Saint Mary's University Voices on the Veterans Memorial

Saint Mary's University releases revised Veterans Memorial design

2008-02-18T18:37:00.000-08:00

Saint Mary's University has released the revised design of the proposed Veterans Memorial, pictured at left. You can read a complete description of the revised design at the Saint Mary's University website.

Veterans Memorial project update

2008-02-14T12:52:00.000-08:00

The following e-mail was sent on Tuesday, Feb. 12 by diane leutgeb munson to
some of the people who have been involved in the effort to establish a
moratorium on the SMU Veterans Memorial. Following her e-mail is an
announcement sent to the Saint Mary's University campus by Michael Meagher,
Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and Brother Louis DeThomasis, Chancellor.

Friends,

For those who haven't heard, there is news from the Board of Trustees regarding the Veterans Memorial project. I will let you read the official email sent out (below), but did want to also let you know how things went with the Board. The group that represented us included: Mary Gleich, Glenna I-have-too-many-consanants-in-my-last-name, Mike Leutgeb Munson, Joe Morse, and Eileen Daily. The report from the group was that the presentation went well, was fairly well received, though quite emotional and full of anxiety (for all but Mary Gleich who could keep her cool with a house burning down around her!). The group seemed confident and well prepared and walked into an incredibly difficult situation with their heads high! Their message was a reflection of the months of discussions, letters, polls, and prayers we have all had together and alone about this project. They chose as a group to not offer any concrete ideas to the Board about what the memorial should look like, stating as their reason that one of the main problems with the project is that it was decided and designed by a select few people and thus does not encompass the desires of the majority- they did not feel that as five people they could fairly represent the diverse ideas of faculty, staff, students and alums regarding this project.

On a personal note, I would like to personally thank and congratulate all of you (and please share this email with those not on the list that have been a part of this!). In my mind, we have already been successful, whatever the final outcome. Our success, in my mind at least, has nothing to do with the decision of the Board of Trustees or the concessions of the Board of Alumni, but instead in embodied in the dialogue that we have engaged in with one another and with the university. The process that we have been a part of as a group has been a beautiful lesson in non-violence and conflict resolution for me, and I have learned a great deal from each of you. Thank you for contributing your strengths to the work that we have done together and for taking risks for the sake of your conscience.

I believe that we are meeting again after SMU gets back from break (the 22nd??). I look forward to seeing you all then, enjoy the rest of your break!

in peace,
diane leutgeb munson

February 12, 2008

Faculty, staff and students of Saint Mary's University,

The Veterans Memorial project at the Winona campus was reviewed and discussed at the February 9 meeting of the Saint Mary's University Board of Trustees. We thank the faculty, students and alumni who joined us at our Executive Session, and who so eloquently conveyed their support for or concerns about the project's design and intention. It is gratifying to note that even though there are strong differences of opinion about this project, everyone has treated each other with respect.

We are realistic and fully realize that no decision will be totally agreeable to all of the community. However, we are confident that most will be understanding of a memorial to Saint Mary's veterans, with an appreciation of our history, and with "service" and "peace" as key messages.

Therefore, the Board of Trustees requested that the Alumni Board of Directors consider a redesign of the memorial to more clearly and better reflect the intention of the project. We authorized the revised project to proceed in a timely manner toward its original dedication date.

The Alumni Board of Directors, which also met on February 9, supported the Board of Trustees' request. A new design will be developed and placed on the university website, and the community will be notified when it is available for viewing.

In addition, both the Board of Trustees and the Alumni Board of Directors indicated support for scholarship aid for veterans and their families. Both boards will discuss the topic at future meetings.

We want to publicly thank the Alumni Board of Directors for the time, energy and good intentions it has invested in the Veterans Memorial project. We also thank the Alumni Board for showing great flexibility in reconsidering an initiative that is now more than three years in process.

Be assured that the thoughtful comments we have received and the discussions we have had will result in a final design of the memorial that is appropriate and complementary to the campus of a Catholic, Lasallian university.

Michael Meagher, Chairman, Board of Trustees
Brother Louis DeThomasis, Chancellor

The Memorial and Lasallian Service

2008-02-10T19:15:00.001-08:00

From: Dorothy Diehl Wednesday, January 30, 2008

To: The SMU community

I am writing this in response to the email sent to us in November by Meg Richtman, Director of Alumni Relations, in which she announced the administration's decision to begin building a veterans memorial here on campus. In that email she encouraged a sharing of viewpoints and discussion on the project. I have been involved in just such a discussion since first learning about the project in the fall of 2005. At that time, I and two other faculty members composed a letter expressing our concerns about such a memorial. We addressed three main issues in our letter: whether the campus should be home to a second memorial honoring students who have died, whether this memorial should honor only those who have died in military service, and whether there could be a better way to honor SMU veterans that would be more in keeping with our Lasallian mission. This letter was then signed by 30 some other concerned faculty and staff and sent to the Alumni board in March of 2006. In response to that letter, three of us were invited to attend the meeting of the alumni board in June, at which time we presented our concerns and expressed our hopes that we might find an alternative to the currently proposed memorial. The members of the alumni board listened to our concerns but refused to consider changing the project.

