American Phoenix

Why I No Longer Support the Jesuits

I have been to three different Jesuit universities: University of San Francisco, University of Santa Clara, and College of the Holy Cross. Therefore I feel I have some experience with the Jesuits as they really are – not as I would wish them to be.

I began my undergraduate life in 1980 at University of San Francisco. While there, I witnessed a virtual war between orthodox Jesuits and Jesuits of a different stripe. Jesuits who I regarded as good and holy men, were silenced when they didn’t toe the Jesuit party line. Fr. Cornelius Buckley, S.J., a professor of history, was silenced and sent to a work at a small hospital in Duarte, California, where he remained for many years, obedient to his order, even though many in his order are flagrantly disobedient.

The St. Ignatius Institute, under the guidance of Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J., operated a classical Catholic curriculum within the larger confines of the university and it attracted many students as well as its own funding. It took the Jesuits over twenty years to shut the Institute down, which they finally did a few years ago by firing its director and hiring new professors who would teach the "new" theology. The Institute now exists in name only. It doesn’t teach the same things.

Shortly thereafter, they tried to silence and send Fr. Fessio to the same hospital in Duarte. Fr. Fessio did his doctoral thesis under Pope Benedict XVI, who was then the prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and was able to get help by a direct appeal to the Pope John Paul II. This ultimately resulted in his going to Ave Maria University in Naples, Florida, where he is building the first Catholic university in America in 40 years – instead of to the hospital. Fr. Fessio is one of the best professors of Patristics you will ever have the pleasure of studying under.

Both Fr. Fessio and Fr. Buckley are two orthodox priests, who when they objected to much of what was going on on campus, did not endear themselves to their fellow Jesuits. In contrast, many of the other Jesuit priests in the California province were living an active homosexual lifestyle, as finally came to light when many of them ultimately got AIDS and died. Several of them had reputations for hitting on students as well. Did I mention that they also tried to rent out St. Ignatius Cathedral to the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus? This included not only some of the Jesuit priests on the University of San Francisco campus but also at St. Ignatius high school in San Francisco, where my brother graduated.

After a year at Oxford University studying the Classics, I transferred to Holy Cross where I could actually get the major. (University of San Francisco then had no major in Latin or Classics, which is odd in itself for a Catholic university.) At Holy Cross, I found more of the same. The final straw that broke the camel’s back for me was an alumni function that I attended in 2004. During that function, Father President described the college as a "progressively Catholic liberal arts" institution. I wondered what he meant by "progressively Catholic"? Is that supposed to mean that there is another Catholic church that isn’t "progressive"?

He then went on to describe some very bright students who gave a symposium and offered papers on a post-modernist philosopher by the name of Michel Foucault. I’m guessing I was one of the only persons in the room, if not the only person, who had any familiarity with Foucault. I happen to have read Foucault’s "History of Sexuality". It’s a horrible book in which Foucault, who is gay, attempts to norm sex with children, between children, homosexual and/or otherwise. So I found myself wondering with the giants of philosophical thought available to them – like St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, Aristotle, etc., why did they choose this pipsqueak of a "philosopher" Foucault to be the subject of their symposium? Even more so considering that Foucault seems almost emblematic of the sexual scandals that have so recently rocked the Catholic Church, particularly an order of priests that has had so many problems with homosexual priests, at least in my province.

Father President went on to describe how the increased endowment money had funded 23 new faculty members, all of whom were extremely well-qualified and who came from some of the best schools in the area – and then he added that they all came from non-religious schools like that was a good thing. Why is that better? Are they somehow better scholars if they come from a secular school? Are they somehow more legitimate? What was the point of that comment? Are professors more legitimate because they have no faith or come from an institution which deems faith unimportant?

He then went on to speak about the student body and how many of the students are reconnecting with their faith and trying to figure out how to get their parents to go to church again, despite all of the problems in the church. I thought that was really interesting so I went to talk with him after he was done with his presentation, and asked him what were his views on the problems in the church. He said that many of the students have issues with authority. I hesitated to put my big foot in it, but I was thinking it was no small wonder that the students don’t respect authority when they see priests, in large part, the Jesuit order, not respecting the authority of the magisterium or of the Pope.

There were also Father President’s comments on Liberation Theology, which is a blend of Marxist ideology and Catholicism and which is not authentically Catholic. This appears to be something that Father President supports, and which has certainly had widespread support among the Jesuits who were its chief proponent, despite a warning on the subject from then Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. Anyone can find this warning on the Vatican’s website, who cares to look it up:

Instruction on Certain Aspects of the Theology of Liberation

There were several Jesuit priests, as well as a few Maryknollers, Trappists and some diocesan priests who supported Liberation Theology and the marxist takeover of Nicaragua. Anyone who knows anything at all on the subject knows that Fr. Arrupe, the Father General of the Society of Jesus, did little to disrupt the Jesuit priests, Frs. Fernando Cardenal and Alvaro Arguello, who held cabinet level positions in Daniel Ortega’s Sandinista (marxist) government, which was responsible for the genocide of the Miskito indians and two other indigenous tribes. Other Jesuits, Frs. Ricardo Falla and Ignacio Anezola were members of the Ministry of Planning, and Jesuit Fr. Xavier Gorostiago was the chief economic advisor to the junta.

