Mission MattersWhat Works Well: Faculty, Presidents,

and Students Speak

O N J E S U I T H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N

Fall 2008 • Number 34

FALL 2008NUMBER 34Members of the National

Seminar on Jesuit Higher Education

Gregory I. Carlson, S.J.Creighton University

Margaret Haigler DavisSpring Hill College

Joseph J. Feeney, S.J.Saint Joseph’s University.

Jennifer G. HaworthLoyola University Chicago.

Raymond M. JonesLoyola College in Maryland.

Leslie L. LiedelWheeling Jesuit University

John J. O’Callaghan, S.J.Stritch School of Medicine

Loyola University

Mary K. ProkschRegis University

Raymond A. Schroth, S.J.Saint Peter’s College

Timothy H. WadkinsCanisius College

Charles T. Phipps, S.J.Santa Clara University

Conversations is published by theNational Seminar on Jesuit HigherEducation, which is jointly spon-sored by the Jesuit ConferenceBoard and the Board of theAssociation of Jesuit Colleges andUniversities. The opinions statedherein are those of the authorsand not necessarily those of theJC or the AJCU.

Comments and inquiries may beaddressed to the editor ofConversations

Raymond A. Schroth, S.J.Boston College Jesuit CommunitySt. Mary’s Hall140 Commonwealth AvenueChestnut Hill, MA 02467-3802Phone: 617-552-8043e-mail: raymondschroth@aol.com

For information about subscriptions to Conversations:Charles T. Phipps, S.J.Secretary to the National Seminaron Jesuit Higher EducationSanta Clara University500 El Camino RealSanta Clara, CA 95053-1600Phone: 408-554-4124Fax: 408-554-4795e-mail: cphipps@scu.edu

Conversations back issues areavailable online at www.ajcunet.edu

Design and layout by Pauline Heaney.Printed by PeacockCommunications, Maplewood, N.J.

Features2 State of the Question, Jack O’Callaghan, S.J. and Timothy Wadkins4 The Fatal Blow, Martin Moleski, S.J.8 Are We Still Jesuit? Catholic? Charles L. Currie, S.J. 19 Complexities of Hiring for Mission, Chester Gillis24 Hiring for Mission, Diversity, and Excellence, John McLaughlin26 Making Critical Connections: Identity and Mission Officers

Tell What Works, Jennifer Haworth and Megan Barry30 The Curriculum Carries the Mission, Claude N. Pavur, S.J.

Testimonies34 Being Jewish on a Catholic Campus, Nancy Ruth Fox37 Leadership as Spiritual Direction, Scott A. Chadwick

39 Describe, Don’t Prescribe, Wilburn T. Stancil40 How I Caught the Spirit, Timothy J. Cook43 The Education of a Heart, Tracey Kahan

Presidents Speak44 What I’ve Done, Stephen Sundborg, S.J.

46 Catholic Courses Are the Heart of Our Mission, Timothy R. Lannon, S.J.

Students Speak50 On the Edge: Defending an Identity, David Gregory

51 The Integrated Catholic Gay Student, Zack Pesavento

48 A Pedagogy of Humility, Robert S. Miola

STudent Pieces7 My First Theological Conversation, Becky Sue Davies18 Idealist, crazy, selfless, naïve, self-righteous, and… Matthew Carroll23 What’s This? Pray in Class? Kelli Gardner

52 Book Reviews: William Rehg, S.J., Eugene Fisher

O N J E S U I T H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N

Mission Matters

Cover photo : Delegates to the 35th General Congregation assemble for a photograph on the roof of the Jesuit curia in the Vatican at the endof their meeting. Seated in the front row are Fr. Adolfo Nicolas, S.J., the newly elected Superior General of the Society of Jesus, and

Fr. Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, S.J., former Superior General. Photo by Don Doll, S.J.

Conversations 1

Yes, we have written about identity and missionbefore. In a sense, since our first words in 1992, wehave written about nothing else. Although the

words “identity” and “mission” have appeared on our cov-ers about a half dozen times, our constant task has been toarticulate what in our teaching, research and self presenta-tion is consistent with the purposes for which the Society ofJesus was founded.

In fact, Saint Ignatius never started out to found a net-work of colleges and universities. He set out to respond tothe practical needs of a Renaissance church in a time of cri-sis. He brought to this task a unique gift: a method ofprayer and life that enables all those open to the experienceto find God in all things. As it happened, this fusion of thesearch for intellectual truth and spiritual insight became aforce that helped transform the Christian world and openthe minds of the Christian West to the wisdom of other cul-tures and religions.

But the questions raised by this project are neveranswered once and for all. The 19th century Jesuits who,after the Society’s restoration, remained unwelcome inFrance, Germany, and Italy, joined the flood of immigrantsto America. They learned, sometimes reluctantly, to adaptthe traditional Ratio Studiorum to the frontier. Split by inter-nal conflicts, they asked: Must they modify, even drop, theirGreek and Latin requirement and replace them with “com-mercial” courses to stem falling enrollments? Must they con-form to the norms of secular accrediting agencies or stickto the Ratio which had “worked” for 400 years? In the 21stcentury Jesuit and other Catholic institutions have had toask whether to sponsor gay and lesbian clubs or stage TheVagina Monologues.

Both sides in these disputes answer in terms of who weare. Over the last few years, our issues on marketing theJesuit name, the role of women, the crisis in reading, facultygovernance, the sexual scandal, the disconnect between gen-erations, and physicality have been attempts to deal with thesame underlying question: how do we remain flexible inorder to meet the needs of a dynamic, rapidly changing cul-ture and remain true to who we are supposed to be?

Rhetorically, this issue follows the structure of SaintThomas Aquinas’ teaching method. He states the question:Does the definition of our mission matter in the day-to-dayoperation of our colleges and universities? He states the caseof the “adversaries”: Some say that: the cause is dead. Wehave squandered our legacy. I answer that, he responds,deals with their objections and reaffirms the thesis. Herehowever we answer with a chorus of diverse voices from a

modern culture. We are still struggling to apply basic prin-ciples in a very fluid environment and make them work.

My own experience — working at five Jesuit universi-ties, plus visits to three campuses a year — is that in mostplaces the academic quality is higher than ever; the qualityof the religious life depends on both the vitality of campusministry and the background of the students; and that thecommitment to a specifically Jesuit mission depends on anumber of factors: administration leadership, the numberand depth of special programs to introduce faculty and stu-dents to Ignatian spirituality; and the willingness of facultywho were not initially drawn by the school’s Jesuit charac-ter to looking at their professional work in a new way.

Corrections and Kudos.

A few letters have come in during the year that have notmade it into print. Responding to our report on corerequirements in Conversations # 32, Diane Jonte-Pace, pro-fessor or religious studies at Santa Clara, corrected ourreport on philosophy and theology requirements. There arethree religious studies requirements. There is no philoso-phy requirement, but one ethics requirement, although itcould be fulfilled in other departments.

Xavier University’s office on mission and identity haslaunched a new website (www.jesuitresources.org) withresources for networking through the Jesuit system. Xavierplans to develop an institute for Jesuit education to helpfaculty incorporate Jesuit values into their courses.

Chris Pramuk at Xavier described Don Doll, S.J.’s, pic-ture of the African family as “breathtaking.” All the morereason for our Don Doll current cover photo of the dele-gates to the recent 35th General Congregation, with the out-going and incoming generals — Peter-Hans Kolvenbachand Adolfo Nicolas — on the roof of the Jesuit curia, withthe splendor of the Vatican and Rome looming in the back-ground. Many of these men share the prime responsibilityof defining and staffing the Jesuit mission in our collegesand universities.

But, as our essays make clear, lay faculty members ofevery religion have caught the Ignatian spirit and are com-ing forward to fill that role. And our other illustrationsattempt to present a mix of lay faculty, Jesuits old and new,and the thousands of young people our efforts touch. n

RASsj

From the Editor

Mission and IdentityWho Are We and What Do We Do?

2 Conversations

W hen the National Jesuit Seminar beganto think about a theme for this issue,we began with the idea of best prac-tices: the various ways that mission“matters” on our campuses. As the dis-

cussion progressed, however, the more fundamental“matter” of mission itself raised its head and demand-ed our full attention. What does mission mean? Howdoes mission relate to questions about who we areas Catholic, Jesuit and American colleges and univer-sities? If we cannot agree about who we are, can wespeak coherently about what we ought to be doingin our educational enterprise?

For example, what does it mean to hire for mis-sion? Should we hire non-Catholics or faculty fromother or no religious traditions? How does missionrelate to academic freedom? Will mission factor in totenure and promotion decisions? How does missionaffect issues of compensation, unionization, and thesalaries of support staff? Does a mission centered pri-marily on the Jesuit values of care for the whole per-son and social justice effectively diminish the moretranscendent concerns of traditional Catholicism?

The more we discussed these specific things themore we realized we had stepped into a quagmire ofconflicting opinions about the more general matter ofmission itself. We did not conclude that our twenty-eight colleges and universities were like rudderlessships with no identities, hopelessly adrift in the secu-lar seas of American higher education. But we wereconvinced that although they all sail under the flags of

Catholic, Jesuit and American identity, and agree thatour common enterprise as Jesuit institutions is to formgraduates who are “people for others,” they are chart-ing different courses and navigating in different ways.

We can not claim to have solved the perplexingconundrum of mission and identity, but perhaps wecan help to frame the conversation better by suggest-ing that Jesuit colleges and universities are precari-ously situated between two, very important andsometimes conflicting pressures that push them invarious ways.

One is the pressure to maintain a theological andecclesiastical identity. What does it mean for a uni-versity to be both Jesuit and Catholic? Obviouslythere is a spectrum of opinions on this, and the arti-cles in this issue by Moleski, Gardner, Fox, andStancil get at the question in very different ways.

The second is the pressure to achieve excel-lence. Obviously, all Catholic and Jesuit colleges anduniversities want to recruit good students and presti-gious faculty, especially if they hope to compete inthe market place of higher education in the UnitedStates. But what are the stakes in the quest to con-form to and compete with other, more secular insti-tutions? What parts of our Catholic tradition andidentity must be jettisoned or sacrificed when we

Mission Mat t er s andMat t er s of Mission

By Jack O’Callaghan, S.J. and Timothy Wadkins

Jack O’Callaghan is chair of the Seminar onHigher Education. Timothy Wadkins, an outgoingmember, teaches theology at Canisius College.

State of the Question

Conversations 3

strive to become like Stanford or Princeton? The articlesby Lannon, Sundborg, and Chadwick offer different per-spectives on the challenges involved in infusing whatthey believe to be a Jesuit and Catholic identity into insti-tutions that are also highly competitive centers of aca-demic excellence.

o f course, it might be concluded that such anarray of opinions is an indication that Catholicidentity at Jesuit Universities has been sacrifi-cially submerged beneath the seas of secular-ism. In the haunting question posed by Martin

Moleski, S.J., are not all of these conversations aboutmission superficial attempts to dress up and preserve thedead corpse of Catholicism on our campuses?

Two articles in this issue take exception to theseconclusions. In a weighty historical piece, Charles Currie,president of the AJCU, documents how the issues of mis-

sion and identify developed and became so heated in thePost Vatican II academic world of Catholic education.Despite the conflicts, he maintains that in serious, albeitflawed ways “we are trying to create something that hasnever existed, a Jesuit, Catholic identity, forged with col-leagues in a pluralistic, postmodern university setting,while facing all of the challenges of a globalizing world.”Jennifer Haworth and Megan Barry bring needed empir-ical data to the discussion and suggest that, if the doom-sayers are right and we have already lost or are about tolose our identity, as some of our country’s most presti-gious and once-sectarian schools have, it won’t be forlack of trying: mission-conversations and mission-orient-ed programs abound at our 28 Jesuit institutions. Andvoices from students, faculty, and administrators seem toverify that, somewhere between theory and practice,mission and identity still matter very much. n

Christ the King Chapel at Canisius College.

4 Conversations

The fatal blow against Jesuit Catholic educa-tion was struck forty years ago when thedecision was made to give our colleges anduniversities away to secular boards. There isstill a lot of life left in the corpse and withsome careful embalming we may be able to

maintain the outward appearances of Catholic identity forsome time yet. The Russians have preserved Lenin’s bodyfor nearly a century; if they can do it, so can we!

The great crisis for administrators watching over thecarcass of Catholic universities is this: if they give toomuch attention to the relationship between their institu-tions and the Church, they may actually be sued for dis-criminating between Catholics and non-Catholics in theirhiring practices. They have to stay constantly on guardagainst any spark of life that might accidentally revivethe deceased. If there is sufficient evidence of a living,meaningful link to the Catholic Church—evidence thatcould stand up in court—the schools will lose access tofederal funding. Every step must therefore be taken, withproper documentation, so that the charge of being aCatholic institution could never be proven against them.We only want the corpse to look as if it is still alive.Heaven forfend that it be resuscitated! The consequencesfor the bottom line are unthinkable.

“No, your Honor. We have no real connection to thelife of the Church. We are willing to swear on a stack of

Bibles to tell the truth, thewhole truth, and nothing butthe truth. Our corporation is assecular as any other universityin America. There isn’t adime’s worth of difference

between what they do and what we do, so please do notcut off the flow of money to us and to our students. Wehave made our choice. Money talks; faith walks. The lifeof our institution is what counts. We’ll do anything tosurvive. Your will be done in us as it is at Harvard.”

Although the evidence has been carefully collectedfor four decades to prove that the institutions formerly

known as Catholic universities are, in fact, completelyand utterly detached from the Catholic Church, the out-ward appearances of Catholicism have been maintainedas a marketing and fundraising device. The thought oftelling the public that our schools are demonstrably nolonger Catholic is as terrifying to the administrators asbeing charged in court with having a real link to the lifeof the Church. Honesty is definitely not the best policywhen competing for customers and benefactors.

Fortunately, the Jesuit tradition supplies manyresources for dealing with this crisis. We are notoriousfor our casuistry and famous for teaching people how tosay one thing but mean another under oath. Languageand culture change over time. Evolution of meaning is alaw of life. Words are arbitrary associations of sound andsense. All we need to do is keep the old words in our lit-erature and give them new and improved meanings. Ithas happened before, so there’s no harm in us causing itto happen again. “Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam” translatesnicely into “Excellence.” There is no need to mention“God” in our translation, of course, because everyoneknows that “God” means “most excellent.” Striving forexcellence is practically the same thing as worshiping theGod of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The SpiritualExercises are great for giving the illusion of a Catholicculture as well, after they’ve been properly filtered toremove those sixteenth-century allusions to sin, suffer-ing, redemption by God-made-man, and the rules forthinking with the Church.

When we’re all done re-reading the Exercises, itturns out that they’re all about feelings, and feelings dosell well in modern culture. “Pray about it. Recognize thefearful risks you are taking. Then do what you think isright. God (if there is a God) loves you unconditionally,so it doesn’t matter what you choose. If you feel that it

THE FATAL BLOWThe Case of the Stinking Corpse

By Martin X. Moleski, S.J.

Martin X. Moleski, S.J., is professor of religious studies and theology at Canisius College, Buffalo, New York.

“If you feel that it isright, it is right.”

Conversations 5

is right, it is right. Whatever you will is what God willsthrough you, with you, and in you.” Changing with thetimes is the Ignatian way. We must adapt to new circum-stances never foreseen by the founders of our universi-ties. If we do not adapt, we will die, and we all knowthat God could never ask such a sacrifice from us.

Then there’s “cura personalis” – care for theperson. This is a stunning slogan for themodern world. “We care for you as a per-son. We don’t care about your eternal salva-tion, of course, because taking any real

steps in that direction might cut us off from federal andstate funding, but we want you to be just like everyoneelse in the world. Our Healthy Sex Committee meetsregularly to help make sure that the incidences of preg-nancy and other sexually transmitted diseases are keptwithin the national norms. We wouldn’t want you tothink that we have any opinion about the proper use ofhuman sexuality. That would be medieval, and we allknow that being medieval is bad, that the present is newand improved, and that the future is going to be betterthan ever. We are people-oriented people. We put per-sonal concerns above everything else. We want you toknow that we care for you just the way you are. There’sno need to repent, unless you want to, of course. Youdo what you think is best.”

In order to maintain the illusion of a Catholic identi-ty, the study of religion must remain part of the curricu-lum. But, lest we be convicted of actually being Catholic,we must make sure that the Church is treated as an aca-demic specimen no different from any of the thousandsof other oddities collected from cultures aroundthe world and from the pages of history. “Youwill know the truth, and the truth will set youfree. The truth is that people disagree aboutwhat truth is. If there were one true Church,everyone would accept it; the fact that peopledisagree about the truth of Catholicism provesthat it is not the true Church; therefore, you arefree to believe anything you wish about God, sin,salvation, and sex. Have a nice day!”

This redefinition of truth is supported by theoriginal meaning of the Greek adjective, katholikos,which meant “general, universal.” In the brave newworld order, in which each person takes full respon-sibility for what he or she believes, we will demon-strate our true Catholicism by endorsing any and allopinions about divinity and humanity. “You can’t benarrow-minded about these things. First things first:funding is fundamental! We are a truly Catholic universi-ty because we do not call some opinions false and oth-ers true. It is all the same to us, as long as we can meet

our payroll. Let ten thousand visions blossom! The moreopinions we embrace, the more universal we are, and themore we can please our customers, about whom we caremore than we can say. Keep the customer satisfied!”

The redefinition of “Catholicism” as “universalist” isconsistent with the trend within Catholicism forCatholics to sift the teachings of the Church through thesieve of their own personal conscience. The vast majorityof Catholics now know that conscience is supreme; thatconscience is a matter of personal choice; and that no oneelse can judge their conscientious decision-makingbecause Jesus said, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.”Therefore the behavior of Catholics in the sexual arenahas become indistinguishable from that of the generalpopulation—the same rate of pre- and extra-marital sex,abortions, and divorce. This means that the AmericanCatholic population wants Catholic universities thatapplaud and affirm dissent from the Church’s dead, white,male, chauvinist, uptight, moralizing, European, colonialPuritanism. Since the sins of priests against chastity provethat the Church is hypocritical in its teaching on heterosex-ual marriage as the norm by which sexual behavior is to

We are fortunate indeed to have found a way to distance ourselves from theinstitutional Church while still keeping the word ‘Catholic’ in our advertising.

6 Conversations

be evaluated, we are fortunate indeed to have found a wayto distance ourselves from the institutional Church whilestill keeping the word “Catholic” in our advertising.

It may well be that we won’t have to keep thecorpse from stinking much longer. An American schismmay yet take place; if it does, our universities will beperfectly positioned to serve those who have brokenwith Rome and have crafted a truly modern form ofCatholicism. We will be able to show how we led theway to freedom by detaching our corporations from thedead hand of authority and allowing them to nurse withdelight at the abundant breasts of the federal and stategovernments. Since Catholicism can be studied notional-ly, just like any other mythology, and since anyone cando religious studies regardless of his own religious con-victions, we really won’t need any Catholics at the uni-versity in order to have a Catholic university. Anybodycan collect the propositions of Catholicism and show thelogical relationships between them. Religion is nothingbut a set of words, and anybody can investigate themeaning of words as well as anybody else. You don’tneed to be converted to see what Catholicism is allabout. All you need is a good dictionary.

