President Obama and funding for embryonic stem cell research

A guest from America's scientific community spoke on BBC Radio 4's PM programme this afternoon, welcoming President Obama's decision to rescind the ban on public funding of embryonic stem cell research.

It is interesting to read the presentation of this decision here on the White House website. I reproduce it below, as I am not expecting the link to be permanent.

“A debt of gratitude to so many tireless advocates”
Moments ago President Obama marked a monumental moment for hope with an audience of Nobel Laureates, leaders of the faith community, and patient advocates.

Today, with the Executive Order I am about to sign, we will bring the change that so many scientists and researchers; doctors and innovators; patients and loved ones have hoped for, and fought for, these past eight years: we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research. We will vigorously support scientists who pursue this research. And we will aim for America to lead the world in the discoveries it one day may yield.

The President acknowledged that there are those who strongly oppose this research, and insisted that even as he had come to a different conclusion those opinions deserved full respect. He explained that the American government has not only a role but a responsibility to keep the country at the forefront of medical science. But he also made clear that his decision was not made based on his belief in science alone: "As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease
human suffering."

The President said that a false choice has often been presented between science and faith, and that corrupting, shielding, or shying away from the facts science lays bare benefits nobody:

That is why today, I am also signing a Presidential Memorandum directing the head of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a strategy for restoring scientific integrity to government decision making. To ensure that in this new Administration, we base our public policies on the soundest science; that we appoint scientific advisors based on their credentials and experience, not their politics or ideology; and that we are open and honest with the American people about the science behind our decisions. That is how we will harness the power of science to achieve our goals – to preserve our environment and protect our national security; to create the jobs of the future, and live longer, healthier lives.

One of the President’s closing notes was to pay homage to those who dedicated so much of their time and energy, often in their last days when both were short, to the cause of allowing this research to see its full potential:

As we restore our commitment to science, and resume funding for promising stem cell research, we owe a debt of gratitude to so many tireless advocates, some of whom are with us today, many of whom are not. Today, we honor all those whose names we don’t know, who organized, and raised awareness, and kept on fighting – even when it was too late for them, or for the people they love. And we honor those we know, who used their influence to help others and bring attention to this cause –
people like Christopher and Dana Reeve, who we wish could be here to see this moment.

The text raises some interesting questions:

1. The claim is that politics has been removed from decision making about science. But, if we read the last paragraph of the release above, there is a clear acknowledgement of the political campaigning that has led up to this decision by President Obama. The decision itself is profoundly political. And, let's be clear, the promise to appoint scientific advisers on the basis of their scientific credentials and not their ideology is probably one sided .... anyone who is pro-life will be considered ideological/political and not be appointed, while those not on the side of the angels (as I would view it!) will be non-ideological and non-political and so be appointed.

2. It is also interesting to notice the interest in the aim that America might lead the world in the discoveries to which this research might lead. At the press conference, President Obama also referred to the potential for scientists to leave America to work in countries where the research was allowed. An interesting motivation, which does not seem to leave much room for properly ethical considerations.

3. In so far as any moral consideration comes into this decision, President Obama cites the possibility that the research might help in developing cures for certain illnesses, and that we have a duty to care. The line of argument is purely consequentialist, and leaves out any consideration of a moral value or disvalue intrinsic to the pursuit of the research itself.

4. But of greater significance is an unstated underlying principle. Decisions about science are to be made based on science. With little or no reference to objective moral considerations. The presentation above seems to portray a separation of scientific endeavour from moral endeavour. On BBC Radio 4's PM programme (the evening current affairs programme that partners the morning Today programme), for example, an American scientist welcomed President Obama's decision, saying that the decision had been made on the basis of science and not of ideology. There is a certain obfuscation in President Obama's talk that "a false choice has often been presented between science and faith"; radio coverage is quoting him as opposing a "false choice between sound science and moral values". This all seems to speak of an abandoning of a sense of the moral responsibility of the scientific enterprise, and of the idea that religious belief can contribute to the moral nature of this enterprise.

I must re-read C P Snow's article on "The Moral Un-neutrality of Science" ...

Marian character of the Lenten season (3)

One of the Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary, intended for use during Lent, has the title The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of Reconciliation.

