Screening orators of dissent

Last week, the Cardinal Newman Society -- a group that scrutinizes

the nation’s 219 Catholic colleges and universities -- lodged

complaints against 13 Catholic colleges and universities for

scheduling commencement speakers or honorary degree recipients who

oppose Catholic teachings, particularly in the area of abortion. The

group of protested figures includes former state Secretary for

Education Richard Riordan and former New York City Mayor Rudolph

Giuliani, both of whom are in favor of abortion rights. Should

religious institutions of higher learning be allowed to invite or

honor individuals who do not necessarily have the same beliefs as the

school?

Catholic higher education is a wonderful resource. Small liberal

arts colleges under religious sponsorship offer a unique learning

experience, and I have always been grateful to the priests, sisters

and other teachers at my alma mater, St. Ambrose in Iowa.

I am also a graduate of two other Catholic universities, Loyola

Chicago and DePaul.

What impressed me about all of these schools was the emphasis upon

service to others, steady cultivation of the spiritual life and

lifetime commitment to learning. Classrooms were not stern, stuffy

places where people could not speak their minds, exchange ideas

freely and disagree with one another. Academic freedom and diversity

on campus did not compromise the Catholic identity of the schools,

but instead allowed truth to shine forth.

How a university best expresses its Catholicity is a much larger

question than abortion politics, and those in charge should not be

pressured or bamboozled by special interest groups.

Bishops delegate administration of Catholic universities to the

presidents, religious congregations and boards of directors who have

been appointed or elected, and who have expertise in higher

education. Evaluation of the extent to which a speaker agrees or

disagrees with church teaching, as a whole or in specific matters

(such as abortion), as well as how to interpret and apply general

guidelines should rest with the school; the Bishop should rarely

intervene.

The Cardinal Newman Society, a right wing, unofficial group

founded in 1993, has no capacity to do anything about these speakers,

other than send out press releases and write letters of complaint to

bishops, which it seems to do very effectively. Screening and

repression are far from the ideals for Christian religious education

championed by Cardinal John Henry Newman. There are many unofficial

groups who differ about church priorities and use the same forum,

which is their right in a democratic society, but it should be

understood as opinion and lobbying.

During the 2004 presidential election, the bishops made it clear

that Catholics could not be single-issue voters, but must weigh all

the issues. Similarly, speakers and honorees at Catholic universities

should be evaluated on the basis of their overall contributions, not

just their stand on abortion.

People are not confused or scandalized to hear that a commencement

speaker is not 100% in agreement with church teachings, since most

Catholics are not. After the election of the new Pope, Gallup found

that 74% of American Catholics will follow their own consciences on

difficult moral questions, rather than the teachings of Pope

Benedict.

I would enjoy hearing the “protested” speakers: Rudy Giuliani at

Loyola Maryland, Richard Riordan at Dominican, Senator Hillary

Clinton at Marymount Manhattan, theologian Sr. Margaret Farley at

Xavier and Ireland’s president, Mary McAleese, at Villanova.

Religious institutions of higher learning should make their own

decisions about whom to invite or honor.

REV. DR. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

My alma maters have invited commencement speakers and given

honorary degrees to theologians and public persons with whom I and, I

am sure, other alumni strongly disagree. I am confident that my

schools have suffered consequences such as loss of affection and

financial support.

Yet I believe one of the purposes of educational institutions is

to expose their constituencies to as great a variety as possible of

opinions, perspectives and world views.

I have written here before that one of my daily reminders to

myself is that the surest liberation from idolatrous religion is to

have to meet God in beliefs that are different from our own. The

right of independent religious institutions to invite whoever they

wish to share their wisdom seems an essential part of this purpose.

Roman Catholic colleges must weigh the consequences of inviting

teachers who may share thoughts contrary to established dogma. That

“the Cardinal Newman Society” would raise such complaints perplexes

me.

The Rev’d John Henry Newman was a priest in the Church of England

for 20 years (1825-1845) before being received into the Roman

Catholic Church. During those two decades, as Fellow at Oxford and an

Anglican parish priest, he was the foremost Anglo-Catholic theologian

of the 19th century.

