Search

Religion is a salient part of cultural competence for mental health clinicians. This paper describes rationales for clinicians to work with a less well-known Catholic clergy: permanent deacons. Demographic, personality structure and religious commitment data from nearly 2,000 deacons support collaboration with clinicians to improve the continuity of mental health care. Guidelines for this work are provided by the Clergy Outreach & Professional Engagement (COPE) model: clergy first support mental health without clinicians, then clergy may need to reach out to clinicians, then clinicians may need to reach out to clergy to provide care salient to persons of religious faith and to help sustain recovery. Deacon examples are provided throughout the paper. Future research is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

U.S. Catholicism spawned hundreds of national ("personal") parishes, most serving early European immigrants. Hispanics' later population growth, by contrast, coincided with Church leaders' emphasis on integrated, territorial parishes. This paper examines more recent practice around personal parishes with explicit, named service to Hispanic Catholics. One in six new personal parishes serves Hispanics. Hispanic personal parishes' minimal presence among American dioceses, however, does not mirror Hispanics' larger presence among Catholics overall. Findings from an original National Study of Personal Parishes reveal commonalities in diocesan explanations for establishing - or not establishing - Hispanic personal parishes. Personal parishes operate as an alternative, non-assimilative parish structure alongside the "ideal" of an integrated, territorial parish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In “A Catholic Showdown Worth Watching” Patrick Deneen identified and elaborated upon an important division within “conservative“ American Catholicism. That division turns on competing conceptions and evaluations of liberalism, and, by extension, America. A parallel division exists within American conservatism more generally. On the one hand are what can be called “Front Porch Republicans” (named after the website around which these conservatives are organized). Front Porch Republicans regard liberalism of any kind as inherently corrosive, and because liberalism is written into the genetic code of the American political order, they are also critical of the American regime. On the other hand are what can be called “Natural Law Liberals” (a term coined by Christopher Wolfe). Natural Law Liberals distinguish between a positive form of classical liberalism that is continuous with the natural law tradition, and a form of modern liberalism that is not. For Natural Law Liberals, the principles of the American founding embody a form of Natural Law Liberalism. Whereas Front Porch Republicans often appeal to Alasdair MacIntyre in defense of their arguments, Natural Law Liberals often appeal to John Finnis. That such a division exists between MacIntyre and Finnis is often taken for granted. But a close examination of their writings suggests more common ground between them than either Front Porch Republicans or Natural Law Liberals usually acknowledge. In this paper I attempt to identify that common ground by exploring MacIntyre and Finnis's conceptions of morality, politics and the common good. I also attempt to indicate places where there is disagreement, and where further clarification is required. This essay is intended to be the first word, and not the last word, on this subject. It is a call to conversation, rather than a showdown, between Front Porch Republicans and Natural Law Liberals. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Civil disobedience actions designated as "Plowshares actions" were first committed by Philip and Daniel Berrigan and others in 1980, in response to nuclear proliferation and as a way to galvanize the Catholic Left following the Vietnam War era, during which the Berrigans had risen to national prominence for their anti-war demonstrations. Still active today, the Plowshares perform ritualized "symbolic disarmaments" that are accompanied by a rhetoric characterizing the actions as successful even though they do not bring about the political change for which the activists seem to aim. This paper examines the rhetoric of marginality that the Plowshares construct by analyzing four accusations that are routinely leveled against them-bad parent, criminaVprisoner, martyr, and ineffective fool-to show how Plowshares activists, through the lens of theology and via metaphor, refashion these accusations into adornments. The activists recode and claim "marginality" because it is understood as necessary to authentic Christian witness and political efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the influence of ethnic background on organizational status attainment. The data are taken from a national sample of 2,755 Roman Catholic diocesan priests and bishops. The sample is divided into seven ethnic categories: Irish, German, French, Italian, Anglo-Saxon, Polish, and other. Controlling for the overall distribution of status positions within the diocese and the individual's age/seniority, a "non-preferential" model of status attainment is constructed. Average expected status on the basis of this non-preferential model for these ethnic groups in seven different regions of the country is compared to average actual status. Although we found three isolated cases of particular ethnic groups in specific regions doing significantly poorer in status attainment than predicted by the non-preferential model, the only consistent effect of ethnicity found across the entire sample is a slight advantage enjoyed by Irish clergy. No significant effect was associated with belonging to the largest ethnic group in a diocese. The very small advantage enjoyed by the Irish suggests that Irish domination of the Catholic hierarchy in the United States is maintained less by selective promotion within the ranks of the clergy and more by a disproportionate recruitment of Irish priests at the entrance levels of the organization. Disproportionate recruitment and preferential promotion are discussed as alternative mechanisms of domination within organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]