You couldn't make it up dept. no.31: But if they appointed a creationist as Director of Science...

[fpb]

Boston College is supposedly a Catholic university.

It has recently appointed an atheist, member of a Universalist church, as its Director of Theology.

Comments

[fpb.livejournal.com]

1) Granted, and I apologize for the misreading.
2) And that makes a difference because? The university authorities who appointed him "a few years ago" are still the same, with the same attitudes - that they are Jesuit only increases my distrust, given the more-than-notorious record of the Jesuit order in general and its American branch in particular in the last few decades (cf.Robert Drinian, Georgetown University, etc. etc. etc.).
3) I hope you can spot the logical disconnect between "The professor most vociferously opposed to his nomination calls him an atheist" and "therefore he's probably not an atheist." If I objected to the nomination of, say, kennahijja to teach Lutheran philosophy in a Lutheran university, let alone to have a major influence on the direction of students' studies, on the grounds that she is, a), an atheist, and b) a Marxist, I hope you would not make the howler of suggesting that my mere objection indicates that she is probably none of the above.
4) I cannot believe you take anything that "the university's own spokesperson" says seriously. Surely you know enough of universities to know that, commpared to them, political parties are a paragon of straight talking, correct information, and impartial views.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

If kennahijja denied that she was an atheist and a Marxist then that probably indicates that she isn't, since I have no reason to doubt her honesty. It's telling that the Lutheran professor only refers to Mr.
Vanderhooft as a "functional atheist," which sounds more like a term of abuse than anything else.

Regardless of whether university spokespeople are more honest than Cretans or less so, there's obviously a disagreement on some factual issues here, and I'm not going to swallow whole the words of an self-professedly biased university professor quoted in a badly written article that shares the same point point of view. (There's nothing wrong with the fact that they're biased, as long as we can check their accounts against other sources.) I don't think this is unreasonable.

Incidentally, the actual chair of the Theology department is Kenneth Himes, a Franciscan, for what that's worth.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I mentioned kennahijja exactly because she is both things, by her own proud assertion. And being a "functional atheist" seems to me quite a sound description of most Universalists.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

"Franciscan" means precious little, considering how many orders lay some claim to Francis' heritage. Some of them, I know, are more or less in schism, and in general the Pope seems to feel that they are out of control, since he appointed a Papal administrator to their head church of Assisi. Certainly the fact that someone is a Franciscan does not by itself commend my respect. (If I ever took orders, anyway, I would be a Dominican - but, alas, they have their corrupt branches too.) The Jesuits are only the most visible exponents of a rot that has taken hold of very many of the older religious orders.

[goreism.livejournal.com]

Um, as far as I know, he's a member of the Order of Friars Minor, the largest branch (i.e., not a Capuchin or that other branch). I daresay they're still reasonably orthodox though; perhaps even more so than the Dominicans.

The Dominicans are my favorite order as well.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Let me put it this way: I find the election of a Universalist to a position where he can influence the reading of all Theology students in a supposedly Catholic university a very dubious step indeed. And the bland public statements from the authorities, that everything is for the best in the best of all possible world, seem to me to fit in a pattern of behaviour with which I and all orthodox Catholics are all too familiar. Given that this is a Jesuit college, that it is based in Paul Shanley's and Bernard Law's Boston, that institutions of its kind are notorious for taking their claim to academic freedom a lot more seriously than their claim to Catholicism, and that I happen to know that other unorthodox things have taken place there - well, as far as I am concerned, they are guilty until proven innocent. There is more than enough ground for suspicion there, with or without a "hermeneutics of suspicion" (see next post).

More news from Boston College, showing just the kind of Catholic school it is

[fpb.livejournal.com]

And why I expect the worst from them and generally get it.
http://www.townhall.com/print/print_story.php?sid=196883&loc=/opinion/columns/jonahgoldberg/2006/05/10/196883.html