Defending the 12th century since the 14th; blogging since the 21st.

Catholicism, Conservatism, the Middle Ages, Opera, and Historical and Literary Objets d'Art blogged by a suburban dad who teaches law and writes stuff.


"Very fun." -- J. Bottum, Editor, FIRST THINGS

"Too modest" -- Elinor Dashwood

"Perhaps the wisest man on the Web" -- Henry Dieterich

"Hat tip: me (but really Cacciaguida)" -- Diana Feygin, Editor, THE YALE FREE PRESS

"You are my sire. You give me confidence to speak. You raise my heart so high that I am no more I." -- Dante

"Fabulous!"-- Warlock D.J. Prod of Didsbury

Who was Cacciaguida? See Dante's PARADISO, Cantos XV, XVI, & XVII.


E-mail me

 


posted by Cacciaguida at 8:14 PM

 
St. Francis and Saint Benedight

posted by Cacciaguida at 6:33 PM

 

posted by Cacciaguida at 6:28 PM

 
President Bush's speech at Shanksville PA (United 93 site) speech
posted by Cacciaguida at 9:13 PM

 
Here's the tenth anniversary. 9/11 was the reason blogging itself took off when it did: people needed a new way to keep in touch and to get behind the anodyne news coverage.

It was also the reason this blog, named after a crusader, was founded. However, this blog has both expanded and contracted its interests over the years. One reason I started it -- excuse me, one reason I came down from the Heaven of Mars to start blogging terrestrially -- was that I feared the topic of radical Islam and the danger it poses would not be adequately covered.

I need not have worried. Other blogs have sprung up, devoted (unlike this one) to nothing else. Questions have been raised on occasion about their accuracy, and people with no basis of knowledge have held forth on these bloggers' motivations. This much is clear: ten years ago, one never heard the term "Islamophobia"; it may not even have existed. Today it is routinely hurled -- and accept as damning -- at anyone who points out (more than, say, once) that violent strains of thought exist within modern and perhaps classic Islam and that these have real-world consequences. Blow up planes and buildings, kill nearly 3000 people -- and become a protected class. Pretty smooth.

That said, I have refrained getting eyebrow-deep into the transatlantic anti-Islamic culture (though perchance I have some links that may take one there if one is not careful: a link is not "eyebrow-deep," imo). That culture's apparent (perhaps not real) ties to renascent European fascism are a little too close for my moral comfort.

In saying so, I do not mean to pile onto Geert Wilders, who I do not think is a fascist. But I note that -- well, perhaps you've heard of Nigel Farage, and his UK Independence Party? It's the fourth largest party in Britain today, after the Liberal Democrats (and the LDs are part of the governing coalition). I remain a Thatcherite Tory, but I admit to being a bit "Ukippy" (in Tory MEP Dan Hannan's wonderful expression). UKIP "reject[s] the 'blood and soil' nationalism of extremist parties," a clear dig at the unspeakable British Nationalist Party. UKIP's platform also calls for "requir[ing] UK schools to teach Britain's contribution to the world, including British inventions and Britain's role in fighting slavery and Nazism." Emphasis added. Apart from my greater preference for schools setting their own curricula, official UKIP's non-racist and anti-Nazi credentials are clearly in order.  

I mention all this because it gives context to a recent Tweet by Mr. Farage, to the effect that that not all the northern European rightwing parties are "friends of UKIP." He singles out one, the True Finns, that is. Others, we are to infer, are too dodgy for UKIP. And what's too dodgy for UKIP is too dodgy for me. (Farage doesn't mention them by name, but I infer the "Sweden Democrats" come under the ban.)

Today's European far right is divided not only by degrees of "extremity," but also by its stance on Islam. The most extreme among them see radical Islam not as the problem but as the solution, because they all agree that real enemy is the you-know-whews. That the Mufti of Jerusalem, an influential figure in the launching of modern today's Islamism, spent the War years in Berlin should not be, and no longer is, seen as a coincidence (though the debate continues as to whether he was made anti-semitic by the Nazis, or whether he sought refuge with the Nazis because they were anti-semitic.) Take-away for today: if you want to shake a hand on the European not-so-center right, have a care for what's at the other end. Make some sort of noise about the need to combat Islamic terrorism, and judge if their reaction is real or pro-forma. Or whether, ahem, they don't even agree.

But that's enough from me. He's what you really want to read: a column by Prof. Richard Landes, a medievalist (another theme of this blog!) at Boston University, specializing in millennialist and apocalyptic movements: "By reacting to 9/11 with self-recrimination, the Western elites have strengthened the hand of brutal Islamism."

