I was not expecting that at all! When you said, “rumors of crazy stuff going on”, I figured you meant really wild parties, lots of alcohol, lots of sex. Not forced Mass attendance, no dating, and complete control. I’m glad they seem to be changing too!

The college I attended (Mount St. Mary’s University MD) is sort of the opposite these days. It had through the 80’s and 90’s a reputation as a major party school, but in recent years has really started to turn around, and is on the Cardinal Newman list now! It makes me happy as an alum, but also makes me wish I had been there when most of that stuff was happening.

You are absolutely right. Good Catholic colleges are few and far between.

Thank your sister for sharing all of this.  I’ve heard of all those same situations and, despite its adherence to the Church I crossed it off my list of colleges my kids would even like much less attend!

The only questions not asked that I would want to know about is the rumor/truth that they prohibited music in a student’s room including ‘Christian’ music as well as a very strict dress code.  I can understand wanting to prevent noisy dorms that prevent anything more than a rock concert but all music??

The same is true in regard to dress codes.  I agree that requiring a professional look in classes aids in a professional attitude towards an education, but too restrictive goes into personal freedom and maturity.  I was told that girls could not even wear shorts in their own rooms.  Any way of finding out about that?

Thank your sister for sharing all of this.  I’ve heard of all those same situations and, despite its adherence to the Church I crossed it off my list of colleges my kids would even like much less attend!

The only questions not asked that I would want to know about is the rumor/truth that they prohibited music in a student’s room including ‘Christian’ music as well as a very strict dress code.  I can understand wanting to prevent noisy dorms or obviously inappropriate lyrics, etc. but all music??

The same is true in regard to dress codes.  I agree that requiring a professional look in classes aids in a professional attitude towards an education, but too restrictive goes into personal freedom and maturity.  I was told that girls could not even wear shorts in their own rooms.  Any way of finding out about that?

It seems as if The College, while trying to correct the problems of the past has forfeited the one thing that made it unique in the past: an integrated community life. When you went to Magdalen you signed on to live in community. And some of the required activities were part of that. That was one of the great lessons I learned there. Especially in a society which doesn’t understand what freedom is, what self-donation is, and what it means to be a part of a community bigger than yourself is. Now community is optional which I guess is great training for the students to live in our culture in which we are not expected to give ourselves to anything and everything is optional. This disintegration of community life is complete, then, when the community isn’t even expected to gather in the midst of the Lord at the Eucharistic banquet. I’m happy Magdalen has fixed it’s problematic issues but am greatly saddened that it no longer teaches it’s students the greatest lesson - how to be part of a community.

@RMW:  the new administration seems very open and eager to spread the news about the reforms, so I’m sure you would get good information by contacting them through their website.

.

@Former Student:  As I said, I don’t have any direct experience with Magdalen (new or old), but I did attend another Catholic college which had none of the draconian rules of the old Magdalen, but which did have an incredibly tight-knit community (I’m close friends with many of my classmates from 15+ years ago, married another, and have a good relationship with my former professors).  There is such a thing as building community without making it mandatory!  I don’t want to gossip, but I have direct knowledge of several people who were driven away from the Church specifically because of the rules at the old Magdalen.

Tim Van Damm’s email address is TVanDamm@Magdalen.edu . Ask him your questions! The directness with which he answered mine impressed me.

I don’t know much about Magdalen (old or new), except for the mailings they send and the ads they run.  For several years, those materials were rife with typos and common grammatical errors.  I am not nitpicking: the mistakes were widespread.  I was mortified on their behalf.  (One newsletter memorably reported the senior class hosted a medievil [sic] feast: one ad used “it’s” when they should have used “its.”)  It’s hard to take seriously the claims of academic rigor when the writing is so bad.  If proofreading and basic writing skills are part of their “intellectual renewal,” praise the Lord!

Glad to hear they are making these changes!

Three of my siblings graduated from Magdalen and I visited them there a few times. The young people attending seemed to be, on the whole, a really nice bunch but some of the rules were ridiculous:

If you received a care package from home its food contents had to go in a communal bin outside the door of the dorm for all to share.

Phones were in booths in the rec center and there wasn’t a way to get a hold of anyone outside of the hours when the rec center was occupied, someone was there to answer the phone and the person you were trying to reach was in the rec center (so almost impossible).

Gals weren’t allowed to walk outside the boy’s dorm because they thought the guys would have impure thoughts.

If your GPA fell below a certain level your driving privileges were taken away and no freshman was allowed to drive except to campus at the beginning of the year and away for holidays. They also kept all the student’s car keys under lock and key in an office and they had to be signed out.

Seating was assigned at each meal with a person who would stand at the end of the food line and point to the table you were supposed to sit at. This was one of the measures to discourage exclusive friendships.

My (very modest) sister had an incident where they told her she couldn’t wear ribbed turtlenecks anymore because it highlighted her slim figure and could make the other girl’s jealous or insecure.

One of my brothers was forced to repeat freshman year, not because his grades were sub par but because the faculty did not feel he had been “formed” enough (aka fallen into line with the way Magdalen wants everyone to act/talk/etc.) and making people repeat was a fairly frequent occurrence.

A well respected PhD in the homeschooling community walked me through the Catholic college choices when I was 17 and she told me to look at all of Magdalen’s literature and think “Catholic Boot Camp” and I would see it in a whole new light. At one point I got a hold of the student handbook and it was very condescending and restrictive. Most notably the faculty stated that they saw themselves as being “in loco parentis” to the students..all of whom (one would assume) are at least 17, if not 18 and no longer legally children in need of an overbearing parent. Of course I won’t even get into the extremely limited worldview and the way that Catholic cheer-leading and pulling the “Jesus card” took precedence over intellectual rigor.

And just to show how petty it could get the gents were not allowed to have their hair go past their ears which meant that they all had to have their necks shaved ridiculously high in the back.

When children are toddlers, they can’t understand right and wrong, so they have to be told what to do. On the other end of the spectrum, a fully mature adult’s freedom and moral obligation are integrated into one movement of the heart. What about in between? The ideal is that as a child grows, he does what it right more and more out of freedom, and less and less out of compulsion. The parents’ job is to teach and show what is right, and then to gradually ease off the reins—as much as the child allows them to—so that the child can embrace his own freedom. When he’s making all his own decisions, he’ll be able to do it right.
~
Some of the examples Katharine gives, above, could be appropriate ways to treat a young child. We insist that four-year-olds share their toys. We don’t give ten-year-olds a choice about whether they go to Mass. We might tell a 12-year-old that she has to invite the neighbor’s daughter to her birthday party.
~
But this is college. These are people for whom the next stage is complete independence. I like this, from Tim Van Damm above: “if students can’t learn to date in a healthy, chaste way, in line with the Catholic Faith in an environment like Magdalen, where are they going to learn to do so?” A good Catholic college should be a place where there is enough Catholic community to make the practice of virtue easier—but enough freedom to make it real virtue.

