Gone to Chicago Early Tomorrow
Speaking tomorrow night at St. James parish in Arlington Heights on Confession, Eucharist and various Lenten-related stuff. Back Ash Wednesday afternoon.
Beans. Noses. You know the drill.
Monday, February 27, 2006
American Gulag
This makes the whole "We're bringing you the all-redeeming power of democracy" message a tougher sell with the target audience.
This makes the whole "We're bringing you the all-redeeming power of democracy" message a tougher sell with the target audience.
So today I'm sitting here working and the phone rings
It turns out that a show on MSNBC called the Abrams Report is doing a story on the British plagiarism suit against Dan Brown. Do I want to do the show?, they ask. Sure, say I. Have you read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the book which authors Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent claim Brown ripped off.
Nope, say I. I remember when it came out and I became familiar with the basic thesis ("Jesus was a dead rabbi with a girlfriend. Their lovechild went on to become the basis of the Merovingian dynasty.") It was a non-starter 20 years ago and I never much bothered with it. But when DVC came out with its startling new thesis that shocked the world ("Jesus was a dead rabbi with a girlfriend. Their lovechild went on to become the basis of the Merovingian dynasty") I remember thinking "This sounds strangely familiar."
But I had not read HBHG. Sorry, they said. We need somebody who's done an analysis of both books. Do you know anybody?
Hmmm, I thought. Who do I know who knows practically everything and who has written extensively on DVC?
This is a job for St. Blog's own Sandra Miesel! So I sicced them on her and, I am happy to report, I just got this email from Sandra:
This is your chance to find out what Sandra actually looks and sounds like, as well as watch her fillet Dan Brown into thin slices of hack and fraud and quick fry him to a crackly crunch. I hope they stream this, cuz it should be a lot of fun.
It turns out that a show on MSNBC called the Abrams Report is doing a story on the British plagiarism suit against Dan Brown. Do I want to do the show?, they ask. Sure, say I. Have you read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the book which authors Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent claim Brown ripped off.
Nope, say I. I remember when it came out and I became familiar with the basic thesis ("Jesus was a dead rabbi with a girlfriend. Their lovechild went on to become the basis of the Merovingian dynasty.") It was a non-starter 20 years ago and I never much bothered with it. But when DVC came out with its startling new thesis that shocked the world ("Jesus was a dead rabbi with a girlfriend. Their lovechild went on to become the basis of the Merovingian dynasty") I remember thinking "This sounds strangely familiar."
But I had not read HBHG. Sorry, they said. We need somebody who's done an analysis of both books. Do you know anybody?
Hmmm, I thought. Who do I know who knows practically everything and who has written extensively on DVC?
This is a job for St. Blog's own Sandra Miesel! So I sicced them on her and, I am happy to report, I just got this email from Sandra:
I'm going to be on some MSNBC cable show called the Abrams Report at 4:20 PM Eastern this afternoon. They're sending a TV truck right to my house! This was prompted by the Dan Brown plagarism trial in England.
Did you see Brown going into the courtroom in his trademark tweed sports jacket and sweater--no suit?
This is your chance to find out what Sandra actually looks and sounds like, as well as watch her fillet Dan Brown into thin slices of hack and fraud and quick fry him to a crackly crunch. I hope they stream this, cuz it should be a lot of fun.
I don't think it will work, but I don't see what's "disturbing" about it
I'm skeptical a lasting community can be built on the basis of the vision of one rich man. But it's certainly a noble goal: far nobler than the goals of most rich men. I think, however, that concupiscence (and the enmity of creatures like Frances Kissling and the ACLU) will soon destroy this.
Is this utopian? I don't know whether it is or not. If it's *fully* Catholic then it will take into account human frailty and sin. If it's (for want of a better word) Catholicist, then it will really be an attempt to impose a human ideology with Catholic-flavored themes by force of law. That is utopian and it will certainly fail. Time will tell.
I'm skeptical a lasting community can be built on the basis of the vision of one rich man. But it's certainly a noble goal: far nobler than the goals of most rich men. I think, however, that concupiscence (and the enmity of creatures like Frances Kissling and the ACLU) will soon destroy this.
Is this utopian? I don't know whether it is or not. If it's *fully* Catholic then it will take into account human frailty and sin. If it's (for want of a better word) Catholicist, then it will really be an attempt to impose a human ideology with Catholic-flavored themes by force of law. That is utopian and it will certainly fail. Time will tell.
A reader writes
Gentle Reader:
Go back and read over this letter, then come back and I will give you a little tour of What It's Like Being Me. I'll wait here.
Everyday, I am flooded with emails and links from various people. Sometimes they want my comments on an article. Sometimes they want to tell me what a jerk I am. Only rarely, however, do I get emails saying, "Please take time out of your busy day to comment on this link and, by the way, here's what I don't like about you." Thanks for economizing on electrons like that. What a delightful way to start the week.
As to the link, I think the guy is basically right with respect to Augustine's counsel to "Love and do as you please." I also think he's badly misreading the Church's tradition of asceticism in a fairly typical suburban way. If we really follow his advice, I don't think there would be any asceticism in the Church at all. Lent clearly contradicts this counsel, as does the One upon whom Lent is modeled: Christ in the desert. Porretto's picture of the Christian life is way too comfy and suburban. Yes, there have been excesses of asceticism in the Church's members. But the notion that this was particularly encouraged by the Church or that it was about the notion that "worldly pleasures compete with devotion to the Church" is bunk. The focus was on complete devotion to *God*. And it was usually taken up from the grass roots, not imposed by the hierarchy. The Prophet Chesterton speaks to this suburban misreading of the Church's ascetic tradition in St. Thomas Aquinas: the Dumb Ox:
So much for the link. As to your complaint about me, I'm afraid I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't believe I've ever claimed that proponents of the War on Terror are Mammon-First Conservatives. That would be rather self-defeating since I am a proponent of the War on Terror, just not of the War in Iraq. I can't for the life of me see that supporting the war on Terror necessarily has anything to do with Mammon-First conservatism. Similarly, I don't think somebody who supports the War necessarily worships Caesar (though I suppose there are people out there who are willing to give the State the power to do anything if it will promise to keep them safe, which is a form of Caesar-worship). Indeed, I would argue that many who *oppose* the War are prone to worship Caesar (so long as Caesar pursues a Leftist agenda). I have tweaked one writer for excommunicating Rod Dreher from the ranks of conservatism for the crime of writing Crunchy Cons and saying that God and family were more important than profit and bigness and power. But that was essentially playing defense against one conservative's absurd act of aggression.
Your note reads to me like a sort of hand-waving complaint. It's short on details and long a hazy sense of grievance. Could you give me details and documentation to back up your complaint? I do think there are roughly two main schools of thought among conservatives: there are conservatives who think God gave us freedom so we could practice virtue (i.e. Love God and neighbor, especially family) and those who think we have freedom (where it comes from is an open question) so that we can be left alone to do what we want, particularly get rich and acquire power. I'm basically in the first camp. I very seldom have remarked on who, if anybody, I think is in the second.
Another Fellow Adopted Brother of Christ, Fran Porretto, writes an interesting post that, in some ways--and whether he meant it or not--has some bearing on the coming season of Lent:
Ritual Denigrations
I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.
Something else--something that's been bothering me about your blog for some time:
Is it too much to ask that whenever you write about someone discussing important *practical* matters--say, for *example,* matters of economics, or policies the government pursues with regard to the WoT--that you not so *casually* dismiss the viewpoints by simply sneering/scoffing that the author is merely a "worshipper of Mammon" (in discussions of economics) or a "worshipper of caesar" (in discussions of WoT policies). It really isn't fair of you, Mr. Shea. Among the things that're to the eternal credit of Our Lord is that He *always* gave an intelligent answer/reply/ to a question--even a mere rhetorical or insincere one. He didn't *just* sneer/scoff. Can you at least give some indication that you actually *understand* what the author (you're criticizing) is saying?
I find it hard to believe that no one else has reproached you for this. But just in case, I thought to let you know.
Anyway, looking forward to what you have to say about Mr. Porretto's essay. Thanks.
Gentle Reader:
Go back and read over this letter, then come back and I will give you a little tour of What It's Like Being Me. I'll wait here.
Everyday, I am flooded with emails and links from various people. Sometimes they want my comments on an article. Sometimes they want to tell me what a jerk I am. Only rarely, however, do I get emails saying, "Please take time out of your busy day to comment on this link and, by the way, here's what I don't like about you." Thanks for economizing on electrons like that. What a delightful way to start the week.
As to the link, I think the guy is basically right with respect to Augustine's counsel to "Love and do as you please." I also think he's badly misreading the Church's tradition of asceticism in a fairly typical suburban way. If we really follow his advice, I don't think there would be any asceticism in the Church at all. Lent clearly contradicts this counsel, as does the One upon whom Lent is modeled: Christ in the desert. Porretto's picture of the Christian life is way too comfy and suburban. Yes, there have been excesses of asceticism in the Church's members. But the notion that this was particularly encouraged by the Church or that it was about the notion that "worldly pleasures compete with devotion to the Church" is bunk. The focus was on complete devotion to *God*. And it was usually taken up from the grass roots, not imposed by the hierarchy. The Prophet Chesterton speaks to this suburban misreading of the Church's ascetic tradition in St. Thomas Aquinas: the Dumb Ox:
St. Thomas, like other monks, and especially other saints, lived a life of renunciation and austerity; his fasts, for instance, being in marked contrast to the luxury in which he might have lived if he chose. This element stands high in his religion, as a manner of asserting the will against the power of nature, of thanking the Redeemer by partially sharing his sufferings, of making a man ready for anything as a missionary or martyr, and similar ideals. These happen to be rare in the modern industrial society of the West, outside his communion; and it is therefore assumed that they are the whole meaning of that communion. Because it is uncommon for an alderman to fast for forty days, or a politician to take a Trappist vow of silence, or a man about town to live a life of strict celibacy, the average outsider is convinced, not only that Catholicism is nothing except asceticism, but that asceticism is nothing except pessimism. He is so obliging as to explain to Catholics why they hold this heroic virtue in respect; and is ever ready to point out that the philosophy behind it is an Oriental hatred of anything connected with Nature, and a purely Schopenhauerian disgust with the Will to Live. I read in a "high-class" review of Miss Rebecca West's book on St.. Augustine, the astounding statement that the Catholic Church regards sex as having the nature of sin. How marriage can be a sacrament if sex is a sin, or why it is the Catholics who are in favour of birth and their foes who are in favour of birth-control, I will leave the critic to worry out for himself. My concern is not with that part of the argument; but with another.
The ordinary modern critic, seeing this ascetic ideal in an authoritative Church, and not seeing it in most other inhabitants of Brixton or Brighton, is apt to say, "This is the result of Authority; it would be better to have Religion without Authority." But in truth, a wider experience outside Brixton or Brighton would reveal the mistake. It is rare to find a fasting alderman or a Trappist politician, but it is still more rare to see nuns suspended in the air on hooks or spikes; it is unusual for a Catholic Evidence Guild orator in Hyde Park to begin his speech by gashing himself all over with knives; a stranger calling at an ordinary presbytery will seldom find the parish priest lying on the floor with a fire lighted on his chest and scorching him while he utters spiritual ejaculations. Yet all these things are done all over Asia, for instance, by voluntary enthusiasts acting solely on the great impulse of Religion; of Religion, in their case, not commonly imposed by any immediate Authority; and certainly not imposed by this particular Authority. In short, a real knowledge of mankind will tell anybody that Religion is a very terrible thing; that it is truly a raging fire, and that Authority is often quite as much needed to restrain it as to impose it. Asceticism, or the war with the appetites, is itself an appetite. It can never be eliminated from among the strange ambitions of Man. But it can be kept in some reasonable control; and it is indulged in much saner proportion under Catholic Authority than in Pagan or Puritan anarchy. Meanwhile, the whole of this ideal, though an essential part of Catholic idealism when it is understood, is in some ways entirely a side issue. It is not the primary principle of Catholic philosophy; it is only a particular deduction from Catholic ethics. And when we begin to talk about primary philosophy, we realise the full and flat contradiction between the monk fasting and the fakir hanging himself on hooks.
So much for the link. As to your complaint about me, I'm afraid I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't believe I've ever claimed that proponents of the War on Terror are Mammon-First Conservatives. That would be rather self-defeating since I am a proponent of the War on Terror, just not of the War in Iraq. I can't for the life of me see that supporting the war on Terror necessarily has anything to do with Mammon-First conservatism. Similarly, I don't think somebody who supports the War necessarily worships Caesar (though I suppose there are people out there who are willing to give the State the power to do anything if it will promise to keep them safe, which is a form of Caesar-worship). Indeed, I would argue that many who *oppose* the War are prone to worship Caesar (so long as Caesar pursues a Leftist agenda). I have tweaked one writer for excommunicating Rod Dreher from the ranks of conservatism for the crime of writing Crunchy Cons and saying that God and family were more important than profit and bigness and power. But that was essentially playing defense against one conservative's absurd act of aggression.
Your note reads to me like a sort of hand-waving complaint. It's short on details and long a hazy sense of grievance. Could you give me details and documentation to back up your complaint? I do think there are roughly two main schools of thought among conservatives: there are conservatives who think God gave us freedom so we could practice virtue (i.e. Love God and neighbor, especially family) and those who think we have freedom (where it comes from is an open question) so that we can be left alone to do what we want, particularly get rich and acquire power. I'm basically in the first camp. I very seldom have remarked on who, if anybody, I think is in the second.
Catholics Join Movement to Promote Da Vinci Code
Boycotts. Don't. Work. It's just free advertising for the film. Far better to educate yourself about the film than start shouting at people not to watch it. By all means, I'm not going to waste eight bux on it. But I'm not going to start buttonholing people on park benches and telling them not to go. It'll just stir up curiosity about this stupid story.
Boycotts. Don't. Work. It's just free advertising for the film. Far better to educate yourself about the film than start shouting at people not to watch it. By all means, I'm not going to waste eight bux on it. But I'm not going to start buttonholing people on park benches and telling them not to go. It'll just stir up curiosity about this stupid story.
...Because the Anglican Communion is So Overrun with Burly Men
The key word here is "counter".
Meanwhile, back at the New Testament, Jesus said, "When you pray, say, 'Father'".
The key word here is "counter".
Meanwhile, back at the New Testament, Jesus said, "When you pray, say, 'Father'".
60 Minutes Does Its Bit for Moloch Worship Disguised as Secular Messianism
Then Moloch said to the Christians who sat nearby, "Which is easier? To say, 'I have the right to eat your children and the unfit for the sake of fat research profits and the Boomer sense of infinite entitlement' or 'Rise and walk'? So that you may know that I have the right to eat your children and the unfit..." and he turned to the rat and said, "Rise and walk." And the rat walked in full view of the majority share of the Sunday night Nielsen audience. All men were amazed by the sign and said, "Screw these obscurantist Christians and their fear of science. If we sacrifice our children and the unfit, we could live forever and be ageless Boomers! Praise Moloch, who gives us endless youth and health!"
