Thinking Critically About Fashion (With the Pope)

We've all heard it, cringed, and hoped desperately that the earnest face of a dubiously denominated Christian was not about to ambush us from that over-played Youtube video. Yes, I mean that supposedly prophetic critique of institutionalized religion which makes the rest of us plead silently, "But what does it mean?"

"To me, the concept of Christianity without religion is contradictory and illusory. Faith has to express itself as a religion and through religion, though of course it cannot be reduced to religion. The tradition of these two concepts should be studied anew with this consideration in mind. For Thomas Aquinas, for instance, "religion" is a subdivision of the virtue of righteousness and is, as such, necessary, but it is of course quite different from the "infused virtue" of faith. It seems to me that a postulate of the first order of any carefully differentiated theology of religions would be the precise clarification of the concepts of faith and religion, which are mostly used so as to pass vaguely into each other, and both are equally used in generalized fashion. Thus, people talk of "faiths" in the plural and intend thereby to designate all religions, although the idea of faith is by no means present in all religions, is certainly not constitutive element for all of them, and—insofar, as it does occur—means very different things in them. The broadening of the concept of religion as an overall designation for the relationship of man to the transcendent, on the other hand, has only happened in the second part of the modern period. Such a clarification is urgently needed, especially for Christianity to have a proper understanding of itself and for the way it relates to other world religions."


--Pope Benedict XVI

Biblical Revelation and Greek Philosophical Wisdom

"       From the very heart of Christian faith and, at the same time, the heart of Greek thought now joined to faith, Manuel II was able to say: Not to act “with logos” is contrary to God’s nature. . . . [T]he faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language (cf. Lateran IV). God does not become more divine when we push him away from us in a sheer, impenetrable voluntarism; rather, the truly divine God is the God who has revealed himself as logos and, as logos, has acted and continues to act lovingly on our behalf. . . . This inner rapprochement between biblical faith and Greek philosophical inquiry was an event of decisive importance not only from the standpoint of the history of religions, but also from that of world history—it is an event which concerns us even today.

         It is my view that the neoscholastic rationalism that was trying to reconstruct the praeambula fidei, the approach to faith, with pure rational certainty, by means of rational argument that was strictly independent of any faith, has failed; and it cannot be otherwise for any such attempts to do that kind of thing."

Passages taken from Pope Benedict XVI to preface an article on the same subject: Natural Theology and the Christian Contribution to Metaphysics

Foiled Again

"In his book, Revelation Unveiled, author Tim LaHaye says this

'One of the dangerous trends during the twentieth century in the Church of Rome is the elevation of Mary to a status just short of deity.  News media reports indicate that millions have petitioned the Pope to declare her a member of the Trinity, though the official line is that it is not going to happen - yet.  Already she is referred to as 'the mother of God' or 'the queen of Heaven' and in some instances appears to be the dispenser of salvation, which contradicts many Scriptures...To even suggest that anyone, even Mary the human mother of Jesus, participates in dispensing the gift of eternal life is not only heresy, it is blasphemous.'"

 Just when we were about to get away with the addition of Our Lady to the Godhead, too...try try again, I guess.

Blessed John Henry Newman on the Modern and Ancient Church

From the twelfth lecture in his post-conversion series "Certain Difficulties Felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching"

"No other form of Christianity but this present Catholic Communion, has a pretence to resemble, even in the faintest shadow, the Christianity of Antiquity, viewed as a living religion on the stage of the world. This has ever attached me to such works as Fleury's Church History; because, whatever may be its incidental defects or mistakes, it brings before the reader so vividly the Church of the Fathers, as a fact and a reality, instead of speculating, after the manner of most histories, on the principles, or of making views upon the facts, or cataloguing the heresies, rites, or writers, of those ancient times. You may make ten thousand extracts from the Fathers, and not get deeper into the state of their times than the paper you write upon; to imbibe into the intellect the Ancient Church as a fact, is either to be a Catholic or an infidel."

Full text of Lecture Twelve:
Ecclesiastical History No Prejudice to the Apostolicity of the Church

Garrettism of the Day

"My pupil asked me today if I have a unicorn. I told him 'Look at me. What do you think?'"

My Norton Anthology of English Literature falls open to King Lear 1.2 and the end of Edmund's speech.

