|
Bishops approve Ex Corde
norms
By PAMELA SCHAEFFER
NCR Staff Washington
Brushing aside pleas for delay and predictions of acrimony and
dissent, U.S. Catholic bishops voted overwhelmingly Nov. 16 to set in motion a
plan for certifying professors who teach Catholic theology. The norms, approved
223-31 at the bishops annual meeting here, give bishops a mechanism for
overseeing orthodoxy at the nations approximately 235 Catholic colleges
and universities, while leaving unanswered many questions about how the rules
will be applied.
Details are to be worked out in coming months, with implementation
to begin one year after the Vatican approves the plan. While Vatican approval
is not guaranteed, it is expected, possibly within the next few months.
The provision for controls on theologians have been the most hotly
contested element of the norms, nearly a decade in the development, which aim
to curb what critics describe as a trend toward secularization at many Catholic
universities. The norms, now in their third draft, are required under
provisions of Pope John Paul IIs 1990 apostolic letter Ex Corde
Ecclesiae (From the Heart of the Church). The popes
letter makes an eloquent appeal for preserving Catholic identity in higher
education.
While waiting for Vatican approval, bishops are to begin dialogues
with theologians aimed at developing a uniform procedure for requesting and
granting certification, described in the norms as a mandatum, or
mandate. The mandate is called for in Canon 812 of the churchs 1983 Code
of Canon Law. The Vatican in 1996 rejected a previous draft of the
implementation norms, though, like the present draft, it had been approved
overwhelmingly by U.S. bishops. That draft, however, had sidestepped a specific
application of Canon 812.
Bishop John J. Leibrecht, head of an ad hoc committee that has
shepherded the norms through the various drafts, said procedural
recommendations will come before the full body of bishops for a vote at a later
date.
Among amendments approved by bishops before the Nov. 16 vote was a
provision for bishops to withdraw the mandatum, or certification, that has been
granted by a bishop of another diocese.
The vote on the norms pleased conservatives and dismayed many
theologians, who fear the new rules could usher in an era of discord and
repression related to what theologians teach and write. Pleas for delay in
approving the document had come from theologians, university administrators and
a few bishops speaking before the vote.
Mercy Sr. Margaret Farley, professor at Yale Divinity School and
president of the Catholic Theological Society of America, said shed
talked to many theologians who were very worried.
Clearly some theologians who see their role as a kind of
mission are pleased with this, she said. However the great majority
are dismayed and worried, wondering what the consequences of this will be. It
will create a climate of suspicion not conducive to scholarly work or
education, she said.
In a published statement, the society said, Theologians
recognize the concerns of bishops for genuinely Catholic theology and they
share these concerns. However, efforts to control the work of theologians, as
they are laid out in this document, are both unnecessary and potentially
damaging to the best work of theology.
Daniel Maguire, professor of theology at Marquette University in
Milwaukee, was critical of theologians and the Association of Catholic Colleges
and Universities, which represents administrators, for what he said had been a
weak voice in recent debates. I think the Catholic theological community
has been very pusillanimous in response to this draconian intrusion into the
academe, he said. When the camel announced it was about to put its
nose under the tent, the Catholic Theological Society and the ACCU began to
negotiate with the camel.
Maguire said he would not request a mandate when the time comes.
In my judgment, I have a mandate to teach and dont need one from
anyone external to the academy, he said. My mandate comes from my
competence and my conscience.
At the bishops meeting, the strongest spokesman against the
document, Archbishop Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee, warned bishops that it
would create a pastoral disaster and squelch the further dialogue
bishops seek. Weakland said approval of the norms would make theologians
defensive and mistrustful by putting their reputations and
livelihoods on the line. Under the new rules, theologians would be
subject not only to whims of individual bishops, he said, but also
to the suspicions of vigilante groups. Weakland added,
Theres a tremendous unrest in my heart about the
document.
Cardinal John J. OConnor of New York, though prevented by
health problems from attending the meeting, sent a strong statement supporting
the document and opposing delay.
In a telephone interview, Jesuit Fr. Joseph OHare, president
of Fordham University in New York, said he is confident that most bishops will
apply the norms in a wise and sensitive way. Nevertheless,
OHare said he is disappointed in the document. I think
its more juridical than it needs to be, he said.
Leibrecht was among bishops who put a benign face on the new
rules. He said his committee has incorporated flexibility on some provisions
into the latest draft, making it more acceptable to university administrators.
While no document can be perfect, we do believe we have made good faith
efforts to listen to everyone and reflect concerns as best we can, he
said. In a news conference, he said the bishops role vis-à-vis
universities is one of relationship, not control. The document does
not authorize bishops to hire or dismiss faculty, he said.