And Moloch laughed and was glad.
Then Moloch said to the Christians who sat nearby, "Which is easier? To say, 'I have the right to eat your children and the unfit for the sake of fat research profits and the Boomer sense of infinite entitlement' or 'Rise and walk'? So that you may know that I have the right to eat your children and the unfit..." and he turned to the rat and said, "Rise and walk." And the rat walked in full view of the majority share of the Sunday night Nielsen audience. All men were amazed by the sign and said, "Screw these obscurantist Christians and their fear of science. If we sacrifice our children and the unfit, we could live forever and be ageless Boomers! Praise Moloch, who gives us endless youth and health!"
And Moloch laughed and was glad.
A Theological Conundrum
If a letter from a saint is a second class relic, what is an email from a saint?
If a letter from a saint is a second class relic, what is an email from a saint?
Meanwhile, Gutsy Quebec Priest Bravely Join the Herd and Courageously Accept Accolades from Canadian Media
It takes a lot of moxie to defy the Church's sexual teaching in Canada.
It takes a lot of moxie to defy the Church's sexual teaching in Canada.
Multiculturalists Suddenly Become Militant Monoculturalists
Rich white ECUSA instructs ignorant, backward jungle dwellers on the manifold splendors and glories of homosexuality. The ECUSA: Laboring to create a community of rich diversity devoted to one single obsessive thought.
Rich white ECUSA instructs ignorant, backward jungle dwellers on the manifold splendors and glories of homosexuality. The ECUSA: Laboring to create a community of rich diversity devoted to one single obsessive thought.
Buckley Says the War Has Failed
I hope he's wrong. My prayer is that the fledgling Iraqi gov't can hold on through this despicable assault on the shrine last week and keep things together. But I'm not optimistic.
I hope he's wrong. My prayer is that the fledgling Iraqi gov't can hold on through this despicable assault on the shrine last week and keep things together. But I'm not optimistic.
The CAEI Pledge
Unlike some bloggers, I won't simply collect my Catholic Blog Award and then abandon you for the charms of the Eternal City, Rome. No. I'm here for you and vow that I will never, never, *ever* leave you.
Until tomorrow, when I abandon you for the charms of the Windy City, Chicago. So until then, consider this your port in an Amy-less storm.
FWIW, I'll be back Wednesday.
Unlike some bloggers, I won't simply collect my Catholic Blog Award and then abandon you for the charms of the Eternal City, Rome. No. I'm here for you and vow that I will never, never, *ever* leave you.
Until tomorrow, when I abandon you for the charms of the Windy City, Chicago. So until then, consider this your port in an Amy-less storm.
FWIW, I'll be back Wednesday.
Friday, February 24, 2006
Jewish Guy Kidnapped, Tortured and Murdered by African Youth of No Particular Religious Affiliation
Fortunately, as reader doubting Thomas has so brilliantly shown, burning people with cigarettes isn't torture if it's not sanctioned by the state (I am not making this up), so these upstanding representatives of No Particular Religious Tradition are now only guilty of murder and kidnapping.
Fortunately, as reader doubting Thomas has so brilliantly shown, burning people with cigarettes isn't torture if it's not sanctioned by the state (I am not making this up), so these upstanding representatives of No Particular Religious Tradition are now only guilty of murder and kidnapping.
I'd like to thank the Academy
for the award for Best Social Commentary.
Here's a few of my favorite acceptance speech quotations:
"Where to begin? Where to begin? You know, they say you can't remember your time in the womb..." - Diane, Cheers
"It all started in a 5000 watt radio station in Fresno, California. A $60 a week paycheck and a crazy dream." - Ted Baxter, The Mary Tyler Moore Show. (Added bonus: Ted Knight, who played Baxter, won an Emmy for his role and actually used Baxter's speech for his acceptance speech).
"Wow! I feel five feet tall!" - Michael J. Fox
"You like me! You really like me!" [Gush! Sob!] - Sally Field
Anyway! Thanks very much for your kindness! I was happy to see the field diversify a bit and congrats to all the other winners and nominees!
for the award for Best Social Commentary.
Here's a few of my favorite acceptance speech quotations:
"Where to begin? Where to begin? You know, they say you can't remember your time in the womb..." - Diane, Cheers
"It all started in a 5000 watt radio station in Fresno, California. A $60 a week paycheck and a crazy dream." - Ted Baxter, The Mary Tyler Moore Show. (Added bonus: Ted Knight, who played Baxter, won an Emmy for his role and actually used Baxter's speech for his acceptance speech).
"Wow! I feel five feet tall!" - Michael J. Fox
"You like me! You really like me!" [Gush! Sob!] - Sally Field
Anyway! Thanks very much for your kindness! I was happy to see the field diversify a bit and congrats to all the other winners and nominees!
Freedom of Choice for Everybody Except Catholics!
Connecticut, which earlier attempted to kick down the door of the confessional, now makes a stab at compelling Catholic hospitals to provide abortifacients.
The Catholic bishops of Connecticut should tell the legislature to go to hell and be willing to go to jail rather than obey this evil law.
Connecticut, which earlier attempted to kick down the door of the confessional, now makes a stab at compelling Catholic hospitals to provide abortifacients.
The Catholic bishops of Connecticut should tell the legislature to go to hell and be willing to go to jail rather than obey this evil law.
It would have been nice if these guys had been in charge of Terri Schiavo's care
It's rather strange for Conservative Christians to rail at doctor's for violating their oath to do no harm when it comes to euthanasia and then demand that they kill people for Caesar. But then, there's something bizarre about the insistence on "qualified medical personnel" seeing to it that a person dies. What? Are they afraid they'll use an unsterile needle on a man who is going to be dead in 30 seconds? We want to kill people, but we don't want to face the fact that we are killing people. Older, coarser and earthier cultures did this in the town square with an axe and a lot of spurting blood. We prefer our violence privatized and sanitized, from the abortion clinic to Schiavo's hospice to the gallows. It's an aesthetic choice that reveals a schizophrenic conscience about our culture of death.
It's rather strange for Conservative Christians to rail at doctor's for violating their oath to do no harm when it comes to euthanasia and then demand that they kill people for Caesar. But then, there's something bizarre about the insistence on "qualified medical personnel" seeing to it that a person dies. What? Are they afraid they'll use an unsterile needle on a man who is going to be dead in 30 seconds? We want to kill people, but we don't want to face the fact that we are killing people. Older, coarser and earthier cultures did this in the town square with an axe and a lot of spurting blood. We prefer our violence privatized and sanitized, from the abortion clinic to Schiavo's hospice to the gallows. It's an aesthetic choice that reveals a schizophrenic conscience about our culture of death.
The latest in Cutting Edge Post-Modern Moral Philosophy...
...is years behind me!
I hate being right all the time.
...is years behind me!
I hate being right all the time.
I have a Congenital Allergy to Conspiracy Theorists Like This
Growing band of kooks floats various theories about 9/11. Soon it will replace JFK's assassination as the new bellwether for all X Files types. I'm one of those simple-minded people who think Oswald got up in a tall building with a rifle and shot the President. I also think the basic 9/11 narrative is right: Osama plotted it and it was carried out by 19 Al Quaeda nuts. I am aided and abetted by the fact that I've seen the Pentagon damage with my own eyes and find it rather hard to credit claims that no plane crashed there. One wonders where Barbara Olsen has got herself to these past five years.
Anyway, further evidence that for some people, not amount of common sense will do. There's a strange itch in the human soul to be the Possessor of the Secret History of Our Time. It's so much grander than being an ordinary schlep.
Growing band of kooks floats various theories about 9/11. Soon it will replace JFK's assassination as the new bellwether for all X Files types. I'm one of those simple-minded people who think Oswald got up in a tall building with a rifle and shot the President. I also think the basic 9/11 narrative is right: Osama plotted it and it was carried out by 19 Al Quaeda nuts. I am aided and abetted by the fact that I've seen the Pentagon damage with my own eyes and find it rather hard to credit claims that no plane crashed there. One wonders where Barbara Olsen has got herself to these past five years.
Anyway, further evidence that for some people, not amount of common sense will do. There's a strange itch in the human soul to be the Possessor of the Secret History of Our Time. It's so much grander than being an ordinary schlep.
Germans Convert to Frenchness
Man given a one-year jail sentence, suspended for five years, and ordered to complete 300 hours of community service. His crime: printing out sheets of toilet paper bearing the word 'Koran' shortly after a group of Muslims carried out a series of bomb attacks in London in July 2005 and sending it to German television stations, magazines and some 15 mosques.
Meanwhile, The Da Vinci Code is *not* printed on toilet paper and Dan Brown is rich. America: What a country!
Man given a one-year jail sentence, suspended for five years, and ordered to complete 300 hours of community service. His crime: printing out sheets of toilet paper bearing the word 'Koran' shortly after a group of Muslims carried out a series of bomb attacks in London in July 2005 and sending it to German television stations, magazines and some 15 mosques.
Meanwhile, The Da Vinci Code is *not* printed on toilet paper and Dan Brown is rich. America: What a country!
Perversion: It's not Just for the Elite Anymore
American pop culture has always worked by the trickledown effect. In the 30s, they made light comedies in which wealthy men in top hats and women in spangles talked lightly of their divorces. It helped to make divorce a popular idea and opened the way for ordinary Joes to destroy their families too. In the 60s, the upper classes embraced the drug culture, paving the way for the middle and lower classes to embrace it too. The Upper class could afford rehab and then write the books about their glorious transformation into Deeper People. The lower classes were stuck with addiction and destroyed lives. Now we've got Britney tongue wrestling with Madonna on the tube and the lower classes are again taking their cues from the upper class on experimentation with various forms of polymorphous perversity.
Hey! What could it hurt?
American pop culture has always worked by the trickledown effect. In the 30s, they made light comedies in which wealthy men in top hats and women in spangles talked lightly of their divorces. It helped to make divorce a popular idea and opened the way for ordinary Joes to destroy their families too. In the 60s, the upper classes embraced the drug culture, paving the way for the middle and lower classes to embrace it too. The Upper class could afford rehab and then write the books about their glorious transformation into Deeper People. The lower classes were stuck with addiction and destroyed lives. Now we've got Britney tongue wrestling with Madonna on the tube and the lower classes are again taking their cues from the upper class on experimentation with various forms of polymorphous perversity.
Hey! What could it hurt?
Interview with My Wife's Husband on His (and Ted Sri's) New Book: The Da Vinci Deception: 100 Questions About the Facts and Fiction of The Da Vinci Code
By the way, check out the cool Da Vinci Outreach site and note the cool (and all lay) speakers we've got lined up (because, you know, the Church is nothing but Official and hierarchs who are protecting their jobs).
I'm going to talking to a Lutheran church here in Western Washington in a couple of months. That's fitting, because the DVC is not an attack on just Catholics. It's an attack on all Christians. It's a measure of the puniness of Brown's mind that, for him, there is no Christianity except the Catholic Church and there is no Catholic Church except "the Vatican".
I'll also be out at Marytown in Chicago on July 15 to talk about DVC.
By the way, check out the cool Da Vinci Outreach site and note the cool (and all lay) speakers we've got lined up (because, you know, the Church is nothing but Official and hierarchs who are protecting their jobs).
I'm going to talking to a Lutheran church here in Western Washington in a couple of months. That's fitting, because the DVC is not an attack on just Catholics. It's an attack on all Christians. It's a measure of the puniness of Brown's mind that, for him, there is no Christianity except the Catholic Church and there is no Catholic Church except "the Vatican".
I'll also be out at Marytown in Chicago on July 15 to talk about DVC.
The Relentless Brokebackification of Movie Trailers Marches On!
The Empire Brokeback
Brokeback Trek
A cottage industry is born!
The Empire Brokeback
Brokeback Trek
A cottage industry is born!
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Vatican Cracks Down On Muslims
Not really. But I just thought I'd continue a venerable MSM cliche. Basically Rome is attempting the "appeal to the better angels of their nature" approach with Muslims. Another way of phrasing it is, "Grow up." We'll see if it works.
Not really. But I just thought I'd continue a venerable MSM cliche. Basically Rome is attempting the "appeal to the better angels of their nature" approach with Muslims. Another way of phrasing it is, "Grow up." We'll see if it works.
Dawn Eden's Adventures Working for the so-Called "Free Press" in New York
Another story to file under "Because the Vatican Does not Issue Fatwas".
Another story to file under "Because the Vatican Does not Issue Fatwas".
The New World
If you've not seen it, I highly recommend it. Gorgeously photographed, it's a slow, meditative look at the first encounters between the colonists at Jamestown and the "Naturals" as they were called by the English settlers. The story is character driven and is not the common "1492 and the Conquest of Paradise" fare where all Europeans are earth raping thugs and all Natives are noble eco-gods living in harmony with Mother Earth. Terence Malick takes some remarkable chances by showing a Native (his heroine, Pocahontas) embracing Christianity in a way that does not crush her own spirituality but completes it. I can't do justice to a film as rich and complex as this one in the space of a blog entry (I've gotta get going and write some stuff today) but I wanted to recommend this fine film.
If you've not seen it, I highly recommend it. Gorgeously photographed, it's a slow, meditative look at the first encounters between the colonists at Jamestown and the "Naturals" as they were called by the English settlers. The story is character driven and is not the common "1492 and the Conquest of Paradise" fare where all Europeans are earth raping thugs and all Natives are noble eco-gods living in harmony with Mother Earth. Terence Malick takes some remarkable chances by showing a Native (his heroine, Pocahontas) embracing Christianity in a way that does not crush her own spirituality but completes it. I can't do justice to a film as rich and complex as this one in the space of a blog entry (I've gotta get going and write some stuff today) but I wanted to recommend this fine film.
Francis Fukuyama on the End of the Neocons
I've always taken Fukuyama with a grain of salt since I thought the idea of "The End of History" was preposterous. Rather a lot of history has stubbornly continued to happen since that essay.
"[T]he neoconservative position articulated by people like Kristol and Kagan was, by contrast, Leninist; they believed that history can be pushed along with the right application of power and will. Leninism was a tragedy in its Bolshevik version, and it has returned as farce when practiced by the United States."
I've always taken Fukuyama with a grain of salt since I thought the idea of "The End of History" was preposterous. Rather a lot of history has stubbornly continued to happen since that essay.
Bp. Imesch Pulls Into the Lead for Narcissist of the Year Award
Stomach-churningly disgusting or blackly funny? You decide.
Let the Great Enema continue!
Stomach-churningly disgusting or blackly funny? You decide.
Let the Great Enema continue!
A reader asks
Not a clue. Anyone?
I was reading Catholic World Report, in which the issue of Modern Slavery was addressed. One reference in the article was the website Free the Slaves, from which I learned that at present there are 27 million slaves. 27 Million people.
What is the church doing about this human rights atrocity? Do you know?
Not a clue. Anyone?
Speaking of Which....