Nor will we need Jesuits to have a Jesuit university.It is easy to teach people to pay attention to what theylike and dislike and to follow their bliss, which is all thatIgnatius meant in talking about “consolation” and “deso-lation,” so the laity can continue the process of continu-al reformation and adaptation that the Jesuits set inmotion after Vatican II.

We will have the best of both worlds: full fundingfrom the government and the full support of those whoagree that there is no once-for-all-time meaning to wordslike “Jesuit” or “Catholic.” The idea of what a Catholicuniversity is has to change because the idea of what itmeans to be Catholic has changed. And the world willbe a better place when the jesuitical universalist gospelis grasped. The old concept of truth was essentially total-itarian. The idea that people could tell the difference

between true and false, good and evil, orHeaven and Hell was essentially fascist.

We now know that the old way of look-ing at things killed thought because it wasunivocal, closed, dogmatic, exclusive, andoppressive. This is the kind of religion thatproduced crusaders, witch burners, and ter-rorists. It made people feel guilty aboutdoing what they felt like doing, and wenow know that feeling guilty is ridiculous.People need and want to be affirmed in thechoices that they are making, not told thatthere are objective standards of right andwrong that can be derived from right rea-soning about nature and from right reason-

ing about revelation. The majority of Catholics don’tbelieve in Catholicism, and we definitely want to bewhere the majority of our market is. The shepherd muststay with the flock, so where the flock goes, the shep-herd must follow.

With our new and improved theologyderived from polling the faithful inmatters of faith, we may fearlesslyencourage our faculty and students to“find God in all things.” God is in the

world, not outside of it. God is engaged in human activ-ity, not divorced from it. God is everything and every-where. He is the wind beneath our wings. Everyone inthe university is striving for excellence and everythingthey study is divine, so the whole world is sacred and allof our work is sanctified. Those who have eyes to seewill perceive the supernatural existential, the horizon ofgrace that is open to the whole of humanity. There is noneed to argue this doctrine against that doctrine nor tocompare one system with another. All is one! The peo-ple who worry about the death of Catholic universitiesare operating on a lower plane—mere religionism. Ifthey would just raise their eyes to the heights, theywould see that everything that rises must converge, thatthe mountain of God may be ascended from east or westor north or south, that all apparent opposites are reallytwo sides of the same coin, and that you cannot have lifewithout death, good without evil, truth without false-hood, or universities without state funding.

This spiritual vision is what our consumers are hun-gry for. They do not want authority, dogma, ritual, sacra-ments, or institutional ties to the Roman Catholic Church.They want to know the glorious freedom of the childrenof God to think what they want to think, to believe whatthey want to believe, and to do what they want to do—when, as, and with whom they want to do it. Let the fac-ulty and staff say, “Amen!” Let the administrators andfundraisers say “Amen!” Let our customers and benefac-tors say, “Amen!” Come, great future, come! n

Conversations 7

Two years ago when Iwas making the bigcollege decision, mymain goal was to gosomewhere differentthan my brother and

sister. While Eric and Tracy bothattended Creighton as biology pre-med majors, I was determined thatthis was my chance to step out oftheir shadows and pave my ownpath through life. Who would havethought that two years later, here Iam — a biology, pre-med student atCreighton University.

When people ask me why Ichose to attend Creighton University,I make certain to specify that I didnot come here because my brotherand sister came here. As much as Ilove my siblings, the last thing I wantis to be labeled as the “little sister.”However, the more I think about it,the more I realize that my siblingsare the reason that I go to schoolwhere I do. I chose a Jesuit educa-tion because I noticed something dif-ferent about both Eric and Tracywhen they came home for fall breakof their freshman years. No, it wasnot multiple tattoos or the freshmanfifteen. Rather, it was somethingdeeper, something that intrigued meto check out the Jesuit experiencefor myself.

I had my first theological conver-sation with my older brother duringfall break of his freshman year. Wehad never actually talked about Godbefore. Even though we grew up ina Catholic household, weekly massmainly consisted of rolling marbles

up and down the pew when our par-ents were not looking, and singingstuffy hymns as obnoxiously as pos-sible. This might explain why I wascompletely stunned when Eric want-ed to have the “God talk” with meafter he came home from college.Eric told me all about his theology101 class, sharing impressive theo-logical insights that I found quiteintriguing. In addition to school, hewas participating in weekly serviceto build houses, coordinating aspring break service trip, and playinghis violin in church. After our heart-to-heart talk, I realized that Eric wasbecoming a different person. Whatin the world had the Jesuits done tomy brother?

The Jesuit experience had a sim-ilar impact on my sister. When Tracycame home on break, my parentswere suddenly in deep trouble fornot buying fair trade coffee. Socialjustice became the main topic at thedinner table. My sister had alwaysbeen a compassionate and lovingperson, but I could not understandhow two months of school hadinstilled in her such a deep passionfor social justice and concern forother people. I must admit that Ibecame a little jealous of Eric andTracy’s new world views. They sud-denly had a strong passion for lifeand an even stronger passion for theworld around them.

I am not sure if it was jealousyor sheer admiration of my brotherand sister that inspired me to under-take a Jesuit education for myself.Whatever it was, nothing could have

prepared me for what I have expe-rienced so far.

In the past two years, I havequestioned my faith, my future, andmy life more times than I care toadmit. My classes have not onlyexposed me to new ideas and newconcepts, but have forced me todefine the values and beliefs thatmake me who I am. Now I findmyself spending my spring breaklearning about rural poverty andenvironmental issues in theAppalachian Mountains. I find myselfnot only aware of social justiceissues, but voicing my opinion andstanding up for my beliefs. Most sur-prising to my parents perhaps, I findmyself singing in the church choir –and singing the words with somesense of meaning.

It turns out that following in mysiblings’ footprints was not so painfulafter all. While the Jesuit educationhas challenged me to live for andwith others, I am honored not only toidentify myself with my brother andsister but also to join in the forefrontof making a Jesuit difference. n

Becky Sue Davies is a junior atCreighton University.

My First TheologicalConversation

By Becky Sue Davies

8 Conversations

W hen I was a student atFordham University in the lateforties to early fifties, no onewas asking “Is Fordham stillJesuit and Catholic?” Therewere too many Jesuits walkingaround in long, black cas-socks, essentially everyone oncampus was Catholic, there

was a tightly structured curriculum centered on neo-scholastic philosophy — more than 30 credits of it,and a benevolent dictator Jesuit served as dean ofstudents. Today, in a very different world, all too reg-ularly I am asked is __________ still Jesuit? Catholic?

Charles L. Currie, S.J. is president of the

AJCU. This article is based on his

keynote address at the twenty-fifth

anniversary of the Bannan Institute at

Santa Clara University, May 2, 2008.

ar e West il l

Jesuit ?Cat hol iC?A Short History of HowWe got to Where We Are

By Charles L. Currie, S.J.

Conversations 9

Some Historical Notes on the Identity QuestionThe issue of Jesuit, Catholic identity has a most interestinghistory, with many of the same questions and themes play-ing over and over again, with different accents, and in manydifferent contexts. Discussions on just what makes a univer-sity Catholic, and how a Catholic university should relate tothe church and the local bishop, date long before Ex cordeEcclesiae, and indeed go back at least to the University ofParis, where Bishop Tempier censured theses of ThomasAquinas, only to have wiser heads prevail and canonize himabout fifty years later.

More recently, in 1949 we had the beginnings of a gen-tle and sometimes not so gentle tug of war between the

International Federation of Catholic Universities (IFCU) andthe Vatican Congregation on Catholic Education. Under theleadership of Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, C.S.C., President of theUniversity of Notre Dame, and with the support of Pope PaulVI, IFCU evolved into an organization increasingly independ-ent of the congregation, to the chagrin of the congregationand foreshadowing tensions accompanying the developmentof Ex corde. Meeting in Tokyo in 1965, IFCU decided todevelop a document on the distinctive character of a Catholicuniversity in the light of the recently published Vatican IIdocument, The Church in the Modern World.

As part of this effort, Fr. Hesburgh hosted a meeting atthe Notre Dame villa in Wisconsin in 1967, from whichresulted the famous (or, to its critics, infamous) Land O’LakesStatement: The Nature of the Contemporary Catholic

Early Saint Peter’s College Jesuits circa 1880. Photo courtesy of Saint Peter’s College Archive Department.

10 Conversations

University. This statement helped frame the issues thathave been the basis for tensions between Churchauthorities and American Catholic higher education forover 40 years, especially when it insisted that

…the Catholic university must be a university in thefull modern sense of the word, with a strong commit-ment to and concern for academic freedom, and that

this institutional autonomyand academic freedom areessential conditions of lifeand growth, and indeed ofsurvival for Catholic univer-sities, as for all universities.

Critics of this so-called “Declaration ofIndependence,” often for-get the distinguished com-position of the group issu-ing the statement. It includ-

ed two bishops, two high-ranking monsignors, one ofwhom is now a cardinal (Cardinal McCarrick), thesuperior general of the Congregation of the HolyCross, the assistant superior general of the Society ofJesus, and the presidents of Notre Dame, BostonCollege, Fordham, Georgetown and St. Louis. Also for-gotten is that of the ten sections of the document, onlythe first spoke of autonomy and academic freedom.The other nine sections were devoted to how Catholicuniversities could assure that Catholicism would be“perceptibly present and effectively operative.”

Five years later, after years of negotiation betweenCardinal Garrone, the prefect of the congregation onCatholic education, and IFCU, the document, TheCatholic University in the Modern World appeared.The Congregation was reluctant to approve the docu-ment because it envisioned “university institutionswithout statutory bonds linking them to ecclesiasticalauthorities.” This issue of a juridical connectionbetween universities and the Church as essential to aCatholic university would later be a neuralgic issue inthe discussions of Ex corde Ecclesiae.

Discussions leading to the revision of canon lawbegan soon after, in 1976. For the first time, canon lawwould contain a section on higher education (canons808-13), and the debate began about a “canonical mis-sion” for theologians (or “mandate” then mandatumas it would later be called). Despite prolongedattempts to eliminate this canon, including a lastminute visit to Pope John Paul II, the mandateappeared in the final text, only to be largely ignored,until Ex corde would resurrect the issue.

By 1985, a draft of a Schema on Higher Educationappeared, and vigorous discussions on what would

become the apostolic constitution, Ex corde Ecclesiae,had begun. The first draft led Fr. Hesburgh to note, ina comment as relevant today as it was then, that thedraft posed a terrible dilemma for Catholic universities,“to choose between being real universities and beingreally Catholic, when in fact, they are already both.”Significant consultation led to a final version of Excorde, issued in August, 1990. The final document hadremoved many of the objectionable elements of previ-ous drafts.

“Part I: Identity and Mission” presented a magnan-imous vision of the Catholic university which includedmany of the ideas from Land O’Lakes and The CatholicUniversity in the Modern World. “Part II: GeneralNorms” reflected the concern for control dating backto 1949, and laid the basis for complementary specificordinances to be developed by local bishops’ confer-ences to fit regional circumstances.

Readers would recognize in Ex corde that thecharacteristics cited for a Catholic university werealmost the same as those described in the 1972 docu-ment, The Catholic University in the Modern World.

Unfortunately, for the next nine years, much of theconversation focused on Part II and the norms devel-oped by the U.S. bishops, especially the requirement ofa mandatum for theologians. Colleges and universitiesspent time and energy on the defensive, distractingthem from the more important task of trying to realizegrand vision of Part I with its magnanimous ideals fora Catholic university in rich dialogue with culture, andthe place where the Church does its thinking.

d espite the worst fears of a fierce stand-off between bishops and theologians,and bishops and universities, the pasteight years have witnessed mostlygood relationships, with the manda-tum being handled quietly, as bothbishops and institutions demonstratedmutual respect and understanding.There has probably been more helpful

contact among bishops, theologians and presidentsthan ever before. Colleges and universities have beenable to concentrate on attempts to realize the Catholicidentity envisioned by the first part of Ex corde.

Meanwhile, Other ChallengesConcurrently with the development of the issue ofCatholic identity, Catholic colleges and universities inthe United States were undergoing massive andsweeping changes in response to a whole range ofpressures and challenges. Let me cite only three.

Monsignor John Tracy Ellis’ famous query in 1955,“Where are the Catholic intellectual leaders?” was themost prominent of many voices critical of the quality

The strong presidentsbehind this progressare often faulted forsacrificing Catholic

identity in the urgencyto grow and develop.

Conversations 11

of Catholic higher education atthat time. Despite the pockets ofquality that did exist in a numberof colleges and universities, thesecriticisms by and large struckhome. They stimulated dramaticefforts to improve the academicand institutional quality ofCatholic colleges and universitiesin the U.S.

A second major stimulus forchange was the Second VaticanCouncil. The Council’s document,Gaudium et Spes, on the Churchin the Modern World, proposed anew ecclesiology moving thechurch from the serene, lordlymountaintop of certitude and clar-ity down into the messy valley ofhuman challenges, risks andambiguities, a move that to thisday leaves many uncomfortable, ifnot openly resistant. In fact, onemight say that many of today’stensions and struggles are ecclesi-ological. The Council also creatednew opportunities for lay leader-ship by emphasizing the responsi-bility identified with one’s bap-tism, and celebrated a new open-ness to dialogue, ecumenism anddiversity. Jesuit campusesresponded quickly and enthusias-tically to these new emphases.

A third stimulus for changewas major growth, encouraged byreadily available federal dollarsfor on-campus construction andfor student financial aid. Collegesand universities grew dramaticallyin size, complexity and diversity.

Responding to all of thesechallenges and opportunities andmore, Catholic, and specificallyJesuit colleges and universitieshave made dramatic strides in thepast 40 years in academic andinstitutional quality, professional-ism, and lay leadership that haveled to new respect among theirpeer institutions. The strong pres-idents behind this progress areoften faulted for sacrificingCatholic identity in the urgency to

The delegates and concelebrants of GC35 enter the Gesu for the mass celebrated by the newsuperior general, Fr. Adolpho Nicolas, S.J. ©2008 Don Doll, S.J.

12 Conversations

grow and develop. In fairness to them, we need to rec-ognize that, without their ambitious vision, Catholichigher education would not be here today, trying to fos-ter that identity.

a number of vocal critics see the endresult as “Catholic lite” or not Catholicat all. George Marsden (The Soul of theAmerican University: From ProtestantEstablishment to Established Nonbelief),James Burtchaell (The Dying of theLight: the Disengagement of Collegesand Universities from Their ChristianChurches), and Philip Gleason

(Contending with Modernity) see us at various stagesalong the same road that led to the secularization ofmany Protestant institutions. Most recently, MelanieMorey and John Piderit (Catholic Higher Education: ACulture in Crisis) register their doubts about our futurebecause our lay leaders lack the extensive formation ina tradition that prepared clergy and religious to leadCatholic institutions. David O’Brien (From the Heart ofthe American Church) and Alice Gallin, OSU, are moresanguine observers, seeing many opportunities for a vig-orous, engaged Catholic identity and mission to trans-form not only the American Church but American high-er education. Michael Buckley, S.J., (The CatholicUniversity as Promise and Project) David Hollenbach,S.J, (“Is Tolerance Enough? The Catholic University andthe Common Good,” Conversations, Spring, 1998), and,most recently, Scott Appleby, in his February 2008address to the Association of Catholic Colleges andUniversities, all strike a more positive response to theidentity question.

The Jesuit Dimension Jesuit colleges and universities were very much part ofthe same realities and pressures affecting their peerCatholic institutions. Encouraged by canon lawyer, Fr.John McGrath, and influenced by Vatican II’s insistenceon the important role of lay leadership, Jesuit communi-ties took the major step of incorporating separately fromthe college or university and turning over institutionalcontrol to a predominately lay board. This step wastaken with no little angst on the part of those who sawthis as too readily handing over a precious asset forwhich they had given their lives.

In 1969, in the midst of the separate incorporationdiscussions, Jesuits and their colleagues gathered atRegis in Denver for discussions on Jesuit identity, manyof which are still relevant today.

Not only the institutions, but also Jesuit provincialswere concerned about identity in the midst of change. In1974-75, the inaugural project (Project One) of thenewly-established Jesuit Conference of Provincials was

an attempt to develop a national rationale for Jesuit high-er education. After long and widespread consultationthat seemed to be going nowhere, the effort was aban-doned in favor of a letter from the American Provincials,entitled The Jesuit Mission in Higher Education, and indi-vidual Jesuit communities were encouraged to developrationales in collaboration with their lay colleagues.These rationales can be seen as the predecessors oftoday’s institutional mission statements.

The 32nd General Congregation of the Jesuits in1975 created a major new agenda for Jesuit colleges anduniversities when, in its Decree 4, it stated that “The mis-sion of the Society of Jesus today is the service of faith,of which the promotion of justice is an absolute require-ment,” emphasizing that every Jesuit and every Jesuitinstitution had to be committed to a faith that does jus-tice, a commitment that has been re-stated and clarifiedin each succeeding General Congregation.

Beginning in the eighties, there were various effortsto explore questions of our Jesuit, Catholic identity,including a meeting on Jesuit-lay collaboration atCreighton University in 1988. Assembly 1989: JesuitMinistry in Higher Education at Georgetown broughttogether the largest ever group of Jesuits and colleaguesengaged in higher education, with Fr. Kolvenbach deliv-

ering the keynote address. This very successful assemblyled not only to the National Seminar on Jesuit HigherEducation and its publication, Conversations, but to sub-sequent gatherings of campus representatives engagedin “identity and mission” activities.

One of the great influences on contemporary Jesuitcolleges and universities was the brutal murder of sixJesuits and their two co-workers at the UniversidadCentroamericana, the UCA in El Salvador on November16, 1989. This was an attack on Jesuits and on a Jesuituniversity committed to what Fr. Ignacio Ellacuria, therector and main target of the assassins, called a “newkind of university” reflecting the Jesuit commitment to afaith that does justice and, deeply committed to the“national reality” of poverty and oppression. This com-mitment was made as a university, engaged in teaching,research and “social projection.” Evidence of the impacton our campuses of what happened not only in campusmemorials, but more importantly, in the ways in whichthat event has influenced how our universities educatestudents and engage society.

The twenty-fifth anniversary of the Jesuit commit-ment to a faith that does justice was celebrated at SantaClara in October 2000, with Fr. Kolvenbach’s memorableaddress raising the commitment to a new level of seri-

ousness and clarity. This particular address has had analmost unprecedented impact on our institutions, lead-ing to a commitment to educate for solidarity in a glob-alizing world

Mission and Identity ActivityThe Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities(AJCU) has conducted three surveys (in 1997, 2004 and2008) of mission and identity activity on our campuses.Frs. Joseph Appleyard and Howard Gray published anarticle reviewing this activity in the Fall 2000 issue ofConversations. A reading of the AJCU reports, theAppleyard-Gray article, the discussions at the annualmeetings of mission and identity coordinators, and theHayworth and Barry article in this issue of Conversationsshows an obvious and significant development in thesophistication and effectiveness of this activity on eachof our 28 campuses.

The intent of all these efforts is to develop a criticalmass, a sufficient number of effective people, strategical-ly placed and capable of influencing the institution, who

Conversations 13

Below: Undated photo of the New York Province Jesuits, courtesy of Saint Peter’s College Archives.

