Essays in Idleness

DAVID WARREN

HOME ABOUT ARCHIVES

Go forth, anyway
The Church, to my mind, has a profound problem, which she has had from her beginning, & yet it could be mistaken for a modern problem. She aspires to convert & inspire all folk, & has within herself the means to reach into the heart of every human culture. But in practice, the pews are empty, & the people stay away. There may have been times when the pews were full, but possibly they were full only in practice. For in the testimony we receive from every generation, so many were, in spirit, not there. They would go off & act just as if they were really just a pack of angry & selfish heathen. I have not written lately about my discouragement at several things said or done at or near the top of the Roman hierarchy. As an old Czech friend used to say, in the depths of the 1970s squalor, Whatever they do in the Vatican, Im staying Catholic. Newman said as much on behalf of the faithful in the time of the Arian heresy, when the Church was apparently saved not by the big but by the little people. (See, On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine.) Men are men, & they make very poor bishops indeed. And they are generally at their worst when they are playing to the gallery when, for instance, perhaps out of a desire to bring in the numbers, they begin to display what I (& Theodore Dalrymple) like to condemn as moral exhibitionism; or otherwise adapt the message to the market; or in the old neo-conservative phrase, define deviancy down to make everyone more comfortable. In my view, for instance, sentences that begin, Who am I to judge? never end well, & oh could I go on. It may even transpire, that men of high ecclesiastical station play at humility, waving a hairshirt about where all may see, when really they should wear it invisibly under their garments. An example would be a lord who disparages the outward trappings of his office. He may have forgotten that these trappings belong to the office, not to him, & that in the end

dressing down is like defining deviancy down. It is to call attention to oneself, not the office. Such things are discouraging, & yet we were instructed by our Founder, even from the Garden of Gethsemane, not to be discouraged. For it cannot possibly do to give up the struggle, to fill the pews not only with warm bodies but with the genuinely reverent & faithful not to some passing fashion of the times, but to Our Lord. This starts, of course, with asking Gods help with ones own case, yet cannot end there, given the specific Christian instruction to go forth among all nations. This, anyway, is my thought for the day.
PUBLISHED: September 15, 2013 FILED UNDER: Uncategorized

90 Responses to Go forth, anyway

.

Kevin Middlebrook September 15, 2013 at 11:17 am Men are men, & they make very poor bishops indeed. Maybe they should allow the other half of the population to participate in running the church. Your statement about churches in the past being full in practice only is quite true. And this does not only apply to the Catholic Church. Not too long ago, not being seen to attend church was seen as a scandal that could cost you a place in society. And if you were a merchant, it could cost you business (unless you were the only show in town). The decline in this attitude is a good thing. My experience has been that some people attend church regularly because they want to, and lead their lives accordingly, but some attend and treat it as a get out of jail free card. But, by far the worst type are those that use their church attendance with an arrogance and snobbery, assuming that it makes them superior to others. My father grew up during the Depression and made a living playing pool and poker until he was in his mid twenties. When he got married, his new in-laws, regular church-goers, treated him like scum. Completely ignoring the fact that he spent his late teens and early twenties looking after his crippled mother and younger siblings. My father was an atheist but led his life as a better Christian than many who call themselves Christians. Jeannine McDevitt September 15, 2013 at 3:41 pm This is marvelous. The

trappings of the office indeed belong to the office, not the man, and they do not exist for him. But for many years now, Peters words (Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of everlasting life) have been my answer to all the hijinks of the hierarchy, from priests to bishops and abbots on up. Your Czech friend said it all! Stephen Sparrow September 15, 2013 at 6:57 pm In my view, for instance, sentences that begin, Who am I to judge? never end well, & oh could I go on.For I have seen all the winter throughThe thorn show itself unyielding, wild,And after all carry a rose on top;And I have seen a ship sail straight and swiftlyOver the sea for the whole of its voyageYet perish at last at the harbour mouth. ~ Dante, Paradiso Charles Disque September 15, 2013 at 8:45 pm I share your lament, but am grateful for your prophetic voice. As the Marines motto goes: Semper Fidelis! Clint Lewis September 15, 2013 at 9:00 pm Hope youre not talking about Pope Francis (he was reassuring the atheists) recently quoted saying things like, Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience. And, If someone is gay and is looking for the Lord, who am I to judge him? Gods mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. As for filling pews, does telecommuting count? Im conservative. I expect things to change slowly. But I expect them to change. Robert Eady September 15, 2013 at 9:36 pm Mr Speaker, there is an unapproved prophecy somewhere or other that the Church will suffer the same crucifixion as her Divine Founder. When one listens to what has been coming out of the mouths of high Catholic prelates over the past fifty years or so, it seems that we are living in the worst of times. What we must do to keep sane is to always look back to Catholic tradition for guidance. If some novelty is presented by Rome, we must evaluate it against tradition. If it is unsound, then that novelty must be rejected.It is enough for us to attend the Holy Mass, pray the rosary, live according to the commandments, and not fall into despair. We can do no more. Peter Buttram September 15, 2013 at 10:07 pm Mr Speaker, one would suppose that you speak of the current pope. As I am not a Catholic I tend to look on with more curiosity than anything else but as a traditionally minded person, I see your concerns. As a Christian I think it proper to pray for him and for the growth of the Kingdom of God. It seems all too often indeed that the shepherd play to the gallery. On a different note, I have been reading here since Christmas time and do feel as though it has been an education in itself. Your writings have

been influential to the thinking of one who still has much to figure out in this world. Ronald McCloskey September 15, 2013 at 10:47 pm Mr Speaker, bells peeled throughout Rome after the Battle of the Boyne and, as Hamish Fraser once noted, when the Irish heard the echo of those bells, they learned forever more how to treat words that come from that city.To which I may add, as a member of the race that heard the bells, I believe youre being far too delicate in your disdain of Papa Francis. One might mistake you for an Anglican. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 15, 2013 at 11:26 pm I could have written that myself Mistah Speakah and (if you remember by GPS coordinates) I speak with something very close to full knowledge of the matter. One must remember Gods modus operandi which consists in disabling the capable (like King David) for long periods of time until they are ready for office. Another divine trick is to name a real nincompoop to the highest office such as our beloved St Peter, perhaps the most complete living catalog of human frailties. The idea is that no one gets the notion of accomplishing something through human strength or smarts. God is a God of miracles. Any coach can win the Superbowl with the best 11 players. In that case the glory will rightly go to the team. But if a coach selects 11 of the lamest most pitiful players in the league and they win the glory goes to the coach big time!Stay put and see salvation by God. We need three things to be Catholic: Our Eucharistic Lord, Our Blessed Mother, and the Holy Father in Rome. If any of those three is missing (in our doctrine or in our hearts) we have become something else. Here we go head first into the End of Times: darkness has covered the nations, Mother Church is confused and tired but we will get to the other side of the Jordan even if only a handful of us survive. Be of good cheer for we read the book and our side wins in the end. Prepare, praise, and pray. Ann Hill September 16, 2013 at 12:16 am It is difficult not to say, Who am I to judge? when as Jesus pointed out we all know ourselves to be sinners. So although we should probably forgive those who say it, I would agree that it is a cowards way out. Instead we should say that as sinners we recognise sin.Sin is no longer fashionable. Most sin is a mental illness or a genetic variation. How we act is no longer our fault. Everything in our Church is no longer fashionable. It is more fashionable to have no god, or if one must have a god, rather than just a background tradition, where the rules are more or less optional, then the fashionable gods are those that look within like Buddhism or the militant Islamists who seem to have no troubles recruiting.We (meaning the West) on the

