It's hard to add anything meaningful to the commentary about the profound evil involving Penn State's former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky and the conduct of those who turned a blind eye to the problem of child sex abuse in their midst. Ross Douthat's Sunday column in the New York Times is one of the most incisive statements I've come across. One person who seems to have displayed courage throughout in launching the investigation when he was Attorney General and then (in his ex officio capacity as a member of the Penn State Board of Trustees) seeing that justice was done to those who failed in their duties is Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania, as recounted in this story from last week. As it happens (and was announced many weeks ago), Governor Corbett will receive the annual Saint Thomas More Award from the Saint Thomas More Society of Philadelphia this coming Wednesday evening following the 60th annual Red Mass in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Penn State and Evil
Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture Conference
I want to second Rob's comments about this past weekend's conference at Notre Dame on secularism. The keynotes I attended by Alasdair MacIntyre, Christian Smith, and Lucy Beckett were extraordinary, and, of course, it was great to be on a panel and to present a paper alongside Rob and my friend and colleague Patrick Brennan. On top of all that, the chance to bask in the generous hospitality of Rick Garnett and his colleagues at Notre Dame is always one of the highlights of the gathering, and Carter Snead's appointment as the new director of the Center for Ethics and Culture portends even better things to come.
USCCB Committee on Doctrine and Sister Elizabeth Johnson CSJ
Here is a link to a news item from the USCCB in which the USCCB's Committee on Doctrine reaffirms its critique of "Quest for the Living God" by Sister Elizabeth Johnson CSJ. The Committee's initial statement was back in March 2011. Sister Johnson published a lengthy (38 page) response. The Bishops Commitee has reaffirmed that it "believes that it is its duty to state publicly that on several critical points the book is seriously inadequate as a presentation of the Catholic understanding of God."
This is another example of the Bishops moving away from a disciplinary approach to dealing with dissent. Sister Johnson is still on the faculty at Fordham. Daniel Maguire is still on the theology faculty at Marquette, even though the Committee on Doctrine issued a statement several years ago explaining that the views expressed by Professor Maguire were erroneous and incompatible with Church teaching.
There is a lot to be said in favor of this kindler gentler approach. It is worth recalling, though, that Charles Curran seemed to have been largely forgotten after he left Catholic U and that one wonders whether Richard McBrien would attract as much attention if he taught at Indiana University-South Bend instead of Notre Dame.
Richard M.
How Do Lawyers Serve Human Dignity?
At Notre Dame over the weekend, I presented a paper on the rise of secularism within the legal profession, which I see as the triumph of the technical over the transcendent. It's evidenced in part by a move from the "moral law" approach of the 1908 Canons to today's "ethics" codes, which are primarily technical regulations. There are some good reasons for this move, but it is by no means costless. There are several market, regulatory, and cultural developments that have contributed to put tremendous pressure on lawyers' ability to see themselves as anything more than technically competent mouthpieces. I'd be happy to email a draft to interested readers.
In a related paper, I take on the thin conception of human dignity that prevails within the legal profession. This paper is now online and available for comment. Titled How Do Lawyers Serve Human Dignity?, here's the abstract:
The conception of human dignity that prevails within the legal profession is roughly interchangeable with individual autonomy. That is, lawyers serve the cause of dignity by facilitating the client’s autonomy. In this regard, the legal profession’s dignity discourse lacks the nuance and depth that is found in the discourse occurring in other fields, bioethics in particular. As far as it goes, autonomy is a key component of individual dignity, but autonomy does not exhaust the nature or implications of dignity, particularly the narrow conception of autonomy employed widely within the legal profession. The narrowness results, in significant part, from lawyers’ failure to invest in the dialogue necessary to pursue a fully relational sense of client autonomy, rather than a simplistic autonomy of individual self-interest secured through the maximization of legal rights and privileges. In reality, there are multiple layers of human dignity, not all of which are centered on individual autonomy. Whether or not a more authentically relational conception of autonomy can be reclaimed, it is important to articulate how the human orientation toward relationship can help provide substantive content to, and draw professionally relevant implications from, the elusive concept of human dignity.
Reflections on secularism
As always, the annual Center for Ethics & Culture conference at Notre Dame provided plenty of opportunities for rich conversation on provocative topics, particularly in light of this year's secularism theme. Among the highlights:
Alasdair MacIntyre explained how secularism loses the capacity to adhere to absolute moral principles because everything is a matter for pragmatic judgment, and disagreement focuses on the question of whether the proffered justification for violating a principle is sufficiently compelling. MacIntyre used the deaths of 100,000 Iraqi civilians in the aftermath of the U.S. invasion as an example. When an audience member objected that MacIntyre was ignoring the 300,000 deaths caused by Saddam Hussein, MacIntyre noted that the nature of the objection underscored his point.
Christian Smith offered a guided tour through the sociological reality of secularism, as reflected in the rise of survey respondents who indicate no religious affiliation ("the nones"). Among the dozens of interesting facts he pointed out were the nones' lower scores on empathy and altruism compared to religious respondents. He believes, however, that a much more pressing threat to Christianity is from the predominance among churchgoers of what he calls "moralistic therapeutic deism."
John Breen provided an update on his project (with Lee Strang) about the history of Catholic legal education. This presentation focused on the mid-century critique of legal realism by Catholic legal theorists, a critique which did not gain a lot of traction or attention within the academy. Hopefully this broader Breen/Strang project will be the subject of many MoJ conversations in the months to come.
There was also a lovely passing of the torch from outgoing center director David Solomon to the incoming director, and good friend of MoJ, Carter Snead. The place is obviously in good hands.
