of Proverbs, but to gain prestige. The parents who bribed their kids’ way into college were just feeding the beast, the same as everybody else.”

In other words, Catholic families who aspire for their children to attend college to obtain a ticket to success instead of forming their minds, hearts and spirits are missing the point of college—at least what the Church deems worthy of young Catholic students.

More than the bribery scandal, the greater fraud in American academia is the pretense that “elite” colleges still have the value they had just a lifetime ago, let alone the value that the great universities had centuries ago. For many big-name universities today, their reputations were built in another time and on another sort of education.

Modern secular education

To be sure, elite universities offer many advantages to their students. They are able to hire brilliant professors, sometimes including prominent Catholics like Robert George at Princeton and Mary Ann Glendon at Harvard. They often have vast resources for research, facilities, libraries, etc. And a diploma from an elite institution can be a ticket to wealth, success and distinction.

These are valuable in their own right, and there are many factors in choosing a college that may lead a student to attend a secular institution—or worse, a corrupted and highly secularized Catholic institution. But Catholics need to be aware and highly cautious about the rest of the baggage that comes with most of modern higher education—especially our “prestigious” universities.

Today many are dominated by identity politics and political correctness, instead of rational dialogue and reasoned argument. Studies tend to be either career-centered, with an emphasis on practical training, or narrow and biased distortions of the liberal arts. The campus life is morally toxic and frequently corrupts the souls of students.

Most important, they lack Christianity. In our secular age, it’s understandable that most students don’t value the insights of Christianity on science, history, the arts and humanity. But Catholic families should value them above all.

Newman’s vision

Blessed John Henry Newman, the 19th-century theologian and educator who will be canonized later this year, argued rightly that the only complete college is a faithfully Catholic one. That’s because higher education should be open to all truth and committed to integrating all truth—thus the word “university.”

At a faithfully Catholic college, the knowledge that is revealed to us by Christ and His Church rightly informs every other branch of study, makes it richer, and opens our eyes to greater understanding. A college that rejects and excludes Christian truth is a lesser college.

Higher education should not be focused primarily on accumulating facts and skills, although that’s the emphasis of most college learning today. Newman said he didn’t care much what subjects a student studied, as long as he learned to reason well, organized and prioritized knowledge, solved problems, and acquired wisdom.

And a higher education is not just about academics—it’s about forming young people to fulfill everything that God desires for them, to become more fully human. A faithful Catholic college like those recommended in The Newman Guide teach not only wisdom but also virtue, and they form students in the Faith and the Sacraments. They attend to campus life outside the classroom and lead students on the path to holiness. This is not contrary to learning, but central to it.

Sadly, many of the elite Catholic colleges like those involved in the admissions scandals—Georgetown University and the University of San Diego—have moved away from this sort of valuable education, even while resting their reputations on the excellent education that they once provided.

Even the Ivy League institutions once understood the value of a faithful, integrated education. Did you know that most Ivy League universities began as Christian institutions? For decades now, they have compromised their original mission, yet they retain their prestige in the eyes of the world.

A faithful Catholic college… now that’s an education worth reaching for! But don’t try bribing admissions officials to get in.

This article was originally published at the National Catholic Register.

Catholic Lessons From the College Admissions Scandal

/in /by

The college admissions fraud that was revealed last week brings up an important topic for Catholic families: what should be our priorities in the college search?

Actresses, wealthy business owners and others are accused of acting desperately to secure the “big school name” for their son or daughter. The parents allegedly found ways for their student to cheat on the SAT or ACT, paid off coaches to list their son or daughter as a recruited athlete, and utilized a variety of other methods to cheat their way into the university.

And for what? So that their student could attend an “elite” college, list that alma mater on their resume, and the parents could earn bragging rights with friends?

It’s a sad reflection on the state of higher education today, but our culture tells all of us that a prestigious college degree is a ticket to wealth and success. Catholic families know that there are more important priorities, yet we too are susceptible to college marketing and neglecting the higher things.

