As Morning Breaks

Last night, the U of D Jesuit community celebrated the 135th graduating class. Following a lovely ceremony, the vast majority of students returned to the school for a wonderful "Senior All Night Party" hosted by the parents.

One of the traditions is to conclude the evening with a prayer service, observed at around 4:30 am! I was approached to help plan the ceremony and prepared the following text. I am putting it up online because I know how hard it is to find good "Prayer Service" resources online and I thought this might be of help to people in planning services for their own schools. As it was written, I had five different leaders, one for each of the main parts.

Commence(ment) Debate

I listened last week to a short piece on NPR concerning the selection of commencement speakers at Catholic schools. In some quarters, rancor has erupted over Georgetown University's School of Public Policy Institute's invitation to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to deliver its commencement address (Wow, that seemed like a long sentence). 

Here is a portion of the transcript from the NPR conversation:

BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY, BYLINE: Sebelius is Catholic. She's also liberal and pro-choice. And the fact that she's speaking to Georgetown's Public Policy Institute makes conservative Catholics, like Patrick Reilly, see red.

PATRICK REILLY: Well, this is clearly a betrayal of the bishops.

HAGERTY: Riley is president of the Cardinal Newman Society. He notes that Sebelius is the architect of the Obama administration's requirement that Catholic universities and hospitals offer birth control coverage.

REILLY: This is not someone who the Catholic Church, or Catholic institutions, should be honoring.

HAGERTY: The Archdiocese of Washington asked the Jesuit university to rescind the invitation. [POST-BROADCAST CORRECTION: The Archdiocese of Washington did not ask Georgetown to withdraw its invitation.] Georgetown spokeswoman Stacy Kerr says it will not.

STACY KERR: Her visit does not mean that the university endorses her positions. In fact, those who speak at Georgetown do not speak for Georgetown.

Now, as a person who is thoroughly committed to the dignity and preservation of human life, I do have serious issues with the positions of Secretary Sebelius concerning abortion. This said, I recognize that her voice is not a lone voice in our country - decidedly not! - nor is it really a lone voice within the Church. 

I think the challenge, as I have posted before, rests upon either an inability or an unwillingness to engage in authentic discourse. When we debate, generally, each side stakes its position and argues from it. In my experience, one seldom changes the position of the other. We become almost fixated with one another, soon seeing the other person more as an antagonist than as a conversation partner. 

How much more effective would it be, consequently, if instead of considering only the position of the other we actually took the time to understand what the other side values. That is to say, underneath the floorboards of a position, what is the value-structure that serves as the foundation? While we might not have much luck engaging in discussions of position, I do think it more fruitful and beneficial to share what it is we value with one another. If we can arrive at a set of shared values, I suspect, we can creatively find new solutions to problems that have proved intractable in the past. 

Secretary Sebelius, in her remarks at Georgetown, recognizes the importance of this conversation:

Ultimately, public policy is about making difficult choices. Today, there are serious debates underway about the direction of our country – debates about the size and role of government, about America’s role as a global economic and military leader, about the moral and economic imperative of providing health care to all our citizens. People have deeply-held beliefs on all sides of these discussions, and you, as public policy leaders, will be called on to help move these debates forward.

Rather than excoriating the other side for disagreeing with 'my' position, how much more fruitful would it be for us to have debate-advancing conversations which would both uncover our values and lead us to see that, very often, our disagreements are eclipsed by the common ground on which we stand and the virtues we share. 

For a long time, I have found people like Patrick Reilly profoundly unhelpful. Their finger-pointing tends only to galvanize the sides and encourages a sort of myopic fundamentalism that blinds both poles of a discussion. As a tradition that values both Faith and Reason, I think the Catholic Church and its universities are singularly able to play a mediating role in these important discussions, drawing various voices together in a spirit of charity and inquiry, and probing beneath the surface positions to arrive at commonly shared values. No one converts because of a good argument. Conversion happens because, through investigation, one's heart is moved by what another values and, in the process of changing what one values, one's life changes. 

