Zenit:: Holy See on World Migration

Holy See on World Migration

"4 Important Factors, That Give ... World Migration One of the First Places in ... Discussion"

ROME, JUNE 12, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is an unofficial translation of an address given by Archbishop Antonio Maria Vegliò, president of the Pastoral Council for Migrants and Travelers, at the 19th plenary session of that dicastery, held May 26-28 in Rome.

* * *

Introduction

The commitment of the universal Church on behalf of human mobility is pursued at various levels, starting from the parochial and diocesan structures to the national offices of the Episcopal Conferences and to the international ones that seek the cooperation of others Organisms and Institutions. The Pontifical Council gladly welcomes the strong desire of these offices to participate and cooperate, by aiming at fulfilling its task to assist the Pope in "the pastoral concern of the Church to bear on the special needs of those who have been forced to leave their native land or who do not have one" (Pastor Bonus, no. 149).

Today human promotion, within our own specific action plan, is considered under two main viewpoints, that at times follow each other, or other times become parallel or run jointly together: 1. considering migration in its poverty, suffering and discomfort, and therefore the action required is of first aid to meet the numerous and constant emergencies; 2. seeing people on the move as a resource and investment, and thus in need to be accompanied in order to be progressively adjusted to the new social and cultural environment and reach their full integration. The Church is committed to both tasks. Actually she expresses her pastoral concern working together with governmental institutions or volunteers at national and international levels, that offer their resources and expertises to care for people on the move. The Church tries to establish a relationship of agreement with all these organisms, knowing that especially today the field of human mobility requires their attention and cooperation, by being in dialogue and practicing the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity.

1. The Holy Father's Pronouncements

In 2006, Pope Benedict XVI, referring to the Convention of the protection of rights of all migrant workers and their families, that came into effect on July 1st 2003, underscores the fact that "The Church encourages the ratification of the international legal instruments that aim to defend the rights of migrants, refugees and their families and, through its various Institutions and Associations, offers its advocacy that is becoming more and more necessary"[1].

Solidarity and subsidiarity are the cardinal principles of the Social Doctrine of the Church, on which a relationship agreement and a common goal are established for all the social, cultural, educational, institutional and ecclesial organisms in order to assess and promote models of integration and cohesion of all citizens, notwithstanding their juridical status. The Servant of God, John Paul II, on this matter says that "The Church invites all people of goodwill to make their own contribution so that every person is respected and discriminations that debase human dignity are banned. Her action, sustained by prayer, is inspired by the Gospel and guided by her age-old experience. The Ecclesial Community's activity is also an incentive to the leaders of peoples and international communities, institutions and organizations of various kinds involved in the phenomenon of migration. An expert in humanity, the Church fulfils her task by enlightening consciences with her teaching and witness, and by encouraging appropriate initiatives to ensure that immigrants find the right place within individual societies"[2].

Thus the Pontifical Magisterium has underscored the richness and importance of the presence and activity of Organisms and Institutions within the various contexts of human mobility, all over the world. Dialogue and exchange of experiences, especially, strengthen the willingness of cooperation and the desire to find together ways to respond to the various needs. Keeping with their own specificity, all these forces continue to support the regional, national and international institutions for the whole well-being of the human person and of all human people. And this is what the Encyclical Caritas in veritate refers to as an authentic development, that "if it does not involve the whole man and every man, it is not true development" (no. 18). This also includes women and men, children, young and elderly people, who freely or forced, undertake the journey of migration[3].

On the occasion of the celebration of the first Forum of non-Governmental Organizations (ONG) of Catholic inspiration, held in Rome on 30 November - 2 December 2007, the Holy Father expressed his appreciation for their special work by saying that "Taking part in this important meeting are representatives of groups long associated with the presence and activity of the Catholic laity at the international level, along with members of other, more recent groups which have come into being as part of the current process of global integration. Also present are groups mainly committed to advocacy, and others chiefly concerned with the concrete management of cooperative projects promoting development. Some of your organizations are recognized by the Church as public and private associations of the lay faithful, others share in the charisma of certain institutes of consecrated life, while still others enjoy only civil recognition and include non-Catholics and non-Christians among their members. All of you, however, have in common a passion for promoting human dignity".

Benedict XVI also added that "This unity of purpose can only be achieved through a variety of roles and activities. The multilateral diplomacy of the Holy See, for the most part, strives to reaffirm the great fundamental principles of international life, since the Church's specific contribution consists in helping «to form consciences in political life and to stimulate greater insight into the authentic requirements of justice as well as greater readiness to act accordingly» (Deus Caritas Est, 28). On the other hand, «the direct duty to work for a just ordering of society is proper to the lay faithful» - and in the context of international life this includes Christian diplomats and members of Non-governmental Organizations - who «are called to take part in public life in a personal capacity» and «to configure social life correctly, respecting its legitimate autonomy and cooperating with other citizens according to their respective competences and fulfilling their own responsibility» (ibid., 29)".

Finally, in order to underline the importance of cooperation, the Pope concluded his discourse by saying that "What is needed, in fact, is a spirit of solidarity conducive for promoting as a body those ethical principles which, by their very nature and their role as the basis of social life, remain non-negotiable. A spirit of solidarity imbued with a strong sense of fraternal love leads to a better appreciation of the initiatives of others and a deeper desire to cooperate with them. Thanks to this spirit, one will always, whenever it is useful or necessary, work in collaboration either with the various non-governmental organizations or the representatives of the Holy See, with due respect for their differences of nature, institutional ends and methods of operation. [...] When experienced in solidarity, legitimate pluralism and diversity will lead not to division and competition, but to ever greater effectiveness"[4].

We should not forget also that the Encyclical Caritas in veritate offers a special reflection in the chapter regarding "the cooperation of the human family". Speaking of "unrelenting growth of global interdependence" (no. 67), the Holy Father proposes the creation of a "world political authority" as urgent and necessary "to manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration" (ibid.).

In the context of joint responsibility of International States and Organisms, it is also important and interesting the theme of intercultural dialogue, that opens new ways for people to come together. As a matter of fact, "the unity of the human family does not submerge the identities of individuals, peoples and cultures, but makes them more transparent to each other and links them more closely in their legitimate diversity" (ibid., no. 53). This is the way to form people to a global mentality that fosters the encounter of people and cultures and requires the welcoming of differences, entering into dialogue and the exchange of gifts. Cultural pluralism is an opportunity to look for answers in order to respond to the most important questions of the human person, such as the meaning of life, history, suffering and death. Here we have an opportunity to educate people to peace as an opportunity of renewal for the administrative, political and social places of society, in the various contexts of life, family, school and Church[5].

Caritas in veritate definitely includes a strong desire for intercultural education, in order to motivate and strengthen the effort to consolidate the foundation of peace, that is tolerance, justice, goodness and forgiveness. In this perspective, intercultural formation is offered today as the main way to resolve the difficult problem of harmonizing the unity of the human family with the diversity of the peoples that form it.

2. Some recent Documents of our Dicastery

Our recent documents, in continuity with the Social Doctrine of the Church, shed light on the relationship between Christian revelation and human family, for "the whole Church, in all her being and acting - when she proclaims, when she celebrates, when she performs works of charity - is engaged in promoting integral human development", considering that the "authentic human development concerns the whole of the person in every single dimension" (Caritas in veritate, nr. 11).