And I thought my friend who went there was exaggerating when she said they inspected your drawers (the ones that hold the clothes, not the other ones, heh…)

And is there still a long-skirts rule?  Or can the girls wear jeans?  That, to me, is a deal-breaker.

@Former Student

To many outsiders, it is almost impossible to understand how anyone could mourn the passing of a system (such as was in place at old Magdalen) that violated the freedom of students for many years.  And yet there are those who mourn.

This is what made the old system so insidious.  For many of those who embraced it, the “community” looked and felt real.  Genuine friendships were formed within it.  Many students found faith or had their faith strengthened.  And yet it was not authentic community: authentic community cannot be based on coercion.  It also cannot be based on the treatment of young adults as children.  The friendships and faith that were found in the old system developed in spite of that system, not because of it.  Indeed, if true community had been cultivated, much more could have been achieved.

For many students, the true nature of the system was immediately apparent and they left after a few days, weeks, or months.  For others, it did not become apparent until many years after graduation, as they began to raise their own children or as they encountered true community in other places.

The old system is dead.  The ground has been cleared and a new edifice is being built.  Establishing a truly Catholic community takes time, but it will (Deo volente) flourish at the College of Saint Mary Magdalen.

As is the case with virtually every human institution, Magdalen has made mistakes in the past. However, I invite, with open arms, anyone interested to come and see, first-hand, the spiritual vitality, respect for persons, joy, beauty and academic seriousness that is Magdalen today.

@ Former Student and Simcha:
I don’t think a community has to have _nothing_ mandatory in order to be healthy.  My experience at Thomas More in NH was that the close-knit community was the result of, among several other things, certain mandatory communal experiences; for instance, all meals in common, all students following the same humanities curriculum (and until a couple of years ago, all 4 classes taking the same humanities class together), and students doing a minimal amount of (unpaid) work to maintain the campus and prepare for events.  I do think that the former Magdalen went way too far, both with the number and the kind of things required; for instance, requiring Mass attendance isn’t just community-building, it impinges on religious freedom.  But I do think that some small mandatory experiences go a long way towards building a community.  I guess the difference is that the TMC requirements were to encourage intellectual community and stewardship of the college, whereas the Magdalen requirements were to form the students’ spiritual and personal lives.

Wow.  I’d heard some rumors, but I didn’t realize it was that bad….  The funny thing is, if we saw a protestant group with rules like these, we’d be shouting “CRAZY CULT” from the rooftops…..

And, for the record, my kids aren’t college aged yet, but the PAST history of insanity is probably enough to make me cross Magdelen off their lists.

Simcha and Abigail,

Thank you for bringing Magdalen past and present to light and thank you for your commitment to authentic Catholic education.  This post has prompted some questions so I thought I’d answer the questions that have arisen thus far.  If there are more questions that individuals have, I’m happy to answer them directly.  All of the policies discussed below will be in this year’s student handbook.  I can be reached via email at tvandamm@magdalen.edu or via phone at 603.456.2656. 

Question:  Are students prohibited from playing music (including Christian music) in their rooms/dorms?

Answer:  Students are not prohibited from playing music in their rooms/dorms.  In the past students were not permitted to play Christian Rock, etc. unless given special permission.  Today, Magdalen’s standard for music in and out of the dorms is the same as it is for student life in general which is to use common sense and to listen to music which doesn’t lead to sin i.e. rated PG. 

In short, if a student is listening to something that he/she would feel uncomfortable listening to in front of Cardinal O’Malley or someone of the like, then he/she probably shouldn’t be listening to it.

Question:  “I was told that girls could not even wear shorts in their own rooms.  Any way of finding out about that?”

Answer:  Women can wear shorts in their own rooms and in other areas on campus when they are not in class.  When attending classes men and women have to dress in a professional manner.

Magdalen’s standard is one of modesty.  If one of our students is dressing in a way that is not in line with standards of modesty, this will be addressed by a member of our student life staff.  We are working to promote virtuous living and sometimes students who are still maturing as adults need some guidance in areas like modesty.  Our students have started a Theology of the Body group which is one of the many initiatives being taken to help students grow in faith and virtue.  Outside of class, students may dress casually.

Question:  If you receive a care package from home do you have to put the contents in a communal bin outside of the door of the dorm for all to share?

Answer:  Students are not required to share the contents of care packages or anything else which is their personal property.  We encourage true Christian charity i.e. sharing or giving to those in need but this is not mandated.  If it were mandated, it wouldn’t be true Christian charity.

Question:  Are there any restrictions on students using payphones, cell phones, etc?

Answer:  Students have access to the campus phones during the hours the St. Paul’s Multipurpose Building is open (usually till about Midnight/1:00 AM).  Most of our students have cell phones.  For obvious reasons, cell phones are not used in class or Mass.

Comment:  “Gals weren’t allowed to walk outside the boy’s dorm because they thought the guys would have impure thoughts.”

Answer:  By that standard women and men shouldn’t interact at all.  There is no inter-visitation in our dorms which we believe is a prudent policy but to mandate that women would not be able to walk in front of the men’s dorms is ridiculous.

Comment:  “If your GPA fell below a certain level your driving privileges were taken away and no freshman was allowed to drive except to campus at the beginning of the year and away from holidays.  They also kept all the student’s car keys under lock and key in an office and they had to be signed out.”

Answer:  Driving privileges and GPA are not tied together in any way, shape, or form. 
Freshmen are allowed to drive if they have a car and their keys are not taken from them.  When students leave campus they do have to sign out but this is to ensure the students safety and security, not to control them.  We have had instances where students went for hikes, etc. and got lost in the woods.  This policy is very helpful in instances like that.

Question:  Is there assigned seating at meals?  Was this ever the case?

Answer:  Sadly there was a time when students were told where to sit and who to sit with at meals.  This was explained as a way of preventing cliques.  Again, forcing students to sit with one another is not encouraging true Christian charity.  Students can sit wherever they like and with whomever they like at meals. 

Comment:  One of my brothers was forced to repeat freshman year, not because his grades were sub par but because the faculty did not feel he had been “formed” enough (i.e. fallen into line with the way Magdalen wants everyone to act/talk/etc.) and making people repeat was a fairly frequent occurrence.

Answer:  On behalf of Magdalen, I apologize to your brother for what he endured.  Unfortunately we can’t change the past but rest assured, students are not and will not be forced to repeat courses based on lack of “formation.”  Our faculty and staff work tirelessly to help students work through the program (which is rigorous) to succeed academically and to graduate on time. 

Question:  Do your faculty and staff view themselves “in loco parentis” (acting in place of your students’ parents?)