Perhaps this is why I love teaching: my job is to help to form the hearts and minds of students, to cultivate within them an acute mind and a vulnerable heart, that they, too, may dwell capably in a morally complex world and discern how God is calling them to share in, and promote, the values of the Kingdom to a broken world. 

Moral Wisdom and a Case Study

Due to unforeseen circumstances, I was approached last week and asked to teach two sections of Junior Morality. Since the seniors had had their last day of school - meaning I had picked up two free periods -  it seemed only natural that I would trade my thirty seniors and my two free periods for sixty-one juniors.

When I was in high school, I hated my course in morality. Not, to be sure, because I was particularly immoral or wanted to lead a debauched life. Rather, the course seemed totally bloodless: it seemed to reduce the Christian life to a bunch of proscriptions, a litany of Do Not....Or Else.... statements. Granted, I was an adolescent and my memories of the course are etched by how my 16-year old self received the information. It seemed then, and still seems, that most courses in Catholic morality obsess over what goes on in the area of the human body covered by an apron. Too often, we fixate so much on sex and things related to sex that we neglect many other important issues.

Since I haven't much time with them, I am focusing what classes I have with the Juniors on fundamental topics: love, sin, conscience, suffering, etc.. Their modus operandi tends to be to ask a lot of particular questions such as, "Abba, is it a sin if..." and I find this frustrating. I simply don't think it is my job to tell a bunch of juniors whether something is or is not sinful, as if I were a lonely expert at the Antiques Roadshow examining people's trinkets. Instead, I want to help in forming them so that they have moral eyes and the ability to discern well what is, and is not, sinful.

To this end, I wrote my own Case Study for my students. Before the case, I attached a Didactic explaining the rationale behind the Wesleyan Quadrilateral and how it might contribute to moral discernment. Rather than a topic addressing abortion, or euthanasia, or pornography I wrote a little narrative about Corey and his (possible) struggle with academic integrity. If readers are interested in reading the case, or learning one approach to moral reasoning, I would encourage them to click the 'read more' below to read the case study. I have removed the instructions I gave the students, as I do not suspect many readers would care much about my style guide!

"You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you."

For a few moments, I thought I might take a picture of my bedroom to show its utter disarray, at least by my standards. I have some slowly-being-filled-with-books boxes on the ground, my laundry is all over the place, and there is an unprecedented amount of dust on my Darth Vader mask. If it says anything, it testifies to the fact that the end of the seniors' last week of school (tomorrow is prom) and that I play a role in making sure things go off smoothly. Just yesterday, in fact, I

• taught five classes...well, almost five. I had to ditch my 3rd period class five minutes in when I was summoned to a meeting (only good things)
• Processed another $10,000 in Prom checks and Cedar Point money (Frosh trip in June)
• Ordered food for, and hosted, a lunch for three freshmen and three seniors (more pizza than normal people could dream of eating, just enough for voracious students)
• Went to a Kairos team meeting
• Acted as greeter and tour guide for Assistant Principal job applicants
• Worked on my application to Boston College's School of Theology and Ministry

Not that this is a lot by the standards of a regular person's workday, but for a high school teacher I found it to be quite a bit to handle!

So, this morning, I woke up a bit early and turned to today's Gospel reading. In the wake of yesterday's chaos, I retain hopeful for a semi-smooth day. The words that struck me, though, title this post:

"You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you."

Jesuit formation is very long. Usually 11 years from entrance until ordination, it may be asked whether the length of the program is worth it. Today, deep within my heart, I felt something "click" into place...or back into place...that brings me peace and excitement.

What is the word which prunes us? What is the word spoken to each one of us that prunes us, shapes us, severs dead limbs and encourages new growth? What is the word spoken to us by the Christ that calls forth life? I cannot help but to think that it is a simple Yes. If I can describe these years, it could be summarized simply by the phrase that "I have come to know the grace of yes."