I continue to have serious reservations about these issues. More recently I have become concerned, as well, about the size and scope of the current project. What began as a "memorial to Saint Mary's alumni veterans" has now become a memorial to "everyone who has ever served--or who are serving--our nation," according to the chairperson for the Veterans' Memorial Project, Captain Timothy Tyre. This memorial, it would seem then, would honor not only those alumni who have honorably served their country but would also include those soldiers who participated in the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War, those who participated in the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, and those who taught at the School of the Americas, whose graduates have been cited for the assassination of 6 Jesuit priests and 2 co-workers, the assassination of Archbishop Romero, and the murder of 4 U.S. church women.

Perhaps an even greater concern is Captain Tyre's assertion that military service reflects "the Catholic, Lasallian tradition of service to others" and that the memorial "promises to be a thoughtful and appropriate addition to the Lasallian tradition." I would agree with him that "Those who have chosen service in the military branches as nurses, chaplains" exemplify the vision statement of Saint Mary's as a Catholic and Lasallian university to "transform society, one learner at a time, so that faith, zeal, service and leadership – all directed toward the common good – become society's defining hallmarks". However, the service represented by those who actively engage in warfare seems to me to be less in keeping with Catholic social teaching and Lasallian service. Throughout the years, both Lasallian leaders and Catholic bishops and popes have advocated for the creation of a culture of peace rather than one of war.

My greatest concern, however, is with children, whom Br. Alvaro in his address to the 2006 International Assembly placed "at the very heart of the Lasallian mission." I refer here not only to our own students but also to children all over the world. Every year I teach an LCT course to juniors on Children's issues in our Lasallian Core Traditions program. At the beginning of each course we look at the impact of war on children. I ask my students to name as many movies, books, courses, and monuments to war as they can--an exercise that they find quite easy. Then I ask them to name as many movies, books, courses, and monuments to peace as they can. Their difficulty is palpable. They finally mention something about Gandhi, Mother Theresa or Martin Luther King, Jr. Only once has a student mentioned that we have a monument to peace right here on campus, the peace pole erected after September 11, 2001. This, however, is not surprising given the fact that it is small and hasn't been a focus of university activities since its dedication. Neither the pole nor its dedication can be found in a search of the University web site although a search for "memorial" yields six references to the Veteran's Memorial with an additional link under both "war" and "veteran," despite the fact that this memorial has not even been built yet.

We, currently, have only a relatively small statue of St. John Baptist de la Salle in the Cascio Family Court. Across from that we already have a much larger memorial to students who have died. Behind this, the planned Veterans Memorial will dominate the landscape, making it by far the most visible structure on campus, aside from buildings.

One aspect of the proposed memorial is that "Each gift of more than $250 [...] will be recognized with an engraved paving brick. [...] Every brick represents an individual tied to the Saint Mary's University family." Perhaps a more appropriate memorial to honor our alumni veterans would be one of Jesus surrounded by children. Some of the bricks could then be dedicated to the 2 million children who have died in wars over just the last decade and who, according to our Lasallian vocation and the teachings of Jesus, are those to whom we should dedicate our lives and our service. We cannot forget that these children along with the additional 1 million orphaned, 6 million injured or disabled, 12 million left homeless and 10 million psychologically traumatized by war also are intimately tied to our Saint Mary's family.

In the book, Touching the Hearts of Students: Characteristics of Lasallian Schools, there is a Catholic Lasallian Assessment Process included in the Appendix for schools to "identify strengths and target areas for growth. The focus of the assessment process is to build on the strengths within the school, affirming and encouraging efforts to live out the Catholic and Lasallian character in all aspects of the school's life." The first of the six qualities assessed is: Lasallian schools are committed to living their Catholic and Lasallian heritage. Listed under "Things to Look For" are the following:

• visible signs, symbols, and practices of Catholic identity on campus

• visible signs, artwork, symbols, and practices of the Lasallian heritage on campus

I hope that, before proceeding with the construction of the proposed memorial, we will consider seriously the statement that this memorial will make to all current, past, and prospective students and their families when they come onto our campus. I also hope that we will reflect deeply on what it means to be called to serve as Lasallians.

Another Concerned Voice

2008-01-28T16:26:00.000-08:00

January 28, 2008

Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, PHD
Chancellor
St Mary¹s University of Minnesota
700 Terrace heights #30
Winona, MN 55987

Dear Brother Louis:

I heard recently heard of the plan of the SMU Alumni Board to build a veteran¹s memorial. As a former seminarian at IHM Seminary and a graduate of the IPM program in 1989, I am deeply concerned about having such a monument on a Catholic University campus.

A tribute to the military and to militarism is contrary to what is central to what makes us Catholic. Jesus is the prince of peace. The heroes among Catholic faithful are those who have died for their faith, or those who led heroic lives helping the poor and suffering and being people of prayer. If a monument is to be erected, it should be for people who brought Christ to others by how they lived their lives.

We already have a veteran¹s memorial at the Lake Park. Please reconsider this project, or at least wait until you have received more input from others who are affiliated with St Mary¹s University.

Yours in Christ,

Thomas Parlin
853 West Mark St.
Winona, MN 55987

CC OFFICE OF ALUMNI RELATIONS

Imagining Peace

2008-01-25T08:22:00.000-08:00

Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, Ph.D.
Chancellor
Saint Mary's University of Minnesota
700 Terrace Heights #30
Winona, MN 55987-1399

Dear Brother Louis,

I am blessed because of the education, direction, and opportunities Saint Mary's has given me and I am grateful for the leadership and gifts you have brought to Saint Mary's University and our larger Lasallian community. I am writing to you because of the challenge the proposed veterans' memorial project presents to the Lasallain vision of faith and service to the poor and youth of our world.

