Friday, May 6, 2005
The New York Times
May 7, 2005
Vatican Is Said to Push Jesuit Off Magazine
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
An American Jesuit who is a frequent television commentator on
Roman Catholic issues resigned yesterday under orders from the Vatican
as editor of the Catholic magazine America because he had published
articles critical of church positions, several Catholic officials in
the United States said.
The order to dismiss the editor, the Rev. Thomas J. Reese, was
issued by the Vatican's office of doctrinal enforcement - the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - in mid-March when that
office was still headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the officials,
who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to
speak on the matter, said. Soon after, Pope John Paul II died and
Cardinal Ratzinger was elected pope, taking the name Benedict XVI.
America magazine, a weekly based in New York City, is a
moderate-to-liberal journal published by the Jesuits, a religious order
known for producing the scholars who run many of the church's
universities and schools. The Jesuits prize their independence, but
like everyone in the church, even their top official, the Jesuit
superior general in Rome, ultimately answers to the pope.
In recent years America has featured articles representing more
than one side on sensitive issues like same-sex marriage, relations
with Islam and whether Catholic politicians who support abortion rights
should be given communion. Church officials said it was the publication
of some of these articles that prompted Vatican scrutiny.
Father Reese, in a statement yesterday, confirmed his departure but
gave no indication that he was resigning under duress: "I am proud of
what my colleagues and I did with the magazine, and I am grateful to
them, our readers and our benefactors for the support they gave me. I
look forward to taking a sabbatical while my provincial and I determine
the next phase of my Jesuit ministry."
Catholic scholars and writers said in interviews yesterday that they
feared that the dismissal of such a highly visible Catholic commentator
was intended by the Vatican as a signal that debating church teaching
is outside the bounds.
Some Jesuits said that within the last two years they had received
spoken or written warnings from then-Cardinal Ratzinger's office about
articles or books they had published.
Stephen Pope, a moral theologian at Boston College who wrote the
article critical of the church's position on same-sex marriage, said of
the dismissal: "If this is true, it's going to make Catholic
theologians who want to ask critical questions not want to publish in
Catholic journals. It can have a chilling effect."
Father Reese, who is 60 and has been editor of America for seven
years, is a widely regarded political scientist. He has written several
books that examine the Roman Catholic Church as a political institution
as well as a religious one, a rather secular approach that was not
appreciated in Cardinal Ratzinger's office, an official there said in
an interview last month.
Jesuit officials said Father Reese was informed of his ouster just
after he had returned from Rome, where he had been interviewed by
nearly every major American news outlet covering the pope's funeral and
the elevation of Cardinal Ratzinger to pope.
He is being replaced by his deputy, the Rev. Drew Christiansen, a
Jesuit who writes often on social ethics and international issues, and
whom Father Reese recruited to the magazine in 2002.
Catholic experts said yesterday that they were stunned to learn of
Father Reese's dismissal. "I'd think of him as sort of a mainstream
liberal," said Philip F. Lawler, the editor of Catholic World News, a
news outlet on the more conservative end of the spectrum. "I think he's
been reasonably politic. I watched him during the transition, and I
cannot think of a single thing I heard that would have put him in
jeopardy."
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith first complained to
Jesuit officials about the magazine four years ago, the church
officials said, after America published a special issue with articles
criticizing "Dominus Jesus," a document on interfaith relations and the
supremacy of Catholicism that had been issued by the Congregation.
Dominus Jesus was broadly denounced by many Catholic and
non-Catholic theologians who said it would undermine decades of
bridge-building with other faiths, and even with other Christian
denominations.
"They were just reporting what a lot of people were saying, they
weren't stirring up trouble," said the Rev. Mark Massa, a Jesuit who
leads the Center for American Catholic Studies at Fordham University.
"I can't think of anything they've reported that was scandalous."
Cardinal Ratzinger's office also complained to the Jesuits about
articles America had published on gay priests and on the work of the
Congregation itself. The Congregation threatened either to order the
dismissal of Father Reese or to impose a committee of censors to review
the magazine's content, but backed down after discussions with the
Jesuits, church officials said in interviews yesterday.
The magazine then began to more regularly solicit articles
examining a single issue from a variety of viewpoints. In 2001, it
published a piece Father Reese had solicited from then-Cardinal
Ratzinger as a response to an article by Cardinal Walter Kasper, a
German who works in the Vatican, that had criticized the Vatican and in
particular the Congregation as failing to give local churches and
bishops sufficient autonomy.
