Diversity Disruption


Substituting the Gender Unicorn for Theology of the Body — diversity disruption @NotreDame. #GoCatholicND Click To Tweet

Our recent reports have described a growing number of actions and events that are hostile to Church teaching on sex and gender. In this respect, the University is rapidly coming to embrace one of the most corrupting features of almost all of the rest of academia. This development has its roots in the elevation of “diversity” to a pre-eminent goal that trumps all others. In the article reprinted below with permission from The Irish Rover, its editor-in-chief, Nicolas Abouchedid, reports on the immersion diversity training now given at the university.

Diversity Director shares University’s initiative for “LGBTQ” issues

By Nicolas Abouchedid

In its employee training programs, Notre Dame has emphasized supporting people who identify as “LGBTQ.” Initiatives such as required diversity training for all staff, workshops at prominent campus conferences, and the funding of LGBTQ-affirming faculty groups comprise this effort. Eric Love, the director for staff diversity and inclusion, shared in an interview with the Rover that this is part of “a Catholic ethic — to treat each human being with dignity and respect.”

Love joined Notre Dame in 2014, after working in a similar role at Indiana University. According to the Indiana Daily Student, Love did not seek out the Notre Dame position, but was personally approached by University officials, encouraged to apply for the job, and given a 70% salary increase over his IU position — a marker of our administration’s confidence in his work and outlook. He is not Catholic, but “has no problem believing in God and being an ally [supporter of LGBT community], because it is about love.”

Love oversees the “diversity training” requirement for all Notre Dame staff. This requirement consists of several workshops, the first of which takes place during onboarding orientation for new hires. This one focuses, according to Love, on “setting the tone on how we treat each other at a Catholic institution: that we will treat each other with human dignity and respect, no matter who you are, where you are from, your race, ethnicity, gender, even sexuality.”

Another component is a full-day workshop for managers, supervisors, and hiring managers called “Multicultural Competencies / Hiring Game Changers,” which focuses on “cultural competency, microaggressions, and benefits of diversity.” Love noted that he usually brings in “a speaker that will do some cultural presentation” for this workshop.

One of these invited speakers was Julian Kevon Glover, who focused on “educating managers and hiring managers about LGBTQ idendities.” Glover, a featured speaker on several occasions, “investigates how Black, Latinx, and Afrolatinx queer people, specifically transwomen …survive/thrive in a world hellbent on their annihilation.” His academic work includes “She Ate My Ass and My Pussy All Night”, and is featured on, a blog about “divination,” “the conjure,” and “sacred sexuality,” among other things. 

Asked about whether inviting Glover might be in tension with Notre Dame’s Catholic mission, Love noted that he is “really comfortable bringing Julian [Glover] as a speaker.” He continued:

“He gave presentations for us on LGBTQ+ identities. We have people who are transgender on campus, we have people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual—and who knows what else—on campus, and so we think it is important to learn a little bit about them so we can treat them with dignity and respect … Absolutely, we’re a Catholic institution; we follow biblical teachings, Catholic Doctrine, but I feel like a major premise of Catholic Doctrine is to treat each individual with human dignity and respect.”

Glover’s presentations on “LGBTQ+ identities” were required for all staff at Notre Dame, as part of their diversity training. 

He was also invited by SPECTRUM, an employee resource group that “focusing on providing a safe space for LGBTQ & Ally employees,” which is funded by Notre Dame’s human resources department. There, he taught the group about ballroom culture, an LGBT subculture featuring drag, sexualized dancing, crossdressing, and competing for prizes. This presentation for SPECTRUM was optional for staff, but was financially supported by Notre Dame’s Human Resources department. 

Eric Love stressed that the mandatory presentations on LGBTQ identities are “not a way of promoting LGBTQ lifestyles.” The goal, Love said, “is to teach us about the identities so we are better able to work with them.” 

In addition to coordinating the diversity training sessions required for staff, Love also organized September’s university-sponsored Diversity and Inclusion Conference, which, in part, introduced staff to the “concerns LGBTQ students face at Notre Dame.” In a workshop entitled, “Allyship in Action,” faculty, staff, and students were taught about how to support the myriad of identities possible within an anthropology that separates gender identity, gender expression, sex (as “assigned at birth”), sexual orientation, and emotional orientation. The following “Gender Unicorn” graphic was used as a guide:

This talk was given by Sara Agostinelli, who argued that it was precisely because of Notre Dame’s Catholic identity that presenting the anthropology outlined in “The Gender Unicorn” was necessary. “We do this as a Catholic institution, [as part of] upholding our Catholic mission,” Agostinelli said.