14 Conversations

are committed to the identity and mission of the collegeor university.

In addition to the programs tailored for individualcampuses, a number of collaborative efforts are under-way. They include the Heartland-Delta Conferences andFaculty Conversations, the Western Conversations, andthe recently inaugurated Eastern Conversations. TheAJCU-sponsored Leadership Development Seminar, nowentering its sixth year, has enrolled nearly 200 leadersand potential leaders currently working in AJCU schools

in a program meant to devel-op women and men commit-ted to mission-driven, effec-tive leadership. A newHeartland-Delta ColleaguesProgram is being developedto offer an in-depth experi-ence of mission through four

components: the development of a cohort; an experi-ence of the Spiritual Exercises; an immersion experi-ence; and an online course on the history and spiritual-ity of Jesuit higher education.

All of this activity reflects a seriousness about foster-

ing the Jesuit, Catholic dimension of our colleges anduniversities that runs counter to the charges that, delib-erately or through inattention, we have lost or are losingour identity. Of course, not only our critics, but we our-selves can ask whether all of this is enough now andinto the future. Considering the reality that more andmore of our new faculty and staff arrive on our campus-es with little or no experience of “Jesuit” or “Catholic,”and that many of our lay colleagues most familiar withthese traditions are retiring, we clearly have a formida-ble task ahead. The pessimism of a Marsden orBurtchaell seems excessive, but their fears provide ahealthy antidote to naïve optimism that everything willwork out just fine.

Some Hard QuestionsThroughout the long history of concern for our Jesuit,Catholic identity, a number of questions persist. Let metry to deal briefly with just a few of them.

How can/should we relate “Identity” and “Mission”? Our identity is who we are; our mission is what we do.Some of our colleagues prefer to talk more about “mis-

Murmuratio, or 'murmuring' after a mass by Francis de Melo, S.J., Bombay provincial. Murmuring is the unique procedure in which, with-out promoting a candidate, the delegates consult one another only one at a time to ask what they may know about leading Jesuits whomight be a good general. ©2008 Don Doll, S.J.

We are trying to create something that

never existed.

Conversations 15

sion” than about “identity,” noting that while they do notor cannot share our Jesuit, Catholic identity, they happi-ly share the mission which resonates with their ownidentity. Identity can be seen as something static, closedand even coercive. Mission can be seen as more dynam-ic, open and inviting. Appleyard and Gray point out thatboth terms are objectionable if they suggest exclusion,while both are acceptable if they suggest there are manyforms of identity and many ways to contribute to themission that can embody the spirit of Jesuit education.Our campuses are increasingly sensitive to this, e.g., byexpressing identity and mission in operational ways thatrelate to the experiences of women and men of differentfaith traditions and background.

What do we mean by “Catholic” and Jesuit”Clearly, there are different understandings about what itmeans to be a Catholic college or university today. I hadmentioned earlier that this can be related to differentecclesiologies or understandings of (and comfort levelswith) Church. At one extreme is a Church kept relativelypure and unsullied by limiting interaction with the “secu-larizing” influences of the world around it. At the otherextreme is a church so deeply embedded in the surround-ing culture as to be almost indistinguishable from it.

Most of us live somewhere in between, being com-fortable with the healthy, if challenging interaction withour surrounding culture that Ex corde describes as therole of the Catholic university:

(a Catholic university) is… a primary and privilegedplace for a fruitful dialogue between the Gospel andculture… A faith that places itself at the margin of whatis human, of what is therefore culture, would be a faithunfaithful to the fullness of what the Word of God man-ifests and reveals, a decapitated faith, worse still, a faithin the process of self-annihilation. (#44)

t here is not the same polarity in talkingabout “Jesuit” as there is about “Catholic,”but there are differences about what istruly “Jesuit” or “Ignatian,” what the recentcongregations really meant, whether wehave gone too far with our pursuit of afaith that does justice, especially in a Jesuitacademic setting, and whether we havesold the “family business” in a bargain sale.

Can we be “Jesuit” without Jesuits, or at least with-out many of them? The reality is clear. At least in the short term, we are run-ning out of Jesuits. Morey and Piderit point out one obvi-ous consequence of this: we are losing those who haveembodied the stories and traditions of our colleges anduniversities. Are we replacing them with women and

men who can keep those stories and traditions alive? I happen to think that we are fortunate to have for

this task, a spirituality developed by a layman for laywomen and men. Ignatian spirituality resonates not onlywith lay colleagues, but also with life on our campuses,with its world-affirming emphasis on seeking God in allthings, its restless and magnanimous pursuit of themagis, its special concern for the individual person, itsfocus on Christ as the contagious model for our adult-hood, its commitment to partnerships, and its linkingfaith with the pursuit of justice. Because this vision willbe necessary to keep alive the Jesuit or Ignatian identityin our schools, it is especially encouraging to see theincreasing numbers of colleagues participating in theSpiritual Exercises, the basis of that vision.

Is seriousness about identity and mission reallycompatible with the reality and demands oftoday’s academy?Denise Carmody notes that, for Catholic colleagues, dis-cussions of identity may raise fears of litmus tests fororthodoxy, a loss of academic rigor, and estrangementfrom the broader academy. The discussion may conjureup visions of hierarchical interference and the demise ofacademic freedom, but, when successful, the discussioncan lead to the conscious appropriation of who we are.Our colleagues who are skeptical about, if not opposedto, identity and mission activities, can stimulate us tomake sure such activities are not excuses for failing tomeet the highest standards of the academy, but ratherare opportunities to energize what we do.

Looking to the FutureMonika Hellwig would often point out that we are nottrying to recover something that has been lost, someneatly packaged, precisely described and circumscribedidentity. Rather, we are trying to create something thathas never existed: a Jesuit, Catholic identity combiningIgnatian spirituality, the Catholic intellectual traditionand Catholic social teaching, all forged with diverse col-leagues, in a pluralistic, postmodern university setting,while facing all of the challenges of a globalizing world.

The magnanimous vision of the first part of Ex cordereflects this world view, as does Pope Benedict’s recentaddress to Catholic educators, when he emphasized that

Not only our critics, but we ourselves can ask whether all of this is enough now and into the future.

16 Conversations

Catholic identity for universities is not a question of statistics nor a question of orthodoxy; rather colleges anduniversities are privileged places for a dynamic dialoguebetween faith and reason, Gospel and culture, with thedialogue reaching out to embrace the whole world, espe-cially the world of the poor and disadvantaged. The recentJesuit general congregation and the words of our newsuperior general echo the same message.

All the excellent activity to foster our Jesuit, Catholicidentity and mission on our campuses, including avibrant campus ministry, is not enough unless theseefforts are part of a larger coordinated effort to makeCatholic intellectual life and Catholic social teaching“perceptibly present and effectively operative” in ourcolleges and universities.

It is encouraging to see the development of CatholicStudies programs of various kinds on more than half ofour campuses, more and more faculty research and teach-ing that reflect a Jesuit, Catholic identity in the selectionof research topics and curricular content, in student livingand learning communities, and in the ever increasingimmersion experiences, not only for students, but for fac-ulty, administrators and trustees. In the spirit of the magis,there is always more we can and need to do.

Peter Steinfels adds a note of caution:

Ultimately, there is in fact no panacea, no silver bullet,no once-and-for-all solution to ensure the Catholicidentity of Catholic higher education. Episcopally cre-dentialed theologians, new institutes, programs inCatholic studies, inner-city service projects, peace andjustice programs, faculty retreats, faculty seminars, stu-dent retreats, ethics across the curriculum, specialchairs, prestigious lecture series – no one thing will doit, but rather a constant alertness to opportunities, ini-tiatives on many fronts, with some successes, somefailures, no quitting.

No QuittingFor those who ask “Are we still Jesuit and Catholic?” wecan respond that we are indeed trying mightily to real-ize the promise of being Jesuit and Catholic in a global-izing world.

To those critics who reject our vision for their owndifferent vision, we can insist that we welcome dialogueand conversation. We can both learn from one another.Better still, we might work together in a venture that canhelp transform not only our colleges and universities,but through them our Church, nation and world. n

Undated photo of New York Jesuits, photo courtesy of Saint Peter’s College Archives.

Conversations 17

18 Conversations

By the time this article is pub-lished, I will have graduatedfrom Boston College and bespending my post-baccalau-reate year as a volunteer.When my year is complete, I

hope to begin graduate school in order topursue a career as a teacher in an under-resourced, inner-city school. My friendsand family have called me an idealist,crazy, selfless, naïve, self-righteous andeverything in between.

I’m not sure who is correct. Maybethey all are in some way. What I do knowis that whatever I am, I am so because BCchanged me through my service-learningexperiences.

My first experience with service-learning at BC came during my sopho-more year as a member of the AppalachiaVolunteers Program. Meeting each Sundayfor several months, members were intro-duced to the ideas of poverty, marginal-ization, racism, and inequality in theUnited States. We attended lectures, heldsmall group discussions, and reflected onwhat role our faith – whatever it may be– plays in responding to the realities thatwe were introduced to.

The program culminated in a week-long service and immersion programthroughout the eastern US. In my commu-

nity along Virginia’s Eastern Shore weworked alongside residents to demolishdilapidated homes so that new andaffordable residences could be con-structed. Throughout our week, we metwith community leaders and held night-ly reflections in an effort to understandall we were discovering about the edu-cational and economic issues facing theresidents of our community.

Like many of my classmates whoexperience volunteer programs each

year, I returned from my trip on fire.Service to others became central to theway I located myself within the world. Ibegan to volunteer at a school for specialneeds students and assumed a leadershipposition within the Appalachia communi-ty. This past year I participated in aninternational service-immersion teachingin Belize.

The person I was began to change.Former Superior General Peter-Hans

Kolvenbach, S.J., recognized the ability ofthese programs to change the individual.He said in a speech given at Santa ClaraUniversity in 2000 that “the real measureof our Jesuit universities lies in who ourstudents become”.

At a Jesuit institution, the goal is toproduce men and women for others.Encounters with service-learning are cru-cial for students’ understanding of what itmeans to become just that. Fr.Kolvenbach’s message was that thewealth of service-learning and volunteerexperiences at Jesuit universities “shouldnot be too optional or peripheral, but atthe core of every Jesuit university’s pro-gram of studies.”

Unfortunately, while the availabilityof service-learning opportunities at ourJesuit universities is extensive, Fr.Kolvenbach’s vision of their centrality tostudent formation has yet to be realized.

Many Catholic high schools and col-leges believe so strongly in the value ofservice that they require all students toparticipate in some form as a graduationrequirement. After calling each of theJesuit universities in the US, I was sur-prised to find that although boast of theirstudents’ commitment in serving others,few required service of their students.

Jesuit education values “care of thewhole person.” Core curriculums arefilled with a breadth of subjects in orderto expose students to ideas they may nothave explored on their own. That is whycore courses are required.

I ask, why not extend the same stan-dard to service-learning?

Nearly all of the admissions officersat the universities I spoke with highlight-ed select programs that required service.However, when asked if it is possible forstudents to complete their four yearswithout service, each responded that it is.While Jesuit schools are often right tobelieve their students will naturally beinclined to serve others, by not requiringat least some first-hand exposure to serv-ice-learning they run the risk of robbingsome students of potentially life-changingexperiences.

If even one student is affected orchanged in some way by his or her serv-ice requirement, then is that not worth theinconvenience it may cause those whoare not?

Such experiences can light a firewithin students, a flame that can spreadthroughout the world. And after all, isn’tthat what the founder of the Societyenvisioned? n

Matthew Carroll, a graduate of BostonCollege, is currently serving as a JesuitVolunteer in Los Angeles with HomeboyIndustries.

Idealist, crazy, selfless,naïve, self-righteous, and…

By Matthew Carroll

Conversations 19

While Jesuit colleges and uni-versities have a legitimateinterest in hiring for mission,that process is complicated inat least three dimensions: theacademy, society, and thestudent body.

The AcademyOne might argue that if Catholic universities want toensure that the majority of those who apply fortenure are Catholics, then they must consciouslyrecruit Catholic faculty. Such a strategy is complicat-ed by a number of external and internal constraints.In most jurisdictions, for universities that accept fed-eral aid (as most do) to ask a candidate if he or sheis Catholic would breech government policies thatprevent search committees from asking questions ofcandidates ranging from marital status to religion.Even if they could legally ascertain that a candidate isCatholic, there is not univocal understanding of whatit means to be Catholic. Does it mean knowledge ofthe tradition, weekly Mass attendance, agreementwith all church teachings, service to the poor, partic-ipation in pro-life activities? Into what Procrusteanbed would the university fit Catholic candidates?

Like it or not the larger academy influencesJesuit universities. Many of the finest graduate stu-dents in all fields seek their education at the mostprestigious universities in the United States andabroad, regardless of the religious affiliation (or lackthereof) of the institution. They earn their PhD’s atthe most competitive institutions, almost all of whichare non-Catholic. And, in a tight job market, many

candidates for tenure-track positions willingly givewhatever impression they think is necessary to a hir-ing committee to be selected. If that means express-ing interest in and support of Catholic identity, somewill go along but will not follow through, oncehired. When hired, usually they are part of the insti-tution for at least five years as untenured assistantprofessors.

Universities are judged academically by the qual-ity and productivity of their faculty. In economics,finance, foreign relations, and languages this meanshiring the best and the brightest faculty. When hiringa chemistry professor, given the opportunity to hirea Nobel Prize winning chemist or a devout Catholicwith lesser academic credentials, whom should theuniversity hire? If the university wants to compete forthe most qualified students, it must continuallyimprove the credentials of its faculty. The recentlypublished The Newman Guide to Choosing a CatholicCollege, favored by the Cardinal Newman Society,lists twenty-one Catholic colleges it deems trulyCatholic. Not one of the recommended schools ranksamong the top tier of American colleges and univer-sities. Most Catholic families, however, want bothCatholic identity and academic excellence for theirchildren. The combination is not an easy one toachieve, but it is a balance worth pursuing.

Professionally, faculty answer primarily to theacademy, not the church. When tenure decisions are

COMPLEXITIES OF

HIRING FOR MISSIONThere are internal and external restraints

By Chester Gillis

Chester Gillis is the Amaturo Chair in CatholicStudies at Georgetown University and author ofRoman Catholic in America.

20 Conversations

rendered, they rest on the criteria established by theacademy. Peer reviewers do not judge the worthiness ofa candidate for tenure on the basis of his or her religiousbelief or practice. If Catholic universities want to injectthis criterion into the mix, they would be ethicallyrequired to disclose to external reviewers that, at theirinstitutions, religious identification plays a part in thetenure process and may trump purely academic achieve-ment. Given this scenario, I suspect that many potentialevaluators would decline to participate.

When hiring senior faculty, one has a known recordof achievement, but recruiting is complicated by a num-ber of factors including the fact that the person soughtdoes not need a job, may not want to move, may have

a spouse who is alsoan academic, and willlikely receive a gen-erous counter-offerto remain at his orher present institu-tion. When recruitingat the senior level,geography also plays

a role. Some Jesuit colleges and universities are notlocated in major cities, and some faculty want a cityenvironment. Some, such as my own (Georgetown) arelocated in attractive but expensive cities. Faculty may not

want to bear the high cost of housing and the daily com-mute associated with the location.

In every university there are faculty members whodo not invest themselves in the institution. They identifyexclusively with their discipline and research. For them,it does not matter if their institution is Catholic, private,or public. They could move their shingle to anotherinstitution and hardly notice. They rarely attend univer-sity events, do little committee work, and seem invisibleon campus with the exception of the classroom (and, forsome even that is a place to try out their research ratherthan teaching the basics). They are not hostile towardthe institution and its values, but indifferent. It providesthem with a salary and the freedom to research and pub-lish. They are solo practitioners in a university that seesitself as a group practice. They may be Catholic, but theirCatholicism does not factor into their involvement withthe institutions’ goals. Colleges and universities need thename recognition of these professors and regularly toler-ate their absence or indifference as a cost of their schol-arly contribution.

StudentsStudents live in a multi-religious, globalized world. Thefaculty has a responsibility to educate them in and forthis world. Well-informed Catholic students want to knowabout the wider religious world. Practically, that means

University of Detroit Mercy.

In every university there are faculty who donot invest themselves in

he institution.

Conversations 21

courses in Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism aswell as in Catholic theology. Jesuits institutions that haveachieved recognition in the academic community havenot done so by thinking only of their Catholic identity. Atthe same time, these universities are known among theirpeer institutions and their students as religiously affiliat-ed institutions. When students arrive at Jesuit schools,they know they are Catholic because they encounterJesuits, learn that the university supports research andaction on social justice, cannot purchase artificial birthcontrol on campus, are required to take Theology cours-es, have campus ministers in their dorms, often have acurriculum with a Catholic studies program, sometimeshave centers that explore some aspect of Catholicism andlecture series that address Catholic concerns.

Jesuit colleges and universities do not recruit theirstudents exclusively from Catholic high schools.At many Jesuit institutions most students comefrom public schools. Their literacy in Catholicismdepends upon many factors—including family,parish, and schooling. Most are not as well

informed in the specifics of Catholicism as previous gen-erations. Many were raised on religious education pro-grams that taught them how to be loving Christians butlittle about doctrinal Catholicism. They differ from theirparents and grandparents who grew up in the heyday ofthe Catholic subculture that nurtured the immigrantCatholic population and for whom being Catholic meantstrict adherence to church teachings as well as beingsocially and religiously different. However, it is not theprofile of universities to do remedial work. Generallyprofessors are not interested in supplying informationthat students should have acquired in high school.

Catholic students want to be informed about theirreligious tradition, but they also want to bewell prepared for graduate or professionalschool or the job market. They make their col-lege selections with this in mind; Catholic uni-versities ignore the preferences of their appli-cant pool at their peril. Do we really wantthem to go elsewhere? Or do we want to havethe opportunity to educate the future leader-ship of our society? If we want them to come,in addition to Catholic identity we had betterprovide the quality of education they can getelsewhere or they will go elsewhere.

American SocietyVincent of Lerins, a fifth-century monk andsaint, defined orthodox faith in hisCommonitorium as doctrines that have beenbelieved “always, everywhere, and by all the

faithful.” Such a definition of orthodoxy would be diffi-cult to support in the contemporary American churchbecause significant evidence exists that doctrines are notheld equally by all the faithful everywhere. This pertainseven more widely topractices of the church.Unlike their grandpar-ents, who generallyheld church authorityas obligatory, today’sCatholic students morereadily perceive compli-ance as voluntary. The church may remain important intheir lives, but it must compete for their attention and alle-giance with social, cultural, and economic forces that pullthem in different directions. The areas in which the churchcarries significant authority in their lives are fewer than inthe past, and the authority is of a different type.

This is due, in part, to the fact that AmericanCatholics are (by and large) no longer an immigrantcommunity, that the educational level of AmericanCatholics today is much higher overall than it has beenhistorically, and that their economic status is greater.Like other Americans, they are subject to the post-Enlightenment heritage of increased autonomy that hascontributed to individualization as a trademark of devel-oped cultures. It may also be, however, that, despitetheir advanced education and improved economic cir-cumstances, contemporary Catholic students arehostages to cultural patterns that they uncritically follow.Perhaps in their yearning to fit in, they have managed tobecome subject to popular thought and culture. Thus,they act like the majority of Americans, even if thoseactions are contrary to their Catholicism.

