Also in the post, details on the petition to move Memorial Day back to the 30th of May. (Seems like a good idea to me) .

Stephen's referring to this review of John Allen's book, Cardinal Ratzinger: The Vatican Enforcer of the Faith. Readers can judge for themselves my assessment of his book. I never said it was "fair" -- in fact, I disagreed with Father Greeley's endorsement of it as "cautious, objective and fair"; but, neither did I think it was a "hatchet job" or a "partisan indictment masquerading as a biography" (to quote another Amazon.com reader). Having followed Allen's work in the National Catholic Reporter, I thought it was a genuine and yes, laudable effort on his part -- howbeit not without its deficiencies -- to get beyond the 'Grand Inquisitor' stereotype of the Cardinal.

At any rate, John Allen Jr. had in fact has "repudiated" his early work -- something which Stephen and I have both noted ("John Allen Jr.'s Turnabout" April 26, 2005), and which I agree is a very good thing indeed. So, there's something Stephen and I can agree on.

Stephen refers here to my recognition of an editorial by Greg Mockeridge and I. Shawn McElHinney back in April, in which they confronted Hand/TCRNews on his unfair misrepresentation of the positions of those who disagreed with him on various issues. The substance of their editorial was not an 'apology for the war', or capital punishment, or a defense of capitalism and the free market, but rather the challenge to Stephen to recognize that good Catholics could, in fact, hold different positions on such matters, even going so far as to disagree with the positions of certain Vatican curia, and yet remain "within the bounds of orthodoxy."

Furthermore, it was a caution against wrongful identification of personal opinions with the magisterial teaching of the Church (and likewise, failure to properly distinguish between different levels of Catholic teaching). Being in completely agreement with their criticism, I joined Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong and blogger Lane Core, Jr. in publicly concurring with Greg's editorial. Suffice to say Stephen didn't take kindly to this challenge.

But this was not merely the concern of a few "pretentious blogheads." As Catholic laity took sides in heated public debate over the war and other controversial issues, a number of well-known Catholics judged this to be a lesson worth reiterating -- among them: Oswald Sobrino, Karl Keating, James Akin, Russell Shaw, George Weigel, Fr. Michael Orsi (Ave Maria School of Law), Cardinal Avery Dulles, Archbishop John J. Myers, and Pope Benedict XVI -- to dismiss this legitimate criticism, then, as the motivation of "war apologists" would be futile.

Regarding the Zwicks, see "The Zwicks vs. Fr. Neuhaus & Michael Novak" (August 19, 2003) -- which, to my knowledge, has yet to receive a response or retraction. I admire Dorothy Day, and reading her biography was an instrumental part of my conversion, and while I appreciate the witness of the Zwicks in their works of charity at the Houston Catholic Worker, I do not think Dorothy Day would have taken kindly to some of the unfair tactics they've used in attacking Neuhaus, Novak and Cardinal Dulles.

That said, like Stephen, I expect some of my other readers are probably curious as to why the maintenance guy for "the Cardinal Ratzinger fan club" publicly expresses an appreciation for Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus, George Weigel, and Michael Novak, in light of the Holy Father's prominent disagreement with 'the First Things crowd' on the matter of U.S. military engagement in Iraq. So, Stephen's sniping aside, perhaps an explanation is in order.

Nearly a decade ago I went through a period where I developed an infatuation with radical politics and anarchist philosophy (inspired by Jacques Ellul, Leo Tolstoy and Noam Chomsky, among others). I could probably have out-done Stephen and the Zwicks in my fulminations against the U.S. military-industrial complex and selfish capitalists gorging themselves on the blood of the working class. Even as a young Catholic convert, my understanding of 'Catholic social doctrine' was limited to what little I gleaned from the pages of the Catholic Worker and the distributism of the New Oxford Review. It was some time before I encountered First Things -- and through that, discovered the writings of Michael Novak, George Weigel, and of course, Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus.

To make a long story short, coming across Michael Novak's The Catholic Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism (Free Press, 1993) in a library, and subsequent readings of Fr. Neuhaus' Doing Well and Doing Good: The Challenge to the Christian Capitalist (Doubleday, 1992) and George Weigel's Tranquillitas Ordinis: The Present Failure and Future Promise of American Catholic Thought on War and Peace (Oxford UP, 1987) -- the latter recommended to me by my father post 9/11 -- were what I consider calls to intellectual maturity, forcing a long-overdue critical assessment of my "anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist, anti-warmonger" naiveté. While Stephen might construe such a discovery as a seduction to the dark side, I call it a necessary corrective to sloppy thinking.

Hence my public recognition and appreciation for Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, along with the likes of Walker Percy, Jacques Maritain, Dorothy Day . . . and those who Hand loves to deride as "the neocons." Call it peculiar, but I've learned and benefited from all of them in the course of my spiritual and intellectual journey, and I certainly think the Church is big enough to accomodate them as well.

I will not rule out a return to this topic in the future, although I will likely refrain from conversing with Stephen Hand. If authentic dialogue consists in the effort to listen, to place one's self in the other's shoes and see from their perspective (see Shawn's post on the conditions for true dialogue), I get the feeling that the discussion has run its course, or perhaps run aground. As indicated by his decision to publish Carol O'Reilly's diatribe last week, together with his increasingl shrill postings and personal attack on Dave Armstrong, it seems to me the necessary preconditions for further discussion and a civil, rational and charitable exchange on this topic are sorely lacking.

To close with a timely excerpt from Pope Benedict XV's encyclical Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum in 1914 -- discovered just today on Stephen Bogner's Catholicism, Holiness and Spirituality:

Background Posts

• A Long Overdue Indictment of Stephen Hand by Greg Mockeridge circa April 29, 2005.
• A commentary on Greg Mockeridge's Guest Editorial, by I. Shawn McElhinney. Rerum Novarum April 29, 2005.
• A Plea for Civility - And an Opportunity for Charity Against The Grain Sat. May 7, 2005.
• "A Small Note of Thanks (And Other Miscellaneous Bits), by I. Shawn McElhinney. Rerum Novarum May 3, 2005.
• "Reactions Without Reasoning" Dept., by I. Shawn McElhinney, responding to comments by Stephen Hand on TCRNews' Musings. Rerum Novarum May 4, 2005.
• TCRNews - Moral Clarity . . . or Confusion? Against The Grain May 15, 2005. [Addressing what I perceived to be a lack of moral distiction in Carol O'Reilly's blistering attack on Bush and American forces in Iraq].
• Fr. Michael Orsi on Different Levels of Catholic Teaching Against The Grain May 15, 2005.
• On the Subject of Foundational Presuppositions - Musings on the Subject of Authentic Dialogue - I. Shawn McElhinney. Rerum Novarum May 20, 2005.

• Homily by Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP, on the Solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ, at Holy Rosary Parish, Houston, TX.

• The Holy Eucharist, educational resource from EWTN, with links to articles by Fr. William Most, Scott Hahn, and relevant Q&A sections from the Baltimore Catechism.

• More posts from A Penitent Blogger, and Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam.

• Fr. Jim Tucker has great photos from his parish's Corpus Christi Procession. (Good thing he doesn't reside in Detroit, Michigan).

• Benedict XVI's homily The Lord Is Near Us - in Our Conscience, in His Word, in His Personal Presence in the Eucharist is excellent as well. IgnatiusInsight.com July 2004 (Excerpted from God Is Near Us: The Eucharist, the Heart of Life):
  Saint Thomas Aquinas took up this saying in his reflections for the Feast of Corpus Christi.[1] In doing so, he showed how we Christians in the Church of the New Covenant can pronounce these words with yet more reason and more joy and with thankfulness than Israel could; in doing so, he showed how this saying, in the Church of Jesus Christ, has acquired a depth of meaning hitherto unsuspected: God has truly come to dwell among us in the Eucharist, He became flesh so that he might become bread. He gave himself to enter into the "fruit of the earth and the work of human hands"; thus he puts himself in our hands and into our hearts. God is not the great unknown, whom we can but dimly conceive. We need not fear, as heathen do, that he might be capricious and bloodthirsty or too far away and too great to hear men. He is there, and we always know where we can find him, where he allows himself to be found and is waiting for us. Today this should once more sink into our hearts: God is near. God knows us. God is waiting for us in Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. Let us not leave him waiting in vain! Let us not, through distraction and lethargy, pass by the greatest and most important thing life offers us. We should let ourselves be reminded, by today's reading, of the wonderful mystery kept close within the walls of our churches. Let us not pass it heedlessly by. Let us take time, in the course of the week, in passing, to go in and spend a moment with the Lord who is so near. During the day our churches should not be allowed to be dead houses, standing empty and seemingly useless. Jesus Christ's invitation is always being proffered from them. This sacred proximity to us is always alive in them. It is always calling us and inviting us in. This is what is lovely about Catholic churches, that within them there is, as it were, always worship, because the eucharistic presence of the Lord dwells always within them.

In looking at the contemporary relationship between Church & State, the compatability of the 'American Experiment' and liberal democracy with Catholic Christianity, the role of religion in public life and education, one is likely to encounter the Jesuit political scholar John Courtney Murray. Less recognized, but rather more substantial in my opinion, is the Thomistic philosopher Jacques Maritain (1882-1973) -- without consideration of whom no discussion of these issues is complete.

As Michael Novak said in his "salute to Jacques Maritain":

Against the secularist philosophies of his day, Maritain espoused an "integral humanism" -- that is to say, a fully Christian humanism which "considers man in the integrality of his natural and supernatural being" -- which he believed could, if embraced, rescue modern democracy from the materialist spirit by properly orienting it to the 'horizontal' and 'vertical' dimensions of mankind:

Having authored over twenty books, Maritain's writings on these topics can be rather daunting. Hence I was pleased to discover Christianity, Democracy, and the American Ideal, a "Jacques Maritain Reader" by Sophia Institute Press. In the space of a hundred or so pages, James P. Kelly III -- President of the Solidary Center for Law & Justice and Director of International Affairs for The Federalist Society -- compiles small nuggets of Maritain's thought on a diversity of subjects, arranged by pertinent themes as "The Limits of Social Planning," "Christianity and the Common Good," "Faith-Based Initiatives," "The American Experience", and "Christian and Democratic Evolution."

