Mirror of Justice

A blog dedicated to the development of Catholic legal theory.
Affiliated with the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame Law School.

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Catholic Philosopher--and Social Conservative--John Haldane on Obama's Election

Some MOJ readers will be familiar with Scottish philosopher John Haldane, but for those who are not:

John Haldane is Professor of Philosophy at the University of St Andrews, Scotland, Visiting Professor at the Institute for the Psychological Sciences in Virginia, and Vice-President of the Catholic Union of Great Britain. He is a Senior Fellow of the Witherspoon Institute and sits on the Editorial Board of Public Discourse.

I commend to all MOJ readers Haldane's thoughtful, insightful "letter" on Obama's election.  I commend the letter *especially* to MOJ readers--and bloggers--who opposed Obama's election.

(Notice Haldane's comments, in the letter, about Elizabeth Anscombe and the Iraq War.  Does anyone know whether the Anscombe Institute, at Princeton, has addressed the issue of the (im)morality of the war?)

Here, Professor Haldane's letter

About FOCA

Here--that is, here--is a post at dotCommonweal that might be of interest to MOJ readers.

Cardinal Martini Speaks

[From America, Nov. 17, 2008:]

Italian Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini said the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae ("Of Human Life") has cut off the church from many of the people who most need its advice about human sexuality. The encyclical, which taught that artificial birth control was morally wrong, caused a large number of people to stop taking the church's views into serious consideration, Cardinal Martini said. "Many have distanced themselves from the church, and the church from the people. Serious damage was done," he said. Cardinal Martini, an 81-year-old Jesuit and the former archbishop of Milan, made the comments in a book-length interview tided Nighttime Conversations in Jerusalem. The cardinal did not address specifically the issue of the morality of contraception. He suggested, however, that the whole question might be better approached from a more pastoral perspective. "Today we have a broader horizon in which to confront the questions of sexuality. The needs of confessors and young people, too, need much more attention. We cannot abandon these people," he said.

Monday, November 24, 2008

Lessons bishops should learn from the '08 election

Fr. Richard McBrien

NCR, November 24, 2008

Regardless of how individual Catholics voted in this year’s historic presidential election, there are at least three important lessons for their pastoral leadership to absorb.

First, Catholic voters are paying less and less attention to the urgings of the most theologically rigid and politically partisan bishops of the U.S. bishops’ conference. Catholics this year returned to their traditional allegiance to the Democratic Party by a margin of 53 percent to 45 percent. And Hispanic voters, most of whom are Catholics, supported the Democratic ticket by an astonishing margin of 66 percent to 31 percent.


Essays in Theology by Fr. Richard McBrien

This was in spite of the efforts of a vocal handful of bishops, including Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver and Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton, to try to persuade Catholics that a vote for the Democratic ticket was tantamount to a vote for abortion and, therefore, gravely sinful.

Some Catholics evidently accepted this line of argument, but one can at least ask how many of them would have voted Republican for other reasons, even if the abortion issue had not been a factor.

By an overwhelming margin of some 60 percent, voters this year identified the economy as their number one concern. The issues that right-wing pressure groups tried to use on fellow Catholics with voter-guides -- abortion, gay marriage, homosexuality and embryonic stem-cell research --gained little or no traction this time around.

This vocal minority of bishops have to ask themselves whether their one-issue approach is actually counter-productive, not only in terms of its effectiveness with Catholic voters but also in its effectiveness in actually reducing the number of abortions in the United States.

This year, in any case, their narrow approach to life issues has stirred other pro-life Catholics to fight back and to reject the focus on the abortion issue to the practical exclusion of all others.

Second, there is also a question to be put to the all-too-silent majority of bishops who have failed to remind Catholic voters that the bishops’ conference supports a “consistent-ethic-of-life” approach to moral issues, that it has gone on record as neither endorsing nor oppos-ing candidates for public office, and that it insists that the Catholic church is not a one-issue church, notwithstanding the moral urgency of the abortion issue.