It is not in the profile of universitiesto do remedial work.

22 Conversations

Naturally, Jesuit colleges and universities have aninterest in preserving their religious identity andshould work towards this goal so that they do notbecome institutions with solely historical ties to theirCatholic founders. Achieving this, however, is as com-plex as it is important.

One Last PointRejecting mere statistics as a basis for Catholic identityin his address to Catholic educators in the United States,Pope Benedict XVI said that “[Catholic identity]demands and inspires much more: namely that eachand every aspect of your learning communities rever-berates within the ecclesial life of faith. Only in faith cantruth become incarnate and reason truly human, capa-ble of directing the will along the path of freedom.”

One initiative that Georgetown has undertaken inrecent years under the direction of the Vice Presidentfor Mission and Ministry, Philip Boroughs, S.J., is toinvolve faculty and administrators in the Jesuit 19thAnnotation Retreat. Unlike the traditional Ignatianthirty-day retreat, this is spread out during the entireacademic year making it logistically easier to do. It

includes monthly meetings and dinners, personalweekly or bi-weekly spiritual direction with trainedlay and Jesuit directors, and daily individual prayer. Iparticipated in this experience last year and continueto meet every six weeks with others who have com-pleted the Exercises in this format.

This experience brings faculty and administratorstogether with a common objective, but respects theindividuality of each participant. It also puts them intouch with the Jesuit mission of the university. Severaldeans and faculty have embraced this opportunitythat has Catholics and non-Catholics discussing thereligious identity of the university and their own spir-itual lives. Such an experience has significant benefitsfor a Catholic university by shaping leaders whounderstand and embrace the Catholic mission of theinstitution and also continue to work diligently for theacademic excellence that the university demands.This constitutes educating for mission rather than hir-ing for mission and includes a diversity of religiousaffiliations. It is Catholicism on the ground in the uni-versity, a powerful example of preserving andstrengthening Catholic identity. n

Students and faculty confer in the hallways at University of Detroit Mercy.

It was the last class I wouldtake as an undergraduateand I felt little of the usualfirst-class-of-the-semesterapprehension that normallyflutters through me as I step

into the classroom. This was my 43rdtime walking into a new class atCanisius College, and I felt that therewas very little I could not handle.

Then I met the Jesuit who wasteaching the course. He rolled in atleast five minutes late to class, andannounced that his only rules werefirst, you were late if he beat you toclass; second, that everyone mustcover his or her mouth when yawn-ing. Oddly funny, I thought. Then heannounced that he begins all hisclasses with silent prayer followedby an “Our Father” recited in unison.Suddenly, it was no longer funny. Ilooked around at the other studentswith an, “Is he serious?” expressionon my face. But it seemed that I wasthe only person who was unfamiliarwith his teaching style. Most headswere already bowed in prayer.Conforming, I also bowed my head,but I was extremely uncomfortablewith this directive.

There is something about pray-ing in class that felt wrong. I couldnot help but think, “This is a class-room! This is a time for learning,thinking, and discussing!” Even with-in our Catholic school, there is alarge variation of belief. In the class-room everyone should feel that theyare among equals. Would not prayeralienate individuals even before theclass begins? Shouldn’t university

education be rooted in an impar-tial inquiry rather than overt dogma?

While everyone else was silentlypraying, I was getting huffy at theinjustice of it all, but even more so, Iwas wrestling with why it was that Ifound praying in the classroom sounnerving. As a practicing Catholic, Icertainly pray and I think prayer isvery important. I spent my first nineyears of formal education in aparochial school, where we prayedat least three times a day and went tomass every Friday. But now as Icomplete my senior year, I am dis-tressed when I encounter prayer inmy classroom. Is this a failure or atriumph of a Catholic and Jesuit edu-cation? Is my dis-ease with classroomprayer a sign that we have tradedour unique religious identity for theneutrality of secular education? Or,on the other hand, does prayer inthe classroom prove that a values-based education and unbiasedinstruction do not have to be mutu-ally exclusive?

Perhaps my discomfort with thissituation is a positive aspect of myJesuit education. The education Ihave received at Canisius has trainedme to critically evaluate situationswith an open mind and because of itI have slowly come to understandmy role as a woman for, and with,others. Jesuit educators want to cre-ate students who think, evaluate,and question practices, traditions,and ideas. They have a dedication tofostering excellence in their class-rooms as well as in their students,and they will not easily sacrifice this

for the sake of promoting or practic-ing a religion. Moreover, I havealways liked the fact that students atCanisius can freely choose to partici-pate in religious or spiritual activitieswithout feeling pressured to do so.Still, part of me wonders if this hastaken away a crucial part of ourCatholic identity. Is my discomfortwith prayer in class an indication thatJesuit education has strayed too farfrom its Catholic roots? Perhaps thereis something to be said for the simplepractice of beginning class withprayer to remind us that we are a partof something uniquely different froma typical American University.

Our professor ends our silentprayer by lifting his head and leadingus all in the “Our Father.” A minutelater, our books are open and a live-ly discussion has begun on whetherit is possible to study religion from acompletely secular point of view.Both sides of the argument are rep-resented and every student isengaged. I leave the class nearly anhour and half later feeling annoyed,challenged, and confused aboutwhat Jesuit Catholic education issupposed to be. n

Kelli Gardner is a recent graduate ofCanisius College.

What’s This? Pray in Class?

By Kelli Gardner

Conversations 23

24 Conversations

Introduction

About a year ago, events in my work at BostonCollege gave me the chance to do a compari-son that the reader might find interesting.

In my professional capacity as a pro-grammer in the information technology department atBoston College, I was working with a team to add somefunctionality to the software used for hiring newemployees to non-faculty positions. This functionalitywas focused on enabling hiring units throughout theuniversity to address the issue of underutilization ofAHANA (people of African-American, Hispanic, Asian,or Native American descent) and/or female applicants.This is known as ‘hiring for diversity.’

At about the same time, I was working in an advi-sory capacity to the Boston College office of missionand ministry. Here the office was focused on twothings: how to be more effective in engaging universi-ty employees in understanding what it means to be aJesuit and Catholic university; and how to encourageemployees to participate in ensuring that the objectiveof being a Jesuit and Catholic university is accom-plished. A very important issue in this area is hiring formission. As one Jesuit put it to me, hiring for missionis the sine qua non of Jesuit higher education. For thoseof us who don’t use Latin phrases so easily, this meansthat hiring for mission is the essential component to theenterprise. Without it, there really is nothing.

It’s useful to note that the term hiring for missionmay be better understood as shorthand for hiring forthe Jesuit and Catholic dimensions of mission. This distinction allows the recognition that any time an

HIRING FOR MISSION,DIVERSITY, AND

EXCELLENCEDo We Know What These Mean?

By John McLaughlin

Conversations 25

employee is hired and carries out her duties well theoverall mission of the university is advanced in a gener-al and very good way. Our concern here is to focusmore specifically on the Jesuit and Catholic dimensionsof the mission.

Because I was immersed in these two areas of con-cern, I was able to compare the two hiring goals of ‘hir-ing for diversity’ and ‘hiring for mission’ with respect tothe information necessary to accomplish both. As Ibegan the comparison, it became evident that the thirdelement of ‘hiring for excellence’ or ‘hiring for profes-sional expertise’ should be included because this is thetraditional means by which hiring was and is done. Theresults of this analysis are presented in the accompany-ing Chart.

QuestionOne can see from the chart above that the individualpieces required for hiring for diversity have beenworked out. While many would argue about various def-initions involved, the effectiveness of the mechanisms,and the limits of this effort, the point remains that a fair-ly elaborate structure does exist to move the universitytoward this goal.

A question that naturally arises next is, “Does howwe hire for diversity suggest some things for hiring formission? Are they similar enough for one to learn fromthe other? Have we gained enough insights from the hir-ing for diversity model to apply them to a hiring for mis-sion model?”

Clearly there are challenges in dealing with theissues that hiring for mission brings up. It won’t be easyor simple to make a definition, to have would beemployees inform us of their interests and qualificationsthereto, to develop internal and external metrics, to havemanagers be accountable, and to create a universitydepartment to oversee it. But let’s recall that as a socie-ty and an institution, we’ve figured out ways to do allthese things for diversity. Mission is certainly no lessimportant than diversity. It is mission which has carriedus thus far. Which brings me to my final question: “Inlight of all this, is there any reason not to do these thingsfor hiring for mission?” n

Hiring for mission

Hiring for excellence

Hiring for diversity

1 Each department defines this.2 For employees at Boston College, diversity is defined as: AHANA

and women.3 Initially, yes. The hiring process is basically a verification of these

claims to expertise.4 Yes. If they don’t, then hiring managers are encouraged to take

their best guess after they interview them.5 Applicants could do so in their resumes. But there is nowhere in

the application process that specifically asks applicants about this.6 This is job-dependent. While some might have metrics, all have

standards specific to each job type.7 Yes. These metrics include information about race and sex for

applicants, all employees, for types of jobs, and for correspondingpotential pools of applicants. Calculations are performed on everyjob opening for whether the job is “underutilized” for AHANAand/or for women. If it is underutilized, then hiring managers areexpected/required to do as much as they can to increase the num-bers of AHANA and/or women in the applicant pool.

8 Yes. And so are Vice Presidents of each area.9 The Office of Institutional Diversity oversees this.

The comparison

John McLaughlin is a programmer in the informationtechnology department at Boston College.

r qDoes a definition exist?

Do applicants self-identify?

Do metrics exist to

measure attainment of goal?

Are managers held accountable?

University department(s) oversee this?

rr r

rr rr r

?

?

qq

q

1 2

3 4 5

6 7

8

9

26 Conversations

In his 2004 Creighton University address on“Cooperating with Each Other in Mission,” Fr.Peter-Hans Kolvenbach S.J., then SuperiorGeneral of the Society of Jesus, began his remarkswith this important reminder: “St. Ignatius ofLoyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus, wrote

his Spiritual Exercises while he was still a lay person.” As we consider the “mission and identity” question

in our nation’s Jesuit colleges and universities, Fr.Kolvenbach’s reminder is helpful for two reasons. Forstarters, it highlights that formation for Ignatius was ulti-mately about discerning how he could best “live themagis.” Second, it underscores that formation is aprocess that, if better understood and practiced, mightencourage more faculty and staff to become “partners inmission” on our campuses.

Especially since 1995, when the 34th GeneralCongregation of the Society of Jesus called for “greatercooperation with the laity in mission,” the number andrange of mission formation programs on our Jesuit cam-puses has increased. Generally speaking, these programsintroduce faculty and staff to the Jesuit mission in high-er education and to key Ignatian values and ideals. Recently we surveyed and interviewed mission and iden-tity officers at AJCU institutions to learn more about theirfaculty/staff mission formation activities. Our ten-itemonline survey focused primarily on documenting thescope, perceived value, and “best practices” central tothe effectiveness of these programs. Eighty-one percentof survey recipients responded; seven participantsoffered further insights in short (30 minute) follow-uptelephone interviews with us.

What did we learn? We briefly report our findingshere before describing three “best practices” that con-tributed favorably to the formation of faculty and staff as“partners for mission.” We then discuss two implications

that flow from our findings, both of which are directedtoward further deepening faculty/staff mission formationefforts on our campuses.

Survey Results Our survey results indicate that the most commonlyoffered formational activities at AJCU institutions include:

• Educational formation: (1) Half- or full-day mis-sion/identity orientation for new faculty/staff (86percent of respondents), (2) mission-themed speak-er or luncheon series (52 percent), and multi-sessionmission/identity orientation (49 percent);

• Spiritual formation: (1) Spiritual Exercises inEveryday Life retreat (91 percent of respondents), (2)Lenten or Advent evening of reflection or retreats(51 percent), and mission-themed weekend retreats(43 percent);

• Experiential formation: (1) International serviceimmersion trips (71 percent of respondents), (2)annual community service day (53 percent), and (3)U.S.-based service immersion trips (33 percent);

• Support/Incentive: (1) Grants for mission-relatednon-core curriculum development (66 percent ofrespondents), (2a) grants for mission-related researchprojects (50 percent), and (2b) policies supportingengagement in mission activities (50 percent).Which of these many activities “make the most dif-

MAKING CRITICAL

CONNECTIONS:Identity and Mission Officers Tell What Works

By Jennifer Haworth and Megan Barry

Jennifer Grant Haworth is associate professor of education and former associate vice president for mission and executive director of Evoke at LoyolaUniversity Chicago. Megan Barry is faith and justicecoordinator in the office of mission and identity atLoyola University Chicago.

Conversations 27

ference” in fostering faculty/staff understandings of theIgnatian mission? According to the mission and identityofficers we surveyed, the top vote-getters include (1)immersion trips and service days – which often enlivenmission themes through direct, hands-on experience –and (2) spiritual retreats and mission-themed seminarsthat prompt participants to reflect on their lives in lightof their own faith commitments and key Ignatian teach-ings. (See Table 1 for more results.)

Best PracticesWe learned quickly that practices – rather than specificprograms – matter most in faculty and staff mission for-mation. Specifically, conversation, relationship, andaction emerged as practices that consistently enhancefaculty/staff understandings of and engagement with theIgnatian mission. While we discuss each separately here,their formational value was most pronounced when theyoperated as a kind of gestalt at an institution.

Conversation invites formation. In Turning to OneAnother, Margaret Wheatley reminds us that conversationis – and always has been – “the natural way that humanbeings think together.” As we talk with one another “wediscover what we care about, we discover shared mean-ing, and we discover each other.”

Conversation is essential to the mission formationprocess for two key reasons. First, it opens a space for fac-ulty and staff to connect their learnings about Ignatian val-ues and principles to their own lives. As Mary Flick, thedirector of mission programs at St. Louis University, toldus: “Faculty and staff have to work through the informa-tion. The discussion piece is critical for that – they need totalk it through themselves and make it their own.”

Once underway, conversation becomes an impor-tant mission formation practice for another reason: ifdone well, it invites faculty and staff to participate in anauthentically Ignatian way of reflecting upon their lives.Joe Appleyard S.J., vice president for mission and min-istry at Boston College, illustrated this point as hedescribed their semester-long faculty/staff seminar onstudent vocational formation:

Our seminar reflects the Ignatian dynamic of payingattention to experience, reflecting on that experience,and then making good decisions based on what islearned through that process. We begin by encourag-ing people to tell their own stories… because of this,people learn to respect each other’s experiences – bothprofessionally and personally, from the old to theyoung, to the professional and the clerical. The dynam-ic continues as the seminar unfolds. We’ll read some-thing but then engage in a conversation where partici-pants make sense of it in light of their own and others’

experiences. This leads people to see that everyone inthe seminar is making a contribution because each hassome knowledge or experience that benefits our stu-dents and the realization of our university’s mission…From my point of view, this dynamic reflects anIgnatian way of proceeding. We need to be about talk-ing with one another about our lives and our work andhelping each other discern good decisions in light ofthem.

Ignatius Loyola stressed conversation with his com-panions, inviting them to walk and talk with him asfriends do – with familiarity and intimacy within theeveryday ordinariness of their lives. For Ignatius – andfor today’s mission and identity officers – this kind ofconversation was and is vital to forming partners on ashared journey.

Relationship makes mission “real.” A few weeksago one of us spotted a student wearing a t-shirt thatsaid, “You can’t hate someone whose story you know.”Think about that for a moment. When someone shareshis or her narrative with us, we see that person’s human-ity more concretely. He or she becomes “real” to us.

From the Ignatian mentoring program at XavierUniversity to the colleagues in Jesuit education seminarat Seattle University, we continually heard about the vitalrole of relationships in forming faculty and staff as “part-ners in mission.” As Debra Mooney, Xavier’s associatevice president for mission, offered:

The Ignatian mentoring program is so valuable to ourfaculty because it focuses on developing personalrelationships first and foremost. Senior faculty arepaired with junior faculty and they get to know eachother as people. The junior faculty hear about the sen-ior faculty’s joys, successes and struggles and they alsotalk with them about their own. The senior faculty alsotalk a lot about their own personal experiences in try-ing to integrate the Jesuit mission into their teaching,scholarship, and service, and what has – and hasn’t –worked for them. The relationships they form are pow-erful. Interestingly, while both benefit a lot from theprogram, many of the senior faculty begin it wonder-ing if they have a deep enough understanding of themission. Quickly they come to see that they do… thatthey are making an important contribution to the fac-

When someone shares his or hernarrative with us, we see that person’s humanity more concretely.

28 Conversations

ulty they mentor individually and that they are helpingto advance the mission of the university, too.

The dynamic at work here is straightforward: whenfaculty and staff share their experiences and stories, theybegin to move beyond the institutional “roles” theyoccupy and to see each other as “real.” The simple actof listening invites this change of perspective andencourages the formation of relationships. As these growand deepen, they nurture in faculty and staff a sense ofbelonging to something “bigger” – in this case, an

enhanced sense of mission –that adds new meaning andpurpose to their work andlives.

Because Ignatian spiri-tuality is grounded in thecore value of relationship –between us and God, others,

and the broader world – it makes sense that relationship-building surfaced as a key practice in Ignatian missionformation programs. Like Ignatius, today’s mission andidentity officers understand that listening and dialoguenot only invite and deepen relationships, but they alsomake mission “real.”

Action stimulates partnership. What begins withconversation and forms into relationship has a goodchance of becoming partnership when put into action. AsKahil Gibran once mused, “A little knowledge that acts isworth infinitely more than much knowledge that is idle.”

The core practice of immersing themselves in

Ignatian values and principles in some active, intention-al way helps faculty and staff to grasp the mission of ourinstitutions more fully by acting themselves into newways of thinking. Action can take many forms – animmersion trip, the Spiritual Exercises, an Ignatian men-toring program, or working on a teaching, research, orco-curricular mission-funded project. The activity is farless important than the choice to engage it intentionallywith an open mind and heart.

In describing their annual trip to Nicaragua, SeattleUniversity’s director of the office of mission and Jesuitidentity, Joe Orlando, emphasized that immersion tripswere “important because they touch people viscerallyand intellectually. They tend to tap into deeper values,giving them legs.” Similarly, Lucien Roy, vice presidentfor mission and ministry at Loyola University Chicago, saidof their yearlong Spiritual Exercises in everyday life retreat:

The retreat has probably been the most influential mis-sion formation activity we’ve offered to faculty and staffover the last decade. There are many reasons for this…but perhaps the most important is the dynamic of theExercises themselves. Over time, participants begin tosee and act differently, and I believe that happensbecause they’re actively reflecting on their experiencesin their prayer and with their directors and members oftheir small faith sharing groups. Doing that intentionallyover eight months cannot but change you in some way.

Identifying action as a key mission formation prac-tice in our study aligns with Jesuit tradition. When menenter the Society of Jesus, they participate in several“action-oriented” experiences, including retreats and

immersions, that form them in thevalues and principles of theSociety while challenging them todiscern the values, principles, anddesires they want to live out. Whywouldn’t Jesuit colleges and uni-versities harness the wisdom of apractice that has guided the forma-tion of their founding order fornearly five hundred years?