other hand are the prodigal son, busy squandering all that our faith has built for us. But we are fast heading to the day when we look upon the pigs with envy. David Warren September 16, 2013 at 12:56 am Dear Ann, on sin, always a favourite topic with me, the notion that it is a mental illness or genetic variation has a certain appeal. One thinks of the Fall of Man in the latter case: that we are twisted fundamentally. But in the former, the interesting thing is that, in contrast to genuine neurological injury or malfunction, most psychiatric disorders show no material cause. There is nothing physically wrong with the victims, except that they are nuts.One of the incomparable advantages of living in beautiful downtown Parkdale is that one gets to meet & observe a great variety of these people, some medicated into harmless zombies, & some not. It is why I have come so much to appreciate the works of Theodore Dalrymple (the pen name of Anthony Daniels, mentioned above): for he understands, at least partially (& even as an atheist) what is going on here. The gaols are full of these people (Daniels was a prison shrink), & the social workers have their hands full, of those who will not take the slightest responsibility for their own self-destructive eccentricities; & yet are, physically, perfectly well.One witnesses behaviour every day that, in the past, would merely have been labelled sinful & called for a priest, not a mad doctor. In the wilder cases, the hypothesis of demonic inhabitation becomes extremely plausible, & I speculate that exorcism would have a better chance than any of the drugs currently administered, which mask the symptoms by lobotimizing the customer.As with sin, plainly so labelled, a good trick is to withdraw permission. I have found that when I confront mad behaviour, & tell the exponent that I wont have it, he generally stops at least with me. He continues only with those who continue to grant permission. But more profoundly, he began by permitting bad behaviour in himself. In several cases Ive known for rather a long time, it has struck me that the convincingly demented presentation is the product of a long & increasingly sordid history of giving in to, shall we say, impulses that are mentally & spiritually unsound & which have spread throughout the psyche until temptation rules.As post-modernity progresses, we may notice this more & more: that an ever bigger proportion of our neighbours just cuss all day, with or without the excuse of an iPhone. And they are, in a sense, victims of society too, because no one ever told them to shut up. Joe Hanna September 16, 2013 at 7:58 am Yes, sin is all too fashionable. It is the label that has fallen out of general use. In support of the Speakers

last point, sin often (perhaps even most often) begins as a thought. Greed, lust and anger certainly begin as a mental accommodation. Choices are made that give no external sign. That is why we repeat the formula at mass that I have sinned in my thoughts, my words and my actions. Robert Eady September 16, 2013 at 9:12 am Unfortunately, what Catholics have been doing since the diabolical disorientation (Sister Lucy of Fatimas words) took firm hold approximately fifty years ago, is give their permission to endless novelties that conflict with Catholic tradition. In the 1960s the folks in the pews knew for the most part that changing the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass into a Protestant supper was as unsound as demolishing the sanctuaries all over the world (more than the mad anti-Catholic iconoclasts of the past ever dreamed could be achieved.) The common refrain back in the days of white gogo boots, tie-dye shirts and acid trips was that, well, Rome approves of all this so lets just go along and join the party. If the folks in the pews had rebelled by refusing to allow their priests and prelates to undermine Catholicism then the modernist revolution might have been stopped or at least the damage would have been greatly diminished. Nothing like this happened as we well know. Catholics are still making excuses for the absurdities that keep escalating. What Pope Francis recently said (quoted above) is not supportable at any level. What he did either intentionally or unintentionally was give licence for sin and elevate the human conscience to the level of divine revelation. No one has the right to be an atheist, not only because such a position defies ordinary logic, but because it is a blasphemy. Homosexual activity must be condemned firmly and consistently. It offends Almighty God and it cuts off souls from eternal salvation. It is not wrong to judge sin and condemn it. That is one of the chief functions of the Catholic Church.One thing Catholics cannot continue to do is just remain silent and go along with what comes out of Rome no matter how unsound or absurd it is. That is not Catholicism, but pope idolatry. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 16, 2013 at 9:58 am There is a passage of the Gospels when Jesus and the disciples cross the Sea of Galilee and land on Gerasa in the Decapolis. The crossing of the sea is considered by many to be a hidden parable about the Church, the bark of Peter, traveling through time and arriving to the end of days. On arrival they realize that they are near the local cemetery where they find a deranged young man possessed by a legion of demons. Jesus exorcises the poor man and the devils then possess some swine and drive them over the cliff into the sea: the depths of the sea are understood to be

the places where the enemies of God hide.I think the meaning of that passage reveals the very nature of the enslavement of mankind to the forces of evil and death, something that only Jesus can completely solve. Matt Muggeridge September 16, 2013 at 11:40 am The example of Cardinal Wolsey comes to mind, who certainly did not play at humility or wave a hair shirt around. He did wear one, however, a fact supposedly discovered after his death. Arthur Gerard Smith September 16, 2013 at 12:02 pm My local parish priest used to say Mass wearing chunky white runners. They were nasty looking Nike knockoffs or some such, clearly visible as his vestments stopped short of his feet by some 5 or 6 inches. I felt like crying with shame. Mind you, another priest used to wear black Doc Martins, and this struck me as quite suitable, especially as his alb hung a proper length.I rarely attend Sunday Mass now; I find I am unable to control the seething emotional negativity the experience tends to induce. The content of most of the sermonizing is fine; priests generally muster at least one point that is worthy food for thought, and I enjoy attempting to discern what it is.A trouble for me lies with the sermons delivery. Ideally, sermons should always be read out, word for word, in an unexcited, level tone, preferably the sort one would adopt if one were a medical doctor informing a patient that he would soon die. They should always be delivered from a pulpit, the sides of which should be held by the priest to avoid any hand gesticulation. What gesticulation there may be should be confined to the movement of the head, and this should never be sudden or jerky.I decry the increasing propensity of priests to wander off from their podiums to speak, as if ex tempore, from in front of the altar; or worse, to descend into the aisle to be closer to the flock, and even to engage them in dialogical gambits such as, who here can tell me what we mean by the word faith? Anyone? How often I have had to fight the urge to there and then march forward, in my Doc Martins, to physically haul the priest back to his podium, and, with wildly gesticulating head and finger, forcefully admonish him with a Stay!But the real reason I forego Sunday Mass is because it is there that one encounters the Cantor, the Choir, and the Sunday Congregant. The Cantor no doubt has a powerful singing voice, but he or she invariably confuses the notion of singing with emotion and that of singing emotionally; his favourite operas are Les Misrables and Cats, while she thinks Celine Dion is fantastic, and Barbara Streisand is simply out of this world. The Choir is made up mostly of older members of the local Catholic Womens League, and

one or two of their husbands who are prepared to do anything for a quiet life. They love to get together and sing under the direction of their Cantor, whom they think is fantastic, and express surprise that he was never snapped up to sing in Les Mis or Cats. Together, the Cantor and the Choir possess the remarkable facility to make everything they sing sound like a vaguely remembered Charlton Heston movie, which wouldnt be so bad if one were not expected to maintain a neutrally reverential expression when listening to it, or even while pretending to sing along.Not that this expectation places any burden on the Sunday Congregant, for neither he nor she is listening anyway. He seems to be fully engaged eyeing the woman three pews up, the one with the dyed blond hair and the cute ass, and standing next to her husband who is joshing and sharing an ongoing joke with their teenage son. She, meanwhile, is not so surreptitiously exchanging text-messages, and will continue to do so throughout the Liturgy of the Eucharist because, presumably, something important is afoot in her life.The Sunday Congregant is the one who is not aware that there are an Apostles Creed and a Nicene Creed, let alone is he the one who can recite either, except for the bit that kicks in with the I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, which he bellows out as if to compensate for his preceding silence. I would return on Sunday if the parish set aside one Mass that used neither cantor nor choir, and where the only congregants admitted were those who had been pre-vetted as able to recite both the Apostles and Nicene Creeds by heart. No doubt, this suggestion opens me to the charge of being a holier-than-thou fascist. But I dont mind. Thats exactly what I am. Mitzi Pepall September 16, 2013 at 12:16 pm As dearest Father Francis Turk (may he rest in peace, but how can he?) used to shout frequently from the lectern, We must pray for the sin of pride of the Bishops! He never imagined what amounts to Pelagian heresy or worse would come directly from the Vatican. Or maybe he did.I was at a funeral service at the Church of the Nazarene in Toronto in June. The minister preached about Grace and how that was the only way we were going to Heaven. What relief I felt. I am so frequently nervous at Mass these days when the priest begins his sermon. As my friend Richard Lubbock frequently reminds us, Keep calm and carry on. Although Richard, an atheist, recently wondered if we could impeach the Pope. Given that Benedict has changed all the rules by his defection, possibly we can. Matt Muggeridge September 16, 2013 at 1:28 pm Mister Speaker: For his own good, if for no one elses, is this House going to reprimand The Honorable Member Smith for not going to Mass on Sunday? And with