"For a long while," Cardinal Ratzinger wrote, "I hesitated to
accept this invitation because I do not want to foster the impression
that there is a longstanding theological dispute between Cardinal
Kasper and myself, when in fact none exists."
Then in 2004, the Congregation took issue with two more articles:
one by Professor Pope of Boston College on same-sex marriage, which
criticized the Congregation for issuing a document that he argued
dehumanized gay men and lesbians; and one by Representative David R.
Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat, who bristled at bishops who would deny
communion to Catholic politicians like himself who support abortion
rights.
In both of these cases, Father Reese published opposing viewpoints.
Mr. Obey's piece was actually a response to an earlier article in
America by Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, now of St. Louis, who had
called for Catholic politicians who support abortion rights to change
their positions or be denied communion.
The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of another Catholic journal
based in New York, First Things, which is more conservative than
America, said yesterday, "It would be fair to say that during the
pontificate of John Paul II that America apparently saw itself or at
least certainly read as a magazine of what some would describe as the
loyal opposition. And, needless to say, there's dispute over the
definition of 'loyal' and the definition of 'opposition.' "
But Father Neuhaus added that he considered Father Reese a friend who was always "fair-minded" even when they disagreed.
At the Jesuits' American headquarters in Washington, a spokesman,
the Rev. Albert Diulio, said Father Reese and his provincial had
jointly agreed on the job change. But he said he did not know if Father
Reese had resigned under duress.
The Rev. Thomas Smolich, who as the Jesuit provincial of California
is Father Reese's supervisor, said he was discussing with Father Reese
about what he would do next. "Tom is a very talented guy," he said.
"There are many things he could do in Jesuit and Catholic ministries,
in a university, in journalism of some kind."
After the election of Pope Benedict XVI, America ran an editorial
that said: "A church that cannot openly discuss issues is a church
retreating into an intellectual ghetto."
__________
Michael P.
I read with great interest both Greg Sisk’s and Tom Berg’s response to the NPR piece referred to in an earlier posting by Michael Perry. It brought back to me the frustration I felt in the period leading up to the election in November and, in general, with much of the political discourse between the left and the right. I remember observing one day to my spiritual director that it was increasingly the case that, although I have been a registered Democrat since I was first old enough to vote, I had reached a point where I wasn’t sure I was really comfortable calling myself either a Democrat or a Republican. His simple response: You are not a Democrat or a Republican; you are a Catholic.
I think Tom’s statement is absolutely correct – the media does not deal well with nuance. And being “always Catholic,” in Greg’s words, defies easy categorization, making mischaracterization a likely occurrence.
Greg S. has just posted our Dean's statement criticizing NPR's simplistic identification of St. Thomas as a "conservative" law school. In response to objections from our faculty -- including politically conservative faculty -- NPR has admitted that they mischaracterized us, has removed St. Thomas from the list on the web page that Michael P. referenced, and will read the Dean's short statement on the air in the next couple of days.
This episode has impressed upon me, and others here, the point that Greg and Chuck Reid make about how difficult it is to avoid being pigeonholed into familiar and simple categories. When NPR was researching this story, I exchanged e-mails with their researcher, emphasizing in my e-mail that "St. Thomas is not a 'conservative Christian' school as such. It is a law school with a serious Catholic Christian identity" -- and I then explained how that led to some stereotypically "liberal" positions being strong here, like opposition to the death penalty and an emphasis on fighting poverty, as well as some stereotypically "conservative" positions like opposition to abortion and euthanasia. I also emphasized diversity of viewpoint on our faculty on these and other issues. NPR totally ignored all the nuances that I described for them when it ran the story. The idea that any seriously religious law school must be turning out nothing but Republican lawyers was too good, and too easy, for NPR to pass up. Discussion in the media of questions about religion and law remains at a depressingly low level.
The objection of so many of us at St. Thomas (from across the political spectrum) to being labeled a "conservative" law school does not arise, for most of us, from any discomfort with those "conservative" ideas that are in harmony with the Christian vision of human dignity. Our objection is that the Christian vision, and the faithful exploration of it at a Catholic law school, is much broader than any such political label and will inevitably cut across such labels. We have also consciously pursued the goal of having differing points of view on many political issues, while also ensuring a strong core committed to the most bedrock affirmations of the Church on matters of human dignity and social relations.