More centrally, however, itseems that action challenges part-ners in mission to “act themselvesinto a new way of thinking” byencouraging them to live as “con-templatives-in-action.” Here theycan be shaken by the realities ofpoverty, disarmed by the graces ofthe Exercises, or confronted by dif-ficult questions that often accompa-ny the authentic integration of mis-sion themes into curricular and co-curricular projects. The discoveriesthat faculty and staff make duringthese experiences often deepen the

The simple act of listening invites

this change

Table 1: Mission Formation Activities Most Valuable in Forming Faculty/Staffas “Partners in Mission”

ActivityExtremelyValuable

%

Valuable

%

Immersion Trips 76 21

Spiritual Retreats 72 28

Service Day 66 33

Mission-themed Seminars 62 38

National Conferences 50 50

Mission-themed Orientation for new faculty/staff 32 68

Mission & Identity Day, Week, or Month 33 66

Grants for mission-themed courses or co-curricular activities 27 73

Mission-themed Speaker Series 25 76

Conversations 29

value they place on Ignatian ideals, further encouragingtheir transformation as “partners in mission.”

ImplicationsWhile our research suggests several implications forstrengthening faculty/staff mission formation efforts onour campuses, two seem especially relevant here.

First, our research suggests that mission formationprograms affect participants more meaningfully whenthey are guided by an “Ignatian way of proceeding.” Itis one thing to inform faculty and staff about the Jesuitmission in higher education but a different one altogeth-er to value them as co-creators of the mission. AnIgnatian way of proceeding invites faculty and staff intothe latter role, through genuine conversation, meaning-ful relationships, and active engagement. While thedemands of this way of proceeding are significant,actively “walking our mission talk” in “deeds and notwords” sends a clear message to faculty and staff thatour institutions are committed to respecting and valuingthem as real partners in mission.

The second implication flows naturally from thefirst. We agree with Boston College’s Joe Appleyard that“conversation,” especially when it involves “talking withone another about our lives and our work and helpingeach other discern good decisions” is what “Ignatian uni-versities ought to be about.” When applied to

faculty/staff mission formation, the implications areclear: it is critical not only to respect faculty and staff as partners in conversation, but also to encourage them tobe attentive to and reflective about their current – andpotential – contributions as co-creators in the sharedwork of mission. Here we would argue that an Ignatian“way of proceeding” suggests a process for meetingwhat we see as the real goal of mission formation: help-ing faculty and staff discern the “magis” they most wantto give as part of their daily work of bringing theIgnatian mission of our institutions to life.

For at least the last thirty years there has been grow-ing concern about how our nation’s Jesuit colleges anduniversities will sustain their Ignatian identity as thenumber of Jesuit clergy declines sharply. As discussiondeepens around this topic, it seems to us that the centralmission and identity issue has less to do with achieving“critical Jesuit mass” and far more with forming facultyand staff who make “critical Ignatian connections.”Indeed, when faculty and staff experience conversation,relationship, and immersion, our research suggests thatthey make connections to the Ignatian mission that invitethem – much like Ignatius nearly 500 years ago – to dis-cern more authentically how and where they can bestuse their gifts in service to others. From where we stand,shouldn’t that be the critical “magis” we desire from ourpartners in mission? n

The Spiritual Exercises, with notes in the hand of Ignatius. ©2000 Jesuits of the Missouri Province.

30 Conversations

Recognizing the Ratio Studiorum as integralboth to the foundations of the Society and tothe foundation of its educational institutionsmakes reflection on it a relevant project fortoday, not only for the Order, but also for theschools. We need to consider what the role

the document might play in the making of Jesuit educationtoday. This is not an easy thing to do, because the task beforeus is not a matter of simple restoration. The Ratio Studiorumwas composed in and for the late Renaissance. As an earlymodern document, it does not fit post-modern times so easi-ly. And yet, its importance and influence for hundreds of yearspoint to the likelihood that it was successful not only becauseit fit its own times so well, but also because it carried valuesthat transcended its own time and may therefore fit our timetoo. What, then, are those lasting elements of value? And howdo we read the Ratio Studiorum in such a way as to becomemore authentic about what we are doing today?

The Curriculum Carries the MissionHere I would like to begin an answer to these questions byfocusing on one of the most radical consequences of takingthe Ratio Studiorum seriously as a foundational document:The Ratio Studiorum’s greatest contribution to our times maywell be the idea of the importance of the curriculum asthe primary vehicle for the mission. And here I am con-

An Editor’s Introduction. RAS

In his March 26, 2008 Edmund F. Miller, S.J., Lecture at JohnCarroll University, Claude Pavur, S.J. develops the history ofand argues for the continued relevance of the 400 -year-oldfoundation document of Jesuit education called the RatioStudiorum, the “official plan of education” which guided thecurriculums of Jesuit high schools and colleges to somedegree until recently. It had rules for almost everything —how to conduct exams, the daily schedule, and what to read.Its vestiges are in the continued presence of philosophy andtheology in core requirements and the teaching of Greek andLatin, and in the emphasis on elocutio perfecta, the principlethat students of Jesuit institutions should be able to speak andwrite well.

Father Pavur writes that Saint Ignatius’ educational theoryevolved from two key moments: when he saw that educationwas necessary for him to save souls and when he decidedthat this required an ordered approach. This led to the Ratio,which took over 50 years to develop; it was not issued until1599, and it has been revised several times after that. TheRatio is also like the Spiritual Exercises in that both employrepetitive activity, progress in stages, combine structure andfreedom, focus on details, require personal activity and pro-mote a specific result — a knowledge and love of God. In thelast third of his address, Father Pavur makes the case that —

THE CURRICULUM

CARRIES THE MISSIONWhy We Still Need the Ratio Studiorum,

Especially Today

By Claude N. Pavur, S.J.

Claude N. Pavur, S.J., of the New Orleans Province andSaint Louis University, has held the Edmund F, MillerChair in Classics at John Carroll University.

Conversations 31

ceiving of the curriculum not as a static block of con-tents, but rather as a structured, engaged, dynamic, con-tent-rich process involving the personalities of the teach-ers and the students.

There are many great things that happen on Jesuitcollege campuses today: there are retreats; service proj-ects; study-abroad programs; liturgies; social events; spe-cial lectures; workshops; meetings of student- and facul-ty-associations and of representative governance groups;extracurricular activities (including sports); musical andtheatrical events; and the activities of fraternities, sorori-ties, and clubs of all kinds. Even though many of theseare vital to student growth and essential for the well-being and identity and life of the university, none ofthem, I would say in light of the Ratio Studiorum, is asimportant as the curriculum.

After all, the curriculum is where all the studentsmust go and spend much of their time, whether or notthey take part in any of these other enterprises. Withoutthe everyday student-teacher events giving shape to adefinite curricular journey, we would not even have acollege or university. The Ratio Studiorum devotes timeto the place of administration and liturgies and study-clubs and sodalities, but it puts the main accent on thecurriculum: what to teach and what to learn, when andhow. In the midst of an abundance of competing factors

in college today, the curricular aspect needs to be recog-nized as the essential bedrock of the mission.

This idea, if it is accepted, suggests major conse-quences. Consider the simple fact that in light of theRatio Studiorum, the mission and ministry office in Jesuitcolleges and universities should have a highly significantcurricular impact. In fact, this is rarely, if ever, the case.

This idea also puts a special responsibility on thefaculty to work out, manage, oversee, and constantlyimprove the curriculum. Of course, it obliges the stu-dents to follow their course of studies responsibly andget the most out of them; it also obliges the administra-tion to oversee the project and keep it moving forward.But the main burden is on the faculty, which shares asa group a corporate responsibility for educating thenext generation. Teachers therefore must devote quality-time to thinking about the curriculum as a whole. Nodiscipline is an island. At some point, the dynamics ofterritoriality are self-defeating; they must yield to a com-monality of purpose. The faculty is charged with engag-ing in a corporate effort to discover, to institute, and torefine a curricular wisdom. That entails a great ongoinglabor. For example, it involves reviewing the major rad-ical critiques of higher education that have been emerg-ing, evaluating them, and working out any appropriateresponses.

A mass commissioning new PLACE (Partners in Los Angeles Catholic Education) Corp members. Cardinal Roger Mahoney conducts themass, speaks to and blesses the new members. ©2007 Loyola Marymount University

32 Conversations

Furthermore, at some level, the core has to be fash-ioned not so much with an eye to professional compe-tency as to the education’s larger purposes, namely to allthat bears most significantly on the development of thestudents in their vocation to be fully humane, fully spir-itual persons who are progressing toward wisdom —wisdom about God and the good, about nature, aboutethics, about culture and society, about family, aboutrelationships, about themselves, and about what it takesfor them to live a truly good life.

To achieve success, it will also be necessary todescend to the details of course-contents and make judg-ments about what should be guaranteed in the educa-tional core. It is not enough to say that everyone shouldhave 1 or 2 or 3 hours of economics or philosophy. ARatio-inspired consciousness asks further questions

about the details: what exactlyare we going to put into thosehours? What texts are better,more appropriate, more pro-ductive, more successful thanothers? What topics are most

worth the students’ time and attention. What best sup-ports intellectual, cultural, moral, and religious conver-sion? It makes sense to pour energy into assessmentpractices if and only if we are agreed on what to assess.

How can the faculty achieve such an effect? It needsto develop a Ratio Studiorum-like vision, and that can-

not be done in a single year or even in a single decade.The Ratio Studiorum was the product of many voicesover time, and we may need a similar investment. If weaccept the principle that the curriculum is the carrier ofthe mission, some type of faculty “on-the-job” formationwill be a high priority, something that makes it clear toevery teacher that there is a distinctive corporateapproach here. The effort supports the institution’s aca-demic freedom to be what it is supposed to be.

Part of that approach involves learning to think for-mationally. For example, a young philosophy teachermay emerge from graduate school very impressed withNietzsche’s Twilight of the Idols and eager to teach it. Butthere is a formational question that needs to be asked:Given the mission and character of our school, and evensimply given basic pedagogical considerations, is this thebest text to give freshmen as their introduction to philos-ophy? If this text is to be taught, how does it fit into thelarger rationale? Where are we trying to lead the studentswith it? This decision, I think, should not just be left tothe individual, as it often is today. There is a corporatewisdom that should at the very least be part of the deci-sion. Everyone is invested in the next generation’s edu-cation. No one has a blank check.

The Ratio Studiorum would never have succeededwithout the existence of the right type of oversight struc-tures and the bona fide agreement of a faculty to co-operate. For practical reasons, Jesuit college programs

Honors Students doing research in Von der Ahe Library's Special Collections. ©2007 Loyola Marymount University

Teach Nietzsche tofreshmen?

Conversations 33

today probably also need a kind of internal governingboard that goes beyond what most curricular committeestend to do, in order to support ongoing reflection andwork on the curriculum.

Order in the CurriculumOne of the main tasks would be the question of orderin the curriculum. How does each year of collegebuild on and extend the work of the previous year? Eversince my own college years, I have been awed by thevast variety of the course-offerings available today. Ihave been equally distressed by the fragmentary jumblethat any curricular program seems to be forced to be.Alasdair MacIntyre put it very well in October, 2006, inCommonweal: Academe has produced more and morefields and more and more specialists and therefore moreand more possible courses; it has not been equally dili-gent about developing a habit of thinking about how theparts relate within a larger totality.

The freedom to choose from a great array of cours-es may feel very good to us when we are college stu-dents, but does it serve us well in the long run? Certainlywhen I was in college I would have preferred to havebeen able to assume that the faculty had worked out avery solid, coherent, well-elaborated core, deliveredwith a consistent and even improving quality throughthe years. In fact, they had not done anything like this.There were simply generic distribution requirements,and the students had to fill them out as best they could.

It is time to go back to Ignatius’s radical insight thatit is better not to jumble things up in the curriculum butto take them in a certain sequence, with thoroughpreparatory grounding, and with a sense of how they fitinto a larger educational plan. One of the greatest thingsthe Ratio Studiorum can give us (and all schooling) issimply the very idea of ratio, or plan.

Electives need not be eliminated, but they do notnecessarily have to be superabundant. And certainly atminimum there should always be, at the very least, acurricular option for the more ordered, integrated, andsystematic approach, one that might more clearly be inthe tradition that impressed Ignatius on his journey somany years ago. This option is usually not present today.I believe we need a standing team of faculty that isexplicitly commissioned to work out a program that inte-grates the best of what might be covered in languageand letters, philosophy, theology, and spirituality. Such aprogram would constitute, in my view, the greatestpromise of Jesuit education. It would allow us to estab-lish a distinctive kind of university that would give stu-dents a real option in types of liberal arts curricula.Surely this kind of diversity will be a valuable thing topromote, and surely it is just the kind of diversity that weshould be most expected to promote.

ConclusionI would like to conclude as I began, with some words ofwisdom:

A disciple asked Confucius about the cultivated person.Confucius said, “Cultivate yourself by seriousness.”

The disciple asked, “Is that all?”Confucius said, “Cultivate yourself to make others

secure.” The disciple asked, “Is that all?”Confucius said, “Cultivate yourself to make all oth-

ers secure. Even the sage kings had trouble cultivatingthemselves enough to make all people secure.” ThomasCleary, The Essential Confucius.

Just so, the Ratio has a very large aim. It is not justabout self-cultivation for some kind of possibly narcissis-tic personal security; nor is it about leaping to just anykind of other-oriented action in some kind of naiveactivism. Rather, it looks to a certain type of energizedwisdom that involves a self-cultivation, a broadened anddeepened consciousness that has undergone conversionand that can act for a universal and transcendent end.That is why recovering the spirit and the genius of theRatio Studiorum is one of the most important things thatwe can do now. n

34 Conversations

What’s a nice Jewish girl doing in aplace like this? That’s what I wasthinking when I first came to SaintJoseph’s University as an assistantprofessor of economics in 1986. I

grew up in a predominantly Jewish suburb ofPhiladelphia. Although my Jewish friends and I all identi-fied as Jews, attended Hebrew school and had bar andbat mitzvahs, for most of us, religion was not an impor-tant part of our lives. Our religious observance was limit-ed to attending services for the high holidays, lighting amenorah at Hannukah, and attending a Passover seder.Our faith was not part of our everyday lives and certain-ly did not in any way inform our world view or daily deci-sion making. This lifestyle continued for me through col-lege and graduate school (at secular universities). At myprevious institution, not only did I find a lack of interestin religion but a true disdain for anyone who took hisfaith seriously. The unspoken feeling was that you couldnot be both a serious scholar and a person of faith.

When I interviewed at SJU, there was little empha-sis on Jesuit Catholic identity, so I really had no ideawhat it meant. I was reasonably sure no one knew I wasJewish, and I certainly did not bring it up. Besides, I fig-ured that economics had nothing to do with Jesuit,Catholic, whatever that was, so I moved to SJU.

From the start, I had two somewhat unsettling expe-riences. When I walked into my classroom on the firstday, above the blackboard was a crucifix. I had neverseen a crucifix up close, and it was unnerving. My solu-tion was not to look above the blackboard. My second

quandary was theMass of the HolySpirit. No waywas I going tochurch! So Istayed away,going instead tothe pool, whichI assumed, cor-rectly, wouldbe virtuallyempty.

Gradually,I got used tothings. Imade friends,did mywork, but theproblem was that I didn’t really feelpart of the community. But I did learn, slowly, that anyalienation I felt was my own doing.

In 1996, when I had been at Saint Joseph’s for 10years and still did not have a clue, Sr. Francis Joseph,R.A. asked me to be the respondent for the upcomingFaith-Justice lecture on the 10th anniversary of the USCatholic Bishops’ Pastoral Letter on the Economy. Myfield in economics was theory of the firm; I hadn’t eventaken the course in economics of poverty in college (tomy lasting regret), so I certainly did not have the eco-nomics background for this.

I knew the keynote speaker, Fr. Jim Stormes, S.J., an

Faculty discover or re-discover the Jesuit Mission

Testimonies

BEING JEWISH ON A CATHOLIC CAMPUS:HAVE THEY TRIED TO CONVERT YOU YET ?

By Nancy Ruth Fox

Conversations 35

economist who had taught in ourdepartment for several years andwho was then the MarylandProvincial. I was not thrilled aboutbeing the respondent to hisremarks. But Sr. Francis was persist-ent, and I figured I could read a “let-ter.” I was very surprised when Ilearned that the so-called “letter”was really a several hundred pagedocument, half on Catholic theologyand half on economics. I thoughtthe economics was severely flawedand felt confident to comment onthat, but I could make no sense ofthe theology. So I consulted with acolleague in the theology dept,whose field was social ethics andwho just happened to be, in addi-tion to a Ph.D. in theology, aMethodist minister. I spent a greatdeal of time preparing for a 5-10minute response, and I decided Ishould somehow continue thiswork. I went back to my colleague,Steve Long, and we decided to teamteach a course on economics andethics, which we called “Profits and Prophets.”

That brief response was the turning point for me. Sowhat has happened since?

Now, I do attend the Mass of the Holy Spirit everyyear, which I find to be a beautiful and inspiring service,and I feel very much part of the community. I certainlydon’t take communion, but I do recite the Lord’s Prayer,since I learned of its Jewish foundation from my rabbi.

I became associate director of the Faith-JusticeInstitute in the late 1990’s. I was invited to be part of theIgnatian Identity committee, and was inducted as anhonorary member of Alpha Sigma Nu in 2000. We nowhave an active inter-faith task force, of which I am amember. In January, we celebrated our 4th annual SJUPrays: Interfaith Blessings for the Spring semester. It wasat this service one year that I learned about how serious-ly the Jesuits take religious diversity, when a participat-ing Jesuit read excerpts from GC 34 “Our Mission andInterreligious Dialogue,” decree five. “…we have a spe-cial responsibility to promote interreligious dialogue.”

After serving as the respondent for the faith-justicelecture, my entire research and teaching agendachanged. I don’t do much with theory of the firm any-more. I’ve taught profits and prophets, and variations of

it, numerous times. I’ve taught the economics of pover-ty as a service learning course. I became reasonablywell-versed in Catholic social teaching, and in fact,included it in my introductory economics courses.Recently, I have changed the focus of my research to therelation between market economics and Jewish socialethics. And althoughthere are significantdifferences betweenthe Jewish andCatholic social tradi-tions, I am regularlystruck by the similari-ties, which shouldcome as no surprise.

As a faculty mem-ber and now as anassociate dean, I lookfor opportunities to beinvolved with social justice and spirituality on campus. Ifind that I am a resource on campus for people who havequestions or want to learn more about Judaism. This, inturn, inspires me to learn more about my own faith. Ihave taken courses at my synagogue, attend religious

Testimonies

Professor Wilkie Au conducts his Theology class, Loyola Marymount University.©2007 Loyola Marymount University

“I certainly don’t takecommunion, but I dorecite the Lord’s Prayer,since I learned of itsJewish foundation frommy rabbi.”

36 Conversations

services more frequently (and pay closer attention), andcelebrated my 50th birthday with an adult bat mitzvah. Ihave a greater interest in and knowledge of the Jewishtradition of tikkun olam, repairing the world, and I con-stantly look for parallels to the Jesuit tradition of socialjustice.

So why am I basically opposed to “hiring for mis-sion,” at least as I understand its implementation? Itseems that “hiring for mission” is often translated (orunderstood by prospective faculty) as supporting the“Catholic agenda,” or, even worse in my opinion, hiringonly or primarily Catholic faculty.

The Jesuit mission, as I understand it after 21 yearson this campus, is wide ranging, and includes the magis¸cura personalis, and social justice. It is hard to imagineany new Ph.D. who could not support these values.Given the emphasis on “formation,” I find it difficult tounderstand why anyone would expect a new Ph.D. to“get it” even before he accepts a position. Is it reason-able to expect candidates to have some level of under-standing of the difference between a Jesuit, Catholicinstitution and a private or secular one? Perhaps, but Idon’t think we’ve been successful in communicating the

nuance. It took me 10 years just tobecome interested, and though Icontinue to grow and learn, I willnever have “a deep personal loveof Christ.”

I know now that no oneexpects me to, but I do not thinkthat is obvious to a prospectivefaculty member. And if the candi-date takes the job offer because helikes the department or prefers tolocate in this particular town, Idon’t find that troubling, becausethere is so much opportunity todevelop. I don’t think anyone canjudge a prospective faculty mem-ber’s ultimate contribution to mis-sion based on a campus interview,and I don’t know how to conveyin a truly comprehensible mannerwhat it means to be on a Jesuitcampus to someone whose focusis on finishing a dissertation.

On several occasions, I‘ve beenasked to speak at the new facultyorientation on mission and identi-ty. I am always the last presenter,and I listen carefully as others talk

about all the ways that the Jesuit and Catholic values arepart of our campus. When it is my turn, I say “I’ve beenwatching your faces during these presentations. Andwhile I can’t remember if there was a session of this kindat my orientation in 1986, I know that if there was, I’dhave been terrified and would have run away as fast asI could.” I then explain that I am Jewish and give arather abbreviated version of my history. It never failsover the year, that some of the new faculty tell me howrelieved and happy and surprised they were to hear mypresentation. I gave a similar presentation to the trusteeswith the same results.

I conclude with an answer to the question I’veposed in my title. “Have they tried to convert you yet?”They haven’t tried to convert me, but they have succeed-ed. I’ve been converted to being a better Jew—moreobservant, more knowledgeable, and more informed bymy faith. And, as a Jesuit friend of mine once told me,the S.J. actually stands for “slightly Jewish.” n

Nancy Ruth Fox is associate dean, college of arts & sciences, and associate professor of economics at Saint Joseph’s University.

Testimonies

Professor Karen Mary Davalos makes a point in her Chicano studies class, Loyola MarymountUniversity. ©2007 Loyola Marymount University

Conversations 37

Testimonies

Afew years ago while at a teaching confer-ence in Oregon, I mentioned to other con-ference attendees my plan to walk up to thepeak of Mount Scott at Crater Lake, Oregon.Even As a novice hiker, a trail hike of about

five miles round trip, gaining 1,500 feet of elevation tothe 8,929 foot summit looked challenging, but possible.A fellow I met two days earlier asked if he could comealong. Having anticipated a half-day of solitude innature, I was not excited about this change in plans, yetI reluctantly agreed, seeing in his eyes an intense desireto join me. During our drive, we stopped to experiencethe majesty of a thunderstorm breaking across themountains of the park. After visiting the lake, we droveto the trailhead for Mount Scott and started hiking.

Nearing the peak, we came to a narrow ridge withangled slopes of loose rocks falling off both sides. Notbeing particularly fond of heights, I paused, feelingfrozen in place out of a growing sense of fear and a lossof control. I wanted to continue. I knew how to contin-ue, but I felt my will abandon me; I would rather standstill in that place forever than risk taking the step thatcould prove to be my downfall. I knew it was irrational,but my fear of misstepping and sliding down the moun-tainside was palpable to me.

My hiking partner came up next to me, and as hewalked by gently said, “Trust the earth your feet are on.”Through those words I was freed from the artificial reali-ty my brain was creating. Looking down, I saw the firmearth, the foundation upon which I stood. I felt connect-ed to God in nature, the connection I sought in taking theafternoon to hike. It empowered me to head for the peak.

As an administrator in a Jesuit university, the “earthmy feet are on” that I trust is the mission of my institu-tion. It is the reason I choose to work at a Jesuit institu-tion. It is the grounding for my daily interactions andevery decision I make. It is also the underpinning for aunique leadership paradigm available to us as followersin the footsteps of St. Ignatius.

My orientation to leadership was formed, poorly, inCorporate America. Some of us know and many of usfear that its paradigm for leadership can corrupt moralvalues, yet we should not discount the many effective

leadership methods which originated there. We need todevelop solid leadership skills that help us address theissues and opportunities that we face as administrators inJesuit schools. If we take those methods and skills andutilize them within our own leadership paradigm, we canbe true to the organizational identity put forth by our mis-sion. Ours is a leadership grounded in love for others andGod, grounded in Ignatian values, and enacted in wayssimilar to those used by a spiritual director guiding a per-son through the Spiritual Exercises.

I am not a spiritual director, butthrough my experience of spiritualdirection I see a model for leading aJesuit institution. The Exercisesmake a specific call for us to act outof love, faith, and compassion. Just as a spiritual directordoes not do the work of responding to the love of Godfor the directee, neither do administrators do the work ofthe organization’s members. Rather they guide, oftenwith questions that lead back to the mission and ensurewe are being true to ourselves and true to our identity. Isthis where we want to go as a Jesuit institution? Is thiswho we, as a Jesuit institution, are called to be? Just asthe spiritual director poses questions rather than issuesorders or relies on his popularity or charm, so must aleader pose questions for reflection rather than justdemand or, worse, rely on the cult of personality or posi-tion, to enact change. Adopting a practice of “looking todiscern what might be possible” and leading from thereis what is needed. Enacting discernment in this wayrequires leadership based on trust, openness, and per-sonal responsibility to each other and the organization.

The leader must hold sacred the trust of her organi-zation just as a spiritual director holds sacred the trust ofthe directee. The leader must form partnerships ratherthan dictate, empower rather than constrain, and chal-lenge compassionately rather than confront harshly. Thespiritual director and the administrative leader eachassume the burden of identifying the environmentalpressures, temptations, and issues that have the poten-tial to inhibit our sincere response to our calling.

The spiritual director must help a directee nurture asense of responsibility for her own spirituality and God.

Leadership as Spiritual Direction “Trust the earth your feet are on.”

By Scott A. Chadwick

Leadership acts out of love.

38 Conversations

Testimonies

For leaders, there is likewise an opportunity to helpshape a culture where choices are based on an unwaver-ing sense of responsibility to the mission of the organi-zation. Just as the spiritual director models unwaveringfaith in both the directee and God, so the leader modelsunwavering faith in the institution’s faculty and staff and

their ability to serve as men andwomen for and with others.Ultimately, the spiritual directorhelps others to define choices basedon the love of God. Leading from alove of colleagues and a love of God

allows all of us to define choices similarly. A desire touse one’s leadership talents in responding to that lovemust be at the heart of administration at a Jesuit univer-sity. That is the path we must walk.

When I reached the top of Mount Scott on that warmsummer day, I was woefully unprepared for sub-freezingtemperatures awaiting me. While standing there, shiver-

ing from my sweat evaporating in the wind, my hikingcompanion reached into his backpack and pulled outdry clothes for me. He had not only recognized me as anovice, but knew from working in the Himalayas withSherpas (as I found out later) that I would need help. Inpart, I think, it is why he asked my permission to hikewith me. What I thought was a practice of compassionon my part by letting him accompany me turned out tobe his gift to me of compassion and care. He was onewho had gone before, and I benefited from walking thepath that day with him, from his leadership in words andchoices. I treated the hike as a walk up a trail, ratherthan as a hike up a mountain. My paradigm did not fitmy task.

We have freedom to choose our paradigms, just aswe choose our hiking companions and guides. For us,St. Ignatius, the Jesuits who have followed his lead, andthe many professionals over the centuries who have sus-tained the essence of Ignatian spirituality in our institu-

My compassionbecomes his gift

Finance-CIS Professor Kala Seal teaching in his classroom, Loyola Marymount University. ©2007 Loyola Marymount University.

Conversations 39

Testimonies

tions have blazed a trail. They can serve as our hikingcompanions and guides if we choose to follow their par-adigm. Hiking that trail requires us to turn away from thematerial and personal rewards that are foundational totraditional leadership paradigms. It invites us to trust andwalk a path of Ignatian values as we build other-cen-tered organizational structures and systems based onlove and compassion.

Traditional leadership paradigms can encouragestrategically positioning one’s unit within the organiza-tion to serve its own interests, defending its turf. Leadingin love means designing and enacting systems to tran-scend self-interest, seeking only that which is best for themission and the development of students. Leading inlove requires that we refuse to perpetuate any injusticesof previous systems, instead, naming them and facingthem compassionately to help heal the wounds theyhave caused on our campuses. It requires that institution-al reflection and discernment be built into the institu-tion’s annual processes. A leadership paradigm ground-ed in love also calls us to openness to those of other faithtraditions who desire to support the institution’s mission

because they believe in that mission. Leading in lovemeans the weight of decision-making and decisionsmade must be carried willingly for the benefit of othersrather than felt as a burden of position. It also means thatcompassion toward all others must be the basis for inter-actions, even as some others work against the leader, themission, or each other.

As leaders, we are often face the choice to eithertrust the earth our feet are on or let fear drive our behav-ior. Acting out of fear increases the likelihood that wewill resort to ineffective paradigms of leadership, ignor-ing the possibility of God working through ourselves andothers as they work for mission. If we truly trust the earthour feet are on, we engage ourselves and others in aprocess of questioning and discernment. Then and onlythen can we follow in Ignatius’ own footsteps further upthe trail. Then and only then, no matter what, we willbase our actions on love, as we stay open to find God inall things. n

Scott A. Chadwick is vice president for academic affairsat Canisius College.

Out and about speaking in churches as I fre-quently do, a common question I oftenreceive is this: What is it like for aProtestant to teach theology and religiousstudies at a Catholic university? While the

question reveals a lack of knowledge of both the diversi-ty of our Jesuit universities and the commitment of theCatholic Church to ecumenism, I do understand thebewilderment inherent in the question. My response gen-erally centers on the convergence of my own values andprinciples with those articulated in the mission ofRockhurst University. And even though that mission isgrounded in a theology and tradition that is clearlyCatholic and Jesuit, many of the values and principles arehumanistic in nature and shared by people of good will.

The religious aspect of a university’s mission state-ment is usually related to the founding vision of the uni-

versity or to the tradition of the founding denominationand/or religious order. Sometimes that relationship is heldtoo loosely, resulting in loss of stability; sometimes it isheld too tightly, resulting in loss of flexibility. In recentyears, writers such as George Marsden and JamesBurtchaell have documented the drifting away (mostly outof neglect) from the religious mission of many prominentuniversities in America, both Protestant and Catholic.

However, occasionally the opposite problem occurswhen the relationship between the religious traditionand the mission is held too tightly. If the missionbecomes a rigid standard, akin to a creed, and is used tomeasure orthodoxy and loyalty, academic freedom isthreatened, flexibility disappears, and the tradition inwhich the university is situated becomes stagnant.

I propose that we think of the mission of a universi-ty as analogous to the role of tradition in early

Describe, Don’t PrescribeWhat would Cardinal Newman say?

By Wilburn T. Stancil

40 Conversations

Testimonies

Christianity—more descriptive than prescriptive. That is,even as the Apostle Paul spoke of handing on (para-didomi) the traditions (paradosis) he had received aboutEucharist (1 Corinthians 11:23) and resurrection (1Corinthians 15:3), so the mission of a university repre-sents a commitment to “hand on” its vision of an educa-tion informed by faith. This way of thinking about themission encourages both flexibility and stability.

While interpreting the mission either too narrowly ortoo widely can be equally detrimental to a university,those outside the Catholic tradition who teach at Catholicuniversities are especially concerned that the mission notbecome too prescriptive. Rigid and narrow interpreta-tions of the mission, whether articulated by the institu-tion or by special interest groups in the foundingdenomination, are contrary to the flexibility essential forboth faith and learning. The impulse to restrict and con-trol is destructive of the very element necessary for vitaland healthy faith: change.

Though some would wish it otherwise, Cardinal

John Henry Newman, in his “Essay on the Developmentof Christian Doctrine (1845),” knew that change and flex-ibility were at the heart of faith: “In a higher world it isotherwise, but here below to live is to change, and to beperfect is to have changed often.” Newman used theanalogy of a flowing river. While it may be true that astream is clearest near the spring, such an analogy can-not hold true for religious belief, “which on the contraryis more equable, and purer, and stronger, when its bedhas become deep, and broad, and full… Its beginningsare no measure of its capabilities, nor of its scope.“Stable enough to assure continuity, but flexible enoughto encourage growth.

When a university articulates its mission with thatprinciple in mind, people of good will, including thisProtestant theologian, will have contributions to make. n

Wilburn T. Stancil is professor of theology and religiousstudies at Rockhurst University.

My story about catching the spirit ofJesuit education may be a bit unusual.For me, the third time proved to be acharm. I am a product of a JesuitCollege (John Carroll) and graduate

school (Boston College), but I became an activist forJesuit mission only in my third experience of Jesuit edu-cation, as a faculty member here at Creighton University.

I had worked for six years as a high school teacherand six more as a president/principal of a Catholic highschool in Rhode Island. When I finished my doctorate ineducation and was ready to go to work at a university, Idid not seek out a Jesuit school. My goal then was clear:I wanted to teach at a Catholic university. I am gratefulthat I landed at Creighton.

I came in 1996 and got involved in the usual roundof faculty activities. By now, almost twelve years later, Igo around promoting Creighton’s Jesuit approach to edu-cation. To help you understand why and how, let meaddress four questions here: What’s so special for meabout Jesuit education? What do I see happening aroundme? How did I get so enthused about it? And what canwe do better in the future?

What is special for me about Jesuit education is allthose things suggested by our familiar slogans: findingGod in all things, seeking the greater glory of God, exer-cising personal care for people, and asking constantlyabout the “more.” These are exciting things at the heartof our lives! I have learned to love Jesuit educationbecause it is so humane and world-affirming. Life at

How I Caught the SpiritThough Jesuit educated, I didn’t care, until…

By Timothy J. Cook

Conversations 41

Testimonies

A student teacher tutors school children in the School of Education Literacy Lab in University Hall, Loyola Marymount University.©2007 Loyola Marymount University

Creighton shows a profound respect for the intellect; itblends reason with faith in a way that I find engagingand confirming.

My interaction with students continues to infect mewith Ignatian spirit. Many of them are really on fire withfaith. Their idealism and energy get to me. They ques-tion me, and I need to rethink. It is invigorating to inter-act with them.

My favorite story about a student transformationconcerns a Jewish undergraduate woman. During hertime with us, she became deeply involved in campusministry, particularly work for peace and justice. Shecame to Creighton as a social activist. She left Creightonwith a deeper understanding of the faith that does jus-tice. Her experience here helped her to become a betterJew. Being a part of an experience like that is exciting!It is worth championing!

What I see around me far too often is a tendency to

softpedal our Catholic and Jesuit mission for fear thatpeople will find these religious values offputting. I expe-rience exactly the opposite. The more we are “out there”with our Ignatian vision, the more students are drawn toparticipate and invest themselves. The Ignatian spirit iscontagious! It is our best “selling” point in every sense ofthe word. I continue to be dumbfounded by people atour own institutions who do not promote exactly thataspect of what we have to offer. This kind of educationis a “pearl of great price” that people will not find else-where. I am amazed at people who think that our being“Catholic” is somehow restrictive. I find life here bothdistinctive and freeing—freeing us to do even more thanwe might elsewhere.

How did I catch this spirit? I ask myself sometimes.These twelve years have seen me develop and changein ways I would not have expected before and that Icherish now as I continue to grow and to be challenged.

42 Conversations

Testimonies

African Studies Professor John Davis poses a question to his class, Loyola Marymount University. ©2007 Loyola Marymount University

Being around people with this sense of vision was high-ly contagious for me. From Jesuits and others I pickedup a strong sense of what we are about. I delved deep-er into Ignatian spirituality in several ways. I am not sureI can now track which things came before which. Iknow that a key phase of my developing commitmentwas making a nineteenth annotation retreat. That oppor-tunity and invitation came out of participating in a fac-ulty seminar on Jesuit education.

People talked there about Ignatius’ experience andtheir own retreat experiences. Fr. Larry Gillick, whointeracted with us about the Spiritual Exercises, actuallysought me out and encouraged me to make a retreatmyself. As it happened, I was going on sabbatical thefollowing semester. I am glad that I took Larry up on hisoffer! From there, regular spiritual direction was a natu-ral next step for me. Being around people who are onfire with the Ignatian charism (or spirit) has certainlyfanned the flames of my development. Good campus

liturgy and preaching have also challenged and sus-tained me.

What things should we be thinking about here?What should we do further than the things we are doing?We need to do more for people like me who have devel-oped an interest in Ignatian education. Formation doesnot end after one year-long seminar. We need to createa developmental scheme for deepening the faith of peo-ple like me who have been infected with the Ignatianvision. For example, should we offer a regular facultypilgrimage to Ignatian sites for those who have made theExercises? I myself have already helped direct the facul-ty Ignatian seminar. I wanted to do that, since the sem-inar helped me so much. I will help anyone I can tocatch the spirit of Jesuit education. n

Timothy J. Cook is associate chair and associate professor in the department of education at CreightonUniversity.

Conversations 43

Testimonies

The Education of a HeartBy Tracey Kahan

Before coming to Santa Clara University in 1990,I was a member of the Loyola MarymountUniversity community for three years. I initial-ly sought the LMU position on the recommen-dation of a student who was in a graduate

course I was teaching at UC Riverside. As an LMU alum,she offered that my commitment to teaching and mentor-ing students was consonant with LMU’s emphasis on qual-ity, values-centered undergraduate education. Not beingCatholic-and having traversed the state educational sys-tems solely, I knew nothing of the Jesuit tradition in high-er education, nor had I ever met a Jesuit.

Looking back, I realize how fitting it is that my “for-mation” as an educator – really as a whole person –should have been initiated by a student recently gradu-ated from a Jesuit university. At LMU, I was introducedto the concept of integrated education — educating theheart as well as the mind- by engaging students (andourselves) in a discovery process that integrates rigorousinquiry and direct experience. The unique opportunities— professional and personal — afforded by involvementwith Jesuit higher education were first revealed to meduring an immersion trip to Nicaragua in 1989.

At this time, the US-subsidized contra war withinNicaragua was winding down and the grass-roots, revo-lutionary Sandinista government was in power. As mem-bers of an educational delegation from LMU, we metwith cabinet ministers as well as with communityactivists and spokespersons of cooperatives for educa-tion, textile production, and farming. No matter that thiswas one of the poorest countries in the world, as meas-ured by Western material standards – the energy of hopewas palpable and pervasive.

I particularly remember our visit to a farming coop-erative near Leon. We arrived in the heat of the noonhour and it took some time for the workers to arrivefrom the fields. We had time to study the newly builtmedical clinic and the Russian-built farm equipment.Having stopped in at their modest one-room homes,each person arrived to the outdoor meeting place carry-ing a beautiful, hand-carved cane chair. These chairswere placed in a large circle and we, the guests, wereinvited to sit. Only the community spokesperson took achair with us. From here, we were offered slices of freshwatermelon before the discussion of life in the coopera-

tive commenced. I was deeply moved by the generosity,pride, strength, and vision of these people and cameaway from this visit both humbled and inspired. TheNicaraguan people believed that we, a small delegationof educators from America, could help change the poli-cies of our country through our witness to the truth oftheir lives.

