…The conference on “The Future of Theology,” sponsored by the Vatican’s Dicastery for Culture and Education [was] held at the Pontifical Lateran University this past December 9–10.
Among the conference’s featured speakers were Fr. James Keenan, S.J., of Boston College, and Dr. Nancy Pineda-Madrid of Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.
Fr. Keenan came to public attention in 2003 when, in testimony before the Judiciary Committee of the Massachusetts state legislature, he opposed a bill defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman as “contrary to Catholic teaching on social justice” because such a law would constitute “active and unjust discrimination against the basic social rights of gay and lesbian persons.”
At the Lateran conference last December, Keenan was reported to have devoted a considerable part of his allotted time to railing against Donald Trump, whose relationship to “the future of theology” is not immediately evident.
Dr. Pineda-Madrid’s faculty page at the LMU website describes her as “a feminist theologian who researches the Latina/x faith experience” and the author of a book “arguing for a fresh theological interpretation of salvation where women’s lives matter.” In June 2024, she was elected president of the Catholic Theological Society of America. But do CTSA theologians represent “the future of theology”?
Evidence for that is not abundant at Dr. Pineda-Madrid’s own university. For while Loyola Marymount counts, at present, 7,094 undergraduates, LMU’s “Institutional Research and Decision Support” website reports that the university awarded one bachelor’s degree in theology in the 2023–2024 academic year. That marked lack of student interest might be explained in part by the faculty page of Dr. Pineda-Madrid’s LMU theology department colleague, Dr. Layla Karst, who offers a seminar entitled “Bad Catholics.” There, students learn from the “voices” of “Feminist theologians, Black and Womanist theologians, Queer theologians, and Eco-theologians” about the “struggle over orthodox belief and right practice that take[s] place under asymmetrical power relations.”
It says something about the current Roman atmosphere of ecclesiastical intimidation that several of those who attended the Lateran conference declined to discuss in detail what was said there, although one brave soul did describe the conference as “vapid.” Irrespective of the theological wokery that framed the conference’s content, however, the imposition of the small group discussion method of “Conversation in the Spirit” on the conference participants guaranteed that there would be no robust exchange of views of the sort that once characterized medieval Catholic universities, where even the most distinguished professors were expected to publicly defend their positions, at length and in-depth, against all comers.
For despite the hype extolling its use at the last two Synods — indeed, based on that experience — “Conversation in the Spirit” is an instrument of manipulation, not a process that yields serious conversation or debate. Participants (some of them brilliant and learned) were given two minutes in “Moment One” to share ideas or reactions to what the principal speakers said to the whole conference; a minute of silence followed; participants got another two minutes to state “what resonated with them most from the contributions shared by others in Moment One” (note: not what they might have thought to be utter nonsense); another minute of silence ensued; and finally, the group’s “secretary and facilitator” concocted “a concise summary to be presented to the assembly….”
From George Weigel in First Things
I earned a B.A. in theology from Loyola Marymount in the 1990s, back when it could still pass as a Catholic university, but even then there were questionable professors and a liberal, modernist slant in the curriculum. In my class there were only about a dozen theology graduates. No way would I attend that school today.
A “moment” of silence? Why stop at a moment? Why don’t these solons pursue a career of silence?
What a travesty. Two minutes in “Moment One” is insufficient time to explore ideas in depth that might run counter to those of the organizers of this conference. Therefore it is presumptuous to call this process “conversation in the Spirit.” Isn’t it interesting that a major concern is that of “asymmetrical power relations.” How this obsession contributes to conversing in the Spirit I’m sure I have no idea. Then again, one might ask if conversation in the Spirit as contemplated here and in the synod on synodalities meetings is a concept grounded in reality.
A concept grounded in reality? “Reality” is far too judgemental and hetero-normative. We intellectuals have jettisoned reality a long ways back.
Well said, Daniel Gallup. These so-called “Catholic theologians” are not even Christian– they are total frauds and should be kicked out of the Catholic Church. So sick of the lack of discipline– and integrity– in our post-Conciliar wayward Church! By the way, do you happen to live in the areas of L A. where the horrific wildfiires have occurred? Is your home okay– and your church?:
Dr. Pineda-Madrid should stay home and take care of her husband and kids (if she has any).
If that’s what listening to the/some spirit is, might I suggest that Dr. Pineda-Madrid spend a decade in silence?
A minute is clearly not enough.
LMU’s theology department is full of modernist heretics. So is the campus Jesuit residence.