While it is true that bishops do not wish to interfere in their fellow bishops’ governing of their own dioceses, the vocal minority of bishops who have spoken out in politically partisan fashion have a national impact beyond the confines of Denver, Scranton, or wherever else.

The media and many in the general public do not usually make a distinction between the personal views of a few outspoken bishops and the official teachings and policies of the entire bishops’ conference.

In the future, conference leaders must make it unmistakably clear that, while individual bishops are free to issue statements and take stands within and for their own dioceses, such bishops have no personal authority beyond their dioceses, and indeed that their views are contrary to the stated teachings and policies of the conference itself.

Third, beyond the concern for political and moral credibility and effectiveness, there are other, equally significant statistics to be drawn from the recent presidential election. The Democratic ticket won the support of 66 percent of voters between the ages of 18 and 29, and 57 percent between the ages of 30 and 44.

These voters are not only the future of the country; many of them are also the future of the Catholic church. Do our pastoral leaders really want to be so far out of step with this crucially important constituency?

Can our leadership not make a more concerted effort to understand the thinking of under-45 Catholics, as well as of many older Catholics who are aware of, and in full agreement with, the official teachings and policies of the conference but who disagree strongly with the views of the conference’s aggressively conservative minority?

And what, again, of the 66 percent of Hispanic voters, many of whom are Catholics? The same questions should be applied to the bishops’ pastoral responsibility toward Hispanic Catholics, young and old alike.

Ninety-five percent of African Americans voted for Sen. Barack Obama. Relatively few are Catholic, but should the entire black community be written off?

The bishops also need to recognize that women voted for the Democratic ticket by a margin of 56 percent to 43 percent. The same concerns that apply to Catholics in general and to younger and Hispanic Catholics in particular apply also to the leadership’s pastoral challenge of addressing the alienation of many Catholic women.

The sexual-abuse scandal in the priesthood has had a devastating effect on the credibility of our bishops. They must take care not to worsen the problem.

[© 2008 Richard P. McBrien. All rights reserved. Fr. McBrien is the Crowley-O’Brien Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame.]

Thursday, November 20, 2008

The grace of living on the margins

National Catholic Reporter
November 20, 2008

For more than 15 years now, I’ve felt starved by the Roman Catholic authorities. But lately I wonder if they haven’t done me a favor.

Since the age of 14, I have felt called to the priesthood. The only real opportunity I’ve been given to discern this call was through my studies for my master of divinity degree (at a Protestant divinity school, of course).

Perhaps it was the insurmountable heights of the ivory tower’s walls or the unshakable hope of feminist theology that clouded my judgment, but it wasn’t until graduation that I realized that an openly lesbian, unapologetically liberal Catholic woman with a M.Div. had somewhat limited career possibilities.

It would take years to find a Catholic community that would hire me as their pastoral associate. When the chance finally arrived, I was welcomed to the staff of a Jesuit parish in New York City noted for its ministry to the poor and the gay and lesbian communities.

The congregation had an interesting phenomenon that they referred to as “upstairs church” and “downstairs church.” Upstairs church was the sanctuary itself, where Mass, confessions, weddings and baptisms took place. Directly below the church was an auditorium where, each Sunday afternoon, more than 800 men and women received a hot meal, clothing, toiletries and a variety of other services.

In upstairs church, my body always seemed to get in the way. Though I had received an education equal or superior to most current Catholic seminarians, I could not preach the sermon or consecrate the Eucharist because of my female body.

Though I held the ordination degree and all of the appropriate ministerial experience, I could not baptize the baby or marry the couple because of my God-given gender. Though I did my very best to serve the community, I was never held in the same esteem as my priest colleagues because of my unordained and unordainable body.

In downstairs church, my gender and sexual orientation never seemed to create barriers. The poor reached out to me, whether on instinct or impulse, and asked me to pray for them, with them and over them. Their longings were basic and bodily: to be touched and listened to and looked at with love.

They didn’t know my previous education, my background, my theology or politics, and none of this seemed to matter anyway. They only saw presence -- my presence. And if I wasn’t especially present on a given Sunday, they saw that, too, and they let me know it!

