Distinctly Catholic: A group of 45 "scholars, prelates and clergy" have sent an appeal to the world's cardinals, asking them to implore Pope Francis to correct what they deem to be "erroneous propositions" in Amoris Laetitia.
The Christian Science Monitor kicks off a seven part series looking at the relationship of gay rights issues and religious liberty issues. A lot of the usual posturing but Tom Berg is the voice of reason and sanity in the article. Sadly, his is a lonely voice.
At Commonweal, Patrick Whelan reviews Scott Simon's memoir of his mother.
Here at NCR, and in line with my post this morning, Tom Gallagher on Archbishop Cupich's recourse to mediation as a means of resolving sex abuse claims at his prior posting in Spokane.
Distinctly Catholic: The appointment of Chicago Archbishop Blase Cupich to the Congregation for Bishops certainly caused a stir yesterday. As a columnist, let me note today why it is consequential.
My colleague Tom Roberts reported last week about the Public Religion Research Institute's new study. In light of Mr. Trump's repeated praise for Saddam Hussein's handling of terrorism, which is wrong on the facts, it is good to look at the numbers in the PRRI survey regarding fears about Islam. They are not happy numbers.
Yesterday, I wrote about the guidelines for the implementation of Amoris Laetitia issued by Archbishop Charles Chaput for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. I took issue with some of the guidelines as not being true to the text of Amoris, and for not recognizing the consensus that was achieved at two synods but stating the minority view as if it had prevailed.
At America, Michael O'Loughlin reports on efforts by prominent Democrats to encourage the party to adopt a "big tent" approach to the abortion issue. Kudos to all those quoted in this piece: Professor Schneck, Sr. Simone, Chris Hale and Steve Krueger. It is not only that they are correct on the merits.
Commentary: The Philadelphia archbishop's guidelines for implementing Amoris Laetitia raise many questions.
In the New York Times, David Brooks correctly makes the case that Trump is shaking the foundation of our party politics by running against free trade, and more broadly against an open society. And, I suspect Brooks is right that Trump can't pull it off but someone more polished might be able to and that, in any event, this is the stuff of political and ideological realignment.