Click here to listen to the episode on Spotify
In the thirty-fourth episode of the third season of the “Saturdays at Seven” conversation series, Todd Ream talks with Dominic Preziosi, the editor of Commonweal. Preziosi begins by discussing the vocation to which journalists are called, the commitments or canons that define the fourth estate, and how journalists who are selflessly committed to their vocation are not only of great service to the Church but are essential to the Church’s ongoing efforts for renewal and vitality. Preziosi discusses the impact technology is having on that vocation, focusing in particular on the corrosive effects of social media over the course of the last fifteen years as well as threats posed by the content in some publications generated by artificial intelligence. Preziosi then discusses his own calling to journalism, the impact of the publications his parents read and had in their home when he was a child, and the influence of Commonweal’s presence at Fordham University during his years as an undergraduate student. While Preziosi served for a variety of other publications, Commonweal’s influence on the Catholic community he grew to value led him to view the service he could offer to that publication as an honor. His eventual appointment as editor also came about the point in time Commonweal celebrated its 100th anniversary. That milestone initiated a season of reflection in which Preziosi and his colleagues focused on the publication’s proud history and planned for advancing the service it offers the Church in the years and decades to come. Preziosi then concludes by discussing how virtues such as charity and humility remain critical to the health of individuals called to practice journalism as well as how the vice of pride corrodes such a calling—especially in a season such as the one in which we presently find ourselves living.
Todd Ream: Welcome to Saturdays at Seven, Christian Scholar’s Review’s conversation series with thought leaders about the academic vocation and the relationship that vocation shares with the Church. My name is Todd Ream. I have the privilege of serving as the publisher for Christian Scholar’s Review and as the host for Saturdays at Seven. I also have the privilege of serving on the faculty and the administration at Indiana Wesleyan University.
—
Our guest is Dominic Preziosi, Editor of Commonweal. Thank you for joining us.
Dominic Preziosi: Uh, it’s very good to be here. Thanks, Todd.
Todd Ream: In his widely cited Models of the Church, published in 1974 by Doubleday, Cardinal Avery Dulles identifies the Church as an institution, a mystical communion, a sacrament, a herald, and a servant. Eventually he would go on to add a community of disciples to that list of models.
When writing about an entity as large, diverse, and long in history as the church, in what ways, if at all, can Dulles’ thinking be beneficial to you and your fellow journalists at Commonweal?
Dominic Preziosi: So I think you know, I’ll, I’ll, I’ll just start by saying that this is a very challenging question and uh, I would say that the last one you mentioned there would probably be the most appealing to, to us, a community of disciples. But I think, you know, all of them probably have something to for us as journalists to keep in mind. And I think it’s important maybe, particularly for a magazine like Commonweal, that we have an understanding of the magisterium and the documents that come down through the Church and the thinking behind the Church, including some of the systematic theology. I think one of the things that we also like to consider though is, you know, thinking too much, too systematically at the expense of lived experience might sort of be a hindrance to, to, to what we do as journalists, particularly at a, at a magazine like ours.
Todd Ream: When interacting with the Church as exemplified by such a model, what would you and your colleagues identify, if any, are that models, theological strengths that allows you to see maybe deeper or further into the life of the Church? And then if there are any, what would be the attendant weaknesses that may come?
Dominic Preziosi: Sure. I think well, you know, although we do not exist necessarily to sort of, you know, plumb the depths of the Church as an institution, nevertheless, we work in a business where we, we view the Church’s operations as an institution, and we look at the Church’s role in history as an institution as well. So I think that this is something that we would want to be very mindful of also.
But, you know we host a, in our pages, a number of spiritual writers and, and, and theologians of, of all stripes, who would I think probably be able to take on, you know, these the, the elements of this model in a very specific way, whether mystical communion, sacrament, herald, or servant. So I think, you know, it’s useful to have a model like this to have at our disposal and to contemplate, but I’m not necessarily sure it’s something that we specifically and explicitly view or, or use as some kind of a tool or instrument in the day to day.
Todd Ream: As complicated as the Church is then, is there a way then that journalists can be mindful that the Church may be operating out of different sensibilities, whether represented by these models or others, you know, different sensibilities and doing so simultaneously?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, sure. I think you know, the word is complicated, and I think that that’s something that anybody who sort of covers the Catholic Church knows, I mean, it’s a universal church and it’s a Church that’s been around for, you know, 2,000 years. And you know, it’s gone through some complicated periods in its own history. And we may, you know, even up to the current moment, there’s a lot of complexities and a lot of cross currents and a lot of realities of the Church that I think we just sort of have to contend with.
I think the good thing um, being sort of the journalistic side of this is, is we approach that in a kind of objective, exploratory way, sort of acknowledging the complexities of the Church. Uh, and I think also sort of acknowledging that none of these can sort of be reduced to sort of simplistic pronouncements or opinions or, or articles that somehow reduce it to, you know, something that it’s not.
