N o t e s 1 The Current State of Catholic Higher Education 1 . John Paul II, Fides et Ratio (Boston: Pauline Books & Media, 1998). 2 . Alice Gallin, O. S. U., ed., American Catholic Higher Education: The Essential Documents, 1967–1990 (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1992), 7. 3 . Edward Manier and John Houck, eds., Academic Freedom and the Catholic University (Notre Dame, IN: Fides Publishers, 1967); Neil G. McCluskey, S. J., ed., The Catholic University: A Modern Appraisal (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1970); Paul L. Williams, ed., Catholic Higher Education: Proceedings of the Eleventh Convention of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars (Pittston, PA: Northeast Books, 1989); George S. Worgul Jr., Issues in Academic Freedom (Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press, 1992). 4 . Recent American historians have documented, from a purely historical perspec- tives, the severance of academic inquiry from religious belief. See George M. Marsden, The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994); James Tunstead Burtchaell, The Dying of the Light: The Disengagement of Colleges and Universities from Their Christian Churches (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998); Julie A. Reuben, The Making of the Modern University: Intellectual Transformation and the Marginalization of Morality (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1996); Jon Roberts and James Turner, The Sacred and the Secular University (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000); David J. O’Brien, From the Heart of the American Church: Catholic Higher Education and American Culture (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1994); and Philip Gleason, Contending with Modernity: Catholic Higher Education in the Twentieth Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). None of these historians address the topic of the relation of spirituality to theology and other academic disciplines in Catholic universities. As historians, they do not draw on theological anthropology or theological epistemology to contextualize and inform their work. 5 . John Henry Newman, The Idea of a University (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982). 166 Notes 6 . Theodore M. Hesburgh, C. S. C., ed., “The Challenge and Promise of a Catholic University,” in The Challenge and Promise of a Catholic University (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994), 4. 7 . I b i d . 8 . M a r k U . E d w a r d s J r . , Religion on Our Campuses: A Professor’s Guide to Communities, Conflicts, and Promising Conversations (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2006), vii. 9 . Douglas Jacobsen and Rhonda Hustedt Jacobsen, eds., The American University in a Postsecular Age (New York: Oxford, 2008), 7. 1 0 . D a v i d S c h i n d l e r , Heart of the World, Center of the Church: Communion Ecclesiology, Liberalism, and Liberation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996), 143–76. 11 . Hesburgh, “The Challenge and Promise,” 7. 1 2 . I b i d . , 6 . 13 . Melanie M. Morey and John J. Piderit, S. J., Catholic Higher Education: A Culture in Crisis (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2006), 105–9. 14 . See also Christian Smith, “Secularizing American Higher Education: The Case of Early American Sociology,” in Christian Smith, ed., The Secular Revolution: Power, Interests, and Conflict in the Secularization of American Public Life (Berkely, CA: University of California Press, 2003), 97–159. 1 5 . I b i d . , 9 , 5 6 – 5 9 . 1 6 . I m m a n u e l K a n t , The Critique of Pure Reason , trans. Norman Kemp Smith (London: Macmillan, 1933), 257. 17 . Timothy Healy, S. J., “Belief and Teaching,” Georgetown Magazine (Jan.– Feb. 1982): 3–5, quoted in Michael J. Buckley, S. J., The Catholic University as Promise and Project: Reflections in a Jesuit Idiom (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1998), 11–12. 18 . John Haughey, S. J. also refers to the university as “necessarily a secular opera- tion.” John C. Haughey, S. J., Where is Knowing Going?: The Horizons of the Knowing Subject (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2009), 91. 19. John Henry Newman, “Intellect, the Instrument of Religious Training,” in Sermons on Various Occasions (London: Longmans, Green, 1921), 6–7. 2 0 . I b i d . , 1 2 – 1 3 . 2 1 . I b i d . , 1 3 . 2 2 . K a r l R a h n e r , Foundations of Christian Faith: An Introduction to the Idea of Christianity , trans. William V. Dych (New York: Seabury Press, 1978), 22. 2 3 . C h r i s t o p h e r F . S c h i a v o n e , Rationality and Revelation in Rahner: The Contemplative Dimension (New York: Peter Lang, 1994), 169, 170–71. I am indebted to Schiavone’s account of Rahner’s view on revelation and rationality. 