"Conservatism--as a philosophical, cultural, and political project--does in fact have boundaries, and those have been set by the cluster of ideas offered by such giants as Burke, Lincoln, Chesterton, Lewis, Hayek, Chambers, Friedman, Kirk, Weaver, Gilder, Buckley, and Reagan. There are, of course, disagreements among these thinkers and their followers, but there is an identifiable stream of thought. It informs our understanding of human nature, families, civil society, just government, and markets.

"What contemporary conservatism has lost--especially in its Hannitized and Coulterized manifestations of superficial ranting--is the connection to a paternity that is necessary so that its intellectual DNA may be passed on to its progeny. The Hannitys, the Counters, and to a lesser extent the Ingrahams, of the conservative world are intellectual mules without deep knowledge of their own patrimony. They speak of their beliefs as if they were mere beliefs whose instantiation in the culture and government can only be the result of the willful exercise of power inspired by mobs organized by them via Talk Radio and Fox TV. I have no doubt that these political celebs sincerely believe their beliefs are true. But that's not the problem. The problem is that they do not seem to have any inclination to present arguments for these beliefs in a way that is carefully crafted, cheerfully presented, and persuasively offered. Unlike the giants from whom they received their intellectual inheritance, they think only of today and tomorrow, but not of a decade or even three decades from now. Their point seems always to embarrass their liberal guest or opponent or to come up with a clever, sit-com like, one-liner to keep their audiences amused. They don't seem to want to plant the seeds of intellectual curiosity to inspire others. They confuse moving people with a movement of people. They want a choir without a cathedral.

"On the positive side (for conservatives), the Left's tactics reveal a lack of rigor on their part as well. They no longer feel confident in making an argument for their point of view with respect to those with whom they disagree. They feel the pressure, like many conservatives do, to bypass the mind and go directly to the gut. This is why, for example, they no longer believe they have to argue that the late-term fetuses whose skulls Dr. Tiller crushed were not members of the human community worthy of dignity and respect. Rather, they will focus on the injustice of Dr. Tiller's murder and hold all prolifers by proxy responsible for it, and by this tactic drown out the compelling case for the unborn's membership in the moral community.

"In my judgment, the party that plays for keeps and not for next week will eventually triumph. That means that you have to be a happy warrior, willing to make your case and to take your lumps with magnanimity and grace. It also means that you fight intelligently, and fiercely, for your point of view while resisting the temptation to attack others personally. (And yes, I have fallen short in that regard on many occasions). You can't be a Keith Olbermann or an Ann Coulter and achieve lasting dominance in American politics. You may make a lot of money, become famous, and/or sell loads of books. Bill Buckley, by the way, achieved those very things without costing him his soul. Better to be a Buckley dissatisfied than a Hannity satisfied."

Labels: food for thought

The German Jesuit Alfred Delp, who was executed by the Nazis, once wrote: "Bread is important, freedom is more important, but most important of all is fidelity and faithful adoration."

When this ordering of goods is no longer respected, but turned on its head, the result is not justice or concern for human suffering. The result is rather ruin and destruction even of material goods themselves. When God is regarded as a secondary matter that can be set aside temporarily or permanently on account of more important things, it is precisely these supposedly more important things that come to nothing.

It is not just the negative outcome of the Marxist experiment that proves this. The aid offered by the West to developing countries has been purely technically and materially based, and not only has left God out of the picture, but has driven men away from God. [p. 33]

Let us return to the third temptation. Its true content becomes apparent when throughout history we realize that it is constantly taking on new forms. The Christian empire attempted at an early stage to use faith in order to cement political unity. The Kingdom of Christ was not expected to take the form of a political kingdom and its splendour. The powerlessness of faith, the early powerlessness of Jesus Christ, was to be given the helping hand of political and military might. The temptation to use power to secure the faith has arisen again and again in varied forms throughout the centuries, and again and again faith has risked being suffocated in the embrace of power. The struggle for the freedom of the Church, the struggle to avoid identifying Jesus' Kingdom with any political structure, is one that has to be fought century after century. For the fusion of faith and political power comes at a price: faith becomes the servant of power and must bend to its criteria. [p. 40]

If we had to choose today, would Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary, the Son of the Father, have a chance? Do we really know Jesus at all? Do we understand him? Do we not have to perhaps make an effort, today as always, to get to know him all over again? The tempter is not so crude as to suggest to us directly that we should worship the devil. He merely suggests that we opt for a reasonable decision, that we choose to give priority to a planned and thoroughly organized world, where God may have his place as a private concern but must not interfere in our essential purposes. Soloviev attributes to the AntiChrist a book entitled The Open Way to World Peace and Welfare. This book becomes something of a new bible, whose real message is the worship of well-being and rational planning. [p. 41]

The Passion narratives are the first pieces of the Gospels that were composed as a unity. In his preaching at Corinth, Paul initially wants to know nothing but the Cross, which "destroys the wisdom of the wise and wrecks the understanding of those who understand", which "is a scandal to the Jews and foolishness to the gentiles". But "the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men" (I Cor 1:19, 23, 25).

