October/November 2016 by The Fenwick Review

The Independent Journal of Opinion at the College of the Holy Cross October/November 2016

Volume XXIV, Issue II

Quod Verum Pulchrum sites.google.com/a/g.holycross.edu/the-fenwick-review

Table of Contents

OPINION

Debate, Dialogue and Truth: On the Listening Session..5 Brooke Tranten ‘17

WOMEN WANT TO KNOW

The False Pretenses of Higher Education.......................7 Seaumus Brennan ‘20

A TALK ON VIRTUE

The Fog of Fascism.............................................................9 Bill Christ ‘18 Making Time for Time.....................................................11 Luke Lapean ‘19 I’m Not Holy Enough to Go to Confession.....................13 Greg Giangiordano ‘18 Why a Jesuit Identity Means a Pro-Life Identity.........16 Elinor Reilly ‘18 The Vision of Stone...........................................................18 Claude Hanley ‘18

The Fenwick Review 2016-2017 Staff Co-Editors in Chief Brooke Tranten ‘17 Claude Hanley ‘18 Layout Editor Audrey Holmes ‘19 Staff Writers Greg Giangiordano ‘18 Luke Lapean ‘19 Bill Christ ‘18 Austin Barselau ‘18 Robert Roberge ‘18 Webmaster Elinor Reilly ‘18 Faculty Advisor Professor David Lewis Schaefer Political Science Cover Art: Stefanie Raymond ‘18

SATIRE & POETRY

FATHER PAUL MCNELLIS, SJ

Atlantic Avenue.................................................................15 Patrick Connolly ‘18 Disclaimers This journal is published by students of the An Effort to Level the Playing Field...............................10 College of the Holy Cross and is produced two Patrick Connolly ‘18 or three times per semester. The College of the

ART

Holy Cross is not responsible for its content. Do Whatever He Tells You................................................15 Articles do not necessarily reflect the opnion of the editorial board. Melissa Gryan ‘18

Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defeneded constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom, and then lost it, have never known it again. --Ronald Reagan

Donation Policy The Fenwick Review is funded through a generous grant from the Collegiate Network as well as individual donations. The Fenwick Review is an organization incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We welcome any donation you might be able to give to support our cause! To do so, please write a check to The Fenwick Review and mail to: Brooke Tranten and Claude Hanley P.O. Box 4A 1 College Street

Mission Statement As the College of the Holy Cross’s independent journal of opinion, The Fenwick Review strives to promote intellectual freedom and progress on campus. The staff of The Fenwick Review takes pride in defending traditional Catholic principles and conservative ideas, and does its best to articulate thoughtful alternatives to the dominant campus ethos. Our staff values Holy Cross very much, and desires to help make it the best it can be by strengthening and renewing the College’s Catholic identity, as well as working with the College to encourage constructive dialogue and an open forum to foster new ideas.

To the Benefactors:

We must reserve the space to offer a heartfelt thank you to our benefactors, without whom The Fenwick Review would not exist. We extend our profound gratitude to The Collegiate Network and the generous individual and alumni donors to The Fenwick Review, for their ongoing enthusiasm and support of our mission. Mr. Guy C. Bosetti Mr. Robert W. Graham III Mr. Robert R. Henzler The Hon. Paul J. Hanley Mr. Kevin O’Scannlain Mr. Sean F. Sullivan Jr. Dr. and Mrs. Paul Braunstein Mr. and Mrs. Richard Fisher Mr. and Mrs. Thomas W. Greene Mr. William Horan Mr. Robert J. Leary ‘49 Fr. Paul Scalia Mr. and Mrs. Michael Dailey Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Gorman Mr. Paul M. Guyet Mr. Joseph Kilmartin Mr. Francis Marshall ‘48 Dr. Ronald Safko Mr. John J. Ferguson

