Its excellent to see that the blog has gone one big step to some kind of gender balance!!
Im really looking forward to some interesting and challenging posts!!
Monday, February 9, 2009
Call me Hypatia...
...though I haven't yet been killed by an Alexandrian mob; you'll need to give me time to accomplish that, readers.
I was received into the church at the age of sixteen; as a result, I have a converts zeal for learning about the church, a zeal that has translated into Bachelors degree majoring in Religion and Classics and an honours thesis written on early Christian texts. I'm contemplating the topic of relics for my PhD presently, and have just started a vigorous research campaign to find an appropriate relic to be the focus of my study. I studied Classical Latin for three years at university, and have a very basic knowledge of Koine Greek that I hope to improve in time. Besides Classics, ancient history and church history, I'm currently having a 'fling' with renaissance humanism and plan to read the works of Erasmus over Lent.
I was invited to contribute here by Stephen- I have served at the altar with him for six years at our parish. I'm not sure what I can bring to this blog, though I am honoured to be here nonetheless.
I was received into the church at the age of sixteen; as a result, I have a converts zeal for learning about the church, a zeal that has translated into Bachelors degree majoring in Religion and Classics and an honours thesis written on early Christian texts. I'm contemplating the topic of relics for my PhD presently, and have just started a vigorous research campaign to find an appropriate relic to be the focus of my study. I studied Classical Latin for three years at university, and have a very basic knowledge of Koine Greek that I hope to improve in time. Besides Classics, ancient history and church history, I'm currently having a 'fling' with renaissance humanism and plan to read the works of Erasmus over Lent.
I was invited to contribute here by Stephen- I have served at the altar with him for six years at our parish. I'm not sure what I can bring to this blog, though I am honoured to be here nonetheless.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
A tale of two churches
I need to make comment on two aspects of the Church today.
One thing that the media has completely missed is that the Pope is primarily a shepherd. benedict's consecration sermon focussed on the central them "Siomon Peter do you love me - feed my sheep". When the Pope goes out to rescue some of the recalcretrant sheep and bring back to the herd is is condemned by the secular media. Yes some of the sheep are mentally unhinged, but the shepherd has to still find them and bring them gently back to to flock "holding them in his arms". In the secular media there is no forgiveness. If you hold views that do not fit in with the modern secular world, you should be flung into the darkness for eternity. This is not to say that there is still a long road to go with the SSPX. Personally, I find them distasteful, too full of sedevacantists and people who do not accept the Second Vatican Council.
But, its not about liturgy anymore since Summorum Pontificum; that issue has been resolved. Its about whether Council was a departure from tradition. Personally as one of the few people who have read the documents, I believe it was a development of tradition, although some of the offshoots (the Consilium that developed the 1969 Missale Romanum) had questionable value.
Closer to home, the result at St Mary's South Brisbane was predictable. Apart from abberations in liturgy, no one has done anything wrong here. However, it has all got caught up in the larger issues of our day: te authority of the wider church, the authority of the magisterium and interpretations of Vatican II. The new acting pastor of the parish will have a hard time of it: I see that it will be like St Vincents in Sydney: blockades, the Mass being disrupted, sit-ins, etc. However, he may win the congregation over, if he is skilled in change management, because that is what the congregation will go through.
All over the world, unfortunately the dissent in the church is becoming louder. There is no such think as "loyal dissent" as that guy Paul Collins calls it. It will not lead to a split, but it will be like WWI where there will be digging into a lot of entranched positions, with some sniping at each other and overall very little movement. Catholicism is increasingly seen as a fascist religion and maybe that is true.
