-
“Roman Catholicism does not readily distinguish between public and private moral obligations”, and yet Roman Catholic institutions have worked to be exempt from this integration of the Chuch and State spheres. The institutions aim for “the exemption solution”: Catholic hospitals argue their First Ammendment rights free them from, e.g., performing or discussing abortions, and so on. Liz B sees two simultaneous outcomes:
There are those who worry that the exemption solution won’t work forever, and those who worry that it will work too well, shrinking the role of religion in public life and reducing the ranks of the faithful. There are also those, like me (I should note that I, too, am Catholic), who suspect that both may happen at once: that religions whose ethics conflict with the broader culture will shift toward forming small, dense enclaves, where they are unlikely to encounter legal challenges to their preferred practices.
-
Liz Bruenig: “It’s just that the Catholic right is no longer recognizably Catholic. Its politics are more or less identical to those of the other members of the right-wing Christian coalition.”
-
a wide, barren, featureless liberty
Which is to say that [Biden] is an ordinary Democrat — more or less his explicit pitch. Perhaps Catholics have earned the right to no distinction, the privilege of blending seamlessly into the social and political landscape of the United States, the freedom of having no special moral obligations. And what a wide, barren, featureless liberty it is.
An “American Catholic” or a “Catholic who lives in America”?
-
self-cancel culture among the moderate woke
Jack Fencl: It’s not cancel culture (the external threat) that is the greatest threat to liberalism, or authoritarianism (the other external threat), but the internal threat of “self-cancel culture.” This self-cancelling is cultivated by the shaming of the (merely) moderately woke, rather than the radically woke:
It is the conversations that will never be had, the research that will never be done and the ideas that will never rise to the top that should worry us most. The primary concern about a culture of self-cancellation is not that people will have great ideas, yet feel afraid to share them, but that people won’t have brilliant ideas in the first place because such a culture doesn’t appreciate the premise—and thus the process—of liberal science. This is especially pernicious, because, under moderate wokeness, there is no active or identifiable attempt to constrict the flow of debate (by contrast with the obvious censorship favoured by outright left-wing wokeness and far-right authoritarianism). Moderate wokeness only attempts to make debate responsible, which inevitably results in less debate.
-
keep it real, Bonnie
Our local B.C. hero, Bonnie Henry, even has a “Good Times Guide.” Part of the “public health PR clinic” that she’s put on: a graphics team to bring us the trendy Bonnie. If us damn kids won’t listen to the buttoned-up Bonnie behind the podium, maybe we’ll listen to this chic version.
-
mercy
In my judgment, it is the opportunity to receive and extend forgiveness that is the greatest possible inducement to repentance and amendment of life, and — I cannot stress this too strongly — a shared repentance and amendment of life make genuine community possible…. We will join the prophets and cry out for justice to roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. But we will also echo St. Paul and tell you that we Christians forgive others because God in Christ has forgiven us. We will tell you that your shortcomings and failures can never outpace the mercy of God, who loves his wayward children, all of them, and will someday wipe from their eyes every tear. This is the great hope of those who wound as well as those who are wounded. And all of us sometimes wound and sometimes are wounded.
Yes, “no justice, no peace.” But also “no mercy (and repentance and ammendment of life), no peaceful community.”
-
reforming and deforming, with Chesterton
G. K. Chesterton (The Thing, 1929):
In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.
-
Bonnie H isn't fussing
Bonnie Henry, B.C.’s much-loved leader on COVID, on the letter from 230 scientists to the WHO:
‘I actually think it’s a little bit of a tempest in a teapot in that we all agree on the extremes and we’re fussing a little bit about how much we need to focus on the bits in the middle,’ Henry said during Monday’s COVID-19 briefing.
Scientific acumen with even a dose of wisdom. A rare bird. Willing to see the forest and not the tress in this recent conversation (though I have no opinion on who is right here).
The contrast between the rhetoric of Henry versus that of (federal) U.S. leaders is striking. I saw that she’s recently been highlighted in the New York Times for her role in B.C.’s response to COVID. I wonder whether any U.S. regional health leaders have the respect that Henry does here. The few friends I talk to seem to indicate not.
(As a U.S. expat, I continue to pray for the U.S. and implore myself to maintain a sense of compassion for the difficult situation many of y’all find yourselves in—as we sit relatively comfortably here in Canada. Hang in there, friends!)
subscribe via RSS