The uproar over Georgetown’s commencement ceremony has brought to the surface one especially noisome argument which those who want to engage seriously with the Church’s internal debates would do well to retire. It goes something like this: “oh, religious order x isn’t really Catholic in the usual/boring/repressive sense, they’re different and better.” This doesn’t just apply to the Jesuits, of course, though today they may be its most frequent victim; this non-sequitur has indeed been deployed countless times against other orders with precisely the same intent.
It’s an argument that, of course, lends itself to plenty of insider-churchy jokes about charisms and how God signs his letters. Fr. Neuhaus was particularly fond of sarcastically musing about actions taken “in the Jesuit tradition” both as a way of deriding the contemporary state of the Society of Jesus and questioning those who would reach for this quick, dismissive answer to objectionable behavior. But it would be a funnier line of reasoning were it not meant quite seriously by so many people.
Not that it makes much sense as a formal argument. Singling out a religious order as “Catholic plus” or, to use a more contemporary term, “evolved,” is like saying “Sue’s not an American; she’s a Pennsylvanian.” Both are true, but the latter only and wholly exists as a subset of the former.
But when taken solemnly and deployed rhetorically, this thinking gets to be pernicious, as it emphasizes divisions in the Body of Christ and serves to amplify personal taste (or worse, politics) at the expense of overarching unity. To be fully and authentically Jesuit is of course to be, in the first instance, fully and authentically Catholic. And St. Ignatius of Loyola, whose order was founded to defend the Church and the hierarchy at the height of the Reformation, would never have granted his imprimatur to those who describe the order as a severed branch of the faith. A branch it may be, but the essential character of a branch is that it remains connected to the tree in order to bear fruit (John 15:1-8).
Critics of contemporary universities and religious orders might have greater success if they began with this sometimes-inconvenient connection, reminding their opponents of the unity within the Church’s splendid diversity, rather than resignedly indulging the notion that some seeds have irretrievably become weeds.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…