Students walk on the campus of the University of Notre Dame in this 2007 file photo.(CNS photo/Matt Cashore, courtesy of the University of Notre Dame)
In 1990, Pope John Paul II
released Ex Corde Ecclesiae, the
papal document defining the centrality of Catholic higher education. Its title translated
as “from the heart of the Church,” the document called for Catholic colleges to
be faithful to their Catholic mission and accountable to their local bishops. Fiercely
resisted by many Catholic college presidents and faculty members, who viewed Ex Corde Ecclesiae as a threat to their
academic freedom, it took more than 10 years to implement. Last month, the Office
of the Secretariat of Education at the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops released what they called The
Final Report for the Ten Year Review of the Application of Ex Corde Ecclesiae for the United States.
Unfortunately, the Ten Year Review provides almost no
information about the progress that has been made in implementing the papal
document on the 230 Catholic campuses throughout the country. Rather than providing
facts about the implementation, the Ten
Year Review is a one-page, self-congratulatory, platitudinous document
that lauds “ongoing dialogue” and a “spirit of collaboration,” but says almost
nothing about what is really happening in Catholic higher education. In fact, any
Catholic who has been paying attention to the culture and curricula on many of
these campuses can be forgiven if he felt like he had stepped into a chapter of
George Orwell’s 1984 when reading a
recent headline in the National Catholic
Reporter, which proclaimed: “Bishops, colleges find good collaboration in Ex Corde review.” That same Catholic
must have been even more surprised to read a headline in Our Sunday Visitor that claimed: “Progress seen in boosting
Catholic identity on campuses.”
Good collaboration with bishops? Boosting
Catholic identity? For faithful Catholics, it must have seemed like just
yesterday there was yet another serious scandal on a Catholic campus. That is
because it was just yesterday. In fact, this month alone included a long list
of scandals on Catholic campuses. Leading the list are the annual productions of
The Vagina Monologues, most scheduled
on or around Valentine’s Day. This year, performances of the play were held on 12
Catholic campuses, up from nine last year; among other things, the play favorably
portrays homosexual relations, adult-child sex, and abortion.
Beyond these annual events, on many
Catholic campuses students can get class credit through internships at Planned
Parenthood, serving as clinic escorts. Pro-abortion speakers and promoters of
same-sex marriage continue to be honored on many campuses. On Friday, February
15, Providence College hosted a lecture by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
despite his 100 percent pro-abortion voting record in the Senate. Our Lady of
the Lake University in San Antonio, Texas recently became the first Catholic
school in Texas to revise its student handbook to protect transgendered
students, faculty, and staff of the university from discrimination based on
gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation. Last semester,
dozens of Catholic campuses celebrated
Gay Awareness Month in October, as well as National Coming Out Day on October
11, with many campusesas the University
of Notre Dame has done in the pastconstructing “coming out closets” on campus
to encourage students to “come out” as gay or lesbian. At Notre Dame’s Coming Out
Day celebration a few years ago, students were invited to “eat rainbow
cupcakes, and come out of a giant glittery closet.” Other schools, including
the University of San Diego, Santa Clara University, and DePaul University,
held “Drag Queen Shows” replete with professional drag queens and cross-dressing
students.
It is
unlikely that there was any collaboration between San Francisco’s archbishop
and the University of San Francisco when Vincent Pizzuto was selected to chair
the Department of Theology and Religious Studies Department in 2012. Pizzuto
was “ordained” a priest in 2006 in the Celtic Christian Church, which is not in
communion with Rome. His church’s website
states that Pizzuto has presided at same-sex weddings, and his published
workincluding “God Has Made it Plain to Them: An Indictment of Rome’s
Hermeneutic of Homophobia,” in the Winter
2008 edition of Biblical Theology
Bulletinis openly critical of Catholic teachings. Still, Pizzuto not only
teaches Catholic theology at USF, he also heads the theology departmentsupervising
other theology professors in the department who are teaching Catholic theology.
It is difficult to believe that USF and the presiding bishop are working
collaboratively in implementing Ex Corde
Ecclesiae.
Just a few months ago in
November, Princeton philosopher Peter Singer, the world’s most prominent
promoter of infanticide, was the main attraction at a Fordham University
conference titled “Conference with Peter Singer: Christians and Other Animals,
Moving the Conversation Forward.”