As Director for Staff Diversity and Inclusion, Love will continue to emphasize that Notre Dame’s “mission is to be a force of good in the world, and we need to know the world in order to be a force of good in it, and we feel that by having more diverse staff on campus, that could help us be a better force for good.”

Nicolas Abouchedid is a junior studying in the Program of Liberal Studies, with minors in philosophy and Chinese. He is originally from, and one day hopes to return to, Caracas, Venezuela. He can be reached at

Annual Request

This is the only time of the year when we go out of our way to encourage our supporters who are able to provide financial support to Sycamore Trust.

For 14 years, Sycamore Trust has made it possible for concerned members of the Notre Dame family to join in the struggle for a Catholic renewal on campus. Because of the interest, encouragement, and assistance of our supporters, we have been able to develop what is far and away the most significant organization of its kind.

It is clear that our effort has struck a chord at Notre Dame. It is clear, also, that we cannot succeed without the continuing support of those who share our goals.

For a more detailed description of the work we are asking you to help us with, please click on the button below.

In whatever way you are able to support our common purpose — by giving of your time (especially in prayer), talent, or treasure — we are all very truly grateful.

Leave a Reply

 Let us know what you think about the issues we’ve raised in this bulletin in the comments below. And help to spread the word by sharing this bulletin with others who care about Notre Dame’s Catholic identity. 

Every Penny Helps!

If you are like us and want to see an authentic Catholic renewal at Notre Dame, please consider lending a hand by making a donation to Sycamore Trust.


22 Responses to “Diversity Disruption”

  1. I support your mission. Tonight ND is sponsoring a forum, packed with all pro sex change, promoting sex change to ND students. my regards to Joe Reich, the golden class of ’57. Patrick Logan MD

  2. There is an obvious tendency and allure by many to make this issue complex. It is not. I know it may not be Andrew Sullivan and the exalted NY Times, but the New Testament provides a barticularly informative and clarifying reading on this topic.

    Although it is no longer fashionable, I urge one and all to simply refer to Romans 1, Verses 24-32. It is quite illuminating, direct and fully answers the question in detail. Read it, ponder it and discern as to how in the world any of this confusion could possibly have started in the first place. In fact, do yourself a favor and start at Romans 1:16, as a panoply of other issues of sins are addressed, and stunningly, just as we are witnessing today, they all seem to inter-relate to the homosexual topic under discussion.

    St. Paul dealt with the same issues long before U. Notre Dame became Apostate. Unlike the infant Church in Rome, Fr. Jenkins, (et. al.) enjoys the benefit of the existing Bible, and have little excuse for ignoring it.

    Tap it into your browser in the event your Bible cannot be located.

  3. steve martinek '71, '74 December 29, 2019 at 8:39 am

    Blessings and gratitude and respect to John McNamara ’86, for his cogent comments. Some of my personal conclusions have been thoughtfully challenged. (Admitting my naivete, I pray for Father Jenkins to read and digest those comments.)
    Steve ’71, ’74

  4. “It is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesial Communion”, due to The Unity Of The Holy Ghost; For “It Is Through Christ, With Christ, And In Christ, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost”, that Holy Mother Church, outside of which, there is no Salvation, due to The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, exists.
    It is not possible for a schismatic church to exist within Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, due to The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.

    “Caritas In Veritate”; Veritas In Caritate; Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost. Amen.

    All Faithful Priests, Bishops, Cardinals, and the Pope, must speak out against The Great Apostasy led by schismatic priests, bishops, cardinals, and a man who is both anti Pope and anti Filioque because of his denial of The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and thus the fact that only The True God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage. To deny that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, is to deny The Divinity Of The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity.

    “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.”- Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, while claiming sin is not sin if it is of a “private” nature.

    “1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.”121
    1850 Sin is an offense against God: “Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight.”122 Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become “like gods,”123 knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus “love of oneself even to contempt of God.”124 In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125”

    All you who are sleeping in Gethsemane, wake up!

    Love does not divide, it multiplies, as in The Loaves And Fishes.

    11] Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land, full of great fishes, one hundred and fifty-three. And although there were so many, the net was not broken.

    17] “Feed my sheep”: Our Lord had promised the spiritual supremacy to St. Peter; St. Matt. 16. 19; and here he fulfils that promise, by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church.

