Christians in Political Science:
Past, Present, and Future
by Corwin E. Smidt
Keynote for the CPS Conference in 2018 at Covenant College.
It is quite fitting that at this 2018 Christians in Political Science (CPS) conference some reflective assessment of the organization’s life be given, as CPS was officially launched with the adoption and approval of its by-laws in 1993—exactly 25 years ago. And, since most, if not all, of you in attendance tonight were not around at the formation of CPS, it might be helpful tonight to discuss:
- Some of the reasons why CPS was initially formed,
- the extent to which CPS as we know it is currently achieving these particular goals, and
- what challenges may lay ahead for CPS in the next 25 years
Of course, each of you may have some ideas related to the history of CPS. But, I would guess that relatively few here know much about endeavors prior to the formation of CPS that sought to bring Christian political scientists together, or how the formal rules of the American Political Science Association shaped the formation of CPS, or even of the close relationship that existed between CPS and the Religion and Politics section of the American Political Science Association. Consequently, it may be helpful if I were to provide a more formal historical narrative about how and why CPS came into existence, before reflecting on CPS today and some of the challenges it is likely to face in the future.
Background to the Formation of Christians in Political Science
There are perhaps a number of ways by which one could discuss those factors related to the formation of CPS. One way might be to recognize some of the changes occurring in the field of political science in the 1960s and 1970s. These were the years that witnessed the so-called behavioral revolution in political science. The natural sciences became the established model to follow, and more normative concerns related to the field were largely pushed to the sidelines. Accordingly, discussions of how one’s Christian faith related to the study of politics were deemed inappropriate.
Furthermore, not only were discussion of religious faith viewed to be inappropriate, but the dominant theoretical perspectives of the day posited that religion was essentially irrelevant to the study of politics. Secularization theory was the prevailing theory within the social sciences, viewing current manifestations of religion as little more than the dying vestiges of a phenomenon associated with pre-modern societies. In addition, a Marxist perspective prevailed within the halls of political science departments—namely, the idea that politics was simply a function of economic life. What we understand today as cultural politics was unknown at the time. What it meant to be a liberal or a conservative was understood in economic terms—not cultural terms. Even the 1960 presidential election with the election of our first Catholic president suggested that the importance of religion was dissipating in American cultural life, as long-standing religious barriers to office were eroding.
Finally, within American religious life, these were the decades during which evangelical Christians were moving from the “sidelines” of American society to take a more active role in public life. With the formation of the National Association of Evangelicals in 1943, evangelicals had, by the early 1970s, spent slightly more than 25 years seeking to differentiating themselves from their more fundamentalist brethren. And, the public recognition and visibility of evangelical Christians had grown due, in part, to the successful candidacy and subsequent election of Jimmy Carter to be the 39th President of the United States, with Newsweek magazine even publishing a cover story calling 1976 “the year of the evangelical.”
Though these particular factors may have served as a broader context for the later emergence of CPS, a more direct factor was the organization’s relationship to what was then known as the “Caucus on Faith and Politics.” Prior to the formation of organized sections within the American Political Science Association, the APSA recognized the presence of various “unaffiliated groups” within the larger association. These unaffiliated groups would meet together at the annual meetings, and their particular gatherings, along with their time and location, would be printed in the official program of the annual meeting (though one would have to make a concerted effort to find this information within the printed program).
My first encounter with the “Caucus on Faith and Politics” occurred when I was a graduate student at the University of Iowa and attended a breakfast meeting during the 1974 American Political Science Association meeting held in Chicago. I am not certain whether there were any previous meetings of the “Caucus on Faith and Politics” prior to the 1974 gathering, but I do not recall any references made to previous meetings at that gathering. As a result, I am inclined to believe that this was its first meeting. I still have the listing of those in attendance. There were professors from Christian colleges (professors from Wheaton, Calvin, Bethel, and Taylor were at the breakfast meeting), but so too were professors from Clemson, Georgetown, Tulane, Southern Illinois, and Princeton. A total of 31 Christian political scientists were in attendance. However, 7 of the 31 attendees had some connection to Calvin College (either as a graduate of, or a professor at, that institution). As a result, I am inclined to think that the gathering was largely due to the organizational efforts of Paul Henry, who at the time, was a professor of political science at Calvin. And, in fact, this breakfast meeting may well have been an outgrowth of what was, for a short period of time, an annual “Conference on Christianity and Politics” held at Calvin College. The fourth, and last, such conference in that series, was held in April 1977 several months prior to the APSA meeting, shortly before Paul Henry left Calvin College for political life.
