Against The Grain

Sounds like a plan.

2009-11-03T00:10:00.003-05:00

"We should all pray … and often … to/through the intercession of Mother Teresa for the conversion of [Christopher] Hitchens."

-- A First Thoughts reader, in response to Hitchens' latest pathetic diatribe against Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

Not the wisest name-change in the book.

2009-11-02T23:34:00.003-05:00

We consulted at length with a brilliant friend of mine, one of the nation’s leading experts on branding. Her advice was direct and powerful: ”Nobody knows what the ‘next majority’ will look like. Maybe President Obama will be re-elected and your hopes of building a new modernized Republican majority will go unrealized for a long time to come.” In any event, she continued, whether Republicans return to majority or remain in minority status, the world of internet political commentary is a world built around individual personalities. Think DrudgeReport, HuffingtonPost, AndrewSullivan.com, Breitbart.TV. Her advice: Put my name on the thing.

- David Frum, on changing the name of his blog to 'FrumForum'.

* * *

Frum (Yiddish: פֿרום; [frum | frim]), from the German fromm, meaning "devout" or "pious", is a Yiddish word meaning committed to be observant of the 613 Mitzvot, or Jewish commandments, specifically of Orthodox Judaism. This appellative is used especially in reference to haredim (i.e. the "Ultra-Orthodox"), and to a lesser extent among the Modern Orthodox.

Here and There

2009-11-02T22:36:00.000-05:00

"The Thomistic Tradition" - Part I | Part II -- a brief survey of the history of Thomism from John Capreolus to John Haldane, with a summary of the main schools of thought, from Dr. Edward Feser.
At What's Wrong with The World, Edward Feser also alerts us to two new books on contemporary conservative philosopher Roger Scruton.
"Decline is a Choice: The New Liberalism and the end of American ascendancy" (Weekly Standard 10/19/2009, Volume 015, Issue 05) adapted from his 2009 Wriston Lecture delivered for the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research in New York on October 5. (Watch the speech).
Paul Zummo (The Cranky Conservative) is blogging an ongoing commentary on The Federalist Papers - "I absolutely believe that an understanding of the Federalist Papers is essential for understanding the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, understanding America."
From the Pope Benedict XVI Fan Club, an extensive roundup of discussion and commentary on Pope Benedict's encyclical Caritas in Veritate.
In the past months I've come to greatly appreciate the news and reflections by Robert Moynihan, founder and editor in chief of Inside the Vatican magazine. Visit themoynihanreport.com to read his regular reports from Rome (or subscribe via email).
Matt Latimer was deputy director of speechwriting for President George W. Bush during the latter part of his presidency. Before that, Matt was the principal speechwriter for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. He is also the recent author of Speech-less: Tales of a White House Survivor. In a guest post to Powerline, he gives a view from the inside on the implosion of the Bush Administration and its flight from principled conservatism.
"Opposite Day" - Daniel Nichols (Caelum et Terra) on "Issue 2" in the Ohio elections.
Net Neutrality: A Brief Primer, by Peter Suderman (Reason Magazine's "Hit & Run") October 21, 2009.
Daniel Mitsui has posted some of his recent illustrations impressive work!
the Kindle user after trying his first "book", by Alan Jacobs (The New Atlantis' "Text Patterns"):
. . . Look, I'm not saying there's nothing good about it. That it's just one book, so if you lose it you're only out a few bucks, that's nice. That you don't have to worry about charging the batteries, that's very nice. And in the relatively few books that have illustrations, the difference is amazing. But overall, the technology just isn't ready for prime time.

Conversion of the Heart.

2009-11-02T22:35:00.000-05:00

“I feel so pure in heart (since leaving). I don’t have this guilt, I don’t have this burden on me anymore that’s how I know this conversion was a spiritual conversion.”

-- Abby Johnson, executive director of a Planned Parenthood facility in Bryan, Texas, having resigned her post after seeing the ultrasound of an abortion procedure.

The Secret of Trappist Ale

2009-11-02T01:35:00.005-05:00

Philip Blenkinsop (Reuters' FaithWorld) discovers a startling surprise about Trappist ale:

It came as a surprise to discover that monks were no longer involved in the beer-making at Trappist brewer Westmalle during a visit to research for a feature of Trappist beers. With the exception of small-scale Westvleteren that is pretty much the case at all seven Trappist breweries in Belgium and the Netherlands. It is largely the result of demographics – the average age of monks at many monasteries in western Europe is up in the 50s, 60s or 70s, hardly an age to be pushing around barrels. [More]

Nonetheless, to merit the name, the profits from the sale of Trappist beer are used for the upkeep of the monastery, it's community and charitable causes. So you can still feel doubly good about yourself next time you imbibe a bottle of Chimay -- confident in the knowledge you're not only blessing your tastebuds but supporting the Lord's work as well. =)

(See also: "Ale and hearty: Aging Trappist monks brew on" (Reuters, October 20, 2009).

"The Line Through the Heart" - J. Budziszewski

2009-10-31T02:23:00.002-04:00

The Line Through the Heart: Natural Law as Fact, Theory, and Sign of Contradiction Intercollegiate Studies Institute; 1 edition (May 15, 2009)

I received this in the mail over the summer from ISI Press. I am making my through it, howbeit slowly -- the bulk of my evening time these days spent with a rambunctious two-year-old who (rightly) demands his father's attention. Still, with my gratitude to ISI for their granting me a preview, the least I could do is give it a mention:

Natural law is a fact about human beings, and a theory that humbles itself before this fact. Yet it is something else as well—a sign of contradiction, something that exasperates, offends, and enrages. The transient cause of such rage is the suicidal proclivity of our time to deny the obvious, but a more enduring cause is the Fall of Man. Our hearts are riddled with desires that oppose their deepest longings, and we demand to have happiness on terms that make happiness impossible.
In The Line Through the Heart, popular philosopher J. Budziszewski threads a path between these various abysses. Among his questions are how the knowledge of good is related to the knowledge of God, how things that seem to run against the grain of human nature can become "second nature", and whether natural law can be reconciled with Darwinian evolution. Turning to politics, he takes up such topics as who counts as a human person, whether human dignity is compatible with capital punishment, what courts have made of the United States Constitution, and how an ersatz state religion can be built in the name of Toleration. Written in Budziszewski's usual crystalline style The Line Through the Heart makes the natural law and its implications clear for both scholars and general readers.

A Line Through the Heart has received high praise from the likes of Peter Kreeft, James V. Schall, Ralph McInerney and Russell Hittinger (among others).

A former Evangelical, Budziszewski spoke with Ignatius Insight on the "objections, obstacles, and acceptance" which culminated in his becoming a Catholic. He is currently professor of government and philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin.

Related

ISI interview with the authordiscussing The Line through the Heart.
"The Natural, The Connatural and the Unnatural" -- on the question: "Can the unnatural become natural to us?" Presented at the conference "St. Thomas and the Natural Law," Jacques Maritain Center, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, July, 2004 (a version of which is reproduced in the book).
"The First Grace: Rediscovering the Natural Law in a Post-Christian World" First Things April 2003

Food for Thought: Thomas Merton

2009-10-28T10:43:00.006-04:00

"The notion of dogma terrifies men who do not understand the Church. They cannot conceive that a religious doctrine may be clothed in a clear, definite and authoritative statement without at once becoming static, rigid and inert and losing all its vitality. In their frantic anxiety to escape from any such conception they take refuge in a system of beliefs that is vague and fluid, a system in which truths pass like mists and waver and vary like shadows. They make their own personal selection of ghosts, in this pale, indefinite twilight of the mind. They take good care never to bring these abstractions out into the full brightness of the sun for fear of a full view of their insubstantiality.
They favor the Catholic mystics with a sort of sympathetic regard, for they believe that these rare men somehow reached the summit of contemplation in defiance of Catholic dogma. Their deep union with God is supposed to have been an escape from the teaching authority of the Church, and an implicit protest against it.
But the truth is that the saints arrived at the deepest and most vital and also the most individual and personal knowledge of God precisely because of the Church's teaching authority, precisely through the tradition that is guarded and fostered by that authority.

Thomas Merton - New Seeds of Contemplation , page 146)

[HT: ReadMerton YahooGroup of the Thomas Merton Society of the Capital Region (NY).]

Related

Thomas Merton, American Catholic 11/13/08
Towards a Critical Appreciation of Thomas Merton 01/02/05

Rome’s talks with the Lefebvrists begin.

2009-10-27T02:40:00.002-04:00

Vatican Information Service on the Meeting between "Ecclesia Dei" and the Society of Saint Pius X:

"On Monday 26 October in the Palazzo del Sant'Uffizio, headquarters of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and of the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei", the study commission made up of experts from "Ecclesia Dei" and from the Society of St. Pius X held its first meeting, with the aim of examining the doctrinal differences still outstanding between the Society and the Apostolic See. "In a cordial, respectful and constructive climate, the main doctrinal questions were identified. These will be studied in the course of discussions to be held over coming months, probably twice a month. In particular, the questions due to be examined concern the concept of Tradition, the Missal of Paul VI, the interpretation of Vatican Council II in continuity with Catholic doctrinal Tradition, the themes of the unity of the Church and the Catholic principles of ecumenism, the relationship between Christianity and non- Christian religions, and religious freedom. The meeting also served to specify the method and organisation of the work".

(Oh, to be a fly on that wall ...)

More on Rome's talks with the Lefebvrists by way of the newsletter of Dr. Robert Moynihan, editor-in-chief of Inside the Vatican, on the perspective of Bishop Fellay, Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), as well as the fundamental question, that of "Rupture, or Continuity?":

What is the real, fundamental issue of these talks?
It is this: Did the Second Vatican Council teach new doctrines not in keeping with prior Church teaching, and so lead the Church into error (as the Society of St. Pius X, and other traditional Catholics, have often argued)?
Or did the Council develop doctrines based on what the Church has always taught, and so open up new, legitimate aspects of old doctrines?
To put it another way: Did a "new Church" come into being after Vatican II, a Church which broke with the "old Church" of the pre-conciliar period?
Or is it still the same Catholic Church of all time, which has simply been passing through a confusing period as it attempts to find a way to live in and bear witness to the modern world?
Benedict has been calling for a reinterpretation of Vatican II for almost 40 years. In book-length interviews when he was Cardinal Ratzinger, in major studies of the liturgy and in addresses as Pope, he has denounced interpretations of Vatican II which claim it as a rupture with the Catholic faith of all time.
The Lefebvrists have maintained that is is difficult, if not impossible, to interpret Vatican II as being in continuity with all prior Church tradition.
But Benedict has said he believes this interpretation can be made.
And he has sent his chosen men into this dialogue to show the Lefebvrists how it can be done.

(You can subscribe to Dr. Moynihan's daily newsletters from Rome here).

"The Challenge of Fatherhood", by Massimo Camisasca

2009-10-25T02:38:00.006-04:00

The Fraternity of St. Charles Borromeo is a society of missionary priests working around the world. We live community life together and work in parishes, schools, universities, and hospitals.

Mons. Massimo Camisasca, founder and general superior of the Fraternity of St. Charles, has educated priests and seminarians for twenty-five years. A new translation of one of Fr. Camisasca’s fundamental works has just been published by Human Adventure Books: The Challenge of Fatherhood: Thoughts on the Priesthood (September 2009)

The first part of this book contains several lessons given to his seminarians during their formation. The second part is articulated around five words: the three “classic” terms (poverty, virginity, and obedience) are completed with reflections on fatherhood and fruitfulness.

An excerpt from the book:

“When God conceives of our face, he conceives of it in its complete form, even though each of us has to achieve it in time as a progressive discovery. And each one of us experiences his own freedom as the possibility of corresponding to the Father’s will, to God’s will. This progressive discovery of our personal destiny usually happens through difficulty and pain. It is often through suffering that we begin truly to know. We come to understand as if by putting together the pieces of a puzzle or weaving together the strands of a tapestry. In God, however, there is no progression. He has a perfectly clear idea of what our face looks like, and he is patient enough to let it unveiled before our eyes, too: slowly, sometimes even through contradictions, zig-zags, second thoughts. This is why we must not make the mistake of thinking, say, that something that blocks our path for a moment thwarts it radically. It is just a moment of darkness that we need in order to fall in love again with the light, to rediscover the light, to walk more resolutely in and towards it. Our freedom matures along the path of this ‘groping’ (see Acts 17:27).” (pgs. 11-12)

(HT: Apolonio Latar, former blogger, now a seminarian of the Priestly Fraternity of the Missionaries of St. Charles Borromeo, studying in Rome).

Real Ecumenism! - Vatican makes a path for Anglicans returning to Rome!

2009-10-20T23:07:00.002-04:00

"NOTE OF THE CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH ABOUT PERSONAL ORDINARIATES FOR ANGLICANS ENTERING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH" (Vatican Information Service October 20, 2009):

With the preparation of an Apostolic Constitution, the Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion.
In this Apostolic Constitution the Holy Father has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by establishing Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony. Under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution, pastoral oversight and guidance will be provided for groups of former Anglicans through a Personal Ordinariate, whose Ordinary will usually be appointed from among former Anglican clergy.
The forthcoming Apostolic Constitution provides a reasonable and even necessary response to a world-wide phenomenon, by offering a single canonical model for the universal Church which is adaptable to various local situations and equitable to former Anglicans in its universal application. It provides for the ordination as Catholic priests of married former Anglican clergy. Historical and ecumenical reasons preclude the ordination of married men as bishops in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The Constitution therefore stipulates that the Ordinary can be either a priest or an unmarried bishop. The seminarians in the Ordinariate are to be prepared alongside other Catholic seminarians, though the Ordinariate may establish a house of formation to address the particular needs of formation in the Anglican patrimony. In this way, the Apostolic Constitution seeks to balance on the one hand the concern to preserve the worthy Anglican liturgical and spiritual patrimony and, on the other hand, the concern that these groups and their clergy will be integrated into the Catholic Church. ... [MORE]

Carl Olson provides a helpful roundup of initial reactions from various parties, notes "three dubious and curious conclusions" and recommends a re-reading of Vatican II's decree on ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio:
It's worthwhile revisiting that document since there appears to be the notion, among some Catholics and non-Catholics, that the goal of ecumenism is unending dialogue and perpetual conversation at the service of further dialogue and conversation, resulting in the formation of committees, sub-committees, and sub-sub-committees, which seek to refine further discussion about dialog—well, you get the picture. Nothing against good conversation and authentic dialogue, of course, but they should have a point, a purpose, a goal. As Unitatis Redintegratio explains, dialogue is meant to correct misunderstandings, remove impediments, and facilitate common endeavors, which are all oriented ultimately to complete, real unity.
Update! - Some good reflections from Amy Welborn (Charlotte Was Both October 23, 2009):
This is obviously about Anglicans, because the initiative has come from the Anglican side – that is, those asking for this kind of structure. But I can’t help but see that it is also about the Church in general, particularly shifts in ecclesiological and canonical thinking and practice, and more specifically about the liturgical life of the Church. It is not clear what liturgy will prevail in this new arrangement, but I can’t help but wonder if part of the envisioned fruit of this is the wider presence of a liturgy that would offer another way for those fed up with the unpredictability and frequent ego-driven banality of a typical parish Mass but who find the TLM too big of a step (or for whom it is not available.) The insertion of a more formal, English-language liturgical tradition into Catholic practice adds a startling new chapter into the post-Vatican II era of liturgical change.
It’s also interesting to me because the structure of this new entity does not depend on a local bishop’s good feelings or sympathies. This has been an enormous problem in the application of the Pastoral Provision and the Anglican Use, and aside from other reasons for approaching it this way, this seems to be a factor. Remember, though, that this is not unprecedented. [More]

Related

Keep this blog alive! -- Help Christopher get a Computer!

2009-10-15T09:22:00.006-04:00

With regards to internet access my situation remains the same: my beloved laptop of 4+ years has bought the farm; regular blogging prohibited howbeit I have occasional access to another for email. I rarely use this blog as a vehicle for blegging for myself, but circumstances being what they are ...

In the event my readers, past or present, have appreciated Against the Grain over the years, or my contributions to The American Catholic, Catholics in the Public Square, or my many other online ventures such as The Pope Benedict XVI Fan Club (providing detailed blogging coverage as the Pope's visit to America or visit to the Holy Land or roundups of coverage and commentary on a new papal encyclical) -- or online archives such as those devoted to Hans Urs von Balthasar, Richard Neuhaus and Avery Cardinal Dulles -- and would like to see these ventures continue -- you can assist in this endeavor by clicking on the banner below.

(For the record, I've resurrected an old Mac G3 w/ OS 9. Painfully slow but I'll make do in the interim. That said, I have my eyes set on a used IBook G4 from Ebay).

Help me by helping yourself to a purchase of books (or any other item) from Amazon.com. Every little bit helps, and your efforts are greatly appreciated.