“Many today are so concerned about getting into this or that elite college, but unfortunately, for many, they are not really seeking a true education – just a ‘brand name’ to go on their resume to assist them with future career plans,” explained Tom McFadden, vice president of enrollment at Christendom College in Front Royal, Virginia.

College should prepare students for a career, but also for the rest of their lives. College can be a time for students to grow in mind, body and soul; discern their vocation; grow in their faith; and so much more—but that means choosing a college that is serious about Christian formation and devoted to all truth, including absolute fidelity to the Catholic faith.

There’s an “irony in this scandal,” according to Michael McMahon, vice president for enrollment management at the University of Mary in Bismarck, North Dakota. “We have parents exercising vice while trying to get their kids into college, the very institution that Blessed John Henry Newman writes is for ‘the formation of character, intellectual and moral.’”

Thankfully, we have a number of faithful Catholic colleges that haven’t forgotten Newman’s vision for Catholic education. When navigating the college search, parents would do well to consider the impact on this life and the one to come.

Families should “avoid getting caught up in the quest for prestige” and instead “put a lot of thought into their child’s particular personality and strengths, as well as their priorities for the child’s formation,” advises Lizzie Griffin Smith, assistant vice president of enrollment at the University of Dallas in Irving, Texas.

The college admissions fraud revealed last week certainly isn’t the first or the last of its kind. But Catholic families can set an important example by putting the focus back on the most important things in the college search.

This article was first published at the National Catholic Register.

Saint John Paul II: His Legacy of Renewal in Faithful Catholic Education

/in /by

Throughout his pontificate (1978-2005), Pope John Paul II was a champion of fidelity and authentic Catholic identity in education. Within his first six months, he signaled his intention to rein in dissent with Sapientia Christiana, the apostolic constitution defining discipline for ecclesiastical universities and faculties. He later approved the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which for the first time in Church history included canons specifically governing Catholic colleges, including the mandatum for theologians.

With Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Saint John Paul II squelched the “liberation theology” movement and silenced several dissident theologians. In 1986, the Vatican forbade dissident Rev. Charles Curran from teaching theology at The Catholic University of America—and the next year, the Holy Father visited Catholic University to deliver an address urging fidelity and reform throughout Catholic education.

His Congregation for Catholic Education issued important guidance in “The Religious Dimension of Education in a Catholic School” (1988) and “The Catholic School on the Threshold of the Third Millennium” (1997). Pope John Paul II gave us the Catechism of the Catholic Church, with great influence over Catholic education and school textbooks. And in 1990, he issued Ex corde Ecclesiae, requiring every Catholic college to demonstrate an “institutional commitment” to the faith, regardless of lay or Church ownership.

With two key encyclicals—Veritatis Splendor (1993) and Fides et Ratio (1998)—Pope John Paul II restored appreciation for what lies at the heart of Catholic education: the absolute compatibility and unity of faith and reason. The first encyclical included a strong message to Catholic educators:

A particular responsibility is incumbent upon Bishops with regard to Catholic institutions. … It falls to them, in communion with the Holy See, both to grant the title “Catholic” to Church-related schools, universities, health-care facilities, and counseling services, and, in cases of a serious failure to live up to that title, to take it away.

Many of John Paul II’s teachings were met with strong resistance from those opposed to strengthening Catholic identity. But inspired by this saintly professor-pope, the Newman Society set out to promote and defend his vision for faithful education. Today, thanks to the Grace of God, the prayers and support of our dedicated members, and a new generation of faithful educators, there is a much needed renewal of Catholic education underway.

Georgetown University

‘Christian’ Abortionist Lectures at Georgetown

/in , , /by

Last Wednesday—as pro-lifers from around the country began pouring into Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life, including thousands of Catholic high school students and college students—Georgetown University hosted a lecture by abortionist Willie Parker.