These moments had a raw authenticity that always seemed elusive in upstairs church. I’ve been present at countless consecrations of the Eucharist, but most of those rituals pale in comparison to the presence of Christ I seen in the despairing eyes of a homeless man when I put him in a car headed for a long-overdue detox, or in the grateful gasp of a poor couple when I give them $15 to obtain a copy of their marriage record that will allow them to stay in a shelter together.

I was feeding people, and I, too, was being fed. This really is all that Jesus asks of us: that with our bodies we become bread for one another. Our minds do such harm to the Eucharist. We convolute it, politicize it, gender it. And with each act, I’ve come to see, we starve one another and ourselves.

Working in a Catholic setting, I often felt at best underutilized and limited, and at worst oppressed and useless. And yet, I cannot help but see what a gift it has been to be forced to live on the margins of the institutional church. It’s a paradox, I know, but I’ve met God in more paradoxes than I have houses of worship.

Being excluded from the church’s center has given me, as John’s prologue says, “grace in place of grace.” It compelled me to discover the face of God in places I might never have ventured into. If I had not been rejected by the church, I may have never have had the chance to experience God’s real presence on the edge of our society.

Living on the outside pushed me to be creative in seeking the sacred, and kept me wary of the power trips, elitism and self-aggrandizement that I’ve encountered in so many ordained people. Though being excluded will always break my heart, the experience allowed God to break through to me in shattered, lonely spaces.

I moved on from that Catholic parish, and now serve as director of Social Justice Ministries at Jan Hus Presbyterian Church in Manhattan. My primary role lies in directing our homeless outreach program which, each day, assists more than 50 homeless individuals with supportive counseling, food pantry items, clothing, toiletries, and the use of phones and computers.

I’m still incorrigibly Catholic in my passionate insistence about the sacramental nature of every encounter we have with our poor and homeless guests. But it is a relief to do the work without having to feel afraid or less-than-valid because of the body God has given me.

I do get a rush of sorrow now and then when I remember that I cannot practice ministry in the church that raised me, within the theological tradition that formed me and amid the social justice doctrines that ground my convictions. But brokenness is the heart of the Gospel story. And living on the margins helps me continue to identify with the margins I serve.

There is no perfect church, no perfect ministry and no perfect community. Instead, it is in the midst of radical imperfection that true Eucharist seems most likely to emerge -- in those downstairs churches where people are genuinely being fed. The church may continue to give much to some, and starve many. But in that hunger there are endless possibilities for us to be bread for one another.

(Jamie Manson received her master of divinity degree from Yale Divinity School where she studied Catholic theology, personal commitments and sexual ethics with Redemptorist Sr. Margaret Farley. She is the former editor in chief of the Yale magazine Reflections, and currently serves as director of Social Justice Ministries at Jan Hus Presbyterian Church, working primarily with New York City’s homeless and poor populations. She is a member of the national board of the Women’s Ordination Conference.)

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

An Event of Interest to MOJ Readers in/around NYC

The Indelible Mark: The Writer and a Catholic Childhood

Tuesday, December 9, 2008 | 6-8 pm

Fordham University, Lincoln Center Campus, Pope Auditorium, 113 West 60th Street

Q. What do you do with a Catholic childhood?  A. You write about it.                        

The temptations, excitements, satisfactions and angst of going from childhood memories to written text—join us for an evening of readings and discussion with four distinguished writers (who had Catholic childhoods). 

Moderator:

Patricia Hampl, poet and memoirist, author of A Romantic Education, Virgin Time and most recently The Florist’s Daughter. She is Regents Professor and McKnight Distinguished Professor at the University of Minnesota, where she teaches in the English department’s MFA program.
                        
Panel:

Stuart Dybek, author of three collections of short stories, I Sailed with Magellan, The Coast of Chicago and Childhood and Other Neighborhoods, and two collections of poetry, Streets in Their Own Ink and Brass Knuckles.  His work has appeared in The New Yorker, Harper’s, The Atlantic and in Best American Fiction and Best American Poetry. He is distinguished writer in residence at Northwestern University, and was a 2007  MacArthur fellow.
                        