Jesus Christ is the Word made Flesh; He is the God's 'Yes' to Mary's 'Yes' uttered on behalf of humanity. His 'Yes' is spoken to fearful and broken hearts, giving them the courage and the hope that life is stronger than death, that good will conquer evil. Christ's 'Yes' promises that at the edge of the darkest night there plays the first rays of the morning sun, the light that will chase away darkness and bathe creation in the splendor of the new day. Christ's 'Yes' to friendship, to each of us, allows us to drop those things, those lifeless branches, which hold us back and tap into the true source of our lives. Christ's 'Yes' prunes away the old and makes way for the new.

I am not living the life I ever wanted. How could I ever have imagined a single day like yesterday, let alone the experiences I have had these years? Impossible. I am living the life I desire, a life of 'Yes' to friendship with Christ, a relationship that impels me...or drags me...into new and wondrous experiences. I am living a living inflected and etched by the "grace of yes" and I hope to continue to be pruned by this grace in the years to come.

Each of us, I suspect, feels something deep within, a stirring that wants to cry out YES (not in some When Harry met Sally way, mind you). Perhaps it could our collective prayer to find the strength to utter, even if near-silently, a quiet 'yes' to God's friend request, a 'yes' that inaugurates a journey not of wants met but desires enflamed.

Who are you to tell my daughter how to dress?

Last week, the elegant Roostertail - where U of D Jesuit hosts its prom - made the news when it released its 2012 Prom Dress Code. A first for this institution, the owner of the establishment decided that it was time for someone to help students distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate attire.

Roostertail 2012 Prom Dress Code:

1. A young lady’s hemline should be no shorter than 6” above the knees.
2. Dresses may be backless, as long as they are not cut below the waist line.
3. No midriff-bearing cutouts.
4. Slits cannot go further than 6” above the knee.
5. No plunging neck lines, modest cleavage is OK.
6. Ladies, if you plan to remove your shoes, bring flats.
7. Gentlemen are not to remove, unbutton, or untuck their shirt.
8. Gentlemen must keep their shoes on.

A parent or guardian is only allowed to come to the Roostertail in case of emergency. Parents and guardians must also abide by the Dress Code. Example: no jeans, shorts, flip-flops, cut offs, halter tops, etc.  At no time will families or friends be allowed on the Roostertail property. 

As the person in charge of prom for the University of Detroit Jesuit High School, I applaud this effort. I admire Mr. Schoenith for having the courage to do something that certainly will bring the ire of certain parents. Can't you hear it already? I sure can: "Who are you to tell my daughter what she can wear?"

In his 1979 encyclical Redemptor Hominis, Blessed John Paul II wrote:

 ...Christ the Redeemer "fully reveals man to himself". If we may use the expression, this is the human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption. In this dimension man finds again the greatness, dignity and value that belong to his humanity. In the mystery of the Redemption man becomes newly "expressed" and, in a way, is newly created. He is newly created! (10.1)

A rite of passage, Prom helps to mark the transition from adolescence into adulthood. It is an exciting event, certainly made somewhat nerve-wracking for many young women who fret about finding the perfect dress. How ironic that, for many, they will pay more money to purchase less material! Some of the dresses are simply outrageous, leaving absolutely nothing to the imagination...much to the chagrin of the chaperones and to the delight of some of the young men!

As a Catholic, I believe in the inherent dignity of the human person. Furthermore, I take seriously Gareth Moore's insight that, "Christian life is a preparation for the restoration of all things when Christ comes as king." We are called to live our lives here and now as we will live them in God's Kingdom. To my mind, this starts with recognizing our mutual human dignity, treating one another as persons rather than as objects.