Answer:  No.  Our faculty and staff view themselves as trained professionals dedicated to the education of our students.  Our faculty and Catholic staff take an Oath of Fidelity to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church and as such commit to living lives in line with the teachings of the Church.  We work to help our students grow in virtue both in and out of the classroom but we know that we can never take the place of a parent.  Our students are young adults who still need guidance but who need to be treated according to their state of life (which is not childhood). 

Question:  Is there a rule governing how long men’s hair can be?

Answer:  Again, this was the case in the past.  This is not a rule today.

Question:  Are students drawers ever inspected to ensure proper folding of clothes, etc?

Answer:  No.  There are no rules determining how to fold clothes, etc. and we respect our students’ right to privacy. 

Comment: And, for the record, my kids aren’t college aged yet, but the PAST history of insanity is probably enough to make me cross Magdalen off their lists.

Answer:  There have been many instances of colleges who have histories of a secular culture (Benedictine College, Belmont Abbey, & Franciscan University of Steubenville to name a few) who have successfully transitioned to a college rooted in the Catholic Faith and focused on forming students in an authentically Catholic, healthy way.  These schools were able to make the transition because parents and students believed that they were serious about their new approach and gave them a second chance. 

I ask that you take a second look at Magdalen, set aside the past, and make your judgment based on who we are today, not on what happened at the institution in the past.  Authentically Catholic colleges are few and far between and we need your help if we have any hope of being successful in our aspirations of building an authentically Catholic institution for the greater glory of God. 

In Jesus & Mary,

Tim Van Damm, VP of Advancement & Admissions
The College of Saint Mary Magdalen

There is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, no secret that will not be known. – Luke 12:2

I still question the “modesty” issue. If you’ve spent any time at all on Catholic blogs , you know how many comments the modesty question elicits.  Can females wear pants?  Can students wear jeans in class? And do you have a hemline &/or neckline rule? Who decides what “modest” is or isn’t? Sure, students need to be dressed decently, but most Catholics can’t even decide what that is.

I had crossed Magdalen off my list of colleges to send my children to or even to recommend to others.  So happy to hear that it may be a possible choice in the near future.

I am a former student who went to Magdalen in the early 1990’s.  For years, I had major issues with what occurred at magdalen under John Meehan’s presidency.  I am also someone who has publicly posted that I felt Magdalen College was a cult.  I want to say that I am proud of Dr. Harne in his willingness to address the major, major issues that were present with Magdalens formation approach (again instituted by John Meehan and promoted by Jeffrey Karls, et at.).  I was a student who was subjected to manipulation, lies, etc. and forced to wear the baggiest clothing possible to hide the fact that i was female.  If John Meehan had access to burka’s, he would have absolutely made females were them.  I am encouraged by Dr. Harne’s transparency and it gives me hope that the changes are genuine.  I am willing to give magdalen a second chance in my appraisal, I think others should as well.  I do, however, still feel that any staff still present (Nicolosi, Karls) from the Meehan era need to be terminated.  I don’t believe they can ever overcome their indoctrination and embracing of the old magdalen.  Good luck to dr. harns.

Last time we had heard, Jeffrey Karls was going strong as President of Magdalen.  He had initiated all these changes.  We were surprised by the sudden change in leadership last February.  I am curious to know what caused this, especially since we had heard that he had let go of many of the old faculty last year.  Also, when will Magdalen have regional accreditation?

Thank you to all who have offered their words of support. 

The College is currently accredited nationally and has begun the application process for regional accreditation.  (There was a resistance to regional accreditation under the old regime.) 

Within the last few years some significant steps were taken to reform the old system, but these did not address the deeper problems or the full extent of the college’s history.  We are seeking to do this now.  When the former president chose to step down in February, those in leadership at the College saw the opportunity to bring what had been begun to completion.  (This included a willingness to address publicly the problems of the past).  Earlier efforts to change the College could be described best as reform.  In February, the College was refounded. 

The original founders of the College aimed to educate the whole person and we remain committed to this objective.  As has been stated above, something went wrong in the attempts to achieve this goal.  The current leadership of the College is committed to building a Catholic institution that is thoroughly Catholic both in its ends and its means.

Regarding personnel changes at the college, only so much can be said in a forum such as this.  I can say that no one who held a leadership position in the old system will be working at the college this fall.  Those mentioned in the post above will not be there.  We have hired three new faculty members (who are currently listed on our website) and several new staff members (who will be added to the website soon). (http://www.magdalen.edu/about-us/faculty/)

For understandable reasons, we must address our past as an institution.  This process is at times discouraging and dispiriting.  What keeps us going each day is the hope that God will bless our efforts.  All who are at the College are seeking to serve Christ and his Church.  We have developed what we believe to be an unparalleled Catholic great books program and liberal arts curriculum.  We have a committed faculty and staff who have made enormous sacrifices personally and professionally to build anew the College of Saint Mary Magdalen.  And we have some of the best students on the planet. 

Since not every question can be answered and every issue addressed in this forum, I would encourage anyone interested in the refounding of the College to contact me at 603-456-2656.  We are hopeful and the source of our Hope will not fail us.  Please keep us in your prayers.

First, what is an “irregular child”? I believe in private property so if a person wants to create a college with strict or liberal policies/rules. God bless them. Let them do so. My comment is not to criticize the old or new Magdalen per se. In fact I found this article very enlightening. I’ve been researching catholic colleges for my child. I was told that St.Mary Magdalen had changed and was even more catholic. However, when I compared it to the other catholic college/universities I been researching I found little difference, other than a limited accreditation and less exposure. Boston College, Seton Hall, Thomas Aquinas, Christendom, Fordham college of liberal studies, etc. So I’m still wondering what are the significant catholic differences that would attract me St. Mary Magdalen?

The College of St. Mary Magdalen is a premiere Catholic Classical Liberal Arts College. The College offers a classical curriculum that is, I think, second to none. Students are steeped in the culture of the West and study the best works it has to offer. Theology is not an add-on but an essential part of the curriculum itself. The study of theology, which includes a careful study of the Patristics and Church documents, is deepened and broadened by the sharp study of philosophy. Art and Music, in both theory and practicum, are taught at the highest levels. At The College of St. Mary Magdalen, Dr. Ellie Wee, a renowned cellist, is the Musician in Residence. Also, work of local Artist will be featured on the campus as well.

Visit the website, www.magdalen.edu or 511 Kearsarge Mountain Road, Warner, NH 03278 and see for yourself.

The College of St. Mary Magdalen is a premiere Catholic Classical Liberal Arts College. The College offers a classical curriculum that is, I think, second to none. Students are steeped in the culture of the West and study the best works it has to offer. Theology is not an add-on but an essential part of the curriculum itself. The study of theology, which includes a careful study of the Patristics and Church documents, is deepened and broadened by the sharp study of philosophy. Art and Music, in both theory and practicum, are taught at the highest levels. At The College of St. Mary Magdalen, Dr. Ellie Wee, a renowned cellist, is the Musician in Residence. Also, work of local Artist will be featured on the campus as well.

