Mirror of Justice

A blog dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory.
Affiliated with the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame Law School.

Tuesday, May 9, 2006

Allen on the Church & Islam

By Rick Garnett

John Allen's recent "Word from Rome" column asks, among other things, "what would a coherent Catholic approach to Islam look like," and discusses the recent conference in Vienna, "where Cardinal Christoph Schönborn hosted a gathering of American and European intellectuals to discuss the challenge posed by George Weigel in his book The Cathedral and the Cube, where Weigel expresses a rather dim view about the cultural prospects for contemporary Europe."  Interesting stuff.  (Allen also takes about the Holy See's headaches regarding China's continued insistence on picking bishops.)

UPDATE:  Here is a related piece, by an Egyptian Jesuit, on "How Benedict XVI Sees Islam". 

The Times on abortion rates

By Rick Garnett

Eduardo linked the other day to the recent story in the New York Times magazine about contraception, and noted that, according to the story:

And, around the world, countries in which abortion is legal and contraception is widely available tend to rank among the lowest in rate of abortion, while those that outlaw abortion — notably in Central and South America and Africa — have rates that are among the highest.

My understanding is that, with the exception of Vietnam and Cuba, all of the countries with the highest abortion rates are Eastern European countries where abortion is legal.  (Abortion is legal in Vietnam and Cuba too, they just aren't Eastern European countries).  Western European countries tend to have lower abortion rates than the U.S., but then again, Western European countries tend to place far greater restrictions on abortion than what are allowable in the U.S. under Roe v. Wade. 

Here is a link to the stats, provided by the (pro-abortion-rights) Guttmacher Institute.

UPDATE:  Elizabeth Brown (St. Thomas) provides this link to a 2003 report from Guttmacher, "Contraception Use is Key to Reducing Abortion Worldwide."

Call for Papers: John Paul II and the Law

By Rick Garnett

Here is announcement that should be of interest:

The Editorial Board of the Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy is currently accepting articles for possible publication in its issue on “John Paul II and the Law,” to be published in Spring 2007. 

The Journal examines public policy questions within the framework of the Judeo-Christian intellectual, religious, and moral tradition.  In its issue on "John Paul and the Law", the Journal seeks to explore how the thought of John Paul II can inform legal, ethical, and public policy decisions.  Topics of interest include (but are not limited to) the late pontiff’s teaching on international debt relief, a consistent ethic of life, just war theory, social justice, and the ecumenical dialogue between the great religions of the world.  All submissions related to all legal, ethical, religious, and policy-oriented aspects of this symposium topic will be considered.

If you are interested in submitting a piece for possible publication, please contact Jennifer Morris at [email protected].  The Journal is also accepting submissions for possible publication for its issue on “Aging America,” also to be published in Spring 2007.  Please direct inquiries on that topic to Mary Komperda at [email protected].  The Journal would like to receive drafts of submissions, preferably via e-mail, on or before August 7, 2006.

Monday, May 8, 2006

Message From Elizabeth Brown: "The Cardinal Newman Society’s List of Errors"

By Greg Sisk

My colleague, Elizabeth Brown, has asked that I post her message below concerning the list of previous commencement speakers and award recipients at Boston College in the Cardinal Newman Society report. By passing along this message, I should not be understood as necessarily endorsing these as vital corrections or saying that they denote underlying error in each instance. Still, I did quote John Adams in my prior post as saying that facts are stubborn things. Accordingly, when asked, I surely ought to facilitate the fleshing out of that factual record more fully, allowing each reader to make his or her own judgment as to significance and implications. Any further comments I may have will be reserved for a later posting, allowing Elizabeth to speak here without further interruption.

