Mirror of Justice

Friday, January 11, 2008

Respect/Reverence: the link between liturgy and life

In the report linked below, John-Henry Westen finds it strange that there is a de facto connection between cultural and liturgical activists. It seems to me that the explanation for this (frequent, certainly not universal) connection lies in a common lack of perception for dignity or sacredness, and with it the loss of respect or reverence for life, on the one hand, and for the Host on the other. This absence of awareness of the great or holy is a result not just of becoming friendlier and more informal, but of the reduction of the whole world to the banal categories of "fact" and "value." This reduction endangers not only the unborn and the liturgy but any firm recognition of the human individiual, as I tried to show in my “The Priority of Respect: How our Common Humanity can Ground our Individual Dignity,” 44 International Philosophical Quarterly 165 (2004), available through http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/

Here is Westen's report: "Although it may seem a little strange, there is a definite battle being waged within the Catholic Church. It is the same culture war being waged by secular moderns against those who uphold traditional morality, it is pro-life vs. pro-choice. But within the Catholic Church the same battle is fought along liturgical lines, and the publication in the Vatican newspaper of an article calling for Catholics to receive Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue is telling..."

The full text of his story is available at:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/08010904.html

Spiritual Exercises and Social Activism

By Thomas Berg

Responding to the problem of burnout among religiously motivated social activists, Tony Campolo, a leading evangelical activist himself, has co-written a new book on spiritual exercises:

Far too often, activists do little to nurture their souls. Consequently, they "burn out." Ignoring the need for spiritual revitalization to sustain their zeal on behalf of the poor and oppressed, they wear out and fade into oblivion. Often those who were one-time dynamic spokespersons for social justice while living out countercultural values become exhausted from working hard with very little sense of accomplishment. Becoming cynical, they sometimes say disparaging things about those who still remain in the fray. . . .

In this book I, along with my co-author, endeavor to present ways to renew the energies of social activists by tapping into spiritual practices of Catholic mystics that we Protestants often ignore. In particular, we focus much of our attention on the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius. . . .

Tom

Family Pets, Animal Welfare, and Catholic Teaching

By Greg Sisk

Given the vital human importance of most of the subjects addressed on the Mirror of Justice — human flourishing in communities, war and treatment of captured combatants, the sanctity of life of the unborn, etc. — a posting about the fate of a family pet seems, well, trivial. As another poignant example of the inestimable worth of human thriving, we at the University of St. Thomas law school have been joining together in prayerful intercession, including a prayer service in the chapel when the new semester begins this coming Monday, on behalf of third-year law student Alisa Huttes, a beloved and valued member of our community, who is struggling (with hopeful signs of progress) to overcome grievous injuries inflicted in a New Year’s Eve car accident (her story and regular updates may be found at her Caring Bridge website). In light of all this, my family’s sadness about the serious illness of our cat must be placed in perspective and understood as having much diminished magnitude and moral significance.

But that doesn’t mean Simba’s situation is completely insignificant and entirely lacking in moral dimension or that the practical problem facing we Sisks as a family in making a decision about his future welfare can be avoided. Reading the recent posting here that cross-referenced a story about Pope Benedict’s heart for and personal care of stray and sometimes injured cats that wander into the Vatican, together with discussions in the past couple of days with colleagues about whether Catholic moral reasoning as applied to such a situation (which of course must be faced again and again by every family with a pet) emboldens me to post some musings about this subject.

Every pet-lover can bend your ear with stories about just how remarkable is their animal companion, going on and on, heedless of the state of boredom into which the kind listener is placed. Now, dear readers, it is your turn to be so afflicted. Simba is an orange (not really “yellow”, but “orange”) tabby cat, with seven toes on each foot, giving him nearly opposable thumbs on his forepaws. He was the neighborhood wanderer in our former home near Des Moines, Iowa, regularly being spotted miles away, running across many a busy street, and even strolling through the aisles of the local grocery store. The combined traits of being prone to roam and being unusually affectionate to every stranger should have used up his “seven lives” in short order. But Simba also had a wiliness about him that somehow kept him from serious harm. Around six years ago, Simba decided he wanted a new home at our house down the street from his original dwelling. I resisted with progressively less vigor, as I am allergic to cats. But Simba seemed to know which of us needed to be persuaded and thus he persistently bypassed the other members of our family with an unerring focus to jump up on my lap. He won me over in a big way, his original owners down the block were happy he had found a new home (as he had become restless at their house, not being overly enamored with their little dogs), and he became a member of our family.

Beginning around Christmas, Simba started to lose his feisty character, still appreciating love and attention but less likely to seek it out and preferring to find a hidey-hole somewhere. Then he started to lose weight dramatically, dropping from 12 to less than 9 pounds very quickly. Two trips to the veterinarian confirmed what I had feared. Simba has cancer, specifically lymphoma of the intestinal area to be precise (which is a very common end-stage condition for cats).

What then to do? Giving Simba a steroid tablet twice a day is inexpensive and simple (other than the adventure of having to force a cat’s mouth open to take a pill), but the improvement in health will be very temporary, likely affording him only a few weeks. Cats do respond well to chemotherapy and do not suffer the debilitating effects that accompany such a treatment for humans (see here). But even chemotherapy is relatively temporary in effect, generally extending a good quality of life for a cat by a few months. And it is rather expensive (thousands of dollars). Which then raises the moral, as well as practical, question: what to do?

The Catholic Church calls upon the faithful to treat animals with “kindness” (see Catechism ¶¶ 2416, 2457). The Catechism reminds us of “the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals” (Catechism ¶ 2416, a practice we see continued today in the Pope’s kindness toward stray cats at the Vatican. But we certainly may not regard animals as having anything approaching the same moral standing as human beings.

I do love Simba very much, and I sincerely believe he loves me as well. But my love for him is based not only on what I see as his unique personality for a cat, but also undoubtedly reflects a certain projection of my human nature toward him. By contrast, his love is limited by his nature as a cat, a nature he obviously cannot escape. I (and every other human being) was created in the image of God. A cat was not. (See Genesis 2:19-20; Catechism ¶ 2417.) Thus, while I of course would not hesitate to expend many, many thousands of dollars for medical treatment of a human family member, even if the prognosis was only fair and life expectancy was measured in months, I am troubled by the moral justification for doing the same for an animal.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church appears to speak rather directly to this situation and to the feelings I have expressed above:

It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or due needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons (Catechism ¶ 2418).

To be sure, I could justify this expenditure on chemotherapy as based not only on kindness for Simba but as not detracting from my charitable contributions for the benefit of humanity, through the mechanism of posing to the family that the choice is one between going on a summer vacation or providing chemotherapy to the cat. But is that not merely an exercise in sophistry? Would the net result still not be, at some level, a shifting of substantial resources from something directed to humanity to that of non-eternal creation? So why, then, do I feel as though I am betraying a member of the family by leaning against further treatment for Simba? Is this another example of how dangerous is the modern trend of making moral decisions based upon inherently flawed personal experiences and passionate emotions rather than on the deposit of faith to be found in the body of teachings of the Church? (And to prey upon your emotions, I post here a photo of Simba.)

Greg Sisk

More good stem-cell news

By Rick Garnett

The story is here.

UPDATE: Or maybe not. Reader Jonathan Watson writes:

I disagree with you that being able to harvest stem cells from embryos without killing them is a good thing. I think it raises the prospect of embryos kept in some sort of horrible "stasis," Scientists figure out how to stimulate embryos to produce stem cells constantly and consistently who would then be farmed for the results. Death saved these embryos previously from becoming miniscule slaves to science - now they may live forever in some sort of twilight. Huxley's "Brave New World" keeps coming up and true in different ways.

Hmmm.

Dissenting Catholics, Revisited

By Michael Perry

Still dissenting after all these years
The Tablet Interview
Theo Hobson

As a monk who, at 90, can claim a reasonable degree of acquaintance with both God and the Church, Sebastian Moore is well placed to question where the latter might be mistaken, in the eyes of the former. He talks to Theo Hobson

This is an interesting interview,in the January 12th issue of The Tablet. To read the interview, click here. Some excerpts follow:

Sebastian Moore OSB chose a good way
of reminding the world that he’s still
going strong: combining his ninetieth
birthday party last month with a book
launch. It was a cut above most religious book
launches – not many are hosted by film stars
(his great-nephews are Ralph and Joseph
Fiennes), and other relatives were on hand
to provide theological ballast (his nephew is
Professor Nicholas Lash). This Benedictine
monk has been rather a maverick since the
Sixties, and this spirit is utterly undimmed.
His new book, The Contagion of Jesus: doing
theology as if it mattered, is animated by a very
distinctive voice: lively, frank, impatient of
humbug. There is a real sense of excitement,
of hope for Christian renewal: “We need a new
Pentecost. If the Church came alive again in
the Spirit, the New Age would begin to look
very old hat… ‘Come, Holy Spirit!’, we piously
pray. I wonder what would happen if she did!”
...
In Liverpool he began to question aspects
of Church teaching. “In the early Sixties
I totally accepted the Church’s line on sex.
I was more interested in other issues –
in a way I’m lazy, intellectually: I only worry
about things that worry me. In Liverpool a
brilliant young priest, Paddy Fitzpatrick,
radicalised me on birth control. We formed
a group of people – professionals, a few priests
– we became known by The Guardian as ‘the
Northern Rising’. We wrote a paper on the issue
of contraception that we sent to Rome – it
turned out to be one of hundreds, all pressing
for change. And it seemed as if this reform
was imminent, and then at the last minute
the pope [Paul VI] went into reverse.”
...
His dissenting views on sex did not abate;
in fact they grew stronger, especially since the
late Nineties, when he came across the work
of James Alison, and agreed that the Church’s
teaching on homosexuality cried out for reform.
Alison also alerted him to the work of
the Catholic anthropologist Réné Girard,
who argues that all human violence can be
boiled down to the practice of scapegoating,
and that Christianity is the unique cure for
this. In his new book Moore accuses the
Church’s teaching of colluding in the scapegoating
of homosexuals, and also of disdaining
femininity (here he is influenced by the
work of Tina Beattie).
But doesn’t he feel that he’s in a contradictory
position, as an ordained member of the
Church who is so opposed to a large aspect
of its teaching? “Well, I simply point out the
difficulties in the position. If you look at the
Catechism on homosexuality it’s very interesting
– they repeat the official position but
they start by saying, ‘We don’t know what it
is, we know that it is not chosen’ – and then
there’s what I call the ‘nevertheless’ clause:
nevertheless the teaching stands. It just isn’t
a solid teaching.” Is the Church capable of the
sort of re-thinking he demands? “It’s very
difficult for this vast, humongous worldwide
institution to re-think, but the irony is, if you
compare the situation in Anglicanism, that
the Catholic Church is in theory more able to
rethink, because it’s less tied to Scripture. Instead
it has to ask: ‘is homosexuality unnatural,
inhuman, against the natural law?’”
Has his difficulty with church teaching ever
led him to question the very concept of institutional
orthodoxy, to think that it has a dark
side? “Well, theologians are rather accommodating
creatures. Karl Rahner, for instance,
is a very orthodox theologian, but he says somewhere
that there is a dark side to the intellectual
history of the Church – that it has
crucified people on absolutes that have turned
out not to be absolutes. And that certainly is
still there in relation to sexual teaching.”
A point he makes strongly in the book is
that the Church’s view of sexuality is distorted
by the enforced celibacy of the priesthood.
“The celibate priesthood has clearly got to go,”
he tells me. “That is an emerging point of view.
Celibacy’s basically a monastic thing, but the
priesthood is a ministry. To put it simply, Pope
Gregory VII monasticated the entire secular
clergy. It’s been very counterproductive to wed
these two elements together – to make celibacy
the condition of this job. Celibacy makes
sense in a community – of course we don’t
tuck up together in pairs, after Compline.”

More on "Conflict of Rights?"

By Michael Perry

In response to my post yesterday ("Conflict of Rights?"), MOJ reader Bruce Korol sent me his Calgary Herald piece from December:

Constitutional rights must be protected

Bruce Korol

For The Calgary Herald

Thursday, December 06, 2007

With an anticlimactic flourish last Friday, the Alberta Human Rights Commission delivered another blow to freedom of expression in this country by concluding that Stephen Boissoin faces penalties for having exposed gays to contempt and hatred.

This ruling stems from a letter written by Boissoin to the Red Deer Advocate in 2002 that took aim at homosexuality and gay activism. Boissoin claimed that gay activists were "spreading a psychological disease" and that homosexuals are "just as immoral as the pedophiles, drug dealers and pimps that plague our communities."

Darren Lund, who recently attacked the Operation Christmas Child project of Samaritan's Purse in the pages of the Calgary Herald, filed the human rights complaint against Boissoin, seeking financial compensation and a public apology that would reflect an understanding from Boissoin that his views were "inappropriate."

After his victory, Lund jubilantly said that "you can't hide behind saying something is my opinion or my belief and that somehow allows hate speech."

However, not even the litigation-happy EGALE (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere) supported Lund's complaint, stating in 2005 that "It is far better that Boissoin expose his views than have them pushed underground . . . . Under the glaring light of public scrutiny, his ideas will most likely wither and die."

Hear, hear. We should be allowing all "hate speech," not limiting it by kowtowing to the whims of someone's agenda or hurt feelings before a kangaroo court that is all too eager to make an example out of some politically incorrect soul.

Unfortunately, the government of Alberta intervened in this case against freedom of expression.

Not content to let their Human Rights Commission carry out its prosecution, the government proactively sought to make an example out of Boissoin. The government parroted the line that the province has the right to limit all forms of "discriminatory" expression and that freedom of expression is subject to a limitation.

Our tax dollars paid to advance the argument that Boissoin crossed that arbitrary line by "creating an atmosphere that is conducive to discrimination" and "encouraging discrimination in employment tenancy and in goods and services."

The natural consequence of making forms of speech illegal is that those who put forth different or unpopular political or religious opinions will be subject to prosecution. Court cases across Canada make it clear that Christian opposition to homosexual sex is one of the surest ways of getting crucified.

In 2002, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ordered the Saskatoon Star Phoenix and Hugh Owens to each pay $1,500 to three gay activists because of the publication of an advertisement that quoted Bible verses on homosexuality. Four years later, this was overturned by the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal after the court ruled that the message, though offensive, didn't reach the level of inciting hatred.

In 1999, Toronto print-shop owner Scott Brockie was ordered to pay a gay activist group $5,000 for refusing to print their letterhead. The human rights commission also made him print the material and apologize. Brockie subsequently lost in the Ontario Court of Appeal.

In British Columbia, Chris Kempling, a teacher at a high school, was guilty of "conduct unbecoming as a member" by the British Columbia College of Teachers for a series of editorials he wrote to a local newspaper defending traditional marriage while condemning the homosexual lifestyle.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld the disciplinary action of the College in suspending the teacher for having participated in public debate.

Bishop Fred Henry was on the receiving end of a human rights complaint in 2005 for articulating his Church's teachings on same-sex marriage.

Lesson: Dare speak out, and the speech police will come after you.

It's important to let all people -- even hatemongers -- air their thoughts. If you disagree, then write a letter in response, as the intervening Canadian Civil Liberties Association argued in this case. Wouldn't you want to know precisely the full extent of someone's thoughts, like those of Boissoin?

Banning "hate speech" forces all people to retreat behind societally acceptable views of moderation, killing vigorous discussion and healthy debate.

Furthermore, this charade has dragged on for years, wasting the time and money of Boissoin and all Alberta taxpayers.

And pending almost certain appeal, this case could be dragged on for quite a while longer.

Had this been ignored, Boissoin's obscure letter would have been long forgotten instead of getting endlessly circulated on the internet.

This isn't about defending the content of Boissoin's letter. This is about defending Boissoin and all Canadians from the purveyors of political correctness and those who are vehemently opposed to free and open discourse.

Muslim Theology (GOP Style)

By Rob Vischer

A few months ago I chastised Howard Dean for his injection of theological claims into his depiction of Democratic Party politics. At least his was well-intentioned and aimed at affirming the good civic standing of members of minority faith traditions. The same cannot be said for Fred Thompson in last night's debate suggesting his ~~willingness~~ eagerness (?) to send Iranian sailors to meet their beloved virgins. Watch Thompson's theological red-meat-to-the-masses line here. (Apparently all members of the Iranian military are also Islamic terrorists.) Mike Huckabee also had an arguably theologically presumptuous line about the Iranian sailors seeing "the gates of hell," but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was speaking figuratively. (As an aside, I earlier indicated that I found Huckabee to be "huggable." I no longer do.)

Sir Edmund Hillary, RIP

By Rick Garnett

Story here. As all you other armchair adventurers know, this guy was something.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Pirates of the Cineplex

By Thomas Berg

Apropos the new Pirates rage ... check out this interesting interview about the movie, and about Christian messages in popular film generally, with PIrates/Veggie Tales creator Phil Vischer, brother of our own Robert K.

Your weekend plans . . .