The book itself is deceptively small. Most of these selections are no more than a paragraph long -- just enough, in my experience, to whet the reader's appetite. But Kelley has skillfully arranged the work such that one quickly picks up connections from one chapter to another, and is moved to carefully ponder what Maritain is saying in one passage before moving along to the next.

Those who really want to benefit from Maritain will avail themselves of Kelly's recommendations for "further reading and reflection" at the end of each chapter, conveniently listing key passages from Maritain's numerous works, as well as related papal encyclicals and counciliar documents.

This would make an excellent gift for any student of political philosophy or Catholic layman interested in the social doctrine of the Church -- and, perhaps, to many a political legislator as well.

Related Links

About Maritain:

Maritain's True Humanism, by Richard Francis Crane. First Things 150 (February 2005): 17-23.
The Faith of the Founding, by Michael Novak. First Things 132 (April 2003): 27-32. (defends Jacques Maritain's assertion that modern democracy of the American type cannot be understood apart from the inspiration of the gospel of Jesus Christ).
Nature and Grace: The Theological Foundations of Jacques Maritain's Public Philosophy, by Eduardo J. Echeverria. Associate Professor of Philosophy. Conception Seminary College. Markets & Morality Vol. 4, no. 2 Fall 2001.
Jacques Maritain: Integral Humanism, by Michael S. Joyce. First Things 101 (March 2000): 49-50.
The Christian Personalism of Jacques Maritain Faith and Reason Summer 1991.

By Maritain:

Jacques Maritain Center , University of Notre Dame. Directed by Ralph McInerny. A treasure-trove of readings and resources, including a number of selected "Readings for philosophers and Catholics".

1. Education — Read and have good, precise knowledge of the Church's social teachings, to be able to expound them with assurance and clarity, and make sure that what we teach in the name of the Church is effectively what the Church teaches, and not our own personal opinions.
2. Humility - so as not to have to jump from general principles to definitive concrete judgments, especially when expressed in a categorical and absolute manner. We should not go beyond the limitations of our own knowledge and specific competence.
3. Realism - Realism in assessing the human condition, acknowledging sin but leaving room for the action of God's grace. In the midst of our commitment to human development, never lose sight that man's vocation is above all to be a saint and enjoy God for eternity.
4. Caution - [So as to] avoid the temptation of using the Church's social doctrine as a weapon for judging "others" (entrepreneurs, politicians, multinational companies, etc.). We should instead concentrate first on our own lives and our personal, social, economic and political responsibilities.
5. Cooperation - Know how to closely cooperate with lay people, forming them and sending them out as evangelizers of the world. They are the true experts in their fields of competence and have the specific vocation of transforming temporal realities according to the Gospel.

• These things get longer and longer with every installment: Good News from Iraq, Part 28 - a regular series on Iraq's state of affairs -- social, economic, reconstruction, humanitarian aid, and the coalition -- from Arthur Chrenkoff.

• Also by Arthur Chrenkoff: An open letter to George Lucas, taking on Star Wars' creator for his remark at the Cannes' film festival that the "Evil Empire" in his films is actually the United States. (The films are good "eye candy" -- pleasant to the eye -- but it appears that Lucas' politics might very well be as atrocious as his writing.)

• Greg Mockeridge (Cooperatores Veritatus), on The Meaning of True Peace

• If It Walks Like a Holy War, Sounds Like a Holy War and Looks Like a Holy War . . . - Benedict Seraphim of Blogodoxy on the New York Time's reluctance to "avoid the obvious."
  

• Displaying a great deal more optimism than many critics here at home, Foad Ajami believes that "The Middle East embraces democracy--and the American president" (Bush Country Wall Street Journal May 23, 2005):
  Unmistakably, there is in the air of the Arab world a new contest about the possibility and the meaning of freedom. This world had been given over to a dark nationalism, and to the atavisms of a terrible history. For decades, it was divided between rulers who monopolized political power and intellectual classes shut out of genuine power, forever prey to the temptations of radicalism. Americans may not have cared for those rulers, but we judged them as better than the alternative. We feared the "Shia bogeyman" in Iraq and the Islamists in Algeria, Egypt and Tunisia; we bought the legend that Syria's dominion in Lebanon kept the lid on anarchy. We feared tinkering with the Saudi realm; it was terra incognita to us, and the House of Saud seemed a surer bet than the "wrath and virtue" of the zealots. Even Yasser Arafat, a retailer of terror, made it into our good graces as a man who would tame the furies of the masked men of Hamas. That bargain with authoritarianism did not work, and begot us the terrors of 9/11.

  The children of Islam, and of the Arabs in particular, had taken to the road, and to terror. There were many liberal, secular Arabs now clamoring for American intervention. The claims of sovereignty were no longer adequate; a malignant political culture had to be "rehabilitated and placed in receivership," a wise Jordanian observer conceded. Mr. Bush may not be given to excessive philosophical sophistication, but his break with "the soft bigotry of low expectations" in the Arab-Islamic world has found eager converts among Muslims and Arabs keen to repair their world, to wean it from a culture of scapegoating and self-pity. Pick up the Arabic papers today: They are curiously, and suddenly, readable. They describe the objective world; they give voice to recognition that the world has bypassed the Arabs. The doors have been thrown wide open, and the truth of that world laid bare. Grant Mr. Bush his due: The revolutionary message he brought forth was the simple belief that there was no Arab and Muslim "exceptionalism" to the appeal of liberty. For a people mired in historical pessimism, the message of this outsider was a powerful antidote to the culture of tyranny. Hitherto, no one had bothered to tell the Palestinians that they can't have terror and statehood at the same time, that the patronage of the world is contingent on a renunciation of old ways. This was the condition Mr. Bush attached to his support for the Palestinians. It is too early to tell whether the new restraint in the Palestinian world will hold. But it was proper that Mr. Bush put Arafat beyond the pale.

  Fouad Ajami teaches at Johns Hopkins University, and is author of Dream Palace of the Arabs: A Generation's Odyssey (Vintage, 1999), a fascinating study of Arab politics and history.

• The Birth of a Bad Statistic - "Abortions rising under Bush? Not true," says Factcheck.org:
  A number of politicians and organizations have been circulating an interesting and surprising idea: that abortions have gone up under George W. Bush’s watch. The claim is repeated by supporters of abortion rights as evidence that Bush's anti-abortion policies have backfired, or at least been ineffective.

  But the claim is untrue. In fact, according to the respected Alan Guttmacher Institute, a 20-year decline in abortion rates continued after Bush took office . . .GET THE WHOLE STORY.

• The Other Stem Cell Bill, by David Schrader @ Catholics in the Public Square May 23, 2005 -- on a morally-sound piece of legislation sponsored by New Jersey rep. Christopher Smith, "creating a new federally-funded stem cell therapeutic and research program for the scientifically sound collection and inventory of umbilical cord blood":
  Umbilical cords are a rich, non-controversial source of stem cells, but currently hospitals throw millions of them away each year because we do not have the infrastructure needed to properly collect and store them," said Smith who has been championing this legislation for three years. "The best kept medical secret has been that thousands have been successfully treated with cord blood stem cells for more than 67 diseases including Leukemia and Sickle Cell Anemia. The infusion of federal funds will make this medical miracle available to thousands more and will ensure that research continues so that this source of stem cells can treat many other debilitating diseases," Smith said.

In religion . . .

• If I had met more pleasant traditionalists earlier on, I'd probably be one by now. - Dale Price @ Dyspeptic Mutterings on people who give real traditionalists a bad name:
  In retrospect, they were typical Feeneyites--loud, insecure, and not nearly as bright (not even close) as they thought they were. But they made up for these deficiencies by going "hahahaha!" a lot and calling themselves "the Hammer" and "Heretic Crusher"--things like that.

  It got to the point where I began to suspect they did actually wear homemade capes while web surfing for error to vanquish. Or at least adult-sized pajamas with the feet still in them. . . .

• War and Capital Punishment - Can We Agree to Disagree?, by Jimmy Akin. This Rock Volume 16, Number 3. March, 2005.

• Dreadnought takes on Donna Quinn and the Rainbow Sash Movement.

• "Blogs Gone Bad" The New Atlantis on unemployment, mental/physical exhaustion, demeaning utilitiarianism and "The Darker Side of the Blogging Boom."

• Boston College had a panel discussion of the 2002 document "Reflections on Covenant and Mission", with attention to the question of "Should Catholics Seek to Convert Jews (If Jews Are in True Covenant with God?)" -- Bill Cork has an excellent analysis of the event. As he notes, "No alternate viewpoints were represented." I guess Fr. Schall, Ronda Chervin, Martin Barrack, Mark Drogin, David Moss and Cardinal Avery Dulles weren't available for further comment. Too bad, it would have been a lively discussion.

• What's in the box? - Mark C. N. Sullivan tears into the newly renovated -- some might say dismantled -- Rochester, N.Y., cathedral. "The diocesan communications director who narrates the Flash presentation says the effect is more intimate. Well, it may be, if your idea of intimacy in interior design is to cart off all the furnishings in a place and replace them with folding chairs around a steamer trunk."

• "How Does the Force Stack Up As a Religion?" asks Orson Scott Card, of George Lucas' Revenge of the Sith:
  . . . the Force is just the sort of thing you’d expect a liberal-minded teenage kid to invent. There’s no God and there are no rules other than a vague insistence on unselfishness and oath-keeping. Power comes from the sum of all life in the universe, and it is manichaean, not Christian — evil is simply another way of using the Force. Only not as nice.

• We like the chase better than the quarry - a good discussion of the Rosary by Disputations:
  A common objection to praying the Rosary is that it is frustrating. The mind begins to wander as soon as the mystery is spoken; you find yourself at the end of the decade without having formed one single thought related to Christianity, much less to the Finding of the Boy Jesus in the Temple; and you think you blew it. You tried an act of devotion, and you failed miserably. You can't do it, it's not for you, and if that isn't bad enough, the local Rosarianut is sure to ask you how it went and beaddevil you into trying it again.

  Now, I am not one to argue (as some do) that the Rosary is the best of all possible devotions, always and for everyone. If the Rosary isn't for you, it's not for you. But I wonder whether the restlessness some feel when they pray the Rosary might indicate that something really is wrong with them -- not regarding the Rosary, but regarding their restlessness. . . .

• Jimmy Aken Counts to 34!