such flimsy justification! An old priest friend quoting an older priests comment in response to a parishioners complaint about said old parish priest: What these people fail to realize is that the parish priest [insert: cantor, clunky sneakers under chasuble, hymns, gathering hymns, Gather hymnal, Gather Us In, sermon, altar girls, banners, stewardship program, parish life weekend, ShareLent, spelling of ShareLent, extraordinary ministers, announcements, bulletins, offertory procession, RCIA, bishops conferences, pastoral letters, bishops full stop, nuns (the new kind), the sign of peace, other people (generally) etc.] is for the sanctification of the people. By this standard, the Honorable Member may very well be found exceedingly saintly. But he has to go to church and suck it up! Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 16, 2013 at 4:12 pm Mr Arthur Gerard Smith: I echo your sentiments. This gives a whole new meaning to the expression the Sacrifice of the Mass doesnt it? Lets us keep going to Mass. It is our way to wear the hair shirt. Not forsaking our assembly, as some are accustomed; but comforting one another, and so much the more as you see the day approaching. Hebrews 10:25. If it is any consolation, the whole world has gone that way. A sure sign things are about to change. David Warren September 16, 2013 at 4:45 pm On the insistence of Lord Muggs, Speaker hereby reprimands Perfesser Smith for not attending Mass on Sundays, pour pater les autres. And in the words of the Anglican Dean of St Patricks:With a Whirl of Thought oppressd,I sink from Reverie to Rest.A horrid Vision seizd my Head,I saw the Graves give up their Dead.Jove, armd with Terrors, burst the Skies,And Thunder roars, & Lightning flies!Amazd, confusd, its Fate unknown, The World stands trembling at his Throne.While each pale Sinner hangs his Head,Jove, nodding, shook the Heavns, & said:Offending race of Human Kind,By Nature, Reason, Learning, blind;You who, thro Frailty, steppd aside,And you who never fell thro Pride;You who in different Sects have shammd,And come to see each other damnd;The Worlds mad Business now is oer,And I resent these Pranks no more.I to such Blockheads set my Wit!I damn such Fools! Go, go, youre bit. Larry Bennett September 16, 2013 at 8:16 pm Exceedingly interesting and familiar! While I agree a lot, with Mr Smith, I must say that I agree more with Muggs (any relation with the original?) and I sometimes console myself by watching the patience and devotion of those who remember even farther back than myself; though they are fewer than they once were. Still, their steadfastness is inspiring, and surely a

virtue. Kevin Middlebrook September 16, 2013 at 9:25 pm Mr Speaker. I dont mean any disrespect, but the sense I get from your essay and the subsequent comments is that tradition is more important than the message. I know that is not what you intended, but that is the message that is presented. Surely tradition and trappings are designed to overwhelm and intimidate rather than convince (or convert). Scaring someone into a certain behaviour is easy. Convincing them to accept, on their own accord, a certain behaviour is much more difficult. From what I have read in the Bible (admittedly limited) the trappings and tradition were secondary. Jesus was big on tradition (respect for elders, etc.) but I dont remember him saying anything about the trappings. In fact, my recollection is that he would not be in favour of the trappings. Maybe that is why there are so many breakaway sects. With respect to sin and mental illness, all I can say is that I am glad that DW and some commenters are not in charge of the mental health system. Do I think that some people abuse this system? Absolutely. But to classify all mental health patients who are helped by medication as chemically lobotomized just demonstrates a complete ignorance of the issues. Just because you cant see a physical problem, doesnt mean that one does not exist. It might be easier to blame this all on sin and free choice, but that is just ignorance at its worst. Based on this, post partum depression, a hormonal imbalance that has led to many suicides, would be relegated to sin. Please save us from this Neanderthal thinking. Joseph Wood September 16, 2013 at 9:29 pm Mr Speaker, I share some concerns about the popes casual comments than can seem to tend towards leftist bromides. But I am sympathetic with his communications problem which includes a hostile audience in many quarters, an at best uncomprehending media, a badly catechized flock, the various limitations of Twitter culture, etc. etc.As a reminder that he does in fact have something to say to those of us who appreciate this site, here are remarks from the Aparecida document of his authorship which he called to priests attention today, from Vatican Information Service:The defining aspect of this change of epoch [we are experiencing] is that things are no longer in their place. Our previous ways of explaining the world and relationships, good and bad, no longer appears to work. The way in which we locate ourselves in history has changed. Things we thought would never happen, or that we never thought we would see, we are experiencing now, and we dare not even imagine the future. That which appeared normal to us

family, the Church, society and the world will probably no longer seem that way. We cannot simply wait for what we are experiencing to pass, under the illusion that things will return to being how they were before.In the document, Bergoglio presents the mission as a proposal and challenge in the face of these changes, and encourages the pastor to be an ardent missionary who lives the constant desire to seek out the remote, not content with simple administration, and reiterates that a transformation in pastoral action and a consequent transforming pastoral action can only occur when mediated by the interior transformation of the agents of pastoral care and the members of the community they form. To become once again a Church driven by evangelical momentum and audacity, we must again become faithful and evangelised disciples.Thats darned interesting, the acknowledgement of the confusion of an epochal transition and the requirements it imposes. And I dont think hes referring to the arrival of a workers paradise. David Warren September 16, 2013 at 9:47 pm Lord Kevin should read with more attention. A hormonal imbalance is a material cause. Let me assure him, too, that he will find many other Neanderthals, with quite formal credentials, making much the same points I was making. Again, that Dalrymple would be a good place to start; & the avalanche of criticism that recently descended upon the 5th edition of the American Psychiatric Associations Diagnostic & Statistical Manual would be a good place to continue. Kevin Middlebrook September 16, 2013 at 10:17 pm But, Mr Speaker, you still have not responded to my concerns. Yes, post partum depression has a material cause, as do most other conditions that lead to what we would call insane behaviour (i.e. hearing voices, talking to yourself, etc). Your example of people who change their behaviour when you confront them about it does not fall into this category. This is just rude behaviour. There is a huge difference between a mental illness and bad behaviour, and your effort to equate the two is, simply, beneath you. David Warren September 16, 2013 at 10:31 pm The people of whom I speak are not just rude. They meet the normal criteria for outpatients of CAMH on Queen Street (just east of Parkdale). Each is a case in himself (or herself), & we run through many symptoms & gradations, & from helpless suffering street person to violent criminal. Nor am I indifferent to their fate. On the contrary, I think pharmaceutical psychiatry is misbegotten, a catastrophe, a scandal, & a reflection of the society that countenances it. Kevin Middlebrook September 16, 2013 at 10:52 pm On the contrary, I think