It is not the goal of this letter to foment division but instead to present one social and theological analysis of the Saint Mary's community's conflicting desires, on the one hand to remember the lives of friends and family, and on the other honor the reality of war and the Catholic teachings on it. Through that analysis I hope to call a community to have difference without division while being honest with history and to inspire hope for the future Lasallian vision. I will try to offer a number of constructive paths toward a concrete historical project that remembers our friends and family, restores us to a union with God in a repentant history, and envisions a world where violence is not the only recourse to conflict.

A memorial such as the one proposed is not simply a monument or specific place to remember Saint Mary's lives lost. As a cultural artifact, it will tell a story as long as it stands. It is with this lens that I challenge the administration to consider the past history such a memorial tells and the futures it will influence. The collective memory of a community can be a powerful force for change. Currently, the proposed veteran's memorial project obscures our history and fails to recognize the dignity of persons in our world. As followers of De La Salle's prophetic path of justice for the poor and powerless in the world, we too must bear that commitment of transformative justice. A university community whose mission claims dedication to social justice should reflect that.

Transformative justice demands that histories be told so that those hearing the story understand injustice as contrary to the will of God and the future of humanity, but also that stories be told of hope and change for a yet-to-be-written history free from violence and war. A veterans' war memorial that can remember and tell the history of sacrifice and service of our community, but that is also sorrowfully honest with the reality of the horror and injustice of that history is the only way that we can respond to the call for transformative justice.

Participation in violence, no matter what "justification," always reflects the broken covenant of a community with God. [1] A memorial that simply honors the SMU war dead explicitly tells the story of their heroism but implicitly tells viewers that the violence, collateral damage, and failure to achieve peace are of no import. Can we have instead a memorial that honors their heroism but also addresses what is necessary to be free from violence, to restore communion with God, and remember such covenantal brokenness with historical accuracy and mourning?

Some of the wars the United States has entered or started since the founding of Saint Mary's University have been "unjust" wars according to Catholic social teaching. If this part of the story is hidden from public consideration in the memorial, we lie to the future students of Saint Mary's University about the depth and difficulty of the discernment required before committing to military service. Such a lie would directly result in the loss of other Saint Mary's lives.

The proposed memorial also fails to acknowledge the many other lives that were lost in those wars, the lives of our brothers and sisters in the global Lasallian community and the lives of our brothers and sisters in Christ.

We are called by God to act justly, love tenderly, and walk humbly with our God, a communion we share with the earthly community. This call does not end; we must strive for ongoing conversion to more justice, more love, and more humility. I am asking you to put a moratorium on this project while you bring all the Saint Mary's community, alumni, faculty, staff and students, together for conversation in a spirit of openness to conversion.

I propose the following suggestions to make such a conversation more likely to succeed in creating a new historical project that honors our Catholic, Lasallian heritage and mission:

Honoring the reality of the violence suffered by the veterans and others in any war.
Rooting the personal services and sacrifices of the veterans within the social contexts of the wars in which they served: what are the larger, historical, theological, and moral considerations of each context?
Considering how a memorial project embodies the SMU mission to help students live ethical lives of service and leadership, especially the poor (who traditionally serve as cannon fodder).
Asking the questions "what kind of future do we want to believe in" and "how is what we are doing embody or disembody that reality, both in the process and product of the memorial project?"
Using language that is honest, acknowledging the violence and suffering in war and the demands and struggles nonviolent peacemakers face.
Allowing for wider community input in a project that affects so many people. Encourage and stimulate discussion about our differences, but do so without division.

The preservation of peace falls on the shoulders of war-makers and politicians of nation-states and by extension, the veterans of Saint Mary's. The building of peace falls on the shoulders of peace-makers and believers of a nonviolent Spirit of God. Please help us take a step toward being peace-makers by reconsidering and reworking what this War Veterans' Memorial Project means to all those committed to Lasallian service.

Live Jesus in Our Hearts,

Jake Olzen, '07

411 Mensching
Roselle, IL 60172

[1] The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, No. 488 says, "Peace is founded on the primary relationship that exists between human beings and God himself, a relationship marked by righteousness (cf. Gen 17:1). [] Violence made its appearance in interpersonal relationships (cf. Gen 4:1-16) and in social relationships (cf. 11:1-9). Peace and violence cannot dwell together, and where there is violence, God cannot be present (cf. 1 Chr 22:8-9)."

Letter Sent To The Cardinal

2008-01-18T19:59:00.000-08:00

January 18, 2008

Dear Editor,

Memorials are loaded structures. I grew up in the South, a land laden in Civil War memorials. Every county seat has some memorial to Confederate soldiers who died in battle. It's a difficult thing to deal with when, 150 years later, the prominent sentiment is no longer 1866's “we want this statue to remember lost friends”, but instead 2008's “we want to live in a community that reconciles old racial divides and not be bound by tragedies and evils of our past”. That's hard to do with that piece of Confederate patriotism staring you in the face. Yet the memorials are even harder to tear down. They perpetuate division.

