EDITORIAL ESSAY A DECADE OF DISCIPLINING THEOLOGIANS Bradford E. Hinze Fordham University, Bronx, New York This is a report on actions taken by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, doctrinal committees of national episcopal conferences, and individual bishops to investigate and discipline theologians and to restrict open discussion of certain theological issues over the last decade. 1 It offers basic information about the processes involved and currently available data about actions undertaken. The arbitrary time frame of ten years provides a reasonable sample to initiate a broader inquiry into the range of issues involved in this topic and these will be set against the backdrop of disciplinary actions taken since the Second Vatican Council. This report will inevitably be impressionistic because some of the theolo- gians consulted have asked to have their names withheld and in some cases information is incomplete. Sources have been contacted on all the continents working through the channels of national and regional societ- ies for Catholic theology. This paper is not intended to offer an in-depth analysis of particular theological issues raised by investigations of theolo- gians. Rather it aims to establish a framework and to offer basic informa- tion about the processes involved in order to identify recurring patterns, surface vexing concerns, and provide a data base for subsequent discus- sion of the larger ecclesiological and criteriological issues involved. I. Contexts and the Cases Pursued by the CDF Without rehearsing its long history, it is helpful to remember that the origins of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith can be 1Editor’s note: Because of the large number of Vatican documents cited here, providing full bibliographical references would result in cumbersome footnotes. Instead, readers are directed to the Vatican website (http://www.vatican.va ) where most documents will be found online; for those few that are unavailable, the site provides full bibliographical references. Bradford Hinze teaches theology at Fordham University (Bronx, NY 10458). His most recent book is Practices of Dialogue in the Roman Catholic Church: Aims and Obstacles, Lessons and Laments ( Continuum, 2006 ). He is currently exploring the connections between pneumatology and lamentations in the development of a prophetic and dialogi- cal ecclesiology . HORIZONS 37/1 (2010): 92–126 Hinze: A Decade of Disciplining Theologians 93 traced back to the establishment of the Holy Offi ce by Pope Pius III in 1542 during the Renaissance and Reformation. The Holy Offi ce was instituted to challenge, thwart, and discipline those involved in cer- tain reforming efforts in the church and those working at the frontiers of human learning in the sciences, both of which were questioning and challenging offi cial teachings and the exercise of authority structures in the church. This mandate of the Holy Offi ce was bolstered by the teaching of the First Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor Aeternus (1870), and its assertion that the authority of papal primacy entails immediate—implying direct—authority over every Catholic around the world (DS 3060). The Offi ce’s reputation for strong action was matched by repeated calls for its reform. Paul VI on the last day of the Second Vatican Council, December 7, 1965, issued Integrae Servandae that set forth a reform of the Holy Offi ce under its mandate “to investigate new teachings and new opinions . and to promote studies of these matters and congresses of scholars.” These reforms included not only a new name, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but also called for relinquishing the practice of secrecy, and for consulting regional bishops about individual cases, if they were interested in them. Theologians under investigation were allowed to defend themselves, in writing if desired, and there were instituted rights of appeal and juridical representation. It furthermore called for the use of university professors as consultors and ended the Index of Forbidden Books. 2 Any consideration of the actions of the CDF since Vatican II will consequently entail an evaluation of the effectiveness of these reforms. Cases during the last ten years need to be placed in the context of other investigations and disciplinary actions taken during the forty-fi ve years since Vatican II and situated in relation to the longer history of theologians, among them some of the most distinguished thinkers of the twentieth century, who were investigated and disciplined both during the modernist crisis and in the wake of Pius XII’s encyclical Humani generis through the administration of this offi ce. This list includes such notable fi gures as Alfred Loisy, George Tyrrell, Marie-Dominique Chenu, Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, and John Courtney Murray. In short, the pattern of behavior we are witnessing in the post- Vatican II period has a history that stretches back throughout the twen- tieth century and further, and we need to distinguish and assess this current set of practices in relation to analogous patterns in previous generations. 2Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) 57 (1965): 952–55; for English translation, see Council Daybook, Session 4 , (National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1966), 354–55. 94 HORIZONS The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith: Its Current Composition Before reviewing the criteria, procedures, and cases involved, it may help to know something about the current composition of the CDF. The group is comprised of nineteen members—cardinals, archbishops, and bishops. There are sixteen cardinals and three bishops, two of whom are ordinaries in local churches. One is currently in his fi fties, eight are in their sixties and ten are in their seventies. They are predominantly from Europe (four from Italy, two from France, two from Spain, two from Germany, two from Poland, one from the Czech Republic), with two from the United States, two from Africa (Nigeria and Tanzania), one from Asia (India), and one from Latin American (Argentina). All of the Cardinal members serve as prefects or members of other Congregations, Pontifi cal Councils, and Commissions. Since 2005 the CDF has been led by the prefect, William Cardinal Levada; (the post was held by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger between 1981 and 2005). The secretary, Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, SJ, was appointed in July 2008 to replace Archbishop Angelo Amato, SDB, and in June 2009 Msgr. Damiano Marzotto Caotorta replaced Joseph Augustine Di Noia, OP, as under- secretary; Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna serves as promoter of justice. In addition, there are three offi ce supervisors and an additional staff of 33 people. This congregation meets in plenary assembly annually. In addition, the congregation has twenty-nine regular consultors who are chosen by the prefect and approved by the pope, fi ve of whom are titular bishops. The others are priests of whom eighteen are from religious orders (six Jesuits, three Salesians, two Franciscans, two Conventual Franciscans, two Augustinians, two Dominicans, one Congregation of the Missionaries of St. Charles, one Legionnaires of Christ, and one Redemptorist). The majority of the consultors teach at pontifi cal universities in Rome (Gregorian [Jesuit], Biblical Institute, Angelicum [Dominican], Alphonsianum [Redemptorist], Lateran, Santa Croce [Opus Dei] and Salesian). There are no lay consultors, and, of course, no women. 3 The Norms and Criteria Cases over the last ten years were judged according to the stan- dards established by the new formula of the Profession of Faith and the 3See Annuario Pontifi cio (Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 2009), 1189–91; Thanks to Eric Meyer for background research on the members and consultants. The information pro- vided on the Vatican website ( http://www.vatican.va ) concerning the offi cers and total number of members of the CDF and counselors does not always correspond with the latest information provided in the Annuario Pontifi cio and available through other channels. Hinze: A Decade of Disciplining Theologians 95 Oath of Fidelity issued in 1989 by the CDF, and further delimited by the 1998 motu proprio of John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Ad Tuendam Fidem , the commentary by the CDF in the same year (which required that theo- logians accept not only doctrine defi nitively declared by the magiste- rium, but also non-defi nitively intended offi cial pronouncements), and the CDF’s Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian (1990). 4 Other relevant documents include the statement by the Conference of German Bishops on “The Procedure for Settling Grievances in Matters of Doctrine” (1972), 5 the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops’ 1989 statement Doctrinal Responsibilities: Approaches to Promoting Cooperation and Resolving Misunderstandings between Bishops and Theologians , 6 the Australian Catholic Conference of Bishops’ 1999 statement, “The Examination of Theological Orthodoxy,” 7 and the 1977 statement by the International Theological Commission, Theses on the Relationship between the Ecclesiastical Magisterium and Theology . What Doctrines Currently Preoccupy the CDF? The most frequently-cited disputed issues targeted for CDF action over the last decade pertain to writings related to women’s ordination, homosexuality, and religious pluralism. Other issues have surfaced, especially in christology, ecclesiology, and a range of moral issues, but these former three have received the most attention during the last decade. In order to put these three