Georges Bataille, along with Thorstein Veblen, Marcel Mauss, Rudolf Steiner, and Karl Polanyi, may be considered an exponent of a school of thought alternative, if not antagonistic, to Liberal economics—a school which may be called “the political economy of the Gift.” The economists of the Gift” analyze economic performance mostly through a society’s use of its surplus. What differentiates Bataille from the others, however, is his obsessive insistence that wholesome, disinterested ways of giving are, in fact, an impossibility. To Bataille, all acts of munificence throughout history have been but manifestations of abarbarous appetite to outshine others, either in peace through sumptuary expenditure, or in war through holocaust and sacrifice. This characterization of human conduct has become a tenet of the late anti-humanist discourse by way of Jacques Derrida, who recycled Bataille’s polemic in the eighties. It is thus curious to observe how, in the end, Bataille’s anti-Liberal radicalism has brought his postmodern followers to converge with the Liberal school, which itself belittles the power of selfless donation and the significance of gift-exchange.

As the historical study of various aspects of American society has unfolded over the course of centuries, the terms “Catholic” and “South” have matured as specific identifications of peoples with clear and precise heritages. But far too often these identities have been victimized, made unclear, through certain scholarly purviews of authors writing the histories. One noticeable tendency long present in the publishing of American history textbooks, for example, has been theover-focusing on the English heritage of the American story at the expense of a more in-depth and accurate look at the Spanish historical legacy. Thus the Protestant Anglican narrative, even today, oftentimes tends to be biased and over-stated. Certainly this is true in Texas where your author lives. Just look, for example, at the manner in which the Alamo is handled. Or again, study how the U.S. invasion of Mexico in 1846 frequently is taught in our schools. Clearly, within this context, the American South and the Roman Catholic history of the United States, particularly in the South, needs to be presented more accurately. It isthe several perspectives of this need to seek historical truth in these areas more accurately that this essay will search out.

This piece was originally presented as a talk for the Archdiocese of Detroit’s Presbyteral Council’s “Disputed Questions” Debate, on February 19, 2008. It argues that the most recent phase of the Iraqi war effort—the “surge”—meets the just-war criteria. In the next issue of CSSR (2009) the editor would like to include a short"symposium" that would include responses to this article, and a reply from the author. Anyone who wishes to respond may submit, for review, a response of approximately 1000 words or less, by January 10, 2009. Send a Word file to Lowery@udallas.edu The numbering will make it easy for respondents to refer to the article. Keep in mind that this piece was written in March 2008.

The principle of solidarity is critical for the social order overall. The Catholic Church in its social teachings since Leo XIII has emphasized its importance and relevance specifically for the economic order. First termed “social charity” by Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno (1931), solidarity was then declared by John Paul II to be “a Christian virtue,” in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1987), and identified as the “principle of solidarity” in Centesimus Annus (1991). Three leading economic system-builders recognized it, which suggests its roots in the natural law. Adam Smith, after indicating its implicit presence in the division of labor, subsequently rejected it in favor of self-interest. Karl Marx distorted it into a class concept by confining its application to the proletariat. Only Heinrich Pesch, S. J. made it the basic principle for all sectors of the economic system and throughout the social order.

In the field of biotechnology, developments are far-reaching and frequent. As soon as we hear of one breakthrough, another is usually not far behind. The pace of change alone has made conditions unfavorable for the kind of moral analysis that is needed. As we struggle to keep up with all that is new on the scientific side of the field, we ought to turn to something that is old—as in forty years old now—for critical moral discernment. At a conference on biotechnology last year at theCatholic Studies Center of the Nassau Community College in Garden City, NewYork, Msgr. Robert J. Batule, Professor of Systematic Theology at Immaculate Conception Seminary in Huntington, New York, noted how the encyclical Humanae Vitae at 40 is helping us to respond intelligently and humanely to the challenges arising from rapid technological change. Here is the address he offered on the occasion.

Orestes Brownson’s doubts about the social contract theory expressed in America’s founding documents have been cited by some Catholic scholars against the legitimacy of The American Republic. Did Brownson reject the American experiment as an atheistic usurpation of legitimate authority—and if so, was he justified? This paper considers Brownson’s critique of democracy in The American Republic in the context of his other writings. Brownson’s organic vision of Americanpolities, derived from Hegel, is of lasting value. But Brownson’s attack on social contract theory ultimately founders because of its failure to distinguish the “contract of society” from the “contract of government.”

Interdependence is a phenomenon prevalent in collectivist societies. Despite being a well-known concept, it is only recently that the interaction between interdependence and independence was studied as orthogonally varying constructs (Liu & Goto, 2007). A primary finding is that individuals high on both interdependence and independence have better mental health and higher family cohesion. This article attempts to understand these findings in light of Pope John Paul II’s understanding of persons as gifts. From Trinitarian theology to its philosophical underpinnings, it will be shown that it is precisely in this gift character that interdependence finds its roots and fundamental meaning. Furthermore, this gift structure also accounts more fully and coherently for the independence-interdependence interaction.

Nineteen-sixty was a significant year in American Catholic history. The election of John F. Kennedy was heralded as symbolic of 'the arrival' of American Catholics in an American society which, in the past, had not always been quite so welcoming to Catholics. However, candidate Kennedy's celebrated insistence on a strict separation of one's private religious views from one's public life and service was not embraced by all observers, Catholic and non-Catholic alike. Two other circumstances in 1960, the publications of John Courtney Murray's We Hold These Truths and Thomas T. McAvoy's "American Catholics: Tradition and Controversy" in Thought, suggested other possibilities and concerns regarding the more complete involvement of American Catholics in the host culture. This involvement, then and now, speaks to the reality and the charity of inculturation, but also as a project incumbent on all believers and perhaps on historians and other scholars as well.

It is a violation of legitimate academic freedom to attempt to link Catholicism to a particular school of economic thought and shut down all further debate. Whether the realm of human choice, which economics describes, is subject to an array of cause-and-effect relationships is obviously a matter for human reason to determine. From there, reason can then investigate these relationships. Although economic policy has a moral dimension, economics as a positive scienceconsists merely of an edifice of cause-and-effect relationships, and to that extent is as autonomous as the purely descriptive sides of all other sciences.