The news is filled these days with reports of sexual assaults against college students, even at some of the most committed and faithful Catholic colleges.
The numbers are disputed, but it’s appalling that even one parent’s daughter would suffer such a violation during what should be happy years of growth in college. The victims of these horrible crimes deserve our prayers, compassion and support as well as justice from our legal system.
Moreover, Catholic colleges should be prepared to offer Christian counseling and support for victims. Too often, colleges of all types and sizes have been found ill-equipped or unprepared to address what appears to be a growing problem.
Ultimately—and most importantly—the assaults must be stopped. Off campus, this is largely the responsibility of law enforcement, although a proper moral formation of students at Catholic colleges can help substantially. On campus, colleges bear great responsibility for preventing these crimes from occurring in the first place.
Insisting upon a culture of chastity and sobriety in campus residences helps protect students while upholding Catholic beliefs and identity.
It’s a commonsense solution.
And it is in this respect, that some of America’s most faithful Catholic colleges have important lessons to teach the rest of higher education—even most other Catholic colleges.
By preserving traditional norms for student access and behavior in campus dorms, faithful Catholic colleges effectively combat on-campus sexual assault.
Such policies come naturally for faithful Catholic institutions, because they are firmly rooted in Catholic morality and fulfill the colleges’ mission of human formation in the light of Christ.
If only the rest of the nearly 200 Catholic, residential colleges would do the same. Catholic families should demand it. It’s long past time that Catholic colleges get on board and set an example of proper campus life, rather than invite the tragic consequences of the secular campus model.
Insisting upon a culture of chastity and sobriety in campus residences helps protect students while upholding Catholic beliefs and identity. It’s a commonsense solution.
Real prevention
Focusing on prevention efforts in campus dorms is how colleges can most immediately and effectively have an impact on sexual assault.
Although most sexual assaults against college students occur off campus—where college leaders have no control over the environment or student behavior—a sizable portion, about a third, occur within student dorms. That’s where colleges bear direct responsibility for protecting their students.
According to the federally funded “Campus Sexual Assault Study” (2007), which considered offenses against female students from 2005 to 2007, 28 percent of the assaults that involved the use of physical force and 36 percent of the assaults against an incapacitated (often drunk) victim occurred in campus residences.
…28 percent of the assaults that involved the use of physical force and 36 percent of the assaults against an incapacitated (often drunk) victim occurred in campus residences.
For most colleges today, preventing sexual assault means educating students about consent to sexual activity, empowering women to avoid and resist assault, and strengthening disciplinary and reporting procedures. These are all very important strategies, and every Catholic college should embrace them.
Still, much more could be done on campus, where college leaders have the authority to regulate student behavior and the environment. Catholic colleges should be leading by example!
Drinking and the hook-up culture
A campus culture of chastity and sobriety is important to reducing sexual crimes, and Catholic colleges should have the moral courage to make it happen.
Alcohol is strongly associated with sexual assault. A report published in 2000 by the U.S. Department of Justice, “The Sexual Victimization of College Women,” found that “frequently drinking enough to get drunk” was one of the four main factors contributing to sexual assault. And the Justice Department’s 2014 report, “Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among College-Age Females, 1995-2013” (2014) found that 47 percent of victims perceived their attacker was drinking or using drugs.
These crimes are also associated with the “hook-up” culture on many campuses. One study, “Some Types of Hookups May Be Riskier Than Others for Campus Sexual Assault” (Psychological Trauma, 2016) found that 78 percent of on-campus sexual assaults took place during casual sexual encounters.
Sex and drunkenness are commonplace on the typical college campus. So, we have two risk factors for sexual assault—drinking and casual sex—occurring frequently in campus dorms.
So, we have two risk factors for sexual assault—drinking and casual sex—occurring frequently in campus dorms.
Even when alcohol is restricted on campus, students may return to their rooms intoxicated from off-campus drinking. Isn’t it common sense that colleges should strive to reduce opportunities for sexual activity in student residences, especially at the times when students are more likely to be drinking?
Sadly, few secular colleges today would attempt any restriction on sexual activity. College leaders, the media, and even many victims’ advocates deem casual sex a rite (and right) of passage for college students. They are therefore limited to prevention strategies that have minimal impact on the dorm environment.
But Catholic colleges that take their identity and mission seriously should actively and enthusiastically embrace policies that reduce sexual activity in campus residences.
Every college serious about its Catholicity should be eager to protect the bodies and souls of its students.
Creating and fostering a culture of chastity and sobriety in campus residences is a commonsense way to create a safe and moral environment. Moreover, it is elemental to a faithful Catholic education.
Catholic colleges especially need to be concerned with more than just sexual assault. Consensual sexual activity is a serious sin that has two victims of their own poor decisions. Every college serious about its Catholicity should be eager to protect the bodies and souls of its students.
Step one: single-sex residence halls
A first step toward reducing sexual assault on campus is to designate all dorms single-sex. Coed residence halls have been associated with greater alcohol abuse and sexual activity, as documented by Dr. Chris Kaczor in his 2012 report for The Cardinal Newman Society, “Strategies for Reducing Binge Drinking and a ‘Hook-Up’ Culture on Campus”.
A 2009 study in the Journal of American College Health, “The Impact of Living in Co-ed Resident Halls on Risk-Taking Among College Students,” found that “students in co-ed housing (12.6%) were more than twice as likely as students in gender-specific housing (4.9%) to indicate that they had had 3 or more sexual partners in the last year.” The study also found a higher likelihood of binge drinking in coed dorms.
And another study, “The Impact of Current Residence and High School Drinking on Alcohol Problems Among College Students” (Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 2002), found that “students living in coed dormitories, when compared with students in single-gender dorms, incurred more problem consequences related to drinking.”
Notre Dame’s experience indicates that, while single-sex residence halls should be helpful in reducing sexual assault, they are only a first step to building a campus culture of sobriety and chastity.
The vast majority of Catholic colleges resemble their secular counterparts in sponsoring coed dorms—but thankfully, not all do. The Newman Society has identified more than 10 percent of America’s Catholic colleges that have bucked the trend of the past 50 years. Colleges with single-sex residence halls include some of the nation’s most faithful Catholic colleges and even a few that have waffled on their Catholic identity.
Most notable among the latter group is the University of Notre Dame. This is an instructive case, since its students report multiple sexual assaults in the University’s single-sex dorms each year. Notre Dame’s experience indicates that, while single-sex residence halls should be helpful in reducing sexual assault, they are only a first step to building a campus culture of sobriety and chastity.
Step two: stronger visitation policies
The second step—arguably more important than single-sex dorms—is for colleges to adopt and enforce policies restricting opposite-sex guests in dorm rooms.
Catholic parents understand the effects of temptation and our fallen nature. They know that there is good reason for never letting their teenager have a boyfriend or girlfriend alone in a bedroom. It’s what Catholics have long described as a “near occasion of sin.”
Why do so many Catholic colleges ignore this basic understanding? Don’t the high rates of abortions, STDs and sexual assaults among young men and women teach us something about the limits of self-control?
… 82 percent of U.S. Catholic colleges allow closed-door visitation until 2 a.m. or later on weekends….
More than a quarter of Catholic colleges have open visitation at all hours of the night!
Since most campus residences are little more than bedrooms with a chair and desk, it’s common sense that they should be off-limits entirely to opposite-sex visitors.
Instead, 82 percent of U.S. Catholic colleges allow closed-door visitation until 2 a.m. or later on weekends, and 88 percent allow it until midnight or later on weekdays, according Adam Wilson’s 2016 report on visitation policies for The Cardinal Newman Society.
More than a quarter of Catholic colleges have open visitation at all hours of the night!
Think about that for a moment. What message does it send to students? And what care does it show for helping students remain chaste?
Loose visitation policies indicate low expectations and suggest a college’s lack of concern for natural consequences, including sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy, abortion, and (have Catholics forgotten?) mortal sin.
And the consequences might also include sexual assault.
