January 2014

The

Fenwick Review Testimonium Perhibere Veritati

January 2014

Volume XXI, Issue 4

The Independent Journal of Opinion at the College of the Holy Cross

Four Myths About Pope Francis Why The Man in Full Should be Read in Full

George Weigel Special Guest Contributor

When he was elected bishop of Rome this past March 13, more than a few people wondered just who Jorge Mario Bergoglio was — which was precisely the reaction to the election of Karol Wojtyla as bishop of Rome on October 16, 1978. That night, Wojtyla described himself to his new diocese as having come “from a far country”; nine months ago, Bergoglio told the crowds gathered in the Roman dusk that the cardinals had gone “to the end of the earth” to find a new pope.

Wojtyla, taking the name John Paul II, went on to become the most consequential pope in

centuries; Bergoglio, taking the name of the beloved poverello of Assisi, quickly seized the public imagination, reminding the world in the process that the world needs a pastor’s care, and a pastor’s challenge, whether the world admits it or not.

Yet many still wonder just who Pope Francis is. To which the answer is: He is a man of many parts. He is a radically converted Christian disciple who has known the mercy of God in his own life and who wants others to know that experience. He is an oldfashioned Jesuit, steeped in the Ignatian idea of spiritual combat, committed to an austere way of life, willing to take risks for the sake of the Gospel. He is a reformer who is calling the Catholic Church to recover the missionary

Also in this Edition:

Fishbowls: Revisited

By Chase Padusniak ‘15 ..... page 10-11

zeal of its origins, and who will make structural changes in the Church in service to that evangelical imperative.

He is a man of compassion for the “peripheries,” who will not let the world forget what the world often wants to forget about the abuse of power, the instrumentalization of the poor, the cheapening of human life, the personal and social costs of the cult of the autonomous self. Surprising those who have known him longest, and who thus knew his longstanding reticence, he has become a public personality, with an uncanny ability for the caring gesture that embodies that love which, as Saint Paul taught two millennia ago, is the more perfect way.

Yet myths about him continue to abound. Four come quickly to mind.

Myth 1: Pope Francis is making a radical break with the pontificates of his two predecessors.

On the contrary, Francis is accelerating the evolution of Catholic identity that was at the center of the program of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, in their authoritative interpretation of the Second Vatican Council. In his apostolic letter closing the Great Jubilee of 2000, John Paul II called the Church to leave the shallow waters of institutional maintenance and to go out “into the deep” (Luke 5:5) of what the Polish pope had long styled the “New Evangelization.”

Continued on page 6

Grade Inflation

When Everyone Is Super… No One Is

By Joe Murphy ‘16 ~ Staff Writer ..... page 9

Like us on Facebook & follow us on Twitter @FenwickReview and read The Fenwick Review online at: http://college.holycross.edu/studentorgs/fenwickreview/index.html

The Fenwick Review

2

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 desires to help make Holy Cross 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 In this issue, as in every issue, we must reserve 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. You are always in our prayers, and with each issue we publish, our first goal is to justify the incredible faith you have shown in us.

Mr. Guy C. Bosetti Dr. and Mrs. Paul Braunstein Mr. and Mrs. Michael Dailey Mr. J. O’Neill Duffy Mr. and Mrs. Richard Fisher Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Gorman Mr. Robert W. Graham III Dr. and Mrs. Thomas W. Greene Mr. Paul M. Guyet Mr. Robert R. Henzler Mr. William Horan Mr. Joseph Kilmartin Mr. Robert J. Leary ‘49 Mr. Francis Marshall ‘48 Mr. J. O’Neill Duffy Mr. Kevin O’Scannlain Fr. Paul Scalia Dr. Ronald Safko Mr. Sean F. Sullivan Jr.

January 2014

Contents January 2014

Volume XXI, Issue 4

1 Four Myths About Pope Francis

By George Weigel ~ Special Guest Contributor

3 The Editor’s Desk

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 & Patrick J. Horan ‘14

4 Letter to the Editor

By Thomas M. Landy ~ McFarland Center Director

4 Response to Letter to the Editor

By Patrick J. Horan ‘14 ~ Co-Editor-in-Chief

5 Losing Iraq’s Anbar Province

By John Castro ’14 ~ Copy Editor

6 Four Myths About Pope Francis (cont.)

By George Weigel ~ Special Guest Contributor

7 Mater Misericordiae: Mother of Mercy

By Steven Merola ‘16 ~ Staff Writer

8 Art in Life: “Everyday Epiphanies”

By Nikolas Churik ‘15 ~ Foreign Bureau Chief

9 Grade Inflation

By Joe Murphy ‘16 ~ Staff Writer

10 Fishbowls: Revisited

By Chase Padusniak ‘15 ~ Staff Writer

January 2014

The Fenwick Review

From the Editor’s Desk

The Fenwick Review 2013-2014 Staff

On Employee Salaries

Co-Editors in Chief

Happy New Year from all of us at the Fenwick Review! We hope that the upcoming year is peaceful and enjoyable for all. Reflecting on the past year, the profusion of war, scandal, and terrorism, there is little doubt that the Year of Our Lord 2013 was turbulent. Though the year had its positive moments, including the election of the first Jesuit Pope, there is little doubt that Anno Domini 2014 will be plagued by the unresolved issues of 2013.

Most notably, October’s partial shutdown of the federal government and Edward Snowden’s revelations regarding the NSA’s surveillance of American citizens have contributed to an problematic atmosphere cynicism, suspicion, and even hostility. The American people’s understandably low approval rating of the government should not viewed as a cause for distress, but rather as a call for politicians to recognize the importance of compromise and cooperation.