Todd Ream: Thank you. I want to ask you a little bit about your own vocation as a journalist now. You earned your undergraduate degree at Fordham University, then dropped down to Manhattan there, and did your graduate work at the CUNY Graduate Center.
At what point though, did you discern journalism would play an important role of how you understood your vocation?
Dominic Preziosi: Sure. Well I should go back even farther to, prior to my time at Fordham I grew up in a household where newspapers were part of our daily experience. Uh, my mom spent some time working at the New York Times and, and before that as a young adult, was a columnist for her local paper growing up. And she worked at a paper called The Hartford Current for a short time as well. But my, my dad was a big reader of newspapers as well, so I, I grew up in New Jersey, but really at any given time, we would have the New York Times in our home two weekly county papers in Hunterdon County the, the Newark Star Ledger uh, and, and a number of magazines as well. So, you know, I was, I grew up around this kind of stuff.
Uh, and in high school I was an editor of the high school paper. Uh, I was a subscriber to a number of periodicals in high school and college, and I, I, I worked on the papers at, at Fordham University as well. It’s always sort of been in my I, I guess DNA. I don’t know if that’s the right way to put it, but I was certainly always drawn to it.
Todd Ream: Yeah, personally, I’m not sure what I missed the most. The feel of the newspaper or the smell of the newspaper when I first unroll it.
Dominic Preziosi: Sure. Well, you know uh, my wife and I talk about this a lot because there is something certainly about the tactile experience of holding the newspaper. And I recall the Sunday papers in particular in the 1970s and eighties growing up, which were quite heavy because of all the sections. And you would, you know, you would spend the entire day paging through these, you know, through these papers. And sometimes it would take more than a day, you know, to, to, to get through them.
Todd Ream: Are there any mentors then along the way, whether through your college years or, you know while working on the student paper or even in your high school years when working on the student paper or early in your professional years?
Dominic Preziosi: Oh yeah, yeah. Sure, sure. Well, I think I’ve been lucky in that a number of people have maybe unbeknownst to them, served as mentors. But uh, interestingly in college, it was actually a uh, an instructor I had in my fiction writing workshop. So I think really did a was really very generous to me and very supportive of the work I was doing. And her name was Elizabeth Cullinan whom some of in the audience might recognize as a short story writer, a novelist. And she spent quite a lot of time writing and working for the New Yorker.
Um, and I, I, I, you know, that was really a formative time for me. It was junior, senior of college, and the, the, the, the work that we did in her workshop and the, and the feedback that she gave to, to all her students was really, really valuable. And I maintained contact with her after graduating as well. And she sort of helped guide me.
You know, just a gap in my CV here. Yes, Fordham University and then the graduate center. But in between I got an MFA in fiction at Brooklyn College too. So I spent a lot of time thinking I’d be, you know, a novelist or short story writer at some point. But this continued, you know, into my professional life. I’ve been in New York publishing my entire career. Uh, but I’ve had good editors all along the way.
But probably one of my real mentors was a guy I worked with at a business technology magazine that was published by McGraw Hill in the mid-nineties. And he was a poet himself of, a successful poet himself, but he was the managing editor of this magazine and also on the staff were a number of former daily newspaper types but he just had this approach to the written word, even if it was something as complicated or as esoteric or specialized as tech security technology, networking, security technology who said, listen, if you like working with words and you want to make something better, that somebody has turned in about this stuff, here’s how to do it. And he really was a quite an amazing editor and he imparted quite a lot of knowledge and wisdom to me, and I still think about him quite a lot.
Todd Ream: Yeah, that’s wonderful.
As a writer, but then also as an editor you also, from some distance, probably have your favorites. We all seem to do so. May I ask who are authors and or editors from afar, that inspired you along the way and contributed to how you think about your own vocation?
Dominic Preziosi: I’m glad you asked that question, Todd, because I actually wrote down a list in preparation. Uh, I think I’ve, I’ve generally been partial to, to magazine writers over, you know, over my, my, my life. Beginning at a young age, in high school I was a very big baseball fan and but there was a writer for the New Yorker named Roger Angell who might be familiar to you who wrote about baseball for the New Yorker, and he wrote a number of books over the decades about baseball. And I just thought he was the best thing going.
I mean, because he not only knew baseball and loved baseball and clearly, clearly enjoyed being a spectator and talking to the players and understood the nuances of the game and the history of the game. Uh, but gosh what a writer, you know, what a writer. He was, he was just incredible. And I you know, I was always very excited when a piece by him appeared in the New Yorker. And then of course I would try to buy his books if I had a few extra bucks in my pocket once they, once they got to the bookstore, the compilations.
But you know, I read a lot of criticism and, and cultural criticism. I was a, you know, big fan of the movie critic, Pauline Kael but I liked the the writing of John McPhee, who, who’s just sort of a generalist who, who covered everything from, you know, Bill Bradley to the New Jersey Pine Barons, to the wilds of Alaska.
