EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 20, 2009 9:33:46 GMT -5
CA, I've stated before I am against the death penalty. I also have a big problem with war and find the just war theory to be difficult for me. But, as in other situations, I rely on my religion to sort that out for me. I am not smart enough to do it myself.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Apr 20, 2009 11:52:23 GMT -5
I am not smart enough to do it myself. Clearly,
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 20, 2009 11:52:33 GMT -5
CA, I've stated before I am against the death penalty. I also have a big problem with war and find the just war theory to be difficult for me. But, as in other situations, I rely on my religion to sort that out for me. I am not smart enough to do it myself. What makes any other human being "smarter" on these issues, or better equipped to make such determinations?
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,906
|
Post by Filo on Apr 20, 2009 12:19:16 GMT -5
I was a Theology minor and took several courses on the Catholic religion, as well as on Hinduism and Islam. So if anything, attending Georgetown made me more in tune with religion. The courses on Catholicism were indeed supportive of Catholic teaching, but also critical of some approaches. I think Georgetown should not be in the business of trying to convert everyone, but instead explaining Catholic theology and practice, and letting the student come to his or her own conclusion. I think this is the proper approach of any Catholic institution of higher learning. I think that is an important point, but pretty much antithetical to the approach almost all religions take. Religions generally seek to inculcate (some would say brainwash) children, so that the religious beliefs are accepted without question. I am with you - I don't blame Georgetown at all for my movement away from Catholicism or religion, in general. And I think it is absurd to try to pin that blame on the school when you are talking about 18- to 22-year olds, who are encouraged and expected to critically think and make their own decisions.
|
|
Gold Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by Gold Hoya on Apr 20, 2009 12:20:33 GMT -5
Ed, I respect your beliefs but I think that you are off-base in your expectation that everybody leave Georgetown as a devout and practicing Catholic. The world and higher education is not like that anymore. An approach like that would drive more people away from the Hilltop than towards it. The way I read Ed's points, I believe he would be ok with a smaller Georgetown University that is more true to its Catholic roots. I also believe he would be ok with me not having attended Georgetown, not because he dislikes me personally, but because a Georgetown University more true to its Catholic roots would not attract Jewish students. Such a Georgetown would not have made my list, just like Notre Dame did not make my list.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Apr 20, 2009 13:28:29 GMT -5
Ed, I respect your beliefs but I think that you are off-base in your expectation that everybody leave Georgetown as a devout and practicing Catholic. The world and higher education is not like that anymore. An approach like that would drive more people away from the Hilltop than towards it. The way I read Ed's points, I believe he would be ok with a smaller Georgetown University that is more true to its Catholic roots. I also believe he would be ok with me not having attended Georgetown, not because he dislikes me personally, but because a Georgetown University more true to its Catholic roots would not attract Jewish students. Such a Georgetown would not have made my list, just like Notre Dame did not make my list. Bah. As a relatively good Catholic, I don't necessarily want Georgetown to be more true to its Catholic roots, but I do want Georgetown not to be ashamed of them and consider them a liability. Stuff like eliminating the Catholic symbols when Obama spoke or (the crowning example when I was there) trying to get rid of crosses in classrooms during the renovation of one of the building seems to indicate that GU would prefer to be nonsectarian. And I don't like that. For a university in Washington, D.C., there is a richness of items that need to involve ethics and morality that have no real backing at an Ivy school but that would at schools like West Point, Notre Dame, and BYU. Georgetown continues to lead in Peace Corps volunteers - something which provides no specific tangible reward but which does speak to a university focused on social justice. And I know that religion is not the sole path to ethics or morality, but every other school that has become nonsectarian doesn't really seem to have a stance on these key issues.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Apr 20, 2009 13:52:51 GMT -5
Bah. As a relatively good Catholic, I don't necessarily want Georgetown to be more true to its Catholic roots, but I do want Georgetown not to be ashamed of them and consider them a liability. Stuff like eliminating the Catholic symbols when Obama spoke or (the crowning example when I was there) trying to get rid of crosses in classrooms during the renovation of one of the building seems to indicate that GU would prefer to be nonsectarian. And I don't like that. For a university in Washington, D.C., there is a richness of items that need to involve ethics and morality that have no real backing at an Ivy school but that would at schools like West Point, Notre Dame, and BYU. Georgetown continues to lead in Peace Corps volunteers - something which provides no specific tangible reward but which does speak to a university focused on social justice. And I know that religion is not the sole path to ethics or morality, but every other school that has become nonsectarian doesn't really seem to have a stance on these key issues. Good post. I don't particularly disagree with any of its content, but would quibble that you may not be giving the University enough credit. IIRC, the admin opposed taking down the crosses, and they remain in the classrooms. Also, I think GU has programs like the Kennedy Institute (and arguably, the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, though I'm sure some would disagree) where ethics, morality, and Catholic principles play a substantial role. However, I'll concede that there are programs at the University, such as the English department, where the conversations that took place in CAHoya07's theology classes never take place. Should they take place within the English department? I'm really not sure.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by hoya9797 on Apr 20, 2009 13:58:47 GMT -5
