Spencer K. Nussbaum, No Man Can Serve Two Masters: A Student Perspective on Jesuit Legal Education, 43 Gonz. L. Rev. 631 (2008).[PDF] [Westlaw] [LexisNexis] %CODE1%
When considering the law schools to which I would qualify for admission, one of the factors I weighed heavily was attending a school where I would receive a quality legal education in an environment in which I would feel comfortable. After researching several schools and not being satisfied, I referred to some recruiting materials I had received in the mail and visited the web page of Gonzaga University School of Law. The web page displays Gonzaga’s mission statement which reads: “providing an excellent legal education informed by our humanistic, Jesuit and Catholic traditions.” Although largely unfamiliar with Jesuit and Catholic traditions, the promised learning environment intrigued me.
Soon after my classes began my first year, I recognized that very little Jesuit and Catholic influence existed in the school. Aside from the occasional crucifix in the classroom, a beautiful chapel on the third floor of the law school building, and the occasional sighting of a priest, a student may not even recognize that Gonzaga School of Law is any different from any other law school in the country. %CODE2%
However, after becoming more involved in the school’s activities and developing friendships with members of the University Ministry, I am able to perceive distinct opportunities for students who attend a Jesuit school that enhance the educational experience and allow for a familiarity with the Jesuit mission of promoting justice in society. Through various events and forums provided by the school and the University Ministry, students who choose a Jesuit law school for a different educational experience will not graduate empty-handed. Through such events, Jesuit and Catholic identities still exist—although perhaps only hanging on by a thread.
Professor Breen’s critique of Jesuit legal education, aside from not giving enough credit to the extra-curricular activities provided by the law school and University Ministry, is quite accurate. The academic study of justice is a completely neglected topic in Jesuit law schools. Whatever reason Jesuit law schools give for ignoring the vital concept of teaching justice and the spreading of the good news of the gospel, whether seeking national prominence or acceptance, they will ultimately lose their identity altogether for “no man can serve two masters.”
This article will first address the importance and vitality of a few of the differences found in a Jesuit law school through various extra-curricular activities and graduation requirements—the ingredients that make up the remaining fading threads of Jesuit and Catholic identity. Next, I will briefly offer my own criticism of the clinical program as it functions at Gonzaga University School of Law. This is followed by a discussion of the Jesuit law schools losing focus by emphasizing national prominence and approval at the cost of abandoning the very principles for which the law schools were founded in the first place. Finally, I propose a simple solution and elaborate on Professor Breen’s suggestions in solving the problems I have encountered in the curriculum as a student. The faculty should be allowed, in their own way, to share their experiences with the concept of justice and a course in moral theory and jurisprudence should be required. It is my hope that Jesuit law schools across the country will again renew their commitment to the Master himself and share with their students the principles that will provide success in the legal profession and in God’s kingdom.
II. Changing Flavors
In his article, Professor Breen states that Catholic identity has become an “extra ingredient” in its colleges and universities that has changed the flavor of the institution, but not the essential quality of it. While it is true that there are few differences between a Jesuit and Catholic law school and other law schools, the change of flavor is significant and qualitative.
If an individual wants to eat a certain flavor of ice cream, the same must go to the vendor or vendors that have that flavor available. If I like the flavor of pralines and cream, I will not go to a store that offers only chocolate and vanilla flavors. Though the essential ingredients that make ice cream remain the same, the flavor adds a distinctive characteristic qualitative enough to influence its consumption.
The same applies to students seeking a legal education influenced by Jesuit and Catholic traditions. Though students may obtain a quality legal education at almost every law school across the country, those students seeking the Jesuit and Catholic “flavor” will have to be quite selective. They will pass by many law schools that do not offer that distinctive characteristic in order to attend the few that do.
I agree with Professor Breen that this extra ingredient needs to be more than the annual celebration of a Red Mass, available members of the University Ministry, and crucifixes in classrooms. These “extras” would be analogous to the flavorless sprinkles added to the ice cream for aesthetic purposes only referred to by Professor Breen. However, other flavor-changing ingredients are available, albeit absent in the curriculum itself, that have changed the flavor of my legal education.
