Monday, March 2, 2009
Happy Texas Independence Day!
Sunday, March 1, 2009
The Human Dignity of the Accused and the Vocation of the Public Defender
The eternal principle behind all of Catholic social teaching is human dignity, that all of us are created in the image of God. From time to time on the Mirror of Justice, I’ve returned to the theme of human dignity in the particular contexts of the accused and the prisoner.
In the United States, to our tribute, we have a history of extending compassion to the disadvantaged, enhancing rights for the vulnerable, and creating opportunity for all. But our beneficence tends to be withdrawn precipitously when a person stumbles badly and commits a criminal act. For in the United States, to our shame, we have a history of throwing away those human beings who have committed serious (and, increasingly, not so serious) crimes against the public.
No cause generates less sympathy than a proposal to grant rights, create opportunities, or simply ensure a minimal quality of life to those who stand accused of a crime and those who languish in prison. Consider, as examples, our public failure to guarantee a defense in court to those who are charged with a crime, the mindless imposition of mandatory minimum sentences against those convicted of relatively minor and non-violent offenses, the persistence of a death penalty in a stable civilization with a secure prison system, the decline in the use of pardons or clemency for cases where the punishment exceeds the wrong, the institution of no tolerance rules in schools and elsewhere that too often transfer disciplinary problems involving our children into criminal court, or the continuing problem of rape in prison that destroys so many lives hidden away in our criminal warehouses.
With respect to the first of these examples, the public duty to provide a true defense for every person charged with a crime, public defenders are among the first to be cut when governments face budget deficits. And those who remain take on ever greater burdens, handling far too many cases while striving always to remember and uphold the dignity of the persons they are representing.
In today’s Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Michael Holland of the Hennepin County (Minneapolis) public defender’s office is the subject of a well-deserved and eye-opening profile. Here’s a few excerpts (the full article may be found here):
Holland spent the morning meeting new clients. A guard led them one by one from their cells to a shoebox-sized interview room, but Holland ran out of time after conferring with only 12 of the 15. They join the 50 others he already represents. Dozens more new cases will come his way next week. . . .
Advocating for the poor in a swamped court system, Holland is not only juggling more cases than ever, but he's also trying to balance his sense of justice with the realities of budget cuts and a sour economy. He is one of a dwindling number of not quite 400 public defenders in Minnesota who speak for more than 85 percent of those charged with crimes. . . .
“When I go to court, I'm the only other one looking out for that client and that's a lot of pressure,” [Holland] says. “But public defenders are eternal optimists, like Don Quixote. We march up the hill every day and we attack this windmill that's not going to move. Occasionally, we do move it.”
For those of us who think and write about the law as a vocation, and especially for Catholic legal scholars who are united in our commitment to human dignity as the measure of a just legal system, Michael Holland and his colleagues in the public defender community are exemplars of the servant-leader model.
In the video that accompanies the on-line version of the Star-Tribune story, Mr. Holland says: “I love my clients, I do. When my client goes to prison, a little bit of me goes too.” Wow! Our Lord promised the blessings of heaven to those who cared for the destitute, including prisoners, saying: “Whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matt. 25:35-40). I am humbled to be part of a legal profession that includes a man like Michael Holland.
Greg Sisk
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Essays on Wolterstorff's "Justice"
Nick Wolterstorff's (relatively) new book, "Justice" -- which I reviewed here -- is the subject of several very interesting essay-responses, over at "The Immanent Frame." Definitely worth a look.
For Flannery O'Connor lovers . . .
. . . which should, of course, include all of us. Here is an interview with Brad Gooch, the author of the new book, "Flannery."
A Lenten reading plan
For those who (unlike me) demand more of themselves during Lent than abstinence from "Grande Nonfat Cappuccinos", here's a great Lenten Reading Plan.
Liberty, Authority, and the Good of Religion
This essay, by Christopher Tollefson, is well worth a read, and should be of particular interest to Catholics engaged with religious-liberty questions. It is also, or might be, responsive, to questions that Steve Shiffrin has raised, most recently, at the Scarpa Conference a few days ago. A bit:
Contemporary culture is often hostile to the idea of authority in general and to religious authority in particular. Religious liberty, on the other hand, is readily grasped as a core value of the West. How the two can be harmonized strikes many as an insurmountable difficulty. But properly understood, religious authority need be in no conflict with religious liberty. That proper understanding, however, requires a prior appreciation of the distinctive value of religion. . . .
