Educational goals justify pro-choice trip funding
The Observer Editorial
A Catholic college is not an oxymoron — but it is a study in duality. The Catholic Church is an institution of strict doctrine and devout followers. Institutions of higher education promote novel, diverse ideas and questioning minds.
But what happens when students at a Catholic college raise questions about Church dogma?
When four Saint Mary's students received funding from the College's Center for Women's Intercultural Leadership to attend a pro-choice leadership conference in Washington, D.C. they raised questions.
Why did students from a Catholic college want to attend a leadership conference that promotes ideas that conflict with Catholic teachings? Why did they receive funding from a department in the College? Does CWIL, founded on a $12 million grant from the Lilly Endowment, have an obligation to uphold the College's Catholic traditions? Is there anything wrong with exploring ideas that differ from the views held by the Catholic Church?
We don't know. But we do know that there is a difference between exposure and espousal.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Catholics attending a conference to learn more about a highly controversial issue. After all, no one would oppose a Catholic college that funded a pro-life conference. Education should be open-minded and unbiased. Even a religiously affiliated college has a responsibility to honor its commitment to education before its vow to religious stewardship.
CWIL was not wrong to fund the students' exploration. In fact, any scholarly environment should demand inquiry. College students, Catholic or otherwise, are charged with a duty to educate themselves and make informed decisions — even when the Catholic Church already has a stance on the issue.
According to its executive summary, CWIL was established to help Saint Mary's "build on its position as the nation's premier Catholic women's college and its tradition of pioneering change in women's education to create a new and unique locus for innovative thinking, reflection and action."
The students who attended the conference were immersed in a pro-choice, feminist environment that would be impossible to replicate at Saint Mary's or Notre Dame. That doesn't mean that the women embraced this new rhetoric — they may be pro-choice, they may be pro-life, they may be undecided on the issue.
Upon returning from the conference, all the College should ask them to be is more thoughtful, more reflective and more active. Their trip has already fostered discussion on an important issue. Now these women have a duty to share their experiences with the students who share their faith — students who probably have questions of their own.
All Viewpoint Stories for Friday, February 7, 2003
