What Happens To Art After The Resurrection?

Fruit of the vine, work of human hands, it will become for us our Spiritual Drink

I don’t know how this question came to mind. It’s interesting to me for several reasons.

The first reason it is interesting is because the things we do in this world matter and echo in some form or fashion for eternity. But next to the beatific vision, the most stunning Caravaggio will look like a childs fingerpainting. And yet, a childs fingerpainting gets pride of place on the refrigerator, not because it is technically good but because of who made it.

Yet not all art is created equal. And besides art, there are plenty of other things which are the work of human hands. Our cities! Our writings! Our marginalia! Our illuminated Bibles. What happens to the Bible after the Resurrection? Will we read in the World To Come? Reading is good, but surely pales in comparison to the presence of God.

But then–we get our flesh and blood bodies back too. And creativity is not a product of the fall, it’s part of the imago dei. So it wouldn’t go away.

I wonder if books will be glorified and resurrected. Or if, rather, the glorious resurrection will grant us true insight into old works.

But all of this must imply some partition of good and bad art and works of human hands. Our cities are real, and we draw Angels down upon them.

So either our fingerpainting is glorified and resurrected, our vision perfected; or our fingerpainting is preserved, but we can no longer paint that way. What art would we make in heaven? Would there be a christ-child in every painting?

Something that makes some art beautiful is that it strives to rise above our fallen nature and capture something transcendent. Without a fallen nature, art would only be transcendent.

Maybe the love and presence of God is spiritual food and drink of a species beyond comprehension, which sates our creativity and permits us to put ourselves and our work wholly at the service of the divine, without feeling any loss.

That answer is a little unsatisfying logically, but if true, hints at something beautiful.

Lord, I believe; help my unbelief.

AMDG

Grab Bag From The Gulag

Surely God’s Love is worth any love. – St Josemaria Escriva

Writing this on my phone, as I am trying to avoid the temptation to blag from my work devices. I have been meaning to update as my brain has been Doing That Thing Again ™ which sometimes culminates in thoughts worth sharing.

We’ll see what actually makes it, as phone clacking is not the ideal way to write thoughtful posts. I beg your forgiveness for typos or other oddities.

Spirit and Letter

I was thinking about the incarnation of Christ and comparing his “first coming” with his second.

I tend to think of Christ as a “surprising” figure, like the punchline to a joke. Everyone believed He would come in one way, and he came in another, yet without undermining the accuracy of the prophets. Where did this misunderstanding come from? Setting aside “God having a sense of humor”, it came from US. We interpreted the proohecies in a way that was favorable to us in an earthly way. And Christ surprised us because he said all the law and the prophets pointed to NEW HEARTS and not NEW LAWS. He said the Spirit of the law, in other words, more than the Letter was the key thing. And the Pharisees were undone by their fixation on the letter.

Would Christ come at the eschaton and surprise us in the same way? I dont think so. I think we were incapable of grasping what faith requires of us without the Holy Spirit, and with the Holy Spirit there is no need to be coy. He told us exactly what he would be doing, and withheld only WHEN it would happen.

In other words, there will be no surprises at the end. And thats a consolation really. No mystery. No “i wonder how I did on the test”. We all know. And He knows too.

But here’s the thing, and this is an innovation my friend offered when I discussed this with him. We have, collectively, swung to the opposite extreme. I say collectively and “we” inclusive regarding Modern Humans more than Catholics. I am sure Catholics fall prey to this too but anyway, the headline: we are in an age of Spirit and not Letter. Protestants reject the Law, prefering merely the spirit. Bizarro Pharisees, reducing God to vibes. We need the law too. We cant good-vibes our way to heaven, we do in fact need specific and actionable steps. We need sacraments. We need the law as a measure of the extent to which we bring it into our hearts. We cant fake the “heart”—God is he from whom no secret is hid; God is he to whom we ask blessings for those present at the Mass “whose faith and devotion are known to you”.

And i think this abuse of the “spirit” of christianity is why His second coming is described in revelation as The Great Day of His Wrath. Why would he have Wrath if we were all here vibing? I think its the abuse if the name “Christian”. We need the Letter of the Law, and we need the Spirit. The classic, Catholic, both/and.

Speaking Of Wrath

I have been in need of confession and so my thoughts have been dark, as I try to stave off my various species of despair.

I was recently counseled that I am too hard on myself. I tend to extremes: when I am good I am good. When I am not good I am the worst. This slingshotting back and forth between extremes is unhealthy and unhelpful. I need a framework to help me climb out of it.

What I have settled on is that there must be a gradation of God’s wrath. I dont know if the church teaches anything about this but where the Church and my blog disagree, prefer the Church because I never do research before I post.

Imagine a child. The child misbehaves. It is both—BOTH!—normal for the child to misbehave AND something that requires correction. Sin is BOTH normal to the human condition and something we must fight against. God obviously knows all context of our lives, our traumas, what we have been taught well and taught badly. So for an otherwise devoted Catholic, surely God must correct them as a parent lovingly corrects a child. This does not abrogate consequences—mortal sin is mortal sin, and breaking Moms China Vase is still bad even if it was unintended. But there is a distinct difference between being hapless and being willful. Throwing Moms China Vase through the window is an act of rebellion and is dealt with differently. Even being peristently hapless loses its charm after a while and demands a stronger response.

Hell is real and people go there, but I think I ought not ruminate so much on how if I die I will go to hell, and instead meditate on trust that God will not permit someone so sincere, yet sincerely foolish, to die an unprovided death. The sacraments are a MERCY and an expression of God’s love, and their proximity should be a balm and not a stressor. It should be “ah, forgive me Lord, and confession is only a week away!” And not “I hope i dont die before next week”.

To the outwardly rebellious: the heretics and determined and willful sinners, the proliferation of sacraments begins to count against them. “Confession was how frequently offered and yet you refused and remained obstinate?”

The Great Day of His Wrath will be preceded by a penance service in the hills, and those who remain will cry out to the mountains to “fall on us”..,

God As Father

I forget if I have discussed a fruitful conversation about parenting.

My friend offered these three laws for parents to relate to their children:

  1. “I love you”
  2. “You cannot change THAT I love you”
  3. “You cannot change HOW I love you”

A child must know he is loved, if a child makes a bad choice he must know that he is loved through it. Parents who disown their kids run afoul of this second rule. A child must know that if he makes a bad choice he cannot force his parents to accept it; parents who enable their kids bad decisions run afoul of this third rule.

It finally occurred to me that God loves ME this way. And you. All of us.

God loves me. This is a cliche, and very often the discussion ends here. But when I sin, I do not change THAT God loves me. God doesn’t disown me when I sin. God loves me even while I sin. But I cannot make God accept my sin, for I cannot change HOW God loves me. I must repent of my error, God will not change His law for me.

This is something I need to meditate on more, as I often find myself in despair after sinning for feeling I am no longer loved or lovable. Every confession feels like trying to convince an ex to take you back, “this time itll be different!”

But thats not what Confession is, not exactly. The love isnt dead and gone—I have walked away from God, I am a prodigal son sleeping in the mud. I can come back any day, and my love and His divine Love are re-united.

Related to this idea is the idea that God’s love is not for humanity, collectively, but for ME specifically. And YOU. All of us, as individuals. I am not diminishing Gods love for someone else by reuniting after confession; Gods love multiplies.

In Prayer, i ought to talk to God as if I have his undivided love and attention, the way a child might demand his parents love and attention. And they give it freely, because what could be better than to hear your child tell you what he needs? Our prayers are a delight to a loving God who is calling us to Him and wants to help us find the right path.

When they say God is Love—this is what it means, I think.

AMDG, with Love

Yours, Mine, and Ours

I remember still the moment in RCIA when they said that in Catholic Social Teaching the smallest irreducible unit of society is the family and not the individual.

It’s hard to wrap our minds around because we are individuals and we think we are social. So that sentence defies understanding at first brush. Individualism prizes me and mine. Here’s what I achieved, these things are mine. It is, shall we say, the ‘sense of self’.

But Catholic Social Teaching does not vitiate the individual. It doesn’t say “you are nothing without your family or community”. Just like a unitless number is a useless number because it lacks context, an individual considered outside of their community is a contextless individual. If I say the rainfall last week was “four”, it tells you nothing. Four inches is not as bad as four feet. Tell me your community, the Church says, and I will tell you who you are.

Marriage likewise is the creation of a family, the sacramental construction of a new context and a new community. The self doesn’t die, but is given a new context.

In talking to a friend who is staring down the barrel of the marriage sacrament, I used the phrase “communal self” (quite on accident, credit for anything wise from me always goes to the Holy Spirit, who alone knows the depth of my inability to practice what I preach) which is the single phrase that inspired this entire post.

