Notre Dame Drops ‘Catholic Mission’ Language From Staff Values

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is very normal for businesses and institutions to update their mission statements.

Here is the old mission statement: Leadership in Mission: "Understands, accepts and supports the Catholic mission of the university and fosters values consistent with that mission."

New statement: In all that we do we seek to advance Notre Dame’s mission as a global, Catholic research university.

Community: Treat every person with dignity and respect
Collaboration: Work together with honesty, kindness, and humility
Excellence: Pursue the highest standards with a commitment to truth and service
Innovation: Embrace opportunities with creativity and dedication

So instead of the vague "Catholic mission" verbiage, they list the things that make up the Catholic mission.

You glossed over the removal of - accepts, supports ... fosters values with ... that mission: "Understands, accepts and supports the Catholic mission of the university and fosters values consistent with that mission."

No I didn't. Advance is even better than "understand, accepts and supports"

And spelling out those values is better than leaving it up to imagination since the USCCB has been spreading hate. The USCCB in 2020 supported the Confederate Flag. Broglio said homosexuality and pedophilia were the same, he worked under a bishop who covered up crimes. They allowed Bannon to sell an alt-right Catholicism with little rebuke until they cleaned up the council. Francis spoke out but the USCCB did not.

The bishops created "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship: A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States" ... trying to stop the election of Obama.

There was a bunch of cleaning up that needs to happen from the top down in the US and I welcome it.

Francis has changed the leadership and replaced 2/3 of the bishops setting up Leo to lead a community based in love, compassion and respect.

[Anonymous]

That is a shame. So many of the Jesuit/catholic schools we toured seem to want to move away from their original mission. ND’s Catholic-forward identity is what made the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I am not in favor. I work at Georgetown and it has moved far from its Catholic mission.

wn

Georgetown is Jesuit (not just "Catholic"). You sure they've moved away from the Jesuit mission?

IMO, yes.

Agreed - it has become far too woke and watered-down its values in comparison to other Jesuit universities.

What’s wrong with that? Everyone needs to stay woke.

Stay woke everybody!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Personally, I am not in favor. I work at Georgetown and it has moved far from its Catholic mission.

wn

Georgetown is Jesuit (not just "Catholic"). You sure they've moved away from the Jesuit mission?

IMO, yes.

IMO, it has not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That is a shame. So many of the Jesuit/catholic schools we toured seem to want to move away from their original mission. ND’s Catholic-forward identity is what made the school.

It's not a shame because you completely glossed over the point. ND will continue to embrace its Catholic identity. For students, in particular:

They still have a prompt asking about faith in the Common App.
Every single dorm has a chapel with at least one (usually more than one) mass a week.
Every dorm has a rector that is either a priest or nun.
Touchdown Jesus is not getting a makeover.
Students visit the grotto as an entire class at beginning of freshman year and end of senior year.
Students will be required to take theology classes
Students will be surrounded with crucifixes, statues of saints and other holy symbols.
Father Pete is still a big feature after third quarter of the games!!

[Anonymous]

Live Father Pete - my kid met Father Pete at her recruiting visit and thought it was better than meeting a celebrity (although he is kind of a celebrity).

ND is still very Catholic. Still parietals and priests or nuns in the dorms, still “our Lady of Victory, pray for us,” still very much about developing and passing on its Catholic values.

[Anonymous]

*love

[Anonymous]

Forget Notre Dame go to the school with the best Catholic name. Holy Cross of course in Massachusetts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Catholic Church is generally accepted as a problematic institution. Any university that wants top talent as staff or students is going to read the writing on the wall. If you are Catholic and have not realized this, you need to get your head out of the sand.

By who? By people who know their behavior and beliefs are bad for them and others, but can’t stand to be reminded of that? Certainly not by the more than 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide.

By the other 7 billion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Catholic Church is generally accepted as a problematic institution. Any university that wants top talent as staff or students is going to read the writing on the wall. If you are Catholic and have not realized this, you need to get your head out of the sand.

By who? By people who know their behavior and beliefs are bad for them and others, but can’t stand to be reminded of that? Certainly not by the more than 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide.

By the other 7 billion.

And you have a source for this? That every non-Catholic in the world thinks the Catholic Church is “problematic?” Honestly, do you really think the vast majority of non-Catholics even think about the Church?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When I was at mass, there were probably 30 college girls in mantillas and jeans.

There are several younger girls who wear mantillas at our middle of the road NOVA Catholic masses. Yes, there is an appetite for more traditional liturgy--one of my daughters is in choir and prefers to sing in Latin--but I also think they think it looks cute. I don't think mantillas -----> tradwives.

What’s a mantilla?

Catholic women used to have to wear a veil over their head in the church during Mass.

When the requirement went away, it quickly disappeared as an American cultural tradition.

This is people bringing that back . . . it is no longer required but is not barred. In modern context it is usually taken as a sign of agreement with a trend toward increased conservatism, the kind that in Catholic Churches goes hand in hand with Opus Dei, Latin Mass, and publicly disagreeing with any pope that is more focused on the things Jesus said to do in the Gospels than fighting abortion, divorce, and the Gays. It is not strictly a sign of conservatism and can (a little naively, usually) be a sign of modesty and outward devotion.