P.S. Re comments: Yes, comments are disabled at the moment. That is temporary, I hope. Haloscan has ceased to function as I remembered it from the old, four-posts-a-day, 12-comments-per-post heyday of this blog (who know? We may go there again), so I deleted the Haloscan code and am looking for a new commenting format. I'm also getting used to Blogger's new dashboard. So give me time: comments will return. In the meantime, I'll check paradisoxv at hotmail dot com from time to time.
posted by Cacciaguida at 4:05 PM

 

CATHOLIC BIBLES IN ENGLISH

GOOD MODERN ONES

Revised Standard Version – Catholic Edition (RSVCE): result of 1950s collaboration between Catholic Bishops of England and the RSV Committee in the U.S. For a long time available only in Britain, but published in U.S. since late ‘80s.

Ignatius Bible: exactly the same as RSVCE; this title is used by one of the RSVCE’s American publishers, Ignatius Press; it is also published in the U.S. by Scepter Publishers.

Second Catholic Edition RSV: Similar to RSVCE but with “thou” and “thee” changed to “I” and “you” and similar minor changes. Continues to reject so-called “inclusive language,” as does the RSVCE. This version is used in the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible New Testament, a version heavily annotated by Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch.

The Jerusalem Bible (1966 edition): In print again by popular demand, despite publication and temporary popularity of the New Jerusalem Bible (see below). Has one problem though (see New CTS Catholic Study Bible, just below):

New CTS Catholic Study Bible: The CTS is the Catholic Truth Society, in London. This version had its origin in the fact that many people like the 1966 Jerusalem Bible except for its tendency to use the Name of God (“Y____h,” but spelled out) when other versions use “the Lord.” When Pope Benedict expressed the same view, the CTS obtained the necessary copyright and brought out this version, which is the 1966 Jerusalem Bible but with “the Lord” instead of “Y____h,” and using the Psalms from The Grail Psalter. Not in U.S. bookstores; may be ordered from www.cts-online.org.uk/

CLASSIC ONES

Douay-Rheims: Contemporary with the King James; the work of English refugees at seminaries in northern Europe. So faithful to the Clementine Vulgate Latin version that its English reproduces Latin sentence-structure, making it awkward to read, especially out loud. Still, good to have around, b/c occasionally it has a reading that cuts the Gordian knot of difficult passages in other versions.

Knox: When Oxford classics scholar Ronald Knox became a Catholic in 1917 (and a priest in 1919), the English bishops didn’t know quite what to do with him, so basically they told him to sit tight at Oxford and translate the Bible, between intervals of counseling students (and writing mystery novels in his spare time). His version often sounds like one Oxford don talking to another. He turns some of the Psalms into acrostics. Out of print, but a precious find if you can get one.

BAD ONES

New American Bible: The “official” Bible of the Catholic Church in the United States. Tin-eared use of English, with notes that reflect the worst of modernist theology. Clearly sent as punishment. (Do not confuse with the New American Standard Bible, a version published by Protestant Fundamentalists but admirable for its accuracy and literalism. Of course the NASB is missing the Deuterocanonical books.)

New Jerusalem Bible: “I will make of you fishers of persons.” Better idea: make of it recycled paper for the New Roman Missal.

posted by Cacciaguida at 2:41 PM

 
ASSUMPTION -- what a day to start blogging again!
posted by Cacciaguida at 11:36 PM

 
Feast of the Restoration of Icons

Aka Feast of Orthodoxy. First and foremost, a feast that, though not part of the Latin Rite calendar (either Ordinary or Extraordinary Form), we ought to be more aware of -- because of the importance of what it represents, the suppression of the heresy known as iconoclasm. If you don't understand why this is a heresy, and why its suppression is worth celebrating, then you don't understand the Incarnation, simple as that. Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy are as one on this, afaik.

(Btw, why do people keep saying that "Catholic" means "universal"? It doesn't: it means "kata holon," i.e. "according to the entirety," "in union with The Whole Thing," rejecting by-ways, rabbit-trails, and heresies. What does mean universal is "Roman"! As Msgr. Knox observed, a spiritual pilgrimage isn't an Odyssey, it's an Aeneid: your home base flames out, so you pick up what's best of your household "gods," in search of a pre-ordained destination, which is Rome. The lives of St. Peter and St. Paul are eerily close to this model. "Household gods" = Jewish roots. Trojan War = Pharisaical persecution followed by Roman-Jewish war. How does the book of Acts end, anyway? They finally return to Jerusalem? No.... They finally arrive at Byzantion/ Constantinople? No.... Luke turns to narrating the adventures of St. Andrew? No....)

No question, the Feast of Orthodoxy is good name for the feast commemorating the restoration of icons. But there might be others; e.g., Feast of Getting Your Chestnuts Pulled From the Fire by Rome Yet Again.

From the 1911 (pre-higher-criticism, pre-ritual-Catholic-self-denigration, and therefore reliable) Catholic Encyclopedia:

Iconoclasm (Eikonoklasmos, "Image-breaking") is the name of the heresy that in the eighth and ninth centuries disturbed the peace of the Eastern Church, caused the last of the many breaches with Rome that prepared the way for the schism of Photius, and was echoed on a smaller scale in the Frankish kingdom in the West. The story in the East is divided into two separate persecutions of the Catholics, at the end of each of which stands the figure of an image-worshipping Empress (Irene and Theodora).