pharmaceutical psychiatry is misbegotten, a catastrophe, a scandal, & a reflection of the society that countenances it.Really? I agree that it is misused far too often. Prescribing Ritalin every time a kid misbehaves is malpractice, at best, child abuse at worst. But something as simple as lithium has made the difference between a productive life and a life out of control for thousands of people. But stating that the entire field of pharmaceutical psychiatry is a scandal just demonstrates ignorance and lack of knowledge of the subject. Drugs should be the treatment of last resort in most cases, but why do we accept the use of drugs for most ailments yet claim that they are misbegotten when applied to mental illness? Even many drugs used for physical ailments have an affect on personality (e.g. insulin, thyroid medication, steroids for asthma, statins, hormone therapy for prostate cancer, etc). Should we also remove these from the doctors tool kit? Arthur Gerard Smith September 16, 2013 at 11:16 pm So gentlemen, I do acceptYour reprimand and interceptAnd will abide with no more fudge For who am I to think to judge?If Peters Church says it will be I will not voice to disagreeWith rancorous and gormless fussBut seek the grace that seeks for us.Ill tend to Mass on Sunday morn,Ill sing along to soppy corn,Ill shake the hand of those who pressWithout resort to second guess.Ill suck it up, Ill sacrifice,Ill smile and nod, Ill make out nice.But let me tell you, if I may,Ill grow again to hate that day. David Warren September 16, 2013 at 11:36 pm Back to Middlebrook.Yes, it starts with ritalin, & yes, drugs are now the first resort once any soidisant mental illness is diagnosed, & you are glibly acknowledging outrageous, & yet perfectly commonplace practices. The attitude they show towards human beings is the same that consigns 100,000 babies to the abortuaries each year in this country because those human beings, too, are inconvenient. The terminally ill, the helpless & abandoned old people are also inconvenient, & were working on a better disposal solution, because warehousing them has become too expensive.The problem is more fundamental than when to prescribe which drugs. We have a society that is sunk in moral depravity because it refuses to acknowledge God. We have a scientism of positively infernal arrogance, which denies the very existence of the human soul. What I see every day on the streets of beautiful downtown Parkdale is people with not medical but spiritual disorders, who have been medicated to chill them out.Lithium works: it makes their hands shake, & cancels skills & talents, & probably wrecks their kidneys, too, but it lowers the suicide rate, & we can prove that with statistics. It diminishes the will to commit provocative acts, when the challenge

was to change that will from bad to good intention. In Japan, there is a proposal to put it in the drinking water, to reduce the soaring suicide rate, especially among the young.Men & women without the theological virtues faith & hope & love fall into faithlessness, despair, & hatred. These virtues are instilled through religion, family, friendships; their contraries throughout our feckless mass culture. They are unambiguously spiritual conditions. You attack these unscientific virtues, or strengths, you take away the irrational beauty in human life, & yes, the suicide rates climb. And people go mad in their purposelessness & their loneliness, & they have no reason to behave well.Lithium does not provide hope. It provides a convenient way to deal with the fallout of an apostate society, that has put Convenience on its highest altar, that has chosen Convenience freely in the marketplace, that has voted Convenience into power. Where In God we trust was inscribed, we have spray-painted: Better living through chemistry. Stephen Sparrow September 17, 2013 at 12:10 am Seeing how this thread has become somewhat unwound I thought I might indulge in a little plagiarism (of myself of course) and further fray the thread.In the early 1970s, internationally renowned psychiatrist Ronald David Laing dumbfounded many of his professional colleagues by declaring that apart from cases where the human brain had been affected by physiological illness, physical injury, or some deformity existing at birth, all mental illness was nothing other than social phenomena, which, just as in the case of normal social behaviours, has been acquired by the individual from his adjacent social environment. Laing was no Freudian so it was little wonder that psychiatrists world wide were dismayed, since the effect of his pronouncement meant that in most cases their methods to cure the mad (as Laing called them) were futile, and that furthermore, the money being poured into trying to identify a gene responsible for schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders was money wasted and tantamount to man searching for God through a high powered microscope.Laings controversial statement should make us all grateful, since any purported genetic link to mental illness would in the future inevitably be used to screen individuals in an experimental attempt to eliminate what experts see as mental illness and what the rest of us might prosaically refer to as bizarre or unusual behaviour which is often the stuff of every interesting story ever told. The corollary is that any attempt at genetic manipulation to modify human behaviour is an attack on free will and as such is doomed to fail. Having said that, there are some mindsets

where free will is a practical impossibility obsessive states leading to paranoia are an obvious example, but rarely if ever is one born into that condition. Obsessive states usually come about through behaviour that over a period has so gradually changed, that even those closest to the afflicted person barely notice the effect until it is much too late to easily reverse the condition.Having mentioned free will, my definition of it is: the freedom to change our hearts for better or for worse, such freedom being rooted in the supernatural virtue of hope. Hope being the universal craving for mercy, which is engraved on all human hearts and completely incompatible with Darwins theory of natural selection (a.k.a. survival of the fittest), which by its own rule would completely crush any sign of mercy at the moment of hatching. But the fact is mercy exists: we have all experienced it; either by receiving it or dispensing it, or at different times both.The last two sentences I had occasion to use here not long ago. Vishal Mehra September 17, 2013 at 12:55 am A hormonal imbalance is a material cause.And hopelessness a spiritual cause of the same depression?But why ascribe to hopelessness what has been ascribed to hormonal balance and vice-versa?If hopelessness is the spiritual cause, then hormonal imbalance may be the effect or correlate of depression. For the empirical observations only yield correlations, and the leap of causation has to be made by human intellect. Larry Bennett September 17, 2013 at 12:57 am Good rhyming Arthur Gerard Smith, surely a God given talent, which I think will cause you to not hate that day. And undoubtedly there will be three, or more gathered in His name, and He will be there! David Warren September 17, 2013 at 1:27 am V for Vishal! The case was stronger than I realized. This is a dimension of things dogmatically ruled out by the High Priests of Scientism; yet one which must be accepted empirically, for we have tests to prove correlations with placebos, which amount to faith healing. Even given hormonal imbalance as physical fact, the psychological reaction to it is likely to be very different if the woman is glad of her husband & baby, or if she is not. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 17, 2013 at 2:21 am The Greek word for sorcery or witchcraft in the New Testament is pharmakeia. Draw your own conclusions. Mick Leahy September 17, 2013 at 5:40 am Is the issue of mental illness yet another example of following the money? There is no money to be made from Confession, but limitless amounts to be made from rendering people dependent on happy drugs for ever-increasing

varieties of mental disorder, most of which are either invented or a reflexive response to the insanity and unreality which pervades modern society. If I am an unhappy lemming in a herd heading rapidly for a cliff, the last thing I need is something to cure my unhappiness. Has Mr Speaker heard of the allegations that Big Pharma are suppressing statistics indicating increased violence and suicide from the use of some of their best-selling anti-depressants? David Warren September 17, 2013 at 9:06 am The allegations of which Mr Leahy has apparently heard are out there in cyberspace, & left alone by mainstream media, which do not need the lawsuits that could follow from robust investigative journalism. I have a small but poignant anecdotal understanding of what happens when intrepid, usually leftwing journalists, stray down that corridor. Cannot recommend it as a good career move: the proposed targets being big media advertisers. This is a huge topic, & it strikes me the most one can say after reading books like Bad Pharma, by Ben Goldacre, is that the corruption is endemic, systematic, & legal. There is muchmoney at stake, from the size of the investment costs to be recovered. The large pharmaceutical companies own most of the research infrastructure, & directly or indirectly fund the people whose regulatory approval & recommendations are required; to say nothing of the scale of their marketing operations. The huge, cumbersome, & thus hideously expensive regulatory bureaucracy is secretive by nature, & rentseeking by disposition. Staff move back & forth between government & industry, & innately understand who butters their bread. Regulatory capture is an old story in economics Adam Smith went on about it & the rules themselves are written & constantly rewritten under massive lobbying pressure. Go figure.The answer isnt to further increase the byzantine regulation, but rather to make possible truly independent & transparent research, along with open access to its detailed findings. Or so we aver, up here in the High Doganate. Robert Eady September 17, 2013 at 10:57 am Mr Speaker, disappointment with yet another self-obsessed thespian for a pope has turned into a discussion of drugs and insanity. This may be quite appropriate, however. In the late 1960s magnificent marble altars often hundreds of years old were smashed and beautiful coloured and gilded statues were spray-painted white giving Catholic churches the look of museums for the exhibition of ghosts. I even heard of altar stones being ripped out and used as patio blocks. If anti-psychotic drugs had been pumped into the water supplies in Catholic parishes from about 1962 to 1980, would they have made a difference? Unfortunately, I

