Then, this morning, I read the following letter from Cardinal Cupich. It prefaces our archdiocese's plan for resuming liturgical and sacramental life - about which I'll post separately when I have time. The cover letter is pretty brief, and I don't think I'm violating the letter or spirit of any ethical laws by pasting it below. To my reading, it did hit the bulls-eye. What I admire about it is how it integrates our reverence of life with our concern for the common good. In my view, we are seeing these two goods pitted against one another in the current civic conflict: those who wish to re-open the economy and society (for reasons of the common good) versus those who wish to take a cautious approach (for reasons of preserving lives and health).
I've also taken a page from Jim McCrea's book by taking the liberty of highlighting certain portions of the text which seem to me to correspond with church teaching. Here is the letter. I hope you find its wisdom as resonant as I did:
Letter from Cardinal Cupich
May 13, 2020
Dear Friends in Christ,
These fifty days of Easter, leading to Pentecost, are marked by unprecedented suffering, as humanity has fallen victim to a perilous contagion. In addition to the threats to our physical wellbeing, we are suffering spiritually as the Covid-19 pandemic has required restrictions of our worship and active participation in the sacramental life of the Church. Surely, there have been moments in history when governments and rulers have persecuted Christians and banned their public worship. This is not one of them. Rather, the present restrictions come in response to an extreme medical emergency as local, state and federal authorities – specifically public health officials – legitimately fulfil their responsibilities to safeguard human life and the common good. They have based their reasonable guidance on careful consideration of empirical data and the best available disease-mitigation practices as they seek to contain the pandemic’s rampage through our communities.
While everyone must exercise good citizenship in observing these restrictions, I call on the Catholic faithful, as advocates for justice and charity, to comply with these regulations. From the first pages of Scripture we learn that we indeed are “our brother’s keeper,” a truth that must inspire us as we are called to sacrifice. We should also be motivated to cooperate with public safety norms, given our reverence for life and human dignity. This is, at its heart, a moment to proclaim the breadth and depth of what it means to be pro-life, particularly as this virus preys on the most vulnerable in our midst.
The good news is that a plan for a gradual reopening of our churches has now taken shape, as I note below. However, since our movements will be restricted as that plan unfolds in different phases, your pastors and bishops will continue for the present time to offer Mass in private each day and to livestream and broadcast Masses from our parishes and the archdiocese. I am particularly grateful to ABC-TV, Univision and Polvision in Chicago for giving us airtime every Sunday. These celebrations surely are not the same as gathering in our churches for Mass, but I know from hearing from many parishioners that they provide a great deal of solace and support in this time of uncertainty.
We must be honest. We expect this situation to continue for some weeks, and any plan for reopening our churches for public worship must include every precaution to ensure public gatherings do not create a second wave of contagion, thus squandering the gains made through our sacrifice in these days.
With those realities in mind, I am heartened to announce that we have reached an agreement with the Office of the Governor on a multi-phase Plan for re-opening our churches for the celebration of the sacraments, private prayer, adoration and Mass. As I share the Plan with you, both by way of an Executive Summary and the full Plan in the following pages, I want to assure you of my prayers for you and your family’s personal, material and spiritual wellbeing. I also express my appreciation to the many people on the archdiocesan staff and in the Office of the Governor for the many hours they have given to designing and fine tuning this agreement. Again, I call on all Catholics to seize this moment to exercise faith-filled citizenship in a way that reflects our deep regard for life, our calling as disciples of Jesus and our love of country.
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Cardinal Blase J. Cupich
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Cardinal Blase J. Cupich
As far as I can see, McLaughlin is making a distinction between killing human life and risking human life. In his view, a pro-lifer is perfectly justified in protesting measures that reduce risk to human life as long as there's no abortion or euthanasia going on.
ReplyDeleteHis happy talk about how "the sky has not fallen" in Georgia strikes me as premature, since infection/death rates lag two weeks behind re-opening measures.
Cupich makes good points, but I wish he had offered suggestions for what Catholics could do to support vulnerable populations besides stay home and be patient.
Things could open up quicker if people were willing to more actively protect vulnerable groups. People like me are more likely to contract Covid19--and more likely to spread it if we don't have better masks, gloves, sanitizer, and shopping services.
Open up safely, by all means, but common logic dictates that you keep your potential Typhoid Marys isolated as long as you can.
Jean, misled by the photo and by what he said at the start of his column I thought he was going to defend the unmasked trumpoleons spewing coronavirus in an effort to get their constitutional rights back from people they elected to make decisions in a time of crisis.
