Pope Gregory XVI proclaimed that “no one in the future dare to vex anyone, despoil him of his possessions, reduce to servitude, or lend aid and favor to those who give themselves up to these practices, or exercise that inhuman traffic by which the Blacks, as if they were not men but rather animals, having been brought into servitude, in no matter what way, are, without any distinction, in contempt of the rights of justice and humanity, bought, sold and devoted sometimes to the hardest labor.”

Nevertheless, the first bishop of Charleston, S.C., attempted to soften the blow. Quoting scripture and Catholic doctrine, Bishop John England wrote a series of letters arguing that the pope didn’t mean to attack those — including Catholics — who already owned slaves.

“Bishop England was not a bad man. He was not personally in favor of slavery, nor was he a racist,” noted Father John Raphael of New Orleans, at a rally organized as an alternative to the University of Notre Dame’s graduation rites.

“In fact, Bishop England exercised a cherished and personal ministry to black Catholics,” he added. “But in the face of strong, anti-Catholic sentiment and prejudice, he simply wanted to show his fellow antebellum Southerners that Catholics could be just as American as everybody else and that tolerance of their cherished institution — slavery — was not in any way opposed by the Catholic church.”

It was wrong for Catholics of that era to seek any compromise on slavery, stressed Raphael, who serves as principal of St. Augustine High School, one of Louisiana’s most prominent African-American institutions. It is just as wrong, today, for Catholic leaders to compromise on abortion. At least the slaves were allowed to live, to be baptized and to receive the sacraments, he said.

The symbolism was obvious, since the priest is a prominent African-American graduate of Notre Dame.

The symbolism was more than obvious, since he was speaking at a rally protesting Notre Dame’s decision to grant President Barack Obama an honorary doctor of laws degree, clashing with a U.S. Catholic bishops policy that states: “Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

The Mass and rally on Notre Dame’s south quad followed hours of prayers in the university’s Alumni Hall and famous Marian grotto. These solemn, peaceful events received little media attention, even though they drew several hundred or several thousand participants, depending on who did the counting, as well as 25 Notre Dame faculty members, 26 graduating seniors and Bishop John D’Arcy of the Catholic Diocese of Ft. Wayne-South Bend. A louder standoff between police and 100 off-campus activists — led by anti-abortion leader Randall Terry — received most of the news coverage.

During the actual commencement address, a few protesters yelled, “Stop killing our children.” Most of the graduates booed the protesters, then chanted, “Yes we can,” Obama’s campaign slogan, and “We are ND” as they were removed.

Notre Dame President John Jenkins stressed that Obama accepted Notre Dame’s invitation knowing that “we are fully supportive of church teaching on the sanctity of human life and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”

“President Obama is not someone who stops talking to those who differ with him,” stressed Father Jenkins. Then he added, “Mr. President, this is a principle we share.”

Meanwhile, many of the speakers at the “Notre Dame Rally for Life” openly criticized Obama’s policies, but consistently focused their harshest words on the actions of the current Notre Dame administration.

“Faith without works is dead, words without actions are meaningless,” said Father Raphael. “If, as we have been told, a dialogue is actually taking place … between the presidents of Notre Dame and the United States, between the university and the nation, then, for the university at least, that dialogue must be shaped by truth and charity, and protecting the sanctity of all human life, as the church understands life, must be its goal. …

Actively building a culture of life at Notre Dame must become central to the university’s witness and mission to the nation and to the world.”

   Send article as PDF to

“For many people, connecting ‘Baptist’ and ‘spirituality’ is like ‘military’ and ‘intelligence.’ They just can’t picture those two words together,” said Whitney, director of the new Center for Biblical Spirituality at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

But for Baptists, he stressed, it’s crucial to underline the word “biblical” in front “spirituality,” in order to stress the center’s ties to Protestant reformers who rejected what they believed were the errors of Rome.

When Whitney and his colleagues talk about spirituality, they emphasize images of the great Charles Spurgeon spending hours in Bible study before preaching, laypeople meditating on the symbolism in John Bunyan’s “The Pilgrim’s Progress” and missionaries weeping while praying for the lost. They do not focus on monks chanting ancient prayers day after day, night after night, generation after generation.

“Why should we go to people who have locked themselves behind a door for 50 years if we want to learn about true spirituality, when the Bible tells us to go out and be salt and light in the world? … This is not to say that we shouldn’t go outside our tradition in order to learn, but we are saying that it’s important to go to our own guys, first,” said Whitney.

“We believe that biblical, Evangelical spirituality has not been tried and found wanting. It simply has not been tried.”

The potential impact of this project is great, if only because 20 percent of all students attending U.S. seminaries study on Southern Baptist campuses. The center opened in January and seminary leaders believe they can handle five students in the Ph.D. program and 10 in their doctor of ministry program. While graduate programs teaching spirituality exist in a few U.S. seminaries, this Ph.D. program is the first targeting scholars and clergy among evangelicals.

One of the first challenges the center will face is defining “spirituality,” a word that means one thing on the Oprah Winfrey Show and something else altogether then it appears in textbooks describing traditions in various world religions. For modern Americans, the word is so vague that it’s almost meaningless, said church historian Michael Haykin, who teaches in the Southern Seminary programs.

Nevertheless, the word has great power and its appeal must be understood by anyone who wants to understand contemporary American religion.

When most Americans hear “spirituality,” said Haykin, they think of “all of those areas in their internal experiences in which they come into contact with things that transcend daily life. … It’s all incredibly nebulous. The key is that the whole ritual of institutionalized, formal religion has nothing to do with this, for most people today.”

Thus, researchers keep running into increasing numbers of un-churched adults who identify themselves as “spiritual,” but not “religious.” These seekers are interested in “spirituality” that is connected to emotions and personal experiences, but not in formal “religion” that comes packaged with history, doctrines and rules.

Meanwhile, many Protestant believers are anxious to escape what they believe is the dry, formal, merely rational approach to worship and prayer that dominates mainstream churches. Some turn to charismatic or Pentecostal churches and some turn to the so-called “emerging churches” that try to weave some ancient Christian prayers and disciplines into their progressive, “postmodern” take on faith.

“What unites all these people is an emphasis on personal experience,” said Haykin. “For all of them, ‘religion’ is a bad word, something they are trying to get away from.”

The Southern Seminary programs, he added, will emphasize that Protestant pioneers such as John Calvin and Martin Luther were interested in early Christian spirituality, but rejected what they believed were newer Catholic traditions. Then again, students will also study the works of latter reformers, such as the Puritans, who stressed personal piety while criticizing what they saw as the formalized, ritualized traditions of the Presbyterians, Lutherans and others.

This cycle keeps repeating itself, generation after generation.

“We already have people accusing us of trying to smuggle a kind of Roman Catholic approach to faith into an evangelical seminary,” said Haykin. “What we are saying is that the Protestant reformers were trying to get past the whole medieval Catholic world and reconnect with the ancient church and its approach to the spiritual life. That’s what we are trying to do, too.”

   Send article as PDF to

Why is matzoh the only bread at Passover? Because the Hebrews had no time to bake leavened bread as they fled Egypt. Why dip bitter herbs into chopped apples, dates, nuts and wine? Because this paste resembles the clay they used in slavery to make bricks. Why dip parsley into salt water? The parsley represents new life, mixed with tears.

This year, some liberal Jews will hear a new question during the ritual meals that define this weeklong season, which begins at sundown on Wednesday, April 8.

The question: “Why is there an orange on the Seder plate?”

The answer, in a new rite written by Rabbi Peter H. Schweitzer of New York, will please many unorthodox Jews.

“To remind us that all people have a legitimate place in Jewish life, no less than an orange on the Seder plate, regardless of gender or sexual identity,” states “The Liberated Haggadah,” a rite for “cultural, secular and humanistic” Jews. “And to teach us, too, how absurd it is to exclude anyone who wants to sit at our table, partake of our meal, and celebrate with us the gift of life and the gift of freedom.”

The goal is to provide an enjoyable and educational Passover for Jews who are united by culture, art, music, literature, foods and folkways — but not faith. Nearly half of American Jews, said Schweitzer, consider themselves “secular” or “cultural” Jews, as opposed to “religious” Jews.

“This is not some small offshoot, it is half of our Jewish world,” stressed the rabbi, who leads the City Congregation for Humanistic Judaism, part of a network of 30 “secular Jewish communities” in North America.