• Dr. Blosser writes a letter to his bishop about a piece of catechitical pamphlet distributed at his parish promoting God as "mother."

• A hearty 'Right on!' to "Orthodox Jewish thirty-something" Sarah, who is postponing her viewing of Revenge of the Sith for religious reasons. Jews are presently counting the omer (the days from the second night of Passover to the day before Shavu'ot), and it's her custom "not to see movies until Lag BaOmer." . . . Being somewhat of a Star Wars fanatic myself, I can appreciate the sacrifice.

• In case you didn't know, The Mighty Barrister is back! =)

Labels: hereandthere

The twist is that the author of the story, Oscar Wilde (1854-1900), was himself a penitent "deathbed convert," holding a lifelong fascination with the Catholic Church in spite of his infamous reputation of being "Apostle of Aestheticism," personal decadence and a martyr for gay rights. For further details on one of most fascinating Catholic conversions, see Jeffrey A. Tucker's Oscar Wild: Roman Catholic (Cisis 19, no. 1 April 2001), and The Long Conversion of Oscar Wilde, by Anddrew McCracken, which contains further background on Dorian Grey:

And for an in-depth treatment of Oscar Wilde's life and thought, see The Unmasking of Oscar Wilde, a spiritual biography by Joseph Pierce. From the publisher:

Joseph Pierce is himself something of an expert on literary converts to the Catholic Faith and I highly recommend his books. See, among others, his excellent Wisdom & Innocence: A Life of G.K. Chesterton, Old Thunder: A Life of Hilaire Belloc and Literary Converts: Spiritual Inspiration in an Age of Unbelief (Ignatius, 2000).

Labels: converts

• In this picture released by the Vatican newspaper Osservatore Romano, Pope Benedict XVI meets with Terri Schiavo's parents, Roy Schindler, right, and Mary Schindler presenting him with pictures of their daughter at the weekly general audience in St. Peter's square at the Vatican, Wednesday, May 18, 2005. - YahooNews.com

• Pope Benedict at 30 Days, by Roger A. McCaffrey (The American Spectator May 19, 2005):
  As Benedict emerged from the balcony of St. Peter's, stricken liberal clerics were actually seen by friends of this writer turning on their heels and shaking their heads in disbelief.

  Meantime, jubilant conservative bigwigs like Rev. Richard John Neuhaus and George Weigel celebrated that same night at Armando's Ristorante on the Via Plauto, just down the street from Ratzinger's old Vatican apartment. The new Pope had dined there himself the week before. Armando and his wife jested with their famous customer that he would be elected. "If I am," he jested back in fine German style, "I won't ever be able to come here again."

• Joseph Marshall (A Straight Shot of Politics) takes on an "unbelievably vitriolic, intellectually dishonest and rumor-mongering" article by Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of "progressive" Jewish magazine Tikkun, pertaining to an interview Ratzinger gave to a French periodical in which he speculated why Catholics might be attracted to Buddhism or the Hindu view of reincarnation.

  Lerner regurgitates the popular rumor that "in 1997 Ratzinger called Buddhism an 'autoerotic spirituality' that offers 'transcendence without imposing concrete religious obligations.'" Examining the text of the original interview, Joseph Marshall reveals the rumor for the overblown and malicious libel that it is. The fact that he is himself a Buddhist and describes himself "of the liberal political persuasion" will remove any suspicion of partiality toward the Holy Father.

• "My Cousin, The Pope" - an interview with Mrs Erika Kopp, cousin of Pope Benedict XVI who migrated to Australia from Germany in 1955. (Via Feminine-Genius).

• The Pope and the Monsignor Ignatius Insight interviews Monsignor Michael R. Schmitz from Germany. "German, born and educated, [Schmmitz] now serves as the U.S. Provincial Superior of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest . . . a new order of priests devoted to the Traditional Latin Mass."

• What could possibly bring together the new Pope, Lance Armstrong, Hermann Hesse, astrophysics, and the little German town of Tubingen? -- Chris Brauer knows. Points for, um, originality.
  

• Pope Benedict Without His Beloved Piano as Movers Struggle to Fit It Into His New Quarters - Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa) - 29 April 2005:
  Pope Benedict XVI, a fan of Mozart and Bach, is still without his piano as movers have been unable to fit it through the windows of his papal apartment, it was reported Wednesday [April 27]. . . .

  Ratzinger, who apparently uses the piano to relax at times of stress, reportedly used to irk his neighbours by playing Mozart, Bach and Palestrina a little too loudly, according to German weekly Der Spiegel.

  Via Catholic Light. (The pope's memoirs, Milestones, has photographs of the Holy Father playing on his beloved piano).

• Benedict XVI As Known by Co-worker Zenit interview with Father Augustine Di Noia. May 15, 2005:
  . . . he's a person of real dedication, discipline, focus and has that academic element in the sense of man who thinks and writes a lot, but is willing to share his knowledge with anyone who's willing to listen or talk with him as he's quite the conversationalist too."

  Benedict XVI has even sacrificed many of his personal interests to work entirely for the Church and faith, said Father Di Noia.

  "There is a willingness to make sacrifices in the sense that, naturally I presume, he would have been perfectly happy doing what he was doing before -- that is as archbishop of Munich, living in Germany and serving the Church there -- when John Paul II sent for him to come to the Roman Curia," he said.

  Laughing, he added: "I suppose every Catholic, every religious or priest is trained to say 'yes' first, and think about the consequences later.

  "This was the case with him -- Peter called and he came, leaving behind his life in Germany, family, friends and culture for more than 22 years. And now, of course, he will never permanently return again."

• A Papal Foreword, by John M. Haas. The American Spectator May 16, 2005. The story behind Cardinal Ratzinger's introduction to the new edition of Romano Guardini's The Lord. (Via Amy Welborn).

• Ratzinger on Europe, by James V. Schall, S.J. Homiletic & Pastoral Review January 2005. Fr Schall takes a look at Ratzinger's discourse Europe: Its Spiritual Foundation: Yesterday, Today and in the Future, given May 13, 2004, to the Italian Senate at the invitation of Italian philosopher and Senate Head Marcello Pera:
  More and more, people are recognizing that Europe has a problem with its own soul. Recently, the Jesuit General, Peter Hans Kolvenbach was asked about the relation of a possible new European constitution and Christianity (September 25, 2003). He replied, "As the Holy Father has said, either Europe is Christian or there is no Europe. I feel that this statement is irrefutable. If the Christian meaning that has inspired European art, literature and philosophy were suppressed, we would be left with empty hands." Clearly, Josef Ratzinger's remarks at the Italian Senate confirm this estimate . . ."
  

• Does this look like 'God's Rottweiler' to you? -- Pope Benedict XVI wears flower necklaces donated by pilgrims and faithful at the end of a special audience, in the Paul VI hall at the Vatican, Monday, May 16, 2005. The special audience was given for those people who attended last Saturday's beatification ceremony of Mother Marianne Cope and Mother Ascension Nicol Goni. (AP Photo/Massimo Sambucetti).
  

• In an spontaneous speech to the clergy of Rome on May 13, in the Basilica of St. John Lateran, Pope Benedict heard testimonies and entertained questions, and affirmed his commitment to the "particular responsibility" the Church has towards other continents, specifically Africa, Latin America, and Asia:

  Africa is a continent that has enormous potential and the enormous generosity of the people, with an impressive, living faith. But we must confess that Europe exported not only faith in Christ, but also all of the vices of the Old Continent.

  It exported the sense of corruption, it exported the violence that is currently devastating Africa. And we must acknowledge our responsibility so that the exportation of the faith, an answer to the intimate hope of every human being, is stronger than the exportation of the vices of Europe. This seems to me a great responsibility.

  and his commitment to spreading the gospel:

  Romano Guardini correctly said 70 years ago that the essence of Christianity is not an idea but a Person. Great theologians have tried to describe the essential ideas that make up Christianity. But in the end, the Christianity that they constructed was not convincing, because Christianity is in the first place an Event, a Person. And thus in the Person we discover the richness of what is contained. This is important.

  And here I think we also find an answer to a difficulty often voiced today regarding the missionary nature of the Church. From many comes the temptation to think this way regarding others: "But why do we not leave them in peace? They have their authenticity, their truth. We have ours. And so, let us live together in harmony, leaving all persons as they are, so that they search out their authenticity in the best way."

  But how can one's personal authenticity be discovered if in reality, in the depth of our hearts, there is the expectation of Jesus, and the genuine authenticity of each person is found exactly in communion with Christ and not without Christ? Said in another way: If we have found the Lord and if he is the light and joy of our lives, are we sure that for someone else who has not found Christ he is not lacking something essential and that it is our duty to offer him this essential reality?

  We then leave what will transpire to the direction of the Holy Spirit and the freedom of each person. But if we are convinced and we have experienced the fact that without Christ life is incomplete, is missing a reality, the fundamental reality, we must also be convinced that we do harm to no one if we show them Christ and we offer them in this way too the possibility to discover their true authenticity, the joy of having discovered life.

Labels: benedict, benedict roundup

His firstborn, if you don't already know, was christened Augustine.

It's a patristics scholar kinda thing, coupled with an affinity for the letter 'A.' ;-)

( I expect the next to be "Athanasius.")

Anyway, he's not around to blogging yet -- but you can posts your congrats to his blog, I'm sure he'll read it eventually. =)

I was struck by the significant of that action, to place loyalty to Christ above family ties (what struck me as a personal application of Luke 14:26). I was greatly impressed by Father Kimel's courage and integrity in doing so, and kept him in my thoughts (and prayers, when I could bring my slothful mind to remember).

Consequently, it comes as an especially great joy -- for myself, as for many of his Catholic readers at 'St. Blog's Parish' -- to read Fr. Al Kimel's announcement to his blog that a decision is reached: he will follow his son into full communion with the Catholic Church:

Please keep Fr. Kimel, his wife and family in your prayers, for as many a convert can attest, the journey is only beginning, and there will be trials ahead. I pray that the saints of Heaven watch over him, and let the venerable John Henry Newman, another great Anglican convert, be his guide and inspiration.

And, if it pleases the Lord, may Fr. Kimel once again have the joy of giving communion to his son.

