Which is what Father Sorin helped do for the Midwest. However, for today's liberal, that is considered as bad as enslavement and mutilating the natives.
On the dark side, the Age of Discovery was difficult for the Natives. On the bright side, they received the Catholic faith. That is belittled today but was considered very important by those, like Columbus and Sorin, who had faith in our Lord. It's odd that Father Jenkins, as a Catholic, did not emphasize this, within it's historical context. Notre Dame exists today because, those with a strong faith and belief in God, decided to share the good news with others.

always willing to see some actual evidence of these things. Until then, Columbus and his Castilian masters stand unchallenged until the 20th century.

which, of course, will get lost. Your thoughtful analysis below is appreciated.

He certainly didn't suggest any questionable behavior on the part of Fr. Sorin or other missionaries. However, it's hard to contend that their mere presence didn't have some impact on the future of the natives, including the spread of possible ailments/disease and displacement. Frankly, it's hard to know what the overall impact was for each missionary, but you can't say it didn't matter.

Who, himself, engaged in the exploitation of indigenous Americans.

The problem with the murals was clearly spelled out in Jenkins’ statement. They depict him as a benevolent hero. That is a whitewashing of history and ND is correct to not want to be a party to it.

If one accepts removing the "whitewashing of history" as a desirable goal, then there is an awful lot to do, and it is almost certain that no matter who you are, there is some "whitewashed" history that you want to keep around.

Hiw far back would you like to go back and leave uncorrected? Should we simply ignore and bury all of the harm that was done by the United States and her citizens because it makes us feel better?

I have no problem keeping such history around, but framing it in the context of what actually occurred. That’s what ND is attempting to do with this compromise. The murals are being preserved, and made available for study in the proper context, while the covering makes clear that they are not a celebration of Columbus’ actions.

Personally, I think they walked a fine line pretty well.

As an example, should today's (1/21) activities focus on MLK's sexist and homophobic beliefs? I forgot where I read it this morning, but some columnist said that he certainly would have been banned from hosting the Oscars now and would probably have had students protesting if he was teaching classes today.

For me, the idea that people from the past did not exhibit modern standards of decency should be self evident. If there are people on the ND campus who do not understand that, then it suggests a far deeper problem that needs to be immediately addressed.