Stupidly true. . .

You may have heard about the dust up at Notre Dame over the appointment of a professor who is an avowed pro-abortion and who makes the ludicrous claim that abortion is an example of white supremacy.  She would be laughable if it were not for the fact that this university which seeks to be the world's premier Roman Catholic school has hired her and given her a comfortable place and a platform to offend the very idea of that university being Roman Catholic.  Notre Dame is now hearing some loud push back from pro-life Roman Catholics on their faculty and among the student body because of this decision to appoint vocal abortion advocate Susan Ostermann to lead the Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies at the Keough School of International Affairs. On the faculty, two scholars — Professors Robert Gimello and Diane Desierto — have resigned from the Liu Institute in recent days over Ostermann’s appointment.  Former Notre Dame President Father John Jenkins rebuked her pro-abortion views in 2022. According to Notre Dame, however, “Those who serve in leadership positions at Notre Dame do so with the clear understanding that their decision-making as leaders must be guided by and consistent with the University’s Catholic mission. Notre Dame’s commitment to upholding the inherent dignity of the human person and the sanctity of life at every stage is unwavering.”

For weeks, University of Notre Dame leaders publicly insisted that the appointment of a pro-abortion-rights professor to head the Asian studies institute was final -- until it wasn't.  Apparently enough of a backlash arose to prevent the Jan. 8 appointment from being completed.  Which goes to show you that what is lacking in the hallowed halls of academia is not in the outrage of those whom they depend upon for moral and financial support.  What is telling, however, is that all of this would have gone ahead and a visible compromise with the schools doctrinal identity as a Roman Catholic institution would have been the acceptable cost they were willing to pay to play with the big boys in the secular land of university enchantment.  The question for all religious schools is why do they bother playing this dangerous game?

The US courts have assured religious schools that they can refuse to employ teachers whose views conflict with the religious teachings of their church.  For whatever reason, some churches think that they must hire those whose view conflict with their teachings but how stupidly true is this.   “I have long worked with scholars who hold diverse views on a multitude of issues, and I welcome the opportunity to continue doing so. While I hold my own convictions on complex social and legal issues, I want to be clear: my role as Liu Director is to support the diverse research of our scholars and students, not to advance a personal political agenda,” Ostermann said.  Yeah, right.  She will not bend in her advocacy of her pro-abortion position which belittles Rome's anti-abortion position as an example of patriarchal white supremacy and she will debate her point of view with those who disagree with her and Notre Dame will pay her to do so.  Again, how stupidly true is this story -- an example of how religious universities falsely presume they must operate.  Sadly, it is but one more instance of how doctrinal fidelity is sacrificed at the altar of diversity.  While I wish I could say this was a Roman Catholic problem, it is not.  We have our own problems in that regard.  In any case, the idea continues to exist that to be credible in our academic world, you must allow faculty to hold a wide range of viewpoints because this is the cost of high-quality academics and research.  The truth is that although you cannot control what your students might hold or espouse, you certainly can control who is teaching and what is being taught at a Christian school.