An Important Announcement
I don’t know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
But for all that, there is one thing I do know: There's not enough hours in the day to conduct this blog as well as care for family, do my work, and most especially at present, finish a book that my conscience has been bothering me about for quite some time.
So after much thought and prayer, I have decided to suspend this blog till that project is well and truly done. I don't know how long that will take, but I firmly believe it is what the Holy Spirit has been bugging me to do for some time and I have been avoiding doing.
My reasons for avoiding it are not especially noble. Cranky as I can be here, I value the companionship of my readers. The life of a writer consists of sitting in a room by oneself. For an extrovert like me, that's solitary confinement and a lonesome business. The blog has been a way to avoid that to a degree and I've been loath to give it up.
Also, as an earthbound materialist whose trust in God is as riddled with concupiscence as anybody's, I've dreaded the thought of putting the blog on Indefinite Pause because, frankly, we don't have a lot of dough and I was about to start a fund drive to cover college, Christmas, dental bills and the thousand natural shocks flesh is heir to. The problem with that Money Trap is that there's no escape if I start putting Mammon First. If I do the fund drive and then stop the blog, people will feel gypped ("Hey! He takes our money and they stops writing!").
And I *must* stop the blog till the book is done. Try as I might, there's just no other way. Writing's a zero sum game. Time spent here is time taken from there.
So: effective immediately CAEI is going on suspension till my book is finished. When it's done (no telling when) I will resume the blog and be back to my old tricks.
I will say (because I a) have no shame and b) could really use the financial input for the labor of the last three months) that in lieu of the normal fund drive, if you have enjoyed what you've read here the past quarter, I would still deeply appreciate whatever you can throw in the Paypal tin cup over there on the left rail. And, of course, as ever, you can get all my books and tapes here. And likewise, as ever, if you'd rather send me check, just email me here and I'll give you my snail mail address.
I would also like to say that I've very much (indeed too much) enjoyed your company and that I apologize to any and all I've offended, insulted, irritated, or otherwise ticked off. Please forgive me and know that I likewise extend forgiveness to all who have offended, insulted, irritated, or otherwise ticked me off.
Findally, as is appropriate on Thanksgiving: Thanks! Thanks to all my readers. Thanks be to God through our Lord Jesus for the chance to do this odd and rewarding work in this odd and rewarding new media.
I'll be back when the book project is done (It's called Behold your Mother: An Evangelical Discovers the Blessed Virgin Mary). Please pray for me that I write well and truly.
The Lord be with you all till we meet again!
PS. Please don't email me links and stories. They'll all be fossilized by the time I resume the blog.
Blessings!
Friday, November 26, 2004
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
Happy Thanksgiving Y'all!
I do thank God for you and pray that he will bless you and yours!
See you Monday!
I do thank God for you and pray that he will bless you and yours!
See you Monday!
Alexander: Not Just Bad. "Springtime for Hitler" Bad
He has cast down the mighty in their arrogance.
I think I'll wait till I can get it through Netflix and then have a gleeful popcorn party with plenty to throw at the screen. How sad there's never going to be an MST3K Treatment of the film.
He has cast down the mighty in their arrogance.
I think I'll wait till I can get it through Netflix and then have a gleeful popcorn party with plenty to throw at the screen. How sad there's never going to be an MST3K Treatment of the film.
Hey Wichita, Kansas and Northern Oklahoma!
I'm gonna be speaking in Ponca City, OK Feb. 5-8, 2005 and will be flying in and out of Wichita. If you'd like me to come speak at your parish while I'm in the area, please let me know as soon as possible so I can book the flight to have me arrive early or stay a day or two later and make all the other arrangements.
I'm gonna be speaking in Ponca City, OK Feb. 5-8, 2005 and will be flying in and out of Wichita. If you'd like me to come speak at your parish while I'm in the area, please let me know as soon as possible so I can book the flight to have me arrive early or stay a day or two later and make all the other arrangements.
Weird for so many reasons
Hard to decide what's weirder. There's the "straining at gnats and swallowing camels" cleric who is more concerned about some annoying oil than the fact that Rainbow Sash types are out in force (and evidently allowed by the local Church) to demand the Church formulate the dogma that Homosexuality is the Source and Summit of all that is Best and Brightest in the Church.
There's the self-appointed vigilante exorcists thinking that much will be accomplished by this peculiar action, yet ignoring the teaching of the Church on exorcism.
There's the stale complaints of "hate" because the rank and file will not knuckle under and worship Homosexuality.
There's the even weirder accusation of "bias".
There's the bogus claim that people who oppose homosexual behavior think gays and not their sinful acts are "evil".
And there's the press, on hand to misreport it all.
In those days Israel had no king. Everyone did as he saw fit.
Hard to decide what's weirder. There's the "straining at gnats and swallowing camels" cleric who is more concerned about some annoying oil than the fact that Rainbow Sash types are out in force (and evidently allowed by the local Church) to demand the Church formulate the dogma that Homosexuality is the Source and Summit of all that is Best and Brightest in the Church.
There's the self-appointed vigilante exorcists thinking that much will be accomplished by this peculiar action, yet ignoring the teaching of the Church on exorcism.
There's the stale complaints of "hate" because the rank and file will not knuckle under and worship Homosexuality.
There's the even weirder accusation of "bias".
There's the bogus claim that people who oppose homosexual behavior think gays and not their sinful acts are "evil".
And there's the press, on hand to misreport it all.
In those days Israel had no king. Everyone did as he saw fit.
A reader writes:
St. Luke and St. Peregrine, pray for Michael!
I'm writing for a prayer request: my wife's cousin Michael, who is 36, has brain cancer. About two months ago he had surgery to remove the tumor, as well as chemo- and radiation therapy. Unfortunately, the tumor has come back with a vengence, and won't respond to anything. Barring a miracle, he will not make it to the end of the year. As you can imagine, his family, particularly his wonderful pious mother is devastated. Despite the fact that the outlook is exremely grim, there are signs of hope. First, he has returned to the church and to the love of Christ, second, he has a very good surgeon/doctor who is taking good care of him, and third, God has entrusted his family to the spiritual care of a fantastic Charismatic priest. I know that all things are possible with God, and I ask for your prayers that may be returned to health. I also ask that you pray for his family, his doctor, and his priest.
St. Luke and St. Peregrine, pray for Michael!
The story is a hopeful one
...but mostly I link it because I think the name "Bishop Anders Arborelius" is cool.
...but mostly I link it because I think the name "Bishop Anders Arborelius" is cool.
The Mysterious Mind of Sean
My seven year old runs up and sez, "I have a riddle! What's the difference between 'sour' and 'tart'?"
I give up.
"One's like a train and the other isn't!"
He says things like this a lot. Leading government cryptologists are studying him closely.
My seven year old runs up and sez, "I have a riddle! What's the difference between 'sour' and 'tart'?"
I give up.
"One's like a train and the other isn't!"
He says things like this a lot. Leading government cryptologists are studying him closely.
America is a Nation with the Soul of a Church. - G.K. Chesterton
Touchstone talk about why that is and how it makes the American Experiment unique. There really is nothing quite like it in the world.
To say that America is like the Church is to say two things. First it is to say America is like the Church. It is also to say that America is *not* the Church, only like it. Both facts must be borne in mind by patriotic American Catholics. For likenesses can be icons--or idols.
Touchstone talk about why that is and how it makes the American Experiment unique. There really is nothing quite like it in the world.
To say that America is like the Church is to say two things. First it is to say America is like the Church. It is also to say that America is *not* the Church, only like it. Both facts must be borne in mind by patriotic American Catholics. For likenesses can be icons--or idols.
I forgot I said that
A reader informs me that I'm quoted in The Wonder of the World (see below):
I think I must have scribbled that in the notes on the MSS or something. Anyway, I'm flattered that it wound up in the book.
A reader informs me that I'm quoted in The Wonder of the World (see below):
In this context, Mark Shea remarks, "It has always struck me as odd to point to the immense concentration of intellect, will, technology and energy it has taken to do relatively small things in the extremely specialized conditions of the lab and argue that this product of white-hot focus of ultra-controling human intelligence is clear evidence that absolutely no intelligence was involved in the production of all the rest of the vastly more complex life we see around us. It's like taking years to build a tiny house of cards and then using this feat to say, 'There! This accomplishment shows the Capitol Dome was therefore obviously the product of a hurricane in a marble quarry.
I think I must have scribbled that in the notes on the MSS or something. Anyway, I'm flattered that it wound up in the book.
Barb Nicolosi Chronicles the Religious Bigotry of Hollywood
Beliefnet comment boxers remind me of Statler and Waldorf from the Muppet Show--except they're not as lifelike and funny.
Beliefnet comment boxers remind me of Statler and Waldorf from the Muppet Show--except they're not as lifelike and funny.
Nicholas Kristof Attacks Left Behind Authors for Not Displaying the Right Kind of Bigotry
It's "hate" (that useful word!) to believe in the Rapture, fear sin, and have a flat-footed biblical literalism that thinks Catholics who believe the Catholic faith are going to hell. But it's open-minded tolerance to ridicule mouth-breathers who believe in the Virgin Birth.
I'll take the Fundies who at least care enough to pray for my soul, thanks.
It's "hate" (that useful word!) to believe in the Rapture, fear sin, and have a flat-footed biblical literalism that thinks Catholics who believe the Catholic faith are going to hell. But it's open-minded tolerance to ridicule mouth-breathers who believe in the Virgin Birth.
I'll take the Fundies who at least care enough to pray for my soul, thanks.
Interesting Conversation Between a Theist and an Atheist on What You Can Know about God by Looking Around at Stuff
The Wonder of the World makes a really interesting case for "natural revelation" available to anybody with five senses as briefly sketched by Paul in Romans 1:19-20:
I helped with the editing of the MSS and really enjoyed the read. Varghese has a really wide-ranging mind and is familiar with a broad range of both scientific and religious tradition (Christian and non-Christian) from both east and west. Check it out.
The Wonder of the World makes a really interesting case for "natural revelation" available to anybody with five senses as briefly sketched by Paul in Romans 1:19-20:
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.
I helped with the editing of the MSS and really enjoyed the read. Varghese has a really wide-ranging mind and is familiar with a broad range of both scientific and religious tradition (Christian and non-Christian) from both east and west. Check it out.
Hollywood to World: I don't have courage, but I do *play* somebody who has courage in my next film
Now, about those horrible people with traditional views of sex who are the *real* menace. I can be as courageous as you like attacking them.
Now, about those horrible people with traditional views of sex who are the *real* menace. I can be as courageous as you like attacking them.
I nominate David Letterman
Who better than a comedian to anchor a news organization that's become a joke?
Who better than a comedian to anchor a news organization that's become a joke?
There is Something About Dan Rather's Story That an Ancient Greek Tragedian Would Enjoy
The symmetry, the hubris, the irony, the way in which the nemesis of Nixon ends up acting like Nixon. It's all so very Greek.
The Pajamahedin savor their first major triumph as the Vanguard of the New Media. The rest of us bloggers bask in their reflected glory.
The symmetry, the hubris, the irony, the way in which the nemesis of Nixon ends up acting like Nixon. It's all so very Greek.
The Pajamahedin savor their first major triumph as the Vanguard of the New Media. The rest of us bloggers bask in their reflected glory.
My reader who is miffed at Carroll's "I Hate Being Catholic" Rumblings writes:
There's a reason Paul repeatedly tells Christians to bear with one another. Doesn't mean accepting heretical nonsense. But it does mean accepting the people who spout it and dealing with the fact that the normal Catholic life means that a certain percentage of people who are members of the body of Christ in baptism are going to drive us nuts. Judging from our Lord's behavior, the general response of the Church is to leave the bad fish in the net, even when they are Judas, and let the angels do the sorting on the day of judgment. Sometimes--very rarely in the history of the Church--have a medicinal excommunications been imposed. You can find an example of it in Paul's letter to the Corinthians.
But what is overlooked is how uncommon that is, even in Paul's letters. That's *not* because the New Testament Churches were Golden Communities where heretics were rare. Paul's letters are, in large part, written to deal with all sorts of people doing all sorts of things they shouldn't and thinking all sorts of things they shouldn't. Yet very seldom does Paul employ anathemas or "handing them over to Satan" as a pastoral tool. That's more or less the pattern of the Church. So I accept the pattern as typically Catholic. Rather than spend a lot of time being frustrated that the Church does not primarily operate on a gospel of kicking ass and taking names, I think the best thing to do is ignore dolts like Carroll and work quietly (or in my case, noisily and obnoxiously) to present the Faith to the best of our ability. Carroll is, in the colorful phrase of the Aussie blogged below, a "mule". His gospel produces no converts, wins no hearts and minds, and is ultimately sterile. Meanwhile the real gospel is fruitful. So pray for his conversion, forgive him (so that he doesn't prey on your mind and distract you from the work of the Church) and soldier on. Adjudicating his (or anybody's) exact relationship to the Body of Christ is not our problem and is one of those dumb distractions the devil sends our way to keep us from doing what we should be doing.
I concede your point as far as the canonical legalities. The latter, however, are rendered moot by the espicopal spinelessness to which you regularly allude. Nobody in Boston will ever call this guy out and take him down.
I am talking more in terms of the practicalities of this and similar situations. Read this piece. Has he not, in practical terms, wandered off the reservation?
Analogous to Baptism of Desire, is there not also Apostasy-in-Place?
Is this piece not a striking specimen of the pathology of liberal Catholic self-hatred?
Are the rest of us condemned to an endless purgatory of the likes of him swanning around in the Public Square and claiming to speak as Catholic? Do words, such as "Catholic", mean anything anymore?
There's a reason Paul repeatedly tells Christians to bear with one another. Doesn't mean accepting heretical nonsense. But it does mean accepting the people who spout it and dealing with the fact that the normal Catholic life means that a certain percentage of people who are members of the body of Christ in baptism are going to drive us nuts. Judging from our Lord's behavior, the general response of the Church is to leave the bad fish in the net, even when they are Judas, and let the angels do the sorting on the day of judgment. Sometimes--very rarely in the history of the Church--have a medicinal excommunications been imposed. You can find an example of it in Paul's letter to the Corinthians.
But what is overlooked is how uncommon that is, even in Paul's letters. That's *not* because the New Testament Churches were Golden Communities where heretics were rare. Paul's letters are, in large part, written to deal with all sorts of people doing all sorts of things they shouldn't and thinking all sorts of things they shouldn't. Yet very seldom does Paul employ anathemas or "handing them over to Satan" as a pastoral tool. That's more or less the pattern of the Church. So I accept the pattern as typically Catholic. Rather than spend a lot of time being frustrated that the Church does not primarily operate on a gospel of kicking ass and taking names, I think the best thing to do is ignore dolts like Carroll and work quietly (or in my case, noisily and obnoxiously) to present the Faith to the best of our ability. Carroll is, in the colorful phrase of the Aussie blogged below, a "mule". His gospel produces no converts, wins no hearts and minds, and is ultimately sterile. Meanwhile the real gospel is fruitful. So pray for his conversion, forgive him (so that he doesn't prey on your mind and distract you from the work of the Church) and soldier on. Adjudicating his (or anybody's) exact relationship to the Body of Christ is not our problem and is one of those dumb distractions the devil sends our way to keep us from doing what we should be doing.