As much as I flourished at LMU, I am a mountain per-son at heart and did not feel at home in Los Angeles, evenfor having grown up in Southern California. When a posi-tion in the psychology department at Santa Clara Universityopened up, I applied, believing that at SCU I would havethe opportunity to combine a vocation in Jesuit higher edu-cation with greater access to the wild, natural places thatinspire and energize my life. I was thrilled when thedepartment chair called to offer me the position. Duringmy years at SCU, I have become good friends with a num-ber of Jesuits and progressively more intrigued.

What was the wellspring of joy, integri-ty, and compassion each expressed inhis own way? Certainly, I have knownothers whose lives are centered bytheir particular faith – but the Jesuits

seemed somehow to more fully embody their faith, andalso to be genuinely interested in, and inclusive of, peo-ple from different backgrounds and faith traditions.

Even as a non-Catholic woman, I was invited tobecome a “companion on the journey” –in exploration offaith, vocation, meaning, and the challenge to discover“where my gifts meet the world’s greatest need. I was wel-comed into the intimate process of discerning what myheart is calling me towards. I was welcomed as a partici-pant in the Ignatian Spiritual Exercises, in celebrations ofthe spirit, in conversations about the mission and vision ofthe university. I have blossomed – professionally and per-sonally — through the humanity, generosity of spirit, andinclusiveness of the Jesuits and their embodiment of thespiritual and educational vision of St. Ignatius. n

Tracey Kahan is an associate professor of psychology atSanta Clara University.

44 Conversations

By far the most important thing I havedone at Seattle University over thelast eleven years is lead the universi-ty community in the formulation ofits mission, reinforce it in multiplepractical ways, and help to unify allof our efforts by building consensusaround this mission. I also try to

embody it personally by how I act as president, ground-ing what I do in daily prayer and in open access to thewhole university community.

I led as many as thirty discussion sessions over thecourse of a year with every university constituencygroup, repeatedly revised drafts of the short missionstatement on the basis of what I heard, checked backagain and again with the trustees because of their ulti-mate responsibility for the mission, and retained person-al authorship of the mission statement so that it spoke inan alive and united way. Then we found every possibleway to make the mission statement visible and enunci-ated everywhere, even to the extent of having it framedat the entrance of every building on campus. I believethe process by which we articulated our mission hasdone more than anything else to galvanize the universi-ty, give it a sense of common purpose, and provide apivot for our sense of community.

From the beginning of my time as president I insist-ed that we take one day a year, not holding classes onthat day, so that the whole of the faculty, staff, adminis-trators and some students could gather for the equivalentof a university-wide in-service day on the mission. Wehave discussed such issues as the spirituality of our stu-

dents, global social issues, the role of the arts in theJesuit educational mission, collaboration for the sake ofthe integration in the experience of our students, issuesof justice and workplace environment among us, etc.This has proven to be an effective mission renewal time.

I also persuaded the trustees to set aside about $1.5million from year-end surpluses for “The Endowed Fundfor Faculty and Staff Development in Mission.” The vicepresident for mission and ministry heads a committeewhich evaluates proposals and distributes about $68,000annually for a wide variety of individually proposedprojects, conferences, studies and trips, which are direct-ly connected with learning about and promoting themission. This endowment has been critical to providedevelopment funds especially to staff who otherwisewould not have access to development resources.

In 2005 we promoted our mission in a curious way.I and others had been impressed with RadicalCompassion, the book by Gary Smith, S.J., about work-ing with people on the streets in Portland, Oregon. Asan educational experiment we bought 400 copies of hisbook and distributed them among faculty, staff, and stu-dents. We allowed various conversations to develop.What emerged was the hosting of a homeless encamp-ment, a “tent city,” on our campus for a month. Everyschool, college, division, department, club, athletic pro-gram, and office voluntarily engaged with our homelessguests in services provided, discussions, in classroom

WHAT I’VE DONE

By Stephen Sundborg, S.J.

Stephen V. Sundborg, S.J., is president of SeattleUniversity.

How the leaders define the mission

Presidents Speak

Conversations 45

Presidents Speak

presentations, public forums, enter-tainment and the preparation ofmeals. In a unique way the wholecampus was involved as neverbefore in a practical, personal, andeducational way with the peopleand the issues of homelessness. Mystomach flipped when I was askedto okay this controversial projectrather than talk about homeless-ness! However, like nothing else,it made our mission real.

I also jointly sponsor, togeth-er with the rector of the Jesuitcommunity, a five-times-a-yearevening of what we call“Colleagues in Jesuit Education.”This grew out of evening conver-sations in depth, with an enjoy-able dinner among Jesuits and the desire by them toexpand the experience to faculty and staff. About 120colleagues interested in learning about and embracingour Jesuit mission, gather for prayer, presentations, dis-cussions, and a meal. It is organized by the office ofJesuit identity and has been going for twenty years. Fr.

Peter Ely, S.J., developed a more in depth year long“Arrupe Seminar” for faculty and staff who meet everyother week in two groups studying the origins and his-tory of Ignatian spirituality and Jesuit education. Myoffice encourages participation and provides some fundsfor those who lead the seminar. n

The chapel at Seattle University.

46 Conversations

Each day, as president of Saint Joseph’sUniversity, I ask myself this question:How might we improve the quality ofthe overall educational experience weoffer our students? It is difficult toanswer that question without knowingthe answer to the following two ques-tions: What are we about at Saint

Joseph’s, and what is our mission?Like most of us in Jesuit higher education in the

United States, I continue to be influenced by the remarksmade by Peter-Hans Kolvenbach, S.J., at Santa Clara in2000. One statement in particular has stayed with me:“The real measure of our Jesuit universities lies in whoour students become.” The essence is not what theybecome, but who they become.

The United States is blessed with the finest highereducation system in the world. Our students are able toreceive excellent educations, whether they attend SaintJoseph’s University or another fine university. So howare we, as Catholic and Jesuit institutions, different? Thatdifference is our mission.

Most recently, when I think about mission, I thinkabout our Catholic and Jesuit identity in 2025 andbeyond. During the ensuing years, we will continue to

CATHOLIC COURSES

ARE THE HEART

OF OUR MISSION

By Timothy R. Lannon, S.J.

Timothy Lannon, S.J., is president of Saint Joseph’sUniversity.

Presidents Speak

Conversations 47

Presidents Speak

have fewer Jesuits on our campuses, we will faceincreasing specialization of the disciplines at our univer-sities, and we may find ourselves living in a culture evenmore unsupportive of our values.

Consequently, I find myself focusing on three criti-cal areas. In the past, I thought it was vitally importantto have a critical mass of Roman Catholics on our facul-ty and in the administration. I still think that is important,but today I consider it even more important to have acritical mass of colleagues who have experienced andlive out the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius. I am con-vinced we can thrive as Jesuit or Ignatian institutionswith fewer Jesuits if we have lay men and women whoare inspired by the Spiritual Exercises.

Another area of importance is a liberal arts educa-tion. Unfortunately, specialized knowledge becomesdated almost upon graduation. However, what enduresis the ability that our students develop at our institutionsto read well, think critically, speak well, listen well, inte-grate their knowledge, and remain intellectually curiousthroughout their lives. We offer our students courses thatenable them to wrestle with life’s issues: faith and rea-son; moral behavior; and religious traditions. Further, Ithink that every graduate of Saint Joseph’s, Catholic ornot, should have some understanding of the RomanCatholic tradition in the intellectual and cultural sense.

These past four years we have been engaged in acurriculum review process, and I am delighted that thenew proposed curriculum includes courses required ofall students in “Faith, Justice, and the Catholic Tradition;”“Religious Differences;” “Moral Foundations;”“Philosophical Anthropology;” and “Faith and Reason.”These are courses at the heart of our mission as a

Catholic and Jesuit university. These courses differentiateus from other institutions.

Lastly, we need to sustain the Catholic intellectualtradition. This vital tradition is not only located in philos-ophy and theology departments, but throughout our uni-versity community. When I think of mission, I think lessof a Catholic Studies department and more of scholars inindividual departments who are committed to doingresearch and teaching courses related to Catholic topics,for example, an English professor whose scholarshipinterest lies in Catholic writers.

The mission of any Jesuit college or university comesto life in the classroom, the administrative offices, the resi-dence halls, and on the playing fields. Our colleagues, onbehalf of our students, bring this mission to life. It is myhope that during my tenure as president, in collaborationwith my colleagues, our mission will have been strength-ened and well positioned for 2025, even for 2050.

Last year prior to the celebration of ourCommencement, our speaker met with a group of grad-uating seniors. During their discussion, she asked, “Whatkeeps you up at night in relation to life after graduation?”One response was, “I’m not worried about my choice tobecome an accountant; I’m worried about how servicewill fit into my life as an accountant. Service has becomea big part of my life and I don’t want to lose that.” It isconversations such as this with our students, alumni, fac-ulty and staff, that reinforce for me that we at SaintJoseph’s are on the right track in strengthening our mis-sion of intellectual pursuit, moral discernment reflectingChristian values, and a transforming commitment tosocial justice for the years ahead…all for the greaterglory of God. n

Above: Two jesuit professors (right, Seminar member Joseph Feeney, S.J.) captivate their classes at St. Joseph’s University. Below left: The church tower at St. Joseph’s.

48 Conversations

As a result of a recentseminar, I findmyself meditatingmore deeply onteaching as anIgnatian vocation.Quentin Lauer,Fordham Jesuit

philosopher, said once that teachingis one of the classic ministries of lovebecause it seeks the good of theother. As a ministry it requires purityof intention and periodic reflectionon its means and ends.

In the modern American uni-versity teaching occurs in a pre-scribed format of courses, exams,and grades, a scripted process thatruns from the admission of stu-dents, through eight semesters andx number of credits, to graduation.The faculty run this show as theprofessors of knowledge, the dis-pensers, assessors, enablers, andaccreditors. The professor profess-es; the student studies. But the chal-lenge of interdisciplinarity is thechallenge to perceive the essentialidentity of professor and student; to

recover, in other words, the essen-tial truth at the core of the teachingvocation, namely, that the professoris in essence a student, from studeo,studere “to be eager for,” one whohungers for learning and wisdom.We are paid to know things, ofcourse, and to teach others; but wecan only do so because we are, firstand foremost, learners, studentswho strike out into our own fieldand into new areas, people wholive the life of the mind. This meansmodeling the intellectual curiosityand responsible adventurism wehope to enkindle in our students.

We are ourselves responsible ifwe allow the mundane realities oflife in the university—yearly evalua-tions, pay raises, tenure, promo-tions, etc.—to destroy or obscureour essential identity as students.And we are ourselves responsible if

A Pedagogy of Humility

Faculty should take courses.

By Robert S. Miola

Robert S. Miola is the GerardManley Hopkins Professor ofEnglish at Loyola College inBaltimore.

Bob Miola, who graduated

from Fordham in 1972 and

who has been teaching at

Loyola Baltimore since 1977,

says he is “still being taught by

Jesuits.” Author or editor of

nine books on Shakespeare,

about 30 articles, including the

recent “Shakespeare and

Religion” in First Things, his lat-

est book is Early Modern

Catholicism: An Anthology of

Primary Sources (Oxford). He

wins honors and awards,

speaks, consults, and partici-

pates in seminars on the

Classics and Shakespeare

around the world. And he is

humble. RAS

Conversations 49

we lose touch with this identitybecause we allow ourselves tobecome mesmerized by the achieve-ments of our curriculum vitae andthe desire for fama gloriaque, aca-demic distinction and peer adula-tion. We need always to remind our-selves that the most fundamentaland indeed the highest vocation atthe university is the vocation of thestudent. And the student is one whois eager for learning, who exists in astate of tension and unfulfilleddesire, who seeks with mind andheart deliverance from the state of unknowing. The deliverancerequires energy, commitment, andsacrifice but it brings great joys.

S o it is,paradoxically, that professors aremost truly themselves when theyknow things and when they don’tknow things but engage in thesearch and the struggle. This in mymind begins to argue for a pedagogyof humility, an important virtue inthe Second Week of the SpiritualExercises (164-8). Students need topractice the virtue of humility: theyneed sometimes to forget about theneed for approval and self-esteem,the need for flattery and feelinggood, and submit to the discipline ofthe demanding and unforgivingriver, as the young Mark Twain doesin Adventures on the Mississippi.This means accepting and welcom-ing the exhilarating and sometimes

uncomfortable fric-tions necessary forintellectual growth.And professors tooneed to practicethis virtue; weneed occasionallyto take courses, tocultivate and sat-isfy the deepdesire within tolearn that firstdrew us to aca-demics. And atleast once in awhile we need to drop the mandarinpose and say “I don’t know,” “I waswrong,” and “I have changed mymind.” We need to let down theguard enough to be students and toshow others that we are studentstoo. And happily so.

The First Principle andFoundation says “Man is created topraise, reverence, and serve Godour Lord, and by this means to savehis soul.” What kind of service?Among the many possibilities,Thomas More, at least as Robert Boltportrays him in A Man for AllSeasons, provides an answer appro-priate for us as professors and stu-dents: “God made the angels to

show him splendor… animals forinnocence and plants for their sim-plicity. But man he made to servehim wittily in the tangle of hismind.” Living out our vocation asprofessors and students is our bestand most proper means of servingGod and giving witness to his pres-ence in creation. n

Top: Laboratoryexperiments, Xavier University. Above: A high-tech classroom in The SellingerSchool of Business and Management buildingat Loyola College in Maryland.

50 Conversations

On the Edge: Defending an Identity

By David Gregory

Idoubtlessly owe everything I amto the Jesuits. Throughout myJesuit high school and collegiateeducation, the Jesuits have setmy heart on fire, truly revolu-tionizing the way in which I

encounter Christ, whom and what I “fallin love” with, as Fr. Arrupe reflected soeloquently. My passion for and dedicationto Jesuit education has me worried asGeorgetown fast approaches a crucialdecision: whether to maintain its power-fully rich Roman Catholic, Jesuit heritage,or to forsake its founding principles infavor of a secular route taken by manyother schools. Please consider the numer-ous implications of the following eventsand trends carefully.

In 2007, Georgetown’s Law Centershockingly provided funding for a studentinternship at Planned Parenthood, thenation’s most prominent abortion provider.In the final lecture of Introductory Biology,I was stunned to hear my Georgetown-educated professor declare the human per-son to be nothing more than a purely mate-rial being, implicitly rejecting transcendentreality. While beliefs of non-Catholicemployees must be respected, these indi-viduals must likewise appreciate, as perPope John Paul II’s apostolic letter ExCorde Ecclesiae, that Georgetown cannotpromulgate views that contradict theRoman Catholic Church. Georgetown mustattract Catholic scholars who manifest love

of the faith in their teaching andprofessional endeavors.However, my main concern lies withthe student body, which truly definesthe university, as Georgetown has suf-

fered a drastic decline in the Catholicity ofits students. A few decades ago, over 350students frequented weekly nocturnal ado-ration of the Blessed Sacrament, and now,no more than two dozen students attendthis classic devotion. The Catholic StudentAssociation and retreat program struggle forconsistent activity, not due to lack of enthu-siastic and talented leadership, but due to alargely apathetic student body. Only fifty-one percent of Georgetown undergraduatesidentify themselves as Roman Catholic, anominously slim majority for one of thenation’s most prominent Jesuit schools.

Georgetown must always welcomenon-Catholic students with open arms, andgive them the resources and opportunitiesto follow their faiths seriously. ManyCatholic students do not take personal spir-itual development as seriously as do theirnon-Catholic peers. Undergraduate admis-sions should now, more than ever, in thisage of wanton secularism and anti-religioushostility, actively seek to recruit Catholicstudents who want to engage and live theirfaith. Georgetown must proclaim proudlythat it is a school in the Jesuit tradition,highlighting diversity while simultaneouslyremaining unflinching in upholding RomanCatholic teaching, unembarrassed andunafraid of any consequent criticism.

Last fall, a Jesuit commented to me that“Georgetown is out of the hands of theJesuits.” While the Society surely maintainsa presence on campus, it no longer exertsits former influence on the university’sadministration and scholarship. Many

Hoyas intentionally graduate without everencountering a Jesuit, without learning fromthese wonderful men who have given theirlives to Christ and education, without allow-ing Jesuit education to transform their lives.

Thankfully, hope springs eternal, asPope Benedict reiterates in his encyclical.Dr. John DeGioia, our first lay president,has been profoundly affected by his experi-ence with the Spiritual Exercises.Georgetown students donate considerabletime and energy to service, understandingthat education is given so that we can effectchange in the world, that we are not ulti-mately meant to live for ourselves. Thisyear, three groups of students are travelingto El Salvador, Tanzania, and thePhilippines as part of a “magis immersion”experience. There exists a sizable group ofstudents dedicated to preserving theschool’s Jesuit identity, through a number ofactivities such as sacramental devotions andthe annual Jesuit Heritage Week. Most stu-dents simply neglect the plethora of oppor-tunities Georgetown provides us with todeepen our relationships with God, andthus our relationships with one another andthe world around us. Hoyas do not compre-hend the vast importance of our origins.

Ex Corde Ecclesiae emphasizes that itis the “honor and responsibility of aCatholic University to consecrate itselfwithout reserve to the cause of truth.” IfGeorgetown loses its Jesuit character, itloses its very self. If Georgetown fails todefend and advocate the cause of Truth,it fails its primary mission, to bring Christto the world and the world to Christ. n

David Gregory is a philosophy and theology major at Georgetown.

Students Speak

These two Georgetown students were members of the student

As I graduate fromGeorgetown Universitythis May, I see a campuscommunity in a process oftransformation. Followingtwo widely-publicized

anti-gay hate crimes and a powerfulresponse from the student body last fall,President John DeGioia announced thecreation of a full-time LGBTQ ResourceCenter to open this fall. Some have sug-gested that this center would require aninstitutional endorsement of positions thatdirectly contradict Church teaching,which would leave the integrity ofGeorgetown’s stated Catholic and Jesuitidentity in jeopardy.

I certainly dealt with these same con-cerns in my personal experience of becom-ing an integrated gay Catholic. For manyyears, these two aspects of my identitydeveloped in a fragmented way, separatedby a seemingly insurmountable wall. I feltforced to choose sides on a daily basis,struggling as hard as I could to make surethat I kept hidden whichever “me” I wasnot to be in a given situation.

Like almost any Catholic, I might notagree with every word ever spoken in theVatican. Nevertheless, I do appreciate thatthe Church embraces the notion that weare all stuck in the same, muddy mess oflife. That’s what I have always enjoyedabout the Gospels; these stories empha-size the intrinsic dignity of the rejectedmembers of society. Through them, webecome friends with lepers, immigrantsand sex workers. It makes sense to methat the Church’s teachings are valuablefor Catholics insofar as they are rooted inthe tradition of these Gospels. In myview, the greatest commandment is thecall to love God and one’s neighbor, aswe have already been loved. Christ tellsus in Matthew’s Gospel that “the wholelaw and the prophets depend on thesetwo commandments.” This love is themost solid of all common ground in ourfaith tradition.

