Welcome
It is with great sorrow that we come together today with the departure of our president and dear friend, Fr. Julio Giulietti, S.J. We have all come here to seek the truth, and to know and understand what has happened within the university walls and what has become of the reputation of WJU. In this light, please invite anyone to read the blog and feel free to comment as you wish.
Any posts with profanity are not welcome, otherwise, please speak your mind. You are a part of this university and we want to hear your voice!
Gerard L. Stockhausen, S.J. has a new job!
It bears noting that the University of Detroit Mercy, where Gerald Stockhausen, S.J., is now departing, was frequently embroiled in controversies during his tenure over issues such as: the university repeatedly sponsoring productions of the Vagina Monologues; recommending Planned Parenthood as a good career opportunity for students on the university's official website; inviting pro-abortion politicans to receive awards and honors from the university; holding a student program on campus called "Sexapaloosa"; hiring a pro-abortion, pro gay marriage chairperson and faculty members for the univeristy's Womens' Studies Program -- who have in some cases publicly ridiculed pro-life students (e.g., one faculty member put a large sign on her office door stating "Just say no to sex with Pro-lifers!"); and pushing Gay/ Lesbian activist organizations on campus.
ReplyDeleteA major university donor from Chicago, who personally met with Stockhausen to object to UDM's support of Planned Parenthood, cancelled a $3 Million gift to the university and reported that Fr. Stockhausen belittled his concerns, saying "these organizations do a lot of good." (Planned Parenthood is by far the largest abortion provider in the United States.)
This same Fr. Stockhausen was the chairman of the WJU board of Trustees who arranged the surreptitious firing of Fr. Giulietti last August.
While I am no fan of the Board of Trustees actions against Fr. Giulietti, I also have little appreciation for 'anonymous' opinions. Additionally, equating 'pro-choice' with 'pro-abortion' does little more than eradicate any credence I might have put into your comments.
ReplyDeleteMr. Naughton: St. Thomas More published his criticisms of heretics anonymously. Trying to discredit an argument by complaining you don't know the author's name is illogical.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you like to think there's a big difference between "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion," and perhaps for you there is, but when it comes to writing laws and setting public policies, it is a distinction without a difference. People like Harry Blackmun, Ted Kennedy, Mario Cuomo and Rev. Drinan probably didn't want abortions for themselves or their own families and friends, but their votes directly advanced the killing of over thirty million unborn humans, disproportionately African-American. When it comes to public policy, it's votes that count, not personal feelings. Have you ever heard a politician say that he or she likes abortions and wants more of them? I doubt it. They are only "pro-choice" and often "personally opposed." Do their subjective feelings make a jot of difference? Of course not.
BTW, I was on WJU campus the day the Roe v. Wade decision was announced. It was probably before you were born and I doubt you can imagine the dismay and disbelief that enveloped the entire campus that day. Social attitudes change, but the objective nature of abortion has not changed. Nor has human nature.
Finally, if you can refute anything I wrote in my previous post about Fr. Stockhausen's controversial expereiences at Detroit Mercy, I sincerely invite you to do so. I was attempting to report facts, not my personal opinions. I welcome corrections if they are factual in nature.
With all due respect,
Anonymous
Let's be honest, your attempt at reporting facts was every bit fueled by personal agenda. If your original post didn't make that clear, your response certainly did. Furthermore, I simply stated that I have little use for someone who jumps on a blog for the sole purpose of challenging the morality of others, yet fails to have the courage to attach their own name. You, sir/madame, are not St. Thomas More.
ReplyDeleteAt no point during the course of the two sentences I wrote did I challenge any of your assertions regarding Detroit Mercy; nor did I claim to have any knowledge of them.
And yes, I do think there is a monumental difference in both the meaning and use of the terms 'pro-choice' and 'pro-abortion'. And I feel sorry for people who are not confident enough in their own convictions that they feel the need to use such language in the absence of more constructive appeals.
John
Mr. Naughton:
ReplyDeleteRe: personal agendas -- I was under the impression that most people who create blogs and post messages on them have agendas.
Re: challenging others' morality, you apparently misunderstood me. I do not challenge Fr. Stockhausen's morals. For all I know he is a living saint. What I question are some decisions he has made as a leader (i.e., president and trustee) of two Catholic colleges including my alma mater. His judgment in the firing of Fr. Giulietti was appalling and caused great scandal and harm; perhaps we can agree on that.
Another point of concurrence: I agree with your assertion that the term "pro-choice" carries monumental significance for many people. I would be astonished if you thought otherwise. "Pro-choice" implies tolerance, liberality, and above all, moral neutrality. It is non-judgmental. It pays respect to others' autonomy as Pilate paid respect the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin. It is self-absolving and self-congratulatory at the same time. Who, after all, wants to live with oppressive feelings of guilt? If the term gives you solace, by all means use it.
I appreciate your honesty in conceding the facts contained in my original post, and while we obviously have some differences of political opinion, I wish you good luck in your endeavors.
Sincerely,
Not St. Thomas More