J. Peter Nixon
By this author
Reading the coverage of today's March for Life in DC reminded me of some writing I did ten years ago on my now-closed blog Sursum Corda. That year was the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. I wrote a week of daily reflections on the subject. You can read the originals here if you are interested.The following piece was probably the post that generated the most reader commentary, both positive and negative. I read it again today.
I suspect the number of Commonweal readers out here in my particular part of Northern California may number in the single digits. Nevertheless, for those of you living within driving distanceof Concord, CA (about 25 miles east of Oakland, CA), let me offer an invitation to a new Adult Formation program my wife and I are facilitating.It's called "Encountering Jesus" and the idea is to look at various images and understandings of Jesus in the history of the Church that have powerfully shaped Christian prayer and spirituality.
I noted yesterday that the papal nuncio had cited--not approvingly, I hasten to add--a post from DotCommonweal that addressed the issue of religious freedom as well as the relationship between the bishops and the laity with respect to matters of public policy.It occurred to me later that the Archbishop Viganmight benefit from reading other pieces in the magazine that deal with these issues, particularly Commonweal's symposium from earlier this year that responded to the U.S.
Anyone who writes for publication wonders from time to time whether anyone is reading their work.
As evidenced by Cathy's wonderful post below, last nights election results have turned statistician Nate Silver into a pop culture icon. Exhibit A is a new Twitter hashtag #natesilverfacts that parodies the Chuck Norris facts.
Last night was not a good night for the nations Catholic bishops. They have spent most of the last year arguing that Catholics--and people of faith generally--should prioritize three key issues in this election: abortion, same-sex marriage, and the conscience rights of Catholic institutions. These issues were highlighted in a large number of communications from individual bishops as well as a two-week Catholic teach in that was described as a Fortnight for Freedom.The bishops have little to show for their efforts.
For those who are interested, I thought I would create an open thread for folks to offer predictions about the results tomorrow. I used to work in an office where we had a pool on this, March Madness-style. I suppose here we will limit it to bragging rights. Here are the categories:1. Swing State Results: CO, FL, IA, NC, NH, NV, OH, VA, WI2. Popular Vote Percentage Breakdown3. Electoral Vote Breakdown4. Tossup Senate Races: AZ, MA, MT, ND, NV, WI.5. Senate Partisan Composition6. Tiebreaker: House Partisan CompositionHere are mine for what it's worth:1.
As we approach next weeks election, Catholic voters are being inundated with messages that suggest that it would be gravely sinful to vote for President Obama.This is not necessarily true.In saying this, I want to make clear that I am not arguing that one should vote for President Obama or that there are no compelling reasons to vote against him.
In their dispute with the Obama Administration over the HHS contraception mandate, a number of U.S.bishops have suggested that they will have to close hospitals, schools and Catholic universities if the mandate is not modified or withdrawn.But would the bishops really be required to do this?
The other day, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput was interviewed by the National Catholic Register regarding the U.S. bishops ongoing struggle with the Obama Administration over the definition of a religious employer. He was asked about the statements of the U.S. bishops in favor of a right to health care. This was his response: