« The basic problem... | Main | Could it be an "0?" »

January 07, 2006

Evangelicals and Catholics, Not Together

There's a quite interesting piece in the WSJ today about professor's faith and religious colleges and universities.

The general point concerns some institutions' determination to beef up their particular religious identity. Notre Dame is mentioned as committed and succeeding in this regard, and Boston College is noted:

At another Catholic school, Boston College, some administrators would like to hire more people committed to its religious mission, but its faculty has proved "particularly resistant," says a 2004 report by the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities. To achieve its goals, the college is contemplating establishing research centers on Catholic intellectual tradition and Catholic education. Georgetown University, also a prominent Catholic school, appointed its first vice president for mission and ministry, a Jesuit priest, in 2003.

Now, giving us Catholics an especially interesting portion to chew on here is the central story of the piece, which concerns a Wheaton professor who converted to Catholicism and...was fired.

Wheaton, like many evangelical colleges, requires full-time faculty members to be Protestants and sign a statement of belief in "biblical doctrine that is consonant with evangelical Christianity." In a letter notifying Mr. Hochschild of the college's decision, Wheaton's president said his "personal desire" to retain "a gifted brother in Christ" was outweighed by his duty to employ "faculty who embody the institution's evangelical Protestant convictions."

Mr. Hochschild, 33 years old, who was considered by his department a shoo-in for tenure, says he's still willing to sign the Wheaton faith statement. He left last spring, taking a 10% pay cut and roiling his family life, to move to a less-renowned Catholic college.

It is worth noting that before coming into full communion, this professor was Episcopalian, signed the statement, and had no problem. Are Episcopalians sola Scriptura? I didn't think so.

When he got his doctorate, Mr. Hochschild was offered jobs by Wheaton and a Catholic school -- Mount St. Mary's University in Emmitsburg, Md. Says Carol Hinds, a former Mount St. Mary's provost: "He was a Protestant, but he was a faithful person. He could contribute to the mission." Feeling "in between" the two schools' spiritual traditions, Mr. Hochschild chose Wheaton.

He signed Wheaton's faith statement, which asserts that the Bible is "inerrant," meaning without error, and "of supreme and final authority." Wheaton President Mr. Litfin asked in a job interview how Mr. Hochschild understood that passage, according to their later correspondence. Mr. Hochschild said he agreed, but added that the Bible should be read in light of "authoritative traditions," an example of which would be church councils. Although that view is closer to Catholicism than evangelical Protestantism, the president approved the appointment.

Mr. Hochschild got on well with colleagues and students, and University of Notre Dame Press agreed to publish his revised dissertation. "He was excellent on every score," says Wheaton's philosophy department chairman, Robert O'Connor.

Yet a question nagged Mr. Hochschild: Why am I not a Catholic? As he saw it, evangelical Protestantism was vaguely defined and had a weak scholarly tradition, which sharpened his admiration for Catholicism's self-assurance and intellectual history. "I even had students who asked me why I wasn't Catholic," he says. "I didn't have a decent answer."

His wife, Paige, said her husband's distaste for the "evangelical suspicion of philosophy" at the school might have contributed to his ultimate conversion. The Hochschilds say some evangelicals worry that learning about philosophy undermines students' religious convictions.

During a 2003 academic conference at Notre Dame, Mr. Hochschild revealed his anguish to another attendee, a priest. The priest replied that Mr. Hochschild seemed, in his heart, to have already embraced Catholicism. Although he had taken Communion in the Episcopalian church, Mr. Hochschild realized after the conversation that he longed to "obey the Gospel commands to eat the flesh of Christ [as a Catholic]." Returning home, he signed up for a Catholic initiation class.

Aware of Wheaton's Protestants-only policy, Mr. Hochschild recalls thinking he would probably lose his job. In September 2003, he told the philosophy chairman, Mr. O'Connor, of his intention to convert. Hoping Mr. Hochschild could stay, Mr. O'Connor notified the administration.

In general, Catholics believe the Pope is the final authority on religious matters. Protestants reject that authority and generally profess a direct relationship between the individual and the Almighty.

A months-long debate followed between President Litfin and Mr. Hochschild. They argued over whether the professor could subscribe to Wheaton's faith statement, which faculty must reaffirm annually. Like most evangelical colleges, Wheaton bases its employment practices on such a document.

Wheaton's 12-point statement doesn't explicitly exclude Catholics. But its emphasis on Scripture as the "supreme and final authority" and its aligning of Wheaton with "evangelical Christianity" were unmistakably Protestant, Mr. Litfin wrote to Mr. Hochschild in late 2003. Because Catholics regard the Bible and the pope as equally authoritative, a Catholic "cannot faithfully affirm" the Wheaton statement, he continued.

