Headlines today are trumpeting the Vatican's emphasis that the sexual abuse of children is not just a problem for the Catholic Church, and that other religious organizations also need to take public steps, as the Church has done, to combat abuse within their ranks. Obviously, child abuse occurs in lots of Protestant churches and other organizations. But hasn't there been something distinctive about the Catholic Church's hierarchical structure, secrecy, and greater tendency (compared to Protestants) to defend its institutional autonomy? In this regard, isn't the institutional culpability greater in the episodes of abuse within the Catholic Church? Have there been any statements from the Vatican recognizing and/or apologizing for this dimension of the crisis (rather than the individual acts of the priests involved)? I realize that the litigation climate may not be especially welcoming to such introspection, but I also think the Church should avoid statements that sound like "everybody else does it too."
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Is the sexual abuse of children a "Catholic problem?"
No-fault divorce
Maggie Gallagher and Douglas Allen have released a study finding that no-fault divorce laws increase the divorce rate by about ten percent, though the effect fades with time. Newsweek interviews Gallagher about the study here.
Monday, July 16, 2007
George on the Neo-Blanshardites
Robert George is troubled by the anti-Catholic reaction to the partial-birth abortion ruling, and he thanks evangelicals for being the only group to rise to Catholics' defense. An excerpt:
Had the partial-birth abortion decision come out the other way, turning on the votes of the two Jewish justices, and had a prominent conservative professor have made an issue of their religion and a conservative newspaper published a cartoon depicting them wearing yarmulkes and prayer shawls, there would have been howls of outrage and loud denunciations of the bigotry on display. People across the spectrum of religious and political belief, including those who oppose partial birth abortion, would have condemned the cartoon and demanded apologies. And they would have been right. Religious prejudice should be unacceptable in American public life. Period.
But while the writings of Professor Stone and the cartoon in the Philadelphia newspaper drew a certain amount of criticism and generated discussion on some blogs, the neo-Blanshardites were not reprimanded or even criticized by prominent liberal civil rights leaders or by leading liberal civil rights and civil liberties organizations. Perhaps I missed something, but I heard no denunciations from those secular or religious liberals who have long proclaimed themselves mortal enemies of all forms of prejudice, and from whom therefore one would have expected a firm condemnation of bigotry even when manifested in support of a cause they like.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Go, George!
New York Times
July 15, 2007
Bush Is Prepared to Veto Bill to Expand Child Insurance
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON, July 14 — The White House said on Saturday that President Bush would veto a bipartisan plan to expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program, drafted over the last six months by senior members of the Senate Finance Committee.
The vow puts Mr. Bush at odds with the Democratic majority in Congress, with a substantial number of Republican lawmakers and with many governors of both parties, who want to expand the popular program to cover some of the nation’s eight million uninsured children.
Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said: “The president’s senior advisers will certainly recommend a veto of this proposal. And there is no question that the president would veto it.”
The program, which insured 7.4 million people at some time in the last year, is set to expire Sept. 30.
[To read the rest of this inspiring story, click here.]
Mixed signals?
In today's New York Times, I read here about the huge (more than $600 million) global settlement to which the Archdiocese of Los Angeles has agreed in about 500 abuse-allegation cases. (How much is that for Mr. Raymond Boucher, "the lawyer who is representing 242 of the plaintiffs in the Los Angeles cases"?).
Then, over in the book-review section, I read this glowing review (one of many the book has received) of Andrew O'Hagan's "Be Near Me," a sensitive and sympathetic portrayal (I'm told) of a depressed, middle-aged priest, who misses his glory days as a university aesthete and who gets intimately involved with a working-class, not-so-innocent 15-year-old boy. After the priest is caught, we are told by the reviewer, he falls victim to the town's "anarchic spite", its "brief spasm of righteousness", and we are (apparently) left wondering "[s]o why are two people alone, in a rectory, murmuring over a nice potage, finally not enough?"
Strange times.
UPDATE: Read our own Steve Bainbridge, on the L.A. settlement, here.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Call for Papers
This Call for Papers might be of interest to some MOJ readers and bloggers:
AALS 2008 Annual Meeting
Section on Law and Education
Call for Papers
The Section on Law and Education seeks 3 to 4 papers and panel participants for the 2008 section meeting, co-sponsored by the Section on Law and Religion, on the topic of religious speech in public K-12 schools. Selected papers will be published in the Journal of Law and Education. The title and a brief description of the program are below.
"Faith at the Schoolhouse Gate: Analyzing Religious Speech in Public Schools."
Because students and educators necessarily bring their beliefs and convictions with them through the schoolhouse gate, clashes inevitably occur between deeply held religious values and the values of others in the school community. Those clashes can arise when school officials attempt to enforce hate speech policies against what they see as offensive or hurtful religious speech, to restrict the distribution of religious literature, or to respond to students' religious expression in broadly framed assignments or activities. They arise in a host of contexts that pit students and their families against school officials, and school officials against one another. They pull into sharp conflict competing constitutional freedoms and competing national values.