think the answer is no. It is my belief that the mass insanity wrought by Vatican II was caused by satanic possession. Arthur Gerard Smith September 17, 2013 at 11:07 am Thank you, Mr Bennett.If Mr Warren will allow, I feel beauty does not actually contradict or offend reason, and is ill-described as irrational. I think nonrational would be a better suited word, and suprarational would be better still, if one could bring oneself to use it in mixed company.I take all your forcefully made points and agree we need to find a suprarational cure for the apostate cancer that afflicts our society. I am also delighted to see how willing you are to go to war against the misuse of massively destructive chemicals. David Warren September 17, 2013 at 11:23 am Perfesser Smith is quite right, I should have used suprarational at the risk of scaring the horses. Let me specify, however, that I am not recommending Scud strikes against the big pharmaceutical companies. At least, not yet. Arthur Gerard Smith September 17, 2013 at 12:36 pm I once worked with a pharmaceutical company, documenting their marketing intelligence processes. And do you know that they had evaluated and recorded a psychological profile for every General Practitioner in Canada, the purpose of which was to measure the individual GPs proclivity to prescribe product, and how best they could be coerced to prescribe product in the future? And that was just the tip of the iceberg of varied data they had amassed to parlay into all sorts of useful information to ground their marketing strategies. What they spend on product research is a drop in the bucket compared with what they spend to disseminate and entrench it. I wouldnt hold off on the Scuds for too long if I were you, as prevention is better than the cure, especially when the cure one seeks to prevent is to eliminate any further possibility of prevention. If you see what I mean? David Warren September 17, 2013 at 1:25 pm A fully-qualified & accredited but now retired shrink, reading this thread, has made two remarks to me on my own Comments:There is nothing physically wrong with the victims, except that they are nuts. He writes: Nuts is a diagnosis on par with anything in the DSM [the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of the APA, see above], with the same degree of accuracy, validity and verifiability.I think pharmaceutical psychiatry is misbegotten, a catastrophe, a scandal, & a reflection of the society that countenances it.He writes: If you leave out the word pharmaceutical, I concur. Otherwise, the statement goes half way only. Gregorio Carbone September 17, 2013 at 1:32 pm As a psychologist with near three decades of diagnostic and treatment experience, the better

. .

part of two of them spent in psychiatric hospitals and working with/consulting to the best psychiatry has to offer, I declare Lord Kevins position the short, very short, end of the stick of the argument. The reasons for this decision are many, and most of them do, as has been pointed out, center around the impossibility of success when taking a reductionist approach to correcting what is wrong with an integrated cosmos. To do so, requires deliberately forgetting about too many very important things, such as the fact that women who murder their babies for convenience tend, very often, to feel guilty about it and to get depressed. Or that a person cannot be transgender and, if they are encouraged to adopt that frame of mind, they tend to become confused, especially if they are four years old, as do their parents and their mental health providers, all of whom then become, by necessity, adherents of a kind of shared psychosis.Or that the primary purpose of sexual activity is to reproduce which, when overlooked, as psychiatry was talked into doing in the 1970s, necessarily creates more and more sexual deviancy and whacky ideas about what children are to be taught and even delusional notions of what marriage is and can be.The best measure of the success of an intervention would have to be its ability to reduce or cure the problem in question, no? That leaves Lord Kevins position with the uncomfortable need to ignore the obvious fact that decades of psychopharmacological breakthroughs now correlate suspiciously with a world in which more and more people are crazier than shithouse rats.As for the money trail, where else would a materialist ethic and theology lead? Matt Muggeridge September 17, 2013 at 3:14 pm So Professor Smith will go to Mass,And smile to hide his seething wrath,And grip the friendly hand extended,And suffer til the Mass is ended. Shall we therefore congratulateThis sullen man so filled with hate?Or rather wonder how Saint PeteWill view it (should they chance to meet).He may embrace Smith, it is true,Or he may say, Why didnt you,Instead of skulking at the back,Grab a hymnal off the rack?To gain admittance to this City, Youd best have joined a church committee,Or offered to bring up a chaliceInstead of nurturing your malice. It would not have taken much To sing and greet and meet and such.But you preferred to stay away, For that: ten thousand years of RCIA! Mike McCracken September 17, 2013 at 9:56 pm Jesus, Joseph and Mary, no wonder there were 43 comments, what a fantastic thread! Ann Hill September 18, 2013 at 12:13 am As the one who unintentionally diverted this thread let me say this. My original statement that many a sin is now a mental illness was to allude to the points that Mr Carbone

makes so eloquently above. I do not mean to be glib about mental illness. Schizophrenia runs in my family, so I have seen the suffering, both from the disease and from the medications used to treat it. People on lithium do not love it. However it seems to me that many mental illnesses are caused by a sense of hopelessness or helplessness. Here I am in agreement with Mr Warren.One of my parish priests mentioned to us while preparing our children for their first confessions that those who confess regularly are less likely to suffer from depression. The lines for confession are extremely short at all the churches I frequent despite the shortage of priests.To Professor Smith: I commend you on your decision to attend Mass more regularly. I remember watching The Godfather when I was younger and commenting on the hypocrisy of the Corleones. They kill people and attend Mass like nothing has happened. My father said to me, At least while they are at Mass, God has a chance of reaching them. Vishal Mehra September 18, 2013 at 1:59 am I have often wondered that there were so many people with unclean spirits in little Palestine of 2000 years ago, and now we dont hear of this condition at all. Would exorcism or prayers be more useful to psychiatric patients? Stephen Sparrow September 18, 2013 at 5:46 am The physician who treats the insane never wholly escapes the contamination of their maladies. ~ Franz Werfel, The Song Of Bernadette Mitzi Pepall September 18, 2013 at 9:15 am Thanks to Matt and Mr Smith we can better Praise Him with Mirth (as the words to the great Old One Hundredth have been written in my Gather.) David Warren September 18, 2013 at 9:43 am While I hate to be topical (perhaps that has something to do with my failure as a hack journalist), the breaking news from Washington is, if carefully perused, illustrative of the points I & others have been making about psychopharmacology in the thread above.Mr Aaron Alexis, the accused Navy Yard killer, was being treated for a mental disorder, almost certainly with an SSRI (selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor). So were James Holmes, the Batman shooter of Aurora, & Eric Harris, of Columbine infame. The website, ssristories lists many hundreds of other cases, including almost every mass shooting or other grisly murder with which the mass media have enthralled us these last few decades.The media do not show interest in this angle, however, now or ever. They have instead focused, in this case as before, on the gun issue. A big shriek was raised about the AR-15 assault rifle Alexis was supposed to have used, until it was discovered he hadnt used that poster boy weapon. Whatever he did use to kill his dozen people, it