For this reason, in order to enhance the joint responsibility of International States and Organisms, in 2001 the Pontifical Council edited and published the "Guidelines for the Pastoral Care of Tourism", where it is stated that "the principle of co-responsibility is the fundamental condition imposed on the touristic activity, whose planning and profit management are requested from its tour managers, civil authorities and local communities. The practise of this principle must be adequately regulated by the public authorities in line with the international principles that regulate the cooperation of states and the institutional tasks that promote the global development of the country" (nr. 12). The appeal to dialogue and cooperation comes up repeatedly in this Document, as in nr. 33, that encourages the Episcopal Conferences "to maintain a dialogue with the public authorities and other organisms involved, in order to establish ways of collaboration suitable for initiatives of planning and supervising the touristic activity"[6]. This statement, surely, makes clear the preoccupation that tourism develops in a selfish, consumerist and insufficient way, by also becoming an occasion of exploitation and degradation, when it creates "immoral or even perverted forms of conduct, as in the case of so-called sex tourism, to which many human beings are sacrificed even at a tender age", as the Holy Father writes in Caritas in veritate (nr. 61)[7]. It is then the responsibility of Governments, International Organizations and the Church, with her vigilant and charitable presence, to protect the human rights, in order to make it accessible for everyone to make use of the natural, cultural and artistic goods. Tourism must aim to be an opportunity of knowledge, meeting and also growth in the way towards the unity of the human family.

Next, in 2004, John Paul II approved the publication of the Instruction Erga migrantes caritas Christi, that pays proper attention to the signs of the times and the changes of ways of migration, by calling to unity and communion of people as a providential occasion to show mutual respect and defend the dignity and human life in all its forms. This shows that "the Pontifical Council, through its superiors and officials, is at times present in the international arena, representing the Holy See at meetings of multilateral organisations" (n. 32), in order to offer with its work the promotion and support of people involved in human mobility, in various ways. Therefore, among the many tasks of this Pontifical Council, the Instruction suggests also "to study, encourage, and animate the pastoral activity of regional and continental organisms of ecclesial communion to co-ordinate and harmonise initiatives in favour of migrants" (Juridical Pastoral Regulations, art. 22 § 2)[8].

Hence, our Dicastery published in 2006 the "Guidelines for the Pastoral Care of Gypsies". In no. 50 we read that "The Church too - through the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, the Representatives and Observers of the Holy See at International Organisations, and the ecclesiastical authorities in various countries - is called on to mediate so that the decisions of the national and international Organisations in favour of Gypsies may be welcomed by local authorities and have an influence in everyday life"[9].

The following year, with special attention to the Pastoral Care of the Road, we published specific "Guidelines" for this sector. In regards to our theme, we read in no. 106 the recommendation to adopt a "multi-dimensional approach", in which "there is a full cooperation between public and private Organisms, in order to eliminate completely sexual exploitation"[10].

Finally, in the "Manual for Chaplains and Pastoral Workers for the Maritime Apostolate", published in 2007[11], no. 13 § 2 points out that "the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People should encourage and foster cooperation and reciprocal coordination of projects among Episcopal Conferences and local Ordinaries. This same Council will establish relations with institutes of consecrated life and with associations and organisations that can cooperate at the international level with the Work of the Maritime Apostolate". Then, in the appendix VI, no. 11, the Document indicates among the objectives of the International Fishing Committee the one of "Therefore advocacy for good governance, is to be encouraged especially towards a) inclusiveness (empowerment, decentralization) b) lawfulness (enforcement, legal reform) c) accountability (ensure that governments are answerable and accountable and open to challenge)".

3. Pastoral care and co-responsibility

What I have been saying so far recalls at least four important factors, that give the phenomenon of world migration one of the first places in the national and international discussion, by calling for the responsibility of all, and, in a special manner, for our interest in the specific pastoral dimension.

The first factor, the most apparent, is the demographic one. Generally speaking, welcoming Countries are experiencing a rapid aging process and a decreasing in the local population. At the same time, Countries of emigration grow rapidly, especially Asia and Africa, where the majority of people is still at a very young age.

The second factor is the economic one. Many developed Countries have to deal with the decrease of availability of work force, the financial pressure to guarantee pensions and medical assistance to the aging population, which are ever-increasing. Also, many Countries in the Gulf area are contracting numerous migrant workers in order to satisfy their economic growth, due to their oil fields. At the same time, men and women in poor Countries have a hard time finding jobs and look for them in rich Countries, especially in Europe and North America.

The third factor is culture, a vast sector that includes ethnicity, language, religion, customs and traditions[12]. In contrast with the past, today people on the move are often different, on a cultural level, from the welcoming people. For instance, after the Second World War, many migrants left their poor Countries from Southern Europe. Today, instead, they have a very limited professional education and are less skilled in comparison to the local people, and are also culturally and ethnically different, creating preoccupations as far as their integration and cultural belonging[13].

Finally, the fourth and crucial factor is national security. Terrorist attacks in the first decade of the new millennium (in USA, Great Britain, Spain, Indonesia and other Countries) along with the violent crimes perpetrated by immigrants and widely reported by the media, have generated reactions of rejection against migrants, also fomenting the prejudice for national safety. Consequently, many Countries have reinforced their border controls, limited their migratory policy and established new procedures to check on people arriving from specific Countries. Because of all these reasons, international human mobility will undoubtedly remain in the near future as a main topic in national and international discussions. Also, it is certain that in the next few years the debate on how to administer the international migration movements will become increasingly controversial, creating divisions and opposition among International Governments and Organizations.

On her part, the Church keeps offering a precious contribution in the complex and vast phenomenon of human mobility, by becoming the spokesperson for people more vulnerable and marginalised, and also by willingly valuing the migrants and itinerant people, within the ecclesial community and society, as an important element for mutual enrichment and the construction of the one family of peoples, in a fruitful intercultural exchange of gifts.

Thank you.

--- --- ---

[1]Benedict XVI, Message for the 2007 World Day of Migrant and Refugee: People on the Move XXXVIII (102, 2006) 42. Benedict XVI has also affirmed that "it is important to protect migrants and their families with the help of legislative, juridical and administrative measures and the support of system of services, centres of attention and structure for social and pastoral assistance": Angelus of 14.01.2007: People on the Move XXXIX (104, 2007) 31.

[2]John Paul II, Message for the 1998 World Day of Migrant and Refugee: People on the Move XXVIII (81, 1999), 5. It is important to reiterate that the "International Convention for the protection of rights of migrant workers and their families" was adopted by the UN General Assembly's resolution 45/158 on 18 December 1990, and came into effect on 1 July 2003. On various occasions, the Holy See has urged those Governments that have not yet ratified this important international agreement, to do so (see for instance Erga migrantes Caritas Christi, n. 6). Other international agreements are still waiting to be ratified, like the ones listed in the action Plan (n. 78) of the "Conference of revision of Durban", that was held in 2009, as a follow up to the "World Conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance", held at Durban, in South Africa, in 2001.

[3]Cf. A. M. Vegliò, "Carità e verità anche per i migranti": Libertà Civili 1 (2010) 116-127.

[4]The whole text is available at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2007/december/documents.

[5]This entails on one side a dynamic process of mutual exchange and relation, and on the other hand an integration that requires the participation in creating and changing the social relations. In this process it is important the involvement of the young generations of migrants, to whom Benedict XVI has dedicated the "Message for the 2007 World Day of Migrant and Refugee": People on the Move XXXIX (105, 2007) 55-58.

[6] L'Osservatore Romano, Suppl. al N. 157 (42.795), 12 July 2001.

[7]See also Pontifical Council for the pastoral care of migrants and itinerant people, Pastoral Message for the 2009 World Day of Tourism. It is a valuable reference the collection edited by the Pontifical Council for the pastoral care of migrants and itinerant people, Magistero Pontificio e Documenti della Santa Sede sulla Pastorale del Turismo, LEV, Città del Vaticano 2009.

[8]Regarding the Pastoral Care of Refugees, our Pontifical Council is now editing a specific document, that we hope it will be published soon.

[9]Cf. People on the Move XXXVIII (100 Suppl., 2006) 33-79.

[10]Cf. People on the Move XXXIX (104 Suppl., 2007) 143-192.

[11]Cf. People on the Move XL (106 Suppl. II, 2008).

[12] Cfr. A. M. Vegliò, "Accogliere i migranti: minaccia, dovere o diritto?": Aggiornamenti sociali 7-8 (2009) 521-527.