Somebody sent me a link to a piece by Scot McKnight, an Evangelical theologian, called From Wheaton to Rome. McKnight is not a convert to the Catholic faih, but he's interested in the dynamics of conversion and writes an informed and empathetic survey of some of the Big Name conversions of recent years (as well as of a few folk I've never heard of). As I read the piece, I recalled Scott Hahn mentioning McKnight's name as somebody who might be interested in _Behold Your Mother: An Evangelical Discovers the Blessed Virgin Mary_, so I Googled him and asked if he'd like to see it (and perhaps blurb it).
I got a gracious note back this morning expressing enthusiastic interest. More than that, Dr. McKnight was a bit gobsmacked because he's writing a book called _She is His Mother: An Evangelical Discovers Mary_.
Something huge is happening out there. I get a stronger and stronger sense that there is a real sea change happening in Evangelical attitudes toward Our Lady. I look forward to getting to know Dr. McKnight better.
Somebody sent me a link to a piece by Scot McKnight, an Evangelical theologian, called From Wheaton to Rome. McKnight is not a convert to the Catholic faih, but he's interested in the dynamics of conversion and writes an informed and empathetic survey of some of the Big Name conversions of recent years (as well as of a few folk I've never heard of). As I read the piece, I recalled Scott Hahn mentioning McKnight's name as somebody who might be interested in _Behold Your Mother: An Evangelical Discovers the Blessed Virgin Mary_, so I Googled him and asked if he'd like to see it (and perhaps blurb it).
I got a gracious note back this morning expressing enthusiastic interest. More than that, Dr. McKnight was a bit gobsmacked because he's writing a book called _She is His Mother: An Evangelical Discovers Mary_.
Something huge is happening out there. I get a stronger and stronger sense that there is a real sea change happening in Evangelical attitudes toward Our Lady. I look forward to getting to know Dr. McKnight better.
Excellent!
Just got a foreword for my Mary book from Fr. Richard John Neuhaus! Sort of like getting a ball signed by Babe Ruth! I'm jazzed.
Now all I need to do is firm up with a publisher. I'll know about that within a month (I hope).
Just got a foreword for my Mary book from Fr. Richard John Neuhaus! Sort of like getting a ball signed by Babe Ruth! I'm jazzed.
Now all I need to do is firm up with a publisher. I'll know about that within a month (I hope).
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
An Unsolicited Encomium From a Rock Solid Podcast Fan
The real genius behind the Rock Solid podcasts is Mary Kochan. She does the heavy lifting in the writing department. I provide various edits and window dressing.
Glad you like 'em!
With my recent subscription to a high-speed internet provider I have been able to utilize my iPod for more than just satisfying my desire to amass arcane music on a portable format. Catholic Exchange has been my home page for about a year now and has helped to open my eyes to the wealth of good Catholic information available. Discovering your Rock Solid pod cast has been the jewel in the crown so to speak. What I appreciate about your programs is what I like best about my Catholic faith: a Church with such a rich past, a history of scholarly endeavors, a tradition of education, and a relevance that speaks so clearly to our modern world. I especially enjoyed your 10/17/05 program on Einstein and the metaphor of an object approaching the speed of light to the weight of our sins as we approach holiness. Brilliant! Keep up the good work and may the Holy Spirit continue to guide you, as I know He guides you now.
The real genius behind the Rock Solid podcasts is Mary Kochan. She does the heavy lifting in the writing department. I provide various edits and window dressing.
Glad you like 'em!
John Granger, Author of Looking for God in Harry Potter Weighs in...
...on the Harry Potter discussion that has been going on here. He writes:
This is why blogs are cool.
...on the Harry Potter discussion that has been going on here. He writes:
Sean is right in his presentation of my opinion that Dumbledore does not ask for his death or for mercy on the Tower ("Severus, please..."). He only asks that their connection be broken and his death become final. Read that "Sever Us, please." When Snape asks his DADA class what the difference is between a ghost and an Inferi, the correct answer is "Albus Dumbledore," whose de-animation has been suspended for a period (not more than a year) by the Stoppered Death potion mentioned in the first Potions class in the series (a class referred to 7 times in HP6). As Joyce Odell has written, cogently I think, Dumbledore is Snape's "handler" and has done everything to protect him - to include lying out right about how much Snape heard of the Prophecy. He trusts him as much as he does for a variety of reasons, but most obviously in his last year because he knows he is only among the living because of Snape's "connection."
Sean may be wrong, though, in presenting Ms. Rowling as an Inkling, which until very recently was a position I championed. I'm writing an article now on the Harry Potter books as Post Modern Myth (attached) the conclusion of which will be that Rowling is a "Post Modern Christian" which is only like Lewis, Tolkien, and Sayers in being "anti-modern" and steeped in Christian literary traditions. Which, of course, is to say "quite a bit like them."
Rowling has been treated as a writer that fell ex machina upon us and Potter mania as something inexplicable. Silly, really. Rowling is a woman of her times and writes books that obviously resonate extraordinarily with the Zeit Geist, for better or worse. They have their extraordinary popularity, however, because they also point to the transcendent realities which we are designed to love and embrace. Like all really great writers, then, (a) she is of her times and (b) her books give us an experience of timeless truth. What you learned in Lit Crit 101 is true, even of Harry Potter.
She is despised, I think, because she makes no apologies for postmodernism and attacks only "fascists and ideologues" to include those who are excessively dogmatic in their postmodernism. As most of her critics (in my experience) are Christians who have retreated into a mechanical faith and ideological position in the culture war because of their objections to the radical relativism of PoMo academics (can you say "Michael O'Brien"?), we have a wonderful snapshot in this "tempest in a teapot" of the lunacy of our times.
You are all welcome to join in the conversation on my private HP boards www.HogwartsProfessor.com/forums .
This is why blogs are cool.
A reader asks
Re: original sin. Chesterton always seemed to me to be prescient here in his glorious book Orthodoxy:
The mystery is not that we are born with original sin. The mystery is that we are born. That our creator has seen fit to leave us to struggle with original sin is something that ultimately, we have to accept rather than explain, because like it or not it's a fact. I don't see how it's unjust, unless I first grant that my existence is "unjust". The odds against me being here are infinity to one. But I have been, as von Balthasar says, granted entry into being. That my entry into being is immediately bound up with the lives of everybody else who have been granted entry into being seems to me to be quite fair. But that's what original sin basically means: you are not an island and those who have gone before affect you. In his mysterious Providence, God has permitted this so that you, in turn, can have a real effect on others. If he thinks that's best, I have to trust him that he knows what he's doing.
Re: Muslim saints. The response is "Documentation please?"
I am a campus missionary with FOCUS (Fellowship of Catholic University Students) in Kansas City--you may know the group, started with Dr. Scott Hahn and founded and run by Curtis Martin.
I'm writing you because I really enjoy your blog.
In any case, I had a student pose a particularly difficult question in Bible
study last week. I have my thoughts, but I'd like yours.
Why would God allow us to be born with original sin? And especially, if Christ died for everyone, why should baptism be necessary for infants to enter heaven or to become "temples of the Holy Spirit" in this life? My student made the comment that everyone is born a temple of the Holy Spirit (essentially without original sin) because of Christ, they just don't have the gifts until baptism. But it's a difficult question--why would God as opposed to show me in Scripture.
And he made a comment about a Muslim canonized by the Catholic Church. I find that hard to believe...
Re: original sin. Chesterton always seemed to me to be prescient here in his glorious book Orthodoxy:
Remember, however, that to be breakable is not the same as to be perishable. Strike a glass, and it will not endure an instant; simply do not strike it, and it will endure a thousand years. Such, it seemed, was the joy of man, either in elfland or on earth; the happiness depended on not doing something which you could at any moment do and which, very often, it was not obvious why you should not do. Now, the point here is that to me this did not seem unjust. If the miller’s third son said to the fairy, “Explain why I must not stand on my head in the fairy palace,” the other might fairly reply, “Well, if it comes to that, explain the fairy palace.” If Cinderella says, “How is it that I must leave the ball at twelve?” her godmother might answer, “How is it that you are going there till twelve?” If I leave a man in my will ten talking elephants and a hundred winged horses, he cannot complain if the conditions partake of the slight eccentricity of the gift. He must not look a winged horse in the mouth. And it seemed to me that existence was itself so very eccentric a legacy that I could not complain of not understanding the limitations of the vision when I did not understand the vision they limited. The frame was no stranger than the picture.
The mystery is not that we are born with original sin. The mystery is that we are born. That our creator has seen fit to leave us to struggle with original sin is something that ultimately, we have to accept rather than explain, because like it or not it's a fact. I don't see how it's unjust, unless I first grant that my existence is "unjust". The odds against me being here are infinity to one. But I have been, as von Balthasar says, granted entry into being. That my entry into being is immediately bound up with the lives of everybody else who have been granted entry into being seems to me to be quite fair. But that's what original sin basically means: you are not an island and those who have gone before affect you. In his mysterious Providence, God has permitted this so that you, in turn, can have a real effect on others. If he thinks that's best, I have to trust him that he knows what he's doing.
Re: Muslim saints. The response is "Documentation please?"
Hey Michiganders! You tax dollars at work!
University of Michigan offers class titled "How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality & Initiation."
Some Michiganders suggest this is not a particularly good use of public monies. (Warning: Evil PDF format.)
University of Michigan offers class titled "How to be Gay: Male Homosexuality & Initiation."
Some Michiganders suggest this is not a particularly good use of public monies. (Warning: Evil PDF format.)
Today is the First Birthday of Msgr. Luigi Guissani, Founder of Communion and Liberation
The Pope remembers a great man.
If you haven't checked out CL, you should. Good stuff.
The Pope remembers a great man.
If you haven't checked out CL, you should. Good stuff.
New Blog for Prolife Teens!
My son's Youth for Life group has 50-60 kids meeting every month (as well as staging peaceful pray-ins, walks for life and various other community outreaches). And the group is growing. There's nothing like belonging to the generation that escaped murder to persuade you that life is a good thing.
My son's Youth for Life group has 50-60 kids meeting every month (as well as staging peaceful pray-ins, walks for life and various other community outreaches). And the group is growing. There's nothing like belonging to the generation that escaped murder to persuade you that life is a good thing.
Sweden: Where the Looniest Ideas of the Left Are Tested on Helpless Men, Women and Children
High Octane Insane Feminism and Leftist Social Engineering gets all its wishes in Sweden. Naturally, they are consistently portrayed by the Swedish element in our media as the moral and social Masters at whose feet all Americans should sit, shut up, and learn.
Happily, American are mostly Indians, not Swedes.
High Octane Insane Feminism and Leftist Social Engineering gets all its wishes in Sweden. Naturally, they are consistently portrayed by the Swedish element in our media as the moral and social Masters at whose feet all Americans should sit, shut up, and learn.
Happily, American are mostly Indians, not Swedes.
Like I Said, I've Always Thought Bush Believed us Into War
The problem is: belief is not certitude and the Bushies were not willing to wait. When you are cock-sure you're right, these things happen.
Summary: During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, writes the intelligence community's former senior analyst for the Middle East, the Bush administration disregarded the community's expertise, politicized the intelligence process, and selected unrepresentative raw intelligence to make its public case.
PAUL R. PILLAR is on the faculty of the Security Studies Program at
Georgetown University. Concluding a long career in the Central Intelligence Agency,
he served as National Intelligence Officer for the Near East and South Asia
from 2000 to 2005.
The problem is: belief is not certitude and the Bushies were not willing to wait. When you are cock-sure you're right, these things happen.
Coming Soon to a Medical System Near You: The Banality of Euthanasian Evil
A desperately poor Indian kid volunteers to die so as not to be a burden on his poor father. A system that could help him finds it easier and more convenient to say, "If they be like to die, they had better do it and decrease the surplus population."
******
"Man," said the Ghost, "if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant until you have discovered What the surplus is, and Where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be, that in the sight of Heaven, you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. Oh God! to hear the Insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust!"
A desperately poor Indian kid volunteers to die so as not to be a burden on his poor father. A system that could help him finds it easier and more convenient to say, "If they be like to die, they had better do it and decrease the surplus population."
******
"Man," said the Ghost, "if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant until you have discovered What the surplus is, and Where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be, that in the sight of Heaven, you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. Oh God! to hear the Insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust!"
16 States Have Citizens Sensible Enough to Think that Experimenting on Children with Gay Adoption is a Bad Idea
34 States say, "Hey! What could it hurt?"
34 States say, "Hey! What could it hurt?"
This sort of thing is almost inevitable in America
SNAP is apparently stepping outside its mission (exposing predators and the bishops who shield them and protecting kids) and starting to do theology, in particular, the theology of Holy Orders. Not surprisingly, they are starting to call for changes to the theology of Holy Orders that are fundamentally incompatible with the nature of Catholic revelation. And also not surprisingly, most American will naturally see this as a desperate attempt to cling to power and not a serious principled stand for a basic truth of revelation. The urge to remake the Church in the image and likeness of the American Constitutional order runs deep. The problem is that apostolic succession is a fixed feature of Catholic teaching. There can be lay input into who gets to be bishop ("Ambrose! Bishop!") but the notion that the Church can be fundamentally remade into a constitutional system of check and balances is a pipe dream.
SNAP is apparently stepping outside its mission (exposing predators and the bishops who shield them and protecting kids) and starting to do theology, in particular, the theology of Holy Orders. Not surprisingly, they are starting to call for changes to the theology of Holy Orders that are fundamentally incompatible with the nature of Catholic revelation. And also not surprisingly, most American will naturally see this as a desperate attempt to cling to power and not a serious principled stand for a basic truth of revelation. The urge to remake the Church in the image and likeness of the American Constitutional order runs deep. The problem is that apostolic succession is a fixed feature of Catholic teaching. There can be lay input into who gets to be bishop ("Ambrose! Bishop!") but the notion that the Church can be fundamentally remade into a constitutional system of check and balances is a pipe dream.
Transmogrification of ECUSA into Gay Bathhouse and Sushi Bar Continues Apace
Chris Johnson will be fun to read today.
Chris Johnson will be fun to read today.
A reader writes:
You sold me. I'm gonna check out the first two seasons on Netflix.
Orson Scott Card once remarked that science-fiction and fanstasy are the only places where serious theological exploration and speculation are still allowed in fiction. He's right.
Just wanted to bring to your attention that the (sorta) pro-life elements of the new sci-fi show Battlestar Galactica since you are, as you often remind us, without a TV. Because the show has quite the story arc (think Babylon 5 or Deep Space 9) it's rather complicated, but 2 recent episodes have touched on the issue.
The first involves the issue of what to do with the unborn offspring of Lt. Helo and Lt. Sharon Valerii, the latter of whom is a human-esque variant of the evil Cylon robots who was more or less put into an extremely complex situation by the Cylon leadership with Helo all of last season for the purpose of the two of them falling in love and having a child for some as yet unrevealed nefarious purpose. Since this is more or less a "Rosemary's Baby"-style situation (the ultimate hard case?), there is a debate within the Fleet's leadership as to whether or not the baby should be aborted. While the plot thread was resolved deux ex machina style, it was extremely interesting to see how Helo and Sharon argued for the inherent personhood and innocence of their baby, which certainly isn't something you'd see on one of the more "realistic" shows like say the Law & Order series.