There is a movement by the Alumni association to create a large memorial on our campus to honor all military veterans connected to SMU. There are many reasons why I think that is misguided: if we should honor veterans, do so through scholarships. Set up a simple historical marker (there is a historical connection to WWII involved). But this memorial, as promoted and planned with huge, sweeping arches signifying the five branches of U.S. Military, makes a very divisive statement: that all military service is a sacrifice in keeping with Catholic teaching. And that statement simply is not true. Some wars may be just, and people may engage in wars according to informed conscience. But many wars have not met the criteria of just war. Just war theory is a complex teaching that seems dismissed by the grandeur of the memorial's proposed structure, which seems to elevate the U.S. military to transcendental status. Yet transcendence belongs to God alone.

I’m not against people in the military. Members of my family have served (one is in Iraq now), and I respect their decisions of conscience; if you are a student in the Reserves or National Guard, I respect your decisions as well. I'm not necessarily against all memorials, either. The Vietnam Memorial is a memorial which brings people together, and the thousands of names speak well to the scale of casualties, tragedy, loss, and some kind of peace with history. But that memorial is on federal land in the nation’s capital. Why is Saint Mary's considering such a sweeping memorial that makes a theologically questionable statement on private land, at a school run by an order that primarily educates the poor?

And if this memorial is divisive now, won't it likely be more so 100 years from now?

Sincerely,

Dr. Susan Windley-Daoust
Assistant Professor of Theology

Lack of Communication

2008-01-13T13:23:00.000-08:00

To: Br. Louis, Dr. John Ferrotte, Mr. William Herzog, and Mr. Timothy Tyre

My name is Jeff Austin, and I am a senior at St. Mary's Winona campus. I would like to share some concerns I have about the proposed Veterans Memorial Project. My first concern is the absence of publications of this memorial to the general campus. As a student enrolled since fall of 2005, I have not heard anything of this project until November of this past year. It seems to me that this would be an exciting undertaking for the Alumni and they would want to get the future alumni excited about it as well. My second concern is to the nature of this memorial. I would like to know more about the structure and reasoning beyond the brochure information. Our Catholic faith holds war to be unjust and unnecessary, and a memorial to the military seems to be contrary to our faith values. If this is to be a gift to the campus community, I feel that there are other ways to honor the lives of those who have served beyond simply honoring the military in general. From what I know of this project, the Alumni borard is under the impression that the students are aware of this project and supportive of it. To my knowledge, the students are unaware of this project and should be informed before they return next semester and find another structure on campus. It would be appropriate for the Alumni Board to present this memorial to the campus in order to explain the reasoning behind it, and be open to feedback from the student body. As LaSallian learners, it is important to be informed and involved in our community because SMU is our (alumni, students, and faculty) Home. Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns. As a future alumnus, I look forward to working with my fellow alumni to building up Saint Mary's University as a Catholic and LaSallian Institution.

In Christ,

May Christ's love bring you Joy!

From a Student (and Seminarians) Perspective

2008-01-11T20:31:00.000-08:00

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing this letter in regards to the 'veterans memorial' that is to be put up centrally located on Saint Mary's University campus. My name is Jason Kern and I am a senior at Immaculate Heart of Mary Seminary. I was recently reading the website with the information about the memorial and after thinking about the information I became quite concerned.
The first and main problem I have is that this project is due to begin construction soon and I had not heard about it all. I thought that I may have missed an email or something, and after asking around I could not find one seminarian who knew anything about the memorial. I even asked our representative on the student senate that goes to the weekly meetings and he told me they had never discussed it. I shared what I knew about the memorial and some of my fellow seminarians shared my concerns. The more I think about the project about to go underway the more I see the benefits of asking for a moratorium. This project needs to be discussed and thought through, especially since we are talking about something that will be permanent on our campus. Please consider this, so that at the very least we can share our full concerns about this memorial.

My second and surely more important concern is that I do not fully understand how a memorial as such fits in with a Catholic Institution. I recently read on the news that 151,000 was the most recent figure of casualties from the Iraq war. I have seen numbers that greatly inflate and deflate this, but the point is that too many people are dying. The Catholic Church upholds the life and dignity of each and every human person, there is no room for us to give the slightest idea that war is okay. In today's society, it is all but impossible to ever fight in a just war. It is my understanding that John Paul II directly asked our president to not enter into war with Iraq. There is no room in today's culture of death to give anyone the idea that war is okay or worse yet that we support war. Let's not memorialize our veterans with a piece of art, it is time to honor our veterans with a fund that helps them deal with the tragedies and horrors they experienced while serving our country. There are a number of options other than unneeded art on this campus that we can do. We need to make sure we are doing this in the right way and that is why I am asking for a moratorium.

I thank you sincerely for taking the time to read this and passing it along to those concerned. Please know of my prayers for this process, I pray that this process will be guided by the Holy Spirit and through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary who is the Queen of Peace, we may come to do what is best for our veterans, our campus, and all of society. Live Jesus in our hearts!

Sincerely,

Jason Kern

The Memorial in Light of Catholic and Lasallian Identity

2007-12-20T11:14:00.000-08:00

Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, Ph.D.

Chancellor

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

700 Terrace Heights #30

Winona, MN 55987-1399

December 18, 2007

Dear Brother Louis,

I am writing to express my concern regarding the veterans memorial that is being proposed for the Winona campus. I have other connections to Saint Mary’s University, but I am writing this letter from the perspective of an alumnus of the pastoral ministries program (class of 2003).