But uh, I remember reading as a, as a young person, probably as a teenager speaking of having the New York Times around there was a columnist for the Times who was actually a conservative political columnist named William Safire, who, who’d been a speech writer, I believe, in the, in the Nixon administration, if I’m, if I’m, I’m not mistaken. Uh, but his, his political columns, I was probably a little too young to sort of, you know, sort of process in any sort of meaningful way, even though I read them. But he had a column in the magazine called On Language that appeared maybe once, once or twice a month which I was just, I couldn’t wait to read because he would, he just wrote on language, literally. Uh, I mean, I guess maybe that’s how I ended up becoming a copy editor, my first job out of college, because I was just sort of really interested in the way he talked about words and about sentences.
But, you know, I think, you know, there’s so many people I still like to read today, sort of across the board and the, the list would be far too long to go into, but there’s a lot of good people out there and I really do appreciate all the work they’re doing.
Todd Ream: Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. As you mentioned, you worked in journalism and media in the New York area for your whole life, whether it’s you know, living in New Jersey. But now, you know, you’ve covered most of the boroughs, in terms of where you’ve lived. And you began your career in your tenure with Commonweal in 2012.
But could you describe a little bit more about your professional journey and how you followed it up to your, that point in time, which you were appointed for your first position with Commonweal?
Dominic Preziosi: Sure. So you know I, I, I think I might’ve indicated that, well, my main, my main goal and it’s part of the reason I went to Fordham, and my father had gone to Fordham as well and actually grew up in the same Bronx neighborhood but uh, I was always just sort of drawn to New York, so that was a big reason. Uh, I wanted to, you know, be in school in New York, and I was lucky enough to, to do it at Fordham. And I said, I got just got to stick around and, and be part of the New York, New York publishing scene.
Um, I, I took a job as a copy editor, entry level, job as a copy editor at a trade magazine uh, on the, on the east side of Manhattan. And it was a great time to get a job like that. It was the late eighties and there was sort of this great sort of golden era of, I think one of the golden eras anyway, New York sort of magazine publishing. There were a lot of good publications around a lot of good work being done sort of across the board. You know, there were magazines like Spy and the New Yorker, New York Magazine. There was a magazine called Wigwag, which was kind of an interesting, an interesting creature.
Uh, but you know, you had the Alternative Press, you had the Village Voice, which was a must read, and this was an addition at the time, you know, New York had four daily newspapers. Uh, you know, the Times, the Daily News, the Post, and New York Newsday. Uh, and so, you know, you had this access to this just wonderful sort of store, deposit of, of, of journalistic expertise and just news being produced and commentary being produced, an exciting cultural commentary being produced.
So it was not so much that I even necessarily said, I got to get myself to one of these prestigious publications. I’m sort of just living among all these people. I mean, I used to see Jimmy Breslin on the, you know, the New York Daily News columnist. I used to see him on the street and other sort of the day. They just, they were part of the city fabric in the city life. And you just, you know, no matter who you were working for, you felt like you were part of it because, you know, there were events that brought press people together and you were just sort of part of this big conversation.
Um, and so I, you know, I, I thought I wanted to, that was exciting and I was really liking it, but I did think at some point I, I’d be a professor of literature and that’s how I ended up, you know, going to grad school at at, at the CUNY Grad Center. And I, you know, did a lot of work there. But ultimately realized that, you know, maybe scholarship and the academy weren’t really my calling. And by then started a family, so, you know, the other considerations sort of, sort of come into play and, you know, really what you need is the job. And, and fortunately, I’d done enough experience in journalism that I was able to sort of find my way into sort of management level, managing, editing managing editors at a couple of different places.
Uh, for a time then though this was after the first so you know, there was that first internet boom right around the turn of the 20th century to the 21st, and then there was the crash right after that. And I had been working at a publication that covered internet technology and was going quite well, until it wasn’t. Um, and and I thought, okay, maybe a little more stable, a career path at this moment would be in marketing communications, which I did for about 10 years and was fine. Um, I think however, that I, I realized that, you know, this is something that I’m not necessarily drawn to.
The work wasn’t something that I ultimately found not very appealing and I, I remember sort of beginning to think about what the next steps would be. And uh, I actually saw an ad, it was on LinkedIn for the digital editor position at Commonweal. And I sent uh, of application, a resumé in quite early in the morning. And by late morning I had a call from, from the publisher at the time for an interview. And it just, I was lucky enough that it just sort of fit.
