A Reply to Susan’s Invitation

I thank Susan for her post on the Duquesne/Planned Parenthood matter. I realize there may be some intricacies about Duquesne’s license to have a radio station aligned with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting that may need to be addressed, but at this stage in the discussion the question is this: must a public broadcaster accept all donations? I do not think so. Is money, in the context of donations to a broadcaster, a form of speech? It can be and often is viewed as a form of speech when it is used to promote, directly or indirectly, the view of the donor involving matters about public life, i.e., debate about the important issues of the day. Moreover, the relationship between the donor and the institution receiving the benefactor can come into question, particularly when the donor’s identity is or must be disclosed in the programming that the radio station owner intends to broadcast. Can the Duquesne radio station have a program/debate on the abortion issue without raising the problems presented here? I think it can. Must it accept the endorsement of Planned Parenthood (no friend of the Church)? No—it need not, and it should not. 

But this is not the only question Susan has raised. Her inquiry and invitation for response also deals with debate on Catholic campuses; more specifically, she focuses the question by asking what kind of speakers should a Catholic university or college permit. She is in favor of more, not less speech. There is nothing wrong with that. But in the case of the radio station and the university (as owner of the station or of the medium for discussion) it can be and usually becomes a forum for someone else’s speech when it accepts either a donation or a speaker. Must the Catholic university or college as owner of the station or as provider of the podium be required to do either without compromising speech? Again, my answer is no.

The Duquesne situation raised by Susan may remind some MOJ contributors and readers about another controversy taking place on a Catholic campus. This situation involves the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, MA which has leased space for a conference sponsored by the Massachusetts Alliance on Teen Pregnancy (MATP). Interestingly, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Boston has been a member of MATP in the past, but its membership has not been renewed for next year according to MATP’s website. It appears that Holy Cross has leased space to MATP for some of its previous conferences. This year, the Catholic Bishop of Worcester, the Most Rev. Robert J. McManus, has intervened and called upon Holy Cross to disassociate itself from this conference and revoke its agreement to lease the space for the conference. The bishop has properly and correctly raised concerns about two speakers at this conference: Planned Parenthood and NARAL-Pro Choice (another adversary of the Church). Some might argue that Holy Cross has not leased space to Planned Parenthood or NARAL but to MATP, an organization to which Catholic Charities (Boston) was formerly a member. But I must point out that Catholic Charities has terminated its membership; moreover, MATP now endorses as a part of its mission, shared with the “comprehensive sex education programs” of Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice, “to increase youth access to comprehensive sexuality education” that includes “support for… healthy choices including abstinence and condom and contraception use” and “access to condoms and other contraception.” These are positions that are diametrically opposed to the Church’s teachings and which are subscribed to and promoted by Planned Parenthood and NARAL-Pro Choice. It is, therefore, not surprising that Bishop McManus has taken the action that he did. Nor is it surprising that Duquesne has returned the PPF donation.

I come back to Susan’s invitation seeking the views of others. In the case of returning donations or denying forums for certain speakers, genuine debates are not affected. What is affected is cooperation—formal or material (or formal masquerading as material). In either case, of returning a donation or denying a podium, discussion of an issue is not prohibited; however, cooperation with an adversary of the Church is stopped.    RJA sj