The collapse of the authority, purpose and effectiveness of key institutions has been central to the social crisis we, and similar societies, face today.
The position of the Catholic Church in Australia has been seriously weakened by the extraordinary remarks, and interventions, of the vice-chancellor of the Australian Catholic University, Professor Zlatko Skrbis.
The saga, which I alluded to in the weekend paper, runs like this. Joe de Bruyn was for 40 years the leader of Australia’s biggest union, the shop assistants, and for many years a member of the ALP’s federal executive. He was long a key figure on the board of Campion College, Australia’s only liberal arts college in the Catholic tradition.
He visited ACU to receive an honorary doctorate and to be guest speaker at a graduation ceremony. He spoke of his career as a trade union leader, seeking justice and good conditions for his members. His public policy life, he said, was consistent with Catholic social teaching. On three issues, he had been involved in controversy because he took positions in line with Catholic teaching. These issues were abortion, same-sex marriage and some aspects of IVF policy.
He recounted his role in seeking a conscience vote for Labor MPs. He encouraged graduating students not to be intimidated out of expressing their beliefs even when these were unpopular. He advised the young graduates to stick to their beliefs, not to express them “in a hostile manner” but to “use logic in a persuasive way, others may still disagree but they will respect your point of view”.
At the first mention of the word “abortion” a walkout began, which included a majority of graduands and a majority of university staff present. A serious vice-chancellor would have attended the speech himself.
In the face of the walkout, the vice-chancellor should apologise to de Bruyn for the rudeness shown him, and reiterate ACU’s commitment, as a Catholic institution, to Catholic teaching.
For an institution to be faithful to Catholic teaching does not compromise anyone’s intellectual freedom. There’s no religious compulsion, no religious test and lots of students and staff are not Catholics. But the institution, as an institution, doesn’t teach against Catholic belief. By all means, do that if you like, but not at a Catholic university.
In 2007, the Australian bishops issued a document ruling how any institution to be called a Catholic university must behave. While prizing intellectual freedom, it also laid out some requirements. In Article 2, Section 4, its number one requirement is: “Commitment to the teachings of the Catholic Church”.
How did ACU stack up on that score?
De Bruyn had given a moderately worded, well contextualised speech, faithful to Catholic doctrine, with good advice to young people. It was perfectly reasonable to disagree with any or all of de Bruyn’s speech, absurd almost beyond parody to regard it as beyond the pale for a speech at a Catholic university, or indeed anywhere else for that matter.
In my view, the response of Skrbis was extraordinary, and profoundly damaging to his institution, to the Catholic Church and to the broader cause of religious freedom.
Skrbis publicly expressed his regret that de Bruyn gave such a speech. He effectively apologised to students by offering anyone who was distressed a refund of their graduation fee. He made counselling available for staff and students upset by the speech. He acknowledged the “hurt and discomfort” many felt.
He wrote to university staff repeating the offer of counselling. A staff member at a Catholic university needs counselling because they were exposed to a modest statement in support of Catholic teaching? Can this really be true? Surely it’s a theatre of the absurd script or an updated Monty Python skit?
Skrbis said “We are deeply disappointed that the speech was not more befitting of a graduation ceremony”, and that “the content of this address did not meet the standards we strive for”.
I put a series of eight question to Skrbis through the ACU media office. In my view he didn’t answer any of them, but The Australian is publishing online all my questions and his generic response.
The effect of the Skrbis interventions, even if it’s not their intent, is to virtually outlaw Catholic anthropology, Catholic life teaching, in public at a Catholic institution. Skrbis was lucky he didn’t have Pope Francis as a guest speaker.
On September 15, 2021, Pope Francis said: “Abortion is more than an issue. Abortion is murder.” On October 10, 2018, Francis said: “How can an action that ends an innocent and defenceless life in its blossoming stage be therapeutic, civilised or simply human? Is it right to hire a hitman in order to solve a problem?”
All of this is vastly tougher language than anything from de Bruyn. Would Skrbis apologise for a speech by the Pope? Would the Pope be an acceptable figure at ACU to make a guest speech? Would ACU apologise to any of its staff or students upset and distressed by the Pope? Is it now forbidden at ACU to play or broadcast a speech by the Pope? Would Pope Francis fail “to meet the standards we strive for” at ACU?
It’s right to acknowledge that Catholic teaching on abortion doesn’t enjoy majority support in Australia or in most Western nations. But the church is still free to teach its own doctrines.
Just imagine the conversation now that Catholic school education authorities, already beleaguered by intrusive, coercive, state control, will have with empowered anti-Christian government bureaucracies.
The state agencies will say to Catholic education authorities: even the vice-chancellor of ACU finds the expression of these doctrines offensive, and thinks they may well distress even experienced university staff at a Catholic university. Why should we let you say these things in front of kids?
Not only that, these agencies will say you obviously don’t really give a fig for these teachings, because you allow ACU to continue in this way.
The official newspaper of the Sydney Catholic archdiocese, Catholic Weekly, reprinted de Bruyn’s speech in full, and its influential columnist, Monica Doumit, commented that it was “entirely apt for the graduating class of a Catholic university to hear”.
Skrbis says “the Catholic intellectual tradition informs our curriculum”, but numerous sources tell me they feel ACU is effectively de-Catholicising itself. Some of the best centres established during Greg Craven’s successful leadership have been abolished or wound down. This is a tragic and needless loss.
The bishops must surely address this urgent and untenable situation. Skrbis should resign and the bishops should help ACU find new leadership.
More Coverage
The cost of nuclear energy? A guide for the perplexed
Will the Coalition’s nuclear power policy reduce or increase the price of electricity for east coast Australians?
Indigenous experience shares common cause with Israel’s struggle
I understand that profound connection between people and land. Aboriginal Australians have maintained this bond for over 60,000 years, despite displacement and colonisation. Similarly, the Jewish connection to Israel spans more than 4000 years.