And I had been familiar with Commonweal this, I should have mentioned this earlier, but that was another publication occasionally in our household. Uh, there was a little bit of a, a a, between my parents, a little bit of a, a, a difference in sensibilities. I think my mother was more drawn to what Commonweal was doing. My father was a little concerned that it was maybe a little too liberal, a little too progressive, if, if not communist. So but it was in the house. And of course, I was exposed to it at Fordham University, you know, Commonweal was everywhere. So I just thought, gosh, Commonweal, that would be just a wonderful place to be. And uh, I’m lucky enough that it worked out. I’m very thankful.
Todd Ream: Yeah. Can you tell me then about the discernment process that led you to go from digital editor then to being appointed editor in 2019?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, I’m not so sure that it was my own discerning, I think that fortunately, you know my, my predecessor who I very much enjoyed working with editor Paul Baumann you know, I think he encouraged, he encouraged me, he welcomed me to the staff. Uh, and I had a very sort of supportive staff, very collegial staff at Commonweal, which has always been the case, I understand, through, through history of course, although there’s sometimes some internal disputes, but they’re always, I think they’re always resolved in a collegial way.
But I think it’s, you know, it’s a really collegial place and uh I felt very welcomed and very comfortable here. And I think when the opportunity was presented I thought, well, not only a huge honor, but really something that I kind of almost couldn’t believe in some ways was, was happening to me, this storied publication, which was a, at the time approaching its 100th anniversary that I would be uh, be fortunate enough to be, to be a named editor. Um I guess, yeah, it did take some thinking.
I mean, you know this was something I remember calling my wife when it was presented to me and saying, you know, is this something to, you know, to, you know, be sure that I want to do? And we talked about it, and I guess I did think about it and yeah, it seemed like it seemed like the right, the right choice.
Todd Ream: I’m going to ask you about technology here in a second, and you echoed the technology boom around, you know, the turn of the millennium. So we’re going to bracket that out for the side because we’ll ask about that in a second.
But over the course of your career, in what ways, if any, has your sense of understanding of the vocation of journalism changed, apart from technology and the influences that it’s had?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, the vocation yeah, I’ll try to sort of separate this from the technology, but in some ways it may be difficult. I mean, I think you know, I think there was an era where we sort of believed, and we may be idealistic about it, but I think there’s some, there’s some truth to it where you know, journalism really was a, a, a vocational project. Uh, and journalism was respected and valued as, you know, the fourth estate and in this country. And I think there was an understanding that the work that journalists did was to be valued as a good in, in and of itself and as a good for society.
Um, I think, again, you know, there are exceptions and I’m sure I’m idealizing somewhat, but you know while there were always sort of, there’s always been sort of like the chase for, you know, for scoops and, and you know, to get the headlines and all that kind of thing. But I think something has sort of happened in, in, in my lifetime, in my career. And I don’t know, maybe it’s the sensibility that was brought on by televised news and the 24-hour news cycle on cable, that, that, you know, has obviously affected print and now online journalism.
I think the pace of course has accelerated sort of, you know, more than exponentially, I guess. Um, and I think some of you know, there are risks that come with that when things move fast, right. There are always, there are always risks and I think some times the pursuit of stories or angles or takes and things like that have not always worked to the, you know, to the benefit of journalism at large.
Todd Ream: Thank you. Can you say a little bit more, now you echoed, you know, a couple of things, you know, with technology that’s, you know, probably inextricable from the nature of the vocation of how journalists understand and exercise it, you know, such as the 24-hour news cycle, cable news, et cetera. Are there other dimensions that you would emphasize or highlight that have been impacted otherwise by technology?
Dominic Preziosi: I think social media is a big something huge to consider, and I think it’s something that I’m a pre-internet generation person but I, at least was in the workplace, and I remember one of my early jobs was among one of the early users of the internet because I worked for a, for a a, a technology publication. So it felt more or less comfortable with the internet. But I think social media is a little something that I’m still sort of trying to figure out, even though it’s now been around for a quarter century or, or more, right.
Uh, but I think you know, I think social media has is something that has brought some benefits, certainly in terms of the dissemination, at least of, of, of voices and of of pieces and, and, you know, articles and, and, and, you know, sort of brand recognition and all those things that we thought it would be good for at one time. But I think certainly in the past decade or so, if not more, we’ve seen I think some of the of the disadvantages of it, and I think some of the, the harms that social media bring in terms of just things being sort of unvetted, unverifiable certainly viral is a problem, you know what I mean? Viral used to be a great thing, but I think sometimes, you know, something, when something goes viral, it’s not always great, right? It’s sort of hard to, to, to cap that.
Now, I think on top of that now, of course, is the emergence of artificial intelligence and the, you know, artificial intelligence is moving into journalism. I, I believe I saw something the other day that a major newspaper will not have its reporters do any writing anymore. The actual writing will be done by an AI bot. The reporters, you know, the bosses sort of justify this by saying, well, the reporters will now have more time to report. They won’t have to worry about writing. AI will do the writing. And I think this is a horrible development for any number of reasons.
