Yes

-----Original Message-----
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 3:17 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case

Is that really the view that Catholics take, or should take?  "We aren't
going to conduct masses in school.  Therefore, we will oppose the Equal
Access Act.  Never mind that it helps other religions, including other
Christians, conduct their services, and worship God as they think is
right.  Never mind that it can help Catholics express their religious
views.  Never mind that it helps Catholic students form groups in which
they can spend timing learning about Catholicism, taking a Catholic
approach to doing good works, and reinforcing each other's faith."  I'd
think that many Catholics would (and should) care about much more than
the liturgy, and would (and should) care about more than just their own
denomination.  Am I mistaken?

Eugene

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Newsom Michael
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 12:11 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case


He doesn't need to be told that none of the foregoing is tantamount to
the liturgy, whereas under EAA evangelical Protestants can have
in-school prayer services that strongly resemble their Sunday services.
Catholics can't do that.
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Berg, Thomas C.
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 11:09 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case
 
He should also be told that the EAA or constitutional rights of
religious speech also guarantee Catholic students in public schools the
right to wear crosses or rosary necklaces in school, to make a
pro-Catholic or pro-Catholic-values presentation in a class paper or
presentation, and to meet after school as a group of Catholic students,
say, to plan a mission project for the needy.  It would not be at all
surprising if those freedoms mattered to serious Catholic families who,
for financial or other reasons, use public rather than Catholic schools.
 
Tom Berg
University of St. Thomas (Minnesota)
 



From: Newsom Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 11/3/2005 5:19 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case
The real question is whether it is likely that at some point theological
differences will rupture the interest-convergence, no matter how
powerful the forces that produced the convergence might be.
 
I can offer up an anecdote.  A fellow parishioner of mine, a lawyer with
a fine mind, a deep commitment to his faith, politically conservative,
and a person whom I genuinely like, recently had a discussion one day
after Mass about the Equal Access Act.  His argument in favor of Church
support of the EAA was that some religion was better than no religion.
This is the "political, legal, and cultural" line to which Tom refers.
I then asked him if he would hold to that view even if he thought that
the religion that school children were being exposed to, thanks to EAA,
were somehow antithetical to the Catholic faith.  (Recall that we have
had a series of emails on the question, and I find it interesting that
several Jewish members of this list remain unpersuaded that their
children just have to grin and bear the exhortations of evangelical
Protestant classmates.)  He said No, and that he wanted to think about
the matter, clearly calling into question his easy "political, legal,
and cultural" assumption.  I strongly suspect that theology will trump
the assumption because my counterargument stunned him.   This is only
one story, and it may not represent very much.  But I do think that it
fairly calls into question any easy distinction between the "political,
legal, and cultural" on the one hand, and the theological on the other.

 
And if this were not enough, I think that the list members who defend
the "right" of evangelical Protestant schoolchildren to proselytize,
however politely, make MY point that evangelical Protestants have no
intention of abandoning their effort, now 500 years old - more or less,
to convert non-evangelical Protestants, including those with whom they
may be allied on "political, legal, and cultural" matters.
 
We need to take into account all of the forces at play.    
 
 
 



From: Berg, Thomas C. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 5:31 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case
 
On the normative question whether traditionalist Catholics ought to
refrain from making common cause with evangelicals over "culture wars"
political and legal issues, I'll stay out of that question on list.  On
the empirical question whether they are likely to continue to do so, I
would just say that there are powerful factors driving the two together
that are more than just a happenstance convergence on particular issues.
I would emphasize that there can be and is convergence on political,
legal, and cultural matters without there necessarily being any
convergence on matters such as liturgy, church polity (episcopal vs.
congregational), papal leadership, etc.  On the political and legal
matters, the underlying convergence comes largely on the powerful issue
of how secular the government should be; these groups both resist the
idea of a highly secular government (which in our present situation also
correlates, though not perfectly, with the idea of a relatively secular
public square).  Whatever one thinks normatively about that question, I
don't see its importance going away.
 
Tom Berg
University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Newsom Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 4:45 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: FYI: An Interesting "See You at the Pole" Case
 
Tom and I read the tea leaves somewhat differently.  I am not sure that
the critical divide is intradenominational conflict between liberals and
traditionalists.  For that to be true one has to pretend that the
previous 500 years or so have left little to no imprint on the attitudes
of Catholics and Protestants towards each other.  I don't know what has
happened since 1970 to cause such collective amnesia. 
 
Tom discounts the possibility that all that we may be witnessing is an
interest-convergence between conservatives in various religious
traditions which, by its own force is not enough to wipe out 500 years
of history.  There is still some denominational integrity left in
America.  The great danger, one that Herberg noted 50 years ago, is that
that integrity may be in trouble, especially for Catholics and Jews.
 
The real issue is whether conservative Catholics and Jews will recover
their senses and defend the integrity of their religious traditions.  Is
it more important to be Catholic, or is it more important to be a
[white] conservative?  The answer to this question is not apparent,
although I think that Tom believes that it is.
 



 
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or wrongly) forward the messages to others.

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to