Obligatory Blogging Vacation (Dead Computer)

2009-09-27T14:12:00.038-04:00

This past weekend my home computer died. Unfortunately, it seems to be beyond resurrection, as in "the cost of repairing it would exceed that of simply buying a new one." Present financial circumstances (and priorities) however, prohibit me from resolving the situation in the near future. Fortunately I have access to email + browsing via IPhone -- but anything requiring extended composition, as in blogging, will be postponed for the time being.

Thanks to my readers for their patience. God bless!

Abraham Foxman vs. the USCCB

2009-09-23T20:31:00.002-04:00

In August 2002 the Consultation of the National Council of Synagogues and the Bishops Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs released a statement, "Reflections on Covenant and Mission", which espoused a two-fold or "dual covenant" path to salvation—the Jews through their adherence to the Mosaic covenant, Christians (and/or) gentiles through Christ. Its assertion that “campaigns that target Jews for conversion to Christianity are no longer theologically acceptable in the Catholic Church” was thus interpreted as a demand that Christians cease any attempt to share their faith with, or pray for, the conversion of the Jewish people. The ensuing criticism, both evangelical and Catholic, obliged the USCCB to distance itself from the document, acknowledging that it was not to be taken as the formal position of the U.S. Bishops' conference but rather "represents the state of thought among the participants of a years-long dialogue between the Church and the Jewish community."

Seven years later, the USCCB has released a formal correction in its Note on Ambiguities Contained in Reflections on Covenant and Mission, reasserting the Church's authoritative teaching:

The document correctly acknowledges that "Judaism is a religion that springs from divine revelation" and that "it is only about Israel's covenant that the Church can speak with the certainty of the biblical witness." Nevertheless, it is incomplete and potentially misleading in this context to refer to the enduring quality of the covenant without adding that for Catholics Jesus Christ as the incarnate Son of God fulfills both in history and at the end of time the special relationship that God established with Israel. The Second Vatican Council explained:
The principal purpose to which the plan of the old covenant was directed was to prepare for the coming of Christ, the redeemer of all and of the messianic kingdom, to announce this coming by prophecy, and to indicate its meaning through various types.
The long story of God's intervention in the history of Israel comes to its unsurpassable culmination in Jesus Christ, who is God become man.
Reflections on Covenant and Mission provides a clear acknowledgment of the relationship established by God with Israel prior to Jesus Christ. This acknowledgment needs to be accompanied, however, by a clear affirmation of the Church's belief that Jesus Christ in himself fulfills God’s revelation begun with Abraham and that proclaiming this good news to all the world is at the heart of her mission. Reflections on Covenant and Mission, however, lacks such an affirmation and thus presents a diminished notion of evangelization.

In August 2009, the Vatican gave its formal recognition to a requested change by the USCCB to its United States Catholic Catechism for Adults:

The change clarifies Catholic teaching on God’s covenant with the Jews. The first version, in explaining relations with the Jews, stated, “Thus the covenant that God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid for them.” The revised text states, “To the Jewish people, whom God first chose to hear his Word, ‘belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ.’ (Romans 9: 4-5; cf. CCC, no 839).[...]
The clarification reflects the teaching of the Church that all previous covenants that God made with the Jewish people are fulfilled in Jesus Christ through the new covenant established through his sacrificial death on the cross. Catholics believe that the Jewish people continue to live within the truth of the covenant God made with Abraham, and that God continues to be faithful to them. As the Second Vatican Council taught and the Adult Catechism affirms, the Jewish people “remain most dear to God, for God does not repent of the gifts he makes nor of the calls he issues.” (Lumen Gentium, no.16).

David Schütz (Sentire Cum Ecclesia) provides an analysis of these events and reaction on the part of participants in the Catholic-Jewish dialogue in "On the Jewish Question: 'There’s no confusion – it’s both/and'" (9/17/09).

Michael Forrest and David Palm have also provided a helpful presentation in All in the Family: Christians, Jews, and God (Catholic Lay Witness July / August 2009).

* * *

In a recent editorial, Abraham Foxman reacted with typical umbrage and hyperbole, describing the USCCB's decisions as "a precarious moment in Catholic-Jewish relations". Regarding the "Note on Ambiguities in 'Covenant and Mission', Foxman asserts that it

rejected a clear statement that there can be no attempts to convert Jews as part of the interfaith dialogue. Instead the U.S. bishops approved language that Catholic-Jewish dialogues could explicitly be used to invite Jews to baptism. They told us the change was directed by the Vatican.

This is simply not the case, as there is nothing in the document that would indicate the USCCB now embraces means of proselytization that it has otherwise and persistently deplored. Rather, it is the understandable concern of the USCCB's doctrinal committee that Reflection's treatment of evangelization is confined to individuals in such a manner that it "fails to account for St. Paul's complete teaching about the inclusion of the Jewish people as whole in Christ's salvation". Even further, it

renders even the possibility of individual conversion doubtful [by the implication that] it is generally not good for Jews to convert, nor for Catholics to do anything that might lead Jews to conversion because it threatens to eliminate "the distinctive Jewish witness": "Their [the Jewish people's] witness to the kingdom, which did not originate with the Church's experience of Christ crucified and raised, must not be curtailed by seeking the conversion of the Jewish people to Christianity." Some caution should be introduced here, since this line of reasoning could lead some to conclude mistakenly that Jews have an obligation not to become Christian and that the Church has a corresponding obligation not to baptize Jews.

Foxman then describes the Bishop's revisions to the American Catechism as follows:

On Aug. 27, the bishops announced that the Vatican had officially affirmed its decision to jettison a teaching in the American adult catechism that the “covenant that God made with the Jewish people through Moses remains eternally valid for them.” The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had several options to update its adult catechism, but chose instead to no longer affirm the validity of the Sinai covenant.

Again, this is simply not the case. Rather, by locating its acknowledgement of the Sinai covenant in St. Paul's epistle to the Romans (9: 4-5; cf. CCC, no 839), it places it in biblical context, precisely as a guard against the erroneous interpretation that Foxman himself holds. It would seem that for Foxman, as for perhaps other authors of "Reflections on Covenant and Mission", nothing less would suffice than the outright and wholesale dismantling of the Church's claim to the unicity and universality of Jesus Christ as savior of the world—in whom "there is neither Jew nor gentile."

* * *

Finally, on the matter of how we are to conduct ourselves in dialogue with our elder brothers and sisters, I find no better response than that of the late Fr. Richard Neuhaus, for whom "it is not Christian imperialism but fidelity to revealed truth that requires Christians to say that Christ is Lord of all or he is not Lord at all." ("Salvation is From the Jews" (First Things, November 2001):

With respect to Judaism, Christians today are exhorted to reject every form of supersessionism, and so we should. To supersede means to nullify, to void, to make obsolete, to displace. The end of supersessionism, however, cannot and must not mean the end of the argument between Christians and Jews. We cannot settle into the comfortable interreligious politesse of mutual respect for positions deemed to be equally true. Christ and his Church do not supersede Judaism but they do continue and fulfill the story of which we are both part. Or so Christians must contend. It is the story that begins with Abraham who in the eucharistic canon we call “our father in faith.”
There is no avoiding the much vexed question of whether this means that Jews should enter into the further fulfillment of the salvation story by becoming Christians. Christians cannot, out of a desire to be polite, answer that question in the negative. We can and must say that the ultimate duty of each person is to form his conscience in truth and act upon that discernment; we can and must say that there are great goods to be sought in dialogue apart from conversion; we can and must say that we reject proselytizing, which is best defined as evangelizing in a way that demeans the other; we can and must say that Jews and Christians need one another in many public tasks imposed upon us by a culture that is, in large part, in manifest rebellion against the God of Israel; we can and must say that there are theological, philosophical, and moral questions to be explored together, despite our differences regarding Messianic promise; we can and must say that friendship between Jew and Christian can be secured in shared love for the God of Israel; we can and must say that the historical forms we call Judaism and Christianity will be transcended, but not superseded, by the fulfillment of eschatological promise. But along the way to that final fulfillment we are locked in argument. It is an argument by which—for both Jew and Christian—conscience is formed, witness is honed, and friendship is deepened. This is our destiny, and this is our duty, as members of the one people of God—a people of God for which there is no plural.

