EWTN News reports that the University of St. Thomas in Houston has appointed several prominent Catholic figures to its board of directors, including R.R. “Rusty” Reno, Adam Laxalt, and Mary Eberstadt. The article presents these appointments as part of the university’s “confident renewal of its Catholic identity,” with the new board members expressing enthusiasm for building a stronger Catholic academic institution. However, a thorough examination of the individuals involved, the language employed, and the theological omissions reveals not a genuine restoration of Catholic identity but rather a sophisticated performance of Catholic identity theater characteristic of the post-conciliar era—one that carefully avoids any confrontation with the radical apostasy that has consumed the institutional Church since Vatican II and fundamentally compromises the very notion of Catholic higher education.
The Appointees: Profiles in Post-Conciliar Respectability
The selection of R.R. “Rusty” Reno as a board member should immediately raise serious concerns for anyone committed to integral Catholic faith. Reno is the editor of First Things, a publication that has consistently operated within the framework of the post-conciliar establishment, engaging in dialogue with the very structures of the conciliar sect while maintaining a veneer of intellectual Catholicism. His background as a theology professor does not automatically confer orthodoxy; indeed, the overwhelming majority of Catholic theology professors since 1958 have been agents of Modernism, the synthesis of all heresies condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis and Lamentabili sane exitu. When Reno speaks of putting forward “the Thomistic tradition in the context of American Catholic higher education in an intellectually strong and robust way,” one must ask: which Thomism? The Thomism of the Angelic Doctor as understood by the unbroken tradition of the Church, or the Thomism filtered through the hermeneutics of discontinuity that has characterized post-conciliar academic endeavors?
Reno’s statement that “a Catholic university requires a very clear and explicit mission to avoid drifting and becoming like any other university with a chapel” inadvertently reveals the problem he claims to solve. The very fact that this needs to be stated—that a Catholic university could somehow become “like any other university with a chapel”—demonstrates the catastrophic failure of Catholic identity that has already occurred. This is not a problem that can be solved by better mission statements or more robust Thomistic programming. It is a problem rooted in the fundamental apostasy of the conciliar revolution, which replaced the supernatural mission of the Church with naturalistic humanism.
Mary Eberstadt’s appointment is equally troubling. As a senior research fellow at the Faith and Reason Institute in Washington, D.C., she operates within the ecosystem of post-conciliar Catholic intellectual life that has consistently failed to confront the root causes of the Church’s crisis. Her enthusiasm for what she calls “the next American awakening” and her observation of “new forms of fellowship and outreach, Catholic and Protestant alike” should alarm any faithful Catholic. The explicit inclusion of Protestant fellowship as a positive development is a direct repudiation of Catholic teaching on the unity of the Church. The Catholic Church has always taught, as Pope Pius XI declared in Mortalium Animos (1928), that the unity of the Church is a visible unity under the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and that any attempt at union that does not require the return of non-Catholics to the one true Church is not true ecumenism but a betrayal of Catholic truth.
Eberstadt’s practical suggestion of adding square dances to the university’s cultural repertoire—while perhaps innocuous on the surface—reveals the superficiality of the approach to Catholic formation being advocated. The reduction of Catholic campus life to social activities and “fellowship” represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what a Catholic university is for. As Pope Pius XI taught in Quas Primas, the reign of Christ the King extends over all aspects of human life, including education, and the purpose of Catholic education is not to produce socially well-adjusted graduates with “spiritual networks” but to form minds in the truth of Catholic doctrine and souls in the state of sanctifying grace.
Adam Laxalt’s appointment brings a political dimension to the board that further illustrates the post-conciliar confusion of Catholic identity with cultural conservatism. His statement that “there is an orthodox Catholic revival going on in the U.S. and our youth are seeking more depth and formation in their education” is contradicted by the observable reality. What is occurring in the United States is not an orthodox Catholic revival but rather a proliferation of competing Catholic identities, many of which are fundamentally compromised by their acceptance of the conciliar reforms. The youth may indeed be seeking depth and formation, but the question is whether the University of St. Thomas—operating as it does within the framework of the conciliar sect—can provide authentic Catholic formation or merely a more aesthetically pleasing version of the same apostate education.