Visit the College at magdalen.edu or 511 Kearsarge Mountain Road Warner, NH.

It is amazing to read all of these posts from insiders/outsiders, and even current staff regarding the strictness of the “former” Magdalen College. What everyone fails to mention is that people chose of their own free will to attend MC. They knew what they were getting into. Now, some may argue the rules, expectations, etc… were overboard and severe, but nonetheless they chose it! Would you tell your boss that you don’t want to adhere to their dress code,computer use policy, or even work schedule? Imagine, if a member of the Armed Forces told their commander…I don’t want to get up at 4 in the morning for drills…this place is a “cult”, you are infringing on my “freedom”! Of course it sounds ridiculous…because it is! Most companies require you to sign off that you agree to the rules/regulations of the company. MC had the same policy. Students were asked to read and sign the Student Handbook. This is called “life” it has expectations all the time. So, if you can’t deal with it you will have a very hard time as a student, employee, priest, husband, wife, etc…  People who didn’t like MC didn’t choose MC for college, or they left. They used their own Free Will! Advice for the current administration of MC…don’t keep apologizing for the past, that just makes you look weak! Press forward and make the changes you are going to make. Then let intelligent, capable people make their own decisions!

I am in agreement with “Former Student.”  Some keep bringing up this issue about “coercion.”  Simply, when students agreed to go to school there, they knew what they were getting into.  It was called formation, and though I didn’t always like it, I knew it was my own choice to attend the college.  If I didn’t appreciate it then, I certainly do now.  A lot of “rumors” are only partly true or not at all.  There was never a time, that I know of, that girls couldn’t wear shorts, especially in their own rooms.  I don’t recall a time that gentlemen had their hair cut so high in the back that it looked strange, though they did have to be clean cut and shaven.  When food was not allowed in dorms, students were allowed to put it in a box outside the dorm, with their name on it.  Later, students were allowed to bring food into certain parts of the dorm.  Dating was not allowed except for when two students approached the Dean of Students or president and asked for permission.  Then, it could be permitted.  The number of couples who attended Magdalen and later got married will show that this was an effective practice.  Students couldn’t listen to music, but one reason for this was that we were encouraged to make our own music or interact with each other in other ways.  And there was plenty of making our own music, forming closer and deeper friendships all the while.  I have to wonder how many wonderful things have been lost because students are now not “coerced.”  Anyway, the list goes on.  Neither then nor now do I think that I was being “coerced.”  Also, I do realize the Magdalen I attended was not perfect, and I think some of the changes are probably good.  However, although past students who were bitter about the school’s practices felt the need to spread their grievances, this was not the case for the majority of students, at least in my experience.  So now I’m left with the same question as “confused” above: If these practices that made Magdalen different are taken away, what is left at Magdalen that makes it more attractive than any other Catholic College?

I never understood the “yeah, but it was their choice to go there!” argument. When secular colleges have co-ed dorms and Planned Parenthood rallies, do Catholics shrug and say, “Well, it’s what you signed up for”?  No, you say, “Something’s wrong here” and you work against it.  Like Mark Shea says, consent is not the sole criterion of the good!

So, the former MC and it’s views of formation is equivalent to Planned Parenthood? Your argument would tell the “cradle catholics” to “work against” the Catholic Church to change it? They also think the Catholic Church is a cult and infringes on freedom.

THEM’S SOME SHARP CRITICAL READING SKILLS YOU GOT FORMER STUDENT. YUP, YOUR OLD MC EDUCATION IS SURE SERVING YOU WELL!

Students certainly did not know what they were getting into!  My son obeyed every rule at Magdalen for two years.  When it was time to reapply after sophomore year, he was told that he couldn’t come back.  They had no reason to give him.  They wanted him out because he was smart.  He had read Mulieris Dignitatem and other encyclicals and wouldn’t go along with the Magdalen view of women.  He passed out copies of the encyclical to other students and for this he had to be let go.  He ended up paying for five years of college, instead of four because his courses wouldn’t all transfer to his new college.  I have felt for years that this was an extreme injustice.  I could go on and on with more horror stories from his two years there, but I can feel my blood pressure rising, just like it does every time I remember what he and our whole family went through.

@Former Student - The Alligator is right, my friend.  If you learned logic at Bad Old Magdalen, I’m glad the academics are improving, too.  You might want to take a post-grad course in punctuation, as well, since you’ve picked up a nasty habit of putting words in quotation marks even when you’re not quoting anyone.  My my, the Old Magdalen is looking worse and worse.

.

In your original post, you argued that students were free to leave the school if they didn’t like the rules.  My point is:  that’s the best you can come up with—it was consensual?  If the rules are poor, which it seems that they were in the Old Magdalen, then they should be changed. No idea what that has to do with “working against the Church to change it.”  Magdalen isn’t and never was the Church.

@Former Student:  sorry, I got a little overheated there. It was really the phantom quotation marks that bothered me.  I say plenty of stupid things all by myself, without people making up stuff and attributing it to me.

OK, let me try this again. You said the following: If the rules are poor, which it seems that they were in the Old Magdalen, then they should be changed.
You have determined from a few posts on this page that the rules at the Old Magdalen were poor. My only point is that that seems like a pretty illogical conclusion or argument.
If I believed every blog posting about how poor the rules of the Catholic Church are, would I simply conclude that the rules should be changed?

@Former Student:  Thanks for clarifying.  I’m not basing my judgment on “a few posts on this page,” though - I’m basing it on what the new administration says about what the rules were (and how they are improving them), and on what I heard directly from former Magdalen students from over a decade ago (including a family member). 

.

Your analogy still doesn’t hold up anyway.  Someone who wants to change the laws of the Church, but who is ill-informed, is simply an ill-informed person.  You weren’t arguing that I was ill-informed about Magdalen, though—you were arguing that what I thought was bad was actually good.  We can certainly disagree about whether the rules were good or bad, but I don’t see how you can say that I think they’re bad simply because I’m ill-informed.

