Catholic University Clarifies Speaker Policy
September 26, 2008 by Margaret Boehm 
Print This Post
Political candidates can speak on campus with University approval from Rev. David M. O’Connell, according to the University’s newly expanded political activity guidelines for student organizations.
“No candidates running for election are to be invited for anything without express permission of the President,” the policy states. “No politicians who have public positions that run counter to the teachings of the Catholic Church are to be invited for anything without express permission from the President.”
The upcoming election has been influential in the University’s decision to finally state an otherwise unwritten rule about political candidates. “Things have ramped up between 2000-2008,” said Craig Parker, the University’s general counsel, about the political policies.
As a non-profit organization, the University legally cannot endorse a specific candidate or use its resources to endorse a candidate. These restrictions are among the 200 federal laws that apply to all institutions of higher education. If political candidates were to come to campus, they would not be given a platform in which they could advocate for their campaign or issues.
“The problem for the University would be the death penalty,” said Parker referring to what would happen if the University were to be found violating these non-profit laws. “You cannot promote a political view.”
In addition, the University is designated by the Internal Revenue Service as a 501 (c)-0 nonprofit organization. It pays no taxes and as a result, is held to political neutrality, especially during election years.
Worries about speakers contradicting church teaching and the University’s non-profit status have loomed large over all decisions concerning speakers and presentations.
Now that the policy has been clarified there should be less confusion, however Professor Emeritus Joseph Sendry says, “the big question is how do we proceed? There will always be someone who will be offended. However, one always has to take risks.”
In the fall of 2004, actor and producer Stanley Tucci was scheduled to speak at the University as part of an Italian film festival. After discovering that Tucci held views on abortion that contradicted church teaching, he was un-invited. Subsequently, the University has been defining its policy on speakers and presentations on campus.
In 2006, Senatorial candidate and alumnus Robert Casey, Jr. was allowed to give the John Paul XXIII lecture at the Columbus School of Law. Casey’s speech was on the topic on responsibility of lawyers to public service. The law school publicly stated that it did not endorse Casey as a candidate, but still faced opposition from the Cardinal Newman Society.
“The policy does not say that political candidates can never come to campus. You need the President’s permission,” said Parker. If political candidates were to be approved by O’Connell, the University would want candidates from both political parties. “You want to have some balance with the politicians you bring to campus. If a Democratic candidate gets approved to come to campus, then the administration will want to bring in a Republican candidate too.”
Chairman of the College Republicans Danielle Beck, is satisfied with the new policy. “The process is simpler now. I prefer not to invite anyone that is campaigning otherwise” In order to bring a speaker to campus, Beck must write a statement that explains why the prospective speaker is qualified to speak on the topic he or she will be speaking on and must reveal any ‘dead skeletons’ that may be in the speaker’s closet.
“It’s definitely a juggling process,” said Beck when asked about the process of finding an expert on a certain topic that has a platform that is in good standing with the Catholic Church.
The of the new policy regarding positions in line with the Catholic Church, comes from the University’s decision to strictly follow the June 2004 statement by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
“Lots of schools chose to ignore the statement. In Fr. O’Connell’s view, we are the national university of the Catholic Church in America and we are going to listen to the Bishops,” said Parker.
The influential statement which applies to all Catholic institutions says,” The Catholic community and the institutions which are a part of our family should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not receive awards, special honors or prestigious platforms, which would suggest support for their actions. However, we cannot cut off dialogue with public officials since they make decisions every day that touch issues of human life and dignity.”
According to Parker, O’Connell has used the criteria in this statement to help form the guidelines for campus speakers. Before a speaker comes to campus, “you need to gauge whether it is someone who is so over the top with their positions on the Catholic Church and assess the speaker’s potential conflicts with Catholic values.”
While some may argue the final decision regarding speakers in solely up to O’Connell’s opinion Parker assures, “I believe that he is truly open, although he has narrowed the gate.”
As the Catholic University of America, there is also an image issue to uphold. “We are the one place that a lot of Catholics expect certain things,” said Parker. “It’s a constant struggle to integrate faith and reason.”
The University is proud of its identification as a Catholic institution. “We protect the right to be different,” said Parker. “If you want to see Hillary Clinton speak, there’s a great college three miles down the road.”
Related posts:
- Brislin's Column: University Correctly Following Catholic Principles By Instituting Speaker Policy Of late, great controversy has surrounded the University's presentations policy....