Professing to be Wise, They Became Fools
St. Paul on the Temple University Art and Society class, doing it's bit to demonstrate that sin makes you stupid.
St. Paul on the Temple University Art and Society class, doing it's bit to demonstrate that sin makes you stupid.
Prayer alert
St. Blog's Karen Marie Knapp will be in surgery today at 1:30 pm CST to have dead tissue removed from her leg. Please pray for a successful operation and a speedy recovery.
St. Blog's Karen Marie Knapp will be in surgery today at 1:30 pm CST to have dead tissue removed from her leg. Please pray for a successful operation and a speedy recovery.
Rod Dreher Finds an Interesting Piece on the Profound Brittleness of Islam
Some readers may argue with this, but I really do think "brittleness" not "strength" is the right term for a religious tradition so singularly unequipped to deal with the reversals of worldly fortune that reality throws at us. I think Spengler's analysis is pretty accurate. I also think that's cause for worry, not triumphalism. We'd be lucky beyond our wildest deserts if Radical Islam went as gently into that Good Night as European communism did.
Some readers may argue with this, but I really do think "brittleness" not "strength" is the right term for a religious tradition so singularly unequipped to deal with the reversals of worldly fortune that reality throws at us. I think Spengler's analysis is pretty accurate. I also think that's cause for worry, not triumphalism. We'd be lucky beyond our wildest deserts if Radical Islam went as gently into that Good Night as European communism did.
Roe Challenge Moves to Supreme Court
Experts, Groups, and Attorneys Needed for Friend of Court Briefs
Roe v Wade is headed back to the Supreme Court. The Justice Foundation will file a writ of certiorari on or before January 17, 2005 asking the Court to hear Norma McCorvey's Rule 60 motion to reverse Roe v. Wade. But a hearing is not guaranteed. Friend of the court briefs will be needed to support the petition for a hearing.
The Justice Foundation, which is representing McCorvey, is willing to help match groups and individuals with an interest in filing briefs in support of this writ with attorneys and academics who will assist in writing the briefs. Also needed are attorneys licensed to practice before the Supreme Court willing to file the briefs on behalf of these individuals or groups.
Groups and individuals have an interest in presenting to the Court arguments regarding how abortion has injured women and society are also needed. The Justice Foundation will help match you with attorneys who will help prepare and file your brief.
Groups or individuals needed include:
a.. Women hurt by abortion.
b.. Victims of domestic violence related to abortion and/or directors or counselors at agencies serving victims of domestic violence
c.. Former abortion providers.
d.. Physicians, psychologists, and other professionals who have treated women injured by abortion.
e.. Pregnancy care centers.
If you are an attorney able to file Supreme Court briefs, an attorney or academic willing to help draft briefs, or an individual or group that wishes to be represented by a brief, please contact the Justice Foundation at (210) 614-7157.
Women interested in filing Friends of the Court forms should go to this link.
Learn more about this case here.
Experts, Groups, and Attorneys Needed for Friend of Court Briefs
Roe v Wade is headed back to the Supreme Court. The Justice Foundation will file a writ of certiorari on or before January 17, 2005 asking the Court to hear Norma McCorvey's Rule 60 motion to reverse Roe v. Wade. But a hearing is not guaranteed. Friend of the court briefs will be needed to support the petition for a hearing.
The Justice Foundation, which is representing McCorvey, is willing to help match groups and individuals with an interest in filing briefs in support of this writ with attorneys and academics who will assist in writing the briefs. Also needed are attorneys licensed to practice before the Supreme Court willing to file the briefs on behalf of these individuals or groups.
Groups and individuals have an interest in presenting to the Court arguments regarding how abortion has injured women and society are also needed. The Justice Foundation will help match you with attorneys who will help prepare and file your brief.
Groups or individuals needed include:
a.. Women hurt by abortion.
b.. Victims of domestic violence related to abortion and/or directors or counselors at agencies serving victims of domestic violence
c.. Former abortion providers.
d.. Physicians, psychologists, and other professionals who have treated women injured by abortion.
e.. Pregnancy care centers.
If you are an attorney able to file Supreme Court briefs, an attorney or academic willing to help draft briefs, or an individual or group that wishes to be represented by a brief, please contact the Justice Foundation at (210) 614-7157.
Women interested in filing Friends of the Court forms should go to this link.
Learn more about this case here.
Triple A's Nefarious Conspiracy to Wipe out the American Priesthood Continues
First, Benedict Groeschel. Now this.
Coincidence? I think NOT!
First, Benedict Groeschel. Now this.
Coincidence? I think NOT!
Today's Catholic Youth Are Growing Antibodies Against the Biddies and Prunefaces of the Secular Educational System
Not a bad effort from my eldest chip off the block.
Catholic Youth: Subverting the Dominant Paradigm
Muuwahahahaha!
"Oh, Frosty the Snowman
Is usurping Christmas day!
Songs sung in God's name
now a social bane
Frosty's taken Christ away.
Oh, take back your Frosty!
And that red-nosed Rudolph knave!
Instead of saving grace
we look for flying Sleighs
As my God sleeps in a cave.
There must have been
Some Magic in
That old materialist view,
for when we stuffed it in our minds,
We forgot about what's true.
Oh, Frosty the Snowman,
Can take his seasonal cheer
and his 'True Meaning of Christmas'
And his winter solstice
And blow it out his ear!"
Not a bad effort from my eldest chip off the block.
Catholic Youth: Subverting the Dominant Paradigm
Muuwahahahaha!
Tuesday, November 23, 2004
Memo to Readers with the Initials "Chris Sullivan"
If I start a thread on Just War, you can talk about Just War. If I start a thread on something else, and you hijack it to talk about Just War and your demand for pan-Catholic pacifism, and your tired attempts to re-write the Catechism, I will delete it. I asked politely. Now I'm taking action. Enough!
If I start a thread on Just War, you can talk about Just War. If I start a thread on something else, and you hijack it to talk about Just War and your demand for pan-Catholic pacifism, and your tired attempts to re-write the Catechism, I will delete it. I asked politely. Now I'm taking action. Enough!
I hold out hope that, somehow or other, animals will be in heaven
It would be a shame if magnificent critters like this weren't part of our heavenly happiness.
It would be a shame if magnificent critters like this weren't part of our heavenly happiness.
Chicken Little Health Nazis Freak out About Candles in Church
We'll all die from lung cancer if we go to Mass! Eeeeeeek!
I'll take my chances.
We'll all die from lung cancer if we go to Mass! Eeeeeeek!
I'll take my chances.
Why I have so little patience with the "Religious Supporters of Bush = Al Quaeda" claptrap from the Left
The notion that some pastor or security mom is the moral equivalent of the people who do such things is so hysterically out of touch with reality that the claim to live in "Realityworld" as distinct from "Bushworld" evokes a horse race of emotion between hysterical laughter and the urge to slap the face of the next fool to say it. If there is one thing that is certain, it is that the typical Evangelical or Catholic supporter of Bush is not operating a torture chamber and murder cell in the basement of the Church. Idiots who say they do are utterly unable to sway an increasing number of normal people for good reason.
The notion that some pastor or security mom is the moral equivalent of the people who do such things is so hysterically out of touch with reality that the claim to live in "Realityworld" as distinct from "Bushworld" evokes a horse race of emotion between hysterical laughter and the urge to slap the face of the next fool to say it. If there is one thing that is certain, it is that the typical Evangelical or Catholic supporter of Bush is not operating a torture chamber and murder cell in the basement of the Church. Idiots who say they do are utterly unable to sway an increasing number of normal people for good reason.
A reader writes:
FWIW, I think it's a better use of language to say Carroll is a very bad Catholic than to say he's not a Catholic. I will leave it to the bishops to declare when somebody is no longer in communion with the Catholic Church. Not my job.
Of course, he's not somebody to pay attention to (unless you want to know what enemies of the faith are saying these days).
As to the apostasy, that's been lurking around in one form or another since St. John wrote "already there are many antichrists". Someday all the dry runs and little efforts will achieve fruition on the Real Thing, but neither you nor I know when that will be. So "Watch" says our Lord.
But also, "Be Not Afraid" says his servant, the Holy Father. There is always hope.
Persuant to the attchments op-ed, I refuse henceforth to recognize James Carroll as a Catholic. To him, the birth of Jesus Christ is a nuisance.
Am I being uncharitable, or Rad-Trad-Lidless-Eye?
No, just logical.
Words such as "Catholic" must mean something or they mean nothing.
Or is it the antinomian times in which we live that allow the like of Carroll to fraudulently claim the designation of Catholic Christian, suck up the oxygen of the Community of Faith and distract the rest of us from persuing the "straight-thinking" (i.e. orthodoxos) road to Enlightenment.
As an act of both penance and spiritual nutrition, dont give up candy - give up "dialogue" with pseudo-Catholic oxygen suckers like Carroll.
I say again as I have said many times: the AmChurch schism, indeed, apostasia, is a veritable Fact on the Ground. Carroll, Kerry et al have morphed, in all but name, into New England Unitarians. The schism, the apostasia is happening already.
FWIW, I think it's a better use of language to say Carroll is a very bad Catholic than to say he's not a Catholic. I will leave it to the bishops to declare when somebody is no longer in communion with the Catholic Church. Not my job.
Of course, he's not somebody to pay attention to (unless you want to know what enemies of the faith are saying these days).
As to the apostasy, that's been lurking around in one form or another since St. John wrote "already there are many antichrists". Someday all the dry runs and little efforts will achieve fruition on the Real Thing, but neither you nor I know when that will be. So "Watch" says our Lord.
But also, "Be Not Afraid" says his servant, the Holy Father. There is always hope.
Beliefnet Wouldn't Let Me Blog This
...something about it being to proselytizish. Weird. Anyway, I'll blog it here.
Someday Beliefnet will be called "Islamnet". Muslims don't observe all that politesse about not proselytizing. Christians shouldn't either, particularly since the gospel is the truth and Islam is a manmade religion.
I know. I'm shockingly crude. So sue me.
...something about it being to proselytizish. Weird. Anyway, I'll blog it here.
Supernature Abhors a Vacuum
Because of this, there is no future for secularism in Europe or anywhere else. The only way to withstand an inflamed spirituality is with a healthy spirituality. Another diseased or watery spirituality won't cut it.
The thing is: nothing is certain, and grace happens. Large swaths of Christendom have been lost to Islam in the past and many Europeans are doing all they can to surrender Europe to Islam. But there is hope too.
Here's hoping the power of Christ will be able to reverse the advance of Islam by the power of the cross and bring the light of Christ to those in Islam who seek him.
The funny thing, of course, is that so many moderns are far more horrified by a thought like that, than by Foaming Bronze Age Fanatics who shoot people, slit their throats and pin death threats to Western Civilization to their corpses. Does lend credence to Malcolm Muggeridge's assertion that there is a death wish at the heart of modern liberalism, don't it?
Someday Beliefnet will be called "Islamnet". Muslims don't observe all that politesse about not proselytizing. Christians shouldn't either, particularly since the gospel is the truth and Islam is a manmade religion.
I know. I'm shockingly crude. So sue me.
Check out...
Catholics in the Public Square. Good fiber for your intellectual diet.
And speaking of the phrase "public square", do check out this interesting piece in Internationalisms from the ever-interesting and thoughtful Fr. Richard "I practically could copyright the phrase 'public square'" John Neuhaus
Catholics in the Public Square. Good fiber for your intellectual diet.
And speaking of the phrase "public square", do check out this interesting piece in Internationalisms from the ever-interesting and thoughtful Fr. Richard "I practically could copyright the phrase 'public square'" John Neuhaus
Speaking of the Happy Land of Upside Down...
Australia: Where the Anglicans are Good Catholics and the Catholics are Bad Anglicans.
Australia: Where the Anglicans are Good Catholics and the Catholics are Bad Anglicans.
An Aussie Looks at the Intellectual Sterility of the Left
The champions of the contraceptive and abortive mind get their wish in ways they had not foreseen.
A mule is a more fitting symbol than a donkey for much of the Left.
The champions of the contraceptive and abortive mind get their wish in ways they had not foreseen.
A mule is a more fitting symbol than a donkey for much of the Left.
First and Second Rules of the Cult of the Imperial Autonomous Self
1. Choice is more important than life.
2. Murder is therefore fine if the victim is yourself.
1. Choice is more important than life.
2. Murder is therefore fine if the victim is yourself.
A reader writes
What? You mean this isn't expressive of authentic Celtic Christian spirituality:
You mean Celts weren't all feminist, earth-affirming, matriarchal men and women in touch with the rhythms of Earthspirit, free in their mutually affirming sexuality (in whatever form they chose to express that), filled with a natural childlike wonder yet wise as the most noble shaman in the use of healing herbs? You mean that the Catholic Church didn't stamp out this Edenic spirituality in "the burning times" and impose, by main force, an evil patriarchal sky god and a sinister organized religion that crushed the dreaming, spiritual, poetic unitarian Celts before they could invent Birkenstocks, create granola, and learn to grow marijuana?
But, but... It's on the Internet! How could it not be true?
Great article in the Tablet on the current Celtic fad in spirituality and how profoundly different it is from actual non-Anglicized spirituality. I certainly can attest to this since the elderly Welsh christians I lived with in Swansea were the spiritual disciples and heirs of of the Welsh revival of 1904 - and a more puritanical bunch never lived.
What? You mean this isn't expressive of authentic Celtic Christian spirituality:
You mean Celts weren't all feminist, earth-affirming, matriarchal men and women in touch with the rhythms of Earthspirit, free in their mutually affirming sexuality (in whatever form they chose to express that), filled with a natural childlike wonder yet wise as the most noble shaman in the use of healing herbs? You mean that the Catholic Church didn't stamp out this Edenic spirituality in "the burning times" and impose, by main force, an evil patriarchal sky god and a sinister organized religion that crushed the dreaming, spiritual, poetic unitarian Celts before they could invent Birkenstocks, create granola, and learn to grow marijuana?
But, but... It's on the Internet! How could it not be true?
My Boss, Tom Allen, Gets Interviewed
I like Tom so much, I'd say he's a great guy even if he weren't my boss.
I like Tom so much, I'd say he's a great guy even if he weren't my boss.
Monday, November 22, 2004
I'm subbing for Charlotte Hays over on Beliefnet on Tuesday
Same blog, different location. Come on over and visit! You can comment there or here, however you like!
Back in this space on Wednesday!
Same blog, different location. Come on over and visit! You can comment there or here, however you like!
Back in this space on Wednesday!
Disgusted with Old Magisterium, Lay Catholics Create New Magisterium
New Oxford Review and Omnicompetent Expert in Everything Robert Sungenis define new dogmas, according to a reader who writes:
Careful. The New Magisterium could start doing some highly personal defining about who is going to Hell. Have they ever been wrong?
New Oxford Review and Omnicompetent Expert in Everything Robert Sungenis define new dogmas, according to a reader who writes:
In addition to their dismissal of David Morrison, there are other problems at the magazine.