ReplyDeleteBut, about half way through, he shifted from appearing to defend their ignorant exhibitionism to defending the governors who are opening up their states for ignorant exhibitionists. And that case, when cut loose from the theological lace he draped over it, boils down to: Nothing is ever 100 percent in social statistics, so you can morally do whatever strikes you as good.
Let's just say I am unimpressed.
I think he tried to start from the Catechism, and carve out a road from there to, "It's actually ok if Georgia re-opens now". I'm not sure he got the road built, though.
DeleteYeah, and here is where he goes amiss with the Catechism: "But one is not exonerated from grave offense if, without proportionate reasons, he has acted in a way that brings about someone’s death, even without the intention to do so." So "freedom" or non-"constitutional rights" don't get you exonerated because bumper stickers are not proportional to deaths. That is why I suggested that McLaughlin shifted to the governors.
DeleteI agree with you that Dan McLaughlin's post doesn't quite hit the bull's eye. he makes some valid points, but his main one is the headline, "It's Not Hypocrisy for Pro-Lifers to Accept a Risk of Death". I even agree with that to a degree, when it refers to one's own death. But when it comes to other people's death, it seems to me there is an added burden of responsibility that he isn't addressing. He doesn't take it quite as far as Robert Reno's recent postings. But there is a mind set that "our home is in heaven, so we shouldn't get too hung up on this earthly life." There is some truth to that, but this school of thought is awfully breezy about the suffering of others. It would be different if this illness were a "once and done" thing, that you got it quickly and in a week or two you were okay. And there are people who get over it quickly. But most adults, even if they don't get life-threatening symptoms, report weeks of fatigue and a wracking cough, even after being pronounced "well".
ReplyDeleteThere is pressure to re-open schools, because supposedly children don't get seriously ill. But now there are reports of disturbing sequelae in children such as Kawasaki syndrome, a painful and debilitating inflammatory condition.
It is worth noting that even countries which are re-opening, or never closed, are still practicing precautionary measures, and not just wholesale going back to business as usual. We still don't know all we need to know about this disease and it is best to proceed cautiously, even though trying to re-open jobs and the economy.
I think Cardinal Cupich's letter is good, and will be interested to read the multi-phase plan.
" he makes some valid points, but his main one is the headline, "It's Not Hypocrisy for Pro-Lifers to Accept a Risk of Death". I even agree with that to a degree, when it refers to one's own death. But when it comes to other people's death, it seems to me there is an added burden of responsibility that he isn't addressing."
DeleteI agree.
Here is how I think about his point about accepting risk:
Even before COVID-19, I took risks all the time that most of us would deem reasonable. Driving to the grocery store is a risk. So is climbing a ladder or walking down a flight of stairs. People are injured or even killed doing these activities.
We can mitigate the risks by ceasing the activity in question: not driving, not climbing ladders, etc. Or, because those measures often are not practical, there usually are workable precautions that make those activities less hazardous: imposing seat belts and speed limits, making our vehicles safer, putting handrails and no-slip surfaces on staircases, and so on.
In this time of COVID-19, we are asking people to do both. We are asking them to take reasonable precautions like wearing face masks, maintaining social distancing and washing hands thoroughly and frequently. These represent changes from our accustomed behavior, but honestly I have a difficult time sympathizing with people's objections to them. They're really not that onerous.
We're also being asked to stay home - the equivalent of not driving or going down stairs at all. The repercussions for some people are enormous. The unemployment rate is through the roof right now; a fifth or more of the entire workforce is deprived of the dignity of work and also is facing economic peril - and it may not be short-term. This is genuine suffering.
There are spiritual and non-spiritual responses to people who object to suffering in this way. One non-spiritual response, which may have quite a bit of validity, is: Yes, you are suffering now. We sympathize. But we need you to suck it up. Because if you are not willing to pay the price now, you and many others will quite possibly pay a worse price in the future, because the activities which you want to resume will spread the disease. Do you not see that the suffering you are undertaking now is not an end in itself, but a means to a good thing, which is to quell the disease? Furthermore, we will mitigate your suffering by giving you money to help relieve your financial distress.
Cardinal Cupich, I thought, followed much the same line of thought, but in more spiritual terms.
There are a lot of reasons a Christian might accept the risk of death. I held back the Russkis at the Fulda Gap myself from 1957 to '59. But here we are talking about making grandma accept the risk for me to do what I damn want That can't be moral.
DeleteRe masks and making free with risks to others: A Gallup poll found attitudes differed by political party among residents: "... the starkest divide was political: 46% of Republican or Republican-leaning voters said in mid-April they never wear a mask compared to 18% of Democrats or Democratic-leaning voters."
ReplyDeleteMore on how FUBAR things are in Michigan: https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/05/michigans-mask-mandate-highlights-political-fault-lines-in-coronavirus-crisis.html
Yesterday, the city assessor knocked on the door without a mask and with no attempt to social distance informed us through the screen door that he was doing property checks.
I emailed the mayor and asked him to provide the assessor with a mask, who said he would ask Mr. Assessor to wear his mask.
If people don't want to wear a mask in a public place, fine. I'll stay away. But don't come to my house and breathe on me through my own damn screen door.
Jean, I just looked at your links in the previous thread. That picture of the doll with the noose around its neck is simply appalling! They denied being rednecks in the story. Which is true in a way, because it's insulting to rednecks. What they were is a slobbering mob, attempting to bully and intimidate.
DeleteOur state hasn't been immune to that spirit, either. Back in March, before the quarantine, a bunch of jackasses showed up at the state capitol toting AK-7s. Their issue at the time was their right to open carry, anytime, anyplace, anyhow. They went inside the building, and the governor let them get away with it, saying they hadn't broken any laws. There was a lot of pushback from that, saying if there weren't any laws against making state employees feel threatened and intimidated in their workplace, there should be.
When I go into my PA courthouse, I have to pass through a metal detector. I am supposed to check any weapons and cell phones with the guards before I enter. I am gobsmacked that these men are allowed to enter public buildings. I can't help but believe that I'm seeing another sign of our country's descent.
DeleteStanley, it's the same with our county courthouse, you have to go through a metal detector, etc. Kind of weird that our local courthouse is more secure than the state capitol. I think it is a small minority of people who do this stuff, but they make a lot of noise and get attention disproportionate to their numbers and actual influence. Unfortunately they scare and intimidate people.
DeleteThe Noose Guy is running for state rep. He has been in jail for assault and stalking. My guess is that a female governor, a black woman doctor who heads our state health department, a single mother as sec of state, and a lesbian AG grates his cheese. There is certainly an anti-woman feeling about the rallies. I suppose that's why they've got their guns out. Makes them feel safer to have a phallic symbol on display.
DeleteI don't know whether or not this is a fallacy, but I'm attracted to the idea that good thinking is elegant. There is something aesthetically pleasing about the simple edifice of Catholic teaching that Cupich erects in a few paragraphs. It rings true to me. I'm not getting those clear notes from the National Review piece.
ReplyDeleteJim, I think in the realm of scientific thinking it might be called avoiding the epicycles.
DeleteIsn't reason one of the pillars of the Church? Faith, tradition, and reason? That's what I learned from the Episcopalians, that each of these pillars were gifts from God. So a logical exposition should seem elegant and beautiful to believers, no?
DeleteAt least y'all don't have to put up with my brother's Facebook shares. This is the latest. From a 60-plus year old guy with an artificial heart valve. Who is in close proximity with a 92 year old guy with multiple health challenges.
ReplyDeleteThat is so sad.
DeleteFrom what I have been able to see, it seems like my brother actually is fairly careful personally (probably because his wife insists on it), and tries not to endanger Dad. But every so often just has to get that little hamster pellet of dopamine from sharing b.s.
DeleteUgh. I am sorry for you.
DeleteAs bad as COVID-19 is, it is not the big one. There are estimated 1.5M viruses out there among the animals. We as a species are intent on disturbing their habitat. Our carnivore tastes make transfer more probable. Zoonotic transfer seems to be occuring at rate of two new viruses per decade. There were MERS and SARS and Zika recently. COVID-19 is the first to go pandemic. We have the tools to defend ourselves as a civilization. But a mob of free, stupid people who take their comforts for granted will not succeed.
ReplyDeletePlease tell me miso, tofu, quinoa and kale can also pass on coronaviruses.
Delete"As bad ad COVID 19 is, it is not the big one." You are right. The hemorrhagic fevers such as Ebola and Marburg are actually much, much worse. The only thing that has saved us is that they much less contagious, requiring contact with bodily fluids. The fatality rates are said to be (by Wikipedia), between 25 and 90%, making them at least an order of magnitude more lethal than Covid. "Hemorrhagic" means bleeding, internally and from the bodily orifices. Not a pretty way to die. I'm betting no one would be calling mask wearers wusses if those were the stakes this time.
DeleteI just found out someone I know has had it. 50's, good health, no underlying conditions. Fever on and off for three weeks. Just had trouble breathing. Went to hospital. Took Benadryl. Feeling better.
ReplyDeleteThis thing is nasty and scary.