Pope John Paul II concluded his Apostolic Exhortation on penance and reconciliation in this way:

I likewise invite you to turn with me to the immaculate heart of Mary, mother of Jesus, in whom "is effected the reconciliation of God with humanity..., is accomplished the work of reconciliation, because she has received from God the fullness of grace in virtue of the redemptive sacrifice of Christ." Truly Mary has been associated with God, by virtue of her divine motherhood, in the work of reconciliation.

Into the hands of this mother, whose fiat marked the beginning of that "fullness of time" in which Christ accomplished the reconciliation of humanity with God, to her immaculate heart - to which we have repeatedly entrusted the whole of humanity, disturbed by sin and tormented by so many tensions and conflicts - I now in a special way entrust this intention: that through her intercession humanity may discover and travel the path of penance, the only path that can lead it to full reconciliation.[1]

In the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the questions about the Sacrament of Penance[2] are presented under the title “The Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation”[3]. In this way, the “path of penance” is seen also as the “path of reconciliation”, as Pope John Paul II suggests.

300. What is interior penance?
It is the movement of a “contrite heart” (Psalm 51:19) drawn by divine grace to respond to the merciful love of God. This entails sorrow for and abhorrence of sins committed, a firm purpose not to sin again in the future and trust in the help of God. It is nourished by hope in divine mercy.

301. What forms does penance take in the Christian life?
Penance can be expressed in many and various ways but above all in fasting, prayer, and almsgiving. These and many other forms of penance can be practiced in the daily life of a Christian, particularly during the time of Lent and on the penitential day of Friday….

310. What are the effects of this sacrament?
The effects of the sacrament of Penance are: reconciliation with God and therefore the forgiveness of sins; reconciliation with the Church; recovery, if it has been lost, of the state of grace; remission of the eternal punishment merited by mortal sins, and remission, at least in part, of the temporal punishment which is the consequence of sin; peace, serenity of conscience and spiritual consolation; and an increase of spiritual strength for the struggle of Christian living.

The theme of forgiveness of sins as reconciliation can be seen in the prayers of the Mass of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of Reconciliation:

Lord our God, through the precious blood of your Son you reconciled the world to yourself and at the foot of the cross you chose the Blessed Virgin Mary to be the mother of reconciliation for sinners; grant through her intercession that we may obtain pardon for our sins.

Lord, we offer you these gifts of reconciliation and praise, that through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, refuge of sinners, you may in your mercy pardon our sins and steady our wavering hearts.

In your infinite goodness you do not abandon those who stray from you, but in marvellous ways you call them back to your love: you gave the Blessed Virgin Mary, sinless as she was, a heart of compassion for sinners; seeing her love as their mother, they turn to her with trust as they ask your forgiveness; seeing her beauty of spirit, they seek to turn away from sin in its ugliness…[4]

Our recourse to the Sacrament of Penance, and to practices of fasting, prayer and almsgiving, during Lent can therefore be seen as having a clear Marian character.

[1] Pope John Paul II Reconciliatio et Paenitentiae n.35.
[2] cf the title of the Sacrament in the 1983 Code of Canon Law c.959, and ff.
[3] cf Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church n.296 ff.
[4] Respectively, the Opening Prayer, the Prayer over the Gifts and the Preface.

Gran Torino

We (literal, not royal) went to see Clint Eastwood's film Gran Torino yesterday. I would not normally want to recommend a film with as much swearing as this one (there is a lot, I don't suggest that you try to count the number of profanities as you will have to give up very quickly, and remember that the scenes shown in the trailer have been censored for language) or one with aspects of the story line that are as violent as this one (and some of the violence is quite raw).

But this turned out to be a film with a number of very interesting aspects.

1. In some ways, Clint Eastwood's character displays prejudice - in his attitudes to his neighbours. But it is not long into the film before his character is being shown in a rather softer light than this statement suggests. ... I was particularly struck by a scene where some misbehaviour by passing teens causes Clint Eastwood to comment to himself "See that. Young people these days!", and a few moments later add "Now, look at that" as one of his teen neighbours comes to help.

2. One aspect of the film, that becomes explicit in one sequence where Clint Eastwood's character listens to an explanation of Hmong culture from the daughter of his neighbours, is a dialogue between American culture (represented by Clint Eastwood's character) and the culture of Hmong immigrants to America. This really is quite fascinating to see developing as the film progresses, and it is done with considerable attention to detail, most especially in the dress of the Hmong family in the closing scenes. [The Hmong people are a hill people from the Laos/Thailand/Vietnam area of South East Asia. They sided with the Americans during the Vietnam War, and came to settle in America in the wake of that conflict.] The film is a very genuine and successful exercise in inter-cultural dialogue.

