Mirror of Justice

Our prayers, love, and support are with Mark Sargent

From the entire community of MOJ bloggers:

Our friend and colleague, Mark Sargent, resigned this week as dean of Villanova University School of Law under very painful circumstances.  Our prayers, love, and support are with Mark and his family in this difficult time.  We pray for healing for Mark and for all those who have been touched by the life of this remarkable and talented man.

Greg Alexander

Fr. Robert Araujo

Stephen Bainbridge

Thomas Berg

John Breen

Patrick Brennan

Richard Garnett

Richard Myers

Michael Perry

Eduardo Penalver

Russell Powell

Michael Scaperlanda

Elizabeth Schiltz

Steven Shiffrin

Gregory Sisk

Susan Stabile

Richard Stith

Amy Uelmen

Robert Vischer

Dear Michael S.,

In response to your post:  I'm sorry that what I said was not clear.  Of course, the Vatican's own explanation for its investigation is non-patriarchal, non-sexist, whatever.  (By the way, by "sexist" I do *not* mean "misogynistic".)  The question I raised--not that the question is new with me--is whether there is a non-patriarchal explanation for "the state of affairs referenced in the [NYT] article."  Whether, that is, there is a (plausible) non-patriarchal explanation for the fact of the investigation.  Shouldn't we wonder whether a non-patriarchal institution would have thought that the contemporary situation of sisters in the United States warranted such an investigation?  Many sisters--my eighty-two-year-old aunt, a Dominican, among them--are skeptical.  Sr. Sandra Schneiders.  Sr. Joan Chittister.  Others.  No doubt, many Catholics are not skeptical.  (No doubt, some Catholics think it's past time for such an investigation.)  In any event, one can be engaged in a patriarchal project without being aware (self-aware) that one is engaged in a patriarchal project.  Consciousness-raising and all that!  Now, off to the grill ...       

Non-sexist explanations for scrutiny

The New York Times article (U.S. Nuns Facing Vatican Scrutiny)  linked by Michael P., his comments (“I doubt there is a non-patriarchal (non-sexist?) explanation for…”), and the response by Fr. Araujo (Sr. Brink said that the Religious Life she proposes moves beyond the Church, Christ, and Christianity) got me to thinking about analogies.

If a law school faculty decided that it had moved beyond the university and beyond the law, shouldn’t the university's hierarchy (not to mention the ABA and AALS) send a team to investigate and scrutinize?  Wouldn’t these hierarchies be justified in scrutinizing a law school that adopted the following first year curriculum:  art and the law (where the main work involved students painting legal subjects), law and society (where the major work was living on the streets and in shelters to learn to identify with the marginalized), tribal law and customs from the ancient world, and two other similar courses?

Happy 4th

WE, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly Publish and Declare, that these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES... And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Dear Robert, John, and Rick,

Thanks very much for your posts (here, here, and here).  MOJ-readers are, of course, much better off--much better informed--hearing from all of us than just from some of us.  And thank God friendship--including even that special friendship we call marriage--doesn't depend on political or even theological agreement.

Happy Fourth to All.

The Feast of St. Thomas, the Apostle

 

 

Today is the feast of St. Thomas, the Apostle. I was taken by a passage from St. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, the first reading. Saint Paul exhorts: “You are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and the prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone. Through him the whole structure is held together and grows into a temple sacred to the Lord.”

I am mindful that our dear friend and colleague at MoJ, Michael Perry, has again drawn our attention to the pages of The New York Times, which has recently presented an article on the multiple visitations by Roman authorities to women’s religious congregations in the United States. Of course, we need to recall that the Holy See recently concluded a corresponding visitation of the seminaries and men’s religious community formation houses in the United States. Although I have much fondness and sincere, profound respect for Michael, I do not share his apparent perspective on The New York Times article to which he has most recently brought our attention.

I have served for many years as a chaplain to houses of women religious in the United States and abroad. From this perspective, I have witnessed that many women religious in the United States are not like those quoted in The New York Times article to which Michael has referred us. From the outset, I am a bit skeptical of The New York Times implication that women religious were the “often-unsung workers who helped build the Roman Catholic Church in this country.” Indeed, they were unsung heroines, as were many lay people, priests and religious brothers. But the insinuation of the Times must be countered by the fact that amongst the native saints of the United States, there are more religious women who have been canonized than men. By my count, there are five American women (and religious) saints [Elizabeth Ann Seton; Rose Duschesne; Katherine Drexel; Frances Cabrini; and, Mother Theodore Guerin] to three men who have been beatified [John Neumann; Isaac Jogues; and, Rene Goupil—arguably, Canada can also claim Jogues and Goupil]. So, I am skeptical of the Times’ claim about unsung heroes and heroines. My point is that many people, men and women, lay and religious and clerics, have been unsung heroes and heroines of the Church in the U.S. So the point the Times wants to make is eclipsed by the facts of the Church’s history in the United States.

So we come to the matter of authority which is important to the Church and most other institutions, both temporal and legal and divine. I respect the Times’ claim to its own authority in the fields where it is competent, but its competence is not without limit for there are occasions when it likes to extend its authority to places where its competence is thin. This article to which Michael refers us is an illustration of this meta-competence.

In any event, I know from my chaplaincy to American women religious that many, not just some American women religious, are grateful that the Church’s Roman authorities are beginning to pay attention to the problems that exist within religious life in the United States. I think the concern concentrates largely on the fact that the idea of religious life has been compromised by some [this includes both male and female members of religious communities] who view themselves beyond the authority of the Church and of their own Constitutions. The Holy See is not, as the Times suggests, trying to push women or any religious back into “convents, wearing habits or at least identifiable religious garb” not “ordering” [the Times’ word] but, rather, reminding them that “their schedules” should focus on “daily prayers and working primarily in Roman Catholic institutions.” This is their charism that explains why these orders were founded and recognized in the first place. To “sojourn” is alien to what they are about and why these orders were established.

And, this is where St. Paul’s wisdom, to which I previously referred, comes into play. He reminds the faithful of the early Church that the time for being a stranger and sojourner is a thing of the past. Yet, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious appears to be focused primarily on an existence beyond the Church that entails sojourning to unspecified destinations. It would seem that some members of this organization’s leadership (of leadership) have forgotten St. Paul’s counsel. For example, in 2007 at the Leadership Conference of Women’s Religious, the keynote speaker, Sister Laurie Brink exhorted,

The dynamic option for Religious Life, which I am calling, Sojourning, is much

more difficult to discuss, since it involves moving beyond the Church, even beyond

Jesus. A sojourning congregation is no longer ecclesiastical. It has grown beyond the

bounds of institutional religion. Its search for the Holy may have begun rooted in Jesus as

the Christ, but deep reflection, study and prayer have opened it up to the spirit of the

Holy in all of creation. Religious titles, institutional limitations, ecclesiastical authorities

no longer fit this congregation, which in most respects is Post-Christian.

In her own words, Sister Brink claims that sojourning is still necessary. All right. But, beyond the Church? Beyond Christ? Beyond Christianity? My friends at MoJ, this is a problem of grand proportion. But the problem does not stop here.

As I read further on in the pages of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious’s website, numerous statements echoing the sentiments of Sister Brink proliferate. But I see no statements reflecting the views of many women religious who continue to labor for Christ, the Church, and God’s people in fidelity to their Congregations and Peter. The Times appears disinterested in the dissenting but not the faithful views.

I guess that is why the Times believes it has the self-conferred emancipation to describe Mother Mary Clare Millea, the head of her congregation and a principal in the Holy See’s examination of women religious in the United States, as “an apple-cheeked American with a black habit and smiling eyes”, and another American woman religious who “has urged [her] fellow nuns not to participate in the study”, as a “professor emerita of New Testament and spirituality at the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley, in California.” Perhaps the Times is also more interested in sojourning to a destination that becomes increasingly unclear but also uniformed by reporting this story about the Church and her authority in the fashion that it did.

 

RJA sj

 

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beholder . . . But All that Glitters Is Not Gold, Even When It Is Described As Such

In offering an alternative headline to the one put forth by Rick Garnett describing President Obama’s policies with respect to abortion overseas, Michael Perry reminds us of what we all learned on the first day of law school – that there is more than one way to characterize the same set of facts.  As Hohfeld made clear nearly a century ago, one person’s “right” is another person’s “duty” and someone’s “power” is another’s “liability.”  Similarly, the proponent of a particular government program may describe it as “affirmative action” while those opposed to the same program may refer to it as state sanctioned “racial preferences.”  Crafting such turns of phrase in service to the interests of one’s client is central to the lawyer’s art.

 

 

 

Thus, on a certain level, Michael P.’s description “The Obama Administration opposes the criminalization of abortion as, all things considered, a fitting way to respond to the tragedy of unwanted pregnancies” seems at first blush on par with Rick’s description “The Obama Administration calls for increased abortion access at the UN.”  Each reflects a different perspective, but each seems to be a legitimate way of describing the same reality.  As Michael P. says, “Beauty, and ugliness too, seem to be in the eye of the beholder.”

 

 

 

Although reality is always susceptible to multiple descriptions, that does not mean that every use of words to describe an object, event or set of circumstances is equally valid.  There must be a truth that underlies our iteration of it against which the use of words can be judged accurate or not.  If this were not the case, then we should all be equally welcoming of the views of Holocaust deniers as the views of those who decry the horrors of the Shoah, and equally solicitous of those who say that the earth is round as those who say that the earth is flat.