In the New Oxford Notes for November 2004, on pp. 20-22, the editor often quotes Robert Sungenis' The Gospel According to St. Matthew: The Catholic Apologetics Study Bible. From Sungenis' analysis, the editor concludes: "It is quite obvious that the Jews who rejected their Messiah in the time of Jesus are in Hell. So yes, Hell is populated." They quote Sungenis' commentary on Jude 7 as proof that "the Sodomites were sent to Hell for their sins." The editor adds, "So there are rump rangers in Hell too (though, if you recall Mt. 11:21-24, the Jews who rejected their Messiah will have it worse in Hell).
Ugh.
I regret that my sub continues till June 2005; when time allows and I decide
how to reply to them, the next step may be something I have never yet done ...
a "cancel my subscription" letter.
Careful. The New Magisterium could start doing some highly personal defining about who is going to Hell. Have they ever been wrong?
If the previous post did not make clear what I find repugnant in Ledeen's thought (and in the amazing amount of excuse-making for it from Faithful Conservative Catholics[TM])...
...then let this post try to sum up the problem I'm having with both Ledeen and his defenders.
Let's recap:
A Marine shoots a wounded man under disputable circumstances. As I have repeatedly said, I think the soldier needs be granted a *lot* of slack since we know stuff like this has been pulled repeatedly by the enemy. In other words, I reject the automatic accusation that the soldier deliberately chose to do evil. Indeed, it is an open question as to whether any evil (in the sense of "sin") was committed at all. (Death is always an evil, but not always a sin.) He may have been doing the best he could to assess a very tricky situation.
Now comes Ledeen, arguing that it would have been better to blow Hitler away in the trench when he was laying there wounded. This would, I suppose, have been a useful thing to say if we knew the mind of God and could foresee the future. But since we don't and can't, it's a meaningless and sinister proposition that suggests (and is patently *meant* to suggest) that sometimes the ends justify the means. And it's an excerpt from a book called "Machiavelli on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli's Iron Rules Are as Timely and Important Today as Five Centuries Ago". Oh, but we can't really tell if Ledeen agrees with Machiavelli or not. (See Shea's Rule of Satanic Complexification and Over-Simplicity).
Numerous Catholic readers read this piece. It's subtitled "What Would Machiavelli Do") and it concludes:
Now, as I pointed out, a bishop who wrote
would probably not get all the chin-stroking benefit of the doubt that so many of my ultra-complexifcated readers were eager to give Ledeen. They might detect just the teensy weensiest service of some sort of agenda there.
But many of my readers were oh-so-unclear about what Ledeen was really getting at. True, it was an odd coincidence that he would happen to pick the example of shooting the wounded (and not, say, abortion) as an example of an evil act that could lead to good things. But strange coincidences do happen, I suppose. And some even professed to remain puzzled about Ledeen's true meaning even after Ledeen spelled it out for us. Read it carefully. Then re-read it. He could not be more clear.:
Now there are several things happening in this masterpiece of fog, sleight of hand, and evil philosophizing and it is important to keep them separate. The first thing is that Ledeen is purporting to help us "think more deeply about the Marine in Fallujah". Now the thing we should be thinking is what I stated at the beginning: wait until the investigation is over. If the Marine deliberately shot a wounded soldier, knowing that he posed no threat, the Marine did evil. Period. End of story. If (as I'm inclined to think) the Marine, in attempting to assess a difficult situation caused by enemy troops faking wounds and death in order to ambush our guys, mistakenly killed a wounded man, then he did not do evil. That's sane moral reasoning and if that's what Ledeen had wanted to do, he would have said that.
But that's not what Ledeen chose to do. Instead, Ledeen chose to suggest that *even if* the Marine had committed cold-blooded premeditated murder... well, is that really such a bad thing?
The core of Ledeen's argument is found in the bold-faced text above. Under the illusion of "defending one of our boys" what Ledeen is, in fact, doing is smuggling in purely Machiavellian reasoning which says "Sometimes you have to deliberately commit mortal sin--not make a mistake in judgment--for the sake of the greater good."
Now we are left with only two possible explanations for this fogged and confusing moral reasoning that never quite comes out and says what it really means. One possibility is that Ledeen is a terrible writer who can't use words to express himself clearly. If so, what's he doing at the helm of a think tank and writing for NRO?
The other possibility is that Ledeen knows precisely what he is doing as he takes advantage of the passions of war. That, I fear, is actually the case. I think Ledeen is deliberately choosing to manipulate his readers into a subtle shift from saying "Sometimes its hard to know how to do the right thing, but we must always try to do it and we can never say the ends justify the means" to saying "Sometimes you have to 'be willing to "enter into evil" and do "things we know to be morally wrong" for the sake of the Greater Good. In short, he's trying (at present) to get people to say "Even *if* the soldier committed cold-blooded murder, that's okay because he did it for the Greater Good."
It is worth noting that this expresses, not to put too fine a point on it, far more contempt for the soldier than even Ted Rall on his worst days. It says, "Hey! He may well be a murderer! But that's okay! Murder (which I say is evil out of one side of my mouth) may be one of those "things we know to be morally wrong" but which failure to do may "unleash great evil".
Personally, I prefer to give the Marine more credit and hope that he was trying to do the right thing, not enlist him as a poster boy for Ledeen's evil suggestion to go ahead and "enter into evil" by "doing things we know to be morally wrong".
Now Ledeen is no Catholic and if he's a Machiavellian who worships power and wishes to get in touch with his inner Joe D'Hippolito, then I have to take that as a fact of life about which I can do little. But what has appalled me in this discussion has been the volume of comments from various Faithful Conservative Catholic[TM] readers who, because he is a political conservative, have been just as willing to make excuses for his evil philosophy just as liberal Catholics were to make excuses for John Kerry's abortion fanaticism. Point this out and you get called a Church Lady, you get excuses for Ledeen up the wazoo, you get Ledeen's own patented rhetoric about being an "abstract theorist" etc. ad nauseam.
I'm not the only one who has been appalled (thanks be to God). Here's a sample of the mail:
So it's nice to know I'm not alone. But it's awfully depressing to see how quickly we can indulge the urge to trim the Faith to suit our political tribe.
Romans 3:8 could not be more clear. Those who say "Let us do evil that good may result" are "justly condemned". You can hurl insults at that verse, you can nuance it into the ether, you can practice euphemism, puzzle of over what the meaning "is" is, and fog the air with tergiversation till the cows come home. You can, as people like Ledeen and D'Hippolito prefer to do, call people who insist on the immutable truth of that teaching as a first principle of moral reasoning "abstract theorists" and pooh pooh them while you try to figure out a way to square the moral circle. But at the end of the day, a Catholic can no more defend Ledeen's suggestion that we do evil that good may come than he can defend Kerry's advocacy for sticking scissors in a baby's brain.
That's pretty much all I've got to say on that. If it's still unclear, then there is nothing more I can say that will clarify it.
...then let this post try to sum up the problem I'm having with both Ledeen and his defenders.
Let's recap:
A Marine shoots a wounded man under disputable circumstances. As I have repeatedly said, I think the soldier needs be granted a *lot* of slack since we know stuff like this has been pulled repeatedly by the enemy. In other words, I reject the automatic accusation that the soldier deliberately chose to do evil. Indeed, it is an open question as to whether any evil (in the sense of "sin") was committed at all. (Death is always an evil, but not always a sin.) He may have been doing the best he could to assess a very tricky situation.
Now comes Ledeen, arguing that it would have been better to blow Hitler away in the trench when he was laying there wounded. This would, I suppose, have been a useful thing to say if we knew the mind of God and could foresee the future. But since we don't and can't, it's a meaningless and sinister proposition that suggests (and is patently *meant* to suggest) that sometimes the ends justify the means. And it's an excerpt from a book called "Machiavelli on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli's Iron Rules Are as Timely and Important Today as Five Centuries Ago". Oh, but we can't really tell if Ledeen agrees with Machiavelli or not. (See Shea's Rule of Satanic Complexification and Over-Simplicity).
Numerous Catholic readers read this piece. It's subtitled "What Would Machiavelli Do") and it concludes:
Murder is surely evil, yet every reasonable person will agree that the cause of good would have been greatly advanced if Henry Tandey had killed Hitler in that trench. History abounds with examples of good actions furthering the cause of evil...
Now, as I pointed out, a bishop who wrote
Sexual abuse of children is surely evil, yet is it really the case that all sex with children is truly sexual 'abuse'? History abounds with examples of happy relationships between adults and people our culture would label 'minors'.
would probably not get all the chin-stroking benefit of the doubt that so many of my ultra-complexifcated readers were eager to give Ledeen. They might detect just the teensy weensiest service of some sort of agenda there.
But many of my readers were oh-so-unclear about what Ledeen was really getting at. True, it was an odd coincidence that he would happen to pick the example of shooting the wounded (and not, say, abortion) as an example of an evil act that could lead to good things. But strange coincidences do happen, I suppose. And some even professed to remain puzzled about Ledeen's true meaning even after Ledeen spelled it out for us. Read it carefully. Then re-read it. He could not be more clear.:
MARINE [Michael Ledeen]
I got a lot of anguished emails about Machiavelli and the British soldier who had the chance to kill Hitler in the First World War. I suppose it's hard for people to deal with Machiavelli out of context, and I should have written more, so I apologize for laziness.
My point--Machiavelli's point, actually--is that real decisions in real life are almost never easy, and those called upon to make those tough decisions have to be willing to "enter into evil." Sometimes by doing that--as briefly as possible, he implores us--means doing things we know to be morally wrong. I gave the Hitler example because Machiavelli knows, as every grownup thoughtful person knows, that it is also possible to do the morally right thing, and by so doing, we unleash great evil.
Life is tough. And the abstract moralists are not a very good guide for leaders, at least not all the time.
Obviously I was trying to get people to think more deeply about the Marine in Fallujah. And along those lines, I urge everyone to look at the wonderful remarks by "Baldilocks" on her excellent blog.
She reminds us--and many of my correspondents got this wrong--that the Marine did not shoot a PRISONER. He shot an enemy combatant. And his own experience had shown how dangerous such persons were, even--maybe especially--those who appeared severely wounded.
Now there are several things happening in this masterpiece of fog, sleight of hand, and evil philosophizing and it is important to keep them separate. The first thing is that Ledeen is purporting to help us "think more deeply about the Marine in Fallujah". Now the thing we should be thinking is what I stated at the beginning: wait until the investigation is over. If the Marine deliberately shot a wounded soldier, knowing that he posed no threat, the Marine did evil. Period. End of story. If (as I'm inclined to think) the Marine, in attempting to assess a difficult situation caused by enemy troops faking wounds and death in order to ambush our guys, mistakenly killed a wounded man, then he did not do evil. That's sane moral reasoning and if that's what Ledeen had wanted to do, he would have said that.
But that's not what Ledeen chose to do. Instead, Ledeen chose to suggest that *even if* the Marine had committed cold-blooded premeditated murder... well, is that really such a bad thing?
The core of Ledeen's argument is found in the bold-faced text above. Under the illusion of "defending one of our boys" what Ledeen is, in fact, doing is smuggling in purely Machiavellian reasoning which says "Sometimes you have to deliberately commit mortal sin--not make a mistake in judgment--for the sake of the greater good."
Now we are left with only two possible explanations for this fogged and confusing moral reasoning that never quite comes out and says what it really means. One possibility is that Ledeen is a terrible writer who can't use words to express himself clearly. If so, what's he doing at the helm of a think tank and writing for NRO?
The other possibility is that Ledeen knows precisely what he is doing as he takes advantage of the passions of war. That, I fear, is actually the case. I think Ledeen is deliberately choosing to manipulate his readers into a subtle shift from saying "Sometimes its hard to know how to do the right thing, but we must always try to do it and we can never say the ends justify the means" to saying "Sometimes you have to 'be willing to "enter into evil" and do "things we know to be morally wrong" for the sake of the Greater Good. In short, he's trying (at present) to get people to say "Even *if* the soldier committed cold-blooded murder, that's okay because he did it for the Greater Good."
It is worth noting that this expresses, not to put too fine a point on it, far more contempt for the soldier than even Ted Rall on his worst days. It says, "Hey! He may well be a murderer! But that's okay! Murder (which I say is evil out of one side of my mouth) may be one of those "things we know to be morally wrong" but which failure to do may "unleash great evil".
Personally, I prefer to give the Marine more credit and hope that he was trying to do the right thing, not enlist him as a poster boy for Ledeen's evil suggestion to go ahead and "enter into evil" by "doing things we know to be morally wrong".
Now Ledeen is no Catholic and if he's a Machiavellian who worships power and wishes to get in touch with his inner Joe D'Hippolito, then I have to take that as a fact of life about which I can do little. But what has appalled me in this discussion has been the volume of comments from various Faithful Conservative Catholic[TM] readers who, because he is a political conservative, have been just as willing to make excuses for his evil philosophy just as liberal Catholics were to make excuses for John Kerry's abortion fanaticism. Point this out and you get called a Church Lady, you get excuses for Ledeen up the wazoo, you get Ledeen's own patented rhetoric about being an "abstract theorist" etc. ad nauseam.
I'm not the only one who has been appalled (thanks be to God). Here's a sample of the mail:
Once upon a time, American conservatism meant honoring strict, traditional moral norms and restraining Caesar. Now the only thing it seems to represent is relentlessly partisan support of a chest-thumping, head-banging foreign policy to make the world safe for Americanism. Leeden or Hansen
"conservative"? Edmund Burke and Russell Kirk would have rightly labeled them amoral Jacobins panting for their Napoleon.
I really do thank God I'm a Catholic these days, because it renders me partly immune to the high fevers infecting the political Left and Right the past year or two.
It's alarming that people would actually come to the defense of this stuff on a Catholic blog. And I'm astonished that they are treating you like some sort of Enemy of America for simply pointing out the screamingly obvious. I thought this sort of thing would dissipate after the election.
So it's nice to know I'm not alone. But it's awfully depressing to see how quickly we can indulge the urge to trim the Faith to suit our political tribe.
Romans 3:8 could not be more clear. Those who say "Let us do evil that good may result" are "justly condemned". You can hurl insults at that verse, you can nuance it into the ether, you can practice euphemism, puzzle of over what the meaning "is" is, and fog the air with tergiversation till the cows come home. You can, as people like Ledeen and D'Hippolito prefer to do, call people who insist on the immutable truth of that teaching as a first principle of moral reasoning "abstract theorists" and pooh pooh them while you try to figure out a way to square the moral circle. But at the end of the day, a Catholic can no more defend Ledeen's suggestion that we do evil that good may come than he can defend Kerry's advocacy for sticking scissors in a baby's brain.
That's pretty much all I've got to say on that. If it's still unclear, then there is nothing more I can say that will clarify it.
Mothers of Hizbullah Eager to Sacrifice More Children
Well, Michael Ledeen says, "My point--Machiavelli's point, actually--is that real decisions in real life are almost never easy, and those called upon to make those tough decisions have to be willing to "enter into evil." Sometimes by doing that--as briefly as possible, he implores us--means doing things we know to be morally wrong. I gave the Hitler example because Machiavelli knows, as every grownup thoughtful person knows, that it is also possible to do the morally right thing, and by so doing, we unleash great evil.