Now, those of us who spend time kvetching about Catholic universities being drained of Catholic identity are obliged, it seems, to give Wheaton due props for seeking to maintain its identity. However, the move still grates, mostly because the fellow was teaching medieval philosophy, for pete's sake.  I'm not saying that an evangelical Christian cannot teach this material, or that a Roman Catholic is automatically more suited simply because of his or her faith, but it seems to me that if you've bent enough to include courses that touch on, you know, Catholicism...how do you justify excluding Catholics from teaching?

Meanwhile, Wheaton hasn't replaced Mr. Hochschild. One obstacle: Most scholars of medieval philosophy are Catholics.

Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d8345b176969e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Evangelicals and Catholics, Not Together:

» A professors firing after his conversion highlights a new orthodoxy at religious colleges from titusonenine
(From the from page of todays Wall Street Journal). WHEATON, Ill. Wheaton College was delighted to have assistant professor Joshua Hochschild teach students about medieval philosopher Thomas Aquinas, one of Roman Catholicisms fo... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 8, 2006 8:58:24 PM

» I'm too principled for this church, too principled for this church, so principled it hurts from The Japery
Another Pantagruelist stirring the pot! And at the outset I must vouch for Prof. Hochschild's character of restraint. For over a year now I have been urging, nay, begging, the good Professor to allow me to stand as middle man... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 17, 2006 11:18:50 AM

» I'm too principled for this church, too principled for this church, so principled it hurts from The Japery
Another Pantagruelist stirring the pot! And at the outset I must vouch for Prof. Hochschild's character of restraint. For over a year now I have been urging, nay, begging, the good Professor to allow me to stand as middle man... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 17, 2006 11:44:00 AM

» I'm too principled for this church, too principled for this church, so principled it hurts from The Japery
Another Pantagruelist stirring the pot! And at the outset I must vouch for Prof. Hochschild's character of restraint. For over a year now I have been urging, nay, begging, the good Professor to allow me to stand as middle man... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 17, 2006 11:46:38 AM

» I'm too principled for this church, too principled for this church, so principled it hurts from The Japery
Another Pantagruelist stirring the pot! And at the outset I must vouch for Prof. Hochschild's character of restraint. For over a year now I have been urging, nay, begging, the good Professor to allow me to stand as middle man... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 17, 2006 11:50:17 AM

» I'm too principled for this church, too principled for this church, so principled it hurts from The Japery
Another Pantagruelist stirring the pot! And at the outset I must vouch for Prof. Hochschild's character of restraint. For over a year now I have been urging, nay, begging, the good Professor to allow me to stand as middle man... [Read More]

Tracked on Jan 17, 2006 11:57:33 AM

Comments

Because it's a protestant school, they know what they're supposed to believe, they know who pays the bills and they're true to their mission.

We could learn from them how to stick to our own guns. We could at least admire their guts. We don't have any most of the time.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 7, 2006 9:59:22 PM

Besides, a high profile convert like that is a great thing. Reminds me of Newman. Wheaton's loss. Our gain.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 7, 2006 10:00:31 PM

Justified thus:

1. There are likely others in the academic labor pool who capable of teaching medieval philosophy and are fully on board with Wheaton College's institutional mission;

2. If there are not such, medieval philosophy is not an indispensible part of the curriculum;

3. That a comprehensive prohibition on the employment of those who are not Protestant Christians is more readily retained in the institutional memory and set of habits than a murkier qualified prohibition;

4. That there may be a sharply circumscribed number of sustainable equilibria in academic institutional life in our time: i.e. that you may have a choice of maintaining an institutional mission through somewhat crude decision rules or to see the institution decompose into a holding company composed of faculty of standard type who fancy themselves as the institution's proprietors and who would be "particularly resistant" to any effort to restore the institution's foundational purposes;

5. You cannot tell readily in advance whether you can establish a happy medium or not, so it is best to maintain risk-averse options.

Posted by: Art Deco at Jan 7, 2006 10:00:56 PM

The Catholic Church requires a “statement of belief” as does Wheaton.
It is not enforced. Too extreme, I suppose.

The Code of Canon Law, Canon 833, Nos. 5-8
----
The following are obliged to take an Oath of Fidelity and to make the Profession of Faith:
vicars general, episcopal vicars and judicial vicars; "at the beginning of their term of office, pastors, the rector of a seminary and the professors of theology and philosophy in seminaries; those to be promoted to the diaconate"; "the rectors of an ecclesiastical or Catholic university at the beginning of the rector's term of office"; and, "at the beginning of their term of office, teachers in any universities whatsoever who teach disciplines which deal with faith or morals"; and "superiors in clerical religious institutes and societies of apostolic life in accord with the norm of the constitutions."