3. Another aspect of the film portrays vividly the problems of gang violence in a neighbourhood, and how difficult it is for young people to keep out of that way of life in areas where it is prevalant. The rawness of some of the violence arises from this. The story line of the film is built around Clint Eastwood's efforts to stop the son of his neighbour's family getting involved with a gang. Little things are well portrayed - that the parents/grandparents of an immigrant family might well not speak English, and rely on their children/grandchildren to translate for them. There is a very touching scene portraying this, when a little girl brings her Chinese grandfather over to ask for help with a job round the house, and she has to speak for her grandfather.

4. There is also a Catholic slant. Clint Eastwood's character is a lapsed Catholic, being regularly visited by his parish priest - see the trailer. Eventually, as the film approaches its climax, Clint Eastwood is shown going to confession, though one could perhaps argue that the substance of his confession is rather superficial. However, that came over to me less as a skit on confession and rather more a portrayal of an aspect of the character being portrayed by Clint Eastwood - an inability to understand just how objectionable he was to others. A scene with his neighbour teen in a barber's shop shows Clint Eastwood trying to make this teen a bit more of a man. He models this by entering the shop and greeting the proprieter in a conversation littered with profanity. The teen is then asked to come and behave in a "manly way". He repeats word for word what Clint Eastwood has said ... only to be told off for being rude, and being asked to do it properly and politely. Clint Eastwood's character just didn't seem to realise that his normal way of doing things was so rude ... Catholicism does get portrayed in a quite sympathetic way.

5. Another interesting aspect of the film arises from Clint Eastwood's character being a veteran of the Korean War. The character has a "past" that in some way stills lives with him, as a matter of both personal experience and culture. His encounter with his Hmong neighbours is coloured by this, because of their origins in South East Asia. The working out of this in his relations with his neighbours is another interesting thing to watch for in the film.

6. I might have given an impression of a film of constant swearing and violence. It is, however, in my view, a very intelligent film. It held my attention completely. A number of the aspects that I have mentioned have a universal value, applicable to any society influenced by the increased migration and globalisation resulting from conflict and modern means of travel and communication. It is a very moving film, too.

And the ending of the film is quite self-sacrificing. By saying which, I have probably given it away ... And Zero observed that many of those in the cinema were of an "older" age group, probably Clint Eastwood fans.

Snippets from ZENIT

ZENIT today carries the text of Pope Benedict XVI's message for this year's World Youth Day, celebrated in the dioceses and parishes of the world on Palm Sunday. I was rather taken by the concluding paragraph:

Mary, Mother of hope

May Saint Paul be your example on this path of apostolic life. He nourished his life of constant faith and hope by looking to Abraham, of whom he wrote in the Letter to the Romans: "Hoping against hope, he believed that he would become the father of many nations" (Rom 4:18). Following in the footsteps of the people of hope - composed of prophets and saints of every age - we continue to advance towards the fulfilment of the Kingdom, and on this spiritual path we are accompanied by the Virgin Mary, Mother of Hope. She who incarnated the hope of Israel, who gave the world its Saviour, and who remained at the foot of the Cross with steadfast hope, is our model and our support. Most of all, Mary intercedes for us and leads us through the darkness of our trials to the radiant dawn of an encounter with the Risen Christ.

I would like to conclude this message, my dear young friends, with a beautiful and well-known prayer by Saint Bernard that was inspired by one of Mary's titles, Stella Maris, Star of the Sea: "You who amid the constant upheavals of this life find yourself more often tossed about by storms than standing on firm ground, do not turn your eyes from the brightness of this Star, if you would not be overwhelmed by boisterous waves. If the winds of temptations rise, if you fall among the rocks of tribulations, look up at the Star, call on Mary ... In dangers, in distress, in perplexities, think on Mary, call on Mary ... Following her, you will never go astray; when you implore her aid, you will never yield to despair; thinking on her, you will not err; under her patronage you will never wander; beneath her protection you will not fear; she being your guide, you will not weary; with her assistance, you will arrive safely in the port" (Homilies in Praise of the Virgin Mother, 2:17).

