Pro-Homosexual Clubs at 96 Catholic Universities

Survey Finds Pro-Homosexual Clubs at 96 Catholic Universities in the United States
Catholic group challenges university presidents to disband pro-homosexual groups

By Michael Baggot

SPRING GROVE, PA, March 27, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Volunteers for the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) found that 45% of the websites of 211 major Catholic universities contained information about pro-homosexual clubs.

"Many of these clubs share in the movement's radical goal - to force social acceptance of unnatural vice on Christian America, and gag expressions of free speech that oppose the movement's ideological agenda," warns an official TFP statement.

The TFP statement cites two concrete examples of Catholic universities suppressing the free speech of critics of the pro-homosexual clubs.

In November 2003, members of the TFP Student Action group were kicked off of campus for handing out flyers detailing the Catechism of the Catholic Church's teaching on the sinfulness of homosexual activity.

In October 2005, Duquesne University cited Sophomore Ryan Miner for a violation against the school's anti-discriminatory policy for posting comments on his own blog opposing the formation of a "Gay-Straight Alliance" group. When Miner refused to write a 10-page paper presenting viewpoints for and against homosexuality, he was threatened with expulsion.

Some Catholic universities with a history of pro-homosexual club activity have increased support for the homosexual movement. Georgetown University, for instance, agreed in October 2007 to open and fully fund a center for homosexual students.

"Georgetown hosts mock same-sex "weddings," grants health benefits to the partners of homosexual employees, and provides services for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Youth and their Families," notes Thomas Peters, on his American Papist blog. The Georgetown GU Pride website even includes photos of students of the same sex kissing at a campus event.

The TFP report also lists other prestigious Catholic universities, including Boston College, Fordham, Marquette, Notre Dame, Seton Hall, and Villanova.

The TFP report attributes the growth of the homosexual movement on Catholic campuses to "a gradual blurring of the distinction between good and evil, a generalized loss of the sense of sin, declining standards of public morality, and, as seen above, the persecutory actions taken by college officials against those who do voice their loyalty to Church teaching."

In response to the growth of pro-homosexual activities on Catholic campuses, the TPF is organizing a petition to Catholic university presidents calling on them to disband pro-homosexual groups on campus.

The TFP report also encourages personal phone calls and letters to Catholic university presidents. In addition, TFP is launching a Purity is the Answer Campaign to promote purity, modesty, and temperance as the antidote to disordered passions.

Reaffirming TFP's opposition to the hateful treatment of individuals with same-sex attractions, its report states, "In doing this campaign, we have no intention to defame or disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any individual. In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense of marriage, the family and the precious remnants of Christian civilization in society."

"As practicing Catholics, we are filled with compassion and pray for those who struggle against unrelenting and violent temptation to sin, be it toward homosexual sin or otherwise," the report adds.

(news tip courtesy of Thomas Peters of American Papist blog)

Sixteen 'Catholic' Colleges Still Allow V* Monolgues on Campus

The Cardinal Newman Society
For Immediate Release
March 20, 2008

2008 V-Monologues in Review: Number of Campuses Hosting Play at Historic Low

Manassas, VA - Thankfully performances of The Vagina Monologues on Catholic college campuses declined to 16 confirmed performances, half of the 32 performances reported in 2003! For seven years, The Cardinal Newman Society (CNS), its more than 20,000 members and a growing number of bishops, college presidents, alumni, and other Catholic leaders have urged Catholic colleges to not approve performances of the Monologues on their campuses.

Patrick J. Reilly, President and Founder of CNS, commented on the success of the campaign: "It is wonderful news for all of those concerned about Catholic higher education that more and more Catholic colleges are refusing to host the morally offensive Monologues."

In December and January, CNS obtained the list of campuses hosting the Monologues from the official sponsor's website, vday.org. Letters were sent to the presidents of every Catholic college and university listed, alerting them to the Vday site and asking for confirmation that the play would or would not be allowed on their campuses. On February 6th, CNS released a list of 20 Catholic campuses that were expected to host the play, based on the Vday site listings and information from presidents who responded to the CNS letters.

CNS applauds those Catholic colleges and universities that have refused to host the Monologues. These include St. Louis University, which refused to host the play for a second consecutive year. Although St. Louis University was identified on the Vday site, we learned from an e-mail contact the day after our release that the university was not hosting the play and immediately updated the list. We regret that St. Louis was included in the original CNS list of 20 colleges. And although Vday continues to promote a campus performance at Le Moyne College on March 28, staff at the college indicated to CNS that the Monologues would not be held this year.

CNS has confirmed that 16 of the 19 Catholic campuses hosted or will host productions in February and March. (CNS has been unable to confirm performances announced by Vday at Loyola Marymount University in California and Regis College in Massachusetts.)

The confirmed list of 16 includes Bellarmine University, College of the Holy Cross, College of Mount Saint Vincent, College of Saint Rose, DePaul University, Dominican University of California, Fordham University, Georgetown University, John Carroll University, Loyola University Chicago, Loyola University New Orleans, Marygrove College, Saint Mary's College of California, University of Detroit Mercy, University of Notre Dame, and University of San Francisco.

Despite this growing momentum against performances of the Monologues, in a statement on March 10th, Rev. John Jenkins, President of Notre Dame, officially approved the return of the play to the Notre Dame campus after a one-year hiatus. The statement was released soon after a committee of U.S. bishops moved an important seminar from Notre Dame because of the planned performances. On March 13th Bishop John M. D'Arcy of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend released a strong statement in response to Father Jenkins' position on the Monologues that forcefully explained why it was inappropriate for Notre Dame to host the play.

"Although the return of the play to Notre Dame was disappointing, the downward trend of campuses hosting the Monologues is one more sign of the ongoing renewal in Catholic higher education. While much work remains to be done, there is reason to be hopeful," said Reilly.

This article is also available on the CNS website here.

Jesuit University President Attacks George Weigel

by Deal W. Hudson
3/20/08

The February 20 issue of the Denver Catholic Register published a column on the Jesuits titled "Some Questions for Father General" by George Weigel. In response, the president of the University of San Francisco, Rev. Stephen A. Privett, S.J., published "Attack on Jesuits Out of Place" in Catholic San Francisco, the archdiocesan newspaper.