Um, but you know, I think, and we’ve seen it already, I think on certain, you know, you, you go to certain corners of the web and even certain, you know, publications that have been around for a while and you can see that they’re doing AI summaries or that they’re doing quickly AI generated stories that might not necessarily, well, that owners or managers of the business believe that is not necessary for a human to be involved in the actual researching, writing, and presentation of it. I think that this is something that’s going to be quiet. We have to be quite aware of what this is, what’s happening.
Todd Ream: Yeah, I would think, going back to the earlier question about writers who influenced you and those who you enjoyed reading, part of it is we develop an appreciation for their sensibilities that they bring to bear in terms of not only the way they present material and how they communicate, but also the material itself, what they find important and gravitate toward, because there’s always infinite options there. And this would seem to, yeah, compromise that in, in a number of ways, so.
Dominic Preziosi: Yeah. And, you know, and also too, there’s just sort of the quality control aspect of it. I mean what’s verifiable, what’s, what’s something that can sort of be just uh, created that’s fake. Uh I mean, these are, you know, these are real real concerns. I think that not only journalists have to be wary of, but I think this is something that society at large has to be, you know, sort of concerned about, or at least, you know, certainly paying attention to carefully.
Todd Ream: I want to come back now to Commonweal and its relationship with the Church, the Church, again, being large, diverse, and long in history. It’s no surprise that there’s a wide variety of publications that intersect with it. Some are local, some are national. Some are offer devotional insights, others report news, and even offer editorial insights. And of course, they run the gamut from, and this is just one of these trajectories or dialectics from the traditional to the progressive, how do you make sense of the ranges of publications that intersect with the Church, and then where does Commonweal fit?
Dominic Preziosi: Sure, sure. Well, for one thing, it’s, listen, I mean, the fact that there are so many publications across so many across the spectrum of engagement with belief is really well, I mean, it’s sort of reflective of the diversity of the Church as well. I mean, you know, it’s, you know, the capaciousness of, of this whole thing is really kind of incredible. And uh, even if you know, a number of publications or a number of voices or outlets are not to my taste, it’s, it’s kind of remarkable that they’re, they’re all out there.
You know I think Commonweal is fairly unique. Um, but I’m sure every editor will say that about his or publication. But Commonweal, I, I do believe is fairly unique. Um, I mean, it’s, it’s completely independent of the Church. It was, you know founded in, you know, in 1924 by lay Catholics and has always been run and managed by lay Catholics. And I think its independence from the Church has given it sort of that ability to be a little more uh, freewheeling, I guess, a little more constructively critical. Uh, you know, not necessarily needing to, necessarily feeling that it has to hew to a specific line or to the, the specific uh, constraints of prelate in a certain archdiocese.
Um, you know, I think we are there to do sort of what I think is even sort of encouraged in our faith, which is to sort of you know, comment constructively on, on faults you know, in a spirit of, I think sort of fraternal correction, but maybe sometimes even a little bit stronger spirit if we think things are, are really amiss. I think too Commonweal, you know, sort of what, what we really have done well, and what we, I think continue to do well is we, we talk about the, the engagement of, of the Church and Catholicism with particular sort of American, you know, pluralistic democracy and American society. Uh, and this is where we’ve been sort of occasionally on the outs over our, you know, over our existence with sort of maybe the prevailing politics or the prevailing sort of societal trends.
I think, you know, we were I think in particular, so, so think of the, the red scare in, in, in the fifties with Senator McCarthy. I think, you know, Senator McCarthy was Catholic, but, and I think a lot of, sort of Catholics felt that because he was sort of exposing communist networks that he was doing, you know, the good of the Church, um godless, communist networks, you know but Commonweal was opposed to, to to, to McCarthy and his, his efforts and, and what he was what he was about. And, you know, that didn’t necessarily endear us to some of the, the, you know, the hierarchical officials of, of the Church.
You know, at the same time, Commonweal for quite a long time had, you know, a sort of concern for pro-life issues that I think ran counter to for, for time to some of the prevailing, even in, even within Catholicism uh, sort of other attitudes. Um, you know, but I think what we’ve also done is we understand that nothing can sort of be reduced to sort of single issue politics or even sort of single issue kind of moral theology, either.
I think, you know, at least one of the one of the formative uh, moments in my time as a, in fact, I was a freshman at, at Fordham at the time was when Cardinal Joseph Bernardin came and gave his famous address on the you know, the seamless garment or consistent ethic of life which I think, you know, is something that is, is, is very appealing. And I think that, you know, I think Catholics have I think certainly Commonweal readers sort of understand the complexity, nuance and, and richness of that metaphor.
But I think, you know, I think we like to see that there is a lot of there’s commentary coming from all directions and all points of view and inspirations, but within the context of I think sort of you know, within the context of, of relationship, relationship with Catholicism.
