A few days ago, Mark posted a call for thoughts on Catholic Social Thought and the City. And, over the course of the last few days, this post has prompted a wide range of thoughts, questions, proposals, and - -perhaps --disagreements, about schools, parishes, cities, suburbs, and so on. If you have not checked in here at MOJ for a few days, keep scrolling down, to get the flavor of the entire discussion.
I just got back from a lunchtime talk, by Fr. Andrew Greeley, on the Catholic school as social capital. He hit the point pretty hard: The parish school has been, in the United States, one of the most important social-capital institutions in our history. When these schools close (or are taken for granted), we lose something very important to the common good, and to the faith. I wrote, in this USA Today op-ed last year:
[U]rban Catholic schools and their teachers do heroic work in providing education, hope, safety, opportunity and values to vulnerable and marginalized children of all religions, ethnicities and backgrounds. Similarly, Catholic hospitals have long cared for underserved and disadvantaged people in both urban and rural areas, and helped to fill glaring gaps in the availability of health care. It is too easy to take for granted these and similar contributions to the common good. We should remember that, as these institutions fold, the burdens on and challenges to public ones will increase.
We might also care about the closings for slightly more abstract but no less important reasons. In a nutshell: It is important to a free society that non-government institutions thrive. Such institutions enrich and diversify what we call "civil society." They are like bridges and buffers that mediate between the individual and the state. They are the necessary infrastructure for communities and relationships in which loyalties and values are formed and passed on and where persons develop and flourish.
Catholics and non-Catholics alike can appreciate the crucial role that these increasingly vulnerable "mediating associations" play in the lives of our cities. Harvard University Professor Robert Putnam and others have emphasized the importance of "social capital," both to the health of political communities and to the development of engaged citizens. In America's cities, it has long been true that neighborhood churches and schools have provided and nurtured this social capital by serving as places where connections and bonds of trust are formed and strengthened. As Joel Kotkin writes in his recent book, The City: A Global History, healthy cities are and must be "sacred, safe and busy." If he is right, Catholic parishes, schools and hospitals help make America's cities great.
I'm sure I'm not the only MOJ blogger who has been getting loads of interesting feedback from readers. I thought I'd pass on some of this feedback, and also some other comments.
First, here is a long post, which references our MOJ discussion, by Patrick Deneen on "Catholicism and Suburbia." Here is a bit from that post:
[It] seems to me that Catholicism as a whole cloth may not be best expressed in either setting, though I'd give considerable preference to a rightly ordered urban setting over a suburban one. The best setting, it seems to me, is a town of a reasonable size, ranging from one that might be considered to be a small city to modest town. I have in mind Aristotle's definition of a polis as a place that is to some extent self sufficient and is of such a size that one does not need to voice of Stentor to be heard through its environs. It should be a place where one can reasonably expect to rule and be ruled in turn, that is, to learn the discipline of liberty and self-rule. It should be a place where culture, as an accumulation of habituation and practice, can be passed from one generation to the next, starting in the family but continuing and being reinforced in the community at large. It should be place where people from various classes and professions can interact, and thereby with greater ease and willingness overcome the resentments or disapproval that can form in the absence of interaction between people differently placed. It should be a place where one's work and one's contributions to the common weal can be discerned and remembered. It is a place, therefore, that allows for the creation of communio, the passing on of culture, the formation of tradition, and the continuity of memory.
The suburbs, it seems to me, were formed for reasons that permitted, nay encouraged, the avoidance and escape of all these conditions. . . .
Alan Jacobs has this post, on urbanism, over at "The American Scene."
Kevin Somok -- a former participant in Notre Dame's (wonderful) "ACE" program -- writes, in response to my statement, in an earlier post, that "the Church should be doing what it takes -- whatever it takes -- to make it really possible (and by "possible," I mean to include "possible given the special needs of many children") for all -- rich, middle-class, and poor -- urban and suburban Catholics to send their children to Catholic schools, which is where all Catholic children should be":
This seems to be still be consistent with the teaching of the Magisterium. Perhaps, however, we ought to qualify this with something like the following:
"The Church should be doing whatever it takes to make it really possible... for all urban and suburban Catholics to send their children to schools of authentically Catholic character and academic excellence..." As you are aware, I suspect, both of these items are quite difficult for most schools
to pull off. Here's part of the problem, as I see it.