Father Privett not only attacked what he termed the "mean-spirited assault" of Weigel, but he was also sharply critical of the Denver archdiocese for publishing it. Father writes,

The readership of Catholic diocesan newspapers deserves more civil, balanced, and professional fare than that served up and passed around by the Denver Catholic Register.

I don't know of a single instance in the history of this country's Catholic Church when one diocesan newspaper attacked another by name.

Weigel asked the new Jesuit Superior, Rev. Adolfo Nicolas, S.J., questions on four issues: Jesuit obedience, the Catholic identity of Jesuit educational institutions, the Jesuit attitude toward the Church's teaching on homosexuality, and the order's theological commitment to the "unique salvific role of Jesus Christ."

Anyone even superficially familiar with the history of the Catholic Church since Vatican II would not be surprised by these questions. The issues of Jesuit obedience and Catholic identity were raised by the secular media in its coverage of the recent election of the new Father General. In addition, the Vatican pressure that led to the resignation of Rev. Thomas Reese, S.J., from his editorship of America magazine got national attention.

Father Privett's outrage suggests that he is unaware that Weigel is merely speaking aloud questions that are shared by Catholics around the world. He specifically charges Weigel with making unfounded allegations about two Jesuits in particular, Rev. James Keenan, S.J., and the late Rev. Robert Drinan, S.J. Wiegel puts both forward as examples of Jesuit attitudes toward basic Church teachings on abortion and marriage.

About Father Drinan, Weigel writes, "He did more than anyone else to convince Catholic legislators that the settled teaching of the Church on the grave immorality of abortion had no bearing on their legislative work." Father Privett's reply to Weigel: "His stunningly sweeping statement . . . lacks any supporting evidence."

I'm sure that Weigel would be surprised to hear that he needed to document the career of Father Drinan, whom I call in my recent book the "Jesuit priest who invented the pro-abortion Catholic politician." Perhaps Father Privett needs to be reminded that, after being elected to Congress in 1970, Father Drinan wrote in support of Roe v. Wade and Clinton's veto of the ban against partial-birth abortion. After being forced by John Paul II to leave Congress in 1981, Father Drinan continued as a pro-abortion lobbyist both within the Democratic Party and as head of Americans for Democratic Action.

Father Privett also takes issue with Weigel's description of Father Keenan's highly publicized testimony before the Massachusetts legislature in support of homosexual marriage. Father Keenan's argument, according to Weigel, was " that the principles of Catholic social doctrine did not merely tolerate 'gay marriage,' they demanded it." But again, Father Privett objects: "He did not do so. Father Keenan testified against unjust discrimination against gay couples. He did not testify in support of gay marriage or approve homosexual activity."

What Father Privett does not make clear is that Father Keenan, a moral theologian at Boston College, argued for gay marriage on the basis of homosexuals' possessing a "right" to be married. Weigel is correct.

The most sensitive issue raised by Weigel is the attitude toward homosexuality among the Jesuits. He rightly calls it the "third-rail" issue, as anyone who raises it can expect some kind of thrashing.

What must have provoked Father Privett is one example Weigel supplies from the Jesuits' California province:

[I]t was not that long ago, after all, that the Web site of the Jesuits' California Province featured photos of "Pretty Boy" and "Jabba the Slut" in gay drag at a novices' party.

Father Privett explains that these photos are not "gay drag"; rather, they were "taken at a Halloween party seven years ago at the novitiate" and were "mistakenly put on-line and immediately taken off for fear it would be malevolently misinterpreted by the likes of Mr. Weigel."

Let me add to this discussion a story I heard, and verified, on a recent trip to San Francisco. A graduate student at the University of San Francisco was rejected for a position in the resident halls because, as he put it, "Father said I do not have the right attitude toward homosexual conduct, as I disapprove of such conduct." After being turned down for the position, it was suggested by a Jesuit that he read Gays and Grays: The Story of the Gay Community at Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Parish, written by Rev. Donal Godfrey, S.J., a professor at USF.

On page 134 of Gays and Grays, Father Godfrey posits the question, "Is it less appropriate for gays to imagine Jesus as gay than for African Christians to picture him as black, Asian Christians as Asian?" This,shortly after acknowledging on page 132,"I will not feign academic objectivity: if such a thing really exists. I firmly believe in a new approach and a new vision in this area of ministry. In this I do have an 'agenda.'"

Not surprisingly, the graduate student has been hesitant to pursue "some questions" he has about the USF Jesuit community's doctrinal approach to homosexuality, for fear that his questions might be wrongly construed as an "attack on the Jesuits." It's not difficult to see where he might have gotten that impression.

Local Catholics familiar with the situation at USF told me that this is not an isolated incident, and that some Jesuits in the community are deeply concerned.

For one, the theologians at USF were offered the mandatum, in accord with Ex Corde Ecclesiae, but none responded to the offer. In fact, Sacred Heart Sr. Theresa Moser, associate dean at the University of San Francisco, urged USF theologians to adopt a stance of noncompliance: "'The appropriate strategy is to do nothing' by way of requesting a mandatum, she said, or, if one is offered, to 'very respectfully decline."'

The questions asked by George Weigel about the future of the Jesuits shouldn't have been so shocking to Father Privett; they have been asked publicly, in both secular and Catholic media, for decades. Weigel's questions didn't surprise the Catholic residents of San Francisco, but Father Privett's outraged response did.

Deal W. Hudson is the director of InsideCatholic.com and the author of Onward, Christian Soldiers: The Growing Political Power of Catholics and Evangelicals in the United States (Simon and Schuster, March 2008).

"The Politics of Abortion" Book Review

From "The Politics of Abortion," By Anne Hendershott. Encounter Books. 179 pages. $25.95.

Doubtless the most painful chapter is the one in which Hender­shott shows that many Catholic colleges no longer foster a prolife culture. Two recent studies have demonstrated that support for abortion on Catholic campuses now increases between the freshman and senior years. Sadly, "abortion is rarely debated on Catholic college campuses, either from a reasoned secular viewpoint or from a theological perspective." True, the Culture of Life is heartily encouraged at the new, more faithful Catholic colleges, but a larger number of the older Catholic campuses actually promote participation in the Culture of Death, for example, with Planned Parenthood student internships and invitations to notorious pro-abortionists to speak on campus.

