Following Father Boroughs’ September announcement that he will be stepping down as the 32nd president of the College, the Holy Cross community is faced with the uncertainty of who their next leader will be. The ambiguity of Boroughs’ email only reinforced this feeling, as a key component was missing: there was no commitment to choosing a Jesuit priest to succeed him. This decision contrasts with the 2011 Presidential Search Committee following Father Michael MacFarland’s 11-year tenure, which explicitly committed to choosing another Jesuit to fill the position. In fact, the College has seemingly been committed to a Jesuit leader since our institution’s founding, with only Frank Vellacio, Ph.D. as an exception, serving as acting president of the College from 1998-2000.
Until the early 2000s, Jesuit institutions across the nation were exclusively led by Jesuit presidents. This began to change when Georgetown University chose layman and current president, John DeGioia, in 2001. Other Jesuit institutions started to follow its lead soon thereafter, which leaves us today with only about half of the nation’s Jesuit institutions being led by a clergyman. Perhaps this doesn’t leave Holy Cross’s consideration of both men and women, in addition to its use of a third-party recruitment firm, as much of a surprise. I mean, how many Jesuit priests have you heard of as being placed through Isaacson, Miller? One must wonder if Holy Cross has told the firm to keep the following key question in mind during its search: what does it mean to be a Catholic, Jesuit, liberal arts institution? This question should be at the forefront of the Presidential Search Committee’s mind as it seeks to choose a fitting leader to take Father Boroughs’ place.
This question is perhaps losing resonance with the Holy Cross community, though, as our identity as an institution is at a crossroads. We can choose to follow an ever-growing populist crowd and defer to a layperson to lead us into the coming years, or we can stand with the strong, principled tradition of Jesuit leadership.
Now, what exactly does it mean to be a Catholic institution? Last fall, the Fenwick Review’s Jack Rosenwinkel ‘21 interviewed Worcester Bishop Robert McManus, who said the following:
“What fundamentally makes Catholic colleges Catholic is that they have to be completely and unambiguously supportive of promoting, fostering, and furthering the great Catholic intellectual tradition [. . .] I think fundamentally, you do that by hiring for mission. You only hire people—even if they’re not Catholic—that thoroughly and authentically commit themselves to supporting the mission. The Catholic identity of a college is completely tied up with the mission, and if we don’t get the mission straight, the identity is going to be undercut. When you don’t hire for mission, you get off the track.”
This mission would be best accomplished by having a Jesuit as the leader of our institution, as we have since 1843. The president of the school sets the tone for those under his leadership. We need a leader who fully embodies and embraces the Catholic, Jesuit tradition of Holy Cross, but all signs indicate that we’re making a left on red.
Bishop McManus has expressed his concerns in the past, saying “These days, I’m less than certain that the Catholic identity of Holy Cross is strong. I’m very concerned.” With rising tensions between the bishop and the College, would a layperson really be the best move? After all, a school can only be recognized as Catholic if endorsed by the local bishop. Choosing a president who does not belong to the Society of Jesus for the first time would not explicitly reaffirm our Catholic mission. This is not to say that Bishop McManus would revoke our Catholic status were we to choose a layperson, but I think it would certainly raise some eyebrows.
Recent polls among the Holy Cross student body indicate a reason for concern. For starters, only 342 students bothered to respond to the poll indicating their preferences for future leadership. As reported in The Spire, 15% of students believe the next president should be a layperson, 55.7% are indifferent, and only 29.3% remain committed to Holy Cross’ long history of clergymen at the helm of our institution. The fact that the majority of the few students polled are indifferent to the matter raises the question of whether we actually want to be, or consider ourselves, a Catholic institution at this point. Additionally, on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (very important) students polled an average of 3.27 for how important they think it is that the next president has worked at a Jesuit institution. How would a president without a lived experience of a Jesuit institution’s mission be able to lead Holy Cross? We must recommit to our Jesuit values through our 33rd president to combat this indifference towards the school’s foundation.
One may wonder how important the president’s role is. The Holy Cross website lists the role of the president as the “chief executive of the College, charged with responsibility for overseeing all affairs of the institution.” This is a fairly broad definition, but from it, one can determine that the president at least sets the tone for carrying out the college’s mission and priorities. At the forefront of these endeavors should be working on reaffirming our commitment to being a Catholic institution. Who better to lead these efforts than someone with a vocation to live a life directly consecrated to God?
Some may wonder why Holy Cross should retain its Catholic identity to begin with. Well, put simply, that’s who we are and that is what students and alumni signed up for when we chose to come here. Disregarding our long history of clergymen would be an unnecessary statement amid Holy Cross’s increasing efforts to be progressive. Our goals and mission can be aptly, and better, accomplished through maintaining a distinguished Jesuit identity. Holy Cross students polled their top priorities for the incoming president as being 29% academics, 27.9% diversity, equity, and inclusion, and 18.5% transparency. Additionally, some of the keywords that many are looking for in a leader include: understanding, charismatic, proactive, honest, etc. All of these priorities can be accomplished by maintaining a commitment to clergy leadership. Let’s avoid becoming the College of the Un-Holy Cross.
Lastly, in addition to choosing a Jesuit priest, I suggest the Committee choose someone who is apolitical. Tensions are at an all-time high, and the College would benefit from a leader who builds bridges rather than walls. Our newest leader should embrace debate and productive discussions rather than enforcing his own agenda. This way, students will be intellectually stimulated and challenged rather than indoctrinated. We must embrace and promote the critical thinking that comes with a liberal arts education. We come to Holy Cross to learn and grow as both people and thinkers; let’s not leave as clones.
Holy Cross has had presidents for as long as 24 years and as little as 2. When it comes down to it, we have little idea of how long our next leader will serve. The selection of Father Boroughs’ successor will not only represent current students––the College is selecting a leader for future Crusaders as well. We, as an institution, must stay in-line with the mission of the College.
We invite those who would like an apolitical, Jesuit clergyman as the next president of the College to fill out this Google Form, which will be forwarded to the Presidential Search Committee. Identities will not be shared with those outside of the necessary channels