Greg Sisk

* * *

The Cardinal Newman Society’s List of Errors

In light of the current protest over Secretary Rice as the commencement speaker for Boston College, a list of past Boston College awards recipients and commencement speakers taken from the Cardinal Newman Society’s website was posted to MoJ. As previously noted, Bishop John Vlazny, the retiring chairman of the Bishops and Presidents Committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, stated that the Bishops and Presidents Committee often found the Cardinal Newman Society to be “inaccurate”. The list from CNS on MoJ contains numerous errors and omissions and gives the misleading impression that Boston College was honoring these individuals for work that was contrary to Catholic Social Teachings.

Below is the list as it was posted to MoJ followed in brackets by a list of each of the errors and omissions made by the Cardinal Newman Society:

Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, Honorary Degree, Chairwoman of the John D. &
Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation (May 2002). The MacArthur Foundation's
Population and Reproductive Health grant program is a leading contributor to
organizations advocating abortion, contraception and population control.

[Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot did not become the Chairwoman for the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation until June 2002. At the time that she received the award from Boston College, she had no ability to shape or influence the policies of the MacArthur Foundation. She was, however, only the second African-American woman to receive tenure at Harvard and was a noted scholar in the area of sociology. In giving her the award, Boston College voiced “profound respect and gratitude for her lavish enrichment of the academy and her heritage as teacher and scholar”.]

Paul Cellucci, Ambassador to Canada and former Massachusetts Governor (May
2002). While governor, Cellucci was a strong advocate of abortion rights.

[Paul Cellucci was not a speaker at the commencement ceremony for the entire university, but only for the Law School. Celluci was a graduate of Boston College Law School. BC Law Dean John H. Garvey praised Cellucci’s outstanding legal career and service to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. “The Law School takes great pride in the dedication and quality of its alumni,” Garvey said. “He served with great distinction during his years as governor. And he has served the people of the United States well as our ambassador to Canada.” See Boston College, News, 2002-Archive. Objections were raised about Cellucci, not only because of his stand on abortion, but over his support for the death penalty. According to the Boston Globe, Cardinal Bernard Law publicly objected to Cellucci’s support for the death penalty. "The teachings of the church are very clear," Law said. "For a well-informed Catholic to support capital punishment, it would be morally wrong. And if one knowingly rejects the teachings of the church it is wrong, morally evil, and a sin."]

Walter Dellinger, commencement speaker, May 24, 2004. Dellinger was closely
associated with NARAL Pro-Choice America and chaired NARAL's 1992 commission
to defend Roe v. Wade.

[Walter Dellinger was not the commencement speaker for the entire university on May 24, 2004. Tim Russert was the university’s commencement speaker. Dellinger was the commencement speaker for the Law School. Dellinger is the Douglas B. Maggs Professor of Law at Duke University and also is the head of appellate practice at O’Melveny & Myers in Washington, D.C. Dellinger served as acting Solicitor General for the 1996-97 Term of the Supreme Court. During his tenure, he argued nine cases before the Court, the most by any Solicitor General in more than 20 years. His arguments included cases dealing with physician-assisted suicide, the line item veto, the cable television act, the Brady Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the constitutionality of remedial services for parochial school children. Regarding the choice of Dellinger as a speaker, BC Law Dean John H. Garvey commented: “Walter Dellinger has had a remarkable career. He has argued some of the most important cases before the Supreme Court in the last decade. He’s a very influential figure in the profession. I am very pleased that our graduating class will have the chance to hear what he has to say.” See Boston College, News, 2004-Archive.]

Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, author of Stenberg v.
Carhart, commencement address, May 23, 2003.

[Justice Stephen Breyer was not the commencement speaker for the entire university. He was the commencement speaker for the Law School. "We are honored to have Justice Breyer address the graduates this year," said BC Law Dean John H. Garvey. "He is one of the most important figures in contemporary American law -- a man of extraordinary intellect, great integrity, and a lifelong commitment to serving the public interest. I am happy for the members of the class of 2003 that he will be joining them at this important point in their careers." Justice Breyer also received the BC Law School’s Founder’s Medal, the highest honor bestowed by BC Law School.]