According to College Fix, the event was co-sponsored by H*yas for Choice, a pro-abortion student club that Georgetown does not officially recognize but nevertheless gives almost free rein on campus. It was also sponsored by the University’s officially recognized Lecture Fund and College Democrats.

Parker is an active abortionist, killing innocent babies in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania. He is also an outspoken activist for abortion rights—the apparent reason for his lecture—as chairman of Physicians for Reproductive Health and the author of Life’s Work: A Moral Argument for Choice. He received NARAL’s Champions of Choice award and Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger Award.

At Georgetown, Parker reportedly cited Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Jesus Christ’s parable of the Good Samaritan to explain to students how he discovered “a moral and ethical obligation to provide abortion care.”

“I broke through the cocoon of religious custom that held me bound,” he boasted.

Moreover, Parker reportedly defended even the most gruesome methods of abortion, declaring, “No procedure should be politicized and prohibited to the peril and detriment of someone for whom that procedure might be vital to have.”

College Fix spoke to a leader of H*yas for Choice, who justified Parker’s lecture as a counterbalance to the annual Cardinal O’Connor Conference on Life, a pro-life student event at Georgetown that occurs around the March for Life. The O’Connor Conference is certainly a credit to Georgetown, but it hardly outweighs the many documented scandals, including blatant abortion advocacy.

Three years ago, Georgetown appalled faithful Catholics by hosting a lecture by Cecile Richards, then-president of Planned Parenthood. The Archdiocese of Washington publicly opposed the lecture.“What we lament and find sadly lacking in this choice by the student group is any reflection of what should be an environment of morality, ethics and human decency that one expects on a campus that asserts its Jesuit and Catholic history and identity,” the Archdiocese said in a statement.

The Archdiocese should be doubly concerned about an active abortionist—a man who not only worked as medical director for Planned Parenthood Metropolitan Washington, D.C., but who by his own hands destroys innocent babies in the womb and then is welcomed at the nation’s oldest Catholic university to preach to students about the “Christianity” of his practice.

This is blasphemy of the worst kind, to claim belief in Christ as a defense for abortion. It is certainly not Catholic education! Catholic families should recognize this and seek out colleges that faithfully and consistently uphold Catholic teaching and the dignity of human life.

This article was first published at The National Catholic Register.

Are Jesuits Proud of Their Pro-Abortion Alumni?

/in , , , /by

As the 116th Congress began in January, the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities (AJCU) trumpeted the surprising fact that more than 10 percent of the U.S. Congress—55 of 535 members in the House and Senate—graduated from American Jesuit institutions.

But in their widely reported press release, the Jesuit educators also displayed a callous disregard for the moral formation of these graduates, most of whom actively work against the Church on today’s most important human rights issue: the right to life.

Upon reading news reports about the Jesuit alumni in Congress, my immediate question on Twitter (@NewmanSocPres) was almost reflexive: “Are they pro-life?”

I don’t really expect them to be, given the direction of Jesuit higher education and the many pro-abortion scandals on their campuses, including the recent lecture by an abortionist touting the Christian virtue of his practice at Georgetown University. But of what value is Catholic education if its graduates are not formed well in faith and morals, the most basic of which is respect for life? Could we at least expect that from highly secularized but officially Catholic colleges?

Moreover, it seems strange that even the most faithful Catholic news media didn’t evaluate the voting records of these alumni before touting the 10 percent-in-Congress statistic as—it probably seemed to most readers—good news for Catholics and a reason to attend Jesuit colleges.

It’s not good news! And it’s yet another piece of evidence that these colleges are having a detrimental impact on society instead of advancing Catholic thought and culture.

Pro-abortion voting records

I reviewed the voting records of the 55 Jesuit-educated senators and representatives using the pro-life scorecard published by National Right to Life (NRLC). If we combine NRLC scores for the 115th Congress (2017-2018) and the 114th Congress (2015-2016) for the 47 Jesuit college alumni who voted in one or both of those years, then we find that only eight of them voted pro-life 100 percent of the time. (God bless them!)