When any two people express a gen-uine love for each other, this gift cannotcontradict any Church teaching that is

consistent with Christ’s only command.Likewise, Georgetown’s decision to sup-port any healthy relationship that is builtupon the virtues of honesty and respect isfully consistent with its mission.

I encourage you to read the parableof the man born blind in the ninth chap-ter of John’s Gospel. Christ contravenedexisting religious doctrine by opening theman’s eyes on a Sabbath. The apparentoutcast subverts his supposed “sin” ofblindness by teaching the Pharisees a newlesson about seeing sin as exclusion andseparation. Some say that we shouldjudge the faithfulness of others on thebasis of an outward conformity to a set ofrules and codes. However, many peoplethroughout history have pointed to adeeper understanding of faith – a journey(often, a struggle) to abide by an ineffablelaw of love that comes forth from within.To varying degrees, we are all blind menand we are all Pharisees.

For me, the road to cynicism isindeed wide and well-paved. But, I’mtired of being left with either that optionor the self-hatred that tore me apart for somany years. This false choice has drivenso many LGBTQ individuals out the doorof our faith communities and into anunnecessary spiritual winter.

When a leading Catholic uni-versity like Georgetown openlyrecognizes the value of LGBTQ stu-dents, it sends a clear message to manythat they do not need to fear oneaspect of their identity in order tomaintain the other. Our administra-tion’s support for the LGBTQ com-munity is a natural expression of its ongo-ing mission to educate the whole person.Georgetown is simply experiencing achange of heart.

I do not believe that we are called toforge unity out of fundamental divisions.Rather, it is our task to reveal that whichcannot be divided. Once we recognize thatthe walls between us – and within us –must have been constructed, it becomesmuch easier to see that we have beenwalking around on the same green earththis whole time. When we reject any formof hatred or discrimination, we are helpingto clear the way for the “civilization oflove” of which John Paul II often spoke.Although the terrain may change, we havealways stood on common ground. n

Zack Pesavento, a 2008 Georgetown graduate, is beginning a one-year mediafellowship with the AFL-CIO.

The Integrated Catholic Gay Student

By Zack Pesavento

Conversations 51

Students Speak

group who met with the Seminar’s members at our January meeting.

52 Conversations

Book Review

1904 was a very good year. In sayingthat, I refer not to the St. LouisWorld’s Fair but to the birth of four

of the greatest theologians of the twentieth century—Bernard Lonergan, John Courtney Murray, Karl Rahner,and Yves Congar. Drawing together essays from variouscentenary venues, this book celebrates the first three fig-ures, each a Jesuit (Congar was a Dominican).

The first four essays helpfully illuminate importantaspects of Lonergan’s contribution. Lonergan is knownabove all for two groundbreaking methodologicalworks, one philosophical, the other theological: Insight(1957) and Method in Theology (1972). ElizabethMurray’s essay on Lonergan the methodologist thus pro-vides a good starting point (though it is not the first chap-ter). His methodology rests on a complex analysis of the“polymorphism of consciousness,” but as Murray set forththat analysis I became increasingly impressed by Lonerganthe phenomenologist, who carefully mapped the contoursof conscious existence.

What is the payoff in Lonergan’s phenomenology ofinquiring consciousness? Nothing less than a break-through in metaphysics, previously considered the mostarid of subject matters. Patrick Byrne eloquentlydescribes this breakthrough, which led Lonergan tounderstand metaphysics as a “passionateness” thatresponds to the “passionateness of being” itself—bothrooted in the passionate love of God poured out in theuniverse and into our hearts.

John Haughey, S.J., elaborates on a further aspect ofLonergan’s philosophical breakthrough, namely his turnfrom the ancient and medieval “classical consciousness”to an evolutionary, historical awareness that remains

Three Jesuit Giants: What is the Value of Their Work?

Mark Bosco, S.J., and David Stagaman, S.J., editors,Finding God in All Things: Celebrating Bernard Lonergan,

John Courtney Murray, and Karl Rahner.New York: Fordham University Press, 2007, 221pp.

By William Rehg, S.J.

©2007 Loyola Marymount University

Conversations 53

Book Review

open to revision and surprise. Thisopenness to revision finds concreteillustration in the first chapter onLonergan, in which Donald Gelpi,S.J., draws on C. S. Peirce to correctdeficits he sees in Lonergan’s cogni-tional analysis—e.g., its overly tran-scendental character, inattention tointuitive feeling and community.

The essays on John CourtneyMurray have a more personal tonethat helps us understand his thoughtas a response to American culture.Indeed, Mark Williams’ essay isentirely personal—a nephew’s remi-niscences on his “Uncle Jack.”Michael Schuck contextualizesMurray’s thinking in the latter’sexperiences as the son of Irish immi-grants whose old-world mentalityconflicted with the American experi-ment in democracy. Leon Hooper,S.J., traces Murray’s movementbeyond Catholic tribalism to a “loveof enemies,” that is, an appreciationof American values, the historicity ofnatural law, and dialogue, bothinterreligious and Christian/atheist.

Finally, Thomas Hughson, S.J.,draws timely conclusions fromMurray’s positions on religious free-dom and nonestablishment: ecclesi-astical authorities have the duty toform, but not to command, the citi-zen’s conscience in the exercise of“politically prudent judgment” at thevoting booth.

Taken togeth-er, the four essays on Rahner power-fully convey a theological vision thatis at once deeply spiritual andbreathtaking in its sweep andgrandeur. The breadth and grandeur

come across especially well in theessay by Leo O’Donovan, S.J., whosurveys five themes in Rahner’sthought: knowledge as orientationtoward the incomprehensible; theinternal relation between knowledgeand love; the ontological intercon-nectedness of self, other, and God;the primacy of praxis; and thedialectical, historical character of thehuman response to God.

The other three essays mine thespiritual depths of Rahner’s vision.Harvey Egan, S.J., gives us a sense ofhow that vision flows from Rahnerthe human being—a generous andpastoral priest, a modest and hard-working Jesuit scholar. After tracingthe historical background and intel-lectual sources of Rahner’s thought,George Griener, S.J., goes to itsheart: a theology of grace as the self-communication of the incomprehen-sible mystery that is God. Finally,James Voiss, S.J., confronts Rahnerwith criticisms raised by Hans Ursvon Balthasar. Although the chargesare not groundless, Voiss finds reso-nant depths in Rahner’s corpus thatcall for more careful attention andbelie the first impressions thatsparked Balthasar’s critique.

The postscript provides the con-cluding coda: Stagaman recalls hisown intellectual encounter with thethree figures and finishes with somebrief remarks on the fourth memberof the 1904 quartet, Yves Congar. Inbringing these essays together, edi-tors Bosco and Stagaman have hon-orably discharged a service incum-bent on Catholic Jesuit theologians:Lonergan, Murray, and Rahnerdeserve our thanks for their enor-mous contributions, and this volumepays them grateful homage. n

William R. Rehg, S.J., is a professorof philosophy at Saint LouisUniversity.

Friends study together on the lawn at University of Detroit Mercy.

54 Conversations

Book Review

Presented here are twounusually importantcollections, both ofwhich have an unusual-ly high percentage ofsignificant essays thatwill add to our under-standing of Catholic-

Jewish relations today. Friends on theWay contains the papers of the ThirdInternational Colloquium of Jesuitsinvolved in Christian-Jewish dialogue,held in Switzerland in July, 2005, thefirst in Krakow in 1998, the second inJerusalem in 2000. Having been invitedto speak at the July, 2007 Colloquium inNew York, I can attest personally to theseriousness of the commitment of theJesuits involved.

If one looks up “Jesuitical” and“Pharisaical” in the Oxford EnglishDictionary (I have the one many of ushave, the huge two-volume editionwith the little magnifying glass), onefinds virtually the same definition,which is no surprise if one knows thehistory of Catholics and Jews in notalways so very merrie olde Englande.

And Jesuits and Jews, as JamesBernauer points out, have been a “’trag-ic couple,’ both demonized in infamousdocuments” by conspiracy mongerers.Yet it is also true, as Bernauer pointsout, that Jesuits have reason to join the“penitential voice” of Pope John Paul II.This collection goes a long way towardconsolidating the hope of Jesuit-Jewishdialogue and at the same time con-fronting the too often tragic realities ofthe relationship.

All of the articles in Friends on theWay are by Jesuits, save for theIntroduction by Rabbi Harold Kasimov,a veteran of the dialogue who ablysummarizes the texts, and Rabbi ToviaBen-Chorin of Zurich, who brilliantlyreflects on the Dialogue between Jewand Non-Jew in the Bible and RabbinicLiterature, opening a number of intrigu-ing possibilities for new research inboth fields.

Since I started out, as have many ofus in Catholic-Jewish relations, as whatFr. Gerard Sloyan would call a “bibler,”I was transfixed not only by the Ben-Chorin piece but equally by the two

contributions of Pere Jean-PierreSonnet. His first essay, “From Midrashto Contemporary Narrative Exegesis.”shows how the innovative, literaryanalyses of Scripture of R. Alter, M.Sternberberg, et al., which have had amajor impact on how Christian biblicalscholars have perceived anew the sto-ries and narrative techniques of thebible, can best be understood as in con-tinuity with ancient rabbinical tradition.Sonnet’s second contribution, on“Inner-Biblical Exegesis,” describeshow the Hexateuch by reinterpretation,re-contextualization, and a close read-ing of the originals, was able to updateearlier law codes for use in a new con-text. Since Catholics today are in themidst, since the Second VaticanCouncil, of just such a period in ourown history, learning from the

Dialogue with Jews Teaches Us about Ourselves

Thomas Michel, S.J., editor, Friends on the Way: Jesuits EncounterContemporary Judaism

Fordham University Press, 2007

Philip A. Cunningham, Norbert Hofmann, andJoseph Sievers, editors, The Catholic Church and the Jewish People:

Recent Reflections from RomeFordham University Press, 2007

By Eugene J. Fisher

Eugene J. Fisher, is associate directoremeritus, secretariat for ecumenicaland interreligious affairs, U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Conversations 55

Book Review

Scriptures themselves on how thiscan be done – innovation withincontinuity and faithfulness toTradition – will be of interest notonly to biblers but to the largerCatholic community as well. One ofthe great things about dialogue withJews is how much we can learnabout ourselves and about copingwith our own dilemmas.

The first essayin the book, by Marc Rastoin, nar-rates the story of the Jesuits’ resist-ance, under Ignatius, to the limpiezade raza laws of Portugal and Spainin the early 16th century. The Jesuitshad an unusually high percentage ofconversos (“New Christians”) andtried to protect them as best theycould, under extreme pressure, itmight be added, by sending themout to the missions, for example.Though they eventually caved in, aswas in my view, inevitable, — giventhe huge antipathy toward Jews, evenconverted Jews, in that particular timeand place, as distinct, say, from Italywhich followed papal canon law andprotected the Jews — the actions ofthis first generation of Jesuits towardtheir Jewish colleagues was nothingless than heroic.

If one wants to gain a concretesense of what Ignatius was upagainst in trying to protect his JesuitJews, I can recommend, of allthings, a novel, Richard Zimmler’s

The Last Kabbalist of Lisbon(Overlook Press, 1998), which con-tains a chilling and chillingly accu-rate depiction of the slaughter of theNew Christians and any who wouldassist them.

Christian Rutishauer comparesthe goals of the Ignatian Exerciseswith Rabbi Soloveitchik’s “HalakhicSpirituality,” while Donald Mooreoffers “An Ignatian Perspective onContemporary Jewish Spirituality.”Both are illuminating, thoughtful,and accurate with regard to Judaismas well as Ignatian spirituality.

Stanislaw Obirek, who offers awell deserved accolade to Fr. StanMusial, S. J., the pioneer of postWorld War II Catholic-Jewish rela-tions, reflects quite deeply on the

challenge of the theology ofAbraham Joshua Heschel for Catholictheology, noting that America maga-zine, for the first time in the history ofCatholic publishing in this country,devoted a full issue to the writings ofa Jew. David M. Neuhaus writes tren-chantly about “What Might Israelis

Celebrating Mass of the Holy Spirit at Xavier University.

Though they eventuallycaved in…the actions ofthe first generation ofJesuits toward theirJewish colleagues wasnothing less than heroic.

56 Conversations

Book Review

and Jews Learn about Christians andChristianity at Yad Vashem,” an essaythat will challenge Jewish readers, Ibelieve most appropriately.

Peter Du Brul’s essay on HaroldBloom and James Bernauer’s onHannah Arendt were for me the twosurprises of this volume, sending meoff into some new thoughts onCatholic-Jewish relations.

Cunningham,et al.’s, volume, The Catholic Churchand the Jewish People, which I havereviewed more fully for a forthcomingissue of The Catholic Historical Review,contains the lectures from colloquiasponsored by the Cardinal Bea Centerat the Gregorianum in Rome and theCenter for Christian-Jewish Learning atBoston College.

Walter Kasper, president of thePontifical Commission for ReligiousRelations with the Jews narrates thethirty-year history of the PontificalCommission for Religious Relationswith the Jews. Also giving histories ofthe Commission, for which each servedas Secretary, are Cardinal Jorge MariaMejia and Fathers PierfrancesoFumagalli and Norbert Hofmann.

This volume is divided into sections.In the first Rabbis Riccardo di Segni andGiuseppe Laras give Jewish perspectiveson the relationship, while Cardinal CarloMaria Martini provides a Catholic per-spective. In the second, Anna Foa andMassimo Guiliani deal with the memory

of the Shoah as “a shadow upon and astimulus to” dialogue.

In the third section ArchbishopBruno Forte, Erich Zenger, and PeterHunermann establish foundations for aChristian theology of Judaism. In thefourth section Alberto Melloni, discussdevelopments in “the Post-ShoahCatholic-Jewish Dialogue.” Finally,Vatican diplomat Cardinal AchilleSilvestrini and Israeli diplomat Oded BenHur discuss the relationship between theHoly See and the State of Israel.

A helpful set of appendices to thisvolume includes all six drafts of what

became Nostra Aetate; JointDeclarations of the InternationalCatholic Jewish Liaison Committee;Joint Statements of the PontificalCommission and the Chief Rabbinate ofIsrael’s Delegation from 2003-2006; andthe 1993 Fundamental Agreementbetween Israel and the Holy See. Asone who lived through much of thehistory narrated in these two volumesand participated in many of the theo-logical dialogues reflected in theirpages, I can only express my delight inand gratitude for them. n

Students on their way to classes at University of Detroit Mercy.

MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL SEMINAR ON JESUIT HIGHER EDUCATION

Gregory I. Carlson, S.J., is associate director of the Deglman Center for spirituality and adjunctprofessor of English at Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska.

Margaret Haigler Davis is associate professor English at Spring Hill College, Mobile, Alabama.

Joseph J. Feeney, S.J., is professor of English at Saint Joseph’s University, Pennsylvania.

Jennifer G. Haworth is associate vice president for mission and ministry at Loyola UniversityChicago, Illinois.

Raymond M. Jones is professor of management and international business at Loyola College in Maryland.

Leslie L. Liedel, is associate professor of history at Wheeling Jesuit University, West Virginia.

John J. O’Callaghan, S.J., chairman, is chaplain at the Stritch School of Medicine, LoyolaUniversity Chicago, Illinois.

Mary K. Proksch is associate professor of nursing and program adviser of online nursing programs at Regis University, Denver, Colorado.

Raymond A. Schroth, S.J., editor, is Jesuit community professor of humanities at Saint Peter’sCollege, Jersey City, New Jersey.

Timothy H. Wadkins is associate professor of religious studies at Canisius College, New York.

Charles T. Phipps, S.J., secretary, is a professor of English at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara,California.

HOW THE SEMINAR WORKS & HOW TO WRITE FOR US

The Seminar plans each of the two annual issues during itsthree annual meetings, each at a different Jesuit college or uni-versity. For the most part, an issue focuses on one theme; but,at the same time, through the various departments — letters,Talking Back, occasional forums, other articles, and bookreviews — there are opportunities to keep the conversationgoing on a variety of concerns.

Our ten Seminar members come from across the spec-trum of our colleges and universities, representing varied aca-demic disciplines and a broad range of experience with theJesuit educational tradition. The themes we choose to explorecome out of our common reflection on that experience andfrom the discussions we hold with faculty, administrators,staff, and students as we rotate among our schools.

So, although most of the major articles are commissionedby the Seminar, we welcome unsolicited articles from thereaders. Ideally, they should be written to explore an ideawhich will generate discussion rather than describe a news-worthy project at one’s institution. Please understand that,since the Seminar meets only three times a year, it may takeseveral months for each issue to take shape.

RASsj

COMING UPThe next issue, January 2009, will continue the theme of missionas applied to professional education. We are asking writersfrom the various disciplines to discuss how and to what degreethe Jesuit mission applies not just to the core, but also to law,medicine, communications, nursing, education, business and theother schools and programs which, historically, led to our schoolscalling themselves Universities. More and more it has becomeclear that the responsibility for mission must permeate every ele-ment of university life. Our tentative plan is to follow this issuewith a deeper examination of both graduate education and theoverall quality of intellectual life in Jesuit higher education.

HOW TO WRITE FOR US

Please keep the article to fewer than 3000 words. Do NOTinclude footnotes. Incorporate any references into the text.Please, DON’T capitalize: chairman of the biology department,names of committees, or administrative titles, unless the titleprecedes the name, as in President Woodrow Wilson. We wel-come photographs, fully captioned, preferably action ratherthan posed shots. Preferable format: a CD containing digitalimages scanned at not less than 300 dpi. Or a traditional print.

Send the article both as a MicrosoftWORD:mac attachment toraymondschroth@aol.com and in hard copy to the editor atSaint Peter’s College.

Permission is granted to reprint articles fromConversations for any educational purpose, provided credit is given to the original source.

A Note to Contributors

Georgetown UniversityWashington, DC, 1789

Saint Louis UniversitySaint Louis, 1818

Spring Hill CollegeMobile, 1830

Xavier UniversityCincinnati, 1831

Fordham UniversityNew York, 1841

College of the Holy CrossWorcester, 1843

Saint Joseph’s UniversityPhiladelphia, 1851

Santa Clara UniversitySanta Clara, 1851

Loyola College in MarylandBaltimore, 1852

University of San FranciscoSan Francisco, 1855

Boston CollegeBoston, 1863

Canisius CollegeBuffalo, 1870

Loyola University ChicagoChicago, 1870

Saint Peter’s CollegeJersey City, 1872

University of Detroit-MercyDetroit, 1877

Regis UniversityDenver, 1877

Creighton UniversityOmaha, 1878

Marquette UniversityMilwaukee, 1881

John Carroll UniversityCleveland, 1886

Gonzaga UniversitySpokane, 1887

University of ScrantonScranton, 1888

Seattle UniversitySeattle, 1891

Rockhurst UniversityKansas City, 1910

Loyola University New OrleansNew Orleans, 1912

Loyola Marymount UniversityLos Angeles, 1914

Weston Jesuit School of TheologyCambridge, 1922

Jesuit School of Theology at BerkeleyBerkeley, 1934

Fairfield UniversityFairfield, 1942

Le Moyne CollegeSyracuse, 1946

Wheeling Jesuit UniversityWheeling, 1954