Rev. Robert Drinan, received BC's first Distinguished Service Medal (October
2004). As congressman, opposed numerous efforts
to ban federal funding of abortions. In 1996, published articles in the
National Catholic Reporter and the New York Times supporting
President Bill Clinton's veto of a partial-birth abortion ban.

[Fr. Drinan received the Distinguished Service Medal from BC Law School, not the university. In making this award, BC Law Dean John Garvey commented: “Father Bob Drinan was one of the most influential deans in the history of the school. He was instrumental in expanding and improving the reputation of Boston College Law throughout the nation. I am constantly hearing stories from alumni who were inspired by him, who thank him for getting them into Law School and starting their careers. He has been a personal hero to me.” Drinan was Dean of BC Law School from 1956 to 1970.]

Only one of these individuals, Sara Lawrence-Lightfoot, was given an award by the university. All of the others were given awards by or were commencement speakers of BC Law School. Certainly, it might be considered a matter of prudential judgment whether a faculty member in the Theology Department has a moral obligation to object publicly to what the Law School does.

The fact of the matter is that no one knows for certain if Fr. Himes and Fr. Hollenbach raised any private or public objections to any of these speakers. Until someone provides evidence that they did not object to these speakers, perhaps we ought to give them the benefit of the doubt, and focus instead on the merits of the award recipient that they have publicly objected to, Secretary of State Rice, who is being honored with an honorary Doctor of Laws, according to Boston College’s press release regarding its commencement, because she is “one of the chief architects of U.S. foreign policy in the new millennium.”

Elizabeth F. Brown
Assistant Professor of Law
University of St. Thomas
School of Law

Gay marriage and religious liberty

By Patrick McKinley Brennan

Forgive me if someone's already blogged about this here.  Maggie Gallagher has a fine piece, in this week's Weekly Standard, on where we're headed and where some already are.  In the following paragraph, which I excerpt, Gallagher is describing a conference in which scholars pro and con gay marriage had been asked to speak to the attendant issues of religious liberty.

Reading through these and the other scholars' papers, I noticed an odd feature. Generally speaking the scholars most opposed to gay marriage were somewhat less likely than others to foresee large conflicts ahead -- perhaps because they tended to find it "inconceivable," as Doug Kmiec of Pepperdine law school put it, that "a successful analogy will be drawn in the public mind between irrational, and morally repugnant, racial discrimination and the rational, and at least morally debatable, differentiation of traditional and same-sex marriage." That's a key consideration. For if orientation is like race, then people who oppose gay marriage will be treated under law like bigots who opposed interracial marriage. Sure, we don't arrest people for being racists, but the law does intervene in powerful ways to punish and discourage racial discrimination, not only by government but also by private entities. Doug Laycock, a religious liberty expert at the University of Texas law school, similarly told me we are a "long way" from equating orientation with race in the law.

By contrast, the scholars who favor gay marriage found it relatively easy to foresee looming legal pressures on faith-based organizations opposed to gay marriage, perhaps because many of these scholars live in social and intellectual circles where the shift Kmiec regards as inconceivable has already happened. They have less trouble imagining that people and groups who oppose gay marriage will soon be treated by society and the law the way we treat racists because that's pretty close to the world in which they live now.

Contra-Contraception

By Michael Scaperlanda

The article in the NYT Magizine on contraception that Eduardo mentioned is entitled "Contra-Contraception."  After remembering Daniel Defoe's 1727 essay "Conjugal Lewdness:  or, Matrimonial Whoredom," which was later renamed "A Treatise Concerning the Use and Abuse of Power of the Marriage Bed," the author, Russell Shorto says:  "The wheels of history have a tendency to roll back over the same ground. For the past 33 years — since, as they see it, the wanton era of the 1960's culminated in the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision in 1973 — American social conservatives have been on an unyielding campaign against abortion. But recently, as the conservative tide has continued to swell, this campaign has taken on a broader scope. Its true beginning point may not be Roe but Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 case that had the effect of legalizing contraception. ‘We see a direct connection between the practice of contraception and the practice of abortion,’ says Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, an organization that has battled abortion for 27 years but that, like others, now has a larger mission. ‘The mind-set that invites a couple to use contraception is an antichild mind-set,’ she told me. ‘So when a baby is conceived accidentally, the couple already have this negative attitude toward the child. Therefore seeking an abortion is a natural outcome.’”