Mary, Star of the Sea, we ask you to guide the young people of the whole world to an encounter with your Divine Son Jesus. Be the celestial guardian of their fidelity to the Gospel and of their hope.

There is also a news item entitled "Pope coaches priests on evangelising parishioners". This is a report of Pope Benedict's meeting with the priests of Rome for a question-and-answer session, something that is now a Lenten tradition. Dare one call this an example of dialogue? An extract quoted in the news report:

"It is very important," he emphasized, "that these faithful really find in their parish priest a pastor who loves them and helps them to listen today to the Word of God, to understand that it is a Word for them and not only for people of the past or the future, to help them even more, in the sacramental life, in the experience of prayer, in listening to the Word of God, and on the path of justice and charity, because Christians should be the leaven of our society with so many problems [...]."

This paragraph suggests to me the importance of what one might term the more "Churchy" aspect of Christian living - prayer and sacramental life - so as to enable the more "outreach" aspect - justice and charity. How far do our priests deliver on the first of these? The two aspects do, of course, go together. The full question and answer can be found here, and are worth a read. I particularly like the reference to "a place of hospitality of the faith", suggested particularly with regard to those attracted to the Church but not yet members, to provide a kind of "way in". I think this idea has an analagous application to those who are already members of a parish. Is the parish really a place of hospitality for their faith? Or does it stop at the level of their culture or social life?

Cherie Blair at the Angelicum

I have at last got round to reading the text of the lecture that Cherie Blair gave at a day conference at the Pontifical University of St Thomas (the Angelicum) in Rome in December 2008. I have two texts to hand, one which I downloaded and printed in December, soon after the lecture itself, and a second text on the official Cherie Blair website. This latter text appears to be a fuller version of the earlier text, but, since I cannot now find my source for the first text, I cannot say this for certain. A transcript of a recording of the lecture is posted at Lifesite News; this transcript is very close to my earlier text, but in at least one point, it completely reverses the sense.

Perhaps the main difference between the two texts - and this appears to represent a difference between the lecture as delivered and the lecture as written up for posting on the website - lies in the concluding paragraphs. The website text is quite forthright in its attack on the Church's teaching on contraception, whereas the delivered text is more indirect. Cherie Blair cites Pope Benedict XVI's insistence that there is no contradiction between faith and reason, referring to his address at Regensburg, and then says:

Yet in relation to contraception the Church has preferred to avoid revisiting old doctrines in the light of present day knowledge.

The reality is that many Catholic couples, exercising their own consciences, in fact limit their families as the declining birth rates in Europe and the US testify. But in the face of the plague of HIV/AIDs where the Church has played such a role of compassionate ministry; that work is undermined by our refusal to allow the use of condoms which are literally making the difference between life and death across the world. And beyond HIV/Aids in a world where two thirds of world’s poor are women, to prevent the devout but poor in the third world, the choice that the devout but rich in the first world have to regulate their own fertility and thus release the potential of women to participate fully in economic and political life just reinforces the stubborn gap between the haves and have nots which the Church campaigns against so passionately across the world....

..unless [the Church] is prepared to be informed and changed by that Enlightenment rationality praised by Pope Benedict at Regensburg, unless it is prepared to look again with clear eyes at what is fundamental truth and what is just a reflection of the culture of the past that voice will be diminished and even distorted to the detriment of the mission of the Church to bring spirituality, wisdom and compassion to the modern world.

It is, of course, quite disingenous to cite Pope Benedict as if his thought provides a basis for supporting a point of view that he would in fact oppose quite strongly. Particularly when Cherie has cited earlier in her lecture Pope Benedict's warning against the "subjective 'conscience' becoming the sole arbiter of what is ethical".

There is, however, a very positive section in Cherie Blair's lecture. This comes in a section headed "The Church and Human Rights", the second section of the lecture. The website text appears to replace a section of the delivered lecture outlining the origin of the discourse on human rights in general with a fuller account of the thought of Pope John XXIII expressed in Pacem in Terris and of Pope John Paul II. I do not reproduce it here but refer the reader to the link above to read it directly. There is also an interesting recognition that the Church contributes a religious underpinning to the principle of universal human rights that genuinely adds something when compared to an exclusively secular understanding. And an interesting citation about the universality of human rights, that they apply to all people. This is a section of the lecture that is well worth reading.