Lawrence Joseph, poet and essayist. His books of poetry include Into It, Codes, Precepts, Biases, and Taboos, Before Our Eyes and Shouting at No One, which received the Agnes Lynch Starrett Prize. Among his awards are a Guggenheim Fellowship and two National Endowment for the Arts poetry fellowships. He teaches law at St. John's University School of Law and wrote Lawyerland, a book of prose.
                        
Valerie Sayers, author of five novels, Who Do You Love and Brain Fever--both named "Notable Books of the Year" by the New York Times Book Review--Due East, How I Got Him Back and The Distance Between Us. She has received a Pushcart Prize for fiction and a National Endowment for the Arts fellowship. She is on the creative writing faculty at the University of Notre Dame.

Monday, November 17, 2008

Capital Punishment. Abortion. Same-Sex Marriage.

How large a role should SCOTUS play, or how small a role, in adjudicating moral controversies that implicate constitutional rights--as do the large controversies over capital punishment, abortion, and same-sex marriage?  MOJ readers may be interested in this:

   
Constitutional Rights, Moral Controversy,
and the Supreme Court

Michael J. Perry

Emory University -  School of Law; University of San Diego - School of Law

November 13, 2008

Emory Public Law Research Paper No. 08-47

Abstract:
In my new book--Constitutional Rights, Moral Controversy, and the Supreme Court (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009)--I examine three of the most disputed constitutional issues of our time: capital punishment, state laws banning abortion, and state policies denying the benefit of law to same-sex unions. I explain that if a majority of the justices of the Supreme Court believes that a law (or other policy) violates the Constitution, it does not necessarily follow that the Court should rule that the law is unconstitutional. In cases in which it is argued that a law violates the Constitution, the Supreme Court must decide which of two importantly different questions it should address: (1) Is the challenged law unconstitutional? (2) Is the lawmakers' judgment that the challenged law is *constitutional* a reasonable judgment? One can answer both questions in the affirmative.

By focusing on the death penalty, abortion, and same-sex unions, I aim to provide new perspectives not only on moral controversies that implicate one or more constitutionally entrenched human rights, but also on the fundamental question of the Supreme Court's proper role in adjudicating such controversies.

In this SSRN paper, I reproduce the table of contents and the introduction to the book

[To download, click here.]

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Pope John XXIII ... Remember Him?

The International Raoul Wallenberg Foundation

Jewish Leader Wants Honor for John XXIII

Endorsements to the Wallenberg Foundation proposal regarding Pope John XXIII as "Righteous among the Nations"
will be welcome at: [email protected]

 

ROME, NOV. 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- The founder of the Raoul Wallenberg Foundation wants Pope John XXIII to receive the honorary title given to those who took extraordinary measures to save Jews from the Holocaust.

Baruch Tenembaum is proposing that the Italian Pope be given the title "Righteous Among the Nations" by the Yad Vashem.

"If we fail to declare Pope John XXIII as 'Righteous Among the Nations,' our kids will be the ones who will do that," Tenembaum said.

The Jewish leader's appeal comes as the Church has just marked the 50th anniversary of John XXIII's election to the See of Peter, on Oct. 28, 1958.

Tenembaum noted that before being elected Pope, Bishop Angelo Roncalli "interceded in favor of the Bulgarian Jews before King Boris of Bulgaria and he did the same before the government of Turkey in favor of the Jewish refuges that had escaped to their country. He also did everything possible to prevent the deportation of Jews from Greece and he became a source of information for the Vatican as far as the annihilation of millions of Jews of Poland and Eastern Europe was concerned."

"During the time he was stationed as the apostolic delegate of the Vatican in Istanbul in 1944, he organized the rescue of Jews and other people who were persecuted by the Nazis," he continued. "Thanks to his actions, thousands of people who were condemned to death had their lives saved. His deeds and historic figure is therefore close to many other diplomat rescuers from the Holocaust."