A student’s growth, formation and development towards a fully integrated life does not end at age 18.  Higher education is meant to continue the growth of virtue as well as skills. This of course involves discipline. This discipline is a universal principle in Catholic teaching. How else does one learn to become a noble and selfless member of society and a saint. High school graduates, especially today, don’t arrive at college as fully integrated and responsible individuals.
One mom commented here that children need freedoms at this time of life.
As I read it here, the biggest concerns from some of the students; is to be able to wear jeans and shorts, especially in front of the boys if they want to; to miss Mass and prayers if they don’t want to go; to listen to “Christian” and other music whenever they want to; and wherever they want to; not to have scheduled study periods; to date and party whenever they want to; to spend time with the people they prefer, and not have to mix with people they don’t want to at dinner and so forth.
Folks, does this really sound like these students have reached a level of maturity that is ready for a prudent discipline of life? And how does missing Mass, wearing shorts and jeans etc make them more responsible? Shouldn’t the real quetion be, what more can I do?  There is not one comment, even by the staff or president in this thread that addresses a high level of expectation. Yes, high level of well integrated expectation! Rather these complaints and new rules seem to be confusing true freedom with a secular notion of ‘anything goes’.
Check out Wyoming Catholic College. Poor kids, they are allowed no cell phones, personal use of the Internet, and other such distractions with the purpose of growing a a broader experience of love of neighbor and leadership skills encouraged by a genuine dicisplined approach involving strict norms and a serious outdoor leadership program that demands a high degree of responsibility for the good of others.  EWTN interviewed them. The students are joyful and talked about higher level classical music, the schola, and other intellectual joys as well as the Faith and the virtues that this program was teaching them.
So I am sorry but you guys look just plain silly in your “new” appoach to adding laxity to your college program. After watching the 2 hours piece on Wyoming Catholic College I felt I had to comment on this sad new state of affairs as expressed in this post. Magdalen needs our prayers.

I did not argue that just because the students agreed to go there, that it made the rules all right.  My argument, though maybe not stated very clearly, was that it’s wrong to claim “coercion” when you get what you sign up for.  I could have added - “unless the rules are wrong, immoral or go against nature,” and that would have clarified my point more.  The old rules of Magdalen were, in my opinion, very good.  Was the school meant for everyone?  No, but for those for whom it was meant enjoyed a solid education and formation.  Going to daily Mass is a good thing, and students knew that Mass attendance was expected of them when they applied to attend the college.  I don’t see the problem here!  As a former student who appreciated the education I received there, it does bother me a bit when people base their opinions of the college on rumors and disgruntled students.  Marie Teresa - The funny thing is, the more I hear about Wyoming Catholic College, the more I think, “That sounds like the Magdalen a went to!”

What’s a “slightly irregular child”?

@Former Student:  Okay, fair enough.  It’s not as if mandatory Mass attendance was the main problem, though, my goodness.  It’s also not as if the rules were simply inappropriate for certain types of people:  it was that they actually did damage, drove people away from the Church.  From what I’ve heard described, some of the rules WERE immoral: some students, especially the girls, were treated unjustly.  It seems that you didn’t suffer from that treatment, but many people truly did.  Just because someone’s disgruntled doesn’t mean they’re lying.

Marie Teresa, I agree with you.  At the same time, I think colleges should strive for a balance between too much control and laxity, with the students’ best interests in mind. 
//
Also, it’s best for students to look into a college first and make sure they agree with the rules and culture of the college.  Obviously, those who went to Wyoming C. C. chose what works for them.  That’s why they are growing joyfully in their faith and knowledge.  Parents who coerce their kids into entering a college that is not a great fit for them will only produce unhappy students and faculty.  If such a student entered Wyoming C. C., we would hear more complaints.  Sounds like a number of students, who were not a good fit for the school, were forced to attend Magdalen in the past. 
//
I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve also heard the rumor that, because of low enrollment, Magdalen has had to lower its standards and accept just any student in the past—whether they were a good fit or not.  Perhaps that’s one of the reasons why they have these student complaints.

I never claimed or even implied that disgruntled students were lying.  For example, the mother of a former student who comments above - I can’t speak to her situation, knowing nothing about it.  All I do know is that it doesn’t sound familiar.  I never experienced anything like that at Magdalen, and don’t personally know anyone who did.  My complaint, if you want to call it that, is that it seems like people are forming opinions based on what a few disgruntled students have said.  I can speak of my own experience, which was very good, and also point you towards MANY graduates who are very happy with their education and formation.  Not just a few, very many.  And these are normal, successful people who have done well “in the world” so to speak.  This is only a guess, but I do have to wonder if those who claim to have been driven from the Church because of Magdalen were really driven by other causes and just find it convenient to blame it on the college.  In any case, what are the rules that were so wrong and immoral?  I haven’t seen any examples of such rules so far.

When I went to Magdalen, I certainly didn’t know what I was getting into initially.  The insidiousness of the approach of the administration was almost a thing of beauty.  You would be told you had a choice - do it or leave.  The catch was the implication - if you didn’t do it (conform), the you were: a. weak, b. a bad person incapable of overcoming your sinful (of the flesh) nature, c. your parents would be totally disappointed in you.  If you were a person like me, you didn’t want to fail.  You wanted to be good.  The administration would always talk about an evil “sub culture” of non compliant students that would be forced out, an evil cadre of students steeped in stubborness and sin, more concerned about their feelings and own personhood than the good of Magdalen.  When I went, we had to clean the president’s office and in that office, I saw sheets and sheets of this line written thousands of times “I will never understand any of what I read or hear in class, no matter how hard I try”.  The person who wrote that was my roomate and I remember her being in tears for a week.  The president decided to teach her to accept that she was too dumb to understand the materials presented.  They let her attend for four years and pay tuition but she didn’t even “graduate”.  She got a certificate of attendance.  I don’t know how that helps someone be a better catholic or better formed.  For years, I prayed for a breast reduction because I had been told that the way God made me put boys in the occasion of sin.  I was hardly allowed to wear anything unless it was large large large.  I won’t go into it here, but I know from first hand experience, the level of dishonesty the top administration engaged in.  The president used his daughter to garner information, manipulate and spread deceit.  Also, in all prior interviews, the former president outright lied about students being permitted to listen to music, how clothing had to be folded, etc.  The culture of lies and manipulation that was present in the 1980
s-1990’s is not the “figment of imagination of a few disgruntled students.  It’s a lot of students.  Being forced to go to church and scripture readings will never make you a better catholic.  Ever.

Marie Teresa, you expressed my sentiments as well, in a clear and concise manner.  As a former Magdalen College graduate, and as someone who has been in close contact with current students and employees recently, I have great concern for the way that the current administration is merely reacting to hearsay, rather than personal experiences of what Magdalen College was.  As many might not know, Dr. Harne only joined Magdalen 2 years ago, with no previous history with the college.  And Tim Van Damm joined only a year and a half ago.  Dr. Discher joined even more recently. For Dr. Harne to claim that the college violated student’s personal freedom, was “so insidious” (definition: entrapment, treacherous or deceitful), and was “not an authentic community”, is verging on slander.  If this College is as terrible as these men claim, why, I ask, did they choose to become employees in the old regime?
  Lastly, on a personal note, I have to argue Dr. Harne’s statement: “The friendships and faith that were found in the old system developed in spite of that system, not because of it.” My husband and I met at Magdalen, developed a true friendship at Magdalen in a chaste manner, and are now married, and are raising our children.  I credit our strong relationship and our faith to the very fact that we went to Magdalen College, not in spite of it.  I take offense that he so boldly claims this, yet never experienced the joyful community, centered on the Eucharist, which myself and all of my close friends from my Magdalen days experienced.
  Yet, I have personally spoken to several current students, under the new regime that are saddened by the changes and claim, in their very words, that it is no longer a “joyfully Catholic College”.  This concerns me.