Whoever removes the Cross and its interpretation by the New Testament from the center, in order to replace it, for example, with the social commitment of Jesus to the oppressed as a new center, no longer stands in continuity with the apostolic faith. He does not see that God's commitment to the world is most absolute precisely at this point across a chasm.

Labels: food for thought

One might have the impression that sloth is not a typically American sin. The virtues of diligence and industriousness are deeply ingrained in our nation’s Protestant work ethic. Our youth learn early on that the way to get ahead—at least for those who don’t win the lottery—is by working hard. The early bird catches the worm. Early to bed, early to rise. In a competitive, dog-eat-dog business world, everyone is looking for an “edge,” and that typically comes from outworking the competition.

And even apart from an employment context, when we want to communicate that our lives have been normal and healthy, we report that we’ve been “keeping busy.” . . .

Yet sloth is a sin against God, and not against the time clock or productivity. The fact is that it’s possible to work too much, in a way that’s not in keeping with our dignity and ultimate good. The essence of sloth is a failure to fulfill one’s basic duties. Surely one such duty is the human vocation to work. Yet another such duty is the enjoyment of leisure, to take time for worship. The gentleman lying on the sofa may be a more popular image of sloth, but the workaholic, who’s on the job 24-7 and in the process neglects God and family, is the more typical manifestation of sloth in our culture.

Labels: food for thought

... It is not until much later -- when her twelve year old son remains behind in the temple, to be found after an agony of seeking -- that the divine 'otherness' of that which stands at the center of her existence is revealed. (Luke: 2:41-50). To the certainty understandable reproach: "Son, why has thou done so to us? Behold, in sorrow thy father and I have been seeking thee," the boy replies: "How is it that you sought me? Did you not know that I must be about my Father's business?" In that hour Mary must have begun to comprehend Simeon's prophecy: "And thy own soul a sword shall pierce" (Luke 2:35). For what but the sword of God can it mean when a child in such a moment answers a disturbed mother with an amazed: "How is it that you sought me?" We are not suprised to read further down the page: "And they did not understand a word that he spoke to them." Then directly: "And his mother kept all these things carefully in her heart." Not understanding, she buries the words like precious seed within her. The incident is typical: the mother's vision unequal to that of her son, but her heart, like chosen ground, is deep enough to sustain the highest tree.

Labels: food for thought

In the climate of the Second Vatican Council, of ecumenism, of openness, the word "heretic" has become not only unpopular but unspeakable -- except, of course, among integralists, who often deconstruct their own identity on accusations of heresy directed at others.

But has the concept of heresy become completely irrelevant? Has our awareness of the duty of tolerance and charity toward the sincere conscience of others absolved us from the danger of the error ourselves? Or is error something we no longer consider dangerous?

I think a Catholic is bound to remember that his faith is directed to the grasp of truths revealed by God, which are not mere opinions or "manners of speaking," mere viewpoints which can be adopted and rejected at will -- for otherwise the commitment of faith would lack not only totality but even seriousness. The Catholic is one who stakes his life on certain truths revealed by God. If these truths cease to apply, his life ceases to have meaning.

A heretic is first of all a believer. Today the ideas of "heretic" and "unbeliever" are generally confused. In point of fact the mass of "post-Christian" men in Western society can no longer be considered heretics and heresy is, for them, no problem. It is, however, a problem for the believer who is too eager to identify himself with their unbelief in order to "win them for Christ."

Where the real danger of heresy exists for the Catholic today is precisely in that "believing" zeal which, eager to open up new aspects and new dimensions of the faith, thoughtlessly or carelessly sacrifices something essential to Christian truth, on the grounds that this is no longer comprehensible to modern man. Heresy is precisely a "choice" which, for human motives . . . selects and prefers an opinion contrary to revealed truth as held and understood by the Church.

I think, then, that in our eagerness to go out to modern man and meet him on his own ground, accepting him as he is, we must also be truly what we are. If we come to him as Christians we can certainly understand and have compassion for his unbelief -- his apparent incapacity to believe. But it would seem a bit absurd for us, precisely as Christians, to pat him on the arm and say "As a matter of fact I don't find the Incarnation credible myself. Let's just consider that Christ was a nice man who devoted himself to helping others!"