Panelists will examine the complex theoretical tensions these conflicts present and the implications of the courts' continually evolving approaches to those tensions.
Abstracts (100-250 words) should be submitted by email by July 31, 2007, to Daniel Weddle at [email protected]. Please put "Education Law Section Program" in the subject line. Questions can be directed to Daniel Weddle at 816-235-5654.
Are Catholics too "mainstream"?
Here's a good post, by Peter Nixon, over at Commonweal. He's commenting on a recent study of American Catholics, conducted by the Barna Group, which "concludes that Catholics are more or less indistinguishable from the general public with respect to many social and cultural attitudes." (See also Ron Sider's "Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience".)
Peter is concerned, but skeptical, and -- I think (notwithstanding my strong concern for Catholic distinctiveness) -- with some justification:
I'm not trying to ignore the massive amount of evidence out there that there has been a marked decline in Catholic religious practice in the last half century. The evidence--from many sources other than Barna--is overwhelming. The finding that concern for the poor is not more evident in the Catholic population than in the general population is certainly cause for concern, as are some of Barna's other findings.
But the overall tone of this document irks me, as it seems to suggest that Catholics are not good Christians primarily because they don't think and act like Evangelical Protestants. . . .
Capitalism, conservatism, and Catholicism
Here's an interesting post -- presenting an argument that resonates with at least some strands and themes in the CST tradition -- by Rod Dreher on the threats posed by a consumption-dependent culture to conservative values, virtues, and institutions. A bit:
Capitalism is an ingenious system for increasing material prosperity. It succeeded historically because the free market is the most rational device for meeting human wants and needs. It also thrived because it rewarded creativity and industriousness, and encouraged both qualities. And the most prosperous people under capitalism tended to be those who understood the value of self-denial and delayed gratification.
Today, however, capitalism is defined not by a producer mentality but by a consumer ethos. . . .
Friday, July 13, 2007
Reactions to the Vatican Document on the Church
This week's Vatican statement clarifying the doctrine concerning the Catholic Church and other Christian churches and denominations has of course triggered reaction, mostly over its assertions that the others "suffer from defects" and that the Protestant bodies "cannot . . . be called 'Churches' in the proper sense." The New York Times article, while recognizing that this document simply restated previous teaching (most recently in Dominus Iesus, 2000), strove to suggest some sinister "roll back Vatican II" trend in the timing of it, a week after the authorization of the Latin missal. Some mainline Protestants, quoted in the Times, complained (as they did in 2000) that the Church's assertions call into question its "respect for other beliefs" and will set back ecumenical relations. But as a Protestant, I agree with Christianity Today's response in 2000 and today: Respect for each other in dialogue requires the participants to be honest about their differences before moving ahead in openness and charity -- to practice "an ecumenism of conviction, not an ecumenism of accommodation" -- and therefore honest, respectful statements of differences are "a step forward, not backward, for Christian unity."
To me, the new document is respectful and charitable. Like Dominus Iesus, it takes pains to recognize the "numerous elements of sanctification and truth" in other Christian denominations, which the Spirit can and does use as "means of salvation" (Dominus Iesus 17), although those "derive their efficacy from the fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church" (id.). We Protestants, of course, won't agree with the last clause. We believe that some of what the Church calls the fullness of grace and truth are mistaken doctrines; and we cannot agree with the kind and degree of primacy that Catholicism gives to the visible Church, as against the invisible church of all believers in Christ, or with some of the doctrines stemming from that primacy (such as the necessity for apostolic succession in order to be called a "Church"). But discussion and argument over those matters will continue -- in charity and respect -- and the Catholic Church should not have to be quiet about fundamentals in its understanding of the faith in order to participate in such dialogue.
I'd make only a more modest point about this document and Domine Iesus: perhaps a criticism, but more likely only a suggested further clarification. When the Church claims "the fullness of grace and truth" as compared with other Christian bodies -- that the Church possesses or affirms all the essential elements A through Z while others, say, only have/affirm up through P -- it would help me if there was also some explicit recognition that this fullness, while it exists (let's grant for argument) in ideal doctrine and structure, is not necessarily always present empirically to the same extent as in other bodies. Other bodies may not merely have some of what the Catholic Church has and affirms; they may actually have more of it, or in a more effective form, and thus may have something to teach the Church about its own core affirmations and elements. For example, I assume that the Church affirms as a matter of "grace and truth" that believers should know and understand the Scriptures, yet the evidence indicates -- this is not just some hoary stereotype -- that American Catholics are substantially less likely than other Americans (certainly than Protestants) to read the Bible. (Thanks to Rob for the survey link.) If one finds that a problem (as I hope is the case), then one may be led to pursue some other questions about why it's so, and what changes in practices and culture within Catholic institutions (parishes, seminaries, etc.) may be necessary to do something about it.