During my first year of law school, I was asked by a member of the University Ministry to participate on a panel which consisted of several students representing the various religions present in our school. This event was well attended by both law students and undergraduate students. We began our discussion by building common ground with our beliefs, and related how those beliefs affect how we interact with each other and ultimately on the type of people we desire to become. This discussion successfully fulfilled one of the Jesuit missions to “conscientize their students on the value of interreligious collaboration and instill in them a basic understanding of and respect for the faith vision of the members of the diverse local religious communities, while deepening their own faith response to God.” This forum, an extra ingredient, not only assisted each of us in understanding different religious and personal beliefs, but also provided an avenue of opportunity for future service in the legal community. We taught each other enough to understand how to build on our common beliefs without bypassing our individual worth.
Gonzaga University School of Law further promotes a different flavor of legal education through its student organizations. One group in particular offers several lectures each year focusing on how religion affects the law and the legal community today. This “Religion and the Law” series features law school professors and members of the legal community who address the student body regarding their religious convictions and how adhering to those convictions has helped them serve others in their professional careers. A law school following the Jesuit tradition not only studies the law itself but also “the deeper values of the society that become reflected in the particular laws at a particular time.” What better way to fulfill this obligation than by discussing it with those value-oriented professionals that make up a vital part of the community.
Additionally, as a requirement for graduation, each student attending Gonzaga University School of Law must complete thirty hours of public service. This requirement compels students to engage personally in the work of promoting justice in our society and provides an educational experience that could not be taught in a discussion of jurisprudence in the classroom. It is one thing to teach and discuss justice hypothetically and quite another to require students to put it into practice. Just as the experience of working in the school’s legal clinic can provide opportunities for some students to put into practice what they have learned in their courses by serving less fortunate members of the community, this public service requirement enables all students to put into practice the core of Jesuit education—justice through service.
These events and requirements can hardly be described as “aesthetic.” I am quite certain that these opportunities are not available or are certainly less abundant in non-Jesuit law schools across the country. For the students truly seeking a different educational experience—a Jesuit experience—these activities are enough to change the flavor and quality enough for them to choose to attend a Jesuit law school over a non-Jesuit law school. This partially fulfills the ultimate mission of the Jesuit school: “to contribute vitally to ‘the total and integral liberation of the person, leading to participation in the life of God himself.’”
I do agree with Professor Breen that these opportunities still fall short of the Jesuit and Catholic tradition, but they do constitute the remaining thread of Jesuit influence in its law schools. Yet such an argument does not even attempt to challenge Professor Breen’s central thesis that the Jesuit and Catholic identities must go further—they must also be found in the classroom, curriculum, and in the law school’s intellectual work.
III. Clinical Programs
The clinical programs offered at Jesuit law schools are incredibly valuable for many reasons. Professor Breen acknowledges the benefits of having such programs, but makes a great point about the clinic being a “convenient diversionary tactic” that enables the law school to avoid the responsibility of carrying the Jesuit and Catholic identities into the curriculum. While a clinical program provides a means for service in the Jesuit tradition, it does not satisfy the obligation of the university to teach and instill in all of its students the sense of justice in society.
The clinical program at Gonzaga University School of Law is grossly insufficient as a pedagogical tool and as a means to promoting justice simply because it offers a limited number of positions for student participation compared to the large student body. During the last two academic years, only about twenty percent of the student body has been enrolled in the law school’s in-house legal clinics. Over the two-year period in which students are allowed to participate in the clinic, many of them retain their positions until graduation, which excludes others from partaking in the opportunity. Thus, eighty percent of the student body is unable to benefit from the pedagogy of the clinical environment by serving the less fortunate of the community. Professor Breen criticized clinical programs as being insufficient as a means to teach the substantive concepts of justice to those working in the clinic because the clinics do not promote the ability “to think through, in a rigorous fashion, the complex kinds of moral questions [students] will encounter later in practice.” If the clinic is insufficient in teaching the participating students, what does that say about the majority of the students who have no experience with the clinic whatsoever?