Todd Ream: The dimension of it being curated by lay leaders from its very beginning is an important piece of it that I had underappreciated before the way you talked about it. But I think it also happens to explain, you know, how even people who are as close as your parents and their sensibilities, how they could still have divergence sort of takes on what Commonweal represented there.
Dominic Preziosi: Sure. And I should say that you know, we do describe ourselves as a journal of opinion and we like to make opinions, and this is a, you know, it’s across sort of various various areas of interest. You know, not, not just, you know, sort of the theological or Church-related, but, you know, we have quite a history of cultural criticism, so there’s a lot of you know, it’s a, it’s a, it’s a rather, I think, as I said, unique publication in that sense. I think, you know, the founder said, you know, that they wanted a publication that wanted to bring the Catholic outlook to American life and society and culture and art. I think that that’s a really still the best way to think about what we do here.
Todd Ream: You mentioned this earlier but November 12th, 2024 was a large day, an important day in Commonweal’s history as it celebrated its 100th anniversary, which I believe because I, I double checked and then triple checked my math here that, that makes Commonweal approximately three months older than Eustace Tilley and his highbrow colleagues with the New Yorker.
Dominic Preziosi: Mm-hmm.
Todd Ream: When celebrating that milestone, you were the editor at the time by almost five years in, at that point, or five years, when celebrating that milestone, what aspects of Commonweal’s history proved most worthy of celebration in your estimation and in the estimation of your colleagues?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, the fact that we made it to 100. Commonweal is, is sort of famous if, or maybe sort of notorious, I, I suppose, I don’t know, for, for uh continually being sort of at, at, at death’s door, I think on, from a financial standpoint. I think those days have sort of passed, thankfully. But if you go back through some of the archives, we had a lot of fun doing this on staff where there were these full-throated appeals for people to send whatever they could right now so we could put out the next issue. And I’m, I’m, I’m glad that we no longer sort of in, in, in, you know, we’re not in those kinds of straits.
But I think what we were really, I think, able to celebrate was the, the fact of so much of of uh such a, a, a history and collection of really deep, thoughtful, provocative writing and commentary through a hundred years with the Catholic Church’s in, in, in conversation about the Catholic Church and conversation with sort of American society and American democracy. Um, and, you know, you could go back, we, we, for, for the year running up to the actual centennial date, we featured items from each decade of our 100 years in, in, in the magazine. And there was never any shortage of material to sort of resurface and, and, and give, you know, show our readers.
Uh, in fact, you know, we had to kind of hold things back that we were, you know, unable to fit in the print issue. But also to sort of see, you know, the, the, the, the, the writers that have been in our pages over the years to see some of the some of the engagement with the issues that was engagement with issues that were really significant in that moment, you know, whether it was the Spanish Civil War, whether it was McCarthyism, whether it was the Vietnam War, whether it was Civil Rights, Vatican II, of course. I mean, you know Commonweal has covered all of these things in depth and I think with quite a lot of rigor and, and heft not necessarily cheerleading on the cause of the Catholic Church or anything like that.
In fact, I think in some ways we, we were, you know, our editors and writers of the past have tried to hold the Church to account on certain things. I think, for instance, that there was some concern in the late sixties when Humanae Vitae was promulgated, you know, over birth control. And I think that came as somewhat of a disappointment to what we, we’re then calling Commonweal Catholics, right. So, you know, I think I think all of this was sort of at play as the centennial approached. Uh, and just to be able to sort of celebrate this fact and that, that we’d been there a hundred years.
And of course I’ll, I’ll admit that we were a little happy that we beat The New Yorker by three months, which we did not hide. We, we, we worked that into our, into our publicity as well, so.
Todd Ream: Perhaps a Netflix documentary then along these lines.
Dominic Preziosi: Yeah, that would be great.
Todd Ream: In addition to its editorial staff, Commonweals also served by a host of contributing writers, and several of those individuals have also fortunately, been gracious enough to serve as guests for Saturdays at Seven, including Massimo Faggioli, Kathleen Kaveny, and John McGreevy. As a result, Commonweal has contributed to the cultivation of vocations of numerous public intellectuals, while also benefiting from their efforts.
How would you describe the relationship then that Commonweal shares with emerging and established public intellectuals?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, I, I, I think what we’re looking for from a, the standpoint of magazine editors is we want to hear, voices the voices of people who are thinking about things and thinking carefully about things, and who don’t come necessarily to us with a preset, you know, sort of preformed set of opinions you know, something that they could just sort of uh, adjust so kind of uh, take on something, but rather who are working through issues or areas of concern in a meaningful way and a rigorous way that also encourages engagement from our readers welcomes sort of entanglement and tackling issues in a, in a, in a, in with the complexity that, you know, complex issues deserve. So I think that that, that creates a sort of a really, sort of fertile, you know, kind of a uh, environment. And I think in doing so, you know, Commonweal not only benefits and Commonweal’s readers not only benefit, but I’d like to think as well that the writers benefit too. You know, because they’re constantly thinking.
