Thursday, July 28, 2011

University of Dayton...Truly A Non-Catholic College...An Update

They don't even pretend to be Catholic.  Since when does a "Faith Professor" ( what does that mean, anyway?) at a "Catholic In Name Only" University get off criticizing a Bishop the Caliber of Bishop Chaput? But, then again, realizing where this guy comes from sort of puts it into perspective.  We have profiled this school before...many times before...( here) and ( here ) and ( here ) and ( here).  These links give you the WHOLE story about U of Dayton.  Now, this guy comes along and really proves my point...they truly are not Catholic.  Here is his statement as posted on The Cardinal Newman Society's  Blog.

In an op-ed for the Philadelphia Inquirer, David O’Brien, professor of faith and culture at Catholic University of Dayton, gives his rather negative point of view of Archbishop Chaput as the newly appointed leader of the Philadelphia Archdiocese.
From O’Brien’s op-ed:
It was announced last week that his [Cardinal Rigali's] successor will be Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver, one of America’s most outspoken Catholic conservatives. The appointment shows that the Vatican accepts the strange idea that the church’s problems in this country have come about because Catholics are too American – too tainted by America’s “culture of death” – and because U.S. bishops and priests are too sensitive to what lay people and non-Catholics think.
What is needed, the Vatican seems to believe, are leaders who “put the church first,” assert the authority of bishops and priests, and make no pastoral or political concessions on supposedly nonnegotiable Catholic teachings about abortion, homosexuality, and female priests.
This winter will see the introduction of a revised liturgy produced by the Holy See, whose handpicked committee made some 10,000 changes to the version approved by the vast majority of bishops in the English-speaking world. Locally, bishops and priests can make use of lay ministers and advisers, but they are required to make the difference between laity and priests very clear – as if this were somehow in doubt. Restoration of hierarchical and clerical power in the church, under the guise of “real Catholicism,” appears to be the order of the day.
Chaput fits this pattern. His promotion most likely came about because of the support of Americans with influence at the Vatican. The most powerful of these is Raymond Burke, now head of the Vatican’s highest court, who regularly makes the restorationist agenda clear. Chaput is cut from the same cloth as Burke, who launched the church’s continuing campaign to humiliate Catholic Democratic politicians when he denied Communion to a respected Catholic congressman, David Obey of Wisconsin, in 2003.
Chaput thought that was a great idea, and he made it clear that then-presidential candidate John Kerry should not appear at the Communion rail in his jurisdiction. He wrote a book arguing that real Catholics would reject John Kennedy’s famous distinction between his religion and his public service, and would always support legislative efforts to enforce Catholic moral teaching.
Like Burke, Chaput makes no secret of his disdain for outspoken Catholic reformers, especially women, and he played a leading role in reducing the influence and resources of the national bishops’ conference. Chaput is, in short, a company man – a churchman.
Like the Americans who serve at the Vatican, Chaput puts the institutional church first, and he seems to think everyone else should, too. According to this view, the church is not the “people of God” – a biblical idea restored by Vatican II that conservatives think has done much damage. For them, the church is the hierarchy, and especially the pope.

I guess the fact that The Pope is the Infallible Head of The Catholic Church doesn't mean a hill of beans to this "professor".  That's the "catholic education" coming from the University of Dayton.  I'm truly ashamed to call that place my Alma Mater.  Of course, when I went there, we had a Catholic Priest as the President, real "Faith Based" profs that new what they were teaching, and a school guided by the principles of Mary, the Mother of God.  No longer.

This guy goes on with more on the plight of the Maryknolls and their Fr. Roy Bourgeois upholding the heresy and blatant disrespect for the Catholic Church...

U Dayton Prof on Letter Defending Embattled Priest

The New York Times reported last Friday that 157 American priests have signed a statement in support of Fr. Roy Bourgeois “who faces dismissal for participating in a ceremony that purported to ordain a woman as a priest, in defiance of church teaching.”
The article quotes David J. O’Brien, who holds an endowed chair in faith and culture (?) at the Catholic,(?) Marianist University of Dayton, about the statement:

 “They are saying, ‘We don’t have enough priests, we’re closing down parishes,’ … It’s a sign that the pastoral needs are sufficiently grave now that priests are speaking up and saying, ‘Wait a minute, you can’t just ignore the pastoral consequences of the things you do and say at the top.’ ”

Well, I guess there really isn't much more to say, is there?  Since the Archbishop of Cincinnati is too much of a coward to say or do anything, it will once again fall to the rank and file Faithful Catholic to petition Rome to have the University of Dayton stripped of it's Catholic Identity...after all, they are "Catholic in Name only" anyway.  They don't teach Catholicism.  (Does the Archbishop?)  What have they got to lose?

Read the other posts on this school and on Xavier in Cincinnati, then start a campaign to get rid of these non-Catholic Bishops that run your Diocese.  Ask God for help.  I know He listens...Rigali's leaving proves it.  Read our posts on "Pedophiladelphia". There are a lot of them and they make for very interesting reading. 

Jesus Is Lord!
Tim M


  1. I am an on-line student at the U of D taking a course in Catholic Beliefs. My wife is a life-long Catholic. I have been mostly Protestant.

    My experience is that course is teaching that one can personalize Scripture and the Creeds just about any way your little cotton pickin' ever lovin' heart desires.

    One example of many is a required reading by Thomas Bokenkotter on The Creed.

    In his five page commentary on the Apostles Creed he takes from "The Father, the Almighty, maker of heven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen" that "God created us to be happy in a wonderful universe of communion with him and with each other." I never knew the Creed meant that.

    In another section under "For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven..." he says that means that our nation's missile defense program, "Star Wars" represents "the sheer tragic character of our solidarity in evil."

    I didn't know the Creeds meant that, either.

    Jerry Mucci

  2. God gave us "the ability" to be happy so that we can bring glory to Him, but happiness is not our "purpose" as the sloppily written required reading stated.

    I couldn't stand the misrepresentation of the faith any longer, so I am no longer in that course.