On an unrelated note, we would also like to take the opportunity to analyze the salary figures published in last month’s issue of the Review. We decided to publish the figures directly from the IRS 990 Tax Forms, thus allowing readers to draw their own conclusions about the salaries. However, in retrospect we recognize it may have be beneficial to provide some context and analysis. For example, the salaries for professors at Holy Cross compare relatively favorably to other similarly ranked liberal arts schools. According to FindTheData.org, average salaries for full professors at Colgate University and Smith College were approximately $130,000, while the average for Oberlin College and Bucknell University were around $110,000.

The more concerning information concerned the disparity between administrative compensation and salaries for teachers. In particular, the payments to head coaches seem excessive for a school not exactly renowned for its athletics. The data shows that Holy Cross is no exception to the trend in academia of hiring increasing numbers of administrators for decreasingly important roles, all the while the cost of attending college continues to rise. Recognizing this is a contentious issue, we look forward to continuing the trend of dialogue and interaction with our readers during the upcoming year. As always, the Review appreciates receiving feedback from both students and faculty on the issues discussed in the paper, as well as topics for further discussion. Overall, welcome back to the Hill and best of luck to the Class of 2014 for their final semester!

Sincerely, Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 & Patrick J. Horan ‘14 Anno Domini 2014

11 Netanyahu: Money over Mandela

By Amber Alley ‘16 ~ Staff Writer

3

Correction: Prof. Mary Lee Ledbetter whose name was listed among the top salaries in the December issue of FR is a professor emerita, not simply professor. We regret the error.

Hate us? Love us? Tell us what you think!

All readers are invited to submit letters to the editor – selected letters will be re-printed in the next issue of the Review. Contribute to the debate!

Letters should be directed to: fenwickrev@g.holycross.edu

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14 Patrick J. Horan ‘14

Copy Editors John Castro ‘14 Kaylie Gage ‘14

Website Editor

Andrew D. Emerson ‘14

Layout Editor in-Absentia Claire S. Mahoney ‘15

Foreign Bureau Chief Nikolas Churik ‘15

Staff Writers

Amber Alley ‘16 J. Alex Cicchitti ‘15 Ken Jordan ‘14 Eric Kuhn ‘16 Joseph Lepera ‘14 Mary Maliszewski ‘14 Steven Merola ‘16 Joe Murphy ‘16 Chase Padusniak ‘15 Hayward Shine ‘16

Faculty Adviser

Professor David Lewis Schaefer Political Science

Disclaimers

This journal is published by students of the College of the Holy Cross and is produced two or three times per semester. The College of the Holy Cross is not responsible for its content. Articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board.

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: Patrick J. Horan P.O. Box 4A 1 College Street Worcester, MA 01610

Letter Policy

We at The Fenwick Review encourage feedback. All comments, criticisms, compliments, and opinions are welcome. As we are striving to promote intellectual freedom and progress here at Holy Cross, opposing viewpoints to anything we print are especially appreciated. Finally, we reserve the rights to print and edit any letters for clarity and length that we receive.

Please email your submissions to: fenwickrev@g.holycross.edu

The Fenwick Review

4

January 2014

Letter to the Editor

The Fenwick Review

January 2014

Response to Letter to the Editor (cont.)

On Fishbowls at Holy Cross

On Fishbowls at Holy Cross

Thomas M. Landy, Ph.D. Director, McFarland Center To the Editors: The Fenwick Review recently published some interesting, though inconsistent, perspectives on fishbowls at Holy Cross.

Given that the editors asked that the McFarland Center “reconsider both the format and the execution of the fishbowl series,” I am happy to respond.

The McFarland Center introduced the fishbowl format to campus a few years ago in order to offer an alternative to the “talking head” format of the traditional panel, and also to contrast to many of the models often available in the media. Nobody is more surprised than me to see how the model has taken off on campus.

Having not attended most of them, I cannot respond to the comments that relate to the many fishbowls which have subsequently been sponsored by other groups on campus. But I have to presume that other people see something in the process that Messrs. Padusniak, Emerson, and Horan do not. (Ironically, five faculty and students have come to ask that the Center pursue various fishbowl topics since The Fenwick Review articles were published).

I see fishbowls as one way to model thoughtful discussion on campus about social issues of consequence

and to surface some of the ethical complexity that may be behind them.

Some topics will inevitably generate more tension than others, but I see plenty of evidence on campus that many people disagree with The Fenwick Review about fishbowls.

From my perspective, the best topics for fishbowls are those where there are competing issues at stake – not a discussion that asks, for example, “Is racism bad?” but one that reflects on the competing values in conflict behind “stop and frisk” policies or affirmative action.

I think we can come to definite conclusions about what we believe is right and wrong, but not until we have tried to understand that there are often competing values, not just ill will, at stake.

As a rule, I want precisely to avoid many of the things that Chase Padusniak seems to long for in the first half of his critique. The “linguistic somersaults and academic tomfoolery,” “flare,” and “decisive matches of wit and skill,” he pines for strike me (to model the kind of debate he longs

for) as narcissistic forms of mental autoeroticism, not as a good way to think about the complex issues. I’m not interested in playing the games he finds so stimulating.

