East vs West

An interesting thing about the Eastern Rite (Byzantine Catholic) liturgy is that the gospel readings are much more likely to be miracle stories than parables. They apparently have no systematic reading of all the gospels over a certain year cycle as the Roman church does. The downside is that if they're going to really know the gospels they'll have to do a lot of reading at home. As a Roman Catholic who hasn't done as much outside church Scripture reading as I ought to have, I do feel like I know the gospels well simply from Sunday Mass attended over decades.

But I like the emphasis they have on the miracle stories especially in the context of the miracle taking place on the altar. With all the Pelegianism in the air, how refreshing to bathe in the mystical Byzantine liturgy.

Thoughts Prompted by an Email

A friend and fellow blogger mentioned in an email yesterday that he's beginning to think what truly divides the Church today isn't abortion or contraception or the liturgy but between those who think salvation is easy and those who believe it is a mighty struggle even for the very best.

That's certainly possible. But I wonder if the Eastern church might have a healthier attitude on matters of salvation by virtue of having been somewhat insulated from the Reformation wars. My extremely limited view is that they don't go to the extreme of salvation as easy or hard, and consequently their liturgy seems neither too distant nor too familiar.

The divide in the Church could also be due to our problem with authority, in our construing freedom with the right to do whatever we want, which Pope Benedict spoke beautifully of recently. Perhaps it also reflects a dvision between those who want a system, who appreciate the coherence of Aquinas, and those who basically eschew system - more like Balthasar. Without a system, the whole thing tends to fall apart intellectually but with a system you run into hard cases that the modern mind simply can't grasp. Reminds me of an interesting comment made on another blog with respect to limbo: "The perils of scholasticism: it makes God a system before He's a lover."

Dreamy


Picture chosen by Steven Riddle on his librarything.com site

Only in America

Julie shares what is apparently an actual, real live book entitled Why is Mommy a Democrat? . But the line o' the day was made by Fidei Defensor: "Wonder how a book would be received if it were entitled "Why is Mommy Pro-Choice?" Indeed.

Tale of Two Religious Channels

Our cable station has two Christian religious channels, both with the word "Word" in them. One is called "Word" network the other "Eternal Word" network.

WORD's list of programming is one long list of names of the hosts. Benny Hinn, Joyce Maier, etc...EWTN's programming almost never includes the name of the presenter. Even a charismatic preacher like Fulton Sheen is listed under his program's title: "Life Is Worth Living". The exception that proves the rule is Scott Hahn, but all other shows appear to be named either for saints, Jesus, or theology, such as "Hail Holy Queen", "St. Thomas More" and "Theology and the Body".

So what's the implicit message one could gather from looking at the program listing of these two religious channels? That for EWTN the message is more important than the messenger?

Top Domestic Threats...



...as written by our dog Obi:

1) Daily incursions on our property by driver driving on wrong side of vehicle. Stops in front of house briefly, I bark and he moves on. He becomes so terrified he doesn't come back for ten minutes and then he stops, paralyzed, on other side of the street until I bark him down the road. My master calls him "the mailman" and seems eager to chase him off too. He runs out to the road to inspect the scene of the crime. Oddly, he opens a small box and takes something out.

2) Weekly incursions on our property by large tank-like conveyance probably in league with the aforementioned mailman. This threat comes in a pair, as if realizing it takes more than just one person to fend off the likes of me. But they are particularly audacious: They steal from my master! They take something my master calls "garbage" though I call it a buffet of still delicious food items, such as nearly empty soup cans, steak bones and stale bread.

3) Quarterly incursions by a man wearing a mask to hide his identity. He goes around with a hose spraying my yard. This is the most outrageous insult and I bark and bark. If I were outside I'd make mincemeat out of him. My master calls him "the chemlawn guy". I'm glad when he steps in my poop.

Your Guide to Papal Histories. Really. I Mean YOUR Guide

Now you can buy a history of the popes in any flavor you desire. I'll rate each guide on a scale of 1-10 where 1 is Sister-Christer-liberal and 10 is Sedevacantist/More-Catholic-than-the-pope. (All scores tongue-in-cheek; survey is mostly by reputation.)

Lives of the Popes by Richard McBrien
Rating: 1

Makes fine kindling wood.

The Papacy - Paul Johnson
Rating: 4

Nice pictures and art.

Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes by Eamon Duffy
Rating: 5

Purportedly one of the most neutral and scholarly of works in print.

The Popes: Histories and Secrets by Claudio Rendina
Rating: 7

Chosen by many local diocesan books stores; was on display at Cincinnati's papal exhibit last year.

Vicars of Christ: A History of the Popes by Charles Coulombe
Rating: 9

For the Trad in us all.
____

Feel free to send me your comments, suggestions, corrections, additions...

He Shoots, He Scores

From Umberto Eco, as quoted in the First Things blog.

It is amazing how many people take that book [The Da Vinci Code] literally, and think it is true. Admittedly, Dan Brown, its author, has created a legion of zealous followers who believe that Jesus wasn’t crucified: he married Mary Magdalene, became the King of France, and started his own version of the order of Freemasons. Many of the people who now go to the Louvre are there only to look at the Mona Lisa, solely and simply because it is at the centre of Dan Brown’s book.

The pianist Arthur Rubinstein was once asked if he believed in God. He said: ‘No. I don’t believe in God. I believe in something greater.’ Our culture suffers from the same inflationary tendency. The existing religions just aren’t big enough: we demand something more from God than the existing depictions in the Christian faith can provide. So we revert to the occult. The so-called occult sciences do not ever reveal any genuine secret: they only promise that there is something secret that explains and justifies everything. The great advantage of this is that it allows each person to fill up the empty secret ‘container’ with his or her own fears and hopes.