The e-mail that Ms. Meg Richtman sent on Nov. 20 stated that the university not only welcomes, but also encourages, all viewpoints on the veterans memorial. I greatly appreciated that gesture. People often speak of the Saint Mary’s University “community” as a way of expressing the common bond of those whose lives have been touched by the school. Maintaining that sense of community, however, requires an openness to the perspectives that each person has to offer—especially regarding matters that cut to the core of the community’s identity.

I believe that the proposed veterans memorial is the sort of project that the whole SMU community should have an opportunity to discuss. This project, by virtue of its size and prominent location, is bound to become one of the iconic images of the Winona campus and a symbol of the whole Saint Mary’s University community. That is why I would like to respectfully ask that you delay construction of the project for as long as necessary to allow a wider discussion of it among all Saint Mary’s University alumni, students, and employees. I believe there are legitimate grounds for such a discussion, which I will attempt to explain below.

I want to begin by clarifying that I have no objection to remembering those who have died in war. I have had friends and acquaintances in the military; my brother-in-law leaves for Iraq for fourteen months immediately after Christmas; and my grandfather participated in the invasion of Italy during World War II. In fact, I am currently helping my mother to post his wartime letters online; I suppose you could call our project a sort of memorial.

The question is not whether we ought to remember such people, but how we ought to do so. No public display is a neutral object: we choose to display images that reflect our identity and values. The images a university chooses to display, therefore, are a sort of extension of the classroom. Just as a good teacher carefully chooses what he says in the classroom, I think it is important to question what the veterans’ memorial will “say” to the tens of thousands of students who will pass by it over the coming decades.

In order to find out what the memorial is intended to say by those who have worked on it, I spent some time reading the Alumni Association’s literature on the memorial and talking to Ms. Richtman about the perspective of those who have worked on it. What I heard is that the memorial is not intended to glorify war; as Mr. Tyre has eloquently said, the intention is simply to offer a “thank you” to Saint Mary’s University alumni who have died in battle. I believe the university has also stated that the memorial is not intended to be “political,” which I interpret as meaning that it is supposed to be neutral on the subject of war.

Those are all good intentions. One of the points Ms. Richtman made, echoed by others who were kind enough to critique early drafts of this letter, is that proponents of the memorial have difficulty understanding why anyone would object to it. Part of my purpose with this letter, then, is to explain (as carefully and respectfully as possible) why those good intentions may not be clear to everyone who views the memorial. I would like to offer three observations along those lines.

First, in the context of its setting, the memorial seems to imply that military service and sacrifice is valued by the university more than other forms of service and sacrifice. I am not suggesting that it says as much in itself. I come to this conclusion based on the fact that the memorial speaks a great deal about service and sacrifice, but there is no correspondingly prominent public display anywhere on campus extolling other forms of service and sacrifice. In particular, there is no prominent display of Christ, the perfect servant who truly made the ultimate sacrifice: “This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other sacrifices” (Catechism 614). It is Christ who is the “one who died for all” (2 Cor 5:14) and who “[made] peace by the blood of his cross” (Col 1:20). Nor are there any prominent tributes to those who followed Christ’s example by overcoming evil through love: the Christian martyrs (including the many Lasallian martyrs), conscientious objectors, the saints, or the many alumni besides our veterans who have also rendered outstanding service to the world at great personal sacrifice. Prominent tributes to these other forms of service and sacrifice would help to “interpret” the meaning of the memorial in the context of Catholic faith. If the memorial is erected in isolation from such balancing symbols, however, a stranger visiting the campus would find small religious statues dotting the grounds here and there—and a huge set of arches representing the military in the center of campus. It seems inevitable that such a visitor would interpret that campus landscape in a way that is not consistent with the university’s strong commitment to many forms of service and sacrifice.

Second, concerning the memorial itself, I question whether it is really possible to erect a veterans memorial that is neutral on the topic of war—or whether, on the campus of a Catholic university, such a memorial ought to be neutral on the topic of war. The university insists that it is not building a “war memorial.” Point taken; it would be unfair to suggest that the memorial is all about war. However, I think it would be overstating the case to claim that the memorial has nothing to say about war. The five soaring arches that are the memorial’s most prominent feature “represent the five armed services of the United States,” according to the promotional literature, making the institution of the U.S. military quite literally the “over-arching” feature of the memorial—especially from the perspective of the casual passerby. Obviously, the U.S. military exists to fight wars. Even absent the arches, the lives of those honored by the memorial were tragically cut short by war. So, while the monument may not be a “war memorial,” those who stop to consider it cannot help but “remember war” at the same time that they remember the veterans.

This is not a bad thing in itself: the Church admonishes us not to forget the tragedy of past wars, and has paused to remember major wars on their anniversaries (see, for instance, “Message on the Fiftieth Anniversary of the End of the Second World War in Europe” and “Intervention of the Holy See at the 59th General Assembly of the United Nations on the Occasion of the Sixtieth Anniversary of the End of the Second World War” as well as Centesimus Annus). But for the Church, the act of remembrance always has as its purpose to “rekindle in all . . . a resolve to work for a firm political commitment to peace” (“Fiftieth Anniversary”). The Church is decidedly not neutral when it comes to war, which brings me to my third point. As far as I can tell, the proposed memorial does not include any sort of language that would help to interpret it in the context of Catholic teaching on war.