Following the APSA breakfast gathering in 1974, there were several additional efforts by the Caucus on Faith and Politics to gather Christian political scientists together at meetings of the American Political Science Association. These subsequent gatherings were not breakfast meetings, but typically consisted of a meeting during the APSA conference at which a Christian political scientist would be invited to give a paper presentation, with those in attendance responding to the presentation with comments and questions. These presentations were also noted in the conference program, but these gatherings were held during time slots in which other conference panels were being held. Generally speaking, these gatherings were not very well attended. I remember, for example, a talk given by the late Paul Weber (a Catholic) of Louisville University at which fewer than 10 attendees were present. Given that the Caucus on Faith and Politics had no formal organization nor any ongoing, current, mailing list (remember these were the days before email), attendance at these meetings was largely dependent on conference attendees reading their conference program carefully to find the presentation in the program and then deciding to attend such a Caucus presentation rather than some competing panel held at the same time.
However, scholarly interest in the role of religion in American politics began to shift in the early 1980s with the election of Ronald Reagan, the rise of the Moral Majority, and the defeat of many liberal Democrats seeking re-election to the U.S. Senate. In response, some of those involved in the Caucus on Faith and Politics decided that, given the prevailing viewpoint that religion was irrelevant to understanding American politics, it might be beneficial to encourage scholars to present research on religion and politics at sponsored Caucus sessions, regardless of their particular religious perspective. Moreover, given changes in in the organizational structure of the APSA, the Caucus became one of the various so-called “Related Groups” of the APSA. Accordingly, it could now organize a number of competing panels that met during the same time slots of the conference program, but usually in locations outside, but close to, the conference hotel. And, just as was done with regard to the official conference panel sessions, there were counters in attendance at these panel sessions in order to determine what number of panel sessions would be awarded to the group at the next conference meeting.
I am not certain all the reasons why our particular religion panels attracted as many attendees as it did, but certainly part of the success was due to scholarly interest in the topic (along with a growing network of scholars doing research on religion and politics). And, as a result of the level of attendance at these panels, the Caucus was able, from one annual meeting to the next, either to maintain or to expand the number of panels it was allocated,
However, a major junction in the life of the Caucus occurred somewhere between 1984 and 1986. Around that time, the American Political Science Association decided to create the presence of “Organized Sections” within its larger structure. But, in order to become an organized section of the APSA, it was necessary to have at least 250 members willing to pay an additional fee for membership within the section over and above one’s regular APSA membership dues. Those involved in the Caucus thought it would be good strategically to enhance the legitimacy of the study of religion and politics by becoming an organized section of the APSA. And, given its recent history of organizing various panels on religion and politics, along with a growing knowledge of the various political scientists interested in the field of study, it did not take long to gather the needed 250 signatures. As a result, the Religion and Politics section became the 11th section organized within the American Political Science Association, whose numbers in 2018 have grown to 48 sections.
During these early years of the Religion and Politics section of the APSA, many of those who would later be members of the Christians in Political Science served in the early leadership of the Religion and Politics section. For example, I served from 1986 to 1987 on what I believe to be the first executive council of the section, and later as Chair of the section from 1990-91. Laura Olson, of Clemson University, also served as chair of the Religion and Politics section in its early years. And Lyman “Bud” Kellstedt of Wheaton College and Jim Guth of Furman University each served as program chairs for selecting the papers to be presented at the section’s panels at different meetings.
The Formation of Christians in Political Science
However, with the formation of the Religion and Politics section, there no longer existed any particular entity that specifically sought to bring together Christians engaged in the field of political science. Consequently, a number of those actively involved in the old Caucus on Faith and Politics began to talk informally about whether it would be beneficial to do so. But, as Stephen Monsma noted in the first CPS newsletter published in the Fall of 1991, the actual impetus to what later developed into Christians in Political Science (CPS) can be traced to a meeting held at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago on September 17, 1988. The Institute for Advanced Christian Studies organized the meeting, and they invited a number of individuals representing Christian professional associations in the various academic disciplines to attend the meeting and discuss the nature of their organizations and explore possible ways that the Institute might assist the cause of Christian involvement in the disciplines.
