Monday, October 5, 2009
The Center for the Study of Law and Religion . . .
Religious education and the Church's evangelizing mission
Here is a letter, from the Congregation for Catholic Education, to the presidents of the various bishops' conferences, on the mission, and importance of Catholic schools:
The nature and role of religious education in schools has become the object of debate. In some cases, it is now the object of new civil regulations, which tend to replace religious education with teaching about the religious phenomenon in a multi-denominational sense, or about religious ethics and culture – even in a way that contrasts with the choices and educational aims that parents and the Church intend for the formation of young people.
Therefore, by means of this Circular Letter addressed to the Presidents of Bishops’ Conferences, this Congregation for Catholic Education deems it necessary to recall some principles that are rooted in Church teaching, as clarification and instruction about the role of schools in the Catholic formation of young people, about the nature and identity of the Catholic school, about religious education in schools, and about the freedom of choice of school and confessional religious education. . . .
Read the whole thing.
Robby George on "The Moral Witness of the Catholic Church"
Read Robby's lecture, here:
. . . In sum, if the Church is to honor the healthy secularity that has been called for by Pope Benedict XVI, her shepherds and pastors from the Pope himself on down must be, at times, quite bold in denouncing grave injustices and violations of the common good, and at other times self-restrained in speaking out about matters of public policy upon which Gospel principles by themselves do not resolve differences of opinion among reasonable and well-informed people of goodwill. . . .
Pope Benedict XVI on an "integrated education"
PB16 is speaking the good stuff. Are our Catholic schools and universities listening?
. . .
The proper autonomy of a university, or indeed any educational institution, finds meaning in its accountability to the authority of truth. Nevertheless, that autonomy can be thwarted in a variety of ways. The great formative tradition, open to the transcendent, which stands at the base of universities across Europe, was in this land, and others, systematically subverted by the reductive ideology of materialism, the repression of religion and the suppression of the human spirit. In 1989, however, the world witnessed in dramatic ways the overthrow of a failed totalitarian ideology and the triumph of the human spirit. The yearning for freedom and truth is inalienably part of our common humanity. It can never be eliminated; and, as history has shown, it is denied at humanity's own peril. It is to this yearning that religious faith, the various arts, philosophy, theology and other scientific disciplines, each with its own method, seek to respond, both on the level of disciplined reflection and on the level of a sound praxis. . . .
Lumen Christi Institute: The Imago Dei
Christianity Today: "Rome Won't Give Up on Europe Without a Fight"
Here's an appreciative article in Christianity Today, the evangelical magazine, on the Pope's campaign to win back Europe by preaching "basic Christianity" (an evocative term for evangelicals). Among the thoughts:
Benedict seeks to mend an open wound in Europe politicians have not been able to heal. Secularism offers European nations no basis for relating to or confronting the highly religious immigrant populations now settling in their cities. Skeptics may rightly wonder whether church history offers a better way of coping with pluralism, given Europe's experience with interdenominational warfare. But Benedict deserves credit for steering the church back to basic Christianity in hopes of reminding Europe that the gospel of Jesus Christ once turned a barbarous continent into the cradle of Western civilization.
Catholics and health care reform
NCR, 10/5/09
What the church teaches on health care reform
Anyone with a newspaper subscription or an Internet connection does not lack for opinions about the legislation on health-care reform working through Congress.
The point and purpose of this week's column, however, is not to advocate in favor of one or another proposed bill, but to make sure that Catholics and other interested readers know what the official teaching of the Catholic church is -- not on any of the specific proposals, but on the key moral elements of any reform of the health-care system in the United States.
Bishop William Murphy, head of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York, and chair of the U. S. Bishops' Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, gave the essence of the church's position in a letter to members of Congress, dated July 17, an excerpt of which was cited in an editorial in the National Catholic Reporter, "The right to health care" (9/18/09):
"Reform efforts must begin with the principle that decent health care is not a privilege, but a right and a requirement to protect the life and dignity of every person. ... The bishops' conference believes health care reform should be truly universal and it should be genuinely affordable" (italics in original).
The teaching that health care is a right rather than a privilege was articulated by Pope John XXIII in his encyclical, Pacem in Terris (Peace on Earth), published less than two months before his death on June 3, 1963.
The pope began that encyclical with a list of rights, the first set of which pertained to the right to life and a worthy standard of living. Included in these rights were the right to "food, clothing, shelter, medical care, rest and finally the necessary social services" (n. 11; my italics).
Pope John Paul II included health insurance in a list of "the rights of workers," alongside social security, pensions, and compensation in the case of accidents, in his own encyclical, Centesimus Annus (The Hundreth Year), n. 15, on the centenary of Pope Leo XIII's landmark encyclical, Rerum Novarum (Of New Things), which had been published in 1891.
Among the major thrusts of John Paul II's encyclical were its concern for the poor and its explicit endorsement of the so-called "preferential option for the poor" (n. 11). Thus, when we are reminded that there are almost 50 million Americans without health insurance, and that some 30 million of these are children, we can begin to appreciate the moral urgency of health-care reform.
[Read the rest, here.]
Quick post from the Camino and its many blessings
Four quick notes. First, I still get choked up when some of the Spaniards along the Camino greet me with a smile and a ¨Buen Camino¨(good camino/way/Journey) as I walk. Second, I offered the day for a specific person and his family and all who are deeply wounded, suffering depression, doubt, hopelessness, or emptiness. Third, I was sitting in the bar/cafe writing in my journal after arriving in Naverette (in La Riojo - left Naverre today) when two pilgrims who I have seen but don´t know their names gave me a glass of wine from the bottle they had just purchased. A little later a Spanish pilgrim, Francisco, who speaks little English and who I have seen several days now, invited me to a dinner of his making at our Albergue. I bought a bottle of Rioja tinto to bring to the party. Fourth, and most amazing, as I was walking into Naverette, I saw a pilgrim with a duffel bag slung over his right shoulder. I thought that seemed an odd way to carry your stuff. He also seemed to be ailing from blisters by the way he walked. He sat to drink some water in some shade and as I passed him, I asked if he was ok, noting his seeming problem walking. It was then that I noticed that he only had a stump for a left arm (is that the reason for no backback?) He then showed me his leg - it was an artificial leg - so I guess no blisters on his feet. I don´t know where he started and whether he is going all the way to Santiago, but whether he is travelling for one day or the whole way, he was an inspiration to me.
The Maine SSM/Religious Liberty Fight: Follow-Up Lawprofs' Letters
The tussle over the upcoming Maine ballot measure to de-recognize same-sex marriage, in which BC lawprof Scott Fitzgibbon has played a role, has also touched on the memo-letters that several of us lawprofs (including Rick and I) wrote back in the spring to legislative leaders and the governor. We proposed meaningful religious-liberty protections to accompany any recognition of SSM, so as to reduce the conflicts between traditionalist believers and same-sex couples. Our earlier letters have been used and criticized, respectively, by the two sides in the current all-or-nothing fight: those who want to eliminate SSM recognition for (among other reasons) religious-liberty concerns, and those who want to dismiss those concerns and keep SSM with the minimal religious-liberty protections that the state enacted in recognizing it.
We've now written another pair of memo-letters (here and here), among other things to (1) answer public criticisms of our claims that SSM recognition will conflict with religious liberty and (2) point out that it's still possible to address the concerns of both traditionalists and same-sex couples by adding meaningful religious-liberty protections to the SSM recognition law. The bitterness of the all-or-nothing debate, we argue, is an indicator of the value of proposals like ours.
Tom
Miscellanea
Amen to the posts by Robby and Rob, immediately below.
And amen too to what Martin Marty has to say, here:
Sightings 10/5/09
Evangelicaldom
-- Martin E. Marty
Take one day, say Friday, October 2, in the life of what we should start calling “Evangelicaldom.” One-fourth to one-third of Americans consider themselves “Evangelicals.” Many are exemplary citizens and, let us say, exemplary Christians. Somewhere along the way millions among them, however, sought what they would call “earthly power,” and won enough of it to dream of and work for “Evangelicaldom.” That “-dom” signals “domain,” as in old “Christendom” and modern “Islamdom.” In it, any hints of traditional “otherworldliness” were forgotten, and the once least-worldly sector among us came to be among the most driven by commerce, markets, media, and politics.
Regular readers know that Sightings does not target or heap on evangelicals. But several media sightings on October 2 prompted and merit response. The main story in the New York Times had to do with one of the several fallen born-again “Christian Right” valiants of the season, Senator John Ensign, adulterer and now alleged criminal in use of funds and power. Atop a full-page story is a picture of the Senator and the cuckolded husband of Ensign’s mistress, autographed by Ensign to his “friend and brother, in Christ.” The sinning senator issued the standard more-or-less apology with the more-and-more frequent substitute for reference to “sin:” He made a “mistake.” Enough.
The same day the Los Angeles Times published Neal Gabler’s absolutely pessimistic but relatively accurate assessment of the way the absolutist style of religious fundamentalism has found its place among the shouting populists who, while not necessarily always bannering “in Christ” – most of the signs at the shout-out rallies are quite secular – are always sure that they have no need for civility and thus for politics. Gabler: “Those who oppose the religification of politics may think all they have to do is change tactics, but they are sadly, tragically mistaken. They can never win, because for the political fundamentalists, this isn’t political jousting, this is Armageddon. With stakes like that, they will not lose, and there is nothing democrats – small ‘d’ and capital ‘D’ – can do about it.” For the sake of the future, any kind of future, they have to try.
Fortunately for civil readers’ sanity, there was a relatively calm assessment in David Brooks’ same-day New York Times column in which he notices and reports on the political limits of those who goad and inspire the religified political troops, people named Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, and O’Reilly. They boast hugely huge audiences. But, as Brooks chronicles, they have not converted those in their seething niche into real electoral dominance of the sort Evangelicaldom once had hoped it could produce.
Fortunately for Christian readers’ sanity, there is also a cover story in the October issue of Christianity Today, a magazine which represents evangelicalism when it was evangelical. Its headline: “Evangelicals desperately need moral and spiritual renewal – on that everyone agrees. But what do we do about it?” Editor Mark Galli at length concentrates on evangelicals’ spiritual sins – not "mistakes" – in an analysis of the sort Catholics, Mainline Protestants, the Orthodox and others need to and often do make.
Until evangelicals can find ways to make clear to themselves, politicians, media, and publics that they are distancing themselves from the Armageddonist absolutism of the “religified Right,” they are more likely to look like and will be in danger of becoming like “the children of the world” against whom their spiritual forefathers creatively and courageously railed as they offered alternatives, not carbon copies.
----------
Sightings comes from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School.