Life is tough. And the abstract moralists are not a very good guide for leaders, at least not all the time."
Well, the time it takes for a bomb to go off is quite brief. And golly! Terrorism *did* alert the world to the suffering of Palestinians, which is a Greater Good, so I guess it's all okay for those Moms to "enter into evil" in pursuit of their Greater Good too.
Yessirree, anybody who could find fault with those moms is just one of the pesky "abstract moralists" who don't realize how tough life is and don't appreciate the rough and tumble of Ledeen's flavor of Realpolitik.
Nice to see Ledeen and Arafat on the same page of the Moral Poisoning cookbook and eager to create moral atmospheres that will destroy generations yet unborn. How good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell together in unity.
Well, Michael Ledeen says, "My point--Machiavelli's point, actually--is that real decisions in real life are almost never easy, and those called upon to make those tough decisions have to be willing to "enter into evil." Sometimes by doing that--as briefly as possible, he implores us--means doing things we know to be morally wrong. I gave the Hitler example because Machiavelli knows, as every grownup thoughtful person knows, that it is also possible to do the morally right thing, and by so doing, we unleash great evil.
Life is tough. And the abstract moralists are not a very good guide for leaders, at least not all the time."
Well, the time it takes for a bomb to go off is quite brief. And golly! Terrorism *did* alert the world to the suffering of Palestinians, which is a Greater Good, so I guess it's all okay for those Moms to "enter into evil" in pursuit of their Greater Good too.
Yessirree, anybody who could find fault with those moms is just one of the pesky "abstract moralists" who don't realize how tough life is and don't appreciate the rough and tumble of Ledeen's flavor of Realpolitik.
Nice to see Ledeen and Arafat on the same page of the Moral Poisoning cookbook and eager to create moral atmospheres that will destroy generations yet unborn. How good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell together in unity.
Get Religion: The Site that Puts The Revealer to Shame
Journalists who *really* want to learn how to cover religion should go there and forget The Revealer, which largely appears to exist in order to confirm ignorant journalists in their ignorance.
Today, GR has two particularly fun pieces. One covers the weird reaction of the Left to the basically sane (and therefore terrifying to Leftists) philosophy behind The Incredibles.
The other is a comment on the pathetic state of my Home Town, which pines for neutral "third places" you can go where "everybody knows your name". This being the Soviet of Washington, naturally, Church never occurs to the reporter.
Journalists who *really* want to learn how to cover religion should go there and forget The Revealer, which largely appears to exist in order to confirm ignorant journalists in their ignorance.
Today, GR has two particularly fun pieces. One covers the weird reaction of the Left to the basically sane (and therefore terrifying to Leftists) philosophy behind The Incredibles.
The other is a comment on the pathetic state of my Home Town, which pines for neutral "third places" you can go where "everybody knows your name". This being the Soviet of Washington, naturally, Church never occurs to the reporter.
Fairy Tales Can Come True/It Can Happen to You
...when you're Young and Catholic!
Tim Drake's latest nifty new book. Also, check out the "Young Catholics" site and the various profiles of young Catholics
...when you're Young and Catholic!
Tim Drake's latest nifty new book. Also, check out the "Young Catholics" site and the various profiles of young Catholics
Another Prophet Bites the Dust
A reader writes in response to this post:
No, Gentle Reader. You see, it turns out I'm interesting trying to tell the truth, not in studiously ignoring things. Nobody ever said the Stupid Party was a monolith. However, the fact remains that virtually the very first act of the Stupid Party was to give a clown like Arlen Specter control of the most important domestic agenda--the appointment of judges. And now we've got dopes out there defending that with stupendously... naive? cynical? both? statements like "But this won’t be like Bork… He’s on ‘short leash’".
Sure.
He got what he wanted. Now it will be back to business as usual.
A reader writes in response to this post:
Well, here are some steps in the right direction by the Republican Congress. However, I expect this will be studiously ignored by the "Republicans think pro-lifers are suckas" crowd...
No, Gentle Reader. You see, it turns out I'm interesting trying to tell the truth, not in studiously ignoring things. Nobody ever said the Stupid Party was a monolith. However, the fact remains that virtually the very first act of the Stupid Party was to give a clown like Arlen Specter control of the most important domestic agenda--the appointment of judges. And now we've got dopes out there defending that with stupendously... naive? cynical? both? statements like "But this won’t be like Bork… He’s on ‘short leash’".
Sure.
He got what he wanted. Now it will be back to business as usual.
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Running Around Tomorrow
So... find a basketball player you can punch out or something. It's the latest thing and it will keep you busy.
And for those inclined to see Ledeen just batting his big blue eyes and proposing a mere neutral "food for thought" experiment, let's try one of our own, shall we?
It's April 2002, the height of the priest abuse crisis. A bishop comes out with a big article in the New York Times which concludes "Sexual abuse of children is surely evil, yet is it really the case that all sex with children is truly sexual 'abuse'? History abounds with examples of happy relationships between adults and people our culture would label 'minors'."
One can, with sufficient applications of sheer self-delusional will, suppose that a bishop would choose that particular time to toss out a "purely theoretical question" such as this. But most normal, sane people would recognize that this is a "thought experiment" that has a 50,000 ton sledgehammer of an agenda behind it--as does Ledeen's.
Okey doke. I'll be back Tuesday.
So... find a basketball player you can punch out or something. It's the latest thing and it will keep you busy.
And for those inclined to see Ledeen just batting his big blue eyes and proposing a mere neutral "food for thought" experiment, let's try one of our own, shall we?
It's April 2002, the height of the priest abuse crisis. A bishop comes out with a big article in the New York Times which concludes "Sexual abuse of children is surely evil, yet is it really the case that all sex with children is truly sexual 'abuse'? History abounds with examples of happy relationships between adults and people our culture would label 'minors'."
One can, with sufficient applications of sheer self-delusional will, suppose that a bishop would choose that particular time to toss out a "purely theoretical question" such as this. But most normal, sane people would recognize that this is a "thought experiment" that has a 50,000 ton sledgehammer of an agenda behind it--as does Ledeen's.
Okey doke. I'll be back Tuesday.
Dan Darling Takes Issue with Me
The Mark Shea Dan imagines has a much more detailed and worked-out view of an entire class of people called "neoconservatives" than the Mark Shea who is typing this blog. The imaginary Mark also has a very detailed knowledge of Michael Ledeen's views and apparently knows and agrees with people who have called him a fascist. I don't know anything about that myself and I nowhere said (or thought) anything about him being a fascist. The imaginary Mark also is tracking something called the AEI (whatever that is) and lumps all supporters of the war in with Ledeen. Again, the real Mark doesn't. Which is why I don't think Dan Darling or, say, Fr. Neuhaus, or George Weigel, or my closest friend are "fascists" or any of those other bad things.
No, my complaint is with Ledeen's very obvious attempt to say, "Let us do evil that good may result" by, say, shooting the wounded lest they go on to do something bad in 20 years. That is simply indefensible. Period. And defenses of his indefensible argument are indefensible too. One can engage in such moral reasoning and be a capitalist, a communist, a fascist, a member of al-Quaeda, a 100% American, or an anarchist. But one cannot be a Catholic or even, I think, a pagan whose intellect has not been corrupted by sin to do it. It was this, and this alone, I was saying. I have no knowledge of or interest in what others have said about Ledeen. I also do not extrapolate to all neocons what Ledeen says. But I think it deeply disturbing the NRO would publish such an argument for evil. I'm glad that Ramesh Ponnuru took issue with it too. And I think Ponnuru would probably describe himself as quite sympathetic to neocons himself.
The Mark Shea Dan imagines has a much more detailed and worked-out view of an entire class of people called "neoconservatives" than the Mark Shea who is typing this blog. The imaginary Mark also has a very detailed knowledge of Michael Ledeen's views and apparently knows and agrees with people who have called him a fascist. I don't know anything about that myself and I nowhere said (or thought) anything about him being a fascist. The imaginary Mark also is tracking something called the AEI (whatever that is) and lumps all supporters of the war in with Ledeen. Again, the real Mark doesn't. Which is why I don't think Dan Darling or, say, Fr. Neuhaus, or George Weigel, or my closest friend are "fascists" or any of those other bad things.
No, my complaint is with Ledeen's very obvious attempt to say, "Let us do evil that good may result" by, say, shooting the wounded lest they go on to do something bad in 20 years. That is simply indefensible. Period. And defenses of his indefensible argument are indefensible too. One can engage in such moral reasoning and be a capitalist, a communist, a fascist, a member of al-Quaeda, a 100% American, or an anarchist. But one cannot be a Catholic or even, I think, a pagan whose intellect has not been corrupted by sin to do it. It was this, and this alone, I was saying. I have no knowledge of or interest in what others have said about Ledeen. I also do not extrapolate to all neocons what Ledeen says. But I think it deeply disturbing the NRO would publish such an argument for evil. I'm glad that Ramesh Ponnuru took issue with it too. And I think Ponnuru would probably describe himself as quite sympathetic to neocons himself.
Not Exactly a Smackdown
But at least Ramesh Ponnuru challenged Ledeen's evil argument. Nice to see not everybody at NRO has embraced Machiavelli.
But at least Ramesh Ponnuru challenged Ledeen's evil argument. Nice to see not everybody at NRO has embraced Machiavelli.
More Good (and Semi-Good) News
A reader writes:
A reader writes:
Got a fundraising letter from St. John Vianney Seminary, the St. Paul-Minneapolis Archdiocesan college seminary. Numbers are up again from 80 to 84, says Fr. William Baer, the rector. Out of 31 new seminarians from dioceses all over, 12 are from Minneapolis-St. Paul archdiocese, bringing the total number of college seminarians up to 28, third highest in US next to Chicago and Newark. (Although he doesn't mention it, our archdiocese is going to ordain more priests this spring than they have in over 40 years.)
Fr. Baer adds:
"Many people ask me why St. John Vianney is so successful. Three reasons: fidelity to the Roman Catholic Church's vision for priesthood; academic excellence; and a dynamic spiritual formation."
Mark, you might also take a look at the new Atlantic Monthly. I don't have it at hand, but in the By the Numbers section they mention a study showing Catholics have the lowest divorce rate (25%) among American Christians. Pentecostals are highest at 44%, while Presbyterians are lowest among Prots (28%). Protestants as a whole are at about 35%. If you can't find it, I'll go find the page numbers.
Leading military historian in Israel and a committed right-wing Israel supporter sez...
Iraq will end like Vietnam.
I hope he's wrong.
Iraq will end like Vietnam.
I hope he's wrong.
Problem: How to Topple the Iranian Gov't Without Dropping Bombs on Them
Bombs tend to irritate people and make them side with their government, no matter how despotic. Patriotism is weird that way.
Bombs tend to irritate people and make them side with their government, no matter how despotic. Patriotism is weird that way.
I nominate "Anthem"
It's a triple threat: atrocious music, wretched lyrics, cringe-making theology. Hands down the worst Catholic hymn actually being sung in parishes, anywhere in the English-speaking world.
It's a triple threat: atrocious music, wretched lyrics, cringe-making theology. Hands down the worst Catholic hymn actually being sung in parishes, anywhere in the English-speaking world.
The Dutch Learn that When Right and Wrong Cease to be King in your City, Pleasure and Pain Assume the Throne
Intemperate in tolerance, they are now suddenly intemperate in intolerance, like drunken men falling off a horse on one side and then falling off on the other.
Democracy only works in a culture that has at least mastered the cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude. Lose those and there is nothing self-sustaining about democracy or civil order.
Intemperate in tolerance, they are now suddenly intemperate in intolerance, like drunken men falling off a horse on one side and then falling off on the other.
Democracy only works in a culture that has at least mastered the cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude. Lose those and there is nothing self-sustaining about democracy or civil order.
God, Manifest Destiny, and the Tide of History Continue to Bless The West With the Riches of Cannibalism
Truly civilized people do the beheading in utero and away from cameras.
Truly civilized people do the beheading in utero and away from cameras.
Yet Another Column Confronting Christians with a Choice Between Obeying Christ and Obeying Right-Wing Rhetoric
Jeff Jacoby's Jewish and so he doesn't have "Love your enemies" in his Bible. However, Christians do. So as tempting as Jacoby's moral reasoning may be to non-Christians thinkers, Christians have a duty to resist this sort of rhetoric, just as they have a duty to reject "Let us do evil that good may result."
I'm hard on Ledeen than Jacoby because, if memory serves, Judaism *does* reject the notion that the end justifies the means. However, if I'm wrong and it doesn't, Christians must, at any rate, reject such thinking.
Jeff Jacoby's Jewish and so he doesn't have "Love your enemies" in his Bible. However, Christians do. So as tempting as Jacoby's moral reasoning may be to non-Christians thinkers, Christians have a duty to resist this sort of rhetoric, just as they have a duty to reject "Let us do evil that good may result."
I'm hard on Ledeen than Jacoby because, if memory serves, Judaism *does* reject the notion that the end justifies the means. However, if I'm wrong and it doesn't, Christians must, at any rate, reject such thinking.
IN LIGHT
For Gerard Bugge
Gerard, we pushed you up the hill
And the wheelchair pushed us back -
This resistance is called death
The human soul is ponderous
When it lives inside the flesh -
Protests against its prison
In this cell a stubborn light -
Through the window and the wall
Illumination, laughter, love
You were known to us through this:
Joyful lightness, flesh of God,
Clothed within a lifespan
Sacred light that we have seen
Joining flame to flame convened
Purified as fire is.
- Pavel Chichikov
For Gerard Bugge
Gerard, we pushed you up the hill
And the wheelchair pushed us back -
This resistance is called death
The human soul is ponderous
When it lives inside the flesh -
Protests against its prison
In this cell a stubborn light -
Through the window and the wall
Illumination, laughter, love
You were known to us through this:
Joyful lightness, flesh of God,
Clothed within a lifespan
Sacred light that we have seen
Joining flame to flame convened
Purified as fire is.
- Pavel Chichikov
More Stupid Party Hubris
First, the Party that used to promise that Caesar was our servant, not our Master, tries to figure out how to grant themselves the power to snoop into your tax return. Then, because it is the Stupid Party after all, the engineers of this brilliant maneuver lie about it.
If Clinton had tried this, there would be hysterics. Fortunately, it's the Good Guys with Manifest Destiny, God, and the Tide of History on their side. So it's okay.
First, the Party that used to promise that Caesar was our servant, not our Master, tries to figure out how to grant themselves the power to snoop into your tax return. Then, because it is the Stupid Party after all, the engineers of this brilliant maneuver lie about it.
If Clinton had tried this, there would be hysterics. Fortunately, it's the Good Guys with Manifest Destiny, God, and the Tide of History on their side. So it's okay.
Young Assassin Fantasy Game
Who could possible doubt such a sincere statement? The money he hopes to make from adolescents drunk on fantasies of violence has *nothing* to do with it.