His desire for a metaphorical football game, and such intense yearning for a “winner” and “victory” is inconsistent with the patience often necessary to look at multiple values at stake. It makes no sense to me to pile up metaphors about games and tomfoolery as he did, and then to call for a “sincere dialectic” a few paragraphs later.

The McFarland Center’s fishbowls seek to model public conversations, not performances. Our college mission does ask students to learn to be patient with ambiguity and uncertainty, even as they pursue a passion for truth.

Re: Emerson and Horan’s editorial comments: the most important comment I can make is to remind them that all of our recent fishbowls were preceded by several campus-wide emails to request fishbowl volunteers.

We deliberately try to structure the

In general, if we don’t get enough conservative voices, it is because conservatives are not coming forward to be part of it.

process to get a variety of views, and always solicit several faculty to suggest students who might have a range of views. In one case, I saw those views shift between the time we selected ‘fish” and the time the fishbowl started.

But in general, if we don’t get enough conservative voices, it is because conservatives are not coming forward to be part of it. The real paradox, perhaps, is that this would be the case even in a setting that gets derided as bland and low-stakes. If that’s the case now, what makes FR writers think that people would volunteer for the alpha male knock-downs that would entertain some attendees by shedding more heat than light?

I should point out that the Occupy Wall Street fishbowl ascribed to the McFarland Center was actually a student event, though the affirmative action event was ours. I thought Chris Theobalt did a great job contributing to it, and I think we modeled how to respectfully disagree.

The Fenwick Review is an important venue for conservative voices on campus. Perhaps the articles will prove most useful if they serve as a call for more conservative voices in the student body to get engaged in the kind of conversation that fishbowls are intended to model.

Thomas M. Landy Director, McFarland Center

Response to Letter to the Editor On Fishbowls at Holy Cross

become the fishbowl. While this can certainly be appropriate at times, other Patrick J. Horan ‘14 issues could be flushed out more thorCo-Editor-in-Chief oughly in a debate-styled format.

The problem is that overreliDear Professor Landy, ance of fishbowls leads to us having

more questions than answers. Yes, we

Thank you for your letter. To hear of different values from students clarify, I do not think the fishbowl se- and faculty, but as the fishbowl intenries needs to be ended. On the con- tionally strives to not necessarily hear trary, the topics chosen have largely all views presented on each question, been interesting and, as you say, “of we do not always hear differences of consequence.” However, the go-to opinion. If Person X makes a claim form of dialogue on such issues has that Person Y disagrees with, Person Y

may or may not have a chance to later respond. Challenges to claims are lost in the conversation. This makes it difficult for members of the audience to have a fully developed opinion.

You are correct to state that our college’s mission requires that we be patient with ambiguity, but I do not think such patience and the willingness to make a strong case in pursuit of truth are mutually exclusive. Indeed, since there are almost always at least two sides to every story, it can still be difficult to make an opinion after a de-

5

bate, but at least we have more clearly heard the pros and cons of each side.

Our college’s mission asks for a commitment to excellence in learning and a passion for truth. Thus, every effort should be made to respectfully analyze and critique arguments, and this is where we feel the current fishbowl format is not always sufficient.

As for the issue of disproportionality of differing views, I do not doubt the McFarland Center’s sincerest efforts to elicit diverse attitudes.

Continued on page 5

Patrick J. Horan ‘14 Co-Editor-in-Chief Continued from page 4

However, as Professor Daniel Klinghard, who largely defended the current execution of fishbowls, nonetheless wrote in the November issue of FR, it is unreasonable to “expect one student to represent an unpopular opinion in a heavy faculty-heavy fishbowl, or to expect the same faculty members to serve as the go-to fish for any unpopular position.” As Prof.

Klinghard noted, “I can imagine, for instance, that any of these situations

would have been exceedingly uncomfortable at the recent fishbowl on the recent Supreme Court rulings on the Voting Rights Act and gay marriage.”

These are definitely topics worth discussing, but perhaps more than campus-wide emails are needed than to ensure diversity and proportionality of opinion. Chris Theobalt did a great job contributing to the affirmative action discussion in a respectful way, but it’s unfair to hope that one student or faculty member will always be willing to defend unpopular positions (which tends to be the more conservative positions among the topics chosen for discussion) while a larger

number of students and faculty enjoy the more popularly-held positions.

Finally, obviously, the McFarland Center cannot be held responsible for the fishbowls of other organizations. When we cited the Occupy Wall Street fishbowl as an example of fishbowl one-sidedness, we should have more carefully pointed out that we were commenting on the fishbowl trend as a whole.

Again, thank you for your letter as you have raised some valid points and helped us better understand the intentions behind the fishbowl format and its effects. I hope that this dialogue has been fruitful. Nevertheless, I still

believe that there is room for either modifying the way fishbowls are executed or, in addition to the fishbowl format, engaging in other forms of discussion such as more structured debates.

The McFarland Center has clearly had an impact on other campus organizations that have mimicked its use of the fishbowl. Perhaps, we would see a positive ripple effect among these groups if the McFarland Center were to make certain structural changes.

Sincerely, Patrick J. Horan ’14 Co-Editor-in-Chief

Losing Iraq’s Anbar Province: Will the Obama Administration Finally Admit al-Qaeda is far from its Deathbed? its goals beyond overthrowing Syrian as documented by the United Nations the Shia majority in Iraq’s central govPresident Bashar al-Assad, to include Assistance Mission to Iraq. The out- ernment. The unfolding situation in John Castro ’14 destabilizing Shia led governments in look for Iraq in 2014 is equally grim. Iraq is also a tremendous setback for Copy Editor neighboring states, namely Iraq.