The Language of Catholic Identity: A Linguistic Analysis
The article’s language reveals the fundamental problem with the entire enterprise. The phrase “confident renewal of its Catholic identity” is characteristic of post-conciliar discourse, which speaks of “renewal” and “identity” without ever defining what Catholic identity actually is or acknowledging that the conciliar revolution represented a rupture with that identity. The very need for “renewal” implies that Catholic identity was lost or diminished—an admission that the post-conciliar authorities would never make explicitly, since it would require acknowledging the catastrophic effects of Vatican II.
The description of the new board members as “influential Catholic leaders” who “have shaped national conversations in faith, culture, law, and public life” reveals the criteria for selection: influence, national prominence, and engagement with secular culture. Nowhere in the article is there any mention of orthodoxy of faith, fidelity to the Magisterium, or commitment to the supernatural mission of the Church. The board members are selected not for their Catholic credentials but for their secular credentials—their ability to navigate the worlds of media, law, politics, and academia. This is precisely the error that Pope Pius IX condemned in the Syllabus of Errors when he rejected the proposition that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80).
The university president’s statement that the school “is poised to take its place among the leading Catholic institutions in our country” is revealing in its ambition. The desire to be among the “leading Catholic institutions” is a desire for recognition and prestige within the existing framework of Catholic higher education—a framework that has been thoroughly compromised by decades of Modernist infiltration. The Cardinal Newman Society’s Newman Guide, which recognizes institutions “committed to the Church’s principles of education,” is itself a product of the post-conciliar landscape and cannot be taken as a reliable indicator of genuine Catholic identity.
The Theological Vacuum: What Is Not Said
The most damning aspect of this article is not what it says but what it does not say. There is no mention of the most fundamental questions that any genuinely Catholic university must address: What is the nature of the Church? What is the relationship between faith and reason? What is the purpose of education in light of man’s supernatural end? What is the role of the Magisterium in preserving and transmitting Catholic doctrine?
The article’s silence on these questions is not accidental; it is symptomatic of the post-conciliar approach to Catholic education, which has systematically avoided any confrontation with the radical questions raised by the conciliar revolution. The “Catholic identity” being renewed at the University of St. Thomas is a Catholic identity carefully constructed to avoid offending anyone—Protestants, secularists, or the post-conciliar establishment. It is, in other words, no Catholic identity at all.
The complete absence of any reference to the crisis of faith in the Church, the invalidity of the post-conciliar “Mass,” the apostasy of the conciliar “popes,” or the need for a return to tradition is the most telling indictment of this entire enterprise. A genuinely Catholic university would be addressing these issues head-on, not avoiding them in favor of discussions about Thomistic traditions and square dances.
The article’s reference to the university’s ranking in the Newman Guide as “the second-largest institution by enrollment among colleges and universities listed in the Newman Guide” is particularly ironic. The Cardinal Newman Society takes its name from John Henry Newman, the Anglican convert whose theory of the development of doctrine was a direct precursor to Modernism. Newman’s proposition that Christian doctrine undergoes a process of evolution and development over time was condemned by the Church, yet his legacy is invoked as a standard for Catholic education. This is a perfect illustration of the post-conciliar inversion of Catholic values, where the very ideas that the Church has condemned are held up as models to be emulated.
The Symptomatic Level: Post-Conciliar Apostasy as Systemic
The appointment of these board members to the University of St. Thomas is not an isolated event but a symptom of the systemic apostasy that has consumed the institutional Church since Vatican II. The conciliar revolution replaced the supernatural mission of the Church with a naturalistic humanism that seeks engagement with the world on the world’s terms rather than on God’s terms. This is precisely what Pope Pius XI warned against in Quas Primas when he wrote that “the plague of our times is the so-called laicism, with its errors and wicked endeavors.”