The “Campus Sexual Assault Study” found that 52 percent of forced sexual assaults and 90 percent of assaults on incapacitated victims took place between midnight and 6 a.m.—and most others between 6 p.m. and midnight. The later at night, the greater the likelihood of drinking and casual sex, and therefore the greater the danger for students.
Couldn’t Catholic colleges, then, restrict opposite-sex visiting hours to the daytime as an immediate intermediary step?
Better still, colleges should protect students by sensibly forbidding opposite-sex guests in campus bedrooms at nearly all times, like many evangelical Christian colleges and a few standout Catholic colleges. These include:
- Christendom College (Va.)
- John Paul the Great University (Calif.)
- Northeast Catholic College (N.H.)
- Thomas Aquinas College (Calif.)
- Thomas More College (N.H.), and
- Wyoming Catholic College. (Wyo.)
Others, like Franciscan University and Ave Maria University, have limited visiting hours and require open doors.
No more excuses
We have discussed these ideas with Catholic college leaders, and one common explanation for allowing opposite-sex visitation and coed dorms is that students need opportunities to socialize. Gathering in dorm rooms has become an accepted and even expected part of the college experience.
There are also physical plant constraints. Despite all the amenities of the typical campus, most colleges have not created adequate spaces for students to gather outside their private rooms.
Some leaders focus on the link between alcohol and sexual assault, strictly enforcing sobriety on campus while taking a softer approach on sexual activity with messaging that appeals to students’ virtue.
Drinking, however, often occurs off campus, with later consequences for on-campus behavior. And relying on students’ self-restraint amid a culture obsessed with sexuality and pornography seems quite risky and naïve.
Some college leaders worry that they’ll lose students if opposite-sex visitation isn’t allowed.
The difficulties, then, of building a campus environment that demands chastity and sobriety in campus residences are real enough. But they seem surmountable at a college committed to safety and Catholic morality.
The difficulties, then, of building a campus environment that demands chastity and sobriety in campus residences are real enough. But they seem surmountable at a college committed to safety and Catholic morality.
Especially for Catholic colleges, protecting students’ health and their immortal souls must be the higher priority.
Especially for Catholic colleges, protecting students’ health and their immortal souls must be the higher priority.
Adopting commonsense student dorm room policies won’t stop off-campus sexual assaults, and it won’t solve every problem on campus. It doesn’t mitigate the responsibility to provide adequate support for victims of assault. But it could help prevent the many assaults that do occur in dorm rooms as a predictable consequence of casual sex and drinking, while upholding the Catholic mission of the college.
It is here that college officials and those concerned with combatting sexual assaults should emulate the commonsense and faithful policies of some of the Newman Guide colleges noted above.
Ten years ago, Pope Benedict told Catholic educators in the U.S. that the crisis of truth is rooted in a crisis of faith.
Catholic colleges should face the ugly truth that, for many of them, their dorm policies may have the effect of undermining their important faith-filled missions. The fact that this is unintentional—and perhaps even contradicted by other efforts to teach moral behavior—does not make the problems go away.
Catholic colleges should face the ugly truth that, for many of them, their dorm policies may have the effect of undermining their important faith-filled missions.
There is nothing anyone can do to eliminate concupiscence and evil in the world. All the more reason that we believe every Catholic college should build a campus climate that celebrates chaste, Catholic living. This is what Catholic families should expect from Catholic education.
The Cardinal Newman Society’s mission is to promote and defend faithful Catholic education. We believe that families have a right to expect that a Catholic education will uphold Truth in accord with the timeless teaching and tradition of the Catholic Church, so as to prepare young people for this world and for eternity with God in heaven.
So Many Choices: How to Know Which College Is Right for You
/in Blog Newman Guide Articles/by Cardinal Newman Society StaffThe typical advice you will read in books and hear from well-meaning friends and advisors focuses on two priorities in the college search: Will the college help you get a good job? And will you have fun? But there’s much more to choosing a college!
Don’t get us wrong: both questions above are important. College is expensive, and the reality of our modern society is that, for right or wrong, a lot of careers require a college degre. And while you’re working hard at it, why go someplace where you’ll be miserable?
But keep in mind several other key priorities, such as whether you’ll get a good education, sustain and grow in your faith, cultivate your talents, discern your calling from God, and discover or confirm your vocation in life—whether it’s marriage, the priesthood, religious life, or the single life.
Faithful Catholic colleges — like those recommended at The Newman Guide online — can help you do all this and more.
Finding the right college for you boils down to a few things:
CONSIDER YOUR PERSONALITY
Are you an extrovert or an introvert? Will you learn more and succeed in small classes or in larger ones?
Are you self-motivated, or do you need more structure to succeed?
Faithful Catholic colleges range in size from 50 students to more than 8,000 students. Some are on small campuses located in the heart of a city, while others are on sprawling campuses in rural areas. Consider your personality and the environment that would best help you succeed.
REFLECT ON YOUR FAITH
Is your faith as strong as a rock, or is it shaky? Do you prefer a particular kind of liturgical environment—like praise and worship, or more traditional Masses—to keep you motivated to attend Mass at least every Sunday?
Are you tempted by certain kinds of sins?
What environment will help you avoid them?
Faithful Catholic colleges offer not only a terrific education but also a campus environment that can help you sustain and deepen your faith during your college years. The typical college culture may celebrate some things as “fun”—whether it is gossiping, binge drinking, the hook-up culture, or any other number of things—but as a Catholic, you know that these things hurt you. Put yourself in a campus environment that will help you be holy!
EVALUATE ACADEMIC & EXTRACURRICULAR GOALS
Are there particular sports, clubs or activities that you want to participate in during college?
Do you know the field or course of study you are you interested in, or are you still trying to figure that out?
Faithful Catholic colleges provide a strong liberal arts core curriculum, rooted in the Catholic tradition. This not only prepares you for a particular career but also for life.
You can choose from a wide variety of majors at faithful Catholic colleges, and you will be prepared to excel. For example, if you study nursing, you’ll be ready to respond to ethical dilemmas in the workplace. If you become a math or a history teacher, you’ll know how to teach and share the faith with students.
TAKE THE NEXT STEPS
Once you have thought about these questions, the next step is to dig in and research the colleges that are on your short list. The Newman Guide online and college websites are good places to study the various aspects of the colleges that are most important to you.
But don’t stop there! Call or e-mail college professors and staff in addition to your admissions officer.
Use social media networks to find current and recent students, asking them about their experiences.
The most important part of your evaluation involves a field trip—the campus visit!
Searching for a college doesn’t have to be difficult, but it does take a lot of thought, research, and soul searching. Pray for guidance. With your parents, decide on a college that will provide a strong education and bring you closer to Christ.
Should the Church Be a Permissive Parent?
/in Student Formation Research and Analysis, Youth Synod/by Dr. Dan GuernseyWith concerns swirling around the Vatican Synod on Young People this October, the Church’s appalling failures to protect its young from predators, and the growing scourges of pornography, sexual activity, and STDs among even Catholic youth, it’s the right time to reconsider how the Catholic Church should be attending to the current generation.1
I propose that we need to renew the once-familiar notion of the Church as mother to the Faithful.2 The Church gives us new life through baptism and instructs, feeds, comforts, strengthens, forgives, protects, and challenges us as we seek to make our way through the world and reach our heavenly goal.
Specifically, young people need the Church to maintain an authoritative style of parenting that exhibits both deep concern for the child’s wellbeing and confidence in what is right and true. This image of responsible motherhood suggests a hopeful path forward for today’s Catholic schools, colleges, and youth ministry.
Parenting Styles
Parents may be labeled “authoritarian,” “authoritative,” “indulgent,” and “uninvolved”—these are the “parenting styles” often used by researchers to categorize naturally occurring patterns of parental practices and values.3
An authoritarian parenting style is highly directive, with little or no deference to child input and little warmth. It is marked by obedience, strictness, structure, order, clarity, high demands, and rule orientation. Authoritarian parenting may have low levels of communication and harsh discipline (shaming).