Irving Kristol, 1920-2009

2009-09-21T03:42:00.007-04:00

And so we lose another giant. A self-identified liberal "mugged by reality", Irving Kristol, commonly heralded as the godfather of 'neo'-conservatism, has died. Hillel Italie gives an account of his life for RealClearPolitics.com:

A Trotskyist in the 1930s, Kristol would soon sour on socialism, break from liberalism after the rise of the New Left in the 1960s and in the 1970s commit the unthinkable — support the Republican Party, once as "foreign to me as attending a Catholic Mass."
He was a New York intellectual who left home, first politically, then physically, moving to Washington in 1988. ... his turn to the right joined by countless others, including such future GOP Cabinet officials as Jeane Kirkpatrick and William Bennett and another neoconservative founder, Norman Podhoretz.
"The influence of Irving Kristol's ideas has been one of the most important factors in reshaping the American climate of opinion over the past 40 years," Podhoretz said.

Among the host of publications he is credited as founding and/or editing was Commentary magazine (from 1947 to 1952); The Public Interest (from 1965 to 2002) and The National Interest from 1985 to 2002.

Kristol's life, along with that of his fellow "New York intellectuals" Irving Howe, Daniel Bell, and Nathan Glazer, was the subject of the 1998 documentary, "Arguing the World". In July 2002 he was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush, the highest civilian honor in the United States.

Since the advent of the Iraq war, 'neo-conservatism' has become something of a derogatory term and indicative of those who supported the foreign policies of the Bush administration. Those who favor to this stereotype might be surprised to learn that Kristol himself took issue with it. Writing in the final issue of The Public Interest, he asserted:

“Foreign policy was no part of early neoconservatism: Had it been, there would have been additional bases of division among the early neoconservatives. How the term ‘neoconservatism' morphed from a political tendency that dealt almost entirely with domestic social policy to one that deals almost entirely—indeed, entirely—with foreign policy is an interesting question, which I will not explore further here. There is very little overlap between those who promoted the neoconservatism of the 1970s and those committed to its latter-day manifestation.”

As to what "neoconservatism" was, Kristol identified it as not so much a "movement" as a "persuasion" -- "one that manifests itself over time, but erratically, and one whose meaning we clearly glimpse only in retrospect." He explored the subject in "The Neoconservative Persuasion" (Weekly Standard August 25, 2003) and in Neo-conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, a compilation of his writings on politics and economics.

(I recommend as well Jonah Goldberg's three-part series on the use, and abuse, of the term itself -- "State of Confusion"; "The Neoconservative Invention" and The End of Neoconservatism).

Though the son of non-observant Jewish immigrants, and not overtly religious himself, Kristol recognized mutual concerns and pursued strategic alliances with religious conservatives in his battle with secular humanism.

In his "farewell to the godfather", Christopher Hitchens joked:

The very word neoconservative, which was used, if not coined, by socialist Michael Harrington to describe his lapsed former comrades, was eschewed or ignored by most of its targets until Irving Kristol said, in effect, the hell with it, that's what we are, let's adopt the title for ourselves. I used to enjoy embarrassing secular Jewish Reaganites by taunting them for their alliance with the so-called Christian Coalition; I could have guessed that it would be Kristol who would write the essay saying that on many critical questions, from the family to Israel, these religious right-wing types had much to recommend them.

Indeed, Wilfred McClay observes that Kristol [had] been preoccupied with questions of religious faith, and the inadequacy of the liberal and secular understanding of things, from the very beginning of his writing career.

* * *

Kristol leaves behind his wife, the historian Gertrude Himmelfard and son, William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard.

Archives of Kristol's work are available online at The Public Interest, Commentary and The New Republic.

Remembrances

Irving Kristol, 1920-2009 - In memoriam, by William Kristol. The following remarks were delivered by William Kristol at the funeral service for Irving Kristol, Congregation Adas Israel, Washington, D.C., September 22, 2009.
My Irving Kristol and Ours: What the master taught his apprentices, by Mary Eberstadt. Weekly Standard 10/05/09.
A Genius of Temperament: Joseph Epstein remembers Irving Kristol Weekly Standard 10/05/09.
Irving Kristol, Godfather of Modern Conservatism, Dies at 89, by Barry Gewen. (New York Times 9/18/09)
Editor Irving Kristol, Architect of Neoconservatism, by Adam Bernstein. (The Washington Post 9/19/09)
Irving Kristol, 1920-2009, by John Podhoretz. (Commentary - "Contentions" 9/18/09)
Irving Kristol: The man who put 'neo' into conservatism (Wall Street Journal 9/19/09).
The Godfather, R.I.P. Irving Kristol, realist, humanist, institution-builder, friend, by Myron Magnet. City Journal 9/18/09
Irving Kristol, Catholic Social Ethicist?, by George Weigel. "The Catholic Difference" 10/14/09.
Irving Kristol, 1920–2009, by Joseph Bottum. First Things November 2009.
Irving Kristol's Reality Principles: A great mind exposes ideological illusions, while thinking through better alternatives Wall Street Journal excerpts from essays that appeared in the WSJ by Irving Kristol.

Jeffrey Stark - a 2,996 Tribute

2009-09-11T01:53:00.001-04:00

Jeffrey Stark was a firefighter stationed with Engine Co. 230 of the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn, NY. He was last seen at Broadway and Vesey, moving toward the Twin Towers with his fellow firefighters.

An account of that fateful day is given by Tom Braumuller for the Fort Monmouth Fire & Emergency Services:

[“Johnny G”. Guarino] and his crew had just returned from another call when someone yelled out to turn on the TV. They saw what everyone in the nation was watching – a tower on fire. They ran to the roof to see how bad it was when the call came in to respond.
Guarino’s crew mounted Engine 230 and headed for the bridges over to Manhattan. They had to take alternate routes because roads were being shut down quickly.
When they finally arrived, the crew of six (Lt. Brian Ahearn, Fire Fighter (FF) Ed White, FF Gene Whelan, FF Jeff Stark, FF Frank Bonomo, and FF Mike Carlo) dismounted and ran into the towers.
Guarino had to stay with the engine. A police officer told Guarino to move his engine up because other crews were arriving. He moved the engine up about two blocks and when he came back his crew was gone. Along with the towers.

Dianne O'Donnell chronicled his life for the Staten Island Advance (September 11, 2001):

When he graduated from the Fire Academy in May 1999, Mr. Stark joined his two brothers, John and Joseph, as a proud member of the New York City Fire Department.
His first assignment was to Engine Co. 230, where he worked for a year before being reassigned to Engine Co. 160, Concord.
When he was transferred to Ladder Co. 33 in the Bronx, Mr. Stark worked side by side with his older brother, John, a captain of Engine Co. 75 in the same firehouse. His final assignment saw him return to his first engine company in Brooklyn. ...
Prior to becoming a firefighter, Mr. Stark had worked for several years for PaineWebber, Manhattan.
He attended Niagara University, Lewiston, N.Y., and transferred to St. John's University, Grymes Hill, where he graduated with a bachelor of arts degree. He was a graduate of Monsignor Farrell High School.

Stark left behind Katharine Suarez, his girlfriend of five years. "He was everything," said Ms. Suarez. "He spent four of those five years helping me through law school. He was my support system. He was behind me 100 percent."

According to the New York Times:

He went hunting and fly fishing, he golfed and did carpentry — some activities with distinction, others with good humor. Relatively new to the department, and with two older brothers already there, he had some catching up to do, so he was always trying to hone his skills. Fires made him nervous but what he really dreaded, he told his girlfriend, was making mistakes in front of the other firefighters at Engine Company 230 in Brooklyn. ...
He drove [Katherine Suarez] home every night from law school; took her food when she was studying; dropped off her laundry and picked it up; made three trips to the paint store without complaining when she changed her mind about the kitchen color; went out at 4 a.m. on a New Year's Eve looking for Band Aids for her nasty cut; researched recipes to entice her to eat her broccoli.
He was 30, he looked after his widowed mother, Rosemary, in Staten Island, and he had a quiet, unassuming way about him. And a startling, melodic, high-pitched laugh.

Guest Book for Jeffrey Stark @ Legacy.com.

This post is part of the Project 2,996 Tribute. Prior contributions to this project were Yvonne Bonomo and Jennieann Maffeo:

9/11/09 will mark 8 years since the attacks of World Trade Center I and II, The Pentagon, Shanksville, American Airlines Flights 11 & 77, and United Airlines Flight 93 & 175.
On that day 2,996 people were ripped from their lives. But as the media and society tend to do, they have focused on the killers. We’ve all learned more about them than we wanted to. On that day many of us made a pledge to never forget what happened.

We keep this promise by learning about and remembering the lives of the fallen.

Imagine that.

