When I speak with supporters of Students for Life, they often ask how many pro-life student groups we have at Catholic universities. Many believe that our nation’s Catholic universities are all pro-life and supportive of our pro-life student groups. However, this is not always case. Everyday, pro-life students face discrimination and resentment from both their peers and administration on these campuses and, some of these campuses are even, shockingly, advocates for abortion.
Reports in recent years prove that we really do need to hold these institutions accountable for speakers, comments, and programs promoted on campus that directly violate the teachings of the Catholic Church and promote abortion.
We can all remember the controversy over President Obama’s 2009 speech at Notre Dame’s graduation and the videos of prayerful protesters, including one of 80-year-old priest being arrested for standing for Life and opposing the university’s decision to invite the most pro-abortion President in our nation’s history to speak.
In recent years, controversies have ensued at Boston College Law School and Georgetown Law School when they were found promoting internships with Planned Parenthood and at Holy Cross College when they were caught hosting a Planned Parenthood Teen Conference on sexual education. And the list could go on.
Unfortunately, it is now crystal clear that Catholic universities are not “safe” from the cultural battle that plagues our nation.
A couple of weeks ago, news spread that Seattle University has been offering and advertising internships with pro-abortion organizations such as: Planned Parenthood, the National Organization for Women, and the Feminist Majority Foundation. In addition to the internships, it has been discovered that Seattle University has been hiring former Planned Parenthood employees, honoring students affiliated with the organization, and referring students to this abortion Goliath.
Pope John Paul II’s Ex Corde Ecclesiae clearly states that, “It is an honor and responsibility of a Catholic University to consecrate itself without reserve to the cause of truth. This is its way of serving at one and the same time both the dignity of man and the good of the Church…”
Undoubtedly, the most critical and pressing attack on the human dignity of man is abortion and the abortion industry. Therefore, it is essential that Catholic universities form their students in Truth to prepare them to stand for the dignity of Life in society.
It is the responsibility of all Catholic universities to uphold the teachings set out by the Magisterium and protect and promote the dignity of man through education and the pursuit of Truth. Offering or advertising internships with organizations that seek to end Life and directly oppose Church teaching is unacceptable. Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, has openly attacked the USCCB for their firm pro-life stance. Just read her op-ed published in the Huffington Post from the 2009 health care debate.
Catholic universities are the hope for the future of the Church, and without sound moral instruction and direction, the future is placed in question. We need to hold these institutions accountable for their education and activities, so that they can continue to be a beacon of light for the future. Please call Seattle University now and express your concern with their recent decisions supporting abortion.
Kristan Hawkins is Executive Director of Students for Life.
March 24th, 2011 | 3:03 pm
This is a story that needs to be told again and again. As with abortion itself, it is silence which is complicit in the betrayal perpetrated by so many Catholic universities. They should be publicly shamed as Notre Dame was when hosting Obama.
March 24th, 2011 | 4:10 pm
I am the co-president of the pro-life club at Saint Mary’s College, which is located across the street from Notre Dame.
I can verify that this post is true in many ways. We face hostility on our campus, from both students and administrators. However, you should not use the event of Obama speaking at Notre Dame as an example of your point. The campuses of Notre Dame and Saint Mary’s are remarkably liberal in their thinking, which comes from educated and progressive students. The way many pro-life advocates approached this event was just as wrong as Obama’s presence. My club’s work was set back tremendously by the extremist pro-life protesters that flooded Notre Dame in the days leading up to and following Obama speaking there. They did more damage to our cause among the students than Obama’s speech did.
Collaborating with students at Catholic colleges and universities is the way to change the pro-choice campuses, not going to the administrators. Leaders in the pro-life movement need to find ways to show these students that the pro-life movement can coincide with their education. You need to look to Catholic college students as your friend, not your enemy. The students at these schools have the power to demand change. You need to empower the students to change, not the administrators and trustees.
March 24th, 2011 | 4:25 pm
[...] Note; This article originally ran at First Things and is used with permission. Share this [...]
March 24th, 2011 | 10:05 pm
I do have a lot of sympathy for the idea that Catholic universities should be more authentically Catholic. I have fond memories of the chapel at my Catholic grade school in rural Wisconsin, and it was disturbing to see some of the overtly ideological, relativist, and even nihilist course offerings at the Catholic universities some of my friends and relatives attended. I went to a non-religious college and I feel I received an overall more politically balanced education.