In the absence of large, vital religious communities, it's extraordinarily hard for schools to retain qualified teachers. Although I didn't believe I had a lifelong vocation to teach middle school students, if I did, it would have been very hard to stay in a Catholic school much longer, given the fact that salaries are low ($29,000 for a third year teacher with a master's degree in Austin, TX, and a ceiling not much higher than that), health care is lousy, and pensions are largely non-existent. This last item, I think is particularly detrimental to teacher retention efforts. . . .
The Church could do a much better job to help religion instructors do a better job of transmitting the Faith. Textbooks are approved by the bishops to ensure they are free of doctrinal error, but this does not not mean that they will be effective instructional materials. . . . With over 6,000 grade schools in the U.S., it's reasonable to expect that the Church could expend the resources necessary to develop solid religion textbook series that convey the full richness of Catholic belief and practice.
In spite of the imperfections in the system, I believe Catholic schools represent a great hope for the U.S. Church. Once-a-week CCD or CEP programs seem to be almost completely ineffective at transmitting a critical mass of Catholic doctrine in spite of the valiant efforts of DREs and parish volunteers (and I'm a person who went through such a program, having been at public schools K-12). [Note: The research clearly establishes that students who attend Catholic schools are much more likely than students who attend public schools and attend CCD to become active adult Catholics. RG.] Catholic school students, in spite of instruction that is less than completely effective at times, still are receiving religious instruction daily and develop the habit of praying throughout the day. . . .
I do believe that it is a grave injustice that many Catholics are unable to send their children to Catholic schools because of finances, and the Church at both parish and diocesan levels needs to rethink education as a mission and ministry of the Church. Parishioners who complain about the "parish subsidy of the school" need to be told by bishop and pastor that this is akin to complaining about the parish subsidy of a soup kitchen or food bank. The content of this framework of conceiving education as a ministry is buried in official documents, but the average person in the pew on Sunday morning hears very little about this. . . . [Note: So true! RG.]
My friend and colleague at Notre Dame, Ed Edmonds, sends this:
As a suburban dweller for most of my adult life, I have read with interest the recent MOJ material on that theme. I find life here in the Midwest – Minneapolis, St. Paul, and South Bend -- to be different from Kenner, Louisiana and Williamsburg, Virginia. Some of it is the urban aspect of those places, or lack thereof, and I think some of it is the dominant culture of the region. My perspective of a city like Richmond, Virginia, is that only those with a long family history in the city will ever be part of the true inner circle. I also think there is a real cycle-to-life aspect. When we had young children, we had baby-sitting co-ops and pre-school co-ops that created a social network. I have to say that [my wife] was far more involved in these activities than I was. When they were in school or involved in sports or dance or art, the social interaction changed. I wonder, however, if the reliance on the automobile and its particular American variation is as strong as Eduardo’s portrayal.
. . . A new report from the United Nations notes that over one-half of the world population now lives in an urban area. See http://www.unfpa.org/swp/. I think that this report might be worth considering as part of this conversation.
Responding to my own and Rob's earlier posts, Jon Watson writes:
. . . It strikes me that in your discussion, you haven't mentioned what the role of a Catholic parent ought to be. In my formative Catholic times (still ongoing), my best education hasn't been through RCIA classes or even Church attendance, but through various "parental" mentors - my sponsor, my wife, good priests (where I have been truly blessed), and the Catholic authors and journals I read. How much more important then, than a Catholic school, is the Catholic parent? It strikes me that no school or parish, public or private, will compensate if the parent at home doesn't teach the essentials (and beyond) of the Faith. No parish can teach a follower of Christ as effectively as a parent - no school can educate the follower of Christ as effectively as a parent.
