Against The Grain

"Can there be real tradition if it amounts on...

2010-04-01T10:25:32.419-04:00

"Can there be real tradition if it amounts only to unquestioning obedience."

Can there be real tradition with questioning disobedience?

Like it or not, Catholics believe in the binding teaching authority of the Church even when a teaching is not infallible or irreformable. Father Harrison's humility is to be applauded.

Are you still a Catholic, Mr. Bannon?

Feser's comments raise a question that has bee...

2010-04-01T06:04:20.785-04:00

Feser's comments raise a question that has been in my mind during much of the healthcare debate. Feser seems to make the claim that the USCCB's public support of the recent bill (provided the treatment of abortion and illegal immigrants were changed) is not a judgment binding on the conscience's of Catholics but is rather a non-authoritative, prudential judgment with which faithful Catholics can disagree.

This is a plausible claim, which squares with what I know about the differing authority of differing ecclesiastical statements. Yet, by the same logic, was not the USCCB's opposition to the bill in its final form (with abortion funding, etc.) also a non-binding, prudential judgment with which faithful Catholics can disagree?

If the bill had been solely designed to fund abortion providers, then clearly it would constitute support for an intrinsic evil and a faithful Catholic could not endorse it. As it was, the bill contained elements that supported intrinsic evils and other elements that were certainly open to debate but were not intrinsically wrong. Is not the question of whether the good elements outweighed the evil elements one on which faithful Catholics can legitimately disagree with the USCCB (and each other)?

I hasten to add that I am not arguing in favor of the recent healthcare bill; I am disappointed by the funding for abortion and am otherwise agnostic on the bill's (de)merits. I wonder, however, whether Catholic opposition to the bill in its final form is as clear-cut as some make it out to be.

So few seem to be willing or able to see that the ...

2010-03-31T15:31:12.965-04:00

So few seem to be willing or able to see that the Bishops seriously dropped the ball on this issue. Apparently the Bishops sought to avoid the appearance of partisanship (that is the kindest spin I can put on it) in restricting their concerns to the abortifacient aspects of the legislation. But --even after recent episodes that saw the Church defending the right of conscience and curtailing social services so as to protect the Church's integrity against an overreaching state-- the Bishops ignored the fact that this bill cedes enormous powers to govenment. They also ignored the issue of the unconscionable debt being imposed upon future generations --to which this legislation adds substantially-- gravely impacting American demographics, as young couples find it difficult to afford children, and undermining everything the Church has said about the central importance of families. This is social justice?

Matthew: You really nailed it. Wow! Thanks for th...

2010-03-31T00:26:13.169-04:00

Matthew:

You really nailed it. Wow! Thanks for that.

If you read my book's introduction and the first two chapters you will see that I entered the Church "eyes wide open."

Frank

I think that was a very good summary of Smith on t...

2010-03-30T00:27:39.411-04:00

I think that was a very good summary of Smith on this topic, Eric! But, having read both men on numerous occasions (and as a real fan of Smith's short book "Whose Afraid of Postmodernism"), I also do think that Smith is imposing a "Cartesian dualism" on Beckwith that isn't actually there. Despite what Smith implies, believing in Truth and our potential union with it is not so much Cartesianism as it is Neo-Platonism (and orthodox Christianity). And I think that Smith would generally agree- but his fear of "intellectualized" Christianity causes him to read that into Beckwith's own story in a way that is actually unwarranted by the book.

My own analysis is that much of this dispute actually comes down to two differences between the men: temperament and religious culture. I think that Smith, for all his emphasis on the embodied practices and situational nature of Christianity, wrote the review as an abstract philosophical inquiry that should not be taken personally- which indicates to me that he emphasizes those elements that he does precisely because such abstraction is his own temptation. Beckwith, for whom such a disembodied and unpersonal intellectualism is not really a danger, reacts to what he perceives as personal accusations with anger and confusion precisely because the things he is being accused of are so foreign to his way of living out his faith.