I think the Prom can be a wonderful event for students and families, a special night to celebrate one's high school experiences and to look to the unknown future. Asking the young women and men to adhere to a dress code and to comport themselves as ladies and gentlemen serves as a great lesson that a fun and memorable evening can be had while respecting one another. Dresses and styles may come into and out of fashion, but a constant regard for human dignity and forming our students to recognize this in one another will never go out of style.

The Good Shepherd

Teaching high school boys, particularly sophomores, is seldom easy. Frequently restive and fidgety, one must move relatively quickly to hold their attention when covering what they might regard as less-than-interesting material. I have always tried my best to "spice up" the class, making connections between theology and philosophy/sociology/psychology/etc., but it can be a struggle.

During my first semester of teaching, when discussing today's Gospel Reading where we find the lovely, if not often kitschy, image of Jesus as the Good Shepherd. As you can see from the attached picture, Jesus is often depicted as a cross between Little Bo Peep and Charlton Heston. He is white, carries his little staff, and the sheep are clean and obedient.

What I wanted to impress upon the students was the notion that "Good Shepherd" in Jesus' day would have been an oxymoron. Shepherds were akin to brigands, were regarded with suspicion, and the nature of their job made them frequently unclean. Indeed, we may do better to consider the image of the "Good Shepherd" as being closer to Rooster Cogburn or Han Solo than to Little Bo Peep: grizzled, ever ready for a fight, not necessarily interested in what they are doing so long as they are being remunerated for it.


Anyway, back to sophomore theology class. As I attempted to impress upon the sophomores how this title would have struck listeners as scandalous - for how could one be a good shepherd? - it quickly dawned on me that they weren't quite grasping the concept. Frequently unable to control my filter, I blurted out, "Guys, calling Jesus the Good Shepherd is like calling someone the Good Pimp."

Well, as you can imagine, this was met with great enthusiasm. As it turned out, this little gem was shared at the very end of class. By 8th period, the other sophomore class flooded into my room and the first question asked: "So, Abba Duns, I heard you tell us how Jesus had hookers." Simultaneously amazed and horrified, I moved our discussion of the "Good Shepherd" image to the beginning of class, explained it most carefully, and resolved to re-teach this portion of the lesson the next day to those students who thought I had suggested that Jesus had been involved in sex trafficking.

Lesson Learned: Sophomores do not readily understand metaphors.

I share this anecdote simply because there is always a temptation to romanticize, or domesticate, Jesus Christ. We find some comfort in this image of the gentle shepherd who will risk his life to rescue us from harm. Yet we should not lose sight that the image is invested with great meaning, that the idea of the "Good Shepherd" would have been somewhat unthinkable to 1st century listeners, and that John the Evangelist gives us yet another way in which Jesus subverts common understanding and prejudice.

Today, it may help us to recall the 'wild' and 'untamed' side of Jesus. Resist domesticating him, making him into some sort of toothless teddy bear and, instead, allow the mystery of the one who stands at the frontier of society to pierce us in our hearts. Do we have the courage to follow this figure, the audacity to put ourselves under the tutelage of the One who subverts our expectations and whose tutelage leads us back to the Father's fold?

Mother/Son Communion Breakfast 2012

Some of the mothers encouraged me to post my talk to my blog. I know that it is long, so I'm going to post it in such a way that you have to click the "read more" to get to it. This was given on April 22nd, 2012, at the Detroit Golf Club for the Moms of Seniors graduating from U of D Jesuit. We had a great attendance at the event and I want to congratulate Dr. Deb Wolfe on a lovely day. I also wish to thank her for extending the invitation to speak on such a wonderful occasion as we celebrate what Father Kiser calls the "Long Goodbye" preparing to send our graduating seniors off to college.

Recovery Period

I'm ashamed that, after a good spate of frequent updates, I've fallen silent for nearly a week. Last Monday, we returned from Spring Break and we kicked off the final week of the Student Senate Election. It was a crazy four days of preparing for the election and then, after the event on Friday, I had to run and chaperone a dance...with quite possibly the craziest mother I have ever met showing up at the end of the event.

I managed to have dinner with some friends on Saturday, but only after preparing two different talks I had to deliver on Sunday. So yesterday I gave two talks and graded a bunch of papers. By 11:00 last night, when I shut off the light, it amazed me that I had just had a weekend - it flew by!

So right now, I'm recovering from the craziness of the last ten days. I need to catch up on some sleep and get back on track with teaching. Please be patient - I'll be recharged in a few days!

Credimus! (In 140-characters or less)

A reader - a brilliant and incisive one at that - who articulates her struggles with the Church reached out to me with, what I consider, a really brilliant idea.

She asks: "People live in 120 character tweets - what can the Church 'tweet' about our core beliefs?" This would be a means, she continues, "to make inroads to Catholics and people who might want to be Catholics."

If you approached an average person on the street, what would she say about Catholicism today? "The Catholic Church is against birth control, prohibits abortion, is against gay marriage, won't ordain women, and covered up the sexual abuse of minors." This may be overly cynical but, I fear, it's probably not far from the truth. The Catholic Church certainly seems more identifiable by what it is against than what it is for.

I don't know how many might be interested in this, but I'm willing to give it a shot. What if we were to complete the following phrases in 140-characters or less?

1. We believe Catholics break bread in community because...
2. We believe Catholics work for social justice because...
3. We believe Catholic traditions appeal to the senses because...
4. We believe Catholics trust in the life and work of Jesus Christ because...
5. We believe Catholics find God in all things because...
6. We believe Catholics understand that God...
7. We believe within the Catholic Church because...

In the Latin, "We Believe" is Credimus. So I might be crazy and this might not go anywhere at all, but what if we were to "Tweet" these (either in the comment box or on Twitter) and start each one with #Credimus. For instance

#Credimus: we recognize the dignity of every human life 

That accomplishes the task in 56 characters! Short, sweet, and to the point. There's even 84 characters left over to work with.

If this caught on, it would be sort of cool to have some "Affirmative Catholicism" stating what we believe in and what we stand for. Think of this as the early stages of setting down a "Twitter Catechism" that may make the tenets of the Catholic faith accessible, and appealing, to a younger generation. This isn't to say that it can be reduced to Tweets but, if we're clever, it might hook them and invite them to dig deeper into the riches of the tradition.

Note: I know the Nicene Creed is no professed "Credo - I believe" but if you look at #Credo on Twitter, pornography comes up. Hence the communal "Credimus" or "We believe."

What the numbers do not tell us

There is a piece in today's Wall Street Journal written by Anne Hendershott and Christopher White entitled "Traditional Catholicism is Winning." Almost eight years into religious life, I think their final paragraph captures well the reasons I decided not to pursue medical school, or law school, and entered into the service of the Church in 2004, a mere two years after the disastrous revelations of sexual abuse that made national headlines in 2002. The young women and men offering themselves as candidates to religious life and the priesthood:

...are attracted to the philosophy, the art, the literature and the theology that make Catholicism countercultural. They are drawn to the beauty of the liturgy and the church's commitment to the dignity of the individual. They want to be contributors to that commitment—alongside faithful and courageous bishops who ask them to make sacrifices. It is time for Catholics to celebrate their arrival.

 I think this is generally spot-on. Speaking from my own experience, I know that it is important to me that my superiors know that I am not afraid to be asked to do things. I have likes and preferences, to be sure, but I want to be sent "to the frontiers of the Church" to spread the Gospel. When asked to sacrifice "for God's greater glory" I will always respond as generously as possible.

This concluding paragraph notwithstanding, however, there is something about this piece that leaves me feeling cold.