One thing that the media has completely missed is that the Pope is primarily a shepherd. benedict's consecration sermon focussed on the central them "Siomon Peter do you love me - feed my sheep". When the Pope goes out to rescue some of the recalcretrant sheep and bring back to the herd is is condemned by the secular media. Yes some of the sheep are mentally unhinged, but the shepherd has to still find them and bring them gently back to to flock "holding them in his arms". In the secular media there is no forgiveness. If you hold views that do not fit in with the modern secular world, you should be flung into the darkness for eternity. This is not to say that there is still a long road to go with the SSPX. Personally, I find them distasteful, too full of sedevacantists and people who do not accept the Second Vatican Council.
But, its not about liturgy anymore since Summorum Pontificum; that issue has been resolved. Its about whether Council was a departure from tradition. Personally as one of the few people who have read the documents, I believe it was a development of tradition, although some of the offshoots (the Consilium that developed the 1969 Missale Romanum) had questionable value.
Closer to home, the result at St Mary's South Brisbane was predictable. Apart from abberations in liturgy, no one has done anything wrong here. However, it has all got caught up in the larger issues of our day: te authority of the wider church, the authority of the magisterium and interpretations of Vatican II. The new acting pastor of the parish will have a hard time of it: I see that it will be like St Vincents in Sydney: blockades, the Mass being disrupted, sit-ins, etc. However, he may win the congregation over, if he is skilled in change management, because that is what the congregation will go through.
All over the world, unfortunately the dissent in the church is becoming louder. There is no such think as "loyal dissent" as that guy Paul Collins calls it. It will not lead to a split, but it will be like WWI where there will be digging into a lot of entranched positions, with some sniping at each other and overall very little movement. Catholicism is increasingly seen as a fascist religion and maybe that is true.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
The Thinker in the Street Corner
The importance of having some acquaintance with good philosophical skills and the ability to think philosophically can't be understated.
Philosophy is essentially common sense with a technical vocabulary to enable one to discuss the finer points. Well, good philosophy anyhow.
And that's precisely what the problem has been for the past four hundred years. Philosophy has become something for the birds. It has no relation to what the man-in-the-street thinks. "All that crazy stuff philosophers philosophize about" and it's a forgivable thought for much of it has been capable of such characterization.
This is brilliantly summarised in the chapter on "The Approach to Thomism" in G K Chesterton's book "St Thomas Aquinas." Please don't jump over this quote. Chesterton is priceless reading.
"Since the modern world began in the sixteenth century, nobody's system of philosophy has really corresponded to everybody's sense of reality: to what, if left to themselves, common men would call common sense. Each started with a paradox: a peculiar point of view demanding the sacrifice of what they would call a sane point of view. That is the one thing common to Hobbes and Hegel, to Kant and Bergson. to Berkeley and William James. A man had to believe something that no normal man would believe, if it were suddenly propounded to his simplicity; as that law is above right, or right is outside reason, or things are only as we think them, or everything is relative to a reality that is not there. The modern philosopher claims, like a sort of confidence man, that if once we will grant him this, the rest will be easy; he will straighten out the world, if once he is allowed to give this one twist to the mind."
If that's just wheting your appetite please also read this which follows shortly after (actually read the whole book):
"I am not, like Father D'Arcy, whose admirable book on St. Thomas has illuminated many problems for me, a trained philosopher, acquainted with the technique of the trade. But I hope Father D'Arcy will forgive me if I take one example from his book, which exactly illustrates what I mean. He, being a trained philosopher, is naturally trained to put up with philosophers. Also, being a trained priest, he is naturally accustomed, not only to suffer fools gladly, but (what is sometimes even harder) to suffer clever people gladly. Above all, his wide reading in metaphysics has made him patient with clever people when they indulge in folly. The consequence is that he can write calmly and even blandly sentences like these. "A certain likeness can be detected between the aim and method of St. Thomas and those of Hegel. There are, however, also remarkable differences. For St. Thomas it is impossible that contradictories should exist together, and again reality and intelligibility correspond, but a thing must first be, to be intelligible." Let the man in the street be forgiven, if he adds that the "remarkable difference" seems to him to be that St. Thomas was sane and Hegel was mad."
Philosophy is essentially common sense with a technical vocabulary to enable one to discuss the finer points. Well, good philosophy anyhow.
And that's precisely what the problem has been for the past four hundred years. Philosophy has become something for the birds. It has no relation to what the man-in-the-street thinks. "All that crazy stuff philosophers philosophize about" and it's a forgivable thought for much of it has been capable of such characterization.
This is brilliantly summarised in the chapter on "The Approach to Thomism" in G K Chesterton's book "St Thomas Aquinas." Please don't jump over this quote. Chesterton is priceless reading.
"Since the modern world began in the sixteenth century, nobody's system of philosophy has really corresponded to everybody's sense of reality: to what, if left to themselves, common men would call common sense. Each started with a paradox: a peculiar point of view demanding the sacrifice of what they would call a sane point of view. That is the one thing common to Hobbes and Hegel, to Kant and Bergson. to Berkeley and William James. A man had to believe something that no normal man would believe, if it were suddenly propounded to his simplicity; as that law is above right, or right is outside reason, or things are only as we think them, or everything is relative to a reality that is not there. The modern philosopher claims, like a sort of confidence man, that if once we will grant him this, the rest will be easy; he will straighten out the world, if once he is allowed to give this one twist to the mind."
If that's just wheting your appetite please also read this which follows shortly after (actually read the whole book):
"I am not, like Father D'Arcy, whose admirable book on St. Thomas has illuminated many problems for me, a trained philosopher, acquainted with the technique of the trade. But I hope Father D'Arcy will forgive me if I take one example from his book, which exactly illustrates what I mean. He, being a trained philosopher, is naturally trained to put up with philosophers. Also, being a trained priest, he is naturally accustomed, not only to suffer fools gladly, but (what is sometimes even harder) to suffer clever people gladly. Above all, his wide reading in metaphysics has made him patient with clever people when they indulge in folly. The consequence is that he can write calmly and even blandly sentences like these. "A certain likeness can be detected between the aim and method of St. Thomas and those of Hegel. There are, however, also remarkable differences. For St. Thomas it is impossible that contradictories should exist together, and again reality and intelligibility correspond, but a thing must first be, to be intelligible." Let the man in the street be forgiven, if he adds that the "remarkable difference" seems to him to be that St. Thomas was sane and Hegel was mad."
Friday, February 6, 2009
Getting Hitched with Hitchens
A couple of days ago I made my first outing to St Paul's bookstore near the Cathedral. Yes, for the first time. It was a flight of curiosity.
Like the Kingdom of Heaven I heard you find both the good and the bad in there and indeed that was the case. But I wasn't prepared for just how bad in some cases. I don't mean the books by Joan Chittister either (ahem, sister). But rather, quite to my surprise several copies of one of Christopher Hitchen's lastest attempts at writing a book, namely "God is not so Great How Religion Poisons Everything." Quite a surprising find I must say. Well yes, I had a quick peek, only to discover a lot of drivel but it does raise the question of just why they would sell that kind of literature and make a profit out of it? Where does one draw the line?
If the excuse is to let Catholics see the "other side" I must say that just doesn't cut it. While we no longer have an index of forbidden books Catholics are still required to be responsible in their reading and not to endanger their faith. To expose all and sundry's curiosity to such a book is not a good idea. I don't think we'd play such a loose game if the matter were physical rather than spiritual health. Secondly, I'm quite sure there are many other places such a book could be bought if someone is really that desperate (and desperate you'd have to be).
Oh but I did also notice one small copy of a book that's supposed to answer all these atheists. What a relief. Diversity is saved.
Like the Kingdom of Heaven I heard you find both the good and the bad in there and indeed that was the case. But I wasn't prepared for just how bad in some cases. I don't mean the books by Joan Chittister either (ahem, sister). But rather, quite to my surprise several copies of one of Christopher Hitchen's lastest attempts at writing a book, namely "God is not so Great How Religion Poisons Everything." Quite a surprising find I must say. Well yes, I had a quick peek, only to discover a lot of drivel but it does raise the question of just why they would sell that kind of literature and make a profit out of it? Where does one draw the line?
If the excuse is to let Catholics see the "other side" I must say that just doesn't cut it. While we no longer have an index of forbidden books Catholics are still required to be responsible in their reading and not to endanger their faith. To expose all and sundry's curiosity to such a book is not a good idea. I don't think we'd play such a loose game if the matter were physical rather than spiritual health. Secondly, I'm quite sure there are many other places such a book could be bought if someone is really that desperate (and desperate you'd have to be).
Oh but I did also notice one small copy of a book that's supposed to answer all these atheists. What a relief. Diversity is saved.
Do awards matter?
It's not a new question, but I think it's still relevant now, with the Golden Globes just behind us and the Oscars fast approaching. Also, on a smaller scale, various awards are being passed around in the blogging world (blogosphere if you must, although I don't like the sound of it). Caitlin over at Fire and Music was even kind enough to send a Superior Scribbler award along my way. So, do all these awards really matter?
Raquelle at Out of the Past made some very interesting points in a post about why she would not be passing along the awards. Mostly it boils down to her not wanting to exclude anyone by her choices. Some of these things do begin to feel more like a popularity contest than a gauge of real merit. If picked, you are in with the cool kids, if not, you are left thinking nobody wants you on their team.
I have to wonder how much even bigger awards, like the Oscars, involve favoritism and factors outside of merit alone. When Julie Andrews won for best actress in Mary Poppins, didn't it have something to do with her being shut out of the film version of My Fair Lady? When Paul Newman finally won for The Color of Money, wasn't it (at least in part) compensation for him never winning in the earlier years of his career? What about this year, will the controversy over Slumdog Millionaire hurt its chances at the Oscars? I don't know, but it does seem impossible to bestow honors completely impartially.
It also seems inevitable that someone will be missed. Even though Citizen Kane is now almost universally regarded as the best movie ever, it lost out on the Academy Award for best picture. So will some great blog get skipped over in the blog appreciation awards? Very possibly.
Don't start that get-off-the-stage music yet, I'm not finished!
These blog awards can also start to feel like chain letters, although fortunately there is no crazy threat (like your blog exploding) if you fail to pass on to the required number of people. As the list of recipients grows, however, doesn't the value of the award begin to fade? It makes me think of The Incredibles, and its point about how saying everyone is special is the same as saying no one is.
I'm also reminded of With Honors, where Brendan Fraser's character is trying so hard to graduate summa cum laude. At the graduation ceremony, his name is called and followed only by silence, but by then the importance of that brief moment has been put in perspective. He has been told he will graduate life with honor and without regret, and that is what really matters. Sure, an award is nice, but it's only a blip in a life. It's not (or anyway I don't think it should be) the end-all be-all of who we are and what we do.
On the other hand, winning an award feels great! The attention and recognition provides a nice feeling of validation. Perhaps because we are social creatures, and being lauded in your community gives one a nice boost.
So while the argument can be made that awards don't matter (that bigger awards are little more than an excuse to get dressed up and party, or worse still a big money-making scheme to draw in viewers to award shows and the system they hype, while smaller awards are given too indiscriminately and without clear enough standards) I think awards do matter. At least, winning this award matters to me. I am flattered.
And so I will accept and display the award bestowed upon me, with thanks to Princess Fire and Music. I will also follow along with its rules:
1. Name five other Superior Scribblers to receive this award.
2. Link to the author and name of the blog that gave you the award.
3. Display the award on your blog with this LINK which explains the award.
4. Click on the award at the bottom of the link and add your name to the bottom of the list.
5. Post the rules.
While there are many blogs I read and enjoy, I'm choosing to pass along this award to the following: The Flick Chick, The Film Doctor, David, Cesia, and The Movie Ness. I hope they will receive it in the spirit I send it, which is to say that I like you(r blog), and I hope you keep writing.