Friday, November 11, 2011
MOJ-ers at Notre Dame "Confronting the Challenges of Secularism"
The annual Fall Conference of Notre Dame's Center for Ethics & Culture is underway, and MOJ is being well represented by John Breen (presenting part of his project, with Lee Strang, on Catholic law schools), Patrick Brennan (asking whether "secularism" can be "healthy"), Michael Moreland (discussing the secularization of bioethics as a discipline), and Rob Vischer (looking at the "short-sighted" secularism of the legal profession. Great stuff!
Gratitude to our nation's veterans
As we gratefully reflect today on the service of military veterans, I thought it would be worth remembering the magnificent prayer in which President Franklin Roosevelt led the nation by radio on June 6, 1944 as the Normandy Invasion began:
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Baude on Federal Common Law and Choice of State Law After DOMA
Will Baude has a wonderful new piece on what should replace DOMA (as it seems to be expiring) for purposes of deciding which state law ought to control the issue of the validity of a same-sex marriage. I haven't had a chance to read through all of Will's piece (and it is not in my area -- but Will writes so accessibly that I can pretend that I really understand it as he does), but one of the (many) things that makes it interesting is that Will notes that this issue is just one example of a larger set of issues dealing with "interstitial law":
First, I demonstrate that the second-order conflicts problem for federal question cases should generally be resolved through a federal common law of conflicts. It cannot be resolved by treating federal question cases like diversity cases [Will rejects applying Klaxon to this category of disputes] . . . . Second, I demonstrate that institutional role matters. Congress solves conflicts problems differently than courts do, because it is free to implement a broad range of policy goals through conflicts doctrine, while courts have a more limited role of filling in the gaps between Congress’s choices. Both of these principles apply to all instances of what is here called “interstitial law”—a form of federal law that relies upon state law.
"Leo XIII -1, John Kasich - 0"?
That's how Distinctly Catholic's Michael Sean Winters scores the recent un-doing of the not-quite-as recent efforts to rein in public-employee unions in Ohio. I'd rather agree with Winters, as when he's writing good stuff about the Freedom of the Church, but I'm afraid I cannot here.
I'm pretty sure I'm as big a fan of Leo XIII as there could be, and also that I've read his social-question writings (including Rerum novarum) at least as closely as most, but I'm afraid the better way to score the unfortunate outcome in Ohio is "Big Labor Money, most from out of Ohio -- 1, Our Children, Fiscal Sanity, and Doom Avoidance 0."
To be clear: mine is not an "anti-union" or anti-labor point, nor am I calling into question the idea that the public employment should be regulated so as to make sure public employees are treated fairly, in safe environments. Of course private-sector workers have a moral right (and should have a legal right) to unionize, and of course labor unions played an important role in securing various important employment-related regulations and reforms (as well as various in-hindsigh unsustainable practices that are sorely hurting many American companies and driving industry elsewhere). Still, the notion that the current pensions / benefits / dues-extraction / bargaining / tenure / security regime enjoyed by public-employee unions in places like Ohio is one that is required by (or, indeed, even consonant with), Leo XIII and the Church's social-doctrine is, I think, wrong and bad for our political community and our children.
UPDATE: Michael responds to me, here. Two quick points: First, Michael writes: "Unions serve as a check on the monied interest, whose power is, in a free society, always going to be dominant. I also see unions as a key part of the social fabric, embodying the kind of intermediate social organizations called for by the Catholic social principle of subsidiarity." I agree that labor unions (that is, associations of workers) can serve as checks "on the monied interest." (Whether they always do is an interesting question.) And, I have never questioned the role of unions in the social fabric or the relevance of the principle of subsidiarity. But, again, I think this statement does not sufficiently take account of the very different dynamic at play in the relationship between public employees, the government, and taxpayers. I think it is essential, if we want to implement faithfully the Church's social doctrine, that we take account of this dynamic.
Second, Michael says "given the choice between raising taxes on rich folk and cutting benefits for teachers and firefighters and policement and sanitation workers, I will vote for raising taxes on the rich every day of the week." But, with all due respect, this is not the choice I'm addressing, or the one that, really, we face. In order to avoid very serious fiscal problems in the not-very-distant future, cutting the (in many cases) excessive and inflated and unsustainable benefits of public employees will be necessary, in part because "raising taxes on rich folk" would not and could not supply enough revenue (putting aside questions about who "the rich" are and what their fair-share of taxes should be) to sustain our current practices and meet our current entitlement-spending obligations.
Belmont College Abbey sues over coverage-mandate
The Becket Fund is on the case, and has the news:
Today, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed a lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of Belmont Abbey College over the “Affordable Care Act” (aka “Obamacare”), that forces the College to violate its deeply-held religious beliefs or pay a severe fine. The heart of the lawsuit involves the recently issued Health and Human Services’ mandate that requires thousands of religious organizations to provide, against their conscience, contraceptives they consider to be abortifacients—namely Plan B and Ella—and sterilization.
Although the government has already provided thousands of waivers for a variety of special interest groups including McDonald’s and teachers’ unions, often for reasons of commercial convenience, it refused to accommodate religious organizations. Instead, the government permitted a religious exemption so narrowly defined that it prompted the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to note that even Jesus’ ministry would not qualify.
“A monk at Belmont Abbey may preach on Sunday that pre-marital sex, contraception, and abortions are immoral, but on Monday, the government would force the same monk to pay for students to receive the very drugs and procedures he denounces,” said Hannah Smith, Senior Legal Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. “This is much worse than an un-funded mandate; it is a monk-funded mandate.” . . .
A "monk-funded mandate." As Instapundit likes to say . . . "heh."
UPDATE: CUA's Mark Rienzi comments on the case, here.
Recent Posts
Categories
Monthly Archive
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