Related Posts

• Dr. Philip Blosser:
  . . . Your presence aboard the Barque of Peter is a welcome one, and your gifts are needed and the Lord will see that they are eventually put to good use. But don't be surprised if you are confronted by obstacles, indifference, or even hostility. Remember the warnings of Thomas Merton to converts: don't let the all-too-human side of the Church get you down. The amazing thing is that the Church has a divine side at all. But the truth about that, of course, is the little ineluctable thing that prevented us converts from putting off the hour of decision indefinitely. (As you put it: "For the sake of my salvation ...")

• Dave Armstrong reflects on Fr. Kimel's decision and the meaning of conversion itself
  Conversion means we feel strongly about where we are going. But again, I want to reiterate the point that this does not rule out ecumenism or Christian unity. And on that note I would like to recall what C.S. Lewis (my favorite writer) said: that those Christians who are at the center of their own traditions are closer to those at the center of other Christian traditions, than to those in their own, who are more on the outer edges, or fringe. Thus, I feel far more kinship with a traditional Anglican than with a liberal Catholic (who, to be frank, drive me nuts); much more with an ecumenical orthodox Reformed who rejects the papacy as an ecclesiological necessity than with a so-called (radical) “traditionalist Catholic” who rejects the current pope, or who thinks there is no pope. I feel infinitely more spiritual kinship with a devout Baptist (which many of my longtime friends are) than with a nominal Catholic who makes little or no effort to learn or live his faith, or to avoid serious sin: let alone try to harmonize it with his thought concerning the larger culture, politics, ethics, the arts, etc.

• Secret Agent Man:
  Catholics spend far more time and energy explaining what Protestants lost in the Reformation than we do about what Roman Catholicism lost. Al Kimel's blog -- Al Kimel's writing, perspectives, and thoughts -- is/was a perfect example of that loss. I'm very happy to see one gem returned to the treasury; I hope the Church will be properly grateful for it.

• Update - 25-year Episcopal priest quits Johnstown parish to join Catholic Church, by Steve Levin, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. May 21, 2005.

Labels: converts

Politics and World Affairs . . .

• Stuart Buck on Darfur:
  This genocide will end in one of two ways: either the international community will begin to take its responsibility to protect the people of Darfur seriously and take whatever steps are necessary to ensure their survival or it will end when the Africans in Darfur have been completely eliminated.

• "Was World War II Worth It?", asks Pat "isolation above all else" Buchanan @ World Net Daily . . . and receives a sound and merited thrashing from Instapunk and VodkaPundit.

• It seems Pat Buchanan isn't the only one prone to utterly stupid comments about World War II -- this week Archbishop Celestino Migliore, the Vatican's permanent representative to the U.N., called "the worst of several unnecessary, man-made global catastrophes that made the 20th century one of the most bitter that humanity has ever known." According to Catholic World News:
  The archbishop acknowledged that under some circumstances warfare may be justified or even required -- as he put it "a limited and strictly conditioned use of force could be inevitable." However, he insisted, "the tragic and devastating nature of war" should prod all leaders to exhaust every peaceful means of resolving conflicts. Archbishop Migliore suggested steps to extend the UN's peacekeeping abilities, by strengthening existing international legal agreements and expanding the role of the UN to include "an inter-governmental peace-building commission."

  Jay Anderson at Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate notes the moral ambiguity in the Archbishop's remarks:

  And just who, according to Archbishop Migliore, deserves the credit (or, rather, blame) for the "unnecessary, man-made ... catastrophe" known as World War II? Does he place the blame squarely where it belongs - on Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, and last, but not least, Stalin (lest we forget the non-aggression pact and his simultaneous invasion of Eastern Europe as Hitler invaded Poland)? When he speaks of "exhaust[ing] every peaceful means of resolving conflicts", does the Archbishop include sacrificing Austria and the Sudetenland to the likes of a madman like Hitler? Does he mean ignoring the Rape of Nanking? And what substantive suggestions - not platitudes - does the Vatican's envoy to the UN offer for how the Allies were to have avoided going to war?

• "More On God And The State" from Someguy @ Mystery Achievement, including a provocative quote from Avery Dulles on the "absolutist interpretation of the right to life" and the abolition of the death penalty in formerly Christian [European] countries.

  Michael Novak has a 3-part interview with Zenit News on "The Hunger for Liberty", the title and theme of his latest book. Part I deals with The Need for Morality to Safeguard Freedom, Part two with "The Clash of Civilizations"; part three "On Europe's Lost Desire for Freedom":

  When the virtues proper to moral liberty weaken, so does the vitality of economic and political liberty. The cardinal virtues of honesty, courage, practical realism and self-control -- temperance -- are indispensable in democracy and a dynamic, creative economy.

  By moral liberty I mean the right to do what one ought to do, not what one pleases. The other animals can only obey their instincts. Humans have a right and a duty to discern among their instincts the way of reason, the law of God, and to exercise self-government in following that law down the pathways of liberty.

  I was listening to a discussion between George Weigel and William Kristol (Weekly Standard) this afternoon, in which Weigel pretty much said the same: that a nation and a culture whose conception of liberty has degenerated into the satisfaction of the ego and material desires has no hope of sustaining itself in the present war.

In religion . . .

• Earl E. Appleby @ Times Against Humanity provides a roundup of news reports and reactions to the appointment of San Francisco Archbishop Levada to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

• Catholics in Congress - A special investigation and report by David of Catholics for President George W. Bush:
  I put together a report on how the 131 Catholics in the U.S. House of Representatives, voted/acted on the non-negotiable issues of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, and torture. I looked at 14 different actions (votes, co-sponsorship status, co-signing of letters of support). An introduction and links to the report in Excel and HTML formats can be found here. (A Senate report is in the works.) I hope it generates discussion and thought. Of course, comments, complaints, etc. are welcome.

• Bill Cork delivers a sound fisking to Commonweal -- responding to the editors' whining over the CDF's disciplining of Fr. Reese of America:
  [Commonweal]: Does this mean that the zeal with which then-Cardinal Ratzinger harried theologians while head of the CDF will continue during his papacy?

  It means that this bishop will continue to preach and teach and defend the Catholic faith, as he was ordained to do.

  [Commonweal]: For those who had hoped that the pastoral challenges of his new office might broaden Benedict's sympathies, this is a time of indignation, disappointment, and increased apprehension.

  For those Catholics who have cried, "How long, O Lord?" this is a time of rejoicing, thanksgiving, and increased wonder at the goodness of God.

  No intellectually honest person could possibly claim that Reese's America has been in the business of undermining church teaching.

  No intellectually honest person could possibly claim that Reese's America has been in the business of bolstering and defending church teaching.

• In this week's "Word from Rome" (National Catholic Reporter May 13, 2005), background details on the expulsion of Fr. Reese as editor of America:
  Based on conversations with senior Jesuit sources in Rome May 11, I can confirm that a letter was indeed sent by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the early months of 2005, before Ratzinger's election as pope, to Kolvenbach. I have not seen the letter, and therefore I do not know if it contained a direct order to remove Reese, or if it was a more vague expression of a desire to see a change in direction at America. The Jesuit sources said, however, that the thrust of the letter was clear -- that Reese's position was no longer tenable.

  I also do not know if that letter was signed by Ratzinger. What I can report with certainty is that over the past five years, Ratzinger personally raised the concerns about America in his conversations with Kolvenbach. Like other religious superiors, Kolvenbach meets with the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to discuss cases involving members of his order, and it was in the context of those routine conversations that America arose.

• Dusty Canons" - Jamie Blosser (Ad Limina Apostolorum) on reading the Code of Canon Law:

  The laws of the Church lay out a vision of the Church and her members which is disciplined, well-ordered, ambitious, and efficient. Roles are assigned, duties are carried out, the disorderly are chastened, the sacraments are offered, the Gospel is preached, and the faithful grow in holiness and charity. Now, I'm hardly a doom-and-gloom type with regard to the state of the American church, but one has to wonder about the gaping chasm between Church law and Church life. . . .

• Classical Music 101, an introduction by Mark Windsor (Be Not Afraid), in answer to the question: "I'd like to learn more about classical music but haven't any idea how to go about it. What would you suggest?"

• Dr. Blosser aka. The Pertinacious Papist weighs in on Jane Fonda's Christianity.

• Chris Burgwald @ Veritas relates his experiences with Communion & Liberation.

• Byzantine-Rite Catholic Daniel Nichols (Caelum et Terra) on the offense of Padded Pews:
  And what, ultimately, is the message of the Padded Pew? That the Church does not intend, in any way, to disturb our comfort? But if the Church is the physician and we are the patients, shouldn't its prescriptions be corrective?

  Perhaps instead of padding our pews churches should remove the padding from the kneelers, and hand out hair shirts at the door.

  In an age such as this the Church must counter not only spiritual sloth, the easy immorality of an increasingly godless society, but physical sloth, the laziness and love of ease of an increasingly spoiled society.

  Indeed, perhaps it is the love of ease, and not the love of sin, which is the greater danger to our souls. Or perhaps the two are the same.

  A provocative essay. Having been to a few pew-less (Orthodox) services myself, I can appreciate his position: There is definitely something about 'standing at attention' that concentrates the mind on the liturgy.

• I've mentioned Canticle magazine before -- this week I had the pleasure of discovering the blog by editor Genevieve Kineke: Feminine Genius, "exploring the richness of authentic femininity." Welcome to St. Blog's, Genevieve!

On a lighter note . . .

• Chianca: Looking for a hipper pope, by Peter Chianca. May 6, 2005.Allston-Brighton TAB:
  For his part, Pope Benedict has said that he opposes abortion, birth control, euthanasia, priests marrying and the ordination of women. He has also decried homosexuality and called rock music "the vehicle of anti-religion." But he admitted he said all that before he got a chance to study the latest focus group results.

  "I realize that American Catholics are a demanding constituency," the new pontiff said this week. "I'll be sure to listen to their concerns closely, and who knows? There might be some wiggle room in the whole homosexuals/birth control/rock music thing."

  He then chuckled and said, "Those crazy Americans and their sexualized, culture-of-death society!"

  . . . Meanwhile, many American Catholics have told the new pope in no uncertain terms that he'd better snap to it.

  "All I know is, something better give," said Mark Venkman, spokesman for Lighten Up, Catholics!, an organization of sort-of Catholic laypeople who have grown disenchanted with the church the more it gets on their case. "If they're not careful, we'll stop going to church.