...And today, if you browse the shelves of any bookshop specialising in the occult, you will find not only the usual tomes on the Templars, Rosicrucians, pseudo-Kabbalists, and of course The Da Vinci Code, but also anti-Semitic tracts such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Of Things Bookish (& Revolutionary)

I'm really liking this Charles Carroll of Carrollton (say five times fast). I'm glad Steven Riddle's envy was enough for me to pick it up again.

I'm superficial enough to like the little touches, like the Revolutionary era font. Phil Albinus writes "I hate to admit this but I am a font queen -- if the book is ugly, the font too small and the paper too bland, I usually give up." Now that's blogesty.*

The only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence, Carroll saw as early as 1765 that America would eventually separate from the mother country, though of course he kept that under his Revolutionary era hat. Here's an excerpt explaining Carroll's response to a rogue named Dulaney, published under the name "First Citizen":

Carroll's fourth and last letter of July 1, 1773, expands on the brilliant analysis of his second letter. He anticipates Cardinal Newman's argument that, in the absence of correct theology, other intellectual disciplines begin to theologize. In this case, it is the common law that Dulany elevates into the realm of theological thruth. Carroll criticizes "the legal subtleties and metaphysical reasoning of my adversary." Rhetorically turning Dulany's anti-Catholicism against him, he asks Dulany to respond "without equivocation." It is Dulany, not Carroll, who would "make an excellent inquisitor."...Carroll uses the natural law as a lever to overturn the English constitution, which had been corrupt ever since the Reformation.

Carroll compared English law to a "Gothic ruin":

"Perfect symmetry, and correspondence of parts is wanting; in some places, the pile appears to be deficient in strength, in others the rude and unpolished taste of our Gothic ancestors is discoverable." For English chaos, Carrollton wishes to substitute the clarity of natural law...Insisting on the rule of law, and not the rule of men, Carroll looks ahead to written constitutionalism. Law must be concrete, and its "true spirit and original intent" should be honored.

One could wish certain U.S. Supreme Court justices felt the same. By the way, Carroll traveled everywhere with a foot tall crucifix which is now on display at a hall on the campus of John Hopkins University.

* - ['blogger' + 'honesty' = 'blogesty']

On Lighting a Candle at Church

The clueless wick
a white, cold prick
waits absurdly pleased
in his standoffishness
as those around him dance.

He can only be lit by another
but he takes the flame slowly
sputtering and resisting
and though too small to survive
the supplicant trusts
withdraws the other candle
until the quivering and tiny
is buoyed by the wax beneath
and blooms.

Sex & Bearing Fruit

There was an article on Mother Angelica in the latest Crisis magazine which included a lot of talk about suffering, for Mother A has seen more than her fair share. But she insisted that the author of the piece emphasize love not suffering. "It's love that bears fruit!" she said.

I was thinking about that in connection with marital fruit. The other day a co-worker to whom I am close is suddenly pregnant again, just a few months after having her first. It was a shock because the first child took Herculean efforts. But this time apparently Hercules wasn't required. The "suffering" phase was over, the pressure off, the utilitarian aspect removed...A similar thing happened to my aunt and uncle. Desperate to have children, they tried for nine long frustrating years. They finally gave up and adopted. You know what happened next. She got pregnant.

Spiritual fruit seems similarly acquired. "Let go, let God" is a cliche but a truism; how can we relax but in Him? A cheerful giver bears more fruit than a straining, grim one, though reluctant giving is better than no giving at all.

Humorous

Introducting the WikiCatechism

Too Good

This is a riot (hat tip to Scipio). Based on the famous Robert Frost poem:

Stopping by a Blog on a Frosty Evening

Whose blog this is, a neo-con,
His book is available on Amazon.
He will not see me lurking here;
My comments all will be anon.

My online friends won't think it queer
If I blog while drinking a six-pack of beer
Between dinner and the ten o'clock news;
It fills my comments with good cheer.

My wife has the spouse-of-a-blogger blues
And asks me if I've noticed her cues.
The only other sound's the click
Of mouse and key as I peruse

This blog and the next one till I'm sick
Of beating a dead horse with a stick
And another evening's burned its wick,
And another evening's burned its wick.
(Jonathan Potter - Korrektiv)

City of Man, City of God

Interesting read:

I will say it is not incorrect to note the Gospel has had a strong, liberalizing, anti-imperial impact in western society. It is a real but undertheorized phenomenon that is handled very simplistically by Girard et al. Girard simply assumes, as does Bottum, that the non-violent aspect of the Gospel is the divinely sanctioned, correct interpretation of the whole Gospel. People of this mind also tend to assume that correct biblical interpretation implies a rule for life, or at least a rule for political life. This doesn't work when one faces the persistent reality (or appearance in the Bible) of violent, evil people who really need to be shot. Luther and Augustine's much derided two-kingdom theory starts to look pretty good then. Even the Grand Inquisitor himself starts to sound sensible. This situation is not psychically tolerable for many people who need to believe that God, the Bible, good intentions, and/or political theory X offer us a body of principles that, if applied in the political sphere, would sustain a society in which one would almost never have to choose lesser evils or justify immoral means with moral ends. Such people want and are able to believe that these kinds of infernal, damning bargains are lies and swindles that may be refused by those who bear worldly power. They want and are able to believe this because they have been removed, by means of various opiates (including forms of Christianity) and phantasms, from the ever-Machiavellian realities of the world. Their condition is, in the end, the real problem.

The Pantagruel's seeming comfort with "immoral means with moral ends" sounds like something that would rightly make Zippy's hair stand on end, and what jumps out at me is the faulty premise that maintenance of society is job one.

Saved By His Vocation

Powerful post from Jeff Culbreath.