Ability to Respond

The deep reflections on the issue of torture in From Disciplina to the Day of Pardon, by Drew Christiansen, S.J., (10/2) are both pertinent and pressing for any Christian troubled by the present political situation in the United States. Your rejection of St. Augustine’s views on politics, however, fails to engage the full tragic character of his understanding of history. The commentaries on Augustine by Dino Bingogiart and Henry Paolucci have influenced my understanding of this issue, and I regret their voices are not available to respond to your statement.

Augustine’s political realism has been persuasive for many because it echoes the view of politics one finds in Machiavelli and Hobbes. If this view lacks any basis in reality, then it is, of course, untenable. But I think it is crucial that any reflection on the political, be it philosophical or theological, clearly states whether the view of the political found in Augustine, Machiavelli and Hobbes must be accounted for. Any political state, that view holds, must be prepared to deal with the challenge of the implacable enemy, one who rejects any way of reconciling conflicts other than violence.

The first duty of every political authority is to maintain order against the criminal within and the enemy without. The use of law, coercion and ultimately capital punishment can always be effective against the criminal. Analogous measures may also be effective against external enemies whenever shared standards of law are available. But when they are not available, Hobbes’s war of all against all becomes a prospect that must be considered, as is the jihadist who views the United States as the evil empire. The jihadist does not merit the protection of international law, since he is a transnational terrorist. The Geneva Convention applies only to citizens of nation-states that are signers to the treaty.

The use of force in the defense of one’s life is defensible by the natural law. So is the right to wage war, but with a difference. The measure of violence a state may have to use is not set by its own moral standards. The enemy determines this. This dilemma is at the heart of the political theory one finds in Augustine, Machiavelli and Hobbes. The Bush administration’s decision to apply extralegal measures against international terrorists seems, therefore, defensible.

Persuasion and good example are surely the responsibility of any Christian in conflict with an opponent. And such a Christian would be beyond judgment if he eschewed the use of force in defending his right to life. But would a state be similarly permitted to accede to another state’s lethal demands? I know no such moral law or Christian counsel that calls for this surrender. Human history, Augustine told us, is driven by two different loves, which form two very different kinds of societies. One confounds our ability to respond with justice and charity. And citizens of a nation state have the right to expect their political leaders to meet this dilemma.

George B. Pepper

Great Teaching

My freshman theology course at Manhattanville College of the Sacred Heart in 1956 was Mother Katherine Sullivan’s study of the Bible (Signs of the Times, 10/16). Thanks to her challenge, I read the entire Bible (slogging through even the doldrums of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, not to mention the disjointed though delightful Wisdom literature). But the most important influence she had was her encouragement to us to re-examine the Bible in terms of modern life and its place in our lives. How odd of God to choose the Jews was a mantra that led her classes into innumerable discussions of responsibilities that we were required to explain and take note of as they evolved with the times.

Deborah Faust

Lesser Love

Twice now during the past week, a squirrel has eaten away parts of my windowsill and gnawed four-inch holes in the screen to facilitate its entry to my house.

Yes, I have read with appreciation Mary Oliver’s poem Making the House Ready for the Lord (9/25). Come in, come in, she says to animals seeking shelter as winter dawns on a snowy world.

And what is my response? Unlike the poet, I have for God’s creatures who live out there in my yard a lesser and imperfect love that stops upon my doorstep. Beyond that boundary I offer a crust of last night’s pizza, nuts and suet, apples, whole wheat bread crumbs. To these you are welcome. Help yourself, I say, but keep your distance. This house is mine. For the limits to my hospitality, may the Lord forgive me.

And another thing: Stop digging up my daffodils.

Katharine Byrne

A Magnificent Witness

I do canonical work for women religious in the United States and in other countries. Some of this work has been with cloistered sisters. Therefore, I was deeply touched by the beautiful photographs of the women from the three Carmelite monasteries (Who Can Argue With Love? by Lily Almog, 10/2). The Jewish photographer made it clear that these women live in a simple dwelling conducive to prayer and recollection. The expressions on their faces conveyed a tranquility that could come only from women who have an intimate relationship with Christ. It is amazing that such a way of life can be lived in a world that is so deeply torn by violence. At the same time, it is the very witness that the people in our own day and time need.

Eileen Jaramillo

Justice for All

On behalf of the bishops of the California Catholic Conference I wish to respond to the article in America by Marci A. Hamilton (9/25), who is both an attorney for plaintiffs suing the Catholic Church and a professor at Yeshiva University Law School. The full response to her article can be found at www.cacatholic.org.

Under the guise of presenting lessons from the crisis of sexual abuse of minors, America has provided one of the most vociferous and bitter critics of the Catholic Church with a forum to publish a new plaintiffs’ brief. In federal court, she has argued the case against the Diocese of San Diego in its challenge to the California law that repealed the statute of limitations for the duration of 2003. She has opposed the church in several major legal issues, including the Archdiocese of Portland bankruptcy action. To describe Professor Hamilton merely as having represented numerous survivors of sexual abuse by members of the clergy of various denominations on constitutional matters is not transparent and certainly not full disclosure for the readers of America.

Professor Hamilton completely ignored the findings of the John Jay Report. The directors of that Report describe it as one of the most extensive collections about sexual abuse of minors and one of a very small number not based on forensic content. As such, it is a very valuable source of knowledge about sexual offending (John Jay 2006 Supplementary Report).

Her book God vs. the Gavel (2005) makes extravagant claims about abuse in the 1990’s that are not sustained by evidence. She has defended California’s targeting of the Catholic Church, and she promoted the same cause in Colorado. However, the John Jay Report shows that after 1985, as society became more familiar with the evil of sexual abuse of minors, church authorities dealt with it vigorously, and that it declined precipitously in subsequent years.

We agree with Professor Hamilton that the protection of children must be an absolute priority. However, we note that her priority extends only to children abused in private institutions. Sexual abuse by Catholic clergy is a terrible tragedy, but it represents a small fraction of one percent of the whole unfortunate problem of sexual abuse of minors. Clearly the extension of the civil statute of limitations in California targeted the Catholic Church. That is how it was drawn up, and that is how it operated. In fact, the thousands of children Professor Hamilton claims were abused in churches during the 1990’s were more likely abused in public institutions, but she closes out the possibility of suits against those institutions.

The Catholic bishops of California reaffirm their absolute commitment to keeping the church safe for all, particularly children. They hope that the lessons learned and the evidence provided regarding sexual abuse will be of universal assistance in dealing with this terrible problem. Our society must go beyond identifying sexual abuse as a Catholic issue. It must treat all victims equally and not just focus on those whom trial lawyers can select to make a great deal of money for themselves. Justice must include all children.

(Most Rev.) Stephen E. Blaire

Effective Preaching

Camille D’Arienzo, R.S.M., (Preaching: A Ministry [Still] in Distress 9/18) has it exactly right. The church needs better preaching. This seemed especially urgent after hearing Walter Burghardt, S.J., on several occasions and recognizing the impact of great preaching. I agree as well that the restriction on nonordained preaching at Mass has diminished the effectiveness of our spreading the word.

Two experiences came to mind, both related particularly to women preaching. The first occurred in 1995 at the motherhouse of the Sisters of Providence, where because of the illness of their priest the sisters conducted Communion services. Two of the three women who preached were extraordinary; both had earned Ph.D. degrees.

Then in 1996 I heard Mary Catherine Hilkert, O.P., at evening prayer at the opening of the Cardinal Suenens Symposium at John Carroll University. It was May 31 and she preached on the Gospel of the day, the Visitation story. I doubt that any man could have done it as well, and it occurred to me then that only a pregnant woman could have been seen as perhaps more empathetic. The following day in the presentations of charisms, Sister Hilkert presented The Charism of the Exegete: Unleashing the Power of the Word, as well as a talk entitled, Anointed and Sent: Preaching the Prophetic Word. She was to me the most charismatic of the speakers (preachers) of the symposium.

It is high time we consider anointing persons to preach and sending them out, because the people are indeed searching for effective preaching. And if commissioning is necessary, let’s begin anointing more preachers.

William J. Duhigg, M.D.