Notre Dame dispute may signal a shift: countercultural Catholic voice stirs a storm - Michael Baxter's rejection for tenure by theology dept. was modified by the school's president - Cover Story

National Catholic Reporter, Jan 31, 1997 by Pamela Schaeffer

A question critical to defining American Catholicism -- the right relationship of Catholicism to culture, of religion to politics -- is at the heart of an intense controversy swirling for months around a young scholar at the University of Notre Dame and reverberating through U.S. academic circles.

On the surface, the issue is why Holy Cross Fr. Michael J. Baxter, 41, failed to gain the support of a majority of Notre Dame's theology faculty when he applied for a, tenure-track position last year.

Under the surface lurks a youthful challenge to American Catholicism's old guard. Baxter, mentored by Methodist theologian Stanley Hauerwas, represents a shift, some academics say, in the way Catholicism is defined and practiced in the United States. Baxter's allies say he blows apart the usual liberal-conservative categories that have often been used to describe Catholics since the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s.

First a bit of history:

Baxter was rebuffed despite solid academic credentials and an affirmative action program at Notre Dame for Holy Cross priests. Sources inside and outside the university trace his troubles to his activist, countercultural stance.

Baxter is far from shy in expressing his views. He advocates a countercultural role for American Catholics, drawing on the influence of such 20th century figures as Dorothy Day, founder of the Catholic Worker movement; Msgr. Paul Hanly Furfey, peace activist, staunch defender of the poor and long-time chairman of the sociology department at Catholic University in Washington; and Jesuit Fr. Daniel Berrigan, firebrand anti-war protester.

In his articles, Baxter attacks some icons of liberal theology -- "Americanists" who, in his view, have posited a false harmony between church and state. He argues that a long-standing mission to belong, supported by U.S. bishops and theologians and aimed at proving Catholics can be good citizens, fin diluted Catholic teachings and devitalized the Catholic witness in the United States.

To some, including Notre Dame's president, Holy Cross Fr. Edward "Monk" Malloy and historian David O'Brien, Baxter's is a refreshing voice, the voice of a new generation. O'Brien is among the icons Baxter has attacked.

"I think he has a legitimate point of view," said O'Brien, professor at Holy Cross College, Worcester, Mass. "There's always a balancing act between faith and culture, and he comes down on the side of faith. He's trying to protect us from our tendency to be reductionist when we do historical or social analysis."

To Fr. Richard McBrien, former chairman of the theology department at Notre Dame, and a strong player in shaping its present direction, Baxter's church-state views are "sectarian" and "diametrically opposed" to Catholicism.

President intervenes

Surprised and vexed by Baxter's denial in a unanimous vote of the theology department's appointments committee last year, Malloy intervened. In a rare use of his presidential powers, he imposed Baxter on the department, appointing him visiting professor for a three-year term.

Malloy's action prompted another unusual event. The Faculty Senate denounced Malloy in a formal resolution on Dec. 3, 1996, saying such a "unilateral" action "seriously erodes the confidence that a faculty ought to have in a president" (NCR, Dec. 13, 1996).

The Faculty Senate is headed by McBrien, who says his concern was over "process" -- that is, Malloy's intervention -- rather than the qualifications of the candidate.

"I knew if anything went wrong with the process I'd be blamed," McBrien said, referring to the theology department's negative vote. "I studiously stayed out of it. I never made any effort to sway anyone's vote in any way."

Baxter was unwilling to be interviewed by NCR. But his positions are clear from his writings. He sees serious conflicts between the national agenda and gospel values. He even challenges the foundations of the American experiment itself, contending against Americanists that a constitutional separation of church and state has served religion poorly.

In an article published in the DePaul Law, Review, winter 1994, Baxter had harsh words for Catholic scholars and leaders who endorse divisions "between `faith' and 'politics." Much as feminist scholars decry a historic split between spirit and body in Catholic teaching, Baxter said the dualism of religion and politics "explains how Catholic slave owners could reconcile caring for the souls of slaves while at the same time buying, selling and abusing their bodies."

In American Catholic history, conflict between religion and politics was "virtually inconceivable," Baxter wrote. As a result of a "chameleon-like" adaptability, Catholics fought against each other in the Civil War, accepted the "politics" of segregation and supported virtually every subsequent war: '"the so-called Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War, World War 1, World War II, the Korean War and the Cold War ...

"Catholic `faith' also proved accommodating to the `politics' of industrial growth in the post-world War II era and the prosperity that came with it, as well as to the expansion of the U.S. economic interests around the world," he wrote.