Kirk Ewing, managing director of the Scottish firm Traffic Games, which developed the game, said he understood some people would be horrified at the concept, but he insisted he and his team had nothing but respect for Kennedy and for history.
Who could possible doubt such a sincere statement? The money he hopes to make from adolescents drunk on fantasies of violence has *nothing* to do with it.
Dawn Eden on the Grinch Who Stole Messiah
The White Witch runs the public schools, making it always winter and never Christmas.
The White Witch runs the public schools, making it always winter and never Christmas.
Another nation benefits from the Light and the Glory Victor Davis Hansen Promises the World
"Sacrifice your children and for you it will be well." Let's inscribe it on the Statue of Liberty right under "Shoot the wounded."
"Sacrifice your children and for you it will be well." Let's inscribe it on the Statue of Liberty right under "Shoot the wounded."
Victor Davis Hansen's Bombastic Hubris About Our Manifest Destiny as Bearers of Light...
...reads very differently when I look at this article about what we in the West are laboring to do to the gift of life. Some money quotes:
Hey! No harm done!
Suppose God (who really does know the future) takes Michael Ledeen's evil advice and decides that our civilization is headed toward creating such a nightmarish future that it needs to be killed now before we can achieve these horrors. I wonder if the editorial staff of NRO will be in a big hurry to print some anti-Hansen about the grave threat we pose to the human race and the need of somebody to bring us enlightenment.
"All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." And brother does that include us.
...reads very differently when I look at this article about what we in the West are laboring to do to the gift of life. Some money quotes:
The risk, they say, is that some human cells will find their way to the developing testes or ovaries, where they might grow into human sperm and eggs. If two such chimeras -- say, mice -- were to mate, a human embryo might form, trapped in a mouse.
"Not everyone agrees that this would be a terrible result.
"What would be so dreadful?" asked Ann McLaren, a renowned developmental biologist at the University of Cambridge in England. After all, she said, no human embryo could develop successfully in a mouse womb. It would simply die, she told the academy. No harm done.
"But others disagree -- if only out of fear of a public backlash."!
Hey! No harm done!
Now Weissman says he is thinking about making chimeric mice whose brains are 100 percent human. He proposes keeping tabs on the mice as they develop. If the brains look as if they are taking on a distinctly human architecture -- a development that could hint at a glimmer of humanness -- they could be killed, he said. If they look as if they are organizing themselves in a mouse brain architecture, they could be used for research.
"So far this is just a "thought experiment," Weissman said, but he asked the university's ethics group for an opinion anyway.
"Everyone said the mice would be useful," he said. "But no one was sure if it should be done."
Suppose God (who really does know the future) takes Michael Ledeen's evil advice and decides that our civilization is headed toward creating such a nightmarish future that it needs to be killed now before we can achieve these horrors. I wonder if the editorial staff of NRO will be in a big hurry to print some anti-Hansen about the grave threat we pose to the human race and the need of somebody to bring us enlightenment.
"All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." And brother does that include us.
Stupid Party Hubris
Exhibit A: Alberto "I just wanna see how much torture we can get away with" Gonzalez. Eve Tushnet sez "ship him to Syria. See how he likes it". I'm with her.
Exhibit B: GOP Bigwigs to Pro-life Stepin Fetchit's: "Thanks for your help suckas! What? Are you saps feeling used? Whaddaya gonna do about it? Vote for Hillary? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Exhibit A: Alberto "I just wanna see how much torture we can get away with" Gonzalez. Eve Tushnet sez "ship him to Syria. See how he likes it". I'm with her.
Exhibit B: GOP Bigwigs to Pro-life Stepin Fetchit's: "Thanks for your help suckas! What? Are you saps feeling used? Whaddaya gonna do about it? Vote for Hillary? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
A reader asks
My answer: destroy any regime that provides support to al-Aqaeda.
Experts have analyzed the tape bin Ladin released before the election. They say to pay close attention to his clothes. The robes he wears are not like those you'd find on a rich Saudi, or in the boarder regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. They're very much like what you'd expect to find in Iran.
Iran has nuclear fuel for its power plants, though they may not have the capability to enrich uranium to bomb making purity. They could, however, supply enough nuclear material to make an Oklahoma City type bomb very, very dirty.
Do we have an obligation to go after Iran if it can be proven that they are supplying arms and comfort to those directly responsible for Sept. 11; OBL and al Qaeda? Does that change if the enemy is potentially planning an attack against the United States using conventional weapons jacketed with nuclear materials (keeping in mind, a dirty bomb may not technically be a weapon of mass destruction so much as a weapon of mass economic impact or simply a weapon of mass inconvenience)?
My answer: destroy any regime that provides support to al-Aqaeda.
NOR Continues to Make Itself Progressively More Worthless
That a once-great Catholic journal should spend so much time bayonetting a fine Catholic like David Morrison both grieves and outrages me.
Pathetic. Just pathetic.
That a once-great Catholic journal should spend so much time bayonetting a fine Catholic like David Morrison both grieves and outrages me.
Pathetic. Just pathetic.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
Gerard Bugge's Brother writes:
God bless you, Gerard. May you dwell forever in the Light you loved, through Jesus Christ.
And may God grant you solace and comfort in this sorrowful time, Bill. You and all your family.
Hi Mark,
Many wonderful comments on my brother.
Here's his final arrangements in case you want to post them:
Gerard Serafin’s farewell:
Sunday, November 21:
Ambrose Funeral Home
1328 Sulphur Springs Road
Arbutus, Maryland 21227
(410) 242-2211
Viewing 3PM to 5PM and 7PM to 9PM
Monday, November 22:
St. Benedicts Church
2612 Wilkens Avenue
Baltimore, Maryland 21223
(410) 947-4988
Viewing 9AM to 11AM
Mass 11AM
------------------------------
St. Mary’s Church
109 Duke of Gloucester Street
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
(410) 263-2396
Burial
God bless you, Gerard. May you dwell forever in the Light you loved, through Jesus Christ.
And may God grant you solace and comfort in this sorrowful time, Bill. You and all your family.
Perhaps the Most Evil Thing NRO Has Ever Published
Michael Ledeen perfects his Joe D'Hippolito impression.
His basic point: "Let us do evil that good may result." I sincerely hope *somebody* at NRO smacks down this deeply sinister kind of thinking. Hell, if you can shoot wounded people because of what they *might* do 30 years from now, why not just abort them and save the cost of child rearing? This kind of moral reasoning is no different from D'Hippolito's "slaughter civilian populations because they could grow up to become terrorists" rationale for nuclear mass murder. Except of course that D'Hippolito's sociopathic rantings are known only to his unfortunate victims at St. Blog's while Ledeen is an alleged respectable writer for a major conservative publication. If this is any indication of where "conservatism" is going then I will get off the train right now.
Despicable.
Michael Ledeen perfects his Joe D'Hippolito impression.
His basic point: "Let us do evil that good may result." I sincerely hope *somebody* at NRO smacks down this deeply sinister kind of thinking. Hell, if you can shoot wounded people because of what they *might* do 30 years from now, why not just abort them and save the cost of child rearing? This kind of moral reasoning is no different from D'Hippolito's "slaughter civilian populations because they could grow up to become terrorists" rationale for nuclear mass murder. Except of course that D'Hippolito's sociopathic rantings are known only to his unfortunate victims at St. Blog's while Ledeen is an alleged respectable writer for a major conservative publication. If this is any indication of where "conservatism" is going then I will get off the train right now.
Despicable.
The Only Thing Worse than Being the Stupid Party Would Be the Stupid Hubris Party
And there are signs of that. More on it later.
And there are signs of that. More on it later.
Mike Dubruiel and Amy Welborn are Proud New Parents!
Michael Jacob Dubruiel is cute as a button.
He had no comment. God is reported to have said, "It is very good."
Michael Jacob Dubruiel is cute as a button.
He had no comment. God is reported to have said, "It is very good."
Thursday, November 18, 2004
Gerard Serafin, RIP
I am saddened to report that Gerard Serafin of Praise of Glory has died.
I first got to know Gerard over on bit.listserv.catholic. He was a constant luminous presence and made it a very careful practice to try to see and reflect, as he called it, the beauty of holiness. His blog shows that. Gerard was an imperfect man and a penitent (as who isn't?). But he always seemed to me to be a model of what a Christian penitent should be and I was always grateful for him. I thought and think that he was among the best of us and I shall miss him.
May his soul and all the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace, through Christ our Lord. Amen.
I am saddened to report that Gerard Serafin of Praise of Glory has died.
I first got to know Gerard over on bit.listserv.catholic. He was a constant luminous presence and made it a very careful practice to try to see and reflect, as he called it, the beauty of holiness. His blog shows that. Gerard was an imperfect man and a penitent (as who isn't?). But he always seemed to me to be a model of what a Christian penitent should be and I was always grateful for him. I thought and think that he was among the best of us and I shall miss him.
May his soul and all the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace, through Christ our Lord. Amen.
A reader writes concerning my take on Stone's "Alexander" pic
It's quite true that pederasty is a fact of ancient Greek culture. However, the theory that went with it was rather alien to moderns. The idea was that you become like that which you love and since a good Greek wanted to be a man and not an idiotic worthless woman, buggery was the way to go. But just as present in ancient Greek culture was the idea that you were basically suffering a protracted adolescence if you didn't knock it off and take a wife (to breed sons for the service of the polis) when you became a man. In a curious sense, "love" or "romance" in the modern (or more properly "medieval") sense of the word had little to do with it. That sort of thinking doesn't jibe well with the Hollywood mindset which is dominated entirely by feelings and if it shows up in Stone's latest bit of agitprop I will be very surprised.
What comes through in the Stone interview, of course, is the standard issue notion that things were great in antiquity when it came to celebration of polymorphous perversity and that the great calamity was the coming of Christianity which cruelly squelched free spirits like Alexander's from being able to explore their sexuality in all its diversity. One wonders when Stone is going to do a film on Caligula. He boldly went places that Alexander never went and had even more diverse experiences. Yet oddly, Hollywood has not (yet) portrayed this as heroic.
What's interesting, of course, is that the ancients noted, but were not especially interested in Alexander's sexual adventures. The reason they called him "the Great" is *exactly* the reason that Stone would hate: because he was an Imperial Conqueror (precisely what Stone hates and accuses America of being).
This is slightly unfair, in that you cannot deal correctly with ancient Greek social life unless you deal with the fact of paederasty in it. And there is solid evidence in the primary sources for Alexander's love-interests. I haven't seen the movie, so can't say whether Stone has attempted to make ancient homosexual equivalent to the modern, which it isn't.
It's quite true that pederasty is a fact of ancient Greek culture. However, the theory that went with it was rather alien to moderns. The idea was that you become like that which you love and since a good Greek wanted to be a man and not an idiotic worthless woman, buggery was the way to go. But just as present in ancient Greek culture was the idea that you were basically suffering a protracted adolescence if you didn't knock it off and take a wife (to breed sons for the service of the polis) when you became a man. In a curious sense, "love" or "romance" in the modern (or more properly "medieval") sense of the word had little to do with it. That sort of thinking doesn't jibe well with the Hollywood mindset which is dominated entirely by feelings and if it shows up in Stone's latest bit of agitprop I will be very surprised.
What comes through in the Stone interview, of course, is the standard issue notion that things were great in antiquity when it came to celebration of polymorphous perversity and that the great calamity was the coming of Christianity which cruelly squelched free spirits like Alexander's from being able to explore their sexuality in all its diversity. One wonders when Stone is going to do a film on Caligula. He boldly went places that Alexander never went and had even more diverse experiences. Yet oddly, Hollywood has not (yet) portrayed this as heroic.
What's interesting, of course, is that the ancients noted, but were not especially interested in Alexander's sexual adventures. The reason they called him "the Great" is *exactly* the reason that Stone would hate: because he was an Imperial Conqueror (precisely what Stone hates and accuses America of being).
Next Stop: Woodward
The talk last night went well. Fueled by a fine steak dinner whomped up by ordained gourmand Fr. Shane (replete with Bearnaise (sp?) sauce of his own concoction), I was fortified to talk the hind leg off a donkey. However, since my audience consisted of the good people of Alva and parts surrounding I restrained my garrulousness to 45 minutes and a good time was had by all.
Then it was back to the Rectory to watch "Futurama" DVDs to our hearts content.
This morning I went to Mass with Fr. Shane celebrating and met some of the lovely morning Mass folk, including a retired history prof named "Dave" who is setting himself the task of reading the great 19th century novelists. Last year it was Henry James. This year it's "War and Peace".
To be a Catholic is to attempt great things.
Speaking of great things, Bearnaise sauce is also terrific on Eggs Benedict, which Padre made this morning after Mass. Total sensory yumminess.
In a bit, we will be heading off to Woodward for my final talk this evening (on Sacred Tradition). We'll stay there overnight and then blast off for OKC tomorrow and the long schlep home. I doubt there will be time for me to write tomorrow what with the 12 hours of travel. But I do want to say that Oklahoma is a wonderful place full of solid, normal, decent folk (a fact I find to be true most places I go).
So my gratitude to the hard-working Fr. Shane Tharp (who will, by the way, have a piece in Crisis soon) and to all the priests of Ragemonkeydom and parts surrounding. I much appreciate the chance to come out and experience the mutual encouragement of the Holy Spirit. Shalom in Jesus Christ, y'all!
The talk last night went well. Fueled by a fine steak dinner whomped up by ordained gourmand Fr. Shane (replete with Bearnaise (sp?) sauce of his own concoction), I was fortified to talk the hind leg off a donkey. However, since my audience consisted of the good people of Alva and parts surrounding I restrained my garrulousness to 45 minutes and a good time was had by all.
Then it was back to the Rectory to watch "Futurama" DVDs to our hearts content.
This morning I went to Mass with Fr. Shane celebrating and met some of the lovely morning Mass folk, including a retired history prof named "Dave" who is setting himself the task of reading the great 19th century novelists. Last year it was Henry James. This year it's "War and Peace".
To be a Catholic is to attempt great things.
Speaking of great things, Bearnaise sauce is also terrific on Eggs Benedict, which Padre made this morning after Mass. Total sensory yumminess.
In a bit, we will be heading off to Woodward for my final talk this evening (on Sacred Tradition). We'll stay there overnight and then blast off for OKC tomorrow and the long schlep home. I doubt there will be time for me to write tomorrow what with the 12 hours of travel. But I do want to say that Oklahoma is a wonderful place full of solid, normal, decent folk (a fact I find to be true most places I go).
So my gratitude to the hard-working Fr. Shane Tharp (who will, by the way, have a piece in Crisis soon) and to all the priests of Ragemonkeydom and parts surrounding. I much appreciate the chance to come out and experience the mutual encouragement of the Holy Spirit. Shalom in Jesus Christ, y'all!
Even the Soviet of Washington thinks gay marriage is a bad idea
It's gonna take some big league judicial tyranny to cram this down the throats of the American people if even Washingtonians won't go for it.
One more reason the Dems are losers.
It's gonna take some big league judicial tyranny to cram this down the throats of the American people if even Washingtonians won't go for it.
