The letters we publish here are edited for space and are representative of those we receive. We print only those letters referring to an article in the most recent edition of the magazine, not those responding to letters or commenting on issues not addressed in the recent edition.
The Jenkins era
I liked and I took issue with “Faith in the Mission,” which described the accomplishments and challenges of Rev. John I. Jenkins’ tenure as Notre Dame president.
Characterizing more stringent admissions standards as an accomplishment misses the mark. Late bloomers need not apply. The article should have instead compared Notre Dame’s various academic rankings in the United States 19 years ago with its rankings today.
I believe the article was unbalanced in its lack of depiction of Jenkins’ failures. OK, he regrets not wearing a mask at the White House, big deal. Jenkins ’76, ’78M.A., had a greater failure, and the article made a significant error of omission: During his tenure, tuition, room and board rose at a much higher rate than that of inflation. This huge rise signals to me that the underdog or less financially fortunate also need not apply to Notre Dame. An excessive rise in tuition is an indicator that the mundane tasks of budgeting and cost containment have been neglected.
I greatly appreciate the balancing act that Jenkins had to navigate. To me the most thoughtful quote was, “I felt Notre Dame had to have a different role. To remain distinctive, not in a reactionary way or in a sectarian way.”
I would not have drawn my lines of diversity as broadly as Jenkins has. However, I am comforted he took a hard stance against antisemitism. That, and the risks he took during the COVID crisis, may be his greatest accomplishments.
Rob Stell ’78
Fort Mill, South Carolina
The article about Father Jenkins reveals his serious inconsistencies. On the one hand, he justifies his decision to invite Barack Obama to be a commencement speaker by claiming that “regardless of one’s political views, if you are the elected leader of the country, we invite you to Notre Dame.” He then explains his decision not to invite Donald Trump — and I am no fan of Trump, either — by saying that one must “meet a certain bar in terms of just moral decency.” However, he also invited Joe Biden, who promotes abortion while flagrantly ignoring the teachings of the Church and is arguably one of the most dishonest and corrupt presidents in our history.
Jenkins also allowed The Vagina Monologues and drag shows on campus, hardly examples of “moral decency.” Apparently he does not see the inconsistencies in how he has applied his high-minded pronouncements and also does not understand why his reputation has suffered as a result of his failures to stand firm against the moral decay promoted by the secular world.
Lou Stahl ’71J.D.
Phoenix
I thank R. Bruce Dold for clarifying a matter which has troubled me for many years concerning the once-honored Notre Dame tradition of inviting a newly elected U.S. president to speak at commencement. Barack Obama became the sixth president to speak at commencement after Jenkins apparently struggled with the choice because of Obama’s open embrace of abortion. But he felt that to be a great university, Notre Dame had to have “open inquiry.”
Imagine my surprise to learn that Vice President Mike Pence was invited to speak following the inauguration of Donald Trump because Pence met “a certain bar in terms of just moral decency” and Trump did not. In other words, Obama, a president who believed in and widely expressed approval of the practice of unlimited abortion, was “genuinely decent” in Jenkins’ judgment, but Trump was not. To my knowledge, the popes wisely decline to hold, much less express, such judgments about other human beings.
How did Trump react to this official slight? When he had the chance send a negative message to Notre Dame, he instead bestowed an unprecedented honor on Our Lady’s University by appointing former ND law professor Amy Coney Barrett ’97J.D. to the Supreme Court.
Jack Sweeney ’58
Avalon, California
Bruce Dold did a good job discussing many of Jenkins’ challenges and achievements during his 19 years as Notre Dame president. His stated goal back in 2005 was “uniting and integrating his two indispensable goals; academic excellence and religious faith,” a policy with which I agree. But I couldn’t help noticing how Dold spends considerable time discussing the University’s accomplishments in academic excellence and secularism.
Where Dold came up short was demonstrating how Notre Dame, through Jenkins, promoted its heritage as a Catholic institution while enhancing the faith and morals of its students. The article makes it sound like Notre Dame has gone the way of Harvard and Yale, minimizing its Christian heritage. In today’s world we need institutions like Notre Dame being given credit for promoting its Catholic faith and not just its secular achievements.
John “Jack” Srnec ’63
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
The article on Jenkins gave me so much information that I changed my mind on the great job he did in one of the hardest positions in the world. I believe he got it right: Our University should keep the love of God above all things and love our neighbors like Jesus loves us.
Congratulations, Father John, and I will be praying for your great health, happiness and blessing.
Andrew Corrao ’54
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Kerry’s influence
I am immensely glad you honored retired editor Kerry Temple ’74. I chose Notre Dame because the admissions brochure — remember those? — contained a beautifully written narrative by him on life under the Dome.
The Notre Dame he described was what I was looking for in a university. When I arrived on campus, I sought him out to tell him that. He was gracious and humble in saying thank you. But he wasn’t done influencing my life. Four years later I was incredibly honored to receive the Distinguished Student Award from the Alumni Association. Who silently watched my work and nominated me (far too generously, I felt) from afar? Kerry Temple.
Alex Montoya ’96
San Diego