2 4 . P a u l T i l l i c h , History of Christian Thought: From Its Judaic Origins to Existentialism (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1967), 362, 365. 2 5 . S t . A u g u s t i n e , Soliloquies I: 12, trans. Kim Paffenroth (Hyde Park, New York: New City Press, 2000), 32.; St. Augustine, The Trinity XII: 24, trans. Edmund Hill, O. P. (Brooklyn, New York: New City Press, 1991), 336. 26 . There has been a welcome proliferation of studies on spirituality in recent decades. Along with this has come a proliferation of definitions of spiritual- ity. Lawrence Cunningham and Keith Egan have included a sampling of 23 Notes 167 separate definitions of spirituality in their introduction to spirituality. See Lawrence S. Cunningham and Keith J. Egan, Christian Spirituality: Themes from the Tradition (New York: Paulist Press, 1996), 21–28; Walter Principe, “Toward Defining Spirituality,” Sciences Religieuses/Studies in Religion 12 (Spring 1983): 127–41; Kees Waaijman, Spirituality: Forms, Foundations, Methods (Leuven: Peeters, 2002), 305–66. 27 . Paul Tillich, drawing on Augustinian thought, distinguished “theonomy” (law or rule by God) from both “autonomy” (self-rule or law) and “heter- onomy” (strange or foreign rule, imposed externally). See Tillich, A History of Christian Thought , 184–85, 188; see also his Reason and Revelation; Being and God , vol. 1, Systematic Theology (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1951), 84–85. 28 . The understanding of tradition that I use in this book is considerably broader than, say, that of David Schindler and Alasdair MacIntyre. For Schindler, there is a “mutual relation between fidelity to conciliar-magisterial teaching, participation in the sacramental life of the church, prayer, and social service, on the one hand, and the formation of a truly Catholic mind on the other” (see Schindler, Heart of the World, 147 ). Where I deviate from Schindler is that my understanding of tradition is broader than “fidelity to conciliar-mag- isterial teachings,” and encompasses the entire Great Tradition of the church that, of course, includes conciliar-magisterial teachings. MacIntyre’s perspec- tive on tradition, while broader than that of Schindler, is based primarily on the thought of Thomas Aquinas, who attempted to synthesize the con- flicting strains of Catholic thought, both Augustinian (in its variant forms) and Aristotelianism. (See Alasdair MacIntyre, Three Rival Versions of Moral Inquiry: Encyclopaedia, Genealogy, and Tradition (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1990), 58–148). While I draw on Thomas, I also draw on a wide range of other thinkers, past and present, to frame my arguments. 29 . This understanding of spirituality does not exclude external practices and rituals; rather, it isolates a basic aspect of the spiritual experience that is prior to outward expressions of the spiritual life. 30 . Michael J. Buckley, S. J., At the Origins of Modern Atheism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987), 360. 31. More recently, John Haughey has written about the dynamism of the mind and unity of knowledge it seeks. See John C. Haughey, S. J., Where is Knowing Going?: The Horizons of the Knowing Subject (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2003). 3 2 . J u s t i n M a r t y r , The First Apology , in The Writings of Justin Martyr and Athenagoras , trans. Marcus Dos, D. D., George Reith, D. D., and Rev. B. P. Pratten (Edunburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909), 46–47. 33 . Bernard McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism: Origins to the Fifth Century (New York: Crossroads, 1994), 114. 34 . Origen, Prologue to the Commentary on the Song of Songs, in Origen , trans. Rowan Greer (New York: Paulist Press, 1979), 224–31; McGinn, Foundations, 119–20. 3 5 . G r e g o r y o f N y s s a , The Life of Moses , trans. Abraham Malherbe and Everett Ferguson (New York: Paulist Press, 1978), 31. 168 Notes 36 . This does not negate or undermine the importance of pursuing an explicit focus on the kind of revealed knowledge characteristic of the science of theology. 3 7 . T h o m a s A q u i n a s , Summa Contra Gentiles , 4 vols., trans. Anton C. Pegis et al. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975), vol. 3, 50 and 62:3. 3 8 . T h o m a s A q u i n a s , The Disputed Questions on Truth , vol. 3, Library of Living Catholic Thought, trans. Robert W. Schmidt, S. J. (Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery, 1954), q. 22, a. 2, ad. 1. 3 9 . S e e f o o t n o t e 2 5 a b o v e . 40 . I am mindful of the qualms many scholars will have about the introduction of spirituality into the discussion of how theology might stimulate other aca- demic disciplines. There has been considerable debate over the past two and a half decades over whether spiritually should be integrated even into theology programs, let alone other academic disciplines.