Michael Bradley, Executive Editor


This weekend, the Identity Project of Notre Dame (idND) will host its eighth annual Edith Stein Project at McKenna Conference Center.  The fundamental question of this year’s conference is “what does it mean to be beautiful?” Formed largely in response to the Vagina Monologues with an initial conference theme of “Redefining Feminism,” the project “hopes to recognize the importance of our choices with respect to our human dignity,” according to its mission statement. The statement reads further: “Informed by Catholic tradition, the Identity Project believes there are certain fundamental truths about the human person. We look to empower persons to live holistic lives consistent with these truths.”

In the case of the Edith Stein Project, empowerment consists in communicating the truths of human dignity that form the basis of a certain way of living. Empowerment is a chief fruit of evangelization.

Notre Dame is an institution that wants to empower people – its students, faculty, staff, graduates. When Father Sorin reported to his religious superior, Blessed Father Basil Moreau, that he envisioned his newly-formed Notre Dame blossoming into “one of the most powerful means of doing good in this country,” he was not far off the mark. Notre Dame has as many means at its disposal as any university in the world.

When university president Father John Jenkins, CSC, delivered his inaugural address in 2005 at the Joyce Center, he echoed Fr. Sorin’s aspirations. “Let no one ever again say that we dreamed too small,” Fr. Jenkins declared.

Over the past decade Notre Dame has certainly dreamt big about its academic reputation, the size of its research budget, and the success of its sports teams.  In fact, Notre Dame has not only dreamt big.  It has become big – in all these areas.  At the same time, many people question whether Notre Dame is dreaming too small where it most matters – about its character and conduct as a Catholic university; indeed, as the leading Catholic university in America, and probably the world.

Our university is surely aware of the great religious responsibilities which come with this high status. It can be a beacon on the hill, the great force for good that Fr. Sorin hoped it would be. Especially in the context of the Church’s New Evangelization, Notre Dame occupies a singular role in the American Church, and – as I suggested – across the globe.

As a modern American university rooted in Catholic tradition, Notre Dame finds itself in a bind. It wants to be mentioned in the same breath as the Ivies, but as a Catholic university, it has to be ambivalent about the comparison. We are, thank God, a far cry from hosting a Sex Week comparable to the one which Yale graduate Nathan Harden describes of his alma mater in his book God and Sex at Yale, or from endorsing clubs such as Harvard’s recently approved sadomasochism club, “Harvard College Munch for the BDSM” (“floggers are my favorite,” one female club member offers). But the trends at play at these troubled Ivies are at play across the nation, and Notre Dame will not be exempt from the pressures and ideologies that have corrupted Yale and Harvard in this regard.

Fr. Jenkins possesses a bully pulpit. By virtue of Notre Dame’s prominence as a first-class research university, as a football power (finally, again), and most of all as the nation’s premier Catholic institution of higher learning, people will listen when  Fr. Jenkins speaks.  In some recent public presentations, Fr. Jenkins has chosen a particular theme and made it into a trademark of sorts.  He will shortly finish a book on it: that better persuasive efforts for dialogue need to replace sharp, polarizing argumentation.

I don’t think anybody disagrees with him. But when the conversation is about moral truth or natural law, one must be as unflinching  as Sir Thomas More was in refusing to violate his own conscience (formed according to the Church’s teachings) in the face of pressure from Henry VIII. It is no coincidence that the American Church has turned to St. Thomas as an exemplar of religious conscientiousness during these times of the HHS mandate; it has not done so simply because More refused to violate his conscience, either. More was as civil, amicable and conciliatory of a statesmen and individual as you could ask someone to be. He deeply angered and even offended many fellow statesmen (who took offense at his allegedly overly-scrupulous and pious approaches to politics) and friends by not swearing to the Act of Succession. More spoke truth to the power of a king and lost his head for the sake of his soul.

Will Notre Dame speak truth to the power of a hostile culture and keep its soul for the sake of converting hearts?

It must do so.  Notre Dame can best serve the Church and the world by being unashamedly committed to the truth, beauty and goodness accessible through its Catholic faith. In order to do that, Notre Dame must be prepared to offend a lot of folks, however graciously it presents its beliefs.

Too often, the result of ambitions to discourse civilly – to avoid offense – is a relativistic, or at least private, presentation of what one believes; a subjective offering of “what works for me.” Positing objective truth – proclaiming that there are goods and virtues which we must all share, rather than that there are preferences and values which we may or may not find pleasing – offends many in a culture in which heightened individual sensitivity is king. Heaven forbid that one make a “thou shall” or “thou shall not” statement in the public sphere regarding the common good. Of course, heaven doesn’t forbid it; it commands it, and commands us to proclaim it as well.

America scorns much of what the Church has to say; simply observe the mocking tone in which students talk about Du Lac’s policies. This shouldn’t be surprising. It is not the first time that living out one’s convictions incurs a large social cost. Notre Dame wouldn’t be in bad company if it stood up for something that the culture deems offensive.

Has Notre Dame made a peep about the meaning of marriage, or lent its considerable resources to that crucial debate? Notre Dame wants to be a head above other universities – as well it should. Does it have the courage to stand up for issues when its peer institutions are all sitting down?

The language that Notre Dame employs concerning its Catholic heritage when explaining its internal decisions to the outside world is often tepid, even apologetic. Notre Dame treats its Catholic commitments, at times, not as intelligible and good statements about reality, but as tribal Catholic customs, speaking of them as one speaks about familial customs that aren’t really reasonable but are just…well, tradition.

In The Fellowship of the Ring (the movie version, at least), Frodo and Galadriel share a powerful moment. “I cannot do this alone,” Frodo complains of bearing the One Ring. “You are a Ring-bearer, Frodo,” Galadriel answers. “To bear a Ring of Power is to be alone.”

To be a true witness to the faith in modern America is, regrettably, often to be alone in some regards. To be a university faithful to Ex Corde Ecclesiae is, sometimes, to stand alone on certain issues.

“If you do not find a way, no one will,” Galadriel challenges Frodo; for that statement is nothing less than a challenge. Fr. Jenkins recognizes a similar challenge, to resist the urge to throw Notre Dame’s lot in with Yale and Harvard. He said in 2006, “I believe that either we will be the University that combines the highest levels of academic discipline with a rich Catholic tradition or no one will, and the world will do without.”  He’s right.

Notre Dame has failed in its Christian duty to be a light to the nation more than once recently, but to quote Galadriel again, “yet hope remains while the Company is true.” Notre Dame is home to some of the nation’s most ardent Catholic academics and young people as Notre Dame’s recent record-breaking number of March for Life attendees demonstrates.

This weekend too, students, faculty and attendees will come together at the Edith Stein Project to evangelize and empower in a sensitive, compassionate and unflinching way. Not everyone will agree with their message, and that’s just fine. As St. Paul reminded us this Sunday, true charity “rejoices with the truth.” After all, you can’t empower someone if you’re afraid to offer what they are missing. You can’t evangelize if the Good News you choose to share is yesterday’s news.

Michael Bradley is a junior studying philosophy & theology. He lives in Dillon Hall with the three best roommates a guy could want. Contact him at mbradle6@nd.edu.