“We have common values and experiences, even if we are not united in the practice of the Jewish religion. … We still want to find a way to celebrate these rituals that define the major transition points in our lives and in the lives of Jewish people throughout our history.”

However, Schweitzer faced a major challenge in writing this particular “Haggadah,” which fits into a tradition of new Passover texts that honor specific moments in Jewish history and culture. Many families freely adapt pieces of different Seder texts to create their own unique rituals.

At the heart of Passover, is the biblical story of Moses and the spectacular series of miracles that helped the Jewish people escape from captivity in Egypt. However, the “Liberated Haggadah” argues that scholars have deconstructed most of the Exodus narrative, leaving modern Jews with a mere “myth” that is rich with symbolism and meaning, but not the gravity or authority of historical fact.

Even casual of participants in this new Seder are sure to notice that a big, big player is missing in this postmodern dinner drama.

Moses is still here and so is his sister, Miriam, along with a quiet character named Nahshon who may or may not have jumped into the Red Sea, which may or may not have parted to allow the Hebrews to escape. But the God of the Bible is gone.

“In early versions of the Haggadah,” notes this text, “Moses makes only a passing appearance, and all of the credit for the escape goes to Moses’ god Yahweh. Here, in this version we prefer to tell, Yahweh is the one who only gets a passing reference.”

This is important, because many “secular” or “cultural” Jews are atheists and many are agnostics. Others, noted Schweitzer, believe in some form of divine power, but not in the kind of God who hears prayers and intervenes in human life.

Thus, traditional prayers are free to evolve into poems or meditations on “human empowerment.” What was once an ancient story of divine liberation can become a story of human liberation to inspire all who suffer oppression and yearn for freedom.

“We want,” the rabbi explained, “to say what we believe and to believe what we say. We think that people who do not believe should not have to use language in these rites that make it sound like they do, in fact, believe. … Our goal is to live good, just, moral lives and we believe that we have the power to do that on our own.”

   Send article as PDF to

Pope Gregory XVI proclaimed that “no one in the future dare to vex anyone, despoil him of his possessions, reduce to servitude, or lend aid and favor to those who give themselves up to these practices, or exercise that inhuman traffic by which the Blacks, as if they were not men but rather animals, having been brought into servitude, in no matter what way, are, without any distinction, in contempt of the rights of justice and humanity, bought, sold and devoted sometimes to the hardest labor.”

Nevertheless, the first bishop of Charleston, S.C., attempted to soften the blow. Quoting scripture and Catholic doctrine, Bishop John England wrote a series of letters arguing that the pope didn’t mean to attack those — including Catholics — who already owned slaves.

“Bishop England was not a bad man. He was not personally in favor of slavery, nor was he a racist,” noted Father John Raphael of New Orleans, at a rally organized as an alternative to the University of Notre Dame’s graduation rites.

“In fact, Bishop England exercised a cherished and personal ministry to black Catholics,” he added. “But in the face of strong, anti-Catholic sentiment and prejudice, he simply wanted to show his fellow antebellum Southerners that Catholics could be just as American as everybody else and that tolerance of their cherished institution — slavery — was not in any way opposed by the Catholic church.”

It was wrong for Catholics of that era to seek any compromise on slavery, stressed Raphael, who serves as principal of St. Augustine High School, one of Louisiana’s most prominent African-American institutions. It is just as wrong, today, for Catholic leaders to compromise on abortion. At least the slaves were allowed to live, to be baptized and to receive the sacraments, he said.

The symbolism was obvious, since the priest is a prominent African-American graduate of Notre Dame.

The symbolism was more than obvious, since he was speaking at a rally protesting Notre Dame’s decision to grant President Barack Obama an honorary doctor of laws degree, clashing with a U.S. Catholic bishops policy that states: “Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

The Mass and rally on Notre Dame’s south quad followed hours of prayers in the university’s Alumni Hall and famous Marian grotto. These solemn, peaceful events received little media attention, even though they drew several hundred or several thousand participants, depending on who did the counting, as well as 25 Notre Dame faculty members, 26 graduating seniors and Bishop John D’Arcy of the Catholic Diocese of Ft. Wayne-South Bend. A louder standoff between police and 100 off-campus activists — led by anti-abortion leader Randall Terry — received most of the news coverage.

During the actual commencement address, a few protesters yelled, “Stop killing our children.” Most of the graduates booed the protesters, then chanted, “Yes we can,” Obama’s campaign slogan, and “We are ND” as they were removed.

