ND Administration: Who do they follow?

ddjones007
Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:15:44 +0000

Without Ted Hesburgh’s leadership, Notre Dame would never have gained the elite academic reputation it has. Without Monk Malloy, student life would have really suffered–they needed his influence. Without Fr. Jenkins, the school’s Catholic identity would be at risk.

Rather than look at this as a debate about who is the best steward of the university’s mission and legacy, I think it is really a matter of the right people being in the right places at the right time.

I, too, am proud to call myself an alumna of the University of Notre Dame. I feel the legacy has been “safe” all along. Tell you one thing, without the critical student life impact that Monk Malloy introduced, I would have felt a lot more reluctant about sending my daughter there than I am now.

If you knew what it was like in the early '80’s compared to how it is today, perhaps it would be easier to see that a little bit of “liberal” intervention and philosophy was actually pretty well needed. Don’t know if there are any other female alum posting on here who were there in the first decade of education, but it was a very institutionally sexist place. There were so many great things and great people there, it was certainly tolerable–more than tolerable–but it clearly needed to change. I believe that it has; I believe that Monk was plugged into the students and plugged into the faculty–something that needed to happen.

I don’t believe ND will ever shed its Catholic legacy. Nor do I think that legacy was ever at risk under Monk Malloy…