cannot have been medicated by the mad doctors; they do their experiments on human subjects only.People may think the media are stupid for missing the big story. They are not. The manufacturers of Zoloft, Prozac, Paxil, & the Paroxetine likely to have been prescribed in Alexiss case of the SSRI drugs which are the common factor in most of our most senseless killings are produced by pharamaceutical companies that spend billions (currently $2.4 billion a year on TV advertising alone, according to Forbes magazine) winning friends & influencing people. They are also highly litigious.This is why the media go after the guns: because it is cheap & easy. It answers to the ideological fantasies of their class, & they dont need to worry overmuch about getting their facts straight when deprecating firearms manufacturers. They know that even people who see the lie, are inured to its repetition. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 18, 2013 at 9:48 am Good priests and good prayer are the last line that separate us from demonic oppression. Since most in society relish different kinds of impurity, and prayer is rare as the last line thins out, evil breaks through in our society. I believe the lines have been breached and now we have extremely evil people in places that were traditionally occupied by those in charge of taking care of us. That is why we have laws fomenting impurity, abortion, dishonesty, and lies. Unfortunately thats not all. The human spirit has been breached also after decades of assault. That is why we have so much schizophrenia, genetic disorders, autism, aberrant behavior, and plain old immorality everywhere. We must pray and make sacrifice and reparation for the world. Pray that the Lord will have pity on the whole world, that the world will respond when He calls for repentance and conversion, that mankind surrenders completely to the will of God. This is a unique moment in history. We must do this not only to fill in the pews but to recover our society from this global Gomorrah it has turned into.Quoting our beloved Speakah: For it cannot possibly do to give up the struggle, to fill the pews not only with warm bodies but with the genuinely reverent & faithful not to some passing fashion of the times, but to Our Lord. This starts, of course, with asking Gods help with ones own case, yet cannot end there, given the specific Christian instruction to go forth among all nations. Yes we must go forth to all the nations with the truth received. The Church will work out its own problems. Now we must get our front lines plugged and fighting again. No fat bishop or cardinal is going to do that. They cant. No one can pray and fast in our stead. This is the hour of the laity. We must do it ourselves.Well worry about shining the

uniforms buttons after the battle is over. Larry Bennett September 18, 2013 at 10:35 am Well this would seem to prove that no man is an atheist when it comes to his muse! And St Muggs II, along with Mr Smith, have proven so! We thank them and the Spirit that moves them. Arthur Gerard Smith September 18, 2013 at 10:56 am Ten thousand years RCIAAre but the passing of one dayCompared to what must be endured In the Liturgy of the Word.The psalmist could not really knowJust what distaste his words can sowWhen through bathetic gush theyre heardIn the Liturgy of the Word.To sing and meet and greet and such,When in their place, no doubt mean much,But out of context theyre absurdIn the Liturgy of the Word.Its not enough to say, Come Prof.,Just go along, dont sulk or scoff,Forms no big deal, were now concurredIn the Liturgy of the Word.What matters is what is insideNot outer stuff, thats just your pride,So belt out tunes, be not deterred,In the Liturgy of the Word.For form matters, if not debased,It brings to presence, charged and graced,The Light that grounds what is averredIn the Liturgy of the Word.The destruction of ancient formsReflects corrupting, shifting normsThat banefully may be observedIn the Liturgy of the Word.Past man sought to be opened byA gracious Lord, who from on high,Raised all to him in one accordIn the Liturgy of the Word. Now man orders a reversal,Invites God to his rehearsal,And thinks its swell hes come on boardIn the Liturgy of the Word.So if I must Ill bear with youFor what else can this sinner do?But know I shall remain abhorredIn the Liturgy of the Word. Robert Eady September 18, 2013 at 11:57 am Mr Speaker, the standard Catholic remedy for mental illnesses is to ask for the intercession of Saint Dymphna, a martyr who was pursued by her lustful pagan father but resisted unto death. Prayers addressed to her can easily be found on the Internet.Ive heard that neurotics can be helped by being taught to stand up to their anxieties. Someone I know who suffered from persistent panic attacks was told to stare the damned things down with the attitude, Do your worst you monster, because I dont care and will endure it. The attacks subsided and are now gone.The psychotic mental illnesses, however, appear to be of a different order. Some say they are inherited, but who really knows? Perhaps they are idiopathic. Matt Muggeridge September 18, 2013 at 2:20 pm Wordsmith know,Your smithery will not suffice,When I want mercy.Not sacrifice.You judge keen,What rites might please.I did not care,For phylacteries.Some other Age,Than yours, you have preferred.Yet in the Beginning,Was the Word.You seek grace,In awkward human art.I seek a humbled,And

. .

contrite heart. Find me not in wordsAnd the thoughts in your head. Which seek the living,Among the dead. David Warren September 18, 2013 at 3:05 pm My apologies to the authors of Clerihews & Limericks which I have just removed from this thread, upon noticing they had triggered a little avalanche of further attempts, now denied publication. Messrs Muggs & Smith have set a reasonable standard for light verse & Audenesque, & I will not have it diluted. Other verse will match or surpass that standard. Ronald McCloskey September 18, 2013 at 4:45 pm David WarrenIs surely a bore whenHe acts like a hogOn his blog. Arthur Gerard Smith September 19, 2013 at 7:58 am SACRIFICEYou want mercy not sacrifice?Im sorry youre late upYou should have said so earlierBefore he took the cup.GRACEWhat awkward human art was that,Done on that fateful eve?Remember what I do and doand so my Peace receive.ONE AGEThe Word was in the beginning?And went to die in timeAnd all are his contemporariesFor all share in the crime.AMONG DEAD MENYou do not care for phylacteries?And that is just the pointYou make it up as you go onNow all is out of joint.HEARTYou seek a humble contrite heart?But surely you must know?Beauty is the gathering form That shows a pure heart glow. Charlie Cahill September 19, 2013 at 3:31 pm And now this very day (Sept. 19), Pope Francis agrees with you. Now that is the highest form of flattery. Robert Eady September 19, 2013 at 10:39 pm Mr Speaker, today it appears from his comments that Pope Francis is taking the route of dividing Catholics instead of uniting them. Liberal/left commentators all over the world are praising him for declaring as back burner issues the killing of millions of unborn children and the growing acceptance of homosexual activity as normal and even desirable. Any apostate Catholic politician who wishes to support the deviation of society from the great moral truths of the Church, can now point to the new direction that Rome is apparently going. The Culture Of Death is now The Culture of Happy Faces.Expect more dancing and twirling bishops as per the recent festivities in Rio. Stephen Sparrow September 19, 2013 at 11:13 pm Robert Eady, so far as I can see, nothing in the Catechism of the Catholic Church has been changed. The Catholic Left and the Catholic Right may or may not be secretly pleased, but Pope Francis has said nothing other than to endorse, If you love me, you will keep my commandments. John 14:15. David Warren September 19, 2013 at 11:19 pm Robert Eadys comment

returns the thread to where I began, with my remarks about playing to the gallery, moral exhibitionism, defining deviancy down, & so forth. I am still assimilating the popes interview with La Civilt Cattolica, published today. For those who have made real sacrifices to uphold Catholic moral teaching, & with it the honour of the Church, the tone of his remarks must come as a body blow. Those who have mocked them through the years the cafeteria Catholics barely inside the Church, the recovering Catholics who left, the secular humanists who never entered have reason enough to celebrate today. Francis has cautiously avoided explicit doctrinal error, however; he has been very careful not to deny what the Catholic moral teaching is. Nor do I detect anything resembling malign insincerity; only a dangerous, & much too personal, exercise in outreach likely to confuse both faithful & faithless, & prove a gift to those who mean the Church harm. I see no reason to amend my title, which was, Go forth, anyway. For whatever happens: Christ is eternal. Popes come & go. Morning update: One tries not to feel anything, in the desolation which follows a catastrophe. Instead think, & pray, & keep guard on emotion.The Catholic Church to which I was drawn is a Church of two thousand years, founded by Christ, corrected by the Spirit when she strays often over long periods. She cannot be reduced to one place or one moment. To my mind, she had made an appalling mistake, in seeking a compromise with the times, the largest part of which consisted in allowing the Mass to be desecrated in the false hope that this would make her relevant. Instead it cracked the loyalty of her people, & sent them away. I swam the Tiber notwithstanding: for she remains the One Holy Catholic & Apostolic Church, & there is no home elsewhere.What Pope Francis exhibits, most terribly in his house of cards remark, is that at her human centre, the Church has not yet learned from her mistake, & will doggedly repeat it as the damage accumulates.I have glanced this morning through Internet over various intelligent attempts by Catholic commentators, who do understand the mistake, to make the best of the popes interview, & of what I consider his evangelical cult of personality. They strike me as well-meaning, & all wet.In a column I had already written for Catholic Thing on Sunday, I touch on what I consider the persistent progressive error in modern, including modern Catholic thought: the belief that there is something fundamentally New about our times. The latest ecclesiastical prattle about a New Evangelization & a New Epoch are of this kind. They positively invite this demonic strategy: Because this is a New Epoch, we are empowered to overturn all traditions. After all, they were only

