« Making Catholics Proud... | Main | The GOP Does Daisy »

October 24, 2006

Jeremy Lott has reviewed Charles Curran's recent autobiography and gives considerable attention to the often-rumored theory that Curran stressed the procedural, versus the substantive, aspects of being prohibited from teaching at a Catholic university:

"In 1967, Curran had been fired because of his loud support of artificial contraception. In his own words, he had attended a White House conference on population control, where he made the distinction 'between Catholic moral teaching and public policy issues in a pluralistic society.' And the Vatican, in turn, had pressured the CUA to make the distinction between a Catholic theologian and Teddy Kennedy."

"[After protest on the campus] CUA caved, and Curran thought that had settled the issue. But in retrospect, he admits that by focusing narrowly on the procedural injustice he was delaying the inevitable. 'The press,' he explains, 'asked a lot of questions about my teaching, expeically in the area of artificial contraception, but we tried to keep that issue from becoming the primary focus. We knew that on the narrow academic issue we could expect support from all corners of the campus.'"

"After the CDF contacted Curran in 1979, he stalled and tried again to play the procedural card. The initial letter was accompanied by 16 pages documenting the "errors and ambiguities" in his writing and a request that he reply to them in the next month. When he did get around to responding, Curran again 'pointed out that serious flaws in the [CDF's] examination process,' claiming the the procedure violates the basic principles of justice."

Sometimes crazy right-wing Catholic theories prove true. Curran is currently as snug as a bug in a rug at Southern Methodist.

Posted by Seth Zirkle at October 24, 2006 02:56 PM

Comments

Post a comment