But I also think that it is really the religious culture, even more than temperament, that is the division in this discussion. Beckwith has Catholic family, grew up Catholic, and knew what he was converting to far better than Smith does even now. Smith's target is really those Evangelicals who turn Catholic only to turn Traditionalist- those who enter the Church in the first place precisely because their narrow vision seeks in Catholicism the same kind of clarity and perfectionism that is possible in sects for self-deluded "saints," from Donatist to independent Baptist. Smith confesses that his own temptation would be to become Catholic and hang out with his own equivalent saints, those "cool Catholics" whose imaginative vision draws him in and who he repeatedly derides Beckwith for not paying sufficient attention to. But Beckwith always knew that being Catholic means you get them all- the ones you like and the ones you don't. But Smith, who has not yet joined the Church and lived within the whole set of practices and situations which make up the life as a Catholic, is to some degree incapable of fully comprehending this- even though he is smart enough to understand it in a pure intellectual fashion.

Matthew G. Minix
mgminix@yahoo.com

Well, as I said, I haven't read Beckwith's...

2010-03-29T08:54:05.894-04:00

Well, as I said, I haven't read Beckwith's book, so it is hard for me to say exactly what Smith is referring to. But in Smith's latest book his argument is that human beings are ultimately desiring beings, not thinking things. That is, he thinks our identities are primarily formed by "what we ultimately love," not by what we think. By "fixation on doctrine" I'm guessing Smith is talking about this - the belief that our church doctrines are more important than our liturgies.

I don't know exactly what he means by "fretting about relativism," but Smith's position is that human knowledge is both finite and situational but not relative.

Regarding "affirming 'objective' knowledge," Smith's position is that while we can know things, we can't know anything objectively. By objective, he usually means unmediated and uninterpreted.

"Also, I've read a number of Smith's ...

2010-03-28T23:53:33.577-04:00

"Also, I've read a number of Smith's books and he does believe in truth."

Eric, I myself am not that familiar with Smith, but I confess his review could have fooled me. He seems largely, and sharply, critical of Dr. Beckwith for his "fixation on doctrine, fretting about relativism, affirming “objective” knowledge" -- in short, Beckwith's interest in truth and the claims to the truth of divine revelation made by the Catholic Church.

Having read his books, I'm wondering if you could elaborate on what Smith was getting at.

Dr. Beckwith, I've read both Smith's revi...

2010-03-28T18:22:56.966-04:00

Dr. Beckwith,

I've read both Smith's review and your comments on your blog but I haven't read your book. I think you took him to be saying something personal when he wrote "Where is the love?" when in fact he was saying something about how you view the relationship between truth and tradition.

Also, I've read a number of Smith's books and he does believe in truth. For you to say otherwise is false.

Hey Christopher. Thanks for the kind comments. I&#...

2010-03-27T17:10:16.948-04:00

Hey Christopher. Thanks for the kind comments. I'm still stunned about Smith's review.

I've had my work reviewed negatively before. So, it's not like I'm not used to it. But I had never had such hateful drivel targeting my personal life in such a rude and unprofessional manner. Of course, I had never published a quasi-autobiographer either. So, I guess you live and learn.

I gotta confess that I am a bit creeped-out about someone I've never met telling the world what he knows is in my heart. The good thing is that because he doesn't believe in "truth," readers will take his comments with a grain of salt. That is, you can't claim to the tell truth if you don't believe there's any truth to tell. But a person who does not believe in truth also must believe that one cannot lie. In this way, Smith can both intentionally not tell the truth while at the same claiming to have not lied. This comes under the general heading, "Eat the fruit, you will not die." And we all know how that story ends.

Coincidentally, Smith will be speaking at Baylor on April 23. Unfortunately, I will not be in town. I will be at Samford University participating in a dialogue with Timothy George on Evangelicals and Catholics.

Fr. Harrison's 180 degree reposition on hearin...