valid for the Old Epoch.The New Epoch began with Christ, not with us. Finally, let it be remembered that God may now, & ultimately will, bring good of circumstances in which we can see little or no hope. What the pope has been saying about Christ before catechism is true in itself, & we should pray that it bears fruit in itself, however narrowly planted. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 20, 2013 at 1:00 am These are the times that try mens souls. Our Lady has been telling us since Fatima or even earlier that the Church is going to experience a time of confusion. If they delivered Our Lord to the Cross, we simple servants are not going to be exempted from our Calvary. I do not know what Pope Francis is trying to achieve. I was telling a friend today that I dont want to go back to the kind of Church that persecuted Padre Pio or Fr Leonardo Castellani (find out about him, Argentine Jesuit) but I dont want the church of Karl Rahner, Hans Kng, or Edward Schillebeeckx either. Somewhere in the middle there is firm ground but it wont be easy to find.Here in Buenos Aires we have seen Padre Bergoglio come out of a van any freezing night at 3 a.m. to set up a table with hot soup and coffee for the prostitutes (female, male and in-between) of Flores, the neighborhood where he was born. Not a word of reproach or a sermon, just a cup of hot soup, a smile.Then someone picks a cup of hot soup and whispers something in his ear, he walks aside and hears her confession, dries a torrent of tears, whispers something which the penitent assents to, sobbing. I know it is bizarre to even imagine a transvestite confessing and leaving the improvised confessional with a mix of tears and mascara running down the face. Same thing about mini-skirted ladies of the road. But Someone told us that angels rejoice when something like that happens no matter how bizarre it may look here on earth. The absolution of the good thief on Calvary was no model of sacramental propriety either, but it worked.I am quite uncomfortable with the idea of ceasing to be the loud and clear moral referent about abortion, militant homosexuality, and stuff like that. Is this a case of catching more souls with honey instead of vinegar? I hope so. I still think of the mix of stern condemnation and tender mercy that Our Lord displayed in His Perfection when He walked this sad and dusty planet. Are we able to get even close that? All I hope is that He is in His mercy mood when I finally meet Him. I also know that depends on how I conduct myself. For He told me that I am going to get what I dished out in this life.I envy the Popes fortitude. He knows he is approaching the enemys front lines by doing what hes doing. He is risking crucifixion, but if souls are saved that way without compromising the truth then the objective has been achieved.

Francis likes to read Jorge Luis Borges, a gentle and very misunderstood soul who died in voluntary exile in Switzerland. Borges chose the following inscription for his grave: And ne forhtedon na. It is Old English for be not afraid, or, go forth unafraid, quoted from The Battle of Maldon, a poem dating back, I believe, to the 10th century.We must go forth. Be not afraid. Go forth, anyway. Mick Leahy September 20, 2013 at 4:17 am I was confused before I read Carlos, but somewhat consoled by his comments. We certainly need clarification and elaboration regarding what Pope Francis has said. I discovered last night that that poster boy of 20th century European atheism, John-Paul Sartre, appears to have apostatised from his unbelief at the end of his life. Perhaps the Church needs to be more compassionate towards sinners, maybe she can draw many of them back in, but she must continue to hate sin unrelentingly. Pope Francis has already mentioned a personal Devil. He needs to remind us of Hell. Ron Prenot September 20, 2013 at 7:38 am If Mr Smith reads the following from the latest interview with the Pope, I think his Mass going days are numbered unless he recalls always this: Mass is prayer; prayer is a conversation with God; conversation with God is our contemplation of him. Shut everything out, withdraw into the depths, and contemplate: Vatican II was a re-reading of the Gospel in light of contemporary culture, says the pope. Vatican II produced a renewal movement that simply comes from the same Gospel. Its fruits are enormous. Just recall the liturgy. The work of liturgical reform has been a service to the people as a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation. Yes, there are hermeneutics of continuity and discontinuity, but one thing is clear: the dynamic of reading the Gospel, actualising its message for today which was typical of Vatican II is absolutely irreversible. Then there are particular issues, like the liturgy according to the Vetus Ordo. I think the decision of Pope Benedict [his decision of July 7, 2007, to allow a wider use of the Tridentine Mass] was prudent and motivated by the desire to help people who have this sensitivity. What is worrying, though, is the risk of the ideologisation of the Vetus Ordo, its exploitation.One would think a person insane who extols the enormous fruits of Vatican II, and the reform of the liturgy as a service to the people.Whatever world the bishops live in, and whatever language it is they speak and write in, I can say this much: it is not my language, nor my world. It is not the world or language of the Gospels, nor of Augustine, Chrysostom, Aquinas; nor St John of the Cross, nor Venerable Louis of Granada, nor St John Vianney. Arthur Gerard Smith September 20, 2013 at 8:47 am Hats off to Mr Caso-

Rosendi. Papa Francis is not a theologian or philosopher like his two great predecessors who sought to order by faith, hope, and love, but a belletrist who seeks to do so by love, hope, and faith.The modern rationalist dissolution of the sensual myths of our Christian tradition have deprived most of us without any speculative bent of the means to connect to the Faith. The myths have to be restored; the desire for Jesus must first be aroused before the truths of the Faith can be explicated and understood. To arouse the desire one must first adopt the Kierkegaardian strategy of easing around to the other guys side, throwing an arm across his shoulder, and then describing the world as he sees it. Only then, and in his terms, can the contradictions, limitations and deprivations of his world be slowly pictured and painted up for him. And it is through realized deprivation, like the feeling of hunger, that the desire to overcome it arises. The disciples didnt come to Jesus through the catechism, but to the catechism through Jesus.There is a great danger, of course. We must be careful what myths we think we are restoring, or what new, equivalent ones we are creating. We must continually refer to the truths as formulated in our dogmatisms and traditional forms lest we stray. We must move forward with a cup of hot soup in our extended arm, and a copy of the catechism in the one held behind our back.And Mr Prenot, yes, I was struck by that very passage. These were my notes to myself:What is a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation? Are not all readings concretely historical?And why is the dynamic of reading the Gospel actualizing its message for today which was typical of Vatican II absolutely irreversible?Is this not an obvious ideologization of the newer liturgical form on Franciss part?Is the message of the Gospel for today different from the message of the Gospel for previous days?And what does prudent and sensitivity mean here? Is he saying that the liturgical form for today is for the people of today, while the older liturgical form is not for the people of today, but for the people of today with yesterdays sensibility?I dont know how to answer these questions yet. But the danger of the belletrist is that he likes to offer things up with both hands. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 20, 2013 at 12:20 pm What is a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation? Are not all readings concretely historical?Mr A.G. Smith, your observation reminds me of Marxs puzzlement at the survival of meta-historical values in the culture of his day. He could not understand how a play by Euripides could move the emotions of Londoners, twenty-five centuries after it was written. He understood there was something there that was lethal