Oath of Fidelity

I, N., on assuming the office __________ promise that I shall always preserve communion with the Catholic Church whether in the words I speak or in the way I act.

With great care and fidelity I shall carry out the responsibilities by which I am bound in relation both to the universal church and to the particular church in which I am called to exercise my service according to the requirements of the law.

In carrying out my charge, which is committed to me in the name of the church, I shall preserve the deposit of faith in its entirety, hand it on faithfully and make it shine forth. As a result, whatsoever teachings are contrary I shall shun.

I shall follow and foster the common discipline of the whole church and shall look after the observance of all ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law.

With Christian obedience I shall associate myself with what is expressed by the holy shepherds as authentic doctors and teachers of the faith or established by them as the church's rulers. And I shall faithfully assist diocesan bishops so that apostolic activity, to be exercised by the mandate and in the name of the church, is carried out in the communion of the same church.

May God help me in this way and the holy Gospels of God which I touch with my hands.
----

Posted by: tcreek at Jan 7, 2006 10:30:42 PM

Anyone who works for the church should have to proclaim this in public. I'm sorry, but we have way too many fakes out there.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 7, 2006 10:41:19 PM

I agree with Wheaton College and with the posters who think Catholic colleges and universities should have as much courage of their convictions.

It seems like the WSJ is just trying to promote a controversy.

Posted by: Margaret at Jan 7, 2006 10:53:58 PM

As I started reading the article this morning I got as far as the first sentence about the professor teaching St. Thomas Aquinas and had a strong suspicion where his part of the story was going.

I also wonder why being Episcopal wasn't a problem - no Pope? But then why the ban on Orthodox, too? And how, knowing how the school intends the faith statement to be interpreted, he could still be willing to sign it. Perhaps he hadn't worked out that issue yet.

I am pleased to see Catholic colleges and universities named as tryiing to bring more rigor and practicing faith back into their faculty. Hope they succeed.

Posted by: Elaine at Jan 7, 2006 10:58:27 PM

"Because Catholics regard the Bible and the pope as equally authoritative..."

Huh? Where do they get this stuff?

Posted by: anonymous seminarian at Jan 8, 2006 12:36:40 AM

Who is stirring this pot? Did somebody seek out this professor, or did he seek out the media? This is an intra-Evangelical issue, too, so perhaps those Evangelicals aiming for academic respectability have adopted the guy as a cause celebre to break down old standards.

I sure hope the professor didn't go whining to the press. Academic positions are hard to come by, but decisions have their consequences.

As described in the article, his rationale for assenting to the faith statement sounds horribly jesuitical--not a good impression. Best of luck to him, though.

Posted by: Kevin Jones at Jan 8, 2006 12:52:10 AM

Well I don't really feel I need to give Wheaton its props and I don't think that Catholic colleges should follow Wheaton's lead in firing professors who are not professing Catholics. I do believe that Catholic colleges need to do a better job "hiring for mission" as Peter Steinfels puts it in A People Adrift. And there are certain areas, like the theological sciences, where courses in Catholic theology (particularly those aimed at undergraduates) should generally be taught by Catholics. But the presence of Protestant (and Orthodox) theologians and scripture scholars in Catholic theology departments is not necessarily a bad thing. The reverse is also true.

Or--if you want me to put it more bluntly--any policy that would have deprived Notre Dame's students of the presence of Stanley Hauerwas (who taught at ND for a number of years) is just blitheringly idiotic. One could say the same about a policy that would keep students at Baylor University from hearing the lectures of Luke Timothy Johnson.

Posted by: Peter Nixon at Jan 8, 2006 1:56:25 AM

"Because Catholics regard the Bible and the pope as equally authoritative..."

Huh? Where do they get this stuff?

Yea, exactly, in all my years of studying and teaching Catholic theology, both here and in Germany, I have never even heard of anything like that ever having been said by any reputable theological authority. Even among the most ultramontane folks, in my experience, to say that the pope and scripture are equally anything is totally off the wall. This opinion might come up in the comments of a blog somewhere; but it seems to be that it is in the realm of theological alien abductions.

Posted by: Jack2 at Jan 8, 2006 2:12:52 AM

I cannot imagine that someone who doesn't believe Catholic theology enough to convert to it would ever be qualified to teach it.