That 467 men were ordained last year to the priesthood is an encouraging number. Certainly, it is better than the 442 ordained in 2001, although I suspect no one would deny that +5.66% change over ten years is sufficient either to replace those who die/retire/leave or to augment the standing number of overworked clergy. I mention only to say that while an uptick in the number of priests is a good trend, we have an awful long way to go before we can say that a certain blend of Catholicism is winning. Indeed, I find it singularly unhelpful to encourage polarization between "liberal/conservative" Catholics. Such labels simply make it easier to dismiss one another and does nothing to bring persons of differing viewpoints to communion.

This leads me to another point. We can have rectories bursting with newly-minted clergy, but will this bring people back to the pews? Will this re-invigorate a Church that alternately appears totally out of touch with culture or narrowly obsessed with a certain issue, generally something to do with sex or sexuality? Will those candidates for the priesthood who are drawn to dioceses which are "unambiguous and allow for a minimum of dissent about the male, celibate priesthood" necessarily translate into men whose preaching  ministry will comfort the afflicted and enkindle greater love and passion in the pews? They may be ordained, they may have all of the right answers, but does that mean they can serve?

Let me be clear. I do not consider myself radically progressive. I regard many of the misinterpretations of Vatican II with dismay and I generally conceive of 1970's liturgical and ecclesial culture and its ongoing residue as a many-headed hydra whose heads need to be severed, the stumps cauterized, and a sword plunged deep into its heart. I enjoy reading and studying doctrinal statements and I am ardently pro-life, from conception to natural death. I am unswerving in my belief in the dignity of every human life and I think that the most under-utilized resource in the Church is our rich heritage of social teaching.

I say this because I find myself very much out of step with this generation's newly ordained. I find them knowledgeable of the liturgy, publicly pious but not especially prayerful, glad to quote from encyclicals but relatively out of touch with contemporary cultural trends.

Here's an experience I had of this difference. I was asked to give a talk in a diocese on "Belief in God Today." I introduced myself to the new associate pastor, 27 years of age, with a handshake and "Hi, I'm Ryan Duns." I was in my collar and a suit. "Hi Ryan, Father Aloysius. Nice to meet you." Now, I was in religious formation when he was still doing keg stands in college. So I called him "Aloysius" and was quickly corrected with a, "Father Aloysius." I smiled, corrected myself, and told him that henceforth he could call me "Mr. Duns" if we were keeping to formalities.

I wish I could say this was an isolated instance but, unfortunately, in the three dioceses I've lived in and where I've gotten to know seminarians, clericalism is on the ise.

What the numbers do not tell us is whether underneath the incense, the liturgical correctness, the fastidious adherence to orthodox teaching, and the appropriate vestments, there beats a pastoral heart. Are these newly ordained willing to listen to the troubles of regular women and men who struggle each day to find God in their lives, who live amidst ambiguities and concerns and doubts that the clergy seldom concern themselves with? These newly ordained may be  attracted to, and wish to preach, a "forthright defense of the faith and doctrine" yet will they remember that that the questions burning in human hearts seldom find an answer in a quote from the Catechism?

Personally, I look at faith and life in the Church through a modified quote taken from Auntie Mame: "The Church is a banquet and most poor suckers are starving to death!" There is much to feast on in our tradition. The joy and excitement of being part of a living faith should be a reason for exuberance and outreach, rather than entrenchment and divisiveness. The faithful remaining in the pews must welcome the newly ordained and they must encourage them in their vocations. They must be willing to be challenged to grow in their own faith and to consider that the new generation may have good things to share. So, too, must the newly ordained be willing to learn from previous generations, be willing to understand where others come from, and listen to the voices of those who have left the Church and find new and creative ways to invite them home.

If the clerical culture wins out, though, I fear that we could have overflowing altars and empty pews. One can prepare the incense, prime the choir, and ready the altar...but if the faithful are not invited and their dignity as authentic seekers is not recognized, the famine of faith will only continue to grow. Are the heirs to Peter willing to feed Jesus Christ's sheep or will they focus more on being celibate than being joyful, more on doctrine than on dining at the Feast of the Lamb?