www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News A shocking,true story from Georgetown University

I sent an e-mail to Peter Reynolds informing him of this thread and invited him to join and participate. Here is his response:

Instead of criticizing Mr. Reynolds we should be praising him. A college student writing about the offending professor is being courageous. His decision not to name the offending professor was not an act of cowardice but, rather, an act of mercy. If one is to assume anything, one should assume that there were more details that were not included in the story and to gather those details before speculating about them or judging Mr. Reynolds. If anyone is upset that he did not include every possible detail they might consider that most of the editorials in our major newspapers also do not contain such information.

Ah, but Franciscan University is right in the heart of Ruthenian/Ukrainian country...it's engendered its share of crossovers.

***(I will get the quote-function right, sometime!!!)***

Non_nomen,

Welcome back! Good to see you are posting here again.

Mary Jo

pretentiousness - p r e t e n t i o u s n e s s

Thanks for pursuing this and providing the information.

Unfortunately Alice, Mike is right in one sense. This is hardly surprising for Georgetown University. A professor I know who teaches there quips that Catholics should only send their children there if they want their children to lose their faith.

Yes, that's an anonymous accusation, and I only repeat it because it's a catchy quip. So, based on what I have truly seen first hand or know based on solid evidence:

- Teaching of orthodox religion is not a priority of the school [first hand]

- the faculty and student newspaper was thoroughly scandalized when Cardinal Arinze condemned homosexuality. [this generated a lot of hubub in the press. My own opinion is that the University believed the African papabile would be impresed when they showed him their commitment to equality, social justice, tolerance and the like. Obviously, they didn't realize who they were inviting.]

- a priest affiliated with the Jesuits running the university spent a long daily mass homily (on the feast day of the Martyr Hippolytus) advocating a married priesthood. I also vaguely recall that he advocated the "ordination" of women to the priesthood in a seperate homily (though in fairness it may have been elsewhere; nevertheless I would not be surprised to hear something like that there). [first hand, and I have been to Mass in the area several times]

There are Catholic schools loyal to the Church. Thomas Aquinas, Christendom, and the "neo-orthodox (with a small 'o')" schools are one group. Franciscan University is another. I also know several people whose faith have grown at Catholic U.

All that said, the parent intending to send their children to a Catholic college should do a thorough investigation of the school to ensure that the Faith is taught there. Good things to do are to look at the course catalog, obtain syallbi, sit in classes, talk to professors, attend daily masses [things someone should do before choosing a college anyway]. Unfortunately, this requires at least a few days visiting the said college.

Marc the - uncomfortably trad-ish sounding - Roman

If I recall correctly, didn't the Pope say something a few years back, to the effect that Catholic universities should hire Catholic professors, and not athiests. It appears he was quite concerned.

Now there is something else brewing here. If I also recall correctly, (probably on CBN News), I had heard that under the Clinton administration, grants were being given to schools with the understanding that certain classes, clubs, etc., had to be established with very liberal agendas.

I remembered this when I went to pick up a grandchild, and found that she was ready to join a club in order to show how open minded she was. I believe the club was something called Gays and Straights. She was 13, a very impressionable age, and I blew a fuse.

Now this was not a public state run school where the parents would not have allowed it, but rather a very distinguished private school, that somehow suddenly found a substantial amount of money. So much so, that it expanded three fold.

I also noticed that in college, that a highly moral boy I knew was encouraged to take a class on 'Aids' etc. Again, I couldn't help but feel that the university was taking advantage of certain federal grants, and in order to do so, were forced to incorporate certain cariculums in order to obtain those grants...I say this, if one should ever wonder, how great the influence the government in Washington has had on our culture.

Zenovia

Now that sounds a bit too much like an urban legend or something from Mr Limbaugh

Good morning all!

Brian wrote:
"Now that sounds a bit too much like an urban legend or something from Mr Limbaugh"

Yes, Brian, I have to agree. I try to stay away from these threads ... too contentious on the whole.

Zenovia wrote:
"I also noticed that in college, that a highly moral boy I knew was encouraged to take a class on 'Aids' etc. Again, I couldn't help but feel that the university was taking advantage of certain federal grants, and in order to do so, were forced to incorporate certain cariculums in order to obtain those grants...I say this, if one should ever wonder, how great the influence the government in Washington has had on our culture."

Zenovia,

Any college which encourages its students to take a class on AIDS (not "Aids") should be commended. Whether a young person is "highly moral" or not does not enter the equation. HIV/AIDS is a fact of life in the 21st century and high morals, sadly, at times fall by the wayside. If I had a teenage son or daughter, I would want that young person`s college to make such courses available and to encourage students to take them. I never did like the ostrich syndrome.

As for the influence of the government in Washington on our culture, IMHO it has very little influence. If one wants to talk about influence, try the multi-national corporations, the tobacco and liquor industries, the oil industry, the film industry, etc., etc., etc.

Corporate and individual donors have much greater influences on college curricula than does the federal government. The federal government looks at compliance with federal policy guidelines - EEO, OSHA, etc.

Now, about the subject of this thread. I, too, wonder about the motives of the young man who wrote that article. Since college courses are, at the least, a semi-public arena, professors who make outlandish and offensive statements should expect that such statements might be publicized along with their names. When I was in college - many, many years ago - I wrote a weekly column for my school`s student newspaper. If I had a problem with this or that professor`s or administrator`s utterances, I wrote "Professor `x` stated `y` and let the public discourse begin.

At the beginning of his article, Mr. Reynolds writes: "No one said a word to him, not even after class." However, in his reply to our good Administrator, Mr. Reynolds wrote: "When we confronted him, he apologized [only to us] and implied that we are too sensitive about the faith since everyone else didn't mind." So my question: which of Mr. Reynold`s comments should we believe? Did someone say something to the professor or not?

Alice wrote: "I find it shocking because this is a Jesuit run Roman Catholic Institution of the highest caliber. Why do they allow these professors to take such positions?

Is there no Roman Catholic institution that is loyal to its foundation and to Christian tenets anymore?"

Not to be pedantic, but the professor did not take a position - he made a statement. And yes, the cross is a scandal, a weakness, for the reasons so ably stated elsewhere in this thread.

Now we know that he is not a professor of theology. If he were, he could face disciplinary action `if` the statements were made in such a fashion or with the intention of insulting the faith or calling it into question.

I would not be surprised if someone in the Georgeown administration remonstrated privately with this professor about his comments. However, the days of the Inquistion are, thankly, behind us. This has nothing to do, IMHO, with loyalty to the magisterium.

As for the Jesuits and Georgetown, both are regular and favorite whipping-boys for the Catholic right. I know of no Catholic relgious community, in the U.S. or elsewhere, which does not have its problems, and that includes those with both liberal and conservative perspectives.

Peace,

Charles

First of all, everyone should stop making lame excuses for what this professor did. There is no reason to assume that he was referring to the "scandal of the cross" in any pious sort of way--at least the students who witnessed the remarks did not think so. Second of all, the cross is not "a weakness." The cross is the tree of life. O Crux! Ave, spes unica!

Third of all, all Catholic colleges are inferior to Christendom College in Front Royal, VA!! :p

I think Thomas Aquinas College would beg to differ with your concluding observation...

You're darn right they would!

Is there a problem with the Jesuits? Does the order need reform to get back to the intentions of its founder? There are no Jesuits in my area, so it's difficult to ask these questions directly.

I took several courses in theology and church history at Georgetown after law school. I really did not see or hear anything I thought was terribly off the wall there. Indeed, one of my friends converted to Catholicism after studying there.

There was, however, some controversy spurred by non-Catholic students who were offended by Crucifixes in classrooms. That was ridiculous to me. Don't go to a Catholic school if you don't want to see Crucifixes. That's a no-brainer, really.

I have always enjoyed Jesuits. However, they are sometimes too "smart" (intellectual) for their own good. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are highly intellectual - blame it on the early councils and the need to make sense of things that are very hard for our small minds to grasp. But sometimes you just have to see with your heart and not with your mind. To me, that's where Jesuits often fall short... but there is a place for the Thomases (as in the doubting Apostle) and they fit the bill oft times.

I think that if an order diviates from the original vision, i.e. charism, of its founder there can be a big problem and there is a need to get back to that vision. Franciscans must keep that wonderful poverty of spirit; Dominicans need to keep preaching; Benedictines need to uphold monastic community ideals; and Jesuits need to keep the strength and mobility of their founder and soldier of Christ --Ignatius Loyola. All must have at the center of that vision the love of God, the promulgation of the Gospels of Christ, fervent prayer, and love of others.All must value the Trinitarian ideals and the glory of worship in liturgical settings. But if there is to be one vision it is this and it is for all:

"Love one another as I have loved you." The words of Jesus. +

Mary Jo