    “Be not afraid”, for Christ Has Revealed Through His Life, His Passion, And His Death On The Cross, that authentic Life-affirming and Life-sustaining Love, is desiring Salvation for one’s beloved.

  5. John McNamara '86 December 13, 2019 at 4:34 pm

    What is going on in this bizarre human resource training at Notre Dame is a reflection of the priesthood and hierarchy of the Catholic Church, as it comes to terms with itself. Though I maintain a healthy suspicion of the source, the New York Times, I found an air of credibility in an article by Andrew Sullivan, dated January 21, 2019, tiled, “The Gay Church: Thousands of priests are closeted, and the Vatican’s failure to reckon with their sexuality has created a crisis for Catholicism”. I think that as parents and alums, when we send our kids or grandkids to Catholic universities, we are sending them to schools where there is as much as 60% chance that the clergy running the universities are homosexual, including any Father H, any Father M, any Father J, any Father B, and any Archbishop G. Father Jenkins knows exactly what is going on with this bizarre unicorn stuff, and is the same priest who refused to ban internet pornography at Notre Dame, because there is a 60% chance that that is how some of the clergy at Notre Dame avoids getting itself in trouble with all the attractive and intellectual young men and women circulating in front of them every day and night. Here are some excerpts from Sullivan’s article, some of which has been stated or paraphrased earlier by Michael Vorhis at Church Militant, and I invite people more knowledgeable than me to challenge what Sullivan wrote:

    “We have no reliable figures on just how many priests in the Catholic Church are gay. The Vatican has conducted many studies on its own clergy but never on this subject. In the United States, however, where there are 37,000 priests, no independent study has found fewer than 15 percent to be gay, and some have found as many as 60 percent. The consensus in my own research over the past few months converged on around 30 to 40 percent among parish priests and considerably more than that — as many as 60 percent or higher — among religious orders like the Franciscans or the Jesuits.” , , ,But there are other reasons for gay men to seek the priesthood that are far from healthy. The first is celibacy. If you were a young gay Catholic in centuries past, one way to avoid social ostracism, or constant questions about why you lacked an interest in girls or women, was to become a priest. (One priest also told me the most powerful force behind vocations to the priesthood had long been mothers, who, intuiting that a son was “not the marrying kind,” would encourage him to enter the church to save their family’s social standing.) This pattern, though much less severe than in the past, endures. A profound lack of self-esteem, fueled in part by the church’s homophobia, also led to some seeking the priesthood as a means to repress or somehow cure themselves. . . .Other gay priests, more self-aware and cynical, find there is a career to be made in all of this falseness. From the 13th century onward, it’s easy to see how secretly gay men found in the church, and the church alone, a source of status and power. Marginalized outside, within they could become advisers to monarchs, forgive others’ sins, earn a stable living, enjoy huge privileges, and be treated instantly with respect. Everything was suppressed, no questions were asked in seminaries, and psychological counseling was absent (and even now is rare). Scarred, scared men became priests, and certain distinct patterns emerged. Benedict XVI has described himself as a bookish boy, averse to sports.
    His soft speech is strikingly effeminate; he was seen constantly in the company of his rather dashing private secretary, Georg Gänswein; and he bedecked himself in vestments of such extravagance they included ermine and custom red slippers. He was also the theologian who demonstrated a manic desire to police the slightest deviation from orthodoxy, who described gay people as “objectively disordered” and inclined toward an “intrinsic moral evil,” and who, after he banned gay priests, called them “one of the miseries of the church.” Even to suggest some kind of connection between all these aspects of someone who is also holy, celibate, and sensitive is to be accused of a disgusting insinuation. But this is because so many in the hierarchy still cannot see homosexuality as being about love and identity rather than acts and lust. As we uncover layer upon layer of dysfunction at the very top of the church, it may be time to point out how naked these bejeweled emperors can appear. But most had some kind of past incident or failing that could be used against them if made public, even if it were only their identity as a gay man. And so a poisonous kind of omertà took hold, the priesthood acting as a forum of mutually assured destruction. Since many fellow priests know about each other’s sexuality and/or lapses, they all have the ability to blackmail one another. Mundane failings — like a brief affair — can become easily blurred with profound evils like child abuse. If you expose a child molester to his superior, for example, he might expose your own homosexuality and destroy your career.
    This dynamic has made the clerical closet — not the fact of gay priests but the way that fact has been hidden — a core mechanism for tolerating and enabling abuse. On top of all this, the vow of obedience to superiors gives gay bishops and cardinals huge sway over their priestly flock. Some, of course, realized this power could be leveraged for sex and abused it.” End of Sullivan quote.