An authoritative parenting style is both demanding and responsive. It is marked by clear standards but with disciplinary methods that are supportive and assertive, rather than simply punitive and restrictive. Authoritative parents balance demandingness and responsiveness: they firmly enforce rules and standards expecting them to be met while encouraging independence and communication.
An indulgent (“permissive”) parenting style is marked by responsiveness, leniency, and empathy more than demands and expectations. It allows for considerable self-regulation, avoids confrontation, and is democratic and engaged. Permissive parenting is marked by tolerance and acceptance of a child’s impulses, makes few demands for mature behavior, and minimizes punishment.
An uninvolved parenting style is marked by very few demands and very little parental responsiveness, and it leans toward neglect and rejection.
It should be clear that this last “uninvolved” style is not conducive to healthy and balanced children. But what do decades of research tell us about the relative merits of the other styles, and how might that guide Holy Mother Church?
The ‘Cool’ Mom
Studies show that authoritarian parenting’s harsh control can lead to even more undesirable behavior in the long run and possibly anxiety and low self-esteem. It may also limit a child’s opportunities and decision-making abilities.4
For Mother Church, the negative impact of employing this style is the stuff of legend and lore. Some older-generation Catholics tell stories of the “bad old days” when nuns beat kids and priests told everyone they were going to Hell each Sunday from the pulpit. Incredibly, some young people today have picked up on the tale. In surveys preparing for the youth synod, they complain that the Church seems out of touch and judgmental.
That’s not a plausible characterization of the Church today, but it could simply be what children have always said about their parents. More than 50 years after the social revolutions of the 1960s and the impact of Vatican II, there is little evidence that today’s youth experience a harsh, shaming, and unresponsive Church. Here’s a thought experiment: List three permissive-oriented Catholic universities, schools, and parishes that you know well. Should be a snap! Now repeat the list for currently authoritarian-oriented universities, schools, and parishes. Not so easy.
Instead of authoritarianism, it’s permissiveness and relativism that saturate all elements of the experience of young people today. The crisis facing current youth is not one of rigid Catholics trying to box them in, but of the permissiveness of liquid modernity drowning them in false tolerance and relativism and leading them to think that any truth claim is short-sighted and mean. The dictatorship of relativism has blinded and enslaved many of our young people, hindering their willingness to seek the truth and conform to it when it is discovered. This may also impede their ability to make meaningful commitments and flourish as dynamic disciples.
The solution to this challenge is not more permissiveness, even though this is a temptation: One can almost hear some youth (or even some adults trying to reach them) saying: “Gee, all of the other churches get to have divorce, contraception, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, cool services, fewer demands, less moralism. Why can’t we?” We know from the sad experience of Protestant sects that this is not a recipe for ecclesial growth and commitment. But there is still the temptation to ditch adult responsibility under the guise of being more “relevant” in the lives of youth. Plus there is comfort in conforming to the age and the very human pleasure of rejoicing in our hip-ness in relation to others who are not as “with it.”
This is how one mother recounts her mom’s group discussions of permissive parenting and attempting to be a child’s friend or “the cool mom”:
Research has revealed that permissive parenting deprives children of the direction and guidance necessary to develop appropriate morals and goals.6 Rejecting discipline (i.e., control, punishment) is related to poorer psychological adjustment in children. Permissive parenting has also been shown to contribute both directly and indirectly to antisocial behavior, including increased conflict orientation in adolescent males.7 The chaotic and inconsistent parenting associated with permissiveness can be harmful to healthy relationships leaving children prone to weaker and ambivalent parent bonding and a feeling of insecurity when encountering an adult world.
These are not outcomes the Church can accept, especially in light of the recent scandals and a culture that presses young people into immorality and deviancy. Hands down, authoritative parenting, which is both demanding and responsive, outperforms authoritarian and permissive styles in virtually all areas. Authoritative parenting has been found to relate to higher self-esteem and life-satisfaction and to lower depression in children.8 Research shows these children have better conduct in school, higher cognitive performance, and less drug use and delinquency.9
So authoritative is good; authoritarian and permissive, not so good. By embracing her role as an authoritative mother, the Church engenders the trust, closeness, and dependability that will lead to healthy bonding and lifelong development in the young.
Avoiding Permissiveness
What does permissive parenting look like from Mother Church? It might look like trying to be a friend rather than a parent; like dropping standards; like coddling weakness and calling it strength; like being afraid to speak truth to kids who do not seem to want to hear it; like changing who you are and what you believe, because you fear kids will leave you. It might look like this passage from the document prepared for the upcoming Synod on Young People:
This is not to say that permissiveness is the intent of the document’s authors or the synod—only that it is a temptation and a possible outcome. This is a concern especially if the youth are overly idealized or approached with fear or pandering, or if their childish complaints are weaponized in an attempt to change Church doctrine.
How can we prevent such an outcome? By sticking to a research-proven, authoritative style with the youth.
What might this look like? It looks like caring more about young people than whether or not they care for you. It looks like calling them to their better selves; like presenting a challenge and making love-based demands; like speaking straight and affirming that compromise with lies is a false life; that courage, humility, and patience are absolute requirements for holiness and happiness; that life is tough and the road is hard, but the destination is worth it. That destination is clear: Christ Jesus.
Authoritative parenting from Mother Church might look like these gems spoken to the youth at various times by Saint John Paul II:
Authoritative parenting might also look like this observation from Pope Benedict XVI:
Stay Bold and True
Our young people do not need—and many do not even want—the Church to try to be cool. We need to relate to them authentically as the loving parents we are, rather than wanna-be hip friends. What they value is authenticity. They need people and organizations to believe what they say and do what they say. They celebrate and trust those who “stay true to themselves.”
Our success with youth will come if we stay bold and true to Christ. Eternity and youth are perfectly harmonized in He who is the alpha and omega. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Heb.13:8).16 He is alive, still with us and still young. It is not He who changes with each new generation of young people; it is His unchanging relevance which is ever new to each new generation. As St. John Paul II put it:
This is the confidence that our shepherds need to have during the Synod on Young People, the Faith, and Vocational Discernment. Jesus Christ spoke “with authority,” and that is how He revealed Himself. Young people today need to know this Christ who speaks with the authority of the Father. His Church leaders need to be confident that she possesses moral and doctrinal truth, and that truth is what young people most need to hear.
Our young people need the Church. Like a caring mother, the Church listens attentively to her young people to understand their needs. But she has the solutions! As mother to the Faithful, she teaches truth and forms young people in humility to listen to the Word and love His commandments.
With this in mind, the Synod on Young People can bear great fruit; but it will not if the Synod is dominated by a spirit of permissiveness and weak confidence in the Church’s superior wisdom. The failure to assert rightful authority is a danger to the lives and souls of young Catholics around the world.
10 Poems Everyone Should Learn by Heart
/in Blog Latest/by Sean FitzpatrickThe world is so full of a number of things,
I’m sure we should all be as happy as kings.
Considering how much unhappiness there is in the world today, there might be a temptation to dismiss this poem and its ilk as an optimistic delusion. There is a sad tendency to view the world as a wasteland rather than a wonderland. This is, perhaps, one of the deepest errors of our time, the error of cynicism. What the world needs, what people need, what Catholics need, is a psychological and spiritual renewal: a renewal of politics, culture, parenthood, education… and poetry.
There is an old proverb that says if a person does not learn poetry as a child, they will not know how to pray as an adult. A more arresting thing could hardly be said, especially in an age where poetry is dead, either shrugged off with indifference or dismissed as unimportant.
Without doubt, the Church and the world need scientists and soldiers in the cultural and spiritual war zones to defend the Faith. But, in as much as civilization needs such professionals, so too does it need poets—and that for a very simple reason. Scientists without poetry can be slaves to systems. Soldiers without poetry can be barbarians devoid of chivalry. A people without poetry cannot be effective missionaries, because the charm of the Faith shines with poetry. Without poetry, without some knowledge or expression of Goodness, Truth, and Beauty, there is less hope of attaining the glorious end of martyrdom—whether through war, marriage, work, or any given Tuesday.