In trying to understand exactly where Cherie Blair is coming from, I recognise two "hermeneutic principles" at play in her lecture. The first is to treat the role of women in terms of "leadership" or "rank". In the text as it appears to have been delivered, Mary Ann Glendon, as head of the Pontifical Academy for the Social Sciences is described as "the highest ranking woman in the Church"; and the roles of Edith Stein, Mother Teresa and others are described as "leadership roles". In the website text this language of leadership is extended, perhaps softened, to include the language of "breaking down barriers to female participation". The language of "participation" is quite nuanced, and to participate is not the same thing as to lead; but I think one should recognise that for Cherie Blair it is a language that refers to leadership and positions of rank in the Church.

However, if we are really to understand the part played by women like Edith Stein and Mother Teresa in the Church, a hermeneutic of "leadership" and "rank" does not work. Instead, one needs a hermeneutic of the "evangelical counsels" which define the religious life that they embraced, and the spirit that is reflected in a genuinely Christian lay lifestyle of those who are active in the Church. I think one can legitimately suggest, as Cherie Blair did, that more women could have roles in the Curia. But that should conform to an authentically ecclesial hermeneutic, which is not one that can be fully expressed in the terminology of leadership and rank. Indeed, a hermeneutic of "leadership" and "rank" misunderstands the part that men should play, too.

The second key "hermeneutic principle" for Cherie Blair is that of freedom for women with regard to child care, and by implication, to an extent at least, from child birth (their "ability to control their own fertility"). For her, the promotion of women's rights only comes about where being a mother does not come in the way of women taking leadership roles. So, for example, in the text of the lecture as it appears to have been delivered, Cherie says of Edith Stein and Mother Teresa that "in return for leadership roles they had to turn away from having children. As a result the Church, like the rest of our society, did not accept the equality of every woman in practice". Fundamental to this, of course, is access to contraception, and this is the basis of Cherie Blair's forthright attack on the Church's teaching on this topic.

It is quite fascinating to see what is present in the text of the lecture as it appears to have been delivered - but has been taken out in favour of the much stronger attack on the Church's teaching on contraception in the website text:

And, while I am on record, as having had difficulties with the current teaching on responsible parenthood, I do recognize that much of what Paul VI predicted could happen in Humanae Vitae as a result of what could happen as a result of wide and indiscriminate use of abortion has been born out in particular in relation to baby girls as the birth ratios of boys to girls in some countries testify. What those lost girls demonstrate is that, across the world, we lack the widely held sense of the contribution of women which is important to society in its own right. The situation of too many women in the developing world shows that we are still far away from women being regarded as of equal worth to men. Here the over-whelming problems: economic, education and health related.

The British Independent newspaper commenting on the 1994 UN Population conference in Cairo singled out the Catholic Church for praise – not something it always does – it persuasively argued that, by being one of the leading providers of education across the developing world, the Church is making a powerful contribution to improving the lives of women, lifting them out of poverty and enabling them to reduce levels of child-birth, which can be, and is actually often dangerous to their health. History teaches us that improving the general economic situation and particularly improving women’s educational levels, gives women more power in society and helps them exercise more responsible fertility.

The appropriate hermeneutic to respond to this second hermeneutic of Cherie Blair's is that provided by the "theology of the body". In other words, a hermeneutic based on an integration of the sexual aspects of women's (and man's) existence into a whole of life. Such a hermeneutic has its application to both married and religious life.

Whilst it is very easy to attack Cherie Blair's lecture for its dissent from Catholic teaching, it is also useful to clearly identify the two "hermeneutics" which underpin it. These can then be evaluated in their relation to wider Catholic thinking and to the thinking of the non-Catholic world.

The Marian character of the Lenten Season (2)

This second reflection is on the theme of Holy Mary, Disciple of the Lord, which is the title of one of the Masses of the Blessed Virgin Mary intended for use during Lent.