    Where Fr. Jenkins and most other Catholic leaders and gay leaders are now is trying to get people to “accept homosexuality as a new norm”, though extremist propaganda featuring unicorns is a quick way to look bizarrely extreme and foolish, and the bottom line is “what is the best path going forward, without straying from what JESUS taught?” It is my belief that Fr. Jenkins and the Pope, and many cardinals Pope Francis is appointing, want to change Catholic belief to make homosexuality o.k., and they will force “unicorn propaganda” on anyone who wants to work for the Church. They have deliberately used a failure to teach and educate on Catholic theology over the last nearly sixty years and two generations, since Vatican II, as a way to make this more acceptable. Catholic education in CCD programs over that last two generations has strayed far from the Baltimore Catechism and has consisted of a frustrating and annoying watered down pablum that generally boils down to “God loves us”, but provides no discussion and no framework for where Catholic beliefs on morality and sexuality come from- whether it be biblical readings, canon law, or Catholic tradition- it has all been erased in the last two generations, including my own generation, thanks to efforts like Father Hesburgh’s and Cardinal McCarrick’s Land O’ Lakes Statement.

    Sullivan’s NYT article sees three paths going forward, though I think and would appreciate hearing other avenues others may see:
    “It is clear to everyone that the current apparatus of secrecy, hypocrisy, abuse, and homophobia needs to end if the church’s moral authority has any chance of being restored. But how? One possible option is the preference of the Catholic right: for all those implicated in the McCarrick cover-up to resign, including, one presumes, Francis (and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI?); for a massive investigation to be launched into how gay priests, bishops, and cardinals came to be so common and powerful; and for strict enforcement of the 2005 ban on priests. But purging the priesthood of “homosexual tendencies” would require removing up to a third of the clergy in the U.S. and dismissing scores of bishops and cardinals, including many who have maintained celibacy, preached orthodoxy, and lived exemplary lives. Countless lay Catholics would watch their priests be outed and fired by the church. How would they react? The mass firings would brand the church as baldly homophobic and easily lead to mass resignations and a further decline in vocations. So be it, the traditionalists say. They want a much smaller, purer church. But few potential popes would want to be the one who precipitated the implosion. More to the point: It could make the problem worse. The church would lose all those priests who are adjusted enough to be honest about their orientation and keep all of those who are the most deeply damaged, closeted, and self-loathing. The potential for sexual abuse could increase.

    A second option would be a fudge, a rerun of 2005, when the church said all gay priests should be fired and no gay men be admitted to the seminary … and then did nothing much about it. This would be, in some ways, the worst choice. It was precisely the simultaneous retention and anathematization of closeted gay priests that, over the decades, helped fuel the abuse and its cover-up.

    A third option would simply encourage an end to the clerical closet, which is to say, ask all priests to obey one of the Ten Commandments: not to lie about themselves. It would require gay priests to identify as such to their superiors and parishioners and, in clearing the air, make a renewed public vow of celibacy. (Whether celibacy is healthy for the church is its own question, one oddly distinct from the current crisis; a relaxation of the rules wouldn’t in itself resolve the church’s position on homosexuality, and an embrace of homosexuality is compatible with a celibate priesthood.) Encouraging an end to the closet would underline the distinction the church formally makes between homosexual identity and homosexual acts. It would deter disturbed closet cases from entering the priesthood and provide priestly role models for gay Catholics who find themselves called to celibacy. Those gay priests who refused to be fully transparent could leave. Cardinals and bishops and directors of seminaries could insist on frank discourse on the matter. Double lives would become far less common. If a priest is committed to celibacy and doing a good job, why is his public gayness a problem?

    The only obstacle standing in the way of this path is the homophobia formally embedded into church doctrine in 1986 by the future Benedict XVI. The church now explicitly teaches that gay people are “objectively disordered” because their very being leads them to an intrinsic moral evil. This “evil” is the orientation to have sex that cannot lead to procreation — the same reason the church opposes birth control for straight couples. The difference, of course, is that birth control is a choice, while gayness isn’t. A better analogy would perhaps be the infertile, who also, simply because of the way they are, cannot have procreative sex. But the church does not call them “objectively disordered.” It eagerly marries them, as well as elderly straight couples. In fact, the church embraces every other minority, person with a disability, and individual persecuted or marginalized by society because of some involuntary characteristic. No other group of human beings is described by the church as “objectively disordered.” At some point you realize that this is, in the end, the bottom line. There is a deep and un-Christian cruelty at the heart of the church’s teaching, a bigotry profoundly at odds with the church’s own commitment to seeing every person as worthy of respect, deserving of protection, and made in the image of God. It’s based on a lie — a lie that the hierarchy knows is untrue, and a lie proven untrue by science and history and the church’s own experience. “The hierarchy is tying itself in knots in public over something it has already conceded in private,” Father Leo explained to me. The task, it seems to me, is not to rid the church of homosexuality, which is an integral part of the human mystery, but of hypocrisy, dishonesty, and dysfunction. Impossible? I admit to, at times, a crushing fatalism. But I also believe, as a Catholic, that nothing is impossible with God.” End of Sullivan quote.

    For me, John McNamara, the real question is what did Jesus actually teach about sexuality and homosexuality, and what have different interest groups spun, as so called fact or public policy over the last 60 years, if not longer, regarding homosexuality? Jesus’s path is a difficult path to trace and many people are willing to distract us. The truest path may be an accurate, detailed, clear explanation of traditional Catholic practice, as laid out in the Catholic Cathechism, and its sources of authority, and an accurate explanation from those who challenge it, minus all the threats, accusations of bigotry, and asinine unicorns. The Church just needs to come clean and loose all the obnoxious Churchspeak and phrases we hear in homilies. Don’t try to confuse people or assume things to have been proven, that actually haven’t, like a congressional impeachment committee, and just come clean. Time would be well spent, Bill and Fr. Miscamble and any one else, Church Militant, and others, on giving us a truthful history of Catholic policy on homosexuality and celibacy and its sources, as Sullivan has laid out in his NYT article. I just don’t know if I can trust Sullivan to be accurate and I share Bill’s mistrust of the New York Times. I know I can’t trust Fr. Jenkins, because of threats to dissenting traditional Catholics and this moronic unicorn policy he’s implemented, and most importantly, his failure (and he’s not alone at Notre Dame) to try to genuinely teach Catholicism from the Catechism, and a typical failure to answer questions or letters from people like Bill Dempsey.

    The plan going forward ought to be for traditional Catholics to get the genuine truth and encourage young Catholics to become genuine educators, not Unicorn deceivers, blackmailers and morons, even if that might raise questions about how closely tied to Jesus some sexual teachings may be and how they might more accurately reflect tradition, based on common sense political policy, not science or Jesus or both, at that time. Calls for rosaries and God to bless us in these dark times ARE very beneficial and VERY welcome.

  6. Quite by coincidence, I read yesterday the attached article by Heather MacDonald that examines in great detail how the “diversity and Inclusion” industry is destroying academia (see link below). Sadly, Notre Dame is falling prey to this plague, with no end in sight. As I remarked in an earlier post last November, there are no concessions great enough, no accommodations expansive enough, no indoctrination comprehensive enough to satisfy the insatiable appetite of the radical secular left. While the University may achieve academic excellence in its secular endeavors, its Catholic character and fealty to Church doctrine are anathema to the secular left. Radical leftists will not be satisfied until Notre Dame, as the nation’s iconic Catholic university, is a hollowed out husk with nothing left to tout but its “picturesque Catholicism”. How pertinent are the words of our Blessed Lord who said, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.” Yes, to preserve Fr. Sorin’s Notre Dame, we need to pray, and pray hard.

  7. The Big Lie of “fluid” gender identity: Men can be women and women can be men. Essentially this amounts to someone perpetuating a lie while pretending the believe their own lie. This has nothing to do with treating people with “dignity and respect.” At the core it is totalitarian.

  8. Rich Evans Class of 77 December 13, 2019 at 1:54 pm

    As per the Bud McFarland book …. are there tanks going down Notre Dame Avenue? Is this travesty under the cloak of accepting differences not without some student resistance? My son was accepted at ND but chose another college for undergrad. I was hoping that his choice would be ND and he would be there to learn and to enrich his faith. So it seems now that ND is determined to take a position of the day, lowering the bar as far as it will go to “fit in” with the social “cool kids”.

  9. Robert Thomas Mastro December 13, 2019 at 1:24 pm

    I am greatly disheartened by what Notre Dame is becoming – has become. We have a pope who defies and defiles the tenets of our faith and butts in inappropriately to matters outside of the infallibility of the pope and we have a University President who is no different. I am a double Domer but I am near to my limit of ND’s compromising of tradition, faith, morality, and ethics. More and more, my two diplomas are becoming ‘not worth the paper they are printed on’. I am actually reluctant to tell people that I am a graduate of today’s Notre Dame in light of how she has devolved. ND has sold out its mission by the intentional eroding of its admin, faculty, and Board into severely diminished catholicity, until nearly bereft of theology and political and social mores,and catholic values, descending into a secular city of cowardice, standing for nothing other than a reactionary situational culture more concerned with offending someone/anyone rather than offending our God. The Golden Dome is not so far from being replaced by a Golden Calf. It seems that the only person willing to stand for what Notre Dame has been, and is behind Jenkins’ smoke screen is Our Lady atop the Dome. The new stadium mega screen has disintegrated ND athletics into ghetto noise and tagged us like a graffiti laden boxcar, just as the distorted priorities of our University President and the gaggle of leftist staff and new fractional rendition of SDS have contaminated the institution and her image to the brink of irreparable damage. We depict images of the Communist manifesto in televised ND promotional spots as if to portray some self-righteous and pseudo intellectual inclusiveness. We overkill diversity (as integral as it is to what ND is) and reduce its visual representation by giving the impression that Caucasian students are an endangered species and somehow undesirable or offensive. May I note here that 2.3% of the inhabitants of this planet are LGBT. Treat properly? Yes. But I can do so for any individual that treats others properly and still stand up for the tenets of my faith without fear of leftist castigation and retribution for my beliefs. We are being held hostage in our society by false imperatives of the socialist few that already have diluted Notre Dame into a secular, state institution. We arrogantly cheer, “What are you willing to fight for?” all the while giving up the fight. My most sad and heart-rending fear is that someday soon I may be forced to give up on Notre Dame because I will not give up on my Catholicity. The Trust must take it to the student body. I believe if challenged, the overwhelming majority will enjoin the battle to save Notre Dame. Today’s Notre Dame? 46556 is the zip code of and academic, administrative, and metastasizing moral compromise mediocrity.

  10. steve martinek '71, '74 December 13, 2019 at 4:49 am

    Teresa Peyton Tawil seems, to me, to largely “have the right of it.” We must seek simplicity with a humble heart. We must turn to prayer–strongly, perhaps only, to prayer. Our Lady, Notre Dame, loves to receive bouquets of roses in the decades of our rosaries. Remember that her intercession is never denied to us of Faith. As we offer marathons of rosaries for the defense and protection and salvation of the unborn, each First Saturday, so should we explicitly attach our prayers for the instituional reform and redemption to Catholicism of our beloved Notre Dame. Amen?

  11. Teresa Peyton Tawil December 12, 2019 at 11:48 pm

    I stayed at the Alumni Hall a couple years ago and there were lots of lovely handouts for our convenience, but no Rosaries. I don’t go to campus anymore with my son having graduated, but I think if we can get more Rosaries handed out more often, Our Lady will triumph on campus. This is a spiritual war and it needs to be our primary weapon.
    United in Christ,
    Teresa Peyton Tawil

  12. I honestly believe after reading this article that Notre Dame is not longer a Roman Catholic Institution. I do not believe supporting Sycamore Trust will make a difference. Notre Dame is too far fallen. Is there anything your organization do to change this honestly?

    We need to focus on making American University or Steubenville the new standard for Roman Catholic Education and help them prevent their demise.

    Notre Dame (Our Lady) is grieving.

    • Beth I don’t think Notre Dame is too far gone, because I think any organization that still identifies as Catholic is still beholden to Catholic teaching. They can try to twist it to try to explain their actions, but as long as you have the Basilica of the Sacred Heart and dorm masses and the grotto and every other Catholic thing embedded into Notre Dame it will have a chance to be turned around. It’s on everyone to do their part to convert Notre Dame.

      I think the Catholic community has to be more visible like it was in 2009 when Obama was on campus. Also, there needs to be a concentrated voice that rebukes the statements that people like Love put out and I think Sycamore can be that voice maybe as well form a faculty coalition that also does the same thing.