The second major plot thread that took place last week involved the issue of whether or not abortion should still be legal within the Fleet (the apparent remnants of humanity, now down to less than 50,000 survivors after the initial Cylon genocide at the beginning of the series). The president, who is personally pro-choice (certainly an interesting departure from the traditional Hollywood paradigm here for reasons you'll soon see) is forced to agree with the somewhat tepidly pro-life commander of fleet (I say tepidly because he agreed with the original decision to abort the Cylon pregnancy, but in his defense that was far more a "Rosemary's Baby" situation than the conventional abortion dilemma) that humans need to have babies if they want to survive as a species against the mechanistic, mass-producing Cylons - a likely inadvertent parallel to the situation now facing Europe with regard to Islam if I ever heard one - in addition to moral objections from the pseudo Greco-Roman religion that appears to be more or less homogeneous throughout the Fleet. Ultimately, the president decides to ban abortion throughout the entire fleet, prompting her VP Gaius Baltar (actually a Cylon collaborator who communicates and occasionally fornicates telepathically with another humanoid Cylon, this one a beautiful woman that he knew as Natasi, a near-anagram for Satan, but who calls herself Six) to break with her and run against her in the upcoming election on a pro-choice platform. The best part of the whole episode, IMO, was while Baltar was delivering all the standard Planned Parenthood trope about freedom and choice being so essential to human society, you could see through Baltar's mind's eye Six standing behind of the press corps smiling wickedly as she claps is almost as powerful an image as the demon whispering in the ear of the Antichrist in that famous painting whose name escapes me at the moment.
You sold me. I'm gonna check out the first two seasons on Netflix.
Orson Scott Card once remarked that science-fiction and fanstasy are the only places where serious theological exploration and speculation are still allowed in fiction. He's right.
Two Readers on Torture
Reader A writes:
While Reader B says:
I've been over this ground enough that I suspect there is little point in adding my 2 cents but, for the record, I do indeed think that something the Church describes as gravely and intrinsically immoral is to be opposed completely, not half-heartedly. I have no problem with people who ask "What is torture?" in a sincere effort to distinguish between torture and legitimate forms of coercion ("Put your hands over your head and get in the squad car."). In short, I do not fault those who ask questions to find things out. But I have nothing but contempt for the project of asking questions to *keep* from finding things out. If you are doing the former, I have no objections. I also have little help to offer for the simple reason that I am not in law enforcement or the military and have no training in distinguishing between the two. That is why I keep referring readers to the appropriate resources which have guided these fine professions for decades.
Beyond the question of "What is torture?" are the various projects which have as their aim the conclusion "...and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture." These projects take various forms such as
The Church approved of torture in olden days, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
Golly, defining torture is just so baffling we'll never be able to figure out what it is, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture since we can't be held responsible when we act in ignorance.
Torture=any form of coercion, so parents who make their kids go to bed on time are guilty of "torture" in the Church's eyes. Clearly, this is silly, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
This is war dammit! While you panty-waist torture Pharisees scold and moralize, brave men are dying and Muslims are tunneling under orphanages with nukes. We have to act now with desperate measures, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
Etc.
For these projects too I have utter contempt (which may be mistaken for glib pronouncements). When the devil speaks I think one way of fighting him is to mock him. And it is the devil speaking when we are told the Church may be safely ignored on a matter of grave and intrinsic evil. Even when it is for the Security of the Fatherland.
Reader A writes:
As often as you have written on this subject, haven't you ever wanted to think the subject through in some sort of comprehensive way instead of making glib pronouncements?
Btw, the magisterial teachings on torture aren't nearly as definitive as you would like to read them. But even from your perspective, the Mark-Shea-vantage of industrial strength repudiation of torture, you seem oddly distant.
There is a war going on, not as the start of some excuse-making, but as a simple statement of fact. And in this war there are US servicemen or intelligence officers who may or may not be interrogating people. These are the people you wish to regulate under your proscriptions of torture. But, you are oddly unconcerned with the details of their lives; their actions, motives, context, etc.
For example, reading from your latest missive, you would never get the idea that a substantial number of those responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib were court-martialed. I'm sure you know that they were, but in your thought that's just a minor little accent in your big cultural agenda picture.
This stance leaves a lot to be desired. Most importantly, it is defeatist. It is actually quite conceivable that Rumsfeld or some guard in an American military prison might listen to or accept your advice. But, that supposes that you actually have some understanding of what they are actually doing before you critique it.
Btw, the Greenwald thesis is crap. As somebody wrote on the Corner, it is almost the exact opposite of the truth. The Right has been very critical of the President in too many instances to count. But anybody, of any political persuasion, instantly earns the enduring scorn of the bitter-end Left if he offers any praise for any action of George W. Bush, no matter how modest or qualified.
And the application to Sullivan is especially crap. As you have noted, Sullivan is primiarily motivated by whatever will preserve the social acceptability of his homosexuality. To be honest, that doesn't bother me so much. What bugs me is that continually writes the most dishonest argumentation of any "major" opinion figure alive today, certainly anyone at all associated with the Right. He routinely misrepresents, builds straw men, lies, feigns ignorance, etc., for even the smallest forensic advantage. If you thought about this for a moment, I'm sure you'd agree.
Nonetheless, you accept whatever he writes about torture as completely pristine in facts and logic. Not that you are at the same level as Sullivan, of course, but it is a blind spot.
While Reader B says:
How do you do it?
Someway, somehow, someone drags one of your comment threads down the twisted road of "what is torture?"
Over and over, the usual suspects continue to press you, Zippy and others to come up with an ironclad definition on what exactly torture is. Why exactly something as blatantly self-evident as torture requires such a definition is charitably beyond me. Uncharitably, I see mouth-foamers for "War, Damn it!" drooling all over the place.
There may be exceptions; I'm willing to concede that some may actually want a clear concept on which many can agree. Therefore, to meet both of these comboxers' needs, I've tackled the issue head-on right here.
When you get tired of the masses haunting you for definitions of torture you don't feel qualified to give, feel free to send 'em over. If they still don't know after that, then they don't want to know.
Keep up the great work!
I've been over this ground enough that I suspect there is little point in adding my 2 cents but, for the record, I do indeed think that something the Church describes as gravely and intrinsically immoral is to be opposed completely, not half-heartedly. I have no problem with people who ask "What is torture?" in a sincere effort to distinguish between torture and legitimate forms of coercion ("Put your hands over your head and get in the squad car."). In short, I do not fault those who ask questions to find things out. But I have nothing but contempt for the project of asking questions to *keep* from finding things out. If you are doing the former, I have no objections. I also have little help to offer for the simple reason that I am not in law enforcement or the military and have no training in distinguishing between the two. That is why I keep referring readers to the appropriate resources which have guided these fine professions for decades.
Beyond the question of "What is torture?" are the various projects which have as their aim the conclusion "...and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture." These projects take various forms such as
The Church approved of torture in olden days, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
Golly, defining torture is just so baffling we'll never be able to figure out what it is, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture since we can't be held responsible when we act in ignorance.
Torture=any form of coercion, so parents who make their kids go to bed on time are guilty of "torture" in the Church's eyes. Clearly, this is silly, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
This is war dammit! While you panty-waist torture Pharisees scold and moralize, brave men are dying and Muslims are tunneling under orphanages with nukes. We have to act now with desperate measures, and so the Church can be safely ignored when it comes to prohibitions of torture.
Etc.
For these projects too I have utter contempt (which may be mistaken for glib pronouncements). When the devil speaks I think one way of fighting him is to mock him. And it is the devil speaking when we are told the Church may be safely ignored on a matter of grave and intrinsic evil. Even when it is for the Security of the Fatherland.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Well, that didn't take long
One day after his book is released, a Mammon-First Conservative issues the first excommunication fatwa against Rod Dreher for the crime of thinking God and family are more important than profit and bigness . Terry Mattingly jumps in to point out that Dreher is not exactly the first conservative to hold this view.
I look forward to the vigorous debate over the health of conservatism in this country that Dreher's book will provoke.
Happily, the Wall Street Journal likes the book and gives it a thumbs up.
One day after his book is released, a Mammon-First Conservative issues the first excommunication fatwa against Rod Dreher for the crime of thinking God and family are more important than profit and bigness . Terry Mattingly jumps in to point out that Dreher is not exactly the first conservative to hold this view.
I look forward to the vigorous debate over the health of conservatism in this country that Dreher's book will provoke.
Happily, the Wall Street Journal likes the book and gives it a thumbs up.
What We Want is More Muslims Like This
The way we get them is by encouraging what is good in Islam and turning Muslims like this more and more against what is evil in Islam. Seems simple. But you'd be surprised how many fools in the West think that if we indiscriminately label all Muslims as adherents of a sort of Religious Nazism we will win hearts and minds.
The way we get them is by encouraging what is good in Islam and turning Muslims like this more and more against what is evil in Islam. Seems simple. But you'd be surprised how many fools in the West think that if we indiscriminately label all Muslims as adherents of a sort of Religious Nazism we will win hearts and minds.
News from the Crunchy Con Front
Dan Knauss, Associate & Design Editor for the New Pantagruel writes:
Dan Knauss, Associate & Design Editor for the New Pantagruel writes:
Coinciding with the February 21 release of National Review alum and Dallas Morning News columnist Rod Dreher's much anticipated book, Crunchy Cons (which contains a chapter on The New Pantagruel and its editor-in-chief, Caleb Stegall), The National Review Online is launching a blog on Tuesday morning that is dedicated to discussing the book. (Rod will be on the air tomorrow as well, discussing his book and the blog on Bill Bennett's radio show, Morning in America.) At the NRO blog, Stegall will join with Dreher, Kathryn Jean Lopez, some NRO regulars, and other guest bloggers for a lively discussion on conservatism and its future in light of Dreher's arguments.
Some of the other guest contributors to will include TNP & ISI Books editor
Jeremy Beer; past TNP contributor and senior fellow at The Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal, Bruce Frohnen; Catholic author and blog maven, Amy Welborn; GodSpy publisher and editor, Angelo Matera; Orthodox religion and culture writer Frederica Matthews Green; Touchstone senior editor and author David Mills; and political writer and editorial analyst for The Atlantic Monthly, Ross Douthat. We hope you tune in.Comments and questions can be sent to the participants, and reader responses will be considered for inclusion in the discussion.
As "crunchy cons" or at least non-neoconservative conservatives with varying degrees of opposition to the US intervention in Iraq, this estimable group of guest writers will probably generate some interesting dialogue with committed neocon NRO regulars, one of whom took a rain-check on TNP's challenge in 2001 to a lumberjack style wrestling match after
The New York Times' David Kirkpatrick suggested TNP as an heir-apparent of the National Review of William F. Buckley. It is an interesting moment for this discussion, as neocon architect Francis Fukuyama has just pronounced the movement dead in the Times.
If your interest is piqued, you can read more about (and purchase) Rod's
book at Amazon.com: Crunchy Cons: How Birkenstocked Burkeans, gun-loving organic gardeners, evangelical free-range farmers, hip homeschooling mamas, right-wing nature lovers, and their diverse tribe of countercultural conservatives plan to save America (or at least the Republican Party).
Cardinal George Supporters in Chicago Think He's Getting Beat up Unfairly
They know more than I do about this particular controversy. I'm sure I'll get an earful next week when I speak in Arlington Heights at St. James parish (Tuesday, Feb 28).
They know more than I do about this particular controversy. I'm sure I'll get an earful next week when I speak in Arlington Heights at St. James parish (Tuesday, Feb 28).
Review of E. Michael Jones' "Volk" music
One can almost picture the family fathered round the warm glow of burning books and singing "Fear the Jews".
Veeeeeeery strange.
One can almost picture the family fathered round the warm glow of burning books and singing "Fear the Jews".
Veeeeeeery strange.
A reader writes:
Most detailed account yet of how interrogation techniques at Guantanamo were authorized by the Pentagon, over the strenuous objections of the Navy's General Counsel Alberto Mora.
These aren't the most salient excerpts as far as breaking news, but listen to who Mora is...If he can't reach conservatives I don't know who can:"Born in Boston in 1952, he is the son of a Hungarian mother, Klara, and a Cuban father, Lidio, both of whom left behind Communist regimes for America. Klara's father, who had been a lawyer in Hungary, joined her in exile just before the Soviet Union took control. From the time Alberto was a small boy, Klara Mora told me, he heard from his grandfather the message that "the law is sacred." For the Moras, injustice and abuse were not merely theoretical concepts. One of Mora's great-uncles had been interned in a Nazi concentration camp, and another was hanged after having been tortured. Mora's first memory, as a young child, is of playing on the floor in his mother's bedroom, and watching her crying as she listened to a report on the radio declaring that the 1956 anti-Communist uprising in Hungary had been crushed. "People who went through things like this tend to have very strong views about the rule of law, totalitarianism, and America," Mora said.
At the time, Mora's family was living in Cuba. His father, a Harvard-trained physician, had taken his wife and infant son back in 1952. When Castro seized power, seven years later, the family barely escaped detention after a servant informed the authorities that they planned to flee to America. In the ensuing panic, Alberto obtained an emergency passport from the American Embassy in Havana. "This was my first brush with the government," he said. "When I swore an oath of allegiance to the American government, part of the oath involved taking up arms to defend the country. And I was thinking, This is a serious thing for me to be an eight-year-old boy, raising my hand before the American vice-consul and taking the oath of allegiance."...
Mora thinks that the media has focussed too narrowly on allegations of U.S.-sanctioned torture. As he sees it, the authorization of cruelty is equally pernicious. "To my mind, there's no moral or practical distinction," he told me. "If cruelty is no longer declared unlawful, but instead is applied as a matter of policy, it alters the fundamental relationship of man to government. It destroys the whole notion of individual rights. The Constitution recognizes that man has an inherent right, not bestowed by the state or laws, to personal dignity, including the right to be free of cruelty. It applies to all human beings, not just in America-even those designated as 'unlawful enemy combatants.' If you make this exception, the whole Constitution crumbles. It's a transformative issue."
Mora said that he did not fear reprisal for stating his opposition to the Administration's emerging policy. "It never crossed my mind," he said. "Besides, my mother would have killed me if I hadn't spoken up. No Hungarian after Communism, or Cuban after Castro, is not aware that human rights are incompatible with cruelty."
This sure ain't true of Alberta!
St. Joseph's parish in Vauxhall was absolutely teeming with kids. Not surprisingly, it was also a very vibrant parish filled with people (including youth) who are very serious and interested in their faith. There's a connection, of course. A culture that believes in the hope of Christ believes in the future and invests in having a lot of kids. A culture infected by the love of death believes in acquiring stuff and having few children.
The fertile shall inherit the earth. Way to go, Alberta! Someday you'll run Canada!
St. Joseph's parish in Vauxhall was absolutely teeming with kids. Not surprisingly, it was also a very vibrant parish filled with people (including youth) who are very serious and interested in their faith. There's a connection, of course. A culture that believes in the hope of Christ believes in the future and invests in having a lot of kids. A culture infected by the love of death believes in acquiring stuff and having few children.