[13]The school in a special way becomes the place for dialogue among cultures and education of youth to co-habitation, as our XVII Plenary Assembly reiterated on "Migrazione e itineranza da e per (verso) i Paesi a maggioranza islamica" - (15-17 May 2006) in its Final Document, nn. 34-37: People on the Move XXXVIII (101 Suppl., 2006).

I believe that the rights to move and to use land to sustain life are not the same as the right to join another political community. However, if secular governments are unwilling to part with the territory they control, even though land is a common good, then how can the right to move (for the sake of improving life) not be transformed into the right to immigrate?

Papal Address to Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy

Papal Address to Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy

"Assume a True 'Passion' for Ecclesial Communion"

VATICAN CITY, JUNE 14, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is the address Benedict XVI delivered today upon receiving in audience members of the Pontifical Ecclesiastical Academy. The academy is responsible for training candidates for the Holy See diplomatic service.

* * *

Venerated Brothers in the Episcopate
Dear Priests,

I always welcome you with joy for our usual meeting, which offers me the occasion to greet and encourage you and to propose to you some reflections on the meaning of the work in the papal representations. I greet the president, Archbishop Beniamino Stella, who follows your formation with determination and ecclesial sense, and I thank him for the words he addressed to me on behalf of you all. A happy thought goes to his collaborators and to the Franciscan Missionary Sisters of the Child Jesus.

I would like to reflect briefly on the concept of representation. Not rarely, it is considered in a partial way in contemporary understanding: in fact, there is a tendency to associate it to something merely external, formal, not very personal.

The service of representation for which you have been preparing yourselves is instead something far more profound because it is participation in the "sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum," which characterizes the ministry of the Roman Pontiff. It is, because of this, an eminently personal reality, destined to influence profoundly the one who is called to undertake such a particular task. Precisely in this ecclesial perspective, the exercise of representation implies the exigency to receive and nourish with special attention in one's priestly life some dimensions, which I would like to point out, though concisely, so that they will be a motive of reflection in your path of formation.

First of all, to cultivate a full interior adherence to the person of the Pope, to his Magisterium and to the universal ministry; full adherence, that is, of the one who has received the task to confirm brothers in the faith (cf. Luke 22:32) and "is the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of the unity, be it of the bishops or of the multitude of the faithful" (Ecumenical Vatican Council II, Constitution "Lumen Gentium," 23). In the second place, to assume, as style of life and as daily priority, an attentive care -- a true "passion" -- for ecclesial communion. Again, to represent the Roman Pontiff means to have the capacity to be a solid "bridge," a sure channel of communication between the particular Churches and the Apostolic See: on one hand, putting at the disposition of the Pope and of his collaborators an objective, correct and profound view of the ecclesial and social reality in which one lives, on the other, being committed to transmit the norms, indications and guidelines that emanate from the Holy See, not in a bureaucratic way, but with profound love of the Church and with the help of personal trust patiently built, respecting and appreciating, at the same time, the efforts of the Bishops and the path of the particular Churches to which one is invited.

As can be intuited, the service you are preparing to carry out calls for full determination and generous willingness to sacrifice, if necessary, personal intuitions, one's own projects and other possibilities of exercising the priestly ministry. In a perspective of faith and of concrete response to God's call -- to be nourished always in an intense relationship with the Lord -- this does not devalue each one's originality but, on the contrary, is extremely enriching: the effort to be in synch with the universal perspective and with the service to the unity of God's flock, peculiar to the Petrine ministry, is in fact able to value, in a singular way, the gifts and talents of each one, according to that logic that Saint Paul well expressed to the Christians of Corinth (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:1-31). In this way, the papal representative -- in agreement with those who collaborate with him -- truly becomes a sign of the presence and of the charity of the Pope. And if that is a benefit for the life of all the particular Churches, it is so especially in those particularly delicate or difficult situations in which, for varied reasons, the Christian community finds itself having to live. Properly viewed, it is an authentic priestly service, characterized by an analogy not remote from the representation of Christ, typical of the priest that, as such, has an intrinsic sacrificial dimension.

Precisely from here derives also the peculiar style of the service of representation that you will be called to exercise with State Authorities or with international organizations. In fact, also in these realms the figure and manner of presence of the Nuncio, of the Apostolic Delegate, of the Permanent Observer, is determined not only by the environment in which one operates but first of all and primarily, by him that one is called to represent. This puts the Papal Representative in a particular position in regard to other Ambassadors or Envoys. He, in fact, will always be profoundly identified, in a supernatural sense, with the one whom he represents. To be spokesman of the Vicar of Christ could be demanding, at times extremely exacting, but it will never be mortifying or depersonalizing. It becomes, instead, an original way of carrying out one's priestly vocation.

Dear students, I hope that your house might be, as my predecessor Paul VI liked to say, a "higher school of charity," my prayer accompanies you, while I entrust you to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mater Ecclesiae, and to St. Anthony Abbot, patron of the Academy. To you all, and to all your dear ones, I willingly impart my blessing.

Hmmm. TOTAL METAPHYSICS by Brother Bruno of Jesus

William Cavanaugh on torture

Dawn Eden: My revised master's thesis is now available (via Mark Shea)

Does Vatican Council II Allow for Errors in Sacred Scripture? by Brian W. Harrison

Aristotle illiberal vision of community

Jowett's translation of Politics III, 3:

...[F]or even supposing that such a community were to meet in one place, but that each man had a house of his own, which was in a manner his state, and that they made alliance with one another, but only against evil-doers; still an accurate thinker would not deem this to be a state, if their intercourse with one another was of the same character after as before their union. It is clear then that a state is not a mere society, having a common place, established for the prevention of mutual crime and for the sake of exchange. These are conditions without which a state cannot exist; but all of them together do not constitute a state, which is a community of families and aggregations of families in well-being, for the sake of a perfect and self-sufficing life. Such a community can only be established among those who live in the same place and intermarry. Hence arise in cities family connections, brotherhoods, common sacrifices, amusements which draw men together. But these are created by friendship, for the will to live together is friendship. The end of the state is the good life, and these are the means towards it. And the state is the union of families and villages in a perfect and self-sufficing life, by which we mean a happy and honorable life.

I was thinking of communities in which racial or ethnic segregation exists -- can they really be called "communities," except equivocally? In the South, there was no intermarriage allowed, along with minor forms of segregation in public places, segregation of schools, and so on. If members of another group are not treated as members of a political community (and are not slaves or have not been deprived of citizenship or the rights to participate in political life as some punishment), then how can they be subject to the laws of that community? I am not claiming that citizens must explicitly consent to a law before it can be promulgated. But even if they have citizenship and are "represented," if they are not treated as members of the community then isn't there a problem with consistency? (No, since the states were forced by the Federal Government to give blacks the right to vote. But this, along with Reconstruction, and the consequences of the Civil Rights Act, show that attempts by the Federal government to eradicate racism cannot succeed. This must be accomplished from within those societies.)

If, for example, most whites did not want to associate with blacks or treat them as "their own," shouldn't they have let the blacks go their own way, forming their own communities and governments? But in this fallen world, who would let this happen? People want to hold on to their territory, even if they have more than enough land to satisfy their needs. (I'll leave aside the historical question of how many whites were actually racist and how many just acquiesced to the state of things.)

Is there anything more to society within liberal/social contract theory than what Aristotle would call alliances between individuals for mutual benefit? A theory about the origin, nature, and purpose of government that is predicated upon what can be only called barbarism (the acceptance of the moral idiot -- the individual without any deep social ties and obligations -- as the norm) cannot but be deficient.

Or is there more to social contract theory than this?

For more on racial discrimination, see this and this.

Orthodox-Catholic Consultation Examines Steps to Unity (from this comment at Eirenikon)

Monsignor Paul McPartlan was a participant.

Peter Gilbert, Pages from a lost book

ByzTex: Bishop Tikhon's first lecture webcast available

Dietrich von Hildebrand Legacy Project Rome Conference

The Christian Personalism of Dietrich von Hildebrand:
Exploring His Philosophy of Love

List of speakers

Supposedly there are some videos of the lectures available... ah, they are at UStream.