The “Catholic identity” being constructed at the University of St. Thomas is a Catholic identity that has been stripped of its supernatural content and reduced to a set of cultural markers—Thomistic intellectual traditions, square dances, fellowship, and community. This is not Catholic identity; it is Catholic cosplay. It is the appearance of Catholicism without the substance, the form without the content, the letter without the spirit.
The post-conciliar approach to Catholic education has consistently prioritized engagement with the world over fidelity to the faith. This is the error that Pope Pius IX condemned in the Syllabus of Errors when he rejected the proposition that “Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life” (Proposition 48). The University of St. Thomas, by seeking to be a “leading Catholic institution” within the existing framework of American higher education, is precisely the kind of compromise that Pius IX condemned.
The Primacy of God’s Laws Above Human Laws
The article’s complete silence on the absolute primacy of God’s laws above human laws is a fundamental betrayal of Catholic teaching. As Pope Pius XI declared in Quas Primas, “Christ possesses supreme and absolute dominion over all things created,” and “it is a dogma of faith that Jesus Christ was given to men as Redeemer, in whom they are to place their hope, but at the same time He is the Lawgiver, to whom men owe obedience.” A genuinely Catholic university would be teaching these truths and forming its students in the knowledge of their obligations to Christ the King.
Instead, the University of St. Thomas is forming students in the knowledge of their obligations to secular culture, to the American experiment, to the “next American awakening.” This is not Catholic education; it is secular education with Catholic trappings. It is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, the replacement of the worship of God with the worship of man and his works.
The appointment of political figures like Adam Laxalt to the board of a Catholic university is particularly problematic in this regard. While there is nothing inherently wrong with Catholics engaging in political life, the elevation of political engagement to a criterion for Catholic educational leadership represents a fundamental confusion of the natural and supernatural orders. The purpose of a Catholic university is not to produce good citizens or effective political leaders but to produce saints—men and women who are conformed to Christ and dedicated to the salvation of souls.
Conclusion: The Bankruptcy of Post-Conciliar Catholic Identity
The appointment of R.R. Reno, Mary Eberstadt, Adam Laxalt, and others to the board of the University of St. Thomas in Houston is not a sign of Catholic renewal but a symptom of Catholic decline. It represents the continued dominance of the post-conciliar approach to Catholic education, which seeks to construct a Catholic identity that is compatible with the modern world rather than one that challenges the modern world in the name of Christ the King.
The “Catholic identity” being renewed at the University of St. Thomas is a Catholic identity that has been carefully constructed to avoid any confrontation with the radical questions raised by the conciliar revolution. It is a Catholic identity that speaks of Thomistic traditions but not of the apostasy of the Thomistic faculty at so many Catholic universities. It is a Catholic identity that speaks of community and fellowship but not of the sacraments and the state of grace. It is a Catholic identity that speaks of the next American awakening but not of the Last Judgment.
The faithful are not deceived by these performances of Catholic identity. They know that true Catholic identity is not constructed by committees and boards of directors but is received from the Church through the unbroken tradition of the faith. They know that true Catholic education is not about intellectual traditions and social networks but about the formation of minds in truth and souls in grace. And they know that the only response to the apostasy of the conciliar revolution is a return to the integral Catholic faith as it was taught and practiced before 1958.
The University of St. Thomas may indeed become a “leading Catholic institution” in the post-conciliar landscape. But in the economy of salvation, this counts for nothing. What counts is fidelity to the truth, and the truth is that the conciliar sect has no authority to appoint boards of directors, to define Catholic identity, or to educate Catholic youth. The truth is that Christ is King, and His kingdom is not of this world. And the truth is that the faithful must resist the siren song of post-conciliar respectability and cling to the unchanging faith of their fathers.
Source:
National Catholic leaders appointed to board of University of St. Thomas in Houston (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 29.04.2026