For me, faith entails walking a frequently uncomfortable line between ultimate hope and a willful blindness to persistent and unanswerable questions. Sometimes the public policy pronouncements of religious believers reflect that willful blindness (e.g., "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve . . ."), and sometimes I hear it in the face of tragedy (e.g., "God must have needed another angel . . .") I just ran across a quote from the writer James Agee that nicely captures my own discomfort. Agee's father was killed in a car accident when he was young, and Agee's mother retreated into religious devotion. In an autobiographical novel, Agee describes the scene of the children overhearing their mother's earnest and trusting prayer:
And they felt that although everything was better for their mother than it had been a few minutes before, it was far worse in one way. For before, she had at least been questioning, however gently. But now, she was wholly defeated and entranced, and the transition to prayer was the moment of her surrender.
Yes, prayer is and should be a type of surrender, at least in the sense that it is an acknowledgement of our fundamental dependence, our lack of self-sufficiency. At a certain point, though, I think that the acknowledgment can function almost as a relinquishment of our humanity, of the tragedy and mystery of the human condition.
Today’s The New York Times has a brief but interesting editorial entitled “Faith-Based Discrimination.” [HERE] The editorial begins by mentioning a parallel between Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama: the promise to maintain a faith-based initiative designed to assist social service programs operated by religious organizations to obtain federal monies and contracts. The Times concludes the parallel between the two presidents at the end of the first sentence of this editorial. It then, in encouraging fashion, applauds President Obama’s vow to ensure “anti-discrimination” by prohibiting these organizations from hiring on the basis of religion. In support of its position, the Times argues a dual objective: anti-discrimination and separation of church-and-state. It would appear that the Times is wrong on both counts.
First of all, the “anti-discrimination” objective proposed by the Times would, in fact, discriminate against religious organizations—especially the Catholic Church’s social service programs. The Times is joined in this crusade by an umbrella group of almost sixty organizations (none of which are considered friends of the Church, e.g., the ACLU, American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Lamda Legal, National Center for Lesbian Rights, NOW, Rainbow PUSH Coalition, Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, and the Unitarian Universalist Association) which calls itself the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination. But civil rights laws and regulations currently permit religious organizations to take account of religious affiliation where there is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ). While lawyers and courts disagree on how to interpret the BFOQ, it exists and it is legally protected. I would advance the position that a bona fide qualification for many of these positions within the Church’s social service organizations would mandate that the employee personally identify with the Church’s teachings. Otherwise, the direction in which the Catholic social service operates could easily be compromised. The Times fails to take account of this. Yet other groups that are involved with social service programs that may also be recipients of Federal monies and contracts and who may hire on the basis of other “protected” categories would not be affected by the Times’ crusade.
Second, the church-state separation issue is a red herring when one looks at the nature of the Times’ argument. The journal asserts that “Effective social service organizations should not be ineligible for federal dollars just because they have a religious affiliation.” But the clincher is that in order for the religious entity to enjoy Federal support, it cannot “discriminate.” The Church maintains a substantive distinction between “discrimination” and “unjust discrimination.” In essence, hiring qualifications “discriminate” but they are not unjust. When the Church deems it essential to her mission to hire those who are sympathetic with or join in its mission, it is not “unjustly discriminating” even though it discriminatingly chooses whom she will hire and whom she will not. When we select health care providers, restaurants, schools for our children, movies, etc., we discriminate, but our discrimination is not unjust. However, it appears that if you do not agree with the social and political agenda sponsored by the Times, you may very well “unjustly discriminate” as the Times understands it. And when The New York Times encourages the Federal Government to adopt its standard, this would indeed be a church-state separation problem because the Federal Government, by adopting the Times’ position, would in fact dictate to the religious institution that has a different view than the Times that it must abandon its beliefs to get financial support. However, if the religious institution agrees with the Times, then financial support is on its way. Now that would be unjust discrimination, and, furthermore, it would be a breach of “the wall of separation.”
Get Religion has follow-up coverage of the New York Times'story on abortion protestors, noting that this may be the first time that a mainstream media outlet has published photos of aborted fetuses.
Scott Idleman has posted a new paper, A Legal Perspective on Conflicts Involving Religious Communities, that should be of interest to MoJ readers. Here's the abstract:
Within any given state or society, numerous factors can influence both relations among religious communities and relations between these communities and other institutions or value systems, including scientific communities, schools of economic or legal thought, and various ideological or political movements. Though some of these factors obviously arise from within the beliefs and structures of the religions themselves, many arise from the history, political culture, and legal framework of the state or society in which a given religious community is situated. This paper discusses the potential role of law and the legal system in influencing these relations and addressing conflicts among these communities and institutions. After explaining in general terms the relevance of a legal perspective to the assessment and resolution of such disagreements, the paper specifically examines characteristics of the constitutional framework and political culture of the United States that appear to prevent or minimize conflicts involving religious communities.
When I walked out of the Albergue this morning, the Romansque Church was bathed in warm hues of pink, red, and blue as the sun began to rise and the roosters were crowing in the distance. As I walked out of town, those same colors cast their mystical properties to the mountains in the far off distance. "Awake lyre and harp, together we will awake the dawn."
After two weeks o walking, just as the newness of the pilgrimage begins to wane and some homesickness sets in, I had reminders of my homes in Texas, Oklahoma, and DeKalb, Il. in the stark barreness of this terrain as it prepares for its winter hibernation. As I walked into Formista yesterday two tumbleweeds greeted me. Not something seen in Austin everyday, yet it still reminded me of my deep (1829) Texas roots. The terrain for the last day and a half has been as flatter than ten mile flats west of Norman if that is possible. And, the wind has been blowing off the plain just like Oklahoma. I even saw a hawk (or some similar bird) doing lazy circles in the sky. Fortunately no rain. Unfortunately, my honey lamb is back in Norman. And, DeKalb. For much of yesterday, as I watched the farmers plow their fields, I was reminded of growing up in DeKalb. (As an aside, I don´t think I´ve seen a farm house since I have been here. The farmer´s live in the villages, driving their tractors into the villages and at times parking them in front of their town houses.) While walking Formista yesterday, I saw a man - a local farmer I think - wearing a DeKalb Ag hat. My first attempt to communicate with him failed as he thought I was accusing him of stealing my hat. Finally I got through, and he understood that I had worked for DeKalb Ag as a teenager detassling corn.
Speaking of home, and just so that you don´t think I have lost my sense of priority, I still know what is really sacred in the fall. Toward that end, does anyone know where I can find a place to watch Texas play OU and Notre Dame play USC this Saturday in Leon, Spain?
The Terrence J. Murphy Institute for Catholic Thought, Law, and Public Policy at the University of St. Thomas invites all readers to a lecture by MOJ's own Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and founder and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions at Princeton University, next Wednesday, October 21. The lecture, entitled "Natural Law, God and Human Dignity" will be at 4:00 in the Moot Courtroom, University of St. Thomas School of Law, 1000 LaSalle Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Professor George will be presented at that time with the University of St. Thomas School of Law's Dignitatis Humanae Award. RSVP by e-mail to [email protected].
This lecture launches an ongoing series of lectures sponsored by the Murphy Institute to examine the meaning of human dignity. The next lecture in the series, in the fall of 2010, will be by David J. Luban, Fredrick J. Haas Professor of Law and Philosophy, Georgetown University Law Center, whose publications include "Legal Ethics and Human Dignity" (Cambridge 2007).
I´d like to say I am walking in a relaxed manner (the title of Joyce Rupp´s book on the Camino) but truth be told, I´m just slow. (This is actually the reason I left Hogan and Hartson and D.C. law practice - I got stampeded everyday on the Metro escalators) I rarely pass people on the Camino, but many pass me. I did pass a 70 year old guy today, but I won´t tell you how many 60 and 70 somethings have passed me these past two weeks. I have a pace that I´m comfortable with so I don´t worry at all about how fast others are going. This is much easier when you are walking alone.
The other day as I was stumbling over pilgrims trying to get packed in the morning in one of the more crowded albergues (the bunkbeds were spaced less than a foot a part and there wasn´t much other space in the room), I found myself grumbling under my brief at the crowded conditions. And, then I realized that I had been one of the last in the night before, and I would have had no bed except for the crowded conditions.
For three days we have been walking the mesata. For two and a half we haven´t been anywhere near a major highway (major meaning similar to our state highways not interstates). This morning I got to see the sun rise twice. Once from the mountain I climbed just before sun up and the second as the sun dispelled the shadows as I came down that mountain. The terrain was pretty much the same - mesata, mesata, mesata with its fields ploughed for the fall. I did enjoy the barren starkness of the terrain. But, I also got three surprise breaks during the day. The first was a picnic area in the middle of know where staffed by two guys with fruit and coffee, seeking only donations. They were probably shrewd business guys because I suspect they made more taking donations than they would have if they sold their goods. The second surprise was a walk over a Romanesque bridge and then along a tree covered lane by the river. And, the third was a 4K walk alond an irrigation canal.
The town I am in now, Fromista has a beautifully preserved Romanesque church built in 1066. The modern church in town, a Gothic structure, was built in the 15th Century.
Today, I offered the day for our law students. Tomorrow, I offer the day for a particular person and all those mourning (or anticipating mourning) the loss of a loved one. One Wednesday, I´ll offer the day for all lawyers that, no matter their practice area, they may always seek justice and act with mercy. On Thursday, in honor of my son´s 27th birthday, I´ll offer the day for the growth of sustainable agriculture and all the benefits that accrue from that. On Friday, my day will be offered for all immigrants, refugees, migrants, and displaced persons in the world that they might know the peace of a secure home.
Over at First Things, Steve Dillard reminds us of the words of a relatively recent winner of the Nobel Peace Prize:
[T]he greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child – a direct killing of the innocent child – murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?
Ambassador and Professor Mary Ann Glendon was honored recently by the National Right to Life Education Trust Fund. Kathryn Lopez has some thoughts on the award, and on Glendon's writings regarding the role of the laity, here.