Stephen Monsma and I were invited to represent political science at that meeting (though neither of us could discern why the two of us were the ones chosen to be invited.). At that meeting, we described the history of the APSA’s Section on Religion and Politics and the role that the Caucus on Faith and Politics had played in its formation. But, we also had to acknowledge that no association currently existed that specifically sought to encourage and support those in political science who were committed to their Christian faith. We also learned of the various activities and vitality of Christian associations evident in some of the other disciplines. Following the meeting, the two of us decided that we should explore the possibility of forming an association for Christians in political science.
That resolve led to a breakfast meeting at the 1989 APSA meeting in Atlanta. Mark Amstutz and Lyman Kellstedt of Wheaton College and Brent Nelsen of Furman University joined us in this meeting. There we agreed on the need for an association of Christian political scientists—a need we believed that other Christians in the discipline might also feel—as well as on the general outlines of the nature of that association. Given the composition of our ad hoc group (all men teaching at small Christian colleges), we also agreed we needed to add a couple of additional people to what was emerging as an organizing committee and that we should meet again the next spring in the Chicago area for an all-day, intensive planning session.
That meeting occurred at Wheaton College on March 17, 1990. Kathy Lee, then of Seattle Pacific University, and Cary Covington of the University of Iowa joined the effort. Together, we prayed and read scripture, drafted an initial statement of purpose, discussed membership criteria, and conferred about various details related to the launching a new organization.
We met again for a second planning session at the APSA’s 1990 annual meeting in San Francisco, and then for a third time at the 1991 APSA meeting in Washington, D.C. Following our third meeting, we believed that we were finally ready to initiate the launching of a new association. Our first effort in doing so was the publication of an initial newsletter in the Fall of 1991.
Nevertheless, it was not clear at the time just what kind of response our endeavor would receive. On the front page of our initial newsletter, the committee’s crafted statement of faith for Christians in Political Science was prominently displayed. The three-pronged statement of faith specified that we believe:
- that God is the creator and sustainer of all that is;
- that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, fully God and fully human, and through his death and bodily resurrection is the mediator between God and fallen humanity; and
- that the Holy Scriptures are the Word of God, the Christian’s authoritative guide for faith and conduct.
As a result of our initial mailing, I received a couple letters of inquiry related to the published statement of faith displayed on the front page of the newsletter. In particular, a number of Catholics were concerned about the third statement of faith—namely, that the Holy Scriptures are the Word of God, the Christian’s authoritative guide for faith and conduct. As one responder noted, as “an evangelically oriented Roman Catholic, Holy Scriptures cannot be the authoritative guide for me, though it is a primary guide. I wonder if this third point was worded as it is with the intention of excluding Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Christians, or whether this is just an oversight?” Or, as another Catholic wrote in response, am I right in “assuming that this third statement allows enough room for those of the Catholic Christian persuasion to also recognize the authority of sacred tradition (since it does not state that the Holy Scriptures are the ONLY authoritative guide)?” Clearly, then, our initially crafted third statement of faith posed a potential barrier for Catholics to join CPS. Nevertheless, despite this particular obstacle, by the time our second newsletter was published a half-year later in the spring of 1992, we had achieved a total of 82 members, of which 19 were graduate students.
Our first general membership meeting was then held in the fall of 1993 at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. For that meeting, Dr. A. James Reichley was invited to speak. And, in my invitation letter to Dr. Reichley dated Feb. 10, 1993 (about a year after the publication of the second newletter) I noted that we then had about 120 members, though we anticipated that somewhere between 30 and 50 people would likely be in attendance at the meeting. And, in the end, nearly 50 people attended our first meeting. Before Dr. Reichley spoke, there was a short business meeting at which the proposed by-laws were discussed. These by-laws were then later sent out to members for their approval, and the membership adopted its by-laws in the fall of 1993 (on a vote of 52 to 2). Then, in the spring of 1994, the first slate of CPS officers were elected.
The original steering committee made a concerted effort to attract committed Catholic political scientists into the organization, as its vision was to create something more than just another evangelical Protestant association. This was reflected in several ways. First, the third prong of the initial statement of faith for CPS was modified to be less of a stumbling block for Catholics to join the organization. Consequently, rather than having the third prong specify that the Holy Scriptures are the Word of God, the Christian’s authoritative guide for faith and conduct, it was modified to state:
The Holy Spirit led the authors of the Bible in writing an authoritative guide for faith and conduct and continues to guide the church of Jesus Christ today.
This shift from specifying that the Bible serves as the authoritative guide for faith and conduct to having the Bible recognized as an authoritative guide not only created the possibility for Catholic political scientists to recognize other such possible guides for faith and conduct, but it also provided a fuller recognition of the Holy Trinity, as one person of the Trinity was recognized in each of the three statements of faith.
Secondly, the steering committee invited a number of committed Catholics they knew personally to become involved in the organization, and subsequently some of these Catholic members served prominent roles in the history of the organization. For example, Clark Cochrane of Texas Tech University became the third president of CPS and Allen Hertzke of the University of Oklahoma served as the fifth president of CPS.
Four years after the formal adoption of the organization’s by-laws and election of its initial officers, the first national conference was held in June of 1997 at Furman University. The call for papers noted that the program chair hoped to have fifteen panel sessions spread over the five designated time-slots for panels, along with two plenary sessions. And, in the end, more than 60 political scientists gathered together for the conference, with a total of 33 papers being given, coupled with two roundtable discussions, along with the two plenary sessions in which talks were given by Jean Bethke Elstain of the University of Chicago and Representative Henry Hyde (R-Illinois). Subsequently, the national conferences of CPS have been held on a biennial basis (except for a three-year gap between 2007 and 2010), with this national conference representing the 11th such national conference.
Within the first ten years of its founding, the membership of CPS had grown considerably. My copy of the 2004-2005 Membership Directory listed the names of 234 members of the organization. However, it is unclear whether all the names listed were necessarily current dues-paying members, as the names listed likely included those who had, at some point in the relatively recent past, paid dues to be members of CPS. But, regardless, the directory reveals a remarkable growth in the membership of CPS over its first ten years of existence.
To what extent, then, has CPS met success in accomplishing its intended mission?
The Positive Successes
Certainly, there are a number of signs that CPS continues to have importance and value for Christians within the field of political science. Clearly, all one needs to point out is that you are here tonight and that this conference constitutes the 11th national conference of Christians in Political Science. That in itself is no small feat. Thus, for some Christian political scientists, CPS continues to function as an important arena for Christian fellowship, as a means of networking with other Christian scholars, and as a means for presenting some of one’s personal research.
Second, CPS is now largely composed of a new generation of scholars. The challenges and experiences that confront Christians within the field of political science today may be somewhat similar to, yet perhaps profoundly different from, the challenges and experiences that confronted my generation of Christians working within the discipline. Organizational theory suggests that organizations lose vitality and ultimately do not survive unless they are able to find ways to meet the particular needs of its members. Accordingly, for CPS to survive, it must address the particular current needs that Christians currently experience in our field of study. And, given that CPS still exists after 25 years, it suggests at CPS continues to have value as an organization for a number of Christian scholars engaged in our field of study.
Third, CPS continues to provide an arena for discussing the possibilities of engaging together in certain joint projects that might be of value to students in many of the classrooms where we teach. Here I am thinking primarily about those of you who teach at Christian colleges and universities. At the 2nd national conference of CPS held at Calvin College in June 1999, I organized a series of four panels in which I invited various scholars to write papers related to different topics typically addressed in a course on American politics. There was a paper on “Religion and the Constitution,” “Religion and Public Opinion,” “Religion and American Political Parties,” Religion and the Presidency,” and “Religion and Congress” to name a few. These papers were then brought together in an edited volume published by Baker Books. That volume, now long outdated, focused more on the influence played by religion on different facets of American politics than upon the Christian faith more narrowly. However, it can still serve as a model for the potential that CPS continues to hold for those currently involved in the organization. I believe there is a need for introductory textbooks in political science written from a Christian perspective that could be used by students enrolled in Christian colleges and universities. Textbooks covering broad topics are generally better written through joint authorship, and CPS conferences can provide a means by which to identify and recruit co-authors to engage in such a task, a setting within which to present its drafted chapters, and a vehicle by which to receive valuable feedback in the ultimate crafting of its content.
These points were largely substantiated by comments I received in a recent survey I conducted. I was curious as to why some committed Christian political scientists choose to join CPS and others not to do so. To get some answers to this question, I decided to send out a brief questionnaire to twenty political scientists I knew to ask them about whether they had ever heard of CPS, and if they had heard, why they had chosen to join or not to join (or to allow their membership to elapse). Clearly, it is far from a random sample, but their responses can still be revealing and helpful. Hence, I will report some of the answers I received.