These are just a few of the most
recent Catholic-campus scandals on the long list from the past decade. The most
noteworthy of them all was the University of Notre Dame’s honoring the most
pro-abortion US president in history at the school’s commencement ceremony in
2009. The scandals continuedespite protestations by presiding bishops. During
the Notre Dame commencement scandal, the recently deceased Bishop John D’Arcy,
then the bishop of the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, publicly pleaded with
Notre Dame administrators to reverse their decision to honor President Obama.
But his pleas were ignored. In fact, things became so contentious between the
bishop and the university that Bishop D’Arcy boycotted the Notre Dame graduation.
“A bishop must teach the Catholic faith in season and out of season, and he
teaches not only by his words but by his actions,” Bishop D’Arcy wrote; he was
joined by 83 other bishops in expressing their disapproval of Notre Dame’s
decision to honor President Obama. This was not the first time objections from
the South Bend bishop went unheeded. Back in 2006, Bishop D’Arcy protested
Notre Dame’s annual productions of The
Vagina Monologues.
There was no collaboration
between the bishops and the president of Notre Dame on granting an honorary
degree to President Obama. There was no “meaningful dialogue” on The Vagina Monologues between Bishop
D’Arcy and Father John Jenkins, Notre Dame’s president. My book Status Envy: The Politics of Catholic Higher
Education documents dozens of examples of bishops being disrespected and
ignored by the administration and the faculty on Catholic college campuses. So,
why are the headlines in the National
Catholic Reporter and Our Sunday
Visitor touting the “good collaboration” between bishops and Catholic
college presidents during the past decade?
The answer is simple. The National Catholic Reporter and Our Sunday Visitor were reporting what
the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops provided for them to report. The
USCCB provided a one-page report which claimed that the relationship between
the US bishops and Catholic colleges has led to “increased cooperation over the
last decade.” Bishop Joseph P. McFadden, current chairman of the Committee on
Catholic Education of the USCCB, issued the report without any dataeven
anecdotal datasupporting its assertions. The report simply stated in almost
Orwellian language: “Bishops reported that they believe our institutions of
Catholic higher education have made definite progress in advancing Catholic
identity…the relationship between bishops and presidents on the local level can
be characterized as positive and engaged, demonstrating progress on courtesy
and cooperation in the last ten years.… Clarity about Catholic identity among
college and university leadership has fostered substantive dialogues and
cultivated greater mission-driven practices across the university.”
Orwellian doublespeak
In Orwell’s dystopia, as the
truth becomes uncomfortable, facts are redefinedor sometimes removedby the
Office of the Ministry of Truth. This new version of the “truth” is then disseminated
by the Office of the Ministry of Propaganda. While this is not to suggest that
the USCCB has become the Catholic Church’s Ministry of Truth, it is difficult
not to conclude that the Ten Year Review
of the Implementation of Ex Corde Ecclesiae provides readers with absolutely
no information about what is really happening at Catholic colleges and
universities. In fact, the report says nothing about campus problems in the
past except to claim that despite the progress that has been made, “there is
still work to be done.”
To understand how such a vacuous report
could be disseminated by the USCCB, one has to go back to November 14, 2010, when
the USCCB Committee on Catholic Education approved a 10-year review of the application
of Ex Corde Ecclesiae for the United
States. Headed by Most Rev. Thomas Curry,
then an auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles, the Committee on Catholic Education
set the goals and the guidelines for the 10-year review. (Curry recently
resigned as bishop in the wake of the release of documents showing that he
deliberately and knowingly took steps to conceal the abuse of children from law
enforcement and to protect abusive priests.)
The guidelines for the 10-year
review guaranteed that no data of substance would be collected or analyzed to
determine effectiveness. Rather than collecting data to assess effectiveness
and progress toward meeting the goals of Ex
Corde Ecclesiae, the committee stated that the purpose of the review was to
“provide a reference tool for both bishops and presidents of Catholic institutions.”
