The new questions raised by global terrorism and the preventive use of military force in Iraq were among the topics discussed at a colloquium convened by the U.S. bishops' Committee on International Policy.
Experts representing various perspectives met at Georgetown University "to examine and apply the Church's teaching on war and peace to pressing foreign policy issues," explained Bishop John Ricard of Pensacola-Tallahassee, who completed his term as chairman of the bishops' International Policy Committee this week.
In addition to terrorism and preventive war, the colloquium had sessions on arms control, disarmament, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; preventive peace and alternatives to war; and the role of the Church in addressing these issues.
...The discussion was off the record, but written presentations will be available, along with the agenda, at http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/international/index.htm or http://www.nd.edu/~krocinst.
Saturday, November 19, 2005
Ethical Lessons From Iraq and 9/11 Assessed
USCCB Office of Media Relations
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
What no Whigs? How could this be? No Weigel? No Novak? They were denied seats in the nose-bleed section. This is scandal. I must protest! I thought they were the "experts" on these matters. Oh ya, I forgot, Neuhaus is in Europe explaining how one can be a secular humanist and it's so-called compatibility with Catholic teachings.
David,
I find my desire to even respond quickly evaporating in the face of your apparent sarcasm.
I'm not sure why Wiegel wasn't invited -- however, if you had actually read Weigel's critique of the USCCB'S position on the use of force and foreign policy -- Tranquillitas Ordinis: The Present Failure and Future Promise of American Catholic Thought on War and Peace Oxford University Press, 1987, then you'd likely understand why he wouldn't be high-up on their invite list.
Regarding Fr. Neuhaus, you've confessed in a prior post to not having read the content of his paper. With that in mind, I recommend refraining from deliberate mischaracterization of his position.
If you can't, honestly -- I see no point in my being a participant on yoru blog.
I think its rather instructive that the three theologians (Weigel, Novak & Neuhaus) that publicly advocated for this war (against the Vatican on a prudential matter) are not invited or even given a voice among the U.S. Bishops. If they, the Bishops, do not take their thought seriously on this topic, why should we?
Michael Novak's field is economics and Catholic social thought, and has participated by invitation of the USCCB in discussions relating to his field. But as I've stated before, he's not exactly "high on the list" in terms of deliberating U.S. foreign policy and the finer points of just war doctrine as it relates to the WOT. Of 'NWN', Weigel would undoubtedly be the most qualified of the First Things crowd to participate.
Numerous voices spoke out on the war but were also absent from this conference: Fr. James V. Schall, Robert P. George, James Turner Johnson -- the latter who, if I recall, you expressed in private conversation your belief that he was indeed competent to address this very issue. Shall we then assume that the Bishops do not take these people seriously, either?
Fr. James V. Schall, Robert P. George, and James Turner Johnson are not in question here. They are real academics, but are the master-minds of the Whig Thomist agenda?
Novak went to Rome to lobby for the war? Who sent him? I forget who actually sent him, wasn't it W.? It's bewildering to me that Novak would be the one sent to Rome unless he knew the "finer points" of the WOT & Just War.
What exact academic qualifications (degrees, etc.) does Novak, Weigel and Neuhaus have? For example, is Novak an economist and not a theologian? I'm confused.
This brings to mind Sirico as well. Does he have any real academic qualifications in economics?
Fr. James V. Schall, Robert P. George, and James Turner Johnson are not in question here. They are real academics, but are the master-minds of the Whig Thomist agenda?
Weigel was educated at St. Mary’s Seminary College in his native city, and at the University of St. Michael’s College in Toronto. In 1975, Weigel moved to Seattle where he was Assistant Professor of Theology and Assistant (later Acting) Dean of Studies at the St. Thomas Seminary School of Theology in Kenmore. In 1977, Weigel became Scholar-in-Residence at the World Without War Council of Greater Seattle, a position he held until 1984. In 1984-85 Weigel was a fellow of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. There, he wrote Tranquillitas Ordinis: The Present Failure and Future Promise of American Catholic Thought on War and Peace (Oxford University Press, 1987).
You can read the rest of his bio here, but I'd say that yes, he is probably qualified to register an informed opinion on U.S. foreign policy and U.S.-Catholic relations.
Q: Have you read Weigel's book I mentioned, David? -- I'd say if you want to critique Weigel, start with that.
Novak went to Rome to lobby for the war? Who sent him? I forget who actually sent him, wasn't it W.? It's bewildering to me that Novak would be the one sent to Rome unless he knew the "finer points" of the WOT & Just War.
Novak was "invited by United States Ambassador to the Holy See Jim Nicholson to deliver remarks to a public audience in the Vatican City on just-war doctrine and Iraq on the evening of February 10, 2003. While in Rome, Professor Novak speaks as a private citizen, a guest of the U.S. State Department as part of its U.S. Speaker and Specialist program, and not as an official representative of the government or as an official representative of American Catholics. While in Rome, Novak is also meeting with Vatican officials."
What exact academic qualifications (degrees, etc.) does Novak, Weigel and Neuhaus have? For example, is Novak an economist and not a theologian? I'm confused.
Michael Novak graduated (Summa Cum Laude) from Stonehill College (B.A., Philosophy and English) in 1956 and the Gregorian University in Rome (B.A. Theology, Cum Laude) in 1958. He continued theological studies at Catholic University and then at Harvard, where he received an M.A. in 1966 in History and the Philosophy of Religion.
In 1974, Mr. Novak campaigned for the creation of a White House Office of Ethnic Affairs. The office was opened during the Ford administration, continued under President Carter, and Mr. Novak served as an advisor during both administrations.
Mr. Novak was appointed and served as: Ambassador of the U.S. Delegation to the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva, 1981-1982; head of the U.S. Delegation to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (the monitor of the Helsinki Accords), 1986; with Senate approval, member of the Board for International Broadcasting (the private corporation that governs Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty), 1984-1994; member of the Presidential Task Force on Project Economic Justice, 1985. He has served the United States during both Democratic and Republican administrations.
His teaching career began as a Teaching Fellow at Harvard. From 1965-68 he was Assistant Professor of Humanities at Stanford, where in two out of his three years, the senior class voted him one of the two “most influential professors.” From 1968 to 1973 he taught at the newly formed experimental College at SUNY Old Westbury. During 1973-1974, Mr. Novak launched the new humanities program at the Rockefeller Foundation. In 1976 he accepted a tenured chair as University Professor and Ledden-Watson Distinguished Professor of Religion at Syracuse University. He held the W. Harold and Martha Welch chair as Professor of American Studies at the University of Notre Dame for the autumn semesters of 1987 and 1988. Intrigued by the relationship between religion and economics, he joined AEI as a Resident Scholar in the spring of 1978.
Personally, Novak wouldn't have been my first choice on the specific issue of just war, but the State Dept. thought he was qualified -- most likely given his prior experience in diplomatic relations and prior work with the U.N.
* * *
This brings to mind Sirico as well. Does he have any real academic qualifications in economics?
From the Acton website: Rev. Robert A. Sirico received his Master of Divinity degree from the Catholic University of America, following undergraduate study at the University of Southern California and the University of London. During his studies and early ministry, he experienced a growing concern over the lack of training religious studies students receive in fundamental economic principles, leaving them poorly equipped to understand and address today's social problems. As a result of these concerns, Fr. Sirico co-founded the Acton Institute with Kris Alan Mauren in 1990.
In April of 1999, Fr. Sirico was awarded an honorary doctorate in Christian Ethics from the Franciscan University of Steubenville, and in May of 2001, Universidad Francisco Marroquin awarded him an honorary doctorate in Social Sciences. He is a member of the prestigious Mont Pèlerin Society, the American Academy of Religion, and the Philadelphia Society, and is on the Board of Advisors of the Civic Institute in Prague. Father Sirico also served on the Michigan Civil Rights Commission from 1994 to 1998. He is also currently the Parochial Vicar at St. Mary Catholic Church in Kalamazoo, Mich.
As far as economics itself is concerned, Michael Novak and Fr. Sirico display a knowledge of real economics and great familiarity with the work of those who engage in economics as a profession. I am told that even Pope John Paul II conversed with Friederich Hayek.
Are they as "academically qualified" to speak on specific issues in economics per se as David Schindler, Tracy Rowland, Thomas Storck, or Dorothy Day? -- I'll let you be the judge.
But I think this is getting a tad ridiculous, and strongly reminiscent of your challenging the credentials of Scott McDermott.
Brother,
Good information on the backgrounds (academic & professional experience) of the Whig Thomists. Neuhaus obviously has a Master of Divinity degree as well considering he was an ordained Lutheran minister. If you have any specific information on him it would be greatly appreciated. I appreciate you doing the research and posting this in the comments. This was never done (after repeated requests) for Scott McDermott.
One could think that it was an oversight (or mistake) of the Bishops not to invite Novak, Weigel, Johnson or others to this meeting. Regardless if one agrees with their position on the War or not, they have been very active in laying out a reasonable case for the validity of doing it. By their voices not being heard, or intentionally being ignored, blocks a view of reality on a prudential matter whose expertise rests with the laity (the autonomy of the temporal order) and not the clergy. In all fairness to the Bishops though, at least they are talking about and discussing these matters.
One could think that it was an oversight (or mistake) of the Bishops not to invite Novak, Weigel, Johnson or others to this meeting. Regardless if one agrees with their position on the War or not, they have been very active in laying out a reasonable case for the validity of doing it. By their voices not being heard, or intentionally being ignored, blocks a view of reality on a prudential matter whose expertise rests with the laity (the autonomy of the temporal order) and not the clergy. In all fairness to the Bishops though, at least they are talking about and discussing these matters.
Thanks, David -- methinks if you had initially applied this comment to your post we would have never had this 'argument'. Pax.
Post a Comment