The foundation founder also lauded the advances made in Jewish-Catholic dialogue under the guidance of John XXIII: "A new era in Catholic-Jewish dialogue started when John XXIII was elected Pope."

 

 

Friday, November 14, 2008

Catholic Church and Labor

Religion & Ethics Newsweekly
November 14, 2008

LUCKY SEVERSON
: There was a time when a labor strike like this one against the Catholic Church in Scranton, Pennsylvania, would have been difficult to imagine. The Church, after all, has always been the champion of workers rights. These workers are Catholic school teachers whose union was suddenly shut out of the Scranton Diocese.

Michael Milz

MICHAEL MILZ (President, Scranton Diocese Association of Catholic Teachers): It’s union busting of the worst sort because we’re used to union busting in the 21st century. But we’re not used to those kind of tactics coming from the Catholic Church. How can you not say it’s hypocrisy when you say that when they urge other employers to allow their workers to have the right to organize, yet deny it to your own workers?

SEVERSON: The Scranton Diocese had recognized the union, which represents about a third of its teachers, for over 30 years until Bishop Joseph Martino arrived. He commissioned a study of the dwindling parochial school enrollment. The bishop then consolidated four unionized high schools into one and said it would no longer work with the union. It caused an uproar in Scranton’s heavily unionized Catholic community.

Bishop Joseph F. Martino

Bishop JOSEPH F. MARTINO (Diocese of Scranton): Many people do not understand all of the facts, and I think if they saw the kind of rhetoric that I’ve endured from various sides they would see that we are beyond the stage of talking at this point. So I have made a decision and I don’t think the word has gone out yet. But it is final

SEVERSON: The Bishop’s stance might not have caused such an outcry if not for the Church’s long record on workers’ rights. Over a hundred years ago, Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical supporting workers’ rights to a living wage and union protection. In the 1960s, the Church defended the farm workers’ right to organize. And as late as 1986, U.S. Catholic bishops proclaimed that “no one may deny the right to organize without attacking human dignity itself.”

RITA SCHWARTZ (President, National Association of Catholic School Teachers): It’s one thing to champion a farm worker or a textile worker. It seems to change radically when it’s your own employees that are trying to unionize.

SEVERSON: In fact, since the 1970s, Church leaders have attempted, sometimes successfully, to bust Catholic teachers unions across the country. Brian Benestad teaches theology at the University of Scranton, a Jesuit school. He says there are times when fighting the union is justified.

Professor Brian Benestad

Professor BRIAN BENESTAD (Theology Department, University of Scranton): The right to form a union is really not an absolute right, and I think a bishop, when he would look at a teacher’s union, he would have to see if that union would at all get in the way of the aim of the school — you know, for example, if the existence of the union would be some kind of obstacle to maintaining the Catholic identity, you know, or the academic excellence or even the financial viability of the school.

SEVERSON: The union says money was not a big issue — that parochial teachers understand they will earn considerably less than public school teachers.

Ms. SCHWARTZ: I told Catholic teachers many times if they taught for the money, if they were here for the money I hope their medical plan was good, because they needed to have their heads examined.

SEVERSON: Joseph Casciano is superintendent of Scranton’s Catholic schools. He says money is always an issue, and coming up with more would require increasing tuition, something many parents can’t afford. He is concerned that because there is so little money available for salaries, the union would instead demand, for example, that teachers not be required to attend functions like Mass with the students, and that, he says, would sidetrack them from their jobs as ministers of the Gospel.

Rita Schwartz

JOSEPH CASCIANO (Superintendent of Schools, Diocese of Scranton): We only want what we’ve always wanted and that is that you accept your responsibility as one of the ministers in our Church, and we believe we do whatever it takes to fulfill that mission.

Ms. SCHWARTZ: To keep people who have a legitimate right to have a say over the conditions of their employment — to keep them from doing that and using as an excuse that they are ministerial, that’s to me hiding behind religion.

SEVERSON: To replace the teachers union, the bishop created one of his own, representing not only teachers but all diocesan employees.