Re Notre Dame: I have a son who went there for 1 year before transferring to a public university. It was all I could do to get him to cross the threshhold of a Catholic church for years afterwards, no thanks to the crackpots and derelicts at Notre Dame, so don't tell me about Notre Dame, okay?

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 2:33:04 AM

I'm one of the Wheaton Catholics - that is, one of an ever-growing group of Protestant Wheaton students/alums received into the Catholic Church. The question of whether the prof, as an Episcopalian, really believed in sola scriptura is intriguing. From my experience, faculty at Wheaton hold a mix of views, many of which would not fit a strict interpretation of the Statement of Faith. Most of the dissent is overlooked (though, the year after I graduated, an anthropology prof was fired for teaching that humans evolved from lower forms of life). But the line has to be drawn somewhere, doesn't it? Becoming Catholic was just going too far.

Posted by: Nathaniel at Jan 8, 2006 3:04:49 AM

Props to the professor for sticking his neck out, whatever his reasoning. I mean, it's not exactly St Edmund Campion stuff, but he did take a pay cut...

Posted by: fidens at Jan 8, 2006 6:51:20 AM

Yes, please, please, please do not tell Michigan Catholic about Notre Dame. Michigan Catholic's experience is normative, everyone.

There, I hope everyone gets the message out, because everyone should know that the condition at Notre Dame is absolutely static, and that Michigan Catholic is all over this like white on rice. I'm sure that Michigan Catholic will share with us more normative pronouncements taken from canonized experience that does admit of nonconforming experiences, which must be dismissed out of hand. I can hardly wait for the oath of loyalty we will be asked to sign in which we pledge fealty to the experience of Michigan Catholic. Gee, where can I sign up for that?

By the way, that offer for a free copy of "A Rulebook for Arguments" is still on the table. The fallacy is called "The Hasty Generalization." You really, really need to look at it, or to start using that philosophy degree.

I am not without sympathy for your son's negative experience at ND. I'm an alumnus, a former CSC seminarian, and am thoroughly alienated from my alma mater. Yet, I am aware of many positive things happening there. The blogosphere is huge enough to convince me that my experiences there [and I had far more than your son, because I was with the Holy Cross Fathers for seven years] are not normative, and that the campus, and more important, the faculty has been changing, even *gulp* improving in some important places.

Posted by: Fr. Brian Stanley at Jan 8, 2006 6:56:09 AM

I went to Notre Dame, too, very recently, and was friendly with many graduate students in the philosophy department and the history department, where they have quite prominent evangelical scholars on the faculty, who drew, quite naturally, many graduate students in philosophy and history who were evangelical and who went on to teach at Wheaton or Calvin or other small liberal arts evangelical schools. One of the interesting points that someone made to me about this situation was that--like the story about this professor at Wheaton--there was some kind of irony or something a little troubling about the fact that Notre Dame, a Catholic college, was training a top-notch bunch of evangelical professors to teach at schools that would not be similarly open to the expression, training, or even the acceptance of Catholic professors and students, on their campuses.

Posted by: Mimi at Jan 8, 2006 10:27:08 AM

By the way, I agree with Mr. Nixon on teh topic of Stanley Hauerwas. I had Prof. Hauerwas for his course on the Papal Encyclicals, and I do not think you could get a professor who was more enamored with encyclicals than Prof. Hauerwas. And he got his students to look at them critically, and to see the Truth. Prof. Hauerwas would get excited about teaching these encyclicals to his students, and his enthusiasm would frequently provoke the Texan into some colorful language. He was very fond of John Paul the Great's writing, and extremely loyal to the magisterium in this course [I can only speak of this one course that I had with him], and it made me an admirer of his. It was a sad day when he left for Duke. The same sadness for Prof. Robert Wilber, a Protestant church historian, who left ND for Virginia at the same time I think, and has since become Catholic. He was another of the "crypto-Catholics" there, who taught fidelity to the Church. Fr. McBrien had not a small role to play in their departures, as I recall, not that that would surprise anyone who regularly reads here.

Posted by: Fr. Brian Stanley at Jan 8, 2006 10:29:44 AM

Fr. Brian and Peter Nixon -

I went to Duke as an undergraduate and was very impressed with what I heard of Hauerwas during my time there. A close friend of mine who took a number of classes with him tells me that many of his students end up converting to Catholicism after studying with him! A number of his students are now at Ave Maria (FL).

Posted by: Tope at Jan 8, 2006 11:12:55 AM

Well, Fr. Stanley, it's not just me. I recently read the results of a study that showed that graduates of Catholic colleges are much more likely to have lost their faith in college than graduates of secular schools. And I don't doubt it a bit.