And I think, you know, you know, true thinkers and true intellectuals, and good journalists for that matter realize that, you know, they might not have thought of everything, in fact. You know, they understand that, oh, maybe I missed this angle, or maybe I’m in fact wrong on this. Or maybe there’s always time to sort of rethink my opinion based on new input or feedback from others who respond to my work. So I think that that’s that’s a really, I think, sort of a, a great dynamic that’s happening with us. And I think, you know, the folks you mentioned in particular, Massimo and Cathy Kaveny who’s just fantastic, and John McGreevy, whose work appeared with us quite a lot and you know, his books if, if your listeners or you have are familiar with his work, fantastic stuff.
And again, what, you know, these are just three folks you mentioned, but the, the way they sort of delve into things and continually sort of revisit and rethink and, and, you know re-imagine accordingly depending on what they’ve learned in the interim and how they’re engaging with their own interlocutors, it’s, I I think it’s a really a, a really energetic dynamic, yeah.
Todd Ream: Thank you. In what ways then, if any, do you believe universities and publications such as Commonweal can partner together in cultivating the habits and dispositions that public intellectuals need, whether they are junior faculty that are sort of discerning whether or not they’re calling as leading them in that direction or more senior faculty who now have the time and maybe the political capital on their own campuses to contribute in such ways?
Dominic Preziosi: That’s a, that’s a great question. So, you know, a lot of a lot of our readers and subscribers and I, I, I guess I sort of generally count myself among, among those, it’s remarkable how many say that they were first exposed to Commonweal while in college. Um, and not necessarily even through a theology class you know but they might’ve just gone to the you know, to the bookstore or, you know, to the back of the church and there’s a copy, you know, available. Uh, and they pick it up and start leafing through this and they go, oh my gosh, this is something I’ve always been, I’ve always been waiting for.
So, you know I, I think though as well, it’s, it’s something of an acquired taste. So it’s not, you know, we’re not as big as football is on the Notre Dame campus, for example. But you know, but I think we understand the importance of you know, having a magazine like Commonweal in front of in front of college age students. I think we understand not, you know, they can then sort of how they can engage with what Commonweal does and be exposed to what Commonweal does. And, and maybe someday in fact be part of the conversation that, that, that Commonweal conversations, that Commonweal holds.
Uh as for the, you know, the faculty who are maybe sort of later career who are having an opportunity, well, gosh, you know? Yes. These folks uh, are smart and engaged and connected and are continually thinking about things and to the extent that, you know, we can feature and their work and their opinion and commentary, it’s, it’s really, it’s really great. But, you know, the university setting, of course, is a, is a very I guess I said, as I said, a very fertile one. So the fact that those sort of later in life scholars or, or, or scholars who have already, you know achieved quite a lot, they can impart this to their students as well through Commonweal.
So I think, you know, there’s an a, a a, a definite way the, the, the, the college campus is an important place, I think, not only for Commonweal I mean, but think about it really for any kind of publication or intellectual endeavor or anything that, you know, cultural endeavor that where people are still being formed and, and they’re young and they’re enthusiastic and they’re trying new things out and they’re, you know, they’re, you know, it’s a good place and important place to be.
Todd Ream: Yeah, with its 100-year history, my first exposure to Commonweal was actually going do with a research topic on a particular figure of prominence in the fifties, sixties, seventies, within Catholic, higher education and the Catholic Church, and going back and seeing how he and his efforts were covered by Commonweal, and then comparing that with some other comparable publications that have long histories. And so it serves as a valuable means in terms of commenting on the age in which we live but also reflecting back on history and how seasoned, thoughtful journalists covered previous eras in time.
Dominic Preziosi: No, I think that’s a very interesting way to look at it for sure, yeah.
Todd Ream: I want to now, as our time unfortunately begins to become short, I ask you, you know, about, you know, sort of, again, most broadly about your calling to journalism. How do you define it? What practices or rhythms have nurtured it? And as you’ve progressed as a journalist, what maybe forces also threaten it?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, these are good questions. I think, um I’ve always been sort of interested in what’s happening around me, and I do think this goes back to my, my high school years and and I was very excited back then as a 17-year-old, maybe younger, 16, 17-year-old to be able to write for the high school newspaper. I was able to cover what many people probably thought was one of the most boring stories ever. But that was the fact that my high school at the time, which was a new public high school had achieved accreditation in, in, in New Jersey. And it was a front page story on it for my high school newspaper that I got to write. I’m sure none of my classmates read it. Um, but it is something I’m very proud of. And it was, and it was recognized by other people.
Todd Ream: They appreciated it when they went to apply for college.