Letter from the Editors

Dear Reader, Thank you for picking up a copy of The Fenwick Review, the College’s Catholic journal of opinion. Mission statements are deceptive things. Anyone who has read the College’s mission statement, for instance, might labor under the bizarre impression that Holy Cross, with an acceptance of an invitation to join in dialogue about basic human questions while acknowledging and respecting differences, a passion for truth and no intention of discovering it, and a reluctant obligation to allow Catholic students to study their faith, is a Jesuit but not Catholic college at the service of the United States of America and the wider world. Such an impression would be substantially incorrect; the Cross still crowns the spires of Fenwick Hall. Particularly in the area of faith, this manifesto misrepresents reality. It communicates, however, a troubling reality: there are elements of this community who would see it abandon its Catholic identity, and retain only its Jesuit ethos. How exactly this is possible we do not know. Instead, we seek to defend a traditional vision of the College, one which is Jesuit because it is Catholic first. We would see the College abandon any understanding of itself as a Jesuit-but-not-Catholic institution, while remaining a liminal space between the Church and the World. These demands are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps we are in no particular position to block the latest iterations of “institutional progress.” We are, however, possessed of two gifts: a conviction, and a voice. Our conviction is the Truth of the Catholic faith. We will use our voice to articulate coherent, Catholic ideas to our College and our world. We hope to spark reflection, discussion, and conversion. To that end, we set this issue before you. Ms. Raymond’s depiction of a canine, that most loyal of creatures, against an autumnal backdrop adorns our cover. Elsewhere, Ms. Gryan renders the symbols of Faith in charcoal. Ms. Tranten opens the discussion with sensitive but challenging thoughts on the recent “Listening Session,” and whether it effectively engaged with identity and diversity issues on the Hill. Mr. Brennan provocatively discusses racial and intellectual diversity, and the value of each for a liberal arts college. Mr. Christ offers a consideration of political correctness and freedom of thought. Trusting in his freedom to speak, Mr. Connolly contributes his entirely factual account of a recent administrative press release. Mr. Lapean presents a lighthearted take on a lofty subject by discussing the Divine Liturgy in the Byzantine Rite, and what it can teach a Roman Catholic about time. Continuing in the vein of ritual and sacrament, Mr. Giangiordano effectively breaks down several misconceptions about the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and, as we near the end of the Year of Mercy, reminds us of the beauty of forgiveness. Ms. Reilly takes up on the College’s Catholic identity, and clearly explains why a Jesuit college must be pro-life. Finally, Mr. Hanley attempts to consider spiritual development and the notion of “Becoming More” through the central mysteries of the Catholic faith. In conclusion, we extend our gratitude to our benefactors, without whom we could not be; to the indefatigable Ms. Holmes, our layout editor; and to you, our readers, for considering the thoughts we set before you, and judging them charitably. Petite Veritatem, Brooke Tranten Claude Hanley

Debate, Dialogue and Truth On the Listening Session

Brooke Tranten ‘17 Co-Editor

way in which would not be possible in other campus Toward the end of September, the College events. I heard stories from students that were held a campus-wide Listening Session, attended by disheartening, incredibly sad in some respects. Many Father Boroughs and a number of administrators of us feel that our concerns are falling on deaf ears, and faculty. Specific RSOs and campus Offices had while the College organizes yet another fishbowl and previously sponsored similar fishbowls and other nothing chances. events with socially conscious taglines, but I had I voiced my concern that the recent changes were in never heard of a “listening session” before. So I direct violation to the College’s supposed commitment went alone, curious as to how the event would be run, to transparency and dialogue. Administrative fiat since I was not familiar with the format. The room is very real at Holy Cross. Take the new housing was packed as I had anticipated and the mood tense policy, for instance, which struck the student body as even before the start of thunderbolt on high from the The Listening Session was aOlympus the session. Thankfully, that is Hogan Campus the tension was lightened neither intellectual dialogue, Center. Regardless if one views considerably by problems nor robust debate. I do not the policy favorably or not, with the microphone, where was the student input, which seemed to afflict believe it intended to be this policy that has a direct Father Boroughs and application to daily life on the either. Father Boroughs alone. Hill? I do not expect Hogan What follows are my administration to clear every general impressions from decision made with the student the hour. body, such an arrangement would be ridiculous. It The participants of the sessions were first seems, however, that transparency goes only so far treated to a poster-sized piece of paper detailing the as the bureaucracy is willing to allow itself to be ground rules for the session. Most of these rules were transparent. reasonable and exercises in basic social manners, More than one student stated that they were no talking over anyone and so on. We also received tired, of having to educate their peers about race, a handout called “A Comparison of Dialogue and of being expected to be the unwilling spokesperson Debate”. This is misleading. The Listening Session for people of color in the classroom. And well they was neither intellectual dialogue, nor robust debate. should be. I too am tired, of often being the only I do not believe it intended to be either. We students voice in a classroom that offers a Catholic perspective are supposed to be able to conduct ourselves properly at a Catholic college. I am tired of being considered during a public discussion, but why were we treated to a hateful bigot because I believe the teachings of the this infantilizing list? Does administration have such Church. I understand, however, that the ridicule will little faith in us now that we need a written catalogue never end. No matter where I go, someone will look of precepts to behave ourselves? We were to down on me for being a Catholic, the child of a single understand that not one person spoke on behalf of an mother, a woman. Some of my peers suggested that entire group (fair enough) and that we were to “speak the College should do more to educate students about our truth”. The Listening Session was a format for race and social justice. Perhaps so, but would that students to speak about their own experiences of the eradicate all forms of prejudice on this Hill? It Hill to fellow peers, faculty and administration in a 5

students at the Listening Session to become the new norm, if they have not already. “Speak your truth” at the Listening Session translated to speaking about one’s lived experience on the Hill, but was nonetheless held to be inviolable. I am not permitted to contradict someone’s experience, for to do so is a violation of his or her personal safety. If I disagree with a personal interpretation of a given experience, I am not intending to invalidate that particular experience, but rather bring in a new perspective. That sheet we were given at the Listening Session told us that dialogue “causes introspection on one’s position” after all. The question remains, however, how anyone can speak their truth if there is not even an acknowledgement of Who the Truth Is? The College of the Holy Cross was founded to illuminate the Truth Embodied in Jesus Christ. This uniquely Catholic understanding of educational institutions exists objectively, regardless of what we believe Holy Cross should be. If we lose it, we have lost our soul in more ways than one.