One more reason the Dems are losers.
Is anybody surprised by this?
Um, the nature of a fanatic is that he doesn't give up. Did anybody expect Fallujah to result in terrorists saying, "Yikes! I didn't realize we'd angered you so. Never mind! We give up!"
File under "Analysis shows water is wet."
Um, the nature of a fanatic is that he doesn't give up. Did anybody expect Fallujah to result in terrorists saying, "Yikes! I didn't realize we'd angered you so. Never mind! We give up!"
File under "Analysis shows water is wet."
What's the difference between Fidel Castro and Walter Cronkite?
Castro shows more restraint in making insane claims. He waits a couple of weeks to make the loony claim that Bush was behind the Bin Laden tape. Uncle Walt says it instantaneously.
The diabolical Karl Rove: he controls the weather too.
Castro shows more restraint in making insane claims. He waits a couple of weeks to make the loony claim that Bush was behind the Bin Laden tape. Uncle Walt says it instantaneously.
The diabolical Karl Rove: he controls the weather too.
Oliver Stone Instructs Us that Homosexuality is the Source and Summit of All Truly Civilized People
Of course, he does history as accurately here as he did with "JFK". Enlisting the ancient in the service of modern agitprop is a favorite (and embarrassing) trait of modern filmmakers. I have a feeling this flick will be as cringemaking as Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood", only without the rigorous fidelity to historical accuracy.
Of course, he does history as accurately here as he did with "JFK". Enlisting the ancient in the service of modern agitprop is a favorite (and embarrassing) trait of modern filmmakers. I have a feeling this flick will be as cringemaking as Kevin Costner's "Robin Hood", only without the rigorous fidelity to historical accuracy.
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Get Religion Chronicles More of the Rumblings Which May Indicate the Grip of the Loony Secularists is Weakening on the Dems
I still hold out hope that the Indian rank and file in the Party will finally overthrow their godless Swedish masters.
I still hold out hope that the Indian rank and file in the Party will finally overthrow their godless Swedish masters.
Chris Matthews Head X-Ray reveals nothing
Mind you, he's talking about these people
Mind you, he's talking about these people
In the south of Fallujah yesterday, US Marines found the armless, legless body of a blonde woman, her throat slashed and her entrails cut out. Benjamin Finnell, a hospital apprentice with the US Navy Corps, said that she had been dead for a while, but at that location for only a day or two. The woman was wearing a blue dress; her face had been disfigured. It was unclear if the remains were the body of the Irish-born aid worker Margaret Hassan, 59, or of Teresa Borcz, 54, a Pole abducted two weeks ago. Both were married to Iraqis and held Iraqi citizenship; both were kidnapped in Baghdad last month.
Made it to Alva
It's really *really* flat in Oklahoma. Really. Drove for two hours and listened to lots of rock and roll from the 70's: Peter Frampton (whatever happened to that guy?), Stones, Supertramp, Fleetwood Mac. I guess it was the radio station or something. Drifted in and out of consciousness (was it the music?). Got here safe and sound.
Oh! I went to Mass this morning with a herd of adorable little kidlets from the local Catholic school. There was also a lady there who had chatted with me last night. The thing I love about America is it's the only place on earth where a woman with a pronounced Southern twang can introduce herself saying, "Ahm Greek Melkaht and mah uncle was the Melkaht bishop of Jeroosullum". She was great.
Also interesting was the old guy who told me he had woken up one time to find there was an angel in his bed. "The angel was a girl," he said, "but she had muscles on her and I wouldn't want to fight her." He said he went back to sleep and when he awoke, she was gone.
My line of work brings me into contact with the most interesting people.
Anyhow, tonight I talk about the Real Presence in Alva, then it's off to Woodward tomorrow.
Then, Home. Ahhhhh!!!! I'm missing Jan and the boys big time.
It's really *really* flat in Oklahoma. Really. Drove for two hours and listened to lots of rock and roll from the 70's: Peter Frampton (whatever happened to that guy?), Stones, Supertramp, Fleetwood Mac. I guess it was the radio station or something. Drifted in and out of consciousness (was it the music?). Got here safe and sound.
Oh! I went to Mass this morning with a herd of adorable little kidlets from the local Catholic school. There was also a lady there who had chatted with me last night. The thing I love about America is it's the only place on earth where a woman with a pronounced Southern twang can introduce herself saying, "Ahm Greek Melkaht and mah uncle was the Melkaht bishop of Jeroosullum". She was great.
Also interesting was the old guy who told me he had woken up one time to find there was an angel in his bed. "The angel was a girl," he said, "but she had muscles on her and I wouldn't want to fight her." He said he went back to sleep and when he awoke, she was gone.
My line of work brings me into contact with the most interesting people.
Anyhow, tonight I talk about the Real Presence in Alva, then it's off to Woodward tomorrow.
Then, Home. Ahhhhh!!!! I'm missing Jan and the boys big time.
This could be a watershed moment in American politics
The Dems have made a *pro-life* guy their Minority Leader in the Senate.
Here's hoping the good people in the Evil Party can carry the day.
The Dems have made a *pro-life* guy their Minority Leader in the Senate.
Here's hoping the good people in the Evil Party can carry the day.
My Latest on Catholic Exchange
Reality TV and Dinosaurs. I like the latter much better than the former.
Which is a great puzzle given that I am informed that my Protestant background must surely mean that I reject all ideas of evolution.
Someday I will post on the development of my thinking about evolution, creation, etc. It's not what a number of my readers seem to think. I've become much more skeptical about a lot of evolution-speak since becoming a Catholic. Trust me, it's not a holdover from my Protestant days.
However, I also have no big problems with theistic evolution. Mostly I think we are talking about a mystery which necessarily involves the supernatural, but about which I have no definite opinions other than "Gimme a break" when somebody tries to tell me that purely naturalistic accounts explain everything.
Reality TV and Dinosaurs. I like the latter much better than the former.
Which is a great puzzle given that I am informed that my Protestant background must surely mean that I reject all ideas of evolution.
Someday I will post on the development of my thinking about evolution, creation, etc. It's not what a number of my readers seem to think. I've become much more skeptical about a lot of evolution-speak since becoming a Catholic. Trust me, it's not a holdover from my Protestant days.
However, I also have no big problems with theistic evolution. Mostly I think we are talking about a mystery which necessarily involves the supernatural, but about which I have no definite opinions other than "Gimme a break" when somebody tries to tell me that purely naturalistic accounts explain everything.
Makes me glad I voted
Rossi ahead by *19* votes in Washington gubernatorial election.
No doubt this is due to Karl Rove's all-encompassing octopus of Evil.
Rossi ahead by *19* votes in Washington gubernatorial election.
No doubt this is due to Karl Rove's all-encompassing octopus of Evil.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
“What if it’s going to Auschwitz?”
Suitably tart rejoinder to some of the meaningless sentimentality dished out in The Polar Express. (Please do read the review for the crushing context of that rejoinder.)
Suitably tart rejoinder to some of the meaningless sentimentality dished out in The Polar Express. (Please do read the review for the crushing context of that rejoinder.)
Everybody will yell at me for this
...but I wish Powell had stayed and am fretful to see the Administration become more and more dominated completely by voices from inside the End to Evil Hothouse. I think Powell served an important role in providing a critical voice that did not go with the Party Line. I suspect mischief and blindness will result from it.
But, of course, I'm just an idiot who wishes the Administration had made a coherent just war case.
...but I wish Powell had stayed and am fretful to see the Administration become more and more dominated completely by voices from inside the End to Evil Hothouse. I think Powell served an important role in providing a critical voice that did not go with the Party Line. I suspect mischief and blindness will result from it.
But, of course, I'm just an idiot who wishes the Administration had made a coherent just war case.
Places the Right Drives me Crazy
Here's the story on the Marine who shot the unarmed, wounded insurgent. My tendency is to cut a lot of slack to this guy till we know what happened. Being in battle for eight days straight, plus being wounded, plus knowing the suicidal treachery of the insurgents, counts for a great deal in weighing the actions of the soldier. My response to this is not the same as with Abu Ghraib, where there's a lot premeditated and coordinated cruelty and abuse of power happening.
That said, when you look in at Lucianne.com and their remark on the story is "Maybe Marine should have put panties on his head?" you do get the sense that, for some on the Right, it would not make a bit of difference if the Marine were found to have shot a perfectly innocent man in cold blood. In advance of the investigation, the outcome is already settled: our troops are incapable of war crimes and the raghead had it coming.
That's a fine formula for evil. Happily, the military takes such things much more seriously than armchair pundits. But it illustrates, once again, that it isn't just the Left that's got some serious blind spots.
I hope this incident doesn't get blown up into The Defining Moment of Fallujah (as my reader Chris is no doubt eager to do). Such things happen in war and, as I say, I'm content to wait for the investigation. But being content to wait also means being content to avoid the knee-jerk attempt of Lucianne.com types to instantly exonerate what could, after all, be an act of cold-blooded murder.
Here's the story on the Marine who shot the unarmed, wounded insurgent. My tendency is to cut a lot of slack to this guy till we know what happened. Being in battle for eight days straight, plus being wounded, plus knowing the suicidal treachery of the insurgents, counts for a great deal in weighing the actions of the soldier. My response to this is not the same as with Abu Ghraib, where there's a lot premeditated and coordinated cruelty and abuse of power happening.
That said, when you look in at Lucianne.com and their remark on the story is "Maybe Marine should have put panties on his head?" you do get the sense that, for some on the Right, it would not make a bit of difference if the Marine were found to have shot a perfectly innocent man in cold blood. In advance of the investigation, the outcome is already settled: our troops are incapable of war crimes and the raghead had it coming.
That's a fine formula for evil. Happily, the military takes such things much more seriously than armchair pundits. But it illustrates, once again, that it isn't just the Left that's got some serious blind spots.
I hope this incident doesn't get blown up into The Defining Moment of Fallujah (as my reader Chris is no doubt eager to do). Such things happen in war and, as I say, I'm content to wait for the investigation. But being content to wait also means being content to avoid the knee-jerk attempt of Lucianne.com types to instantly exonerate what could, after all, be an act of cold-blooded murder.
Van Gogh Viciously Attacked and Lampooned Both Jews and Christians
...yet, oddly, no Christian or Jew thought to shoot him, cut his throat, and pin a death threat to civilization to his corpse with a knife.
Can you name the religion of the person who *did* think to do this?
...yet, oddly, no Christian or Jew thought to shoot him, cut his throat, and pin a death threat to civilization to his corpse with a knife.
Can you name the religion of the person who *did* think to do this?
Leave a blog for a few days and watch what happens
Two points:
Anonymous: My readers were right. I don't like anonymous posters. I like them even less when they use my blog to advocate for crimes against humanity like the nuclear slaughter of civilian populations. Please consider yourself as welcome on my blog as Frances Kissling of Catholics for a Free Choice. Crimes that cry out to God for vengeance are sinful even when they appeal to the sensibilities of radical right wing militarist types and not radical left wing pro-abortion types.
Second:
Somehow or other my reiteration of the perfectly clear biblical teaching of Mark 11:25 (Must I really repeat it again?) has morphed in the mind of some of my readers into "smug self-congratulation". Coupled with this is the peculiar claim that you can loathe Arafat enough to rejoice over his death, yet be distant from him enough that you have no obligation to forgive him or hope for his salvation. I continue to not buy this. I much prefer the honesty of one reader who says frankly, that Arafat's sins effect us all (which is perfectly true) and that she can't bring herself to forgive him, but has handed him over to God. That's a very healthy start and if that's all you can do, then God is pleased with that.
I don't reiterate Mark 11:25 because I'm such a saint. I loathe forgiving, just like most of you. Forgiving sucks and I'm bad at it. So does submitting to surgery. But my experience has been that forgiving cures spiritual cancer and refusal to forgive metastasizes it.
Bottom line: if somebody's death is cause for rejoicing, that's a general indication that you have *something* against them and therefore something to forgive. If somebody's death doesn't ocassion a little song in your heart, probably you have nothing against them and nothing to forgive.
Two points:
Anonymous: My readers were right. I don't like anonymous posters. I like them even less when they use my blog to advocate for crimes against humanity like the nuclear slaughter of civilian populations. Please consider yourself as welcome on my blog as Frances Kissling of Catholics for a Free Choice. Crimes that cry out to God for vengeance are sinful even when they appeal to the sensibilities of radical right wing militarist types and not radical left wing pro-abortion types.
Second:
Somehow or other my reiteration of the perfectly clear biblical teaching of Mark 11:25 (Must I really repeat it again?) has morphed in the mind of some of my readers into "smug self-congratulation". Coupled with this is the peculiar claim that you can loathe Arafat enough to rejoice over his death, yet be distant from him enough that you have no obligation to forgive him or hope for his salvation. I continue to not buy this. I much prefer the honesty of one reader who says frankly, that Arafat's sins effect us all (which is perfectly true) and that she can't bring herself to forgive him, but has handed him over to God. That's a very healthy start and if that's all you can do, then God is pleased with that.
I don't reiterate Mark 11:25 because I'm such a saint. I loathe forgiving, just like most of you. Forgiving sucks and I'm bad at it. So does submitting to surgery. But my experience has been that forgiving cures spiritual cancer and refusal to forgive metastasizes it.
Bottom line: if somebody's death is cause for rejoicing, that's a general indication that you have *something* against them and therefore something to forgive. If somebody's death doesn't ocassion a little song in your heart, probably you have nothing against them and nothing to forgive.
Back in Enid
Last night went well in Guymon. Had about 175 people turn up from all over tarnation, including Kansas, Texas, New Mexico and the Panhandle. Had a bunch of teens there too, which was fun cuz they were really engaged (and giggly). Frs. Hamilton and Tharp are, 'ow you say?, cards. They enjoy each other's company way too much and get very silly.
I have been remonstrating with Fr. Tharp to get the sacrament of anointing for his bad back, but he's too much of a martyr to go for it. Something about having to be near death. I told him, "I'm right. You're wrong." but the overwhelming majesty of my cocksureness failed to persuade. Time to call in the Archangel Raphael to rough him up.
Anyway, slept (a little) last night and went to Mass this AM before hitting the road.
Oh! I forgot. Fr. Hamilton is a faboo cook who made yummy Italian chicken scallopini and an even yummier dessert involving flaming rum and bananas. Also, I met a guy in Guymon who is a history prof who know both Rod Bennett (author the really terrific book Four Witnesses (Ignatius) and also knows Dale Ahlquist of the American Chesterton Society. He was another casualty of Newman's dictum that "To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant."
People in OK are lovely. Decent, generous, and open. Lots of Hispanic folk in Guymon and, to lesser extent in Enid.
Spent the long drive from Guymon to Enid (4 hours) fiddling with the Mary book and reading parts of it to Fr. Shane. Nothing like reading your work aloud to discover all the awkward parts that don't scan and make no sense.
I saw a Roadrunner! I did not say, "Meep! Meep!" Everything I know is wrong.
Tonight I will be talking about "The Family as the Icon of the Holy Trinity." Tomorrow I'm in Alva, gabbing about the Real Presence. Then it's Woodward and Sacred Tradition.