They can choose to play by the rules in accepting and passing it on, call in a guest blogger dressed in Native American gear to refuse, or do anything in between. I imagine it will all depend on whether or not they think awards matter.
Raquelle at Out of the Past made some very interesting points in a post about why she would not be passing along the awards. Mostly it boils down to her not wanting to exclude anyone by her choices. Some of these things do begin to feel more like a popularity contest than a gauge of real merit. If picked, you are in with the cool kids, if not, you are left thinking nobody wants you on their team.
I have to wonder how much even bigger awards, like the Oscars, involve favoritism and factors outside of merit alone. When Julie Andrews won for best actress in Mary Poppins, didn't it have something to do with her being shut out of the film version of My Fair Lady? When Paul Newman finally won for The Color of Money, wasn't it (at least in part) compensation for him never winning in the earlier years of his career? What about this year, will the controversy over Slumdog Millionaire hurt its chances at the Oscars? I don't know, but it does seem impossible to bestow honors completely impartially.
It also seems inevitable that someone will be missed. Even though Citizen Kane is now almost universally regarded as the best movie ever, it lost out on the Academy Award for best picture. So will some great blog get skipped over in the blog appreciation awards? Very possibly.
Don't start that get-off-the-stage music yet, I'm not finished!
These blog awards can also start to feel like chain letters, although fortunately there is no crazy threat (like your blog exploding) if you fail to pass on to the required number of people. As the list of recipients grows, however, doesn't the value of the award begin to fade? It makes me think of The Incredibles, and its point about how saying everyone is special is the same as saying no one is.
I'm also reminded of With Honors, where Brendan Fraser's character is trying so hard to graduate summa cum laude. At the graduation ceremony, his name is called and followed only by silence, but by then the importance of that brief moment has been put in perspective. He has been told he will graduate life with honor and without regret, and that is what really matters. Sure, an award is nice, but it's only a blip in a life. It's not (or anyway I don't think it should be) the end-all be-all of who we are and what we do.
On the other hand, winning an award feels great! The attention and recognition provides a nice feeling of validation. Perhaps because we are social creatures, and being lauded in your community gives one a nice boost.
So while the argument can be made that awards don't matter (that bigger awards are little more than an excuse to get dressed up and party, or worse still a big money-making scheme to draw in viewers to award shows and the system they hype, while smaller awards are given too indiscriminately and without clear enough standards) I think awards do matter. At least, winning this award matters to me. I am flattered.
And so I will accept and display the award bestowed upon me, with thanks to Princess Fire and Music. I will also follow along with its rules:
1. Name five other Superior Scribblers to receive this award.2. Link to the author and name of the blog that gave you the award.
3. Display the award on your blog with this LINK which explains the award.
4. Click on the award at the bottom of the link and add your name to the bottom of the list.
5. Post the rules.
While there are many blogs I read and enjoy, I'm choosing to pass along this award to the following: The Flick Chick, The Film Doctor, David, Cesia, and The Movie Ness. I hope they will receive it in the spirit I send it, which is to say that I like you(r blog), and I hope you keep writing.
They can choose to play by the rules in accepting and passing it on, call in a guest blogger dressed in Native American gear to refuse, or do anything in between. I imagine it will all depend on whether or not they think awards matter.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
New Directions
You are probably wondering about the future of this blog.
Generally I am keeping it in the same direction as it has been going with general discussion on liturgical praxis and some comments upon current church politics. Hopefully I will get some new authors soon to provide some different perspectives. The idea being to liven up the debate a bit, and to put out some challenges to both hard line traditionalists and hardline liberals.
Generally I am keeping it in the same direction as it has been going with general discussion on liturgical praxis and some comments upon current church politics. Hopefully I will get some new authors soon to provide some different perspectives. The idea being to liven up the debate a bit, and to put out some challenges to both hard line traditionalists and hardline liberals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