would not, because knowledge does not automatically translate into right action for us human beings. The pseudo-intellectual social justice warrior du jour on Facebook Live did not say that, St. Augustine of Hippo did. We must always remember that our work will never be done, at least not in this life. I genuinely admired the courage of the students who stood up to speak in front of Holy Cross’ academic and administrative bigwigs. Most also pointed out that the people who were in attendance were the same people who have attended previous similar events and that they were preaching to the choir. They were right, with a few exceptions. The choir, as it were, had a monopoly on the Listening Session and those who happened to share some of my own viewpoints felt incredibly unwelcome to attend such an event. I certainly did not feel welcome, but I do not mean that as a grievance. The assertions voiced at the Listening Session were not those of a disaffected fringe, but were mainstream indictments of modern campus culture. Just as the antiestablishment sentiment of the 1960s has become the academy’s status quo, I expect some of the suggestions voiced by

The False Pretenses of Diversity in Higher Education Seamus Brennan ‘20 Staff Writer As one of the most beloved catchwords of 21st century academia, the term “diversity” has become one of the most used and celebrated attributes of our nation’s colleges and universities. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a top university that does not tout diversity as one of its most prized qualities. For a term that is so widely used and flaunted in the U.S. educational system, we ought to have an appropriate grasp of what it really means – or perhaps more importantly, what it should mean. When the term “diversity” comes to mind, most will likely think of matters relating to multiculturalism. On the surface, a student body representing a wide range of races and socioeconomic statuses seems appealing and fair. From the lenses of America’s leading institutions of higher education, a racially diverse environment is best equipped to engage with difficult topics. Again, at first blush, this seems logically practical and socially just. But is this really what our colleges and universities should be focused on? According to many school administrations, a racially diverse community is innately strong. In reality, this is nonsense. To claim that a student body can attain strength and success merely because of racial and social diversity is misleading, and detracts from what is truly meaningful in learning environments. While racial and multicultural diversity are not necessarily negative attributes, they are not necessarily constructive either. For instance, a racially diverse charitable organization is no better or worse than an all-black church ministry; melanin level is not the true determinant of values and meaning, and nor should it be. There is something deeper and more substantial that diversity of skin color cannot achieve on its own. Diversity of thought is infinitely more important than diversity of skin color or economic standing. Variety of ethnic makeup does not hold a candle to

differences of values, ideals, and beliefs – and we shouldn’t pretend that it does. An academic and faith-based community is not strong because of its racial and socioeconomic makeup. Rather, its strength emerges from its members’ composition of beliefs and values. But even this on its own is not enough to form a truly strong, robust community. As evidenced in many colleges and universities over the past several years, administrators tend to believe that diversity cannot thrive in an environment in which people disagree. Thus, they seem to advocate openness to an extreme level that dilates any values they once claimed to represent. This, again, is nonsensical. What good is there in learning and engaging with ideas if we are all expected to hold the same views? Thus, diversity of any type is meaningless without basic human decency. In an era as politically polarizing and ideologically difficult as today’s, it is more difficult than ever to cultivate a diverse community that also maintains decency and respect for people of all viewpoints and beliefs. Leftist practices such as “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces,” as well as nebulous terms like “white privilege” deter us from achieving intellectual freedom and ideological liberty. Attempting to shut down a presidential candidate’s event because of opposing viewpoints – as we have seen across our country in recent months – does not achieve anything. It is sillier than it is effectual. The college campus should be the heart of intellectual progress, and it is difficult to advance when many use vain, insincere excuses to silence opposing viewpoints, all in the name of “diversity.” The College of the Holy Cross mission statement states, “As a liberal arts college, Holy Cross pursues excellence in teaching, learning, and research. All who share its life are challenged to be open to new ideas, to be patient with ambiguity and uncertainty, to combine a passion for truth with respect for the views of others. Informed by the presence of diverse

Variety of ethnic makeup does not hold a candle to differences of values, ideals, and beliefs – and we shouldn’t pretend that it does.

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

interpretations of the human experience, Holy Cross seeks to build a community marked by freedom, mutual respect, and civility.” In an environment in which people are offended by something as puerile as party themes and demand administrative punishment for ideas they disagree with, are we nurturing an academic community that excels because of all of its members and their ideas rather than only those that do not offend people? Diversity cannot be meaningful without decency. Thus, it is time for our nation’s colleges and universities to move away from their preconceived focus on racial diversity and move towards promoting an environment that tolerates and respects ideas. Dr. John Ellison, a Dean of Students at the University of Chicago, sent a letter to all incoming freshmen this past September. The letter read, “Fostering the free

exchange of ideas reinforces a related University priority — building a campus that welcomes people of all backgrounds. Diversity of opinion and background is a fundamental strength of our community. The members of our community must have the freedom to espouse and explore a wide range of ideas.” It’s about time that other colleges – including Holy Cross – take note.