Poetry offers that knowledge and expression, and thus offers children a window to view and begin to understand a world so full of “a number of things.” Poems should be lifelong teachers and they should begin their lessons in the hearts of the young. Once there, they can give satisfying expression to those mysteries of childhood that are beyond a child’s ability to express. And in so doing, poetry can begin to introduce children not only to the outward world and inward emotions, but also to give all things their proper place and relation.
Perhaps the most significant obstacle to providing today’s children with the experience of poetry is that many of today’s parents and teachers have not had the experience of poetry themselves. (It is never too late to have the experience!) Poetry—that art which meditates on beauty, rest, perfection, and the grandeur of God’s presence in nature—is good for grown-ups too. No matter how old you are, or how busy you are, it is always important to be reminded of the beauty and mystery that transcends all our distractions. And this is especially so if you are a teacher.
If you never thought about the importance of poetry in education, do not, by any means, let this article convince you. Take the time to discover great poetry. Read Shelley, Keats, and Byron. Read Wordsworth and Poe. Read the Psalms. Read Homer, Virgil, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Coleridge, and Hopkins. Write your own book inscriptions and Christmas cards to your loved ones in verse. Allow yourself the opportunity to encounter and engage the kiss of beauty.
Immerse yourself. Engage the material. And, above all else, enjoy it.
Take the time.
No parent or teacher can give their child or student what they do not have. No pupil will take to heart what is brushed off as being unimportant by their parents or teachers. If parents and teachers want their children to pray, they must pray first. If parents and teachers want their children to be good, they must be good themselves. If parents and teachers do not read and savor the poetic works, neither will their children.
The first step to giving your children the gift of poetry is to love it yourself. Following are 10 excellent poems to begin with, to learn by heart and to teach the children you know to learn by heart. The rhythms of poetry reflect the rhythms of creation, of life, and the human heart. They put profundities in the mouths of babes, fortifying them for those times when, as adults, they will cry out from the depths. The power of beauty must not be lost. Like the coming of spring, the world will be saved by beauty, and a line of poetry may make all the difference in a person’s salvation. There is nothing like a poem held in the heart, like a fire in a hearth, to give the first and final context of earthly experience.
Memorize these 10 poems with your children or your students. They are not long or difficult. Neither does it take long, nor is it difficult to incorporate them at the beginning of a class, on a walk, in the car, or at table. Teach your young minds and hearts these poems and plant the power of poetry in their lives. These are only a beginning, but they are a good start.
SEAN FITZPATRICK is a graduate of Thomas Aquinas College and serves as the headmaster of Gregory the Great Academy in Elmhurst, Pa. He also serves on the Advisory Council for Sophia Institute for Teachers. His writings on education, literature and culture have appeared in Crisis Magazine, The Imaginative Conservative, and Catholic Exchange.
Catholic Colleges Should Lead Charge Against Sexual Assault
/in Student Formation Research and Analysis, Student Residences/by Cardinal Newman Society StaffThe news is filled these days with reports of sexual assaults against college students, even at some of the most committed and faithful Catholic colleges.
The numbers are disputed, but it’s appalling that even one parent’s daughter would suffer such a violation during what should be happy years of growth in college. The victims of these horrible crimes deserve our prayers, compassion and support as well as justice from our legal system.
Moreover, Catholic colleges should be prepared to offer Christian counseling and support for victims. Too often, colleges of all types and sizes have been found ill-equipped or unprepared to address what appears to be a growing problem.
Ultimately—and most importantly—the assaults must be stopped. Off campus, this is largely the responsibility of law enforcement, although a proper moral formation of students at Catholic colleges can help substantially. On campus, colleges bear great responsibility for preventing these crimes from occurring in the first place.
And it is in this respect, that some of America’s most faithful Catholic colleges have important lessons to teach the rest of higher education—even most other Catholic colleges.
By preserving traditional norms for student access and behavior in campus dorms, faithful Catholic colleges effectively combat on-campus sexual assault.
Such policies come naturally for faithful Catholic institutions, because they are firmly rooted in Catholic morality and fulfill the colleges’ mission of human formation in the light of Christ.
If only the rest of the nearly 200 Catholic, residential colleges would do the same. Catholic families should demand it. It’s long past time that Catholic colleges get on board and set an example of proper campus life, rather than invite the tragic consequences of the secular campus model.
Insisting upon a culture of chastity and sobriety in campus residences helps protect students while upholding Catholic beliefs and identity. It’s a commonsense solution.
Real prevention
Focusing on prevention efforts in campus dorms is how colleges can most immediately and effectively have an impact on sexual assault.
Although most sexual assaults against college students occur off campus—where college leaders have no control over the environment or student behavior—a sizable portion, about a third, occur within student dorms. That’s where colleges bear direct responsibility for protecting their students.
According to the federally funded “Campus Sexual Assault Study” (2007), which considered offenses against female students from 2005 to 2007, 28 percent of the assaults that involved the use of physical force and 36 percent of the assaults against an incapacitated (often drunk) victim occurred in campus residences.
For most colleges today, preventing sexual assault means educating students about consent to sexual activity, empowering women to avoid and resist assault, and strengthening disciplinary and reporting procedures. These are all very important strategies, and every Catholic college should embrace them.
Still, much more could be done on campus, where college leaders have the authority to regulate student behavior and the environment. Catholic colleges should be leading by example!
Drinking and the hook-up culture
A campus culture of chastity and sobriety is important to reducing sexual crimes, and Catholic colleges should have the moral courage to make it happen.
Alcohol is strongly associated with sexual assault. A report published in 2000 by the U.S. Department of Justice, “The Sexual Victimization of College Women,” found that “frequently drinking enough to get drunk” was one of the four main factors contributing to sexual assault. And the Justice Department’s 2014 report, “Rape and Sexual Assault Victimization Among College-Age Females, 1995-2013” (2014) found that 47 percent of victims perceived their attacker was drinking or using drugs.
These crimes are also associated with the “hook-up” culture on many campuses. One study, “Some Types of Hookups May Be Riskier Than Others for Campus Sexual Assault” (Psychological Trauma, 2016) found that 78 percent of on-campus sexual assaults took place during casual sexual encounters.
Sex and drunkenness are commonplace on the typical college campus. So, we have two risk factors for sexual assault—drinking and casual sex—occurring frequently in campus dorms.
Even when alcohol is restricted on campus, students may return to their rooms intoxicated from off-campus drinking. Isn’t it common sense that colleges should strive to reduce opportunities for sexual activity in student residences, especially at the times when students are more likely to be drinking?
Sadly, few secular colleges today would attempt any restriction on sexual activity. College leaders, the media, and even many victims’ advocates deem casual sex a rite (and right) of passage for college students. They are therefore limited to prevention strategies that have minimal impact on the dorm environment.
But Catholic colleges that take their identity and mission seriously should actively and enthusiastically embrace policies that reduce sexual activity in campus residences.
Creating and fostering a culture of chastity and sobriety in campus residences is a commonsense way to create a safe and moral environment. Moreover, it is elemental to a faithful Catholic education.
Catholic colleges especially need to be concerned with more than just sexual assault. Consensual sexual activity is a serious sin that has two victims of their own poor decisions. Every college serious about its Catholicity should be eager to protect the bodies and souls of its students.
Step one: single-sex residence halls
A first step toward reducing sexual assault on campus is to designate all dorms single-sex. Coed residence halls have been associated with greater alcohol abuse and sexual activity, as documented by Dr. Chris Kaczor in his 2012 report for The Cardinal Newman Society, “Strategies for Reducing Binge Drinking and a ‘Hook-Up’ Culture on Campus”.10
A 2009 study in the Journal of American College Health, “The Impact of Living in Co-ed Resident Halls on Risk-Taking Among College Students,” found that “students in co-ed housing (12.6%) were more than twice as likely as students in gender-specific housing (4.9%) to indicate that they had had 3 or more sexual partners in the last year.” The study also found a higher likelihood of binge drinking in coed dorms.
