It might be hard for alumni, sports fans and fundraisers to admit but, at the end of the day, not every educational institution matters. Few are unique; most are redundant and easy to replace.The University of Notre Dame, though, is different.
This is not merely because of past (and, we can hope, future) football success, a catchy fight song and savvy merchandising. Notre Dame matters because it aspires to be something different and interesting: a great research university that is excellent precisely because it is meaningfully and distinctively Catholic.
This project is not about nostalgia, heritage, school spirit or "branding." Instead, Notre Dame's aim is to achieve genuine excellence, and thereby to engage and improve the world through — not despite — its Catholic character. This character is to be pervasive, animating and enriching, not merely a decoration or garnish, a little "something extra" sprinkled on top of an otherwise standard-issue enterprise.
Notre Dame's project is challenging and vulnerable, but it's also exciting and important — and not just to Catholics. We all have a stake in its success. Conversations are made deeper and richer, and the diligent search for truth is helped by the presence of diverse, distinctive — sometimes dissenting — voices. Institutions, like individuals, provide these voices.
Peter Parker's Uncle Ben was right to say, "With great power comes great responsibility." Similarly, institutions that matter carry a burden. This is why Notre Dame's decision to honor President Obama with an honorary law degree is so controversial. Most graduation speeches, of course, are entirely forgettable hodgepodges of Dr. Seuss, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Starbucks-cup quotations.
This year, however, Notre Dame's commencement speaker on Sunday could hardly be more prominent or memorable. And yet, the choice has divided sharply not only the Irish Nation but Catholics generally and has prompted many of us who love Notre Dame and embrace its mission to ask: Is Notre Dame's decision consistent with the character and commitments that make it distinctive? That make it worth caring about? That make it matter?
To understand what the controversy surrounding Obama's invitation is about, it is important to understand what it is not about.
Most important, the issue is not, as some commentators have suggested, whether Notre Dame should welcome, engage, debate and explore a wide range of viewpoints. Of course it should. It was, after all, a central message of the Catholic Church's Second Vatican Council that "nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo" in Christians' hearts, and the same can be said for the work of a Catholic university. Such a university has nothing to fear from — indeed, it has the best possible reasons to welcome — inquiry, investigation, argument and testing. And so, no one could reasonably oppose inviting the president to Notre Dame for discussion and dialogue on immigration, education, health care — or even abortion.
The question on the table is not whether Notre Dame should hear from the president but whether Notre Dame should honor the president. A Catholic university can and should engage all comers, but in order to be true to itself — to have integrity — it should hesitate before honoring those who use their talents or power to bring about grave injustice. The university is, and must remain, a bustling marketplace of ideas; at the same time, it also has a voice of its own. We say a lot about who we are and what we stand for through what we love and what we choose to honor.
The controversy at Notre Dame is not about what should be said at Catholic universities, but about what should be said by a Catholic university.
It is also a mistake to frame the controversy in terms of academic freedom. Obviously, this freedom, properly understood, is central to the mission of any great university.
Even so, no one is proposing limits on what can or should be discussed, debated, taught, studied or written by students or scholars. The American Association of University Professors is right to insist that "the opportunity to be confronted with diverse opinions is at the core of academic freedom," but wrong to imagine that this principle requires a university to be indifferent to the messages it sends through the honors it confers.
No university is entirely neutral; every university makes decisions about what to affirm, through its policies, as good or true. One can (and should) affirm the right (and duty) of scholars at Catholic universities to be true to their scholarly vocations while still asking whether Notre Dame is being true to itself.
Next, some have suggested that it threatens the separation of church and state for Catholic bishops to express regret and criticism regarding Notre Dame's decision. This suggestion is badly misplaced. A Catholic bishop who calls on a Catholic university to be true to its Catholic character is exercising, not undermining, religious liberty.
Finally, the reason some say that an authentically Catholic university — even one that appreciates fully President Obama's appeal and the historical significance of his election — should not honor him with a ceremonial law degree is not because he rejects "Catholic" views on abortion. The worry, instead, is that Notre Dame will send the wrong message and say something that is inconsistent with its Catholic character and with its commitment to human rights by honoring — at this time, anyway — a president whose record so far on abortion and embryo-destructive research is glaringly in conflict with that commitment.
The Catholic view on these matters, after all, is that there is no specifically or narrowly "Catholic" view. The church affirms that human life is sacred, and that every human being, at every stage of development, should be welcomed in life and protected in law. This affirmation rests on the same foundational principles of human dignity and equality that animate the Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, principles that were celebrated not only by Pope John Paul II but also by Martin Luther King Jr. and Abraham Lincoln.
The president's error is not failing to submit to "Catholic" authority — why should he? — but aggressively and consistently promoting policies that are unjust because they deny the basic equality of every human being.
To doubt that a Catholic university should honor Obama at this time, and to worry about the message such an honor sends, is not to engage in partisan or "single issue" politics or to deny that there are many things to be celebrated and admired about our new president's life, campaign, election and vision. Indeed, these things make it all the more regrettable — tragic, really — that he is so badly misguided on such a fundamental issue of justice.
WRITTEN by Richard W. Garnett for USA Today and published on May 11th, 2009