The “communal self” embraces the idea that what is yours belongs to your community but it is yours to steward for that purpose. It means the community can make demands on your self, but you can administer yourself with prudence to maximize effect. This same idea embraces the idea that a starving man has more right to your bread than you do. Someone who is part of your community is a part of you; what is yours doesn’t cease to be yours when it becomes “ours”. The Community has, at its disposal, the combined resources of all of its parts, including yours.

The opposite of the communal self is the individual self, which is the idea that what is yours is yours alone and no one else’s. That your title is absolute and true charity is the voluntary giving of what is yours, and no amount of need can force you to budge. The individual self would not feel any remorse to not give bread to a starving man if the individual did not choose to do so.

Catholicism has this tendency to both expand our horizons without eliminating the importance of the here and now. I can share food and money and shelter and whatever else with those in need, and never once lose my self. Marriage is many things, but one of those things is a loss of individualism; one thing it isn’t is a loss of self. Community, too. True community–the loss of the individual, without the loss of self.

AMDG

Immaculate Heart of Mary

I have cultivated, somewhat on accident, a devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Devotions usually work this way. I won’t go into detail of mine. In fact I’ll take a little digression here about devotions.

Sometimes I mention my devotions, sometimes I reference them, sometimes I say them outright. Sometimes I say the ones I don’t like. It’s not hard-n-fast, it really depends on what I feel is worth talking about. Does it help me? Does it help you? Sometimes talking about devotions can feel more like the pharisee than the publican, and I think it’s for this reason that we are admonished in scripture to pray in private. I bristle a bit when people brag about their devotions online that are clearly not meant for laity. The divine office/liturgy of the hours is wonderful. Our Lady gave us the Rosary, in part, so that we peasants need not take on that obligation. Pray the rosary.

In any event, I have a devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It started small, and has become an iron clad part of my prayer life. Recently some stars have been aligning for me, and I turned my Calendar over to August and see that August is the month of the Immaculate Heart. There are no coincidences.

August has always been portentous for me particularly because of the Assumption. I know there are other feasts but the Assumption has taken on increasing weight for me as the years go by. I really don’t know why, I’ve read more and better meditations on the Assumption from my fellow blogosphere friends than I’ve ever mustered myself. Yet it stands out to me as an important feast; maybe it need only be important to ME but it’s certainly important enough for the Church to remember.

There’s not really a point to this. The star-aligning aforementioned means I have been busy and had a lot of work to do. This is the first time I have had kind of a peaceful “God will help this all work out” attitude about it; and noticing that August is the month of the Immaculate Heart, I can’t help but feel as if this is a blessing from Our Lady. It always surprises me, miracles big and small. It is hard not to be grateful. And it felt worth mentioning.

I will remember you, dear reader, and your intentions in my prayer this week.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

AMDG

Appearance’s Sake

Sometimes I see discourse circle back around to the practice of veiling among Catholic Women. It takes a distinctly protestant flavor–that it is for the benefit of modesty contra the predatory eyes of MEN that the women must veil. I’ve never considered this to be the case.

IIRC the instruction to veil is presented alongside a parallel instruction for men to remove their hats in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament. And this, to me, helps explain why women veil, which was not decipherable on it’s own: Men remove their hats because men are proud of their hats, hats and headwear have always been used, especially among men, as status symbols. Men are proud of their hats. Women are reciprocally proud of their hair, and it is not something that can be removed so it is instead covered. The purpose of removing hats and covering hair is to be humble. It is the equalizer. We have no status before God, we are all, equally, His sons and daughters.

I think it is important to predicate what I actually want to talk about with this anecdote, because something I am afraid of is vanity. Vanity is a spiritual toxin, and if you are not aware of it it is like a snake in the garden, and will poison what you do. Dress and presentation need not always lead to vanity: As Catholics we can baptize it for good, but we must have the right intention from the start.

Fashion

Fashion is not something I have ever understood. I have always been utilitarian, and always preferred as basic an appearance as possible. I have a reflexive desire to be invisible, so bold fashion terrifies me, insofar as it draws attention to myself, which historically I fear.

However, I have been following a fashion designer on Substack who is creating his own fashion brand, and he has been using videos to explain the thought process behind fashion. Fashion is a language, and we use it to communicate in ways both subtle and unsubtle. How we dress–how we present ourselves to the world–says something about how we see ourselves (the temptation to vanity) and how we see others (temptation to pride).