Notre Dame President John Jenkins stressed that Obama accepted Notre Dame’s invitation knowing that “we are fully supportive of church teaching on the sanctity of human life and we oppose his policies on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”

“President Obama is not someone who stops talking to those who differ with him,” stressed Father Jenkins. Then he added, “Mr. President, this is a principle we share.”

Meanwhile, many of the speakers at the “Notre Dame Rally for Life” openly criticized Obama’s policies, but consistently focused their harshest words on the actions of the current Notre Dame administration.

“Faith without works is dead, words without actions are meaningless,” said Father Raphael. “If, as we have been told, a dialogue is actually taking place … between the presidents of Notre Dame and the United States, between the university and the nation, then, for the university at least, that dialogue must be shaped by truth and charity, and protecting the sanctity of all human life, as the church understands life, must be its goal. …

“Actively building a culture of life at Notre Dame must become central to the university’s witness and mission to the nation and to the world.”

   Send article as PDF to

Take comfort in this: The items on the following “to do” list do not apply to all teens today.

Lie to your parents about those wild weekend plans — check.

Steal that scarf you want at the mall — check.

Download that term paper off the Internet and add a few mistakes to confuse the teacher — check.

Inflate your volunteer hours at your church’s soup kitchen to pump up that college application — check.

The problem with the Josephson Institute’s latest survey — the 2008 Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth — is that it contained so many bad numbers that many depressing readers were tempted to pin an “all of the above” verdict on most teens.

Consider the numbers on stealing. Nearly of third of the students surveyed — 29,760 in 100 randomly selected public and private high schools — admitted stealing from a store during the previous year. Also, 23 percent said they stole from a parent or relative. The numbers were lower for honors students and those who attended religious schools, but around 20 percent of them stole something from someone.

It’s easy to criticize the young, but it’s also important to know that they’re learning these behaviors from the adults around them, said Michael Josephson, founder of the Los Angeles-based ethics center.

“Did you lie about your child’s age to save money? Did you provide your child with a false excuse for missing school? Did you lie about your address to get your child into a better school?”, he asked, in a commentary about the survey. “Most of us stray from our highest ethical ambitions from time to time, but we usually do so selectively, convincing ourselves that we’re justified and that occasional departures from our ethical principles are inconsequential when it comes to our overall character.

“Most of us judge ourselves by our best actions and intentions, but the children who watch everything we do may be learning from our worst.”

The sobering numbers leapt into headlines nationwide, while the researchers said the truth was almost certainly worse — since 26 percent of the participants admitted that they lied on at least one or two of the prickly questions. Students took part in the survey during class sessions, with guarantees of anonymity.

Other results noted by the institute included:

* More then eight in 10 students — 83 percent — admitted that they lied to a parent about an issue of some importance, while 43 percent of the students in public and private schools said that they have lied to save money.

* In a 2006 survey, 60 percent of the students said they cheated on at least one test and 35 percent cheated two or more times. This year, the numbers rose to 64 percent and 38 percent on the same issues.

* The Internet makes plagiarism easy, with 36 percent of the students confessing that vice — up from 33 percent in 2004.

* Self-esteem is not a problem, since 93 percent of the students reported that their ethics and character were satisfactory and, in a popular quote from the survey, 77 percent said, “when it comes to doing what is right, I am better than most people I know.”

Buried deep in the survey form was another question that would be of special interest to clergy and other religious leaders who work with the young. When asked if they had done “things in violation of my religious beliefs” during the past year, 48 percent of those polled affirmed a simple answer — never. Another 15 percent confessed to one violation of their personal religious beliefs.

This survey is more proof that something has gone wrong with the way Americans are teaching their young people the meaning of right and wrong, said evangelical activist Charles Colson.

“Instead of being rooted in an objective moral order that exists independently of ourselves, right and wrong are subjective — they’re the product of the person’s ‘values.’ In that case, it makes perfect sense that people can lie, cheat, and steal and still be ‘satisfied’ with their ethics,” he said, in a radio commentary.

“After all, they are not answerable to God or the community, only to themselves. The question isn’t, ‘How shall we live?’ but, ‘How do I feel about it?’ “

NEXT: The theological content of “whatever.”

   Send article as PDF to