"Now, gods, stand up for bastards!"

An arrow has been traced from this underlined passage to a comment scrawled in the margins.

"ha ha, hard not to cheer him on."

Reason #489 why Kindle will never replace real books. Used and Abused copies are the way to go.

Why We Do What We Do

From an email sent to my lead teacher...

"I wanted you to know the difference in Zane's attitude from Monday to Tuesday is remarkable.  He is enjoying the book now and the poetry he loves.  He read to me the poem that you did in class and had a smile on his face. Thank you so much for putting the love of learning back in my son."

The Question of Papal Primacy in England, 664 A.D.

An illuminating statement by King Oswy at the Synod of Whitby as he submitted to the Paschal practice of Rome. "I dare not longer", he said, "contradict the decrees of him who keeps the doors of the Kingdom of Heaven, lest he should refuse me admission".

The full context by Bede the Historian here: http://www.britannia.com/history/docs/whitby.html

First Day of Fifth Grade Science

The moment I've been dreading has finally come. The children have been asked "What is Science?" The list of what Science is and is not amassed a frightening array of designations.

 Science  
Experiments
Natural Things
Concrete
Visible

Not Science
Supernatural
Feelings
Abstract
Invisible
Sadness

The discussion was certainly innocent enough. Mr. Muns (a fine specimen of Reformed theology) brought up examples of charlatans and fortune-tellers as those who prey on the weak of mind. No one wants to be taken in by false sources of unverifiable authority. As the Great Stevie Wonder said "When you believe in things you don't understand---it's Superstition." And yet...

Could it be that even at the level of fifth-grade Science we want to preserve our epistemological terms carefully? Is it really the wisest method to teach impressionable minds that scientia is a kind of certainty only proper to studying the phenomena of the natural world? The nature and domain of Science has quite a checkered past.

Take the second article of the very first question of Aquinas' Summa. "Whether Sacred Doctrine is a Science?" A brief reading quickly reveals that for a Medieval Aristotelian, science is most properly about that which is not concrete. "No science deals with individual facts" but rather immutable principles. That seems to throw a wrench into our modern instincts. St. Thomas considers the discipline of theology to be not only scientia, but the grandest of all the sciences. And yet I heard in class today (no joke) that the famous "How many Angels can fit on the head of a pin" question is the archetypal "unscientific" question. Apparently Scholasticism, with its questions of Nature, Being, Substance, and Essence are no longer chic. Have we forgotten that the Classical and Medieval world laid claim to the title of Science as well as us? Are we unknowingly teaching our children to accept a weak relationship between Faith and Reason? Natural philosophy (only one small compartment of Science) and Metaphysics?

Article 2. Whether sacred doctrine is a science?

Objection 1. It seems that sacred doctrine is not a science. For every science proceeds from self-evident principles. But sacred doctrine proceeds from articles of faith which are not self-evident, since their truth is not admitted by all: "For all men have not faith" (2 Thessalonians 3:2). Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.
Objection 2. Further, no science deals with individual facts. But this sacred science treats of individual facts, such as the deeds of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and such like. Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.

On the contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. xiv, 1) "to this science alone belongs that whereby saving faith is begotten, nourished, protected and strengthened." But this can be said of no science except sacred doctrine. Therefore sacred doctrine is a science.

I answer that, Sacred doctrine is a science. We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is established on principles revealed by God.

Reply to Objection 1. The principles of any science are either in themselves self-evident, or reducible to the conclusions of a higher science; and such, as we have said, are the principles of sacred doctrine.

Reply to Objection 2. Individual facts are treated of in sacred doctrine, not because it is concerned with them principally, but they are introduced rather both as examples to be followed in our lives (as in moral sciences) and in order to establish the authority of those men through whom the divine revelation, on which this sacred scripture or doctrine is based, has come down to us. 

An Adventure in Syncretism

First things first. Read Garrett's account of our trek to Food City and the paraphernalia we found contained therein. http://turtleandthephoenix.wordpress.com/

Next, imagine Garrett and I gawking at this Meso-American monstrosity in our incurably Caucasian state surrounded by Hispanics. What good is existence if it isn't rife with peril!

Lastly, please don't ever buy the cartoon children's version of the Our Lady of Guadalupe prayer candle. There may be no exact accounting for taste but we can at least try to keep rough estimates.