I was a Theology minor and took several courses on the Catholic religion, as well as on Hinduism and Islam. So if anything, attending Georgetown made me more in tune with religion. The courses on Catholicism were indeed supportive of Catholic teaching, but also critical of some approaches. I think Georgetown should not be in the business of trying to convert everyone, but instead explaining Catholic theology and practice, and letting the student come to his or her own conclusion. I think this is the proper approach of any Catholic institution of higher learning. I think that is an important point, but pretty much antithetical to the approach almost all religions take. Religions generally seek to inculcate (some would say brainwash) children, so that the religious beliefs are accepted without question. I am with you - I don't blame Georgetown at all for my movement away from Catholicism or religion, in general. And I think it is absurd to try to pin that blame on the school when you are talking about 18- to 22-year olds, who are encouraged and expected to critically think and make their own decisions. I give Georgetown credit for starting me along the path to atheism since if not for my senior thesis, I wouldn't have learned about the incredible similarities between the Egyptian and Roman mystery cults and the Jesus story. And that is what planted the seeds of doubt in my mind that eventually resulted in rejecting religion and the idea of a god entirely. I am extremely grateful that this happened and it's one of many reasons that I so glad I went to Georgetown.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Apr 20, 2009 14:35:05 GMT -5
Bah. As a relatively good Catholic, I don't necessarily want Georgetown to be more true to its Catholic roots, but I do want Georgetown not to be ashamed of them and consider them a liability. Stuff like eliminating the Catholic symbols when Obama spoke or (the crowning example when I was there) trying to get rid of crosses in classrooms during the renovation of one of the building seems to indicate that GU would prefer to be nonsectarian. And I don't like that. For a university in Washington, D.C., there is a richness of items that need to involve ethics and morality that have no real backing at an Ivy school but that would at schools like West Point, Notre Dame, and BYU. Georgetown continues to lead in Peace Corps volunteers - something which provides no specific tangible reward but which does speak to a university focused on social justice. And I know that religion is not the sole path to ethics or morality, but every other school that has become nonsectarian doesn't really seem to have a stance on these key issues. Good post. I don't particularly disagree with any of its content, but would quibble that you may not be giving the University enough credit. IIRC, the admin opposed taking down the crosses, and they remain in the classrooms. Also, I think GU has programs like the Kennedy Institute (and arguably, the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, though I'm sure some would disagree) where ethics, morality, and Catholic principles play a substantial role. However, I'll concede that there are programs at the University, such as the English department, where the conversations that took place in CAHoya07's theology classes never take place. Should they take place within the English department? I'm really not sure. www.shmoozenet.com/jsps/stories/newvoices.shtml - in the best research I can find right now, the admin took them down as part of "building maintenance" (I think it was White-Gravenor), until some students got annoyed and raised a stink. The best part was when Rabbi White and Imam Hendi smacked down the administration. My position continues to be that anyone under 25 doesn't know anything. So I'm markedly less concerned about classes than about the university's centers and other items. College students are often freed for the first time from their parents and begin to make decisions about who they want to be (The Onion is good for a few articles a year lampooning kids who go through massive transformations, only to switch back to "normal" prior to graduation) - it's logical that some who previously identified as religous will either lapse or switch faiths, even at schools like BYU or Notre Dame. Even at militantly secular schools, there are students who reconnect with their faith. Georgetown's classes - which, I'm assuming, still requires a course on the Bible as well as on the Problem of God - seem more than most universities and acceptable. My issue is with the admissions material that play up the Catholic faith, the donor giving envelopes that play up the Catholic faith, and yet a strange reluctance on the part of the administration to say that they're Catholic (the switch to De Gioia relatively early in my alumni tenure probably didn't help). I think that Georgetown can provide a very serious distinction between Princeton, Yale, and Harvard by not simply saying "we're in D.C. and we have a powerhouse basketball team!" but by saying "we work to reconcile the real-world issues (as a change from Notre Dame, which focuses on the theoretical) with morality and ethics". For many people who now believe strongly that our actions in areas as diverse as foreign policy to the acquisition of wealth must be concerned with the impact of those decisions on our fellow man, this seems to be a great place to put Georgetown.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Apr 20, 2009 16:34:30 GMT -5
While there are clearly a variety of opinions out there about it, Georgetown remains a Catholic, Jesuit school, and I am proud of that fact. I do think that separates us a bit from the Ivies, and despite my own personal questions of faith, I think Georgetown should maintain its Catholic heritage. Now, unlike others on this board, I do think what Georgetown does now to maintain that heritage is fine. It allows those who wish to learn about and practice the Catholic faith to do so - Dahlgren chapel is centrally located, there are masses over the course of the year, etc. However, if Catholicism isn't your thing, then there's a place at Georgetown for you too. Georgetown never shoved religion down my throat, and I always appreciated that.
The Jesuits are also very big on community service and social justice, and I am a big proponent of that.
However, I think Georgetown should also be a place of free speech and be open to a variety of viewpoints, which is why I have no problem with H*yas for Choice being on campus distributing condoms. Even though it would never happen, I would love to see that asterisk taken away. At the very least, I'm at least glad that there is a group on campus that does this.
Finally, I think that crosses should be kept in the classroom, in keeping with the Catholic tradition, but I have no problem whatsoever with the White House requesting the cross be covered during Obama's speech. It's presidential procedure, it's been done before, and it does not mean we are abandoning our Catholic heritage. I think people have gotten way too worked up about this, but that is my personal opinion.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,732
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 20, 2009 21:02:16 GMT -5
This I agree with. One of the key reasons I went to Georgetown was the focus on ethics. It was a big draw for me.
That said, focus on this. Not whether there are crosses in the classrooms or whether something was covered up. Yes, by all means show the cross, but I was astounded at the crosses in the classroom debate while I was at school. It was two tiny minorities barking about something that didn't matter to the vast majority of the population, Catholic or Jewish or Muslim or Atheist.
When I see someone infuriated by something like this, I wonder if they couldn't have just taken the time from arguing to go down to a soup kitchen or something and volunteer. And I include myself in that group that could honestly be much more productive with my outrage at times.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Apr 20, 2009 21:35:16 GMT -5
This I agree with. One of the key reasons I went to Georgetown was the focus on ethics. It was a big draw for me. That said, focus on this. Not whether there are crosses in the classrooms or whether something was covered up. Yes, by all means show the cross, but I was astounded at the crosses in the classroom debate while I was at school. It was two tiny minorities barking about something that didn't matter to the vast majority of the population, Catholic or Jewish or Muslim or Atheist. When I see someone infuriated by something like this, I wonder if they couldn't have just taken the time from arguing to go down to a soup kitchen or something and volunteer. And I include myself in that group that could honestly be much more productive with my outrage at times. And that, SF, is exactly what gets me the most about the Church. Even IF I were ok with the Church's views on things like homosexuality and contraceptives (and I actually am in agreement on abortion but for different reasons), I still come back to the question: Is this the best usage of the Church's enormous time and resources, especially given all the other important interests that the Church espouses (poverty, environment, peace, general inclusiveness)?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,732
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 20, 2009 22:49:05 GMT -5
Well, Strummer, it is kinda of hard to evaluate an organization made up of individuals -- such as the Church is. The Catholic Church and other religious institutions do a tremendous amount of good. And also have plenty of unintentional and possibly intentional negative effects. Their members spin their wheels and go off on useless fights and do mean-spirited things, etc. So does everyone.
I don't agree with everything the Church does, and I doubt many American Catholics do, either. But it doesn't mean that the Church doesn't do a lot of good.
It's funny to see people who came to Georgetown and became disenchanted with religion. I was kind of the opposite.
I was extremely jaded about what I learned in CCD, finding it mostly dumbed down and inordinately focusing on things that are not part of the central tenets of the religion. I suppose this is much of what you mean -- contraceptives, premarital sex and gay rights are NOT the center of the Catholic Church's belief system.
In trying to take Father King's class on Teilhard (which I never got into in two tries...grrr), I got sent to Intro to Catholicism instead.
It was awesome. I had loved Father King's Problem of God class, and this was illuminating to learn all the things that my religion was supposed to be but that my CCD class teachers either didn't understand themselves or thought that teenagers were too dumb to comprehend.
I think the Church does itself a tremendous disservice (and the media does the Church a disservice) by focusing so much on proscriptive rules and ignoring the long history of reason through faith and other tenets of Catholicisms (and other religions). At its heart, religion is an intensely personal thing at its core. Giving out rules without ever truly exploring the other aspects does it a disservice.
