The Common Ground Project At the End of an Era
EDITORIAL
In our last three editorials (Oct., Nov., & Dec.), we really stuck our necks out. While the response has been overwhelmingly favorable, it’s been mixed with flurries of “cancel my subscription” notes. In between those two kinds of responses have been others, several of the “wait a minute, now” variety.
The misgivings usually revolve around our critique of the Common Ground Project (recently renamed the Common Ground Initiative — but we will go with the original name here, for the sake of consistency and clarity). We received a letter from Jerome Wolbert of the Department of Mathematics at the University of Chicago which clearly captures the spirit of the misgivings. It deserves careful attention. Here is what he has to say (abridged and adapted):
“Your November editorial, ‘Rome Under Siege,’ was a skewed view of Cardinal Bernardin’s Common Ground Project, and this has been borne out by Bernardin’s replies to Cardinal Law and the others who questioned his motives.
“I realize that ‘dialogue’ is a code word which sets many minds on edge, but there needs to be a way of saying that we need to talk without saying that doctrine must change.
You May Also Enjoy
Well, we take our hats off, left-handedly, to Bishop Carlton Pearson.
Neither Lewis nor Eliot was willing to condemn all uses of artificial contraception, yet both had obvious concerns about the moral implications of its use.
Scripture and Tradition testify that the order of this world ends in the chaos from which it was formed when the hand of God withdraws its providential order.