500 years ago today, Henry VIII acceded to the throne of England, which was then the most Catholic country in the world. Sigh.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
What might have been . . .
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Cheney's consequentialism, cont'd
I agree with Rob that the good results achieved through immoral interrogation practices -- and, I am inclined we should not kid ourselves by thinking that these practices did not yield any good results -- should not be seen as justifying those practices. But, like Rob says, the consequentialist premises of Mr. Cheney's calls for more disclosure are, it seems to me, more than "disturbingly common"; they are nearly universal. From the perspective of the Administration, or from the critics of the previous one more generally, what is the argument, really, against disclosing the results of these practices? I suspect the reluctance to disclose reflects the an uneasy realization that many of the Bush Administration's critics never really minded the detention-and-interrogation practices.
I have been thinking about this, as I read the passionate, non-consequentialist denunciations of some of these practices in the papers, etc. If only -- I guess this has been Mark Sargent's "seamless garment party" point for years -- we could actually get the non-consquentialists on the same page, across the board.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Times embarrasses itself -- yet again -- on religion
Here is the NYT account of Arbp. Timothy Dolan's homily at St. Patrick's this past Sunday. (I was there.) Sigh. Is this really the best the "oh so great all the smart people read it" paper can do?
The homily was, in fact, a straightforward, accessible meditation on "faith and mercy." For the NYT writer, though, it became (through the magic of the NYT's "control-alt-Catholics-hate-science" function) something . . . different. And there was this howler:
He did not refer to it, but there is conflict between Catholic dogma and scientific conventions on several fronts, including the medical definition of brain death, the legal definition of the beginning of human life and the ethics of embryonic stem cell research.
But, of course, there is no such "conflict" between "science" and "Catholic dogma" (that's "the reasoned moral judgments developed in the Catholic tradition" to you and me) because "science" has absolutely nothing to say about the "legal definition of the beginning of life" or the "ethics of embryonic stem cell research." Now, if "scientific conventions" means "the political and moral views of those who happen to be scientists" then, well, fine. But such a conflict is one between two different non-scientific visions, not between "Catholic dogma" and science. (HT: Amy Welborn.)
Everybody is somebody
Fr. James Martin's reflections on the Susan Boyle phenomenon are very moving; well worth a read. (If you have not yet watched Ms. Boyle's performance on "Britain's Got Talent," do it. It's absolutely beautiful. As Fr. Martin put it, "[i]t may be the best example of the how God sees us--and the way that the world often doesn't.")
Clarification re: "the current opposition of most people"
Nothing in my post -- in which I noted the "current opposition of most people" to same-sex marriage -- is inconsistent with Michael's observations that (a) a majority of Americans, according to some polls, anyway, support some kind of legal recognition for same-sex couples and (b) the opposition to same-sex marriage (or, at least, a willingness to express such opposition publicly or to pollsters) is waning (though, I suspect, in a way that is not evenly distributed across the states). This "waning" phenomenon -- which has, I suspect, a number of causes and which I expect to continue -- is the reason I used the word "current."
Call for Papers
CALL FOR PAPERS
NOTRE DAME CENTER FOR ETHICS & CULTURE
10th ANNUAL FALL CONFERENCE
The Summons of Freedom: Virtue, Sacrifice, and the Common Good
November 12-14, 2009
This past November 6-8, the Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture hosted
its 9th annual fall flagship conference: The Family: Searching for Fairest
Love. Toward the end of that weekend we canvassed the opinions of the
conference audience regarding themes for the 2009 conference, and,
interestingly, a clear consensus emerged. After such a stimulating
conference focused on the various threats to the family here at the dawn of
the 21st century, many of the conference participants expressed a desire to
expand the discussion of family life outward to include the social,
political, and spiritual common goods in which the common good of the family
is nested. At the same time, there was a clear desire to focus on the
virtues as those moral and intellectual habits that allow us to achieve,
solidify, and defend the network of common goods in which we human beings
realize our happiness. After deliberating on this broad consensus with the
staff here at the Center, I concluded that our friends had advised us well.
Thus I am delighted to write to you today in order, first of all, to
announce the theme for the Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture's 10th
annual fall conference: The Summons of Freedom: Virtue, Sacrifice, and the
Common Good. The conference will take place November 12-14, 2009, here at
the University of Notre Dame.
Final confirmation of the relevance of this conference theme came when we
reflected once again upon the remarks made on the South Lawn of the White
House by Pope Benedict XVI during his apostolic visit to the United States
last April. In those remarks the Holy Father said:
Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility.
Americans know this from experience-almost every town in this country has
its monuments honoring those who sacrificed their lives in defense of
freedom, both at home and abroad. The preservation of freedom calls for the
cultivation of virtue, self-discipline, sacrifice for the common good, and a
sense of responsibility towards the less fortunate. It also demands the
courage to engage in civic life and to bring one's deepest beliefs and
values to reasoned public debate.
Here the Holy Father makes clear certain connections that are of utmost
importance not only to us Americans, but also to anyone trying to sort
through the enormous moral and political complexities of our dizzyingly
globalized world. Pope Benedict underscores that freedom is both gift and
summons, a call toward a particular "cultivation" or cultural formation in
the virtues, virtues that always demand sacrifice-and sometimes even the
total sacrifice of one's life-for the sake of common goods higher than the
merely private goods of the self. Earlier in his remarks the Holy Father had
emphasized that "the great intellectual and moral resolve" that, in America,
ended slavery and brought into being the civil rights movement, took
religious belief as a "constant inspiration and driving force," thus
reminding us of Christianity's role as the true preserver and defender of
human freedom. In saying this, the pope invoked his revered predecessor,
John Paul II, who tirelessly preached that "in a world without truth,
freedom loses its foundation."
In taking up the theme, The Summons of Freedom: Virtue,
Sacrifice, and the Common Good, our 10th annual fall conference will reflect
upon political and legal questions having to do with the very nature of the
political common good, the particular conflicts that arise in trying to
achieve it, and the precarious situation of freedom in the democracies of
advanced modernity. But we will also welcome inquiries into social
structures other than political ones-such as the arts-in which the virtues
may flourish, or which are designed in such a way so as to choke off the
development of genuine virtue in favor of ersatz versions. Particular focus
will be placed on the analogous forms of virtuous self-discipline and
sacrifice required to sustain the human network of common goods.
It is entirely fitting, moreover, that in this tenth anniversary
edition of our annual fall conference we will be highlighting the theme of
virtue. When, ten years ago, we launched our initial triad of fall
conferences-A Culture of Death (2000), A Culture of Life (2001), Agendas for
Reform (2002)-we took inspiration in large part from the Center's senior
research fellow, Alasdair MacIntyre, and his hugely influential work in
recalling moral philosophy and theology to the tradition of the virtues. How
better to celebrate this anniversary edition of the conference than to
return to the fountain of Professor MacIntyre's work for fresh inspiration,
especially in the year of his eightieth birthday!
Our aim, as always, is to bring together a large number of respected
scholars representing all the main academic fields, from Catholic,
Christian, and secular institutions, to engage in a spirited discussion of
this theme from the perspectives of philosophy, theology and religious
studies, law, history, the social sciences, literature and the arts, as well
as other fields of intellectual inquiry and endeavor.
We welcome the submission of abstracts drawing on a wide range of moral and
religious perspectives and academic specialties. Special consideration will
be given to submissions of ideas for panel discussions that would bring
together several people to discuss a focused theme. Possible issues to be
explored are:
* the natural law and American democratic government
* analogous senses of the common good
* special demands on courage in contemporary culture
* the multiple threats of individualism
* philosophical and theological inquiries into the virtues
* the riches of Catholic social teaching
* the global economic crisis and the situation of late modern
capitalism
* the secularization of contemporary culture
* imagining the common good: what the arts contribute
* the fate of Europe
* stewardship over nature: what does it entail?
* Catholic approaches to the common good: Maritain, McInerny, and
MacIntyre
* "Whose common good?": the unborn, the barely born, the disabled, and
the elderly
* freedom and its relation to truth
* Pope Benedict on charity and hope
* the Christian Democratic movement in 20th Century politics
* Elizabeth Anscombe and the virtue revolution in ethics
* the sacrifices of family life
One-page abstracts for individual papers should include name, affiliation,
address, and e-mail address (if available). Session presentations will be
limited to twenty minutes for individuals, one hour for panels.