Yes, twice during the 8th and 9th centuries, Byzantine Emperors -- abetted by compliant, state-appointed patriarchs -- decided that the tradition of veneration (not "worship": Catholics and Orthodox have always been as one on that point too, I think) of religious images, already ancient in both eastern and western Christendom, was a heresy (just like the next-door Muslims said it was -- what a coincidence), and set about deposing and torturing priests, monks and laymen who kept the ancient faith on this point.

Both times, the Bishop of Rome asked wtf was going on and demanded that the aforesaid emperors cease persecuting Orthodox Catholic believers (no distinction needed to be made in those days) and suggested that they work harder on running their empire, of which they were making quite enough of a nonsense, and make themselves scarcer in what concerns the Church exclusively. (Of course, as the 10th century would show, the Roman hierarchy needed no help in making a near-nonsense of the Church. That's why the Papal Reform of the 11th and 12th centuries was so important. Pope Gregory VII: that's the man!)

Returning to our story, and quoting again from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

The pope at that time was Gregory II (713-31). [We ran through Gregories betw. the 8th and 11th cents., didn't we?] Even before he had received the appeal of Germanus [a Patriarch of Constantinople and early hero of iconodule polemics] a letter came from the emperor [Leo the Isaurian, iconoclast] commanding him to accept the [iconoclast] edict, destroy images at Rome, and summon a general council to forbid their use. Gregory answered, in 727, by a long defense of the pictures. He explains the difference between them and idols, with some surprise that Leo does not already understand it. He describes the lawful use of, and reverence paid to, pictures by Christians. He blames the emperor's interference in ecclesiastical matters and his persecution of image-worshipers. A council is not wanted; all Leo has to do is to stop disturbing the peace of the Church.

The Second Council of Nicaea, 787, ruled authoritatively against iconoclasm. But in the East, it broke out again, thanks to that reliable symposium of learned theologians, the Byzantine army, and its levers of control (as in west-Roman Imperial times) over who the emperor would be. Patriarch Nicephorus ("Victory Bearer"?) courageously defended icons -- also arguing that he didn't need to defend them, b/c the issue had been settled by Nicaea II (I do like lawyerly argumentation!) -- and for his trouble got deposed, exiled, and replaced w/o fuss by an imperial appointee.

(Over in the West, not even an Emperor Henry IV, a Frederick II, or a Philip the Fair could have done that to a Pope, tho' they would have liked to. Emperor Henry would sometimes take it into his head that he had deposed "Hildebrand" -- Gregory VII -- but as I recall he didn't even claim to have appointed his successor, much less do so successfully.)

Meanwhile, back in the 9th century, the Orthodox/Catholic faithful of Constantinople appealed to Pope Paschal I, who denounced the new iconoclast emperor. Beyond that, he was not as effective in solving the crisis as Gregory II before him had been. Nonetheless, the second iconoclast outbreak produced the last and strongest affirmations of Roman primacy to emerge from Byzantine sources. The Catholic Encyclopedia, as might be expected, stresses this, but also acknowledges that, second time around, the solution came from with the East, albeit slowly, and with the help of palace coups, many sufferings by Orthodox/Catholics in Byzantium, and finally, the accession of a Orthodox/Catholic regent, Theodora:

In the same year (842) a synod at Constantinople approved of [iconoclast Patriarch] John VII's deposition, renewed the decree of the Second Council of Nicaea and excommunicated Iconoclasts. This is the last act in the story of this heresy. On the first Sunday of Lent (19 February, 842) the icons were brought back to the churches in solemn procession. That day (the first Sunday of Lent) was made into a perpetual memory of the triumph of orthodoxy at the end of the long Iconoclast persecution. It is the "Feast of Orthodoxy" of the Byzantine Church still kept very solemnly by both Uniates [sic: the term is accurate enough but out of favor, as it tends to sideline both the Catholicism and the small-o-orthodoxy of those so described] and Orthodox.

Emphasis added. Nicaea II, 787, was of course critical in putting down the dreadful heresy that was iconoclasm, a heresy that misunderstands and ultimately destroys the fundamental change in the spirit/matter, God/man relationship wrought by the Incarnation. But the Feast of Orthodoxy/Feast of Rome Saving Our Ass does not literally commemorate Nicaea II: it commemorates the physical restoration of the icons in Constantinople on the first Sunday of Lent, 842. But ultimately, does it matter? Both are eminently worth commemorating.

posted by Cacciaguida at 10:29 PM

 
Epiphany

Today is the Feast of the Epiphany. I don't care what you did in your parish last Sunday, Epiphany is January 6, and not only in the Extraordinary Form: the Holy Father celebrated it today.

The wise and wealthy of the Nations, as well as the poor sheep-herders of Israel, visit the Child and recognize king (gold), God (frankincense), and sacrifice unto death (myrrh). HAPPY EPIPHANY!
posted by Cacciaguida at 11:14 PM