Here is a lengthier statement from our Dean, Tom Mengler, which may appear on the NPR website (they have indicated that they are considering this, but if they don't post it you'll have it here).
Tom Berg
A report on “Morning Edition” was incorrect in implying that the University
of
St. Thomas School of Law
is a “religiously conservative law school.”
St. Thomas
is a Catholic law school, and we take our religious identity seriously. For us, that does not mean pursuing political causes, but instead helping our students to integrate their religious and personal values — whatever those values may be — into their professional identities. We hope that this will lead our students to practice law ethically and use their legal training to serve their fellow human beings — particularly the most needy among us.
There is nothing politically “conservative” about our mission, and the people we have attracted prove this. The vast majority of our faculty and student body are left-of-center politically. Our faculty includes individuals who are openly gay, who support abortion rights, who oppose the death penalty, and who have worked on behalf of other “liberal” causes. We have chapters of the National Lawyers Guild and Out!law on campus, but we do not have a chapter of the American
Center
for Law & Justice. We are one of the few law schools in the country to require all of our students to do public service as a condition of graduation, and the American Bar Association recently singled out for praise the high number of our graduates who have taken Legal Aid and other public service jobs.
Far from being “politically conservative,” St. Thomas
is striving to prove that a law school can take religion seriously without ascribing to any political agenda.
Dean Thomas M. Mengler
Dean and Ryan Chair in Law
In a posting a couple of places below, Michael Perry refers to a story on National Public Radio about "conservative" Christian law schools, which in a side-bar on the web page previously had listed the University of St. Thomas as among them. (Interestingly, that side-bar quoted the St. Thomas web site in expressing the school's "mission [as] inspired by Catholic social thought, the Catholic Church's historical commitment to advancing social justice, particularly helping those who are most in need of our assistance," a message which doesn't exactly ring in stereotypically conservative tones).
After the inaccuracy of this categorization was brought to its attention, NPR has removed the side-bar on UST from its web page and will be reading the following message from UST Dean Tom Mengler on the air: "St. Thomas is a Catholic law school, and we take our religious identity seriously, but there is nothing 'conservative' about it. The vast majority of our faculty and student body are left-of-center politically, and our faculty includes individuals who are openly gay, who support abortion rights, who oppose the death penalty, and who have worked on behalf of other 'liberal' causes. Far from being politically conservative, St. Thomas is striving to prove that a law school can take religion seriously without ascribing to any political agenda."
One of my colleagues, Charles Reid, put this whole controversy about categories into wonderful perspective: "We need to remember that we are very much in the culture changing business. We are a Christian Catholic law school situated in a highly secular environment. News media, like NPR, will always try to translate the Christian message into a secular framework –- red state vs. blue state, left vs. right, and so forth. Our purpose in being is to challenge these categories. The message of Catholic social thought is clear -– it is to protect the most vulnerable among us (innocent life from conception to natural death); it is to protect human dignity in a wide variety of contexts (in prisons, in immigration centers, and so forth). It is to welcome the stranger and tend to the needs of the poor. It is to be a witness against violence (just-war thought for instance, and the effort to restrain state violence). These are signs of contradiction to the secular media. They will wish to pigeon-hole us. In responding to the secular media, we should not lose sight of who we are; we should not buy into conventional categories; we should be, in short, a sign of contradiction."
And it is that to which we aspire: to be a contradiction to the secular world. We seek to build a diverse academic and faith-based community that transcends secular and political boundaries, thereby allowing unusual cooperative projects and dynamic conversations to emerge.
Transitioning from the ill-founded attempt at political categorization of our institution to the question of what makes such an institution authentically Catholic, let me offer a few personal thoughts as well, in partial response to earlier questions raised on this site (and directed toward Richard Meyers and me) about the legitimacy of a mandatory course that would include Catholic thought. At present, Jurisprudence is a required upper-level course at the University of St. Thomas. While the course surveys the broad range of jurisprudential thought, it definitely does include study of the Catholic intellectual tradition, which typically is sadly in similar courses at most law schools. The faculty presently is considering addition of a foundations course to the first-year curriculum, focusing on integration of faith and values into professional life. Catholic intellectual concepts and social thought presumably would be given significant, but again not exclusive, attention in such a course.