Shorto asks: “Why is this happening? What's the nature of the opposition to something that has become so basic a part of modern life?”

To me, his answer is the most interesting part of the article – it also points to the relevance of Catholic thought in the public square.

Shorto says:  “One starting point is the Catholic Church, and especially Pope John Paul II, whose personal and philosophical magnetism revitalized Catholics around the world, especially the young. A series of reflections the pope gave between 1979 and 1984 on the ‘theology of the body’ — his vision of the integrated physical, mental and spiritual human — has become a whole method of study within the church."

“The pope was a trained philosopher, and the actual text of his addresses on the topic can be dense: ‘Masculinity and femininity — namely, sex — is the original sign of a creative donation and an awareness on the part of man, male-female, of a gift lived in an original way.’ But his words have been unpacked and pored over by theologians and students, and they have shaped a new approach to sex that is, in many ways, old. Kimberly Zenarolla, for one, is applying the theology of the body to the American political sphere. She is the director of strategic development for the National Pro-Life Action Center, a two-year-old organization with 10,000 members that lobbies on abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research and contraception. She's also a single 34-year-old who lives in Washington with, as she put it, ‘a group of young professionals who are living the countercultural message of chastity to its fullest expression.’"

"Zenarolla told me she converted to Catholicism two years ago: ‘I tell people I became Catholic because of the church's teaching on contraception. We are opposed to sex before marriage and contraception within marriage. We believe that the sexual act is meant to be a complete giving of self. Of course its purpose is procreation, but the church also affirms the unitive aspect: it brings a couple together. By using contraception, they are not allowing the fullness of their expression of love. To frustrate the procreative potential ends up harming the relationship.’"

"… As Pope Benedict XVI wrote when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, ‘Contraception and abortion both have their roots in [a] depersonalized and utilitarian view of sexuality and procreation — which in turn is based on a truncated notion of man and his freedom.’”

As the article makes clear, this contra-contraception mentality is not limited to Catholics, with some influential Protestants now seeing the destructive force of a contraceptive mentality.

A couple of years ago, I attempted to draw a link between Griswold, Eisenstadt, Roe, Casey, Lawrence, and Goodrich.  Am I out to lunch or am I on to something?

Michael S. 

The Imperfect Forecast

By Robert John Araujo, SJ

I begin this posting by asking the indulgence of MOJ contributors and readers for talking about Catholic identity at colleges and universities once again; however, over the past day, Greg, Mark, and Rick have made some important observations about recent developments at several universities and the recent publication of Cathleen Kaveny’s essay “The Perfect Storm” in America magazine. All three MOJ contributors and Cathleend have made important and insightful observations. Frankly, there is not much to argue against and much to agree with in their respective treatments. Their commentaries have helped me understand better why we are discussing the issue of Catholic identity again and why it is an issue that cannot be dismissed from our consciousness. Cathleen’s essay emerges from the recent controversy at Notre Dame over the Eve Ensler’s Monologues. Also at play in this discussion is the situation at Boston College regarding the letter issued by Fathers Himes and Hollenbach critiquing their university’s decision to award Secretary Rice an honorary degree and to give her the commencement speaker’s podium.

I should like to make three points today.