If Jesuit law schools wish to use the clinic as the scapegoat to incorporate the teaching of justice in the classroom, they should require it for graduation. Anything less would be insufficient to promote and preserve the Jesuit identity—resulting in a Jesuit law school no different than the other law schools across the country that offer clinical programs. To borrow from Professor Breen’s analogy of the icing on the cake, very few students even get a chance to taste it through the clinical program.
IV. Serving Two Masters
The reason that Jesuit and Catholic law schools are failing to maintain their identity is their willingness to sacrifice their identity for the sake of national prominence by seeking a talented and diverse faculty as well as a diverse and capable student body. With outside influences bearing down on every law school in the country to fall within a certain genre, it is easy to place the heart of Jesuit and Catholic education on the back burner away from the spotlight. Yet the heart is the gospel of Jesus Christ and the common good, the last thing that should be ignored.
Christ himself taught that: “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” Yet that is exactly what Jesuit and Catholic law schools are doing, or at least apparently doing, by neglecting Christ’s teachings in search for secular approval and prominence. There are certainly problems associated with taking such a bold stand, but attempting to balance these problems against the foundation of faith is in turn, a tremendous lack of faith in itself. In response to such problems I believe the teaching “seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you” is an appropriate response.
A. Courage to be Catholic
In response to a criticism that Professor Breen has received about being “nostalgic for a by-gone era in which authentic Catholic identity flourished,” he expresses his desire for schools having the courage to be Catholic. The Catholic Church indeed has a unique and courageous position. It claims apostolic succession from Peter to the present and believes the message “is true and solid, in which one and the same way of salvation appears throughout the whole world” and “[o]utside the Church there is no salvation.” Standing by these assertions is not easy in a profession that requires ignoring the “‘bleaching out’ . . . the residue of particularistic socialization that we refer to as our ‘conscience.’” However, standing by the assertions is what is needed, both in the periphery and in the center of Jesuit and Catholic law schools.
The Jesuit organization originally found inspiration in helping its fellow men know God. Jesuits served the Church “with a particular focus on missionary work.” Though I am not opposed, even as one who is not a member of the Catholic Church, to direct evangelization, the means by which the Jesuits achieve this end is not so straightforward. Their way is being open to a wide array of diverse religious and cultural beliefs and building on those beliefs so that all may know God and recognize the truth taught in the Church. “The mission of the Society today is participation in the total evangelizing mission of the Church, which aims at the realization of the Kingdom of God in the whole of human society . . . .”  This approach can only be effective if it reflects “a faith that the God of Israel lives and works in the world and calls believers to articulate, evaluate, critique, and act upon their assumptions and values.” I can honestly say that very little, if any, effort has been made to share the gospel of Christ in the law school. Aside from the few extra-curricular activities noted above, I have not heard about Christ’s triumph on the Cross and I do not know many who would even feel comfortable mentioning it. By hiding its unique heritage and its saving message under the law school curtain, not only is the Church being untrue to itself but it is also being untrue to the One who is supposed to be at its head.
It would be logical to conclude that Jesuits and Catholics are either ashamed of their gospel message or simply do not care enough about the non-Catholic students to share it with them. Ultimately it would be for the students to decide whether it was a desirable path to follow, but the Jesuits at least need to give us the option. I do not believe that embarrassment or lack of concern for their fellow men is necessarily the cause for keeping the truth hidden, but when the institution does almost nothing to promote the cause for which it was created, a drastic change needs to take place. Paul taught the Romans: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” It is time the Jesuits follow this example and “preach the gospel to every creature”—including law students.
B. Serving the Master of National Prominence
One of the greatest challenges to restoring and maintaining Jesuit and Catholic identities in law schools is having mission-oriented faculty. Regardless of the motivations for founding Jesuit and Catholic law schools, they were soon “pushed toward secularization by their faculties, by their reactions to prejudice, and by their desire to become a part of the mainstream of legal education.” In order for a law school to aspire to national prominence, the members of the faculty are “drawn predominantly from other, primarily secular, national law schools.” After acquiring non-Catholic faculty to achieve this end, law schools remained dedicated to the Catholic philosophy but their nationally prominent professors were neither “intellectually nor emotionally equipped for this task.”
