No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 March 2013
The Vatican took a stand in February with its “notification” on Roger Haight's Jesus Symbol of God prohibiting him from teaching Catholic theology. Then in May it was reported that the Vatican influenced Thomas Reese's resignation as editor of America. In these two situations, as with other recent controversies in the church and American public life, the question was posed to the College Theology Society, “Where do we stand?”
This is not answered easily. The appropriateness of entertaining the question is itself problematic given the specific ways the CTS constitution defines our mission as an academic society. Has the CTS, its Board or its members at the annual convention any business at all taking stands on controversies in the church or American public life? What would justify this? And to what sort of issues would this apply? And when? How is this decided? And by whom? For whom does the Board speak? Or for whom does a majority at an annual convention speak? And to whom? And to what end?
Nor is the question of where we stand dodged without significant cost. Much is at stake for the specific pedagogical mission of the CTS both in the issues regarding Haight and Reese and in the questions of principle about taking stands. Both are part of a larger and consequential controversy about what place convictions should have in the interactions of the church, academy, and society.
1 Issues that have been brought forward recently in resolutions proposed for the annual convention, in communications to the officers, or on the Society's internet discussion listserv include among others: the U.S. war against Iraq, and charges of government complicity in the torture of Muslim prisoners in U.S. detention camps.
2 Over the years there has been cooperation or collaboration, for example, with the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities, the Catholic Theological Society of America, the International Network of Societies for Catholic Theology, the National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion and the Council of Societies for the Study of Religion.
3 Constitution and Bylaws of the College Theology Society, Article II, Purposes (http://www2.bc.edu/%7Ebarciaus/const.doc).
4 See Clifford, Anne M. and Godzieba, Anthony J., eds., Christology: Memory, Inquiry, Practice (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2003)Google Scholar and Wiley, Tatha, “Christology Special Session,” Proceedings of the Catholic Theological Society of America 57 (2002): 185–87.Google Scholar Unfortunately, neither the CTS annual volume nor the CTSA proceedings include summaries of the questions and observations from the audience.
5 “The Clash of Christological Symbols: A Case for Metaphoric Realism,” in Christology: Memory, Inquiry, Practice, 62–86.
6 In speaking of the substance and conceptual rationale of faith convictions, I have in mind the intersection of issues sometimes treated separately in apologetic, fundamental and systematic theology, and related specializations that today are not always so easily or helpfully disconnected.
7 Rausch, Thomas P., “Postmodern Jesus,” The Christian Century 122/9 (2005): 31.Google Scholar
8 Ibid.