Deadline for submissions is Friday, July 17th. Notification of acceptance
will be mailed by Monday, August 4th. One-page abstracts, along with your
full contact information, should be emailed to <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] or mailed to:
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture
10th Annual Fall Conference - The Summons of Freedom
1047 Flanner Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556
Law-blog rankings
Prof. Paul Caron has the latest. MOJ is holding strong. Still, I can't help thinking we should be outdrawing the "Wills, Trusts, and Estates Blog" (no offense, but . . .).
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Language matters, redux
As if to underscore Rob's point in this post, the ever-irenic (not) Frank Rich went off today. Much of the column was devoted to tinfoil-hattery about Prof. Robert George and Princeton's James Madison Program. (I was -- I confess! -- speaking on Friday at a conference on religious liberty co-sponsored by the Program. I don't *feel* like a bigot. . . .) He also trotted out the tired charge that to worry about judicial overreach is to set oneself against Brown v. Board of Ed. (I imagine our own Michael Perry would -- as would, I am confident, if he could, that scourge of judicial overreach, Abraham Lincoln -- argue otherwise!).
Now, that said, I suspect that Rich is right, and that the movement toward same-sex marriage will continue, notwithstanding the current opposition of most people. I do wonder, though, whether it will continue in a way that respects religious liberty. (Should it?) Rich's column does not provide much reason for optimism. Stay tuned.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
"The End of Christian America"?
Jon Meacham, the sage of Newsweek, considers the question whether we are reaching the "end of Christian America" (here): "To the surprise of liberals who fear the advent of an evangelical theocracy and to the dismay of religious conservatives who long to see their faith more fully expressed in public life, Christians are now making up a declining [though still more than 75%] percentage of the American population." He notes, though:
Let's be clear: while the percentage of Christians may be shrinking, rumors of the death of Christianity are greatly exaggerated. Being less Christian does not necessarily mean that America is post-Christian. A third of Americans say they are born again; this figure, along with the decline of politically moderate-to liberal mainline Protestants, led the ARIS authors to note that "these trends … suggest a movement towards more conservative beliefs and particularly to a more 'evangelical' outlook among Christians." With rising numbers of Hispanic immigrants bolstering the Roman Catholic Church in America, and given the popularity of Pentecostalism, a rapidly growing Christian milieu in the United States and globally, there is no doubt that the nation remains vibrantly religious—far more so, for instance, than Europe. . . .
. . .
America, then, is not a post-religious society—and cannot be as long as there are people in it, for faith is an intrinsic human impulse. The belief in an order or a reality beyond time and space is ancient and enduring. "All men," said Homer, "need the gods." The essential political and cultural question is to what extent those gods—or, more accurately, a particular generation's understanding of those gods—should determine the nature of life in a given time and place.
If we apply an Augustinian test of nationhood to ourselves, we find that liberty, not religion, is what holds us together. In "The City of God," Augustine —converted sinner and bishop of Hippo—said that a nation should be defined as "a multitude of rational beings in common agreement as to the objects of their love." What we value most highly—what we collectively love most—is thus the central test of the social contract.
Judging from the broad shape of American life in the first decade of the 21st century, we value individual freedom and free (or largely free) enterprise, and tend to lean toward libertarianism on issues of personal morality. . . .
There's a lot more.
"Faith Groups Losing Battles Over Gay Rights"
The headline is not *quite* right, but the story is worth reading. (I say it is "not quite right" because it is not clear to me that a commitment to gay rights requires eliminating religious-hiring rights for religious organizations.) Here's the conclusion:
Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University who supports same-sex marriage, said the Bob Jones ruling "puts us on a slippery slope that inevitably takes us to the point where we punish religious groups because of their religious views."
Both sides predict more litigation as gay rights bump up against strong religious beliefs.
Marc Stern, general counsel for American Jewish Congress, said: "When you have a change that is as dramatic as has happened in the last 10 to 15 years with regards to attitudes toward homosexuality, it's inevitable it's going to reverberate in dozens of places in the law that you're never going to be able to foresee."
More here (HT: First Things) on this "mega-cultural issue."
Recent Posts
Categories
Monthly Archive
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