Please keep me in your prayers that I do a good job and don't say anything stupid.
Last night went well in Guymon. Had about 175 people turn up from all over tarnation, including Kansas, Texas, New Mexico and the Panhandle. Had a bunch of teens there too, which was fun cuz they were really engaged (and giggly). Frs. Hamilton and Tharp are, 'ow you say?, cards. They enjoy each other's company way too much and get very silly.
I have been remonstrating with Fr. Tharp to get the sacrament of anointing for his bad back, but he's too much of a martyr to go for it. Something about having to be near death. I told him, "I'm right. You're wrong." but the overwhelming majesty of my cocksureness failed to persuade. Time to call in the Archangel Raphael to rough him up.
Anyway, slept (a little) last night and went to Mass this AM before hitting the road.
Oh! I forgot. Fr. Hamilton is a faboo cook who made yummy Italian chicken scallopini and an even yummier dessert involving flaming rum and bananas. Also, I met a guy in Guymon who is a history prof who know both Rod Bennett (author the really terrific book Four Witnesses (Ignatius) and also knows Dale Ahlquist of the American Chesterton Society. He was another casualty of Newman's dictum that "To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant."
People in OK are lovely. Decent, generous, and open. Lots of Hispanic folk in Guymon and, to lesser extent in Enid.
Spent the long drive from Guymon to Enid (4 hours) fiddling with the Mary book and reading parts of it to Fr. Shane. Nothing like reading your work aloud to discover all the awkward parts that don't scan and make no sense.
I saw a Roadrunner! I did not say, "Meep! Meep!" Everything I know is wrong.
Tonight I will be talking about "The Family as the Icon of the Holy Trinity." Tomorrow I'm in Alva, gabbing about the Real Presence. Then it's Woodward and Sacred Tradition.
Please keep me in your prayers that I do a good job and don't say anything stupid.
Monday, November 15, 2004
Greetings from Guymon, OK
It's not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
Flew to OKC on Saturday and was met at the airport by Fr. Shane Tharp, who pastors the Church in Alva, OK. He took me through OKC and we stopped and visited the OKC Bombing Memorial. Heart-rending and grimly funny. The heart-rending part was the Memorial to the children killed in the bombing. All the rage and anguish came back looking at the little tiles with children's handprints on them. I tear up writing about it.
Then you turn around and there is the "Oklahoma City Bombing Museum and Gift Shop".
Only in America.
Fr. Shane remembers the day vividly (as does anybody alive that day). He was 25 miles away and felt the vibration from the blast. Awful what fallen man can do.
Anyway, we drove out to Enid and I met the pastor of the parish there, a lovely man who looks uncannily like Robert Morse, the guy who starred in "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying". I crashed about 11 that night and crashed hard. Didn't wake up till 11:04 the next morning--four minutes after Mass started (thank God for alarms on watches). So I stumbled into Mass late (d'oh!).
Yesterday was mostly goof off time except for speaking in the evening, which seemed to go well.
Today, Fr. Shane and I took off a little after noon and drove four hours up into the Panhandle to visit his partner in Ragemonkeyism, Fr. Hamilton. I will speak here tonight, crash, and then return to Enid to talk tomorrow.
I saw real tumbleweeds!
Anyway, I'll write more later. Toodles!
It's not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
Flew to OKC on Saturday and was met at the airport by Fr. Shane Tharp, who pastors the Church in Alva, OK. He took me through OKC and we stopped and visited the OKC Bombing Memorial. Heart-rending and grimly funny. The heart-rending part was the Memorial to the children killed in the bombing. All the rage and anguish came back looking at the little tiles with children's handprints on them. I tear up writing about it.
Then you turn around and there is the "Oklahoma City Bombing Museum and Gift Shop".
Only in America.
Fr. Shane remembers the day vividly (as does anybody alive that day). He was 25 miles away and felt the vibration from the blast. Awful what fallen man can do.
Anyway, we drove out to Enid and I met the pastor of the parish there, a lovely man who looks uncannily like Robert Morse, the guy who starred in "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying". I crashed about 11 that night and crashed hard. Didn't wake up till 11:04 the next morning--four minutes after Mass started (thank God for alarms on watches). So I stumbled into Mass late (d'oh!).
Yesterday was mostly goof off time except for speaking in the evening, which seemed to go well.
Today, Fr. Shane and I took off a little after noon and drove four hours up into the Panhandle to visit his partner in Ragemonkeyism, Fr. Hamilton. I will speak here tonight, crash, and then return to Enid to talk tomorrow.
I saw real tumbleweeds!
Anyway, I'll write more later. Toodles!
Friday, November 12, 2004
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
klahoma, (where the wind comes sweepin' down the plain) is where I'm headed tomorrow. I'll be there all next week, speaking at various parishes, thanks to the energetic efforts of the Catholic Ragemonkeys.
I'll check in next week from the Heart of the Heartland, where it's hundreds of miles to Blue America in every direction.
Meanwhile, in the words of Saruman, "We have work to do!"
Ciao!
klahoma, (where the wind comes sweepin' down the plain) is where I'm headed tomorrow. I'll be there all next week, speaking at various parishes, thanks to the energetic efforts of the Catholic Ragemonkeys.
I'll check in next week from the Heart of the Heartland, where it's hundreds of miles to Blue America in every direction.
Meanwhile, in the words of Saruman, "We have work to do!"
Ciao!
Chris Johnson writes, concerning the possibility that Bin Laden might use a nuke against the US:
In 1913, a man named Norman Angell wrote a book called The Grand Illusion, in which he argued that there would never be a major war in Europe because, if there was, why, millions of people would die and it would utterly destroy the entire geopolitical and economic structure of Europe! That would be... insane!
WWI was a cooperative effort in mass stupidity involving the brightest minds in Europe, all carried out to prove to a rapidly de-christianizing Europe that sin makes you really really really stupid.
I'm praying that we humans will not prove that again.
I would hope Bin Laden is not that stupid. Because if Al-Qaeda ever did use one here, then all bets would be off as would all restraints; anything less than total, savage retaliation would doom the presidency of whoever held the office.
And, on a personal level, in the event of such an attack, I wouldn't want to be a Muslim in this country. For the most part, Americans restrained themselves very well following 9/11. If Islamists set off a nuclear bomb here, I doubt we'd restrain ourselves anywhere near as well. Or even try to.
In 1913, a man named Norman Angell wrote a book called The Grand Illusion, in which he argued that there would never be a major war in Europe because, if there was, why, millions of people would die and it would utterly destroy the entire geopolitical and economic structure of Europe! That would be... insane!
WWI was a cooperative effort in mass stupidity involving the brightest minds in Europe, all carried out to prove to a rapidly de-christianizing Europe that sin makes you really really really stupid.
I'm praying that we humans will not prove that again.
Leftist Dissent in the Church Also Lost the Election
Future developments will have to take care of Reactionary Dissent.
Future developments will have to take care of Reactionary Dissent.
An interesting argument on forgiveness
A number of readers are, not to put to fine a point on it, rejoicing over the death of Arafat (see the comments here). Me: I think some of the hype from his co-thugs is absurd ("His big heart stopped") and I make fun of that. But I also pray God have mercy on him and I think rejoicing over *anybody's* death and cheerfully anticipating their damnation is both wrong and highly dangerous to the soul.
Not surprisingly, I get flak for this. I say "not surprisingly" because, as
I
have
long
maintained,
the most scandalous and repulsive teaching in the entire Catholic corpus of teaching is not about pelvic issues or women priests or any of that junk. It's the demand for forgiveness and love of enemies. Now *there's* an equal opportunity offending Stone of Stumbling. It enrages everybody for the same reason: "Whereto serves mercy but to confront the visage of offense"?
In other words, forgiveness is for real sin, not for foibles, mistakes, excusable blunders, and things we can't help. It's for miserable, dirty bastards who knew exactly what they were doing and did it anyway. And we are commanded to extend to to *everybody* we have anything against.
Everybody.
I didn't say that. Jesus did: "And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against any one; so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses." (Mark 11:25)
There are various ingenious strategies Christians have devised to avoid this demand. Many people simply ignore it. Others offer the "tough love" excuse ("I'm insulting and venting my rage at you *because* I love you"). And some say things like my reader who wrote:
To which I reply:
What you are really saying is that you feel free to identify with Arafat's victims enough to hate him, but you don't identify with Christ enough to forgive him. It's a very convenient philosophy which allows Christians to ignore Christ's commands to forgive anybody who has not directly harmed them (which is practically everybody).
Sorry, there's no wiggling out that way. "And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have ****anything against any one****; so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses." - Mark 11:25
Obviously you have something against Arafat or you would not be so delighted at his death. Next time you pray, you need to think long and hard about Mark 11:25. As to whether Arafat "deserves" heaven, of course he doesn't. Nobody does. But I still hope he somehow found the grace to repent of his sins and get there by the grace of Christ. And whether he did or not, I, in any event, want to extend him my forgiveness and hand him over to God for judgment--who knows what to do with him.
This draws the charge of "fake piety" from one reader, but I assure you that I am quite in earnest. I believe with all my heart that there are few things more destructive to the soul than refusal to forgive. I have... personal reasons for being particularly alert to this danger (and no, they are none of your business). But suffice it to say that refusal to forgive, particularly in the case of the dead, is essentially like drinking poison and expecting the other guy to die. It does nobody any good.
There are, of course, reasons beyond "What's in it for me" to forgive. But God is quite willing to start us off with low reasons ("I fear your just punishment, Lord") if we are not able to embrace high ones ("I abhor my sins because you are all Love, O Lord!") yet. Refusal to extend forgiveness to is, like all sin, ultimately its own punishment.
And, just a reminder, forgiveness does not mean saying "He wasn't really a bad guy." It means saying "He *was* a bad guy who did a lot of bad things--and I forgive him". Then you hand him over to God and get on with life.
A number of readers are, not to put to fine a point on it, rejoicing over the death of Arafat (see the comments here). Me: I think some of the hype from his co-thugs is absurd ("His big heart stopped") and I make fun of that. But I also pray God have mercy on him and I think rejoicing over *anybody's* death and cheerfully anticipating their damnation is both wrong and highly dangerous to the soul.
Not surprisingly, I get flak for this. I say "not surprisingly" because, as
I
have
long
maintained,
the most scandalous and repulsive teaching in the entire Catholic corpus of teaching is not about pelvic issues or women priests or any of that junk. It's the demand for forgiveness and love of enemies. Now *there's* an equal opportunity offending Stone of Stumbling. It enrages everybody for the same reason: "Whereto serves mercy but to confront the visage of offense"?
In other words, forgiveness is for real sin, not for foibles, mistakes, excusable blunders, and things we can't help. It's for miserable, dirty bastards who knew exactly what they were doing and did it anyway. And we are commanded to extend to to *everybody* we have anything against.
Everybody.
I didn't say that. Jesus did: "And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against any one; so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses." (Mark 11:25)
There are various ingenious strategies Christians have devised to avoid this demand. Many people simply ignore it. Others offer the "tough love" excuse ("I'm insulting and venting my rage at you *because* I love you"). And some say things like my reader who wrote:
I see you're out in left field again.
The command is "Love YOUR enemies." Not someone else's. My family didn't die in Nazi ovens, so I couldn't possibly forgive Hitler and his thugs. Nor were my children murdered by one of the many violent butchers that Arafat supported. I have no reason to "forgive" Arafat. I also have NO reason to love a man who slaughtered innocents and stole ruthlessly from his own poor while banking away billions for himself.
I don't recall Christ forgiving those who crucified others. He left that to the victims.
I'd respectfully suggest that you do the same and quit throwing cheap slurs at those of us who don't quite feel that Arafat deserves immediate, if any, entrance into Paradise.
To which I reply:
What you are really saying is that you feel free to identify with Arafat's victims enough to hate him, but you don't identify with Christ enough to forgive him. It's a very convenient philosophy which allows Christians to ignore Christ's commands to forgive anybody who has not directly harmed them (which is practically everybody).
Sorry, there's no wiggling out that way. "And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have ****anything against any one****; so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses." - Mark 11:25
Obviously you have something against Arafat or you would not be so delighted at his death. Next time you pray, you need to think long and hard about Mark 11:25. As to whether Arafat "deserves" heaven, of course he doesn't. Nobody does. But I still hope he somehow found the grace to repent of his sins and get there by the grace of Christ. And whether he did or not, I, in any event, want to extend him my forgiveness and hand him over to God for judgment--who knows what to do with him.
This draws the charge of "fake piety" from one reader, but I assure you that I am quite in earnest. I believe with all my heart that there are few things more destructive to the soul than refusal to forgive. I have... personal reasons for being particularly alert to this danger (and no, they are none of your business). But suffice it to say that refusal to forgive, particularly in the case of the dead, is essentially like drinking poison and expecting the other guy to die. It does nobody any good.
There are, of course, reasons beyond "What's in it for me" to forgive. But God is quite willing to start us off with low reasons ("I fear your just punishment, Lord") if we are not able to embrace high ones ("I abhor my sins because you are all Love, O Lord!") yet. Refusal to extend forgiveness to is, like all sin, ultimately its own punishment.
And, just a reminder, forgiveness does not mean saying "He wasn't really a bad guy." It means saying "He *was* a bad guy who did a lot of bad things--and I forgive him". Then you hand him over to God and get on with life.
Apparently Dan Rather is fixing to do a report on the Scandal
No links, but I'm getting email to that effect. My own suspicion is that CBS knows there's no better way to burnish your reputation that to point to an even bigger scoundrel than yourself and denounce him. All of a sudden, voila!, you are a Voice of Righteousness.
Still, before watching Dan Rather give you whatever he claims are The Hard Facts About the Catholic Church, it might be salutary to read this. Ask yourself, during the broadcast, "Is this knowledge or pseudo-knowledge?"
No links, but I'm getting email to that effect. My own suspicion is that CBS knows there's no better way to burnish your reputation that to point to an even bigger scoundrel than yourself and denounce him. All of a sudden, voila!, you are a Voice of Righteousness.
Still, before watching Dan Rather give you whatever he claims are The Hard Facts About the Catholic Church, it might be salutary to read this. Ask yourself, during the broadcast, "Is this knowledge or pseudo-knowledge?"
Naturalists have Their Religion Threatened
...and respond with name-calling, as is their custom. For an informed discussion of this that gets beyond the quality journalism you've come to associate with CBS News, check out:
...and respond with name-calling, as is their custom. For an informed discussion of this that gets beyond the quality journalism you've come to associate with CBS News, check out:
One of the reasons I oppose the death penalty
... and find it bizarre that many Christians are so enamored of the death penalty that they will argue conversion should have no effect on whether somebody should be executed. In effect, that boils down to saying Man was made for the Law, not the Law for man and reveals a profoundly disordered set of priorities.
... and find it bizarre that many Christians are so enamored of the death penalty that they will argue conversion should have no effect on whether somebody should be executed. In effect, that boils down to saying Man was made for the Law, not the Law for man and reveals a profoundly disordered set of priorities.
