Protecting Students from Catholicism At Marquette

In their zeal to protect students from any comments or opinions that may hurt their feelings, many professors have created “safe spaces” in their classrooms—controlling all conversations in an effort to ensure that no one is ever offended. But, a recent controversy at Marquette University has revealed that a “safe space” is now defined as a classroom that is free from Catholic teaching on marriage—and offending faithful Catholic students is always allowed.

The Atlantic reports that the controversy began on October 28, 2014 when Cheryl Abbate, a graduate student in philosophy, was teaching a course about John Rawls and asked students for examples of current events to which Rawlsian philosophy could be applied. According to Abbate’s own blog, “When one student rightly suggested that a ban on gay marriage would violate Rawls’s Equal Liberty Principle, I wrote on the board, noted that this was the correct way to apply Rawls’s principle to a ban on gay marriage and then moved on to more nuanced examples.”

Maybe not. According to The Atlantic and other media reports, Professor Abbate did not “move on” quite so quickly. Rather, Abbate added that “if anyone did not agree that gay marriage was an example of something that fits the Rawls’ Equal Liberty Principle, they should see her after class.” She made it clear that the classroom was not a “safe space” for dissent on the value of same-sex “marriage.” Such conversations had to be held in secret so as not to offend others.

One student in the class decided to pursue this issue with Abbate after class—secretly recording the exchange. According to published transcripts, the student said:

I have to be completely honest with you, I don’t agree with gay marriage. There have been studies that show that children that are brought up in gay households do a lot worse in life such as test scores, in school, and in the real world. So, when you completely dismiss an entire argument based off of your personal views, it sets a precedent for the classroom that “oh my God, this is so wrong; you can’t agree with this, you’re a horrible person if you agree with this.” And that’s what came off. And I have to say I am very personally offended by that. And I would stress for you in your professional career going forward, you’re going to be teaching for many more years, that you watch how you approach those issues because when you set a precedent like that because you are the authority figure in the classroom, people truly do listen to you … it’s wrong for the teacher of a class to completely discredit one person’s opinion when they may have different opinions.

Professor Abbate replied:

Ok, there are some opinions that are not appropriate, that are harmful, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions, and quite honestly, do you know if anyone in the class is homosexual? And, don’t you think that would be offensive to them if you were to raise your hand and challenge this?

When the student replied: “If I choose to challenge this, it’s my right as an American citizen,” Abbate responded: “Well, actually you don’t have a right in this class … to make homophobic comments, racist comments, sexist comments…. This is about restricting rights and liberties of individuals … and just as I would take offense if women cannot serve in XYZ positions because that is a sexist comment…. You can have whatever opinions you want but I can tell you right now, in this class homophobic comments, racist comments and sexist comments will not be tolerated. If you don’t like that you are more than free to drop this class.”

And, when the student asked: “So, are you saying that not agreeing with gay marriage is homophobic?” Abbate responded that “To argue that individuals should not have rights is going to be offensive to someone in this class.”

In the “safe space” Abbate has created, homosexual students have the right not to be offended if another student objects to same-sex “marriage.” But, where does that leave faithful Catholic students? Is there a safe space for them? This student was invited to drop the class. It is likely that he was not the only student who was offended by Abbate’s dismissal of counter-arguments to Rawlsian support for same-sex “marriage.” It is likely that many faithful Catholic students were offended in that class—but at Marquette, it is clear that the rights of Catholic students who are faithful to Catholic teachings on marriage are secondary to the rights of progressive students to feel validated in their support for same-sex “marriage.”

In her own blog, Abbate admits this “I did however, remind a student of his right to drop my class if he felt he could not abide by my safe-space policy (which is in accordance with Marquette University’s Harassment Policy).” For Abbate, it is uncontroversial to have a safe-space policy that is only safe for those who agree with her about the value of same-sex “marriage.” Rawls’ Equal Liberty Principle could just as easily be drawn upon to support the student’s contention that same-sex “marriage” can violate the equal protection rights of children. To demonstrate her own commitment to Rawls’ Equal Liberty Principle, Abbate could have invited discussion on the research by Mark Regnerus on the unique problems faced by children raised by same sex parents, or the newest study by Catholic University sociologist Paul Sullins, which found that in a representative sample of 207,007 children, including 512 with same sex parents, children raised in same sex households were twice as likely to experience emotional problems than children with opposite sex parents.

But, such discussion cannot occur in a Marquette University classroom because it appears that it has indeed become a space that is safe from Catholic teachings on same-sex “marriage.” The Marquette Harassment policy states that: “verbal, written or physical conduct directed at a person or a group based on color, race, national origin, ethnicity, religion disability, veteran status, age gender or sexual orientation where the offensive behavior is intimidating, hostile or demeaning or could or does result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or harm.” As Abbate has said, according to Marquette’s anti-harassment policy, if there had been a gay or lesbian student in that classroom that day, that student has the right to be free of “mental or emotional discomfort” if debate on same-sex “marriage” was allowed to occur. Such a policy is effective in insulating students from Catholic teachings on same-sex “marriage.”

What if a student was enrolled in the class who had previously had an abortion—would that student also have the right to be free of mental or emotional discomfort if debate on Catholic teachings on abortion occurred? Most likely—and this is why there is so little debate on Catholic campuses these days. And, those professors who persist in continuing the debate over these issues are punished—one tenured professor has been fired.

Tenured Professor Fired for Publicizing the Case
In December, Marquette relieved Professor John McAdams of his teaching and other faculty duties for blogging about the Abbate incident. According to McAdams, the student involved in the confrontation with Abbate talked with him about the incident, and McAdams took to his blog, Marquette Warrior, to publicize it as an example of the ways in which free speech is chilled at Marquette. And, because of that blog—because he was exercising his own right to free speech, McAdams has been stripped of tenure.

In a December 16 letter to McAdams, Dean Richard C. Holz of Marquette’s Klingler College of Arts and Sciences wrote: “The university is continuing to review your conduct and during this period—and until further notice—you are relieved of all teaching duties and all other faculty activities, including, but not limited to, advising, committee work, faculty meetings and any activity that would involve your interaction with Marquette students, faculty, and staff.”

Holz was critical that although McAdams did not reveal the name of the complaining student, he did reveal the name of the Professor in the class—a graduate student—and this was a violation of the graduate student’s rights. McAdams has protested that the graduate student was the only professor of the class—with full-authority in charge of her ethics class. Abbate had the authority to award grades to students—putting her in the role of a faculty member. She was not functioning as a “graduate student” in her capacity as the identified faculty member for that ethics course.

McAdams also claims that Holz did not inform him of the policy violations, but he provided McAdams with a copy of Marquette’s harassment policy—suggesting that he was under investigation for violating this policy. It is likely that McAdams’ offense was making the professor “uncomfortable” by publicizing the controversy. On December 17, Marquette released a statement on its suspension of McAdams publicly insinuating that the professor was suspected of violating Marquette’s harassment policy through his blog. The statement read:

Our president has been very clear including in a recent campus wide letter about university expectations and Guiding Values to which all faculty and staff are required to adhere, and in which the dignity and worth of each member of our community is respected, especially students.

Although McAdams has received support from students on campus through a change.org petition and a Turning Point USA demonstration supporting him, there has been little faculty support. It is likely that McAdams has made himself unpopular among the progressive faculty members on campus because of his willingness to expose what he sees as campus corruption. In 2011, he blogged about the search for a new Dean in the College of Arts and Sciences at Marquette that resulted in the hiring (and then, “not-hiring”) of Jodi O’Brien, a self-described “sexuality scholar” who denigrated Catholic teachings on marriage in her publications. According to O’Brien, she had been recruited by several senior leaders from Marquette to lead the College of Arts and Sciences. And, she is not the first gay or lesbian scholar to have been so recruited. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that Isaiah Crawford, an openly gay man and currently Seattle University’s provost—the highest ranking academic officer at the university—was offered the same job of dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Marquette several years ago.  Professor McAdams blogged that Marquette had sent a representative to Seattle to encourage Ms. O’Brien to apply for the dean position—confirming his belief that “she was pushed by some faculty and administrators adding the right kind of diversity to the school.”

Last week, Marquette began the “firing process” against McAdams—claiming that the blog led to “impaired value.” But, it may not be quite as easy as Marquette’s President and Dean may have anticipated. The American Association of University Professors sent a letter to Marquette objecting to the suspension of McAdams without adequate cause or hearing. Now, with this latest development—the firing process—AAUP is stepping up its response. In The Academe Blog, the blog of the AAUP, the editor writes of the McAdams case: “This latest development is far more alarming. AAUP regulations, and Marquette’s own policies, explicitly prohibit what Marquette is now doing: punishing a professor for publicly expressing his opinions.”

Indeed, this is what is at stake here. Do faithful Catholics on Catholic campuses have the right to express their support for Catholic teachings on faith and morals? At Marquette, the answer seems to be no.

Editor’s note: In the inset above is pictured Cheryl Abbate with Marquette University campus in the background.

Anne Hendershott

By

Anne Hendershott is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Veritas Center at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio. She is the author of Status Envy: The Politics of Catholic Higher Education; The Politics of Abortion; and The Politics of Deviance (Encounter Books). She is also the co-author of Renewal: How a New Generation of Priests and Bishops are Revitalizing the Catholic Church (2013).

  • Blaise Pascal

    If the Jesuits were suppressed it wouldn’t be the first time.I know , I know who the Pope is.

  • HughieMc

    While I stand four-square behind both the content and the intent of this article, and its writer, and those abused individuals highlighted here, I have one caveat. Why, Anne, do you oppose “the rights of Catholic students” to “the rights of progressive students”? What is progressive about the “rights” of a small section of the community, 1.5% or less, being advanced ahead of the rights of the rest of us?

    • Anne Hendershott

      When the “progressives” have the power of the media, the faculty, and administration on their side, you have to pay attention to the 1.5%. It truly is the tyranny of the minority.

  • orientstar

    If you give up on the delusion that Marquette is in any meaningful sense a Catholic institution then Professor MacAdams would probably have a better case legally!

  • samnigromd

    Marquette’s actions and comments are totally OFFENSIVE to millions. Marquette is denying the right to free speech. Marquette is suppressing thought and ideas from open discussion. Marquette is anti-academic and totalitarian. Marquette is doing what the gay cult and selfish feminists are always complaining about. This is absurd.

    THE GREAT KOOKS OF THE
    WESTERN WORLD

    Book Review of The Victim’s Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing
    of the Liberal Mind by Bruce Bawer, Broadside, 2012, 400pp.

    By Samuel A. Nigro,
    M.D., November 2012

    This book is an astonishing,
    overwhelming description of victimhood as it has taken over the Academy, the
    press and media and our culture. Victimology, perhaps excepting The Prince, excludes the “great books of the Western
    World” replaced by the “great kooks,” all named in the book as founders of a
    cultural sewer of victimhood exploiting the innocent who have a civil
    conscience enough to be fooled into spurious “guilt” and willingness to offer undeserved
    sympathy.

    Bruce
    Bawer powerfully describes the victimhood process for women’s studies, black
    studies, queer studies, and Chicano studies.
    Fascinating are his first hand participation in each group and he gives
    witness to who, what, where and when. I
    will try to give my understanding of Bawer’s experiences and findings, but this
    book is a knowledge filling asset for every library.

    Each
    study group’s existence is based on publicizing “victims,” and, if none can be
    found, then victims must be fabricated and created. Otherwise, these groups would have no reason
    to exist. Victim studies are a
    stagnating, imprisoning process for both teachers and students.

    Victimology
    is done by sanctimonious, poor-me, whimpering, whining, moaning, groaning, cry-baby,
    sob-sister, how-dare-you routines, which are so inferiority proving, it is
    embarrassing. Relevance is created by
    moaning grandiose narcissism which prevents growth, responsibility and
    independence. The need to fabricate about historical matters
    is blatant proof of the fundamental inferiority of these groups—If Truth is not
    allowed, what other word applies except, “inferior”? The process is selfish, uncivil,
    pseudo-intellectual dead-ended perseveration of psycho-social waste. It is really un-American in that, “From many,
    one” is anathema, having been replaced by “Diversity, me! me! me!” (Totally
    overlooked is that people are still more
    alike than different even as they proclaim their simple differences). But professional
    victims basically refuse to join the productive human race when crackpot
    hustling, pseudo-academic gobbledygook and begging for the common good enable full
    throttle entitlement schemes, as they unwittingly thereby reject duty, honor, reason, responsibility, sanity, self-respect
    and virtue.

    Victimhood
    is a grandiose contest of who has suffered the most and “how hurt I have been”
    because of “plights” of being “a woman”, a “black”, “sexually confused,” or
    “Chicana/Chicano (both genders so as not to discriminate against whining
    Hispanic women).” The chapter titles
    are worthy of mention: “Gilligan’s Island—Women’
    Studies,” “The Ebony Tower—Black Studies,” “Visit to a Queer Planet—Queer
    Studies,” and “The Dream of Aztlan—Chicano Studies.” Each chapter details more than you ever
    wanted to know about professional victims, hatred of white men, general
    misandrism, and the trashing of Western Civilization. They all want to do, to white males
    especially, what they believe has been done to their ancestors, as if two
    wrongs make a right. The kooks and their
    antics responsible for all this are described by Bawer from direct observation. Plenty of jargon is provided to blame
    everyone but themselves for their continued paralysis. And all this will continue as long as these
    “study” groups are funded. Without
    funding, perhaps, these hate-crime filled and victimhood-disabled will have to
    get jobs which create, develop, and produce something beneficial to the common
    good instead of empty sloganeering which reduces freedom and impairs the
    content of one’s character.

    Victimhood is a dead-end
    self-excommunicating and withdrawal from not only a civil culture, but from
    nature itself. It is a selfish, uncivil,
    pseudo-intellectual ruination of its practitioners. It is an empty alternative to real life and against
    embracing Nature and the world. It is a
    dead-ended evolution, and thus not “evolution” at all. It is behavioral pollution (1).

    For
    women, victimhood is the fragmenting of their lives into emotional, anatomical,
    body part dysmorphism or the pervasive identification with a simple body reflex
    always rejecting irrationally the Oxford English Dictionary definitions of “female” (“belonging to the sex which bears
    offspring”) and “male” (“belonging to the sex which performs the fecundating
    function of generation”).

    For
    Blacks, victimhood is the loss of motivation which should be inspired by the American
    fact that slavery was the luckiest thing that ever happened FOR the 35 million
    Blacks in the US who came from the 450,000 slaves brought here…otherwise they
    would be destitute or dead in some miserable African country, in which they
    would not want to live (Of interest is that Muslim countries imported many more
    slaves than the West but have basically no Black descendants—and they were not
    assimilated—If Blacks knew this, they would reject Islam completely).

    For
    Queers, victimhood promotes a “gay cult”—usually most visible at Queer parades
    or wherever their flaming look-at-me “gay seizures” take over. This gay cult prevents the disorder from being
    seen as an illness such that natural and normal functioning do not occur (2, 3). Queer disorders (Bawers is homosexual, and I
    am using his words) are most likely due to the feminizing effects of their
    mothers’ birth control pills taken before their conception or other hormones in
    the food chain. For some, if not all, “normality”
    is possible with civil adjustment and continued embracing of Western
    Civilization as much as possible.

    For Chicanos, victimhood renders
    them to be “invaders” or “conquerors” of America
    rather than immigrants. To want biculturalism
    is totally against E pluribus unum and
    thus tries to defeat all that has made America
    great.

    Overall, for Victimology, there is
    an absolute absence of transcendence – there is no truth, oneness, good or
    beauty – just “me – me – me!” And “the
    common good” – well, that is just another Western Civilization crime unless these
    professional victims are given whatever they want—which, today, might be best
    called “the common goof.” They live
    “reparation” fantasies – undeserved, unearned, unfair and unjust! For victimhood, Imperialism is anything not
    in agreement with the sub rosa welfare scheming and
    self-righteous lifestyle and livelihood.

    Bawer’s final chapter, 7, “Is there
    hope?” begins with a reminder that Arthur Schlessinger Jr. in 1998, was
    confident that universities would not impose victimhood on its students. Alas, he was wrong except in what he called
    it: “voguish blather.” This last chapter,
    a mandatory re-read, is an uplifting poignant reminder and plea that the Great
    Books of the Western World need promotion by all, especially by educational
    institutions, if humanity is to find salutary life, sacrifice, virtue, love,
    humanity, peace, freedom and acceptance of death. Victimhood offers only loud withdrawal.

    (1.) Samuel A. Nigro, “Universal Sex in Nature
    Statement” Social Justice Review,
    September/October 2002, pp 146-147.

    (2.) Samuel A. Nigro, “Homosexuality: A Disease and for Gays a Cult,” 1994,
    bulletin 45 pages.

    (3.) Samuel A. NIgro, “Why Homosexuality is a
    Disorder”, Social Justice Review,
    May/June 2001, pp70-76.

    • Rock St. Elvis

      An irony – if that’s the right word – is that Bruce Bawer is himself homosexual and an early advocate for “gay marriage.” But he has his limits.

  • Beth

    wake up CATHOLIC parents…http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/

  • Objectivetruth

    Great article, Anne.

    The solution is simple. The bishop of Milwaukee needs to quietly walk over to Marquette and start ripping crucifixes off the walls. Send the president of Marquette an email informing him that his institution has lost its right to be called “Catholic.” This will send a nice message to other Catholic colleges that are committing heresy.

    Pope Benedict XVI wisely stated several “I’d rather have fewer, more faithful Catholics in the world than many unfaithful ones.”

    • Kristyn

      My thoughts exactly. It is a statement on the state of Catholic education today when you see the shockwaves that developed when the archbishop of San Francisco (named for St. Francis of Assisi) had the nerve to suggest that Catholic schools should uphold Catholic teaching ((gasp!)) Now we have Marquette U (named for Fr. Marquette, who came from Catholic France to “impose” his religion on the N. American natives—a true hero of the Faith) discriminating against Catholics. St. Francis and Fr. Marquette, pray for us!

      • Objectivetruth

        I believe there are 227 Catholic colleges in The United States? If the Church needs to remove the Catholic designation from half of them, so be it. 110-120 truly, authentically Catholic colleges living and breathing the teachings of the magisterium is all that is needed.

        • Dr. Timothy J. Williams

          I think the actual number is more like 5 or 6.

          • Steubenville, Christendom, Ave Maria – what else is there?

            • ForChristAlone

              I am delighted that in three months I will be living ‘up the mountain’ from Christendom. I’ll be able to volunteer my time to support their noble effort to educate Catholic youth properly.

            • Objectivetruth

              Thomas Aquainas in California, Wyoming Catholic, Belmont Abbey, Mount Saint Mary’s, Desales, ……

    • Anne Hendershott

      Thank you – and I agree with your suggestion. I will never understand why the bishops have not responded to these scandals. Ex Corde requires them to – Last year the USCCB issued a “ten year progress report” on the implementation of Ex Corde Ecclesiae. It was a ONE page report – without any data – without any evidence – which essentially said “progress is being made”…nothing to see here – we are “dialoging” with the college presidents. The report the bishops issued was Orwellian. Some of the bishops have become part of the problem. The Cardinal Newman Society has been courageously documenting these scandals for years now – and I do not think the bishops ever read them. If they did, they could not continue to ignore them.

      • ForChristAlone

        Let’s begin to get serious about providing names of bishops who are sitting on their hands. Let’s hold our bishops to account.

        • This is going to have to come from the pews. I have dome concern that if a good Bishop took it upon himself to use the informal powers of his office (real leaders understand that their offices convey both formal authority and informal authority) to dispute some CINO academy or to dissuade his Parishioners from attending these academies od apostasy, then they would become magnets for the rebellious.

          • MarcAlcan

            I have some concern that if a good Bishop took it upon himself to use the informal powers of his office (… then they would become magnets for the rebellious.

            Then so be it. He is the Bishop supposed to be leading his flock. The question is, is he going to be shepherd that Ezekiel spoke of – the one who failed to shepherd his sheep properly. Or are there enough shepherds in our midst who are willing to do battle for their sheep?

            • Would it be safe to assume your last question was rhetorical?

          • ForChristAlone

            And this would be good – a sheep and goats sort of thing.

            To quote our dearly beloved Pope in Rome: “I would prefer a church that gets out, into the streets and has accidents a thousand time more than a church that is closed in on itself.”

            • AugustineThomas

              Yea, a BergoglioChurch that loses millions of souls out their mixin it up, bein “nice” and havin good leftist “fun”! Anything but being some type of “radical traditionalist” who takes the Faith as it’s always been taught seriously!

          • AugustineThomas

            You know bishops used to risk death by martyrdom to defend the Faith and still do in some countries?

        • Anne Hendershott

          Our newest book, Renewal: How a New Generation of Priests and Bishops are Revitalizing the Church, names names – mostly of the courageous ones but we do identify some of the problems.

          • Paddy

            O’Mally, Dolan and Wuerl are rather useless cupcake eaters.

            • AugustineThomas

              Gomez never makes a peep about LMU in Los Angeles. (Though it would be impossible for him to be worse than his predecessor.)

      • St JD George

        Anne, please tell me that the Franciscan jewel of Steubenville isn’t in danger of falling prey to this intellectual and spiritual nonsense anytime soon … I mean ever.

        • Anne Hendershott

          Never!! It is the reason I am there now. Franciscan is one of the great ones. I feel very blessed because I know how bad things are elsewhere

          • St JD George

            I know Anne, fight the good fight to keep that tradition alive. It is a jewel.

          • Dr. Timothy J. Williams

            Generally, I agree. However, some worrisome secular tendencies in education have made serious inroads at Franciscan, and the faculty appears powerless to avert or slow the process. Examples: the “assessment culture,” (the “outcomes based” education that has wrecked our public school system); student evaluations of faculty (i.e. customer satisfaction surveys); the emphasis on “peer-reviewed” publications (when our “peers” are defined as secular academics); the exponential growth of administration (the sort of thing John Senior used to call “death by administration”). And of course, there is the extreme debt burden of our graduates. But as regards moral standards and moral clarity of teaching, we are indeed holding to the course charted by Ex Corde Ecclesiae.

            • St JD George

              Why do you think that is? Are the administrators under pressure to conform to the standards of the secular world, i.e. through the back channels required to maintain accreditation? Are their federal dollars involved that helps sustain the institution with strings attached? I can imagine a lot of things, but I don’t know, and I haven’t researched.

              • Dr. Timothy J. Williams

                To answer your question: Yes.

                • St JD George

                  How else could it. Very cunning it is to lead one into thinking that they are making a wise decision, incrementally not alarmingly of course, and with false choices and premises so that one ultimately concludes without even being aware of the manipulation that it is for their own good. You will be made to conform, resistance is futile. Not to be too Orwellian as that would be “crazy talk”, but you do know (kidding) education is the vanguard institution to ensure conscription of the masses to “get with the program”. Every authoritative regime in the history of man has sought to control its subjects with it. It could be seen as a gift to lead one to a deeper relationship with Christ, or it could be done to lead one … astray. I’m not sure that I believe all that I write, a lot of it just venting out of frustration, but I do believe that we are living in a particularly interesting period of history.

      • Jim H.

        Sad to say that the Jesuits, once the staunchest defenders of the faith, have allowed their institutions to have become distorted by relativism and progressive bullies. There are 27 such other Jesuit institutions in North America which probably suffer from the same loss of Catholic identity.

        • Don’t confuse Catholic and Jesuit.

          Whenever my Jesuit alma mater solicits money (frequently, and against my wishes and without any prior contribution that might encourage them), their glossy magazines and fundraising use the word Jesuit “a lot”, but I don’t recall much reference to the Catholic Church.

      • I’ve come to understand that local ordinaries have limited power in influencing what happens at these institutions; it is the provincials of the sponsoring religious orders (the Jesuits in this instance) that need to be held to account, at least initially. Failing that, I pray for Magisterial intervention (Pope Francis was a Jesuit provincial). Although such an action might appear contrary to Rome’s plans to decentralize ecclesial authority—with respect to the unravelling of Catholicism within Jesuit education specifically—perhaps the Vatican could wield the authority that it brought to the Legion of Christ crisis?

      • GregK

        Episcopal Conferences have done very little to promote the Church’s Catholic identity and her all-important evangelizing mission, and much to ape the ideologies of the prevailing culture. Here in Australia, much like in the USA, Catholic education has been a disaster and has been one of the greatest contributors to the demise of the faith and the decline in Mass attendances in country dioceses. For over 10 years now, Into the Deep at stoneswillshout.com/wp has been a lone voice calling bishops to account. You can read articles I have written in this month’s issue on page 10, and in last month’s issue on page 7.

        • “Episcopal Conferences have done very little to promote the Church’s Catholic identity and her all-important evangelizing mission, and much to ape the ideologies of the prevailing culture.”

          Amen! These extra ecclesial bureaucracies should be disbanded, they are wasteful and counterproductive extravagances that do exactly as you have written. I would like to retain and use this observation, if you do not mind.

          • ForChristAlone

            The reason I do not give a dime to my parish. Some of it would eventually trickle down to the diocese and from there to the USCCB. Ain’t gonna happen. I’ll make a donation to the LSOTP instead.

          • GregK

            Not at all DE-173, I’ll be delighted. In the article I wrote in Into the Deep on page 10, which can be found at stoneswillshout.com/wp, I asserted that if Rome is serious about saving the shipwreck the Church is fast becoming in the West, then it is high time it dissolve all episcopal conferences and revert to the traditional way of communicating and dealing with local bishops individually before Vatican II.

            • Glenn M. Ricketts

              Won’t EVER happen. The VII notion of “collegiality” stands immovably in the path, and the episcopal conferences have been the chief means of circling the wagons and protecting the corruption and incompetence of the many very bad bishops that we have. The hills will crumble before the episcopal conferences are abolished.

      • Paddy

        Our bishops are weak. many of them had some involvement in the pedophile scandals over the last half century or are compromised, morally, in more profound ways. They’re eh…not “Catholic” but are invariably good Leftist pols. The gals they appoint in every parish are wackjob socialists, too. Sometimes, they’re just VERY angry women. Who knows why?

    • Guest

      I completely agree!! The only time many of these “Catholic” Universities want to wave the flag is when someone from some other Progressive Group cries foul!! They then run to cover themselves in the Catholic Colors. They need to decide are they Catholic or not? By their actions they are not!! When will the Bishops say enough is enough?

    • Vinny

      BIshops? What we need is the National Labor Relations Board, believe it or not.

      “Noting that Manhattan College’s own admission brochure does not even include any reference to the Catholic Church or Catholicism, the NLRB issued a 26-page report which concluded that the college cannot claim a religious affiliation in an effort to prevent the unionization of its employees.”

      “A similar NLRB ruling at Seattle University, led Seattle’s provost, Isiaah Crawford, to argue that the labor board acted inappropriately in concluding that Seattle “lacked substantial religious character.”

      • SK

        Well, while it might be nice to have allies in the cleansing of Catholic schools, I don’t think we want non-Catholics determining the Catholicity of a school, or any organization or individual for that matter. To take or act on the opinions and determinations of others is a dangerous precedent. Look at the HHS mandate nonsense. The government determined that the Little Sisters of the Poor are not Catholic enough to be exempt from the mandate. We can only hope that the Sisters win their day in court. That determination is, ultimately, up to the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. The faithful should have persistent recourse to their Shepherds, and, more importantly, prayer and fasting.

        It is wonderful that there are these “hold-outs” at schools such as Marquette. They are needed everywhere and are fighting the good fight. Should they fire this brave soul, however, I am sure there are other authentically Catholic schools or organizations who would be more than happy to have him.

        • “The government determined that the Little Sisters of the Poor are not Catholic enough to be exempt from the mandate. ”

          Funny how playing with fire often burns houses down. Somehow, many people simply can’t fathom that politician’s ambitions are boundless and disordered and that they are not instruments of charity or justice.

          • SK

            I don’t know what you mean. I also don’t know what you mean when you claim that the Little Sisters of the Poor have “played with fire”. The reason they were deemed “not religious enough” is because they, in accordance with Catholic Church teaching, care for the elderly poor of ALL faiths. They also employ non-Catholics. They have neither struck any deals nor supported any particular candidate or politician. To blame the Little Sisters of the Poor for the injustice that is now taking place is ignorant.

            • Let me clarify. It wasn’t the LSOP who played with fire, it is

    • Dr. Timothy J. Williams

      If you are waiting for an American Catholic bishop to behave like a Catholic, you are in for a very long wait.

      • Objectivetruth

        Sometimes…..a man can still hope……!

      • MarcAlcan

        Well, there’s Chaput, Cordelione, Burke.

    • Glenn M. Ricketts

      Are there any crucifixes left on the walls at Marquette?

      • St JD George

        Archival microfiche, in the basement of the admin building (guessing).

        • Glenn M. Ricketts

          Better get ’em out of there as well – it could be offensive to unbelievers or non-Catholics if they happen to attend Marquette. Can’t too sensitive, you know.

          • St JD George

            Is this the price of prostitution for accepting federal secular dollars with strings attached, or the cost of employing educators who can’t spell Catholic or Christian, or both?

            • Glenn M. Ricketts

              All of the above, especially with Catholics who seem eager to sell out.

              • St JD George

                In a story all to familiar across the country, the parish I belong to now used to have a K-12 school and a few years ago finally closed its doors. Our current Pastor presided over that decision and I know it was not a popular one (before my time). The reality was that it had been hemorrhaging money for years with declining attendance and tuition to support. Would it have been better to try and boost enrollment by stripping itself of it’s Catholic identity? I don’t think even that would have mattered as it is in a impoverished area where folks don’t have a lot of discretionary income. I’m certain that this is actually part of the Feds plan to not allow school choice by forcing folks tax dollars to subsidize public schools and teacher unions knowing most won’t afford an alternative brick-and-mortar escape. Thank God for the ever growing home school movement to fill the void and giving loving, caring parents an alternative to provide for their children’s spiritual development and needs.
                I suspect this is the case for many of these once vanguard institutions over time, to continue operations they’ve accepted blood money which came with secular strings and looked the other way. Better to fill the class rooms with empty souls starving for the truth and not feed them, or to have fewer quality institutions who are doing God’s work to save souls and educate?
                I have a good friend of mine who is Christian but not Catholic that attended Gonzaga for his undergrad and Loyola for his Masters and he told me he never once recognized that either were Catholic while on campus. At the time (years ago) I thought he must have been stretching the truth a little. Now I know better.

                • Glenn M. Ricketts

                  I taught second grade CCD for 15 years, followed by our parish’s RCIA program. I couldn’t believe the things that I was obliged to teach to the “cradle Catholic” parents of my second graders. They drew almost a blank on the second grade catechism. Same for folks who attended RCIA because the needed a sacrament, usually confirmation. Needless to say, they wouldn’t find those voids filled at Marquette, would they?

            • A lot of this is self-imposed fealty to the dictates of diversity, where eccentric and capricious excess is nurtured and prized.

              The whole diversity thing is full of contradiction.

              I once sat through a diversity class, where the indoctrinators, once the daughter of a divorced and remarried Catholic, the other herself a divorced and remarried Catholic, provided us a lecture on the evils of generalization, and provided us further instruction on how Christians and Catholics in particular needed to be on guard against this, as a group they had unique susceptibility to being judgmental.

              This was 20 years ago, I can just imagine what’s being shoved down the throats of the employees of that insurance company now.

              • St JD George

                On steroids, or a bacteria colony in a Petri dish wish suddenly experienced explosive growth in the fertile, ideal environmental conditions the past 6 years.
                Given your penchant for recognizing phobias I though you might particularly appreciate the twist on this one from Col. Peters:
                http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/624983

                • I remain convinced that Obama’s Christianity is nominal only and a was a political expedient. It just so happened that Jeremiah Wright sounded like his mentor Frank Marshall Davis, so he could go along with it. His real religions are collectivism and statism, and if he has any theistic affinity, it is with the crescent, not the Cross.

                  Of course he could be a master practitioner of Taquiyya and Kitman.

                  • St JD George

                    You know what is in a mans heart not by his words, but by his deeds and his associations.

                  • ForChristAlone

                    I am convinced that he’s still pining for the father who abandoned him who was Muslim. This man is seriously flawed characterologically. But it’s not surprising that he was elected by a populace similarly flawed in character and who have also grown up fatherless.

                  • St JD George

                    You don’t set to fundamentally transform that which you love. Between that, his apology tour, his closest associations, and his unapologetic adoration of the religion of peace tells me all I need to know about where his heart and allegiances do not lie. He does apparently like the perks of the office though and is unabashedly unafraid to use them, particularly his big taxi cab.

    • John O’Neill

      God bless Benedict XVI; for many he is still our pope during this time of sede vacante.

    • Anne Hendershott

      I would love to see that. The whole idea of “ripping crucifixes off the walls” would certainly send the message that needs to be sent to all of the Catholic-in-name-only institutions

      • It would be better that they be torn down by Bishops exercising their authority than covered by factotums of the state, bowing to the wishes of a politician.

        So Marquette’s in the Milwaukee diocese, huh? Hmmm.. wasn’t that Rembert’s back yard?

        • ForChristAlone

          Has he re-paid the $400,000 he stole from the diocese in hush money? I hear the list of bishops roundly denouncing his episcopal conduct is growing.

          Justice in the Catholic Church these days is when Weakland gets a free pass for homosexual behavior and stealing from the Church and Cardinal Burke gets canned for what – being too orthodox?

          • Last I heard, Rembert was still a ward of the Diocese. There should be a way to kick his behind to the curve. Let him live off any Social Security he might be entitled and if that’s not enough, he can beg.

      • Objectivetruth

        The whole idea of a crucifix hanging high on a wall is to remind us that Christ suffered and died greatly for our sins. That sin is no small deal, and we are to constantly be reminded by the prescence of the Corpus Christi of what it took for us to regain eternal life. A crucifix is the strongest of symbols and sacramentals. For someone in anyway to justify the sin of sodomy in front of a classroom with a crucifix has openly mocked Christ’s great sacrifice and is leading His flock over a cliff. If such open disrespect is allowed, why even have a crucifix on the wall?

    • Thomas J. Hennigan

      Unfortunately bishops these days are not wiling to govern. For the most part they want to avoid trouble. What accountability is there for bishops?nNone or not much. If bishops don’t act, then move up the scale to Rome. If the Congregation for Bishops gets thousands of complaints against such bishops, it cannot simply ignore it. This campaign could take place especially before bishops’ ad limina visit to Rome. If these so called Catholic colleges are stripped of the “catholic” part of their title, it is likely that donations will be affected, so that they can also be hit where it hurts, the pocketbook.

      • St JD George

        Easier to navigate the safe waters and administrate rather than rock the barque. Somewhat human nature I suppose, but not a particularly attractive quality in a spiritual leader, or leader of any kind.
        I’m sure if the school heard from the faithful in large numbers including ceasing charitable donations it would drive their resentment underground, and they would less bold to retaliate against those who are not ashamed to live and teach their faith at a school that is supposed to celebrate it.

    • Fargo106

      And why does Marquette care? What benefit do they actually get form calling themselves Catholic? I think they’d probably do just fine w/o being identified as Catholic… most of the kids that go there probably don’t care; those that do are likely a small minority. I can’t see any financial or reputational damage that would be incurred by “stripping” them of their right to call themselves Catholic… it’s already a hollow designation in the minds of most.

    • Lucretius

      My brother Objectivetruth,

      Your suggestion is the wrong way to approach this problem. In fact, what you are jumping to is the exact same position of the professor, but instead of the liberal orthodoxy suppressing heresy, the Catholics are. No, at an university we should be having these discussions and debates. Without them how can a place be called Intellectual? Before we strip Marquette of the label ” Catholic,” we should strip it of its label of “university.”

      The classroom and halls of a college are for “ruthless” intellectual thinking and debate. If I wanted to tell a homosexual how much I value him, I would take him to an amusement park, not an old classroom. It is a sign of a stable and great intellect to be able to contemplate and hear out multiple sides of a position without feeling uneasy and offended (of course, name calling is just thoughtless garbage). Back then, Nazis could come and give speeches on campuses (even if they would be debated into the ground afterward). Now only those promoting the progressive (to what standard?) orthodoxy can give such talks. If the other side is allowed, it’s only if the speaker is completely hopeless when defending a position (like having a fundamentalist defend Christianity, instead of a Peter Kreeft).

      The Age of Reason started in the Age of Faith, and ended at the so called “Enlightenment” with the first head that went up on a pike in the Bastille.

      Christi pax,

      Lucretius

  • thomistica

    Imagine other implications. Not just discussion of abortion should be disallowed on these criteria (inducement of discomfort), but also discussion of just war theory, lest there be either a conscientious objector, or a war veteran, in the class. And so too any number of other topics. A student’s parents might be a stock broker, or a student might have deeply felt difficulties with market based economies, so there goes discussion of market-based economies. So too discussion of animal rights, climate science, and — lo — even discussion of due process in academic settings. Discussion of any of these topics is potentially so…uncomfortable, for someone. What next: supply redacted copies of philosophical classics, on the basis that they contain objectionable ideas? Do surveys at the outset of a class to arrive at a common consensus as what at least one student might find objectionable? Do surveys of faculty, tuition-paying parents of students, or alumni, as well? And so on.

  • thomistica

    It should not be too difficult to find examples of the reverse sort of discrimination. Much as it was discovered, vis-a-vis the “Notre Dame 88” (individuals facing charges for protest at ND), that ND had selectively discriminated in the permissions it gave to groups to protest on campus. This is a very effective counter-strategy in these sorts of cases.

    • Guest

      Watching this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iiz4tfjSuPc
      of Fr. Weslin being arrested at ND still makes me sob, not just for him, but for Our Lady. He was arrested just across from the cemetery, and under the gaze of Mary on the Dome. Something at ND died that day. There are a few true Catholics still there fighting the good fight–unfortunately they are not in the upper echelons of the administration.

      It would have been one thing if the president of the univ was cordial and respectful of the office, hence Obama, but he acted like a 12 y.o. girl at a Justin Bieber concert. Pathetic.

      What is really disheartening is to this day, when someone asks what year my child graduated (usually the first question after I say “blah blah degree from ND”) is waiting for the “oh, that’s the year…” and yup, just as then, for the students and their families, all the focus on the graduates’ and their families hard work and sacrifice is lost.

  • GG

    ‘Abbate responded: “Well, actually you don’t have a right in this class …
    to make homophobic comments, racist comments, sexist comments…. This is
    about restricting rights and liberties of individuals … and just as I
    would take offense if women cannot serve in XYZ positions because that
    is a sexist comment…. You can have whatever opinions you want but I can
    tell you right now, in this class homophobic comments, racist comments
    and sexist comments will not be tolerated. If you don’t like that you
    are more than free to drop this class.”’

    This is not only about the Catholic understanding, but about right reason. The professor reveals a fascist understanding of fairness. Any so-called offense must be based in reason not simply a stupid feeling or emotion.

    These liberal fascists only want indoctrination. Authentic thinking is not allowed.

    • Objectivetruth

      I remember someone commenting on another Crisis article that these fascist educators at pseudo Catholic colleges weren’t there to “enhance Catholic doctrine, but to erase it.” So. True.

      • GG

        In addition to the Catholic perspective here I think the fact that the instructor did not even attempt to form a coherent argument on the topic is distressing. Instead of teaching critical thinking and logic we have an educator whose chief concern is protecting other ideologues from being offended. That is not education in any authentic way. That is superficial reasoning that we would expect from TV shows not the academy.

        • Objectivetruth

          A copy of the Catechism should be on the desk of every classroom at a Catholic college. Any dispute, the instructor should grab the book and say ” well let’s see what the Church has to say about it.”

    • ForChristAlone

      Abbate is guilty of hate speech. Can her immediately.

      • GG

        I thought universities were about seeking the truth? Apparently, you can seek it as long as what you seek is liberal, relativistic, and heterophobic.

      • Crisiseditor

        I believe she transferred to the University of Colorado, which is ideologically more to her liking. She is also seeking to distance herself from public opposition to her behavior at Marquette.

        • ForChristAlone

          And we do know that marijuana is freely available and legal there.

          • Well, in a decent world she would be stoned. (can’t wait to see how many panties get in a knot over that).

  • licjjs

    Apart from whether it is a Catholic point or not, if this is supposed to be a Philosophy class, Professor Abbate is being seriously unprofessional – and very unphilosophic. Is she saying that her interpretation of Rawls is the only one? Philosophy positions are for debate and she should be teaching students how to pick holes in Rawls and every other philosopher who puts his ideas out there, for the sake of clarity of thought and, eventually, coming to the truth. Points for discussion should even include points like, for example: ‘Would it be better for society if married women stayed at home and looked after their children?’ or ‘If the good of the child is uppermost in decisions regarding adoption, should two gay men or two lesbians be allowed to adopt on the basis that THEY deserve equal rights?’ or ‘Would polygamy benefit society and women within that society?’ or ‘Is contraception the ultimate sign of a completely hedonistic culture? If not why not? If so, Why?’ If one is not clear about the principles on which one’s opinion is based and is too afraid to have those principles challenged and tested by lively discussion, the last place one should be is a Philosophy class or seminar. I had a class of 12 year olds who debated a wide range of matters every week in class, two being chosen to defend the motion and two against, irrespective of which side they actually agreed with.

    Leaving this particular topic just now and moving to another example that is often the subject of hotly debated ethics seminars: what is her attitude to Peter Singer’s logic that infanticide is morally acceptable in some cases, this position flowing directly from approval of abortion based on the non-personhood of the foetus, the argument’s being that a baby is not a person until accepted by the mother and society whether that baby is in the womb or not? Is she ready to defend THIS position? If not why not? After all, there may be some fragile young people in her class who have had an abortion and might be hurt if she starts arguing against it. How will she get round Singer’s (and other’s) position if this is the case?

    • Catholic pilgrim

      Socrates the Ancient Greek philosopher would be so disappointed on this so-called “philosophy professor” Miss Abbate. Instead of promoting & engaging in dialogue, discussion, & questioning, this lady promotes oppressive, intolerant thinking. Why is she even teaching at a Catholic university?

      • We can safely assume she’s not employable in something productive.

    • Michael S.

      “….the arguments being that a baby is not a person until accepted by the mother and society…” Hmm. When ISIS reportedly executed children for not rejecting their faith in Jesus, at least they were given a choice. Peter Singer would not allow that child the opportunity to choose. Hence, ISIS is for choice while Singer is not….

  • samnigromd

    This is such victimhood manipulation–totally offensive to honest people not needing to hide or overcompensate for homophobia, theophobia or whatever. Abbate must have plenty to hide to allow herself to be so protective of objective error, disease, and the unnatural–which can be discussed without depersonalizing…unless guilt evokes an emotional sense of being degraded.

    VICTIMISIM — THE LAST “ISM”

    By Samuel A. Nigro

    Date:February 2001

    Victimism
    — the self promotion of victimhood by self serving propaganda against a
    non-guilty, falsely accused “perpetrator” or “alleged
    victimizer” (victimor).

    Victimist — a promoter of victimism; one who creates a
    “false perpetrator” (victimor) and a “false victim”
    (victimee).

    Victimee — One who falsely claims to be a victim.

    Victimor — One who is falsely accused of being a victimizer
    or a perpetrator.

    Victimizer — One who is actually guilty of victimizing another.

    Victimism is feigning the victim role
    with a purpose of manipulating others for selfish gain. Victimism is a manifestation of hate for
    others with avoidance of genuine dialogue because victimists monopolize
    communication by a sob sister whining and “poor me” exaltation which
    unjustly scapegoats, degrades and dehumanizes victimors. Victimism demeans the victimists and
    victimees into a bizarre form of self admitted inferiority. Victimism impedes community participation and
    not only blocks justice but itself is a hate crime of the worst sort because it
    is based on impudence and false accusations.
    Victimism is demagoguery against equal treatment and trust. It incites hate and violence. Victimism actually does what it accuses
    others of having done.

    Victimism
    cannot exist without complete reliance on the press and media’s need for shock,
    attention-seeking and hypnotizing themes to entrap people. The press and media rely on hoaxes rather
    than truth, and victimism is almost always a hoax. By hoax after hoax, the press and media are a
    modernist, skeptical and relativist curse on mankind especially when
    publicizing victimism.

    Victimism
    is a natural result of the press and media fundamentally being modernism in
    action. Thus, victimism and the
    press and media are anti-common good, anti-peace, anti-justice, anti-dignity,
    fake messianism, gnostic apparati, intellectual play schools for adults,
    perpetual kindergartens, and sources of incitement and phrase
    salesmanship. Victimism is to
    participate in the press and media’s continuous replay of Orson Well’s
    “Invasion of the Martians.”
    Victimism, like the press and media, is anti-transcendental in that it
    is primarily self aggrandizement uninterested in truth, oneness, good or
    beauty. Victimism and the press and
    media are hand and glove.

    Victimists
    use scare tactics, indoctrination, and rely on the infernal suggestibility of
    people. By promoting a “mortal
    menace” theme so ruthlessly, victimism itself is a mortal menace to
    community well being. Victimists
    conduct hate propaganda and hate campaigns with demagogic rhetoric. They create a whirlwind of hatred always
    justified by pompous words that do not stand the test of truth or time. Victimists fundamentally have a paranoid fear
    of the power of others (victimors) which converts into a persecutory theme to
    maintain their status as leaders of the victimees. Victimists concede nothing to their country
    or America except as an inflammatory torch for their own form of subcultural
    exclusive quasinationalistic victimism.
    Victimists cannot be talked out of hate but always have a monotonous
    series of narratives to justify their unreliable and fragmented perception of
    reality and prejudiced rejection of victimors.
    They are fundamentally indecent as they carry a spirit of hate by their
    slack thinking, misperceiving and miscalculating. They would spit in your salad and brag about
    it. Basically, victimists do not want
    wars, but they cannot allow peace because they are organized to create a
    conflict in which no quarter can be given because power is lost if they
    collaborate and accept a genuine compromise where all parties win.

    Victimees
    love to be hated because it enables them to claim special privileges including
    the right to hate the victimors.
    Carefully coached by victimists, victimees embrace double standards and
    can see their side only. Collectively,
    victimees form a support group rightfully called Justice Anonymous. Victimees claim special privilege and rely on
    a latent weariness of victimors such that the latter do not and cannot
    vigorously combat press and media hoaxes (The press and media will not be fair
    for victimors). And victimors, aware of
    their basic innocence, often feel no strong need to speak up against the
    manipulations and accusations of the victimists.

    EXAMPLES

    1. Homosexuals are prime users of
    victimism. An example is the gross
    exaggeration of the abuse of homosexuals by the Nazis in World War II. Deplorably, about five thousand homosexuals
    were murdered by the Nazis. But this
    does not diminish the fact that many more homosexuals were supporters of
    Hitler. Less than 10% of Hitler’s
    originating group in power had normal sexual orientation. They almost all had been evaluated by the
    Berlin Sex Research Institute which was the first place Hitler’s comrades
    burned in the celebrated “burning of books.” What they actually burned were their own
    discrediting sex history records.
    Furthermore, homosexuals typically rely on self inflated indignation and
    self proclaimed “They hate us.”
    Actually, the entire “homophobia” flim-flam is a method of
    establishing victimee status. Basically,
    homosexuals use victimism because if they are not aggressive, they will be
    aware of their sickness.

    2. Jews are another example of those who
    use victimism, especially those Jews who were so embarrassingly compliant with
    the Nazis in World War II. Their
    victimism is most prominent in making Pope Pius XII and Catholics to be
    victimors as if the Pope and the Church were not the most outstanding helpers
    of Jews in World War II. The Holocaust
    was real, but because of victimism, it is unrecognizable from what it really
    was in 1945 and before. As Hannah Arendt
    wrote in 1963 after witnessing the trial of Adolf Eichmann detailing the
    Holocaust:

    To a Jew, this role of Jewish leaders in the
    destruction of their own people is undoubtedly the darkest chapter of
    the whole dark story. (Emphasis added).

    Arendt further indicates that almost
    half of Jews would not have been killed by the Nazis if they had not followed
    the Jewish leaders. Victimism is why the
    Jewish community condemns Pope Pius XII and everyone but themselves for the
    Holocaust. Basically, Jews must use
    victimism because if they are not accusatory, they will be aware of their own
    cowardice and complicity.

    3. Abortionists (Anyone who is for
    abortion is an “abortionist”) also use victimism especially in
    comparing themselves to members of Right-to-Life. The facts are that abortionists’ violence
    directed toward Right-to-Lifers far exceeds Right-to-Life violence against
    abortionists. The use of RICO
    (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) against Right-to-Lifers
    is an example of victimism. Legislation
    which punishes only violent abortion protestors and not violent abortion
    promoters is blatant victimism.
    (Abortion related legislation must be neutral and applicable to
    both abortionists and Right-to-Lifers).
    Basically, abortionists must use victimism because if not vicious, they
    will become aware of their guilt.

    4. Victimism by blacks should be called
    “blackism”. “Blacks”
    are supreme users of victimism. A recent
    example is the claim for “reparations” for slavery in the United
    States. Of course from the determined
    reparation amount should be deducted the costs of transfer, upkeep,
    maintenance, training, education, and whatever “blacks” have
    received; the cost of all benefits from all support systems including the War
    on Poverty and other welfare programs; the cost of all litigation on their behalf;
    the cost of the entire Civil War caused by their presence including
    compensation to all families of men who died in that effort to overthrow
    slavery; the value of all affirmative action efforts including compensation to
    those non-blacks discriminated against; penalties for failure to apply oneself
    sufficiently to develop themselves; the costs of all benefits from being in the
    United States which have not been available in Africa; and interest payments on
    it all. Actually, a more valid case can
    be made that reparations ought to be made for the liberal Democratic Party’s
    welfare programs which have destroyed Negro genuine pro-family subculture since
    1960. Fundamentally, victimists’ claim
    for reparations means that “blacks” are dissatisfied about being in
    the United States. Therefore, a more
    legitimate question is, “What is it worth to have been born in the United
    States?” Basically, Negro Americans
    demanding reparations must prove that they would not be destitute or dead if
    their ancestors had been left in Africa. And anyone who accepts reparations
    must leave the United States upon payment and go back to wherever they think
    they would have been better off had they been left there instead of brought to
    the United States. For the few who
    remain, there can no longer be any sort of affirmative action or special
    support programs. One has to be a fool
    not to realize that Negros, among all others, are better off in the United
    States than anywhere else with few exceptions.
    One must also realize that few ethnic groups in America have not been
    mistreated in their early arrival. To
    re-embrace the mistreatment of one’s ancestors is to wilfully imitate them
    which does not justify reparation, but pity.

    An
    analysis of blackism as victimism is justified:

    First
    of all, few people are really “black” just as few people are really
    “white.” Accuracy demands that
    “black” not be used anymore than “white” be used as
    motivation or as victimism theme.

    Second,
    the history of the use of “black” is a contemporary phenomenon as is
    the verbicide of “Negro” over the past 30 years. “Black” began based on anger,
    especially by Stokely Charmichael as echoed by James Baldwin. Yet James Baldwin wrote:

    The Negro has been formed by this nation, for better
    or worse, and does not belong to any other — not to Africa and certainly not
    to Islam.

    Obviously, Afrocentrism is bogus and
    based on a nostalgic wish for something other than being “formed by this
    nation” as per Baldwin. No real
    African would call a Negro American “African” any more than a
    European would call me “Italian”.
    Neither name changes nor clothing changes nor appropriation of another
    place’s customs will make one a member of that other place. “Negro” is correct. “African-American” is, per Baldwin,
    an un-historical victimism attempt to fill a self-created vacuum in one’s
    background, created by removal of “Negro” history.

    Third,
    the use of “black” as a form of victimism is a manipulation
    used by pseudo-leaders of the Elmer Gantry style who never stopped spitting in
    the salads of people whom they are supposed to serve. These leaders basically believe that their
    group cannot meet higher standards. The
    use of the term “black” is part of the victimism ploy consistent with
    the Oxford English Dictionary which states that “black” is not to be
    applied to a person (“blackamoor” is the appropriate word according
    to the OED). “Black” is to be
    a victimee consistent with a melanomaniac’s self-ethnic cleansing of “Negro”. To this is an incredibly offensive to history
    and truth example of the dubbing in of “black” in place of
    “negro” in the audio rebroadcasts of Martin Luther King’s speeches.

    Fourth,
    Negros constitute a specific American ethnic group which ought to be called
    NAOSA — Negro American of Slave Ancestry.
    Therein is plenty of exuberant Negro history where none played or sought
    the victim role. Negro history must
    include the current “black” phase — but only as a phase of temporary
    use to be abandoned as one rejoins fully the American nation which, as Baldwin
    stated, has formed us. Not only
    does the concept of black “exterminate” NAOSA, but it separates,
    fragments and excludes Negros from full participation in their own country by
    victimism.

    Fifth,
    The differences between “black” and “Negro”
    need to be clarified. “Black”
    is a darker arranged melanin pigment; an adjective, qualifier and limiting
    modifier; a wave length in physics dependent upon an observer; a fragmentation
    applicable to non-human and even non-viable objects; a passivity without choice
    except by an external mover; and a static neutrality without ascending
    potential. In contrast, “Negro” is a genetically darker
    pigmented human being; a noun and substantial entity in existence; a personal
    individual conscious of consciousness capable creature; a member of the human
    species; has the freedom to choose properly; and is potentially able to ascend
    economically, socially and spiritually.
    Indeed, one can be comfortable with one’s ethnic background, whatever it
    is, including NAOSA, but one cannot be comfortable and aware of one’s color
    without being subhuman and totally racist.
    To promote one’s color all the time is racism as well as victimism

    Victimists’
    change of “Negro” to “black” is the ultimate insult to
    those who paid the price and built NAOSA.
    The historical extermination of “Negro” is nothing but a
    transparent manipulation not only to control but to enslave the
    suggestible. “Black” creates
    skepticism and hostility.
    “Black” is the cry of angry, uncompromising people,
    unnecessarily reliving past injuries never to be denied or minimized, who have
    been convinced that “black” (demanding lesser standards and racial
    profiling known as affirmative action) is the best they can do. When used by demagogic leaders, “black”
    is a mesmerizing stimulus to brainwashed subjects inducing unison as if
    conditioned by Pavlov’s dogs.
    “Black” is a key word which induces thoughtless robotile
    pessimistic whining zombies. It has
    served its purpose but decent people will return to a glorious Negro American
    history without promoting victimism.

    Continuing
    “black” leaders promoting victimism are a disgrace to truth,
    history, the people and themselves.
    “Black” leaders have a vested interest in maintaining
    separation from humanity because such separation is the basis for their
    power. “Black” is a recent
    arrival and unworthy of continued use.
    “Black” is either a sign of being fooled and duped, or it is a
    willful effort to isolate the people so they can be manipulated by malignant
    fostering of hatred masquerading as “power”. This is the real tragedy of blackism in that
    blacks are not allowed to integrate in contrast to Negros who were and are full
    human beings in the full human race.
    Whatever, NAOSA are better off here then they ever would have been in
    Africa. Victimism cares little about
    that. “Black” history is forty
    years of self destruction and isolation by victimism — a minstral show of
    fighting self-created ghosts. Instead,
    Negro history must be embraced.
    Basically, “blacks” must use victimism because if not angry,
    they will become aware of higher standards than their pseudo-leaders think they
    can meet.

    SUMMARY

    By
    proclaiming some sort of oppression, victimists themselves are oppressors in
    the most unjustifiable way, because they knowingly and shamelessly are
    contriving to exalt themselves and oppress others who are not deserving of
    such. In a way, victimism is a sign of
    incompetence if not inferiority.
    Claiming to have been crushed, victimists advance themselves by crushing
    others. The Golden Rule has been
    abandoned. Victimism is the fallacy of
    special pleading raised to a level of art form.
    Victimism is a way of bypassing the rules. History is deformed self-servingly and
    oppression is fabricated repeatedly. In
    spite of pompous “tolerance” proclamations, what victimists (and
    liberals) really cannot stand is anyone discussing matters with them
    reasonably, forcefully and convincingly.
    Victimism enables them to be angry instead of being confident, civil or
    decent. Basically, without using
    victimism, they will become aware of their inferiority and their inability to
    embrace freedom equally.

  • pogothe2nd

    Glad to see Anne continuing to speak out against ersatz Catholicism and the against the protection of deviance. Marquette University is and has been a Catholic joke.

    • GG

      Not only a Catholic joke but an intellectual joke as well.

  • ForChristAlone

    To say that the culture of Marquette University is tantamount to Nazism would be an understatement. Germany in the late ’30’s would be able to take lessons from how they operate.
    Whoever is the bishop of this diocese, take note and now remove Marquette’s right to call itself a “Catholic” university. Stand up for the faith.

  • samnigromd

    deleted from my first post…Is Crisis a subsidiary of Marquette U??

    THE GREAT KOOKS OF THE
    WESTERN WORLD

    Book Review of The Victim’s Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing
    of the Liberal Mind by Bruce Bawer, Broadside, 2012, 400pp.

    By Samuel A. Nigro,
    M.D., November 2012

    This book is an astonishing,
    overwhelming description of victimhood as it has taken over the Academy, the
    press and media and our culture. Victimology, perhaps excepting The Prince, excludes the “great books of the Western
    World” replaced by the “great kooks,” all named in the book as founders of a
    cultural sewer of victimhood exploiting the innocent who have a civil
    conscience enough to be fooled into spurious “guilt” and willingness to offer undeserved
    sympathy.

    Bruce
    Bawer powerfully describes the victimhood process for women’s studies, black
    studies, queer studies, and Chicano studies.
    Fascinating are his first hand participation in each group and he gives
    witness to who, what, where and when. I
    will try to give my understanding of Bawer’s experiences and findings, but this
    book is a knowledge filling asset for every library.

    Each
    study group’s existence is based on publicizing “victims,” and, if none can be
    found, then victims must be fabricated and created. Otherwise, these groups would have no reason
    to exist. Victim studies are a
    stagnating, imprisoning process for both teachers and students.

    Victimology
    is done by sanctimonious, poor-me, whimpering, whining, moaning, groaning, cry-baby,
    sob-sister, how-dare-you routines, which are so inferiority proving, it is
    embarrassing. Relevance is created by
    moaning grandiose narcissism which prevents growth, responsibility and
    independence. The need to fabricate about historical matters
    is blatant proof of the fundamental inferiority of these groups—If Truth is not
    allowed, what other word applies except, “inferior”? The process is selfish, uncivil,
    pseudo-intellectual dead-ended perseveration of psycho-social waste. It is really un-American in that, “From many,
    one” is anathema, having been replaced by “Diversity, me! me! me!” (Totally
    overlooked is that people are still more
    alike than different even as they proclaim their simple differences). But professional
    victims basically refuse to join the productive human race when crackpot
    hustling, pseudo-academic gobbledygook and begging for the common good enable full
    throttle entitlement schemes, as they unwittingly thereby reject duty, honor, reason, responsibility, sanity, self-respect
    and virtue.

    Victimhood
    is a grandiose contest of who has suffered the most and “how hurt I have been”
    because of “plights” of being “a woman”, a “black”, “sexually confused,” or
    “Chicana/Chicano (both genders so as not to discriminate against whining
    Hispanic women).” The chapter titles
    are worthy of mention: “Gilligan’s Island—Women’
    Studies,” “The Ebony Tower—Black Studies,” “Visit to a Queer Planet—Queer
    Studies,” and “The Dream of Aztlan—Chicano Studies.” Each chapter details more than you ever
    wanted to know about professional victims, hatred of white men, general
    misandrism, and the trashing of Western Civilization. They all want to do, to white males
    especially, what they believe has been done to their ancestors, as if two
    wrongs make a right. The kooks and their
    antics responsible for all this are described by Bawer from direct observation. Plenty of jargon is provided to blame
    everyone but themselves for their continued paralysis. And all this will continue as long as these
    “study” groups are funded. Without
    funding, perhaps, these hate-crime filled and victimhood-disabled will have to
    get jobs which create, develop, and produce something beneficial to the common
    good instead of empty sloganeering which reduces freedom and impairs the
    content of one’s character.

    Victimhood is a dead-end
    self-excommunicating and withdrawal from not only a civil culture, but from
    nature itself. It is a selfish, uncivil,
    pseudo-intellectual ruination of its practitioners. It is an empty alternative to real life and against
    embracing Nature and the world. It is a
    dead-ended evolution, and thus not “evolution” at all. It is behavioral pollution (1).

    For
    women, victimhood is the fragmenting of their lives into emotional, anatomical,
    body part dysmorphism or the pervasive identification with a simple body reflex
    always rejecting irrationally the Oxford English Dictionary definitions of “female” (“belonging to the sex which bears
    offspring”) and “male” (“belonging to the sex which performs the fecundating
    function of generation”).

    For
    Blacks, victimhood is the loss of motivation which should be inspired by the American
    fact that slavery was the luckiest thing that ever happened FOR the 35 million
    Blacks in the US who came from the 450,000 slaves brought here…otherwise they
    would be destitute or dead in some miserable African country, in which they
    would not want to live (Of interest is that Muslim countries imported many more
    slaves than the West but have basically no Black descendants—and they were not
    assimilated—If Blacks knew this, they would reject Islam completely).

    For
    Queers, victimhood promotes a “gay cult”—usually most visible at Queer parades
    or wherever their flaming look-at-me “gay seizures” take over. This gay cult prevents the disorder from being
    seen as an illness such that natural and normal functioning do not occur (2, 3). Queer disorders (Bawers is homosexual, and I
    am using his words) are most likely due to the feminizing effects of their
    mothers’ birth control pills taken before their conception or other hormones in
    the food chain. For some, if not all, “normality”
    is possible with civil adjustment and continued embracing of Western
    Civilization as much as possible.

    For Chicanos, victimhood renders
    them to be “invaders” or “conquerors” of America
    rather than immigrants. To want biculturalism
    is totally against E pluribus unum and
    thus tries to defeat all that has made America
    great.

    Overall, for Victimology, there is
    an absolute absence of transcendence – there is no truth, oneness, good or
    beauty – just “me – me – me!” And “the
    common good” – well, that is just another Western Civilization crime unless these
    professional victims are given whatever they want—which, today, might be best
    called “the common goof.” They live
    “reparation” fantasies – undeserved, unearned, unfair and unjust! For victimhood, Imperialism is anything not
    in agreement with the sub rosa welfare scheming and
    self-righteous lifestyle and livelihood.

    Bawer’s final chapter, 7, “Is there
    hope?” begins with a reminder that Arthur Schlessinger Jr. in 1998, was
    confident that universities would not impose victimhood on its students. Alas, he was wrong except in what he called
    it: “voguish blather.” This last chapter,
    a mandatory re-read, is an uplifting poignant reminder and plea that the Great
    Books of the Western World need promotion by all, especially by educational
    institutions, if humanity is to find salutary life, sacrifice, virtue, love,
    humanity, peace, freedom and acceptance of death. Victimhood offers only loud withdrawal.

    (1.) Samuel A. Nigro, “Universal Sex in Nature
    Statement” Social Justice Review,
    September/October 2002, pp 146-147.

    (2.) Samuel A. Nigro, “Homosexuality: A Disease and for Gays a Cult,” 1994,
    bulletin 45 pages.

    (3.) Samuel A. NIgro, “Why Homosexuality is a
    Disorder”, Social Justice Review,
    May/June 2001, pp70-76.

    • Crisiseditor

      You know the rules about posting long articles. I”m merely enforcing them. If you keep up with your stubborn defiance, I’m going to have to take further measures. This is not your personal blog.

      • samnigromd

        Sorry…I did not know of any rules except elementary decency. I did not consider my articles long. I apologize for “defiance”–I remember a couple of petty putdowns by cranky “ad hominums” with nothing else to say, but no “official” directions. I have been writing for years and I just pull something related to your issue hoping to add substance. Your issues are always so timely and provocative, it is hard to ignore my old still fairly cogent thoughts. Sorry again. I will now understand if you delete…your call. I do not know what a blog is.

        • Crisiseditor

          Several readers have recommended that you should get your own website (blog). It’s a good idea. When I removed your articles for the first time, I explained why. Perhaps you didn’t notice.

          • samnigromd

            I just want to add to the “multilect” (the web is more that a “dialect”). I thought my contributions were usually on point in different ways than most have heard–somewhat challenging and offering different new perspectives but totally in concert with Tradition and the Church…I have been recording my thoughts for years about anything and all things…grandiose but I just thought I should record what I knew was a different but transcendent (I hoped) approach. I know that NEW ideas offend some–I have always thought because they resent having to deal with the “new” and the complainers are just having trouble dealing with what they had not considered nor want to consider because it is work…I guess I am just fooling myself. I would like to ask the complainers: “Specificially, what did I write that was objectionable? Where wrong?” To just object because the article take a little time to read is bogus and not to want to multilogue. MY fantasy: maybe they will learn something new! I would like to respond to you intriguing articles…they stimulate often to what and where I have been in the past. I will quite if you say so…but I just as soon would send and you go ahead and block–but for reasons other than petty complainers who have, I suspect, little to add of substance…I will as my computer guy about a blog, but who will log onto “me?”

            • Phil Steinacker

              You really don’t get what is said to you directly.

              You seem to be a prolific writer or commenter. Getting your own blog would be a good idea. If no one came back after viewing your posts, then that might tell you something about how to take a different approach.

              OTOH, it seems from your defensive remarks that you might be piggy-backing on this blog to get your stuff read.

        • Phil Steinacker

          I just saw the one above, and I fail to understand how you could possibly not understand it as long.

  • Tony

    I am almost going to take back every bad thing I’ve said about the AAUP over the years. A slap on the back for them.

    The ironic thing about this is that the whole incident, whether feminists like Ms. Abbate see it or not, takes the form of the Knight Coming to Save the Damsel in Distress. Of course it is quite out of place. If you are embarking on a quest for truth, then your “feelings” are simply not important. If you are entering the lists of intellectual combat, then again you should have no expectation that it will always be a tea party. You can demand that personal insults be kept out of it. You can’t demand that ideas be kept out. “Safe space”? It is the imposition of an etiquette where it does not belong. It assumes that everybody is a weakling….

    • GG

      That is exactly the point. We are all talking about Catholic identity, which is fine, but we should be outraged that this nonsense passes as intellectually valid. How does one always seek the truth if the class leader cannot think well?

    • Anne Hendershott

      I agree – I had let my AAUP membership lapse but will be re-joining. They have been courageous and correct in this case. Finally…

  • Maggie Sullivan

    Another silent cowardly Bishop.

    • Anne Hendershott

      actually not – Archbishop Listecki is very courageous–just not in this case. He has criticized the President for the contraceptive mandate, he criticized Notre Dame for honoring the President. But, For some reason, I have not yet figured out, he won’t criticize the corruption that continues at Marquette.

  • Marquette is no longer a Catholic University. They need to have their charter stripped and their accreditation revoked.

    • Anne Hendershott

      It is so much harder to do that than it seems. Milwaukee has a strong, courageous and holy Archbishop…Archbishop Listecki has publicly rebuked Nancy Pelosi when she was speaker. He condemned President Obama’s appearance at Notre Dame and came out against the health care bill because of funding for abortion. He courageously criticized the contraceptive mandate. He is a great Archbishop–but he has been unable–or perhaps unwilling–to help Marquette recover its Catholic mission. I really do not understand why. There is more to the story of the bishops’ unwillingness to do what it takes to help Catholic families find a truly Catholic education on our campuses–I just do not know what that is (yet)…

      • Beth

        Part of the problem is the mistaken idea that the ultimate purpose of a college education is a job.

        • GG

          Right. We no longer educate people. We credential them. Basically technocrats.

          • I occasionally go to World War II events at museums and marvel at the idea that 75 years ago 18-21 year olds marched off to war, in many cases with complex technical responsibilities, armed only with the minimal training and high school diplomas.
            Despite their lack of degrees, they not only could learn to calculate trajectories and use Norden bomb sights, to fly airplanes and navigate with sextants, they led other soldiers. Today, I think the average college graduate would be lost.

            • ForChristAlone

              For proof of what you say, one only has to read the book “Unbroken” to experience the youth of 75 years ago from the tatooed idiots that currently grace the stage.

      • I do not think it is possible to save these universities and recover their Catholic identity. I think it is time to sell them off and start new institutions.

        • That may happen sooner than you think. Colleges and universities, absent their status as tax-exempt charities (laughable, their earnings inure to a vast professioriall and

      • a guy

        Part of the difficulty may have to do with the fact that Marquette is a religious, not diocesan, college. And, frankly, even some diocesan colleges have successfully cut out their respective bishops though the Land O’Lakes phenomenon of lay-controlled schools. The local ordinary of the diocese probably just does not have jurisdiction. Instead, it would lie with the authorities of the Society of Jesus.

        • Anne Hendershott

          The presiding bishop of a diocese is the “teacher” of that diocese – it does not matter that the school is “Jesuit” – The bishop is the presiding authority. Archbishop Listecki has the authority – he may not have the will.

      • ForChristAlone

        He might just encourage faithful Catholics in his diocese to get an education elsewhere. He is entitled to voice his opinion about what would best serve his flock.

        These bishops ought to begin to get serious about defending the faith. They’re beheading Christians in Libya and have said that Rome is next. Sooner or later they’ll be coming for bishops (of course, that could never happen – unthinkable)

  • I’m glad I sent my children to public universities, where they stood up for the Catholic Faith against those outside, and not to a so called Catholic university where their faith would be crushed by those purportedly inside.

    • Objectivetruth

      Some of the Catholic Neumann Centers at public colleges are excellent.

      • Not in their case, but they lived at home while at college.

        • Living at home I think, is effective prophylaxis against some of the mayhem that occurs in dormitories.

          • Indeed, they were felt like they were the only sane people in a madhouse. And nobody feels pressured by the insane, even in great numbers.

            • I know what it was like during my undergraduate years, I lived in an all male dorm. Mixing the sexes, I’m sure is basically a recipe for sexual indiscretion on massive scale. You certainly did the right thing by insulating them from the morally degrading effects of college bacchanalia.

            • Objectivetruth

              Agree…..in fact, I feel commuter students that live at home have a greater sense of maturity.

  • HartPonder

    Our Holy Father’s admonishment to Notre Dame applies equally to this situation:

    “…In my Exhortation on the Joy of the Gospel, I stressed the missionary dimension of Christian discipleship, which needs to be evident in the lives of individuals and in the workings of each of the Church’s institutions. This commitment to “missionary discipleship” ought to be reflected in a special way in Catholic universities (cf. Evangelii Gaudium, 132-134), which by their very nature are committed to demonstrating the harmony of faith and reason and the relevance of the Christian message for a full and authentically human life. Essential in this regard is the uncompromising witness of Catholic universities to the Church’s moral teaching, and the defense of her freedom, precisely in and through her institutions, to uphold that teaching as authoritatively proclaimed by the magisterium of her pastors. It is my hope that the University of Notre Dame will continue to offer unambiguous testimony to this aspect of its foundational Catholic identity, especially in the face of efforts, from whatever quarter, to dilute that indispensable witness.”

    • Guest

      But pick that apart and what was he really saying? Did he say to uphold ALL of it? Nope.
      And “continue to?”
      Well that’s just saying what you are doing is just dandy and will suffice.

  • AcceptingReality

    The reasons that Catholic truths regarding homosexuality, abortion, marriage, etc. are not discussed in classrooms at Catholic Universities are the same reasons they are rarely mentioned from parish pulpits. God forbid someone should be made uncomfortable in their sin. What a terrible crime that would be. Oh, shoot I mentioned sin…..sorry if anyone was offended by that!

  • HartPonder

    When it seems most is lost, the Holy Spirit brings us faithful examples:

    Archbishop Cordileone summarized the mission of Catholic schools:

    “…In Catholic schools we teach virtue and truth, and we hold out holiness as the Christian vocation of all students. The core mission of the Catholic Church is to provide an integrated education to young men and women, that is, knowledge and virtue combined. The connections between the two are provided by Catholic practice and teachings. We believe this is the formula for outstanding schools, and for forming outstanding disciples of Jesus Christ”

    Residuum revertetur!

  • samharker

    People pay money to attend Marquette? Why?

  • Margaret

    The Archdiocese, for some mysterious reason, is in complete control of Archbishop Weakland. All his people are still in place. Marquette will continue to secularize itself. There will be no accountabily from the archbishop.

  • samnigromd

    In fact, the more you think of Abbate and Marquette as described, the more their suppression of open discussion is violence and injustice to those with the so-called unexpressible thought and ideas. There is also FRAUD to claim the title of “university.” All ideas deserve erudite (I hope) analysis…maybe students will learn something other than imitating their liberal professors…

    Ideas Mean: You
    Are What You Think

    (And Ideas Spiritualize and
    Divinize the World)

    By Samuel A. Nigro, M.D.

    2517 Guilford Road/Cleveland
    Heights, Ohio 44118

    December,
    2007

    Ideas
    and their significance cannot be denied.
    Ideas exist only in man thus proving supernature i.e., escape
    from and control of biology at one extreme and angels trying to return to God
    at the other. Taken for granted because
    everybody has them, ideas get little respect. But this must change because ideas
    confer spirit and give direct evidence for God. Thomas Crean, O.P., in his outstanding book,
    God Is No Delusion, says it best:

    An idea, whatever it is, is
    clearly something simple. It has no
    size, shape or mass. It has no
    constituent parts standing in spatial relation to its other parts. It can serve as a design for something
    complex, but in its own nature it is free of the complexities that it
    represents. How this is so is rather
    mysterious to us. But no one can deny
    that it is so (page 15).

    Ideas are materially based
    in and an accompaniment of the brain which not only has consciousness but
    consciousness-of-consciousness (C2) not present in subhumans. C2 is the body-brain’s
    contribution to the body-soul composite.
    C2 enables the “I” of you and me to be aware of our
    personhood with intellect and will, transcendental capacity and ideas,
    all of which enable our souls to know, love and serve God and His creatures (or
    do otherwise as the case may be). Without
    C2 and its rational capacity for ideas, there is no above- or
    meta- nature and, therefore, nature-only can and must be followed as is the
    case for all subhuman creatures. In
    contrast, by ideas because of C2, humans have a rational
    intellect and free will to be metaphysically above nature, and there is no comparable
    evidence for such in subhumans. By C2,
    ideas reverberate in the human mind with their being of
    spirit. To reflect deeply on ideas
    is to muddle around and conclude that ideas are bewilderingly pure
    spirit with a life of their own by words.
    Again, there is no evidence of C2 being found in subhumans.

    The
    reality of an idea forces the recognition of an incorporeal existence
    neither physical nor measurable by mathematics.
    Ideas prove a different dimension of existence. In fact, ideas make you what you
    are. That is: You are what you think! Such is the spirit of life; and, logically
    consistent with spirit, in the long run you will get what you think and do! That is, in the spirit world, that which one
    allows by rational intellect and free will in one’s mind is that which one is
    and will become (…and, self-determinately, will get!—which is another reason
    to live the transcendental life).

    Ideas
    are God-like images within you. In my
    book Happy Ending, I propose that words are angels, i.e., spirit
    conveying messengers ranging from elementary objects of matter to the
    transcendentals. And, like angels, words
    just pop up into existence in different places without traveling through space;
    the same for ideas too (This happens with some elementary particles in
    physics, and thusly theologians preempted contemporary physicists by at least seven
    centuries!). By angelic words, ideas
    are made real as God-like linkages in the spirit world. Thus the spirit world spreads from the most
    simplistic inanimate object to the mental world and the Divine … from simple
    numbers to angels to The Word.
    Supernatural spiritual transition especially occurs with the appearance
    of word created ideas such as “love,” “person,” the
    transcendentals, the virtues as well as other lesser ideas all of which
    individually and collectively prove a metaphysical different level of existence
    and a metanatural different level of the universe. Ideas mean that there is a spirit
    existence.

    One’s being (total existence including
    spirit) is composed of one’s transcendental actuality—the seven components of
    all created being in Addendum I.
    The transcendentals are one’s actual primary being—all the rest
    is secondary. One’s, and everyone’s, identified
    matter flows on a transcendental conduit of truth, oneness, good, and beauty,
    to and through eternity, perhaps “like music” is a good simile. This eternal permanence of one’s existence is
    the promise of one’s immortal soul whose transcendental permanence is confluent
    with one’s transcendental activity. This
    is one’s spirit life and it has its own genealogy mediated by whatever the
    brain has seen or heard as words, either demonic or angelic (This is why it is
    important to protect at all times all brains from evil—“Garbage in, garbage
    out!”). One’s brain is especially lit up
    and one’s spirit is enhanced by anything which is transcendentally sound, i.e.
    ideas regardless of content as long as true, one, good and beautiful. The transcendentals spiritualize ideas and
    souls, but evil ideas destroy the brain and spirit. One’s soul (like a transcendental sponge) is
    created immortal, but it can be annihilated by anti-transcendental acts, just
    as it can be sustained and enhanced by the images of God within: truth, oneness, good and beauty. And it all happens by ideas and words. Furthermore, the transcendentals are the
    basis for and essence of human subjectivity by which concepts (ideas)
    are warmed with the Image of God, refired with Big Bang warmth most often by
    the Word (Jesus) enabling all spirit computations between you and the Universe.

    To deny spirit is to deny ideas; is to deny
    that words exist; is to deny the impact of words in the world of ideas;
    and is to deny a spirit world wherein anti-being demons (un- or
    anti-transcendental words) try to run amuck while angels (transcendentally
    intact words) promote being. The more
    evil (pursuit of non-being) one does, the more one’s being is
    annihilated. This is because evil is a supernature
    negation of metastability, and evil exists in time for man only. For man, evil is a self-negating entropy
    promoting vacuum. Therefore, the evil
    one does converts one’s self into that black hole of self-annihilating negative
    nothingness caused by oneself and relived by oneself over and over, most
    commonly called hell. Oppositely, one’s
    transcendental acts forge forever in eternity, carrying one’s own being
    with these acts. As beautiful concert
    music, reverberating forever throughout the space of the universe, one’s
    transcendental acts will timelessly carry one to and throughout all eternity
    (This is why we like music!). This is to
    understand finally that “nothing unclean shall enter heaven” because nothing
    evil or sinful will last in eternity.
    This reminds of the ancient dictum of Socrates: “No evil can come to a good man
    either in life or in afterdeath, and God does not neglect him” (I would extend this
    to “No evil can come to a transcendental man (male or female)” and “By
    their words, you shall know them.”).

    The
    significance of ideas cannot be underestimated: You are your ideas — which can
    be non-being especially if one believes television, movies, internet,
    newspapers and celebrities or non-persons (To understand “celebrities” and
    “non-persons,” see Addendum III), and, needless to remind, the promotion of
    non-being is evil (And Original Sin is “suggestibility”—see Addendum IV—promoted
    epidemically by the metastasis of Patronizm—see Addendum V). The simplest understanding is that you are
    promoting your own non-being when you break The Ten Commandments or act
    contrary to Natural Law. But the
    opposite is also true: Your ideas
    can make you the best being filled with truth, oneness, good and beauty in a
    confluence of transcendental existence into the level of spirit. Your ideas make you what you are—and
    you can control them. And, furthermore,
    to repeat and remind: what goes around,
    comes around. Your intellect and free
    will make it that way, and the ideas you put into action will determine
    your eternal spirit existence — In other words, you will get what you do over
    and over in Heaven, Purgatory or hell. In
    your spirit life, what you have been and done will come back to you in a pop-up
    spirit caricature of your ideas and action life with justice mirroring it all giving
    it back to you as well deserved, blessing or punishment! (Dante has it right! And so does Plato with,
    “Virtue is (and will be) its own reward” (and I add: “Evil will be its own punishment—just you wait!”)
    and St. Thomas has it right when he says, “Do good and avoid evil” (or my
    elaboration: “Do transcendentals and
    avoid non-being.”).

    Ideas
    are Fire Forms (Read my poem “Fire Forms”) from the Big Bang mediated by words
    (angels), transcendentalized (refired) by The Word (Jesus) which overcomes
    matter to return being to God. No
    matter how exciting or stimulating or suggested by celebrities, if your ideas
    are not transcendental (true, one, good and beautiful), to hell with them
    because that is where they will take you and you will not like reliving the
    evil you have done turned back on yourself (As Jesus said, “Go and sin no more”…and
    with good reason.).

    Ideas are not merely confined
    to you as an individual but must be socialized because man is by nature a
    community creature optimally relating by dignity, unity, integrity, identity
    and spirituality—five more angelic ideas defined in Addendum II. Without these angels, the transcendentals
    remain selfishly individual.

    In
    closing, not to understand ideas is likely to fail the major personal
    and only “evolution” that matters:
    one’s personal spirit transcendental transition by the ideas one has
    and acts upon. The reader is
    encouraged to study http://www.theogeocalculus.com
    (which I believe is the first ever linkage of elementary physics to the
    transcendentals, to the variables of psychotherapy and mental succor, to the
    sacraments, to the community universals, and to the virtues). The most effective way of transcendentally
    processing ideas and feelings are in Addendum VI—Everyone is on the Cross in
    one way or another at some time or another.

    Any idea, regardless of
    origin, which cannot be interpreted consistent with all the following addenda is
    highly likely to be satanic. Keep true
    to full being and strive to interpret and understand all in the way of ideas.

    ADDENDUM
    I: The Seven Transcendentals: (Full elaboration was first printed in my
    pamphlet, “Male/Female Differences in Natural Law” of 1993 at the First Annual
    Conference of Catholic Social Scientists.)

    1.
    Ens (Latin)—what has existence.

    2.
    Res (Latin)—which is the corporeal body, i.e. the
    confluence of the being with matter completing it. It is the most visible dimension for those in
    the material world. In nature, nature
    rules, neurochemistry and all, on how the being manifests itself in nature. Bodies are needed to relate. They are our physical being by which men
    interact with all. MATTER (male).

    3.
    Aliquid (Latin)—which is the identity or form of
    the being, i.e. the confluence of the being with its essence—for humans,
    not ethnicity, not color, nor anything but humanbeingness—the total embracing
    of humanity for us—in a word “catholic”—all
    for and with all. IDENTITY (female).

    4.
    Verum (Latin)—which is the truth of the being, i.e.
    the confluence of the being with reality and not fantasy—or for us humans, the
    confluence with real life and not television shows, movies, magazines,
    newspapers or figments of imagination from oneself or others. TRUTH (male).

    5.
    Unum (Latin)—which is the oneness of the being, i.e.
    the confluence of the being with itself and all desirability related to it: its
    integrated, whole entirety. ONENESS
    (female).

    6.
    Bonum (Latin)—which is the good of the being, i.e.
    the confluence of the being with proper function in nature, or for mental
    beings, with proper choice in Natural Law (or Rational Environmentalism). GOOD (male).

    7.
    Bella (Italian…preferred by the author to the Latin
    “pulchritude” for multicultural reasons and the economy of two syllables)—which
    is the beauty of the being, i.e. its confluence with ascendancy or the
    “bringing out the best of itself and all around it. “ BEAUTY (female).

    Transcendental
    maleness (tm or “transcendentals”) is an activating centrifugal outer-space
    seeking, sacrifice style of: res (a
    matter organizing, procreative seeking, fathering, corporeal principle); verum
    (a truth enhancing, social orienting, reality principle); and bonum (a
    good promoting, work succeeding, choice principle).

    Transcendental
    femaleness (tf or “immanentals”) is life-giving, centripetal inner-space
    seeking, elevating style of: aliquid (an
    identity-essence forming, unitive, mothering, activating principle); unum (a
    oneness enhancing, desirability unifying, family orienting, relational
    principle); and bella (a beautifying, elevating, total humanity
    enhancing, ascendant principle).

    ADDENDUM
    II: The Five Community Universals (of
    Donald DeMarco):

    1.
    DIGNITY: Man should always be respected as an
    inviolable end and never used as a

    means.

    2.
    UNITY: Man should be honored as a totum and whole
    entity; and none of his parts should be treated in isolation of that whole
    entity.

    3.
    INTEGRITY: Man’s moral good should be upheld and his
    morality should never be divorced from his nature.

    4.
    IDENTITY: Man has identity both as a member of the
    human race and as a unique individual and person; these identities should be
    valued and allowed to develop and no attempt made to deform or radically alter
    them.

    5.
    SPIRITUALITY: Man’s spiritual qualities should be affirmed,
    and no attempt should be made to reduce man to his material components or to
    limit man to what is merely natural.

    Without the benefits that man stands to
    gain through the application of these moral principles, there exists the imminent
    danger of his falling victim to five forms of dissolution: (1) exploitation; (2) fragmentation; (3)
    disintegration-demoralization; (4) dehumanization; and (5) despiritualization.

    ADDENDUM
    III: Celebrities and Non-Persons:

    Celebrities are attention seeking
    unhumble individuals who inflate themselves (This definition excludes those who
    are celebrated because of their productive and/or self-sacrificing
    accomplishments. In contrast celebrities
    who selfishly seek and artificially promote themselves are basically fakes. It is their show-biz glitzy self-promotion fakery
    which pleases or excites us preying on our suggestibility making us fools when
    we believe them. They usually take hours
    to be able to look the way they appear. Their
    own extravagant relationships routinely fail proving they cannot stand each
    other once they really get to know each other.
    Their touted as spectacular actions, failing time after time, prove what
    frauds they are. Celebrities can startle
    us by their excitement frenzy, but they cannot even be happy with
    themselves. That tells us
    something: That what celebrities show us
    is fakery, pure and simple, with rare exceptions. So do not spend your money or time believing
    celebrities—who glorify each other as being great people and great couples, but
    they usually are only great actors (which is non-being) and that is
    usually all that they are! It is a waste
    of time and energy (pollution!) to bother with them except for entertainment.

    Non-persons are those unwilling to
    protect all members of the human species from natural beginning to natural end
    in the context of Natural Law. The most
    common non-persons around are abortionists, those who misuse words, and those
    who wear little to no clothes.
    Basically, non-persons are those who reject Addenda I and II above. They have no dignity, unity, integrity,
    identity or spirituality; they have no truth, no good, no oneness, and no
    beauty. They talk dirty; tell lies; run
    around without clothes; hurt others unnecessarily; degrade themselves; and
    descend their beings to subhumaness. They deserve the respect they give
    themselves…which is why “critical talk” is needed for those participating in deformed
    subhuman sexuality.

    ADDENDUM
    IV: Original Sin is suggestibility. Brains are suggestible…they play and replay
    what is seen and heard…like advertising, music, actions, words and ideas. Basically, if you see it or hear it, you will
    likely do it (I was told that by Adam and Eve).
    Thus, there should be Suggestibility Education Programs in every grade
    which teach all that is in this article as well as other factual information to
    discern the transcendental from the dross.
    The specific messages about suggestibility are:

    1.
    Do not be so impressionable.

    2.
    Do not be so
    gullible.

    3.
    Do not be a
    “monkey see, monkey do copycat”—you are not a monkey.

    4.
    Celebrities are
    fakes. It takes them hours to look like
    that and they get paid to carry on like that.

    5.
    Believe nothing
    on television, in movies, on the internet, in the newspapers without two
    independent confirmations otherwise you will be buying junk stuff, junk food
    and junk ideas.

    6.
    Do not believe or
    do anything except what is true, one, good, and beautiful, not what otherwise
    is usually done or believed by others.

    7.
    The spirit life
    means that you are what you think…so think matter, identity, truth, oneness,
    good, and beauty, and all will be well.

    8.
    In the long run,
    you will get, for eternity in Heaven, Purgatory or hell, whatever you have
    thought and done…so think and do what is true, one, good and beautiful.

    9.
    Boycott all
    anti-spiritual dehumanizing degrading anti-nature glitzy nonsense from the
    uncivilizing unreliable untrustworthy press and media.

    10. Do not be suggestible.
    You are not missing a thing.

    Suggestibility
    Education Programs will protect brains so the ideas therein are real being and
    not unreal fantasies, lies, manipulations, propaganda and other patronizm based
    non-being.

    ADDENDUM
    V: Patronizm—Contemporary Journalism
    (From my article “The Results of

    and Psychological Causes of Contraception,”
    Social Justice Review December 1993, 209-213

    http://www.catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=721
    ):

    Today, the practice (“charade” really) of
    journalism is the patronizing of one group or another and the censoring of the
    rest—thus “patronizm.” The most accurate
    description of today’s press and media is:
    Patronizm, not journalism.
    Patronpaper, not newspaper.
    Patron press, not free press.
    Patronizer, neither journalist nor reporter. For those described, the First Amendment does
    nothing but give them immunity to truth, justice, the common good and
    trustworthiness. Most of today’s
    “journalists” are self-promoting perverters of the First Amendment. Do not trust what you see or hear in the
    press and media.

    Ideas as promulgated by today’s
    press and media are usually of the non-being kind and mainly provide only
    vicarious living.

    ADDENDUM
    VI: Natural Law Processing of Ideas and
    Feelings:

    1.
    by being baptized
    as a dignified event and giving faith—“Woman behold thy son.”

    2.
    by being confessed
    into a unified energy spectrum giving hope—“Father, forgive them for they know
    not what they do.”

    3.
    by being holy
    communioned into an integrated field giving charity—“Oh my God, why has
    thou forsaken me?”

    4.
    by being confirmed
    as an identifiable quantum giving prudence—“Into thine hands, I commend my
    spirit.”

    5.
    by being extremely
    unctioned as a spiritual singularity giving justice—“It is finished.”

    6.
    by being holy
    ordered into dimensions giving courage—“This day thou shalt be with me in
    paradise.”

    7.
    by being matrimonized
    into the liberty of uncertainty giving temperance—“I thirst.”

    8.
    by being in transcendental
    pursuit into the force of holiness giving grace—the earthquake.

    Sacramentalized
    ideas and feelings give the full use of one’s soul. All actions can be spiritualized by these
    eight processes and the metaphors available from the Last Eight Words of Christ,
    because all will be on the Cross at one time or another.

  • B. F.

    Marquette isn’t a Catholic college; any more. They are a CINO college. And most of you know that means Catholic In Name Only.

  • Marquette 87

    As an alumni who had a good Catholic experience at Marquette, events like these are what prevent my husband and I from supporting the school financially.

  • cestusdei

    Academic freedom? Not there.

  • M

    Lots of less than admirable behavior here. An anti-harrassment policy is a good thing, but there needs to be a clearer understanding of what constitutes a racist, sexist, ideological, or homophobic slur versus what constitutes genuine exploration of a topic. “Gays are all narcissists” or “leftists are all sexual libertines” are clearly ignorant and bigoted statements that are easily disproven. Unjust discrimination against homosexuals clearly contradicts Catholic teaching. However to say one disagrees with gay marriage and to give a reasoned analysis of that opinion is quite a different matter. Now the class was about Rawls’ Equal Liberty Principle, not about the merits or otherwise of gay marriage, and Abbate was right to try to maintain focus and to avoid distraction. In dealing with the student after class, Abbate could have handled the situation with a great deal more tact, grace, and diplomacy. The student has a reputation for being confrontational and aggressive in his demeanor. His former in-class behavior may have provided some context. He committed an ethical breach by surreptitiously recording the conversation and lying about it (he claimed at first he was not doing so,) and he was clearly trying to play “Gotcha!” However it was up to Abbate to be the adult and to be respectful. She correctly stressed hat homophobic, sexist, and racist comments would not be tolerated in her classroom, but she failed to differentiate between true homophobia and the mere expression of an opinion. She should have kept the discussion within the context of Rawls’ Equal Liberty Principle and placed the burden of proof on the student to show that gay marriage either violated that principle or did not. Instead they had a rather tense, adversarial discussion about personal viewpoints. Abbate handled an admittedly difficult situation very badly. She blustered. She is young, probably not much older than the student, and I hope she can learn from this and that Marquette will clarify its harassment policies as a result.

    • ForChristAlone

      “She correctly stressed hat homophobic, sexist, and racist comments would not be tolerated in her classroom”

      Straw man alert…beware of reflexive liberalism at work.

      • Tim

        Why is that a “straw man” alert? The issue centers around the dance between outlawing bigoted and demeaning comments and allowing free speech. It is possible to do both. The teacher and student never resolved that issue because they didn’t engage it. Instead they danced around one another, each restating their views without finding common ground.

        • ForChristAlone

          Simply because bigoted and demeaning comments just don’t happen. This is an attempt by the left to silence its opposition simply by making outrageous accusations and then placing the opposition in the position of having to defend themselves against them. It’s typical Alinsky-esque Democrat strategy.

          • Tim

            But I see a lot of bigoted and demeaning comments on this blog alone. You are accusing “the left” (a bigoted comment in itself) of saying things most leftists are not saying and then attacking them for saying them. Oh, and then you accuse the “Alinsky-esque Democrats” (another bigoted slur) of doing exactly what you’re doing, which is both bigoted and hypocritical. McAdams falsely accused Cheryl Abbate of calling the student a homophobe. If you read the full transcript of the taped conversation, it’s clear that is untrue. Abbate restated reasonable guidelines but did so without addressing the student’s concerns. She could have been more skillful and attentive. Perhaps she was rushed for time and nettled by the student’s combative attitude, but she should have taken the time to explain the difference between speech that is merely offensive and speech that is punishable. She didn’t handle this well, but she also didn’t do what McAdams has accused her of doing. None of what she said justifies the vicious and often misogynistic verbal violence directed at her as a result of all this.

            • ForChristAlone

              if everything is bigotry, then nothing is bigotry. You’re creating bogeymen.

              “she should have taken the time to explain the difference between speech that is merely offensive and speech that is punishable” Doubtful that she’s capable of functioning at that higher order level. But, then again, that’s bigotry on my part. I am probably a misogynistic bigot.

            • Asmondius

              ‘verbal violence’ = Mommy, Mommy, they disagreed with me!
              .
              ‘bigotry’ = speech one would like to silence

              • M

                If you want to see examples of verbal violence directed toward her, go to Ms. Abbate’s page. Many of the names she was called would be inappropriate to publish here, but they include some crude Anglo-Saxon four letter words. She has published some of the nastygrams she received, which include a comment by someone hoping she gets “raped and murdered” and someone else who said “anal rape would be poetic justice for the fag enabler Cheryl Abbate.” The emails were notable for poor grammar and spelling. I’m sure everyone here will agree that there is nothing Christian about that sort of bigotry. Personally I don’t think that sort of speech should be silenced. Hideously antisocial speech should be allowed — not silenced — so that people can get a clear picture of the kinds of people they’re dealing with.

                • Phil Steinacker

                  Ignorance in spelling and grammar afflicts all sides to an issue. Seen it everywhere.
                  Too bad about the unhelpful nasty comments, but that should indicate to what low esteem university BS has sunk in the estimation of the public.

                • Asmondius

                  ‘The emails were notable for poor grammar and spelling.’
                  .
                  Thus making every single graduate of a government school suspect…

              • “Verbal violence” has a corporate pedigree, it’s used by the left-wing Pharisees that inhabit corporate HR and “diversity” departments.

            • But I see a lot of bigoted and demeaning comments on this blog alone.

              Why yes, I quoted your internet crush “M” above. Perhaps you are thinking of the inane hateful rants of Hombre111, who likened somebody to the people that burned Joan of Arc at the stake.

            • Phil Steinacker

              Tim,
              We routinely encounter uniform lockstep among lefties, homosexualist and feminist activists, Alinskeyites, Democrats, etc.

              Leftist and Democrats – excuse me, I repeat myself – shut down anyone who doesn’t toe the party line. You can deny this by calling such statements bigoted slurs, but that does not negate the truth of the claims. Your own thinking process has beeninfected and polluted by this nonsense, as we can see as you attempt to use what you think is reasonable. Abate’s guidelines are NOT reasonable. These kind of restriction is used to shut down opinions which are labeled as bigoted to avoid the unpleasant experience of being unable to refute them.

              I see it at rags like the National Catholic Reporter all the time. Refute their ideas and you are unkind and mean.

              We’re fed up with these false standards, invented over the last 40 years, and we will
              no longer tolerate them.

          • GG

            Right, challenge the small-minded ideologue and suddenly we need to silence people.

        • Asmondius

          ‘bigoted and demeaning’ = Catholic Teaching

      • Asmondius

        ‘homophobic, sexist, and racist’ = homosexuality is the same as biological sex and race
        .
        Don’t you know that homosexuality is a natural differentiation of mammals rewarded by evolution?
        .
        Why, look at all the homosexual species flourishing in the world today.
        .

      • If you hear a comedian is leaving his show and you are despondent and realize you need a new place to catch up on current events, you might be liberal.

    • Tim

      Very balanced, M. The student was trying to get in her face; she responded without much finesse. Colleges should give graduate teaching assistants clearer guidelines on handling these difficult situations. If one looks at the full transcript of the conversation, it is clear that Abbate and the student were talking past one another, each stating and re-stating their own viewpoints without engaging. It is also clear that Abbate did NOT tell the student that it is homophobic to oppose same sex marriage and did not call the student a homophobe, which is the crux of McAdams’ false claim and why he is in hot water with the school. Cheryl Abbate gives her side of the story at https://ceabbate.wordpress.com/2015/01/20/gender-based-violence-responsibility-and-john-mcadams/ It is very sad that she has been subjected to violent and abusive rhetoric as a result of McAdams’ lies.

      • GG

        The student challenged a teacher. That is not “getting in her face”. One of the problems is that the student is smarter than the teacher. I guess there is hope for Marquette after all.

        • Tim

          Let’s hear from someone who knows more about the student’s attitude than either of us. Todd Starnes of Fox News, after listening to the conversation, noted that the student’s behavior “was in fact disrespectful to the instructor” and that he “did not tell the truth” when Abbate asked him if he was recording the conversation. He says the student admitted his behavior was wrong. This, from someone who was critical of Abbate, indicates that the student indeed “got in her face.”

          I suggest you read Cheryl Abbate’s side of the story at https://ceabbate.wordpress.com/recent-controversy/ She writes:

          “It is also worth noting that there is a significant difference between the following claims:

          1. Gay marriage is morally acceptable, and
          2. John Rawls’s Equal Liberty principle would permit gay marriage

          The claim made in my class was that “John Rawls’s Equal Liberty Principle would permit gay marriage.” To make this claim is not to “squelch” a discussion of gay marriage. Rather, it is to apply correctly one philosophical principle to a contemporary social issue.”

          This is an accurate application of the principle that was under discussion. She also says she did NOT tell the class that “everyone agrees with gay marriage” so there is no reason to discuss it. Her response:

          “This false claim can be traced back to the original blog post of Associate Professor John McAdams (who was not in the classroom to hear what I said and does not have a tape recording of the class lecture itself). For one, I am well aware that not everyone agrees with gay marriage. But more importantly, the class discussion was not about the public’s opinion of gay marriage. Rather, the discussion concerned how a particular philosophical principle (John Rawls’s Equal Liberty Principle) might be applied to various contemporary social issues, such as the criminalization of drugs, seat belt laws, or a ban on gay marriage.”

          It appears that McAdams lied and that the student would have liked to hijack the class away from a discussion of Rawls and into one on the morality of gay marriage and adoption by same sex couples, The issue of gay adoption was not even raised in the class. Why would he want to bring it up afterward? The kid clearly wanted to get off topic to pontificate about his own views. The fact that he taped the conversation and lied about it does not cast his character in a positive light.

          • Asmondius

            yup, those durn Catholics tend to ‘pontificate’ all right!

          • GG

            I read the transcripts posted. The student was right. The instructor was wrong. Read the transcripts for yourself.

      • Asmondius

        Yes, it’s certainly ‘difficult’ to expect that a student at a Catholic college would seek to express their faith.
        .
        Da noive!

    • GG

      From what is in the essay above, and in links here to the transcript, I do not see people talking past each other. I see a well developed student challenging an ideologue who happens to be teaching his class.

      He got the better of her because he is informed and prepared. The young philosopher was over her head. Ideology is not teaching. Her position is corrupt.

    • Asmondius

      Once you begin using terms such as ‘homophoboc slur’ or ‘gay marriage’, you are lost.
      .
      The first is dishonest and the second is an oxymoron twice over.

    • Iowa10

      You don’t catch a thief by telling him you have a trap set up for him. Do you think the ACORN or abortion “clinic” employees would have allowed filming? This is spiritual warfare! The gloves come off.

    • ” “Gays are all narcissists” or “leftists are all sexual libertines” are clearly ignorant and bigoted statements that are easily disproven.”

      When somebody pens the following:

      “My own experience is that “liberal Catholics” are more likely to lead personally clean lives while refraining from judging the sex lives of others. Perhaps we don’t judge so much because those of us in happy, stable marriages just don’t obsess about other people’s sex lives so much. Conservatives are more likely to indulge in impure behavior while condemning the same in others. It’s not always the virulently anti-gay conservatives who are caught with rent boys, etc., but more often than not. Some call conservatives the “horny hypocrites.” It’s the red states that are awash in illegitimacy, incarceration, crystal meth labs, divorce, and federal handouts.”

      That person is an experts on ignorance and bigotry, truly a distinguished practitioner.

  • St JD George

    Thought everyone might enjoy …
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUreJeUI9qM

    • Beth

      Thanks for posting!

      • St JD George

        When I listen to Bishop Sheen I’m like putty in his hands. He was such a beautiful man, I miss him. Strong and courageous he was, and a brilliant communicator.

        • Beth

          I never saw him on TV but I certainly understand your description. His radio shows are rebroadcast on our local Catholic radio station.

          As to education, since beginning to school my own children, I have learned much about education–what it is and what it is not. Now that we have had the children in a classical education program for six years, I can see for myself that to focus on truth, goodness and beauty will set my children on a solid path no matter what ‘job’ they may choose. The point is to teach them to search for and spot truth, desire goodness in all things, and appreciate beauty all around–this task acquired through diligent training in reading, writing and arithmetic. If you can read thoroughly, write effectively and have a solid foundation of mathematical skills you can learn anything.

          • St JD George

            God bless you Beth and your family for your great wisdom, and faith.

  • Robert

    Hit ’em in the wallet: were I a donor (alumnus or otherwise) I would cease providing financial assistance and make sure the powers that be at Marquette knew precisely the reason why.

  • Ruth Rocker

    First of all, the university should be disallowed from claiming a Catholic identity if they do not allow or actively suppress Catholic teachings. And second of all, any faithful Catholic should immediately transfer to a truly Catholic institution, assuming one can be found. This is ridiculous. Doesn’t disallowing the student to voice his opinion in opposition to the homomafia position create an uncomfortable emotional state for him? Doesn’t he get a “safe space” (what a stupid policy)? I’d love for someone there to challenge this under the freedom of speech clause in the Constitution!!

  • joe colletti

    this is utterly disgraceful from this CAtholic University, a Jesuit Catholic University. Where is their Catholic Identity?

  • Bewildered Mom

    Good grief!

  • hombre111

    You raise and interesting, painful issue. yu
    u

    -++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    • ForChristAlone

      For once I agree with you.

  • hombre111

    Good, challenging article. Shame on Marquette. The professor who objected should be reinstated. The graduate student/prof sounds like someone who might have killed Socrates. That said, I think the Church is also wrong. We are not talking about marriage in the Church here, but somebody in our pluralistic secular society getting married somewhere else. To demand that society march to our beat on a very controversial issue is unfortunate.

    • ForChristAlone

      who’s demanding anything….the Church simply states her beliefs…looks like we’re once again on opposing sides.

      • hombre111

        Umm, no. The Church states her beliefs, and the bishops enter into the political fray.

        • Phil Steinacker

          Ahh, there we differ. The bishops are entering the MORAL and SOCIAL debate, which was politicized by those with an agenda to overturn societal values.

          Bishops must respond to the degradation of the culture, and if done so by political means, then any response is seen as political, obscuring the essential moral nature of the response.

          The canard about the Church entering politics has been effective in persuading fools, but is still a lie – and relatively recent in its successful application.

          • hombre111

            Since the Church is not going to win the political debate, it would be better to enter the moral and social debate, which has not received enough thought or energy. As far as the debate against gays is concerned, the Church is doing a rear-guard battle, over a cliff.

    • Asmondius

      Our ‘pluralistic society’ demands abortion as well.

      • hombre111

        True enough, and shame on us. Because of so many Americans have freedom and individualism as their one and two values, it will never go away.

        • Asmondius

          ‘Individualism’ that demands the life of another as the price is not ‘freedom’ – it’s tyranny.

          • hombre111

            Amen.

    • Scott W.

      Same-sex “marriage” is only sustainable in the self-refuting philosophy of moral relativism. True marriage is affirmed by reason, revelation, science, history, and simple apprehension. The Church’s teaching is no more wrong than the laws of gravity.

      • hombre111

        Mmm. An interesting comparison to this issue appeared somewhere else on the Net, about Judaism and Christianity’s struggle to come to terms with slavery, especially the slavery of Black and indigenous people. They were not 100% human, do you see. Finally, the Quakers, in a moment of religious enlightenment, understood that they were, and began the anti-slavery movement in the U.S., where some of our religious orders still owned slaves. A pope was still arguing in favor of some kind of slaver in the middle 1800’s!

        Fast forward. Gays have a “disordered condition,” whatever that is. Shame on them if they want a life with someone else. Then modern science begins to show that their condition, whatever it is, has roots in their genes and in their brains. God made them that way, it seems. As an old Jewish saying goes, if God lived in my neighborhood, I would go throw rocks at his windows. Or maybe God wants us to do what we finally did with slaves: admit their humanity and bless their attempt at a life.

        • Scott W.

          There is and never has been a Church teaching that blacks were less than human. You analogy is invalid.

          • hombre111

            A very good reply, sir. But actions speak louder than words. The Church tolerated slavery, and shamefully, hers was not the first voice to oppose it.

            • Scott W.

              Thank you. My point is made. The Church only tolerated slavery in the sense that she “tolerates” legal abortion in the age of Roe v. Wade. Which is to say she doesn’t tolerate it in any meaningful sense to the topic at hand.

              • hombre111

                The Church didn’t just tolerate slavery. She did not have the guts to stand up against it as a violation of the Body of Christ. Why? For the same reason priests don’t have the guts to stand up for issues today. The “good” God-loving people in the pews will rise up and tear their faces off.

          • Seamrog

            It is not just invalid – it is insidious.

            Shame on you, Father.

        • Phil Steinacker

          The “science” you cite is bogus. Such claims are aired constantly with nothing to back them that has survived scrutiny.
          Good enough for propaganda purposes, though, and very effective.

          Besides, the central thrust of such arguments relies on elevating “science” to the status of religion, and its purveyors the new priesthood.

          • hombre111

            The problem with people who speak in absolutes is that their arguments collapse when somebody presents new facts, as science does, or speaks from a more adequate point of view.

            • asmondius

              Yes, yes – there was a ‘twins study’ and then the ‘study’ with the fingers and then the ‘homosexual gene’ and then the supposed similarity between the brains of homosexual men and the brains of women. All new ‘facts’ that have proven to be just as reliable as the practice of lobotomy and shock treatments to treat the mentally disturbed.
              .
              Just remember – when a cause is found, the cure will also eventually be found.

              • hombre111

                I won’t do your homework for you, lazy man. Go on Google and type in brain studies on homosexuals, and get a glimpse of lots of research. Give me a link to refereed scientific studies that prove the opposite.

                • asmondius

                  I don’t need to conduct research or provide citations for what common sense dictates to be a fraud.
                  .
                  Looking at the brains of adults can never prove that those individuals were ‘born that way’ since the brain continually changes over an individual’s life. When you can provide a study showing scans of large sample groups from birth forward, then you will have some possibly concrete evidence instead of just another homosexual propaganda myth born of the desperate attempt to be ‘normal’.

                  • hombre111

                    Along with the peer-reviewed findings of science, there is the witness of so many gay people I have known, who realized from the beginning that they were different, who tried with great anguish to be hetero like everybody else. They asked, “why would I decide to be something that is so hated and maligned?” But, when they finally came out of the closet, they found peace. The anti-homosexual crowd routinely dismisses this evidence…until one of their own stands up and says, I am gay, and this is why, and this is how I have struggled to be what you want me to be.

                    • asmondius

                      ‘peer reviewed’ = flawed humans reviewing the work of other flawed humans
                      .
                      ‘witness of so many..’ = anecdotal evidence
                      .
                      We can probably assume that no one would decide to be a pedophile either.

                    • hombre111

                      Most gays are not pedophiles, and the testimonies add up. Dismissing them as “anectodal” is culpable blindness.

                    • asmondius

                      What people have said to you personally is indeed anecdotal – I’m sorry if I am blind to the rhetoric.
                      .
                      I never said ‘all homosexuals are pedophiles’, thus instead of addressing my comment directly you wandered off into an apparent argument with yourself (or lost track of your responses).

                    • asmondius

                      I’ll wait until you make an honest reply instead of setting up straw men. There is no scientific consensus on the origin of homosexuality.

        • asmondius

          ‘Shame on them if they want a life with someone else. ‘
          .
          Well, it can be a delicate practical problem when necrophiliacs bring their love interests to parties.

  • Paul

    Sadly this is an all too familiar scenario that is sweeping across the western world. With western culture often at the forefront of societal trends, we will see this destructive force against religious freedom & morality spreading to the rest of the world.

  • Samuel63

    Thank you Anne for a great contribution! Like Notre Dame in the 1960’s it is now Marquette’s turn to be converted into an institution focused on social engineering America’s catholic young adults. It appears significant inroads have been made into Marquette’s staff and faculty at this time. And now the battle is drawn between them and authentic Catholicism. Since Truth is on the side of authentic Catholicism, it only takes exposure to win the battle. This brave “ethics” class student and Professor McAdams had the fortitude to expose this case to begin with. I believe they deserve a reward. It is up to us now to keep the flame of truth held high. Father John Marquette literally gave his life to save souls in this area of the new world. It would be proper justice for Father Marquette to stand in judgment against these faculty and staff at the end of their lives. These employees that is that are promoting the loss of eternal souls by supporting objectively immoral behavior and censoring any and all opposition.

  • Veritas

    Interesting parallels, Anne, to what appears in the most recent edition of National Review. The cover reads, “The End of The University.”
    Great work as always, Anne.

  • TERRY

    Let’s not forget 6 years ago when notre dame (no capitals) gave an honorary degree to obama. The Fort Wayne Diocese protested most strongly, notre dame basically told them to stick it and went right ahead.

    Around the turn of the last century the rather vile play ‘the vagina monologues’ was a fixture at notre dame during the winter months. In one particular year opening night was scheduled on Ash Wednesday. Some friends and I had small cards made up protesting this and we went to Mass at the Basilica and put a few in each pew. We were soon told politely but firmly, that this was not permitted.

  • Atilla The Possum

    What planet are these supposedly ‘intelligent’ people from?

  • Jamie

    What I don’t get is the lack of appetite for real debate in a university. “Does this or that situation exemplify the Rawls Liberty Thing, or NOT? Let’s hash it out! Everything’s on the table!” Why can’t they do this? Why did the Catholic student have to bring in his personal feelings of offense? Why would a gay student be so threatened by holding his or her lifestyle up to some kind of measure? This situation at Marquette is alarming, given that it’s supposedly a Catholic university. But it’s also just alarming, intellectually stifling, disappointing. What wimps.

  • Captain America

    Marquette’s never been an important place. This rinky dink episode fits it well, and the young woman who teaches philosophy there will likely become Chief Censor at some unknown institution, hounding kids for years, etc.

    • She aspires to be the female version of the character played by Fritz Weaver in the Obsolete Man Episode of the Twilight Zone, first aired over 50 years ago. (Minus the ignominious end, of course”.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP_doPwPrXs

  • Let’s be honest about this. Philosophy is one of those departments that is thoroughly politicized, because it’s a field with little or no commercial value and there’s no way to check the assertions of the lunatics with experiments and empirical testing and graduates have no other option than to pursue a career in the professoriate, if they want to actually use the degree. It’s simply not a field like Math, Physics or Economics, where there’s some actually real world employers lined up to hire graduates.

    It’s insular and incestuous, because once inside, they have comfortable little sinecures with no accountability or escape from their gilded cages.

    In an earlier time, she would have been an esteemed member of the Third Reich.

    • Iowa10

      She would have been like that little communist lady from an early James Bond film. She would kick with a little blade protruding from the tip of her shoe. Proseffors like her don’t want to offend anyone except actual Catholics. In the process, she mocks God–who will not be mocked.

  • thomistica

    Holy wow! Marquette’s new provost is from…get this…Univ of Notre Dame! Wonder what he thinks about the Marquette mess.

    http://news.nd.edu/news/55885-vice-president-and-associate-provost-daniel-myers-appointed-provost-at-marquette-university/

    • Iowa10

      If he’s from Notre Dame, he will fit right in. Notre Dame has been in the Devil’s hip pocket since Fr. Hesburg got there. Bela Dodd warned about this in the 40’s.

      • thomistica

        “Faculty Affiliate, Gender Studies (since 2003)”
        Daniel J. Myers – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Also, see this from National Catholic Register:

        Patrick Reilly, president of the Cardinal Newman Society, expressed a
        measure of relief that an individual with a history of financial support
        for pro-abortion organizations would not be setting policy for the
        university. But he asserted that the administration’s handling of the
        controversy provided little reassurance that a broad reassessment of
        other troubling actions was under way: “Since the Obama controversy, we
        have raised numerous concerns that have been brushed off by the
        university. For example, Notre Dame just announced that Daniel J. Myers,
        a sociology professor and associate dean of the College of Arts and
        Letters — who had repeatedly sponsored the Vagina Monologues — has been
        promoted to vice president and associate provost for faculty affairs.”

        Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/what-notre-dames-trustee-resignation-means-for-the-university#ixzz3RxGiq77x

        • Anne Hendershott

          It has become very difficult – or perhaps impossible for a faithful pro-life, pro-traditional marriage candidate to be appointed to a position as Provost or Arts and Sciences Dean at a school like Marquette. It is not surprising that the Sociology Department Chair who sponsored the Vagina Monologues for students at Notre Dame will lead Marquette’s faculty. He is perfect for the job.

          • ForChristAlone

            Sociology is no science at all. It was politicized way before Psychology was in the 1970’s. One didn’t have to dig too deeply back in the 1960’s to discover that sociology was among the weakest of majors. It amounted to personal opinions supported with ersatz statistics.

            I’d adamantly refuse to pay the tuition of a child of mine who intended to major in either – and I was a Psych major.

        • Anne Hendershott

          Marquette’s new Provost, Daniel J. Myers is an excellent sociological scholar – He is a highly respected sociologist – with many books and articles. But,whether he understands and appreciates Catholic teaching is another matter. In an interview for an article in the Christian Science Monitor, he stated that ” religion has a long history of suppressing free thought”
          http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0125/p12s02-legn.html Provost

          • thomistica

            Suppressing free thought. Such a tiresome cliche. Wonder what Myers thinks of the tens of millions in the 20th century who died at the hands of atheistic ideologues.

            One also wonders what Myers thinks of the AAUP’s stance on the unfolding Marquette thing discussed in your article. It will be interesting to see how he handles all this. Or will this just be a reprise, mutatis mutandis, of the Notre Dame 88.

  • Iowa10

    Get the word out to Marquette’s donors to keep their money where it will do no more further harm–under their mattresses.

  • Captain America

    The more I think about it, the more sorry I feel for the grad student Ms. Abbate. There’s no doubt that she has some intelligence, etc., but it’s very difficult for anyone well-versed in philosophy in 2015 to be a standup philosophical liberal. Liberalism really IS nonsense on stilts. . . and I say this as a former Rawls devotee. There’s just not enough THERE there, in liberalism.

    I hope Ms. Abbate reads my words here.

    • Wasn’t the phrase “nonsense on stilts” used by that detestable Jeremy Bentham to describe the idea of natural rights- an idea recently parroted by that political shill masquerading as a journalist, Chris (the lesser) Cuomo?

  • Marie

    “Safe spaces”? I have a professor at a PUBLIC university who mocks everyone (including himself). He makes fun of all religions, and atheism and agnosticism. He even calls out particular students and teases them bare-knuckled. As far as I can tell, everyone likes him. I do, even though he hassles me in class, and I’m not exactly thick-skinned. The “safe spaces” policy is just an excuse to quell dissent.

    • ForChristAlone

      Is his name Professor Charlie Hebdo?

      • Marie

        No, not Charlie Hebdo. He’s not obscene or blasphemous, he just likes to stir the pot.

    • Scott W.

      I’m going to have to disagree here. Professors have much power over their students, and whether it’s PC bullying or equal-opportunity offending so to speak, it’s still bullying and “you need thicker skin” is the classic bully’s defense that shouldn’t be tolerated.

  • simplynotred

    Come on send in ISSI, that should take care of any Catholics at Marquette. As well as gays, lesbians, transexuals, bisexuals, perverts, hindus, budhist, protestants, and all non muslim believers. Come on lets get rid of people, who needs em!

  • finishstrongdoc

    Kids go through 12 years of indoctrination in gov’t schools on every possible sexual perversion to the point where they’re almost qualified to lecture on the subject of sex perversions, but when they get to college any mention of homosexuality is offensive?

    • ForChristAlone

      well put, indeed.

  • ForChristAlone

    Time to suppress the Jesuits once again. Oh, I forgot, the Pope is (was) a Jesuit.

    In that case, time to suppress the Jesuits again.

    • Tziggy

      Be very careful about the stones you throw. Holy mother church IS the body of Christ and his Vicar the head.

  • Seamrog

    What a mess.

    It seems that the new normal on campus (pick most any campus) is wanton, celebrated immorality – an immorality that is now being particularly protected at the expense of students and faculty who chose to remain faithful to Jesus.

    I have children in college now, and it is a real struggle as a parent. The dorms that used to be male and female in separate buildings evolved to same building, different floor, to same floor, different rooms and bathrooms, and there are now options for same room, shared bathrooms for males and females.

    It is a real scandal, and it dangerous.

    As a parent who visits the campus and tries to follow what the climate there is, it is clear to me that the focus for students is a celebration of freedom for “all things below the waist,” as Anthony Essolen accurately portrays it. The focus of the university seems to support – in every way possible – this celebration of private parts and the delicate sensibilities of the students who get to spend four years (or five years now) in relative luxury pretending they are wise adults.

    All this while the parents are saddled with tuition / room and board / student fees / parking fees / activity fees / book fees / program fees ect. that have so far outpaced the rapid rate of inflation that it is nearly impossible to budget for it. Those parents who are unable to pay for college see their children slide into the college loan racket – student loan debt is now over $1 TRILLION and growing by the second.

    All of this, in the climate of the drinking, the pot, the hooking-up, the promotion and protection of deviance…all of this, and the plot still thickens.

    Universities are now openly indoctrinating students to understand that support of traditional marriage and traditional morality is now a punishable offense. An offense!

    What a mess – a wearying mess.

    I hope to see a follow up to this essay addressing the unanswered question of silent Bishops. It could at least serve as a small boost to the faithful who feel increasingly isolated and assaulted – an indication that in all there, there may remain some who are on our side.

  • Jdonnell

    The best way to have handled the classroom situation for any intelligent student would have been to challenge the soundness of Rawls’s approach to ethics. A number of philosophers have shot large holes in Rawls’s philosophy. That sort of give and take is what academics are supposed to be about, not secretly recording conversations in which one hopes to catch an instructor in some embarrassing or inappropriate remark and then trotting off to the equivalent of the principal’s office to tattle.
    The article fails to make a clear identification of this accused instructor’s actual status, calling her a “Professor” and in another instance a “graduate student.” She cannot be both, and the difference in the context of the incident is relevant.
    Firing a professor in this case only brings shame to Marquette University, which has a solid reputation for solid academic work. Certainly, an instructor is right to want to act charitably toward everyone, even if that means trying to avoid inflicting hurt on vulnerable students in the class. Sometimes, however, an effective way may be to allow bigoted comments by students that attack religious, racial, or gender to be responded to by other members of the class. But, that can lead to further acrimony and become just nasty, destroying any chance of thoughtful discussion, when emotions have taken over. This could wreck the class atmosphere for the rest of the term.
    A spirit of love and gentleness ought to be paramount in any Catholic classroom. No genuine pursuit of truth can do without them

  • Tziggy

    My son attended Marquette. I was very disappointed in their wontonly progressive nature. It’s very obvious this institution has run amuck.

  • barthomew

    A sexuality study by the University of Chicago concluded that the word “homophobe” is unscientific, since a person might oppose homosexual acts or alleged homosexual marriage on religious and/or moral grounds. Marquette is giving support to pseudo-science.
    Loras College in Dubuque, Iowa, once proposed a rule that it should have no discrimination based on sexual orientation. Then-Archbishop Jerome Hanus said that such a rule would mean that there could be no preaching against the immorality of homosexual acts or alleged homosexual marriage.

MENU