Georgetown v. Tufts

dzleprechaun
Thu, 02 May 2013 12:05:17 +0000

I mean, if you’re actively anti-Catholic, then yes, Georgetown would probably be a bad fit.

Having said that, there are a few things I’d like to throw out, from my perspective as an alum who has long checked “None” as his religious affiliation.


Georgetown was the first University in the country to be open to students from any and all religions - including those without any religious affiliation - having been explicitly founded that way by John Carroll. From the very beginning, the school has had a religious mission as part of its overall raison d’etre, but it has not been a mission of indoctrination.
One could, I suppose, list a bunch of various liberal or downright progressive stances the University has taken, such as being the first U.S. university to have a full-time Muslim imam on staff, being the first Catholic school to have an LGBTQ resource center, offering same-sex partner benefits (technically, any adult with whom you were legally domiciled was eligible, but I think that makes it an even more progressive concept) since long before gay marriage or civil unions were a reality, various commitments to sustainability, a living wage for employees, etc. etc. One could just as easily counter with some conservative stances, of course, but the point is to paint a more complete picture than the one conjured by simply thinking of a “Catholic school.”
In response to this specific point: “as a parent paying the tuition, there’s a certain “ick” factor just thinking about sending my money to a Catholic institution.”


I see where this is coming from, but I’m not sure that judging a (pretty independent) institution by its progenitor is all that reflective. I think the government of the State of Texas does lots of deeply stupid and immoral things and the ranks of the state’s elected offices are filled with many knaves and scoundrels. I’m not going to hold that against the University of Texas. Better to judge the institution itself and how it chooses to utilize the tuition dollars it receives.


Specifically with regard to “Maybe it’s their position on same sex marriage, contraceptives, or covering up pedophilia, etc.”


One must take care to distinguish religious precepts in theory from that faith as put into practice. On number two, the vast majority of American Catholics disagree with the church’s official stance as it is (and the history of Vatican II shows that the majority of those tasked with studying the topic actually reached the opposite conclusion from the final decision that was made, which was a minority view).

On number one, if a majority don’t already disagree with the Church on this point, then that point will be reached within a few years. The highest-ranking Catholic in America is Joe Biden, whose stance on those two issues is well-known. Another Catholic, Governor Martin O’Malley, led the charge for same-sex marriage in Maryland, which became the first state in which the public voted FOR same-sex marriage in an up-or-down vote. Maryland is, of course, a historically Catholic state. Massachusetts, the state with perhaps the strongest Catholic identity in the country, is one of the most liberal and was the first U.S. state to recognize gay marriage.

Long story short, breaking down obsolete dogmas is very much a possibility, and it has already happened to a great extent among the faithful, and it is highly likely that Georgetown - which has often been at the forefront of such change - will play a central role in that.

On number three, the only thing I can say is that, while the Catholic Church worldwide deserves a great deal of blame for its handling of the sexual abuse of children, it is in no way a problem unique to the Church. It may seem more pervasive because it is the single largest hierarchical organization on the planet. But as one can see all too well from a glance at the headlines, this is a problem in Protestant churches and in Jewish communities and in youth sports teams and in pretty much any other facet of society. That includes attempts to hush things up. It is a societal problem, first and foremost. (“Insurance companies, child advocacy groups and religion scholars say there is no evidence that Catholic clergy are more likely to be involved in sexual misconduct than other clergy or professionals.” - [Source](http://blogs.denverpost.com/hark/2010/05/25/scandal-creates-contempt-for-catholic-clergy/39/).)

But yea, if your approach to religion is more Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris than Barry Lynn (Georgetown Law Class of '78) or Michael Ruse, then it’s probably not a great fit.