I think if either Mrs. Fisher or someone else could give examples of unjust rules, it might further the case of those who have something or somewhat against the old Magdalen.  What was unjust about the rules, and what was particularly unjust to women about the rules?  Ms. Biros’ anecdote above doesn’t speak to Magdalen’s rules, unless she is trying to say that there was a rule against having too large a breast size.  However, I think she is simply relating an experience, an undesirable one to be sure, that she had at Magdalen.  Her anecdote easily speaks to one’s emotions, but is not a good argument in itself against the school’s policies and rules.  Are we to believe, for instance, that no similar bad experiences were had or could be had by someone who attended Thomas More College, or Christendom College, or Notre Dame University?  If we are going simply by anecdotal evidence, then I can say that I have met many Magdalen students, none of which have expressed any regrets about their education, or experience otherwise, there.

Actually, to respond to buckinky, I was not allowed to wear specific clothing, specific types of clothing and was advised on the way to walk.  I was also not permitted to wear heels.  Clothing was required to be modest, something I have not problem with, but the rules varied on how one’s figure was.  Other rules included how to fold clothing, drawer searches and a rule against sharing clothes (unless you were related). My friends and I were not permitted to sit with each other.  A staff member would assign us tables as it was against the rules to spend to much time with one person (male or female).  I had a very good friend and we were not allowed to hang out together and other students were encouraged to tell us we were “cliquey”, not christian because we had a best friendship, etc.  Students had to do campus service, which I also didn’t have a problem with.  However, students would have to do the same job over and over again until it was arbitrarily ruled it had passed muster.  Leaving a rock in the grass would mean you had to re-rake until you got it right. For the record, I went to Christendom after Magdalen and it wasn’t until I went there that I understood what it was to have a catholic education.  The happiest time in my life was at christendom.  My other friends ended up at Thomas Moore and they felt the same way.  Also, at the time, one could only call home at certain times of the day and all phones were in one centrally located area.  No radios, etc.  I am most bothered by John Meehan’s and most particularly Jefferey Karls’ ability to lie completely and still claim to be catholic.  I probably have the old handbook.  IF you want a blow by blow reading of the “rules”, I would be more than happy to help you out.

Thanks Mary, my wife went to Magdalen so I already have a copy of the rules.  Reading your commentary, I am even less convinced that the old Magdalen was such a bad place, but you did succeed in convincing me that you didn’t belong there.

You’re entitled to your opinion.  I am merely stating facts.  You are right, I didn’t belong at a cult, but at a school that embraced a joyful catholic experience.  Thankfully the new administration is acknowledging the past mistakes and moving forward. I am proud of Dr. Harne for having the courage to address the serious issues that were present at Magdalen to make it a truly Catholic (and not Jansenist) college.  I am sorry you have to personally attack someone (by implication) because their voice disagrees with yours.  I will certainly keep you in my prayers.

Above, “Mother of a former student” said that her son “had read Mulieris Dignitatem and other encyclicals and wouldn’t go along with the Magdalen view of women.”  This is another assertion that needs concrete demonstration if it is to be believed.  What is, or was, the “Magdalen view of women?”  It was, judging by the context in which the author put the comment, unfair or unjust to women.  How so?

I attended Magdalen a long time ago.  When I attended, Mass was not mandatory, the curriculum was still being settled and lacked unity, there was a no dating policy which I attempted to break but also supported (who cares about rules when you have a crush on a pretty girl, but afterwards, it was good to be able to be friends with all the women in my class).  There was no rock music and no drinking on campus rules:  they were broken at times, but I also appreciated them.  But there was enough openness that you could discuss any rule or incident and philosohical reasons were given for the college’s policies.  I studied in the student lounge, because I was smart and had good concentration and wanted to spend time with fellow students and other students who had poor concentration studied in the dorm with “study club” rules which I thought a bit extreme.  A fovorite memory of mine was the night the whole class broke curfew and snuck out to Hebert hall to write term papers all night.  We had all procrastinated.  The Dean of Students came, said he just wanted to be sure we really were writing, and then told us he was going to bed:  please behave.
I do not think George Harne or Tim Van DAmm should speak of John Meehan and the former regime without spending some time with him.  Word’s used like “insidius” about John Meehan are slanderous. Mr. Meehan was always someone you could talk to.  He was always right, you were always wrong, and he was always fiesty:  but he actually listened and he did know more about life than I did.
In my opinion, rock music is bad for a person’s soul.  Michael Platt’s article is the best explanation of that.  I was able to convince a protestant friend that a no dating policy, properly implemented, would help the student life at New Brunswick Bilbe Institute.
One classmate of mine had become an alcoholic in just one year at regular University, and another was caught hiding beer in her toilet tank on campus and admitted, it beer was that important to her that should could not wait until night to go have a beer (she was over 21 by that time) she might have a drinking problem.  I have never had a drinking problem, but I think a no drinking policy is appropraite for a college.
I think that Magdalen was doomed to be “refounded” because of a lack of openness and agree that formation was taken to inappropriate extremes at times.  Also, the Socratic method and true dialogue slowly died away, also dooming the academic program.  But I find the “new way is good” “old way is evil” characterization demeaning to me and my classmates and other Magdalen friends.
When I was at Magdalen, a friend left the school because of the dating policy and went to Thomas More College.  He met a new girl at Thomas More and married her and I went to the wedding.  He was not a Magdalen supporter, but he did say, “It is strange to me that we can read Aristotle in class on Friday and extol temperance and then go on a booze cruise on Saturday.”
Through my years at Magdalen, people claimed they were being coerced, but upon investigation I found out that all they ever did was talk to you.  And Fr. Anlthony Bannon of the legionaires of Christ (who argued we should have mandatory mass attendence, while I still said no, mass should not be mandatory) said in observation, “I don’t agree with the educational philosophy of Magdalen, but one thing I have to admit about Magdalen graduates, they know they have a free will.” 
If you can’t see that Fr. Bannon was right, you don’t really understand the founding of Magdalen College.

YES, LC PRIESTS TRULY UNDERSTAND FREE WILL!

Very Long Time Ago, I recognize my husband from the “booze cruise” quote, but as often happens with old stories, you’ve got the details mixed up. It doesn’t matter. But my husband says I should tell the rest of the story, which is that at least one of the booze cruise students later noticed, and commented on, that very disconnect—and very consciously amended his life to conform to the great ideas he was studying. It was a beautiful thing to watch. He’s a priest now.
//
I also wanted to say that although I asked those questions of Tim Van Damm, I never meant to suggest that I disapprove in principle of all of those rules. I would send some—but not others—of my children to a school with mandatory Mass and rosary and even mandatory study times. I asked a wide range of questions in order to get a better understanding of what kind of school the new College is. I thought by seeing how the school puts its stated understanding of human freedom into practice, I could better understand what the administration meant—and how sincerely they meant it.