DvHLP on Facebook

Finally!

Pope Benedict XVI comes to St. Thomas Aquinas in his Wednesday series.

Zenit: On St. Thomas Aquinas
He "Showed There Is a Natural Harmony Between Christian Faith and Reason"

Zenit: Thought, Work, Changes of Migrant Council
Summary of May Plenary Session

Mirror of Justice: Kevin Flannery on the Phoenix case

Father Kevin Flannery S. J., who teaches philosophy at the Gregorian, has this to say about Cathy Kaveny's position on the Phoenix case:

--- If one follows Thomas Aquinas’s action theory—and I would argue that the Church’s action theory is Thomas’s action theory—the basic error of Kathy’s argument lies in the sentence, "The immediate aim (object) of the procedure is simply to separate the baby from its dependence on the mother’s system, not to kill the baby, either as an end in itself or as a means to another end." The object of the procedure is not the "aim" in the sense of what the agent hopes to achieve but rather the fetus’s skull (or spine or whatever). Scholars who oppose traditional Catholic teaching on cases such as the craniotomy case (and also, for instance, on the use of condoms where one spouse is HIV positive) tend to argue that the object of a human action cannot be physical object such as a skull. This goes against what Thomas says, for instance, at ST 1-2.18.2 ad 1. He also maintains that a moral object (such as a baby’s skull) is a moral object in so far as it is part of the larger structure of a human act [ST 2-2.58.3 ad 3]. These are not incompatible propositions.

In any case, it is the object of the external act that gives it its species, "what it is." What the external act is has a bearing upon the human act’s moral character: that is why Kathy does not want to say that the act is (has the species of) (e.g.) crushing a fetus’s skull. If one knows that such an act will kill the fetus, it is called ‘killing a fetus,’ i.e., killing a human being. The act performed in the Phoenix case apparently had a fetus’s skull (or some other vital part) as its object; that object makes that act to be an act about that object, not about separating the baby from its dependence on the mother’s system—or, at least, not solely about that. Anscombe would not have tolerated such selective descriptions of what one was intending. As she says in paragraph 25 of Intention: "The idea that one can determine one’s intention by making such a little speech is bosh."

I think I'd have to agree with those "scholars who oppose traditional Catholic teaching" -- the object of the act cannot be some thing, like the skull, by itself. The skull can be the matter of the object, but the object cannot be limited to it.

The (what is the word I am thinking of -- not proximate) remote end of the act may be to separate the baby from its dependence on the mother's body, but the proximate end, which is what the act achieves, is the crushing of the baby's skull, which does end the baby's life. Can one intend to crush the baby's skull without intending its death? I don't think the morality of the act can be "saved" through an attempt at double-effect reasoning.

Papal Address to Migrants and Travelers Council

Papal Address to Migrants and Travelers Council

"The Acquisition of Rights Goes Hand in Hand With the Acceptance of Duties"

VATICAN CITY, MAY 28, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of the address Benedict XVI gave today upon receiving in audience participants in the plenary session of the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Travelers.

The meeting, which was held this week in Rome, reflected on the topic: "Pastoral Care of Human Mobility Today, in the Context of the Co-Responsibility of States and of International Organizations."

* * *

Esteemed Cardinals,
Venerated Brothers in the Episcopate and the Priesthood,
Dear Brothers and Sisters!

I welcome you with great joy on the occasion of the Plenary Session of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers. I greet the president of the dicastery, Archbishop Antonio Maria Vegliò -- whom I thank for his words of happy cordiality -- the secretary, the members, the consultors and the officials. I wish all fruitful work.

You chose as the topic of this Session the "Pastoral Care of Human Mobility Today, in the Context of the Co-Responsibility of States and of International Organizations." The movement of peoples has been for some time the object of international congresses, which seek to guarantee the protection of fundamental human rights and to combat discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance. They are documents that furnish principles and techniques of supranational protection.

Appreciable is the effort to build a system of shared norms that contemplate the rights and duties of the foreigner, as well as those of the host community, taking into account, in the first place, the dignity of every human person, created by God in his image and likeness (cf. Genesis 1:26). Obviously, the acquisition of rights goes hand in hand with the acceptance of duties. All, in fact, enjoy rights and duties that are not arbitrary, because they stem from human nature itself, as Blessed Pope John XXIII's encyclical "Pacem in Terris" affirms: "Every human being is a person, that is a nature gifted with intelligence and free will; and hence subject of rights and duties which are, because of this, universal, inviolable, inalienable" (No. 5).

Therefore, the responsibility of states and of international organizations is specified in the commitment to influence questions that, respecting the competencies of the national legislator, involve the whole family of peoples, and exact an agreement between governments and the organisms most directly concerned. I am thinking of problems such as the entry or forced removal of the foreigner, the enjoyment of the goods of nature, of culture and of art, of science and technology, which must be accessible to all. Not to be forgotten is the important role of mediation so that national and international resolutions, which promote the universal common good, finds acceptance with local entities and are reflected in daily life.

National and international laws which promote the common good and respect for the person encourage the hopes and efforts being made to achieve a world social order founded on peace, fraternity and universal co-operation, despite the critical phase international institutions are currently traversing as they concentrate on resolving crucial questions of security and development for everyone. It is true, unfortunately, that we are witnessing the re-emergence of particular instances in some areas of the world, but it is also true that some are reluctant to assume responsibility that should be shared.

Moreover, not yet extinguished is the longing of many to pull down the walls that divide and to establish ample agreements, also through legislative dispositions and administrative practices that foster integration, mutual exchange and reciprocal enrichment. In fact, prospects of coexistence between peoples can be offered through prudent and concerted lines for reception and integration, consenting to occasions of entry in legality, favoring the just right to the reuniting of families, asylum and refuge, compensating the necessary restrictive measures and opposing the disgraceful traffic of persons. Precisely here the various international organizations, in cooperation among themselves and with the states, can furnish their peculiar contribution in reconciling, with various modalities, the recognition of the rights of the person and the principle of national sovereignty, with specific reference to the exigencies of security, the public order and control of borders.

The fundamental rights of the person can be the focal point of the commitment of co-responsibility of the national and international institutions. This, then, is closely linked to "openness to life, which is the center of true development," as I confirmed in the encyclical "Caritas in Veritate" (cf. No. 28), where I also appealed to states to promote policies in favor of the centrality and integrity of the family (cf. ibid., No. 44).

On the other hand, it is evident that openness to life and the rights of the family must be confirmed in the various contexts, because "in a society in the process of globalization, the common good and the commitment to it must assume the dimensions of the whole human family, that is to say of the community of peoples and nations" (ibid., No. 7). The future of our societies rests on the meeting between peoples, on dialogue between cultures with respect to their identities and legitimate differences. In this scene the family retains its fundamental role. Because of this, the Church, with the proclamation of the Gospel of Christ in every sector of existence, carries forward "the commitment .... in favor not only of the individual migrant, but also of his family, place and resource of culture and life and factor of integration of values," as I reaffirmed in the Message for the World Day of the Migrant and the Refugee of the year 2006.

Dear brothers and sisters, it is also up to you to sensitize organizations that are dedicated to the world of migrants and itinerant people to forms of co-responsibility. This pastoral sector is linked to a phenomenon in constant expansion and, therefore, your role must translate into concrete answers of closeness and pastoral support of persons, taking into account the different local situations.

On each one of you I invoke the light of the Holy Spirit and the maternal protection of Our Lady, renewing my gratitude for the service that you render the Church and society. May the inspiration of Blessed Giovanni Battista Scalabrini, described as "Father of Migrants" by the Venerable John Paul II, and of whom we will remember the 105th anniversary of his birth in heaven next June 1, illumine your actions in favor of migrants and itinerant people and spur you to an ever more attentive charity, which will witness to them the unfailing love of God. For my part I assure you of my prayer, while blessing you from my heart.