But let me be clear: I have analogous reactions to some assertions that Protestant theological positions are superior. For example, although Protestants often claim that their approach is better than the Catholic at observing the Second Commandment -- not to make an idol of anything in the culture or the world -- things frequently have failed to work out that way, to say the least. Protestants have sometimes capitulated to evil in the culture much more easily than have Catholics, partly because Protestants have lacked a strong ecclesiastical structure to stand against powerful competing forces, and thus have tended to mirror or adopt the mores and institutions of the local community. A prime example, sometimes mentioned here on MOJ, is the much better record of Southern Catholic bishops, compared with Southern Protestant clergy, at standing up against racial oppression in the 50s and early 60s. Protestants have lot to learn from Catholicism, even to be better Protestants.
The modest point of this long post is that when any of us talk about the greater truth of our theological claim as against another's, we should also be asking and acknowledging how that claim is (or isn't) being lived out in reality. At the very least we're less likely to fall into arrogance -- or leave that impression, which documents like this week's can easily do -- and we'll realize we need to pray for grace to live up to the ideal. But beyond that, we might find that we can each be truer to our own claims by learning from the other: Catholics learning from certain features of Protestantism about how to be fuller and more faithful Catholics, and Protestants learning from certain features of Catholicism about how to be fuller and more faithful Protestants. Maybe we'd find we need to change some non-core beliefs and practices that are interfering with the core ones. All of this amounts to a lot of learning from ecumenical dialogue, and it all stops short of changing any really core beliefs themselves.
I can't imagine that any of this is inconsistent with what's said in this week's document and in Dominus Iesus, which is why I think I'm just suggesting a clarification. But if some such recognition of the gaps between ideal and reality were explicitly included in documents like those, it would remove a stumbling block for me and maybe for others in reading them.
With thanks to all of you who continue to welcome me as a contributor to the MOJ project.
Tom
Catholic Social Thought, Catholic schools, and the City
A few days ago, Mark posted a call for thoughts on Catholic Social Thought and the City. And, over the course of the last few days, this post has prompted a wide range of thoughts, questions, proposals, and - -perhaps --disagreements, about schools, parishes, cities, suburbs, and so on. If you have not checked in here at MOJ for a few days, keep scrolling down, to get the flavor of the entire discussion.
I just got back from a lunchtime talk, by Fr. Andrew Greeley, on the Catholic school as social capital. He hit the point pretty hard: The parish school has been, in the United States, one of the most important social-capital institutions in our history. When these schools close (or are taken for granted), we lose something very important to the common good, and to the faith. I wrote, in this USA Today op-ed last year:
[U]rban Catholic schools and their teachers do heroic work in providing education, hope, safety, opportunity and values to vulnerable and marginalized children of all religions, ethnicities and backgrounds. Similarly, Catholic hospitals have long cared for underserved and disadvantaged people in both urban and rural areas, and helped to fill glaring gaps in the availability of health care. It is too easy to take for granted these and similar contributions to the common good. We should remember that, as these institutions fold, the burdens on and challenges to public ones will increase.
We might also care about the closings for slightly more abstract but no less important reasons. In a nutshell: It is important to a free society that non-government institutions thrive. Such institutions enrich and diversify what we call "civil society." They are like bridges and buffers that mediate between the individual and the state. They are the necessary infrastructure for communities and relationships in which loyalties and values are formed and passed on and where persons develop and flourish.
Catholics and non-Catholics alike can appreciate the crucial role that these increasingly vulnerable "mediating associations" play in the lives of our cities. Harvard University Professor Robert Putnam and others have emphasized the importance of "social capital," both to the health of political communities and to the development of engaged citizens. In America's cities, it has long been true that neighborhood churches and schools have provided and nurtured this social capital by serving as places where connections and bonds of trust are formed and strengthened. As Joel Kotkin writes in his recent book, The City: A Global History, healthy cities are and must be "sacred, safe and busy." If he is right, Catholic parishes, schools and hospitals help make America's cities great.
I'm sure I'm not the only MOJ blogger who has been getting loads of interesting feedback from readers. I thought I'd pass on some of this feedback, and also some other comments.