And another study, “The Impact of Current Residence and High School Drinking on Alcohol Problems Among College Students” (Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 2002), found that “students living in coed dormitories, when compared with students in single-gender dorms, incurred more problem consequences related to drinking.”
The vast majority of Catholic colleges resemble their secular counterparts in sponsoring coed dorms—but thankfully, not all do. The Newman Society has identified more than 10 percent of America’s Catholic colleges that have bucked the trend of the past 50 years. Colleges with single-sex residence halls include some of the nation’s most faithful Catholic colleges and even a few that have waffled on their Catholic identity.
Most notable among the latter group is the University of Notre Dame. This is an instructive case, since its students report multiple sexual assaults in the University’s single-sex dorms each year. Notre Dame’s experience indicates that, while single-sex residence halls should be helpful in reducing sexual assault, they are only a first step to building a campus culture of sobriety and chastity.
Step two: stronger visitation policies
The second step—arguably more important than single-sex dorms—is for colleges to adopt and enforce policies restricting opposite-sex guests in dorm rooms.
Catholic parents understand the effects of temptation and our fallen nature. They know that there is good reason for never letting their teenager have a boyfriend or girlfriend alone in a bedroom. It’s what Catholics have long described as a “near occasion of sin.”
Why do so many Catholic colleges ignore this basic understanding? Don’t the high rates of abortions, STDs and sexual assaults among young men and women teach us something about the limits of self-control?
Since most campus residences are little more than bedrooms with a chair and desk, it’s common sense that they should be off-limits entirely to opposite-sex visitors.
Instead, 82 percent of U.S. Catholic colleges allow closed-door visitation until 2 a.m. or later on weekends, and 88 percent allow it until midnight or later on weekdays, according Adam Wilson’s 2016 report on visitation policies for The Cardinal Newman Society.17
More than a quarter of Catholic colleges have open visitation at all hours of the night!
Think about that for a moment. What message does it send to students? And what care does it show for helping students remain chaste?
Loose visitation policies indicate low expectations and suggest a college’s lack of concern for natural consequences, including sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy, abortion, and (have Catholics forgotten?) mortal sin.
And the consequences might also include sexual assault.
The “Campus Sexual Assault Study” found that 52 percent of forced sexual assaults and 90 percent of assaults on incapacitated victims took place between midnight and 6 a.m.—and most others between 6 p.m. and midnight. The later at night, the greater the likelihood of drinking and casual sex, and therefore the greater the danger for students.
Couldn’t Catholic colleges, then, restrict opposite-sex visiting hours to the daytime as an immediate intermediary step?
Better still, colleges should protect students by sensibly forbidding opposite-sex guests in campus bedrooms at nearly all times, like many evangelical Christian colleges and a few standout Catholic colleges. These include:
Others, like Franciscan University and Ave Maria University, have limited visiting hours and require open doors.
No more excuses
We have discussed these ideas with Catholic college leaders, and one common explanation for allowing opposite-sex visitation and coed dorms is that students need opportunities to socialize. Gathering in dorm rooms has become an accepted and even expected part of the college experience.
There are also physical plant constraints. Despite all the amenities of the typical campus, most colleges have not created adequate spaces for students to gather outside their private rooms.
Some leaders focus on the link between alcohol and sexual assault, strictly enforcing sobriety on campus while taking a softer approach on sexual activity with messaging that appeals to students’ virtue.
Drinking, however, often occurs off campus, with later consequences for on-campus behavior. And relying on students’ self-restraint amid a culture obsessed with sexuality and pornography seems quite risky and naïve.
Some college leaders worry that they’ll lose students if opposite-sex visitation isn’t allowed.
The difficulties, then, of building a campus environment that demands chastity and sobriety in campus residences are real enough. But they seem surmountable at a college committed to safety and Catholic morality.
Especially for Catholic colleges, protecting students’ health and their immortal souls must be the higher priority.
Adopting commonsense student dorm room policies won’t stop off-campus sexual assaults, and it won’t solve every problem on campus. It doesn’t mitigate the responsibility to provide adequate support for victims of assault. But it could help prevent the many assaults that do occur in dorm rooms as a predictable consequence of casual sex and drinking, while upholding the Catholic mission of the college.
It is here that college officials and those concerned with combatting sexual assaults should emulate the commonsense and faithful policies of some of the Newman Guide colleges noted above.
Ten years ago, Pope Benedict told Catholic educators18 in the U.S. that the crisis of truth is rooted in a crisis of faith.
Catholic colleges should face the ugly truth that, for many of them, their dorm policies may have the effect of undermining their important faith-filled missions. The fact that this is unintentional—and perhaps even contradicted by other efforts to teach moral behavior—does not make the problems go away.
There is nothing anyone can do to eliminate concupiscence and evil in the world. All the more reason that we believe every Catholic college should build a campus climate that celebrates chaste, Catholic living. This is what Catholic families should expect from Catholic education.
The Cardinal Newman Society’s mission is to promote and defend faithful Catholic education. We believe that families have a right to expect that a Catholic education will uphold Truth in accord with the timeless teaching and tradition of the Catholic Church, so as to prepare young people for this world and for eternity with God in heaven.
John Dewey and Progressivist Education
/in Blog Latest/by Daniel HubinDespite its dominance in philosophy and scientific inquiry, Enlightenment empiricism would have but minimal practical effect upon education until it manifested itself powerfully in a philosophy of education—progressivism —that came to prominence during the early years of the twentieth century.
Progressivism was largely founded by the thought and labor of John Dewey (1859-1952), a man whose mind was enraptured by the scientific method, and who expanded its use to education.[1] He took the processes of empirical science, established by such men as Sir Francis Bacon, and extended them further than most of the men of the Enlightenment would have taken them. While men such as John Locke (1632-1704) would have seen the scientific method as a means by which empiricist knowledge is gained regarding objective, physical nature, Dewey understood the scientific method as knowledge itself.[2] While at least most empiricists would have remained consistent with the ages past in holding a division between knowing and doing, Dewey abolished that division and postulated knowledge to be but mere doing.[3]He advocated a theory known as operationalism which held that knowledge is merely the scientific method in action.[4]
In his thought, Dewey reflected in many ways that of the Enlightenment philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), who seems to have perceived the logical results of the Enlightenment better than did his contemporaries.[5] Dewey paid much heed and respect to Rousseau, who Henry T. Edmundson III described as the “single most important influence on progressive education,” both in Europe and America, although Dewey rightly criticized Rousseau’s neglect of his own children.[6] An essential point of agreement between Rousseau and Dewey was their belief in the natural goodness of man.[7]
Endorsed by pure empiricists such as John Locke, this concept of man’s innate goodness flowed naturally from the nominalist and empiricist positions.[8] In the words of Richard Weaver, “If physical nature is the totality and if man is of nature, it is impossible to think of him as suffering from constitutional evil; his defections must now be attributed to his simple ignorance or to some kind of social deprivation. One comes thus by clear deduction to the corollary of the natural goodness of man.”[9] Without universals, there is nothing to which human nature may be compared and nothing by which it may be deemed corrupted.[10] If anything is wrong with man, the ill is due to something external to man (such as a destructive environment or a lack of information) and not to man himself. Man is, as described by John Locke, born with a mind that is a tabula rasa or “blank slate,” without any natural propensity to evil.[11] The doctrine of original sin is thereby abolished.[12]
As a result of these ideas, Rousseau and Dewey promoted what has since been labeled the “child-centered” approach to education.[13] For them, education is concerned with hands-on experience and physical activities and manipulations—the only true knowledge—with an emphasis on vocational preparation.[14] They saw the rightful foundation of these endeavors as the natural impulses of the child.[15] Based upon the natural goodness of man, they charged previous education with suppressing these impulses as vices and, thereby, with suppressing the selfhood of the child.[16] These impulses should be set free from adult correction or discipline and utilized as guides for classroom activities and instruction.[17] In this way, the ideas of Dewey, reflecting those of Rousseau’s “noble savage,” led to traditional virtue and notions of sin or evil being replaced in America’s educational system by the savage’s right to be “himself,” a shift which encouraged an egocentric, i.e. selfish or prideful, approach to knowledge. The results of such a shift are all too evident in our current situation.
