You write,
"When you snottily and breezily affirm that Miscamble will soon be exiled and Jenkins is another wolf in sheep's clothing you can have no basis in knowledge about the school to go on."
Um, excuse me, but we do. While I wouldn't make the first charge regarding Miscamble, we have ample evidence Jenkins is, in fact, a wolf in sheeps clothing. Sorry, DI, but this is a no-brainer. If the guy can't stand up and say, "Uh, we're a Catholic institution so we won't be promoting the V Monologues and we're not going to be promoting homosexuality either," well, then, if he's not a wolf he's at least a coward acting no different than a wolf.
In fact, one of the more disheartening things to me is that I think you're right. I think Miscamble IS writing just as a disappointed friend, indicating that while he may wish the outcome were different, its really not that big of a deal. He'd just like his friend to reconsider.
Meanwhile, thousands of parents will ship their kids off to ND this year mistakenly believing their kids will get a Catholic education.
Frankly, Georgetown, BC, Loyola, etc., don't bother me as much as Notre Dame. Most everyone knows they're not Catholic anymore. But things like this letter are just enough to keep some people believing that ND still is. Hence, it is ND, not these other institutions, which perpetrate the biggest fraud. You yourself indicate ND has a ways to go before it can truly be considered "Catholic," again. But what percentage of this year's incoming freshman families do you think realize this?
Let's look at this Cavadini you mention as being one of those who is fighting the good fight, one of the 'allies' of those who wish to restore ND to catholicity. Is this the same Cavadini who called the Cardinal Newman Society, "a militant right-wing Catholic interest group lobbying for the most stringent standards of orthodoxy to be used in courses and curricula at Catholic colleges and universities,” when defending McBrien against charges of plageurism?
Don't get me wrong, I thought Cavadini was correct in his decision at the time. And I thought he made good points in defense of McBrien. McBrien's an outright heretic, not a plageursit. But the gratutous swipe at the Cardinal Newman Society? Granted, the CNS IS militant, and it is right-wing, (thank goodness) but you and I both know he used those terms to smear the people making the allegation and curry favor with the liberal press. Again, his concern was far more for protecting the image of ND than it was for advancing any restoration of catholicity. So while I might not have 'inside information' on the politics at ND. It seems fairly clear even a country bumpkin like me can conclude that even some of the so-called 'orhtodox' at ND aren't really all that concerned with orthodoxy if orthodoxy bumps up against popularity.
While I have supported the Cardinal Newman Society from its inception, on occasion its spokesmen have said some foolish things. Sometimes they have undertaken well-intended campaigns in unwise ways. For instance, their effort to attack individual faculty by name for theological error was guaranteed to backfire if one knows something about university culture. The faculty thus attacked took an attack from CNS as a badge of honor that proved their scholarly academic credentials. CNS would have been far better off to work with alumni, board members, selected movers and shakers in the dioceses etc. I fully support their goal, I questioned their strategy.
They have been unfairly and falsely villified as extremists by some. In the case you refer to, I think Cavadini was right and CNS overstated its case, as you yourself note. One has to be careful not to give one's enemies ammunition. When any group overstates its case or lacks sufficient evidence to support its case, it makes it easier for its opponents to avoid engaging the issues and to dismiss its critics as extremists. CNS has, unfortunately, overstated things often enough to make the (false) claim that they are extremists more credible that it otherwise would be among the people who count--administrators and board members and faculty in the middle.
I repeat, the "Miscamble will be exiled" statement was out of place. The letter itself makes that clear.
If you read what I wrote you will have noticed that I do not hold out a lot of hope for Notre Dame. However I am sick and tired of those who make no distinctions between Notre Dame and Boston College, for instance. You don't have to be an insider. All you have to do is pay attention. At least there is a genuine conversation going on at Notre Dame and a vibrant though small faithful Catholic representation on campus. That does not exist at the other schools to the same degree (there is a very miniscule such group at BC but no real conversation--the critics are successfully marginalized as kooks--that simply is not the case at Notre Dame) and to equate all of these schools undermines your goal of reforming Catholic universities. The first step in curing anything is accurate diagnosis. The presence of a small but vocal and committed faithfully Catholic body of students and faculty at Notre Dame gives a starting point that is not present at some other schools.
But if it makes you feel better say what you wish.