On the other hand, 36 of the alumni had NRLC scores of zero. That means that they voted 100 percent of the time against pro-life objectives.

Three others had mixed records:

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska managed to get a 44 percent pro-life rating, largely because she voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. But Murkowski voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (prohibiting abortions before 20 weeks of gestation) and supported funding for Planned Parenthood.

Sen. Robert Casey of Pennsylvania scored just 18 percent. He supported the 20-week ban, but he repeatedly voted for Planned Parenthood funding.

Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas had a mixed record of 43 percent. He claims to be pro-life but opposed efforts to reduce funding to Planned Parenthood.

Seven of the alumni are new to the House of Representatives and had no voting record in the last two Congressional sessions. But according to statements made during their campaigns, it appears that five strongly support legalized abortion and only two are pro-life:

Gil Cisneros (California): As a candidate, Cisneros strongly defended “women’s right to choose” and funding for Planned Parenthood.

Greg Pence (Indiana): The Catholic brother of Vice President Mike Pence ran for Congress on a pro-life platform.

Mikie Sherrill (New Jersey): Endorsed by the abortion lobby NARAL, Sherrill said she was “proud to stand with NARAL and the work they do to protect the rights of women.”

Xochitl Torres Small (New Mexico): The former Planned Parenthood employee supports funding for abortion and even opposes limits on late-term abortions.

Greg Stanton (Arizona): While mayor of Phoenix, Stanton urged Congress to fund Planned Parenthood and co-chaired a fundraiser for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona.

Bryan Steil (Wisconsin): The pro-life candidate was endorsed by Wisconsin Right to Life.

Lori Trahan (Massachusetts): Candidate Trahan vowed to fight “bans on abortion, bans on private and public insurance coverage of abortion, and the frequent attempts to regulate abortion providers out of existence.”

These campaign positions were upheld last month, when the U.S. House voted to overturn President Trump’s ban on foreign aid to pro-abortion organizations. Only Pence and Steil voted against it, while the other five Jesuit college alumni who are new to Congress voted for it.

Delegate Stacey Plaskett, another of the Jesuit college alumni, is a nonvoting House member from the Virgin Islands and has no voting record. But last year, Plaskett made a commitment to NARAL to fight to keep abortion legal across the United States.

Not ashamed?

The final tally: only 10 of the 55 Jesuit college alumni are clearly pro-life, 42 are strongly pro-abortion, and three have mixed records that are unworthy of anyone who had a Catholic education.

If the Jesuits think that their 10 percent representation in Congress is so significant as to warrant public celebration, then why are they not ashamed that 82 percent of those alumni oppose the Church on such important issues as abortion and taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood?

Or to put it another way: Why does secular prestige appear to be more important to the Jesuit colleges than the slaughter of innocent babies?

Below is the tally for the Jesuit college alumni, with details from the AJCU:

Sen. John Barrasso (WY) – NRLC rating 100
B.A. Georgetown U. (1974), M.D. Georgetown U. (1978)

Sen. Robert P. Casey, Jr. (PA) – NRLC rating 18
B.A. Coll. of the Holy Cross (1982)

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (IL) – NRLC rating 0
B.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (1966), J.D. Georgetown U. (1969)

Sen. Mazie Hirono (HI) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1978)

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (VT) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1964)

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (NV) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Gonzaga U. (1990)

Sen. Edward J. Markey (MA) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Boston Coll. (1968), J.D. Boston Coll. (1972)

Sen. Robert Menendez (NJ) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Saint Peter’s U. (1976)

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (AK) – NRLC rating 44
B.A. Georgetown U. (1980)

Sen. Gary Peters (MI) – NRLC rating 0
M.B.A. U. of Detroit Mercy (1984)

Sen. Dan Sullivan (AK) – NRLC rating 100
J.D.-M.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (1993)

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Jr. (MD) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1990)