Loyalty is....

When your fifth-grade student offers to bring pb&j for lunch every day just to get kicked out of the peanut-free classroom and eat with you outside.

Halle Sweeter, you truly bear the qualities of your surname.

I woke up this Sunday to the brightly mischievous voice of Bill Haley as Scott handed me his phone. "Would you like a ride to Latin Mass today?" The sound of uncountable amounts of Catholic children permeated the background. I quickly explained that I would be there but that I had already made arrangements with the Lindquists to go to Mater Misericordiae. Anticipation was in the air. Subtext? Anybody who's anybody is going to be at Latin Mass. As Josh Rice so eloquently put it back at Hillsdale "Mass is pretty much just a club for the coolest people." I firmly believe that liturgical peer pressure is good for the soul.   

High Latin Mass is another of those newly discovered privileges that I desperately want to make a regular practice. I am steel in PTLSD (Post-Traumatic-Liturgical-Stress-Disorder) from climbing the liturgical ladder so quickly from Evangelicalism to Roman Catholicism. Ecclesiastical Vertigo. I used to worry about whether or not I should consider closing my eyes and raising my hands in worship. Now I frantically cross myself every thirty seconds as a sort of safety barrier. You never know when something especially holy might be happening. Garrett's little brother has a habit of referring to high church forms of worship as the "Stand-Up, Sit-Down" method. He's right. "Intuitive" is not the word I would choose to describe formal liturgical worship. So why choose it? Why not sit in comfy seats and drink Starbucks? Or why not gather in basements with praise songs and candles moving as the Spirit leads? Why insist on patterns and practices that must be learned and performed? My imagination runs wild. Screen pans left. Angry Baptists hold signs saying "Low Church: We're the 99%" "Come As You Are To Worship!" (bathrobe and coffee, anyone?) "Liturgical Legalism? Meet G-C-D-A, the chord progression dictated by God himself."

Ultimately, my attraction to liturgy is the fulfillment of the principles my father instilled in me. Church is about God, not us. It's a simple thing that requires constant vigilance. Wasn't it my Dad that complained to me about how the band was up front distracting our attention? Now I hear plainsong from the schola in the balcony. Behind me. My Dad would love it. He would often explain to me the fundamental mistakes that "seeker-sensitive" churches were making. Evangelism can never be the primary goal of the church service. It sickened him to see people brought to a service by anything other than the things of God. (I could digress here on youth group tactics but I'd like to avoid hate-speech censures from the State of Arizona for a while longer.) Church is for those who know Whom they are desiring.

The earliest Christians kept the celebration of the mysteries of God almost completely secret from outsiders. Evangelism took place in daily living, not during the Eucharistic feast. A fond memory I carry with me is the Divine Liturgy I attended for a friend's wedding. The whole thing was in Greek (and hey, we Westerners still get our weekly dose of Kyrie's) and after completing the introductory portions announced "Ta Thura, Ta Thura!" The doors, the doors. The insistence on closing communion to those only partially initiated or half-heartedly participating speaks volumes as to what Church IS. The celebration of the Eucharist deserves the privacy and reverence of the marriage bed.

As a modern Evangelical Christian, I didn't even know what I didn't know. Thank God, that my Dad had the right instincts. He knew the first question was to ask "What is the nature of worship?" Admittedly, it's a question that has hounded my friends and more broadly speaking my entire non-denominational generation and the course isn't easy. It's a question that spans a prodigious amount of history and theology that I really have no business talking about.  Luckily, we can afford to make the question more concrete. What is it that we do during Mass every Sunday?

“The Holy Mass is a prayer itself, even the highest prayer that exists. It is the Sacrifice dedicated by our Redeemer at the Cross, and repeated every day on the Altar. If you wish to hear Mass as it should be heard, you must follow with eye, heart and mouth all that happens at the Altar. Further, you must pray with the Priest the holy words said by him in the Name of Christ and which Christ says by him. You have to associate your heart with the holy feelings which are contained in these words and in this manner you ought to follow all that happens on the Altar. When acting in this way you have prayed Holy Mass.”-  His Holiness, Pope Saint Pius X

Garrettism of the Day:

"I'm going to be paid to teach small children to hate Saladin. This job is awesome."