Update: Holy Cross stands firm:
Holy Cross officials stressed that the school, a Jesuit institution, is not affiliated in any way with the conference, but added that it will fulfill its contractual obligations.
“Holy Cross in no way supports or endorses Planned Parenthood, NARAL, or other organizations that engage in or promote practices contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church,” said the Rev. Michael C. McFarland, school president.
He said the college “fully affirms and promotes” Catholic teaching on abortion and “the sanctity of all human life,” but he added that the meeting organized by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy will help professionals address health matters affecting at-risk youth.
Meanwhile, Patricia Quinn, senior director of public policy and programs at Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy, said the organization was surprised by the uproar, considering that the group’s annual meeting has been held at Holy Cross since 2001.
“To be honest, this all came out of the blue,” said Ms. Quinn. “We’re disheartened by the opposition.”
Some of you might be aware that a controversy has recently arisen over a program on Teen Pregnancy, to be held in space rented by Holy Cross College to the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy. The controversy centered on the involvement of Planned Parenthood and NARAL in the workshops.
Today, Bishop McManus of Worcester issued a statement:
A controversy has arisen at the College of the Holy Cross that has resulted from the College’s renting space for a conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy. The conference involves workshops presented by members of Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. Both organizations promote positions on artificial contraception and abortion that are contrary to the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.
I have received numerous complaints from people who are shocked and outraged that a Catholic institution like Holy Cross would have anything to do with such groups. They have appealed to me to ask Father Michael McFarland, president of the College of the Holy Cross, to revoke the College’s agreement to rent space to the Massachusetts Teen Alliance. I have done so.
As Bishop of Worcester, it is my pastoral and canonical responsibility to determine what institutions can properly call themselves “Catholic.” This is a duty that I do not take lightly since to be a Catholic institution means that such an institution conducts its mission and ministry in accord with Catholic Church teaching, especially in cases of faith and morals.
The moral teaching of the Catholic Church on respect for life at all stages of its development is manifestly clear. Life is a fundamental good that must be protected and respected from the moment of fertilization to natural death. This teaching is so basic and important that it provides the foundation upon which much of the Church’s moral and social doctrine rests. It is beyond modification and compromise.
Both Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice are notorious for their policies and practices that directly reject the Church’s teaching on artificial contraception and abortion. The College of the Holy Cross should recognize that any association with these groups can create the situation of offering scandal understood in its proper theological sense, i.e., an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. Certainly it is understandable how people of good will could interpret the college’s allowing presentations to be made by such groups as truly scandalous.
I strongly contend that the confusion and upset to the Catholic faithful and others that flow from the perception that the administration of the College of the Holy Cross supports positions contrary to the fundamental moral teaching of the Church must be avoided. To deny Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice a forum in which to present their morally unacceptable positions is not an infringement of the exercise of academic freedom but a defensible attempt to make unambiguously clear the Catholic identity and mission of the College of the Holy Cross.
It is my fervent wish that the administration of the College of the Holy Cross will unequivocally disassociate itself from the upcoming conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy so that the college can continue to be recognized as a Catholic institution committed to promoting the moral teaching of the Roman Catholic church.
Hooray!
I cannot tell you how happy I would be to see Holy Cross at least struggling to maintain its Catholic identity. It is close to home and has good music (organ) and good science, both of which are important to my next college applicant. But every time I start feeling comfortable with the idea of an application, something like this crops up, and I am once again struck by how UN-Catholic the college appears to be.
Very frustrating. But three cheers for the good bishop!
This is awesome news. Our pulpits cannot remain silent as society tries to convince us that what is sick and evil is “good for us”.
Wow, another bishop with a backbone – what a rarity in today’s Church! I wish he was a bishop in Conneticut…
Bishop Mc Manus is a wonderful man! My husband and I were just discussing this topic last night and I am overjoyed at the news that he (the bishop) has stepped up and spoken up.
As an interesting (or perhaps not so much) aside, the topic arose after the Director of Chaplains at HC came to speak at our diaconate discernment class last night.
I pray that we can affect a change at our so-called Catholic institutions of higher learning so that our children can earn a truly Catholic education.
Thanks for posting this, Amy.
Not only is he a bishop with a backbone, he is also an incredible man. I’ve met him several times, and he is incredibly down to earth and pious.
I’m glad to see this. My neice is there now, and I wouldn’t want her to be led astray.
In response to the Update:
Holy Cross will “fulfill its contractual obligations”? What, I wonder, are those “obligations”? Is this guest group really a contractor, in any legally binding sense of the term? Sorry, Fr. McFarland, but this sounds like a very lame excuse to go ahead and do what you wish to do, the bishop and Catholic teaching be damned. Bishop McManus is no fool. I hope he acts.
Bishop McMAnus is a moral theologian with a wonderful gift of communication and pastoral courage. As a graduate of the College of the Holy Cross I am once again disturbed by the lukewarm drivel that spues forth from my alma mater’s leaders. If only the Jesuits had the fortitude to proclaim the TRUTH. Ignatious Loyola must be rolling over in his grave. What a disgrace.
When will turnabout be fair play and Planned Parenthood and like organizations will allow Catholic events that promote a culture of life to be held on their property?
“…he added that the meeting organized by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy will help professionals address health matters affecting at-risk youth. …”
To the degree that PP and NARAL are involved, these professionals will be addressing these matters badly.
Yet another school in the civic deist tradition, behaving true to form.
Isn’t this an interesting turn of events!
“Beyond modification or compromise”!
Thank God BISHOP McManus has MODIFIED the views he held as FATHER McManus which cause even The New York Times to marvel at his “Kind of Precent”-setting opinion regarding withdrawal of hydration and nutrition from a comatose woman.
Apprently the weight of the mitre has had a salutary effect. Better late than never . . . unless, of course, you were Mrs. Gray.
January 12, 1988
Bishop Sees No Moral Issue If Feeding Ends in Coma Case
By PETER STEINFELS
The Roman Catholic Bishop of Providence, R.I., Louis E. Gelineau, said yesterday that a diocesan official’s opinion approving the removal of a feeding tube from a comatose patient ”does not contradict Catholic moral theology.”
The opinion was written at Bishop Gelineau’s request by the Rev. Robert J. McManus, vicar of education, who is a member of the diocesan medical ethics commission.
It has been criticized as ”utterly and unquestionably wrong” by another Catholic theologian, the Rev. Robert Barry, who teaches religious studies at the University of Illinois. A diocesan press officer said abortion foes in the Providence area had expressed concern that Father McManus’s view weakened the church’s teaching on the protection of life.
A Kind of Precedent
Although Father McManus’s opinion in the case of Marcia Gray, a 48-year-old Catholic who has been in a coma since January 1986, is not unprecedented among moral theologians, it is apparently the first time such a viewpoint has been expressed by someone acting in a diocesan capacity.
A growing number of state courts have ruled that such chemical feeding is a means of artificial life support like mechanical respirators, which can be removed.
Bishop Gelineau, in Providence, had asked Father McManus to study the case after Mrs. Gray’s husband, H. Glenn Gray, who is seeking to remove a tube supplying food and water to his wife, sought church advice, The Bishop emphasized yesterday that Father McManus’s opinion ”in no way supports or condones the practice of euthanasia.”
Mr. Gray, who is a University of Rhode Island professor, has sued the Rhode Island Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals, which administers the hospital where Mrs. Gray is a patient, to have the feeding tube removed. The case is scheduled to be heard this month by the Federal District Court in Providence.
According to Bishop Gelineau, the church has made no ”definitive statement regarding the need to provide nutrition and hydration to the permanently unconscious person.”
At a news conference, Bishop Gelineau acknowledged that his position supporting Father McManus might differ from the standpoint of other bishops. But Dr. James J. Walter, associate professor of theology at Loyola University, in Chicago, said that Father McManus’s opinion appeared to be one held by a ”growing majority” of Catholic moral theologians. ‘Ordinary’ vs. ‘Extraordinary’
According to Dr. Walter as well as Dr. Lisa Sowle Cahill, professor of theology at Boston College, the terms Father McManus used to examine the issue were traditional ones. Most Catholic theologians ask whether artifically provided nutrition and hydration constitute ”extraordinary” medical treatment. Such treatment may be suspended if seen as burdensome. On the other hand, ”ordinary” medical treatment cannot be morally withdrawn.
Dr. Cahill noted that theological foes of removing feeding tubes for the permanently unconscious stress the ”ordinary” and basic character of food and drink. ”But food and drink is no more basic than air,” said Dr. Cahill, noting that Catholic theologians have agreed that artificial respirators qualify as ”extraordinary” treatment and can sometimes be disconnected.
The differences among theologians, Dr. Walter said, depend on whether they look at the medical treatment alone or in relation to the benefit it may give a particular patient. In the case of Mrs. Gray, Father McManus had concluded that the measures ‘’supplying nutrition and hydration artificially offer no reasonable hope of benefit” and were therefore ”disproportionate and unduly burdensome.”
The Jesuit order answers to their Jesuit Provincial, then the Jesuit General, and then the Pope.
> As Bishop of Worcester, it is my pastoral and canonical responsibility to
> determine what institutions can properly call themselves “Catholic.”
This is factually incorrect. The Bishop holds pastoral and canonical responsibility over the diocese. Quite properly, Bishop McManus has no authority over Holy Cross, and should be engaging the Jesuit Provincial Superior of New England (V. Rev. Thomas J. Regan, S.J.) in discussion over this issue.
Feminists For Life has a speaker at Holy Cross next week:
Angelica Rosales
“Did I Deserve The Death Penalty? I Am That Exception”
7:00 PM
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Kimball Theater
College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, MA
Not all the Holy Cross news is bad. FFL has a great message to get out to college women.
It might be nice if the university fulfilled its Catholic obligations.
Pardon me, but All contracts can be broken…
It appears that they have a greater fear of the consequences of a secular breach of contract than an ecclesiastical breach of the magisterial teaching of the Church.
These people seem to have a blind spot in regard to this scandalous matter through poorly formed consciences. It is sad and unfortunate that they fail to comprehend the grave matter of their magisterial breach of doctrine.
Non nobis, Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.
Ex anima,
Mark
Make your opinions known to Holy Cross that this behavior from a “Catholic” institution is not acceptable. We should put pressure on the administration officials at schools like this to return to Catholic values.
It is very gratifying to see a bishop take a stand. However, now that the Jesuit school, Holy Cross, hasl already refused to to consider his “wishes,” it remains to be seen if he will take further action.
Conferences are held by the thousands on every imaginable topic across the US every day. Most take place in hotels or conference centers designed for the purpose. The only reason to have such a conference on a college campus, in my experience, is to encourage student involvement and to organize students for action.
This conference could be held elsewhere but is now in its sixth year at Holy Cross. I suspect there is a considerable faculty/administration constituency which is driving this annual event. This is far more concerning than the event itself.
The question remains now for the bishop, what is to be gained by denial of the Catholic name to Holy Cross? It would be a difficult decision. Is the school so secular that this would not be a punishment? If so, no loss. The school is likely a mix of Catholic and secular consituencies. If this is the case, the loss of Catholic support may bring the school to its knees, and to compliance. Still, this is a risky strategy. There may be more instituions than we realize that will happily walk away if put to the test. If such a trend were to begin, we could lose half of Catholic higher ed in the next twenty years. Once gone they would never return. But some, even many, could possibly be saved by not being forced to choose in the near future.
As a BC graduate, I can attest to the poor state of that institution in regard to Catholicity.
Congratulations to the whistleblowers who have brought this problem at Holy Cross to light. We need more of this kind of activism to cajole institutions into fidelity.
The Jesuit order answers to their Jesuit Provincial, then the Jesuit General, and then the Pope.
> As Bishop of Worcester, it is my pastoral and canonical responsibility to
> determine what institutions can properly call themselves “Catholic.”
This is factually incorrect. The Bishop holds pastoral and canonical responsibility over the diocese. Quite properly, Bishop McManus has no authority over Holy Cross, and should be engaging the Jesuit Provincial Superior of New England (V. Rev. Thomas J. Regan, S.J.) in discussion over this issue.
Hmmmm. My understanding is that while the Bishop has no operational authority over a non-diocesan Catholic institution such as Holy Cross, such institutions are permitted to operate within a diocese only by permission of the Bishop. In other words, if the bishop believes that such an institution is acting in a way that is inimical to Catholic teaching, he may withdraw his permission to operate within his diocese. I would think that any college that calls itself Catholic but supports or endorses positions that are contrary to Catholic teaching can, under canon law, be forced to leave by the Bishop. At least this is my understanding.
Now, I am not saying that Bishop McManus should do this. Nor am I saying that Holy Cross renting space to a teen pregnancy consortium is always impermissible if such a consortium includes Planned Parenthood or like organizations. I actually think that these questions are prudential in nature, which is why Bishop M rightly focuses on the potential for scandal and confusion. What I am saying is that technically, I think, Bishop M holds the ultimate trump card under canon law. That said, if I’m correct, the trump card’s power actually may diminish its value, since most people would not want this stand-off to result in the closing of Holy Cross, or even its forced removal. It’s a bit like making the death penalty the only remedy for exceeding a 55 mph speed limit. In such a case, the police would be very reluctant to actually issue tickets.
When my Catholic college rented out its chapel to some women’s ordination proponents who then hed a “pretend” Mass there, I cut off my financial support to the school. Now I think that perhaps I should have sent a large check and urged other to do likewise so that that school did not have the need for the income generated by the rental.
Nah… I can’t help but think that they might take my financial support as an endorsement of their rental policy.
On the other hand, what would it cost Holy Cross to rip up the contract & tell the organizers that the conference can not be held there. Are the alumni & concerned Catholics willing to pony up to cover the cost of breaking the contract?
Maureen,
I would be surprised if the damages caused by a refusal to perform under the contract would be significant. But I do think that one should normally honor contracts as a matter of simple ethics. For that reason, I would think the bishop should be (and perhaps would be) satisfied if the school’s response was (i) we will fulfill our contractual obligations and (ii) we agree that it was a prudential error to rent the space and we won’t do it in the future. But I don’t read McFarland that way. I interpret him as saying that the school has no intention of altering its decision because the “meeting organized by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy will help professionals address health matters affecting at-risk youth.” In a sense, he is saying that the school has made its own prudential calculus and intends to continue to exercise its right to do so. I suspect (and it is only a suspicion) the subtext is that the school doesn’t want its sense of independence to be disturbed by a meddling outsider, even if that outsider is the bishop. This is kind of normal organizational behavior, but it can be perverse insomuch as it would not surprise me in the least if McFarland’s response is motivated less by actual disagreement as to the prudential calculus and more by wanting to protect his turf. And for this reason it would not surprise me if the school does not rent space to the MATP next year — as long as it is seen as its own decision rather than submission. All kind of silly and sad, but human nature. Of course, please understand that this is nothing more than rank speculation.
Isnt there a difference, like we saw with Ave Maria in FL?
A university/college must get permission to operate as a “Catholic” University from the local Diocesan Bishop.
If the Bishop gives his approval, then it can be called a “Catholic University”.
If the Bishop denies approval then it can be called a “University in the Catholic Tradition”
“Over the weekend, the spokesperson for the Diocese of Venice (Florida) was quoted as saying “[AMU] is not a Catholic university. It’s a private university in the Catholic tradition.” …..Only institutions approved by their local diocese can be called “Catholic”.
http://www.avewatch.org/files/6fbdb7c8172c92a0b396d2d23080028b-141.html
The Bishop must be able to rescind his approval to operate in his Diocese as a “Catholic University”???
As an alum, I will take Maureen’s suggestion and offer to make my first ever donation to HC, provided the funds be applied solely to breach-of-contract costs.
Fr. McFarland’s response to the controvercy is measured, thoughtful, and absolutely in line with Catholic beliefs, despite the Bishop’s accusations. The Church’s disaproval on an issue is not sufficient reason to stifle the discussion, and I’m proud that the president of my college is tolerant of the opinions and rights of those with whom he does not necessarily agree.
By the way, if Bishop McManus had such a backbone, we could have used his righteous outrage during the priest sex scandal. Selective morality, perhaps???
Liz,
I’d agree with you if the annual meeting was designed to include any “discussion” of the morality of abortion or contraception, but I don’t believe that it was.
“The Church’s disaproval on an issue is not sufficient reason to stifle the discussion, and I’m proud that the president of my college is tolerant of the opinions and rights of those with whom he does not necessarily agree.”
This is a red herring. No one is”stifling discussion” – the bishop is just asking the college not to sponsor it in any way: there’s a difference. Fr. McFarland says that HC “in no way supports or endorses Planned Parenthood, NARAL, or other organizations that engage in or promote practices contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church,” but this does not pass the smell test. Would it be acceptable for HC to rent space the the KKK and then make the claim that it does not support organizations that promote racism and violence? Shouldn’t he be “tolerant” of these opinions, too?
Many people at the TFP Rosary Rally in Worcester last weekend were thanking the Bishop for his stance. He was, as always, very gracious. We’re lucky to have such a wonderful bishop!
I’ve signed the petition against PP at Holy Cross
http://www.tfp.org/student_action/activities/protests/holy_cross_abortion_groups.htm
God bless!