Leibrecht said application of the norms would be reviewed 10 years
after they go into effect.
Leibrecht said the committee had worked hard to avoid any language
that would exacerbate any legal concerns that college and
university administrators had expressed. Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua of
Philadelphia said language in the fourth draft had minimized legal risks.
Thats not to say there wont be litigation, but the risk of
negative decision provided universities have a good lawyer is
minimal, he said.
The requirement for a mandatum will apply to all theologians, even
those who have been teaching for many years, Leibrecht said. He noted that the
canon law from which the U.S. plan is derived has been in place since 1983. No
one is grandfathered in, he said in a news conference.
Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles said in the long discussion
before the vote that it represented a very historic moment, one
that would help Catholic leaders be an influence in the society in which
we live.
I would say to presidents of Catholic colleges and
universities, You have nothing to fear from us, from the church, from the
implementation of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, Mahony said.
Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, speaking in favor of approval,
said, Catholic colleges and universities are not just part of our legacy
but, please God, will be an integral part of our future.
Bishop John DArcy of South Bend, Ind., who favored delay to
allow for more dialogue on the role of academic freedom in Catholic education,
said, While we can use Protestant universities as a wakeup call
we
dont have to go down that road.
In a report to bishops on The Catholic University of America by
its president, Fr. David OConnell, the day before the vote on university
norms, OConnell said the university had succeeded in being
distinctly Catholic and credible among our peers. It can be done
intelligently and well, he said. It can be done without fear.
The Catholic University is chartered by the Vatican. Theologians on its faculty
are subject to Vatican approval.
Although the higher education issue clearly dominated the
conference, and headlines afterward, bishops dealt with less controversial
issues. Among those, the bishops:
- Adopted a pastoral message on charity, stressing the
governments role in guaranteeing basic human needs and calling on
Catholics to make a Jubilee pledge for justice, charity and peace. We are
shocked and scandalized by the global dimensions of poverty and
exclusion, the bishops said in their message.
- Approved a plan to fold the bishops two-conference
structure into one, called the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,
and double the number of regional representatives on the administrative
committee to 26. The effect, some bishops said, is to shift power away from
more specialized committees that rely on input from lay advisers and expert
consultants.
- Discussed a subcommittees report on lay ministry, a
controversial topic that affects more than 29,000 lay ministers who assist some
27,000 U.S. priests. Several bishops warned of dangers associated with blurring
distinctions between lay ministers and priests.
- Agreed on a plan for informing bishops of any preexisting
problems when candidates for the priesthood change seminaries.
- Discussed at length and called for revisions in a policy
statement on church architecture. A more prominent place for the tabernacle in
churches was an important concern for many bishops. Bishop Sean OMalley
of Fall River, Mass., complained of the suburbanization of the heavenly
Jerusalem, sizing up recent trends in church building.
Statement of Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland
in opposition to the new rules for Catholic colleges and
universities Bishop Leibrecht, I rise to speak against passage of
this document now.
Because we have heard so few speak in opposition to
this implementation document now, I hope my fellow bishops will listen to me
carefully. I have tremendous unrest in my heart. I am very uneasy about it. I
believe passing this document now will create a pastoral disaster for the
church in the U.S.A. I feel it is not the right moment. We have done much
dialoguing with the presidents of Catholic colleges and universities. I hope
that good spirit will continue. But I fear it will not with the juridical
norms. We have not had the same good spirit with the theologians. Probably
the tension between hierarchy and theologians now is the highest I have ever
seen it in my 36 years as a superior in the Catholic church. Now theologians
will be ever more defensive and have less trust. We have talked about
procedures for granting or denying the mandatum, but the real question
will be the criteria upon which such decisions are made. Theologians also have
souls and must be the object of our concern. Their reputation and their
livelihood are at stake. They are also not just afraid of being at the whims
of individual bishops, but also the object of vigilante groups. I can tell you,
my fellow bishops, that it is not easy to find out or monitor what is being
taught in our church. Having been chancellor of San Anselmo in Rome for 10
years, and having had to deal with several cases where a student denounced a
professor to the Holy Office, I can assure you it is not easy to find out what
is being taught and bring justice to a situation. In addition, by placing so
much emphasis on the mandatum for theologians, I wonder if we are not
putting too much emphasis on the influence of theologians in a Catholic
university. We must not forget our role as teachers with regard to what is
taught in our faculties -- English, history, philosophy, business schools or --
as we learned with the economic pastoral letter (Economic Justice for
All, 1986), the economics faculty as well. Because of the tension
between hierarchy and theologians and the distrust that exists among so many, I
feel that it will lead only to public bickering and public disputes that will
bring harm to the church. Non est tempus opportunum. |
National Catholic Reporter, December 3,
1999
|
|