The first is to offer a preliminary reaction to Cathleen’s comment that Ms. Ensler’s work “gives raw, eloquent voice to the experiences of actual women.” In the introduction to the 1998 (first) edition, Ensler states that the Monologues are “based on interviews with a diverse group of over two hundred women…” It is not clear from what the author says in her introduction whether any of the monologues reflects the experiences of one of the women interviewed, or are the monologues composites of interviews with different women, or are Ensler’s presentations syntheses of the interviews and the creativity of the playwright? These few questions have relevance to any discussion about the propriety of the Monologues on a Catholic campus. Based on my reading of the 1998 and 2001 editions of the Monologues, I must agree in part and disagree in part with Cathleen’s characterization of the work. It is raw, but it is not eloquent.

The second point regarding Catholic identity emerges from an important topic of concern to many Catholics and others affiliated with Catholic education that is not discussed on Catholic campuses as frequently as it should: that is the subject of sin. While keeping in mind the clever characterizations and commentaries of others about sin that many of us have heard when someone attempts to dismiss its relevance to the world of today, there is the need to acknowledge that sin exists and to discuss how it affects human existence. This discussion belongs on a Catholic campus. Strangely, discussion of this important matter today on Catholic campuses seems sparse and, sometimes, absent. Sin and the temptation to sin are parts of human existence that arise through the exercise of free will. Ultimately we, as individual human beings, make the final decision to sin or not. But is the word “sin” a part of our contemporary vocabulary; is it something that gets regularly discussed and examined on the Catholic campus; is it the sort of matter we reflect upon when we address a major issue of God and the incarnation? Do we in the Catholic intellectual world consider in our discussions, teaching, research, etc. the question: why did God become incarnate? Well, the basic response to this question, I believe, is this: to save us from our sin. I remember having a conversation with a brother Jesuit a few years ago. He had served for many years as a distinguished superior and administrator in Catholic higher education. When he and I had this conversation, he was teaching a required theology course to freshman students. It was clear what the subject was that his students had difficulty grasping. After listening to him, I said, “Oh, you were discussing ‘sin’ with them”? He said, “Oh, we can’t use that word… the students wouldn’t understand!” My final comment (question) was: “Why not?” Why is not only the discussion but its examination in an academic context off limits? Ms. Ensler would like us to add one of her favorite words to our daily vocabulary, but why do we shy away from using another word, “sin,” that should come natural to our Catholic discourse?

My third and final point for this posting relates to one other observation made by Cathleen. She mentioned that “membership in the church cannot be equated with virtue.” Perhaps there is something to her claim, but is it not also important to learn why virtue and striving to live the virtuous life is the antidote to sin—something which Cathleen does raise in her discussion of sin? When sin beckons us, is not the virtue of forbearance relevant to how we respond? When others tempt us into sinful action, is not the virtue of courage helpful to resist their Siren call? When we do not understand whether something is sinful or not, does not the virtue of wisdom provide the sagacity to make appropriate distinctions? When the cardinal sin of pride lures us deeper into temptation, is it not the virtue of humility that puts us back on the course of righteousness? In taking action or not that may have sinful consequences, does not the virtue of prudence help guide our way along a perilous path?

When the perfect storms of life threaten our progress as thinking disciples of the one who came to save us all, is it not the ability to know sin and its remedy in the form of the virtuous life the task of the Catholic university? Cathleen is correct in my opinion when she warns about the dangers of assimilation and isolation. However, the meaning of “engagement” as she posits needs to be explored more fully. If sin and the temptation to commit sin can form some of life’s perfect storms, is not a thorough knowledge of the virtues and the virtuous life the manner in which God assists us so we may deal with the tempests of the world—including its sinful temptations—that can consume us? While the Catholic educational institution may not be faultless, if it is true to its vocation, might it just be an important tool God provides us, imperfect as we might make it, that can help us forecast and weather the storm of which Cathleen speaks?    RJA sj

Rights Talk

By Rob Vischer

Cardinal Francis Arinze seems to be suggesting that Christians should push for the censorship of The Da Vinci Code:

"Christians must not just sit back and say it is enough for us to forgive and to forget," Arinze said in the documentary made by Rome film maker Mario Biasetti for Rome Reports, a Catholic film agency specializing in religious affairs.