Bay Area Bubble Dwellers Make Noises About Leaving US
...but figure out it will involve sacrifice and so drop it.
...but figure out it will involve sacrifice and so drop it.
"We are always blamed. It is the woman who is doing it - not us," said one of the doctors.
Caring, compassionate doctors fail to explain why they get to take all that money for what the woman does.
Nice to see that Kenya is more civilized than we are.
Caring, compassionate doctors fail to explain why they get to take all that money for what the woman does.
Nice to see that Kenya is more civilized than we are.
Germany attempts to create a secular vacuum
The trouble is, vacuums suck. This vacuum will suck in more Bronze Age fanatics.
The trouble is, vacuums suck. This vacuum will suck in more Bronze Age fanatics.
Hard to decide
Should I file this revolting piece of sicknessunder "Show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that despises children" or "What the Muslim world sees when it looks at the West"?
Should I file this revolting piece of sicknessunder "Show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that despises children" or "What the Muslim world sees when it looks at the West"?
Science Helps Men Find New Way to Avoid Love, Meaningful Sex and Commitment
It also helps Blue States (and secular Europe) lose the demographic war.
Hat tip to David Seleb.
It also helps Blue States (and secular Europe) lose the demographic war.
Hat tip to David Seleb.
One advantage of not having a TV is that you can go months without hearing that Jesus is now a fashion statement
It probably helps to live in the Soviet of Washington too.
It probably helps to live in the Soviet of Washington too.
Virgin Mary Appears in Grille Cheese Sandwich
--and is now up for auction on Ebay.
Fr. Bryce Sibley can't have *all* the cool links.
--and is now up for auction on Ebay.
Fr. Bryce Sibley can't have *all* the cool links.
Sheep Stampede to be Tagged for Later Shearing and Slaughter
But it's the latest technology! I *got* to have it or somebody else will be ahead!
But it's the latest technology! I *got* to have it or somebody else will be ahead!
CAEI Readers Are Articulate People
In the olden days, you'd get a code-word packed piece of drivel in the diocesan paper about the need to re-examine the Church's attitude to homosexual behaviour in light of "contemporary Scripture study" etc. blah blah and long-suffering readers would just nod their heads.
(Personal favorite canard: "The *real* sin of Sodom was "lack of hospitality". As Kimberly Hahn once observed: "Homosexual rape is a special form of lack of hospitality.")
However, these days, you get more and more educated and vociferous laypeople like Craig Martin, writing informed and articulate rejoinders to this twaddle.
Kudos to Mr. Martin!
In the olden days, you'd get a code-word packed piece of drivel in the diocesan paper about the need to re-examine the Church's attitude to homosexual behaviour in light of "contemporary Scripture study" etc. blah blah and long-suffering readers would just nod their heads.
(Personal favorite canard: "The *real* sin of Sodom was "lack of hospitality". As Kimberly Hahn once observed: "Homosexual rape is a special form of lack of hospitality.")
However, these days, you get more and more educated and vociferous laypeople like Craig Martin, writing informed and articulate rejoinders to this twaddle.
Kudos to Mr. Martin!
Trapped Bronze Age Fanatics Now Ready for Crushing
Not being a pacifist, I think they should surrender or be rightly and properly crushed.
Oh, and some more Bronze Age Fanatics are being primed for the Surrender or Be Crushed Process in Mosul.
Not being a pacifist, I think they should surrender or be rightly and properly crushed.
Oh, and some more Bronze Age Fanatics are being primed for the Surrender or Be Crushed Process in Mosul.
Christians Lend Help to "Kinsey" Marketing Effort
For a more productive form of educating yourself about this profoundly evil man, check out "The Kinsey Corruption". Quiet education and repulsion, rather than crowd-attracting protests is the sensible approach, I think.
For a more productive form of educating yourself about this profoundly evil man, check out "The Kinsey Corruption". Quiet education and repulsion, rather than crowd-attracting protests is the sensible approach, I think.
Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa
There are days when I'm not real happy with myself. This is one of them:
There have, in fact, been several times, both lately and in the past, where I've been awfully quick to assume bad faith on the part of my readers. I apologize for this. There are places where I disagree with my readers, and *sometimes* I do think my readers ought to know better. But my presumption that this is always the case, and my harsh responses, are uncalled for. I'm sorry.
As to this particular disagreement, I would simply say that Catholic social teaching has always held that a legitimate function of the state is to protect the worker from rapacious exploitation and that life presents more than the stark choice between laissez fair capitalism and Joseph Stalin. My suggestion would be to read Rerum Novarum, Quadreggisimo Anno, Mater et Magistra, and Centissimus Annus, the four great social encyclicals.
Again, apologies for biting people's heads off.
There are days when I'm not real happy with myself. This is one of them:
First, on my recent journey home from a Free Will Baptist minister to
Catholicism I had the pleasure of reading some of your work. It really helped me on
my way and I thank you for that.
Here it comes....
However, your knee jerk reaction to my comments on your blog (below) leave
little to be desired. You openly accused me of putting politics above the
Church. If I have done that show me how and I will wholly and humbly submit myself.
I have read some of the Church's social teaching but cannot find any doctrinal
statements that point me to look to the state to provide for the least of
these. I read the Vatican II document "The Church in the Modern World" last night
and can find references to society performing some of these human welfare
functions but nothing that indicated the gov't must provide this welfare. Why
cannot the Church's social teaching be carried out through private means with the
help and aid of the Church.
If this is in fact anathema to Catholic Social Teaching please tell me
quickly so that I may repent and conform.
There have, in fact, been several times, both lately and in the past, where I've been awfully quick to assume bad faith on the part of my readers. I apologize for this. There are places where I disagree with my readers, and *sometimes* I do think my readers ought to know better. But my presumption that this is always the case, and my harsh responses, are uncalled for. I'm sorry.
As to this particular disagreement, I would simply say that Catholic social teaching has always held that a legitimate function of the state is to protect the worker from rapacious exploitation and that life presents more than the stark choice between laissez fair capitalism and Joseph Stalin. My suggestion would be to read Rerum Novarum, Quadreggisimo Anno, Mater et Magistra, and Centissimus Annus, the four great social encyclicals.
Again, apologies for biting people's heads off.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Okey doke. I'm outta here for the day
For most people, today is Veteran's Day (Kudos to all you guys and gals who have served your country! I salute and revere you--and pray for victory and protection for our troops in Falluja!)
For me, however, it's Honeydew Day. That special moveable feast where my wife gets to say, "Honey, do this. Honey, do that."
Later, dudes and dudettes!
For most people, today is Veteran's Day (Kudos to all you guys and gals who have served your country! I salute and revere you--and pray for victory and protection for our troops in Falluja!)
For me, however, it's Honeydew Day. That special moveable feast where my wife gets to say, "Honey, do this. Honey, do that."
Later, dudes and dudettes!
Hmmmmm....
A reader writes:
"Mark Shea: A more powerful Elton John"
That goes into every press release henceforth.
A reader writes:
Dear Mr Shea
I was just navegating around the web to find new opinions about Chesterton and I see your modified view of him at the light of the Liberation Theology. Im basque and I have to suffer the depressing influence of dozens of crisis-stricken priest that are in love with every kind of secular discipline prone to put together the rags of their existential wreck. I laughed very much with your sayings. You must forgive my almost polinesian english but I only write to you to give my thanks four your humour. I think Chesterton should be born another time to make fun about all the miseries of our contemporary religious life.
Im going to read your other writings. I will add that you look like a more powerful Elton John in your photos.
"Mark Shea: A more powerful Elton John"
That goes into every press release henceforth.
Chinese to Hold Toilet Summit
Just think: that exact combination of words has probably never been written before in the whole history of the world.
Just think: that exact combination of words has probably never been written before in the whole history of the world.
Layer upon layer of cynicism and hypocrisy
Here's another little canker eating away at the heart of the Right.
This guy thinks the French are despicable hypocrites. He also admires them very much and looks forward to the day when we can cynically trample human rights too.
Stare into the abyss and you find the abyss stares into you.
Here's another little canker eating away at the heart of the Right.
This guy thinks the French are despicable hypocrites. He also admires them very much and looks forward to the day when we can cynically trample human rights too.
Stare into the abyss and you find the abyss stares into you.
Interesting piece. Sorry, no link
What I find interesting is that he's basically right insofar as he observes that the MSM has essentially conceded that they don't believe the Left holds possible the very idea of "values" per se. In a world that is essentially defined as a Power Struggle, where is the room for a notion of transcendence--of things that are greater than Whoever Wins? The Left, which is increasingly wedded to secularism and the denial of the transcendent cannot suddenly pull the transcendent out of the hat. It is more and more committed to the postmodern claim that "truth" or "goodness" or "virtue" or "right" is whatever the Winner says it is. So the point becomes not "conform ourselves to the Transcendent" but "Win! And then we shall henceforth decide by main force what truth and goodness shall be."
For all its flaws, the Right (or at least many on the Right) still deny this. But on the Left, the Patrick Nugents are in definite eclipse, particularly in the MSM. So *any* talk of the Transcendent is greeted with embarrassed silence and the reflexive tendency to translate "morality" into "values" and "values" into "conservative values".
I think Nugent's crie de coeur will largely go unanswered, barring a miracle. The problem with the Left is (like all human things) ultimately spiritual, not political. The power of Christ can change all human things--even the Left. But the prelude to that is repentance, not tweaking political strategies.
Values Judgement
-- Patrick J. Nugent
My exposure to American media is a bit limited these days. Living in rural Kenya, I have no television. I listen to National Public Radio by satellite and the BBC on the FM. I also read the Nation, the major national newspaper of Kenya. But even from this distance, I am sighting aspects of the media's treatment of religion that I find disturbing.
Alex Chadwick of NPR's Day to Day exemplified a growing trend in his coverage of President Bush's post-election press conference. He asked guest William Bennett, conservative activist and cultural watchdog, whether Bush's re-election indicates that Americans are now more concerned about "moral values" or "ethics," equating such concern with support for Bush. Bennett took his cue and played along.
The media's increasing use of "ethics" and "moral values" to refer specifically to "conservative moral values" and "conservative ethics" is troubling. This turn of speech suggests that those who do not hold conservative opinions on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, or the war in Iraq are not interested in morality, that conservative positions are the only moral ones, or that those who do not share conservative values have no values at all.
Quite to the contrary, the beliefs that gays should marry, the Iraq war is wrong, or women's reproductive choices should be protected are moral positions. By this I do not mean that these are necessarily morally right, but that they are positions that individuals hold on ethical grounds, and upon which they may legitimately disagree.
Those who opposed the president's re-election employed their own ethical arguments, based on clearly articulated values, about which conservatives were silent or in opposition. For instance, accusations that the president misled the American people about the causes for invading Iraq were based on moral concerns about truthfulness and the human costs of war.
My intention in this column is not to argue that liberal viewpoints on the issues debated in this election are more moral, but that they are, indeed, moral positions. (I am speaking as an evangelical Christian, a missionary training pastors in a burgeoning Pentecostal environment -- and a voting Democrat.) My point, rather, is to raise an alarm that the currency of language about ethics is being dangerously devalued. The Rev. Robert Edgar, general secretary of the National Council of Churches expresses the stakes: "We need to work really hard at reclaiming some language. The religious right has successfully gotten out there shaping personal piety issues -- civil unions, abortion -- as almost the total content of 'moral values."
Indeed, when Americans take opposing positions on marriage, warfare, presidential truth-telling, campaign finance, the politicizing of the judiciary, or options in healthcare policy, we are reflecting and propounding opposing values, ethics, and moral positions -- whether they be conservative, liberal, radical, or flaky. The term "values" is not a synonym for "my values" or "conservative values."
If the careless diction of an increasingly inarticulate media abets political and religious conservatives to monopolize the vocabulary of ethics, then we risk losing our moral tongues entirely.
Patrick J. Nugent, a recorded minister in the Society of Friends (Quakers), is principal of Friends Theological College, Kaimosi, Kenya. He holds a doctorate in the History of Christianity from the University of Chicago.
What I find interesting is that he's basically right insofar as he observes that the MSM has essentially conceded that they don't believe the Left holds possible the very idea of "values" per se. In a world that is essentially defined as a Power Struggle, where is the room for a notion of transcendence--of things that are greater than Whoever Wins? The Left, which is increasingly wedded to secularism and the denial of the transcendent cannot suddenly pull the transcendent out of the hat. It is more and more committed to the postmodern claim that "truth" or "goodness" or "virtue" or "right" is whatever the Winner says it is. So the point becomes not "conform ourselves to the Transcendent" but "Win! And then we shall henceforth decide by main force what truth and goodness shall be."
For all its flaws, the Right (or at least many on the Right) still deny this. But on the Left, the Patrick Nugents are in definite eclipse, particularly in the MSM. So *any* talk of the Transcendent is greeted with embarrassed silence and the reflexive tendency to translate "morality" into "values" and "values" into "conservative values".
I think Nugent's crie de coeur will largely go unanswered, barring a miracle. The problem with the Left is (like all human things) ultimately spiritual, not political. The power of Christ can change all human things--even the Left. But the prelude to that is repentance, not tweaking political strategies.
Elliot Bougis...
on various Protestant last-ditch attempts to avoid being Just Plain Catholic (by inventing something called "Reformed Catholicism") as well as various cogitations on Eastern Orthodoxy.
I like the cut of Elliot's jib.
on various Protestant last-ditch attempts to avoid being Just Plain Catholic (by inventing something called "Reformed Catholicism") as well as various cogitations on Eastern Orthodoxy.
I like the cut of Elliot's jib.
The Latest Insta-Meme: Bush Voters=Sons of the Confederacy
This will come as news to the people of Ohio, Colorado, Arizona, the Dakotas...
This will come as news to the people of Ohio, Colorado, Arizona, the Dakotas...
The 21st Century American Academy...
...where recycled Internet flotsam and jetsam can substitute for course material.
Someday, college students are going to wake up and realize they are *paying* for this flaccid twaddle.
...where recycled Internet flotsam and jetsam can substitute for course material.
Someday, college students are going to wake up and realize they are *paying* for this flaccid twaddle.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
A good friend asks for our prayers
She writes:
She writes:
On Monday morning, while on an errand with my mom, my dad had a small stroke. They got him to the local hospital in Centralia fairly quickly and got the clot broken up with a thrombolytic drug, and then transferred him to the hospital in Olympia to see a neurologist. I went up with my siblings on Monday afternoon and stayed through yesterday, and came back to PDX today to catch up on work. I'll go back to Oly on Friday, stay Saturday, and then be back in Portland to cantor at Mass on Sunday. (*pant, pant).
Dad is actually doing pretty well; they're calling it a transient ischemic attack, and he's able to speak and stand/walk a little bit, though he's very drowsy and seeing double most of the time. The thing I've learned about these, though, is that they can be like little earthquakes along the San Andreas fault - i.e., precursors to The Big One. My sibs and I don't know yet what kind of help the folks will need once Dad is released; we'll have to see how that goes.
Just wanted to let you know so you could pray. Feel free to unleash the power of the blog as well. We'll keep you posted. St. Luke, pray for us!