With that, I also think that the "butter or guns" dichotomy between a parish creating followers of Christ and educating young Catholics is a false one. The entire mission of a parish is to create and educate followers of Christ in metanoia, a continual turning and conversion to Christ, and that mission necessarily includes education about the Faith. Therefore, I think there is room for Prof. Garnett's statement that a parish's most important role is to start Catholic schools (thus educating the community of the faithful) and Prof. Vischer's thought that it is critical to create followers of Christ (the entire Church's role), for one necessarily entails the other and the latter consumes the former.
Well, this post is too long. Soon, I will post some thoughts in reponse to Lisa's, Rob's, and others'.
My colleague, Elizabeth Brown, brought this to my attention.
The USCCB did a study in Nov. 2002 on this issue. It can be found here: http://www.usccb.org/education/fedasst/ideafinal.pdf
The study found that only 6.83% of the students in Catholic Schools had disabilities compared with the 11.4% of students in public schools. In addition, 87% of the dioceses reported that they were unable to enroll children with disabilities because they lacked the capacity to meet their special needs.
The study did discuss some of the problems that parents and Catholic schools encountered when trying to get children enrolled in Catholic schools their share of IDEA funds.
I'm travelling right now, and have only a very creaky internet connection making it very difficult to access the USCCB report. While I do have much sympathy for the budget constraints under which all schools, including Catholic schools, operate, I just find some of these budgetary arguments for not accepting kids with disabilities by Catholic schools less than compelling. The lack of federal funding for the IDEA mandate that I discussed in my last post means that these same constraints affect public schools, as well. Public schools have a federal mandate to find some way to accommodate kids with disabilities, anyway. Catholic schools don't have that federal mandate, it's true, but it seems to me they do operate under the mandate of an even higher authority. That authority tells us we parents are responsible for raising all the children we are given, no matter what sorts of disability they might have. Why doesn't that authority give the same message of joint responsibility to our parish communities?
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Speak Now to End the War in Iraq
Dear Friend,
Four years into the Iraq War, Catholics from across our nation are finally coming together to say, "Enough!" And to get this message to those lawmakers who need to hear it most, Catholics United, Pax Christi USA and NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby have launched a collaborative petition drive called Catholics for an End to the War in Iraq.
Click here to add your voice to the growing number of Catholics
calling for a responsible end to the war in Iraq
The time to act is now: Congress is currently debating whether or not to send President Bush a definitive plan to end U.S. military operations in Iraq. We must insist that our lawmakers use this opportunity to legislate a solution to the Iraq War that includes diplomacy, redevelopment, and responsible withdrawal of U.S. troops.
Why is our voice important? Because Catholics account for more than 1 in 4 voters nationwide, and our lawmakers know that Catholics will push for action on Iraq. By signing this petition, you help remind our policymakers that anything short of immediate action on this issue will come as a slap in the face to
the millions of U.S. Catholics who are fed up with the present "stay the course" Iraw policy.
Click here to add your voice to the growing number of Catholics
calling for a responsible end to the war in Iraq
Time is of the essence. Catholics for an End to the War in Iraq needs to show the world that our voice is a force to be reckoned with by gathering 20,000 names between now and September 1st. Help us reach this goal by signing the petition and encouraging your friends and family to do the same. Once we reach our goal of 20,000, we will hand deliver the petition to our Congressional leaders in Washington.
As a Catholic, will you join the growing chorus of voices
calling for a responsible end to the war in Iraq?
Our Catholic voice matters and our faith calls us to use it. Send our lawmakers a clear message that Catholics want a new plan for Iraq.
Sign the petition today at www.catholicsforanend.org.
In peace,
Simone, Dave, Krista, James, and Chris
The Catholics for an End to the War in Iraq Team
www.catholicsforanend.org
In response to both Rob and Rick, let me start by conceding that this topic taps into a couple of my personally most deeply-felt frustrations over unfairnesses in the world that I just have no idea how to address. So I'm not sure I'm an especially good debate partner on this -- I'm not very objective and I haven't yet figured out for myself what I think the solutions might be.