Prof. BENESTAD: These are associations of the administrators, and the teachers and the staff people and the aids, and they meet on a regular basis to discuss, you know, everything pertaining to working conditions, benefits and wages.

Mr. MILZ: They created a company union, which is illegal in every other workplace in America. The only legitimate representation that employees can have is when they decide the method of representation that they want to have with their employer.

SEVERSON: Milz was a high school history teacher for 33 years before he was let go, along with other teachers, when the diocese consolidated schools. He was told that other teachers had more seniority.

Mr. MILZ: I was fired for my union activity. There were a lot of teachers who had more seniority than me. But there were also a number of teachers who had lesser seniority that I did.

SHARON HOURIGAN: Kevin thought Mike Milz was probably the best teacher he ever had.

SEVERSON: Sharon Hourigan’s son Kevin and her daughter Megan were attending Catholic schools at the time. She says she was shocked when she heard what the diocese had done because she knew the sacrifices teachers were making, even when there was a union.

Sharon Hourigan

Ms. HOURIGAN: I saw the teachers that were, you know, sitting in broken chairs and, you know, falling out of them half the time, and they would spend their money on supplies for the classroom. They would take their free time to tutor the kids, and it was just incredibly appalling to me that after all of this time, after 30 years of this kind of service, that they would be treated so shabbily — just appalling.

SEVERSON: Denying the union was not a risky venture because the diocese knew the law, as it is now, is on its side. In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Catholic teachers were not protected by the National Labor Relations Act because they weren’t included in it. But when the act was written, the vast majority of Catholic teachers were nuns and priests. Now it’s different. Today nine out of 10 teachers are lay teachers.

In a last ditch effort to get union protection under state law, the Pennsylvania House is debating legislation, known as House Bill 2626, which is similar to laws already enacted in three states. It would force the diocese to bargain collectively with teachers’ unions in religious schools of all faiths and allow them to bring grievances to the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board — a bill the diocese strongly opposes.

Prof. BENESTAD: If the Catholic schools are required to recognize the union, then you’re going to have government, you know, intervening in the school, making decisions about whether the bishops’ invocation of doctrine is really genuine.

SEVERSON: John Dean is a lawyer and serves on the board of Holy Redeemer High School. He argues that the proposed legislation violates the separation of church and state.

JOHN DEAN (Board Member, Holy Redeemer High School, Diocese of Scranton, speaking at school board hearing): House Bill 2626 would constitute a governmental intrusion into our interest in the continuing stability and religious identity of our children’s educational path and an unconstitutional impingement on our rights to religious freedom.

What concerns me as a parent of Catholic students is that our teachers currently accompany our students to Mass. It is certain, certain that the teachers’ union will attempt to negotiate that as a term and condition of employment. I do not want the school system . . .

AUDIENCE shouts in protest.

Mr. DEAN: I do not want . . .

Mr. MILZ: That is a lie. That is a lie. Wherever you got that information, you were misinformed or lied to.

SEVERSON: The legislation will be reintroduced in both Houses when the legislative session begins in January. While the union holds out hope, Sharon Hourigan seems to have lost hers.

(to Ms. Hourigan): Has this affected your faith?

Joseph Casciano

Ms. HOURIGAN: Huge, hugely, yeah. It’s very hard for me to say this, and it’s scary for me to say this, especially publicly, but I’ve lost my faith. I really have, and I have to say that given all of what has gone on in our little town, in our diocese, I admire anyone that can hang onto it.<a

Mr. CASCIANO: What do we have to compromise, and where do we have to compromise? It affects the mission of the Church. One of the concerns that was at the forefront was always the mission of the schools — that it would truly be that our schools would truly be Catholic and that they would do what they are supposed to do, which is an extension of the Church itself.

SEVERSON: For now that mission will proceed as dictated by Bishop Martino. An appeal from the union to the Vatican was recently denied, and the bishop’s right to go forward without a union was upheld.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

An Open Letter to President-Elect Obama About Abortion:



From a Pro-Obama and Pro-Life Leader



Read it here.