One current member stated that he continues to remain in CPS for three reasons:
“first, out of gratitude for how the folks associated with CPS were helpful and encouraging to me when I was a graduate student; second, because I want to do that with current grad students (or younger faculty); and, third, because I have research/writing interests in Christian political thought and it’s a good place to try out ideas, work with collaborators, etc.
Another current member responded:
“I appreciate interaction with other folks in the discipline with similar faith commitments. I also teach at a CCCU institution, and I’ve enjoyed conversations about faith and learning in the specific context of political science.”
Present Concerns for CPS
Clearly, then, there continues to be a number of positive aspects with regard to participation in CPS. What concerns then might I have with regard to CPS today? I raise these concerns as someone who wishes the organization to prosper and not as a criticism of the leadership or of any person or persons involved in CPS. These are concerns generated by my observations and by the comments made in response to my brief questionnaire.
My first concern is more of an observation, and it raises the issue of where CPS stands today in terms of adherence to faith statements as a basis for organizational unity. Certainly, over the last 50 years we have moved from a more textually-oriented to a more visually-oriented society. And, over this period of time, within the broader contours of the Christian faith within American society, there has been a shift away from doctrine and toward religious experience as the authenticating truth for religion. These changes within American religious life may well have diminished the perceived value of specifying particular religious beliefs as a basis for providing unity within CPS. Nevertheless, although salvation is not dependent on holding the “correct” doctrinal beliefs, there is a sense of unity that is derived from the mutual acknowledgement of adhering to particular religious beliefs.
My second concern about CPS is its possible growing “ghettoization” as just another evangelical Christian organization. On the one hand, evangelical Christians have always been a core constituency for CPS. But, have evangelical Christians now become almost the sole base of its memberships? Certainly one of my disappointments related to CPS has been its failure to attract more Catholics to become involved in the organization. Part of the difficulty of accomplishing this goal of broader Christian involvement in the organization is the fact that there is a Catholic Society of Social Scientists that hosts annual conferences and that publishes their own interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, journal. Certainly, some potential Catholic members of CPS are likely drawn to that association. Nevertheless, there likely remain some Catholic political scientists who could be led to join CPS, but this is not going to occur unless current members of CPS make concerted efforts to encourage their Catholic colleagues to become involved in the organization.
Similarly, why is it that other committed Christian political scientists, whether evangelical or mainline Protestants, have not been motivated to join CPS? Certainly, unlike the situation related to committed Catholics, there is no competing organization to siphon off potential members. Why is it, then, that some committed Christian political scientists choose not to join our organization?
Here are two responses I received to my survey:
“I perceived that Christians in Political Science was A) more for fellowship than scholarship, and I did not really think I wanted or needed fellowship and B) likely was too conservative/evangelical for me, though I cannot say exactly why I perceived that to be the case.”
And the second response:
“The organization never seemed relevant to my personal or professional existence. I have never felt like an “outsider” in academia because I identified as a Christian—and I say this as someone who has only been at secular (both state and private) universities for 28 years since I received my BA at a Christian undergraduate college. In other words, I never felt the need for an organization to provide solidarity with fellow believers. I didn’t need an organization for fellowship, for worship, etc. Those important needs of mine were, and are being, met elsewhere in my personal life.”
Clearly, then, CPS is not for all political scientists who are committed Christians. But, I do believe that there are still a fair number of Christians who could be attracted to join CPS, and I think that, if CPS seeks to be broadly inclusive of Christians and not just evangelical Christians, then it needs to work at attracting more mainline Protestants and Catholics to join CPS.
The Challenges Ahead
These current matters are challenging enough, though fortunately they can be addressed and rectified. However, there are also a number of other, broader, social changes occurring that will likely affect the future of CPS. Here I will briefly touch upon three such changes.
First, many members of CPS are Christian political scientists teaching at church-related institutions of higher education. Though many of these schools have minors in political science, relatively few have departments of political science that offer majors in the field of study. However, with the growing emphasis on vocationally-based education and the decline of the liberal arts, these church-related colleges will be under increasing pressure to reduce their political science offerings (and faculty) in order to provide additional faculty and resources to those more vocationally-oriented departments in which enrollments are growing. Thus, these broader shifts in education are likely to diminish the number of political scientists working within institutions that serve as an important base for CPS.
But, there is an additional change within American religious life that is also likely to affect the future course of CPS. Most of the colleges and universities that provide an important foundation for membership in CPS are institutions tied to particular denominations, and denominationalism is declining within American religious life. This means that the future of the church-related college is uncertain, as such schools chart new waters to attract a broader range of students to their halls of learning. It is likely that a number, perhaps a substantial number, of such institutions will close in the next 25-50 years, and with the closure of these colleges and universities, a major institutional base for CPS members will also be diminishing in numbers.
However, there is a third trend that could counteract some of these changes with regard to membership in CPS. And, that trend is the growing internationalization of scholarship and academic life. Given the internet, the world-wide web, video conferencing, increased international travel, and the growth of the English language as an international means of communication, there are increased opportunities to incorporate Christian political scientists who teach at institutions outside the United States to become involved in CPS. Just how this may best be done would likely require some strategic planning. And, it would likely involve some research into what aspects of CPS that might be most helpful in meeting the particular kinds of challenges that these Christian political scientists face in teaching and doing research within their specific cultural contexts.
In conclusion, there is much to celebrate in terms of the past twenty-five years of Christians in Political Science. And, though there are certain aspects of its organizational life today that raise certain concerns, this has always been the case; it is not something new. And, though there are various important changes occurring within American society that will likely serve to shape the future of CPS, there is nevertheless much to suggest that CPS will continue to provide a meaningful and important venue for many Christian political scientists in the decades ahead. May it be so, and may God bless each of you as you seek to serve Him in your particular arenas of study and work.
Stephen V. Monsma, Pepperdine University 1994-1996
Corwin E. Smidt, Calvin College, 1996-1998
Clarke E. Cochrane, Texas Tech University 1998-2000
Christopher J. Soper, Pepperdine University 2000-2002
Allen D. Hertzke, University of Oklahoma, 2002-2004
Brent F. Nelsen, Furman University, 2004-2006
Amy Black, Wheaton College, 2006-2008
Kevin J. Cooney, Northwest University, 2008-2010
Mark David Hall, George Fox University, 2010–2014
Kim Conger, University of Cincinnati, 2014-2016
Darren Guerra, Biola University, 2016-2018
Daniel Bennett, John Brown University, 2018-
1st National Conference: Furman University, June 20-22, 1997
2nd National Conference: Calvin College, June 17-20, 1999
3rd National Conference: Point Loma Nazarene University, June 7-10, 2001
4th National Conference: Bethel College, June 5-7, 2003
5th National Conference: Catholic University of America, June 16-18, 2005
6th National Conference: Wheaton College, June 2007
7th National Conference: Union University, June 3-6, 2010
8th National Conference: Gordon College, May 31- June 3, 2012
9th National Conference: Azusa Pacific, May 29-31, 2014
10th National Conference: Baylor University, 2016
11th National Conference: Covenant College, June 7-9, 2018
 There may have been a few more in attendance as it is not clear whether all in attendance necessarily left their name and address.
 At the time of the meeting, I had no connection to Calvin College, so I am not included among the seven with ties to Calvin College.
 At the time of the meeting, I had no connection to Calvin College, so I am not included among the seven with ties to Calvin College.
 Later in the 1980s, several more conferences on Christianity and politics were organized by the Political Science Department of Calvin College. Then beginning in 2002, Calvin College’s Paul B. Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics organized and hosted a biennial Symposium on Religion and Politics.
 Paul Henry left Calvin following the end of the 1977-78 academic year.
 Again, this listing is dependent largely on my memory of the situation as I could not locate any information related to the Caucus on the web. But, Hubert Morken of Oral Roberts University and I were among those involved in organizing these particular panel sessions.
 I could not find the formal beginning date of the section from the APSA website nor from any other documents done through a search of the web. However, I believe that I was a member of the first executive council of the section, and I note in my vita that I was a member of the council from 1986-87.
 And, by the time of its publication, the name of J. David Woodward of Clemson University had also been added to the list of members of the organizing committee.
 See the spring 1994 issue of the CPS newsletter.
 Stephen Lazarus, “A Conference to Remember,” CPS Newsletter, Vol. 7, No. 1, 3-4.
 I am stating this on the basis of the preliminary program published in the CPS Newsletter, Vol. 6, No. 2.
 This has always been a difficult matter. And, whatever successes CPS has had in this regard has only occurred when individual members of CPS have encouraged their committed Catholic acquaintances to become involved in the organization.
 I am aware of at least one Catholic (Kenneth Grasso of Texas State University – San Marcos) who was involved in CPS for some years, and now, for many years, he has been an active member of the Catholic Society of Social Scientists