However having said that, I don’t quite understand why it was so controversial to have President Obama speak at a Notre Dame convocation. I mean he is, after all, the president of this country. That would, in my opinion, override any particular issue you might have with his politics. And it goes without saying that Obama would have enough sense not to raise the abortion issue at a Catholic university campus. I might also add that, like it or not, abortion is legal in the US and it may not be the place of the executive branch to attempt to restrict it.
I would be happy to hear why, although he is pro-choice, the president of the United States is unqualified to say some pretty words of encouragement to graduating students. So far, I remain unconvinced that this is anything other than a “wedge issue” that is designed more to discredit the Democratic Party than to save unborn babies.
March 24th, 2011 | 11:11 pm
I agree with Patrick that this is a wedge issue, however I do not agree in the way he describes or applies it.
Catholics have been pro-life from the beginning-long before ‘politics’ or ideology entered into the picture. Every March 25th we celebrate the Gospel of Life: that One Human Life began at the moment of conception revealing the dignity of human life from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death and on to the resurrection of the dead
Catholic students need to work on the culture of their universities whether Catholic or not, just as the ‘older generations’ work at transforming our culture in America. Some of this is about laws etc but that is only the tip of the iceberg. The laws would never have allowed abortion etc if our culture was not already slipping away from our Judaeo-Christian roots.
As for Catholic Universities themselves-they each need to come to a decision. Some have positively and some negatively while others straddle the issue. Are ‘we’ a Catholic University or College or not. Since being Catholic holds the beauty of the unity of faith and reason [not one over the other] this really is not as hard as some make it out to be. On the other hand, some Catholics forget this unity of faith and reason, and if what is being offered in a class does not sound like a Catechism class etc they panic or worse.
Catholic Universities need to reestabllish or renew not only their theology departments but their philosophy departments as well. There is no question of the great benefit of seeking knowledge, but even better is the pursuit of real wisdom.
Finally, (here I am not making a political comment on the President) I blame the ‘leadership of Notre Dame and Catholic dissenters in Washington who wanted to push ‘the President’ in the Bishops faces. As for the fiasco at Georgetown where the President demanded all religious symbols be taken down for him to make an address, I blame Georgetown. They should have ‘politely’ and firmly declined
Good Lord what would these people do with somebody the likes of Henry VIII?
SAint Thomas More; Saint John Fisher, and Blessed John Cardinal Newman pray for us
March 25th, 2011 | 12:07 am
I am an adjunt professor in the religion and philosophy department of a Catholic university. The religion part of the department is allowed to be somewhat theistic, but the philosophy section is atheistic. I just talked to another adjunct who is an atheist and teaches introduction of religion. This is normal here. In fact, I have never met an adjunct of any department who was a Catholic (except me), and only one who believed in God! I can only think the administrators are stupid, they couldn’t really want to hire professors who explicitly undermind the Catholic faith. One more example, the chairman says “metaphysics is dead” and won’t allow Aquinas to be taught.
March 25th, 2011 | 1:30 am
If the president was an advocate of slavery or genocide, would it have been Ok to have him speak at a catholic college? He is, after all, the president.
March 25th, 2011 | 7:18 am
The president IS an advocate of genocide!
That is the very reason why his speaking at a (formerly) Catholic University was so opposed by those opposed to our time’s version of genocide.
March 25th, 2011 | 7:50 am
I was recently chastised rather sharply by a priest for failing to recognize and acknowledge that Planned Parenthood does good and needs to be supported.
March 25th, 2011 | 9:44 am
Patrick, it was not the speaking at graduation.
It was the honorary degree that was the problem. It the Honorarium, it meant that the Univ. supported his past deeds ( supporting infanticide & abortion for starters).
30 pieces of silver come to mind.
March 25th, 2011 | 10:44 am
The idea that pro-life protesters on ND’s campus hurt the pro-life cause is, frankly, absurd. It may be true that different situations call for different tactics, but if one can’t protest on a college campus – a CATHOLIC college campus – then there is a serious problem, as protests are de rigeur on campus for almost every other issue imaginable. Those who are offended by the ND protests (and these were entirely peaceful, if not always entirely charitable) are not people of good will, and will NOT be reached with niceness and cleverness. Protest is the language of the campus Left, or at least it was before they achieved unchallenged power in campus leadership. Now they resent it when others challenge them with activism.
