Domers error
I was pleased to see my uncle's name, Creighton Miller,
in the Winter 2002-03 issue under "Domers in the News."
My uncle was a very special person, dear to many Notre
Dame alumni. I was saddened, however, to note that the brief mention
contained three mistakes. Creighton died in May 2002 (not April)
-- a small mistake. The other two mistakes are not so small. Creighton's
father, my grandfather, was Harry Miller '09 (the 1908 team captain
you mentioned). Creighton's uncle was Don Miller '25, one of the
Four Horsemen. (Three other uncles, Gerald, Walter and Ray also
played football and graduated from Notre Dame.) The Four Horsemen
are part of Notre Dame lore; in addition, the University markets
their image on many items of apparel, sports memorabilia, etc.
I do think that you could be expected to check your facts, and
so keep their names straight.
Diane Miller-Deasy (SMC '72)
Dunwoody, Georgia
Editor's note: We use interns to check
our facts, and they do an excellent job. The mistakes you mentioned
were corrected on a galley proof. Unfortunately an early computer
version of the column, which did not include the corrections,
was sent to the printer. The mistakes have been corrected on the
web version. We apologize for the printed errors.
'Miracle Child' Problematic
I am writing in response to the "Miracle Child" story
in the Winter 2002-2003 issue. It is about a child who was saved
from the abortive efforts of its surrogate mother by an act of
God. While we must praise and thank God for sparing the life of
this most precious child, let us not forget that this child's
dignity and life were first offended by the parents themselves
when they chose to conceive this child through "in vitro" fertilization
and surrogate motherhood. Despite the very cloudy statement of
their local priest, who "had some concerns about conception taking
place outside the womb" and who "gave [the parents] his blessings
as long as [they] agreed to give each embryo the best chance of
life," it is completely against Catholic moral teaching to participate
in "in vitro" fertilization and surrogate motherhood.
The parents of this child were poorly guided, and both they
and other Catholic parents need to know the truth about the harmful
effects of surrogate motherhood and "in vitro" fertilization.
The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith states, "Surrogate
motherhood represents an objective failure to meet the obligations
of maternal love, of conjugal fidelity and or responsible motherhood;
it offends the dignity and the right of the child to be conceived,
carried in the womb, brought into the world and brought up by
his own parents; it sets up, to the detriment of families, a division
between the physical, psychological and moral elements which constitute
those families" (Donum Vitae, CDF, II.3). It also says
regarding "in vitro" fertilization, "In conformity with the traditional
doctrine relating to the goods of marriage and the dignity of
the person, the Church remains opposed from the moral point of
view to homologous "in vitro" fertilization. Such fertilization
is in itself illicit and in opposition to the dignity of procreation
and of the conjugal union, even when everything is done to avoid
the death of the human embryo" (II.5).
The story, "Miracle Child," completely avoids the moral fact
that the harm committed against the child began even before
the abortive efforts of the surrogate mother. It also does not
mention the moral atrocity that resulted upon the death of the
second embryo in the womb of the surrogate mother and, undoubtedly,
the deaths of the other embryos not mentioned, all of whom are
to be considered full, human persons. This story hides the very
"anti-life" choice made by the parents under the guise of a "pro-life"
stand against abortion. The story, at the very least, should
have ended with a qualifying note by the editor to indicate that
Catholic moral teaching prohibits not only abortion but also surrogate
motherhood and "in vitro" fertilization.
As a magazine that operates under the reputation and name of
the University of Notre Dame, it is your moral obligation to be
sure not to present blurred, watered-down, and even false Catholic
teaching. I would even call the story appalling in its pastoral
insensitivity precisely because it presents a cloudy picture of
what is right and wrong, thus helping to cloud the judgment of
readers who consider Notre Dame to be a Catholic university.
I actually felt sick upon reading the story. I find it gross,
offensive, and extremely dangerous precisely because it hides
a grave moral evil under the pretense of an anti-abortion, purportedly
"pro-life" stance. This is exactly the kind of material that continues
to foster the "culture of death" in America: grave offenses against
human life are constantly ignored because they are covered over
with other moral "goods."
My concern is that this poor child will suffer from great wounds,
having not only been the victim of a failed abortion but also
having been denied the right to be conceived in the womb, within
the self-giving communion of conjugal act, and in accordance with
his dignity as a full human person from the moment of conception.
This article completely ignores this fact, and therefore threatens
to present behavior that is offensive to a child's life and dignity
as morally acceptable. This consequently presents false information
to other married couples, thus contributing to the susceptibility
of other families to such harm.
I would like to ask you to include in the next issue of Notre
Dame Magazine a note to your readers regarding this story,
making clear the Catholic moral teaching on surrogate motherhood
and "in vitro" fertilization in order to be sure that in rejoicing
over the miracle, readers are not deceived into thinking that
surrogate motherhood and "in vitro" fertilization can be considered
loving behavior towards a child. I would also like to ask you
to have better discernment in the future when choosing which articles
are included in Notre Dame Magazine as it reaches many
readers under a well-known Catholic name and should therefore
carry with it all the beauty and truth of Catholic moral teaching.
Meghan Cokeley '01
South Bend, Indiana
Loneliness at Notre Dame
I was disappointed to read that the "Screw Your Roommate"
(SYR) dances at Notre Dame are moving off campus ("Have Alcohol
Rules Changes Worked?" Winter 2002-03). I know that the world
has changed since my SYR days in the mid-'80s, and that the University
has good reasons not to sanction the alcohol-soaked bashes that
I remember; however, I still regret the demise of an event that
was central to the concept of the dormitory as the Notre Dame
students' fraternity or sorority. From the pre-party planning,
to the clearing of furniture from the study lounges, to the socialization
at the dance itself, SYRs helped me believe that Sorin Hall was
my house, and that my dorm mates were more than just co-inhabitants
of the same building.
I vividly remember my freshman fall SYR as a night of firsts.
It was my first formal college dance; my first date at ND; the
first time I saw my dorm mates dressed up; my first margarita,
complete with salt on the plastic cup rim; and the first time
I saw anyone actually have fun in the study lounges -- not counting
some late-night mashing witnessed in the 24-hour lounge. Later
that night, I had my first "deep" conversation with my roommates
while lying on the floor of our corner turret room, light out,
with Pink Floyd spinning on the turntable. I can't remember what
we discussed, but I'm sure it was pretty profound for 18-year
olds with more alcohol than philosophy education in our systems.
It was also a night of lasts. It was the last "real" date I had
with a woman -- real in that I sincerely wanted and tried to feel
the thrill of the opposite sex that I could clearly see almost
everyone else around me was enjoying. It was the last night I
could pretend that I was the same as my new friends and classmates,
who were obviously experiencing a completely different rite of
passage than I was. Because my high school friends and I had not
dated or partied much, I had been spared this painful realization
before. Even the double-entendre "SYR" bore its own little reminder
of the divide between my fellow students and me.
I suppose that had SYRs been held off-campus in those days, I
might have escaped most such reminders. I could have stayed at
home in the still-intact study lounge, curled up with a good book
-- or perhaps a bad one, like The Joy of Abstinence or
another sexual orientation programming tool. Maybe if all my fellow
gay dorm mates had done the same, we would have discovered each
other and established something resembling a normal social life.
The University certainly did not help us to do so, and in fact
suppressed attempts by gay groups to organize on campus. The milestones
of young adulthood, which SYRs and numerous other experiences
helped most Domers reach while still under the in loco parentis
protection of Our Lady, eluded many of us until
years later, when we stumbled onto them in squalid and dangerous
environments. Considering the lethal AIDS disaster that raged
just beyond the protective glow of the Golden Dome during the
1980s, I can only wonder whether more of my gay classmates were
saved or sacrificed by the University's institutionalized denial
of our validity as homosexual adults.
Despite these sad reflections, I am still glad that Sorin Hall
became a (straight) party house once each semester. I enjoyed
watching everyone else have fun, even if I could not fully participate.
It was also good preparation for loneliness, prejudice and other
challenges that I would face after graduation.
Greg Fuhrman '87
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
About the Pope
Andrew Nagorski writes: (in "The Power of John Paul II")
that "Karol Wojtyla will go down as one of the greatest popes
ever, but he has left some extremely difficult issues to his successor."
(Winter 2002-03.) With age I realize more and more the importance
of recognizing from time to time the silliness of some of my more
serious thoughts. One day perhaps Mr. Nagorski will laugh to think
of a journalist 2,000 years ago authoring: "The power of Jesus
of Nazareth -- This Jesus will go down as the true Christ, but
he has left some extremely difficult issues to future generations."
David O. Cantu '81
Clearwater, Florida
'Change the Church' disturbing
Your feature article "Keep the Faith, Change the Church"
was really great! I have a suggestion to improve your magazine.
Tell everyone to stop sending money. I am certain your magazine
will improve immediately beyond belief! Also your University should
beg all who donate funds to stop immediately so your school can
improve and be the best of all by a great margin.
Sound kind of stupid when applied to your own organization,
doesn't it? I think the author has too large an ego or some similar
problem.
There are lots and lots of wonderful people in our church who
are struggling to get our church back on its feet. I am deeply
disturbed that you should even allow such a person to have available
space in your magazine. Maybe you need to rethink your situation
and grow up. Maybe you have not lived through enough hard times
to be able to handle a bump.
Luther G. Anderson
Oakland, Michigan
"Keep the Faith, Change the Church!" featuring peacenik and Voice
of the Faithful (VOTF) heretic Jim Muller '65 made me
cringe. Has not the Church changed enough already for the worse?
Isn't the entire sex problem we face today because many in the
Church have not kept faith with her traditions and magisterium?
And, of Muller's peace boondoggle: All antiwar activists ought
to analyze their legacy from America's failure in Vietnam: hundreds
of thousands "collaborators with Americans" murdered by victorious
North Vietnam; hundreds of thousands of others dead in contiguous
countries where they fled; a million fleeing boat people, including
the former North Vietnam minister of justice, who rejected all
he had fought for when he saw the outcome of the actions of his
former ideologues; and starvation in 1974 when in prior years,
even during the war, South Vietnam exported food thanks to American
rice and support. Antiwar activists can also claim the killing
fields of Cambodia as resulting from their efforts. The "peace"
legacy of antiwar people is way worse than any imagined outcome
of committed Americans fighting to victory.
But the best paean to all antiwar activists is the following
letter from Cambodian Prime Minister Sirak Matak to the American
ambassador's offering to evacuate him as the Khmer Rouge were
about to murder him and 20 percent of the Cambodian population
because we Americans abandoned them:
I thank you very sincerely for your letter and for your offer
to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such
a cowardly fashion. As for you, and in particular for your great
country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this
sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You
have refused us your protection and we can to nothing about it.
You leave, and my wish is that you and your country will find
happiness under the sky. But, mark it well, that if I shall die
here on the spot and in my country that I love, it is no matter
because we all are born and must die. I have only committed this
mistake of believing in you, the Americans.
Please accept, Excellency and dear friend, my faithful and friendly
sentiments.
(Read that three times so it bites deep like
it should!)
No doubt all this is too much for those unwilling to fight and
unwilling to trust the true Church. The legacy of the anti-war
people and their current "let's change the Church" propaganda
is worse than any imagined reasonable alternatives. The entire
gang of oxymoronic VOTF and Phyrrhic antiwar activists is not
worth one Sirak Matak who honorably loved freedom and his country--and
probably his church too.
Past and recent events prove liberals in the Church have done,
like antiwar activists, enough harm already.
Samuel A. Nigro, M.D.
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Our Church Today
I always enjoy reading the ND Mag, but the most recent
issue (Winter 2002-03) was exceptional. I would urge every member
of the ND family to read the four feature articles regarding our
Church today. I ask this not with the thought of looking for agreement
with the various authors, but because each is thought provoking
in its own right and even more so collectively. We owe it to ourselves
and to our faith to challenge the "administrators" of our religion
from time-to-time because, after all, they are only human.
Guy J. Bentivenga, '57
Frankfort, Illinois
Priest Scandal
I applaud Scott Appleby for his well-balanced (Winter
2002-03 issue) article on the problems in the Catholic Church.
It is easy to agree that the bishops need to be accountable, in
temporal matters, to the laity.
I was disappointed that Scott skipped over the problem of clerical
homosexuality that seems to be at the root of most priestly sexual
abuse. Granted, not all homosexual priests are abusers, but certainly
nearly all the known priest-abusers are homosexual.
In a perfect celibate world, a priest's sexual orientation would
not matter. Alas, such a priestly world seems not to be the reality.
Some surveys have suggested that half of all homosexual priests
are sexually active (presumable with other homosexuals). Some
have observed that these sexually active priests apparently do
not consider themselves to be breaking their vow of celibacy because,
in an exercise of Clintonesque obfuscation, they limit their definition
of "sex" to the marriage act.
The presence of aggressive homosexual cultures in many seminaries
has repelled countless young men from pursuing a priestly vocation.
Today, those seminaries that screen out homosexual applicants
are overflowing with priest-candidates. Two examples are the seminaries
in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, and at Emmitsburg, Maryland).
No responsible parent would permit their male teenager to interface
privately with an openly homosexual priest. Therefore, the only
way a homosexual priest can experience a full pastoral ministry
is to stay "in the closet," living a lifelong lie. Any ministry
depending for its viability on such keeping of secrets cannot
long endure.
Most homosexuals are good people. It's just that too many have
an abysmal track record as priests. For nearly 20 years, Rome
has advised the bishops that it is not acceptable to ordain homosexuals.
Perhaps it's about time our bishops discovered the virtue of obedience.
Bill Dotterweich '58
Fort Wayne, Indiana
There appears to be almost universal agreement that the central
villain of the abuse scandal is some form of "clericalism." This
view needs unmasking; it is the product of a privileged "clerisy."
Clerisy always includes some clergy but is a much wider concept.
Clerisy is that power of worldliness which dematerializes the
historical in Christianity while it materializes its forms of
thought and action. Clerisy is more likely to be lay than clergy;
it is most often academic or rentier or taxable in its
dividends. Clerisy narrows the scope and focus of belief: it does
not think Christianity can be humanism. It tends to dismiss the
entire problem of humanism as aesthetic and trivializing. Clerisy
is too fragilely optimistic to credit its own experience and will
not see that all essential humanisms begin with a pessimistic
openness toward the bondage of nature, process, and will. Clerisy
clings to a life-lie; it does not think that a disillusioned ideal,
a disillusioned religion is possible. Clerisy grows a protective
cuticle of sin to shame contact with the groundlessness of creation.
Latin Europeans are often not anti-clerical: They have merely
undergone a long philosophical discipline in the observation of
the "trahison des clercs." Anti-clericalism is evasion and displacement.
Clerisy represents all change in the church as the work of liberal
ideology and ignores question about the development of the deposit
of faith. Clerisy is a large investment in the preservation of
special interests. Clerisy is unfeminine and delights in the paternity
of Nobodaddy rather than in that of the Holy Spirit. Clerisy is
intellectualism that fears the service of human wholeness. Clerisy
always puts the blame on Rome; it economizes all questions into
questions of political organization and ultramontane tyranny.
But the modern political question is the question of man.
Joseph Ryan '59
Yarmouthport, Massachusetts
Guidance for Bishops Wrong
To have Ed Cohen explain the bishops is like the undersigned
explaining the Talmud. He did no better than with Kurt Waldheim.
The excesses by Steinfels and Appleby in Dallas were not productive.
Professional guidance for the bishops was wrong in retrospect,
as stated by Pope John Paul II.
The people sought by Father Daley "of heroic risk in proclaiming
the gospel" are already here, worldwide, and in the hundreds of
thousands. Let us encourage more Catholic institutions to be heroic
in the spirit of Cardinals John Henry Newman and Avery Dulles,
both converts. The vineyards of societal failures await.
It seems some are not familiar with the very active pastoral
councils in each parish, since Vatican II.
James W. Ford '43
Wilmette, IL
Statements Damning
In the winter 2002 edition of Notre Dame Magazine, associate
editor Ed Cohen gave a one-page synopsis of a mini-conference
purportedly on "ways to restore trust in the church." It is difficult
to glean the complete picture from a synopsis, however Mary Rose
D'Angelo's statements are damning even in a condensed version.
She talks of "the church's inability to promote the use of condoms
to prevent AIDS . . ." Is she totally ignorant of the fact that
every medical study to date has failed to show a decrease in AIDS
spread? Her statement sounds like Planned Parenthood propaganda
with its constant "give them a serpent when they ask for bread."
Has she really not heard of teaching the value of chastity?
Surely a respected university like Notre Dame doesn't have to
sink so low to find associate professors of theology.
Stephen G. Watson, M.D.
Van Nuys, California
Catholic Rorschach Test One-Sided
I disagree with much of what Scott Appleby wrote in his
article, "The Do-It-Yourself Catholic Rorschach Test" (Winter
2002-03, p.22). I will address but one; that is the one-sided
discussion about the involvement of lawyers in the claim and litigation
process related to what the author has mischaracterized as "the
most damaging and traumatic ordeal in the history of the U.S.
church."
Mr. Appleby says that this is a pathetic time for the lawyers
who represent the victims. He also blames the media for not bothering
to report that claimants pay their lawyers for representing them.
This is a classic example of blaming the crime on the victim.
It is not the victims who have intentionally perpetrated and permitted
innumerable sexual assaults over many years. It is not the lawyers
for the victims who committed sexual assaults. The media that
reports the despicable acts of church representatives does not
commit those acts. It is the immoral, criminal and cruel representatives
of the church who perpetrated the assaults, taking advantage of
their religious power and trust. It is leaders of the church who
have repeatedly enabled and assisted some members of the clergy
to commit these acts for motives that may have arisen from pride,
selfishness and greed.
The author fails to call upon the church to disclose the millions
of dollars it has spent paying the church lawyers $200, $300 or
more per hour to defend and deny the claims of victims. Those
lawyers are paid to hide the nature and extent of the trauma inflicted
on countless victims, to use all available avenues to cover up
the actions of the church, to attack the victims who are often
psychologically fragile and vulnerable, and to buy off as many
of the claimants as possible at the cheapest price. Mr. Appleby
also neglects to mention that few of the victims have access to
the financial power and resources available to the church through
the generosity and faithfulness of church members.
When the lawyers for the church succeed in denying and avoiding
legitimate claims, with the help of their paying client, the church,
the claimants recover nothing. When the claimants recover nothing,
their lawyers, under the contingent fee arrangements, are paid
the agreed percentage called for by the contingent fee contract;
whether that fee is 30 percent of 0, 40 percent of 0, or even
50 percent of 0, the result is the same. They lawyer is paid no
fee. The lawyers for the church, however, are paid regardless
of the outcome. The more successful they are in denying or defeating
claims, whether legitimate or not, the more likely they may be
to be hired for similar, additional legal work.
If Mr. Appleby is successful in having the attorneys' fees (on
both sides) fully disclosed and reported by the media, it may
well be that the church will be found to have spent more in fees
than the claimants have. Is he interested in an even-handed disclosure?
Perhaps he could also address the efforts made by church lawyers
to minimize the psychological and financial damages church representatives
have inflicted on their victims. If the church is so victimized
by those who have been traumatized, why has the church refused
to disclose to the media all that the church and her representatives
have done to those they have assaulted? Why has the church consistently
denied and concealed the severity and extent of its responsibility?
Had lawyers for victims insisted on payment of hourly fees, and
not agreed to be paid only if claims were successfully pursued
against an intransigent church, this "traumatic ordeal" for the
church might have remained hidden from view for decades to come.
They consequence of the church's past and continued concealment
is that the "traumatic ordeal" suffered by the true sexual assault
victims will likely continue.
Richard T. Lenz
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Where Does the Money Go?
The Winter 02-03 issue advises that increased football
parking fees were to fund minor sports. This clarification is
most welcome, as some unsophisticated folk might have thought
that the parking (and ticket) increases related to the seven figure
salary of the football coach (umpteen times what Miami pays Larry
Coker), not to mention breach of contract reparations to Bob Davie,
and perhaps a few bucks to Georgia Tech and/or Stanford. Davie's
success two years ago in guiding the team to a BCS payoff might
have covered the brilliant decision to go to trial on a recent
age discrimination claim?
Tom Mahoney
Buffalo Grove, Illinois
New Alcohol Policy Disturbing
In response to the winter story "Have the alcohol rule
changes worked?", please print this letter beneath one you receive
that lauds Father Poorman's crusade against Notre Dame binge drinking.
I cannot believe such readers and Father Poorman are naive enough
to think the new rules will do ANYTHING other than push student-life
(and the same amount of drinking) further and further off campus.
Good thing those cleaning ladies and Freshmen Flipside members
see positive changes on campus! Binge drinking (defined by 3 or
more drinks in a sitting) is forever gone at ND! (on campus, at
least). How many off-campus muggings, robberies, abductions, cases
of drunk driving, or simply instances of injury or sickness without
an RA around will it take before the administration realizes that
maybe all the drinking ON-campus wasn't so bad?
Lawrence Hayes '01
via e-mail
A Remarkable Man
Thank you for including a very interesting and appropriate
article by Robert Leader in the magazine.
Professor Leader was one of the best of my college teachers and
as a student, I looked forward to his classes on Art History.
During his class I only remember him talking about World War
II once. This was during a discussion about Japanese ceramics.
While he said he was wounded in the war, he didn't say anything
about the details or his feeling as he did in his article. Even
then, I found it remarkable that he was not bitter about the war
or Japanese people. I remember him saying "How could you hate
a people who could produce such beautiful art."
Professor Leader's article only reinforced my opinion that he
is a remarkable man.
Bill Dasso '73
via e-mail