2010-03-23T14:57:17.969-04:00

Fr. Harrison's 180 degree reposition on hearing that the Pope endorsed article 404 which Harrison had previously seen as non binding speaks to a problem in Catholic tradition in general...the individual person as non thinker. Can there be real tradition if it amounts only to unquestioning obedience. (Parenthetically...can there be real tradition between 1252 and 1816 during which the papacy supported torture?...if coercion nullifies a marriage....how can it affirm a tradition?)
Let's place Fr. Harrison in 1454 A.D. just after Pope Nicholas V gave Portugal the right to "perpetually enslave" all new world natives that resist the gospel (Romanus Pontifex 1453/mid 4th paragraph). I assume Fr. Harrison would then have assented to that slavery which is now called intrinsic evil in "Splendor of the Truth". This raises a further question as to who are fleeing from conversion to Catholicism....people who see such mimesis as untruthful? Are we mainly converting primitives and Christians from other churches that are accustomed to exaggerated defference? And are we thus turning away those human beings who are confident in many areas such that they would not change simply because a leader gave a short sentence on the matter.

There is just no getting through to Camelot true b...

2010-03-11T15:23:18.122-05:00

There is just no getting through to Camelot true believers. As with those who think Obama is God's Other Son, they always experience the presentation of evidence to the contrary as a personal attack, so invested are their egos in their ideology.

Thanks for posting this digest Chris, but especial...

2010-03-08T13:47:54.673-05:00

Thanks for posting this digest Chris, but especially for Archbishop Chaput's speech. What great stuff! I can't help but to wonder how it went over with his audience.

RL

Hank, Thanks for this (I'll update the post)....

2010-03-03T02:54:14.221-05:00

Hank,

Thanks for this (I'll update the post). Very interesting.

Christopher Some good background From the
2010-03-03T02:23:52.856-05:00
Christopher

Some good background

From the The Brusseles Journal

I knew him when he was just setting out, reluctantly, on his political career.

snip

Van Rompuy, a conservative Catholic, born in 1947, was active in the youth section of the Flemish Christian-Democrat Party. He wrote books and articles about the importance of traditional values, the role of religion, the protection of the unborn life, the Christian roots of Europe and the need to preserve them.

snip

Our paths crossed at intervals until 1990, when the Belgian Parliament voted a very liberal abortion bill.

Snip

In April 1990, the King did in fact abdicate over the abortion issue, and the Christian-Democrat Party, led by Herman Van Rompuy, who had always prided himself on being a good Catholic, had one of Europe’s most liberal abortion bills signed by the college of ministers,

Pray for him.

This one was interesting: http://wluse.blogspot.co...

2010-02-21T23:16:16.260-05:00

This one was interesting: http://wluse.blogspot.com/2009/07/hurts-so-good.html

Good work! Much appreciated. Jim McCullough Green...

2010-02-20T23:29:13.816-05:00

Good work! Much appreciated.

Jim McCullough
Greensboro, NC

Why am I not surprised that a lefty Catholic would...

2010-02-17T17:35:54.780-05:00

Why am I not surprised that a lefty Catholic would effectively downplay the seriousness of the sin of abortion while playing up the seriousness of the sin of torture, arguing that it is more scandalous for someone to go on t.v. argue in favor of waterboarding terrorists than it is to argue on t.v. in favor of abortion. Once again we see one's personal political preferences dictating, or at least influencing, which doctrines of the Faith one will embrace and which doctrines one will downplay, explain away, or outright reject. It's just what I expect from Mornings Minion, whose left-leaning politics are far more prominent than his Catholic faith.

Isn't the first question what is torture? I d...

2010-02-16T12:12:08.719-05:00

Isn't the first question what is torture?

I don't think any thinking Catholic advocates torture. They just disagree with some that waterboarding is torture.

Christopher, Great post. Don't miss this on...

2010-02-15T13:44:01.797-05:00

Christopher,

Great post. Don't miss this one.

Ludwig von Mises versus Christ, the Gospel and the Church (An Open Letter to Tom Woods)
Christopher A. Ferrara
REMNANT COLUMNIST, New Jersey

Excellent post and lots of great resources. I ofte...

2010-02-03T09:51:16.085-05:00

Excellent post and lots of great resources. I often find myself at odds with fellow Catholics who question my belief in capitalism and support for the free market. You given me a lot more to use in the way of resources. Thanks for the one stop shop.

"My biggest beef with such sanctimonious sava...

2010-01-30T18:28:50.743-05:00

"My biggest beef with such sanctimonious savants is their comparative silence on abortion and execrable democrat/liberal/progressive ideas and policies."