"Sometimes it is our duty to do something practical. So it is not I who will tell all Christians what to do but some know legal means which can be taken in order to get the other person to respect the rights of others," Arinze said.

"This is one of the fundamental human rights: that we should be respected, our religious beliefs respected, and our founder Jesus Christ respected," he said, without elaborating on what legal means he had in mind.

We're suffering from a serious case of rights-inflation, in my view, if we're going to stake out a legally cognizable right to have the substance of our religious beliefs respected by others.  Ilya Somin calls this an example of "censorship envy."

Rob

Sunday, May 7, 2006

Contraception

By Eduardo Penalver

Interesting story in today's NY Times Magazine on contraception.  Here's the most interesting observation in the article, at least in my opinion:

And, around the world, countries in which abortion is legal and contraception is widely available tend to rank among the lowest in rate of abortion, while those that outlaw abortion — notably in Central and South America and Africa — have rates that are among the highest.

Engagement & Identity: Response to Mark

By Rick Garnett

Mark is a great dean, and so I'm not surprised at all by his charitable and irenic post, in which -- responding to my thoughts about Cathy Kaveny's "Perfect Storm" essay -- he cheers the fact that MOJ-friend and veteran Paolo Carozza and I agree with Kaveny that "[o]ur important task [in Catholic universities] . . . is building capacity for critical engagement with culture, which is what Cathy is challenging us to do."

For my own part, I am very pleased (and not surprised) that Mark appears to agree with Paolo and me that "meaningful 'engagement' . . . is not possible absent a commitment to distinctive Catholic identity and sound formation and education in the faith.  That is, [a] focus on [a university's Catholic] identity is not in the service of moralism, or sectarian separation, but is precisely on the conditions for meaningful engagement."  In other words, talk about "engagement" with the culture as the mission of a Catholic university -- as opposed to the mission of a few experts in things Catholic who work at universities -- is not likely to get us very far, absent a focus on what Mark calls "capacities", or on what I called the "conditions," for meaningful engagement.  These conditions, again, will necessarily include a Catholic faculty -- not just some faculty trained in the "Catholic intellectual tradition," but Catholic engineers, chemists, accountants, and business-law scholars who serve as Catholic role models, mentors, parents, and friends.  These conditions include also a shared commitment to the university's Catholic identity -- not in a narrow, sectarian, fearful, or moralistic sense, but in the sense of knowing what we are called to be -- and to the formation in the faith of students.  And, of course, a deep sense of the Catholic university's place in "the heart of the Church" -- as well as in the "current of engagement" -- is essential.

In John Cavadini's excellent open letter, he warned that the "Catholic university" project cannot be reduced to providing a platform for select faculty, trained in a disembodied "Catholic intellectual tradition," who are interested in engaging or conversing with "the culture."  The point of a Catholic university, in other words, is not merely to be the home base for a few gnostic priests and priestesses.  Cavadini puts it well:

The ancient Gnostic heresy developed an elitist intellectual tradition which eschewed connection to the "fleshly" church of the bishop and devalued or spiritualized the sacraments. Are we in danger of developing a gnosticized version of the "Catholic intellectual tradition," one which floats free of any norming connection and so free of any concrete claim to Catholic identity?

Any understanding of a Catholic university (or, for that matter, a law school) that is worthy of the description has to include an account of the moral, spiritual, and intellectual formation of students, and of the way the university serves and participates in the Body of Christ -- in Cavadini's words, the "real, incarnate Body of Christ, the Church as it is with all its blemishes and not the abstract, idealized Church in our minds - is the lifeblood and only guarantee of our identity as a Catholic university.  There is no Catholic identity apart from affiliation with the Church. Appeal to 'the Catholic intellectual tradition' apart from some explicit relationship to the Church risks reducing the tradition itself to an abstraction."

But again, I'm sure Mark agrees.  =-)

Previous Articles More Articles

Recent Posts

Categories

Monthly Archive