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

Bill Christ ‘18 Staff Writer

The Fog of Fascism

A common phenomenon exerting itself throughout American colleges and universities has quickly positioned itself as the silencer of opposing points of view. This phenomenon, called political correctness, has emerged as the most extreme export of educational institutions. Those who claim the mantle of being “politically correct,” argue that they occupy a moral high ground based on tolerance or equality. However, this sense of tolerance is often misguided as equality of social conditions is disproportionally placed above the equal distribution of ideas. This lack of intellectual freedom is common throughout places of higher learning within America as views contradicting the “politically correct” are silenced or ignored. Responding to the lack of greater conversation on campuses across the nation, Alan Dershowitz condemned the movement because of its restrictive dialogue. In a 2015 interview with Fox News’s Meghan Kelly, the retired Harvard Law professor said, “The fog of fascism is descending quickly over many American universities.” Referring to the oppressive nature of the dominant liberal ethos surrounding higher education in America, Dershowitz claims that the dearth of intellectual freedom is an affront to the claim of an education without bias. He added that, “These are the same people who claim they are seeking diversity. The last thing many of these students want is real diversity, diversity of ideas. They may want superficial diversity, diversity of gender, diversity of color, but they don’t want diversity of ideas.” For institutions who pride themselves as places of easy access to differing perspectives and opinions, this lack of opposing information taints their education integrity. For those who preach that colleges are a place to be exposed to conflicting opinions and still refuse to acknowledge the other sides of the argument are hypocrites. When education becomes one-sided

as Dershowitz claims, the purpose of teaching ceases to be informing, but rather propagandizing and indoctrinating students. Colleges that refuse to admit opposing viewpoints to current events occurring throughout the nation are complicit in the cloud of political correctness. The colleges and universities that hold sitting demonstrations during the National Anthem while simultaneously omitting any reference to the lives of law enforcement are just as guilty as those who refuse to teach differing opinions. The campuses that place a larger emphasis on appropriate Halloween costumes or party themes and provide no information surrounding calculated murders of two cops in Palm Springs are guilty of pushing a one-sided narrative. The campuses that emphasize the deaths of African Americans at the hands of policemen are whitewashing the growing number of police deaths in the line of duty. By withholding vital evidence in the regard to the relationship between cops and African Americans, the “politically correct” institutions are providing a false narrative. The motives behind the political correctness movement are altruistic, as they are against racism and offensive language. However, the benefits of speaking out against outlandish actions are negated when they are being used to suppress differing points of view. When this happens and only one viewpoint is considered, the respectable position campuses fall under, as Dershowitz claimed, a fog of fascism. Places of higher learning should hold true to their promises to be institutions dedicated to the educational development of their students from all viewpoints. College is the time to be exposed to different opinions, so why should you keep yourself coddled by the same beliefs?

An Effort to Level the Playing Field

Patrick Connolly ‘18

Worcester, MA— Announcing a new age of inclusion and a better future for all, Holy Cross president Father Phillip Boroughs, S.J. announced this past Monday, via a skillfully crafted email, the imminent terraforming of Mount Saint James. The email began by informing the school of sparsely-attended open forum meetings that occurred last month to determine the most prudent course of action given the campus’ lack of wheelchair accessibility. “It is in light of much prayer and contemplation that I have determined we must make a change. In the coming years we will flatten the top of Mount Saint James to create the Brooks-Boroughs plateau,” read the decree. The elegant address continued pointing out that, “we live on a hill with people who aspire to move mountains, so why don’t we just do it already?” When the office of the president of the college was contacted for comment about the email, they simply replied, “Ask more.” The reaction of the college community has been lukewarm— while the community has been universally amicable to promoting well-being and inclusivity of any wheelchair bound members of Holy Cross, Boroughs has faced some opposition. Some have cited the legacy of Saint James and the tradition of the Holy Cross campus as reasons to keep the hill the same as it has always been. Others have said the hill should remain as a reminder to the community of our shortcomings and a reminder that we ought

to do more to help our colleagues and friends in wheelchairs. One concerned student pointed out that a plateau is just a mountain with the top cut off. “How does no one else see this?” the student said when asked for comment, “A plateau still has steep sides; people in wheelchairs will still be unable to get to the top— it’s the same damn thing! Am I the only one around here who isn’t losing my mind?” At press time the student was reported to be complaining about the decision on social media, fighting for justice the only way he knows how. Many supporters, however, have called the idea “brave and daring,” some even going as far as suggesting his noble actions be nominated for the Sancte Brooks-Crucis award. One such supporter is area liberal arts professor, J.J. Smith. Smith, a master of the liberal arts, sent out an unsolicited press release in support of Boroughs’ decision. “We only have the ten commandments because of a mountain,” Smith’s statement reads, “But what if Moses was in a wheelchair? Would we still be murdering people and talking back to our parents? Think about it.” While the letter was also met with controversy, Boroughs was appreciative of the support, no matter how uninformed and peripheral the support may be. “Seriously guys,” Boroughs said in a follow-up email, “I think this is my best idea yet.”