Newman’s Anglican period ranged from an initial outspoken

intolerance with regard to Roman Catholicism to times of

understanding and respect, which immediately preceded his reception

into that branch of Christendom.

I wonder... what if the Catholic University of Ireland, of which

Newman was rector in the 1850s, had invited the Anglican Vicar of St.

Mary the Virgin and Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford, to be the

commencement speaker in 1830? Would “the Cardinal Newman Society”

have complained about the Catholic University scheduling its eventual

namesake, who was then an Anglican priest and a professor highly

critical of Roman Catholicism? If so, would its complaint have

deprived Roman Catholicism of a great thinker and teacher and kept

John Henry Newman from becoming one of the great cardinals?

(THE VERY REV’D CANON)

PETER D. HAYNES

Saint Michael &

All Angels Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar

The role of the commencement speaker is to underscore the core

values of the institution from which the students are graduating. The

speaker should affirm the mission and vision of the school.

A fundamental doctrinal belief of Catholicism holds that abortion

is morally abhorrent. The church considers abortion to be the leading

human rights issue in America today. Why would a school identified

with the Catholic faith, one that prides itself on its Catholic

identity, invite a speaker whose beliefs violate a basic principle of

the church?

If I were President of a Jewish university, would I invite a

speaker who expressly denies one of the most significant and

cherished tenets of Judaism? Even if his speech does not address his

deviance from tradition, I still would not cast him as the

centerpiece of the most anticipated day in the annual calendar of a

university and confer special recognition upon him.

Yes, academic freedom at Catholic universities is good to pursue,

but not at the expense of Catholic concerns about the truth.

A Catholic writer observed: “The primary concern is scandal. Once

an individual has publicly acted “in defiance of our fundamental

moral principles, that person is identified with that action

regardless of the reason for the campus visit. When a Catholic

institution freely chooses to invite that individual to lecture or

receive special honors, the institution publicly declares a lack of

intensity in its commitment to Catholic teaching, disregards those

who have been harmed by the individual’s actions, undermines efforts

to expose and oppose the individual’s harmful behavior, and confuses

students about the responsibilities of faithful Catholics.”

Of the thousands and thousands of potential speakers, men and

women who can articulate the Catholic vision, why on earth would a

Catholic school choose one who says “sin” is permissible? Should

speakers who defy church principles be lavishly introduced,

applauded, honored? If commencement speakers should serve as role

models, should that model be “heretical?” Since his appearance is

prohibited by the leaders of the church, what wisdom can he impart to

a largely Catholic audience other than that it is legitimate for

Catholics to disobey their bishops?

Are advocates of choice the only commencement speakers able to

offer inspiration at a Catholic university? Pope John Paul II told a

Catholic higher education congress in Rome: “Clearly, university

centers that do not respect the laws of the church and the teachings

of the magisterium, particularly in the areas of bioethics, cannot be

endorsed with the character of a Catholic university.”

Apparently, many Catholics honor and remember Pope John Paul II

for his charisma rather than for his convictions.

RABBI MARK S. MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

Religious institutions of higher learning are always going to have

this problem. No matter where you go or what institution you are a

part of, each will have a standard that must be considered when

employing outside speakers. This does not mean they have to follow

the standard, but at least they should consider it.

Secular institutions might seem like they have it easier, but I’ve

heard that they have had problems when employing speakers with very

radical points of view, like white-power groups or various speakers

representing other unpopular points of view.

Still, the thing that makes our country great is the freedom of

speech and the right to dissent. Without those rights, we are not

free.

Groups like the Cardinal Newman Society will always be in the

wings to put pressure on institutions to try to make them follow

their agenda. But I urge the Catholic churches under fire to stand

their ground and consider having other speakers that balance the

question, sharing the opposite point of view. At least then they

can’t be accused of an unbalanced platform.

SENIOR PASTOR

JAMES TURRELL

Center for Spiritual Discovery

Costa Mesa