Clothing and appearance need not always communicate something status or financial. It can communicate heritage, it can communicate interest, it can communicate personality, it can communicate priority. It can speak to how we view the world.

This language is not something I ever understood until I heard it explained by this designer. And I can look on some of my fashion choices and do a little eye-roll. OH. I get it. My reflex to be invisible was also saying “I don’t value myself” and possibly even “I don’t value you”.

Listening to an interview, which I wrote about before but I can’t be bothered to find the link, someone said they dress up “even for Tim the farmer”, because it was a way of saying to Tim the farmer that he is worth dressing up for. That was counterintuitive to me, and still is: taking care of ourselves as a way of demonstrating care for others. It is nevertheless true. You wear a suit to go to an interview, because you want to communicate that you are a serious professional. You do not wear torn up shorts and a hoodie to an interview where you want to be taken seriously as a professional. Likewise, if you dress up in a suit because you have a meeting with Tim the Farmer, it tells him that you take him seriously, no matter how he dresses. And if you dress in torn up shorts and a hoodie to meet with Tim because “it’s only Tim” then Tim will know you think he’s “only Tim”.

If you don’t have a meeting with anyone that day, and have one of those blessed days where you have no occasion to leave your house on purpose, you should still dress yourself, because dressing is an act of civilization. Your body is a gift from God and treating it with respect by dressing it well is a good thing to do.

Pipe-And-Fedora Performative Gentlemanliness

Men are prone to thinking that wearing the right uniform is a cognitive cheatcode. “Dress for the job you want”. And so a man might wear the fedora, smoke the pipe, wear a vest, and still be a total jerkwad. That’s because his intention is in the wrong place.

Let me put it this way: The glamorization of the 1950’s is misplaced. It was not a utopian age. Everyone was drunk all the time, and physical abuse was commonplace. Dressing like you are from the 1950’s might signal your fondness and appreciation for the 1950’s, but remember that the 1950’s gave way to the 1960’s and 1970’s, and one followed the other as naturally as night follows day. I, personally, believe (and recall I am no enemy of Tradition I am probably better described as some kind of liturgical realist) that the Church’s struggles with the liturgy right now are because we have this liturgy which is by all appearances beautiful but which doesn’t demand a change in the hearts of the participants. Recall that Vatican 2, whatever you may think it’s faults are, was effectuated by people who were raised and fed on the Traditional Latin Mass. There is nothing about the TLM that intrinsically changes what you think and feel in the pews. You have to do that work yourself.

Likewise, wearing a suit doesn’t magically change what you think and feel. A jerk in a fedora is still a jerk.

So again, I, as a man, must note that we men are especially prone to these vain temptations by how we dress. The intention must be in the right place.

Resolutions

I’ve been contemplating Fashion for some time. And I don’t know exactly what I will change. The first step to solving a problem is recognizing you have one, so that’s about the step I am at.

Buying new clothes won’t magically change my thinking, so that’s important. I can change my thinking with the clothes I have today and approach the world differently. In fact, if I were to amend how I think about myself I would probably treat myself a lot better, and in treating myself better I would take care of myself better. And in taking care of myself better, I would look and dress better–it’s all the same self-care. And self-care has become a bit of a cliche phrase these days, so let’s be specific. Self care is not self-indulgence, it is an act of healing. If I get right with the Lord, and get right with myself, I will be in a better position to get right with the world.

Once I am sure my heart is in the right place, then I can justify ‘investing’ in clothes. Nice clothes intended to last a long time, clothes which I can wear for the purpose of dignifying those I encounter and communicating in the language of fashion that I respect myself as a creation of God, and dignify all I meet as creations of God.

If I am not right with the Lord, or right with myself, none of these ideas will be communicated by my clothes.

The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord. Start there–the rest will follow.

AMDG

A Smattering Of Thoughts

Catholic Money

I think a lot about how our concept of money governs our understanding of the world. I’ve “figured it out” and so I haven’t had as much to say about it, but I still see stuff around and about so let me share a reminder.

Today, seen on substack, was a note which said the following:

During the homily at Mass today our priest said his Mom lived alone into her 90s after his Dad died, but he and his brother never worried about her for a second because she had so many friends dropping in on her daily.