Rather than collecting specific information that could be quantified and
analyzed, the review was to simply consist of a “conversation between a bishop
and each university president within his diocese.” In lieu of collecting facts to
inform a report that would assess progress toward goals, the review was
described by Bishop Curry and his committee as “not a report, but rather an
opportunity for a bishop and a president to meet and discuss the Application of Ex Corde Ecclesiae for the
United States.”
It was anticipated that “this 10-year
review, modeled on the five-year review of 2006, will occur in a spirit of
ecclesial communion and will yield an appreciation of the positive developments
and remaining challenges in our collaborative efforts to ensure the
implementation of Ex Corde Ecclesiae
in the United States.” Rather than a real assessment, the purpose of the review
was identified as simply providing an opportunity for the bishops and the
presidents to talk with one anotherto “dialogue.” The words “dialogue” and
“conversation” are used frequently in the one-page report on the 10-year
review, as were “positive” and “progress.” The reviewers also promise
“continued dialogue…for greater cooperation in advancing the mission of the
Church.”
What the original committee identified
as a key element of the review was providing a way for bishops to “share their
reflections with one another at USCCB regional meetings.” Once these
“reflections” were shared, the minutes of the discussions at all the regional
meetings would be compiled by staff and presented to the president of the
USCCB. Beyond that, there was never a mechanism created to share any of the
outcomes of these conversations with any other stakeholdersincluding donors,
faculty, students, parents, and other Catholics interested in the progress that
is being made on their Catholic campuses. The review was never intended to be disseminated
beyond a one-page document that offers no specifics on the current state of
Catholic colleges and universities.
In a phone conversation with CWR on
Thursday, February 7, 2013, Sr. John Mary Fleming, the new executive director
of the USCCB’s Secretariat of Catholic Education, helped put the report into
context by saying that the 10-year review was “never designed to be an attempt
to assess the past.” And although Sr. Fleming acknowledged that “the
relationship between the bishops and the college presidents was fractured in
the past,” she spoke optimistically about the future, lauding the bishops for
“focusing on how they can reach out to create a culture of communion and
support.” Acknowledging that challenges do remain, Sr. Fleming pointed to the
one sentence within the report admitting that “there is still work to be done.”
Sr. Fleming also pointed to the formation of a group of bishops and college
presidents who will be working under Bishop Joseph P. McFadden, the current chairman
of the Committee on Catholic Education. According to Bishop McFadden, the
working group will “continue the dialogue about strategic subjects on a
national level.”
According to the USCCB website,
the working group will begin gathering “information on best practices, will
offer suggestions for local conversation, and, as needed, develop resources.” Once
again, the website says nothing about whether the review will involve
collecting data to assess goals, objectives, or activities to meet the
requirements of Ex Corde Ecclesiae.
Yet, any undergraduate student in public policy or social research knows that
one cannot adequately assess the effectiveness of a program without systematically
collecting and analyzing quantifiable data. Conversations alone will not do it.
It is difficult to know whether
anyone at the USCCB has the will to do something about the problems with
Catholic higher educationespecially if they are unwilling even to attempt a real assessment of
those problems. In a recent conversation with a professor at a high-profile
Catholic university, he lamented the lack of leadership displayed by the
bishops. “For years I’ve upheld and defended Church teaching and have
criticized the failure of this school’s leaders to do the same, to the point of
hurting my career,” he told CWR. “But when my bishop won’t address the serious
problems here, and the bishops at large won’t do anything, I wonder: why even
bother?”
The Cardinal Newman Society has
helped to document some of these problems. But, more importantly, the organization
has identified (in the Newman Guide for
Choosing a Catholic College) more than two dozen Catholic colleges (out of the
country’s 230) that demonstrate that a strong Catholic identity can be created,
revitalized, and maintained. The bishops could have highlighted some of the
successes of these schools in their review. But, that would have required them
to look at what was actually happening on Catholic campuses.
Among faithful Catholics
monitoring the situation, there has been great optimism that Sr. Fleming, a
member of the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecilia in Nashville, will begin to turn
things around for Catholic education. She will have to find out what is
happening on these campuses through a real assessment that quantifies goals,
objectives, and activitiesnot just through “dialogue” with those who will tell
her what they want her to know. Whether Sr. Fleming will be able to accomplish
this through the intractable offices of the USCCB remains to be seen.