The general effect is an absence of discussion in the classroom regarding anything Jesuit or Catholic. Sadly, in the few courses where I have actually expected a discussion of beliefs and the promotion of justice—the required course of professional responsibility and an elective course in jurisprudence— very little, if any, reflection or instruction regarding the Jesuit mission was addressed. In the professional responsibility course the closest we came was when we briefly discussed the suggested number of pro bono hours outlined in the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. This discussion quickly turned into whether we should have such a requirement at all, and very little was said regarding our duty to serve the indigent population in our society.
Even more disappointing was the course in jurisprudence. The discussion regarding the natural law theory was dismissed as problematic, transitioning to focus on the aspects of positivism and Kantianism. At best, the allocation of discussion was incredibly disproportionate favoring the positivist approach over natural law theory. Professor Breen has suggested that “[a]t the very least, a law school that purports to be Jesuit should require its first-year students to compete an introductory course in moral theory and jurisprudence.” Even with such a requirement, my course would have been grossly deficient in even identifying Jesuit tradition.
Regardless of the history and reason, the Jesuit and Catholic law schools serving the master of national prominence must change or cease their claims to follow such a powerful and worthy tradition. By ignoring the intellectual tradition, law schools have become hypocrites and though they will have their reward—it is not the reward to which they should aspire.
C. Serving the True Master
When asked which of the many commandments was the greatest, the Lord responded:
And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.”
These two commandments are dependent on each other because one cannot show love for God without also showing it to his neighbor. Sponsored by the Society that bears Jesus’ name, a law school should make these commandments a foremost priority.
The true Jesuit mission should provide a vehicle for all those involved to serve the Lord and their neighbors. This element of service should be at the very center of Jesuit legal education. Not only should the Jesuit and Catholic law school prepare us to become members of the legal community, it must prepare us to handle our client’s affairs “in a way that is not only just to them but is just to all others.”
Father Robert Araujo, S.J. addressed how the Jesuit law schools must respond to this call in producing good people and good lawyers. First, the Jesuit and Catholic law schools “must be clear about who [they] are.” Such a law school must teach and seek God’s justice, “a justice that can be incorporated into man’s if we accept the premise that law is both objective and transcendent and seeks to obtain the suum cuique for each and every person at whatever stage of life.” Furthermore, Jesuit legal education must reflect its history and tradition as an institution adhering to the first and second great commandments. Finally, the Jesuit and Catholic law school must be willing to promote its views, beliefs, and culture regardless of society’s influence to do otherwise.
The law school that is successful in promoting faith and justice with an emphasis on the “awareness of God’s love and mercy, present in every person, has to result in an active commitment for others.” This commitment for others will then permeate society and more people will come to know God because of it. The ultimate objective of the Jesuit education is supposed to be: “leading to participation in the life of God himself.”
In a letter to the Hebrews, Paul wrote: “Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward.” No greater reward exists than to bring others to know God through the principles of the gospel and through the promotion of justice in society. Jesuit and Catholic schools must serve God, their true master, and let the issue of national prominence and acceptance fall where it may, for “[s]ufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.”
V. The Faculty Problem Becoming the Solution
By serving the wrong master for so long, Jesuit and Catholic law schools have much ground to make up. If the problem began by seeking faculty from other secular and national law schools, then a solution lies in reversing this trend.
I readily admit that I am not qualified to gauge the religiosity of the members of the faculty and their ability to convey Jesuit and Catholic principles, but I think that the solution to the problem is quite simple: allow each member to convey the concept of justice in the way they feel comfortable. I assume that very few members of the current faculty would feel comfortable teaching various Catholic doctrines regarding the social issues of our time, but each can bring to the table a vast array of experience in dealing with the concept of justice. Whether from their time as practitioners or in academia, I would be hard pressed to assume that some faculty have not personally dealt with the concept of justice in their careers that “in a special way [will] help prepare all . . . students effectively to devote themselves to building a more just world and to understand how to labor with and for others.”
Members of the faculty at Gonzaga University School of Law have much to offer regarding the mission of promoting social justice regardless of their religious affiliation. For example, one faculty member, Professor Sheri Engelken, related to me an experience about her pro bono representation of a man on death row. While working as a judicial clerk for the Eleventh Circuit, Professor Engelken became interested in the changing law regarding the death penalty. Personally opposed to capital punishment, she struggled with the notion that a person who committed a serious crime was beyond change. Soon, she became the clerk that handled all of the death penalty cases on the docket in exchange for pledging future pro bono work on behalf of death row inmates. Holding fast to her pledge and after gaining a few years of experience, Professor Engelken volunteered and was assigned the case of Willie Enoch. For eleven years and thousands of hours, she rode the rollercoaster of changing capital punishment jurisprudence taking place at the time. As she tried to “roll the boulder uphill,” the impact of serving Willie Enoch influenced her professional outlook. As she continued to work with various businesses and corporations, her experience caused her to reflect that it is the client who determines the objective of the case and to act contrary to that objective would thwart the true concept of justice.
The effect of a professor, such as this one, who felt comfortable in sharing experiences like this one would allow for the Jesuit mission to permeate into the classrooms and positively influence law students to seek out those in need while serving them in a humanistic way. Current faculty should be encouraged by the administration to continually engage in discussion with their students both in and out of the classroom regarding this mission. Coupled with a required course in moral theory and jurisprudence by a qualified member of the faculty familiar with the catechesis and willing to emphasize and promote the concept of justice would adequately reflect Jesuit and Catholic identity in the curriculum.
I agree with Professor Breen that if the mission is not being conveyed in the classroom by the current faculty, steps need to be taken to ensure that the Jesuit and Catholic tradition permeates and endures.
The Jesuit and Catholic law schools of today have much to offer their students. The many activities offered by the law schools can have a clear and qualitative impact on those willing to participate. Yet as significant as those few activities may be to preserving what is left of Jesuit and Catholic influence in legal education, it is not enough. As soon as the law schools return their focus on promoting justice and stop serving other masters than the Master himself—they will share in the success that the legal world and the Kingdom needs today.
*. J.D., Gonzaga University School of Law, expected 2008, B.A. Weber State University, 2005. I would like to express my appreciation to Father Rick Ganz, S.J. for taking the time to answer my countless questions and provide me with some valuable resources for this article. I would also like to thank Professors Jim Vache, Sheri Engelken, and David DeWolf for sharing their experiences and insights with me. Additionally, I would like to thank Tamera Kelly for giving me the opportunity to write this article. Above all, I would like to thank my sweet wife for her patience and support in everything I do.
. Gonzaga University School of Law, https://law.gonzaga.edu (last visited Oct. 3, 2007).
. It is significant to note that I am not a member of the Catholic Church. My personal experience with the Catholic Church has been, for the most part, limited to the past two and a half years. This position is advantageous because I am able to view the Jesuit and Catholic law school in a way similar to many of my peers who are also not Catholic. Although I may be disadvantaged to the extent that I may not be able to appreciate the “beauty” of the Church and its doctrines, I do not believe my analysis is problematic. But see John M. Breen, The Air in the Balloon: Further Notes on Catholic and Jesuit Identity in Legal Education, 43 Gonz. L. Rev. 41, 55 n.37 (2007) (stating “to ‘objectively evaluate’ the Church from an external perspective is problematic at best”). Not only does my approach as a non-Catholic student of a Jesuit law school allow for evaluation from a perspective of the majority of the student body, having no previous exposure to the Jesuit and Catholic traditions, I can uniquely evaluate the “commit[ment] . . . to the promotion of justice as an integral part of [its] mission.” The Decrees of General Congregation Thirty-Four, the Fifteenth of the Restored Society and the Accompanying Papal and Jesuit Documents, Decree 3, ¶ 1 (1995), reprinted in Documents of the Thirty-Fourth General Congregation of the Society of Jesus 39 (John L. McCarthy, S.J., ed. 1995) [hereinafter Thirty-Fourth General Congregation].
I am, however, a devout Christian and quite familiar with the teachings of the New Testament. Since the “initial source of the principles with which Jesuit legal education should be concerned is the Good News, the teachings of Jesus Christ,” I feel that my familiarity with the teachings of the New Testament, at least in part, qualifies me to comment on the Jesuit and Catholic influence, or the lack thereof, during my law school experience. Robert J. Araujo, S.J., Legal Education and Jesuit Universities: Mission and Ministry of the Society of Jesus?, 37 Loy. L. Rev. 245, 257 (1991). As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I do not necessarily agree with the all the positions of the Catholic Church, but the more I learn the more I perceive the similarities in missions and teachings—particularly regarding the teachings of Christ himself. Therefore, my non-Catholic position is similar to those even intricately involved in it.
. See Thirty-Fourth General Congregation, supra note 2, Decree 3, ¶ 1.
. See generally Breen, supra note 2.
. Steven M. Barkan, Jesuit Legal Education: Focusing the Vision, 74 Marq. L. Rev. 99, 104 (1990).
. Matthew 6:24 (King James).
. Breen, supra note 2, at 54.
. Id. at 57.
. Id. at 54 (stating that the relationship between being Catholic and university is “one of complementary juxtaposition, the effect which is largely aesthetic”).
. This event was held on December 1, 2005 and titled “Inter-religious Dialogue.” It featured panelists representing Muslim, Methodist, Catholic, Jewish, LDS, and Native American religious beliefs. The theme of the event was a statement from Pope John Paul II, “A commitment to the truth of one’s religious tradition by its very nature and makes dialogue with others both necessary and fruitful.” Unfortunately, this dialogue has not occurred again.
. Thirty-Fourth General Congregation, supra note 2, Decree 5, ¶ 9, pt. 8.
. “Each man and woman is personally known and loved by God, and the human effects of every encounter and transaction must be considered and evaluated.” Barkan, supra note 5, at 112 (citing The Characteristics of Jesuit Education 21 (1987)).
. The J. Reuben Clark Law Society, founded at Brigham Young University, shares a mission statement similar to that of the Jesuits: “We affirm the strength brought to the law by a lawyer’s personal religious conviction. We strive through public service and professional excellence to promote fairness and virtue founded upon the rule of law.” J. Reuben Clark Law Society, http://www.jrcls.org (last visited Jan. 28, 2008); see Gonzaga School of Law—J. Reuben Clark Law Society, https://law.gonzaga.edu/students/SBA-and-Student-Organizations/J-Reuben-Clark-Law-Society.asp (last visited Jan. 28, 2008).
. Gonzaga University School of Law is not unique in offering this type of program that allows for a connection between faith and justice through interreligious dialogue. See Amelia J. Uelmen, An Explicit Connection Between Faith and Justice in Catholic Legal Education: Why Rock the Boat?, 81 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 921, 937 (2004).
. Andrew F. Moore, Contact and Concepts: Educating Students at Jesuit Law Schools, 41 Gonz. L. Rev. 459, 460 (2006).
. The public service requirement encompasses, but is not limited to, pro-bono legal work. It may also include volunteering for a non-profit organization, serving at a public agency, and other opportunities to serve in the community. See Gonzaga School of Law – Public Service Requirement, https://law.gonzaga.edu/Academic-Program/Registrar/Public-Service-Requirements/default.asp (last visited Oct. 4, 2007).
. Professor Breen briefly acknowledged this aspect of Gonzaga University School of Law in another article criticizing Jesuit legal education. John M. Breen, Justice and Jesuit Legal Education: A Critique, 36 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 383, 423 (2005). I am not aware of any other Jesuit law school requiring public service as a condition of graduation, although I believe its value would exceed that of a required course in jurisprudence or any other academic endeavor discussing justice.
. Breen, supra note 2, at 54. The University Ministry celebrates Mass weekly at the law school during the noon hour. This allows participating students the chance to escape the arduous and competitive nature of law school and retreat to refocus on what is more important. Beginning this year, the University Ministry and law school have also scheduled a retreat specifically geared toward law students with an emphasis on finding God while in law school. Additionally, the University Ministry is active in inviting law students to other activities offered at the undergraduate campus pertaining to the Jesuit mission.
. Jesuit Conference, What Makes a Jesuit School Jesuit? 10 (2007) (quoting The Decrees of the 32nd General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, Decree 2, ¶ 11 (1975); The Decrees of the 33rd General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, Decree 1, ¶ 44 (1983)), available at http://jesuit.org/JesuitSchools/WhatMakesAJesuitSchoolJesuit/default.aspx.