The fertile shall inherit the earth. Way to go, Alberta! Someday you'll run Canada!
"Before we go to war, let's have a debate of whether we need to go to war."
Yes, yes. I see the byline. I know he is Evil Incarnate. Nonetheless, I find his argument persuasive. Tell me why you don't.
I say this in part because I read over the looooooong conversation between Rob and Zippy from this weekend. The fun thing (from my perspective) is that, after hearing from various readers for so long that I hate Bush and call him a liar, here was Rob really despising Bush ("The man is evil"), excommunicating Bush from the Christian faith (a habit with Protestants like Rob since many Protestants fall for the notion that "real Christians" don't do or think sinful things), and calling Bush a liar. Memo to readers who think I hate Bush: this is what a real loathing for Bush looks like.
Meanwhile Zippy nailed precisely my assessment of the guy, which is far less vehement than the "Bush lied and is evil" crowd:
Or, as Zippy so concisely summed it up elsewhere:
That's why I have never believed the "Bush lied us into war" meme. I think Bush beleived us into war. He believed and saw what he expected to see and did not wait to find out if he knew what he was talking about. He had faith that he was right. The trouble is, belief is not certitude and certitude is what is necessary in order to go to war.
Having been railroaded into an unjust war once, I am rather more leery about having it happen again. I suspect many people are.
Yes, yes. I see the byline. I know he is Evil Incarnate. Nonetheless, I find his argument persuasive. Tell me why you don't.
I say this in part because I read over the looooooong conversation between Rob and Zippy from this weekend. The fun thing (from my perspective) is that, after hearing from various readers for so long that I hate Bush and call him a liar, here was Rob really despising Bush ("The man is evil"), excommunicating Bush from the Christian faith (a habit with Protestants like Rob since many Protestants fall for the notion that "real Christians" don't do or think sinful things), and calling Bush a liar. Memo to readers who think I hate Bush: this is what a real loathing for Bush looks like.
Meanwhile Zippy nailed precisely my assessment of the guy, which is far less vehement than the "Bush lied and is evil" crowd:
People who see GWB as dishonest or self-interested simply do not understand the man. I disagree with him about any number of things, but if you want to know what he is thinking all you have to do is listen to what he says, because he is telling you straight out. I do not think he is particularly brilliant, though he is obviously much smarter than the average guy (you don't just end up in that job without a decent complement of smarts). Smart, honest, well-meaning, and not particularly deep: that is the impression I had when I met him in person a number of years ago, and I have yet to see anything that would alter that impression.
You don't have to make up any conspiracy theories. What the man actually thinks is wrong - or maybe shallow is a better word - much of the time, but it isn't hard to figure out what it is. Just listen.
Or, as Zippy so concisely summed it up elsewhere:
Sincere, smart, straight-talking, and shallow as a rain puddle in July sunshine, Rob. Think what you want, that's my assessment of the man.
That's why I have never believed the "Bush lied us into war" meme. I think Bush beleived us into war. He believed and saw what he expected to see and did not wait to find out if he knew what he was talking about. He had faith that he was right. The trouble is, belief is not certitude and certitude is what is necessary in order to go to war.
Having been railroaded into an unjust war once, I am rather more leery about having it happen again. I suspect many people are.
SCOTUS to consider Partial Birth Abortion
Now we get to find out if Dubya's appointees were worth the struggle. God help our nation.
Now we get to find out if Dubya's appointees were worth the struggle. God help our nation.
Beyond Parody
The politicization of childhood continues apace:
Sample pages on view here.
They left out the sample page that says, "Democrats make sure Mommy could have scissors stuck in your brain as you were being born." An oversight, no doubt.
Beyond that, is the loony notion that a political party is the repository of human values rather than, well, human beings. It turns out that even evil Republicans--heck, even libertarians and anarchists--prefer to see their children safe rather than endangered. Surprisingly, Democrats do not have a corner on common decency. However, their tendency to talk as though they do is one of the reason they keep losing and find it so difficult to figure out why. When every failure is attributed to the notion that the people who did not vote for you are unworthy of your greatness, you tend to suffer from impaired learning skills.
The politicization of childhood continues apace:
Sample pages on view here.
They left out the sample page that says, "Democrats make sure Mommy could have scissors stuck in your brain as you were being born." An oversight, no doubt.
Beyond that, is the loony notion that a political party is the repository of human values rather than, well, human beings. It turns out that even evil Republicans--heck, even libertarians and anarchists--prefer to see their children safe rather than endangered. Surprisingly, Democrats do not have a corner on common decency. However, their tendency to talk as though they do is one of the reason they keep losing and find it so difficult to figure out why. When every failure is attributed to the notion that the people who did not vote for you are unworthy of your greatness, you tend to suffer from impaired learning skills.
Last Day of Voting for Catholic Blog Awards!
If you vote for me I promise an end to evil on earth as well as limitless prosperity, happiness, and long life! If you don't vote for me, things too terrible to describe will be unleashed on an unsuspecting mankind.
CAEI: The choice is clear.
If you vote for me I promise an end to evil on earth as well as limitless prosperity, happiness, and long life! If you don't vote for me, things too terrible to describe will be unleashed on an unsuspecting mankind.
CAEI: The choice is clear.
CatholicBlogs is on the Air!
Check 'em out. The owner writes:
Don't have time to review it myself, but you guys might.
Check 'em out. The owner writes:
The core features include:
-Search over 13,000 articles from 700 Catholic blogs
(about 550 new articles are added per day)
-Subscribe to an RSS feed for any search.
-The "Mobile Edition" is optimized for your cellphone or PDA.
-Soon, a feature-filled directory will be added.
I'd really like your feedback, whether it be constructive criticism, feature requests, bugs, etc.
In addition, please consider adding a link to it to your sidebar and mentioning the site in a post.
Thank you very much for your assistance...
Don't have time to review it myself, but you guys might.
On the Other Hand....
Tevye-like, I wonder if jailing people like Irving might send a message to beauxeaux with their "God Bless Hitler" signs.
I'm of two minds here. The goal is to create fewer thin-skinned paranoid Bronze Age thugs who blame everybody but themselves for their troubles. Jailing guys like Irving might send a message that their thuggery will not be tolerated or it might make a martyr for them to venerate.
On the whole, I think I still favor free speech. If people can hold stupid opinions about the Civil War, they should be able to hold them about WWII. Two wrongs don't make a right. I think I still favor letting Irving get hammered in the market place of ideas rather than by the state. If you want to show up a fool, rent him a hall.
Tevye-like, I wonder if jailing people like Irving might send a message to beauxeaux with their "God Bless Hitler" signs.
I'm of two minds here. The goal is to create fewer thin-skinned paranoid Bronze Age thugs who blame everybody but themselves for their troubles. Jailing guys like Irving might send a message that their thuggery will not be tolerated or it might make a martyr for them to venerate.
On the whole, I think I still favor free speech. If people can hold stupid opinions about the Civil War, they should be able to hold them about WWII. Two wrongs don't make a right. I think I still favor letting Irving get hammered in the market place of ideas rather than by the state. If you want to show up a fool, rent him a hall.
A reader writes:
Come to Family Honor's Third National Conference on the Theology of the Body!
This is the third theology of the body conference held by Family Honor and if the third one is anything like the first two it is going to be fantastic! This year's speakers include Cardinal Arinze, Fr. Benedict Groeschel, Christopher West, and Fr. Richard Hogan just to name a few. It is in Jacksonville, Florida, proving that God is doing great things here in the deep South.
A reader writes:
I don't have brilliant pastoral advice here. Clearly, her advice about artificial insemination is whack and her hostility toward the pastory and hatred of men is a bad sign. Likewise "God could be a woman" is whack. God in his deity is without gender or, if you like, encompasses both genders. If she's referring to our Lord, she's doubly wrong, since Jesus is obviously a man. I'm not particular about how Jesus is portrayed in art.
My own suggestion would be "Find somebody else to run RCIA since she will poison the minds of newbies." The way to do this, of course, is not to enact a direct challenge to her little kingdom, but to do what actually needs done: use the gifts of a gifted layperson to bless the people of God by teaching. I would approach the pastor and ask for the chance to do that and then assemble a good RCIA team. She could even be part of it if she wanted. But she would now be surrounded by people who could quietly but firmly exert a corrective role when she says whack stuff. Personalities like hers tend to dislike not having Total Control and will soon leave in a huff to do something else. The trick is to have a thick skin because whoever takes on that job will be subject to hostility for a while. Another trick is to keep her in the Church, but diminish her role in doing catechesis till she's healed of what's eating her.
Just my opinion of course.
I am searching for advice on how to handle a nun we have serving at our parish.
She told me that if my single daughter wants to have a baby then she should use artificial insemination. I was shocked. I told her Father would kill her and she said "NO." Our daughter went to Father and asked him about that being an option for her and he said "NO!!!!" He explained the church's view on the matter. She then told him where the idea came from. He just shook his head and blesssed himself. She told the RCIA group that GOD could be a woman and that Jesus did not look as he is shown....."after all, he was a Jew." She puts down the pastor at every turn and he says she hates men....all men. I have recently read a book by Michael Smith about the seminary and she fits in with those people. They are not really inline with the Church and she is getting away with it. I have no idea if there would be any avenue to pursue or if I should just let it go?
I don't have brilliant pastoral advice here. Clearly, her advice about artificial insemination is whack and her hostility toward the pastory and hatred of men is a bad sign. Likewise "God could be a woman" is whack. God in his deity is without gender or, if you like, encompasses both genders. If she's referring to our Lord, she's doubly wrong, since Jesus is obviously a man. I'm not particular about how Jesus is portrayed in art.
My own suggestion would be "Find somebody else to run RCIA since she will poison the minds of newbies." The way to do this, of course, is not to enact a direct challenge to her little kingdom, but to do what actually needs done: use the gifts of a gifted layperson to bless the people of God by teaching. I would approach the pastor and ask for the chance to do that and then assemble a good RCIA team. She could even be part of it if she wanted. But she would now be surrounded by people who could quietly but firmly exert a corrective role when she says whack stuff. Personalities like hers tend to dislike not having Total Control and will soon leave in a huff to do something else. The trick is to have a thick skin because whoever takes on that job will be subject to hostility for a while. Another trick is to keep her in the Church, but diminish her role in doing catechesis till she's healed of what's eating her.
Just my opinion of course.
Bronze Age Thugs in Africa Murder Local Christians Over Danish Cartoons
Fortunately, it was just Christians, so no harm done.
Why do Bronze Age Thugs burn down their own country over something that happened in Denmark?
Fortunately, it was just Christians, so no harm done.
Why do Bronze Age Thugs burn down their own country over something that happened in Denmark?
New Orleans Hospital Staff Discussed Mercy Killings
In other words, it was premeditated murder.
Steve Drake of Not Dead Yet weighs in.
In other words, it was premeditated murder.
Steve Drake of Not Dead Yet weighs in.
America: The one nation in the developed world where politicians *must* talk about Jesus if they hope to win
Canadians I spoke with this weekend were all marveling that Dubya is so open about his faith. I had to point out that, while it's authentic in Bush's case, it's also the case that even politicians with only the most tenuous connections to Christianity (think Kerry and Guiliani) know they have to make a showing of piety because the Swede/Indian Factor in American politics.
I think that's a good thing, by the way. Hypocrisy is the compliment Vice pays to Virtue.
Canadians I spoke with this weekend were all marveling that Dubya is so open about his faith. I had to point out that, while it's authentic in Bush's case, it's also the case that even politicians with only the most tenuous connections to Christianity (think Kerry and Guiliani) know they have to make a showing of piety because the Swede/Indian Factor in American politics.
I think that's a good thing, by the way. Hypocrisy is the compliment Vice pays to Virtue.
Jerk Tries to Be Martyr--Remains Jerk
As I've said in the past, I think Holocaust denial is both pernicious and stupid. I find it impossible to credit the good intentions of anybody who practices it and, in particular, anybody who practices it stubbornly. I recognized that, as time goes on and the event fades into a history without living witnesses, there are going to be people (the sort of people who think The Da Vinci Code is a penetrating historical analysis) who will have real doubts since the scale of the crime is so fantastic. But we are not there yet and David Irving most certainly is not somebody with an excuse.
At the same time, as a free speech advocate, I am disquieted by the state legislating against pernicious and stupid opinions about history. In an age where The Da Vinci Code can so easily persuade ignoramuses that History is a Lie Agreed Upon by The Winners, this sort of ham-fistedness by Officialdom can often achieve exactly the opposite results it is intended to achieve. Irving is a jerk, not a martyr. But he gets 300 letters a month from people afflicted with Da Vinci Syndrome who think that punishment for his stupid and pernicious views makes him a martyr.
I think it would be far better to send this guy up in debate against a real historian than to send him to jail. I can appreciate that the Austrians and Germans, so keen to exorcise Hitler from their history, are hyper-sensitive on this point. But I think trying to legislate stupid and evil historical opinions out of existence is a mistake. Better to destroy them in the marketplace of ideas.
As I've said in the past, I think Holocaust denial is both pernicious and stupid. I find it impossible to credit the good intentions of anybody who practices it and, in particular, anybody who practices it stubbornly. I recognized that, as time goes on and the event fades into a history without living witnesses, there are going to be people (the sort of people who think The Da Vinci Code is a penetrating historical analysis) who will have real doubts since the scale of the crime is so fantastic. But we are not there yet and David Irving most certainly is not somebody with an excuse.
At the same time, as a free speech advocate, I am disquieted by the state legislating against pernicious and stupid opinions about history. In an age where The Da Vinci Code can so easily persuade ignoramuses that History is a Lie Agreed Upon by The Winners, this sort of ham-fistedness by Officialdom can often achieve exactly the opposite results it is intended to achieve. Irving is a jerk, not a martyr. But he gets 300 letters a month from people afflicted with Da Vinci Syndrome who think that punishment for his stupid and pernicious views makes him a martyr.
I think it would be far better to send this guy up in debate against a real historian than to send him to jail. I can appreciate that the Austrians and Germans, so keen to exorcise Hitler from their history, are hyper-sensitive on this point. But I think trying to legislate stupid and evil historical opinions out of existence is a mistake. Better to destroy them in the marketplace of ideas.
Monday, February 20, 2006
Back Finally
Airline rebooked my flight and neglected to tell me. Spent night in Lethbridge Alberta and all day on plane. I will now squeeze kids, visit, read Harry Potter to them, and go to bed. Will blog tomorrow.
Airline rebooked my flight and neglected to tell me. Spent night in Lethbridge Alberta and all day on plane. I will now squeeze kids, visit, read Harry Potter to them, and go to bed. Will blog tomorrow.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
I'm outta here till Monday
Tonight I go see "The New World" with Jeffrey Overstreet. Tomorrow I get on a plane and head off to the Coldest Place I've Ever Been: Vauxhall, Alberta (-31 Fahrenheit predicted for this weekend) in the far flung northern tundra of Canada, where I shall be translating my native American tongue into Canadian as my mother taught me to do. I'll be speaking about various Catholic topics.