For decades, she poured into her local church, and then when she needed it, the church was there for her. “How’re you doing today, Betty? You need anything, Betty?” Thirteen years of this, per our priest, and he took care of his parishes all over the state while other people took care of his Mom.

Thinking of everything in terms of ROI is short sighted. And anyway if you make a profit in this earthly life, well, you have received your reward. God has a way of taking care of people who take care of Him, and who do so with the right heart. Invest in hearts and you will be rewarded in hearts. Invest in money and you will be rewarded in money. See which of those two will take care of you in your 90’s.

Middle Age

It struck me recently, speaking of 90’s, that I have arrived at what could be considered Middle Age. My grandfathers both died in their seventies. My parents are still kicking, God bless and have mercy on them, in their 60’s. One of my grandparents is still kicking, she’s well into her 90’s now as I recall, despite her best efforts. In June I turned 35, which is the halfway mark to 70.

I do a lot of reflection in this space about what I want vs what is possible, and I think I am slowly, slowly learning to just let go of it all. God has given babies to the elderly, has ennobled the young, has done great deeds through peasants and Kings only insofar as they surrendered themselves to Him. I need to let go of thinking about what I have done so far, and even let go of what I want to do in the second half of my life. What do I need to do NOW. Now, the eternal now, is all that matters. Now, and at the hour of my death. God have mercy on me.

SSPX

I’m still thinking about the SSPX. There’s a lot of heroic work being done by brilliant writers who left the SSPX before the schism and who are speaking about their experience and thought processes. Cal Vega on substack is one. I just can’t help but see the Holy Spirit at work, raising up people who can speak to the times in the manner required by the times.

Adoration

I’ve known for a long time that Adoration needs to be a part of my schedule, and a few weeks ago circumstances lined up to make it happen. I took a witching-hour adoration slot weekly. It certainly doesn’t make me holier to do it, and hasn’t made me holier as a result. But I can’t help but think it is good.

Let me put it this way. It’s easy to forget about the working of grace. We talk about grace pretty casually, but it’s a serious and definite thing. The vocation of marriage, properly understood, has graces associated with it which reinforce the married in the conduct of their duties. They probably don’t notice it, no light shines down from heaven that says “YOU NOW HAVE THESE GRACES”. There’s only the sacrament, where a priest says “you are now sacramentally married, and FYI there are graces”. It is hard to read that way, but nonetheless true.

The Pope has graces, with his office. I am sure rulers, if they aligned themselves with the Church, would have special graces. The Sacrament of Confession has graces. The Eucharist has graces. Adoration has graces.

What I’m saying is–the Holy Spirit is invisibly at work in ways you and I don’t even know, right now.

But also: When we criticize some action we see in others, we discount the working of grace in their lives because we are not in their position. When we don’t feel ready for some future thing, we discount the working of grace in our lives because we are trying to bootstrap our way to perfection. We need the sacrament to open the door to graces we need to do our important work.

The math, to my mind, goes something like this: We are presented with a choice, we must choose, God reinforces our choice with grace, and we bear the consequences of that choice BETTER for the grace we received.

This does not baptize ANY choice. If the choice is between sin and virtue, choosing sin does not have any graces. I almost said “denies” but God isn’t withholding. We act first, in this scenario, God acts second. If we don’t choose the door with grace we haven’t lost anything, we just simply don’t get something. The violence of sin harms our souls. Repentance orients us back to communion, and reconciliation restores us to communion, and the graces flow again. If we are choosing between two sinful options, it is best not to choose at all. And if we can’t tell which choice opens grace to us, this is why we pray so we can invite our guardian angel, the saints in heaven, and the Holy Spirit to illuminate our choices and help lead us on the right path. Prayer invites grace, too.

I don’t know the point of all this. I suppose what I’m saying is that ‘give yourself grace’ is a beautiful and meaningless cliche these days. Pray! Pray the rosary. And ask God for grace. Whether you feel it or not, He will deliver.

AMDG

Thwarting Napoleon

I’ve written previously about how I think Donald Trump is a Napoleonic figure and not in a good way. Napoleon and Trump both pushed on boundaries. Napoleon found nothing pushing back, and so conquered Europe. Trump is finding the Supreme Court. Not perfectly, some may say, but in some important ways. Ever since Athens, the elderly have served as a conservative influence against radical, dynamic change. The word Senator derives from Senex, ‘Old Man’.

Which tells me that the second people start messing with the Supreme Court, that’s when the walls are crumbling. Conservative institutions (I mean this in the ‘change slow’ sense contra ‘change fast’, not in a factional sense) are never going to put out the fire, but they serve effectively to slow it’s spread.

Don’t intuit in this either that I think Trump “must be stopped” or anything like that. Neither intuit that I think all the news coming out of the Supreme Court is a ‘hip hip hurray!’ thing. All I am pointing out is that I recognize now the Supreme Court are America’s failsafe. When people are unhappy they talk about changing the electoral college, or changing the supreme court, or any number of other things. Changes to these institutions are incredibly difficult, and the system does punish those who try.

Trump and Napoleon are products of revolution. Capable of great and terrible deeds, both, as liberal societies are wont. The important question to my mind is what comes after.

AMDG

Reflections for Early July

My Country

I find it hard to summon in myself that I love America. I don’t feel it. I live in a kind of perpetual tension with the nation. I like to think–and haters will say it’s cope, let them–that it’s because I will her good, and see that she has determined to take for herself a path of destruction.

I was talking to another dear friend (brace yourselves) and there were some thoughts about raising children. The child 1) must know he is loved; 2) must know he cannot change that he is loved; 3) must know he cannot change HOW he is loved. A child whom a parent hates from the outset will suffer for it. A child who chooses to be an artist instead of following the family business as a cobbler and is subsequently disowned realizes that he CAN change whether or not he is loved, and suffers because of it. A child who insists that his parents embrace his lifestyle even if it is self destructive, and the parents assent, realizes that he can change HOW he is loved, and suffers because of it. A parent loves his child, a parent loves his child permanently, a parent loves his child properly. A child choosing a self destructive path isn’t unloved, but isn’t encouraged. Measure all things according to circumstance and prudence etc, you shouldn’t read this blog for parenting advice.

I think America is like a derelict parent, to me, and I cannot rid myself of them. So I love America, in the distant way one loves through estrangement. I cannot change that I love America–it is my home, after all. I am moved by the national anthem being sung by crowds, my hackles are raised by detractors. I must not change HOW I love America–that is, willing her good, praying for her, despite her self destructive tendencies.

I love my state far more unambiguously. Virginia is beautiful country, it is the closest thing I have to a motherland, and so I love Virginia with the gratitude of the prodigal son. Virginia politics–God bless her–are predictably ridiculous, so I will her good and pray for her too.

The 250 years doesn’t register for me. It’s certainly a grand jubilee if ever there was one, it merits acknowledgement. But, it’s more like counting years of estrangement. Noteworthy, a little sad. I wonder when she’ll come home.

Aquinas tells us that Patriotism is a virtue, and so we owe it to ourselves to muster within us the love of country and especially the love of countrymen. Bittersweet it may be, but never let anyone change HOW you love. Love with the properly ordered love of God, love the good, reject the bad, condemn the evil.

My Church

I love the Church with a much stronger love, because she is not a derelict parent. I owe her everything, because I owe God everything. Love of Church is like love of the country you are about to go to, love of the heavenly country of the blessed. Patriotism for God’s Kingdom. I love her, no one can change that I love her, no one can change HOW I love her. And I know, unequivocally, that she loves me the same.

How tragic, then, to meditate the seemingly imminent schism of the SSPX. Much ink can and surely will be spilled on the subject, and let it, but I would like to acknowledge the horror of schism. It is an act of violence, like secession, like murder, like crimes against the sacraments.

The eagle eyed observer will suggest that excommunication is like Holy Mother Church declaring she no longer loves her sons and daughters. But the SSPX has chosen the dangerous life of deciding for themselves what the Church teaches, they have strayed from the path and insisted that the Church acknowledge them, embrace them as they once did. But they cannot change how the Church loves them. The Church will pray for unity until the bitter end.

And yes! It is love! Excommunication is an act of love! “You cannot live like this under my roof! You have to go, but you will always be welcome back if you amend your life”. You cannot enable an addict. I have nothing but sadness and sympathy for the laity who attend SSPX services. They must be in a state of abject confusion right now, and their shepherds do them a great disservice.

But I love my Church. I am not smart enough to tell you the who’s, the what’s, the why’s, the how’s. All I know is the SSPX is choosing to act against the Holy Father, against MY Holy Father. My Papa Leo. And I love them, my brothers–he is their Papa too. But they need to get right, and fast.