It might be interesting to hear exactly how McBrien played a role in the departures of the instructors above. Did that occur in a vacuum, I wonder, or did unfortunate students have to observe the whole affair or even suffer it themselves?

When I recently decided to take some classes for enrichment from a Catholic school, I didn't even give ND a shot, even though it's within driving distance. No point. I'd have had to do more research to stay out of peoples' classes than in them--in order to avoid the likes of McBrien and the Vagina Monologues and such folderol. I'm taking a few classes from Franciscan in Ohio--a far, far more suitable school if one is actually interested in Catholic teaching and not the "Catholic status symbol" which is ND.

Watching for 20 years and finally coming to a regrettable & sad conclusion after tons of data and lots of disappointment is not hasty generalization. In fact, failing to come to any sort of conclusion at all would have been negligent and unthinking, not to mention dangerous to my faith. A person can only stand just so much cognitive dissonance. The Church, after all, has always taught that even though she is a mystery, she is intelligible even if not comprehensible.

Being able to actually point out right and wrong on the basis of long-standing church teaching is not, contrary to some peoples' goofed up ideas, a problem. The operable set of ideals that drives that sort of goofed up thinking is cultural, American cultural, in fact, and not religious in the Catholic sense.

As in, "Thou shalt not point out the truth, for the truth costs market share and makes people realize they are not gods. And then they become despondent and stop buying."

Look up "obfuscation" in your little logic book sometime. Or rather, watch the USCCB convention for about 10 minutes and get a world-class example.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 11:30:20 AM

It's interesting, though, that there's a pattern here. There is a decided preference here for "closet catholics" who are nominally non-catholic OVER "closet non-catholics" who are nominally catholic. That's interesting.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 11:32:50 AM

Good for Wheaton. They actually seem to want their professors to believe what they teach. I wish more Catholic schools would follow suit.

Posted by: dymphna at Jan 8, 2006 12:30:46 PM

BTW, about that little marketing maxim:

"Thou shalt not point out the truth, for the truth costs market share and makes people realize they are not gods. And then they become despondent and stop buying."

It only obtains logically if truth is a commodity among other commodities on a cost benefit analysis.

Is that all it is? You tell me.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 12:37:29 PM

No preference here, just more facts and less generalizing. The problem you have, Michigan Catholic, is that YOU want to draw things to a conclusion -- and the script is still being written. You are willing to write off a whole lot of people. As a priest and pastor, I cannot afford to do that, and so I hold out in hope, I look for positive developments, and try to steer people into those positive developments. But with folks like you around, every time I try to get a positive word out to someone such as Rod Dreher, who is truly suffering and knows more about it that you and I put together, it doesn't take too long for you to come around with some personal kerosene to pour on the fires of indignation. Unfortunately, it only causes heat, and not a lot of light.

By the way, I donate to Franciscan U. of Steubenville, too, and steer people over there as well. I know the orthodox places too. But you know, it wasn't always the case there at Steubenville. There was a reform movement that caused Steubenville to become the fine school that it is today. If you want to give up on ND, that's fine, and I understand it. But please get off the soap box on which you pretend to speak for all orthodox Catholics. I respect your experience, but your conclusions are not, thank God, the Church's conclusions. I know BXVI has far more hope than you do, you might want to take a page or two from his script. Or is he an Obfuscator too?

Posted by: Fr. Brian Stanley at Jan 8, 2006 12:41:04 PM

Fr. Stanley, Benedict XVI is not an obfuscator. Listen closely to him and you'll hear the church speaking in all her beauty and glory. His words are compact.

Attempting to shield Rod from the truth won't help him. He knows what he's seen and he won't believe you. He needs someone to listen to him as he struggles, purely and simply, because he must struggle through the ugliness of the times--a dark night of sorts, which you cannot take away by your own power.

He must cling to the truth while he reconciles the mystery of the Church (truth & love in one, never separated) and understands. It's something most converts go through at some point or another, some more deeply than others. Rod has seen a lot so he has a deep crisis. He thinks and he thinks deeply because he's still around. There's nothing wrong with that. It's largely what God used to get him this far.

The danger, as always in these things, is that he will find a crutch or develop a pattern of avoidance of the truth.

Denying the truth never works. It's throwing everything out for the sake of shutting up the confusion. It's only human nature that wants things to be honky-dory even if not true. It's not the way.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 12:55:08 PM

If you want to help people with these crises, teach them to pray and never stop, no matter what else happens. And listen, really listen.

Posted by: michigancatholic at Jan 8, 2006 1:02:32 PM