By the way, if your parish, conference, or Catholic group or gathering is looking for a really great time and a chance to learn a bit more about your Catholic faith, I highly recommend my wife's husband. To find out more about him and the stuff he talks about, click here. I can give lots of references if you need them.
Tonight I go see "The New World" with Jeffrey Overstreet. Tomorrow I get on a plane and head off to the Coldest Place I've Ever Been: Vauxhall, Alberta (-31 Fahrenheit predicted for this weekend) in the far flung northern tundra of Canada, where I shall be translating my native American tongue into Canadian as my mother taught me to do. I'll be speaking about various Catholic topics.
By the way, if your parish, conference, or Catholic group or gathering is looking for a really great time and a chance to learn a bit more about your Catholic faith, I highly recommend my wife's husband. To find out more about him and the stuff he talks about, click here. I can give lots of references if you need them.
Calling human cloning in all its forms an "egregious abuse," as President Bush did in his State of the Union speech, is a serious mischaracterization.
Actually, of course, Bush is absolutely right and the author is a stooge for the Culture of Death. But members of the Chattering Classes get all their ethical instruction from the pages of the NY Times, so they are oblivious to that fact.
Actually, of course, Bush is absolutely right and the author is a stooge for the Culture of Death. But members of the Chattering Classes get all their ethical instruction from the pages of the NY Times, so they are oblivious to that fact.
Leftist America-Hater George Will suggests there is something wrong with the administration's argument that the president alone, as commander in chief, may conduct the nation's foreign affairs.
Check and balances do slow down the swift execution of the will of Caesar, but they have surprising hidden benefits on the nearly impossible chance that the will of Caesar is in error or corrupt. Also, on the off chance that Caesar does not possess everlasting earthly life and power, check and balances helps to make sure that something will stop the next Caesar from doing something bad even if the current Caesar is a living saint.
Check and balances do slow down the swift execution of the will of Caesar, but they have surprising hidden benefits on the nearly impossible chance that the will of Caesar is in error or corrupt. Also, on the off chance that Caesar does not possess everlasting earthly life and power, check and balances helps to make sure that something will stop the next Caesar from doing something bad even if the current Caesar is a living saint.
Laura Ingraham Made an Interesting Point Last Night
She ran some clips of an interview Mike Wallace did with various wounded troops from Iraq. They were very moving. Incredibly selfless, heroic people whose lives really are ordered toward the good of the other in amazing ways. Ingraham (and I) was inspired listening to these valiant men and women. Then Ingraham made the remark that nobody knows about these people, but everybody knows about Jennifer Aniston's hair.
It got me thinking. Name a single actor or actress from the year 1800. Sports figure? I can't think of any either. But today, whole cultures are ordered around the lives of their shallowest members. One gets the uneasy feeling that we are sooner or later going to discover the meaning of Jesus' words about houses built on sand.
She ran some clips of an interview Mike Wallace did with various wounded troops from Iraq. They were very moving. Incredibly selfless, heroic people whose lives really are ordered toward the good of the other in amazing ways. Ingraham (and I) was inspired listening to these valiant men and women. Then Ingraham made the remark that nobody knows about these people, but everybody knows about Jennifer Aniston's hair.
It got me thinking. Name a single actor or actress from the year 1800. Sports figure? I can't think of any either. But today, whole cultures are ordered around the lives of their shallowest members. One gets the uneasy feeling that we are sooner or later going to discover the meaning of Jesus' words about houses built on sand.
Weir Causes Stir with SS Uniform
He "admires German culture", you see.
Oh. Wait! It was a Soviet uniform and he admires *Russian* culture. Well then. That's all right. After all, they murdered millions more than Hitler, but their hearts were in the right place. After all, it was class warfare, not race warfare. So it's okay.
He "admires German culture", you see.
Oh. Wait! It was a Soviet uniform and he admires *Russian* culture. Well then. That's all right. After all, they murdered millions more than Hitler, but their hearts were in the right place. After all, it was class warfare, not race warfare. So it's okay.
One of the reasons I reject the thesis that Israel is immaculately conceived and preserved from all stain of sin original and actual
One of the most screwed-over Christian communities on earth gets contempt from all all sides--including their co-religionists here in the States, who care *far* more that McCarrick once called God "Allah" in a brief thank you to an Arabic speaker than that these people are being jerked around. Just call 'em dhimmis and forget 'em.
One of the most screwed-over Christian communities on earth gets contempt from all all sides--including their co-religionists here in the States, who care *far* more that McCarrick once called God "Allah" in a brief thank you to an Arabic speaker than that these people are being jerked around. Just call 'em dhimmis and forget 'em.
From the Abstract to the Blood-Stained Concrete
Just to be clear that this is not theoretical, this and this is what we are talking about as we puzzle about what O what torture is and baffle ourselves with insoluble moral conundrums and assurances that the Church's teaching can safely be ignored as the naive pontifications of a few clueless Vatican bureaucrats who know nothing about realpolitik and the rough-and-tumble necessities of the Real World.
Just to be clear that this is not theoretical, this and this is what we are talking about as we puzzle about what O what torture is and baffle ourselves with insoluble moral conundrums and assurances that the Church's teaching can safely be ignored as the naive pontifications of a few clueless Vatican bureaucrats who know nothing about realpolitik and the rough-and-tumble necessities of the Real World.
Remember Last Week When We Were All Agog for Free Speech?
That was then. This is now. Another Rightie takes another step toward gutting conservatism of all recognizable traces of resemblance to conservatism. The movement that used to be about free speech, small government and distrust of Caesar, having embraced Caesar as worthy of trust even when he spends like drunken sailor and tortures people, now puts out feelers toward the possibility of jailing people for exercising free speech. The only difference I can see between this and the Hate Speech Police on the Left is that you get jailed for criticizing the Glory of the Fatherland instead the glory of an Approved Victim Group. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
The column is just a trial balloon. But given what many on the Right are willing to affirm under the rubric of "Whatever It Takes to Win the War on Terror, Dammit!" I have little doubt that the column will resonate with a significant number of people eager to create yet another secular utopia.
That was then. This is now. Another Rightie takes another step toward gutting conservatism of all recognizable traces of resemblance to conservatism. The movement that used to be about free speech, small government and distrust of Caesar, having embraced Caesar as worthy of trust even when he spends like drunken sailor and tortures people, now puts out feelers toward the possibility of jailing people for exercising free speech. The only difference I can see between this and the Hate Speech Police on the Left is that you get jailed for criticizing the Glory of the Fatherland instead the glory of an Approved Victim Group. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
The column is just a trial balloon. But given what many on the Right are willing to affirm under the rubric of "Whatever It Takes to Win the War on Terror, Dammit!" I have little doubt that the column will resonate with a significant number of people eager to create yet another secular utopia.
Interesting Discussion of the Cdl. George Fan Club (Yes, Virginia, there's a fan club for everything)
I only hope I can be as utterly flawless as some of the comboxers are. Then I will not need mercy anymore and will be able to indulge my screams for zero tolerance without any sense of hypocrisy.
I only hope I can be as utterly flawless as some of the comboxers are. Then I will not need mercy anymore and will be able to indulge my screams for zero tolerance without any sense of hypocrisy.
NOR Continues to Bayonet its Own Troops
Pete Vere writes:
The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs!
Pete Vere writes:
Last year, Canadian author and orthodox Catholic Michael O'Brien penned the following essay in which he warned the homosexual agenda was leading to a new totalitarianism in Canada:
If you live in Canada, you can sympathize with O'Brien. We are shouldering the brunt of the gay agenda on this continent. Christians in this country have been fired from jobs, arrested, and fined tens of thousands of dollars for standing up to the gay agenda.
For some reason, this got New Oxford Review's knickers in a knot. From their easy chair thousands of miles away in California, they made use of their first ammendment rights to attack O'Brien and other Catholics from Canada for standing up to the gay agenda.
When a reader points out that Pope Benedict XVI used similar language to describe "a dictatorship of relativism," New Oxford Review, which purports to have converted to Catholicism from Episcopalianism, slags the Roman Pontiff who in his lifetime has witnessed both the Nazi regime and the current ideological dictatorship:
This is not acting as the intellectual prize-fighter of Catholicism. Rather this is backstabbing those of us within Church Militant who are on the front lines of the culture war.
The Dwarfs are for the Dwarfs!
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
You knew this would happen
Columnist charges that Cheney meant to shoot his hunting partner. It's a Vast Conspiracy!
I dunno. Call me crazy, but I think there are more subtle ways for the Veep to keep subordinates in line than to blast them with shotguns and bring extremely public international humiliation down on his own head.
File this guy in the Bush Derangement Syndrome file.
Of course, on the other hand, maybe he's got a point if this is any indication.
Columnist charges that Cheney meant to shoot his hunting partner. It's a Vast Conspiracy!
I dunno. Call me crazy, but I think there are more subtle ways for the Veep to keep subordinates in line than to blast them with shotguns and bring extremely public international humiliation down on his own head.
File this guy in the Bush Derangement Syndrome file.
Of course, on the other hand, maybe he's got a point if this is any indication.
I Join Kathy Shaidle in Indulging the Immense Gratification of saying, "Toldja So!"
The next step on the way to "What's so bad about sex with children?"
Mark my words: the day will come when the Church is attacked, not for allowing pedophilia, but for condemning it.
The next step on the way to "What's so bad about sex with children?"
Mark my words: the day will come when the Church is attacked, not for allowing pedophilia, but for condemning it.
Catholic Blog Awards
I was going to tell you to vote early and often for the Mark Shea blog of your choice, but when I go to the link I find that the site thinks I've already voted (which I have not) and I suspect it will think you have already voted too. Hopefully, they will get the glitches worked out and we will have free and democratic elections without the nasty necessity of the assassinations, intrigue and Machiavellian scheming I've had to resort to in the past. So messy.
I was going to tell you to vote early and often for the Mark Shea blog of your choice, but when I go to the link I find that the site thinks I've already voted (which I have not) and I suspect it will think you have already voted too. Hopefully, they will get the glitches worked out and we will have free and democratic elections without the nasty necessity of the assassinations, intrigue and Machiavellian scheming I've had to resort to in the past. So messy.
Nat Hentoff: Courageous Pro-Lifer Who Speaks Truth to Power or Craven America-Hater Who Refuses to Realize We Are at War, Dammit
It's hard to make up my mind which is the most tragic and disgusting line in this story of hostage-taking, torture, murder and injustice. Is it:
or
It's hard to make up my mind which is the most tragic and disgusting line in this story of hostage-taking, torture, murder and injustice. Is it:
Army officer Welshofer, interrogating the prisoner on November 26, 2003, at Qaim, Iraq, shoved him into a sleeping bag and sat on his chest before "waterboarding" him to simulate drowning. No information was obtained, because the prisoner stopped breathing.
or
Hussein's torturers used to use that technique.
Video Interview with Three Reformed Terrorists
Not a world you get to glimpse from the inside very often.
Not a world you get to glimpse from the inside very often.
People who believe the Constitution would break if it didn't change with society are "idiots," U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says.
I like the refreshing directness of that.
I like the refreshing directness of that.
Another for the "More Muslims Like This Guy, Please" file
Most intriguing of all is this observation:
Most intriguing of all is this observation:
Nor is the West a unitary culture. Europe's fervent secularism reminds me that the nation of the Great Satan, with its crowded churches and Sunday preachers who fill sports stadiums, is actually more like my world than Europe is.
Since Sept. 11, I've accepted certain verities that now I have come to question. Europe was supposed to be the neutral bastion of moderation in the face of a belligerent America. But in fact that Europe is godless and alone.
God Bless Richard Comerford
A classy guy and one of my heroes. God keep you safe through Jesus Christ, Richard, and bless your defense of our country.
A classy guy and one of my heroes. God keep you safe through Jesus Christ, Richard, and bless your defense of our country.
Report: U.S. Is Abusing Captives
A U.N. inquiry says the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay at times amounts to torture and violates international law.
A U.N. inquiry says the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay at times amounts to torture and violates international law.
A reader writes:
This is interesting: The Czech parliment, headed by the left leaning Paroubek, passed a gay partnership law. I suppose everybody expected that it would simply pass, but Vaclav Klaus is refusing to sign it. I've been following this in the Czech media, but could only find this link in English.
A reader writes:
I buy some of his argument (the important part) but not all. For me, the crucial point is this:
In my experience, this has often been the case, though I also think my experience is tempered by the fact that my audience is largely Catholic and therefore is not nearly as given as, say, the readers of Little Green Footballs to making their ideology a substitute religion. Certainly, I have been labeled a "traitor" by some for my failure get on board with the war and with Bushie excuses for torture. But, on the whole, I get the impression that I have been treated with much more civility than Greenwald, who appears to be operating out in the harsh cold winds of American political discourse untempered by any interest in the Christian faith.
I'm highly skeptical of his use of Andrew Sullivan as a poster boy for wrongly maligned conservatism. Perhaps this is because I'm primarily a God-first rather than a Mammon-first conservative, but Sullivan has, on the issues that matter to me most, been a steady exponent of ideologies repugnant to a traditional Christian view of the family and the human person. What always surprised me about Sullivan was his *support* of Bush (until I realized that his moral calculus was, at the end of the day, consistently driven by the question "What or who will do the most to protect my indulgence of homosexuality?"). Then I realized that when Al-Quaeda was the largest threat, Bush was the Hero. When Bush became the largest threat to homosexual indulgence, Bush became the villain. Some of Sullivan's criticism's of Bush (particularly with respect to torture) are very important. But I'm highly skeptical that this marks him as particularly conservative.
Finally, I'm wary of dragging Antichrist into the discussion without a great deal of qualification, precisely because of the kneejerk tendency of Bush devotees to make easy dismissals of critiques because of a false word. When antichrist comes, he will have enthusiastic support from both sides of the aisle. There is something in all of us that hungers for the promise of secular messianic solutions to our problems. Despite the screams of Greenwald's readers about "Bush Derangement Syndrome" the interesting thing about both those entries is that they do not seem to me to be about Bush, but about his devotees. What has struck me all along in the torture debates is how much further apologists for torture in my comboxes are willing to go to justify torture than any Administration spokesman would ever go. Impalement? Fine! The Church has no problem with that. It is a comment on us, not on Bush, that we are willing to pre-emptively justify such things, should Caesar wish to do them. And that's on this blog. Over on Little Green Footballs one finds (routinely) a slavering horde of people in the comboxes who would gladly grant Caesar the power to, not just to torture, but to unleash a nuclear holocaust, put all perceived enemies of the state in concentration camps, and generally "do whatever is necessary" to keep us safe. Here and throughout St. Blog's, such D'Hippolitan thinking is the kooky exception and kooks who advocate mass murder as an instrument of US policy are booted from comboxes (with rare exceptions). On LGF, the suggestion that all New Jersey Muslims be rounded up, locked in a mosque and subjected to artillery fire as retribution for a terrorist act in Iraq is acceptable political discourse that is a normal part of the landscape. And they think they are conservative.
Bush is only going to be President for a couple more years. But, as with Clinton, a surprisingly large crowd of people are eager to run ahead of the President and make excuses for whatever excesses the Their Guy might, in future, want to commit--as though they imagine his Administration is eternal. That's not really a comment on Bush or Clinton. It's a comment on how willing we are to enslave ourselves to somebody who promises to make us comfortable (with a Booming 90s Economy) or keep us safe (in the War on Terror). It's unbelievably short-sighted.
I don't think Bush is the bad man some of his defenders make him out to be. But I do worry that someday a bad man will come along, promising "peace and safety" and we will run after him with the same zeal we've run after so many others. I know that prophecy makes such things inevitable sooner or later, but I hope to forestall it as long as I can.
I've just finished reading two short essays by Glenn Greenwald, a conservative blogger. Great stuff, which I highly recommend.
In case you haven't seen them, here's a synopsis. He does an excellent job of describing a phenomena that YOU have experienced first hand (as have I).
Namely, the tendency of Bush followers to: (1) rabidly attack ANYONE who disagrees in any way with Bush, and (2) essentially "excommunicate" any conservative who disagrees with Bush.
I noticed this phenomena early on, in your blog, when you started being accused, in effect, of being a closet liberal, because of your misgivings about the Iraq war and your opposition to torture.
Greenwald says it all, better than I ever could.
In my opinion, many Bush followers are not really true conservatives. Greenwald calls them cultists. That might be too strong. I think they really just want a strong Daddy figure, and when Bush is gone, they will latch on to the next one that comes along, even if (like Bush) he betrays much of what conservatism has historically stood for. I hate to say it, but I personally have reached the opinion that when the Antichrist finally does come, it will be people like them who will put him into power.
Take a look, and see what you think.
I buy some of his argument (the important part) but not all. For me, the crucial point is this:
It used to be the case that in order to be considered a "liberal" or someone "of the Left," one had to actually ascribe to liberal views on the important policy issues of the day – social spending, abortion, the death penalty, affirmative action, immigration, "judicial activism," hate speech laws, gay rights, utopian foreign policies, etc. etc. These days, to be a "liberal," such views are no longer necessary.
Now, in order to be considered a "liberal," only one thing is required – a failure to pledge blind loyalty to George W. Bush. The minute one criticizes him is the minute that one becomes a "liberal," regardless of the ground on which the criticism is based. And the more one criticizes him, by definition, the more "liberal" one is. Whether one is a "liberal" -- or, for that matter, a "conservative" -- is now no longer a function of one’s actual political views, but is a function purely of one’s personal loyalty to George Bush.
In my experience, this has often been the case, though I also think my experience is tempered by the fact that my audience is largely Catholic and therefore is not nearly as given as, say, the readers of Little Green Footballs to making their ideology a substitute religion. Certainly, I have been labeled a "traitor" by some for my failure get on board with the war and with Bushie excuses for torture. But, on the whole, I get the impression that I have been treated with much more civility than Greenwald, who appears to be operating out in the harsh cold winds of American political discourse untempered by any interest in the Christian faith.
I'm highly skeptical of his use of Andrew Sullivan as a poster boy for wrongly maligned conservatism. Perhaps this is because I'm primarily a God-first rather than a Mammon-first conservative, but Sullivan has, on the issues that matter to me most, been a steady exponent of ideologies repugnant to a traditional Christian view of the family and the human person. What always surprised me about Sullivan was his *support* of Bush (until I realized that his moral calculus was, at the end of the day, consistently driven by the question "What or who will do the most to protect my indulgence of homosexuality?"). Then I realized that when Al-Quaeda was the largest threat, Bush was the Hero. When Bush became the largest threat to homosexual indulgence, Bush became the villain. Some of Sullivan's criticism's of Bush (particularly with respect to torture) are very important. But I'm highly skeptical that this marks him as particularly conservative.
Finally, I'm wary of dragging Antichrist into the discussion without a great deal of qualification, precisely because of the kneejerk tendency of Bush devotees to make easy dismissals of critiques because of a false word. When antichrist comes, he will have enthusiastic support from both sides of the aisle. There is something in all of us that hungers for the promise of secular messianic solutions to our problems. Despite the screams of Greenwald's readers about "Bush Derangement Syndrome" the interesting thing about both those entries is that they do not seem to me to be about Bush, but about his devotees. What has struck me all along in the torture debates is how much further apologists for torture in my comboxes are willing to go to justify torture than any Administration spokesman would ever go. Impalement? Fine! The Church has no problem with that. It is a comment on us, not on Bush, that we are willing to pre-emptively justify such things, should Caesar wish to do them. And that's on this blog. Over on Little Green Footballs one finds (routinely) a slavering horde of people in the comboxes who would gladly grant Caesar the power to, not just to torture, but to unleash a nuclear holocaust, put all perceived enemies of the state in concentration camps, and generally "do whatever is necessary" to keep us safe. Here and throughout St. Blog's, such D'Hippolitan thinking is the kooky exception and kooks who advocate mass murder as an instrument of US policy are booted from comboxes (with rare exceptions). On LGF, the suggestion that all New Jersey Muslims be rounded up, locked in a mosque and subjected to artillery fire as retribution for a terrorist act in Iraq is acceptable political discourse that is a normal part of the landscape. And they think they are conservative.
Bush is only going to be President for a couple more years. But, as with Clinton, a surprisingly large crowd of people are eager to run ahead of the President and make excuses for whatever excesses the Their Guy might, in future, want to commit--as though they imagine his Administration is eternal. That's not really a comment on Bush or Clinton. It's a comment on how willing we are to enslave ourselves to somebody who promises to make us comfortable (with a Booming 90s Economy) or keep us safe (in the War on Terror). It's unbelievably short-sighted.
I don't think Bush is the bad man some of his defenders make him out to be. But I do worry that someday a bad man will come along, promising "peace and safety" and we will run after him with the same zeal we've run after so many others. I know that prophecy makes such things inevitable sooner or later, but I hope to forestall it as long as I can.
Andreas Katsulas, RIP
A great actor who played a great role in the greatest science fiction series ever made (and one of the greatest TV series ever made): Babylon 5. He enriched the world through his art. Thanks, Andreas.
A great actor who played a great role in the greatest science fiction series ever made (and one of the greatest TV series ever made): Babylon 5. He enriched the world through his art. Thanks, Andreas.
More Muslims Like This, Please
Muslim Cultural Institute in German Dares Iranian President to Visit Auschwitz.
Muslim Cultural Institute in German Dares Iranian President to Visit Auschwitz.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Wheeeeeee!!!!
Mark Shea: NeoCon Pawn of the Jewish Conspiracy or Anti-Semitic Ambassador and Apologist for Genocidal Racism?
Life is so wonderfully simple in a Manichaean Universe!
Mark Shea: NeoCon Pawn of the Jewish Conspiracy or Anti-Semitic Ambassador and Apologist for Genocidal Racism?
Life is so wonderfully simple in a Manichaean Universe!
Girls Scouts Reconfigured as Sturmabteilungen for Planned Parenthood
Show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that despises children.
Show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that despises children.
Check out Logos
Features a nice piece by Archbishop Zycinsky of Poland on the evolution/intelligent design stuff. (Warning: evil pdf file).
Features a nice piece by Archbishop Zycinsky of Poland on the evolution/intelligent design stuff. (Warning: evil pdf file).
On the other hand, I have to give Sullivan credit for this
Naturally, the question that will plague my cadre of Torture Excusers in the comboxes is, "But is hanging an innocent man up and beating him to death really torture? Who is equal to such mysterious moral conundrums?" A vexing question for the ultra-nuanced conscience, I know.
Naturally, the question that will plague my cadre of Torture Excusers in the comboxes is, "But is hanging an innocent man up and beating him to death really torture? Who is equal to such mysterious moral conundrums?" A vexing question for the ultra-nuanced conscience, I know.
Christopher Hitchens Foams and Gibbers at the word "Religion"
St. Paul answers the Corinthians' confident proclamation of anarchic freedom in Christ ("Everything is permissible!") with the common sense reminder that "not everything is beneficial".
As I watch the Cartoon Jihad play out and the various Western champions of Freedom of Speech start to forget what it is they are defending, I'm reminded of St. Paul's remark.
Andrew Sullivan is a fairly typical specimen of a Western Christian who is far more western than Christian. As he becomes more defiant in his lust to extend the middle finger to Foaming Bronze Age Fanatics, he tends to lose focus on what is the precise good he is defending. Like Hitchens, he starts to talk as the blasphemy is a positive good in and of itself. Hitchens, at least, has an excuse: he hates all religions indiscriminately. But what is the sense of Christians celebrating blasphemy?
This is what is called "mission creep" (at least from a Christian perspective). The goal is not and never has been for Christians to become enthusiastic blasphemers. The fact that some think it is simply shows how thoroughly some Christians allow themselves to be co-opted by jingoism against Islam rather than allow their minds to be formed by the gospel. The weird spectacle of Christians rejoicing in reviling God is not likely to persuade many Muslims that Christians are even particularly sane, much less that their gospel is worth heeding.
So what is the good being defended? Freedom. Genuine freedom allows the possibility for evil things to be spoken and done. But only a lunatic thinks the evil things are thereby good. The loony thing about the West is that it *does* tend increasingly to talk as though the mere fact that something was freely chosen automatically renders it good. This is the pernicious logic behind "Freedom of Choice" rhetoric and (under the lash of jingoistic hatred of Islam) it threatens to become the moral logic of dunces who want to swell the ranks of Blasphemers for Christ.
St. Paul answers the Corinthians' confident proclamation of anarchic freedom in Christ ("Everything is permissible!") with the common sense reminder that "not everything is beneficial".
As I watch the Cartoon Jihad play out and the various Western champions of Freedom of Speech start to forget what it is they are defending, I'm reminded of St. Paul's remark.
Andrew Sullivan is a fairly typical specimen of a Western Christian who is far more western than Christian. As he becomes more defiant in his lust to extend the middle finger to Foaming Bronze Age Fanatics, he tends to lose focus on what is the precise good he is defending. Like Hitchens, he starts to talk as the blasphemy is a positive good in and of itself. Hitchens, at least, has an excuse: he hates all religions indiscriminately. But what is the sense of Christians celebrating blasphemy?
This is what is called "mission creep" (at least from a Christian perspective). The goal is not and never has been for Christians to become enthusiastic blasphemers. The fact that some think it is simply shows how thoroughly some Christians allow themselves to be co-opted by jingoism against Islam rather than allow their minds to be formed by the gospel. The weird spectacle of Christians rejoicing in reviling God is not likely to persuade many Muslims that Christians are even particularly sane, much less that their gospel is worth heeding.
So what is the good being defended? Freedom. Genuine freedom allows the possibility for evil things to be spoken and done. But only a lunatic thinks the evil things are thereby good. The loony thing about the West is that it *does* tend increasingly to talk as though the mere fact that something was freely chosen automatically renders it good. This is the pernicious logic behind "Freedom of Choice" rhetoric and (under the lash of jingoistic hatred of Islam) it threatens to become the moral logic of dunces who want to swell the ranks of Blasphemers for Christ.
Canada Cutting Off Nose to Spite Face
One doomed secular society attempts the "Extend the Vacuum into Infinity" approach to deal with Islam.
Although Christians and Jews have quietly and successfully run religion-based arbitration tribuals for a decade, they will now lose this legal right in the name of "fairness" as Ontario cannot legally exclude one religious group and allow others to continue.
One doomed secular society attempts the "Extend the Vacuum into Infinity" approach to deal with Islam.
So I Go Away After Blogging and Return to Discover a Kerfuffle in my Combox
Evidently reader Marv thinks everything the US does is rotten. Saddam's an innocent victim of a kangaroo court. WWII was unjust. The Nazis should have just been allowed to pursue their natural course and they would have faded away. Other outre opinions. And other readers seem to have the idea I agree with him, judging from a very cursory glance at the comboxes.
I don't. I certainly don't think WWII was unjust. I most emphatically do not think our war with Hitler was unjust. He did, after all, declare war on us. My comment about the folly of utopian nation-building is directed primarily at our current adventure in Iraq, which I hope will succeed, but doubt will do so. Various people have written in to scold me that if I think we should mind our own business, then I must think we should have left Pope JPII to his fate under the Nazis. This heart-tugging bit of irrelevance is a great sales point for utopian nation-building, since exactly this point can be made for every victim of every tyrannous regime on earth. But of course, nobody does so. Nobody is down protesting the Administration's grant of Most Favored Nation status to the brutal thugs of China. Why not? If we're really all about Compassion, then why aren't people outraged?
We went to war (properly so) with Hitler and Tojo because they went to war with us. We had a perfect right to defend ourselves. For the same reason, we went to war in Afghanistan against the Bronze Age thugs of the Taliban who attacked us and I have never had a problem with that. Weird arguments that *every* military action the US has ever taken was illegitimate are just that: weird. But equally strained arguments that every military adventure the US has undertaken meets Just War criteria are just as strained.
So I *do* think Saddam is a victim of a kangaroo court? No. Saddam's a mass murderer. Portraying him as the victim of a charade is silly. Saying, "Our war against Iraq fails to meet Just War criteria" does not exonerate Saddam. Why should it?
Evidently reader Marv thinks everything the US does is rotten. Saddam's an innocent victim of a kangaroo court. WWII was unjust. The Nazis should have just been allowed to pursue their natural course and they would have faded away. Other outre opinions. And other readers seem to have the idea I agree with him, judging from a very cursory glance at the comboxes.
I don't. I certainly don't think WWII was unjust. I most emphatically do not think our war with Hitler was unjust. He did, after all, declare war on us. My comment about the folly of utopian nation-building is directed primarily at our current adventure in Iraq, which I hope will succeed, but doubt will do so. Various people have written in to scold me that if I think we should mind our own business, then I must think we should have left Pope JPII to his fate under the Nazis. This heart-tugging bit of irrelevance is a great sales point for utopian nation-building, since exactly this point can be made for every victim of every tyrannous regime on earth. But of course, nobody does so. Nobody is down protesting the Administration's grant of Most Favored Nation status to the brutal thugs of China. Why not? If we're really all about Compassion, then why aren't people outraged?
We went to war (properly so) with Hitler and Tojo because they went to war with us. We had a perfect right to defend ourselves. For the same reason, we went to war in Afghanistan against the Bronze Age thugs of the Taliban who attacked us and I have never had a problem with that. Weird arguments that *every* military action the US has ever taken was illegitimate are just that: weird. But equally strained arguments that every military adventure the US has undertaken meets Just War criteria are just as strained.
So I *do* think Saddam is a victim of a kangaroo court? No. Saddam's a mass murderer. Portraying him as the victim of a charade is silly. Saying, "Our war against Iraq fails to meet Just War criteria" does not exonerate Saddam. Why should it?
Pretty damning
Happily though, this comes from a ritually impure site and so can be ignored. Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot have been war crimes because we are definitionally incapable of war crimes.
