Waiting to Happen

It can be, and frequently is, argued that this kind of near-miss (in this case) is perpetrated by the lunatic fringe; that it can happen among the lunatics of any religion, including the Christian faith; that it is unfair to stereotype all members of the Scimitar on the basis of a lone lunatic's actions.

All of which is true, except for the fact that the Scimitar seems invariably to produce more "lone lunatics" than other religious communities that seem far more capable of being assimilated into their dominant cultures. Result? More potential catastrophes like this.

Solution to the problem? Good question.

Until those who are charged with the protection of the innocent and safeguarding of nations take into full account the anthropological realities explicated by René Girard's mimetic theory in general and the bloodlust of the "primitive sacred" (read: pagan), regardless of the Scimitar's ostensible claims of monotheism, all attempts to claim that the Scimitar is "just another of the world's religions" will ring hollow.

And dangerous.

Knox - How to Serve, to Live

"... you serve grace now, not the law" ((Rom 6,14) - that means, evidently and most importantly, a better chance in the struggle; the law does but set before us a high standard, which we despair of achieving, grace enables us. But something else, I think, is implied. When you serve the law, you serve it, inevitably, in a legal spirit, unwillingly, grudgingly, according to the letter. When you serve free grace, you serve it in a spirit of freedom; you enter (as we say) into the spirit of it, co-operate , gladly and generously, with its designs for you. That contrast between doing God's will because you want to is more explicitly set forth elsewhere ... "The spirit you have now received is not, as of old, a spirit of slavery, to govern you by fear; it is the spirit of adoption, which makes us cry out Abba, Father!" (Rom 8,15) It is the same principle which our Lord himself had taught, though with a slightly different emphasis, when he told his disciples, "I do not speak of you now as my servants; a servant is one who does not understand what his master is about, whereas I have made known to you all that my Father has told me, and so I have called you my friends" (Jn 15,5). If the practice of the Christian religion seems to you and me something uncommonly like drudgery, that is our fault; it was not meant to be. The only really Christian attitude is to obey God with the dutifulness of loving sons, is to follow Christ with the loyalty of devoted friends.

- Ronald A. Knox

Like Father Like Son

Let these words - "you're allowing five out of nine hotshot lawyers to run the country" - spoken by the father of this fellow, who we are blessed to have serving in the priesthood in our neck of the woods, sink in.

But No Longer a Monopoly

Penn State and Baylor professor, Phillip Jenkins, says that the Christian faith is alive and well in Europe, and will be even more alive a century from now.

Condom-minimum

Given the brouhaha over the comments of Benedict XVI regarding condoms, I find the commentary of my publisher here to be the most measured, historically-oriented, and balanced. With the Holy Father, one must always remember that he takes the long view, speaks with the Fathers of the Church, and, in this case, is not speaking definitively ex cathedra. See what you think.

Gijsbrechts @ Lion & the Cardinal

A timely reminder as we draw close both to Thanksgiving Day and the end of the Church Year: stop over now and again and visit Daniel Mitsui's website, The Lion & the Cardinal when you need a shot in the arm of Truth, Goodness, and Beauty. Above is an example of Cornelius Gijsbrechts' take on the genre of trompe l'oeil that is featured in a most recent posting; and a reminder to pray for the holy souls, whose ranks one truly hopes to join on the way to Heaven.

Waterhouse PRB

Saint Cecilia (1895) - John W. Waterhouse

Miracles - Knox and Lewis

I cannot recommend highly enough Father Milton Walsh's book about C. S. Lewis and Ronald Knox, Second Friends. For example, on the topic of what it takes philosophically in order to believe in the miraculous ("something that traverses the law of uniformity in nature and does so in such a way that it gives evidence of divine power directly at work"), Walsh quotes Lewis:

If the end of the world appeared in all the literal trappings of the Apocalypse, if the modern materialist saw with his own eyes the heavens rolled up and the great white throne appearing, if he had the sensation of being himself hurled into the Lake of Fire, he would continue forever, in that lake itself, to regard his experience as an illusion and to find the explanation of it in psycho-analysis, or cerebral pathology ('Miracles', God in the Dock, 25)

Walsh states that for both Knox and Lewis, post-enlightenment persons have certain prejudicial philosophical presuppositions that preclude acceptance of and belief in miracles. Note: philosophical rather than scientific presuppositions. Science, by definition, can only study the regularly recurring laws of the universe and other phenomena available to the scientific method; science, therefore, cannot even hold an opinion about the existence or non-existence of miracles. What are those 'certain prejudicial philosophical presuppositions?' The following:

- that the only reality is the spatiotemporal world in which we live

- that the laws of nature exclude the possibility of the miraculous

- that God would not 'stoop' to do miracles

It is not easy to put these presuppositions aside, because many intellectuals since the Enlightenment have claimed insistently the contrary: there is no world beyond what we can experience with our senses; miracles are impossible; God does not enter into the workings of our world. It is also challenging to put these presuppositions aside because a living, personal God makes demands on us that the Enlightenment "Watchmaker" or pantheist "Absolute" do not:

(Lewis:) Here lies the deepest tap-root of Pantheism and of the objection to traditional [biblical] imagery. It was hated, at bottom, not because it pictured Him as man but because it pictured Him as king, or even as warrior. The Pantheists' God does nothing, demands nothing. He is there if you wish for Him, like a book on a shelf. He will not pursue you. There is no danger that at any time heaven and earth should flee away at His glance.

If any of this strikes you as being seen, heard, or felt by today's so-called New Atheism proponents, your Pantheist friends, or ignoring-of-God neighbors, once again I highly recommend Fr Walsh's book, Second Friends.

Why the Atonement - Girard

René Girard

In his book on C. S. Lewis and Ronald Knox, Fr Milton Walsh relates Lewis's skepticism prior to his conversion. Walsh writes:

(Lewis) could not see how the life and death of "Someone Else" two thousand years ago could help us here and now, except as an example: "And the example business, tho' true and important, is not Christianity: right in the centre of Christianity, in the Gospels and Saint Paul, you keep on getting something quite different and very mysterious expressed in those phrases I have so often ridiculed ('propitiation' - 'sacrifice - 'the blood of the Lamb') - expressions which I could only interpret in senses that seemed to me either silly or shocking" ...

How can the suffering of one person atone for the sins of another? Knox admits that many people consider such an arrangement immoral, and Lewis comments that there ahve been many theological explanations for this core conviction of Christianity, some more valuable than others. (85, 87)

René Girard's unveils humanity's deep, dark secret which he explicates in his "mimetic theory." This secret is that human culture is built squarely upon a "single victim mechanism" and it is the unique work of the Gospel in history to bring an end this secret's satanic reign.

But this foundation of human violence was so vital to the construction and maintenance of human culture - re-enacted each time victims were arbitrarily selected and expelled and/or murdered - that for aeons there was no alternative. The "lamb slain since the foundation of the world" (Rev 13,8) was the default way to manufacture human cultural cohesion; the "lowest common denominator" of human society.

Without gainsaying any teaching of the Catholic Church regarding atonement, Girard showed not so much how our Lord's death brought about salvation, but why it needed to happen. It happened because human sin always - always - takes us back to the same place: the place of expelling the victim and scapegoating violence. The way that God chose to reveal and break the inner workings of our satanic (literally: Satan - Σατάν - "the accuser") method of convening had to be to go to the place our sin always took us - the place of sacrificial violence - and undo Satan's power once and for all.

Excellent Move

Bravo and congratulations, Archbishop Timothy Dolan

Walsh - Second Friends

(F)or both (C. S. Lewis and Ronald Knox) Christianity is much more than a doctrinal system: it is above all a personal relationship with Christ that entails romance, struggle, and loyalty. It was important for Knox and Lewis that the mind and the heart converge, that truth could be defended by reason and not simply by an appeal to feelings. At the same time, they realized that the heart needs to prod the mind if notional truths are to become real Truth, a truth upon which a person is willing to risk everything.

- Milton Walsh, Second Friends:

C. S. Lewis and Ronald Knox in Conversation

BXVI - Books and the Church

And for all you fellow bibliophiles, the Holy Father says in no uncertain terms, the Church of Rome is inextricably tied together with the importance of books. Who would have thought it?

What the Pope Really Said

Just in case you only heard - literally - the de-generate side of the story, here is what Benedict XVI really said in Spain.

Worldly People - Knox

(T)HE CHRISTIAN RELIGION ALWAYS HAS one enemy, and always it is the same enemy, the world ... What do we mean when we talk about "worldly" people? It isn't a very easy thing to explain or to define. But, roughly speaking, I think you can say worldly people are the people who either don't believe in a future life, or don't bother about a future life, and want to make this world as comfortable a place as possible for as many people as possible, always including themselves ... And of course all that was what Pontius Pilate stood for. He didn't care a bit about whether our Lord was the Son of God or not, about whether he broke the Sabbath or not, about whether he kept the law of Moses or not. He only wanted to keep the Jews reasonably contented, reasonably quiet; he didn't want crowds of people going round shouting out slogans like "Hosanna to the Son of David," or "Crucify him" - that kind of thing was bad for public safety, so it had got to be stopped. It wasn't Judas, you see, it wasn't Caiaphas, that crucified our Lord. If they had done it, there was an intelligible motive for doing it. Caiaphas and those others had at least the excuse of wounded professional pride, for wanting to put our Lord to death. Judas had a much more practical excuse - thirty pieces of silver. But Pilate didn't dislike our Lord at all; he was rather impressed by him, he was certainly convinced of his innocence. And yet it was Pilate who crucified him. It was the world of worldly people, with its dislike of a scene, its dislike of a fuss, its doctrine of "Live and let live" that put Jesus Christ to death.

- Ronald A. Knox

Clueless

He just doesn't get it, does he? If he spent one-half his time trying to reach the American public with the same fervor, he might just make some friends.

Meanwhile, he and most of the MSM ignores this. Sigh.