To Gary the Alligator,

Not sure what your comment means.
In my day, the Legion always had a reputation of being quite pushy with its own and with recruits.  One Magdalen Student I know left Magdalen because Magdalen was too soft and he wanted bigger and more challenges.  And, multiple friends warned me that legion priests would just tell eveyone they had a vocation, thinking there was no harm done if they didn’t and great good if they did have a vocation.
However, I always found Fr. Bannon to be different from most LC priests and to me he seemed sincere, kinder, and more respectful of people’s freedom.
I did not know Fr. Bannon that well, so if you knew he was compromised by the corruption in the LC that has been uncovered, I would not be able to defend him.
But it seems to me that categorizing all LC priests and members just by their membership is an unfair prejudice.
Similarly, the characterization of all students and faculty who appreciated the “old regime of Magdalen” as being duped by that insidious Mr. Meehan is an unfair prejudice.

To Abigail Tardiff,
Sorry if the details got messed up.  It could be memory or it could have been a misunderstanding at the time since my visits to Thomas More were sporadic.  Everything I knew about Thomas More originally came from conversations with your husband and a few short visits so I don’t mean my comments to be generalized or scandalize people.  But back then, when I was a Magdalen Student, the “booze cruise” comment certainly got my attention and was a starting point for thinking about what limits were appropriate for a college community (sort of like the ‘obliging stranger’ example, though not as gory).  Should a college community find out about booze cruises and forbid them or is it none of their business except maybe as a talking point.  I think you husbands exact reference to the booze cruise was that he had challenged some participants about it using Aristotle.  I apologize if the awkward way I wrote it might have made someone think he went on the cruise or something like that.

And just for the record, I do not think any college should have mandatory mass and rosary:  it is too dangerous for prayer and mass to become external only.  I agree mandatory study times and many other such rules are student specific, I did not need them but some friends were helped by them.
Also, I appreciate your questions probing the view of human freedom being espoused at the College of Saint Mary Magdalen.  Thank you.

Very Long Time Ago: Oh, no problem and no scandal. I asked my husband and found out I was a little mixed up on the details too (and, see what a great good came out of all that trouble! He ended up at Thomas More, where he met me. I try to remember the felix culpa ending to that story whenever I’m embroiled in something similar).
//
But anyway, these are questions I think about all the time, since I have two kids in college and five more to send. I think that different Catholic schools have different charisms, just like different religious orders do. The old Thomas More (and the new Erasmus Institute) seemed to have a special mission to the Seeker—the type who, through natural virtue, is attracted to the truth, but who, maybe through acquired baggage, needs to be handled with special care. He can’t perceive any kind of pressure from the believers around him, or he’ll run scared. He needs a special atmosphere of freedom for his search. Other students needs something different.

“By their fruits you shall know them”  Magdalen College produced its fair share of vocations to the priesthood and to the religious life and many happily married Catholic couples.  Can one say that this happened despite it being an unhealthy cultlike place?  Doesn’t seem likely. 
Yes, there were many excesses, which seemed to have ebbed and flowed depending on the period in time one is talking about, but in the last decade or so when I was exposed to the place through friends, I was always struck by the joy and friendliness of the students when I visited.  Was is all a sham?  I just don’t think so.
In more recent years, things seem to have derailed (total slackening of most rules) due to built-in flaws in its management structure - all power was concentrated in the hands of one person - its president.  It’s not a healthy way to run an institution.  The issue seems to have been there since the beginning and seems to be at the root of many of the problems that existed through the decades.  One hopes that this will be addressed in the re-founding…
Really though, when the new administration of this new college pretty much denigrates anything that came out of the old Magdalen College, how is this suppose to make the graduates who are proud of their education there feel?  They attended school there, they made many good friends there, they learned to love their Catholic faith there, they thought they received a good education there, but they hear now about what a horrible place it was in just about every way possible.  It just isn’t right…

To those alumni who loved the old Magdalen

The new administration was confronted with a complex situation.  On the one hand there is substantial testimony of alumni and former students who suffered grave injustices or were subjected to bizarre practices while students at the College.  (This is confirmed by parents and there is written evidence as well.)  The testimony and evidence suggests that some of this goes back to the very early years of the college and continued until recently.  Some of the comments above substantiate this.  (I could multiply the examples, but won’t.)  Some of the injustices were systemic and others resulted from the zeal of second-tier administrators and student leaders. 

It is also true that some students who came to the college knew what was in store for them and chose it.  Many knew but came against their will.  (When I first arrived three years ago, the joke was that students were beginning to choose Magdalen rather than having it chosen for them.)  Many other students did not know the details of what they were getting into but did their best to work within the system once they arrived. 
It is also the case that only a fraction of what was done at the college came from written policies. 
Most of the problems came from customs that were only discovered by students after their arrival. 
To dismiss those who had bad experiences at the College as complainers (or liars), or to claim that they knew what they were getting into (because they may have read a student handbook), or to say that students chose freely is to misrepresent the reality of the college’s history and the painful experience of many alumni and former students. 

On the other hand, there were students who came to the College and had life-changing, positive experiences.  These students loved the customs, respected the teachers and administrators who led the college, grew in their faith, and believe that their years at Magdalen were the best years of their lives.

The goal of the current administrators is to acknowledge the painful experiences that many students and alumni had at the college while working to ensure sure that these things never happen again.  We must also make sure that past and future students and parents know about the changes that have been made.  The college has been re-founded and in order to build the college that we believe God has called us to build, we must confront the things that have remained hidden for too long.

At the same time, we wish to honor (rather than denigrate) the experience of those who loved the old Magdalen.  We are not attacking personally the founders or those who served the institution.  We are rejecting a system and an approach that hurt many people.  The original mission—the education of the whole person—is something that continues to guide us.  By its very nature, this blog post and comments could not serve to adequately affirm the good to be found in the old Magdalen.  That good has been proclaimed for 37 years in the literature produced by the College.  The other side of the story has been ignored, whispered, denied, mocked, or dismissed and must now be acknowledged. 

But the story does not end here.  We have made a new beginning.  It is a strong, faith-filled beginning that will (Deo volente) bear much fruit and bring great glory to God.