Yes, the Catholic tradition accepts the necessity of warfare in order to defend innocent lives, once certain very strict conditions have been met. Indeed, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting Gaudium et Spes, says: “Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace” (paragraph 2310). It seems to me that it is this sentiment that is driving the memorial project, and those elements of the memorial dealing with individual veterans seem to express that principle.

However, I think it is urgent that the memorial not promote this principle in isolation from the rest of the Church’s teaching on war. A balanced presentation of Church teaching is always important, but especially when students may be making life-changing decisions partly based on the information that is presented.

If the proposed memorial goes ahead as currently planned, it will stand as a constant reminder to students of the sentiments expressed in Catechism 2310. But there will be no expression of the Church’s condemnation of war as a “scourge” that “is never an appropriate way to resolve problems,” but rather is “the failure of all true humanism” and “always a defeat for humanity” that causes “not only material but also moral” damage (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church 497). There will be no plaque telling students of the Church’s strong “presumption in favor of peace and against war” (The Challenge of Peace 83), its promotion of alternatives to war (Compendium 498), or its strict requirements to justify “legitimate defense by military force” (see Catechism paragraph 2309). Nor will students learn about the Church’s teaching regarding the conduct of combatants during war (Challenge of Peace 101-110), and the near impossibility of fulfilling those jus in bello requirements in the context of modern warfare (Compendium 497). Students passing through the memorial will remain innocently unaware of the frequency with which the U.S. military has failed to uphold those requirements—including, just for example, the acts of war “aimed indiscriminately at the destruction of entire cities” that were committed during World War II and subsequently condemned by the Second Vatican Council (Gaudium et Spes 80). That point is especially relevant in light of the expectation that Catholic military personnel are to disobey orders that contradict the moral order (Compendium 503), since all genuine service is ultimately oriented toward God.

If the memorial goes ahead as planned, the campus will have its permanent tribute to those who defended security by the use of armed force. But there will be no soaring arch or bronze plaque honoring those who chose to “resist injustice through non-violent methods” (Challenge of Peace 116)—a form of service that has a long and rich history in the Church.

Given the U.S. commitment to wage what has been called “the long war,” it seems more important than ever for students to be fully informed about such matters. If the memorial is erected with no reference whatsoever to the tragic nature of war, or to the Christian belief that war is not inevitable and that “peace is always possible” (John Paul II, 18th International Meeting of Peoples and Religions), then what message will it send to students? I fear that, in its silence on these matters, it will suggest a fatalistic attitude toward war that is contrary to Christian hope.

Exactly how Catholic beliefs and values ought to be more fully expressed in the veterans’ memorial is a question for broader discussion, which is part of the value of delaying construction of the memorial. I offer my own ideas below as possible starting points for such a discussion.

Had there been an opportunity for alumni input at the beginning of the planning process, I think I would have suggested raising money for a “living” memorial—one that would actively serve the needs of our rapidly growing population of veterans. Stone seems a cold way to honor veterans when so many of them struggle with poverty and homelessness right here in Winona.

Assuming that the Alumni Board has its heart set on the proposed memorial, I think the next best option would be to remove the arches that are its dominant feature. Doing so would shift the emphasis from the institution of the military to the alumni whose memory the monument is supposed to preserve, making it more like the widely accepted Vietnam Memorial in Washington, D.C. At the very least, the university could stop referring to the arches as representing the five branches of the military; surely they could be said to represent something else?

Some of the Catholic identity concerns I have raised might be addressed by incorporating interpretive language from the Catholic tradition (i.e., quotes from the Scriptures, Christian saints and heroes, or Catholic social teaching) along the lines of the themes I mentioned above.

Finally, if the veterans memorial is erected without any modification to the current design, then it seems only appropriate that the university attempt to highlight its Catholic identity by erecting equally prominent public displays that more clearly reflect that identity. Perhaps another fundraising effort could be launched for that purpose. Personally, I would favor inscriptions from the saints and Scriptures in the walkways around campus, but obviously the exact nature of such a display would have to be the product of a wider conversation.

Brother Louis, although I do not expect a point-by-point reply to this letter, I would be interested in your response to three questions. First, would the university be willing to briefly delay construction of the memorial in order to conduct a wider consultation among the whole university community? Second, is there any possibility that the administration and the Alumni Board would consider modifying the proposed monument? And third, do you think the university would be open to erecting other, balancing displays along the lines I have suggested in this letter?

I appreciate the opportunity to share these thoughts with you, and look forward to your response.

Respectfully,

Jerry Windley-Daoust

Pastoral Ministries Class of 2003

Catholic Worker Letter

2007-12-12T07:46:00.000-08:00

15 November 2007

To Whom It May Concern:

As a group of concerned alumni of Saint Mary's University, we would like to address the plans for a war monument on campus.

As graduates of Saint Mary's University, we have been taught that Lasallian service to those in need pertains to the work of education in a spirit of faith. In our understanding military service is not synonymous with Lasallian service to the poor. We would like to remember the sacrifices that soldiers have made, especially those who have graduated from Saint Mary's University. However, we would ask that such a memorial speak to the dream that there be no more lives claimed by war.