. Breen, supra note 2, at 43-44.
. For example, students are required to become very familiar with particular fields of legal doctrine, learn practical aspects of the legal profession, develop relationships with clients, and are encouraged to acquire a sense of social responsibility by providing the poor and disadvantaged with legal assistance. See Breen, supra note 17, at 397-98. Professor Breen has also referred to the profoundly religious and spiritual dimension of the attorney-client relationship, often developed in the clinical setting. Breen, supra note 2, at 46 (citing John M. Breen, The Catholic Lawyer: Justice and the Incarnation, 39 Cath. Law. 269, 270-75 (2000)).
. Breen, supra note 2, at 54.
. I am only stating what appears to be obvious. I have not been involved in any way with the clinic at the law school. Therefore, I am hesitant to engage in further criticisms of a program of which I am somewhat unfamiliar and will let the statistics speak for themselves.
. In the 2005-06 school year, 111 out of 562 students were enrolled in the clinic. In 2006-07, that number remained about the same with 104 out of 529 students being enrolled. This information was provided by the Gonzaga University School of Law Registrar’s Office.
. First-year law students are prohibited from working in the clinic.
. Breen, supra note 17, at 397.
. Traditionally, the scapegoat was used by the Israelites wandering in the wilderness of Judea. As an act of atonement, the Israelites chose a goat to symbolically lay all of their sins upon, then they tossed the animal over a cliff to rid themselves from impurities. Madeline S. Miller & J. Lane Miller, Harper’s Bible Dictionary 52 (8th ed. 1973).
. Breen, supra note 2, at 46 (quoting Breen, supra note 17, at 396 (“[A] powerful case can be made that a Jesuit law school should insist on the completion of some formal clinical experience as a requirement for graduation.”)).
. Id. at 56.
. See Araujo, supra note 2, at 256 (quoting The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus 67 (George E. Ganss, S.J. trans., 1970)).
. Matthew 6:24 (King James).
. Id. 6:33.
. Breen, supra note 2, at 46 (citing Posting of Amy Uelmen to Mirror of Justice, Questions for John Breen on his Critique of Jesuit Legal Education, http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/ (May 4, 2005, 9:20), available at http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/mirrorofjustice/2005/05/Questions_for_j.html).
. Id. at 50.
. Catechism of the Catholic Church ¶ 863 (Libreria Editrice Vaticana trans., 1994).
. Id. ¶ 174.
. Id. at ch. 3, art. 9, ¶ 3, §111.
. Uelmen, supra note 14, at 924 (quoting Sanford Levinson, Identifying the Jewish Lawyer: Reflections on the Construction of Professional Identity, 14 Cardozo L. Rev. 1577, 1578 (1993)).
. See Moore, supra note 15, at 461 (citing Daniel J. Morrissey, Bringing the Messiah Through Law: Legal Education at the Jesuit Schools, 48 St. Louis U. L.J. 549, 553 (2004)).
. Id. (citing Daniel J. Morrissey, Bringing the Messiah Through Law: Legal Education at the Jesuit Schools, 48 St. Louis U. L.J. 549, 554 (2004)).
. See id. at 480. Personally, I am sufficiently secure enough in my own beliefs that a direct attempt at evangelizing would not be, even in the least degree, offensive. I am sympathetic that some of my peers may not feel the same way, but such an attempt should not come as a surprise. Not one of my fellow students did not unknowingly apply and accept admission to a law school that claims to be affiliated with the Catholic Church. I like to think that the majority of my peers, would not be offended with such an approach. But see id. at 469.
. The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus and Their Complementary Norms 271 (John W. Padberg, S.J. ed., 1996).
. Barkan, supra note 5, at 109.
. See Breen, supra note 2, at 51.
. Romans 1:16 (King James).
. Mark 16:15 (King James).
. See Robert John Araujo, S.J., And Justice Shall Flourish in His Time, in Promise Renewed: Jesuit Higher Education for a New Millennium 189, 196 (Martin R. Tripole, S.J. ed., 1999).