Father Boroughs delivering his latest email.

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

Luke Lapean ‘19 Staff Writer

Making Time For Time

One of phrases that seems to best capture the modern world’s belief in the importance of time is “go there, get it done, and go home”. No longer do we value taking our time and doing a job right—all that matters is that the job is done. A perfect example of this is attendance at Mass; all we want is a quick 45 minutes that do not make us feel too bad about ourselves, preferably with donuts afterwards. Of course, what I’m speaking about mainly occurs in relation to the Ordinary Form of the Latin Rite (the one we all know and love). This summer I learned that ten minutes down the road from my house is the New Skete Monastery, an Eastern Orthodox Monastery run by Byzantine Rite Franciscans known for their dog breeding and cheesecake baking. The Byzantine Rite originated with the Church in Constantinople and is in communion with Rome, meaning that Roman Catholics can go to Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgy and have it count for our Mass obligation, so we have one less thing to worry about sending us to hell that week. Divine Liturgy is not like the Mass you are used to, or even the Traditional Latin Mass if that is what you prefer. It is over an hour and a half in length and when you go you better wear good shoes, because you are standing for at least three-quarters of the time. But length is what gives it a lot of its beauty. The presider and choir chant just about everything, and these folks know how to chant! It’s very different from Gregorian chant, but no less powerful. Even though the presider reads the Gospel, preaching duties rotate among the brothers and sisters too! Probably the biggest difference, though, is the fact that the Eucharist is received on a spoon, since both Species are present. Overall, attending Byzantine Rite Divine Liturgy was a great experience that I highly recommend if you want to get a sense of the universality of the Catholic Church. No matter your feelings on the Byzantine Rite, there are some words used during Divine Liturgy that can apply to us all. Before the procession into the church, as well as before each reading, the

presider sings out, “Wisdom, let us attend”, and along the church walls are icons of Hagia Sophia—”Holy Wisdom”. Before you say anything, no, these are not pictures of the church, but of that for which Justinian named it. Most of us probably know that wisdom is one of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but what does that mean to us? Do we think that God is just going to reach down and make us geniuses before our next biology test? Now, as much as I wish God had reached down and told Dave Dombrowski not to sign David Price―every human in Boston knew his postseason record (now 2-9) and that players given massive contracts choke the first year (especially in Boston; see Carl Crawford and Pablo Sandoval), that is not how this works. This means that all wisdom comes from God. Now, supposing that this interpretation makes any sense, is not every institution of learning a vessel for God’s work in a very real sense? Beyond the religious affiliation of a college, God is the source of all wisdom, so God is being taught wherever wisdom is sought. No matter how secular the knowledge may seem, if it is true wisdom, it has come from God and can be used ad majorem Dei gloriam—for the greater glory of God. With that in mind, should not a college that does claim religious affiliation work all the harder to tie the wisdom that it teaches to God? Sure, there are perfunctory nods to finding God in all things, but it seems like this means leaving God at the classroom door to many. Even theology classes become purely academic, with the knowledge seen as hypothetical rather than just as true as the theory of evolution. In both cases, there are those who see much evidence supporting their position, but they cannot state unequivocally that it is correct―the scientist because any hypothesis must be demonstrably falsifiable and the religious man because he must have faith in the existence of God—to know would take away his faith and belief. In both cases the element of time is also at play. Just as evolution was fought about and still has specifics being hammered out, so too was Roman Catholicism argued about, with beliefs hammered out 11

from Nicaea to Vatican II. The key difference is that one of these fields is seen as progressive and socially acceptable level and the other is seen as something that only the backward dabble in. Why is this? I say it is because of the investment of time that each requires. People seem unwilling to devote time to activities, no matter their worthiness. And since neither religion nor science is something that one can master overnight, they must be derided by those who have absorbed the shorthand version of both, the most common option of one, or neither. In a society where the instant has replaced the important, one is just as likely to see a selfie as a ciborium in a church. Thus, the one who reveres or seeks to understand the permanent has become a threat, being firmly moored amidst the sea of fads.

This weekend, try slowing down. You do not have to go to a Byzantine Rite service to understand the importance of wisdom as coming from God or spend hours in the lab to feel the presence of God. You just need to realize that each book you read and paper you write speaks to the glory of God, and you being cognizant of that fact begins the realization that you are always in the presence of God. Once you know this, will you not try to adjust your behavior accordingly?