The introduction to the Mass of Holy Mary, Disciple of the Lord refers to the following passage from Pope Paul VI’s Apostolic Exhortation Marialis Cultus:

First, the Virgin Mary has always been proposed to the faithful by the Church as an example to be imitated, not precisely in the type of life she led, and much less for the socio-cultural background in which she lived and which today scarcely exists anywhere. She is held up as an example to the faithful rather for the way in which, in her own particular life, she fully and responsibly accepted the will of God (cf. Lk. 1:38), because she heard the word of God and acted on it, and because charity and a spirit of service were the driving force of her actions. She is worthy of imitation because she was the first and the most perfect of Christ's disciples. All of this has a permanent and universal exemplary value.[1]

The following texts from this Mass reflect the way in which Mary is an example of the disciple who hears the Word of God and answers the call that the Word makes. They can therefore be related to the aspect of Lent as a recalling of baptism.

How favoured are you, Mary! You received the angel’s message and became the mother of God’s Word. How favoured are you, for you kept in your heart those words from heaven and became the disciple of God’s Word.

Lord God, through the Blessed Virgin Mary you have shown us the example of a disciple, who is faithful to the words of life; open our hearts to receive your saving word, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit it may speak to us in our daily lives
and bring forth a rich harvest of holiness.

Blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it!

Blessed is the Virgin Mary who kept the word of God and pondered it in her heart.[2]

A second group of texts emphasise more the putting into practice of a response to the Word of God:

…she is even more blessed because, as a disciple of the incarnate Word, she eagerly sought to know your will and faithfully carried it out.

Lord God, filled with the joy that comes from this sacrament, we ask that by imitating the Blessed Virgin Mary we may be true disciples of Christ, eagerly hearing his words and putting them into practice.[3]

These texts more call to mind the penitential character of the Lenten season.

The themes of this particular Mass are also reflected in the third Mystery of Light of the Rosary. In his Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae, Pope John Paul II first writes of discipleship as being a friendship with Christ:

In the spiritual journey of the Rosary, based on the constant contemplation – in Mary's company – of the face of Christ, this demanding ideal of being conformed to him is pursued through an association which could be described in terms of friendship….[4]

In writing of the third Mystery itself, Pope John Paul II brings out more the penitential aspect of the call to conversion:

Another mystery of light is the preaching by which Jesus proclaims the coming of the Kingdom of God, calls to conversion (cf. Mk 1:15) and forgives the sins of all who draw near to him in humble trust (cf. Mk 2:3-13; Lk 7:47- 48): the inauguration of that ministry of mercy which he continues to exercise until the end of the world, particularly through the Sacrament of Reconciliation which he has entrusted to his Church (cf. Jn 20:22-23).[5]

[1] Paul VI Marialis Cultus n.35.
[2] Respectively, the Entrance Antiphon, the Opening Prayer, the Communion Antiphon and the Verse before the Gospel.
[3] Respectively, the Preface and the Prayer after Communion.
[4] John Paul II Rosarium Virginis Mariae n.15
[5] John Paul II Rosarium Virginis Mariae n. 21.

Invisible women?

The Sunday Times headlines a short piece in today's issue "Cherie in warning to churches over invisible women". This is a trail for a programme on Channel 4 tonight, in which Cherie Blair presents the last episode of their series Christianity: A history. According to the Channel 4 website:

Leading British lawyer and committed Catholic Cherie Blair investigates Christianity over the last 100 years and explores its future prospects.

Cherie Blair is quoted by the Sunday Times as follows:

..when it comes to the public face of Christianity, now women are virtually invisible.

Like, for example, Mary Ann Glendon. Until President Obama was elected, the US Ambassador to the Holy See. And she is a professor of Law at Harvard. And she is is still, I think, president of the Pontifical Academy for Social Sciences. Like, she is a pretty visible Catholic woman. And she has a high profile position in a Pontifical Academy.

Like, for example, Chiara Lubich. Founder, and the spiritual source, of the Focolare Movement. Founder and leader of a movement spread throughout the Church, and which leads in many ways the dialogue between the Church and different areas of contemporary life - economics, politics, the media - under a heading "Culture of Unity". Oh, and the constitutions of the Focolare Movement mean that the President can only be a woman .... Like, Chiara was a pretty visible Catholic woman, as is her successor Maria Emmaus Voce.

But there is a difference between women like this and Cherie Blair. They are women who are visibly faithful to the Church. Cherie, for all her high profile, is not known for the Catholic nature of that profile. Is she really, as The Sunday Times suggests, "one of the most influential lay figures in the Catholic Church"?