My post conflated two different sources of that frustration. First is the unfairness of the inequities in our public school systems. Kids with special needs just bear the heaviest brunt of that unfairness. IDEA is one of the largest unfunded mandates that the federal government has ever imposed. When IDEA was passed in 1975 it was supposed to be funded 40% by the federal government. I think the highest amount of federal funding that it's ever gotten was 20%, and it's a struggle every year to get even that much. That leaves local school districts with special ed budgets that are growing every year. The inner-city schools that have the fewest resources generally obviously have the fewest resources for their kids with special needs, too. And their parents have the fewest alternatives for placing their kids in more appropriate settings, because private schools are NOT obliged to take kids with special needs; IDEA doesn't apply to them.
The kids with special needs living in really poor, urban school districts are burdened with the consequences of their poverty in a particulary dramatic way, because they really have no options. Their parents don't have the luxury of moving to suburban districts with more generous programs. The private schools that might provide scholarships to some lower-income kids don't have to take kids with special needs.
Which brings me to my second sources of frustration -- the unwillingness of most Catholic schools in my experience (and based on truly LOTS of anectodal evidence over the years from other parents) to voluntarily take students of kids with special needs. I actually incline more toward agreeing with Rick than Rob about the importance of Catholic schools, but not so much for what they do or do not do to immerse our own kids into a vibrant faith life from an early age, but rather in the (maybe naive) notion that Catholic schools might provide a great alternative to public schools in the poorer school districts. But they typically seem to choose NOT to embrace as part of their mission or community kids with special needs. And, no, Rob, I really don't think this is simply a question of resources -- it's so much more a question of will, imagination, and flexibility. School funding & special ed is really complicated & varies in different states, but in both the states where I have lived with a kid with special needs -- Indiana and Minnesota -- the school district continues to provide services like therapies & things, even to the kids in Catholic schools - you just have to find a way to transport the child to the public school facility to get those services. But if your Catholic school doesn't signal a willingness to reach out and engage in some dialogue about what accommodating your child might really entail, you'll never get a chance to explore those possibilities.
The refusal of a local parish to even seriously consider educating a child with special needs feels like a particular betrayal to Catholic parents with such kids. I never even tried to enroll my son with special needs in a local Catholic school, but I did experience that rejection (and the real feeling of betrayal that accompanied it) and a couple of different parishes in just trying to enroll him in the religious education programs. As a Catholic parent, you just assume that the one place you're not going to have to fight for your child is going to be your church. It really hits you hard in the gut when you realize you're going to have to have the same sorts of meetings with your parish priest that you've had with your local public school principals, just to remind them that your kids are just as much members of the parish, and thus the responsibility of the community, as all the other kids. It's enough to cause many parents to leave the Catholic church. The Protestant churches seem to be much better at really reaching out to people with disabilities than the Catholic church. I will admit to feeling my first-ever pangs of curiosity about whether I could leave my parish when I visited a Protestant mega-church in the area a few months ago, and on the racks in back of the church saw a glossy brochure about all the programs for people with disability offered by that Congregation.
Time magazine has an interesting article on the Democrats' rediscovery of religious voters. Here's an excerpt:
The Democrats are so fired up, you could call them the new Moral Majority. This time, however, the emphasis is as much on the majority as on the morality as they try to frame a message in terms of broadly shared values that don't alarm members of minority religions or secular voters. It has become an article of faith among party leaders that it was sheer strategic stupidity to cede the values debate to Republicans for so long; that most people want to reduce abortion but not criminalize it, protect the earth instead of the auto industry, raise up the least among us; and that a lot of voters care as much about the candidates' principles as about their policies. "What we're seeing," says strategist Mike McCurry, "is a Great Awakening in the Democratic Party."
The revival comes at a time when the entire religious-political landscape is changing shape. A new generation of evangelical leaders is rejecting old labels; now an alliance of religious activists that runs from the crunchy left across to the National Association of Evangelicals has called for action to address global warming, citing the biblical imperative of caring for creation. Mainline, evangelical and Roman Catholic organizations have united to push for immigration reform. The possibility that there is common ground to be colonized by those willing to look for it offers a tantalizing prospect of alliances to come, but only if Democrats can overcome concerns within their party. "One-third gets it," says a Democratic values pioneer, talking about the rank and file. "A second third understands that this can help us win. And another third is positively terrified."