2009-09-09T02:22:00.005-04:00

In other news, Human Rights Watch's Marc Garlasco, the point man for the organization's monitoring and criticism of Israel, turns out to have a fanatical obsession with ... Nazi memorabilia.

Meanwhile -- HT: Volokh Conspiracy -- NGO Monitor has published a systematic analysis of HRW entitled "Experts or Ideologues?":

NGO Monitor's detailed report examines HRW's activities related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and particularly on Israel -- including analysis of key HRW staff members, five case studies of HRW campaigns, and quantitative analysis comparing HRW publications in the Middle East, covering the period from 2002 to 2009.

* * * Harmless coincidence or something rotten within the organization? -- Reading on, we learn that the deputy director of HRW's Middle East section, Joe Stork, once praised the murder of eleven Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games in 1972 as an "achievement." And this same individual attended a conference on "Zionism and Racism" in Saddam Hussein's Iraq:

There he made a presentation that lamented the "devastating defeat" of the Six Day War, which he attributed to "imperialist collusion that lay behind the Israeli blitzkrieg." A decade later, Stork was still railing against "the pernicious influence of the Zionist lobby." It was Stork's boss, Sarah Leah Whitson, who went to Saudi Arabia to tout HRW's battles with "pro-Israel pressure groups.

For details, see:

Watching Human Rights Watch Implode Weekly Standard August 17, 2009.
Human Rights Botch Weekly Standard July 27, 2009.
Human Rights Watch Goes to Saudi Arabia - , by David Bernstein. Wall Street Journal July 15, 2009.

On the troubles within the ELCA

2009-09-06T21:49:00.000-04:00

I attended a Lutheran (ELCA) college, where I majored in theology and philosophy. Much of my junior and senior year, however, were spent engaged in study of Catholic teaching (thanks to the fortunate discovery of Dorothy Day and Cardinal Ratzinger), culminating in my conversion.

In much the same manner as my familial background leads me, even as a convert, to take an interest in Mennonite affairs, I try to stay abreast of Lutheran matters and Lutheran-Catholic relations.

News of late has made for rather grim reading.

This past week, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) affirmed major policy recommendations to bless same-sex unions and give formal recognition to gay and lesbian pastors in partnered relationships.

Robert Beene appraises the decision in "How the ELCA Left the Great Tradition for Liberal Protestantism" (Christianity Today September 2, 2009).

On the ELCA and the future of Lutheranism, I would recommend the recently-established blog "Lutherans Persisting", which publishes the response of Carl Braaten, The Aroma of an Empty Bottle.

The reaction to such a crisis will be varied -- for some, it will be a last straw compelling their journey across the Tiber. Others will choose to stay and fight, a remnant of the faithful against the tide. A number of them have in this case decided to "work together for positive reform" within the ELCA -- a number of familiar names among their ranks -- former classmates, teachers, friends.

My prayers are with them.

* * *

What is interesting, at least from this Catholic perspective, is the extent to which the critics of recent decisions recognize the seeds of their present troubles woven into the very fabric of their tradition. Robert Benne remarks:

What was truly chilling about the assembly's debates was that the revisionists seemed to quote Jesus and the Bible as knowledgeably and persuasively as the orthodox. Passages reinforcing their respective agendas were selected and then brilliantly woven into their arguments. Both sides seemed to have the Bible on their side. The revisionists "contextualized" and relativized the relevant texts. The orthodox claimed a plain sense reading of Scripture. The Lutheran confessions were utilized effectively by both sides. There was no authoritative interpretation conveyed by any agent or agency in the church. The church was, and is, rudderless.
Sola Scriptura, a Lutheran principle adopted by evangelicals, did not seem to be sufficient in such circumstances. An authoritative tradition of interpretation of the Bible seemed to be essential. More was needed than the Bible alone. Protestants seem to lack such an authoritative tradition, so they fight and split. In this situation, the option of swimming the Tiber seems all the more tempting.

and Carl Braaten:

Lutheranism may contain within its origins the seeds of its own instability. When the first Lutherans lost the magisterial authority of the Roman Catholic Church, it had no sure authority to put in its place. The solas sounded good in theory, but it finally comes down to who who has the authority to interpret and apply them in changing times.

Which is not to say the Catholic Church doesn't have its share of dissenters, troubles and scandals -- but there is something to be said for the authority and definitive teaching of the magisterium.

Related

"ELCA Journeys: Personal Reflections on the Last Forty Years", penned by Michael McDaniel (RIP), is both a diagnosis for and chronicle of the denomination's decline. I expect if he were alive today he'd have a few choice words.
See also Carl Braaten's anguished "Open Letter to Bishop Mark Hanson From Carl E. Braaten":
... All of these colleagues have given candid explanations of their decisions to their families, colleagues, and friends. While the individuals involved have provided a variety of reasons, there is one thread that runs throughout the stories they tell. It is not merely the pull of Orthodoxy or Catholicism that enchants them, but also the push from the ELCA, as they witness with alarm the drift of their church into the morass of what some have called Liberal Protestantism. They are convinced that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has become just another liberal protestant denomination. Hence, they have decided that they can no longer be a part of that. Especially, they say, they are not willing to raise their children in a church that they believe has lost its moorings in the great tradition of evangelical (small e) and catholic (small c) orthodoxy (small o), which was at the heart of Luther’s reformatory teaching and the Lutheran Confessional Writings. They are saying that the Roman Catholic Church is now more hospitable to confessional Lutheran teaching than the church in which they were baptized and confirmed. Can this possibly be true?
As Bratten acknowledges, a number of theologians have answered that question in the affirmative.

"Manufactured Landscapes" - Photographs of Ed Burtynsky

2009-09-06T20:06:00.005-04:00

"Manufactured Landscapes" -- an incredible documentary I saw this week on IFC. Aesthetically and morally provocative. From the artist's website:

MANUFACTURED LANDSCAPES is a feature length documentary on the world and work of renowned artist Edward Burtynsky. Burtynsky makes large-scale photographs of ‘manufactured landscapes’ – quarries, recycling yards, factories, mines, dams. He photographs civilization’s materials and debris, but in a way people describe as “stunning” or “beautiful,” and so raises all kinds of questions about ethics and aesthetics without trying to easily answer them.
The film follows Burtynsky to China as he travels the country photographing the evidence and effects of that country’s massive industrial revolution. Sites such as the Three Gorges Dam, which is bigger by 50% than any other dam in the world and displaced over a million people, factory floors over a kilometre long, and the breathtaking scale of Shanghai’s urban renewal are subjects for his lens and our motion picture camera.
Shot in Super-16mm film, Manufactured Landscapes extends the narrative streams of Burtynsky’s photographs, allowing us to meditate on our profound impact on the planet and witness both the epicentres of industrial endeavour and the dumping grounds of its waste.

"... I think the work that I do, and the work that I did for 20 years before I even got to doing China, is, in a way, a lament. It's a lament for a loss of our natural world. So, in a way, the work champions that world, and looks at it, and tries to remind us that our built environment comes from somewhere, and that we just have ignored it.

We've moved on to the new ages: the Information Age, the Biological Age; that's what occupies our mind. But the Stone Age and the Iron Age and the Copper Age are all alive and well, and expanding on a level that is breathtaking. So, in a way, it's like our consciousness is forging ahead into the new world, but I think it's those old worlds that can come up from behind us and undercut our ambition, so to speak.

So, to me, the work is this meditation, is this walking through those worlds, through these wastelands that have been left behind, through that residual kind of place in the world where the taking has happened and we've walked away, and try to remind us that there is this other side to the built world that we have."

From Ed Burtynsky and "Manufactured Landscapes" Interview w. Collin Dunn. Treehugger.com. June 27, 2007.

See also: Photography by Edward Burtynsky on Amazon.com.

The problem wasn't the funeral.

2009-09-06T19:00:00.002-04:00

Speaking of the recent funeral of Senator Edward Kennedy, the Archbishop of Boston, Sean Cardinal O’Malley, endeavors to defend his participation in the event -- to which Fr. John Zuhlsdorf provides a helpful fisking. On the Archbishop's own blog there are already 100+ comments from readers -- the first comment by "Grace" will suffice, and indicates my thoughts exactly:

Of course Senator Kennedy should have been afforded a Catholic funeral. And I had no problem with you being there.
If you read what has been written about this Mass of Christian Burial, however, I think what you will find is that the bulk of the criticism out here is not directed at your participation, but at the way in which Senator Kennedy was canonized at the funeral and the way in which certain aspects of the funeral were politicized.
The purpose of a Mass of Christian Burial is the pray for the soul of the deceased and to bring to mind the hope we have in the Risen Christ. Period. It is not to be a celebration of the life of the deceased, no matter what pop culture and contemporary praxis seems to say.
In watching the funeral closely, there was no sense of this. It was all about Kennedy, all the time. The homilist effectively canonized him, picturing him in heaven. The General Intercessions, in particular, were a rather shocking politicization of the moment.
I don’t think anyone but the most inveterate Kennedy-hater would have expressed any objections to the funeral or your participation in it if the rite had been respected for what it has traditionally been about – praying for the soul of the departed, prayers that we will all need.

Father Rutler on contemporary "Catholic" funerals

2009-09-06T18:55:00.002-04:00

"Speaking well of the dead", by Rev. George Rutler (InsideCatholic September 5, 2009) -- or, the wisdom of the traditional Catholic 'no-eulogy' policy at funerals. (HT: Wheat and Weeds):

On July 29, 1997, a representative philosophe of our abortion culture, retired Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, was lavishly eulogized in St. Matthew's Cathedral in Washington, D.C., where the Requiem Mass for President Kennedy had been sung in 1963. Richard Cardinal Cushing was relatively constrained back then, because liturgical depredations had not yet switched into high gear. It was not thus when President Clinton, who vetoed the ban on partial-birth abortions, was permitted to announce to all corners of the cathedral for consumption in all corners of the world: "Brennan's America is America at its best." That is, internecine America is at its best with 39 million fewer children than would have been born were it not for Brennan's eisegesis of the Constitution. Attorney General Janet Reno later said in a speech to the American Bar Association that the honors paid to Brennan in St. Matthew's Cathedral inspired her to go on.
As Dr. Johnson conceded, in lapidary inscriptions no man is upon oath. To avoid testing this protocol in the sanctuary where only truth is to be spoken, eulogies were discouraged in more honest days when even romanticized charlatans and avuncular Caligulas could be buried, but with the crepe of contrition. Since Americans became persuaded that God is a Butterfly, funerals have started to resemble Jeanette Macdonald's airy obsequies at Forest Lawn Cemetery in 1965, with canaries warbling fantasias in gilded cages. Nature had revenge when the canaries were released and dropped dead on the heads of mourners, victims of hot air and manifest incontinence. No such favor was granted on July 29 in St. Matthew's Cathedral when a priest asked from the pulpit: "How does a young man, son of immigrants, rise to such a position of judicial pre-eminence, with almost the entire government present to honor him on the day of his burial?" It would have been lovely if St. Thomas More had dropped from Heaven right then. A brief glimpse of the saint's head would have been a sufficient reply.

From Crisis magazine, November 1997. Regretfully, not much has changed, as we recently witnessed with the recent beatification of Senator Ted Kennedy.

Eschaton Si, Imminent No!

2009-08-31T00:00:00.006-04:00

[Cross-posted to The American Catholic]

Over at Vox Nova, Henry Karlson offers some thoughtful reflections on eschatology (Part I | Part II | Part III), or rather -- those who employ the catch phrase "Don't immanentize the eschaton!" as a cudgel against those "doing the work of Christ":

How many times do we find these words repeated, time and again, since Voegelin has suggested to do so is Gnostic? How ironic is this claim, when authentic Christian theology believes that the eschaton has been immanetized in Christ. Voegelin, and many of his followers like Buckley, became critical of anyone who would try to connect the supernatural with the natural in a way which understood the eschatological ramifications of Christ have any this-worldly implications. But this is exactly what Christian theology proposes. God became man; the eschaton has been revealed; the world and all that is in it has been affected by the immanentizing of the eschaton that history can never be the same. Christians are called to live out their lives in and through Christ, bringing the eschatological implications of Pascha to the world itself. The world is meant to be transformed and brought to its perfection, and we are to be Christ's workers in helping to bring this about; of course, our work is not on the same level of Christ's, but, if we truly become one with Christ in his body, we must understand this is exactly what we are called to do. Anything else is a rejection of the incarnation, anything else which tries to establish an absolute duality between the immanent and transcendent is what really qualifies as gnostic!

In response, I'd like to say a little bit about why I find myself sympathetic to Buckley and company.

* * *

Henry's post was a good impetus to find out more about Voeglin, whose work I am not (yet) familiar with. This entry in Wikipedia, however, does a decent job of briefing novices like myself on Voegelin's understanding of "gnosticism", and what he perceived to be gnostic characteristics in various movements in history (National Socialism and Communism being two that figure heavily in his mind).

Concerning the "immanentization of the eschaton", the phrase is apparently derived from a passage in The New Science of Politics, in which Voegelin asserts "the problem of an eidos in history, hence, arises only when a Christian transcendental fulfillment becomes immanentized," remarking specifically on the heretical eschatology of Joachim of Fiore. A brief summary of Voeglin's criticism is offered by D. Vincent Twomey (in the context of a discussion of Joseph Ratzinger -- more on this later):

Eric Voegelin argued that the speculations of Joachim of Fiore are in large part the source of modernity; they helped replace the Augustinian concept of history that had formed Western Christendom. ... In Augustine's view, history is transitory, and empires pass away; only the eternal Civitas Dei (the "citizenry of God," as Ratzinger translates it) lasts forever. Its sacramental expression is the Church, understood as humanity in the process of redemption. By contrast, Joachim proposed a radically new understanding of world history as a divine progression of three distinct eras, the last being the era of the Holy Spirit when all structures (Church and State) would give way to the perfect society of autonomous men moved only from within by the Spirit. This understanding of history amounts to what Voegelin called "the immanentization of the eschaton." It rests on the assumption that the end of history is immanent in history itself—the product of its own inner movement towards ever greater perfection, towards the kingdom of God on earth. This idea is at the root of what we mean today by "progress." It underpins, albeit in different ways, both radical socialism and liberal capitalism. And it has had a profound effect on political life, giving rise to both revolution and secularism.

As Henry mentions, William F. Buckley was quite fond of the phrase and was largely responsible for its popularization among conservatives as a general criticism of liberal "progressive" ambitions:

"Conservatives believe there are rational limits to politics, that politics should not, in the lofty phrase of Voeglin, attempt to immanentize the eschaton." [Unmaking of a Mayor 196-97)]

More recently, Mises' Institute scholar Gene Callahan employed the term in a criticism of 'neoconservative' foreign policy.

* * *

But what does it mean to say that the "eschaton has been immanentized", at least from an orthodox Christian perspective? -- Henry answers: "the Church is the continued presence of the Eschaton [Christ] in the World" :

The Church is where the kingdom of God is found in the world, and it is through the Church, which is the Body of Christ, that the world can be united with Christ and find its place in the eschaton. The Church is a sacrament – in her, the grace of God is found immanentized. [...]
The Church finds its mission to be the mission of Christ to the world, to show the world the love of Christ in order to transform it. We are the ones who make the not yet become a part of the "already" as we do the work of Christ by being his continued presence in the world and bring more and more of the world into Christ.

To which Michael Iafrate adds:

In Catholic eschatology, the eschaton is not merely an event or set of events in the future, but we believe that the future has broken into the world in Jesus Christ and continues to break into the world in a variety of ways, including the sacraments, Christ's ongoing presence in the Church, in the struggle for justice, etc. In Catholic theology, indeed in Paul's theology, the Kingdom is "already and not yet." We are living in the overlapping in-between times. As members of Christ's Body, we are to prefigure the Kingdom in history, today. Of course we don't do that in the fullest sense. Sin still affects our efforts. The Kingdom is still coming, but it is also here, at hand.

I don't think any Catholic would dispute Henry's fundamental point -- that the 'eschaton has been immanentized" in Jesus Christ, God become incarnate in humanity and within history, and that, moreover, "the Church is constituted as the Body of Christ through the Eucharist."

As (then) Cardinal Ratzinger asserted in his wonderful book on ecclesiology, Called to Communion:

Jesus himself is God's action, his coming, his reigning. In Jesus' mouth, "Kingdom of God" does not mean some thing or place but the present action of God. One may therefore translate the programmatic action of Mark 1:15 "the Kingdom of God is near at hand" as "God is near." We perceive once more the connection with Jesus, with his person: he himself is God's nearness. Wherever he is, is the Kingdom. [p. 22]

Furthermore, Ratzinger adds, "Jesus is never alone -- he came to gather what was dispersed. His entire work is to gather the new people." The fruit of Jesus' work is the Church, "a communion of converted sinners who live by the grace of forgiveness and transmit it themselves" [p. 149] -- united in our reception of the Eucharist: God himself.

There is, however, the thorny matter of what it actually means to "transfigure the world and bring it to its perfection" (to quote Henry Karlson), or "prefigure the Kingdom in history" (to quote Michael Iafrate). Henry remarks that:

"understood properly, the immanentized eschaton leads to Catholic Social Doctrine — the reason why we have social doctrine is because we become persons in Christ, and are to do the work of Christ."

Again, I don't think anybody will dispute that the revelation of Jesus Christ should have a necessary and transformative impact on human conduct and our temporal affairs. With respect to "Catholic social doctrine", however, I would add the qualification that Catholics across the political spectrum may very well likely differ over the prudential application of such. The Catholic Worker and the Catholic enterpreneur, while (presumably) united in an ambition to bring assistance to the poor, may differ in their practical strategies to do so.

However, it is when the idea of "the Kingdom" becomes politicized and ultimately perverted, taking the form of a political manifesto or concrete program for revolution -- when we perceive politics itself as a suitable vehicle for "the transfiguration of the world", that I find myself sympathetic to the wariness expressed by conservatives. For it is at this juncture that the very essence of Christianity, God's reconciliation of the world to himself in Christ on the Cross -- can be -- and has been -- subverted by our worldly ambitions. Or as Hans Urs von Balthasar cautioned,

Whoever removes the Cross and its interpretation by the New Testament from the center, in order to replace it, for example, with the social commitment of Jesus to the oppressed as a new center, no longer stands in continuity with the apostolic faith. [p. 81, A Short Primer for Unsettled Laymen]

Indeed, Buckley's own understanding of the "immanentization of the eschaton" -- that there is "a rational limit to politics" -- bears remarkable similarity to comments made by a certain Joseph Ratzinger, reflecting on the challenges to contemporary democracy:

... there is the inability to be reconciled with the imperfection of human affairs. The demand for the absolute in history is the enemy of the good in it. Manes Sperber speaks about a fanaticism that arises from disgust with the status quo. Disgust with the status quo is on the increase today, along with delight in anarchy, based on the conviction that there must be a good world somewhere after all. No one wants to pay homage to the enlightenment faith in progress anymore, but a sort of secular messianic belief has penetrated deep into the general consciousness. The notion that all history to date has been the history of bondage but that now, finally, the just society can and must be built soon is propagated in various slogans among atheists and Christians alike and even makes its way into bishops' statements and liturgical texts. Strangely enough, the Reich (kingdom) mystique from the period between the two world wars, which then met with such a macabre end, is now making a comeback. Once again, instead of talking about the "kingdom of God", people like to speak simply about the "kingdom" as something we are working for and building, which through our efforts has come within our grasp. The "kingdom" or the "new society" has become a moralistic slogan that replaces political and economic arguments. [Church, Ecumenism and Politics p. 195]

That we are striving for a new and definitely-better world is self-evident, says Ratzinger. However, he finds much that is "politically and philosophically questionable about such an imminent eschatology." (Hey, there's that phrase again! ;-)

The more I read of Ratzinger, the more I find myself struck by a marked circumspection regarding any attempt by the Church to appropriate political power in pursuit of its aims. (I gather this is born both of his childhood experience of National Socialism and his later encounters with revolutionary Marxism). This warning appears again and again, from his early writings as a young academic down to his most recent book published under his pontificate, Jesus of Nazareth. Here I'd like to offer a few selections for consideration :

... the New Testament is acquainted with political ethics, but not political theology. Precisely along this distinction runs the boundary line that Jesus himself and then, very emphatically, the apostolic letters have drawn between Christianity and fanaticism. As fragmentary and random the various New Testament statements on the political realm may be when taken individually, they are entirely in agreement and thoroughly clear about this fundamental determination. Whether we reflect on the account of the temptations of Jesus and their political implications or th story of the coin of tribute that belongs to Caesar or the political admonitions in the lettersof Paul or Peter or even the Book of Revelation ... the Scriptures always reject the fanaticism that tries to set up the kingdom of God as a political project. [Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 204]

* * *

The Kingdom of God, not being itself a political concept, cannot serve as a political criterion by which to construct in direct fashion a program of political action and to criticize the political efforts of other people. The realization of God's Kingdom is not itself a political process. To misconceive it as such is to falsify both politics and theology. The inevitable result is the rise of false messianic movements which of their very nature and from the inner logic of messianic claims finish up in totalitarianism. [Eschatology: Death and Eternal Life, p. 58]

* * *

[T]his by no means signifies that the proclamation of the Kingdom of God can be pushed aside as of no practical importance, and so transformed into a surreptitious justification of the status quo. The Kingdom of God is not a political norm of political activity, but it is a moral norm of that activity. ... In other words, the message of the Kingdom of God is significant for political life not by way of eschatology but by way of political ethics. The issue of a politics that will be genuinely responsible in Christian terms belongs to moral theology, not to eschatology. In this very distinction, the message of the Kingdom of God has something very important to say to politics. It is healthy for politics to learn that its own content is not eschatological. The setting asunder of eschatology and politics is one of the fundamental tasks of Christian theology. In carrying it out, the theologian can know himself to be following Jesus' own path in opposing the eschatology of his Zealot rivals. Only by taking this route can we preserve the hope which eschatology carries, and prevent its turning into the terror of the "Gulag Archipelago." And conversely, only along this way can we preserve the morality of politics and so its true humanity. Where eschatology and politics are made to coincide, morality decrees its own dissolution, becoming no more than the question of how to find the most efficient way of reaching the unum necessarium of the absolute goal. [Ibid, p. 59-60].

* * *

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

* * *

I would also recommend Ratzinger's "Preliminary Notes on Liberation Theology" -- especially with regards to the transformation of fundamental concepts in Christianity: "Hope", "Love", "The People of God" and "The Kingdom of God" -- by Marxist hermeneutics:

The fundamental concept of the preaching of Jesus is the "Kingdom of God". This concept is also at the center of the liberation theologies, but read against the background of marxist hermeneutics. According to one of these theologians, the Kingdom must not be understood in a spiritualist or universalist manner, not in the sense of an abstract eschatological eventuality. It must be understood in partisan terms and with a view to praxis. The meaning of the Kingdom can only be defined by reference to the praxis of Jesus, not theoretically: it means working at the historical reality that surrounds us in order to transform it into the Kingdom.
Here we must mention another basic idea of a particular postconciliar theology which has led in this direction. People said that after the Council every dualism must be overcome: the dualism of body and soul, of natural and supernatural, of this world and the world beyond, of then and now. Once these supposed dualisms had been eliminated, it only remained to work for a kingdom to be realized in present history and in politicoeconomic reality. This meant, however, that one had ceased to work for the benefit of people in this present time and had begun to destroy the present in the interests of a supposed future: thus the real dualism had broken loose.

* * *

Commenting on Pope Benedict's second encyclical, Spe Salvi, Fr. James V. Schall characterized it Benedict XVI's own attempt to "de-immanetizing the eschaton": "he restores the four last things and the three theological virtues to their original understanding, as precisely what we most need to understand ourselves."

Spe Salvi Section 24 in particular -- titled "the true shape of Christian hope" -- seems to me expressive of the Pope's desire to reign in our more grandiose ambitions. Benedict reminds us that "incremental progress is possible only in the material sphere"; that "freedom presupposes that in fundamental decisions, every person and every generation is a new beginning"; that "the moral well-being of the world can never be guaranteed simply through structures alone" -- indeed, that

since man always remains free and since his freedom is always fragile, the kingdom of good will never be definitively established in this world. Anyone who promises the better world that is guaranteed to last for ever is making a false promise; he is overlooking human freedom. Freedom must constantly be won over for the cause of good. Free assent to the good never exists simply by itself. If there were structures which could irrevocably guarantee a determined—good—state of the world, man's freedom would be denied, and hence they would not be good structures at all.
What this means is that every generation has the task of engaging anew in the arduous search for the right way to order human affairs; this task is never simply completed. Yet every generation must also make its own contribution to establishing convincing structures of freedom and of good, which can help the following generation as a guideline for the proper use of human freedom; hence, always within human limits, they provide a certain guarantee also for the future. [Spe Salvi 24-25]

Wherein, then, lies the Kingdom?

The Kingdom is at once now and not yet. As expressed in Catechism of the Catholic Church:

In the New Testament, the word basileia can be translated by "kingship" (abstract noun), "kingdom" (concrete noun) or "reign" (action noun). The Kingdom of God lies ahead of us. It is brought near in the Word incarnate, it is proclaimed throughout the whole Gospel, and it has come in Christ's death and Resurrection. The Kingdom of God has been coming since the Last Supper and, in the Eucharist, it is in our midst. The kingdom will come in glory when Christ hands it over to his Father:
It may even be . . . that the Kingdom of God means Christ himself, whom we daily desire to come, and whose coming we wish to be manifested quickly to us. For as he is our resurrection, since in him we rise, so he can also be understood as the Kingdom of God, for in him we shall reign. [CCC 2816]

The Church looks to the time of Christ's return -- when, as the Catechism states, "the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness", when "the just will reign with Christ for ever, glorified in body and soul, and the material universe itself will be transformed"; when "God will then be "all in all' (1 Cor 15:28). [CCC 1060]"

Until that time, Christians, as Henry righly noted, are called to manifest the Kingdom in the "here and now": in our actions toward each other; to be a witness in this world, "the salt of the earth." The Catechism is explicitly clear that the vocation of the laity is to "illuminate the temporal order" and direct it according to God's will -- "discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian doctrine and life. [CCC 899]"

At the same time, our work on this earth is provisional -- we should enter into the social, political and economic realms, cognisant of the necessary imperfections of human affairs, accomodating the demands and reality of human freedom, and particularly vigilant concerning pseudo-messianic attempts to realize "the absolute in history."

Once again, the Catechism reminds us:

The Antichrist's deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the "intrinsically perverse" political form of a secular messianism.
The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection. The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God's victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his Bride to come down from heaven. God's triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.

As Benedict puts it in Spe Salvi #31:

His Kingdom is not an imaginary hereafter, situated in a future that will never arrive; his Kingdom is present wherever he is loved and wherever his love reaches us. His love alone gives us the possibility of soberly persevering day by day, without ceasing to be spurred on by hope, in a world which by its very nature is imperfect. His love is at the same time our guarantee of the existence of what we only vaguely sense and which nevertheless, in our deepest self, we await: a life that is “truly” life.

* * *

Finally, a bit of papal trivia. We mentioned D. Vincent Twomey's reference to Voegelin in "The Mind of Benedict XVI" (Claremont Review of Books). Twomey notes that Joseph Ratzinger's postdoctoral dissertation was titled Theology of History In St. Bonaventure -- an analysis of the Saint's attempt to come to terms with the understanding of history put forth by the progressive theology of Joachim of Fiore, the subject of Voegelin's own analysis. While Ratzinger concluded that Bonaventure failed in his critique of Joachim, it did "alert him to the philosophical and theological issues underlying contemporary political life," particularly his later analysis of the radical and Marxist forms of liberation theology.

Not suprisingly, Ratzinger's study makes reference to Voegelin's own study of this subject. And in a subsequent book, Pope Benedict XVI: The Conscience of Our Age Ignatius Press, 2007), Twomey further mentions encountering a letter by Ratzinger, then Archbishop of Munich, to Eric Voegelin on the occasion of his eightieth birthday:

It was as great a surprise as it was a joy for me to receive your philosophical meditation, which you kindly sent to me with a personal dedication, in which you intend to awaken such a necessary and such a very fragile consciousness of the imperfect in opposition to the magic of the Utopian. Ever since your small book, Science, Politics and Gnosticism came into my hands in 1959, your thinking has fascinated and stimulated me, even though I was unfortunately unable to study it with the thoroughness I would have wished."
Addendum
By no means do I wish to infer that Henry Karlson or Michael Iafrate ascribe to the radical positions above, of the type criticized by Ratzinger. (In fact, this is why I've taken care to explicitly indicate my agreement with them on their fundamental points).
Rather, the intent of the post was to identify what I think were the perfectly valid and shared concerns, of Voegelin, Ratzinger (and perhaps even Buckley): that time and again, humanity's desire to "immanentize the eschaton", to bring the world to its perfection through political means, has resulted in complete (and oftentimes bloody) disaster.

Two Letters.

2009-08-30T01:02:00.001-04:00

I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith I have tried to right my path. I want you to know Your Holiness that in my nearly 50 years of elective office, I have done my best to champion the rights of the poor and open doors of economic opportunity. I have worked to welcome the immigrant, to fight discrimination, and expand access to health care and education. I have opposed the death penalty, and fought to end war. Those are the issues that have motivated me and been the focus of my work as a United States Senator.
I also want you to know that even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health field, and I'll continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone.

Excerpt, Letter of Senator Edward Kennedy to Pope Benedict XVI, which President Obama delivered to the Pontiff in July, 2009.

* * *

While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old. [...]
I share in the confidence of those who feel that America is willing to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. I also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society's problems -- an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.
When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

Excerpt, Letter of Senator Edward Kennedy to Thomas E. Denelly, August 1971.

"Objectivism"

2009-08-25T10:50:00.002-04:00

Over at CrankyCon, Paul Zummo offers a brief review of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged:

The atheism is only a small part of the issue with objectivism. Galt (and thus Rand’s) objection to the concept of original sin is naive, but even absent this aspect of objectivism, it remains a dehumanizing and abhorrent moral philosophy. Rand detests totalitarianism, it is true, but other writers have written better and less repugnant works in defense of capitalism and against totalitarianism. If libertarians and conservatives wish to seek out inspirational works on the topic, they are better off with the likes of George Orwell, C.S. Lewis, Thomas Sowell, Wilhelm Roepke, F.A. Hayek and countless others.
The fundamental problem is that Rand is as naive about human nature as the socialist utopians. After all, a utopian is a utopian, whether they are Marxian or Randian utopians. Therefore the rejection of the concept of original sin is something of a problem because it blinds Rand to the idea that human beings cannot simply shut off their passionate desires. If totalitarians are blind to the reality that human nature cannot be perfected, Rand is blind to the fact that the altruistic tendencies of humans cannot similarly be wiped out. Believe it or not, we are social beings (Aristotle and Aquinas being right), and it is simply unrealistic - and Rand is supposed to be about reason and realism - to expect humans to simply ignore these aspects of their personality.

See also Maclin Horton (Light on Dark Water) on "Ayn Rand, Crank" and what Ayn Rand got right.

And of course, Objectivism illustrated:

Divine symmetry.

2009-08-24T21:54:00.003-04:00

What is a fractal?

A fractal is generally "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole,"[1] a property called self-similarity. Roots of mathematical interest on fractals can be traced back to the late 19th Century, the term however was coined by Benoît Mandelbrot in 1975 and was derived from the Latin fractus meaning "broken" or "fractured." A mathematical fractal is based on an equation that undergoes iteration, a form of feedback based on recursion. [...]
Because they appear similar at all levels of magnification, fractals are often considered to be infinitely complex (in informal terms). Natural objects that approximate fractals to a degree include clouds, mountain ranges, lightning bolts, coastlines, snow flakes, various vegetables (cauliflower and broccoli), and animal coloration patterns. [Wikipedia]

If you have an spare hour on your hands, I heartily recommend this episode of PBS' Nova on Fractals: Hunting the Hidden Dimension on the discovery of fractals and their manifestation in ; further info can be found on their accompanying website.

For a mind-blowing demonstration of a fractal's scale, explore the infinite detail of a Mandelbrot set as you zoom to a magnification of 250,000,000x.

Thus begins the "Reform of the Reform" ...

2009-08-22T23:31:00.003-04:00

The USCCB has launched a new website introducing the Third Edition of the Roman Missal, which includes an updated translation of the English text of the mass:

The Missale Romanum (the Roman Missal), the ritual text for the celebration of the Mass, was first promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970 as the definitive text of the reformed liturgy of the Second Vatican Council. A second edition followed in 1975.
Pope John Paul II issued a revised version of the Missale Romanum during the Jubilee Year 2000. The English translation of the revised Roman Missal is nearing completion, and the Bishops of the United States will vote on the final sections of the text this November. Among other things, the revised edition of the Missale Romanum contains prayers for the observances of recently canonized saints, additional prefaces for the Eucharistic Prayers, additional Votive Masses and Masses and Prayers for Various Needs and Intentions, and some updated and revised rubrics (instructions) for the celebration of the Mass. The English translation of the Roman Missal will also include updated translations of existing prayers, including some of the well–known responses and acclamations of the people.
This website has been prepared to help you prepare for the transition. As this site continues to be expanded, you will find helpful resources for the faithful, for the clergy, and for parish and diocesan leaders.
May this process of the implementation of the revised Roman Missal be a time of deepening, nurturing, and celebrating our faith through our worship and the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy.

(Here are some examples of the changes afoot).