In an interview within the lead story “A Papal Voyage, a Campus Question” (THE HOYA, Apr. 18, 2008, A1), Patrick Reilly, the president and founder of the Cardinal Newman Society, unnecessarily injected his disdain for sizable segments not only of the Georgetown campus community but of the Catholic community in general. Reilly seemingly views a Catholic undergraduate education as a time for blind obedience to doctrine rather than an opportunity for the interaction of faith and reason, free thought and critical analysis of issues both religious and secular. His view is the antithesis of what both a liberal arts education, even a Jesuit one, is supposed to be, but also of the inclusive nature of our campus. For example, Reilly describes H*yas for Choice as “very much a problem” and describes its members as promoting the “killing of innocent children.” Using such language in no way furthers his argument, as it only serves to demean those of us who are both Catholic and pro-choice, a group to which many Catholics in the United States belong.

Reilly went on to denounce the forthcoming LGBTQ Resource Center, saying it should be frowned upon because it will celebrate sinful activity. Particularly given the events of the past school year that have furthered the need for such a center on campus, Reilly’s belief that Georgetown should not be supporting members of the LGBTQ community is insulting, harmful and incorrect. People like Patrick Reilly are precisely what is wrong with the Church in current times. President DeGioia is right to stand up for the advancement of what he describes as “both academic freedom and … the free exchange of ideas and opinions across all issues.” Georgetown must continue to promote the free exchange of thought and critical analysis of issues. Thus far, particularly here at Georgetown, that resulted in a rejection of the views of those such as Reilly, based on both rationale and religious thought.

Adam Beck (COL ’10)

April 21, 2008

Have a reaction to this article? Write a letter to the editor.

Comments are closed.

In an interview within the lead story “A Papal Voyage, a Campus Question” (THE HOYA, Apr. 18, 2008, A1), Patrick Reilly, the president and founder of the Cardinal Newman Society, unnecessarily injected his disdain for sizable segments not only of the Georgetown campus community but of the Catholic community in general. Reilly seemingly views a Catholic undergraduate education as a time for blind obedience to doctrine rather than an opportunity for the interaction of faith and reason, free thought and critical analysis of issues both religious and secular. His view is the antithesis of what both a liberal arts education, even a Jesuit one, is supposed to be, but also of the inclusive nature of our campus. For example, Reilly describes H*yas for Choice as “very much a problem” and describes its members as promoting the “killing of innocent children.” Using such language in no way furthers his argument, as it only serves to demean those of us who are both Catholic and pro-choice, a group to which many Catholics in the United States belong.

Reilly went on to denounce the forthcoming LGBTQ Resource Center, saying it should be frowned upon because it will celebrate sinful activity. Particularly given the events of the past school year that have furthered the need for such a center on campus, Reilly’s belief that Georgetown should not be supporting members of the LGBTQ community is insulting, harmful and incorrect. People like Patrick Reilly are precisely what is wrong with the Church in current times. President DeGioia is right to stand up for the advancement of what he describes as “both academic freedom and … the free exchange of ideas and opinions across all issues.” Georgetown must continue to promote the free exchange of thought and critical analysis of issues. Thus far, particularly here at Georgetown, that resulted in a rejection of the views of those such as Reilly, based on both rationale and religious thought.

Adam Beck (COL ’10)

April 21, 2008

Have a reaction to this article? Write a letter to the editor.

Comments are closed.