“Catholic doctrine and discipline may be walls; but they are the walls of a playground.” – G. K. Chesterton
“The Rover is too harsh!” “The Rover needs more bridge-building!” “The Church emphasizes both walls and bridges, right? Why doesn’t the Rover do both?”
The Rover often receives criticism like this from students, faculty, and administrators, who claim that we divide and polarize at the expense of bridge-building or seeking unity. These arguments are not completely ill-founded. The Church has a duty to be a “light to the nations,” to “open wide the doors for Christ,” as Pope John Paul II declared in his inaugural address as pope.
But today, attempts at bridge-building too often ignore love’s inseparability from the walls of truth. At this moment, this is the mission of the Rover: to remind Notre Dame of her walls—her Catholic character, her purpose, her namesake.
Vatican II, Pope Saint John Paul II, and all the great ‘bridge-builders’ of the Church understood that bridges mean nothing without walls—in fact, they’re dangerous without them. In a recent homily on the same topic, Bishop Barron addresses this issue: “Have we been passing through a time in the Church when we’ve allowed the walls to be breached? The stories and the law that define us as a people are no longer being told in the same persuasive way. What that leads to is a loss of purpose, a loss of identity, a loss of mission.”
Similar to the universal Church, Notre Dame cannot hope to maintain its distinctly Catholic identity when its messaging is limited to loving the sinner, with no mention of hating the sin. A frequent risk of activities that seek to “build bridges” is that little effort is made to preserve the “buildings,” so to speak, that already exist.
Perhaps an application of this principle to a specific issue can elucidate my point more clearly. There are few issues more discussed in the pages of the Rover, at Notre Dame, and in the global Church, than the issue of pastoral care for the LGBTQ community.
At Notre Dame, the current approach on this issue is one of ‘acceptance.’ For example, the university’s last post for the month of June celebrated the LGBTQ community: “This #PrideMonth, in keeping with our Catholic character, we seek to build a community in which all students are welcome, feel a sense of belonging, and can flourish on campus and in our Notre Dame family.” Another post stated, “Happy #PrideMonth! We celebrate all LGBTQ+ identities and reaffirm our commitment to being a welcoming, safe and supportive place for ALL members of the Notre Dame family.”
The Rover has already written numerous editorials on this topic, but the message bears repetition: Love without truth is not love at all.
Then-Cardinal Ratzinger explained it well in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.” He wrote, “We wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.”
The letter continues emphatically: “All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely misinterpreted.”
Notre Dame might think that its “bridges” fit within this framework of pastoral care. The university sees its mission as one that welcomes all beliefs in the name of a universally-accepting “Catholic mission.” This acceptance, however, inevitably causes an ambiguous rhetoric in the university’s communication, that, as Ratzinger shows, comes with a grave risk of misleading many of the faithful.
At surface level, words like “welcoming,” “belonging,” and “flourishing” do not explicitly contradict Church teaching. But at best, Notre Dame’s statements are ambiguous about Church teaching on LGBTQ issues, and as Ratzinger points out, any hint of ambiguity on this topic is fatal.
In matters of doctrine on homosexuality, Notre Dame has an important obligation to provide pastoral care to this community—LGBTQ issues are a current and urgent social problem, and the Church must respond. Ratzinger is clear, however, that no amount of good intention can replace truthful and faithful teaching. Any neglect on Notre Dame’s part to point her students to the freedom found in the truth of Christ’s teachings is a failure in her mission of education.
Through our reporting on the LGBTQ issue and other campus controversies, the Rover helps to sustain the walls that are in place to protect the university from the harms of societal pressure that target this university.
Yes, this might mean less emphasis on “bridge-building,” but when the bridge being extended by the university is not supported by the walls that define our identity and tradition, those bridges are meaningless. Perhaps in a different time, the Rover will need to emphasize bridges to reinvigorate the apostolic mission of the university. But in 2025, Our Lady’s University needs the Rover to maintain the structure that supports her pastoral efforts as a university.
The purpose of creating a bridge to meet someone “on the margins” is not to stay on the other side of the bridge. It is to then accompany that person back over the bridge and return to the Church—a place of true love and mercy.
The Rover emphasizes ‘walls’ not to make Catholicism ‘exclusive’ or ‘harsh,’ but so that, defined in the truth, Notre Dame can properly fulfill her true apostolic and educational mission for all.
Bridgette Rodgers is a junior studying theology and political science. She likes bridges, as her name suggests, but she also likes walls. You can contact her at brodger4@nd.edu.
Photo Credit: Matthew Rice
Subscribe to the Irish Rover here.
Donate to the Irish Rover here.