 

 

 

And here is where Michael P.’s description simply doesn’t match up with reality, indeed, with the very article to which he links.  That article says that the Obama administration has introduced language that calls for “universal access” to “sexual and reproductive health services including universal access to family planning.”  Here, “universal access” means not only the absence of criminalization.  It means financial support from the state for those women who want to obtain abortions but cannot afford them.

 

 

 

Moreover, Obama has already shown his commitment to an abortion policy that goes far beyond the mere absence of legal prohibition regarding the procedure.  In reversing the Mexico City Policy the Obama administration instituted a policy whereby American taxpayer dollars are now used to pay for abortions performed by Planned Parenthood and similar NGOs in foreign countries.  Likewise, in its current form, the Obama health care reform plan will likely mandate public funds for abortions, albeit in a surreptitious but nonetheless effective way (a fact that has alarmed pro-life House Democrats).  Similarly, action in the House is taking place (presumably with the President’s support) that would nullify the Dornan Amendment and fund abortions in the District of Columbia with federal taxpayer dollars.  All of these actions go well beyond mere “oppos[ition] [to] the criminalization of abortion, all things considered,” that is, based on prudential grounds.

 

 

 

It would be one thing for a state to decide simply not to criminalize the use of heroin, but it would be something else altogether if the state were to subsidize the habit of heroin junkies.  It might be possible, I suppose, for a government to be opposed to the criminalization of child abuse in the home based on prudential grounds.  If the government instituted a policy that paid a third-party to go into the home and beat the child, it would, I think, be fair to say that the government had gone beyond mere opposition to criminalization on prudential grounds.

 

 

 

Words matter – both their use and their misuse.  In our hands they should be more than instruments used to score points, or to show that a match of verbal wits has ended in a draw.  Rather, they should reflect the underlying reality that actually exists.

A Fourth of July mistake

With respect to Michael's post, recommending some "Fourth of July reading", "Swiss Cardinal George Cottier, 87, former theologian of the papal household under Pope John Paul II," is, unfortunately, mistaken about what the views, policies, and plans of President Obama and his Administration are, with respect to abortion.  So, in praising the President's "humble realism" on the issue, he is, like many others, and unfortunately, reacting favorably to something other than actual events, or existing law, or the commitments of this Administration's leading policy-shapers.  Too bad.

Scavi Tour

Visiting the Necropolis under St. Peter's is one of the highlights of my past two trips to Rome, and I recommend anyone going to Rome contact the Scavi office well in advance for tickets.  Now, this tour is also available online here.

Some Fourth of July Reading ...

Former papal theologian praises Obama's 'realism,' even on abortion
By John L. Allen Jr.

Swiss Cardinal George Cottier, 87, former theologian of the papal household under Pope John Paul II,has praised Obama's "humble realism" and compared the president's approach to abortion to the thinking of St. Thomas Aquinas and early Christian tradition about framing laws in a pluralistic society.

Read More

or paste this link into your browser

http://ncronline.org/node/13874

Faith and Doubt on the Feast of St. Thomas

On this Feast of Doubting Thomas, I reread the words of Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) on pages40-41 of Introduction to Christianity: 

[B]oth the believer and the unbeliever share, each in his own way, doubt and belief, if they do not hide from themselves and from the truth of their being.  Neither can quite escape either doubt or belief; for the one, faith is present against doubt; for the other, through doubt and in the form of doubt.  It is the basic pattern of man's destiny only to be allowed to find the finality of his existence in this unceasing rivalry between doubt and belief, temptation and certainty.  Perhaps in precisely this way doubt, which saves both sides from being shut up in their own worlds, could become an avenue of communication.  It prevents both from enjoying complete self-satisfaction; it opens up the believer to the doubter and the doubter to the believer; for one, it is his share in the fate of the unbeliever; for the other, the form in which belief remains nevertheless a challenge to him.

Back to Thomas, Pope St. Gregory the Great wrote:  "The disbelief of Thomas has done more for our faith than the the faith of the other disciples."

UPDATE:  For Susan's excellent reflection, click here.

A Literary Key to the New Encyclical

John Allen's latest, A Key to Reading Benedict's Social Encyclical looks like a super-helpful guide and warmup for the release of Caritas in Veritate, due out this Tuesday.

Kmiec Chosen As Ambassador to Malta

Story here.

I doubt there is a non-patriarchal (non-sexist?) explanation for ...

... the state of affairs described in the article referenced below.

(But then, God knows, the membership of the men's club known as magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church is nothing if not ... patriarchal.)

For a while this afternoon, the most e-mailed article of all the e-mailed articles in the New York Times was an article titled

U.S. Nuns Facing Vatican Scrutiny

Read the article, here.

Beauty, and ugliness too, seem to be in the eye of the beholder ...

This is the way my buddy Rick Garnett sees it (here):

"The Obama Administration calls for increased abortion access at UN

Story here."