Currently, al-Qaeda fighters are in con- U.S. foreign policy in the region as the

In the past year, Iraqis were trol of large portions of Iraq’s Anbar U.S. fought there for 8 years, sacrific In The Fenwick Review’s first forced to contend with a wave of vio- Province, a region that was secured by ing nearly 5,000 troops, with the aim issue for the Fall 2013 semester, I wrote lence reminiscent of the worst years U.S. forces in 2004 at a huge cost. of making Iraq a model for democracy an article entitled “The Myth of a Deci- of the U.S.- led Iraq War. Numerous For Iraq’s fledgling democ- in the Middle East. Additionally, the mated al-Qaeda,” detailing the Obama news reports estimate that in 2013, racy, the recapturing of key cities, such fall of major cities in Anbar Province Administration’s failure to acknowl- nearly 8,000 civilians were killed in po- as Fallujah and Ramadi, by al-Qaeda to al-Qaeda fighters further derails the edge that al-Qaeda was regaining sig- litical violence largely attributed to ex- poses a serious threat, as the terrorist Obama Administration’s claim that alnificant influence in Africa, the Middle tremist fighters crossing into Iraq from group is in a position to further exac- Qaeda is on the path to defeat.

East and South Asia. Since the publish- Syria. This figure is more than twice erbate increasing tensions between the Instead, the recent events show ing of that article, al-Qaeda’s growth the number of civilian deaths in 2012 Sunni majority in Anbar Province and that al-Qaeda has has only accelerstrengthened sigated. Using the nificantly in the Syrian civil war past year and as both a propanow possesses ganda tool and an the capability to opportunity for challenge a govtactical training, ernment that is al-Qaeda and its heavily supported global affiliates by the U.S. As alhave become emQaeda continues boldened by new to maintain conrecruits, weaptrol over these ons, financial relocations, the sources and bases organization beof operations. comes better poTaking advantage sitioned to begin of these newly acrestoring the quired resources, strong influence the Sunni terrorit once held in the ist organization region. has expanded A map showing Iraq’s Anbar Province where government forces are battling al-Qaeda linked extremists (Photo Credit CBS News) Continued on page 10

The Fenwick Review

6

January 2014

Four Myths About Pope Francis (cont.)

Why The Man in Full Should be Read in Full

George Weigel Special Guest Contributor Continued from page 1

Benedict XVI summoned the world Synod of Bishops to consider just what that “New Evangelization” might mean, especially for the deChristianized parts of a once-vibrant Christendom.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio took these counsels to heart and, at a 2007 meeting of all the bishops of Latin America and the Caribbean, became the intellectual architect of the revolutionary Aparecida Document, which called Latin American Catholicism out of the complacency of cultural “establishment” and into a vigorous proclamation of the Gospel, centered on personal encounters with Jesus Christ.

Now, in Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel), his apostolic exhortation completing the work of Benedict’s Synod on John Paul II’s “New Evangelization,” Pope Francis, in clear continuity with his two predecessors, is calling the Church to what he describes as “permanent mission.”

It is all of a piece.

tian conviction and his judgment are tethered to the settled teaching of the Church (as he reiterated in Evangelii Gaudium on the question of whom the Church can and cannot ordain to the

Leo XIII in the late 19th century, Francis knows and teaches that economic activity, like every other form of human activity, is subject to what he called, in Evangelii Gaudium, “critical thinking”

Myth 4: Pope Francis is soft on the hot-button social issues.

Myth 2: Pope Francis is a liberal.

“Liberal,” of course, means different things to different people. But a pope who, in a daily Mass homily, cites with appreciation Robert Hugh Benson’s 1907 apocalyptic novel, Lord of the World, and uses Benson’s imaginary future to illustrate his own papal warning against “adolescent progressivism,” is no “liberal” in any of the word’s conventional American meanings. (Indeed, Francis’s “adolescent progressivism” is but another name for Benedict XVI’s “dictatorship of relativism.”)

Similarly, when the pope told an Italian Jesuit journal that he was “not a right-winger,” he meant that he was not enthralled with Latin American generals dripping with faux decorations; he did not mean that he was deploring Paul Ryan (although he may or may not agree with Ryan on matters of prudential judgment).

Attempts to capture Bergoglio in the typical ecclesiastical or political meanings of “liberal” are bound to fail.

He is a churchman; his deep Chris-

ciphers, mere problems-to-be-solved; rather, this man of the “peripheries” is calling the world and the Church, as John Paul II did, to see the poor through the lens of empowerment, as people-with-potential-to-be-unleashed.

and “moral discernment.”

From his Argentine experience (which can hardly be described as an experience of well-functioning markets regulated by law and Myth 3: Pope moral culture), Francis is antiFrancis knows business. that cupidity is a personally and

If he socially destrucwere, why would tive vice. As he write in Evana pastor, he is gelii Gaudium challenging the that business is business world a “noble vocato do all it can to tion” when busiinclude the poor ness serves the in what John common good Paul II described — a descripas networks of tion that well fits productivity and those American exchange. companies and At the same American entretime, he chalpreneurs who take job creation lenges governand philanthropy seriously? Like John ments not to fall prey to what Evangelii Paul II and Benedict XVI, and indeed Gaudium deplored as a “welfare menlike all of Catholic social doctrine since tality” in which the poor are human ministerial priesthood). And as a public figure, he is not a “man of political ideology,” as he stated bluntly in that same document, but a pastor.