The Monks of New Skete

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

I’m Not Holy Enough to Go to Confession

Greg Giangiordano ‘18 Staff Writer

In the past, whenever I would go to Confession (I go roughly every two weeks), I would swing through my friends’ rooms on my way out of the door. I would knock on their doors, poke my head in, and address the room at large with a simple, “Hey, I’m headed to confession. Anybody want to join?” Very rarely was I ever met with “Sure, I’d love to.” The usual response from my friends was, “I don’t think the priest could handle what I’d have to say,” “I’m not really comfortable with that”, or just “Nope”. There was always a running theme of unease in my friends’ responses: it was, I can only assume, an anxiety at the potentiality of being shamed by the priest during Confession. This anxiety is not unique to just my friend group; a large number of Catholics have an erroneous view of what confession is and why it is so important to our faith. Some of the most frequently asked questions that I hear when I talk about going to Confession are; “Don’t you just get told how bad you are and then told to go say a Rosary or something?”, “Aren’t you uncomfortable telling a stranger all of your faults and mistakes?”, and “Do we really need confession if we know that Jesus will forgive us?” Since each of these questions are so commonly asked, it is necessary to give each question its own particular answer. I’ll start with the third question; do we need the Sacrament of Confession if we know that Jesus will forgive us? The answer is yes, we do need the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and we need it because we can only assume that Jesus forgives us until we go to Confession. Then we know for sure that He forgives us. And here’s why: The Bible says that Jesus gave His Apostles the ability to forgive sins in His name (John 20:23). Priests are the descendants of the Apostles. Therefore, during the Sacrament of Reconciliation, priests are given the power by Christ to forgive sins in His Name. The priest, during Confession, becomes the mouthpiece for Christ to forgive our sins. Christ, during Confession, is therefore present and we can then know with certainty that our sins are forgiven. To use a simile, I like to

think that the priest is like a telephone connecting me to Jesus. I, by way of the priest and with authentic remorse, tell Jesus my sins and ask for His forgiveness, and He, also by way of the priest, forgives me. Furthermore, we cannot assume that Christ will just forgive us of our sins outside of Confession, because giving forgiveness implies that the wrongdoer has felt true remorse and has authentically sought forgiveness. Since Christ has given us free will, it is impossible for Him to forgive us until we ourselves realize that we have done wrong and actually want to receive His forgiveness. Once we have done that, Christ is more than happy to forgive us. Now I will answer the second question, do I feel uncomfortable telling a stranger all of my faults and mistakes? The answer is yes, it is never easy admitting when you have done wrong, especially to another person. But, when I am confessing my sins in the Confessional, I do so with the conscious knowledge that it is not to the other human being to whom I am confessing my sins, but to Christ Himself, who so desperately loves me and so desperately wants to forgive me. Still, I will grant you that the hardest part about going to Confession is wrestling with my feelings of guilt. I have to remind myself constantly that Jesus does not care how often I have sinned, or how often I have committed the same sin, and that if I simply go to Reconciliation and make a heartfelt and sincere confession, Christ will forgive me. One Bible verse that I like to keep in mind in times of doubt about Confession is the passage where Christ is asked how many times the sinner should be forgiven, and He responds, “seventy times seven” (Matthew 18:22). This is meant to mean that Christ will forgive us an uncountable number of times, so long as we truly desire to be forgiven and sincerely ask for it. The final question, does not the priest just tell you how bad you are and then tell you to go say a Rosary? I find this a little amusing in how wildly untrue it is. Any priest whose goal is to shame a person giving an honest confession is a priest who in no way deserves to be hearing Confessions. For my own part, whenever 13

I go to Reconciliation, after I have confessed my sins, the priest always starts out by saying something along the lines of, “You have made a beautiful Confession, let us thank Christ for your openness and honesty”. It is the priest’s desire to let you know how much God desires to forgive you. The priest is not out to make you feel ashamed of yourself, but to let you know that no matter what you have done, you can always be forgiven. I, in a moment of doubt and guilt, once asked my spiritual advisor, who is a Jesuit priest, if priests ever get tired of hearing the same people confess the same sins over and over. He very reassuringly said that they do not, and that priests actually admire people who confess the same sins over and over, because it means that they are fighting to stop committing that sin, and are seeking God’s help in order to do so. My

advisor also told me, with an amused smile, that there is nothing a Holy Cross student can confess that they haven’t heard confessed hundreds of times before. His words heartened me and have only bolstered my belief that Confession is good for my soul. The Sacrament of Reconciliation is not a process where a sinner is shamed for what he or she has done. Rather, it is a time of liberation where a person can let go and have done with the sin clawing at his or her conscience. It is a time of healing, a chance for us to mend the relationship that we have broken with God. We need only be genuinely sorry and sincerely ask for God’s forgiveness, and then we can sleep easy knowing that God has forgiven us. It truly is one of the best things about being a Catholic, and I can only hope and pray that more Catholics will come to know the healing power of the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Do Whatever He Tells You

- Melissa Gryan ‘18

Atlantic Avenue At the edge of the Boston mandala, Blows a cold wind across the colored sand. Concentric circles fall into the water, Weary dreams drown just off the land. Neon signs entice the children, To come in and soften life, Trap are set between the trees by the aquarium, To prolong strife. The drunkards add to the sewage below them, As they purge themselves of trouble. And only I have met the skeletons below the bars, Buried by vice in rubble.

