TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/031389/03138900.018

Text File | 1992-09-23 | 3.7 KB | 73 lines

                                                                                RELIGION, Page 70

The Pope Wins in Court


A theologian's removal raises questions about the Vatican's
role in U.S. Catholic higher education


    There will be plenty to talk about when 35 Roman Catholic
Archbishops of the U.S. meet with Pope John Paul II at the
Vatican this week. The purpose of the gathering, in fact, is to
clear the air on a number of nettlesome issues, ranging from
doctrinal discipline to the role of women in the church, on
which the Pontiff and the U.S. prelates do ,not see eye to eye.
By coincidence, one of their most vexing disputes was settled
just days earlier, in District of Columbia Superior Court.
Judge Frederick Weisberg ruled that the Catholic University of
America had every right to follow John Paul's dictates by
removing from its theology faculty Father Charles Curran, an
outspoken professor who questions church policies on birth
control, abortion, homosexuality, premarital sex and divorce.

    Among the U.S.'s 233 Catholic colleges, Curran's former
employer is unique. The Catholic University was chartered in
1889 by the papacy, and its theology school grants
Vatican-authorized degrees. While most U.S. Catholic
universities are run by predominantly lay boards, the school's
chancellor is the Archbishop of Washington, and 16 bishops,
usually including all active U.S. Cardinals, sit on its
40-member board. Last year the board carried out a 1986 Vatican
directive and barred Curran from teaching Catholic theology.
Curran, 54, retained tenure but spurned compromise offers to
teach nontheological subjects in other departments.

    The judge ruled that Curran "could not reasonably have
expected that the university would defy a definitive judgment by
the Holy See that he was `unsuitable' and `ineligible' to teach
Catholic theology." There was a "direct and unavoidable"
conflict, said the court, between academic freedom and the
school's fealty to the Pope. The university sided with Rome,
and "whether that is ultimately good for the university or for
the church is something they have a right to decide for
themselves." Heartily agreeing, a Vatican official said the
"essential issue was the freedom of the church to regulate
teaching of theology in its own schools." Curran, who is now
teaching theology at the University of Southern California, will
file no appeal. Says he: "I'm a free man now, and better for
it."

    It is unclear whether the decision will have a broader
effect on Catholic higher education in the U.S. Curran thinks it
might, "given the current atmosphere" of John Paul's campaign to
clamp down on errant theology teachers in seminaries and
universities. But Sister Alice Gallin of the Association of
Catholic Colleges and Universities, emphasizes Catholic
University's unusual status and expects no spillover effect.
She adds, however, that the case is "a warning that faculties
must protect academic freedom."

    Many Catholic academicians, pleased with the laissez-faire
environment that has developed since the Second Vatican Council,
are anxious to prevent any rollback. The Vatican, on the other
hand, intends to issue a long-pending decree on higher education
including specific provisions for removing dissidents. The whole
issue could come to a head next month when some 170 Catholic
leaders from around the world meet in Rome to discuss the final
draft of the decree. Father Richard McBrien, chairman of the
University of Notre Dame theology department, is confident that
the document will cause no change in the status quo. "Regardless
of what they come up with," he says, "it's not enforceable."
That, of course, is just what Father Curran thought.