By contrast, this is a different way of seeing it:

The Obama Administration opposes the criminalization of abortion as, all things considered, a fitting way to respond to the tragedy of unwanted pregnancies

Story here.

We are such a broken, fallible church ...

"We are, after all, the church of the Medicis and the Borgias, the Papal States and the Avignon Papacy, the Documents of Discovery and anti-Modernism, the condemnation of "mixed" marriages and the rejection of the U.S. policy of separation of church and state. It may behoove us to be a bit more compassionate in our condemnations and a bit more humble in our attempts at political dialogue."

Thus writes Sister Joan Chittister, who is "a Benedictine Sister of Erie [and] a best-selling author and well-known international lecturer on topics of justice, peace, human rights, women's issues, and contemporary spirituality in the Church and in society."  Read the column in which Sister Joan made the above-quoted statement, here. 

I second Michael S's recommendation

I was going to recommend that MOJ-readers read an op-ed, and then noticed that Michael S had already done so (here).  So let me just second Michael's recommendation.  The author of the op-ed, Leah Ward Sears, "stepped down this week as Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. In 1992, she became the first woman -- and youngest person -- appointed to Georgia's highest court."  And since we're talking about Georgia, where I now live (assuming that Atlanta is part of Georgia, which is not clear), let me add that Justice Sears is African American.

After reading the op-ed (here), consider this:  The emergence of same-sex marriage is no threat to the future of traditional marriage, but even if you disagree with me about that, our casual attitude toward divorce is (as Mary Ann Glendon once suggested to me) a much more serious threat--and yet we spend much less time and energy addressing *that* threat.  Why are our priorities so skewed?!

The Obama Administration calls for increased abortion access at UN

Story here.

Place, flourishing, mobility, meritocracy, etc.

It's too big to summarize well here, but I think MOJ readers would enjoy the fascinating conversation that is rollicking along at First Things' "Postmodern Conservative" blog (here) and "Front Porch Republic" (here).  Take a look also at Jody Bottum's contribution, at "First Thoughts (here).  And, for a refresher, check out the many MOJ posts -- including this one -- regarding Philip Bess's work on urbanism.  Great, challenging stuff.

Welcome to Greg Alexander

I am pleased to announce that Prof. Greg Alexander, an accomplished Property scholar at Cornell -- and the colleague of our own Steve Shiffrin and Eduardo Penalver -- has agreed to join our merry MOJ band of Catholic Legal Theory bloggers.  Welcome, Greg!  (For a very helpful electronic collection of Greg's scholarship, go here.)

"Let's end disposable marriage"

Leah Ward Sears, former Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court, writes from a gut wrenching personal persptective:

The coupling and uncoupling we've become accustomed to undermines our democracy, destroys our families and devastates the lives of our children, who are not as resilient as we may wish to think. The one-parent norm, which is necessary and successful in many cases, nevertheless often creates a host of other problems, from poverty to crime, teen pregnancy and drug abuse.

Forgiveness

I have just posted a new paper in which I try to develop a Thomistic account of interpersonal forgiveness.  Aruging that forgiveness is the form love takes on the part of a person who has been offended, I resist the claims of those who would assimilate forgiveness to a conditional act such as reconciliation.  My account of forgiveness begins in natural human teleology and proceeds to consider what grace adds in terms of our ability to love ourselves and then our offenders. Comments would be welcome.

"Honduras Defends its Democracy"

From a WSJ op-ed yesterday:

Hugo Chávez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's constitution.

It seems that President Mel Zelaya miscalculated when he tried to emulate the success of his good friend Hugo in reshaping the Honduran Constitution to his liking.

But Honduras is not out of the Venezuelan woods yet. Yesterday the Central American country was being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo himself. The Organization of American States, having ignored Mr. Zelaya's abuses, also wants him back in power. It will be a miracle if Honduran patriots can hold their ground.

For the rest, click here.

Congratulations and Best Wishes to Dean Patricia O'Hara

Today is the last day of Dean Patricia O'Hara's deanship at the Notre Dame Law School.  I joined the faculty of the Law School in the summer of 1999, at the same time that she became our dean.  Ten years later, my colleagues and I are in a beautiful new building, working with outstanding students among excellent scholars, and we are as strongly committed as ever to the project of building a law-school community that is interesting and important, and preeminent, precisely because it is distinctively Catholic.  Everyone who thinks the "Catholic legal education" project is a worthy one -- and I hope many do! -- have many reasons to be grateful to Dean O'Hara for her leadership and good stewardship.  Best wishes to her, and God's blessings.

Can property crimes be "extraordinarily evil?"

Hofstra law prof (and MoJ-friend) Ron Colombo and his friends at The Conglomerate are having an interesting debate about whether Bernie Madoff's actions are properly labeled "extraordinarily evil."