- Patrick Connolly ‘18

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

Why a Jesuit Identity Means a ProLife Identity Elinor Reilly ‘18

It is no secret that the College of the Holy students, faculty, and friends of a Jesuit school to a Cross has a rocky history with the pro-life movement. particular responsibility to care for life at all stages, That is, the movement to protect all life, from especially the most vulnerable. conception until natural death, not to be confused The Society of Jesus, now commonly known with the Republican Party or others who have been as the Jesuits, was founded in 1540 by St. Ignatius interested in claiming this name over the years. In of Loyola, a former soldier. One of the directives 2008, space in Hogan was rented out for a conference he gave his new religious order was to “find God in in which Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion all things.” People are one of the best places to find provider in the U.S., and the National Abortion Rights God, both as his children but also as the face of the Access League (NARAL) participated. Then-president Suffering Christ. Jesuits have historically lived out of the College Father Michael McFarland, SJ, refused this call in many ways, from teaching, to working as to oppose the event. This past spring, among other missionaries, to caring for the marginalized throughout incidents, a vandal hung a coathanger on a student the world. The Jesuit St. Aloysius Gonzaga wrote, “It display representing the number of people killed by is better to be the child of God than king of the whole abortion each day in the U.S. One need only listen to world,” a simple quote which asks one to remember conversations of students the importance of oneself How did this become thought around campus to know that and each person as a child a lot of people are talking of as acceptable? Why do so few of God, of equal value and about having sex, but not priceless dignity. “Teach us many are talking about taking people know that the College to give and not count the care of children. cost,” St. Ignatius wrote in provides special housing How did this become one prayer. Recognizing accommodations for pregnant the dignity of humans thought of as acceptable? Why do so few people know and practicing respect for and parenting students? that the College provides life is not always easy special housing accommodations for pregnant and and never has been, but it is not something optional parenting students? When we talk about Title IX, why or something to do for a select few. Pope Francis, is the focus always on sports teams and bathrooms the most prominent Jesuit in the world today, has and never about how it offers many legal protections repeatedly spoken of the importance of such love for for pregnant and parenting women and outright “the weakest and most fragile human beings — the prohibits discrimination against them? The Catholic unborn, the poorest, the sick and elderly, the seriously faith holds that “human life must be respected and handicapped, etc. — who are in danger of being protected absolutely from the moment of conception” ‘thrown away,’ expelled from a system that must be (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2270). As people efficient at all costs” (December 2013 speech to the living a Catholic way of life, the Society of Jesus and Dignitatis Humanae Institute). all those who practice the Jesuit approach to prayer One example of how this “throwaway culture,” and life must be unconditionally pro-life. Contrary as Pope Francis has termed it, is the Internet. On some to what some believe, there is nothing about the popular forums there are specific sections for people Jesuits which at all abrogates any of the Church’s asking for advice on their life and their relationships. teachings, and certainly not the requirement to respect Women frequently post asking for advice surrounding life. Furthermore, there are certain aspects of Jesuit an unplanned pregnancy. Responses on these types of spirituality which go so far as to call all of us, as posts usually differ based on the woman’s situation in 16

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

we think, speak, and act on campus and throughout our lives. Jesuit values have influenced so much of this campus’s history and have inspired many of us as students today. Even if you are not Catholic, or Christian, or religious at all, “finding God in all things” can be realized in your care for and love of those around you. This is not a vague statement to help you feel warm and fuzzy. There are vulnerable people who will surround you, no matter where you are in life, and your love for them as a fellow human being can make a tangible difference. For example, when a girl who receives financial assistance or does not speak to her family asks you for advice on her pregnancy, will you give her a different opinion than you would give a girl who has a second home or doting parents? It is vital to remember that there are choices aside from abortion. The Jesuit identity that we all, like it or not, are a part of means that no matter your income level, or your religion, or your pro-choice or pro-life stance, or your fear of being looked askance at on campus, there is help and love.

life. If she is happily married and has enough money the general consensus is to provide affirmation of her stability in life and readiness for a child, though she is invariably reminded that she could have an abortion if she changes her mind. However, if she is not in a stable relationship, or does not have much money, or her landlord does not allow children, or once she accidentally dropped a baby’s pacifier, the refrain is different. “I think you should highly consider abortion,” “I would get the abortion in your shoes,” and “Get an abortion. I’m speaking for the child here,” were all actual responses to one horrific post by a woman whose husband was attempting to force her to have an abortion by threatening to take full custody of their child if she gave birth (the post in question was later deleted). The implication in these responses and in many others like them is clear: A life in poverty, a life with an absent father, or a life with a disability is not a life worth living. Influenced as we are by Jesuit values, we must reject this idea. This call needs to shape all of us and how

Jesuit banner at the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C.