And as a public figure, he is not a “man of political ideology,” as he stated bluntly in that same document, but a pastor.

Virtually no attention has been paid to the pope’s multiple defenses of the right to life from conception until natural death in his daily Mass homilies and in a notable address to Italian physicians. Similarly, Evangelii Gaudium underscores the unchanging (and unchangeable) moral teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion, even as the pope called the world Church to complement its right-to-life advocacy with effective and compassionate service to women in crisis pregnancies — thus paying tribute to what the American pro-life movement has done since Roe v. Wade.

In the midst of the battle over the nature of marriage in Argentina, Cardinal Bergoglio wrote a convent of cloistered nuns, asking them to pray that “gay marriage” legislation would be defeated, since that project was an effort of the “father of lies” to deceive the children of God. (One of the striking, and typically unremarked, things about Francis’s papal preaching and catechesis is the number of times he has referred to Satan.) Both of these longstanding concerns of Jorge Mario Bergoglio were summed up in Evangelii Gaudium’s description of the traditional family as the “fundamental cell of society,” a classic Catholic socialdoctrine theme with which he is in obvious accord.

To be sure, Francis wants the Church’s pro-life advocacy to be firmly located within its healing ministry to a wounded culture. And his pastoral sense tells him that postmodern humanity scoffs at the Church’s necessary “No” to some acts because contemporary culture has forgotten, or has not been taught, the “Yes” to the dignity of the human person that stands behind every “No” the Church must say to death-dealing actions. But that the pope is a man of rock-solid orthodoxy on the “social issues” no one should doubt.

Continued on page 7

The Fenwick Review

January 2014

7

Four Myths About Pope Francis (cont.)

Why The Man in Full Should be Read in Full

George Weigel Special Guest Contributor Continued from page 6 The dangers lurking beneath the remarkable approval ratings Francis has garnered in his brief pontificate have largely to do with the ongoing incapacities of Vatican communications, which permit various interested parties, in the press and among politicians, to “narrativize” the pope to their liking.

Evangelii Gaudium was a remarkable document; it may well have marked the decisive turning point from the Counter-Reformation Church to the Evangelical Catholicism of the future.

Yet I’d bet that no newspaper in the world led the story, the day after Evangelii Gaudium was released, with the lede the pope would likely have

wanted: “Pope Francis today called the Catholic Church to rediscover its missionary nature, challenging Catholics in all walks of life to think of themselves as missionaries who enter mission territory every day.”

And as it becomes more and more clear, through his decisions in appointing bishops and his disciplinary actions, that Pope Francis is not the left-leaning creampuff that some imagine him to be, there will be a danger that the “narrative” on the pontificate will change, such that “the system got him” becomes the dominant storyline — thus further burying the pope’s central message, which is the call to the New Evangelization.

But that need not happen, and won’t, if this man in full is read in full, and if the Holy See manages to create a communications apparatus and strat-

egy for the 21st century.

This article originally appeared in the December 31, 2013 issue of National Review.

Mr. Weigel is the distinguished senior fellow

of Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center. His most recent book, co-authored with Elizabeth Lev and Stephen Weigel, is Roman Pilgrimage: The Station Churches.

Mater Misericordiae:

Some Thoughts on the Mother of Mercy Steven Merola ‘16 Staff Writer

Toward the end of the rosary we recite a prayer of praise and petition to the Blessed Virgin Mary called the Salve Regina, “Hail, Holy Queen.” The second line of this prayer has us address her as “Mother of Mercy.” This is a rather intriguing and stirring salutation, and so prompts the point of this brief essay: to explore the relation between Mary’s motherhood and mercy.

Mary is, quite literally, the mother of God’s mercy. That is, she is the mother of Christ, whom God gave so that we might be redeemed and have eternal life. As the mother of the God-Man, Mary was, in the words of Pope Bl. Pius IX, “united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond” (Ineffabilis Deus). This unity relates the mystery of the Incarnation with Mary’s Immaculate Conception, for both Christ and Mary were “eternally at enmity with the evil serpent.”

Mary’s motherhood of Christ is integral to her merciful role. St. Louis de Montfort, in his treatise True

Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, writes of the Incarnation: “it is the seat of his mercy for us, since we can approach and speak to Jesus through Mary. We need her intervention to see or speak to him. Here, ever responsive to the prayer of his Mother, Jesus unfailingly grants grace and mercy to all poor sinners.” Mary’s unity with her son makes her our greatest advocate, because the bond she shares with him is so perfect that he becomes entirely receptive to her prayers. Thus, “she is his mystical channel, his aqueduct” for an outpouring of grace and mercy.

St. Louis further expounds upon the importance of Mary’s motherhood, asking us to mature within her womb. He says, quoting scriptural interpretation, that those who live in Mary’s womb reach spiritual maturity faster, because “it was Mary’s womb which encompassed and produced a perfect man.” The womb, that wonderful symbol of motherhood, becomes for us the source for spiritual nourishment, allowing us to grow, fed

by God’s mercies, into wholesome Christians. The Mother provides her children with the grace necessary for salvation.

In one other supremely maternal quality, Mary desires all her children to come unto God. She shines forth “in mercy, to bring back and welcome lovingly the poor sinners and wanderers who are to be converted and return to the Catholic Church.” Through her advocacy and example, Mary leads us in right paths, drawing those who have strayed to the Lord. Through her most perfect example, humble, obedient, and loving, she shows us how to live a life pleasing to God, just as a good mother provides good example to her children.

