Standing in front of a famous
1964 photo of Father Theodore Hesburgh locking arms with the Rev. Martin Luther
King, Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, honored Father Hesburgh at a
party on Capitol Hill celebrating the retired president of the University of
Notre Dame’s 96th birthday in late May.
During her celebratory remarks, Pelosi praised Father Hesburgh’s
courageous record on civil rights and pointed to the photo, on loan from the
National Portrait Gallery, taken at a rally just days after a vote on the Civil
Rights Act. Pelosi was joined at the party
by dozens of congressional well-wishersas well as Vice President Joe Bidenall
paying tribute to the priest that Biden described as “the most powerful
unelected official this nation has ever seen.”
Biden is correct. Father Hesburgh has indeed exerted a powerful
influence on our country, on our Church, and especially on our Catholic
colleges and universities. He has
received 150 honorary degrees, the most ever awarded to one person, and has
held 16 presidential appointments involving most of the major social issues in
his timeincluding civil rights, nuclear disarmament, population, the
environment, Third World development, and amnesty and immigration reform. In
July 2000, President Clinton awarded Father Hesburgh the Congressional Gold Medalmaking him the first person
from higher education to be so honored.
Father Hesburgh has always viewed
himself as a “citizen of the world” and his secular activities reflect
that. Father Hesburgh was the first priest ever elected
to the Board of Directors at Harvard University and served two years as
president of the Harvard Board. He also
served as a director of the Chase Manhattan Bank. A longtime champion of
nuclear disarmament, Father Hesburgh has served on the board
of the United States Institute of Peace and helped organize a meeting of
scientists and representative leaders of six faith traditions who called for
the elimination of nuclear weapons.
On many occasions, Father Hesburgh found himself the first
Catholic priest to serve in a given leadership position on boards of secular
organizations. Much of his success can
be viewed as stemming from his ability to distance himself from the authority
of the Church. Such was the case during
the years he served as a trustee, and later, Chairman of the Board of the
Rockefeller Foundation, a frequent funder of causes counter to Church
teachingsincluding population control.
Some of Father Hesburgh’s activities are
curiously missing from the Notre Dame website’s formal
biography of their beloved president emeritus. For example, in the early 1970s, Father Hesburgh became swept up into
the “one world” cause and he gave a speech at Harvard University which called
for an international agency to be created to grant people “world
citizenship.” Suggesting that this would
help to break down the great dividers of people, Father Hesburgh affiliated with the United World
Federalists, and in 1974 became a member of the Advisory Board of an
organization called Planetary Citizens.
The mission of the now defunct organization was “to create, expose, and
nurture positive change in the world.”
Their first objective was “to help people around the earth to cross the
threshold of consciousness from a limited, local perspective to the inclusive
and global view required in a planetary era.”
The business offices of Planetary Citizens were located directly across
from the delegates’ entrance to the United Nations. This was convenient for Father Hesburgh when he was appointed
to serve as ambassador to the 1979 UN Conference on Science and Technology for
Developmentthe first time a priest had served in a formal diplomatic role for
the United States government.
Providing cover for Catholic pro-choice politicians
Pelosi described the party for Father Hesburgh at the Capitol as “bipartisan,”
intending to bring politicians and staffers from “both sides of the Capitol,
both sides of the aisle and all sides of Pennsylvania Avenue”. The reality
remains, however, that Father Hesburgh has always held a
special place in the hearts of Catholic Democrats like Pelosi and Biden who
want to be able to vote in favor of abortion rights yet still be perceived as
being in the good graces of the Church.
Pro-choice Catholic politicians are grateful to Father Hesburgh because for the past 40
years he has been providing them with the kind of Catholic cover they have
needed to continue voting to expand abortion. Faithful Catholics have been
disappointed that the courage Father Hesburgh showed in advancing the cause of civil rights for
African Americans and other underrepresented groups did not seem to extend to
protecting the civil rights of the unborn.
This is not to say that Father Hesburgh himself is
“pro-choice.” It is clear from his
writings that he abhors abortion; he once wrote that “it is difficult to
explain how a moral America, so brilliantly successful in confronting racial
injustice in the sixties, has the most permissive abortion laws of any Western
country.” But faithful Catholics may well question how Father Hesburgh can object to abortion
while at the same time promoting the Catholic politicians who have done
everything they can to expand access to abortion.
In fact, Pelosi and Biden’s
“personally opposed to abortion but unwilling to deny the right to an abortion
to others” position was famously articulated on Father Hesburgh’s watch at Notre Dame on September
13, 1984, in a speech entitled “Religious Belief and
Public Morality: A Catholic Governor’s Perspective,” given by Mario Cuomo,
then the governor of New York.
Father Hesburgh and Father Richard McBrien, a longtime
theology professor at Notre Dame, invited Governor Cuomo to the university to
give a major speech clarifying his position on abortion. At one point, Governor Cuomo appeared to be
thinking out loud when he mused: “Must I agree with everything in the bishops’
pastoral letter on peace and fight to include it in party platforms? And will I
have to do the same for the forthcoming pastoral economics? And, must I, having
heard the Pope renew the Church’s ban on birth control devices, veto the
funding of contraceptive programs for non-Catholics or dissenting Catholics in
my State? I accept the Church’s teaching
on abortion. Must insist you do? By law? By denying you Medicaid funding? By a
constitutional amendment?” Governor
Cuomo’s answer to all of these rhetorical questions was “No.”
In his written response
to Governor Cuomo’s speech, Father Hesburgh seemed to agree.
Describing the Cuomo speech as “a brilliant talk on religion and
politics” Father Hesburgh’s response can be read online
today at the Notre Dame website.
Although Father Hesburgh used his response to
the governor’s speech to encourage Catholics to support “a more restrictive
abortion law,” he also acknowledged what he called the “political reality” and
noted that “there is not a consensus in America for the absolute prohibition of
abortion.” Saying he longed for the day when politicians would not be “forced”
to support abortion, Father Hesburgh decried the need for
abortion. Yet, the Notre Dame president seemed unable to see thenor nowthat
the Catholic pro-choice politicians he has promoted, like Governor Cuomo, and
now Pelosi and Biden, are the same ones who are pushing and implementing the
greatest expansion of abortion rights in the world.
In a 2001 review of Father Hesburgh’s role in promoting
abortion, Msgr. George Kelly, a founder and, until his death, president emeritus
of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, criticized Father Hesburgh for providing
protection for pro-choice politicians and theologians. Msgr. Kelly wrote that during his years as
Notre Dame’s president, “Father Hesburgh’s ecclesiology became
steadily more hostile to the hierarchy… In 1972, when he was a delegate to the
International Congress of Catholic Universities, at a meeting held on Vatican
territorywithin mere feet of the office of Pope Paul VIhe threatened to walk
out and take the American delegation with him if Rome dared to impose norms for
the conduct of American colleges.”
Msgr. Kelly acknowledged that “at
times there is a sting to Father Hesburgh’s rhetoric,” and provided an example of that attitude in
an incident that is well-known on the Notre Dame campus: “A prominent Notre
Dame official went to Father Hesburgh as to a mentor,
worrying that the implementation of the Vatican document Ex Corde Ecclesiae might bring the American bishops in to the
governance of the university. The
retired president consoled his worried friend, ending his counsel with this
message: ‘What is the worst thing that can happen to us? John Paul II will tell the world that Notre
Dame is not a Catholic university. Who
will believe him?’”
This story has become almost a
legend at Notre Dame and beyond, and Father Hesburgh’s words are often repeated by faculty and administrators
on other Catholic campuses in order to reassure themselves and others that
compliance with Ex Corde Ecclesiae is
not necessary. A decade later, the Notre Dame faculty obviously took Father Hesburgh’s reassurance to heart
when the faculty senate voted unanimously to ignore the requirements of Ex Corde Ecclesiae.
Secularizing Catholic higher education
Msgr. Kelly acknowledged that Father Hesburgh played an important
role in the secularization of Catholic higher education. Father Hesburgh’s 1994 book, The Challenge and Promise of a Catholic
University, makes it clear he believes that in order for Catholic colleges
and universities to be truly great, these schools must distance themselves from
the Church and her teachings. In his
book, Father Hesburgh claimed that “there has
not been in recent centuries a truly great Catholic university, recognized
universally as such…one would have hoped that history would have been different
when one considers the Church’s early role in the founding of the first great
universities in the Middle Ages: Paris, Oxford, Cambridge, Bologna, and
others.”
