Campus Notes

During the March 2011 meeting of the University of Notre Dame Faculty Senate, a resolution failed that would have offered the Senate’s affirmation of the University’s commitment to the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life.  According to the minutes of that meeting, eight senators were in favor of the resolution and 22 were against it.

The resolution text placed the proposed faculty support in the broader context of the University of Notre Dame’s pro-life initiatives over the course of the past two years.  The resolution mentioned how Notre Dame adopted its Institutional Statement Supporting the Choice for Life on April 8, 2010, and how Fr. Jenkins responded to a recommendation of the Task Force on Supporting the Choice for Life by creating the position of Coordinator for University Life Initiatives.

With these and other considerations in mind, the proposed Faculty Senate Resolution read:

In light of these events, and consistent with its earlier resolution of support for Father Jenkins, the Faculty Senate affirms again Fr. Jenkins’ witness to the University of Notre Dame’s commitments both to intellectual inquiry and debate and to the dignity of the human person and the sanctity of human life; and by this resolution wishes to commend the ongoing public witness of Father Jenkins, his Task Force on Supporting the Choice for Life, the Coordinator of University Life Issues, and most especially Notre Dame students, to a culture of life. In addition, respecting the freedom of conscience of individual University faculty (and Faculty Senate) members who may disagree in whole or in part, the Faculty Senate endorses and urges the University to pursue and implement the remaining Task Force recommendations submitted to Father Jenkins in January 2010.

Finally, and as a general principle, the Faculty Senate urges both the Coordinator for University Life Issues and the University administration itself to strive in all their programs and policies to be faithful to the full spectrum of Catholic social teaching, including especially the promotion of communal solidarity and a preferential option for the poor, and the ongoing development of a culture of justice and generosity both within and beyond the University of Notre Dame.

The minutes from the March Faculty Senate meeting give the responses of various members as to why they disagree with the resolution.

One senator opposed it because “it sends the wrong message to the outside world, some quarters of which already view the university as a peculiar place at which to pursue research.”

The minutes also recorded that there were concerns that some faculty would misinterpret the resolution, “thinking that their senator was attempting to speak for them on a matter on which individuals tend to take very different positions.”

And the minutes continued with other faculty senators’ reactions to the proposed resolution:

It was then pointed out that not everybody in this university is Catholic and that this resolution may not reflect the viewpoint of many of those individuals.

Again the timing of this resolution was questioned on the grounds that it could create unnecessary tension within the University and on the grounds that it does not address other social policies that the Catholic Church endorses.

Philip Bess answered saying that support for this resolution would show that the Senate endorses those social policies and also urges the administration to follow those policies. It would also, he said, challenge the claim that a Catholic university cannot be a great university.

Another senator said that talking about abortion will not start any new discussion about the issue and said that this resolution will not serve the goal of making this university a better place.

Others said that some people will see this resolution as support for the pro-life movement and not for the rest of Catholic social teaching….

Finally, one senator said that this resolution, if approved, would be perceived as a reprisal for the Senate’s 2009 endorsement of Father Jenkins’ invitation to President Obama, adding that he was opposed to the resolution for that reason.