Recently, though, there have been a few hopeful signs: some pro-abortion lecturers were dis-invited -- Gloria Steinem from Trinity in Vermont, Frances Kissling from Holy Cross, and James Lawson from Christian Brothers University in Memphis. Yet Hendershott finds that the prolife movement in certain elite secular colleges and universities has more vitality today than that found in their Catholic counterparts. This shouldn't be. Our institutions should be the yeast raising the mass of dough.

As Reviewed in New Oxford Review

Persepective From CUA President Offered on pope's Visit

Note: I tend to agree with the Rev. in his response to the Washington Post story from a few days ago. The media loves to jump all over controversy and play up division. But the Pope is a shepherd, not a lion tamer. He will speak as a father and a pastor. He will encourage and praise and only lightly touch on concerns he may have. When he does, expect the headlines to be "Pope Admonishes College Presidents". But they'll hear the whole message and know what it means. The Vatican already said what needed to be said in Ex Corde Ecclesiae. It's up to the colleges to respond.

A Challenge From the Pope

I could not disagree more with those who predict a "stern message" and a "rebuke" when Pope Benedict XVI addresses Catholic university and college presidents and diocesan education leaders at Catholic University on April 17. The fact that the pope, as teacher of the faith, takes on the compromises advanced within contemporary culture, pushes hard against moral relativism, and seeks to present the intelligibility of the alliance between faith and reason in the quest for truth does not constitute an attack on the Catholic academy. They are the very things that Catholic universities and colleges, too, should be considering, precisely because they are Catholic.

The pope is presenting a challenge to all of us in Catholic higher education to be authentic and faithful to what we say we are and what we say we do. No one should fear such a challenge or paint the call to authenticity as some sort of public reprimand. It is the pope's role and responsibility to lift up Catholic principles as goals to be achieved and as elements of truth, identity and mission for all institutions within the church.

Positive messages do not often make headlines. Controversies -- real or imagined -- do. The suggestion that the pope is coming to the United States with a hammer for Catholic educational leaders is not only premature but also prejudicial. Instead of condemning Catholic universities and colleges for what may be perceived as failures -- and failures do exist -- the pope might very well thank Catholic educational institutions for being beacons of light in a society that sometimes prefers darkness.

VERY REV.
DAVID M. O'CONNELL
President
The Catholic University of America
Washington

The Catholic Brand

The Challenge of Controlling the Catholic Brand
Theophilis
March 15, 2008

(ITH) - The article below from the Washington Post describes the trepidation that Catholic college presidents feel about the upcoming visit by Pope Benedict XVI. They feel that his likely response to their "leadership" will be admonishment and lecturing about "Catholic" identity and dissent. And understandably so.

These college presidents have benefited greatly from using the Catholic brand. Powerful and wealthy alumni who identify themselves as Catholic continue to pump millions of dollars into Catholic college endowments and supply a stream of descendant applicants to their Alma Maters. Further, Catholic high schools continue to encourage graduates to attend Catholic colleges and many have scholarships available from those colleges geographically closest to them .

The college presidents though openly flaunt their dissent from Catholic teaching on faith and morals in the name of "academic freedom". Why? One answer may be the demographic reality that fewer young people identify themselves as churchgoing Catholics. Another may be that to "compete" for faculty and students these colleges feel they need to diversify into demographics having nothing to do with the Catholic faith and more to do with current trends or fads like feminism, homosexuality and secularism.

The response of the Church leadership, especially the Pope, has been to add requirements for these colleges and their presidents to prove they are worthy of the Catholic moniker. Is their response rational or one of futility and desperation?

I liken it to a corporation that wants to control its brand. For Coca Cola to be Coca Cola, it must have the same ingredients, appearance, packaging and advertising wherever and whenever it is made and distributed. If a consumer were to detect a distinct difference in taste from time to time or place to place, they would likely complain or change brands to something more reliable.

Catholic colleges, by using the brand name "Catholic" have broken the rules of sound brand management. "Catholic" at Franciscan University at Steubenville, OH means something very different from "Catholic" at Georgetown University. An unsuspecting parent or student performing a college search almost has to eliminate the idea of a Catholic college from the equation. Indeed, it may be easier to have a Catholic experience at the Catholic Center at secular Boston University than at "Catholic" Boston College just three miles up Commonwealth Avenue.

The Church hierarchy responding to this problem of inconsistent brand has tried to impose some order. The document Ex Corde Ecclesiae issued by the Vatican sought to standardize the brand with respect to theology departments and the delivery system, the professors.

Likewise, the USCCB document, Catholics in Political Life, also sought to create guidelines by which Catholic colleges would approach political activity on their campuses. The reaction by the college presidents was predictable. They ignored these documents and the authority of the Vatican and Episcopate and continued to manage their colleges as separate franchises.

The result has been confusion and disillusionment on the part of practicing Catholics seeking an authentically Catholic experience. Organizations like the Cardinal Newman Society and National Catholic Register have called attention to the problem and produced guides for students and parents to use when selecting a college. In both cases, the list of authentically Catholic colleges is a small minority. And the geographic dispersion means that a student may well have to travel many miles and out of state to attend one.

So now the Pope is visiting and has on the agenda the problem described in this article. He will likely exhort the colleges to come more in line with the truth as defined by the magisterium of the Church. Less likely are any concrete steps to exert pressure on the college presidents or religious orders.

Many will cry that the Pope and the bishops are overstepping their authority and that they are trying to restrict academic freedom. But in reality they are trying to control the Catholic brand because to do otherwise usually means a steep decline in customers.

Catholic College Leaders Expect Pope to Deliver Stern Message

By Jacqueline L. Salmon and Michelle Boorstein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, March 14, 2008; A01

After years of Vatican frustration over what it views as the failure of many U.S. Catholic colleges to adhere to church teachings, school leaders are intently watching for a rebuke from Pope Benedict XVI during his Washington visit next month.

The pope requested the meeting with more than 200 top Catholic school officials from across the country. The gathering will come amid debate over teachings and campus activities that bishops have slammed as violating Catholic doctrine: a rally by pro-abortion rights Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton at St. Mary's University in San Antonio; a Georgetown University theologian's questioning whether Jesus offers the only road to salvation; and a performance of "The Vagina Monologues" at the University of Notre Dame.