Dominic Preziosi: I think maybe so, maybe so. But I got, I, I tell you what, what they did read, I grew up in an area where hunting was very popular, and I, I, I wrote a, I wrote a signed editorial in opposition to, to hunting. Look, I was, I was ill-formed at the time, and I had opinions, but I didn’t necessarily realize that other people would also have opinions that held merit. Uh, so that was kind of a, a kind of a, a, a, you know, a cautionary tale and a helpful experience. I think but being but paying attention I think is something that I’ve always just sort of felt the need to do the instinct, I suppose.
And, you know, and there’s an aspect I think that, writers and theologians have said, and others that paying attention is a form of love, I guess, you know, and I think that that’s if I think about it, is that that’s how I, I sort of approach some of these things. I, I’ve, as I mentioned, I’ve been in New York City since the early eighties, and I think being around people in this very sort of incarnated way and these encounters on the street and encounters in the subway, encounters in crowded elevators or restaurants or schools, whatever, I think you know, you really are forced to see the different circumstances that people are in or that people come from, and especially when you begin to talk to them as well. And then you sort of also begin to understand some of the commonalities too.
Um, so I think this is sort of informed me particularly, I mean, I, I guess maybe always, although maybe not consciously and maybe I think I’m a little more aware of it and appreciative of it now, especially since being at Commonweal.
Todd Ream: Thank you. Are there any particular intellectual or moral virtues you believe journalists need to cultivate in order to flourish and/or perhaps theological virtues that they need to pray to receive in relation to advancing their calling?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, I think, you know, all the virtues are necessary for, for, for journalists, but I think I, I, I think in terms of theological virtue, I, I, I do think charity is extremely important and I, I sort of, I, I sort of indicated that a moment ago, but you think about it as love or charity, and I think that these are very important virtues for journalists because we can’t imagine, or we can’t be expected or, you know, we can’t assume to understand where the other person is coming from until we hear from that other person.
But I think, you know, intellectual moral virtues, these are just, I mean, look, I, I think most editors will tell their reporters this, temperance, fortitude, prudence, I mean, be careful out there. Uh, double check. Make sure you’re, you’re fact checking. Maybe make sure you ask the next question. Uh, don’t assume you have all the answers, you know, make sure to go back and, and, and cover another detail. Uh, or if you’re confused about something, check it out. Those are all very important virtues, I think for journalists.
Todd Ream: Flip side of that then, what vices would you advise journalists to be prepared to confront?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, pride, obviously you know, I guess a deadly sin of vice, whatever. Um, I think, but self-certainty something that I think journalists really need to be careful about. And I think once, if you see somebody who professes to be a journalist or, or even opinion writer or, or, you know, an essayist or columnist who exhibits so much self-certainty, I think you have to wonder, well, are they still really living up to the vocation that they, they say that they profess to be a part of? So, yeah.
Todd Ream: Thank you. For our final question then today I want to ask you, moving forward and in the age in which we live and find ourselves, in what ways do you believe journalists could be of greater service to the Church, and perhaps the Church could be of greater service to journalists?
Dominic Preziosi: Well, I think you know, as I’ve indicated, something that Commonweal has always done is sort of pointed out gently, but occasionally force, a forcefully to, or, you know where the Church might might be misstepping or where it’s representatives here on Earth might be misstepping. Uh, and that’s not to say necessarily that we’re, we’re condemning, you know but more in a spirit of that, of that correction and to say that, you know, people of good faith can sort of also disagree. And, and I think journalists are sort of obligated to, to note that when, when that happens.
Um, as for the Church and journalists, you know something that I think is sort of I, I’ve always sort of appreciated that one of the one of the final documents that came out of Vatican II was about the media and about the, the need for the Church to support the media and to understand the role of the media in a free society.
And I do wish that the Church, I, I think we hear about it occasionally and I’m, I’m wondering what the papacy of Leo might bring. And I wonder how, you know, the Church institutionally in the United States might begin to sort of remember that this is something that you know, that came out of Vatican II as, as I think journalism is facing threats here in the United States that it’s, you know, the Church should be supportive, as it claimed to be, you know, at the end of Vatican II of what the press is about.
Uh, I think the Church could also sort of on that point, there’s, there’s a portion of that document that says, you know, governments should not, should not, cannot spread disinformation, you know, they can’t lie. Uh, and governments cannot shut down the free press. So, you know, I think to hear more of that, I think a little more explicitly or viably would be nice at this moment, to know that it’s there and that we can draw on that, those documents and that thinking is very helpful for us at the moment.
Todd Ream: Thank you very much. Our guest has been Dominic Preziosi, editor of Commonweal. Thank you for taking time to share your insights and wisdom with us.
Dominic Preziosi: Well, thanks for this conversation, Todd. It was good to be here.
—
Todd Ream: Thank you for joining us for Saturdays at Seven, Christian Scholar’s Review’s conversation series with thought leaders about the academic vocation and the relationship that vocation shares with the Church. We invite you to join us again next week for Saturdays at Seven.