Then, as a most perfect advocate, she entreats God to provide us with grace. In example and action, Mary is supremely merciful unto us.

In Mary, then, we find a mother overflowing with mercy. As the mother

of Christ, she can entreat her son to show us mercy. As a mother to us all, she nurtures us in mercy. Mary’s relation to God’s mercy would seem to be tied to her motherhood, and she is fittingly addressed as the Mother of Mercy.

The Fenwick Review

8

January 2014

Art in Life

Nikolas Churik ‘15 Staff Writer “We have art in order not to die of truth.”

-Friedrich Nietzsche “And the people bowed and prayed to the neon god they made.”

-Simon & Garfunkel

Just in time for the post-Christmas season, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York (as is, incidentally, the Worcester Art Museum) is holding exhibitions on art since the mid-century. They provide an opportunity to speculate on the interest in such recent pieces and on what messages about the contemporary world they send. The Met’s exhibit purports to present “the quotidian, intimate, and overlooked aspects of everyday existence.”

The New York exhibit comprised photographs labeled “everyday epiphanies,” revelatory actions that

sianism of the brand that arose in the latter half of the twentieth century.

The photographs ranged from domestic scenes to landscapes and natural scenes, many focusing on very minute facets. A large number of the other images frequently depicted individuals interacting with their environment and of the environment’s humans. This last group of photographs might have been illustrative of what may perhaps have been seen as a third source of modern revelation, materialism.

Throughout the exhibit, the question of what is the perspective of

Image Credit The Metropolitan Museum of Art Everyday Epiphanies: Photography and Daily Life Since 1969

the artist on materialism persists. One set of three black and white photos depicted three women staring pensively out of windows in their kitchens with the brightly colored labels of their favorite coffee brands at the bottom of the frames. A video showed the capacity and limitation of certain face recognition software. The software used in

the exhibit could not distinguish between faces of real humans, paintings, and cartoons.

Both wondered if the world was now limited to this sort of faceless anonymity, colored only by the brands a person decides to use.

The exhibit as a whole also raised the point of whether this fact is commonly grasped. Even if the artist notices that the world is being “branded,” does the common person, the viewer, notice and recognize this fact? If one does recognize it, what does one do with that recognition?

The epiphanies take place in these microcosms of self-criticism; by taking a reflective view on the created world, the images elucidate the edifices, both figurative and literal, in which humanity exists. When such a proposal is proffered, one might first think of Oscar Wilde’s claim that “Life imitates

9

Grade Inflation:

When Everyone Is Super… No One Is

A Reflection on “Everyday Epiphanies” may not be exceptionally noticeable.

The title of the exhibit raises the question of what is being deified, which seems to have been a point of interest in the past issue. The photos lack any religious images, although certainly “epiphanies” need not occur in a religious framework. They also lack any notion or intimation of political mes-

The Fenwick Review

January 2014

art far more than art imitates life,” and wonder how much the objects in the photos have shaped the lives of the owners.

Once the problem is recognized, the solution remains. . In Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis I the issue is noted, “we frequently hear of a ‘diagnostic overload’ which is not always

accompanied by improved and actually applicable methods of treatment” (EG 50) . The art work leads one to introspection and still might make one think that the depictions only go as far as suggesting the existence of a problem.

The opposite, in fact, seems the case: rather than suggest another set of ideas to “buy into,” the images demonstrate the value of reflection on the zeitgeist and its implications.

Although “we are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase,” the depictions capture the empty shell that is left over after mass consumption of material wealth without consideration of its end (EG 54). The representations of life and its epiphanies do present the picture of the midwinter that can be [post-] modern existence, but these very images might also act as goads to change the scenes they depict.

Both lead the viewer to wonder if the world was now limited to this sort of faceless anonymity, colored only by the brands a person decides to use.

Joe Murphy ‘16 Staff Writer

While Holy Cross students were dreading the difficulty of their final exams, Harvard University’s students and faculty had a different sort of challenge- explaining why their classes are so easy. On Tuesday December 3, Professor Harvey C. Mansfield, a professor of government for more than five decades at Harvard, lashed out against the rampant grade inflation at Harvard.

The Harvard Crimson, the college’s daily newspaper, reported that the most frequently given grade at Harvard is an A, citing data from fall 2012 and several previous semesters.

The report initiated a debate on campus about grade inflation and if it is really a problem at all. By giving grades that do not sufficiently represent the student’s level of understanding, colleges and universities are failing to properly educate their students.

Grade inflation in the United States, unfortunately, is widespread. Stuart Rojstaczer, a former geophysics professor at Duke University, and Christopher Healy, an associate professor of computer science at Furman University, describe the current and historical trends in grade inflation in their 2010 article “Grading in American Colleges and Universities.”

It finds that GPA’s have risen from a national average of 2.52 in the 1950s to about 3.11 by the middle of the last decade, and based on contemporary grading data the authors collected

from 160 schools, the average GPA at private schools is 3.3, while at public schools it is 3.0. It would be nice to think that American students have become more intelligent over the years, but Healy and Rojstacez claim that “students’ entrance exams scores have not increased… and the literacy of graduates has declined.” Of course, the extent of grade inflation varies from school to school.

One notable school that has tried to make changes in its grading policies is Princeton University.