The specific term mantilla (MON-TEA-UH in faux phonetic English) is specifically taken from the Spanish version which was once common for Spanish women in contexts beyond Church even though it was an overwhelmingly Catholic country. The big black thing draped over your head, etc.

If you haven't heard of a mantilla, it's probably a good sign.

Wow, thank you for this helpful explanation and context. I'm a protestant Christian and was not understanding why we are talking about some seemingly Spanish word in this discussion.

DP: For more context, women stopped wearing hats/veils at mass in the 60s, though it was officially changed in 1983. I was born in the 60s and never saw anyone wearing a hat or veil in church other than a bride or old lady until the last three years. To me, it comes across as performative in a way that goes against Catholic teaching about performative religious practices. But I conceed that for some it may be a genuine, though not required, modesty choice.

They are the Catholic taliban.

No but I do think the hijab is a good comparison. I can defend each woman’s right to wear it without molestation or harassment but also know that they are signaling something I don’t love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When I was at mass, there were probably 30 college girls in mantillas and jeans.

There are several younger girls who wear mantillas at our middle of the road NOVA Catholic masses. Yes, there is an appetite for more traditional liturgy--one of my daughters is in choir and prefers to sing in Latin--but I also think they think it looks cute. I don't think mantillas -----> tradwives.

What’s a mantilla?

Catholic women used to have to wear a veil over their head in the church during Mass.

When the requirement went away, it quickly disappeared as an American cultural tradition.

This is people bringing that back . . . it is no longer required but is not barred. In modern context it is usually taken as a sign of agreement with a trend toward increased conservatism, the kind that in Catholic Churches goes hand in hand with Opus Dei, Latin Mass, and publicly disagreeing with any pope that is more focused on the things Jesus said to do in the Gospels than fighting abortion, divorce, and the Gays. It is not strictly a sign of conservatism and can (a little naively, usually) be a sign of modesty and outward devotion.

The specific term mantilla (MON-TEA-UH in faux phonetic English) is specifically taken from the Spanish version which was once common for Spanish women in contexts beyond Church even though it was an overwhelmingly Catholic country. The big black thing draped over your head, etc.

If you haven't heard of a mantilla, it's probably a good sign.

Wow, thank you for this helpful explanation and context. I'm a protestant Christian and was not understanding why we are talking about some seemingly Spanish word in this discussion.

DP: For more context, women stopped wearing hats/veils at mass in the 60s, though it was officially changed in 1983. I was born in the 60s and never saw anyone wearing a hat or veil in church other than a bride or old lady until the last three years. To me, it comes across as performative in a way that goes against Catholic teaching about performative religious practices. But I conceed that for some it may be a genuine, though not required, modesty choice.

They are the Catholic taliban.

No but I do think the hijab is a good comparison. I can defend each woman’s right to wear it without molestation or harassment but also know that they are signaling something I don’t love.

How about you MYOB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When I was at mass, there were probably 30 college girls in mantillas and jeans.

There are several younger girls who wear mantillas at our middle of the road NOVA Catholic masses. Yes, there is an appetite for more traditional liturgy--one of my daughters is in choir and prefers to sing in Latin--but I also think they think it looks cute. I don't think mantillas -----> tradwives.

What’s a mantilla?

Catholic women used to have to wear a veil over their head in the church during Mass.

When the requirement went away, it quickly disappeared as an American cultural tradition.

This is people bringing that back . . . it is no longer required but is not barred. In modern context it is usually taken as a sign of agreement with a trend toward increased conservatism, the kind that in Catholic Churches goes hand in hand with Opus Dei, Latin Mass, and publicly disagreeing with any pope that is more focused on the things Jesus said to do in the Gospels than fighting abortion, divorce, and the Gays. It is not strictly a sign of conservatism and can (a little naively, usually) be a sign of modesty and outward devotion.

The specific term mantilla (MON-TEA-UH in faux phonetic English) is specifically taken from the Spanish version which was once common for Spanish women in contexts beyond Church even though it was an overwhelmingly Catholic country. The big black thing draped over your head, etc.

If you haven't heard of a mantilla, it's probably a good sign.

Wow, thank you for this helpful explanation and context. I'm a protestant Christian and was not understanding why we are talking about some seemingly Spanish word in this discussion.

DP: For more context, women stopped wearing hats/veils at mass in the 60s, though it was officially changed in 1983. I was born in the 60s and never saw anyone wearing a hat or veil in church other than a bride or old lady until the last three years. To me, it comes across as performative in a way that goes against Catholic teaching about performative religious practices. But I conceed that for some it may be a genuine, though not required, modesty choice.

They are the Catholic taliban.

Ridiculous and offensive

No honey. What’s offensive is ordained catholic priests being predatory pedophiles for decades; likely centuries and the so-called “pope” knew all about it. Yet he did nothing (other than protect the perpetrators).