Now it appears that, under these conditions, it is not the case that a non-coercive religious authority—that is, an authority which cannot punish with the sword—is ever in a position to violate the conscience or religious liberty of its members or its alleged members. For those members are either believers, in which case they look to the magisterial authority for guidance and, receiving it, take it to be authoritative for the formation of their conscience, or, they are not believers, perhaps because, having consulted their consciences and exercised their reasoning capacities, they no longer believe in the privileged epistemic position of the magisterial authorities. These agents, whom the magisterial authority is unable to coerce, are free to leave the set of believers, or accept what non-coercive—because avoidable at will—punishments, such as excommunication or lighter discipline the ecclesial authority may mete out, just as agents in any other voluntary association are free to leave, or accept that association’s non-coercive punishments.
At the same time, it is also clear, based on what has been said, that a mingling of religious authority and political, or coercive authority, is inappropriate, given the nature and importance of conscience and the good of religion. Yet it is important to see this as the locus of abuse, not the exercise of magisterial authority as such. Religious authority that is exercised with genuinely coercive power—the sort of power characteristic of the political state—is a perversion of both religious and political authority, and is inadequate to the tasks of either. Magisterial authority need pose no threat to religious liberty; and if the claims of some magisterial authority are true, then such authority must be considered essential for the fullest participation in the good of religion.
Thoughts?
Cuts to charitable deduction
Elections have consequences, and so I'm resigned to the fact that any number of policies pursued by the current Administration and Congress will be, in my view, misguided. This one, though, seems particularly regrettable. According to the Chronicle on Philanthropy:
Some charities and nonprofit experts are worried that President Obama’s proposal to impose new limits on charitable tax deductions for wealthy people would dampen giving at a time when charities are under severe strain because of the recession.
"Wealthy people", in this context, refers to households with incomes about $250,000. Put aside doubts one might have about the economic merits of tax increases on such households in times like these. For purposes of this blog, a particularly pertinent question would seem to be whether we should worry about policies -- like this one -- that threaten to expand the state-sector at the expense of the non-profit, charitable, and religious sectors. Now, people with expertise in these matters have suggested to me that churches are less likely to suffer from a change like this than are other charitable organizations. If true, I suppose that's good news. (But what about, say, private scholarship funds for children in Catholic schools?) But, we are hearing hosannas from some quarters about the extent to which Pres. Obama's budget and economic agenda are increasing dramatically the role and energy of government. Some think that's a good thing. Fine. But, need this increase come -- should, from a Catholic perspective, it come -- at the expense of civil society and religious institutions?
Friday, February 27, 2009
A short-lived federal conscience rule
President Obama is looking to rescind the federal conscience rule adopted at the end of the Bush Administration. As MoJ readers are probably tired of hearing, I'm not a big fan of sweeping government conscience laws, but I'm hoping that Obama does not head to the opposite extreme via a sweeping government anti-conscience law.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Just Love, the Dialogue
Thanks Michael P. for citing to a review of a book of essays on Margaret Farley's book "Just Love," It reminds me that I am very much looking forward to our dialogue (blog symposium) on Margaret Farley's book this summer.
Book Notice: "A Just and True Love"
The periodical Theological Studies is published by Theological Studies, Inc., for the Society of Jesus in the United States. In the March 2009 issue (Vol. 70, No. 1), there is a review (at pp. 231-33) of this new book:
A Just and True Love: Feminism at the Frontiers of Theological Ethics. Essays in Honor of Margaret A. Farley. Edited by Maura A. Ryan & Brian F. Linnane, SJ. University of Notre Dame Press, 2007.
The review begins with these words: "This Festschrift [is] for a giant [Sister Margaret Farley] whose work has changed the shape and manner of doing theology and theological ethics ..."
Recent Posts
Categories
Monthly Archive
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