Pope John Paul II petitioned Fr. Arrupe in 1980 to have them resign their office and return to their clerical duties. Fr. Arrupe did nothing. Frankly, Pope John Paul II should not have had to make such a request. Fr. Arrupe should have disciplined these priests on his own initiative and he did not. Nothing was done until 1984, well after Fr. Arrupe’s stroke in August 1981, when Fr. Kolvenbach finally dismissed all the Jesuits, including Fr. Fernando Cardenal, who would not leave their posts – but only after Pope John Paul II forced his hand.

Apparently, Fernando Cardenal has recently renounced his ties to the government, reapplied to the Jesuits and was admitted as a novice. Without knowing more, I find it difficult to believe that one whose role was so central in the Sandinista government has really had a change of heart – a true metanoia. Even if he has, I question whether the priesthood is now an appropriate mode of service for someone who has demonstrated such disobedience in the past.

It was obvious to many that the Jesuits were in trouble twenty years ago when Pope John Paul II intervened to chose Fr. Paolo Dezza as his personal delegate to the Society of Jesus after Arrupe’s stroke in 1981. (This was prior to Kolvenbach’s election as Father General after the 33rd General Congregation in 1983.) To anyone who was really paying attention, however, the trouble began far earlier with Frs. Teilhard de Chardin, George Tyrell and Gustavo Guteirrez, all of them Jesuits. Liberation Theology was not of Latin American origin. It was a European import.

I have a friend who lived in El Salvador during the civil war and I know from her telling what class warfare the political/quasi-religious ideology of Liberation Theology wrought. She experienced it, including priests who taught that it was acceptable to steal from those who had more. This resulted, for example, in the theft of jewelry that had been inherited from her mother and grandmother. This same friend spent the bulk of her time teaching and working with the indigenous peoples of El Salvador, as well as educating children.

I really do want students to reconnect with their faith, as the Father President of Holy Cross pointed out. It’s just that I want them to reconnect with the Catholic faith. Not some Marxist-flavored version of Catholicism.

My experience in law school at the University of Santa Clara was relatively uneventful. There was only one Jesuit teaching in the law school and I didn’t attend his class as I was in a different section. Unfortunately, that gave the Jesuit university more of a secular character. Consistent with that, no mention was ever made during my entire three years of law school regarding the Christian context of our laws. None. The positivist idea of separation of morality and law was taught in all of our classes – and never questioned. One of my classmates was actually berated by a professor on his first day of school for suggesting that law and morality were connected.

The University of Santa Clara also invited Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J. to be a visiting scholar. Fr. Reese was previously forced to resign his post as Editor of America, the Jesuit magazine, because of the magazine’s content, which included:

An essay exploring moral arguments for the approval of condoms in the context of HIV/AIDS;

Several critical analyses of the doctrinal congregation’s September 2000 document Dominus Iesus, on religious pluralism;

An editorial criticizing what America called a lack of due process in the congregation’s procedures for the investigation of theologians;

An essay about homosexual priests;

A guest essay from U.S. Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, challenging suggestions that the church should refuse Communion to Catholic politicians who vote against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The latest insult has been a catechism class that was supposed to be on liturgy. This class was offered through our diocese by a professor of liturgy from the University of Santa Clara. We spent nearly half of the class on breathing exercises and babbling to our neighbors about absolutely nothing meaningful, after which time he decided that we were all "happy" now and ready to pray. Frankly, I was furious, as I had wasted valuable time that could have been spent learning about the liturgy. I was ready to pray when I walked in the door.

What a pity. St. Inigo de Loyola must be weeping tears in Heaven to see what has happened to his wonderful order!

I will never donate to another Jesuit university again or, at least not until I see real change – a metanoia. So far I haven’t seen it. Neither will I ever send my son to a Jesuit school. I want him to get an authentically Catholic education. After what I’ve seen, I know he won’t get one at a Jesuit school.

2 Responses to Why I No Longer Support the Jesuits

Ave Maria!
July 15th, 2006 at 8:26 pm
I wrote to a couple of Jesuit heads of colleges that were allowing the ‘vagina monologues’ and I heard back from several and the specious reasons for allowing that play were sad. They are long gone. Also I know a diocesan priest who very much wished to be a Jesuit but the gay agenda he encountered was too much.

I understand that when Fr. Hardon celebrated his 50th year as a Jesuit, no Jesuits came–maybe there were no ‘true’ Ignatian Jesuits in the area?

Has anyone else taken Fr. Hardon’s catechist’s courses?
I recommend them.
American Phoenix
July 16th, 2006 at 12:41 am
With respect to the “Vulgar” Monologues, I am aware that they have been shown at the University of Notre Dame (which is not Jesuit) in opposition to the wishes of the local bishop. I hadn’t heard or read that this was happening at other Catholic universities, although it would not surprise me.

With respect to Father Hardon, I really couldn’t comment on his 50th jubilee and whether any Jesuits showed up, as I have no knowledge of that. However, I am currently taking his catechism course. It is far more demanding than the catechism course that is being offered through my diocese. But the drawback is that there is no one at hand to ask questions of, and I always have plenty of questions. My only criticism of his course, so far, is that some of the test questions aren’t constructed so that they match up with the text provided.