- O'Connell Asks Faculty to Draft Speaker Policy A group of ordinary professors in the school of Arts...
- O’Connell Reflects On University Speaker Policy The University’s efforts to understand ideas that differ from those...
- Professors Call For Speaker Policy Reversal Professors in the school of Arts and Sciences have begun...
- News Coverage and the Speaker Policy Last week, the Tower emphasized that its mission was to...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Joh Paul XXIII indeed! I must have slept through at least XXI Popes!
Do you know of Any US politicians who do not “contradict” catholic teaching on any matter of public policy or practice?
Why one speakers from two parties? What about all the others?
LOL! the link to this story headlined “Univ Clarifies Seaker policy”. Is there a policy on “Seakers [sic]“? Let us always welcome them!
[...] Political candidates can speak on campus with University approval from Rev. David M. O’Connell, according to the University’s newly expanded political activity guidelines for student organizations. “No candidates running for election are to be invited for anything without express permission of the President,” the policy states. “No politicians who have public positions that run counter to the teachings of the Catholic Church are to be invited for anything without express permission from the President.” [...] [...]
Why is the death penalty a probem?
In Catholic teaching, abortion and the death penalty are very different moral issues
From Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below.
Catholics in good standing can support the death penalty and even an increase in executions, if their own prudential judgement calls for it. Or they can oppose it.
What Ardent Practicing Catholics Do (1)
By Fr. John De Celles, 9/1/2008
“Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is … a grave and clear obligation to oppose them … [I]t is therefore never licit to … “take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it.”
In other words: it is always a grave or mortal sin for a politician to support abortion.
Now, some will want to say that these bishops-and I- are crossing the line from Religion into to politics. But it was the Speaker of the House (Nancy Pelosi) who started this. The bishops, and I, are not crossing into politics; she, and other pro-abortion Catholic politicians, regularly cross over into teaching theology and doctrine, And it’s our job to try clean up their mess.
But there’s something more than that here. On Sunday, before the whole nation, she claimed to be an “ardent, practicing Catholic.” Imagine if someone came in here and said “I’m a mafia hit man and I’m proud of it.” Or “I deal drugs to little children.” Or “I think black people are animals and it’s okay to make them slaves, or at least keep them out of my children’s school.”
Are these “ardent practicing Catholics”? No, they are not.”
And neither is a person who ardently supports and votes to fund killing 1 to 1.5 million unborn babies every single year. Especially if that person is in a position of great power trying to get others to follow her. Someone, for example, like a Catholic Speaker of the House, or a Catholic candidate for Vice President of the United States, or a Catholic senior Senator who is stands as the leading icon his political party. Like the proud and unrepentant murderer or drug dealer, they are not ardent Catholics. They are, in very plain terms, very bad Catholics.”
But the reason I say all this is not because I want to embarrass them or even correct them — they’re not even here. It’s because of you. Because back in the 1850’s when Catholic bishops, priests, and politicians were either silent or on the wrong side of the slavery debate, they risked not only their souls, but the souls of every other Catholic they influenced. I cannot do that, and I won’t do that.
Some would say, well Father, what about those people who support the war in Iraq, or the death penalty, or oppose undocumented aliens? Aren’t those just as important, and aren’t Catholic politicians who support those “bad Catholics” too?
Simple answer: no. Not one of those issues, or any other similar issues, except for the attack on traditional marriage is a matter of absolute intrinsic evil in itself. Not all wars are unjust — and good Catholics can disagree on facts and judgments. Same thing with the other issues: facts are debatable, as are solutions to problems.”
———–
Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) “stated succinctly, emphatically and unambiguously as follows”:
“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.” (2)
(1) “What Ardent Practicing Catholics Do: Correcting Pelosi”, National Review Online, 9/1/2008 6:00AM
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTY1MzAwOTc5MmViMzUyYzM5YmY3OWFkYzdkMzY0YzM=
(2) “More Concerned with ‘Comfort’ than Christ?”, Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick: Catholic Online, 7/11/2004 http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php NOTE: Ratzinger was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and delivered this with guidance to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
ALSO:
Cardinals, Bishops and Congressmen Slam Pelosi on Abortion
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082601.html
New York Cardinal - Pelosi Not Worthy of “Providing Leadership in a Civilized Democracy”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082605.html
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
[...] your article on the new speaker policy (“University Clarifies Speaker Policy”), I appreciate the simplified approach to approving campus speakers. But after explaining the [...]