Thoughts About "Greatness"

Picking up on the “Great” Catholic university and law school thread – I agree with our readers’ comments that the vision definitely needs to move beyond providing an “avenue of social mobility for the children of the immigrant Church,” and that the universal call to holiness is a good place to start in appreciating how faith can penetrate into every area of the curriculum and every area of the practice.  I also agree wholeheartedly that “greatness” can also be linked to an open interdisciplinary exchange.  In the essay at the side bar have I have reflected on some of these themes and outlined the argument for moving toward “an explicit connection between faith and justice” which moves beyond a generic social justice / public interest agenda.  (Being the technological wizard that I am, I have not yet figured out how to do the fancy links here!). 

But I also want to throw two concerns into the mix:

The first is about variety:  to what extent does focusing on a generic “great” fuzz over the most important (and perhaps most difficult) questions about the particularities of institutional identity?  I would argue it’s important to move beyond a one-size-fits-all hope for “greatness” in order to ask questions about “greatness” in the context of a given institution’s specific spirituality, history and location.  For example, what it means to be a great Jesuit law school in the city of New York will differ in substantial ways from what it means to be a great Jesuit law school in Los Angeles, or a great Augustinian law school near Philadelphia, a great Holy Cross law school in South Bend, or a great diocesan law school in Minneapolis, etc.  I think part of the trap in some of the discourse about “greatness” is the sense that one model is better than another – which fails to fully appreciate that there really could—and should—be a variety of “great” approaches.  

The second is about openness: I think it’s important to note that the conversation goes both ways – not only an awareness of the impact that Catholic teaching and traditions can have on our field, but also as Gaudium et Spes invites, to develop a dialogue in which the Church also learns from “the world.”  I agree whole-heartedly that Catholic law schools should be a place for critical assessment of prevailing legal culture, but I also think that we need to be careful that this doesn’t slip into a sense that the primary purpose is to shore up troops for the culture wars.  So perhaps in thinking about the “ingredients” – it would be important not only to have faculty grounded in the Tradition and convinced that their Catholic faith is relevant to the way they think about law – but also to highlight their capacity (or openness to developing a capacity) to enter into dialogue with their colleagues of other faith traditions and backgrounds – so as to present something of a model of the Church in dialogue with others, and with the discipline itself.  This, I think, is one of the most important gifts we can give our students as they head into practice.

What is the path to that kind of openness?  Here, perhaps, an appreciation for a “theology of littleness” as “a basic category of Christianity” (Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth p.20), might be the best way to cultivate the openness and leads to true greatness. 

Amy