I’m all for charitable and clever engagement, but ND’s decision to honor Obama with an honorary degree while NOT getting him to sit down and debate a single issue is indefensible.
March 25th, 2011 | 11:31 am
At my Catholic College, it has been declared that the mission of a Catholic College is not to manage for a Catholic Interpretation of Life but rather to provide a table with seats for all points of view while making sure that there is one for the Church. In practice, while this makes sure that the Church is at the table it in no wise makes sure that the other people bring her into the conversation.
March 25th, 2011 | 11:32 am
“It was the honorary degree that was the problem. It the Honorarium, it meant that the Univ. supported his past deeds ( supporting infanticide & abortion for starters).”
Exactly.
March 25th, 2011 | 11:50 am
Ms. Maguire’s post is deeply disturbing. To say that “The way many pro-life advocates approached this event was just as wrong as Obama’s presence” suggests a shocking degree of ignorance and moral equivalence. For a Catholic university to honor a man who has repeatedly demonstrated a callous indifference to the protection of innocent human life is simply an abomination. On what grounds can this affront to the university and to the Church possibly be regarded as being somehow equivalent to the actions of the people who showed up to protest this outrage? Her complaint seems to be that these protesters did not attempt to appeal to students and that college students should be viewed as potential “friends” of the pro-life movement. If her point is that the protesters were “wrong” because they were ineffectual, in that they addressed the wrong audience (a bizarre enough claim in and of itself, since the protest was designed to speak to the consciences of everyone concerned) what does that have to do with the merits of the decision to honor a man who has abandoned the most defenseless among us?
March 25th, 2011 | 1:32 pm
I agree that the honorary degree was wrong. There were many pro-life advocates that held peaceful discussions and vigils, and I took part in those. The extremists that yelled at people and flew planes over with banners of dead fetuses are the ones that failed to counteract the university’s decision to honor Obama. As far as my ignorance….I clearly had different experiences than you in the months surrounding the event. That’s no grounds to discredit my experiences. I stand by what I said. That’s all I’m going to say on Obama at Notre Dame. If you want to talk to me about Catholic schools as a whole, feel free. That would be a much more valuable discussion.
March 25th, 2011 | 2:48 pm
I think Anne Maguire has an interesting point. There is a difference between the message and the means of delivery.
The method of delivery of a prefectly valid message can be counterproductive. I’d like to hear more on what constitutes an effective means of delivery.
Thanks for your thoughts and observations.
March 25th, 2011 | 3:18 pm
After four years at Notre Dame, a graduating student, yet alone the President of the university- should be expected to defend life by articulating why abortion is morally wrong. The game is played politically/economically while real babies die. Obama heads this game while Fr. Jenkins “held” his hand-not the hand of the baby nor the brave souls/protestors. The real failure is in the students themselves who could have made all the difference. Many are called, far fewer are chosen, and then there are those “who refuse to hear”. Maybe that was Jenkins problem too.
March 25th, 2011 | 4:10 pm
I think the whole Notre Dame protest would have been more effective if it hadn’t seemed that many of the protesters actually hated Obama more than abortion or valued hearing the sound of their own voices over having them heard. I respect Anne Maguire’s position.
March 25th, 2011 | 4:24 pm
Anne, if you’re still open to duscussing this–did you agree with the arrest of the pro-life protesters at ND? You talk about the backfire effect of some who weren’t willing to talk to students, but isn’t just as bad (if not worse!) to arrest people on campus simply because they AGREE with the teachings of the Church? How do these arrests create any dialogue or forward movement, especially given the double standard the university has practiced regarding who it arrests for protesting?
March 25th, 2011 | 4:38 pm
Patrick, if it’s only about
“say[ing] some pretty words of encouragement to graduating students” I can think of any number of other people who could’ve done that and not caused the controversy the President did. Plus there would have been much less money spent on security, etc., for everyone involved.
March 25th, 2011 | 11:06 pm
Ann Maguire does have a point, though I don’t agree with the equivalency she draws. The pro-life groups at Notre Dame were doing a good job of expressing forceful and conscientious disagreement. (I was at Notre Dame at the time, by the way.) Some of the leaders of the outside protests chose to use methods that were, in my view, counterproductive. I think they should have realized that the people at the school had more credibility on the issue and more chance of making a difference in other people’s views on the matter. I might add that Bishop D’Arcy thought so too, and said so, asking outside protesters to let the Notre Dame people take the lead and handle things according to their prudential judgment.