This would, of course, be heresy in a Catholic whose faith is a radical and total commitment to the truth of the Incarnation and Redemption as revealed by God and taught by the Church. . . . What is the use of coming to modern man with the claim that you have a Christian mission -- that you are sent in the name of Christ -- if in the same breath you deny Him by whom you claim to be sent?

Thomas Merton
Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander, 1968.

Labels: food for thought, merton

In the washing of the feet, we catch a glimpse of what Jesus does and what he is. He, who is the Lord, stoops to our level. He lays aside the robes of his kingship and becomes a slave, standing at the door and performing the duty of a slave -- the washing of the feet. That is the meaning of his whole life and Passion: the he bends to wash our dusty feet, to wash away the dust of humanity, and, in his exceedingly great love, washes us clean. The purpose of this menial task of washing the feet was to make the guests fit to appear at table, to appear in company, so that they could sit together at table. Jesus Christ makes us, as it were, fit to appear at table and in company both before God and before one another; we, who are not fit to appear before God, are received by Jesus. He wears, so to speak, the garment of our wretchedness and, by taking us with him, makes us fit to stand in the presence of God; we have gained access to God. We are washed by letting ourselves be drawn into his love. This love means that God receives us unconditionally even when we are not capable and are not worthy of it, because he, Jesus Christ, transforms us and becomes our Brother.

-- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

Excerpt from Co-Workers of the Truth.

Labels: food for thought, ratzinger

In his writings while in prison, Bonhoeffer once remarked that even the Christian must live today quasi Deus non daretur -- as if there were no God. He must not involve God in the perplexities of his everyday life, but must assume responsibility for himself for the course of that life. Personally I would prefer to state this thought in exactly the opposite way: in practice, even one for whom the existence of God, the world of faith, has grown dim, should live today quasi Deus esset -- as if God really exists. He should live subject to the reality of truth, which is not our creation, but our mistress. He should live under the standard of justice, which is not just a product of our own minds, but the norm by which we ourselves are measured. He should live subject to the love that awaits us and that loves even us. He should live under the challenge of eternity. In fact, one who consciously lets himself be formed by this concept will see that it is the only way by which the human race can be saved. God -- and he alone -- is our salvation. . . . And one who -- even if perhaps at first only hesitantly -- entrusts himself to this difficult yet inescapable as if, who lives as if there were a God, will become ever more aware that this as if is the only reality. He will percieve its justification, its inner strength. And he will know profoundly and indelibly why Christianity is still necessary today as the genuinely good news by which we are redeemed.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
From Co-Workers of the Truth
(Ignatius Press, 1992)

Labels: food for thought

Powerful reading to begin the morning with. Here is an excerpt that has stuck with me for a while now:

I am always moved by those reports fron concentration camps and Russian prisons, where men were without the Eucharist for weeks and months at a time and did not look to themselves to provide it, but celebrated a Eucharist of desire. In such a Eucharist of desire, they were made ready in a new way for the Lord's gift and received it anew whenever a priest was able to find somewhere a piece of bread and a little wine. It is in this frame of mind and with appropriate humility and patience that we should approach the question of intercommunion. Where unity does not exist, it is not for us to act as though it does exist. The Eucharist is never a means at our disposal; it is the gift of the Lord, the central mystery of the Church herself, which we cannot use as we will. Intercommunion is not a gesture of personal friendship, but of insisting on the unity of the one Church and of waiting humbly until God himself confers it. Instead of experimenting and robbing the mystery of its greatness and demeaning it to the status of a means in our hands, we, too, should learn to celebrate the Eucharist of desire, and, united in prayer and hope, to find unity with the Lord in a new way.

-- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger [Eucharistie - Mitt der Kirche, pp. 30ff.]

Labels: food for thought, ratzinger

When, then, a man complains of his hardness of heart or weakness of purpose, let him see to it whether this complaint is more than a mere pretence to quiet his conscience, which is frightened at his putting off repentance; or, again, more than a mere idle word, said half in jest and half in compunction. But, should he be earnest in his complaint, then let him consider he has no need to complain. Every thing is plain and easy to the earnest; it is the double-minded who find difficulties. If you hate your own corruption in sincerity and truth, if you are really pierced to the heart that you do not do what you know you should do, if you would love God if you could, then the Gospel speaks to you words of peace and hope. . . .

. . . Christ says, "Watch and pray;" herein lies our cure. To watch and to pray are surely in our power, and by these means we are certain of getting strength. You feel your weakness; you fear to be overcome by temptation: then keep out of the way of it. This is watching. Avoid society which is likely to mislead you; flee from the very shadow of evil; you cannot be too careful; better be a little too strict than a little too easy,˜it is the safer side. Abstain from reading books which are dangerous to you. Turn from bad thoughts when they arise, set about some business, begin conversing with some friend, or say to yourself the Lord's Prayer reverently. When you are urged by temptation, whether it be by the threats of the world, false shame, self-interest, provoking conduct on the part of another, or the world's sinful pleasures, urged to be cowardly, or covetous, or unforgiving, or sensual, shut your eyes and think of Christ's precious blood-shedding. Do not dare to say you cannot help sinning; a little attention to these points will go far (through God's grace) to keep you in the right way. And again, pray as well as watch. You must know that you can do nothing of yourself; your past experience has taught you this; therefore look to God for the will and the power; ask Him earnestly in His Son's name; seek His holy ordinances.

Knowledge of God's Will Without Obedience
Parochial & Plain Sermons

Labels: food for thought, lenten reading

Nowadays we forget that human life is a battle . . . Not for nothing did the Church Fathers take over the pagan Greek doctrine of the cardinal virtues, because in prudence and justice, in fortitude, temperance and self-discipline, they saw remedies against concupiscience, which continues to affect the baptized.

Today, when the ravaging of human life is so great . . . it is essential to promote the simple virtues that slowly but surely can restore a human life. We are once more in a situation like that of Paul, who in a pagan culture had to remind the new Christians of the elementary human virtues. They are the humus of humanity, the ground-soil of the humanum, upon which the live of the divine virtues, the truly Christian life, can be grown. "Whatever is true, whatever his honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things." (Phil 4:8 CCC 1803).

This struggle is unending as long as there is a world. It is the praeparatio Ecclesia, the gathering up of men in the cause of the good, in the cause of community. For only goodness unites; sin splits and separates. As Origen says, "where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also is harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers." It is Christ who is our hidden guide and teacher in this struggle, the magister interior, the inner teacher of our hearts, the light that enlightens every man (cf. Jn 1:9). This is how he gathers up his people, prepares the way for His Church.

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn.
Loving the Church

Labels: food for thought

Hell is a state of mind . . . and every state of mind, left to itself, every shutting up of the creature within the dungeon of its own mind -- is, in the end, Hell. But Heaven is not a state of mind. Heaven is reality itself. All that is fully real is Heavenly. For all that can be shaken will be shaken and only the unshakeable remains. Milton was right. The choice of every soul can be expressed in the words "better to reign in Hell than serve in heaven." There is always something they insist on keeping, even at the price of misery.

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God "thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "thy will be done." All those that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no hell. No soul that seriosly and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek, find. To those who knock it is opened.

C. S. Lewis, The Great Divorce.

It's a penetrating psychological study of the many ways in which our preoccupation with our thoughts and desires leads us to forego a relationship with the divine, one of the most hard-hitting books I've ever read. I would count it as one of my personal favorites by Lewis, second only to The Screwtape Letters.

Labels: food for thought

. . .the present situation is characterized by a strong polerization in the Church, so much so that a dialogue between "progressives" and "traditionalists" succeeds only rarely. The camp of the progressives seeks to conquer the center; that of the traditionalists holds the fortress tenaciously as if it defended the center. Both sides distance themselves from the men in office and the small number of theologians who seek to maintain the true center.<

Where should one look to see a dawn? One should look to where in the tradition of the Church something truely spiritual appears, where Christianity does not seem a laboriosly repeated doctrine, but a breathtaking adventure. Why is all the world suddenly looking at the wrinkled but radiant face of the Albanian woman in Calcutta? What she is doing is not new for Christians . . . but suddently the volcano that was believed extinguished has begun to spit fire again. And nothing in this old woman is progressive, nothing traditionalist. She embodies effortlessly the center, the whole.

Hans Urs von Balthasar
A Short Primer for Unsettled Laymen

Labels: food for thought, hans urs von balthasar

"We live in the age of what Karl Rahner (in his earlier, more orthodox days) called "cryptogamous heresy" heresy which cannot readily be pin-pointed or "nailed down" with precision, because it consists chiefly of underlying emotional attitudes rather than clearly intelligible propositions. As Rahner said, it "often consists simply in an attitude of mistrust and resentment towards the Church's Magisterium, in a widespread feeling of being suspiciously and narrow-mindedly supervised."
In short, it is the heresy of hating "heresy-hunts" more than heresy itself. How very different is that pure and timeless Catholic spirit displayed by Cardinal Newman in his great Apologia: 'From the age of fifteen, dogma has been the fundamental principle of my religion: I know no other religion; I cannot enter into the idea of any other sort of religion; religion, as a mere sentiment, is to me a dream and a mockery.'"

-- Brian W. Harrison.
"Hunting the Heresy-Hunters"
Living Tradition, No. 4. Nov. 1987.

Labels: food for thought