I surely don't wish to trivialize the Mass, which is most
certainly very important for Catholics. Saying that preventing mass
murder is worth running the risk of X hardly means that X is trivial. I
also don't understand where I've suggested that I lack sympathy for the
Religion Clauses or for "the Catholic faith community." I certainly
lack sympathy for Prof. Newsom's interpretation of the Religion Clauses,
but that strikes me as a rather different matter.
As to my "audacious claim that the Catholic Church might be
willing to lose members in order to save unborn children," let me offer
two thoughts:
(1) It is simply not the case that "[this] claim supposes that
the only way to save them is to run the risk." My original paragraph
read "Might the Church think that an alliance might actually win more
converts from Catholicism to Protestantism (perhaps because the Church
thinks that Catholicism is true and more persuasive than Protestantism)
than vice versa? Might it think that winning more converts to
Christianity of any stripe (both from the non-Christian and from those
who are Christian in name only) is so important that it's worth risking
a small amount of conversion away from Catholicism? Might it think that
preventing the deaths of millions of unborn children is likewise worth
running this small risk?" The first sentence in that paragraph
specifically suggested that an alliance with Protestants might help
Catholics *gain* members (as well as perhaps helping rescue the unborn).
The other two questions merely suggested that *even if* there's some
risk that an alliance would lose the Church a few members, such a risk
might be worth running to save unborn lives -- not that "the only way"
to help decrease the number of abortions is to lose members.
(2) But much more importantly, perhaps some other list members
might speak to whether my claim is accurate or even that "audacious."
As I understand Catholic teaching, a person doesn't forfeit salvation by
converting from Catholicism to Protestantism; it surely isn't good for
him to do so, but it's not horrifically bad in the way that a loss of
salvation might be. And as I understand Catholic teaching, the killing
of the unborn is very bad indeed.
Say a Catholic was convinced, as a factual matter, that -- as
Prof. Newsom earlier suggested -- an alliance with Protestants might
lose a few Catholics to Protestantism, but was also convinced, as a
factual matter, that such an alliance might save many unborn children.
Would it really be that shocking, or "trivializing," for the Catholic to
think "that preventing the deaths of millions of unborn children is . .
. worth running this small risk [of losing some Catholics to
Protestantism]"? Can one take this view and yet still be sympathetic to
the Mass and to the Catholic faith community?
Speaking for myself, it is my sympathy for Catholics -- my view
of them as being genuinely interested in good works and in saving
innocent life -- that leads me to assume that they'd take such a view.
But I'd love to hear what other list members, especially those who are
intimately familiar with Catholic thought, have to say about this.
Eugene
Michael Newsom writes:
> Your response to point 1 begs the question. You insist on
> trivializing liturgy. You are welcome to do so, but please
> don't impute your point of view to others.
>
> I think that you also trivialize the Religion Clauses, but
> there is no need to rehearse that argument here.
>
> You need to find some authority for your audacious claim that
> the Catholic Church might be willing to lose members in order
> to save unborn children. Your claim supposes that the only
> way to save them is to run the risk. I don't buy that for a
> minute, and I seriously doubt that the Church does either.
> Again you are engaging in some remarkable trivializing
>
> Eugene, you tend to trivialize matters that either you don't
> know much about or lack sympathy for -- the Mass, the
> Religion Clauses, and the Catholic faith community.
_______________________________________________
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.