March 26th, 2011 | 1:28 pm
I don’t think Anne Maguire really understands the issue: not so much abortion as the tolerance for it at “Catholic” universities. When we recall that while Hitler killed only 6 million, while we Americans have killed 50 million of what the Church defines as human beings since R v. W., that might actually call for a little “extremism,” such as the White Rose in Germany. A little “extremism” might be in order.
But that’s not really the issue. The fact is that “Catholic” universities are subtly (or not so subtly) anti-Catholic because they “identify” mainly with the intellectuals, who are overwhelmingly irreligious. And why do the Catholic U’s do this? Because the faculties are recruited overwhelmingly from secular universities and these professors, as one pointed out above, are hostile to all the Church stands for. The conformist Catholic universities have uncritically accepted the “model” for university life that came here from Germany in the 19th Century. To be both Catholic and leaders, the Catholic universities would have to fashion a new model of what a real university is. And since, as even the secular universities testify, the secular universities are undergoing moral collapse, the Catholic counterparts should see this as a huge opportunity. But ince they are led by third-rate hacks, that is not going to happen. The bottom line is that the mostly secularist faculties at Catholic universities dictate the official attitudes of the administrators, who are almost terrified of taking them on.
March 26th, 2011 | 2:06 pm
And since, as even the secular universities testify, the secular universities are undergoing moral collapse, the Catholic counterparts should see this as a huge opportunity. But since they are led by third-rate hacks, that is not going to happen
I think it is.
The first step to solving a problem is becoming aware of it. All around me, I see people becoming aware that we have to re-examine our assumptions – about education, and about purpose in life.
March 27th, 2011 | 11:48 pm
This is sad but true. The same trend exists in the “Catholic” medical schools. We need to look to the small Catholic colleges as the new centers of Catholic learning. Although, there’s hope in some small non-Catholic colleges too. Hillsdale College is arguable one of the most pro-life colleges in America. It took 10% of its student body to the March for Life last year and recruits many new professors from the most conservative schools–many of them Catholic. It also had a 24% increase in applicants and 1 point increase in average ACT scores. Hillsdale is thriving and is now the most Catholic college in Michigan.
March 30th, 2011 | 11:59 pm
In response to Joe Z: You are right. There were a lot of positive responses. One response I really grasped onto was Communion and Liberation. They really sought to see what led up to the university’s decision. CL held an engaging discussion about the questions they present. See this link: http://beingornothingness.blogs.com/living/2009/04/communion-and-liberation-at-notre-dame-a-judgment.html
In response to Bob G’s statement: “I don’t think Anne Maguire really understands the issue: not so much abortion as the tolerance for it at ‘Catholic’ universities.”
There were many different issues involved with the situation at Notre Dame. Not to dismiss your comment, but it’s comical to me that you think I don’t understand the issue. I have been working against this decline in Catholic values at my school for the past 4 years. I was in disbelief freshman year when I found out that the March for Life was not an excused absence. A contact of Bishop D’Arcy suggested that I get a printed letter from the school stating that the March was not excused so the bishop could act on it. I met with administrators, and I was persistently ignored. I was unable to obtain that document, and to this day Saint Mary’s students are penalized in their classes when they go on the March for Life.
Last school year, our right to life club tried to get the school to take a look at pregnancy resources. (Don’t be scandalized–Google Feminists for Life.) They panicked. Although the school has free pregnancy testing, and several people on campus trained with Project Rachel post-abortive counseling, the school did not want to advertise this. We were promised a website would be made, but it never happened. Notre Dame advertises pregnancy resources to support women so they choose life: http://studentaffairs.nd.edu/health-safety/assistance-for-pregnant-students/
Please see above comments for one by “austinn”. His description really reminds me of my school. We have atheists and non-Catholics teaching our classes. The 2 required “Catholic” classes required of students are called “religious studies.” Our school does NOT have a theology department. Also, for a school of about 1500 women, we have one priest. (He is very dedicated, but it’s too much for one person.) I could go on and on. Bob G., I understand the issue you are talking about.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact