Monday, July 6, 2009
Politics, morality and original sin
|
The speeches by US President Barack Obama at the University of Notre Dame and at the Al-Azhar Islamic University in Cairo can be usefully compared with elements of the faith and of Christian social doctrine |
by Cardinal Georges Cottier OP
Theologian Emeritus of the Pontifical Household
[You can read the article here.]
I did not intend to comment on the Vatican's decision late last year to conduct a visitation of religious communities of women in the United States because I expected such a study, to be done under the auspices of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, to come up more or less empty-handed as did the Vatican's earlier study of U.S. seminaries and theologates.
I may, of course, hear from some seminary quarters itemizing a few of the negative results of that previous study. I would welcome such input and would want to assure the sources in advance of complete confidentiality.
I experienced a change-of-mind about the study of women religious in the United States, however, when I learned earlier this year that the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has initiated a doctrinal investigation of the Leadership of Conference of Women Reli-gious, referred to as the LCWR, the largest of its kind in North America.
In light of previous statements made about religious life by the cardinal-prefect of the Vatican congregation, Cardinal Franc Rodé, one has reason to wonder how objective and dispassionate the visitation of religious communities of women in the United States will be.
[Read the rest of Fr. McBrien's weekly column, here.]
From the American Papist blog, a recent statement -- made in the context of the Year of St. Paul -- by Pope Benedict (emphasis not mine):
"Paul wants the Christian faith have a 'responsible', an 'adult faith," said the Holy Father. "The word 'adult faith' has in recent decades become a popular slogan. It is often used to refer to the attitude of those who no longer adhere to the Church and her pastors, but choose for themselves what they want to believe and not believe - a kind of do-it-yourself faith."
Benedict XVI continued: "Speaking against the Magisterium of the Church is presented as courageous. In reality, however, it does not take courage for this, since you can always be sure of audience applause."
"Rather it takes courage to adhere to the faith of the Church, even if it contradicts the 'scheme' of the contemporary world," said the Pope. "It is this non-conformism of the faith that Paul calls an 'adult faith.'"
The Holy Father gave two examples of an 'adult faith'. First, "to commit to the inviolability of human life from the very beginning, thus radically opposing the principle of violence, in defense of the most defenseless humans." And second, "to recognize marriage between a man and a woman for life as a law of the Creator, restored again by Christ."
For Paul, said Benedict XVI, "following the prevailing winds and currents of the day is childish." (LSN)
Does this statement, I wonder, tell us anything about the content of the soon-to-be-released encyclical? I've heard speculation, in some quarters, that the encyclical will be a tough critique of the modern economy; others seem to expect an elaboration of the "dictatorship of relativism" theme. We'll see. One thing is for sure, though: The New York Times will use some of the following words in its coverage: dictate, edict, dogma, conservative, hard-line, enforcer; any tension between the Pope's critique and "conservative" Catholics in America will be highlighted, as will any consonance between that critique and the positions of the Obama Administration. Challenges to market-economics will be foregrounded in the coverage; challenges to an individualistic culture and morality will be skated over. In fact, I imagine we could come up with a "Mad Libs"-style template for most press accounts! The "Get Religion" blog, I expect, will be must-reading in the days to come.
Patrick Deneen has an interesting post at Front Porch Republic critiquing the conservative and liberal strands of American liberalism.
Trinity College (Dublin) Law Prof Gerry Whyte sends this our way:
Welcome, Obama. The Vatican Plays Him a Fanfare
On the eve of the visit of the president of the United States to the pope, Cardinal Cottier, for many years the official theologian of the pontifical court, writes an enthusiastic commentary about him. Obama responds with a very friendly interview. But the points of conflict remain
by Sandro Magister
(Click here to read what Cardinal Cottier has to say, Obama's interview, etc.)
Another informative post by Drew Christiansen, SJ, editor of America, here.
Interesting reading, here.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
From the entire community of MOJ bloggers:
Our friend and colleague, Mark Sargent, resigned this week as dean of Villanova University School of Law under very painful circumstances. Our prayers, love, and support are with Mark and his family in this difficult time. We pray for healing for Mark and for all those who have been touched by the life of this remarkable and talented man.
Greg Alexander
Fr. Robert Araujo
Stephen Bainbridge
Thomas Berg
John Breen
Patrick Brennan
Richard Garnett
Richard Myers
Michael Perry
Eduardo Penalver
Russell Powell
Michael Scaperlanda
Elizabeth Schiltz
Steven Shiffrin
Gregory Sisk
Susan Stabile
Richard Stith
Amy Uelmen
Robert Vischer
In response to your post: I'm sorry that what I said was not clear. Of course, the Vatican's own explanation for its investigation is non-patriarchal, non-sexist, whatever. (By the way, by "sexist" I do *not* mean "misogynistic".) The question I raised--not that the question is new with me--is whether there is a non-patriarchal explanation for "the state of affairs referenced in the [NYT] article." Whether, that is, there is a (plausible) non-patriarchal explanation for the fact of the investigation. Shouldn't we wonder whether a non-patriarchal institution would have thought that the contemporary situation of sisters in the United States warranted such an investigation? Many sisters--my eighty-two-year-old aunt, a Dominican, among them--are skeptical. Sr. Sandra Schneiders. Sr. Joan Chittister. Others. No doubt, many Catholics are not skeptical. (No doubt, some Catholics think it's past time for such an investigation.) In any event, one can be engaged in a patriarchal project without being aware (self-aware) that one is engaged in a patriarchal project. Consciousness-raising and all that! Now, off to the grill ...
The New York Times article (U.S. Nuns Facing Vatican Scrutiny) linked by Michael P., his comments (“I doubt there is a non-patriarchal (non-sexist?) explanation for…”), and the response by Fr. Araujo (Sr. Brink said that the Religious Life she proposes moves beyond the Church, Christ, and Christianity) got me to thinking about analogies.
If a law school faculty decided that it had moved beyond the university and beyond the law, shouldn’t the university's hierarchy (not to mention the ABA and AALS) send a team to investigate and scrutinize? Wouldn’t these hierarchies be justified in scrutinizing a law school that adopted the following first year curriculum: art and the law (where the main work involved students painting legal subjects), law and society (where the major work was living on the streets and in shelters to learn to identify with the marginalized), tribal law and customs from the ancient world, and two other similar courses?
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