[1]. Clark, Gordon H. Thales to Dewey: A History of Philosophy. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1980, 519, 523, 525.
[2]. Ibid., 525.
[3]. Ibid., 524-525.
[4]. Ibid., 526.
[5]. Henry T. Edmondson, John Dewey & the Decline of American Education: How the Patron Saint of Schools Has Corrupted Teaching and Learning (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2006), 8-9.
[6]. Ibid.
[7]. Ibid., 8.
[8]. Russell Kirk, The Roots of American Order (Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1991), 406.
[9]. Richard M. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 4-5.
[10]. Ibid., 4.
[11]. Kirk, Roots of American Order, 406.
[12]. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences, 4.
[13]. Edmondson, John Dewey, 8.
[14]. Ibid., 8-9.
[15]. Ibid., 22.
[16]. Ibid., 8, 22, 23, 33.
[17]. Ibid., 22, 23.
DANIEL K. HUBIN resides in the Nashville, Tenn., area where he studies education, history, and literature at Welch College. He earned the Eagle Scout Award in 2014 and currently teaches U.S. government and civics to homeschool students.
America’s Common Core: Standardization by a Low Standard
/in Academics Commentary, Common Core/by Joseph PearceMany years ago, the English writer G. K. Chesterton claimed that the “coming peril” facing civilization was “standardization by a low standard.” Today, almost a century later, Chesterton’s words have something of the mark of prophecy about them. Standards of literacy and numeracy, to say nothing of standards of morality, are not so much declining as plummeting.
The calamitous “dumbing down” of America’s already beleaguered education system is encapsulated and epitomized by the monstrous Common Core. At the risk of seeming a trifle sensationalist, this affront to educational standards is nothing short of being a crime against humanity. Let’s not forget that the humanities are thus called because they teach us about our own humanity. A failure to appreciate the humanities must inevitably lead to the dehumanizing of culture and a disastrous loss of the ability to see ourselves truthfully and objectively.
The problem is that the architects of the Common Core do not believe that it is possible to see ourselves truthfully and objectively. They have a chilling indifference to truthfulness and objectivity in human affairs, rejecting all discussion of truth and objectivity except in terms of that which can be measured empirically by science. With regard to the truth that we can know about ourselves as human beings, and which is expressed in the great works that have graced our civilization through the centuries, they never get beyond Pontius Pilate’s famous question, quid est veritas?, which is asked not in the spirit of philosophy as a question to be answered, but in the ennui of intellectual philandery as merely a rhetorical question that is intrinsically unanswerable. This intellectual philandery spawns numerous illegitimate children, each of which has its day as the dominant fad of educationists, at least until a new intellectual fad replaces it. It is in the nature of fads to fade but in the brief period in which they find themselves in the fashionable limelight they can cause a great deal of damage, a fact that Chesterton addressed with customary adroitness in 1910, over a century ago:
Obviously it ought to be the oldest things that are taught to the youngest people; the assured and experienced truths that are put first to the baby. But in a school today the baby has to submit to a system that is younger than himself. The flopping infant of four actually has more experience and has weathered the world longer than the dogma to which he is made to submit. Many a school boasts of having the latest ideas in education, when it has not even the first idea; for the first idea is that even innocence, divine as it is, may learn something from experience.
Implicit in Chesterton’s critique of the nature of modern education is a condemnation of the intellectual elitism that fuels the transient fads and fashions of the zeitgeist, the antidote to which is the timeless touchtone of Tradition.
It should, of course, be obvious that the disenfranchisement of the past inherent in the Common Core’s manic pursuit of novelty is not only an abandonment of the wisdom of the dead but also a disenfranchisement of the unborn. In denigrating and deriding the Great Books of Western Civilization, and the great ideas that informed them, the doyens of the modern academy have broken the continuum by which the wisdom of the ages is transmitted to each new generation. In refusing any authority beyond the individualism of the self, egocentric Man (homo superbus) has disinherited himself from his own priceless inheritance; in imposing his egocentric ethos on the Common Core, he is also disinheriting future generations. He is a contemptuous and therefore contemptible cad who not only kicks down the ladder by which he’s climbed but tries to destroy the ladder so that no-one coming after him can climb it either.
The Common Core is nothing less than the dogmatic imposition of radical relativism, the only philosophy compatible with homo superbus, a philosophy which goes hand in glove with the implementation of secular fundamentalism, the political ideology of homo superbus. Such a philosophy and its accompanying ideology refuses to tolerate anything but the things it tolerates itself, doing so in the name of “tolerance”, an egregious and outrageous example of the sheer chutzpah of Orwellian double-think! In short, homo superbus has recreated education in his own image, sacrificing all rival dogmas on the altar of self-worship he has erected to himself, on which the tabernacle of any god other than himself has been replaced by the mirror of self-referential subjectivism. There is no place in such self-referential education for religion or for any metaphysical philosophy, nor for the great writers and thinkers who espouse religion or a metaphysical understanding of the cosmos. Homer and Plato and Aristotle are vanquished, vanishing from school curricula. There’s no room for Dante or Chaucer or Shakespeare; or Austen or Dickens or Dostoyevsky. Instead today’s already malnourished high school students will be fed trivia and trash, selected on the basis of its perceived “relevance”. Instead of a good, solid education offering real meat and gravitas, American kids, thanks to the Common Core, are being fed a thin gruel of nutrient-free nonsense. A good education is health-food for the mind and soul, full of nourishing traditions; the Common Core offers only fast food and junk food for the soulless and the mindless.
The reductio ad absurdum at the heart of such a system of education was certainly not lost on Chesterton, who perceived it as the very antithesis of the object of a true education: “The whole point of education is that it should give a man abstract and eternal standards by which he can judge material and fugitive standards.” The problem is that the radical relativism of the Common Core presumes that there are no abstract and eternal standards but that, on the contrary, all standards are merely fugitive, here today and gone tomorrow. Education does not serve truth because there is no truth to serve. Chesterton’s bon mot will not serve as a motto for the modern academy because the modern academy does not serve anything but itself. Its motto is non serviam. In such circumstances, education ceases to be the means to an end because there is no end, in the objective sense of a purpose or meaning to life. Such an education, incarnate in the Common Core, is nothing less than the end of education in that other doom-laden sense of the word. It has put an end to it.
The tragedy of the Common Core is that it has left us perilously ignorant of who we are, where we are, where we have come from, and where we are going. We are lost and blissfully unaware that we are heading for the abyss. Such is the price we are doomed to pay for our blind faith in nothing in particular.
This article was first published in the International Business Times.
Editorial: Infidelity, Dissent and Scandal—from McCarrick to Catholic Education
/in Blog Latest/by Cardinal Newman Society StaffIn light of the terrible scandals confronting the Church in recent days, may we (once again) propose a key part of the solution to widespread infidelity, dissent and scandal?
We propose the renewal of faithful Catholic education.
The Church has been repeatedly wounded by the predatory, criminal and obscene abuse of innocent boys and men by trusted leaders, including former Cardinal McCarrick and those who enabled him.
How can we still be in this situation? After the 2002 scandals, the faithful stood with the bishops and trusted them to end not just the sex abuse scandals—which we were assured were all in the past—but also to work to rebuild and strengthen Catholic identity across the Church’s institutions.
But here we are 16 years later. Church attendance is plummeting, young people are abandoning the faith, and heterodox Catholic colleges, leaders and organizations have persisted in dissent and scandal without consequence or public correction.
If you wonder how we got here, Anthony Esolen’s article on the McCarrick scandals at the Newman Society’s website is a must-read. McCarrick, he points out, was one of the signers of the infamous “Land O’ Lakes Statement” in 1967, which paved the way to outright dissent and academic opposition to Humanae Vitae a year later.