[Translation by ZENIT]

THE REASON AND PURPOSE OF MATRIMONY by Matthew Buckley

The controversy that has arisen is the charge that the “good of the spouses” has now taken an equal place alongside that of the procreation and education of children in the ends of matrimony, and that this represents a change in the Church’s teaching. This assertion is deserving of a critical response.

Before discussing these passages in detail, the history of the matter requires some reflection. The Church had typically spoken of the ends of marriage in a hierarchical manner, ordering them as primary or secondary and emphasising the subordination of the secondary to the primary end. Now, in Gaudium et Spes, the section on matrimony does not contain this traditional terminology. This fact is cited as evidence that the Church has radically changed her understanding on the matter.

The claim that Gaudium et Spes represents a retreat by the Church on this teaching is one that has already been responded to by the Magisterium, which rejected this weakly-founded interpretation of the conciliar text. In a doctrinal note on the book Human Sexuality: New Directions in American Catholic Thought, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated the following, appealing to the comment of the theological commission on the text during the drafting stages of Gaudium et Spes:

“Furthermore, in regard to the teaching of Vatican II, we note here another mistaken notion. This book repeatedly states that the Council deliberately refused to retain the traditional hierarchy of primary and secondary ends of marriage, opening ‘the Church to a new and deeper understanding of the meaning and value of conjugal love’ (p. 125 and passim). On the contrary, the Commission of the Modi declared explicitly, replying to a proposal brought forward by many Fathers to put this hierarchical distinction into the text of n 48, ‘In a pastoral text which intends to institute a dialogue with the world, juridical elements are not required… In any case, the primordial importance of procreation and education is shown at least ten times in the text’ (cf. nos. 48 and 50).”22

In other words, the Council keeps intact this teaching, which is evidently brought out by the text whilst refraining from using the hierarchical terminology, not because it is rejecting it as wrong, but because of the pastoral nature of a document issued to the whole world. As we shall see, this general approach has been retained by the Magisterium since that time. For the Code of Canon Law in turn makes no mention of this hierarchical language, but rather states nothing with respect to priorities. It does, however, list “the good of the spouses” first, which would appear to be the foundation of the claim that it is out of accordance with tradition.

Music and Spirituality: To the Tune of St. Thomas Aquinas by Fr. Basil Cole, O.P.

Pope's Words to Centesimus Annus Foundation

Pope's Words to Centesimus Annus Foundation

"The Common Good Is the End That Gives Meaning to Progress"

VATICAN CITY, MAY 24, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is the address Benedict XVI delivered Saturday upon receiving in audience the participants in the 2010 International Conference of the Centesimus Annus Pro Pontifice Foundation titled "Development, Progress and Common Good."

* * *

Esteemed Cardinal,
Venerated Brothers in the Episcopate and Priesthood,
Illustrious and Dear Friends,

I am happy to greet you on the occasion of the congress promoted by the Centesimus Annus Pro Pontifice Foundation. I greet Cardinal Attilio Nicora, Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli and the other prelates and priests present. A special thought goes to the president, Doctor Domingo Sugranyes Bickel, whom I thank for his courteous words, and to you, dear advisers and members of the foundation, who wished to visit me with your relatives.

I appreciate that your meeting is focused on the relationship between "Development, Progress, Common Good." In fact, today more than ever, the human family can grow as a free society of free peoples only when globalization is guided by solidarity and the common good, as well as by social justice, all of which finds in the message of Christ and of the Church a precious source. The crisis and difficulties that international relations, nations, society and the economy suffer at present are, in fact, due to a great extent to the lack of trust and of an appropriate solidaristic, creative and dynamic inspiration oriented to the common good, which leads to authentically human relations of friendship, solidarity and reciprocity also "within" economic activity.

The common good is the end that gives meaning to progress and to development, which otherwise would be limited to the sole production of material goods. Progress and development are necessary, but if they are not oriented to the common good, they lead to the negative consequences of the prevalence of consumerism, waste, poverty and excess.

As I highlighted in the encyclical "Caritas in Veritate," one of the greatest risks in the present-day world is that "the ethical interaction of consciences and intelligences does not correspond to the de facto interdependence between men and peoples, from which might emerge as a result a truly human development" (No. 9). Such interaction, for example, seems to be too weak for those governing that, in face of renewed episodes of irresponsible speculation in confrontations with weaker countries, do not react with appropriate decisions for governing finances. Politics should have primacy over finance and ethics should guide every activity.

Without the point of reference represented by the universal common good it cannot be said that there is a true worldwide ethos and the corresponding will to live it, with appropriate institutions. It is now decisive that those goods be identified to which all peoples should have access in view of their human fulfillment. And this should be carried out not in any manner whatsoever, but in an ordered and harmonious manner. In fact, the common good is made up of many goods: of material, cognitive and institutional goods, as well of moral and spiritual goods, the latter [two] being superior over the former.

The commitment to the common good of the family of peoples, as for every society, entails, therefore, taking care of and of making use of a complex of institutions that structure juridically, civilly, politically, culturally global social living, in such a way that it takes the form of polis, of the city of man (cf. Ibid., 7). Therefore, one must ensure that the economic-productive order is socially responsible and to the measure of man, with a joint and unitary action on more planes, including the international (cf. Ibid., 57.67). Likewise, the consolidation must be sustained of constitutional, juridical and administrative systems in countries that still do not enjoy them fully. Together with economic aid must be exercised, therefore, aid geared to reinforcing the guarantees proper to the state of law, a just and efficient system of public order, in full respect of human rights, as well as truly democratic and participatory institutions (cf. Ibid., 41).

However, what is fundamental and a priority, in view of the development of the entire family of peoples, is to do one's utmost to recognize the true scale of goods-values. Only thanks to a correct hierarchy of human goods is it possible to understand what type of development must be promoted. The integral development of peoples, central objective of the universal common good, is not happen only with the diffusion of entrepreneurship (cf. ibidem), of the material and cognitive goods such as the house and the instruction, of the available choices. That happens in particular with the increase of those good choices that are possible when the notion exists of an integral human good, when there is a telos, an end, in whose light development is planned and desired.

The notion of integral human development presupposes precise principles, such as subsidiarity and solidarity, as well as the interdependence between state, society and market. In a global society, made up of many peoples and various religions, the common good and integral development are obtained with the contribution of all. Religion is decisive in this, especially when it teaches fraternity and peace, and when, in a society marked by secularization, it instructs the faithful to give space to God and to be open to the transcendent. With the exclusion of religion from the public realm, as well as religious fundamentalism, the encounter and collaboration for the progress of humanity between peoples is impeded, the life of a society is void of motivation, and politics assumes an oppressive and aggressive face (cf. Ibid., 56).

Dear friends, the Christian vision of development, of progress and of the common good, as it emerges in the Social Doctrine of the Church, responds to the most profound expectations of man, and your commitment to further it and spread it is a valid contribution to build the "civilization of love." For this I express my gratitude and best wishes, and bless you all from my heart.

[Translation by ZENIT]

Thanks for the equivocation on the word "life"

Craig Venter unveils "synthetic life"



Craig Venter creates synthetic life form

J. Craig Venter Institute
Edge bio

The Public Discourse:The New Maritainians, by Matthew J. Milliner

Can Thomistic art theory provide an alternative to postmodern “Neutralism”?

Mirror of Justice: IF DOROTHY HAD NOT HAD TOTO

Richard T. Stith criticizes the notion of human rights.

Insight Scoop: Moyra Doorly and Aidan Nichols, OP, discuss ecumenism, "hierarchy of truths"

Don’t let Catholic ecumenism down

Papal Message to Ecumenical Congress in Germany

Papal Message to Ecumenical Congress in Germany

"We Cannot Ourselves Achieve the Great Things in Life"

VATICAN CITY, MAY 16, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is a translation of the German-language message sent by Benedict XVI to participants in an ecumenical congress that ended today in Munich, Germany.

* * *

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

From Rome I greet all those who are gathered at the "Theresienwiese" in Munich for the liturgical celebration to open the second ecumenical "Kirchehntag." I remember with joy the days when I lived in the beautiful capital of Bavaria as the archbishop of Munich and Freising. I thus address a special greeting to the Archbishop of Munich and Freising, Reinhard Marx, and to the Lutheran regional bishop, Johannes Friedrich. I greet all the German bishops and of many countries of the world, and in a special way, also the representatives of the other Churches and ecclesial communities and all the Christians who are participating in this ecumenical event. I greet the representatives of public life too and all those who are present through radio and television. May the peace of the risen Lord be with all of you!

"So That You Might have Hope:" with this motto you are gathered in Munich. You want to send a signal of hope to the Church and to society at a difficult time. I thank you very much for this. In fact, our world has need of hope, our time has need of hope. But is the Church a place of hope? In recent months we have had to be repeatedly confronted with news that could take away the Church's joy, that darkened it as a place of hope. Like the servants of the householder in the Gospel parable about the kingdom of God, we too want to ask the Lord: "Lord, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where did the weeds come from?" (Matthew 13:27). Yes, with his Word and with the sacrifice of his life the Lord has truly sown good seed in the field of this earth. It has grown and is growing. We need not think only of the great luminous figures of history, whom the Church has recognized with the title "saints," who have been completely permeated by God, who gave them their splendor. Each of us also knows ordinary persons, not mentioned in any newspaper or told of in any history book, who grew through the faith achieving great humanity and goodness.

In his impassioned dispute with God over sparing the city of Sodom, Abraham obtained assurance from the Lord of the Universe that if there were ten just people there he would not destroy the city (cf. Genesis 18: 22-33). Thanks be to God, in our cities there are many more than ten just people! If we are more attentive today, if we do not see only darkness, but also the light and good in our time, we see how faith has made men pure and generous and educates them in love. Again, the weeds are also present within in the Church and among those whom the Lord has welcomed into his service in a special way. But God's light has not been extinguished, the good seed has not been destroyed by the bad seed.

"So that You Might have Hope:" This phrase intends first of all to invite us not to lose sight of the good and good people. It intends to invite us to be good ourselves and to become good always, it intends to invite us to dispute with God for the good of the world, like Abraham, trying to live from God's justice ourselves.

Is the Church a place of hope? Yes, since from it the Word of God comes to us again and again and always, the Word that purifies us and shows us the path of faith. It is because in it the Lord continues to give us himself, in the grace of the sacraments, in the word of reconciliation, in the many gifts of his contemplation. Nothing can obscure or destroy all of that. We must be joyful for this in the midst of all tribulations. If we speak of the Church as the place of the hope that comes from God, then that also entails an examination of conscience: What do I do with the hope that the Lord has granted us? Do I really let myself be formed by his Word? Do I let myself be changed and healed by him? How many weeds are in fact growing in me? Am I disposed to pull them up? Am I grateful for the gift of forgiveness and ready to forgive and heal in turn instead of condemning?

Let us ask once more: What is "hope," truly? The things that we can do by ourselves are not the object of hope but rather a task that we must do with the power of our reason, our will and our heart. But if we reflect on all that we can and must do, then we see that we cannot do the greater things that come to us only as a gift: friendship, love, joy, happiness. I would like to note one more thing: We all want to live, and life too we alone cannot give to ourselves. Almost no one today, however, still speaks of eternal life, which in the past was the true object of hope. Because one does not dare to hope in it, one must hope to obtain everything from the present life. Setting aside hope in eternal life leads to a greediness for life here and now, which almost inevitably becomes egoistic and, in the end, remains unrealizable. Precisely when we want to take control of life as a kind of good, it slips away.

But let us return. We cannot ourselves achieve the great things in life, we can only hope for them. The glad tidings of the faith consist precisely in this: The One who can give them to us exists. We will not be left alone. God lives. God loves us. In Jesus Christ he has become one of us. I can speak to him and he listens to me. Because of this, like Peter, in the confusion of our times, that try to persuade us to believe in many other ways, we say: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life and we have believed and know that you are the Holy One of God" (John 6:68-69).

Dear Friends, I wish for all of you who are gathered at the "Theresienwiese" in Munich to be again overcome by the joy of being able to know God, to know Christ and to know that he knows us. This is our hope and our joy in the midst of the confusions of the present time.

From the Vatican, May 10, 2010

[Translation by Joseph G. Trabbic]

© Copyright 2010 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana

James Chastek, A-T axioms on possibility

Edward Feser, God, Man, and Masculinity (WWWTW)


Father, Glorify Thy Name!
The Patriarchal Shape of Trinitarian Theology
by Patrick Henry Reardon

Alasdair MacIntyre has a couple of essays (republished in the collection Ethics and Politics) that explain how Renaissance Aristotelians, in their misinterpretation of Aristotle, caused academic moral philosophers to be discredited. Does he give conclusive evidence for his historical thesis? I don't think so, but it is some sort of evidence nonetheless.

James Chatsek, Why act is essentially transcendent (or, Act as St. Thomas uses it, UPDATED)

Michael Sullivan, Gender Equality

Ah, but what does St. Bonaventure say about the headship of the family?

James Chastek, Why framing laws in terms of obligation to some extent misses the point

The Anglo-Catholic: Introducing Father Louis Bouyer

Fordham: Orthodox Constructions of the West (via Eirenikon)

Assault and murder?

I'm re-watching Public Enemies, and early in the movie, FBI agent Melvin Purvis warns Pretty Boy Floyd to stop. Floyd continues running, firing his Tommy gun to no use, since his pursuers are out of range. Purvis takes aim with his rifle and shots Floyd, mortally wounding him. Is what Purvis did licit? Or is it a sin? It could be argued that since he was out of range and fleeing, Floyd was not a threat to the lives of Purvis and the police officers. Even if a LEO is more like a soldier and has broader powers than that of a normal citizen, and is not only able to kill in self-defense, but is allowed to kill in defense of the community, even when his own life is not threatened, is it permitted for soldiers to shoot and kill the enemy when it is in retreat? This has happened frequently during war, especially if one believes the historical studies cited by Col. Grossman, but is it right?

A defense: Purvis is allowed to shoot in order to stop and prevent Floyd from committing another crime? But Floyd was not about to commit another crime, though he might do so in the future. How about stopping Floyd in order to apprehend him? Are any means acceptable in order to catch a fugitive? Or must the fugitive's "right to life" be respected, unless he poses an immediate danger to those seeking to catch him?

Can extrajudicial capital punishment be tolerated, for the sake of justice?

James Chastek, Reasons for the claim “Morality requires God”

The most important way God and morality are connected is God being our ultimate end and the primary object of our love. No one can be completely moral unless he love God.

The Useless Tree: In Honor of D. C. Lau

More:
In Memory of D. C. Lau | China blog | ChinaGeeks
D. C. Lau, 1921-2010

D.C. Lau D.C. Lau was born in Hong Kong in 1921
short profile

Zenit: Papal Address to Social Science Academy
"Economic Life Should Properly Be Seen as an Exercise of Human Responsibility"

Friars of the Immaculate: A Primer on the Absolute Primacy of Christ

I still haven't read The Universal Primacy of Christ. Aquinas argues from Sacred Scripture that the motive of the Incarnation was for the restoration of human nature. He does not say that it is impossible that the Word would have become incarnate even if there had been no sin, but that we have not been told that this is the case.

Why are mathematicians prone to explaining everything through math?

His official website.
Stephen Wolfram: A New Kind of Science
Wolfram Research: Mathematica, Technical and Scientific Software
Wolfram Blog



Reflections on Stephen Wolfram's 'A New Kind of Science'

Edward Feser, ID, A-T, and Duns Scotus: A further reply to Torley

James Chastek, An interpretation of “all I have written is straw compared to what I have seen”

The most well-known story of St. Thomas’s life is that he stopped writing a few months before he died, saying that “all that I have written was like straw compared to what I have seen”. The experience is difficult to judge for several reasons: the reference to “straw” commands most of the attention, but it’s not clear exactly what this means; but also- and more simply- we don’t know what he saw. It’s hard to understand something being “straw” in comparison to X without knowing what X is.

We do, however, know the modes of the things he is comparing, and this is significant. “What is written” is a certain mode of knowledge; “what is seen” is another. What is the nature of each of these modes, and what might they tell us about why the things in the mode of writing were “straw”?

Writing sets the role of making in knowledge in bold relief. Words are human artifacts, as are the letters one creates to record them, and the author himself must make the order among the words. All this making is to communicate the primordial making of the human agent intellect, which makes a concept in conjunction with the object as an exterior principle. By way of contrast, angels don’t need to make the word (or species) by which they know, since the word is simply innate to them (and thus it can’t be called a concept); and God need not make the word he knows since he simply is that word.

All this making of that which is known is opposed to pure intuition, which is most of all manifest to us in sight. The sensible object requires no cognitive act to make it sensible. This absence of making in knowledge is called intuition, and in the measure that our understanding is less the product of making it is more intuitive. Thus, the higher the intellect, the more intuitive it is, and the less it is characterized by the need to make that by which it sees. All this making of our intellect, therefore, is really just a shadow of intellectual non-making, that is, of the pure intuition of higher intellects and disembodied souls. It is this pure intuition that most deserves the name “see”; and taken in this sense, human beings see only in a very roundabout and shadowy way. What we long for is the effortless intuition of the in corporeal or disembodied intellects, which can simply see science as opposed to having to make it after a very long initiation process. This making process is most of all manifest in”writing”; and in this sense we all long to throw aside our writing and simply see. St. Thomas’s desire to stop writing, in other words, is natural and common to all of us. St. Thomas, however, had that desire fulfilled in this life, while the rest of us have to wait.

Zenit: Archbishop Speaks on Aquinas and Universities
"We Must Reaffirm the Passion for Truth That Animated St. Thomas"

The Treasonous Clerk: “See, I Am Doing Something New”: John Paul II’s Summons to Secular Being, by James Matthew Wilson

The pope’s summons proves extremely daunting: he wants a philosophy attentive to metaphysics in order to reground modern theology in a concern with reality—with objective and absolute truth. But, in 1998, he finds no one (or few) in contemporary philosophy turned toward the questions of being. Who any longer treats philosophy as founded in its sapiential dimension—that is, in its drive to explore the foundational human questions all persons need answered if they are to live fully (§81)? And who endeavors to arrive at philosophy’s “genuinely metaphysical range” (§83), its concern with being, with what is real? And so Fides et Ratio makes an intervention in philosophy in hopes of building up a population of philosophers who might, someday and in turn, help to rebuild modern theology as a discipline attentive to the foundations of reality rather than merely the phenomena of history or experience. Beyond analytic and Continental philosophy, we need, as it were, a renewal of “plain old-fashioned philosophy.”
Emblem of the Papacy

Thus, the provisional nature of this encyclical. It makes insightful arguments about the history of religions and intellectual inquiry in general; it recovers a reading or narrative of history often dismissed as the alibi of an anti-modern Church; but in doing so it primarily makes the case for others to begin a new work: the rediscovery of human life as an intellectual and spiritual pilgrimage whose terrain is always what is real (being) and whose horizons are the specific historical revelation of God’s Word and the “infinite mystery” of God Himself (§14). We are asked to rediscover that the reason of “separate philosophy” leads finally to despair of reason. If, on the contrary, we recognize that reason is preceded by faith (as we experience, for instance, in the already present desire to know the truth about ourselves) and that reason is completed by faith (reason opens onto truths that, finally, surpass it and that it can see in only fragmented fashion) (§13)—we discover something grand. Reason participates in the human being’s circular journey from the gift of being and the gift of revelation toward a theological understanding of those gifts. It is man’s natural means of searching for a truth that ultimately transcends human life and reason alike and brings all searching to an end (§73).

Fr. Benedict Ashley has written that Thomism has neglected the historical dimension of being, but it is not clear to me how this can be the case if philosophy is to attain to the Aristotelian ideal of episteme and sophia. The contingent may be helpful in helping us understand natures and causes, but there cannot be a science of the contingent as such. While Pope John Paul II is correct that we are in need of metaphysics, Fr. Ashley rightly reminds those who desire to know that we must first have an adequate physics.

Edward Feser: Dembski rolls snake eyes and the actual response.

Edward Feser, Cudworth and Fuller respond

One of the comments at WWWTW:

30. In order to maintain the unity of body and soul clearly taught in revelation, the Magisterium adopted the definition of the human soul as forma substantialis (cf. Council of Vienne and the Fifth Lateran Council). Here the Magisterium relied on Thomistic anthropology which, drawing upon the philosophy of Aristotle, understands body and soul as the material and spiritual principles of a single human being. It may be noted that this account is not incompatible with present-day scientific insights. Modern physics has demonstrated that matter in its most elementary particles is purely potential and possesses no tendency toward organization. But the level of organization in the universe, which contains highly organized forms of living and non-living entities, implies the presence of some "information." This line of reasoning suggests a partial analogy between the Aristotelian concept of substantial form and the modern scientific notion of "information." Thus, for example, the DNA of the chromosomes contains the information necessary for matter to be organized according to what is typical of a certain species or individual. Analogically, the substantial form provides to prime matter the information it needs to be organized in a particular way. This analogy should be taken with due caution because metaphysical and spiritual concepts cannot be simply compared with material, biological data.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html

Which reveals two things, to a Thomist -- a Catholic theologian cannot do without adequate training in philosophy, especially physics, if he is to speak of natural things. Secondly, one must look at the causes of natural things in order to judge what others speak of them. While it may be easy for those of some intelligence to look for corresponding concepts, it is unfortunate that they do not see the problem with saying DNA is the formal cause of a human body, which can lend support to a dualistic understanding of human nature. Catholic intellectuals have lost much in the last century.

James Chastek, Notes on Thomism and ID

Wolfgang Smith has a new book out from Sophia Perennis, according to Amazon, but it is not listed on the Sophia Perennis website yet -- Science and Myth: What We Are Never Told.

NLM: R.I.P. Cardinal Tomas Spidlik

Public Discourse: Free Will and Biology, by William Carroll

Biological reductionism doesn’t disprove the notion of free will.

Edward Feser, ID theory, Aquinas, and the origin of life: A reply to Torley
(via WWWTW)

De unione ecclesiarum: Notes on a text by Severian of Gabala

For this reason, I also brought up the point about the Turban and the Tiara. No, I do not possess any special information about threats to Christianity. I do know that the European Union, by its economic policies, has brought about in a few decades a demographic transformation of Western Europe that appears to be irreversible, and that Mehmed the Conqueror and Suleyman the Magnificent would have found very gratifying. How to respond to that transformation in a genuinely Christian manner is obviously a difficult and complex question; but it is one issue among many that raise for me profound concerns about the future of Christianity — indeed, I think that anyone who is informed about the present state of the world ought to be concerned about the future of humanity itself. A healing of the division between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches seems to me a most urgent need if the Church is to give a credible, united witness to its faith before a sceptical and cynical world. I agree with you that the Fourth Crusade was a gross crime (although the murder of some thousands of Venetians in Constantinople a few years earlier was not the work of angels!). I do not agree with you that the policy of unionists like Bekkos had mainly secular motivations, or that it was an abandonment of the faith of the fathers, or that it was in any way to blame for the fall of the Byzantine state. The last Byzantine emperor, who died defending the walls of Constantinople, was a unionist, and an Orthodox saint. And when you say, “there was no Greek nation at that time,” it is clear that you misunderstand what the English word “nation” means: it does not refer chiefly to a political entity, but to an historical, linguistic, and cultural one, to a people. In that sense, there certainly existed a Greek nation at that time, and it certainly became enslaved. I think that men like Joseph Bryennios and Mark of Ephesus bear some share of the responsibility for that catastrophe, by helping to make Christian reconciliation impossible by their polemics. And those who continue those polemics will bear some responsibility before the throne of Christ for the next catastrophe, whenever and wherever it comes.

MB recommended this article: Critical Consideration of The Case for Clerical Celibacy, by Anthony T. Dragani


And I found this: Migne's Patrologia Graeca - emule links.

Alice von Hildebrand on Female Chastity

Laura Wood cites Alice von Hildebrand

But let’s consider female chastity on a spiritual and moral plane. As Alice von Hildebrand has wrote in her essay, “The Privilege of Being a Woman,” the woman is a secret garden. Her sexual organs themselves are veiled and enclosed, which signifies their sacred dimension. Her body is the scene of creation. Even a woman who has never conceived or cannot conceive possesses this physical holiness. If you view the conception of a human being as purely a material event, her body does not resonate with this higher meaning. But even hard-core materialists have a difficult time evading this truth. They too find themselves drawn to the mystery of feminine beauty. They cannot explain what it means or why sex is more spiritual and consequential to women than to men, why it affects them on a deeper level.

Here we arrive at an important point. Sex means more to a woman. She cannot be as casual about it as men without violating her nature. The emphasis on female chastity is not some crude patriarchal imposition, some power play by men, but cultural recognition of this truth and of the highest aspects of femininity. Hildebrand writes:

The union of body and soul is particularly close in a woman’s body. She is “incarnated” in her body in a special way. This is why, when she gives herself, she gives herself completely; when she stains herself, the stain is particularly damaging. (The Privilege of Being a Woman, 2002)

The emphasis on female chastity reflects the moral power of women. This is another essential point. The sphere of conscience and feeling belongs to woman. This is where she reigns. The springs of feminine goodness feed the culture at large; the drought inhibits. This is why it is more serious when a woman commits adultery. (It is very serious in a man too). In giving away her body alone, she betrays the trust that underlies all things and destroys the riches, the vestiges of that long lost Garden, dependent on her love and protection.

I should read Dr. von Hildebrand's book, but I think this is an illustration of phenomenology's weakness, in comparison with philosophical realism. It is proper to the female to be that which is being acted upon (or receiving) in coitus. The natural term (completion) of the sex act is within her. The feeling of bonding that results from the actual bond being achieved is a natural consequence of the act, when oxcytocin is released and so on. The male, on the other hand, brings about the term of the sex act when he ejaculates, or releases his semen into the female. The term of the sex act for the man is a "going out," not the "receivng of." It is only appropriate then that the psychology of sex differs for men and women.

The knowledge, physical reactions, and emotions that a woman has in relation to sex follows upon her role. The belief that sex should be reserved to someone special is not always linked to the awareness that she can get pregnant and must find someone who will stick around. Rather, she would find it offensive to her "dignity" or her "specialness" if she were to share herself with so many men, rendering herself a tool for their pleasure and nothing more. Sexual intimacy should be reserved because of the physical interiority. (Though there are some women who have become some disturbed to think that being promiscuous is ok since women should seek only pleasure from sex, just like certain men.) Women, by instinct (one that follows upon their awareness of their body and role in sex) tend to be sexually reserved, and they invest more meaning into sexually bonding with a man (and we cannot forget that much of this is due to her psychological preparation that leads up to sex). It seems true that men must have a certain spiritual maturity to view sexual intimacy in the same way.

Still, I find the following to be imprecise, on the par of metaphorical language: "The union of body and soul is particularly close in a woman’s body. She is “incarnated” in her body in a special way." I think that eliciting this sort of "metaphysical" statement from the female sexual perspective is wrong. The emotions and understanding that a woman has of herself and her role follows upon her being a woman. If she "incarnated" in her body in a special way it is because she is a woman, and not a man.


On the Privilege of Being a Woman
Alice Von Hildebrand on Feminism and Femininity - Catholic Online


Started on March 15.

New titles froM CUA Press

The website.

Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John, (Translated by +Fabian Larcher, O.P., and +James A. Weisheipl, O.P., with introduction and notes by Daniel Keating and Matthew Levering)

Edward Grant, The Nature of Natural Philosophy in the Late Middle Ages

Steven J. Jensen, Good and Evil Actions: A Journey through Saint Thomas Aquinas

Paul Richard Blum, ed., Philosophers of the Renaissance (translated by Brian McNeil)

Paul J. Griffiths, Intellectual Appetite: A Theological Grammar

Two by Fr. Rhonheimer: Vital Conflicts in Medical Ethics and The Ethics of Procreation and the Defense of Human Life: Contraception, Artificial Fertilization, and Abortion

New titles from UND Press

Forthcoming from University of Notre Dame Press:
1. Joshua P. Hochschild, The Semantics of Analogy: Rereading Cajetan’s De Nominum Analogia

2. Thomas F. O’Meara, O.P., Erich Przywara, S.J.: His Theology and His World

Edward Feser, “Intelligent Design” theory and mechanism. (See also the discussion at WWWTW.)

FPR has a precis of Lew Daly's God's Economy.

Mr. Daly writes, concerning subsidiarity:

I needn’t explain here the tendency among American conservatives to interpret subsidiarity as a Catholic version of the Republican Party’s libertarian agenda of dismantling government agencies and privatizing entitlements and services. Of course it means nothing of the kind: subsidiarity is not a theory of local control or minimal government; it is a theory delineating precisely the critical role of central government in assisting natural social structures, beginning with the family, when they are weakened in the order of society. The properly subsidiary role of the state is to support, for example, the family, without distorting or usurping its place in the order of creation or its purposes as given by God. Unlike the liberal welfare state, a subsidiary state recognizes the prior ground of family and other natural spheres and does not encroach on the legal and moral autonomy they derive from God; but unlike liberal anti-statism, the subsidiary state is responsible for protecting and supporting the natural spheres when they are violated within society or otherwise falter. For example, when wages fail to support workers and their families in their proper dignity, the sanctity of the family is violated and the state must intervene, either by strengthening the power of workers to extract higher wages from employers, or by compensating families directly out of the public purse. Against the moral anarchy created by “market laws” that push working families beneath their dignity, a properly subsidiary state delineates “justice” by strengthening the weaker spheres against the stronger, those given by God against those ordered by men. In upholding and protecting such “sphere sovereignty,” as the Kuyperians termed it, the state “brings stability to the land,” and this, Kuyper insists, is called “justice.”

In the background to modern subsidiarity teaching, the opponents of revolutionary liberalism at the dawn of the modern era understood the dialectical relationship between individualism and statism. The latter does not arise without the former’s destruction of all other forms of authority and protection within society. As Nisbet put it, “the state is a refuge for the moral consequences of individualism,” adding, further, that the new “laissez faire individualism” of the nineteenth century was not “the simple heritage of nature,” but rather a calculated, collaborative product of economic interests and centralized power:

It was brought into existence by the planned destruction of old customs, associations, villages, and other securities; by the force of the State throwing the weight of its fast-developing administrative system in favor of new economic elements of the population. And it was brought into existence, hardly less, by reigning systems of economic, political, and psychological thought, systems which neglected altogether the social and cultural unities and settled single-mindedly on the abstract individual as the proper unit of speculation and planning.

Does everyday use of analogy debase a language?

Common expressions that you'll hear in the United States include, "My bad," and "You're good." It's rather easy to decipher the meaning of these expressions and it is usually clear that the speaker is not speaking of a moral quality or attribute, but something else. Certainly these expressions show that the use of analogy is quite common in our language, even if we do not know that we are doing it unless we are prompted to reflection. Still, is this a sign that our language is in decline? Instead of saying, "My bad," or, "You're good," should we not retain more traditional expressions like, "My mistake, " and "You are fine."