As members of the Winona Catholic Worker community, we regularly sit down to dinner with veterans of war. Many of our guests are well educated, well traveled and deeply wounded. The emotional scars of war leave their mark not only on the guests that live and eat with us, but on our homes and all of us who live in them. We now each carry the pain of the walking wounded; courageous and broken women and men who have given their lives at the request of their government. They now walk our streets, reliving the trauma of war with each new day. A monument to their service seems a mockery of the anguish that they have seen, especially in light of gaps in veterans care that exist in our communities and our government. Would it not be a more compassionate response to use the money raised for the monument to assist veterans of war with medical care, housing, and other financial support?

As people of faith, we find it presumptuous to honor fallen soldiers with a monument when there stands no concrete recognition on campus of the countless martyrs who have gone before us within the Lasallian family, including Br. James Miller and the 58 recently beatified Christian Brothers. Those who gave their lives in service to the poor, dying armed only with the cross and with forgiveness for their assassins, deserve the attention of all students, parents, faculty and staff that would pass by a monument on a regular basis. We must honor and glorify peace, and those who work to build it in our communities and in our world, if we indeed ever hope to see people lay down their weapons.

Just last month the International Council of Young Lasallians, with the support of the General Council, proclaimed an International Day of Prayers for Peace. Young Lasallians from all corners of the globe participated in works of peace. Superior General, Br. Álvaro Rodríguez Echeverría reiterated a message that he frequently shares with the Lasallian family, "I believe that we are living in a time of grace in which, on the one hand, awareness is growing that war has never been and never will be a solution and that on the other hand we must create and develop a culture of peace." It is hard to comprehend that Saint Mary's University would consider physically glorifying war when the elected head of the Lasallian family makes such a simple and deliberate call for peace.

We speak as a group of people deeply connected to Saint Mary's University and the Lasallian mission. We ask that you not only consider our concerns and requests, but know that we will carry this message to the Midwest District and the Generalate in Rome. We believe this to not only be a matter of faith and conscience, but also an affront to the Lasallian mission.

Sincerely,

Diane Leutgeb Munson '04 Michael Munson '04 Rebecca Lambert'06

Voices from the Catholic Worker

2007-12-11T19:52:00.001-08:00

From:

Winona Catholic Worker

P.O. Box 102

Winona MN 55987

November 21, 2007

To:

Bro. Louis De Thomasis, FSC

Chancellor

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

2500 Park Avenue

Minneapolis MN 55404

Ms. Margaret Mary Richtman

Director of Alumni Relations

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

700 Terrace Heights

Winona MN 55987

Dr. Jeffrey Highland

University Provost and Vice-President of the College

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

700 Terrace Heights

Winona MN 55987

Board of Directors of the Alumni Association

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

700 Terrace Heights

Winona MN 55987

We, core community members and associates of the Winona Catholic Worker, are disheartened and disturbed by news of the Alumni Board’s plan to erect a $100,000 veterans memorial monument on the campus of St. Mary's University.

Our times cry out for an alternative to the status quo of militarism. Gospel precepts as exemplified by Lasallian tradition offer such light. The proposed monument does not.

Memorial architecture is highly symbolic and rife with both explicit and implicit messages. While the intent of this proposed project may be to honor the commitment of those alumni who joined the armed forces and suffered injury or death, a public monument invariably glorifies the institution of war, not its participants. Winona and environs has numerous examples of this sort.

Meanwhile we are inundated these days with news of how our nation’s soldiers are treated—or not—by the government they served. In the current wars with Iraq and Afghanistan, the hero/heroine motif does not translate into authentic post-battlefield support. Our nation tends to honor the ideal of military service but sideline the soldier-turned-civilian when help is desperately needed in the aftermath of war.

If Saint Mary's University intends to honor the men and women who have engaged in the military, then the already accrued monies should more appropriately go to veterans' services. Another use of the funds could be to create scholarships for immediate family members of disabled or deceased veterans.

The cofounder of the Catholic Worker movement, Dorothy Day, wrote in May 1975 about the futility of war, contrasting it with its opposite, the Gospel Works of Mercy: "When we talk means and ends, the most striking means in the world today are the means of war and the means of the Works of Mercy as Jesus taught his disciples. All the wars we have seen since 1933 when the Catholic Worker began--the Ethiopian War, the Spanish Civil War, the second World War, the Korean War, and now the Vietnam War--have not achieved any of the ends we as a people have wanted, or have been told we were looking for."

Assisting veterans and their families with their real needs for rehabilitation, healing, and education (the Works of Mercy) seems to us to be more in keeping with the Gospel mission of Saint Mary’s University than the erection of a monument that glorifies war. We urge you to reconsider this project and look at alternatives that would more authentically serve veterans and Lasallian social justice principles.

In peace,

Mary Farrell John Heid James Allaire (Class of ’64) Barbara Allaire

A follow-up:

Winona Catholic Worker

P.O. Box 102

Winona MN 55987

December 11, 2007

Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC

700 Terrace Heights #30

Winona MN 55987-1399

Dear Brother Louis,

We appreciate your response to our letter of November 21 regarding the veterans memorial planned for the Saint Mary’s campus. Thank you for taking the time to write us.

Yes, we understand that you and the Alumni Board are not intentionally trying to glorify war by means of this monument. Our concern, however, is that by the very appearance and size of the monument in such a prominent position on the campus, with its five curved pillars representing the five branches of the military, it will be perceived by the typical visitor or student as praising the military, military solutions to human conflict, and the wars fought by the veterans of SMU. Is there any other way to honor those alumni who died in U.S. wars that would be less apt to be perceived as giving praise to war?

