Critics Say USD Compromised Its Independence by Barring Killea

The University of San Diego’s cancellation of an on-campus conference because of state Sen. Lucy Killea’s participation drew widespread criticism Friday from Catholic theologians and others as an infringement of academic freedom.

Defending their decision, USD officials said Friday that they scrapped the event to head off what they perceived as a potential embarrassment for Bishop Leo T. Maher, whose clash with Killea over her advocacy of abortion rights generated a national controversy last fall. But others argued that the action had precisely the opposite effect and raised serious questions about academic independence.

“Any action like this is a very discouraging and disturbing thing,” said Father Thomas Reese, a fellow at Georgetown University’s Woodstock Theological Center. “Academia is supposed to be the place where various views are discussed and debated in a reasonable fashion. It’s difficult to do that when you start barring people because of their views.”

But USD President Author Hughes, who prohibited the conference from being held on campus so long as Killea was involved, said Friday that he “did not regard this as an academic freedom issue.” Rather, Hughes argued that his decision, made after discussing the issue with Maher, simply reflected his desire to avoid a “public affront and embarrassment” for the bishop.

“The problem was not what Mrs. Killea has said, what her personal convictions are, what her relationship is to the church,” Hughes said. “The issue was whether or not it was appropriate for this institution to make her a guest . . . in view of the recent conflict. My judgment was that’s inappropriate, because it would be viewed by the Catholic community as an affront to the bishop.”

The dispute stems from USD administrators’ decision last month to cancel a March 16-18 meeting on political campaign tactics the week before the event because of their discomfort over Killea’s inclusion among its speakers. The conference was to have been co-sponsored by USD’s political science department and a La Jolla consulting firm headed by Brenda Kinnaman, who raised funds for Killea during her successful 39th District state Senate race last December.

During that campaign, Maher denied Communion to Killea because of the San Diego Democrat’s support for legalized abortion--igniting a political and religious firestorm that figured prominently in her upset victory in the heavily Republican district.

Though Killea, who obtained a master’s degree in history from USD, did not intend to specifically discuss the abortion issue at the conference, Hughes said he feared that her mere appearance would revive the 4-month old controversy. When he discussed the matter with Maher, the bishop shared his concern, saying, as Hughes recalled, “Yes, there could be some difficulties.”

At first, officials at the independent Catholic university told Kinnaman that the meeting could not be held as planned because of a last-minute scheduling conflict at USD’s Douglas Manchester Conference Center. But, when Kinnaman sought to reschedule the event, USD administrators acknowledged that Killea’s involvement was the real reason behind the cancellation.

Many of the Catholic theologians and others interviewed by The Times on Friday reacted negatively to the cancellation, terming it an ill-conceived gesture that undermined the university’s academic independence from diocesan concerns.

“To the extent that the administration bows to forces external to the academic community, in this case a bishop, that is inappropriate in an academic setting,” said Father Richard McCormick, a longtime professor of theology and essayist at University of Notre Dame. “A self-image of being self-protective, of being involved in sectarian indoctrination and proceeding that way, means you’ve forfeited the right to be called a university.”

Similarly, the associate secretary for the Washington-based American Assn. of University Professors called USD’s action “clearly inconsistent” with the principles of academic freedom.

“For the university to disinvite a person on the basis that the person’s presence may cause potential embarrassment to the institution” is the kind of issue with which the association is too familiar, Jonathan Knight said.

“There are (many) instances where members of the board of trustees of an institution are concerned that a person will show up who will embarrass them, whether the issue is abortion, or Palestinian rights or black nationalism,” Knight said.

In a letter sent to Hughes on Friday, San Diego City Councilman Wes Pratt, another USD alumnus, criticized the president’s decision as “shortsighted and a very significant disservice” to the university.

“Your decision . . . belies a disregard for a basic tenet of education: the spirit of exploration and debate,” Pratt wrote. “You have unfortunately shifted the focus of community concern . . . onto the issue of censorship of education at the university. This diminishes the institution’s reputation and credibility.”

Offering a contrary viewpoint shared by some Catholic leaders, Sister Alice Gallin, executive director of the Assn. of Catholic Colleges and Universities, also in Washington, argued that USD’s action does not curtail academic freedom.

“I don’t see any academic freedom involved,” Gallin said, defining that term to mean the unfettered rights of professors to teach and conduct research. “What is involved here is institutional autonomy, the judgment that something or someone is not appropriate for their institution at this particular time.” Father James Burtchaell, another Notre Dame theologian, added: “To me, this is not big news. If somebody got squashed for the opinions he expressed in the classroom, I’d be more concerned.”

But, within the USD political sciences department, at least several professors objected privately to the cancellation, arguing that, from their perspective, it did strike at the issue of academic freedom. “This could be seen as just another case of the church influencing--some would say dictating--university policy,” said one professor, who, like his colleagues, asked not to be identified.

This is not the first time that the issue of church influence has been raised at USD. In 1986, Helen Copley, publisher of the San Diego Union, was pressured to quit the board of trustees by Maher after a series of articles about clerical scandals in the San Diego diocese ran in the paper. Indeed, Hughes himself called the incident a clear case of clerical interference.

But, in this instance, Maher spokesman Dan Pitre reiterated Hughes’ explanation of how the decision was made, emphasizing that the bishop did “not apply pressure, recommend or dictate” the cancellation.

“The bishop shared Dr. Hughes’ concern that this could cause a problem with a good segment of the Catholic population,” Pitre said. “But Dr. Hughes was then free to make his own decision.” Maher declined to be interviewed Friday.

USD began as a college owned and operated by the San Diego diocese, but became an independent Catholic university in 1972 when the College of Men merged with the College of Women, which had been operated by an order of nuns called the Society of the Sacred Heart.

The diocese and the society maintain fours seats on the 34-member board of trustees to protect their land and other assets turned over to USD in 1972. Maher has been elected board chairman every year since 1972, but will retire this summer and be replaced as chairman by shopping center developer Ernest Hahn.

The timing of the planned conference--less than four months before Maher reaches the church’s mandatory retirement age of 75--was a consideration in the decision, USD officials conceded. Hughes, for example, said he recognized that Killea’s planned participation in the conference had “a public relations overtone.”

Not only could her appearance have been perceived as an insult to Maher, some said, but it also could have sent an unintended--and undesired--subliminal message: that Killea was quietly being forgiven for her divergence from church orthodoxy on the volatile abortion issue.

Others, however, speculated that, had the conference been allowed to proceed as scheduled, it might have unfolded quietly, drawing minimal, if any, press coverage. It was not Killea’s planned appearance, they argued, but rather USD leaders’ refusal to permit it, that magnified the issue and conjured up memories of the dispute from last December’s campaign.

“Either way, they might have gotten some bad press,” one theologian concluded.