In 2004, Princeton initiated a policy for grade deflation (the number of students receiving an A in a class was nearly fifty percent at the time) with the goal of reducing the number of students receiving an A-plus, A, or A-minus to about 35 percent. Unfortunately, the policy may be doing more harm than good. Princeton students have been extremely un-

A college filled with A-plus students lumps those students that are truly exceptional with those that are average.

happy about the new policy, and no other Ivy League schools have followed Princeton’s example. With graduate schools and other future employers looking at student grades, many Princeton students fear that they will lose out to other students who have benefitted from grade inflation.

Maybe this rampant grade inflation cannot be undone. If only one school, like Princeton, decided to grade fairly, it would harm the future of those students, but all students can take the reality of grade inflation as a lesson that grades do not represent everything; we should always be open to change and the idea that our skills and education can constantly be improved.

A college filled with A-plus students lumps those students that are truly exceptional with those that are average. It is unfair to talented students that are not properly recognized for their achievement or to average students who are falsely led to believe that they have an excellent grasp of the as-

Grade inflation leads to a sense of entitlement, an inability to deal with failure, and a desire to place higher priority on grades than actually learning anything important.

Image Credit http://www.gradeinflation.com

signed academic material.

John Adams, writing to his young son John Quincy, claimed “all the end of study is to make you a good man and a useful citizen.” Grade inflation leads to a sense of entitlement, an inability to deal with failure, and a desire to place higher priority on grades than actually learning anything important. College should be a place where students become mature men and women who are ready to deal with the challenges of the outside world, but how can students ever really mature and become good and useful citizens if no one is ever willing to tell them their wrong?

The Fenwick Review

10

January 2014

Losing Iraq’s Anbar Province (cont.)

Will the Obama Administration Finally Admit al-Qaeda is far from its Deathbed?

John Castro ‘14 Copy Editor Continued from page 5 In light of the unfolding crisis in Iraq, the Obama Administration needs to take decisive action in assisting the Iraqi government in combating the new al-Qaeda threat. Recently, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the U.S. is committed to supporting Iraq, but no U.S. troops will be deployed. While it is important that U.S. troops are not reintroduced to Iraq, the U.S. must work to supply the Iraqi military with the equipment needed to eliminate the extremists and secure the border with Syria.

Long before the situation in Iraq became dire, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki requested that a deal be negotiated for providing the Iraqi military with F-16 fighter jets and Apache attack helicopters; however, due to

fears that al-Maliki will use the equipment for suppressing the Sunni minority at large as opposed to solely targeting militants, Congress has not approved the measure. President Obama must work quickly with Congress and the Iraqi government to alleviate these fears and provide the equipment. Waiting will only allow al-Qaeda to harden its positions in the captured cities.

In terms of the threat posed by al-Qaeda threat in general, the Obama Administration needs to reassess how the al-Qaeda threat is evaluated. Since the death of Osama bin-Laden, al-Qaeda has evolved into numerous affiliated groups, many of which do not use the al-Qaeda name, but share the same ideology. In measuring success in defeating the extremist group, the Obama Administration has focused on illustrating how bin-Laden’s core al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan has suffered major defeats. This measure of success is irrelevant when new affiliated organizations are forming in numerous other

locations, such as Syria, Yemen and now Iraq.

As the al-Qaeda threat evolves, U.S. national security policy must as well. Because the threat is so fragmented, any new strategy must focus on strengthening ties with both the central and local governments where terrorist organizations operate and working to identify the underlying economic and social conditions that allow Islamic fundamentalism to flourish in these states. In places like Syria, where civil war has disrupted law and order, the U.S. must work with moderate groups to isolate extremists and assist neighboring states in preventing the violence from spreading outside Syria’s borders. Nevertheless,

Since the death of Osama bin-Laden, al-Qaeda has evolved into numerous affiliated groups, many of which do not use the alQaeda name, but share the same ideology. before a new strategy can be devised, President Obama must first acknowledge that the al-Qaeda threat is still very real and growing. Failure to do so will have severe consequences for both U.S. interests abroad and the homeland.

Fishbowls: Revisited of views represented, though whether they were represented with equal skill Chase Padusniak ‘15 and passion is another question. ReForeign Bureau Chief gardless, Fishbowls are not a plague on Holy Cross; in fact, they exist precisely

After receiving a few responses because they may be useful in certain to The Fenwick Review’s recent comcontexts. ments about Fishbowls Discussions, I

On the other hand, I think betfeel it necessary to clarify my position, ter forms of dialogue exist. Perhaps my to cut through any vitriol and simply to previous image of the football game did lay my opinion bare. not clarify the issue but actually com The Fishbowl is better than no plicated it. But my point was that Fishdialogue at all. Discussion is better than uneasy silence and at an institution of bowls play into a dangerous impulse in higher education I cannot level major our society: that is to be unwilling to complaint against something that seeks adequately mix openness and belief in to provide a greater breadth and depth of reasoned discussion for students.

In this sense, I honor the McFarland Center, Fishbowls, and anyone whose thoughts and deeds reflect a respect for liberal education. Silence benefits few.

I have even enjoyed some Fishbowls. I’ve asked questions and seen friends and respected professors speak their minds at others. I have no issue with the McFarland Center and frankly I cannot speak about bias in its selection of panelists as some of my colleagues have. While their concerns are possible, I have generally seen a range

one’s own correctness. Both extremes are dangerous. One the one hand, belief that no one else can be correct is a sad dogmatism.

On the other, simple dialogue without deeply-held opinions betrays a lack of interest in the subject matter.

