Kevin Lee asked me to post his reaction to Alison Sulentic's reaction to my question about the use of the Compenium as a teaching tool. (Sorry for the delay in posting - I just returned from picking up my daughter from summer camp.) Kevin does not share Alison's sense that the Compendium overemphasizes the writings of Pope John Paul II, given the length of his tenure during a time of "radical development" in the Church's social teaching. He observes:
"It may be that students will have difficulty grasping the accomplishments of this soon-to-be-canonized pope, but I think rather than presenting his thought against other less authoritative voices, it might be more productive to attempt to locate his thought in the fullness of the Catholic intellectual heritage by clearly articulating his reading of that tradition with as much hermeneutical good will as can be brought to the task. This is a very demanding task, indeed, because he was a complex thinker and the text tradition of his work is in a nascent stage. But, I would encourage all of us to read deeply of John Paul II’s thought in order to make a cogent critique of it, rather than to risk allowing the students to dismiss it without fully appreciating what it has to offer.
"I understand all too well the problems involved in trying to come to terms with the complexity of John Paul’s thought. I’ve been working for several years on my doctorial dissertation, which attempts to unfold the meaning of his conception of the human person for the Rule of Law. What I have found is that to understand his thought it is vital to get into the primary sources from his early life as a scholar of philosophical ethics. Here you can find a number of helpful works. In addition to the standard ones, Acting Person, Love and Responsibility, etc., what I have found most important for understanding his assessment of moral philosophy in the Catholic intellectual heritage is his collection of essays known as the “Lublin Lectures.” It is here that he takes up Aquinas, Kant, Scheler and several others in a robust discussion of the nature of the moral good and justice in the context of a magnificent discussion of the phenomenology of moral action. This is heady stuff, but well worth reading. That’s the rub. For all its value, there is no reliable and authoritative English translation of the Lublin Lectures on the market today. If you read German, they are available in Lubliner Vorlesungen, ed. Juliusz Stroynowki (Stuttgart-Degerloch: Seewald Verlag, 1981). This translation seems very good, but my German is very bad. Kenneth Schmitz relied on this translation in his very useful book, At the Center of the Human Drama (CUA Press). This text, along with Rocco Buttiglione’s Karol Wojtyla, The Thought of the Man Who Because John Paul II, are excellent background sources on John Paul’s thought and its relation to twentieth century Neo-Scholastic thought and phenomenological ethics. I think, given the relative innocence of most students of the Catholic intellectual tradition in general and Catholic moral philosophy, let alone secular moral philosophy, that picking and choosing among texts is quite difficult. Unfortunately, there is no single work on the market today with a sustained analysis of his Lublin Lectures, although I plan to have one out soon."
I don't disagree with the importance of John Paul II to the development of Catholic Social Thought (and did not read Alison as doing so either). That does not mean, however, that having students read other sources in addition to his teachings risks the students dismissing his thought without fully appreciating it. Certainly it can't be said that no other voices are worthwhile and important to the development of the Church's thought. It is this that leads Alison (and several others whom I have read) to hesitate about overreliance on the Compendium.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Alison Sulentic from Duquesne sent this reponse to my query about the possible use of the Compendium as a teaching tool:
"I have spent some time reading the Compendium over the past few months. I teach a class at Duquesne Law School entitled "Faith, Justice & Social Responsibility" and, like you, I assign the encyclicals and other magesterial documents. However, at this point I don't think I will be assigning significant portions of the Compendium in lieu of the original encyclicals and Vatican II documents. I agree with the review in America a few months ago (I think it was by Tom Massaro) which noted that the Compendium is heavily footnoted to JP II's writings and that this has the somewhat unfortunate effect of unduly emphasizing his writings in comparison to other sources.
"While JP II's contribution to CST is important, I think it is equally important for the students to see that CST's roots extend well beyond JP II's work. In my class, I assign excerpts by Aristotle and Aquinas, as well as materials from most of the major social encyclicals and Vatican II. Then I supplement this with materials from the Catholic Bishops' Conference and other non-magisterial writers. My concern is that the intellectual history of the development of CST might be less apparent if one relied solely on the Compendium. So, that's my two-cents on the issue that you raised on MOJ, for what it's worth."
Thanks to Alison for her helpful comments.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Mike's Scaperlanda's most recent post contains some suggestions by Kevin Lee for the Catholic Legal Theory booklist. One of Kevin's suggestions is the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, which as he observes provides a nice comprehensive overview of the Church's social teachings. Kevin suggests that "[a] close reading of [the Compendium] might make for a course on Catholic Social Teaching all by itself." On the other side, I have also heard some critical views expressed of the book.
I'm curious about people's assessments of the Compendium both generally and specifically with respect to the following. Last spring, when I taught my seminar in CST in the Law I assigned either the entirety of or portions of vaious encyclicals and other church documents, requiring the students to purchase the O'Brien and Shannon collection and posting links for them to other documents not included in that collection. As we all know, many of these are not the easiest readings for students. I'm wondering whether, when I teach the course again in the spring, I ought to consider having them purchase the Compendium instead, using primarily that rather than the original documents. I have mixed feelings and would be grateful for the thoughts of those who have evaulated the Compendium.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Since Mike posted his request for a reading list for those interested in the development of Catholic Legal Theory on Aug. 22, a number of people (including myself) have weighed in with suggestions. The list is already fairly extensive and I sense we have only scratched the surface.
Obviously one question is what reading (foundational or otherwise) is necessary or useful for those of us engaged in Catholic legal theory scholarship. However, since the discussion is in the context of discussing what is an essential (or important) part of a Catholic legal education, an important question is also how do we turn this list into a workable list of reading for our students. As Kevin Lee's comments to Mark point out, we can't assume familiarity with any texts, regardless of how foundational. I taught Catholic Social Thought and the Law for the first time last spring at St. John's and culling a "reasonable" amount of reading for my students was no easy manner. (I put "reasonable" in quotes, since I suspect some of the students in the seminar would argue that the reading each week exceeded reasonable...although to their credit, they read it all.) So I'd be interested in some discussion of reading lists in the context of courses (either specific courses or broader courses of study, depending on how the school structrures their offerings), which requires some prioritizing among an almost endless number of books.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Mark's advanced list of CST literarure is a good start. Just a reminder that in addition to readings with a broad coverage of CST, there are a number of books that address applications of Catholic thought to particular questions/legal areas that should be included as well. The couple that jump to mind are:
Massaro and Shannon, Catholic Perspectives on Peace and War
Cortright and Naughton, Rethinking the Purpose of Business: Interdisciplinary Essays from the Catholic Social Tradition.
Naughton, Managing as if Faith Mattered