  "Um ... I mean, on Easter and Christmas Eve, too."

• The Comics Curmudgeon is updated daily (if all goes well) by Josh Fruhlinger, who posts strips from the Baltimore Sun funnies with his own witty commentary.

• The Ordination Class of 2005 -- the USCCB posts introductions to "a few of the men ordained this year to serve the Church and the people of God." Among them is Dana Christensen, whom you might know better as author of the blog The Meandering Mind of a Seminarian. Congratulations!

• Brewery Says New Pope Loves Its Beer - Stuttgart brewery "Stuttgarter Hofbreau" sent a beer truck to Rome this past weekend to deliver 700 liters, or 185 U.S. gallons of beer to Pope Benedict XVI, who is reported to be a fan. Via Saintly Salmagundi.

• Ferid from Iraqi4Ever posts some great photos of the Iraqi softball team. "The Iraqi national baseball and softball federation was established after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Hussein considered baseball a product of U.S. imperialism. The Baghdad softball team has been invited to travel to the U.S. in July 2005."

Incidentally, my habit of posting a roundup of my favorite posts was inspired by Lane Core Jr.'s "BlogWorthies". Check him out every week at Blog from the Core.

Labels: hereandthere

At the end of private and public exchanges over the past week, some of which were undoubtedly heated (as any talk of this issue tends to be), I confess I had entertained the faint hope of his coming to a recognition of the criticisms expressed in Greg's editorial.

Having read Carol O'Reilly's latest screed on Stephen Hand's blog ("TCR Musings"), I realize how mistaken I was, for it is readily apparent that Mr. Hand intends to continue in the same pattern as before. Case in point:

I do not doubt the sincerity of Ms. O'Reilly's concern for Iraqi children and civilian casualities in the war, but I would ask whether this kind of speech is truly a reflection of Christian morality? -- It seems to me that the absolute pacifism of Carol's remarks, the wholesale condemnation of violence without distinction, rules out the very possibility of moral distinction. This is what inevitably leads to the vulger equasion of Saddam = Bush, suicide bomber = American soldier, the United States as perpetrators of "a new holocaust."

Ms. O'Reilly's insinuations are an insult to every American soldier who has died in battle -- in liberating Iraq from the brutal tyranny of Hussein and the Batthist regime. An insult to every civilian worker kidnapped and beheaded by "insurgents" while assisting the Iraqis in rebuilding their country. An insult to every volunteer Iraqi policeman and soldier who has given his life in defense of his nation, including Capt Abdul Amir Khadam -- a 29 year old Iraqi policeman who hurled himself atop suicide bomber heading for a line of Iraqi voters on election day, giving his own life in protection of innocents.

Notably absent from her account of atrocities are the tales of the Iraqi people about life under Hussein -- stories of brutality, torture, rape, fear and death -- as if these were no consequence, or had no role in the Bush administration's decision to call for an end Saddam's reign, and carry out the liberation of Iraq with international support dubbed the "Coalition of the Willing (see the link to Trevor Stanley's excellent page on this subject).

This is not a coherent argument. This is simply rhetoric. This is pacifism and blustering self-righteousness barely-concealed by a thin veneer of Christianity -- I would expect this kind of diatribe from the likes of Michael Moore, MoveOn.org or the Democratic Underground. There was a time where I would have been shocked to see it on TCRNews.com . . . that it now appears with Stephen Hand's acknowledgement and personal support, speaks for itself.

Is this a case of moral confusion or moral clarity? -- I'll let my readers be the judge.

Further (Corrective) Reading:

• "War and the Eclipse of Moral Reasoning", by Dr. Philip Blosser. Presented at the Tenth Annual Aquinas/Luther Conference held October 24-26, 2002 at Lenoir-Rhyne College, and reprinted with his kind permission.

[Update May 17, 2005 - Oops! They removed it again. Here's the cached copy via Google -- CB].

Responding to his critics in First Things, George Weigel had observed that the Pope and the Holy See "speak in a number of different registers: magisterial, doctrinal and theological, pastoral and prophetic. To conflate those several papal voices into equivalent acts of papal magisterium with equal binding authority on the consciences of Catholics is to make an elementary mistake in ecclesiology." Fr. Orsi turns to "A Doctrinal Commentary on Ad Tuendam Fidem" (1998) for further clarification, identifying the following levels and categories of Catholic teaching:

On the question of whether Catholic disagreement with the Pope on matters of capital punishment and war constituted dissent (in the same manner as, say, Senator Kerry's assertion that he could be a "pro-choice Catholic" and remain in communion with the Church), or whether they were considered, quoting Cardinal Ratzinger, areas of "legitimate diversity of opinion", here is Fr. Orsi's explanation:

Fr. Orsi concludes:

My last post had provoked a flurry of comments and (somewhat heated) discussion with respect to Cardinal Ratzinger's statement "Worthiness to Recieve Commmunion: General Principles":

To which Jerry, displaying his affection for quotation marks, offered the following:

Good questions, and here I would expect -- humbly request, rather -- my readers to jump in on this as well (as they are likely more educated and qualified than I). As far as Fr. Reese and America is concerned, the CDF's concern was that the very action of publishing pro/con positions editorials on issues on which the Church has already spoken lends the impression to readers that "the jury is still out." Mark Brumley @ InsightScoop comments:

Fr Orsi's article is helpful in discerning those areas where "legitimate diversity of opinion" is possible between Catholics, and why moral debate is permitted on some issues, but not others. However, to say that "diversity of opinion" is permitted shouldn't be reduced to an "anything goes" approach. Moral debate should occur with due attention to the teachings of the Holy Father and the bishops, referencing the breadth of Catholic tradition.

I think that one reason why contemporary perspectives on capital punishment and armed warfare are met with resistance by some Catholic scholars is that they appear to be at variance with Catholic tradition over its 2,000 year history -- for example, the erroneous interpretation that capital punishment itself is a violation of the right to life, equatable to abortion and euthanasia (see Avery Dulle's "Capitalism & Catholic Punishment" First Things 112 April 2001). Or, the claim by Archbishop Martino in March 2003 that "there is no such thing as a just war"; and the elevation of John Paul II's expression "War never again!" -- what should, of course, be the desire by every Catholic -- into a formal proclamation concerning the legitimacy of the use of force itself (see "No Just War Possible?", by George Weigel. The Catholic Difference April 2003), thus contributing to the criticism that some in the Vatican had adopted what amounts to a "functional pacifism" contrary to traditional Church teaching on war.

Labels: politics

A Jewish convert to the Catholic faith and member of the Carmelite order, she was martyred under the Nazi occupation in 1942; beatified in 1987 and canonized in 1998 by Pope John Paul II, who as priest/scholar Karol Wojtyla was himself a student of phenomenology.

From the essay:

Personalism is more an approach than a philosophical school per se, and the entire article reads like a game of "six degrees of separation". It's fascinating to see so many Catholics among them, including: Gabriel Marcel (1888—1973) and Jacques Maritain (1882-1973) of France; Karol Wojtyla (Pope John Paul II) in Poland, who studied under Roman Ingarden (a student of Husserl's), and about whom

Also, discussed: Dorothy Day (1897—1980), co-founder of the Catholic Workers under the influence of the personalist teachings of Peter Maurin (1877—1949).

Related Links

• What It's Like To Be a Christian, by Peter Simpson. First Things 144 (June/July 2004): 23-28. An exploration of the Pope's "phenomenological personalism."
• The Phenomenology of Edith Stein, by Marianne Sawicki, Ph.D., abridged from lectures delivered at St. John’s University in New York on October 15, 1998, and at the Carmelite Monastery in Baltimore on November 13, 1998.
• For comic relief, there's nothing like discussion of the John Paul II's phenomenology to throw traditionalist Mario Derksen into a hissy-fit: "Having studied the issue for quite a while, I must say that I find it to be, at best, nothing other than utterly verbose sophistry with little substance."
• Perhaps Mario might make use of John Crosby's The Selfhood of the Human Person (Catholic UP, 1997), which Dr. Blosser regards as possessing "remarkable clarity and assibility" particularly for those who have "languished through the iniquitous translation of Karol Wojtyla's The Acting Person, or finds phenomenological approaches frequently impenetrable and mystifying." (I'm adding this to my Amazon wish list as well).

• Rev. Thomas J. Reese, editor of America Magazine, is being replaced. According to the Associated Press:
  he editor of the Jesuit weekly America is leaving the magazine after the Vatican received complaints about articles he published on touchy issues such as same-sex marriages and stem cell research, Jesuit officials said Friday. . . .

  Jesuit officials in Rome and the United States, who spoke on condition they not be identified, said some American bishops had contacted the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith about articles in the magazine over the years that had presented both sides of controversies over sensitive church issues.

  "Fr Thomas Reese Purged Or 'America' Restored?", John Heard notes that "in their warped understanding [of the Vatican's critics], demanding compassion for the unborn and intellectual rigour from the editor of a Catholic journal is not a valid exercise of authority, it is always arbitrary." Good commentary as well by Mark Brumley @ Insight Scoop.

• "Us and Them". Michelle Malkin has a photograph that captures "the difference between US forces in Iraq and the Michael Moore's 'minutemen,' and posts the story behind the picture. Check it out.

• "Teaching Tradition" National Review May 4, 2005. claims that "When it comes to traditional morality, President Bush — not John Paul II — has it right." Some Catholic readers react with predictable knee-jerk reaction. Someguy from Mystery Achievement extracts the issues worth discussing.

• BeliefNet.com profiles Ingrid Stampa: The Pope's "Right Hand Woman":
  . . . One of the most reassuring signs of his personal stamp on the office is taking place away from the public gaze. In an unprecedented move, Benedict has tapped Stampa, a 55-year-old German laywoman and academic who has served as his live-in personal assistant since 1991, to bring her counsel, support, and "brain trust" role to Catholicism’s most hallowed corridor of power.

  Stampa, who has never married, is a lay affiliate of the Schoenstatt Sisters of Mary, a group founded in 20th century Germany which, according to its publications, is dedicated to forming “a community of lay leaders in the Church and secular spheres.”

  Wire reports have characterized Stampa solely as "the housekeeper." But given the Pope’s reliance on her as his all-access confidante, the better analogy is to see Stampa as Karen Hughes to Benedict’s President Bush. While she has served as Ratzinger’s domestic–a role which she took up on the death of his sister and trusted counsel, Maria–she was never just a cook and clerk for Ratzinger. On the contrary, Stampa—a former professor at the conservatory of Hamburg who speaks at least three languages and has an advanced degree in ancient music–ghostwrites and translates for him. She will now serve Benedict XVI as the first member of the papacy's inner circle . . .

  Call to Action, Voice of the Faithful and "feminist Catholics" take notice:

  By appointing the first laywoman in the Vatican’s long history to enjoy a Pope’s daily confidences with a strong voice over his schedule and activities, Benedict is not only holding to his policy of keeping the best, brightest, and most honest aides around him. With this move, the Pope has sent a strong indicator of support for those who have called for greater inclusion of rank-and-file Catholics, particularly women, in the Church’s daily life and administration at all levels.

  (Further comment): Beliefnet's article really lays the politicized feminist interpretation on thick, but from a human perspective, I think it's a touching account:

  "Even before the cardinals were released from the Conclave, Ingrid Stampa’s boss called her to his side. As she wept at the sight of an old friend in his new robes, he told her, "Let us together follow the will of God.'"

  It reminded me of Pope John Paul II, who after his election suprised a lot of people by having his first papal audience not with any powerful dignitary or member of the clergy, but with his childhood friend, Jerzy Kluger. That is to say, Karol Wojtyla's sudden elevation to the throne of St. Peter, Bishop of Rome, wasn't about to get in the way of their simple and lasting friendship.

  So, I'm inclined to see Pope Benedict's relationshiop with Ingrid in that light.

• Nathan Nelson posts his thoughts on "strict constructionism": "My question . . . is simply this: How can you be Catholic and favor strict constructionism? -- The very nature of the Catholic Church, and of Christianity itself really, is opposed to a strict constructionist mentality." Mark Windsor responds.

• Stephen Riddle (Flos Carmeli) explains "What I Learned from Blogging--Part DCCCCLXXV".

• Bill Cork presents the main points of dispute in the famous 'Ratzinger-Kasper' debate ("What comes first, the universal church or the local church?").

• "The Vicar of Heterodoxy" - Dr. Philip Blosser believes "Andrew Sullivan's dogma is a circular system that's immune to reasoned query," in a parody of a Time magazine editorial by Sullivan himself.

• Fr. Kimel at Pontifications wants to know if you "have a Pope in your belly?":
  How little can I get away with believing and still be considered a card-carrying Christian? This attitude might be described as the liberal Protestant disease. Those of us who are Episcopalians are well acquainted with this disease, and we know that the disease affects most Christian traditions. But I confess that I am always a little bit shocked when I see Catholics expressing similar attitudes. . . .

• Pacifism = Heresy? -- my brother publishes the exchange of one of his "rapid-fire email debates with one of my readers and friends, the Polish Prince" to a flurry of comments. (Hmmmmm, I see Steven Riddle has already responded, but one might expect Chris Sullivan to be weighing in on this conversation as well?)

• Blogging on one of the latest moral skirmishes in the relationship between Church and State, Earl E. Appleby (Times Against Humanity) explains that "More At Stake Than A Pharmacist's Beliefs".

• Fr. Jim Tucker on Knowing Whether We Love God (Sunday homily):
  Fairly often, good-hearted people torture themselves, trying to figure out whether they really love God or not, and they try to measure the quality of their emotions when they pray, or the ardor of their sentiments when they think of God, and if they don't get the warm fuzzies they are afraid that they don't truly love Him, or that their faith is lacking. Emotions are never a trustworthy guide to our spiritual state, in much the same way as feelings really don't guide us in the practice of Christian morality. In fact, they often mislead us. The keeping of the commandments, on the other hand, is a much surer criterion. We are changing creatures existing in time, and the best indication of our interior state are the concrete choices and decisions that we make. . . .

  God has called on us to love Him above all things? Who here does? Nobody. Not a single one of us, from the priest in the pulpit down to the usher at the front door. We are imperfect, and so our love fails, and the concrete signs of that are our sins. There are some commandments that are hard for me to follow, and I don't particularly like them, but I try to do so anyway. There are perhaps other ones that you don't like, either, and that give you trouble. Well, I guess that's just tough, both for you and for me. We know we're imperfect, and we make wholesome use of Confession, and we keep aiming for a perfect observance of the commandments, which is to say, a perfect love for God. Don't let your failures discourage you or your sins blind you to the fact that you are, we hope, making some progress and coming closer to the goal of perfect conformity to the Will of God. If we don't give up, and if we keep asking pardon when we fail, we know that God will little by little give us the grace we need eventually to love Him with our whole hearts.

  Good words from a good priest -- thank you, Father. =)

• Juventutem is an international delegation of traditional youth to the XXth World Youth Day in Cologne 2005. The delegation is named Juventutem after a quote from the prayers at the foot of the altar in the 1962 Missal: "Introibo ad altare Dei, ad Deum Qui laetificat juventutem meam."

  According to Juventutem:

  "There is a modern cult of youth, as though youthfulness itself were the greatest good humans possess. We have chosen a name which refers to the only genuine youth that there is: the one dependent not on number of years or cosmetic manipulation, but rather that spiritual youth which flows from humble and confident familiarity with Divine Grace. This will be the first official traditional Catholic delegation to World Youth Day. We have consecrated our mission to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and go to spread the Faith for the greater glory of God.

• Love Alone is Believable: Hans Urs von Balthasar’s Apologetics, by Fr. John R. Cihak @ Ignatius Insight:
  Though people may glaze over when one makes claims of truth and goodness, their ears seem to perk up at the mention of beauty: the flash of lightening across the sky, the dramatic auburn colors of a late summer sunset, a sublime snatch of music whether it be Mozart’s Requiem or a David Gilmour guitar solo.

  An even more intense encounter is with the beauty that expresses human love: the exhilaration when love is extended and the other’s eyes sparkle, trembling lips break into a smile and say "Yes." The heart soars, and one may even weep for joy. Often the encounter is described as being swept off one’s feet. Though perhaps darkened to what is true and good, the post-modern heart is still captivated by beauty revealing love, and this may be the road to Christ for many citizens of the post-modern world. . . .

• Pope spoke the truth, by Andrew Bolt. The Australian Herald Sun April 13, 2005. A dismantling of the "Pope killed thousands -- wait, millions -- of Africans by banning condoms in the fight against AIDS" slur against John Paul II. Further discussion at Open Book.

On a lighter note . . .

• Ecumenical Dialogue in the Checkout Line. Mark Windsor relates a true story of his wife's experience:
  BAGGER DUDE: So, did ya hear they got a new pope?

  WIFE: Yes, but it was a few weeks ago. It didn’t happen today.

  BAGGER DUDE: So, what’s the pope do? . . . READ THE WHOLE THING.

• "ratzenfreude", a flash animation by doxaweb.com.

• The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch & the Wardrobe. Whew . . . I've got chills up my spine! =)

• Apocrypha Now: (With apologies to Francis Ford Coppolla) - A Tragic Comedy by Epicurious George. Via Jumping Without a Chute.

Labels: hereandthere

• A Long Overdue Indictment of Stephen Hand by Greg Mockeridge circa April 29, 2005.
• A commentary on Greg Mockeridge's Guest Editorial, by I. Shawn McElhinney. April 29, 2005.
• "A Small Note of Thanks (And Other Miscellaneous Bits), by I. Shawn McElhinney. May 3, 2005.
• "Reactions Without Reasoning" Dept., by I. Shawn McElhinney, responding to comments by Stephen Hand on TCRNews' Musings.

Despite my initial post, some readers expressed curiousity and concern over my display of solidarity. At the risk of repeating myself, here are some further notes on this topic.

The chief point of Greg/Shawn's recent editorials is that the issues of economics, capital punishment, and war remain areas about which -- citing then-Cardinal Ratzinger -- there could be a "legitimate diversity of opinion" (Paragraph 3, Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion — General Principles June 2004).

This point is sufficiently made by Fr. Michael P. Orsi of Camden, NJ in an excellent article clarifying "Different Levels of Catholic Teaching Homiletic & Pastoral Review December, 2003. [Editor's Note: This article was available last week on HPR's website; from what I understand it was "in rotation"; it's offline at the moment, but I've conveyed a request that it be made available again in the future, given it's pertinence to this discussion and the issues addressed by Greg/Shawn on Rerum Novarum].

This point has been reiterated time and time again -- with respect to the death penalty, by Cardinal Avery Dulles (Catholicism & Capital Punishment First Things 112 (April 2001): 30-35) and Karl Keating (Must Catholics Oppose Capital Punishment? Catholic Answers E-Letter, March 2, 2004); with respect to war, by Russel Shaw "Iraq, Weigel & the Pope" Catholic Exchange March 31, 2003); George Weigel ('Dissent' from church teaching? Great bosh! Tidings March 21, 2003) and Archbishop John Myers (Wall Street Journal Sept. 17, 2004).

As far as politics and economics are concerned, the Church, while offering various perspectives on such matters through the medium of her social teaching, does not propose much less canonize a particular economic model or political platform. As Fr. Orsy noted, "eternal salvation does not depend on one’s adherence to the modified form of capitalism that the Pope suggests in Centesimus Annus (1991) [n. 35]." At the same time:

In spite of the urging of Pope John XXIII, some have forsaken opportunities to explore areas of cooperation and persist in grievous attacks on their fellow Catholics, amounting in some cases to outright slander, malignment of character, and calculated mispresentations of the other's position. In my initial post I cited as an example the unfair portrayal of Fr. Neuhaus, Michael Novak, and Avery Dulles by the Zwicks in the Houston Catholic Worker (circa. 1999-2002) as apologists for unbridled capitalism and "wage slavery." As Greg laments:

More recently, Stephen Hand has given platform to -- or otherwise authored himself -- similar misrepresentations of George Weigel, Karl Keating, Fr. Frank Pavone (Priests for Life), not to mention President Ronald Reagan (at the very time of his death, no less!), all of which is documented in great detail by Greg Mockeridge in his guest editorial, who concludes:

I am not so much concerned here as to the justifiabilty of the war in Iraq, the applicability of capital punishment in our society, or the viability of Michael Novak's economic proposals. Like Greg & Shawn, I have my own thoughts on this matter. Stephen is free to differ, and there is time enough to present our respective cases. (For those who are curious, Shawn provides a convenient summary of his reflections here).

What is my concern is the fact that with respect to these issues there is room in the Church for "legitimate diversity of opinion" -- and the possibility for serious debate -- without succumbing to the cheap tactics that have become commonplace on Traditional Catholic Reflections and Reports.

A selection from TCRNews' latest musings will suffice as an example of what I am objecting to, in which Mr. Hand regards "the warbloggers" in the same fashion as he visited upon previous critics:

In all fairness, I note that Stephen Hand acknowledged the justifiability of "police action" against Bin Ladin and the Taliban in the aftermath of 9/11, and has, more importantly, published on TCRNews several op-eds by Fr. James Schall (who objects to the notion that "this is not a war of American imperialism").

May I be so bold, then, as to request that Stephen extend to Greg, Shawn and David ("the warbloggers," I presume?); to Weigel, Novak and Neuhaus ("the neocons"), to Fr. Pavone and Karl Keating, and to anybody else who disagrees with his particular political platform, the same charity, civility, and respect that he presently affords Fr. Schall?

(And with the understanding that we should all strive to better ourselves, this "heartless indifferent money imperialist," howbeit with a full-time "real" job, will hereby strive to do likewise).

Finally, towards the alleviation of the suffering caused by the war that Stephen has mentioned, not to mention years of oppression under a ruthless dictator and supporter of international terrorism, permit me to recommend as a recipient of our charity Spirit of America, whose mission is to "extend the goodwill of the American people to assist those advancing freedom, democracy and peace abroad."

Spirit of America is a 501c3 nonprofit supported solely through private-sector contributions. They do not receive funding from the government or military, and 100% of your tax-deductible donation is used for the purpose you choose -- among which are: purchasing library books for Iraqi children; helping Iraqi women escape domestic violence, develop job skills, and lobby for rights; bring American and Iraqi schools together to establish bonds of friendship, and contribute to the success of free elections and democracy in Iraq.

• Writing for the Jewish World Review, Suzanne Fields calls Pope Benedict "A Good Egg", recalling the time when her son-in-law was a teenager and was tutored for 15 days by Joseph Ratzinger:
  At the retreat, the boy was sworn to a fortnight of silence except for talking with his tutor. He remembers Joseph Ratzinger vividly, the most brilliant mind he had ever encountered before and since that time. Joseph Ratzinger had been through World War II, had been in the Hitler Youth and knew firsthand the irrational evils of fascism. Marxism was alive and well in the Soviet Union and behind the Iron Curtain and Joseph Ratzinger understood the dangers that emanated from the ruthless materialism of Communism in the Cold War.

  But he didn't talk to the boy about such things. Instead he had him read Aristotle and Plato, the novels of Thomas Mann, the philosophy of Heidegger, and the most critical think piece of all, "The Grand Inquisitor," that powerful legend embedded in a single chapter of The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevski. . . .

• Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger: On the 40th Anniversary of Gaudium Et Spes. Homily at St Peter's Basilica. Friday, 18 March 2005, with commentary by my brother at Ad Limina Apostolorum.
  

• "White Smoke" a 'Wide Angle' PBS television special on the Conclave, as presented from a largely liberal standpoint (the show closes with a Bill Moyers' interview with James Carroll, if that tells you anything). To their credit, they include a few brief interviews with some token faithful, sorry, CONSERVATIVE Catholics.

• "Pope in Talks with Traditionalist Anglicans" -- Anglican blog titusonenine on the news that "THE new Pope has established links with a faction of discontented Anglican traditionalists seeking to form their own church affiliated to the Vatican." The Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) represents some "400,000 Anglicans around the world who have either left their church or are protesting against its liberal policies. It is estimated that 400-500 Church of England parishes may support the group in the long term."

  Readers might recall back in October 2003, Cardinal Ratzinger had sent a letter to the American Anglican Council, conveying his personal support to another network of traditional-minded Anglicans. You can read about the conference, and the text of Cardinal Ratzinger's letter to them, here.

• "Ratzinger on Benedict", courtesy of Bill Cork (Ut Unum Sint), with reference to Ratzinger's interview God & The World: Living & Believing In Our Time (Ignatius Press, August 2002). Bill also spies a not-too-subtle "time bomb" regarding "the proscription against the form of liturgy in valid use up to 1970."
  

  

  Fr. Richard J. Neuhaus' April 21 Rome Diary @ First Things:

  . . . On the basis of his copious writings as Ratzinger, we know that Benedict is robustly skeptical of sociological depictions and analyses of the Church. The general media, as well as many scholars, are obsessed with statistical assessments of the Church's fortunes and misfortunes in history. For Pope Benedict these assessments are almost beside the point. The media will have a hard time adjusting to this. They do not want to talk about revealed truth or the redemption worked by Jesus Christ. Benedict insists that to speak of the Church is to speak of Christ. Which may result in the secular elites in control of the commanding heights of culture declining to talk about either.

  The circumstance was nicely summed up by a comment of Ted Koppel on Nightline the night of the election. The subject turned to interreligious dialogue, and I had referred to the radical Christocentrism of the new pope. "So which is it, Father," Koppel asked, "Christ or interreligious dialogue?"

  But, of course, it is interreligious dialogue because of, and upon the premise of, Jesus Christ as the redeemer of the whole world, including the world's religions in which, as Catholic teaching holds, elements of truth and grace are to be discovered. The same confusion arises with respect to Dominus Iesus, a document issued by Ratzinger's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a few years ago, which is regularly cited as claiming that "Catholicism is more true than other religions and even other Christian churches." But of course. There is but one Christ and therefore, at the deep level of theological understanding, there can be only one Church, and the Catholic Church claims to be that Church most fully and rightly ordered through time. That is not in tension with ecumenism; it is the foundation of the ecumenical quest for full communion among all Christians.

  The argument that Ratzinger has tried to make through these many years, and the argument that Benedict will undoubtedly be making, is that there is no tension, never mind conflict, between truth and love. The caricature is that liberals are big on love while conservatives are big on truth. As Ratzinger said in his homily before the conclave, love without truth is blind and truth without love is empty. Without truth, love is mere sentimentality and, without love, truth is sterile.

  This is, of course. in perfect continuity with John Paul's favored passage from Gaudium et Spes that Christ--who is the way, the truth, and the life--is the revelation of man to himself. If Christ is the truth about everyone and every thing, then the way forward is by following the way of Christ. This is the genuine progressivism proposed to the Church and the world by John Paul and by Benedict. The Church does not seek to be counter-cultural, but it is unavoidably counter to the modern mindset in proposing that fidelity and continuity, not autonomy and novelty, are the paths toward a more promising future.

• Lest we forget . . ." - Chris Burgwald has a roundup of a few "radtrad" (radical traditionalist) reactions to the election of Pope Benedict XVI. Whew . . . if you thought the left was hysterical over the prospect of the PanzerPope, guess again!

• Seminarian recounts experience at installation of Benedict XVI, by Joseph Previtali, who is currently studying in Rome (in a letter to InsightScoop).

• Ithillien has been dipping into Cardinal Ratzinger's various addresses and articles since the election, and posts his reflections on what he's learned:
  The central and consistent theme of Ratzinger's thought is communion. Not authority, not law, not order, not even tradition. Human beings are created for communion with God and one another. The Church is the fellowship in which this communion takes place--a fellowship that sums up God's work of creation throughout the aeons, and God's work of revelation throughout the centuries. The purpose of doctrine and liturgy and discipline is to shape this fellowship of communion. All the history of the universe and the human race is pointing toward the eschaton, in which the creation to which God has given freedom will freely return to communion with Him. The Church exists as a sign of that final goal of all creation. This is the context which Ratzinger's critics repeatedly miss. And without it nothing he says or does makes sense.

  The new Pope's abhorrence of relativism stems from its threat to this doctrine of communion. If the truth is changing and uncertain, then the history of the universe lacks a goal. Communion is not simply a matter of warm feelings or of tolerance. It involves a deep spiritual unity, and this requires a shared vision of the truth. . . . READ MORE

• From Off The Record, discussion of the article "The Document That Put Ratzinger on Top", by Marco Tosatti La Stampa April 22, 2005 -- and a look at Cardinal Ratzinger's thoughts on a "crisis of faith" in the priesthood prior to the conclave, as expressed in the first reflection of The Way of the Cross:
  The first of the series took place during his reflections accompanying the Stations of the Cross on Good Friday, the reflection on Jesus' third fall under the weight of the cross. The Pope's theologian-friend wrote: "Ought we not call to mind how much Christ has to suffer in His own Church? . . . How many times we celebrate only ourselves without so much as taking Him into consideration! . . . How much filth there is in the Church, even among those who, by virtue of their priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Christ! How much vainglory, how much self-complacency! How little respect we show the Sacrament of Reconciliation, in which He awaits us to raise us up again every time we fall!"

  It was a reflection in which he spoke of the Church as a "boat on the point of sinking, a boat taking in water on all sides. And also in Your field we see more darnel than wheat. To see the vesture and visage of Your Church so filthy throws us into confusion. Yet it is we ourselves who have soiled them! It is we who betray you time and time again, after all our lofty words and grand gestures."

  Two days later, near the Vatican, Cardinal Ratzinger met on the street a retired curial monsignor who asked him the reason for giving what seemed a discouraging reflection. "We must pray much, we must pray much," answered Benedict XIV, "You weren't born yesterday; you understand what I'm talking about; you know what it means -- We priests! We priests!" he concluded in a tone of pleading, adding, "Remember the prayer to the Sacred Heart, in which we ask particular pardon for the sins of priests. I know it hurts to say the boat's taking in water from every side, but it's true, it's true. We priests . . . "

  Struck by the manner in which Ratzinger said, "we priests, we priests," the monsignor recognized his inner suffering and asked him nothing further.

• Rich Leonardi responds to the Dennis Doyle's criticism of Ratzinger's assessment of Paul Knitter in Truth & Tolerance. (Book review: National Catholic Reporter April 22, 2005).

• "The Moor" on Pope Benedict's Coat of Arms, some helpful informational resources from Ono Ekeh.

• Behind the Rage at Benedict XVI, by Pat Buchanan. Chronicles April 22, 2005.