This will be the first papal address in the United States on Catholic education in more than 20 years, and some Vatican watchers predict that it will be the most enduring part of Benedict's visit. Before becoming pope, Benedict was known as "the enforcer" of church orthodoxy, and since taking office, he has said Catholic education must bow to Catholic "truth" and the "rule of life." Such comments have some educators keyed up.

"With people expecting his address on these issues, hopes and concerns are beginning to resurface," said Mathew Schmalz, a religious studies professor at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass., who has researched and lectured about Catholic identity in higher education.

The Rev. Timothy Broglio, archbishop of the U.S. military services, who served in Rome for a dozen years, said Benedict's speech will be direct. "It'll be very clear and distinct ideas," Broglio said. "... There will be no mistaking what he wants to say."

A drumbeat for greater orthodoxy in Catholic colleges has been heard since 1990, when Pope John Paul II issued a call for Catholic colleges and universities to refocus on their religious identity.

Now educators are waiting to see how tough Benedict, a former theology professor in Germany, will be at the April 17 lecture at Catholic University and how his message will be interpreted and carried out by the bishops after he leaves.

Church officials won't give details about the content of the speech, but conservative Catholics are predicting -- and hoping for -- shock waves from Benedict, who before becoming pope was associated with public reprimands of Catholic theologians and blocked appointments of university faculty members he thought were too liberal.

"This is something that's been simmering for so long that it's reached a boiling point," said Patrick Reilly, president of the Cardinal Newman Society, which works to promote orthodoxy in Catholic higher education. In its recommendations to students, the society says 20 of the 235 U.S. Catholic colleges and universities are sufficiently orthodox. Reilly said a number of bishops and Vatican officials say privately that the speech will "raise a lot of eyebrows."

As pope, Benedict has not been as explicit about the limits of academic freedom as some had expected him to be, and some educators predicted that the talk next month will have a pastoral tone. However, they said, it will make clear that the pope thinks change is necessary.

"One thing the pope will emphasize is the importance for all [Catholic] schools to realize that they aren't independent contractors, they are part of the church," said the Rev. David M. O'Connell, Catholic University's president.

Catholic University is the only U.S. Catholic college founded by the nation's bishops, and it follows the Vatican line more closely than do many other schools. O'Connoll said Rome is concerned about the lack of Catholic faculty at Catholic universities and about rampant "moral relativism" -- the belief that there is no objective right or wrong -- on campuses.

Last fall, Worcester Bishop Robert J. McManus objected to a conference on teen pregnancy held on the campus of the College of the Holy Cross that included speakers from Planned Parenthood and NARAL.

And last month: San Antonio Archbishop Jose Gomez complained about the Clinton rally at St. Mary's University; St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said St. Louis University basketball coach Rick Majerus should be disciplined for his comments in support of abortion rights and embryonic stem cell research; and Catholic bishops moved a theological seminar off Notre Dame's campus to protest an on-campus performance of the play "The Vagina Monologues."

Bishops have criticized Georgetown for hosting Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and allowing the establishment of a pro-abortion rights student club there. Conservative Catholics are complaining about plans to open a gay resource center soon at the school.

School presidents insist that truth-seeking is part of their institutional purpose.

"Every university is committed to the pursuit of truth," said Georgetown President John J. DeGioia, "and we want to ensure that there is the opportunity for both academic freedom and for the free exchange of ideas and opinions across all issues."

But David Gibson, the author of a Benedict biography, said the pope will ask, "If you're not going to be an authentically Catholic, orthodox institution, why should you exist?"

The lecture will be attended by presidents of most U.S. Catholic colleges and universities. All 195 diocesan education directors are also invited, although the Vatican's focus has been on countering relativism in higher education.

After liberalizing moves by the church in the 1960s and 1970s, Pope John Paul in 1990 issued Ex Corde Ecclesiae, presenting his views of what a Catholic university should be. In 1999, U.S. bishops voted to require theology professors to be certified as teaching in a truly "Catholic" manner.

Since then, there has been a vigorous exchange, with most educators on Catholic campuses agreeing that they want to keep a "Catholic" perspective but disagreeing about how pervasive that needs to be. Does it mean events and courses should always come down on the side of orthodox church teachings? Or can the church's position simply be articulated and discussed? What does academic freedom truly mean under Ex Corde?

Many conservatives have complained that colleges and universities don't take seriously the requirement that people teaching theology obtain a "mandatum," or certificate, from the local bishop indicating that the coursework was approved by the church.

Although Catholic colleges and universities were originally founded by religious orders or by laypeople working with bishops, their campuses have become more diverse, and that diversity affects their mission.

"Our schools are not made up of all Catholic students or Catholic faculty and administrators," said the Rev. Charles Currie, president of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities, who has spoken out against the mandatum and quotas on non-Catholic board members and faculty members. "And so the institution has to be respectful of differences at the same time they're trying to foster a [Catholic] identity."

Some are skeptical that anything will change.

"Whatever he says, I think, for the most part, it will fall on deaf ears," said Derry Connolly, president of John Paul the Great Catholic University. "Universities are tough institutions to turn around, and faculty are very powerful. ... I don't think it will have much of an effect."

Infanticide Supporter at Villanova

Note: I made my headline include the word "infanticide" because Obama voted against the Born Alive Act which simply stated that a child born alive during an abortion procedure cannot be murdered. That such a law is even needed shows how perverse our society has become. Of course, he also supports partial birth abortion so the principle is the same separated by a birth canal and five minutes. That Villanova welcomes a supporter of such a crime shows how far they will go to cozy up to political power.

VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY HOSTS ABORTION ADVOCATE MICHELLE OBAMA

Manassas, VA - In another example of a Catholic university hosting a pro-abortion political figure, Michelle Obama spoke before 2,500 people at a political rally for her husband, Democratic presidential candidate Barak Obama, at Villanova University's Jake Nevin Fieldhouse on March 13.

Mrs. Obama, an abortion advocate, endorsed partial-birth abortion in a 2004 fundraising letter for her husband. Senator Obama supports Roe v. Wade, partial-birth abortion and embryonic stem cell research. He has voted against parental notification and for increased contraceptive funding for teenagers.