THAT is offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When I was at mass, there were probably 30 college girls in mantillas and jeans.

There are several younger girls who wear mantillas at our middle of the road NOVA Catholic masses. Yes, there is an appetite for more traditional liturgy--one of my daughters is in choir and prefers to sing in Latin--but I also think they think it looks cute. I don't think mantillas -----> tradwives.

What’s a mantilla?

Catholic women used to have to wear a veil over their head in the church during Mass.

When the requirement went away, it quickly disappeared as an American cultural tradition.

This is people bringing that back . . . it is no longer required but is not barred. In modern context it is usually taken as a sign of agreement with a trend toward increased conservatism, the kind that in Catholic Churches goes hand in hand with Opus Dei, Latin Mass, and publicly disagreeing with any pope that is more focused on the things Jesus said to do in the Gospels than fighting abortion, divorce, and the Gays. It is not strictly a sign of conservatism and can (a little naively, usually) be a sign of modesty and outward devotion.

The specific term mantilla (MON-TEA-UH in faux phonetic English) is specifically taken from the Spanish version which was once common for Spanish women in contexts beyond Church even though it was an overwhelmingly Catholic country. The big black thing draped over your head, etc.

If you haven't heard of a mantilla, it's probably a good sign.

Wow, thank you for this helpful explanation and context. I'm a protestant Christian and was not understanding why we are talking about some seemingly Spanish word in this discussion.

DP: For more context, women stopped wearing hats/veils at mass in the 60s, though it was officially changed in 1983. I was born in the 60s and never saw anyone wearing a hat or veil in church other than a bride or old lady until the last three years. To me, it comes across as performative in a way that goes against Catholic teaching about performative religious practices. But I conceed that for some it may be a genuine, though not required, modesty choice.

They are the Catholic taliban.

Ridiculous and offensive

No honey. What’s offensive is ordained catholic priests being predatory pedophiles for decades; likely centuries and the so-called “pope” knew all about it. Yet he did nothing (other than protect the perpetrators).

THAT is offensive.

+1

You cannot call yourself a catholic without simultaneously being a MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

When I was at mass, there were probably 30 college girls in mantillas and jeans.

There are several younger girls who wear mantillas at our middle of the road NOVA Catholic masses. Yes, there is an appetite for more traditional liturgy--one of my daughters is in choir and prefers to sing in Latin--but I also think they think it looks cute. I don't think mantillas -----> tradwives.

What’s a mantilla?

Catholic women used to have to wear a veil over their head in the church during Mass.

When the requirement went away, it quickly disappeared as an American cultural tradition.

This is people bringing that back . . . it is no longer required but is not barred. In modern context it is usually taken as a sign of agreement with a trend toward increased conservatism, the kind that in Catholic Churches goes hand in hand with Opus Dei, Latin Mass, and publicly disagreeing with any pope that is more focused on the things Jesus said to do in the Gospels than fighting abortion, divorce, and the Gays. It is not strictly a sign of conservatism and can (a little naively, usually) be a sign of modesty and outward devotion.

The specific term mantilla (MON-TEA-UH in faux phonetic English) is specifically taken from the Spanish version which was once common for Spanish women in contexts beyond Church even though it was an overwhelmingly Catholic country. The big black thing draped over your head, etc.

If you haven't heard of a mantilla, it's probably a good sign.

Wow, thank you for this helpful explanation and context. I'm a protestant Christian and was not understanding why we are talking about some seemingly Spanish word in this discussion.

DP: For more context, women stopped wearing hats/veils at mass in the 60s, though it was officially changed in 1983. I was born in the 60s and never saw anyone wearing a hat or veil in church other than a bride or old lady until the last three years. To me, it comes across as performative in a way that goes against Catholic teaching about performative religious practices. But I conceed that for some it may be a genuine, though not required, modesty choice.

They are the Catholic taliban.

Ridiculous and offensive

No honey. What’s offensive is ordained catholic priests being predatory pedophiles for decades; likely centuries and the so-called “pope” knew all about it. Yet he did nothing (other than protect the perpetrators).

THAT is offensive.

Church leaders were wrong to cover up any sex abuse that occurred in the Church. No argument there. The Church has gone to great lengths to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

It’s disingenuous to pretend that sex abuse only happens in the Catholic Church and that it is more prevalent in the Church than in other institutions. It is always wrong when it happens in churches AND when it happens elsewhere. Check out the stats for sex abuse in public schools and yet virtually no mention of it ever made and very little is done to decrease its prevalence.

“ Consider the statistics: In accordance with a requirement of President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act, in 2002 the Department of Education carried out a study of sexual abuse in the school system.

Hofstra University researcher Charol Shakeshaft looked into the problem, and the first thing that came to her mind when Education Week reported on the study were the daily headlines about the Catholic Church.

"[T]hink the Catholic Church has a problem?" she said. "The physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/

https://www.edweek.org/leadership/sexual-abuse-by-educators-is-scrutinized/2004/03