  13. There is a book that the entire Notre Dame staff (and Eric Love) should be required to read:
    Gay Girl, Good God: The Story of Who I Was, and Who God Has Always Been Paperback – September 3, 2018
    by Jackie Hill Perry
    I have heard her speak – about her feelings and attractions, her temptations and her ultimate battle to overcome them. She is an amazing woman and she embodies the Catholic approach to homosexuality. Notre Dame is following the rest of academia into the sewer!

  14. steve martinek '71, '74 December 12, 2019 at 9:08 pm

    The thought-fascists of the PC Left have effectively hijacked the narrative on many topics of significance in public discourse over the last half-century. Sodomy, and related deviant “coupling” is not merely or genuinely the equivalent of normal, non-deviant “sexual expression.” Likewise, abortion, voluntary infant genocide, infanticide of the innocents in the womb–these are not properly grouped and considered under the label “a woman’s reproductive rights.” Whenever we accede to such improper articulations, we concede unwarranted and undeserved legitimacy to the arguments of satan. IMHO

  15. I give up — where does any of this support Catholic Evangelization or the unleashing of the gospel? This guy isn’t even a Catholic — how can he know what a Catholic thinks or feels about the LGBT community?? Does a Catholic have to pass a litmus test of LGBT community “love” to teach at ND now??? Weird !
    Alfred (Fred) Gade ‘60

  16. Willliam Dotterweich December 12, 2019 at 8:25 pm

    I try to treat all persons I meet with dignity and respect, regardless of which body orifice they choose to use for sexual expression.
    However, I resent them waving their sexual deviancy, if any, in my face as a means of domination.
    I am sick at my stomach at the cesspool that has formed on the Notre Dame campus. The Lady on the Dome must blush. How can this administration look us in the eye? What have they done to my Blessed Mother?

  17. steve martinek '71, '74 December 12, 2019 at 7:38 pm

    I feel impelled to comment and pray for the Holy Spirit to help me be cogent and concise. Where and why to begin?! In my 70th year, much that I have loved has been transformed into sepia-toned memories, sadly including the cultures and values of our beloved University, our Catholic Church, and our once exceptional nation. For years I regretted and somewhat resented never having been able to secure a position at Notre Dame. One perverse benefit of this article is it empowers me to know that my conscience and my soul would now never permit me to accept a position on the faculty or staff–I would surely fail the orientation. Love, and his ilk, are fundamentally in error about so much–arguably everything. I do not feel called or mandated to extend “human dignity and respect” to deviants or their deviance. Rather, I am called to channel and model the divine love of Christ for all people–which includes a duty and willingness to offer loving rebukes for observed sins and deviance. It is fundamental error, and evil, to call for, or mandate, the indiscriminate acceptance, tolerance, and extolling of disordered thought and attitudes, and sexual or gender deviance, or willful sinfulness.
    It is assuredly wrong on a once-Catholic campus. Steve ’71, ’74

  18. Is Fr. Jenkins among those receiving this diversity training?

  19. Dominick Anthony Zarcone, ND 1970 December 12, 2019 at 7:24 pm

    Recommended reading for : those who identify as LBGTQ, Eric Love, Julian Kevon Glover, University Officials/Faculty/Staff, Students/Alumni and Father Jenkins : THE DAY IS NOW FAR SPENT by Robert Cardinal Sarah In Conversation With Nicholas Diat

    Hail Mary, Full of Grace, the LORD is with thee….

  20. Deacon Edward Knauf December 12, 2019 at 7:24 pm

    Dignity and respect, yes. Where is the call to repent and convert and be saved? Has the University no concern for the eternal well-being of it’s “family” members? That is, after all, the real definition of “love” – wanting what is best for the other – and what is best for the other is eternal life.

    I’d be interested, by the way, to get Our Blessed Mother’s take on “She Ate My Ass and My Pussy All Night.” How far her University has strayed!

  21. “One of these invited speakers was Julian Kevon Glover . . . His academic work includes ‘She Ate My Ass and My Pussy All Night.'”

    How the heck did that title not elicit laughs from the staff of the American Quarterly academic journal that received it? How could that thing have been taken seriously AND published? What happened, did the editors from Penthouse Forum get Ph.D. degrees and move to the American Quarterly?

    Somewhere a student is writing a submission to the American Quarterly that begins “I never believed that the articles in ‘American Quarterly’ were true until this happened to me…”

    Utterly shameful. At least Alan Sokal’s joke paper had a somewhat academic sounding title.

Comments & Questions