Al Kresta's Blog, page 337

How Political Correctness Makes Us Dumb

By Francis J. Beckwith
TheCatholicThing.com

The other day I was lecturing in my critical thinking class on the difference between arguments and explanations. An explanation is an account of something whose truth is not in dispute. So, for example, if you ask me why the Packers won the Super Bowl, I can give you several different answers. But the simplest one is this: they scored more points than the Steelers. We do not disagree as to whether the Packers were victorious. I am not trying to prove that. All I am doing is giving you a simple explanation as to why the Packers won.

On the other hand, if you asked me why I think belief in God is rational because you doubt God's existence and may want to believe, I can give you several reasons. If did that, I would be offering you an argument (or a set of arguments) for the veracity of a belief that is in dispute between us.

In class, I took an example from the textbook (Peter Kreeft's Socratic Logic, 3.1e) and asked my students whether the following is an argument or an explanation: "Men pitch baseballs faster than women because they have more upper body muscle strength." The right answer is that it is an explanation, because a reason is offered – "men have more upper body muscle strength" – in order to explain a fact that is not in dispute, "men pitch baseballs faster than women." Or so I thought.

My students, like virtually the whole lot of them at Baylor, are bright and eager to learn. But like most of their peers at other institutions, they have been formed by a wider culture, including the schools they attended and the media they consume, that has taught them that universal judgments about the nature of things is inherently unjust. There is, of course, some wisdom in this, but it is only wise insofar as it depends on universal judgments.

So, for example, it would be wrong to issue a negative judgment about someone simply because of his race without knowing anything further about the person. But, ironically, the reason why this particular judgment is wrong is precisely because we have made a universal judgment about all human beings: each of us possesses intrinsic dignity because of the nature we share.

Of course, if a human person commits an immoral act, we judge the actor as wrong. But we do so precisely because we respect his humanity and the power of moral choice that all human beings possess by nature. Though some human beings cannot exercise that power because of immaturity or illness, they are nevertheless moral subjects deserving of moral respect. They possess no less a human nature than do their mature and healthy peers.

Now back to baseball.

Well trained by their cultural teachers in spotting and reflexively condemning universal judgments, some of my students resisted the right answer because they thought it a mere prejudice. They seemed to think that to say that "men pitch baseballs faster than women" is to wallow in an ancient irrationality not worthy of our enlightened present. In that case, they would be wrong.

The ability of the human mind to make true universal judgments is a power that distinguishes human beings from other things like baboons, snails, and rocks. Thus, my students' cultural teachers, though they mean well, have done my students no favors. For anyone who provides assistance in atrophying the mind's proper function is an enemy of education, even if in his heart he thinks he's a friend.

The right answer is right because there is a difference between a term's comprehension and a term's extension. So, for example, if I say America is a rich country, I am saying something that is comprehensively true about America as a whole, but not something that is extensively true of each and every American in the population.

The two most important terms in the class problem are "men" and "women." If I were to say that all men throw a baseball faster than all women, I would be talking about the extension of the terms "men" and "women." That is, I would be talking about each and every man and woman. In that case, my claim that "all men throw a baseball faster than all women" is clearly false, since there are individual women who throw a baseball faster than individual men. On the other hand, when I say that "men pitch baseballs faster than women because they have more upper body muscle strength" I am referring to what is comprehensively true of men and women. And in that case, it is uncontrovertibly true that men in general pitch baseballs faster than women in general.

The distinction between extension and comprehension is clear, easy to understand, and essential to the proper exercise of our mental powers. This is why political correctness makes us dumb.

Francis J. Beckwith is Professor of Philosophy and Church-State Studies at Baylor University. His most recent book is Politics for Christians: Statecraft as Soulcraft. He blogs at returntorome.com.

Pope Benedict chooses two bishops for Detroit archdiocese

Pope Benedict XVI has named two Michigan priests as auxiliary bishops for the Archdiocese of Detroit.

Msgr. Donald F. Hanchon, 63, pastor of Holy Redeemer Parish in Detroit and 52 year-old Fr. Michael Byrnes, pastor of the city's Our Lady of Victory Parish, were appointed as auxiliary bishops for the archdiocese on March 22.
"It's a great blessing for the archdiocese," said Detroit Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron, who introduced the bishops-elect at the local Sacred Heart Seminary.
"Certainly it's an honor for a priest to be selected for this level of responsibility," he added. "More than an honor, it's about new capacity for sharing Christ with others."
The appointments were announced in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, Apostolic Nuncio to the U.S.

Bishop-elect Donald F. Hanchon, who was born in Wayne, Mich., said he is humbled by the appointment and looks forward to being "in the service of the people of the Archdiocese of Detroit."

After attending St. John Provincial Seminary and the University of Notre Dame, Bishop-elect Hanchon was ordained a priest for the Detroit archdiocese in 1974 and named a monsignor in 2005.

Following his ordination, Bishop-elect Hanchon's assignments included pastoral roles in multiple parishes in Michigan as well as being the episcopal vicar for the central region of the archdiocese from 2009 to the present.

"I promise obedience because I believe that the God who began this good work in me all those years ago will indeed bring it to fulfillment," he said on March 22. "I thank Archbishop Vigneron for his trust in me, and his joyful encouragement to serve."

Bishop-elect Michael Byrnes was born in Detroit in 1958. After attending the University of Michigan, and Sacred Heart Seminary, he earned a Ph.D. in biblical studies from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome. He was ordained a priest for the Archdiocese of Detroit in 1996.

"I am honored that the Holy Father and Archbishop Vigneron have such confidence in me to make this appointment," he said in reaction to the news on Tuesday. "I will do my best not to let them down."

Assignments after his ordination to the priesthood included serving as the associate pastor of St. Joan of Arc and St. Clair Shores parishes, vice-rector and dean of formation at Sacred Heart Seminary, and pastor of Presentation/Our Lady of Victory Parish from 2004 to present.

"I love being a priest of Jesus Christ, and I have loved my work helping young men discern and prepare for the priesthood," Bishop-elect Byrnes said.

"I place my trust in God's providence that these experiences, along with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, will help me to do that."

Bishops-elect Hanchon and Byrnes will join Auxiliary Bishop Francis Reiss and Archbishop Allen Vigneron as shepherds of 1.4 million Catholics in the Detroit archdiocese.

The two will be ordained as auxiliary bishops on May 5 at the Cathedral of the Most Blessed Sacrament in Detroit.

Obama visits grave of assassinated Archbishop Romero in El Salvador

Missal boycott calls 'not helpful'

Recent criticism of the new English translation of the Roman Missal in Australia could be interpreted as "opening the doors to liturgical anarchy", a national liturgical commission official said.

Australian Catholic Bishops Conference Liturgy Commission executive secretary Fr Peter Williams made the comment in response to a press release issued after a recent meeting of the executive of the National Council of Priests of Australia (NCPA).

The NCPA said members at their convention last year alleged a lack of consultation, and called for a boycott of the translations.

They were concerned at the use of exclusive language in the Eucharistic Prayers and wanted "some tolerance of people who find this new translation unacceptable".

Fr Williams said, while "obviously priests and others are entitled to express their views, calls by some NCPA members for a boycott or a trial period of the new translation were not helpful".

"Such statements attempt to give a wink and a nod to priests to change what they don't like," he said.

"All this does is open the doors to liturgical anarchy."

Fr Williams and ACBC Liturgy chairman Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Canberra and Goulburn strongly refuted claims by some NCPA convention members "of a lack of consultation amongst priests and faithful to the text presented".

"The claim there was a lack of consultation puzzles me," Archbishop Coleridge said.

"Successive drafts were sent to all English-speaking bishops who were free to consult anyone they chose.

Some bishops consulted widely, some less so. But this does not mean that there was no consultation."

Fr Williams said "every draft had been made available to members and consultants of the National Liturgical Council which includes a cross-section of clergy, religious and laity trained in liturgy".

Archbishop Coleridge and Fr Williams agreed the new Missal translation had received a wide range of responses.

The archbishop said his guess was a call for a boycott was "a minority view though neither I nor anyone else could be certain of this or the opposite view".

"It depends in large part upon whose voices you hear," he said.

"I can only say that in the many sessions I have done in Australia and elsewhere, most people are more or less okay once you explain clearly and openly what is happening and why.

"There is a small element of implacability, but for the implacable the texts tend to be a lightning-rod for a range of other issues.

"The source of their unhappiness lies elsewhere."

Fr Williams said in his consultations over the translation and its implementation he'd had a range of responses from the clergy.

"Some were quite enthusiastic and others had adopted a 'wait and see' attitude, and others sincerely expressed concerns for a range of reasons," he said.

Fr Williams said while he respected the desire of priests "to make the Gospel attractive and public prayer come alive, this desire does not automatically mean that someone has expertise in liturgy".

"Particular skills are required to meaningfully engage in this work and in criticism - competence in Latin and liturgical competence are obvious requirements," he said.

"Thus the reality is there was always going to be a limit to the scope of consultations.

"They could never have opened the consultation to every priest, every Mass-goer ... decisions leading to an outcome would never have been reached."

PRACTICING Catholics more likely than general public to back homosexual unions

Only 31% of Catholics who attend Mass at least weekly oppose granting legal recognition to homosexual unions, according to a new report by the Public Religion Research Institute. 64% favor some sort of legal recognition of homosexual unions, with 26% favoring same-sex marriage and 38% favoring homosexual civil unions.

In 2003, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reiterated the Church's opposition to any form of legal recognition of homosexual unions.

Overall, only 22% of Catholics oppose granting legal recognition to homosexual unions. 43% favor same-sex marriage, while 31% favor homosexual civil unions.

Latino Catholics are more likely to be faithful to Church teaching on this issue than are white Catholics. 30% of Latino Catholics oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions; only 19% of white Catholics do. In contrast, 58% of white evangelicals, 52% of black Protestants, and 33% of the general public oppose granting legal recognition to homosexual unions.

Despite the Catechism of the Catholic Church's clear teaching on the "grave depravity" of homosexual acts, Catholics are less likely than other Americans to believe that homosexual activity is sinful. 56% of Catholics-- compared to 46% of the general public-- believe that homosexual activity is not a sin.

Pakistani bishops condemn Qu'ran burning

The bishops of Pakistan have condemned the March 20 burning of the Qu'ran by a Florida Protestant pastor. Two Pakistani churches were attacked last year after Rev. Terry Jones said that he would burn the Qu'ran.

"I condemn this act of sheer madness that does not represent Christian values or the teachings of the Church," said Archbishop Lawrence Saldanha, president of the bishops' conference. "We regret to note that someone who calls himself a pastor is ignorant of his religion and normal decency."

"By the very message of their faith, Christians are obliged to respect other faiths and people," he added. "Therefore the Christians of Pakistan, who are law abiding and themselves a marginalized community, condemn this incident in the strongest terms. We demand that the government of the United States of America deal with this provocative act in accordance with the law."

"There Be Dragons" presented at the Vatican with Roland Joffé and Ennio Morricone

Film Critic Steven Greydanus is currently in Spain representing Ave Maria Radio at the world premiere and press junket for "There Be Dragons." He will be reporting for "Kresta in the Afternoon" and other Ave Maria programs upon his return.



View the trailer here:

Hypocricy Much?

In 2007, then Sen. Joe Biden said launching an attack without congressional approval is an impeachable offense. This flashback comes on the heels of Obama launching an attack on Libya. Whatever you think of Bush's use of the military or Obama's use of the military - you can't deny that this is a double standard.

Cartoon of the Day - Whatever the Mission

Today on Kresta - March 22, 2011

Talking about the "things that matter most" on March 22

4:00 – The Power of the Sacraments
In her own inspiring style, Sr. Briege McKenna explores the marvelous ways God acts through the sacraments, and explains how nothing can substitute for the grace of receiving the grace of the sacraments. The book is entitled The Power of the Sacraments and Sr. Breige is here to discuss it.

4:20 – Kresta Comments – The US House Hearings on Muslim Radicalization in America and Rep. Keith Ellison's Disingenuous Testimony
Last week Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) testified at a hearing on Islamic radicalism by weeping his way through a speech about whata-buncha-nasty-bigots Americans are. He chose as his case in point Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a Pakistani-born Muslim American who rushed to lower Manhattan on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, to assist in rescue efforts, and died in the collapse of the World Trade Center. Did his account check out with reality? We have the tape and the facts.

4:40 – Benedict's Creative Minority
Sam Gregg

5:00 – Kresta Comments – The Prosperity Gospel

5:20 – The Kingdom and the Cross
We believe a lot of false narratives about the nature of God, things like "God helps those who help themselves"; "God blesses the righteous"; "God might not be out for your good, and you might be missing something." But James Bryan Smith points us to the truth of who God is, revealed by Jesus: A God who loves to help the helpless. A God who doesn't play favorites, whether righteous or unrighteous. A God who is, in his essence, self-sacrificing--even to death--to save a people he loves. We look at Christ's work on the cross and what it all means about who God is and how we're to live as his people.

5:40 – The Problem of Genesis
One of the most important principles of Catholic Biblical interpretation is that the reader of the Scriptural texts must be sensitive to the genre or literary type of the text with which he is dealing. Just as it would be counter-indicated to read Moby Dick as history or "The Waste Land" as social science, so it is silly to interpret, say, "The Song of Songs" as journalism or the Gospel of Matthew as a spy novel. By the same token, it is deeply problematic to read the opening chapters of Genesis as a scientific treatise. So why is it so common for people to struggle with the seemingly bad science that is on display in the opening chapters of the first book of the Bible? Fr. Robert Barron answers the question.