On July 18, 1945, exactly 19 days before the first atomic bomb was dropped on Japan, in his own handwritten diary, Harry S. Truman wrote:"Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. (Churchill) of telegram from Jap emperor asking for peace…"
Happily though, this comes from a ritually impure site and so can be ignored. Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot have been war crimes because we are definitionally incapable of war crimes.
The trick to abusing kids in Colorado?
Just don't be Catholic. They'll look the other way.
We now enter the phase where focused anti-Catholic bigotry replaces actual concern for children.
Just don't be Catholic. They'll look the other way.
We now enter the phase where focused anti-Catholic bigotry replaces actual concern for children.
Steve Chapman is Skeptical Muslims are a Threat to Europe
I'm not as sanguine as he is, but I do think his point is well-taken that Islam is not a monolith. The whole "Muslims are absolutely single-minded..." line of argument some people indulge is silly. No group of a billion people is single-minded.
I'm not as sanguine as he is, but I do think his point is well-taken that Islam is not a monolith. The whole "Muslims are absolutely single-minded..." line of argument some people indulge is silly. No group of a billion people is single-minded.
The Curt Jester is a Genius
His latest accomplishment: the Rite for the Exorcism of the Spirit of Vatican II.
His latest accomplishment: the Rite for the Exorcism of the Spirit of Vatican II.
More Schiavo News
A Schiavo conference in Penn.
Various Machiavellian machinations in the Schiavo Marriage
Update: Fr. Rob writes:
A Schiavo conference in Penn.
Various Machiavellian machinations in the Schiavo Marriage
Update: Fr. Rob writes:
I've been onto this story for a couple of weeks now, but haven't been able to gather enough to do a publishable article, as there's no "smoking gun". It is true that this David Ridenour was an attorney for Hospice of the Florida Suncoast, and now he works for the Tribunal in St. Petersburg, as a Defender of the Bond. BTW, he was also a priest of the Diocese some decade ago, before he was laicized and married.
However, as _unusual_ as all that might be, it doesn't _prove_ any wrongdoing, much less a quid pro quo of some kind.
I spoke with Ed Peters about this, and he has said that Ridenour's presence on the Tribunal isn't really relevant to whether Schiavo's marriage is licit/valid or not. The key official here in this case is not the Defender of the Bond. The Defender of the Bond has nothing to do with dispensations. The key official in this case is the Promoter of Justice.
There are a couple of errors in the article. One of them is the contention that Ridenour as Defender of the Bond had something to do with giving the OK to Schiavo's marriage. Not true. The Defender of the Bond has the task of making sure that any alleged grounds for nullity are legitimate in _annulment_ cases. As I said, the Defender of the Bond has _nothing_ to do with whether Schiavo and Centonze were given the proper dispensations.
There _are_ canonists working on this issue to challenge the marriage and the procedures followed by the St. Pete Tribunal. But Ed Peters and others have assured me that the Ridenour business, while it doesn't pass the smell test, is a side issue in this.
I am trying to contact the people at North country Gazette to apprise them of the problems in this piece. I wish they hadn't jumped the gun on this, as publishing incomplete and inaccurate info can do more harm than good.
Thinking Catholics[TM] Continue to Demonstrate They Live the Pelvis-Driven Life
Delivering the gift of sterility and selfishness for Valentine's Day!
Delivering the gift of sterility and selfishness for Valentine's Day!
A reader writes:
Scenes from the front lines of the Church's engagement with the world. You go, girl!
I homeschool our 6 children and often speak with Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons who come to our door during the day. My husband and I have been praying about this situation, and have come to an astounding conclusion which we've never seen discussed on any forum. Perhaps a few bloggers would be interested in our conclusions. It could be reason # 5,849,583,724,956,847 to homeschool. (LOL!)
It is Saturday, and I am waiting for the Jehovah's Witnesses to show up this morning. On Monday, a lady and two men knocked at my door, and I told them I was homeschooling, but could talk with them for about 20 minutes. My children got to listen to everything we talked about, which was good for them to hear me calmly give my Catholic viewpoints, explain to them where they got the bible, and their faulty translation, etc., and lovingly tell them they are in a man-made church, and they need to get into The Catholic Church.
They always have a daily bible verse they're studying that day, and Monday's verse was 2 Tim. 3:16! All scripture is inspired by God . . . One of my favorite verses that they take out of context, so we were able to discuss that very well. Since I was polite, and took a pamphlet they offered, I'm sure they'll be back today or next week to visit some more.
So many times we homeschooling mothers feel like we can't evangelize the lost, because we are "stuck at home", so we wait on the Lord, and we wait . . . , and we wait . . . , but in God's goodness, several times a year he sends J.W.'s and Mormons to our very doorsteps! We need to take this as a sign from God, and learn what they believe and why, then spend a few minutes planting a seed that may lead these people to Christ.
Think about this: when these good people go from door-to-door, most people are not home, or refuse to talk with them. It's only a homeschooling family who can invite them in and say, "We love to talk about Jesus and the Bible! The children can practice their Spelling & Handwriting, and listen in, while we visit." Since they are in my house, I lead the prayer, I lead the discussion, and we talk about what I want to discuss. I don't let them take the lead, cos they won't stop talking, and I can't break-in politely.
After 30 mins. I say, "Wow, time flies when I talk about my Savior and Best Friend, but now I need to work on Math with the children. Please stop by again in a few weeks." This gives me a chance for more study, and to ask my husband's counsel. They will return in a week or two, and I'll be ready.
In the past 20 years, the Witnesses and Mormons have been growing by leaps and bounds. So has the homeschooling movement. J.W.'s and Mormons evangelize during the day, door-to-door. Homeschooler's are home during the day, and know and love their faith. I'm convinced that God is using faith-filled homeschooler's to evangelize these lost sheep. What a blessing for us, that God gives us a job to further his kingdom, and defeat heresy, all without leaving our homes.
I better go, I need to tidy up my dining room if they come inside.
Scenes from the front lines of the Church's engagement with the world. You go, girl!
Monday, February 13, 2006
By the way, Go see "Nanny McPhee"
A bit dark, as though Roald Dahl had written Mary Poppins, but ultimately a quite wonderful film.
A bit dark, as though Roald Dahl had written Mary Poppins, but ultimately a quite wonderful film.
I'm coming your way (if you live in Michigan or Charlotte, NC
March 31-April 1 Lenten Retreat on Repentance and Conversion at St. Stanislaus Kostka in Bay City, MI.
April 27-28 Catholic Scripture Study Conference in Charlotte, NC
If you would like me to speak at your parish while I'm in the area, now's the chance to book me without even having to cover the air fare. Please let me know by week's end if you want me and I will arrange my flight accordingly. I can be contact by email. My address is over on the left rail.
March 31-April 1 Lenten Retreat on Repentance and Conversion at St. Stanislaus Kostka in Bay City, MI.
April 27-28 Catholic Scripture Study Conference in Charlotte, NC
If you would like me to speak at your parish while I'm in the area, now's the chance to book me without even having to cover the air fare. Please let me know by week's end if you want me and I will arrange my flight accordingly. I can be contact by email. My address is over on the left rail.
Stupid Party Coward Fears Consequences of His Cowardice
Yes, well, fear is what you sign on for when you choose to be a coward. Sleep well.
Yes, well, fear is what you sign on for when you choose to be a coward. Sleep well.
Little Hiccups on the Way to the Establishment of the Democratic Cure All in the Middle East
Democracy is a mechanism that, with relative efficiency, allows a political culture to have its heart's desire....
Democracy is a mechanism that, with relative efficiency, allows a political culture to have its heart's desire....
MSM Journalist Strays into St. Blogs
Another clueless journalist remains clueless thanks to The Revealer, the greatest scam in American religious journalism. He's heard of the Ratzinger Fan Club (not surprising since they were buried in hits after the electtion of Benedict) and I'm glad he noticed the Curt Jester, who is wonderful. But to visit St. Blog's and remain unaware of the existence of Amy Welborn is a bit like visiting Rome and remaining unaware of the existence of St. Peter's Basilica. But then, this is journalist who is relying on the Revealer to help him understand religious journalism. So he's bound to be ignorant. The Revealer exists in order to expand Sharlet and Co's employment opportunities in the MSM and to give the illusion that they are boldly exploring territory the MSM doesn't touch even as they confirm the MSM's archaic bigotries and make a name for themselves among the Chattering Classes. Very clever.
Another clueless journalist remains clueless thanks to The Revealer, the greatest scam in American religious journalism. He's heard of the Ratzinger Fan Club (not surprising since they were buried in hits after the electtion of Benedict) and I'm glad he noticed the Curt Jester, who is wonderful. But to visit St. Blog's and remain unaware of the existence of Amy Welborn is a bit like visiting Rome and remaining unaware of the existence of St. Peter's Basilica. But then, this is journalist who is relying on the Revealer to help him understand religious journalism. So he's bound to be ignorant. The Revealer exists in order to expand Sharlet and Co's employment opportunities in the MSM and to give the illusion that they are boldly exploring territory the MSM doesn't touch even as they confirm the MSM's archaic bigotries and make a name for themselves among the Chattering Classes. Very clever.
A reader writes:
I see nothing wrong with helping Christians in the Holy Land, though I don't see why the bishops have to be pestered. This seems like a job for us laypeople. There's a lot more of us than there are of bishops. I suspect there are already relief agencies in place. Maybe Mercy Corps knows about this. I dunno.
How about the bloggers starting a movement to pressure the bishops to take up an emergency collection for the Holyland Christians. They have been pleading for help for some time now. They get no help from the Israeli Government. The wall the Israelis built shuts off Bethlehem and is a problem for Christians living there to earn a living. Go here.
I see nothing wrong with helping Christians in the Holy Land, though I don't see why the bishops have to be pestered. This seems like a job for us laypeople. There's a lot more of us than there are of bishops. I suspect there are already relief agencies in place. Maybe Mercy Corps knows about this. I dunno.
Homosexuality is the Glorious Source and Summit of All that is Noble, Good and Beautiful in the Entire Universe!
DePaul and Notre Dame are now receiving the proper indoctrination and funding so that they can join the swelling throng in repeating this wondrous mantra.
DePaul and Notre Dame are now receiving the proper indoctrination and funding so that they can join the swelling throng in repeating this wondrous mantra.
Ron Howard Makes New Film Sure to Outrage True Believers with its Shocking Insensitivity to Traditional Pieties
I speak, of course, of Curious George.
San Francisco saves its fury for the things that really matter.
I speak, of course, of Curious George.
San Francisco saves its fury for the things that really matter.
Mohammed, Like All Fallen Men, Thought We Were In This World to Win
Christ knows this world has been subjected to futility, and so came into this world to be mocked, to lose, to die--and to gain eternal life for us in the world to come.
The question for Christians, of course, is whether, in our heart of hearts we believe Christ or Mohammed.
Christ knows this world has been subjected to futility, and so came into this world to be mocked, to lose, to die--and to gain eternal life for us in the world to come.
The question for Christians, of course, is whether, in our heart of hearts we believe Christ or Mohammed.
Churches Profess Spaniel-Like Devotion to Theory that Has Nothing Whatever to Do With Their Mission
So are we going to get a Euclid Sunday too? Or a Third Law of Thermodynamics Feast Day? How About Inertia Sunday (or is that already celebrated far too often)?
What on earth are churches doing proclaiming their fealty to a scientific theory (besides saying to the Chattering Classes, "Please don't despise us!")? It's kind of pathetic really.
So are we going to get a Euclid Sunday too? Or a Third Law of Thermodynamics Feast Day? How About Inertia Sunday (or is that already celebrated far too often)?
What on earth are churches doing proclaiming their fealty to a scientific theory (besides saying to the Chattering Classes, "Please don't despise us!")? It's kind of pathetic really.
Pro-Abort Scientist Surprised to Find that Two Plus Two Equals Four
Abortion Supervisory Committee declares it would be “undesirable to publish the results in their ‘unclarified’ state.”
Uh-huh.
Abortion Supervisory Committee declares it would be “undesirable to publish the results in their ‘unclarified’ state.”
Uh-huh.
Puhleeeze
Illinois paper censors sonograms as "too graphic".
Wait till you see the graphic baby pictures in our photo album. Horrifying shots of babies cooing, sleeping, sucking their thumbs.
To the impure, all things are impure. Could there be any more (what's the word I'm looking for?) graphic display of the guilty conscience of the pro-abort press than this? Even pictures of a perfectly healthy baby are too red-hot to cope with.
Illinois paper censors sonograms as "too graphic".
Wait till you see the graphic baby pictures in our photo album. Horrifying shots of babies cooing, sleeping, sucking their thumbs.
To the impure, all things are impure. Could there be any more (what's the word I'm looking for?) graphic display of the guilty conscience of the pro-abort press than this? Even pictures of a perfectly healthy baby are too red-hot to cope with.
World's Oldest Know-Nothing Pens Column
Drags out deathless anti-Catholic tropes to rail against Romish influences on gummint, secure in the knowledge that Catholics do not issue fatwas.
More raw courage from the Chattering Classes.
Drags out deathless anti-Catholic tropes to rail against Romish influences on gummint, secure in the knowledge that Catholics do not issue fatwas.
More raw courage from the Chattering Classes.
Judge Discovers Yet Another Form of Specious Reasoning
It turns out something has to be harmful 100% of the time before it's illegal. Just being harmful 95% of the time won't do. I'm torn. File under "What Could it Hurt?/How were We Supposed to Know?" or "SMACTDVAISYACTDC"?
Or maybe just a file called "Federal Judges are Fools".
Judge: No credible evidence underage sex always harmful. A federal judge hearing a constitutional challenge to a Kansas law requiring doctors, teachers and others to report underage sex between consenting youths said the state presented no credible evidence that underage sex is always harmful.
It turns out something has to be harmful 100% of the time before it's illegal. Just being harmful 95% of the time won't do. I'm torn. File under "What Could it Hurt?/How were We Supposed to Know?" or "SMACTDVAISYACTDC"?
Or maybe just a file called "Federal Judges are Fools".
Perhaps they could improve their chances of avoiding offense further by replacing the Bible with the Koran
From our "Supernature Abhors a Vacuum" file.
From our "Supernature Abhors a Vacuum" file.
Friday, February 10, 2006
After attacking the MSM for Their Confession of Abject Cowardice...
...it is now reasonable to ask why this blog has not run the Danish cartoons.
Here's the answer:
What I object to in the MSM cowardice is its manifest double standard. The NY Times wets itself in glee over "Piss Christ" and publishes dung covered image of our Lady while suddenly going all squishy and sensitive over making fun of Mohammed. They present themselves as champions of free speech against "theocracy" (meaning "conservative Christians") while bending over and taking it from the people who really do, in fact, believ
...it is now reasonable to ask why this blog has not run the Danish cartoons.
Here's the answer:
What I object to in the MSM cowardice is its manifest double standard. The NY Times wets itself in glee over "Piss Christ" and publishes dung covered image of our Lady while suddenly going all squishy and sensitive over making fun of Mohammed. They present themselves as champions of free speech against "theocracy" (meaning "conservative Christians") while bending over and taking it from the people who really do, in fact, believ