We hope that you and the Alumni Board will consider a moratorium on going forward with this project, so that there might be some time to reflect on and look at alternatives. Thank you for your consideration.

Have a blessed Christmas.

Sincerely,

Mary Farrell James Allaire (Class of 1964) Barbara Allaire

Cc: Dr. Jeffrey Highland, University Provost

Meg Richtman, Alumni Director

About the Saint Mary's University Veterans Memorial Project

2007-12-11T11:29:00.000-08:00

(Photos used with permission. You can see the university's official memorial website here, and read letters about the memorial at the Saint Mary's University Voices on the Veterans Memorial home page.)

Since 2003, the Saint Mary’s University Alumni Association has been working to raise about $100,000 to build a Veterans Memorial on the Winona campus. The memorial was initially meant to honor the 33 Saint Mary’s University students and alumni who died while fighting in World War II. At some point during the planning process, it was decided that the memorial should honor all students and alumni who have been part of the U.S. military. The funds necessary to build the memorial have come from charitable donations to the Saint Mary’s University Alumni Association Board.

In a Nov. 20 memo, the SMU Cabinet and Brother Chancellor Louis DeThomasis approved groundbreaking on the memorial for spring of 2003, with a dedication ceremony tentatively planned for Homecoming, June 13-15. The memorial is to be located on the path between the plaza and Hillside Hall, north of Gostomski Fieldhouse; the site is near the former site of the barracks that housed young men training to be officers in the Navy V-12 Program from 1943 to 1946.

The original memorial design incorporated numerous elements. The most prominent feature of the original memorial design was five arches representing the five branches of the military. According to the Nov. 20 memo, the memorial was also to feature an honor roll of alumni who have died in the military; identification of the site of the V-12 program barracks; the plaque that was presented to Saint Mary’s College after World War II by the Secretary of the Navy in recognition of the V-12 program (displayed in the west entrance of Saint Mary’s Hall for many years); and a “dedication to all those who have served in the armed forces.” The memorial was designed in such a way that, on Nov. 11 (the traditional date for Veterans Day), a beam of light would fall on the honor roll of alumni who have died while in the military. Bricks inscribed with the names of veterans honored by those who donated more than $250 to the project will line the walkways leading up the memorial. A memorial plaque will read: “Lord, may your perpetual light shine upon them.” According to Mr. Tim Tyre, a member of the Alumni Association Board, the memorial “is a quiet, respectful way of saying thank you” to those who died while in the U.S. military.

A letter expressing concern about the memorial was signed by about 30 members of the faculty in the spring of 2006. That letter precipitated a meeting between two faculty members and then-president Brother Craig Franz over the summer. Ultimately, the concerns were brought to the alumni board, which opted to continue supporting the project. In the fall of 2006, Brother Craig gave permission for the project to go ahead provided that the necessary funds could be raised within a year.

In the fall of 2007 the Alumni Association Board sent out a fundraising letter to some, but not all, SMU alumni. That letter, which presented participation in the military as an exemplar of the Lasallian ideal of service, prompted some alumni, faculty, and students to write letters of concern to Brother Chancellor Louis DeThomasis and the Alumni Association Board.

Subsequently, Brother DeThomasis and other university staff held several meetings with concerned alumni and students, as well as a campus forum to share information and thoughts about the memorial. On February 9, 2008, the Board of Trustees discussed the concerns that had been raised and voted to redesign the memorial in an attempt to address some of those concerns while keeping the construction and dedication of the memorial on schedule.

The redesigned memorial retains certain elements of the original design, but removes the five arches representing the five branches of the military, replacing them with a glass panel inscribed with an olive branch. The panel reads, "Peace through service"; its base says "Veterans Memorial." One of five small pillars bears a plaque with words from the Catechism of the Catholic Church regarding military service. A full description of the revised design can be found at the University website.

The concerns that people have voiced about the memorial range so widely that no attempt is made here to summarize them. Rather, some of their letters will be posted on this site; they speak for themselves. Read those letters at the Saint Mary's University Voices on the Veterans Memorial home page, and then submit your own letter.

How to Voice Your Concerns About the Veterans Memorial

2007-12-10T10:28:00.000-08:00

If you want to express your concern about the proposed veterans memorial, write a letter to the university and its alumni board, and send a copy of your letter to this blog. Here's how:

Brother Louis DeThomasis, FSC, Ph.D.
Chancellor
Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota
700 Terrace Heights #30
Winona, MN 55987-1399
507-457-1566 (Fax)
LDETHOMA [at] smumn.edu

You can write to the SMU Alumni Board, Dr. John Forrette, President, Saint Mary's Alumni Board; William Herzog, President, Alumni Association; and Timothy Tyre, Alumni Board Member and Chariperson, Veterans' Memorial Project at the following address:
Office of Alumni Relations
Saint Mary's University of Minnesota
700 Terrace Heights #21
Winona, MN 55987
507-457-6697 (fax)
alumni [at] smumn.edu

You can send a copy of your letter to this blog by e-mailing it to:

The subject line of your e-mail will become the title of the post. All letters must be signed to be included. Letters will be posted after they have been reviewed in order to avoid spam and inappropriate content.