In reading about the decision of the U.S. bishops' doctrine committee to condemn a 2007 book by Sr. Elizabeth Johnson of Fordham University, my thoughts turned back to another story of ecclesiastic condemnation in the late 19th-century regarding the writings of Henry George. Back then, some U.S. prelates argued that condemnations were ill-suited to the American temperament and were likely to produce more harm than good.
Bless their hearts, the Vermont House of Representatives passed a bill that puts the Green Mountain state on the path to a single-payer health care system. At a time when many states are looking for ways to frustrate the health care reform law, how welcoming to find a state that is moving the ball further than the White House could move it last year. A single-payer health care system is the best solution, and always has been, and ,yes, it is socialized medicine and I am all for it.
(H/T- Ben Smith at Politico)
Father Ian Ker wrote the definitive biography of Cardinal, and now Blessed, John Henry Newman and was honored by the Holy Father at the Mass of Beatification for Newman last year. He will be giving a lecture at Catholic University on April 27, 2011 at 4:15 on the topic, "Newman's Idea of a University - Some Misunderstandings." The lecture is part of the year-long festivites commemorating the inauguration of John garvey as President of the Catholic University of America, all organized around the theme "Intellect and Virtue." The lecture will be held in the Great Room at the Pryzbyla Center on campus. This is a must-attend lecture.
Bill Galston, of the Brookings Institution, is a very smart man and I disagree with him very rarely. But, in a post at New Republic this morning, he gives President Obama some really bad advice about answering the forthcoming budget proposals from Cong. Paul Ryan.
Ryan is one of the stars of the new GOP - he is articulate and smart, and he seems to know the budget inside and out, better than almost any of his colleagues to be sure. But, his proposals, if they track with his "Roadmap," are likely to take aim at some of the core programs Democrats hold dear, starting with Social Security and Medicare.
Amy Sullivan, who is one of the few journalists who really understand religion and the religio-political landscape, looks at Newt Gingrich's attempts to reach out to Evangelical voters in a post at Time magazine. It is more than passing strange that the new Catholic Gingrich should be courting Rev. John Hagee who thinks Catholicism is the "great whore." But, with Donald Trump becoming a birther and Michelle Bachmann considering the race (for those who think Sarah Palin is just too much of a nerdy intellectual), the GOP presidential sweepstakes promises to be strange indeed.
Sir Isaiah Berlin begins his justly famous essay on Tolstoy by invoking a fragment of poetry found in Athens and attributed to Aeschylus. The fragment read: “The fox knows many things; the hedgehog knows one big thing.” Berlin than goes on to categorize certain great contributors to Western civilization based on whether they were foxes or hedgehogs, whether they pursue many ends or relate all ends to a central objective or theme, whether their ideas exhibit centripetal or centrifugal tendencies, whether they are pluralists or monists. Among the foxes, Berlin puts Shakespeare, Herodotus, Aristotle, Montaigne, Erasmus, Moilere, Goethe, Pushkin, Balzac and Joyce. Among the hedgehogs, he places Dante, Plato, Lucretius, Pascal. Hegel, Dostoevsky, Ibsen and Proust.
Cardinal Angelo Scola of Venice, who has been at the forefront of inter-religious and inter-cultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims has some interesting comments about the situation in Libya at Sussidiario.
Among other things, Scola says, "What I can observe is that we Europeans are often victims of a strong presumption. We think we know how to evaluate and solve problems without taking account of the testimony of those who live in these situations. This often prevents us from considering all the factors in play." It seems to me that President Obama's cautious approach to the situation reflects, in part, this concern that Scola pinpoints, the sense that "we know best in the West" which, as we learned tragically in Iraq, is not always the case.
The question of whether or not hell is empty is an old, but it is getting new life because of a forthcoming book by an evangelical preacher who holds the universalist position. Father Robert Barron who teaches theology at Mundelein recaps the history of the debate and sides with the position of the great Swiss theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar, namely, that we have reason to hope that hell is empty.
This article recalled an event in the 1990s, I can't remember exactly when. The Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, made a reference to Balthasar's teaching in this regard at one of his Wednesday General Audiences. It happened to be during the summertime when Cardinal Raztinger was on holiday. The Italian press had a field day with headlines that said, as I recall, "While Ratzinger is away, Pope becomes heretic." But, Balthasar catches something important, and it is the thing that drove Pope John Paul II in his finer moments. Of course we can't know if hell is empty, but in contemplating the power of the Cross, we must hope that it is so.
[Update - It has been called to my attention that Cardinal McCarrick spoke before the Senate panel representing the USCCB, so his words are not simply reflective of his individual judgment but reflect the will of the corporate body of bishops. This is an important distinction.]
Among those testifying before a Senate panel to defend the rights of Muslims to practice their faith was Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop emeritus of Washington. McCarrick said, "A justified concern for security and the appropriate pursuit of those who pervert religion to attack others cannot be allowed to turn into a new form of religious discrimination and intolerance," the prelate pointed out....This is why we stand with our Muslim brothers and sisters in defense of their dignity and rights, just as we welcome and expect their reciprocity and solidarity with us when the rights of Christians and other religious groups are violated around the world."
Does President Obama's decision to intervene in Libya, and the rationale for that intervention he set forth in his speech Monday night, amount to an "Obama Doctrine?" That is the question posed to a group of analysts at the New York Times.
It is difficult to discern the kind of sweeping vision in the President's words that we normally associate with the word doctrine. This President, to his great credit, seems to recognize that enshrining a doctrine runs the risk of becoming doctrinaire. Indeed, you could say that the Obama Doctrine is that we should avoid doctrines. We should look at the facts on the ground. We should analyze the threats to our security, our interests and our values posed by problems in the world, and posed, too, by the prospect of intervention itself which always brings a host of unintended consequences. We should assess our ability to affect positive change, e.g., is an American fleet nearby and do local political conditions favor an intervention?