In Father Hesburgh’s opinion, the early European
universities in the Middle Ages were great because they encouraged a culture of
freedom and independence from the state as well as from the authority of the
Catholic Church. Claiming that unlike
American Catholic universities, these early colleges provided “an atmosphere of
free and often turbulent clashing of conflicting ideas, where a scholar with a
new idea, theological, philosophical, legal, or scientific, had to defend it in
the company of peers, without interference from the pressures and powers that
neither create nor validate intellectual activities.”
Throughout Father Hesburgh’s book, the theme of
independence from the “external authority” of the Church is clear. For Hesburgh, “The best and only traditional
authority in the university is intellectual competence… It was great wisdom in
the medieval church to have university theologians judged solely by their
theological peers in the university… A great Catholic university must begin by
being a great university that is also Catholic.” Few questioned this distancing from the
Church because until recently, Father Hesburgh’s proclamations were simply accepted as fact because of
his own high status in the academy and beyond.
The most significant event for
the Church and the its relationship with Catholic colleges and universities
occurred in 1967, when Father Hesburgh assembled a group of
Catholic academic leaders at the Notre Dame Retreat Center in Land O’ Lakes,
Wisconsin, where a crucial statement on the nature of the Catholic University
emerged. The opening paragraph of the 1,500-word statement
began: “To perform its teaching and research functions effectively the
Catholic university must have a true autonomy and academic freedom in the face
of authority of whatever kind, lay or clerical, external to the academic
community itself.”
While liberal academics, such as
Holy Cross College historian David O’Brien, nostalgically look back on the Land
O’ Lakes gathering as a kind of “Catholic Woodstock” for professors and
administrators anticipating independence from the authority of the Church,
others disagree. Catholic historian Philip Gleason, in his book Contending with Modernity: Catholic Higher Education
in the Twentieth Century, described the Land O’ Lakes statement as a
“symbolic manifesto” which marked a new era in Catholic higher education. As Father Hesburgh had envisioned, within the next few years most Catholic
colleges moved to laicize their boards of trustees. Some colleges went even
further. Manhattanville College of the
Sacred Heart and Webster College publicly and officially declared themselves
“no longer Catholic.” Manhattanville promptly dropped part of their name,
deleting the now too-Catholic sounding “Sacred Heart.” Not only did Webster,
under the direction of the Sisters of Loretto, become the first Catholic
college to announce that it was relinquishing its Catholic identity, but its president,
Sister Jacqueline Grennan, SL, renounced her religious vows and withdrew from
her order to function as the lay president of the now secular institution.
Indeed, concerns about upward mobility
were so high during the 60s and 70s that any hint of obedience to the authority
of the Church became an embarrassment for the leaders of Catholic higher
education. And although many of the
Jesuit colleges and, of course, Notre Dame, maintained that members of their
founding religious orders would continue to hold the office of the president at
what became increasingly secular institutions, many of those colleges that had
been founded by women from religious congregations were more than eager to turn
the leadership over to lay leaders as women’s colleges increasingly merged with
men’s institutions and co-education became the norm. Having abandoned their
earlier preoccupation with integrating the curriculum around a core of
philosophy and theology, Catholic collegesencouraged by Father Hesburgh’s
vision for thementered the final decades of the 20th century by devoting
themselves to the pursuit of academic excellence, often at the cost of their
religious identities.
On September 30, 2008, Father Hesburgh rejected more than 2,000
years of Church teachings when he told a Wall
Street Journal reporter that he had “no
problem with females” as priests in the Catholic Church. And in 2009, Father Hesburgh defied Bishop John
D’Arcy of Fort Wayne-South Bend and supported the honoring of President Barack
Obama at Notre Dame’s commencement ceremony.
Bishop D’Arcy, who died earlier this year, drew national attention when
he protested the honoring of the pro-abortion President Obama; Father Hesburgh rejected his authority
and publicly supported Notre Dame’s decision to invite the president.
Sociologist Randall Collins
once suggested that “secularization is not a zeitgeist, but, rather a process
of conflict.” From this perspective, the
current secularization of our most important institutionsespecially many of
our Catholic colleges and universitiesis more the result of a contested
revolutionary struggle than a natural evolutionary progression. It is the achievement of specific
individuals and groupsboth within the Church and outside the Churchwho
intended to marginalize the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. Even today, as pro-choice politicians both flout
Church teachings and are honored by Catholic institutions, Father Hesburgh remains an
important part of that process of secularization.