First, here is a long post, which references our MOJ discussion, by Patrick Deneen on "Catholicism and Suburbia." Here is a bit from that post:
[It] seems to me that Catholicism as a whole cloth may not be best expressed in either setting, though I'd give considerable preference to a rightly ordered urban setting over a suburban one. The best setting, it seems to me, is a town of a reasonable size, ranging from one that might be considered to be a small city to modest town. I have in mind Aristotle's definition of a polis as a place that is to some extent self sufficient and is of such a size that one does not need to voice of Stentor to be heard through its environs. It should be a place where one can reasonably expect to rule and be ruled in turn, that is, to learn the discipline of liberty and self-rule. It should be a place where culture, as an accumulation of habituation and practice, can be passed from one generation to the next, starting in the family but continuing and being reinforced in the community at large. It should be place where people from various classes and professions can interact, and thereby with greater ease and willingness overcome the resentments or disapproval that can form in the absence of interaction between people differently placed. It should be a place where one's work and one's contributions to the common weal can be discerned and remembered. It is a place, therefore, that allows for the creation of communio, the passing on of culture, the formation of tradition, and the continuity of memory.
The suburbs, it seems to me, were formed for reasons that permitted, nay encouraged, the avoidance and escape of all these conditions. . . .
Alan Jacobs has this post, on urbanism, over at "The American Scene."
Kevin Somok -- a former participant in Notre Dame's (wonderful) "ACE" program -- writes, in response to my statement, in an earlier post, that "the Church should be doing what it takes -- whatever it takes -- to make it really possible (and by "possible," I mean to include "possible given the special needs of many children") for all -- rich, middle-class, and poor -- urban and suburban Catholics to send their children to Catholic schools, which is where all Catholic children should be":
This seems to be still be consistent with the teaching of the Magisterium. Perhaps, however, we ought to qualify this with something like the following:
"The Church should be doing whatever it takes to make it really possible... for all urban and suburban Catholics to send their children to schools of authentically Catholic character and academic excellence..." As you are aware, I suspect, both of these items are quite difficult for most schools
to pull off. Here's part of the problem, as I see it.In the absence of large, vital religious communities, it's extraordinarily hard for schools to retain qualified teachers. Although I didn't believe I had a lifelong vocation to teach middle school students, if I did, it would have been very hard to stay in a Catholic school much longer, given the fact that salaries are low ($29,000 for a third year teacher with a master's degree in Austin, TX, and a ceiling not much higher than that), health care is lousy, and pensions are largely non-existent. This last item, I think is particularly detrimental to teacher retention efforts. . . .
The Church could do a much better job to help religion instructors do a better job of transmitting the Faith. Textbooks are approved by the bishops to ensure they are free of doctrinal error, but this does not not mean that they will be effective instructional materials. . . . With over 6,000 grade schools in the U.S., it's reasonable to expect that the Church could expend the resources necessary to develop solid religion textbook series that convey the full richness of Catholic belief and practice.
In spite of the imperfections in the system, I believe Catholic schools represent a great hope for the U.S. Church. Once-a-week CCD or CEP programs seem to be almost completely ineffective at transmitting a critical mass of Catholic doctrine in spite of the valiant efforts of DREs and parish volunteers (and I'm a person who went through such a program, having been at public schools K-12). [Note: The research clearly establishes that students who attend Catholic schools are much more likely than students who attend public schools and attend CCD to become active adult Catholics. RG.] Catholic school students, in spite of instruction that is less than completely effective at times, still are receiving religious instruction daily and develop the habit of praying throughout the day. . . .
I do believe that it is a grave injustice that many Catholics are unable to send their children to Catholic schools because of finances, and the Church at both parish and diocesan levels needs to rethink education as a mission and ministry of the Church. Parishioners who complain about the "parish subsidy of the school" need to be told by bishop and pastor that this is akin to complaining about the parish subsidy of a soup kitchen or food bank. The content of this framework of conceiving education as a ministry is buried in official documents, but the average person in the pew on Sunday morning hears very little about this. . . . [Note: So true! RG.]
My friend and colleague at Notre Dame, Ed Edmonds, sends this:
As a suburban dweller for most of my adult life, I have read with interest the recent MOJ material on that theme. I find life here in the Midwest – Minneapolis, St. Paul, and South Bend -- to be different from Kenner, Louisiana and Williamsburg, Virginia. Some of it is the urban aspect of those places, or lack thereof, and I think some of it is the dominant culture of the region. My perspective of a city like Richmond, Virginia, is that only those with a long family history in the city will ever be part of the true inner circle. I also think there is a real cycle-to-life aspect. When we had young children, we had baby-sitting co-ops and pre-school co-ops that created a social network. I have to say that [my wife] was far more involved in these activities than I was. When they were in school or involved in sports or dance or art, the social interaction changed. I wonder, however, if the reliance on the automobile and its particular American variation is as strong as Eduardo’s portrayal.
. . . A new report from the United Nations notes that over one-half of the world population now lives in an urban area. See http://www.unfpa.org/swp/. I think that this report might be worth considering as part of this conversation.
Responding to my own and Rob's earlier posts, Jon Watson writes:
Recent Posts
Categories
Monthly Archive
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