In fairness, T. Shaw, I think the participants of the present 'Coalition for Clarity' didn't vote for Obama, and have been vocal as well on abortion and the many deficiencies of the present administration.

Red Cardigan -- thanks for responding.

Hi, Christopher! I hope you'll give the Coali...

2010-01-30T16:30:36.950-05:00

Hi, Christopher! I hope you'll give the Coalition a chance. The name is my fault; I put a picture on my blog a year ago with that name, and someone asked, and things started happening, etc. It wasn't meant to tweak anybody--but as I said to Jay Anderson, I didn't call it Catholics Against Torture or some such thing because that doesn't really get at what the group is supposed to be about.

What it is supposed to be is simply a place to post Catholic teaching on torture along with various interesting questions raised, discussions, etc. The blog takes the position that all torture is evil, that things like waterboarding do count as torture, and that there aren't exceptions to the principle "Don't torture" on the grounds that we're the good guys, that we're trying to get information to save lives, or that there's a ticking time bomb somewhere (and so on).

The reason I credit Mark Shea as inspiration for the blog is simple: he did inspire me. I was one of those people who wasn't sure what torture was or if it could possibly be wrong when all the good Republicans I knew approved of it. I'm the sort of person who responds best to a rhetorical smack upside the head; a gentle, calm tone would not have convinced me to re-examine my rather smug positions at all.

So I'm grateful to Mark for persevering despite my lack of clarity on the subject. And now I want to do what little I can to help clear things up for anyone else who, like me, was genuinely confused about torture. My own tone tends to be different from Mark's, because while I'm not opposed to strong rhetoric I tend to favor persuasion over debate.

I recognize that some people who are sincerely wrestling with the issue may reach different conclusions than I do, but I also realize that there are a lot of Catholics who have convinced themselves that the Church isn't really against "our sort" of torture--and I see that as being a spiritually dangerous place to be. Let's face it: that 51% of Catholics, a sizable number of them weekly churchgoers, said in a survey they had no problem with a person being tortured (not "interrogated" or "waterboarded," but *tortured*) if we thought he was a terrorist and had information is shocking and disturbing.

Anyway, appreciate the mention, and hope you'll give us a chance!

Bush has been a private citizen for over a year. ...

2010-01-29T23:22:39.380-05:00

Bush has been a private citizen for over a year. McCain was opposed to torture.

I think this gaggle of moral superiors (presbyters?) should be renamed the coalition for DETRACTION.

Do these saintly superstars truly believe that opposing torture, capital punishment, Iraq, and hating President Bush justified voting for abortion, class warfare, drone assassinations, escalating war in Afghanistan, and Obama? Holy cow!

My biggest beef with such sanctimonious savants is their comparative silence on abortion and execrable democrat/liberal/progressive ideas and policies.

You won't get into Heaven if you vote Democratic, even if you did it because you hate George W. Bush (snark). Many people (me included) need to get to Confession.

There's my spiritual work of mercy for this night.

T. Shaw

Beneath the Rubble – Deuteronomy 33:27 Where’s my...

2010-01-21T16:20:32.283-05:00

Beneath the Rubble – Deuteronomy 33:27

Where’s my Hope… beneath the rubble?
Where do I find Strength in this complete destruction?
How can Courage exist when death surrounds me?
How can I see God, in the faces of despair?

“The eternal God is your refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms”

In the fallen buildings, I am in the dust
In the eyes of orphans, I am the innocent reflection
In the fresh laid tombs, I am still eternal Life
In the souls of the lost, I am the Grace to press on

“The eternal God is your refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms”

I am the hands that dig and rescue
I am the head that’s bowed in prayer
I am the cries of those who suffer
I am the doctor giving desperate care

Look into the darkness, I am still redeeming Light
In the harrowing brokenness, I am still the Great Physician
For my lost and lonely children, I am still the air they breathe
I remain your everlasting arms of Love… beneath the rubble

Life of Christ by Fulton Sheen was wonderful. Tri...

2010-01-05T12:44:39.736-05:00

Life of Christ by Fulton Sheen was wonderful. Tried St. Francis by G. K. Chesterton, its short but difficult to get through.