250 years is nothing to the 2,026 years of the reign of our Lord. But our human nature remains the same. We need the love of Christ now, more than ever. For some of us, it might be tough love–but it is love all the same.

AMDG

The Taste Of Truth

“This devil’s drink is so delicious that it would be a pity to let the infidels have exclusive use of it. We should cheat the devil by baptizing it.” – Pope Clement VIII, the first Pope to try coffee.

Orthosphere writer and erstwhile Times-Dispatch Comment Section Interlocutor JMSmith has posted a rejoinder to my previous post at the Orthosphere.

JMSmith has often (and fairly) planted his flag against religious polemic and has often and ably engaged in polemic against my own polemic. Live by the sword, die by the sword and all that–I can’t complain about his complaints, given that I was complaining.

And, if you accede his presupposition that all this is a matter of taste, he’s right! Who am I to ‘yuck’ anothers ‘yum’? He supposes my philosophical discussion with my dear protestant friends was probably contentious, because he supposes I was telling them they had poor taste.

Well, in my own defense all I will say is that I bit my tongue because my protestant friends are dear indeed. I came to my blog to vent my frustration of things I didn’t say. No one in the blogosphere was witness to my conversations so you’ll have to trust me on that. What kind of two-timing friend I must be to have protestant friends and not accost them with my distaste for their beliefs? Well, I pray for them. I have tried polemic and I agree it doesn’t work. Which is why I vent my polemical frustrations here.

I need not justify why I write in my blog, any more than JMSmith. It’s all fair game, and here we are.

But I don’t accept his presupposition that Catholic is to coffee as protestant is to tea.

And he knows I don’t accept this, of course. That’s been the core of our disagreement stretching back years. So I’ll say my windstorm of words for my own benefit and if he writes any more posts on the subject I presume they will be for his benefit and the discourse will go on.

But I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten son of God, born of the Father before all ages. I believe that, for us men and for our salvation, He came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. I believe that, for our sake, He was crucified under Pontius Pilate, He suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day. I believe He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end. I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. And I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.

I believe all these, and more, because I believe and profess all that the Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.

To believe that all of the above is mere taste is to not believe at all. Coffee and tea are equally good, Jesus or Mohammed or my own opinions, it’s all taste. Don’t yuck another’s yum!

When Jesus comes again to judge the living and the dead, he won’t ask, “Did you find my teachings to your taste? How did you like it?”

He will ask, I presume, “did you pick up your cross, and did you follow me?”

Not, admittedly, did you argue about me. Did you follow me.

AMDG

Sophistry

Recently it was announced that two sermons of St. Augustine regarding the Witch of Endor have been discovered. From what I can gather, it’s nothing earth shattering. But it initiated a conversation with my dear protestant friends that irked me, so here I come a-blogging.

I went through a phase where I was enamored with the crooners, those dulcet toned singers from the 50’s and 60’s, like Sinatra and Cole and, in this example, Bobby Darin. I went looking for more on Bobby Darin and discovered that Kevin Spacey directed in a biopic, and cast himself in the title role. I tried watching it but the knowledge that Spacey directed and cast himself made it unwatchable–just congratulatory tripe with no real attempt to mask the underlying ego trip that Spacey was having with himself. There is a scene (near the beginning–again, I didn’t make it very far) where Spacey as Darin was being difficult to work with, and walked away. Three fellows remained, one of them was John Goodman and John Goodman’s famous friend. So the odd man out starts saying something like “hey what a jerk right” and Goodman and Friend get upset with him: “He’s an a-hole, but he’s OUR a-hole”. The odd man out hadn’t earned the right to criticize him, even justifiably.

That’s how I feel talking about philosophy with protestants. There’s some thinly veiled criticism of how Catholics do things, and then some effusive praise about how they do things, and it drives me mad. Even if we concede it’s sophistry, at least it’s CATHOLIC sophistry.

The protestant critiques aren’t really worth enumerating or responding to. Greater minds than I have said all that needed to be said 500 years ago or more. But it just got me thinking about St. Thomas Aquinas and his “all I’ve written as so much straw” moment. Philosophy is important, but it shouldn’t be a stumbling block to the heart. The mind can do a great many things but if it’s not helping you love your neighbor you need to stop.

I wish I could synthesize all my thoughts about what it means to be a GOOD LAYMAN. Either here or on substack, maybe that’ll be something I write come July.

AMDG