From the Director's Desk...

Just days before, President George W. Bush announced the appointment of John J. DiIulio Jr. to head up a new federal office to develop a program of federal assistance to "faith-based communities" rendering social
services to citizens in need.  This initiative met with roars of both approval and denunciation.  Approval came
from those who feel that not to provide federal funding for such programs was anti-religious discrimination. 
The denouncers, some of whom are very committed religious believers and activists, fear that this would be
tantamount to government intrusion - with its predictable criteria and accountability paperwork - into religion's proper domain.  Of course, the ACLU and its friends have the opposite denunciation: "Government
will be contaminated with the infection of theocracy."

The fears underlying these opposing views are precisely what we had in mind when we listed the questions for this forum: (1) What makes the invocation of religious belief by public officials so disturbing to some people? (2) Must public life aim to be as secular as possible for the sake of full participation, tolerance, and
cooperation?  In that instance, what does "secular" mean? Agnostic? Atheist?  (3) Is religious belief a purely
private affair? Or is it invariably embedded into the fabric of public life and culture?  (4) Is it what we see in
the experience of some other countries and cultures (Iran, Northern Ireland, the Middle East, Indonesia, India) that makes us nervous about religion in public life?

The context within which the panel addressed these questions was set by the first speaker that night, Professor José Casanova of the New School University in New York. As he put it in his classic publication, Public Religions in the Modern World in 1994, we have learned two lessons from recent history: "The first is that religions are here to stay, thus putting to rest one of the cherished dreams of the Enlightenment.  The second and more important lesson is that religions are likely to continue playing important public roles in the ongoing construction of the modern world.  This second lesson in particular compels us to rethink systematically the relationship of religion and modernity, and, more important, the possible roles religion may play in the public sphere of modern societies." 

If we have moved beyond and also shown the inaccuracy of the Enlightenment conviction, where are we now
and where do we go from here with religion and public life?

Read on and hear the views of Peter Steinfels, author of the "Beliefs" column in The New York Times and
Woodstock fellow Jim Redington, S.J., in their discussion with Professor Casanova.  With the interreligious
expertise of Fr. Redington, Woodstock fully expects to continue this conversation about the profound
influence of religions on cultures, institutions, and historical developments in all of our Woodstock projects

Many prayers for a blessed Easter season.

James L. Connor, S.J.