The Vision of the Stone

Claude Hanley ‘18 Co-Editor

theological principles inform this understanding. In his final encyclical letter, Pope Benedict XVI writes, “The vocation to progress drives us to ‘do First, that “in the image,” present in the tradition of the Church from its very beginning, is the basic more, to know more, and to have more in order to be more.” In the document, the Pope Emeritus discusses quality of human beings. In parallel, in Colossians 1:15, St. Paul writes, “the Son is the image of the the notion of human development in relation to the invisible God.” Furthermore, Christ is encountered principles of Catholic social teaching. Benedict’s as the logos, the creating reason of the universe. concerns are chiefly the economic and social spheres of global society. The principles he outlines, however, As such, since human beings are stamped with the image of God through Christ, we have a share in offer a perspective from which to consider a Catholic logos. This, and nothing else, makes us rational. college’s duty to its students. As the eminently Two corollaries follow naturally from this principle. trustworthy College magazine tells parents and First, the College, dedicated to reason, exists only alumni, with Ignatian commitment to the magis, in line with the finest traditions of Catholic education, as because humans are fashioned in Christ. Second, in the cultivation of reason, which arises from the image the oldest Jesuit College in New England, ours is an of the Father, the human institution that demands In this place, we face the tran- being lies entirely open to the ever more of itself, and creator. In this place, we face ever more of us. The scendent reality of our nature, the transcendent reality of our “more” is my theme. nature, and in ourselves face and in ourselves face Him. This essay considers that Him. “more” from a theological Rationality, in its theological sense, opens on perspective, analyzes its relationship to the life of faith and originates in what is transcendent in the human at Holy Cross, and briefly questions how well Holy person. Without the divine, the holistic development Cross fulfills that duty. of our rational nature is impossible, because it fails The notion of “being more” emphasizes that to account for the source of rationality. Unless it this institution’s duty is the development, in the looks inward toward its source, the mind has no non-technical sense, of its students. Pope Benedict anchor. It drifts out onto a absurd ocean of facts and suggests that development must be integral, meaning figures. Value and truth become arbitrary notions, it must concern the entirety of every person. This unique to every individual and utterly incapable of understanding of development is essential to a communication. Every mind is a self-containing Catholic institution. On the one hand, the aim of vessel. Occasionally, one meets another in an inane the Catholic Church is the salvation of souls, which requires robust moral and spiritual direction even more crashing of principles and beliefs. Absent the divine, however, such confrontations can communicate than intellectual growth. As St. Ambrose observes, nothing. A purely mechanical perspective demands “God was not pleased to save his people through that each viewpoint be its own meaning, for dialectic.” Practically, neglecting the spiritual, no meaning can come from without. Only a psychological and moral dimensions of the human being will constrain the intellect. The human person is comprehensive spiritual foundation can ground the monuments of intellect. a unified whole, and human development must match In promoting intellect, therefore, Holy Cross human nature. must begin in the truth of Christ, as expressed in the More fundamentally, the human nature is fashioned in the divine image, marred by sin, but open scriptures and the traditions of the Catholic faith. Christ, who is the logos from which intellect takes to God through Christ, who makes it rational. Three 18

October/November 2016 The Fenwick Review

its origin, restores to humankind the image of God lost through disobedience. He does so by becoming a man, and so overpowers death and teaches human beings of the Father. Human nature, intellectual and spiritual, is preserved from decay and reordered towards Truth by the Incarnation. It can only be developed with reference to the God who makes it possible. Attempts at spiritual development must begin from that principle. This does not exclude students of other faiths from the life of the College. Instead, it establishes Catholicism as the privileged tradition. It mandates that the entirety of Catholic teaching be respected by the community, which could not exist without the Faith. Finally, it demands that those responsible for religious development at Holy Cross respect and promote Catholic orthodoxy, not a feeble-minded, fainthearted approximation of “spirituality.” Unfortunately, the robust legacy of the Catholic tradition is increasingly relegated to the margins of student spiritual and academic life, despite the best efforts of portions of the Holy Cross community. This fault does not rest substantially with the Jesuit community; quite the contrary. It is only through the efforts of our professor-priests that Catholic student life survives on Mount St. James. Spiritual direction.

The sacraments. RCIA. The Students for Life. The Society of Ss. Peter and Paul. The litany of their labours is endless. The dangers come, not from the Roman Catholic religious order, but from the (often non-Catholics) who claim its legacy. In the past year, the administration has enacted policies utterly at odds with a Catholic anthropology. Similarly, the Chaplains Office, in its “Mission Statement” and “Guiding Values,” does not condescend even to mention the religion of Edmund Campion. In the end, substantial elements in Campion House and Hogan Center do not seek the “More” in any coherent Catholic fashion; they excrete a murderous relativism and call it “Jesuit Identity.” There is an inscription carved in the entryway of Beaven Hall which tells us what we are about. Holy Cross, it declares, exists “for the purpose of making Catholic young men more deeply educated in every art...so that the splendor of truth may shine out from the sacred ground.” Faith and reason, light and truth, the only mission that we need. Long after “Being More” is finished, Beaven’s doors will bear their witness of the dream that once was ours. It can never be forgotten; it is written in the stone.

The Fenwick Review is proudly sponsored by: