May 12, 2008

Roman Catholic College Disinvites Pro-Choice Speaker

A South Dakota state senator was supposed to deliver the commencement address at Presentation College on Saturday. But, at the last minute, the Roman Catholic college withdrew its invitation because of the senator’s pro-choice views on abortion.

According to The Aberdeen News, a South Dakota newspaper, Sen. Nancy Turbak Berry was told the decision stemmed from her failure to share the Vatican’s stance that abortion should be illegal. Ms. Berry said she considers abortion a “very personal” decision.

The college replaced her with a much-safer choice: the bishop of the Sioux Falls Catholic Diocese. That move was in keeping with a trend, as reported today in The Boston Globe, of Catholic colleges’ steering clear of on-campus speakers with un-Catholic views, often under pressure from outside groups. —Thomas Bartlett

Comments

1. Faculty members and their carefully managed students at most universities are opposed to the war in Iraq, and, yet, the large majority of American colleges have invited pro-war speakers for commencement this year, with the goal of giving the other side fair hearing. Some schools, obviously, lack the integrity and courage to listen to the opposition.

   — S. Britchky    May 12, 06:36 PM    #

2. There is another war going on. In that war a faithful Roman Catholic school rightfully concedes no ground. Ever.

   — Reed Won    May 12, 07:14 PM    #

3. Reed Won is absolutely right!! Catholic schools are supposed to teach Catholic doctrine. If you really want to hear this speaker, go to a secular college!!

   S. Britchkey has it all wrong – Presentation College does have integrity:

   1. By not kowtowing to political correctness; and

   2. Not sending students and the public a mixed message of what the Church stands for (or doesn’t).

   — garyz    May 13, 02:09 AM    #

4. The Roman Catholic church also is opposed to the death penalty. Would a pro-death penalty speaker be “disinvited?”

   — grw    May 13, 06:17 AM    #

5. A university must be committed to freedom of expression, not matter what its religious affiliation. By banning these commencement speakers, Catholic Colleges send the message that faculty and students are not allowed to engage in any kind of dissent.

   — John K Wilson    May 13, 06:52 AM    #

6. The university has every right not to invite a speaker whose views it officially disagrees with. What is offensive here is that the invitation was extended in the first place, thereby enabling the public “disinvitation”. Don’t they know where a politician stands on an issue? Can’t they query first? This is so common an occurance one wonders what idiots book the speakers at these schools.

   — RM    May 13, 07:34 AM    #

7. It should NOT be the mission of a Catholic college to push Catholic doctrine but to explore knowledge openly and fearlessly – or why be a college at all?

   — Mike in Kalamazoo    May 13, 07:52 AM    #

8. How about a pro-slavery speaker? Or a pro-genocide speaker? Or someone who advocated pollution? How many readers of this magazine would have respect for someone who considered owning another human being as “a deeply personal decision”?

   This is not about religion, it is about scientific truth. I cannot abide the hypocricy on this issue, and I’ve been listening to the same arguments for 35 years. Every time one of the “pro choice” arguments gets debunked by science (science! mind you, not religion, which never “proves” anything), they glom onto something else. “It’s not a human being” (Wrong.) “It’s just a blob of tissue” (Wrong.) “It doesn’t have a heartbeat.” (“Wrong.”) “It lacks the power to sense or feel.” (Wrong.) Oh, yes, there is a moral issue there, but you can’t even get to it unless you’re willing to tell the scientific truth about the separate human being growing in the uterus.

   Abortion is nothing less than wholesale slaughter of human beings, one human child (usually) at a time.

   “Tolerance,” therefore, on this issue is like tolerating Darfur, the Khmer Rouge, or Auschwitz. Killing human beings because they don’t fit into your plan, whether its because of their skin color, their religious belief, or their developmental stage, is killing human beings, whether it’s done by a military junta, as a matter of the latest governmental “policy,” or just one at a time.

   And as for “hearing both sides” in the name of advancing knowledge, that’s laughable. What arguments are ever advanced by abortion advocates that are based on demonstrable science? None. Because they can’t be. So their arguments consist entirely of emotional appeals to vapid words like “choice,” in a deliberate effort to give the listeners an excuse for disregarding the science. Would this audience tolerate that if the speaker were telling the audience to ignore gravity? Calculus? Physics? And to substitute their feelings instead? How about evolution? Did I miss something? Has the academic community come out in favor of belief in a Supreme Creator as science, now?

   And this group fares no better when it comes to educating about moral dilemmas. Understanding the predicaments that get women into these desperate straits in the first place is not the same thing as condoning bad decisions they make thereafter. I might be destitute, and my family starving, but that does not give me the right to shoot the local grocery store owner so I can steal food. RM is right – this college needed to find out her views before they invited her. That’s the only thing the college should be embarrassed about.

   As for the everyone else, the only thing we should be embarrassed about is propping up this sort of soppy, amorphous, anti-scientific drivel, and calling it “knowledge” or “dissent.” True, anyone can believe that the moon is made of green cheese, or that the sun revolves around the earth. But why would an institution of higher education bring in a speaker who said so?

   — Ergum Soloff    May 13, 08:15 AM    #

9. There’s a big difference between “pushing doctrine” and remaining true to the Church. If the school is not going to represent the teachings of the Church, why be a CATHOLIC college?

   — JB    May 13, 08:25 AM    #

10. But represent ONLY the teachings of the church?

    — Mike in Kalamazoo    May 13, 08:35 AM    #

11. And the Godwin award goes to…Ergum Soloff!

    — Anna B.    May 13, 08:42 AM    #

12. RM (#6) is right.
    Now that the college has disinvited the speaker, it should also fire the idiot who booked that speaker.

    — Sam    May 13, 09:01 AM    #

13. S. Britchky and grw – Wrong. Whether or not a war is just will always be debatable within the Church. Furthermore, the anti-death penalty stance is not dogmatic in the way that the pro-life stance is. The view is that, in a society with a rational system of law and order, the death penalty does not have a place. But in other societies and times when such a system is not present, the death penalty may be just in certain circumstances. To the Catholic, abortion was, is, and always will be sinful.

    — SM    May 13, 09:01 AM    #

14. They can disinvite whomever they please. The rest of us will just shake our heads, perhaps giggle a little bit and be thankful we’re not still trying to reconcile irrational, ancient beliefs with the modern world.

    — gir    May 13, 09:03 AM    #

15. Does anyone care what the woman was scheduled to speak about? I highly doubt that her opinion on abortion was to be included in her speech!

    — TH    May 13, 09:07 AM    #

16. Why does this surprise anyone or even spawn debate? It is a Catholic school. It’s job is to indoctrinate Catholics—not teach reasoned debate or tolerance for a diversity of viewpoints (or even that its OK to listen to and judge for yourself from a diversity of viewpoints). If you want those things, you don’t attend a religious school or send your children to one. Religion is not and never has been about intellectual freedom or thinking for oneself. The school acted as one would expect and it had a right to do so.

    — EAC    May 13, 09:11 AM    #

17. Yeah, #16! It would be as ridiculous as a Jewish school inviting a pro-Palestinian speaker!

    — Marci's Sister    May 13, 09:23 AM    #

18. They have a right to their medieval world view. They have a right to believe in funny stuff like transubstantiation. Readers who reject these things, especially those who teach life sciences, may want to think twice before taking a job at any Catholic university because YOU’RE NEXT if you don’t toe the line. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but soon enough.

    — Ba'al    May 13, 09:26 AM    #

19. SM: I think that John Paul II made it clear in his argument about a culture of death (?) that the death penalty, abortion, etc. are all alike. I believe that the Catholic Church now views the death penalty as wrong as abortion.

    More generally, some may “giggle” at other people’s beliefs, but a more “rational” approach is to recognize that Catholic colleges and universities have a vision and mission that includes promoting a particular (and still developing) understanding of what matters. Those who don’t have an interest in that view shouldn’t go to such institutions, and those who are enlightened in the “modern world” usually respect diversity rather than “giggle” at it.

    EAC: Catholic Colleges and Universities are not about “indoctrinating Catholics.” Nor are Catholic schools about intolerance. We do teach tolerance, and diversity of views, and reasoned debate. The Catholic church’s involvement in higher education has long stood for intellectual freedom and thinking for oneself. Who is narrow minded here? Wow.

    What some here (clearly working outside Catholic institutions of higher education) seem to have a problem with is that one can examine and consider the whole range of human experience, but also know what one’s own perspective is, and try to hold true to that perspective. And, despite stereotypes, we at Catholic schools even do that without the stereotyped arrogance that others seem to perceive. Check out the course offerings at the Religious Studies department of typical Catholic universities and colleges, and you’ll see it isn’t all about indoctrination.

    I’m not Catholic, but I sought out a job at a Catholic college for its overarching vision and goals (as amorphous and developing as it is).

    — Ray    May 13, 09:28 AM    #

20. It is so tiresome to see the same prejudices repeated continually. Catholic schools do not indoctrinate their students, nor are they blindly submissive to the Vatican. A Catholic, if s/he is truly striving to live the faith as it ought to be lived, believes because s/he is convinced and committed, not coerced. Therefore, by extension, the Catholic school, to be true to its identity, will have both intellectual rigour – and thus reasons for its belief – and will have as its starting point the Catholic worldview, which includes a deep respect for all human life. It is because the Catholic Church is committed to defending the dignity of each person – even an unborn person -that Ergum Soloff, poster of #8, actually got the point of the whole newstory. There is a rational, intellectual basis for the Catholic Church’s opposition to abortion.

    — thoughtful    May 13, 09:38 AM    #

21. A commencement speaker is usually presented with an honorary degree for his/her achievements as well as being asked to address the graduating class. This is quite different from an issue oriented speaker or debate on a campus that occurs between September and April. Distinguished persons directly opposed to the values of an institution are not the ones those insitutions should honor. Just as well, those persons should not accept an honor from an institution which holds core values antithetical to their beliefs. (IMHO death penalty advocates are even more clearly in opposition to Catholic values and ought never to be commencement speakers at Cathiloc schools)

    — Dave H    May 13, 09:39 AM    #

22. I wholeheartedly agree with the college’s decision to not have a pro-abortion speaker at Commencement. Christian Catholic doctrine emphatically promotes the respect for life, and should not bend. If people want to listen to pro-choice rhetoric, then they need to attend secular schools. A Christian Catholic school is not the place for that. We have given in too much already, and must return to the fundamental teachings and beliefs of the Christian Catholic Church.

    — Yolanda    May 13, 09:45 AM    #

23. What surprises me is that churches are not pushing for health coverage for the 40% or more in the USA without it. What would Jesus do?

    — H Murphy    May 13, 09:52 AM    #

24. Such is the dilemma for today’s magesterium-abiding Roman Catholic living in “Britchky’s and Ba’al’s World”: Peace be with you vs. Peace on you.

    — Douglas    May 13, 09:59 AM    #

25. I agree with TH (#15). We have no idea what this senator was going to address in her speech—it is HIGHLY unlikely that it was abortion. It’s a commencement speech!

    I disagree with Presentation College’s decision, but they have every right to make it.

    However, if the college’s policy is now to invite a speaker based on what he/she believes (but does not voice in the speech), this means that the college limits their choices to Catholics only… no? That seems incredibly limiting.

    — J    May 13, 10:02 AM    #

26. Congrats to Presentation for reasserting its Catholicity!

    — Fellman    May 13, 10:02 AM    #

27. H Murphy, do your homework. Many Catholic advocacy groups are decried as “too liberal” by my evangelical friends becasue they do indeed promote greater access to health care, improved safety nets for the indigent, diplomacy rather than force, and global peace and justice.

    What many of you are missing is that many, I dare say nearly all, classrooms at Catholic colleges DO allow full expression of ideas. The commencement speech is neither the time nor place to explore alternate viewpoints. If the college is worth its salt, abortion debates were had in classrooms, student lounges, and study groups across campus regularly in the years leading up to graduation. They should not be a part of the graduation ceremony.

    — Patrick    May 13, 10:06 AM    #

28. I salute an institution whose leaders have the guts to stand for what they believe. How many secular colleges stand for anything except the prevailing political and cultural fads of the day?

    — Esteban    May 13, 10:22 AM    #

29. Cathoic colleges are damned if they do and damned if they don’t, when it comes to invited speakers on campus. What usually happens is the adminstrative assistants comb through a potential speaker’s CV and publications and if it breathes anything about the tiniest support of the “A” word, that person is shot from the list. Even if the proposed speaker may alluded to the “A” word in a public way 35 years ago, they are considered too risky. This is because there are groups out there whose whole mission is to monitor speakers on Catholic campuses. (Cardinal Newman Society is one good example.) These watchdog groups then “inform” the archdiocese and a few of the ultraconservative Catholic donors in the area. They call and threaten to drop all support if a “pro abortion” speaker is allowed on campus. The poor president is hog-tied and has no choice but to disinvite the speaker. That is why you see loads of bishops, priests, and nuns speaking at Catholic college commencements. They are “safe.” The huge paradox that I’ve discovered in my years of being involved in Catholic higher education is that it is a fountain of free exchange of ideas and the Catholic intellectual tradition is one proud accomplishment of the Catholic church, especially through the religious orders of priests, brothers, and nuns. At the same time, a few words such as “abortion,” “homosexuality,” and “women priests,” sends everyone into a frenzy around commencement time, a fire storm results, and the Catholic college can’t win. (Notice I don’t say “just war,” “capital punishment,” “immigration,” or “universal health care for the marginalized.” (Another major paradox.) I feel for the poor person at Presentation who didn’t dig deeply enough into the state senator’s views. Because we all know that there are folks out there that do nothing but spend their time digging and make commencement weeks hell for Catholic colleges, their adminstrations, faculty, and most sadly, their students. It will never change. JB

    — jb    May 13, 10:58 AM    #

30. As a Roman Catholic myself, I’m proud of Presentation College for showing the way by standing up for our religious belief in this most important matter. If only the Catholic leadership in this country was able to demonstrate a similar level of integrity!

    — Joseph Spretnjak    May 13, 11:08 AM    #

31. Anti-intellectualism is in style these days! When this season is over, the Chonicle should publish a list of the institutions that have withdrawn invitations to speak and/or receive an honorary degree. A small backwater, not-visible institution (like Presentation) does not bother me as much as a distinguished university (like Northwestern).

    Church-related institutions are expected to offer their students a distinctive education, sensitive to important values, but not indoctrination. Even the Popes have had to admit that Galileo was correct and the church was wrong.

    Pax vobiscum!

    Don Freeman

    — Donald M. Freeman    May 13, 11:08 AM    #

32. Having faith in God is hardly antiintellectual. Perhaps a refresher course in the history of higher education would benefit poor Don.

    — Sergey Vlogev    May 13, 11:54 AM    #

33. I thought one of the basic tenets of Catholic education is that one should question ones beliefs about the world and about God in order to come to a fuller understanding of God and his creation (I’m using the terminology of the church here for hose of you who object to the gender pronouns and capitalization). While an exploration of the issue of Abortion within that context is appropriate, I’m not certain that a graduation speaker is the most appropriate place to do it. On the other hand, if the topic of the speech did not touch upon the “A” word, then shouldn’t the doctrine of “The inherent value of every human being” fall into play? Wouldn’t that lead one to the logical conclusion that maybe she has something important and commencement worthy to say on other topics? Unfortunately, I doubt that this level of conversation occurred between those who pressured the college and those who are responsible for its care.

    — JS    May 13, 12:20 PM    #

34. In other Vatican news today, noted Tuscan scientist Galilei Galileo was disinvited from a talk he was to give at the University. According to spokesmen for the Pope, Galileo’s views on heliocentrism were unacceptable to the tenets of the church which, they said, “represents the one and only true word of the Creator of the Universe.”

    — original marci    May 13, 12:40 PM    #

35. All the discussions simply remind me of the dogmatic nature of the catholic church, i.e. … “we have the answer, we know it all, and if you disagree it is your fault”. Reminds me of the Inquisition.

    If the catholic church or any other group is truly opposed to abortion they should vehemently lobby the government to make it illegal for men to get women pregrant, after all a woman cannot get pregnant without a man.

    What a hypocrisy.

    — AN    May 13, 12:40 PM    #

36. I’m confused – was the senator expected or expecting to discuss abortion and the right to choice during the commencement address? Doesn’t really seem like common commencement address content.

    — TDD    May 13, 12:49 PM    #

37. I’m not Catholic but good for them. The supposed public exchange of ideas over abortion is a farce. There’s really nothing further that needs to be said in favor or against infanticide. Just draw lines, fight, and by God may humanity win out.

    — It's Me    May 13, 12:54 PM    #

38. As a response to JS, one does not deny the inherent value of a person by not inviting them to give a speech…with logic like that, everyone’s dignity is being denied every time they are not asked to speak, which is untenable. And to put that on the same level as killing a life makes me wonder if you really thought this through before you wrote it.

    And my dear original Marci, both Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI have worked energetically to clear up the confusion surrounding the Galileo case. The issue here is not that the Church needs to recognize science’s validity: it has done that and continues to affirm science. Just read about any of the numerous meetings John Paul II organized with scientists of every field. Dare to read what Benedict XVI has addressed to intellectuals and scientists since the beginning of his pontificate. The sad fact is that certain people refuse to open their eyes and see reality. It is baffling how many posters on this blog alone will to remain enmeshed in views of the Church that simply are false if one views facts with an open mind.

    And AN, what is wrong with becoming pregnant? Life is a beautiful gift – you would not be posting today had your father not gotten your mother pregnant.

    — thoughtful    May 13, 02:16 PM    #

39. I’ve never read a clearer statement on this or one I agreed with more than #8. Thank you!

    — Rich    May 13, 03:24 PM    #

40. Yeah, AN – isn’t it wonderful that your father’s sperm is the equivalent to a fully-formed human being who’s able to type comments on the internet? It certainly wasn’t necessary for any WOMAN to have any part in your development – why, any walking uterus who was free for 9 months would do! Ergo, every person (woman) should be happy for such an honor as being pregnant. Case closed!

    As for the topic at hand – if Catholic universities are going to have some sort of litmus test, why don’t they apply it to all the important tenets of the faith? Do their speakers believe in transubstantiation? Christ’s divinity? Mary’s perpetual virginity? These are cornerstones of the faith just as their abortion policy is. Or, if we’re talking about just legal / public policy issues – what about speakers who are OK with the legality of contraception? What about politicians who have supported foreign governments that have killed Catholic clergy?

    Oh that’s right – if these colleges wanted only perfect Catholics to be their commencement speakers, they would find it very difficult to find someone to speak at all. (The 50% plus of Catholics who miss Mass every weekend – a mortal sin, I might add – shouldn’t hold their breath for a speaking invite. And that’s just one example.)

    So these colleges can just make their stand about one or two issues that will keep the donations rolling in, and let the other “less important” issues become a matter of the “careful discernment” of each individual speaker.

    I hope Bill Donahue isn’t busy during the month of May – he is going to have a LOT of upcoming speaking engagements.

    — Anna B.    May 13, 03:41 PM    #

41. There is a difference between intellectual dialogue and a commencement address. A commencement is not the time nor the place to put on a debate, much less to showcase a speaker who disavows the values and principles of the institution. Presentation was right to change speakers, the last talk the students hear there should not be one that violates the values of the college granting their degree.

    — Michael    May 13, 04:38 PM    #

42. Presentation College is one of those private colleges on the verge of extinction who probably viewed this as good chance for some publicity. As a someone raised in the Roman Catholic Church and familiar with its dubious history, the hypocrisy of the institution no longer surprises me. I remember the threat to deny Senator Kerry communion because of his stance on abortion by overwhelmingly conservative leadership of the Church while they conveniently forget about the pro-death penalty policies of others. Not to mention the recent kowtowing of the Pope to the current President who is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands. So much for being “pro-life”!

    — Dan    May 13, 05:51 PM    #

43. Amen to Dan (#42). Well said, Dan. I was born into and raised in the catholic church too. But of course, that was then. The hypocrisy of the catholic church as exemplified by Presentation College and all those “pro-lifers” in these discussions above is their selective “pro-life” stand. These “pro-lifers” do not seem to have any problem with George W because Geroge W is “pro-life” regardless of the fact that thousands of Americans and Iraqis that have been killed in Iraq because of his decision to go to war. Are those lives not as important?

    Again, as I said earlier, what a hypocrisy.

    — AN    May 13, 06:42 PM    #

44. Abortion is murder! Enough said. Let it be written, let it be done!

    — mike    May 13, 10:25 PM    #

45. mike – keep your tired old moral posturing to yourself unless you’re working at being part of the solution. as has been noted so many times, if males were the ones getting pregnant this discussion would never take place as pregnancy-termination would be right up there with viagra and “size enhancements”

    — Gary    May 14, 09:58 AM    #

46. #6, #17… yes, real colleges and universities do, and should, host controversial, wrong, scientifically questionable, and sometimes offensive speakers and ideas, so long as they are delivered in ways consistent with the nature of academe. (Although tenuring them might be a different story.) What kind of health club only installs weight machines with 5# loads? Yes, a sectarian college has a RIGHT to narrow allowable ideas to a narrow doctrine, but when does it stop being a college with a religious affiliation, and start being a church camp with some classes?

    — hieddoc    May 14, 10:20 AM    #

47. Michael (#41) writes: “Presentation was right to change speakers, the last talk the students hear there should not be one that violates the values of the college granting their degree.”

    Again, the topic her commencement speech was likely NOT abortion. Why is this not addressed in the comments?

    — J    May 14, 03:43 PM    #

48. we reserve the right to comment stupidly on every issue. that’s what makes any comment a “marci”.

    — every marci    May 19, 03:11 PM    #

49. I’ve relied throughout my life on my American Catholic university education to enable me not only to question beliefs and ideas, but also to question challenges to beliefs and ideas. Whether embracing or rejecting whatever a teacher or speaker says, my faith is stronger for the experience. Providing a platform shouldn’t imply endorsement of what is said from the platform. Failure to provide the platform, on the other hand, diminishes the educational experience.

    — Michael Grimaldi    May 20, 04:03 PM    #

50. Of course I was not going to speak on abortion — or birth control, for that matter. My intended remarks concerned service to others, spirituality, and sharing gifts with which we are blessed. Thank you all for sharing yours. Peace be with you.

    — Nancy Turbak Berry    May 20, 10:38 PM    #

Previous: U.S. Labels MIT Students as 'Security Threats' and Denies Clearance at Ports
Next: State Governments Pony Up a Half-Billion Dollars for Specific Research