Rep. Vern Buchanan (FL) – NRLC rating 100
M.B.A. U. of Detroit Mercy (1986)

Rep. David Cicilline (RI) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1986)

Rep. Gil Cisneros (CA) – elected 2018
M.B.A. Regis U. (2002)

Rep. Henry Cuellar (TX) – NRLC rating 43
B.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (1978)

Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (CT) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Marymount Coll. (now part of Fordham U.) (1964)

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (CA) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Coll. of the Holy Cross (1974)

Rep. Debbie Dingell (MI) – NRLC rating 0
B.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (1975), M.A.L.S. Georgetown U. (1998)

Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (NE) – NRLC rating 100
M.P.P. Georgetown U. (1986)

Rep. Lois Frankel (FL) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1973)

Rep. Mike Gallagher (WI) – NRLC rating 100
M.A. Georgetown U. (2012 & 2013), Ph.D. Georgetown U. (2015)

Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ) – NRLC rating 100
B.S. Creighton U. (1981), D.D.S. Creighton U. (1985)

Rep. Trey Hollingsworth (IN) – NRLC rating 100
M.P.P. Georgetown U. (2014)

Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (MD) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1966)

Rep. Jared Huffman (CA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Boston Coll. (1990)

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (WA) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Georgetown U. (1986)

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (NY) – NRLC rating 0
M.P.P. Georgetown U. (1994)

Rep. William Keating (MA) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Boston Coll. (1974), M.B.A. Boston Coll. (1982)

Rep. Ann McLane Kuster (NH) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1984)

Rep. Ted Lieu (CA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Georgetown U. (1994)

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (CA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Santa Clara U. (1975)

Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Boston Coll. (1991)

Rep. Gwen Moore (WI) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Marquette U. (1978)

Rep. Stephanie Murphy (FL) – NRLC rating 0
M.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (2004)

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Fordham U. (1978)

Rep. Jimmy Panetta (CA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Santa Clara U. (1996)

Rep. William J. Pascrell, Jr. (NJ) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Fordham U. (1959), M.A. Fordham U. (1961)

Rep. Greg Pence (IN) – elected 2018
B.A. Loyola U. Chicago (1979), M.B.A. Loyola U. Chicago (1983)

Delegate Stacey Plaskett (VI) – nonvoting member
B.S.F.S. Georgetown U. (1988)

Rep. Michael Quigley (IL) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Loyola U. Chicago (1989)

Rep. Francis Rooney (FL) – NRLC rating 100
B.A. Georgetown U. (1975) , J.D. Georgetown U. (1978)

Rep. Robert C. Scott (VA) – NRLC rating 0
J.D. Boston Coll. (1973)

Rep. Mikie Sherrill (NJ) – elected 2018
J.D. Georgetown U. (2007)

Rep. Albio Sires (NJ) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Saint Peter’s U. (1974)

Rep. Xochitl Torres Small (NM) – elected 2018
B.A. Georgetown U. (2007)

Rep. Adam Smith (WA) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Fordham U. (1987)

Rep. Greg Stanton (AZ) – elected 2018
B.A. Marquette U. (1992)

Rep. Bryan Steil (WI) – elected 2018
B.S. Georgetown U. (2003)

Rep. Tom Suozzi (NY) – NRLC rating 0
B.S. Boston Coll. (1984), J.D. Fordham U. (1989)

Rep. Lori Trahan (MA) – elected 2018
B.A. Georgetown U. (1995)

Rep. Juan C. Vargas (CA) – NRLC rating 0
M.A. Fordham U. (1987)

Rep. Filemon Vela (TX) – NRLC rating 0
B.A. Georgetown U. (1985)

Rep. Peter J. Visclosky (IN) – NRLC rating 0
L.L.M. Georgetown U. (1982)

Rep. Peter Welch (VT) – NRLC rating 0
A.B. Coll. of the Holy Cross (1969)

This article was first published at the National Catholic Register.