Different colleges have different viewpoints and charisms.
I have to disagree with you that the criticism of the rules and system at Magdalen College was ignored, whispered, denied, and mock, and dismissed.  I agree there was a pattern of keeping secrets, and in recent years a lack of openness and dialogue. 
Actually, my main reason for leaving the college was the inability of the majority of the faculty and staff to dialogue to settle their differences.  Not many people even asked me about my reason for leaving, they still seemed content to make up their own theories about me without being bothered about information from my point of view.
In 1985, most of the criticisms you are voicing now were preached from the pulpit of the Magdalen Chapel to the entire community on parent’s weekend:  faculty, staff, visiting alumni, students, parents there for partents weekend.  Even before that sermon, the complaints and student stories were told to the bishop, the newspapers, and also to the NH postsecondary education commission and even the highway department who took down the sign on the highway that said “this way to Magdalen College” because the accusers had a new President and a new name for the college, and no-one believed that any board of directors could side with the insidious Mr. Meehan and Dr. Stanciu when the rest of the faculty and the chaplain had revealed all this information.
I agree that some people were treated miserably by the college, but in all the cases I was aware of, the offense started as a lack of charity in a person and not as a direct result of the principles or pedagogy of the institution.
I also disagree that the good things of the college have been sufficiently proclaimed over the years.  So many people toiled endless hours in service for the college because they supported the principles of education there.  Try to find out who Victor Chaput was.  There was always a legacy of Peter Sampo in the curriculum.  Did you know that in the days before computers Cynthia Nicolosi typed about 50 drafts of a 300 page self study report when the college first applied for accreditation?

The college lost a great opportunity when Sean Regan, Fr. Farfaglia, and Nyssa Garcia wanted to speak to the board of directors and were received as attackers or complainers.  These three people are honest, charitable, and in my mind, I cannot think of any three Magdalen graduates less likely to have participated in bizzare practices than these three.

I have come to the conclusion that during my time as a tutor and as academic dean, there was a lack of openness and trust.  Tutors were not allowed to speak to the board of directors.  This means that the tutors were not trusted.  But it also means the board of directors were not trusted.  The alumni were not trusted:  the alumni association was shut down and restarted with a college appointed head numerous times.

As you proceed with the refounding of the college, I hope you find the strength to examine your own opinions and and to be aware of the opinions and prejudices of those describing the benefits and the problems they had at Magdalen College.  I have not been convinced that the old system of formation at Magdalen was inherently unjust or denied people’s freedom.  And if you ask, you will find from friends and enemies alike that I talk too much and I listen to anyone.  It is part of the old regime to brag about that big bag of secrets, some with “written evidence”.  I have only heard one or two of them, but since I was at Magdalen for 22 years, my memory has a load more than that, good and bad. 

I wish you blessings in your quest to refound a college and certainly I support the openness and trust that was lacking at Magdalen:  the College of Saint Mary Magdalen will be doomed if you leave out trust and dialogue.
However, you have not sufficiently carried the argument that the College of Saint Mary Magdalen understands human freedom and education better than Magdalen College.

I actually was at school while dr. hayes taught and I have to disagree with the comments about Sean Regan and Cynthia Nicolosi.  I, and many of my friends, were degraded and spoken badly of by these two in particular.  Sean Regan was rude, condescending and immature and had no qualifications for any position at magdalen other than he had toed the line and graduated.  Cynthia Nicolosi was manipulative, rude and uncharitable in all my dealings with her.  Both of these people were part of the old guard and I am glad the reformation of Magdalen will not include them or any of their ilk.  I also have to add that at one time, the dean of women with the initials TR was one of the most uncharitable, dishonest, unkind, unwelcoming persons to ever hold the position - again, given the position based on her adherence to the old regime.  I am so proud of the new administration and their courage to throw off the shackles of deceit and oppression and welcome a truly catholic experience as their future.

I never said Sean Regan wasn’t rude, condescending, and at the time in question, immature.  I just said he was unlikely to engage in bizzare practices (he was just too cool) and that his recent attempt to talk to the board of directors a year or two ago was a sincere attempt at dialog.  Cynthia has been my friend for too long to get into any response:  all I can say is be glad you didn’t know her when she was younger and even more intense.  I never understood TR even a little bit, so I have no particular comment on your experience with her.
I would like you to think why you had to write a post about these particular people, that you cannot stand someone saying something good about them.  (Even if you think they failed in being a friend to you, would it really be a better world if they were mean and nastry to everyone?)  There are numerous people who lied to me while I was at Magdalen, I heard derogatory rumors about myself come back around and spoken as gospel truth by administrators, I had fellow tutors refuse to speak to me because of what I considered to be honest disagreement with them, and as a too young tutor, I know I was disrespected and the butt of running jokes for some years.  Things like that happen, I have nothing in me that wants to name these people or rehash the offenses.  I am sorry I could not be of help back then:  I am confident, at least with Sean and Cynthia, that with help and dialogue they would have treated you better.

my post about these particular people has to do with my feelings that they are very notable representatives of what went on at magdalen.  the bad decisions by the administration to indoctrinate and perpetuate a specific way of thinking and approach.  For the record, I always felt that you were a pretty decent guy. I probably could have been nicer to you as a teacher and more respectful.  I will have to agree to disagree with Nicolosi.  I personally found her to be horrid.  Also, for the record, my experience @ Magdalen wasn’t all horrible either (but it did almost destroy my self worth).  I have lifelong friends and for that I am grateful.  I will not, however, deny what wrongs were perpetuated by the old administration, in particular, John Meehan.  You cannot deceive, oppress and repress and still be catholic.  Catholicism is the ultimate expression of spiritual and personal freedom, not shackled to mandates and bizarre rules.  I am glad I went to Christendom because I got to see what a truly catholic college offered.

Hey Simcha Fisher,

My life is very busy right now and I really don’t have the time.
But can you put a stickynote somewhere on your blogging monitor:
I challenge you to a interview me and debate one of the big old guard Magdalen rules on the basis of principles rather than collections of “what happened to me” stories.

It will be up to you if examples are allowed, since allowing examples might give me an unfair advantage:  though it sounds like enough people leaving Magdalen College talked to you that you may want to discuss some examples.

The only thing off limits is the “weird folding clothes and looking in my drawer” issue:  never could stand that one.  And remember I never supported mandatory mass attendence.

So No Dating Policy, No alcohol on campus, No rock music:  pick any one you like.

But you have write the sticky note and remind me if you are up to the challenge.  Even my boss at work has to wait until July 21 for the next time she’ll have a meeting with me.

how about jeffrey karls outright lying in interviews claiming magdalen never had a no dating, no draw searching policy (among others).  As the former PRESIDENT of magdalen, tell me what kind of principles of magdalen college he demonstrated.

To all:  Because this discussion is getting too specific and unpleasant about individual people, I’m going to close comments.  To anyone who has questions about the college, please remember that you can contact the school directly.  As I’ve said, I’m extremely impressed by the openness, honesty, and charity displayed by the current administration.  Here is their contact information:

For other questions please email administration@magdalen.edu or give us a call: Phone: (603) 456-2656
Toll-Free: (877) 498-1723