But that's just me.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,301
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 21, 2009 9:29:31 GMT -5
I think the Church does itself a tremendous disservice (and the media does the Church a disservice) by focusing so much on proscriptive rules and ignoring the long history of reason through faith and other tenets of Catholicisms (and other religions). At its heart, religion is an intensely personal thing at its core. Giving out rules without ever truly exploring the other aspects does it a disservice. I couldn't agree with this more. I tried to express this thought above, but was not able to articulate it as well as you have.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Apr 21, 2009 11:12:17 GMT -5
I think the Church does itself a tremendous disservice (and the media does the Church a disservice) by focusing so much on proscriptive rules and ignoring the long history of reason through faith and other tenets of Catholicisms (and other religions). At its heart, religion is an intensely personal thing at its core. Giving out rules without ever truly exploring the other aspects does it a disservice. I couldn't agree with this more. I tried to express this thought above, but was not able to articulate it as well as you have. I will be stunned if Syracuse's message board ever get into discussions like these. First, on the crucifixes on the symbols - I focus on it because it's so newsworthy, and enough events like this make me question Georgetown's approach. I don't research Georgetown top-to-bottom every day - if I see these items, I tend to assume that they're representative. On the "focus on the important stuff" - I disagree. The Catholic Church believes that God, through the Pope, has very specific positions on a variety of items. These positions are non-negotiable since God is omniscient and therefore knows better. They're also consistent under some very specific universal rules. And it's NOT personal - unlike most other brands of Christianity, which emphasize a personal relationship with God, Catholicism is heavily dependent on the interaction with the larger Church. With Catholicism, it's ALL important. It's not "these three are must-dos, and these four are "do them if you can", and these - well, nobody follows them." If you're like Homer, and you commune face-to-face with God, and He accepts your rationale as to why you shouldn't have to make church every week, then more power to you. But, if not, then you're not doing what the Catholic Church has said that God wants. It's impossible to prove whether the Catholic Church's interpretation of what God considers important is the real list. But, at some point, if you don't adhere to enough items within the Church's belief set, the question becomes whether you're really Catholic. If you say you're Catholic but you skip church once in a while, is God OK with that? what if you favor abortion? the death penalty? what if you're a bank robber? And it's not just a philosophical debate. The Anglicans excommunicated someone who became Muslim (problematic since Muslims hold different views of Jesus - notably, His lack of divinity). If you hold that everything's kinda sorta optional (the "cafteria Catholic approach" - hate to bring that up) - then it doesn't really mean anything.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Apr 21, 2009 11:19:52 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure a loving god cares more about whether we treat others the right way than whether we go to church on sunday or if we believe in him. That's the only rational assumption I can make. Otherwise it would mean over half the world was going to hell just because of the way they were raised and that makes no sense. I definitely think the love your neighbor as yourself is the more important one. Basically most people are the religion they are and believe the things they believe because of their upbringing. It seems cruel to punish people for which family they were born into. I think if you live your life according to whatever creed you adhear to and do good deeds and live a good moral life. I think God cares a lot more about that than anything else.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 21, 2009 18:45:08 GMT -5
Just like to say I enjoyed hearing other peoples' takes on Catholicism, religion and Georgetown, even those who disagree with my views.
|
|
CAHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,598
|
Post by CAHoya07 on Apr 21, 2009 19:54:01 GMT -5
Just like to say I enjoyed hearing other peoples' takes on Catholicism, religion and Georgetown, even those who disagree with my views. Really!? I thought you came in to post that we're all going to hell!
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,732
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Apr 21, 2009 21:26:16 GMT -5
Exorcist, I think you misunderstood me a bit. 1. The comment you quoted... it wasn't meant to say those those things highlighted are a tenet, but I do think there are degrees. Certain things are central to the religion and haven't changed over the centuries. Some are part but not central. When talking about your religion, should the focus be entirely on non-core elements? I don't think so. 2. The Catholic Church has never been a literalist, and has always viewed the Church as an interpration device. Furthermore, stated infalliability in all things is a myth -- from my understanding the Church is well aware that people are interpreting and that it has changed its mind over the years. Every priest, nun, etc., I've ever talked to... none has ever expected 100% agreement or compliance from me. We all have doubts and disagreements. Maybe they were just being nice. Is there a point where you aren't really Catholic? I suppose, but somehow I bet Jesus and the Church would just view us as lost sheep.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Apr 21, 2009 22:01:30 GMT -5
I like SF's contributions here.
In the interest of disclosure, I am agnostic and, at the same time, not generally comfortable with centralized, institutionalized religion. I do not question people who choose to attend church/temple/mosque, etc., even though I view the related belief-systems as limiting to me.
The traditions of Georgetown, however, were a major selling point for me. I do support the idea of "community organizing" and finding/stressing some aspects/beliefs/traditions around which a group of people can organize for the common good and health of the population.* As an agnostic, I view that as the important part of religion, while many religions do great things for people individually as well.
I do think Georgetown has lost its way a bit in some of its efforts recently, as I do think the approach has been diluted somewhat. I am not advocating for going Notre Dame on this, but I think voices for the Catholic tradition need to be more prominent on campus. That is just my $.02.
*It is for this reason that I attended Mass exactly once at Georgetown. This was in the week of September 11. I was the only non-Catholic in my group, but I found the experience to be powerful and objectively beneficial from the point of view of "community."
|
|