Joseph A. Esposito, director of the Cardinal Newman Society's Center for the Study of Catholic Higher Education, said, "The Obamas' record on abortion is clear and unequivocal. We are disappointed with Villanova University. For a Catholic university to provide a platform for a pro-abortion figure in the midst of a political campaign is simply wrong."

The Cardinal Newman Society had a lead role in drafting a "Statement of Principles Regarding Catholic Institutions, Sanctity of Life and Political Engagement" last month. The statement was endorsed by 18 major Catholic organizations, including the Cardinal Newman Society, Catholics United for the Faith, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and the Fellowship of Catholic University Students.

The statement reads, in part, "We call on Catholic institutions to join us in refusing to honor or provide a public forum for any political leader or candidate who acts 'in defiance of our fundamental moral principles.' This includes any politician who undermines a 'culture of life' by advocating public policies to permit or support abortion, physician-assisted suicide, embryonic stem cell research, or any other threat to human life."

This initiative was undertaken in response to an alarming trend of pro-abortion politicians using Catholic college campuses for political rallies during the presidential campaign. In January, Senator Obama appeared at a huge rally on the campus on Saint Peter's College, a Jesuit institution in Jersey City, N.J. Senator Hillary Clinton appeared at St. Norbert's College in Wisconsin and St. Mary's University in San Antonio, Tex., in February.

In objecting to Clinton's visit to St. Mary's University, Archbishop Jose Gomez said, "Our Catholic institutions must promote the clear understanding of our deep moral convictions on an issue like abortion, an act that the Church calls 'an unspeakable crime' and a non-negotiable issue."

Esposito added, "It is important to let Catholic college leaders know that such disregard for Catholic Church teachings is morally wrong and ultimately impugns the Catholic mission and integrity of the institution. Faithful Catholics may want to contact Father Peter Donohue, president of Villanova University, to indicate their outrage."

He also said, "It is important, too, to thank Catholic leaders who do stand up for Church principles regarding campus speakers. The Cardinal Newman Society recently praised the University of St. Thomas, Houston, for their top administrators barring the speech of a Latina activist with a record of abortion advocacy from speaking on campus."

Father Donohue, the president of Villanova University, can be reached at president@villanova.edu.

HLI Calls for Ouster of Notre Dame President

FRONT ROYAL, VA (MARCH 13, 2008) - The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, president of Human Life International, (HLI) today called for the firing of University of Notre Dame President Father John Jenkins, C.S.C., for his approval of the presentation of the play The Vagina Monologues on campus. Father Euteneuer is a Notre Dame alumnus, Class of '84.

Euteneuer said today, "This is really getting tiresome. For forty years Catholic university presidents have been intimidated and afraid of 'offending' ideological feminists and others who have undisguised contempt for the Catholic Church. These groups have been welcomed to Catholic campuses and have been spitting in the eye of the Church ever since. They cannot be pleased or placated."

Euteneuer continued, "Father Jenkins has been given several chances to take a truly Catholic position on this heinous piece of ideological propaganda and has consistently voted against the pleas and well-reasoned arguments of students, faculty and alumni alike. He needs to step down from his position or the ND Board of Directors needs to dismiss him. A Catholic priest just does not endorse this screed."

In the March 10 statement, Father Jenkins said: "Notre Dame's policy on controversial events rests on the conviction that truth will emerge from reasoned consideration of issues in dialogue with faith.... [I]t is, in my judgment, the action that best serves the distinctive mission of Notre Dame."

Father Euteneuer responded, "The distinctive mission of Notre Dame is to communicate the Catholic Faith. There is nothing inherently truth-producing about 'dialogue' or controversy, especially on immoral issues. "Catholics deserve better from a university named for Our Lady."

Contact:
Human Life International
http://www.hli.org
OK, US
John Mallon - PR Director,
johnmallon@cox.net
405 - 720-2575

Statement by Bishop John M. D'Arcy Regarding Dirty Play at Notre Dame

Note: After reading this and realizing that Fr. Jenkins rebuffed the good bishop, one can only conclude that Jenkins is a man with a heart hardened against all natural reason. He is so committed in his sin he cannot move off his position. He has fixed himself in opposition to the institution that ordained him and placed him in a position of authority over young people. The bishop has few arrows in his quiver. He does not want to declare the preeminent Catholic university in the US "not Catholic". But he has no other authority over it.

The decision to allow performances of 'The Vagina Monologues' at the University of Notre Dame

March 2008

Reverend John Jenkins, CSC, and I have been in communication about his decision to allow performances of "The Vagina Monologues" at Notre Dame. I am grateful to Father Jenkins for the extensive time he has put into our conversation and correspondence on these matters over the last two months, and I have taken care in this statement to present his position accurately in order to make a fair response. Father Jenkins has informed me that, while he thinks that this play is a bad play, he believes that permitting its performance under certain conditions, namely, in an academic building without fundraising and with a panel discussion afterwards in which the Catholic perspective is represented, is consistent with the identity of a Catholic university. In particular, Father Jenkins believes that reading the works of authors such as Nietzsche, Gibbon, Luther and Joyce, who in various ways espouse ideas that are contrary to Catholic teaching, in classes at Notre Dame, is comparable to permitting performances of "The Vagina Monologues" under the conditions specified.

As bishop of this historic diocese, entrusted with the spiritual welfare of all those who live within its borders, including the students at our beloved Notre Dame, I believe that, once again, I must publicly and respectfully disagree with Father Jenkins' decision. I am convinced that permitting performances of "The Vagina Monologues" is not consistent with the identity of a Catholic university and not comparable to the long accepted academic tradition through which a wide variety of authors are read and discussed in classes at Notre Dame and in all institutions of higher learning.

In the first place, the difference between the works of authors such as Nietzsche, Gibbon, Luther and Joyce, and "The Vagina Monologues" is a difference, not of degree, but of kind. The former have written serious philosophical, theological and literary works, which have influenced Western thought. As such, their work has academic merit and is worthy of serious discussion and critique in a classroom setting. Father Jenkins believes that Eve Ensler's play was written to shock and offend. How can one put such a play, which many consider pornographic, on the level of serious works such as the writings of Gibbon and Luther?

Even if one could make a case that this play has academic merit, it could be read in class. When a book or play is read in class, the student expects it to be discussed and critiqued; indeed, this is an essential part of the classroom experience. This is not so when one attends the performance of a play. One generally goes to a play and leaves; staying afterwards to listen to a panel discussion about the play is not inherent in the activity of attending a play. No one who comes to the play is required to stay for the panel discussion, and Father Jenkins' attempt to give the performances of this play an academic quality seems deficient.

In addition, unlike reading the play as a classroom assignment, the performances are themselves an endorsement of the international V-Day campaign, even if this is done without fundraising. Is this not the motivation of the departments that have asked to sponsor the play and the young women who will be acting in it? Did they not propose to have multiple performances of the play again this year because they believe it conveys an important message, and they want as many people to see it as possible? In short, people push to have this play performed year after year because they endorse the message it conveys, and they want to be part of the international campaign to promote this message. In allowing performances of the play on campus again this year, whether or not they are officially considered part of the V-Day campaign, Notre Dame continues to cooperate in advancing the campaign's agenda, an agenda which, as I have repeatedly reflected in my several statements over the years, is directly opposed to the dignity of the human person and is antithetical to Catholic teaching.

According to their Web site, the international V-Day campaign has extended the time when this play can be performed to March 30. But if this play is performed on the dates scheduled, it will be held during Easter week, the holiest time of the church year. Notre Dame has a long and blessed tradition of liturgical excellence, a tradition both theoretical and practical and eminently pastoral and prayerful. Easter week is liturgically considered as Easter Day. Surely Notre Dame will not prefer or even seem to prefer the requirements of the V-Day campaign to the proper observance of Easter.

Perhaps an analogy might illustrate how critical the context is when making decisions about what is appropriate to allow. Suppose that Notre Dame was a Catholic University in Nazi Germany in 1938, and a portion of the faculty and student body were Nazi sympathizers. Suppose further that there was a national movement to show a prominent Nazi propaganda film on college campuses. Would not the showing of such a film at Notre Dame involve the university in providing a platform for Nazi propaganda and entail some level of cooperation with the evil of Nazism? Would providing a panel in which the Catholic attitude towards Nazism was included as one among several viewpoints, in any way mitigate the evil involved in showing such a film? Would not the university bear moral responsibility for the fact that some students who viewed the film on campus might be persuaded by the propaganda and became Nazi supporters?

I chose this analogy because Father Jenkins, in our correspondence, made mention of a series of documentary films shown recently on campus concerning the early days of Nazism, which he believes would also have to be banned if "The Vagina Monologues" were banned. But there is an enormous difference between showing a Nazi propaganda film in 2008 and showing it in 1938. One is a matter of historic and scholarly interest in a long-past event, and the other constitutes active cooperation in promoting a current and threatening evil ideology.

I am convinced that, in the current cultural context, allowing performances of "The Vagina Monologues" at Notre Dame is analogous to the situation described above. The play is little more than a propaganda piece for the sexual revolution and secular feminism. While claiming to deplore violence against women, the play at the same time violates the standards of decency and morality that safeguard a woman's dignity and protect her, body and soul, from sexual predators. The human community has generally refrained from exposing and discussing the hidden parts of a woman's body, preferring to consider them private and even sacred. Most importantly, the sexual sin, which the play depicts in several scenes, desecrates women just as much as, if not more deeply than, sexual violence does. The play depicts, exalts, and endorses female masturbation, which is a sin. It depicts, exalts, and endorses a sexual relationship between an adult woman and a child, a minor, which is a sin and also a crime. It depicts and exalts the most base form of sexual relationship between a man and a woman. These illicit sexual actions are portrayed as paths to healing, and the implication is that the historic, positive understanding of heterosexual marriage as the norm is what we must recover from.

Father Jenkins has informed me that after each evening performance there will be a panel discussion, which will include someone who will give an informed and sympathetic presentation of Catholic teaching. In so doing, he notes that Notre Dame "has taken stronger steps than many other Catholic institutions to put limits on the performance of this play." While this may well be true, there are a growing number of Catholic institutions of higher learning that have permanently banned the play.

The overriding issue here is moral. The play is an affront to human dignity, as Catholic teaching understands it. If it is performed, it should be denounced. Otherwise, the university appears to endorse it as in some way good and the impression is given that Catholic teaching is one option competing among many. This method places faith in a defensive position and on the margin and is unacceptable at a Catholic university.

"A faith that places itself on the margin of what is human, of what is therefore culture, would be a faith unfaithful to the fullness of what the Word of God manifests and reveals, a decapitated faith, worse still, a faith in the process of self-annihilation." - John Paul II, Address to Intellectuals, to Students and to University Personnel at Medellin, Columbia, 5 July, 1986. Cited in "Ex Corde Ecclesiae" 44.

Some claim that a performance of the play followed by a panel will "engage the culture" and that out of such a discussion the "truth will emerge." Sadly, "Ex Corde Ecclesiae" is even cited in defense of this position. But what makes a Catholic university distinctive is the conviction that in the search for truth, we do not start from scratch; we start from the truth that has been revealed to us in the Word of God, the person of Jesus Christ, and the teaching of his church. The notion that truth will emerge from a discussion in which many points of view are represented both disrespects revealed truth and separates the search for truth from the certainty of faith; instead, as Pope John Paul II stated in "Ex Corde Ecclesiae": "A Catholic university's privileged task is 'to unite existentially by intellectual effort two orders of reality that too frequently tend to be placed in opposition as though they were antithetical: the search for truth, and the certainty of already knowing the fount of truth.'" - John Paul II, Discourse to the Institut Catholique de Paris, June, 1, 1980, cited in "Ex Corde Ecclesiae," 1.

For these reasons, I believe that the performing of this play, even with one or more persons willing to present Catholic teaching, is in direct opposition to both the spirit and letter of "Ex Corde Ecclesiae." Also, because it depicts and endorses sinful sexual acts in direct opposition to church teaching, I believe its performance to be pornographic and spiritually harmful. This judgment is made after prayer, reflection and dialogue and after preparing several statements over many years.

Because of this pastoral finding, of which I am convinced, and keeping in mind primarily the spiritual welfare of our young students, the good name of Notre Dame and her well-earned position of academic and Catholic leadership, and the blessed Easter week - I remain hopeful that Father Jenkins will reconsider his decision for this year and future years. A decision not to sponsor the play is not only consistent with academic freedom but is a right use of such freedom for it shows respect for the truth, for the common good and the rights of others. (ef. "Ex Corde Ecclesiae," 12)

Bishop of Fort Wayne: Notre Dame President is Wrong to Allow Vagina Monologues

Note: The Bishop presents a detailed argument against the play, one that is rooted in both faith and reason as opposed to the weak defense offered by Jenkins based on emotion and pressure from groups opposed to the Church's mission. Jenkins clearly argues from a fixed position that cannot fathom the possibility that he is just plain wrong. His decision abandons young people to the evils of the age. Jenkins has abdicated his responsibility and failed in his mission as an educator and Catholic priest. As I stated before, he should resign or be removed and laicized.

"I believe its performance to be pornographic and spiritually harmful" and "If it is performed, it should be denounced."

By John Jalsevac

FORT WAYNE, March 12, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The bishop of Fort Wayne, Bishop John D'Arcy, has released a public statement berating the president of Notre Dame University, Fr. John Jenkins, for deciding to allow a performance of The Vagina Monologues at the university.

LifeSiteNews.com reported yesterday that Fr. Jenkins released a statement on Mar. 10 in which he announced his decision to allow the performance of the play to go ahead on Mar. 24-26. "My decision on this matter," wrote the president, "arises from a conviction that it is an indispensable part of the mission of a Catholic university to provide a forum in which multiple viewpoints are debated in reasoned and respectful exchange - always in dialogue with faith and the Catholic tradition - even around highly controversial topics."

Jenkins also said, "It is particularly painful for me that Bishop John D'Arcy - for whom I have great respect and affection - disapproves of my decision."

Bishop D'Arcy begins his statement, released today, by thanking Fr. Jenkins for engaging in an ongoing dialogue with the bishop about the advisability of allowing the scheduled performance of the play to continue. Immediately after, however, the bishop launches into a detailed critique of Fr. Jenkins' position, taking taking him to task for his belief that allowing The Vagina Monologues is in any way comparable to reading in class the works of anti-Christian and anti-Catholic authors such as Nietzsche, Gibbon and Luther, saying that between such works and the play, there is a "difference, not of degree, but of kind."

Nietzsche, Gibbon and Luther, writes the Bishop "have written serious philosophical, theological and literary works, which have influenced Western thought. As such, their work has academic merit and is worthy of serious discussion and critique in a classroom setting. Father Jenkins believes that Eve Ensler's play was written to shock and offend. How can one put such a play, which many consider pornographic, on the level of serious works such as the writings of Gibbon and Luther?"

D'Arcy also points out that it is clear that the students and teachers who are pushing to have the play performed at the university, are doing so not simply for the purpose of an academic discussion, but rather because they passionately believe in the message of the play, which promotes sexual license and immorality in a way that deeply contravenes Catholic teaching. "Is this not the motivation of the departments that have asked to sponsor the play and the young women who will be acting in it?" asks the bishop rhetorically. "Did they not propose to have multiple performances of the play again this year because they believe it conveys an important message, and they want as many people to see it as possible? In short, people push to have this play performed year after year because they endorse the message it conveys, and they want to be part of the international campaign to promote this message. In allowing performances of the play on campus again this year, whether or not they are officially considered part of the V-Day campaign, Notre Dame continues to cooperate in advancing the campaign's agenda, an agenda which, as I have repeatedly reflected in my several statements over the years, is directly opposed to the dignity of the human person and is antithetical to Catholic teaching.

"The play is an affront to human dignity, as Catholic teaching understands it. If it is performed, it should be denounced. Otherwise, the university appears to endorse it as in some way good and the impression is given that Catholic teaching is one option competing among many. This method places faith in a defensive position and on the margin and is unacceptable at a Catholic university."

The bishop concluded, saying, "I believe that the performing of this play, even with one or more persons willing to present Catholic teaching, is in direct opposition to both the spirit and letter of 'Ex Corde Ecclesiae.' Also, because it depicts and endorses sinful sexual acts in direct opposition to church teaching, I believe its performance to be pornographic and spiritually harmful. This judgment is made after prayer, reflection and dialogue and after preparing several statements over many years."

If Notre Dame goes ahead and allows the performance of the play on campus, it will be the sixth year in a row that it has done so.

To contact Fr. Jenkins:

University of Notre Dame President
Fr. John Jenkins, C.S.C.,
jenkins.1@nd.edu

Priest President of Notre Dame Approves Pornographic Homosexual Play on Campus

Note: Other activists struggle to define what this issue is all about so I changed the headline. In the age of homosexual abuse by priests that cost the faithful Catholics half a billion dollars, we here have a priest running a nominally Catholic college openly supporting a play that glorifies homosexuality in the most pornographic terms. He's not only unfit to be a Catholic college president, he should be laicized from the priesthood as well as a real and present danger to the souls of the young people in his charge. How can a formed conscience allow this type of news to come out during the season of Lent and just prior to the arrival of the Holy Father? Fr. Jenkins has lost both his mind and his soul. Let's pray he doesn't take many with him.

Notre Dame President Approves Vagina Monologues

University of Notre Dame President, Father John Jenkins, C.S.C., announced yesterday, March 10, that he has approved campus performances of the lurid play The Vagina Monologues on March 24-26. It will be the sixth year since 2002 that Notre Dame has hosted the play.

The Vagina Monologues is a sexually explicit and offensive play that favorably describes lesbian activity, group masturbation, and the reduction of sexuality to selfish pleasure. In one scene, the lesbian seduction of a teenage girl is described as the girl's "salvation" that "raised her into a kind of heaven."

"The announcement comes as a grave disappointment given the status Notre Dame holds as America's most prominent Catholic university-albeit not the most consistent in its Catholic identity," said Patrick Reilly, President of The Cardinal Newman Society. "This play is a scandal in every sense of the term."

For seven years, The Cardinal Newman Society and its more than 20,000 members have urged Catholic colleges to ban The Vagina Monologues, resulting in a significant decline from 32 Catholic campus performances in 2003 to just 19 this year.

Father Jenkins released the statement only weeks prior to the much-anticipated visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the United States, including an address to the presidents of America's 213 Catholic colleges and universities on April 17. The statement also comes after the U.S. bishops' doctrine committee snubbed Notre Dame by moving a February 11 meeting off campus, because Father Jenkins would not assure Bishop John D'Arcy of Fort Wayne-South Bend that plans for The Vagina Monologues would be canceled.

"By approving performances of the Monologues, Notre Dame is in blatant defiance of Catholic morals and basic civility," Reilly said. "Given the imminent arrival of Pope Benedict next month, the refusal of the U.S. bishops' doctrine committee to meet at Notre Dame, and Bishop D'Arcy's repeated condemnation of this play at a Catholic institution, this decision amounts to a public thumbing of the nose to our Catholic leaders."

A Notre Dame policy, "The Common Proposal of the Chairs of Arts and Letters and Fr. Jenkins," makes allowances for almost any event on campus, so long as "a knowledgeable presentation of Catholic teaching is included."

In the March 10 statement, Father Jenkins said: "Notre Dame's policy on controversial events rests on the conviction that truth will emerge from reasoned consideration of issues in dialogue with faith. ...[I]t is, in my judgment, the action that best serves the distinctive mission of Notre Dame."

Reilly countered: "Reasonable consideration of issues-even of perversity-can hardly mean that a Catholic university should put perversity on display and scandalize its students. Catholics have been discussing and lamenting this play for seven years. It's time to move on to both a new discussion and much better campus entertainment."

Catholic College Hosts Canada's Most Outspoken Abortion Advocate

Catholic College Hosts Canada's Most Outspoken Abortion Advocate

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

LONDON, ONTARIO, March 7, 2008 - Yesterday evening Brescia Women's College at The University of Western Ontario hosted notorious abortion and homosexual "marriage" advocate Michele Landsberg, who gave a talk entitled, "The F-Word: Fearless, Funny, Fast-Forward and Fabulous...Feminism."

The talk was given as part of Brescia's 'Women Making Change' conference in conjunction with International Women's Day.

Landsberg is an extremely outspoken critic of orthodox Christianity and a venomous opponent of the pro-life movement.

Landsberg wrote a column in The Toronto Star a number of years ago, saying, "Will no priest or minister publicly resolve to stop the indoctrination of youth to view abortion as murder? Is none ashamed of the blood-drenched holocaust vocabulary used so cynically (and anti-semitically) to whip up fervor for the crusade? Where are the outspoken cries of conscience by bishops and cardinals who should be appalled by the evidence of links between anti-abortion fanatics and far-right militias, neo Nazis, and white supremacists? Is there no religious leader who regrets his church's role in feeding this blind frenzy? Will none of them repent of their excesses, will none call a halt to their sickeningly manipulative campaigns of 'precious little feet,' their fake 'documentaries' about screaming fetuses? You'd think that the world had enough lessons in the dangers of hate speech."

Landsberg is married to Stephen Lewis, who has a long record of outspoken opposition to Catholic moral principles and has unequivocally placed himself on the side of the Culture of Death.

Kim Young Milani, director of The Circle Women's Centre at Brescia, which sponsored the lecture, said, "She's one of Canada's feminist icons. We're really excited to have her," in an interview with the London Free Press.

Loretta Dubrick, an alumna of Brescia, told LifeSiteNews.com she is saddened at the news. "It seems so far from the Catholic heritage of that College, and a total departure from the traditional Catholic spirituality on which it was founded," she said. "It shows a lack of discernment about their Catholic identity to encourage their students to accept dissenting ideologies. It's really disappointing and I do deeply wish they had reconsidered."

Brescia was established in 1919 by the Ursuline Sisters and has been affiliated with The University of Western Ontario since its founding.

Calls by LifeSiteNews.com to the administration of the college were not returned.

To express your concern please contact:

Brescia University College at The University of Western Ontario
1285 Western Road
London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 1H2
Tel: (519) 432-8353
Fax: (519) 858-5137
Email: brescia@uwo.ca

Most Rev. Ronald P. Fabbro, C.S.B.
Bishop of London
1070 Waterloo Street
London, Ontario N6A 3Y2
Phone: (519) 433-0658 Ext 224
Fax: (519) 433-0011
E-mail: bketelaars@rcec.london.on.ca

Blasphemous "Art" Missing From Nominally Catholic U of Dallas

Note: The Anti-Catholic administration, the heretical ilk that is so common these days, will try to pass of blasphemy as academic freedom and artistic expression when in reality it is trash, which is hopefully where this garbage ended up. The arguments for keeping this garbage on display on a Catholic campus could just as easily be used to promote pornography, which is about what this thing was. That the college president couldn't bring himself to exercise any degree of leadership or authority is no surprise. He is the the typical spaghetti-spined Catholic college president, whose stature the common worm gives visible similitude.

Missing artwork of Virgin Mary as stripper stirs University of Dallas

Stolen print of stripper Virgin pits school, artistic freedom

12:50 AM CST on Saturday, March 8, 2008

By SAM HODGES / The Dallas Morning News samhodges@dallasnews.com

Looking back, trouble seemed likely when an artwork depicting a stripper as the Virgin Mary went on display last month at the University of Dallas.

And trouble sure came, though the artist says she was making a point about perceptions and didn't intend anything sacrilegious.

The artwork - a print - prompted complaints from students at the Catholic college in Irving. Then, on Feb. 14, it was discovered missing from a school gallery.

It still hasn't been found, and the case is being investigated as a theft by campus police. Meanwhile, students, alumni and others have been weighing in, though some never got a chance to see the print and have had to rely on descriptions.

University president Frank Lazarus, in particular, has been criticized by alumni who feel he erred by not ordering the print removed after he got a look at it.

"It was imprudent of him to leave it up," said Tom Lagarde, a member of the Class of '97 and secretary of the school's national alumni board.

"Regardless of what the artist's message was... the means she used were illicit, at least for Catholics."

Dr. Lazarus didn't respond to requests for an interview. But earlier he released a statement denouncing the apparent theft and acknowledging the school's struggle to balance academic and artistic freedom with preservation of "Catholic character."

"A number of mistakes were made, and there are lessons to be learned here," he said.

The print is the work of Joanna Gianulis, a senior art major at Murray State University in Kentucky. It came to UD as part of an exhibit of Murray State students' work, following an exhibit at Murray State of art by UD students.

Ms. Gianulis, reached Friday by e-mail, said she has no