<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>First Things RSS Feed - Timothy Reichert</title>
		<link>https://www.firstthings.com/author/timothy-reichert</link>
		<atom:link href="https://www.firstthings.com/rss/author/timothy-reichert" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description></description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2025 First Things. All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
		<managingEditor>ft@firstthings.com (The Editors)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>ft@firstthings.com (The Editors)</webMaster>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:56:31 -0500</pubDate>
		
		<ttl>60</ttl>

		<item>
			<title>Valuing Celibacy</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2021/02/valuing-celibacy</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2021/02/valuing-celibacy</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2021 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p>The question of married priests is primarily a Christological and ecclesiological one. But it has important practical and pastoral aspects, as well. Many claim that eliminating the celibacy requirement would increase the supply of priests, thereby increasing the pastoral capacity of the Church. This sounds plausible, since the requirement of celibacy is a barrier, or cost, and lowering the cost of entry into the priesthood would seem to lead more men to choose it.
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/article/2021/02/valuing-celibacy">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Economic Stakes of the Election</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/10/the-economic-stakes-of-the-election</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/10/the-economic-stakes-of-the-election</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2020 10:10:00 -0400</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Donald Trump and Joe Biden have numerous economic policy differences. In my view, the most important concerns the largest social and economic experiment in American history: the COVID-19 &ldquo;lockdowns.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/10/the-economic-stakes-of-the-election">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Origami of the Soul</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/06/origami-of-the-soul</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/06/origami-of-the-soul</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2018 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p>The modern state typically inspires two antithetical interpretations. Progressives see the state as a means to restrain capitalism, level the economic playing field, ensure equality, and liberate the individual from the dead hand of traditional forms of marriage, family, and sexual morality. Conservatives see the state as a threat to personal freedom and inherited values, at best a guarantor of property rights, free markets, and equality of opportunity. In a sense, both are right. Both are also deluded.
<br>
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/06/origami-of-the-soul">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bitter Pill</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/05/bitter-pill</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/05/bitter-pill</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 May 2010 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p>  
<strong> Introduction </strong>
  
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/05/bitter-pill">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