. Barkan, supra note 5, at 104; see Leonard J. Nelson, III, God and Man in the Catholic Law School, 26 Cath. Law. 127, 139 (1981).
. Araujo, supra note 47, at 196 (quoting Mark Tushnet, Catholic Legal Education at a National Law School: Reflections on the Georgetown Experience, in Georgetown at Two Hundred: Faculty Reflections on the University’s Future 321, 326 (William C. McFadden ed., 1990).
. Barkan, supra note 5, at 104 (quoting Edward J. Power, A History of Catholic Higher Education in the United States 249 (1958)).
. It is not my intention to imply that my professors were unsuccessful in teaching the required material for these courses, only that they did not incorporate any of the Jesuit or Catholic teachings that should be a motivating factor behind the subject matter.
. Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 6.1 (2007).
. Cf. Uelmen, supra note 14, at 932-33.
. I responded to this unbalanced approach in a class presentation, a requirement of the course, where I expressed my frustration with the lack of a Judeo-Christian perspective. Although it seemed to strike a bitter nerve with a few of my classmates, many responded positively and agreed that more discussion of Catholic and Jesuit traditions and beliefs would have been appropriate in the course.
. Breen, supra note 17, at 401. Professor Breen further explains that even required courses in jurisprudence alone are not enough. In his more recent article, he suggests that Jesuit law schools should “host a faculty seminar or colloquium to introduce faculty to the Catholic intellectual tradition and explore ways in which it might be introduced into the curriculum.” Breen, supra note 2, at 72. This would not only force the concept of justice to be present in the minds of the professors but it would also facilitate them in leading thoughtful discussions in each of the courses.
. Cf. Matthew 6:16 (King James) (“Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countencance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.”).
. Mark 12:30-31.
. David K. DeWolf & Robert John Araujo, And God’s Justice Shall Become Ours: Reflections on Teaching Law in a Catholic University, 11 Regent U. L. Rev. 37, 41 (1999).
. Araujo, supra note 2, at 257.
. Id. at 276.
. Araujo, supra note 47, at 198.
. Morrissey, supra note 39, at 583.
. The Decrees of the 33rd General Congregation of the Society of Jesus, Decree 1, ¶ 44 (1983), reprinted in Documents of the 33rd General Congregation of the Society of Jesus 61 (Donald R. Campion, S.J. & Albert C. Louapre, S.J. eds., Jesuit Conference trans., 1984).
. Hebrews 10:35 (King James).
. Matthew 6:34 (King James).
. The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus And Their Complementary Norms, supra note 42, at 303.
. Professor Sheri Engelken is an assistant professor of law at Gonzaga University School of Law. She received her B.A. with high honors from the University of Missouri-Kansas City in 1980. She received her J.D. with honors from the University of Chicago in 1983 where she served as Articles Editor on the managing board for the University of Chicago Law Review. She clerked for the Honorable John C. Godbold, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in 1983-84. Sheri Engelken worked with the Kirkland & Ellis law firm from 1984-2003 before beginning her teaching career at Gonzaga University School of Law. See Gonzaga School of Law – Engelken, Sheri, https://law.gonzaga.edu/Faculty/Faculty-Directory/Engelken,-Sheri.asp (last visited Feb. 18, 2008).
. For details about the case, see Enoch v. Gramley, 70 F.3d 1490 (7th Cir. 1995).
. Professor Engelken’s involvement with the Enoch case took place between 1989 and 2001 when Enoch died of natural causes.
. See also Moore, supra note 15, at 470-73 (outlining alternative effective methods as a means to promoting the Jesuit and Catholic identity).
. Professor Breen suggests how this can be accomplished: “[T]he Catholic law school truly committed to fulfilling its mission must find some way of welcoming all faculty, regardless of religious background, to share in the conversation and invite them to collaborate in the mission.” Breen, supra note 2, at 72.
. But see Moore, supra note 15, at 469 (“While such a course may appeal to some students for ideological reasons, it could be considered by some as an overt attempt at converting the students’ moral and religious beliefs or values that lie behind the ideas. At least some, and perhaps many, students would not simply disregard such a course, but might also find it offensive.”).
. See Breen, supra note 2, at 71-72.