The lukewarm will not adequately present a complex point of view. The Fishbowl does try to toe the line between these. But it discourages direct discussion between its participants. Normally, a series of statements is made, a few questions asked, and a summary given. But the problem is not even the

lack of a winner so much as the lack of interaction. If we take the Socratic point of view, the two sides should be trying to point to holes in the other’s way of thinking. Is this perhaps dangerous? Can it lead to active disagreement?

Yes, absolutely. But the Fishbowl lacks this risk altogether. Without direct, impassioned dialogue between two sides we’re left with little more than a few opinions from the participants and some questions from an audience, who is, assumedly, not the expert in the room.

And so what is needed (and this is where my football metaphor may have been inapt) is something more direct that provides both sides an opportunity to attack each other’s positions.

Perhaps the term “attack” will seem a little over-the-top, but if the two sides are not confronting one another, then what can we say is being accomplished?

Socrates simply asked questions to discern what we think we know but do not. A debate should do the same for both sides. People are won over to an opinion through their own reflection coupled with the thoughts and expressions of others.

Continued on page 11

The Fenwick Review

January 2014

11

Netanyahu: Money over Mandela Amber Alley ‘16 Staff Writer It is no secret that the late Nelson Mandela made racial equality a global standard when he disassembled the apartheid regime in South Africa by becoming the first African South African president. His passing marked the end of a life that championed equality and freedom for all races in all places of the world, a wisdom that is now cherished in many societies, especially in the United States. To many of his followers and his peers, his efforts were and still are priceless, excluding Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minster.

Nelson Mandela’s funeral gathered thousands of supporters including dozens of the world’s leaders except for Netanyahu.

His reasoning shocked many: it was too expensive for him to attend.

This is the same Benjamin Netanyahu who has been in hot water among his own citizens for using tax dollars to fund his lavish lifestyle while simultaneously helping to pass legislation that raises taxes.

Netanyahu’s excuse was so egregious it seemed as if he wanted the public to think he was lying about the true reason he did not attend. It so

obviously could not be that it was too expensive for him to attend Mandela’s funeral because nothing is too expensive for to a man who spends around $30,000 on house cleaning, $130,000 on installing a private “resting chamber” on an airplane, and $3000 a year on his favorite ice cream.

Deductively, Netanyahu was either saying the cost of a plane trip was worth more than honoring the life of a global hero or he was using the excuse

raeli-Palestinian conflict still rages and must have played a role in Netanyahu’s decision. Netanyahu so disdains the idea of letting Palestinians live freely and happily that he is willing to cut off ties with anyone who even so much as says that he supports the Palestinian cause, even if that person is Nelson Mandela.

Even as offensive as it was for Netanyahu to say that it was too expensive to attend Mandela’s funeral,

of expense to hide his actual reasoning for not attending.

Not as obvious as Mandela’s support for the ending of the apartheid in South Africa was his support for the ending of the occupation in Palestine.

Mandela was quoted as saying, “We know too well that [South African’s] freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.” The Is-

ostensibly it would have been more offensive for Netanyahu to say that he could not attend Mandela’s funeral because Mandela supported the Palestinians. Netanyahu seemed to try to avoid stirring up political drama and in the process made himself look greedy, which is normal for the Prime Minister.

Although Nelson Mandela was revered by both the American pub-

lic and American President Barack Obama, Netanyahu’s mishap is likely to not affect U.S.-Israeli relations seeing as how Israel is the U.S.’s longest standing ally in the Middle East. If the ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people is not enough to break the U.S.-Israeli bond, an idiotic statement will surely not break that bond.

The American government may not change its relations with the Israeli government, but the American people may change their feelings towards Netanyahu. Simplistically, ultra-liberals have opposed Netanyahu because of his persecution of the Palestinian people and ultra-conservatives have supported Netanyahu because Israel has been a loyal ally to the U.S. for many years.

This will likely remain the same. It is the moderates on both sides of the political spectrum that will most likely change their opinions, but it will not take only this one situation. It is in Netanyahu’s nature to take a mile if given an inch, or, more accurately, a country if given an acre, so this blunder will not be his last. When he slowly but surely pushes American moderates to do nothing but disdain him, the American government will be forced to adjust public policy with Israel.

Fishbowls: Revisited book that preChase Padusniak ‘15 Foreign Bureau Chief

sented that faith in dialogue with Christianity, but

Continued from page 10

How can an opinion be ade-

quately presented if it does not face direct criticism from the other participants in the discussion? Although anecdotal

it was framed as an “attack” of sorts. It was ecumenism but it was ecumenism

with bite. evidence can never be authoritative, I It sought recall a story that may prove illuminat- understanding ing here. A couple of years ago I took of difference as a course on a non-Christian religion much as of simiat Holy Cross. In that class, we read a

larity and it ac-

We cannot skirt the issue; the Fishbowl is not a failure, but the time for impassioned debate has come.

complished that best. Just as that text about ecumenthrough stark

ism used juxtaposition and direct ad-

juxtaposition.

dress to bring greater understanding

This

between faiths while highlighting their

is

the

Fishbowl issue differences more direct forms of dein other terms.

bate could do just that for discussion

It is effective in

at Holy Cross.

its own right;

Putting one opinion up against

it provides a another does not have to mean barbaforum for dis-

rism and anger but can mean a greater

cussion. But that degree of understanding for both the does not mean

participants and the audience. We can-

it is always the not skirt the issue; the Fishbowl is not best nor that it a failure, but the time for impassioned is generally the debate has come.

January 2014

The Fenwick Review

In Gratitude to Our Sponsors and Partners

12