• Why Pope Benedict XVI is not wrong about relativism, by Dr. Philip Blosser (Pertinacious Papist). Responding to an article by Okezie Chukwumerije titled -- guess what? -- Why Pope Benedict XVI is wrong about relativism. NigeriaWorld.com. April 29, 2005.

• "You Have to Love A Pope Who Loves St. Augustine" says Daniel Henninger, deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page (Wall Street Journal April 22, 2005).
  

• Cardinal Ratzinger's favorite beer? - From the New York Times April 24, 2005:
  . . . The new pope is not, however, a teetotaler: Cardinal Bertone said he occasionally allows himself a glass of "excellent" wine from Piedmont. Manuela Macher, co-owner of the Cantina Tirolese, a Bavarian restaurant near the Vatican where he is a regular, said he also liked an occasional German beer, Franziskaner Weissbier. Which raises a question: Does he order the large size or the small?

Labels: benedict, benedict roundup

• James V. Schall, S.J., ponders the implications of the progressive agenda in "Suppose We Had a Liberal Pope?":
  ". . . for the sake of argument, let us suppose that the new Pope actually thinks he can do what the modern world insists is necessary to be "up to date." Suddenly, Rome, in a world-wide announcement, agrees that abortion, birth control, euthanasia, divorce, cloning, gay life, whatever, are just fine. The question immediately becomes, where are we?"

• The Blind-Obedience Myth: There's no virtue in being an unquestioning sheep, by Michael Novak. National Review Online. April 27, 2005. (With an excellent response to Novak by Christine @ Lauden Gloriae).

• With the public's attention focused on the papacy comes the reassertion of Protestant challenges to the Petrine Primacy. Jimmy Akin has a series of informative posts on the topic Mr. Peter?; "Hollow" Peter?; and the relevant verse in the original Aramaic.

• Also from Jimmy Akin -- thoughts on the moral licitness of engaging in Affiliate Programs with secular booksellers like Amazon.com or Barnes&Noble.com, who may also provide a market for other books and materials of morally questionable subject matter.

• "Sodom & the City of God": A Response to the New Oxford Review, by Ron Belgau of Courage Seattle. NOR June 2003. A very good article and necessary rebuttal to the editors of the New Oxford Review, who have a history of uncharitable remarks toward Catholics living with same sex attraction. (Via Amy Welborn, who posts several other links to articles by Ron.

• Amy Welborn posts "a brief statement" and initiates a long and rich thread of discussion between readers, this time on the necessity of rules and the pre/post Vatican II Church. Good points on both sides. I was impressed with the argument of commentator "Loudon is a Fool":
  I am reminded in this conversation of the passage in Belloc's Path to Rome regarding post-Reformation beverages, where he sets forth a rule for his drunkard friend that he must abstain from spirits and champagne. And the friend improves until one day he is offered whisky and water, and accepts. Before Belloc can take the drink from his friend, the drunkard tells him "After all, it is the intention of a pledge that matters." Belloc observes, "I saw that all was over, for he had abandoned definition, and was plunged back into the horrible mazes of Conscience and Natural Religion."

  I am no doubt defective in some manner, but where the Church sees fit not to make rules, or to rescind rules, it puts me in utter confusion. So the Bishops provide that I must make an act of penance on Friday, but the particular act is up to me. Which is to say there were no Friday acts of penance performed by me until my wife and I decided upon a rule. No meat on Friday. Of course, we always intended to visit prisons and the sick and do all sorts of other wonderful things on Fridays, which empty intention resulted in not only not doing grand things, but not even performing simple acts.

  With no rule on being tardy for Mass, we never know what to do. The best answer is don't arrive late. But if I am, what do I do? Rely on the prophetic murmurings of the Holy Spirit to my interior self? God evidently does not see fit to provide a bit of special revelation when this issue comes up. So if the readings have started, I don't receive Communion. Not because that's the rule, but because I don't know what the rule is and I figure better safe than sorry.

  Without rules, depending on personality, I think, some persons become overly scrupulous. Others become as dirty as they wanna be. Neither is a particuarly good situation to find oneself in (although, it's certainly better to be overly scrupulous). So let's have rules, and many of them. And those who can deepen their Faith and go beyond the rules will do so. And those who are lost without rules (i.e., post-lapsarian man) will be no worse off.

  The rapid descent into insanity following the council is certainly a sign of sickness. But it is not a sickness abated by a world without rules, but by Grace which is not inhibited by law.

  Additional good discussions from the Open Book's feisty 'Commentariat':

  - On On the "Reform of the Reform", Thomas Day's Why Catholics Can't Sing, Archbishop Chaput's column on why blessing children at communion is innappropriate, holding hands during the Lord's Prayer, etc.

  - Discussion of George Weigel's latest column -- "What Benedict XVI Means" (The Tidings April 29, 2005) -- and the observation that "The "progressive" project is over --- not because its intentions were malign, but because it posed an ultimately boring question: how little can I believe, and how little can I do, and still remain a Catholic?"

  - On John Allen Jr.'s "About Face", discussed previously on this blog.

• "The Church does not come to Scripture as a stranger" - Fr. Al Kimel of Pontifications, musing on the tenability of the Protestant principle of sola scriptura.

• Interfaithless dialogue?, from Talmida (Lesser of Two Weevils). Reflecting on an article by Bill Tammeus on the damaging effects of theological illiteracy on interfaith dialogue:
  "I felt quite challenged when I read it. There's just so much out there to learn if you're catholic!! 2000 years worth of history, theology, philosophy and probably a dozen other -ologies to say nothing of Latin and Greek and Hebrew and there's apparently something called patristics and there are maybe some other -istics too!!! WHERE TO START???"

  Heh. I certainly know the feeling.

• Why Tolerance Requires Judgment - musings on the necessary foundations of tolerance by Francis Beckwith, of the excellent philosophical blog Right Reason:
  popular culture--and in columns penned by such liberal luminaries as Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, and the Daily Kos--one often hears a call for "tolerance" while at the same time offering a condemnation of social and religious conservatives making critical judgments about another's sexual preference or religious beliefs . My sense is that this prescription is a form of intellectual bait and switch, for tolerance, properly understood, requires judgment. . . .

• James R. Davila, and blogger @ PaleoJudaica ("a weblog on ancient Judaism and its context"), has an article on Assimilated to the Blogosphere: Blogging Ancient Judaism (Society of Biblical Literature). During the controversy over Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ back in 2003, Davila challenged New York Times columnist Frank Rich's creative use of an ellipsis to give the false impression that Gibson had made an anti-Semitic statement. Davila "wrote to Rich about his quotation, but he never replied and the Times has never offered a correction."

• Good News from Iraq, the twenty-sixth installment in the series of truly massive roundups by Arthur Chrenkoff -- all the underreported news you're likely to have missed about the United States' latest attempt to transplant liberal democracy on foreign soil.

• President for Life: The Case for Gratitude, by Ramesh Ponneru. National Review Online (NRO). April 26, 2005. A response to Hadley Arkes' article "Bush's Second Chance" ( First Things 152 April 2005), appraising the President's pro-life commitment and activities to end abortion, in which he chastised the president for his reluctance to talk more openly on abortion and the Secretary of Health and Human Services for their neglect to enforce the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, describing the experience of the past two years "as though the White House had taken an account of the simplest, slightest measures that might be taken, and then come to the judgment that it was not in the interest of the President to do the slightest thing."

On a lighter note . . .

• My brother has a modest proposal on how to solve the "vocations crisis" in the American Catholic Church.

• Lycos Announces Searches for Pope Benedict XVI Jump 1,300 Percent Over Past Week:
  Pope Benedict XVI (#2) makes his first-ever appearance on The Lycos 50 this week, just missing the number one spot, as Pamela Anderson (#1) edges out the new Pontiff by less than one percent of online search interest. Searches for Pope Benedict XVI jumped 1,300 percent over the past week, with the top Pope-related searches centered on Pope Benedict biography, Pope Benedict pictures and the Joseph Ratzinger Fan Club. Interestingly, Pope Benedict's fan club web site (http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/) receives twice as many searches as the Clay Aiken fan club site. Ratzinger's fan club web site began in 2000, created by a 31-year-old former Protestant who converted to Catholicism. Searches for Nostradamus (#31), in relation to predictions about the new Pope, continue to be popular for the third consecutive week.

  Could it be? -- Could we have actually surpassed CLAY AIKEN?!?

• By way of Disputations, an amusing exchange between Mark Shea and Chris Sullivan -- who you might see haunting my comments boxes from time to time:
  It's amazing how you can take any subject and bend it to one of your private opinions. Is the thread about oriental shrubbery? Within a post or two, Chris, you manage to turn it into a discussion of either God's Demand for Absolute Pacifism or The Ongoing Hope of Women's Ordination. How do you do it?

  Mark Shea | 04.27.05 - 8:04 pm | #

  Dear Mark,

  If one doesn't raise one's questions, then one can't avail oneself of the correcting wisdom of the likes of Mark Shea or Tom or other wonderful posters here.

  God Bless

  Chris Sullivan | 04.27.05 - 9:10 pm | #

  Chris:

  You drive me crazy, but so help me, I can't help but like you.
  Mark Shea | 04.27.05 - 9:48 pm | #

  Just another day at St. Blog's Parish. =)

• For all you appreciators of God's creation in the form of peculiar weather phenomena, here are pictures of a sandstorm descending on Al Asad at about 60mph from BlackFive ("The Patratrooper of Love"). April 29, 2005.

• Review of the movie Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy from Captain's Quarters:
  Now, fans must understand that the film version takes liberties with many elements of the books. In fact, when I say that the movie takes liberties, I mean that if the film version dated your sister, not only would you be tempted to take the film out behind the gym after school and beat the living hell out of it, but your father would almost certainly get his shotgun and arrange for some abrupt nuptials. These liberties bear some similarity to those which gave the Yanks such a naughty reputation in Britain during WWII.

  But he still liked it. One of the few movies I'm hoping to see in the theater this month. Can't wait! -- And for those interested in delving into the deliciously twisted, absolutely hilarious mind of Arthur Adams, I recommend The Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the entire "five part trilogy" in one whopping volume.

• Looking for something to read but tired of the same old Catholic dogma? -- Join the Dissident Book Club! Courtesy of the Curt Jester.

Labels: hereandthere