Esolen rightly finds that the Cardinal’s behavior—and the apparent tolerance for that behavior by other bishops—had much the same cause as the decline of Catholic education.
And it can be corrected, if all of us in the Church demand fidelity and true Catholic formation in our homes, our schools, our colleges, and our seminaries.
But this will be easier said than done. In many corners of the institutional Church, we seem to be rushing to meet the (fallen) world where it is, instead of boldly and confidently proclaiming that true happiness is found in Truth, in the Way of Christ. Just look at the agendas, marketing materials and speaking lineups of the upcoming World Meeting of Families and the Synod on Young People.
More than ever, what our families need… what the Church needs… what all the world needs, is a revitalization of truly faithful Catholic education.
Still, in too many Catholic elementary and secondary schools, we find the influence of the utilitarian Common Core and secular textbooks and curricula, often embraced by well-meaning but apparently poorly catechized educators. The Newman Society’s Catholic Is Our Core project exposed the inadequacy of the Common Core, and thankfully many dioceses have abandoned it. A number of them have embraced our faithful Catholic Curriculum Standards. But there is still so much more to be done.
With regard to Catholic colleges, it is well past time for the Church—the bishops, the clergy and religious, and parents—to publicly reject those that undermine fundamental Church teachings while claiming a Catholic identity! This scandal has done enormous damage to souls.
The most heterodox of the Catholic colleges serve as incubators for practically every bad idea in the Church today. Dissident educators and their college leaders bear direct responsibility for leading young people astray—and yet we cannot ignore the painful fact that the Church’s continued endorsement of these institutions leads many Catholic families to send their sons and daughters to be corrupted by sin and relativism.
More than a quarter of Catholic colleges allow overnight, opposite-sex visitation in student bedrooms! What effect do you suppose that has on students and their faith? Where are Church leaders and Catholic parents on this? Why are they not demanding that it stop?
This is just one example of how the Church’s silence on public scandal and the collapse of Catholic moral formation have fostered infidelity and dissent.
The good news is that there is a renewal of Catholic education underway: at Newman Guide colleges; at Catholic Education Honor Roll schools, including lay-run independent Catholic schools that get too little support and attention from the Church; in the exploding Catholic homeschool community that also gets too little support and attention from the Church; and in lay Catholic organizations like the Newman Society, FOCUS, ICLE, the Augustine Institute, and so many others.
Thanks be to God for this!
And thanks also for those orthodox and holy priests and bishops who faithfully live their vocations and proclaim the Truth of Christ. We have met and worked closely with many of them, and they need our prayers and support more than ever.
We need the entire Church, both clergy and laity, to demand fidelity from every Catholic and every institution which claims a Catholic identity. It’s an expression of the greatest love to uphold Truth, Beauty and Goodness in Catholic education and throughout the Church. May we love our young people and fellow Catholics more deeply and fervently in these times of dissent and confusion.
Founder of Catholic Magazines Reflects on Faithful Catholic Education
/in Blog Newman Guide Articles, Profiles in FCE/by Cardinal Newman Society StaffGraduates of Newman Guide colleges are making a difference for the Church and the world, and Rose Rea is no exception! A graduate of Franciscan University in Ohio, Rose is the founder of Radiant and Valiant magazines for young Catholic women and men, respectively. Readers can subscribe to Radiant and Valiant magazines, which are owned by Our Sunday Visitor, at this link. We thank Rose for taking the time to share with us about how her Catholic education prepared her to share the Faith through these magazines.
Photo of Rose Rea by Lisa Wahl.
Rose, how did Franciscan University of Steubenville prepare you to serve the Church and achieve professional success?
Franciscan has a way of bringing people to campus who are not afraid to live out their faith in a beautiful and vibrant way. I had never seen anything like it in my high school years, so when I visited my older sister attending Steubenville, I knew immediately that this was the place I wanted to be. I made life-long friends there, studied abroad and traveled all over Europe learning about the history of our Catholic Church and most importantly, I was educated and formed in a Catholic environment by people who wanted me to succeed in whatever I felt called to do. Having Fr. Michael Scanlan as a spiritual advisor was also the biggest blessing. What a holy man he was!
How has your Catholic college education helped you communicate with young men and women in Radiant and Valiant magazines?
It sounds cliché, but to be around people who were cool and Catholic resonated deeply within my heart. So many adolescents and young adults feel very alone in their faith, because most of their peers around them are not living out a faith-filled life. At Franciscan University, we connected with people from all walks of life who were very great examples of people living in the world doing very normal things, but who were not “of the world”. That definitely motivated me to want to bring that mentality to young women and men everywhere. I felt that if I could just inspire one young lady to save herself for marriage because she is worth it or one young man to step up to make a decision God wanted him to make, even if it was difficult and hard, it would be valuable! The world is in desperate need of courageous men and women who are ready to answer God’s often difficult calling in their lives and we want them to understand that a small yes to God can lead to making a huge difference in the world! Every fire starts with a spark, right?!
What kind of articles can readers, including college students and graduates, find in these magazines?
Readers will find so many different topics covered! For the ladies, we cover topics like dating and relationships, include modest fashion in each issue, and highlight in-depth interviews and personal stories from well-known speakers and authors. We feature artists and photographers, as well as fantastic organizations, who are making a difference in their respective vocations. Overall, women will find all kinds of stories that will uplift and inspire them to grow deeper in their faith and allow them to connect with women just like them.
For the men, we share stories of courage, conviction and determination by guys just like our readers who were not afraid to answer God’s call in their own lives. We feature authors, bloggers, musicians, priests, military men and national speakers who are making a difference. It is so incredibly fun and rewarding to work with these talented young, Catholic men and women. Their stories are phenomenal!
This October, the Vatican will host a Synod on Young People. Some have suggested that the Church needs to back away from certain teachings and traditions to appeal to young people, but to the contrary, your readers and the students at Newman Guide colleges are attracted to the Church. How can the Church communicate Truth, Goodness and Beauty to today’s young people?
I completely agree with the latter; the doctrine and teachings of our Catholic Faith do not need to be updated or changed for our modern times. The teachings only need to be communicated in a more appealing and effective way to reach today’s young in the modern language that they speak. God’s gift to us, the teachings of the Catholic Church and the beautiful examples of the Saints and the martyrs need to be reheard and retaught to the new generation; so many of them are already responding in a positive way! There is much more work to be done, but I see the fruits of the sacrifices our parents and those before us have made. This is a difficult but special time to be Catholic, and our own happiness and the salvation of many souls depend on our complete abandonment to God. When that happens, then we’ll find peace! That is the goal of Radiant and Valiant magazines—to bring our readers to this peace—which we strive to do, led by our most blessed mother, the Virgin Mary.
It Never Was About Anything Else
/in Blog Latest/by Anthony EsolenMore than fifty years ago, a group of prelates, priests, and cherry-picked leaders in Catholic higher education published the so-called “Land O’ Lakes Statement,” a declaration of independence made on behalf of Catholic colleges from the oversight of, and from influence by, the Holy See, local bishops, and the magisterium of the Church. The ostensible reason for it was that the Church was seen by its secular counterparts as retrograde and sluggish in producing scholars and statesmen of international recognition. That is, Notre Dame, the school whose president, Father Theodore Hesburgh, led the signatories, was not yet Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. A petitio principii if there ever was one, for why should Notre Dame have wanted to be one of those schools, which were all in the very quick process of abandoning most of their classical and Christian heritage?
We know, of course, what was at issue here. It was a preemptive strike against what Pope Paul VI would issue in 1968, namely the encyclical Humanae vitae. For the business of contraception, abortion, fornication, and every other sexual sin for which there is a name was on the table for reconsideration. A mere ten years later, the authors of Human Sexuality: New Directions in American Catholic Thought (1977), would find it somewhat difficult even to condemn sexual activity with animals, let alone anything else that human beings might do, so long as they did it with the appropriate funny internal flutter (if I may adapt Frank Sheed’s wonderful phrase), a flutter of love, whatever love is, and mutuality, and sincerity, and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
I bring the matter up, because one of the signers at Land O’ Lakes was the now disgraced Theodore Cardinal McCarrick, at that time the president of the Catholic University of Puerto Rico. McCarrick was also one of the main movers in Dallas in 2002, when the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops twisted themselves into pretzels so as not to bring up the staggeringly plain facts of the clergy sex scandal. That is, more than four-fifths of the victims were boys, and most of those boys were big kids, not little kids—big enough to resist the advances of a grown man. They were seduced, not overcome by sheer physical force. That, as I’ve said elsewhere, does not make the deed less miserable. In a crucial way it makes it worse, because the boys were inveigled into cooperation with their own defilement, and so they could never say that they had no part in it.
In an interview with USA Today, from June 2002, speaking about the upcoming conference in Dallas, McCarrick tries to parry the whole question of homosexuality. When the interviewer brings it up, he engages in another petitio principii: for the real question is whether someone who has engaged in, and who feels a strong desire to engage again in, actions contrary to nature and to the division of the human race into male and female, suffers from a severe moral and psychological syndrome, one that would disqualify him from the priesthood or from any line of work that would put him in contact with boys and young men. So, responding to the suggestion that homosexual men not be admitted to the seminary, McCarrick makes the standard move, balancing homosexuality with heterosexuality:
“You want someone who can live a chaste life; that is key for me. If somebody who would like to go into the seminary says, ‘All my life, I’ve tried to be chaste, I’m a heterosexual, and I have tried to be celibate, and I have proven that I can be,’ I think you say ‘Fine.’ If someone says to you, ‘All my life I’ve tried to be chaste, I have a homosexual orientation, but I’ve always tried to be chaste,’ I think you do that one case by case. Probably beginning in this next school year, the question of admission to seminaries will be discussed. It might be that the overwhelming weight of opinion will say that homosexuals should not be ever admitted to seminary. I’m not there yet. But if that’s what they tell me to do, then that’s what we’ll do. Certainly, I’m there if we say anyone who has been active in a gay life should not be admitted.”
I detest having to parse a bishop’s sentences, but when he will not speak frankly, he leaves us little choice. We notice that all that is required of the homosexual here is that he has “tried to be chaste.” I can try to hold my place on the field of battle. I can try hard to do it, and then I can run away. I can try not to sin. But in the cases of fornication and sodomy, trying is not good enough. We are not talking here about sins of intemperance, including what used to be called self-abuse. We are talking about sins that you actually have to plan in advance, as McCarrick himself did. It may be difficult to refrain from the lewd thought or the untoward glance. It is not difficult to keep your clothes on.
We should perhaps not say that McCarrick was a flat liar when he uttered that final sentence: “I’m there if we say that anyone who has been active in a gay life should not be admitted.” He may by then have repented of his deeds, after all. He may also be slurring the word “active,” or the word “life.” Never underestimate the human capacity to draw distinctions in our favor. A man may say, “Pornography is not a part of my life,” and mean it, while still he views it once in a while, casually—as if it were something he stumbled upon at times, or at least did not strive too hard to avoid. A man may say, “I am not an active adulterer,” because he has not committed adultery in several years and has no intention to do so in the near future.
But what has all the turmoil in the Church and in Catholic colleges been about, ultimately? Not controversies over the Trinity, not scholars hurling books at each other’s heads for misinterpreting Augustine, not even profound disagreements over such important matters as evolution, the character and the dangers of democracy, the licit use of money, or the relative blessings of work and leisure. Not community and what it is, not culture and why it is fading, not the duties we owe to both our ancestors and our posterity. Nothing of that. Consider Land O’ Lakes and the recent revelations regarding Cardinal McCarrick to be bookends on a shelf, and every book between the bookends is about nothing more respectable, nothing more complicated, and nothing less grubby than how to do what you want with your groin and have a nice day afterwards.
30 Years Later, Notre Dame Has Learned Nothing
/in Blog Latest/by Matt ArchboldProving that they’ve learned absolutely nothing from the scandal when they honored President Barack Obama in 2009, the University of Notre Dame recently honored former Indiana Gov. Joseph Kernan with one of its highest honors despite his public advocacy for the legalization of abortion.
The university honored Kernan with its 2018 Rev. Edward F. Sorin, C.S.C., Award, “in recognition of his significant contributions to the University of Notre Dame and his country,” according to a press release from the university. While a politician, Kernan famously insisted that as a Catholic he was “personally opposed” to abortion but remained an advocate for keeping it legal. This line of thinking, of course, is absurd and immoral.
The honor for Kernan is at least partly fitting, because it was on the campus of Notre Dame that New York Governor Mario Cuomo established his indelible print on American politics and Catholicism by infamously promulgating the argument that a Catholic politician can, in good conscience, personally oppose abortion while politically fighting to establish its legality. The past three decades have borne the terrible fruit of that speech.
In a watershed moment for American Catholics, Cuomo didn’t just attempt to create a space for Catholics to vote in favor of legalized abortion, but he went even further by accusing pro-life Catholics of “seeking to force our beliefs on others.” He said that forcing our views on abortion on others would be like forcing our views of premarital sex on others. Of course, this leaves out the victim of abortion, the unborn child.
On top of this, he also said Catholics’ diversity of opinion on abortion policy is essentially equivalent to Catholic diversity on issues such as military expenditures and education policy. So, Cuomo essentially laid out the enduring playbook for Catholic social justice warriors for the next few decades.
Of course, the university named for Our Lady also honored the newly elected President Barack Obama in 2009, despite his history of radically pro-abortion votes and his pledge to support abortion as president—a promise he upheld with gruesome distinction. It then honored Vice President Joe Biden, another defender of legal abortion, with its Laetare Medal. Kernan himself was the commencement speaker at Notre Dame back in 1998.
Moreover, Notre Dame seems to have exempted itself from Humanae Vitae. Just this year, the university announced that it would offer insurance coverage for contraception and abortifacients to employees, a policy it said was “based on Catholic principles.” The same excuse of not “forcing our belief” on non-Catholic employees—employees of a Catholic institution—has been used by Notre Dame to justify its harmful policy.
Amid that darkness, the honoring of Kernan who followed Cuomo’s lead shouldn’t be surprising in the least. It isn’t, but it’s still disappointing that Notre Dame hasn’t realized its mistake thirty-plus years after the Cuomo debacle and nine years after the Obama spectacle.In 2004, Kernan’s high school alma mater, St. Joseph High School in South Bend, was forced by then-Bishop John M. D’Arcy to withdraw its invitation to Kernan to deliver a graduation speech, based on his policy statements on abortion. Bishop D’Arcy made clear at the time that Kernan’s appearance contradicted the moral truths the school expected students to embrace.
Kernan, a Notre Dame graduate, served as mayor of South Bend and as lieutenant governor and governor of Indiana and consistently and publicly pronounced himself to support the legalization of abortion, despite realizing its immorality.
“We’re so proud to present this year’s Sorin Award to Joe Kernan,” said Dolly Duffy ’84, the executive director of the Notre Dame Alumni Association in a release. “Joe has been a loyal and devoted son of Notre Dame, and his dedication to serving others is a testament to the values the University strives to instill in its students and alumni.”
“Others” would presumably not include the unborn, their parents, the pro-life movement, and the Catholic Church.
While much of Kernan’s life has been spent in creditable and even heroic activities—including time as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, his work with the St. Joseph County Red Cross, and the Special Olympics—this honor sends a message to students, alumni, and Catholics around the country that the killing of the unborn is an issue of secondary importance that can be offset by other accomplishments.
There is something terribly amiss at Notre Dame which has caused it to obfuscate, violate, and ignore fundamental Catholic teaching on the dignity of human life, time and again. Please say a prayer for the university and its leaders that they will realize the error of their ways.
Matt Archbold is a fellow of The Cardinal Newman Society. This article was cross-posted at The National Catholic Register.