Greg Kalscheur put it very well when he said that Catholic law schools should "be places where the Catholic intellectual tradition is alive and at home -- not imposed on anyone, but present, vital, articulate, and thoroughly involved in the academic conversation that is at the heart of the life of the university." Less eloquently, I simply tell new students who ask me about it that we are always Catholic, but not only Catholic. By that I mean that whenever philosophical foundations or values are addressed, the Catholic perspective will be present, even as other perspectives are also included.
Greg Sisk
A new paper of mine, "Changing Minds: Proselytism, Religious Freedom, and the First Amendment," is available on-line, at Larry Solum's "Legal Theory" blog. (Thanks to the University of St. Thomas Law Journal -- which is publishing the essay -- for permitting me to post it, and to MOJ-er Patrick Brennan for inviting me to write it.) Here is the abstract:
Proselytism is, as Paul Griffiths has observed, a topic enjoying renewed attention in recent years[.] What’s more, the practice, aims, and effects of proselytism are increasingly framed not merely in terms of piety and zeal; they are seen as matters of geopolitical, cultural, and national-security significance as well. Indeed, it is fair to say that one of today's more pressing challenges is the conceptual and practical tangle of religious liberty, free expression, cultural integrity, and political stability. This essay is an effort to unravel that tangle by drawing on the religious-freedom-related work and teaching of the late Pope John Paul II and on a salient theme in the law interpreting the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Running through and shaping our First Amendment doctrines, precedents, and values is a solicitude for changing minds - our own, as well as others'. Put differently, the Amendment is understood as protecting and celebrating not just expression but persuasion - or, if you like, proselytism. There are, therefore, reasons grounded in our Constitution and traditions for regarding proselytism and its legal protection not as threats to the common good and the freedom of conscience, but instead as integral to the flourishing and good exercise of that freedom. This same solicitude for persuasion and freedom pervades the writing of Pope John Paul II, who regularly insisted that the Church's evangelical mission does not restrict freedom but rather promotes it. The Church proposes - thereby inviting the exercise of human freedom - she imposes nothing. The claim here, then, is that proposing, persuading, proselytizing, and evangelizing are at the heart of, and need not undermine, not only the freedoms protected by the Constitution, but also those that are inherent in our dignity as human persons.
Rick
That's what the NPR website calls the school to which Rob Vischer is migrating, and where Tom Berg is already well settled. Click here. Rob, Tom: True/false?
At a Glance:
Conservative Christian Law Schools
Regent University School of Law: Founded by televangelist
Pat Robertson, Regent University School of Law was established in 1986
as a full-time, three-year law program. It gained full accreditation
from the American Bar Association (ABA) in 1996 -- the first
religiously conservative law school to do so. Today, 500 students
attend the school. Students come from 44 states, over 413 colleges and
universities and numerous foreign countries.
"The number one distinction in our school is teaching from a religious perspective; faith impacts what we do in the classrooms." -- Dean Jeff Brauch
Liberty University School of Law:
Televangelist Jerry Falwell founded Liberty University in Lynchburg,
Va., in 1971 as a fundamentalist Baptist university. The law school
welcomed its first students in the fall of 2004 and is working towards
provisional accreditation from the ABA. Currently, 56 students from 22
states and one foreign country (India) attend the school.
"Liberty
University School of Law is founded upon the premise that there is an
integral relationship between faith and reason, and that both have
their origin in the Triune God." -- Liberty's Web site
University of St. Thomas School of Law:
The Catholic-affiliated University of St. Thomas Law School is based in
Minneapolis, Minn. It was founded in 1885 by Archbishop John Ireland.
The Great Depression forced the law school to close in 1933, but it
reopened in 1999. The School of Law is provisionally accredited by the
ABA. It has presented a plan to achieve accreditation within three
years.
"Our mission is inspired by Catholic social
thought, the Catholic Church's historical commitment to advancing
social justice, particularly helping those who are most in need of our
assistance." -- St. Thomas' Web site
Ave Maria School of Law:
Located in Anne Arbor, Mich., Ave Maria School of Law opened its doors
in 2000. The school was founded by devout Catholic Thomas S. Monaghan,
founder of Domino's Pizza. Students from 43 states and 125 universities
enrolled for the 2004-2005 school year. On May 2, 2005, the ABA gave a
recommendation of full accreditation to Ave Maria School of Law. The
school will receive final word from the ABA in August 2005.
"We
want to equip students with an understanding of the underpinning that
supports the law, and an appreciation for the philosophy and the moral
dimensions of the law." -- Associate Dean for External Affairs Michael Kenney
Web Resources