to his materialist philosophy. Marx managed to leave his imprint in many ways, but I think his warped vision of history is his most perverse and pervasive legacy. That perversion can be detected in the words: concrete historical situation. That seems to imply a chasm or disconnection with the past that must affect the understanding of our human condition in each age. That carries the seed of a subtle and destructive heresy, because it drags the eternal and submits it to a temporal context. This is much worse than putting the horse behind the cart: it is placing the horse on the cart and asking us to push it! Liturgical rites grow organically from eternal truths and every generation adds a little something to the whole. In that way we are both present and connected to the past, and to the future through it. Our gestures and moves are not the essence of the liturgy because liturgy emanates from truths that are eternal. That mystery touches us, through the ages reaching our own time and place from Heaven. In a way, liturgy is to the life of the Church what the arts are to society. Marx was alarmed, watching the women of Victorian London weeping for their Trojan sisters, dead three thousand years ago. Somehow he knew he was in the presence of something that was harder and more durable than mere matter or societal struggles.What is more concrete than something that survives unmoved through death and the upheavals of history? What can happen today that can make those strengths void and null? Matt Muggeridge September 20, 2013 at 12:39 pm Mister Speaker: So we can no longer obsess about artificial contraception, abortion, and homosexuals? (Were we? Was anyone? I sure as heck wasnt, nor was this House.) In response to the Holy Fathers invitation, perhaps we could craft a resolution redirecting our obsessive wrath and indignation. The French? The Bishops? Sanitation workers? Academics? Warren Kinsella? When I lived in Toronto, walking down Bloor, I often thought that if we all pooled our obsessive negativity (and got some American financial backing) we could definitely take out OISE. Robert Eady September 20, 2013 at 1:04 pm Mr Speaker, I think what is being missed for the past fifty years or so is that Christianity is a revealed religion. It is not founded on how people might feel, but what God has passed on to us fixed in time and space. We might not like what God has revealed, but that doesnt matter. What is is.The problem with rambling interviews with the pope conducted in the back ends of airplanes or with magazines is that they are not thought out and therefore bring ambiguity and imprecision of language into play. That is why in past ages the popes communicated with their flocks formally in

. .

Latin: because that language is not subject to change as the vernacular languages are.In his recent interview Pope Francis, besides relegating abortion, homosexuality and contraception to lesser moral teachings, spoke of a woman who had had an abortion, but remarried and gave birth to five children. What, the Pope asked, is a priest to say to such a woman in the confessional when she comes feeling guilt for killing one of her babies.Two obvious questions arise from this.1) When the woman remarried, did she do so with a legal annulment of her first marriage? If she did not, then she is living in a state of sin which Jesus forbade. Did Saint Thomas More and Saint John Fisher die for nothing? What exactly is the pope asking?2) Is the pope suggesting that priests in the confessional play down the seriousness of taking the life of another human being who was deprived of the Sacrament of Baptism? Surely, women who receive absolution for aborting their children know the immensity of what they have done. Cant this terrible guilt be built upon, however, showing the wondrous scope of the mercy of God. Can an abortion ever be looked at by anyone as anything other than a very grave matter?Pope Francis did not alter doctrine with his comments, but he introduced needless ambiguity for what appears to be the sake of pleasing the crowd. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 20, 2013 at 9:35 pm I read the Popes interview in Civilt Cattolica. Knowing Bergoglio the man I would say: wait for the other shoe. I may be wrong about this but I think he has a plan. Let us wait and see. Imran Khan September 20, 2013 at 10:36 pm Can an abortion ever be looked at by anyone as anything other than a very grave matter?But that is exactly what abortion is, grave matter. Christians, you make me laugh. But I like this Francis. I understand what he says. Catholic, like my mother, is more than wash your hands, wipe your feet and so on. He will be good for you. Mick Leahy September 21, 2013 at 7:09 am Carlos: wait for the other shoe. It needs to be a bovver boot at this point! Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 21, 2013 at 7:59 am Mr Khan: abortion is a very grave matter and yet we human beings are flawed and we always end up making idols of things. In a battle one can fall into a trap by concentrating excessively into capturing one hill while the rest of the battle lines are breached. If we Christians per impossibili were able to convince the rest of the world to change their mores for the better and yet forget to live by the Gospel of Christ it would be an empty victory. It is obvious that the world no longer cares for what we think. We have to go back to basics and that includes boldly resisting while at the same

time living and declaring the truth. God in in charge. Nothing happens without His permission. Definitely this is not a time for laughter for the results of this conflict will affect all of mankind. The next few years are going to unleash many changes on us. Prudence and caution are the order of the day. Charlie Cahill September 21, 2013 at 9:43 am My Dear Carlos: Indeed the other shoe has fallen the next day. I think the Popes idea (as though I can read his mind) is to make it clear that there are other serious matters besides abortion, etc that must be addressed.Too quickly have some jumped onto the saddle and spurred the horse on. Mitzi Pepall September 21, 2013 at 10:08 am With all due respect to Mr CasoRosendi, his descriptions of soup van confessions sounding like scenes out of an Almodvar flic put into my mind the phrase, bad cases make bad laws. Im afraid this Pope reminds me of the director of the Art Gallery of Ontario who, in his desperation to get the rubes in, is having David Bowie look-a-like parties and David Bowie exhibitions. Those of us who always went because we loved the pictures are swept aside and the pictures stored in the basement or hung, with no respect paid to chronology or tradition, in order to demonstrate the most recent rubbishy vogue idea. I fear the other shoe. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 21, 2013 at 10:42 am Mitzi, those are the facts. The man has always been discrete, his life is a long list of sacrifice and good deeds, and work done in silence. If he (and other priests) made himself available to reconcile prostitutes and transvestites one cannot blame him for the spectacular impact of the action. I should have been there, I should have been doing good but the truth is I was snoring in bed, nice and comfy. It was the Archbishop who was up and freezing his behind. What I cannot repeat enough times is that Bergoglio is like that. He has always been like that even as a seminarian. He is not rubbing elbows with the intelligentsia (they hate his guts here in Buenos Aires) or the politicians (same thing). He could have very easily been popular by slamming the Vaticans doors in the face of Argentine politicians who suddenly developed a love for him. He did not, he truly forgave them. By the way today we have all over the front pages a very strong defense of the pro-life work of the Church. That is in the front line today because of the interview published last week. Is this Pope media savvy or what? I dont know but I trust the Holy Spirit wont abandon Peter or start making mistakes after 20 centuries. We had Alexander VI and some others who were not exactly examples for the faithful. That is why I cut Francis a bit of slack. Hes not afraid, hes not a traitor, hes not being manipulated. He may

be wrong exception made for doctrinal matters but, knowing the man, I cannot believe his intentions are not the best.The other shoe fell today and everyone could hear the thud. That is a good start.Mr Leahy, if one thing can describe this Pope it is suaviter in modo, fortiter in re . The stamp of his bovver boots is permanently marked in several dastardly behinds here in Buenos Aires (impish smile here) but no one can quite remember how it happened. There are not witnesses. Miracle! The man has made an art of the unexpected move.I compare him to Pele who could hide the ball from the full-back and pass him without resistance. The defender, poor chap, knew he had failed when the roar of the fans brought him back to reality.Yesterday the Pope asked us to look at the whole battlefront and not to be obsessing about abortion or homosexual marriage. Obviously all that concentration in resisting the legalization of moral deviancy and death has given us only limited results. He is going to the base of the problem: defeat the culture of death by conversion which is a radical form of education. Today the Pope is thundering against Catholic physicians who perform abortions. It looks to me that he is more street wise than his more intellectual predecessors. The old right fist up, step back, and left jab to the jaw strategy that has put so many of his enemies to sleep around here.John Paul II cleaned the Soviets clock. Benedict XVI condemned the vacuity of the European project when it seemed unbeatable we see it now gasping for air. This Pope is going to set the Americas straight and finish the job. But his tactics are scaring the you-know-what out of me for sure. David Warren September 21, 2013 at 12:20 pm Clearly, the Holy Father hadnt anticipated the amount of blowback hed receive from the Idleness Commentariat, & moved quickly to correct the impression his Jesuit editors had left in their little-read magazine. Though I think he should decently leave a Comment here, to thank us for calling attention to the problem. Mick Leahy September 21, 2013 at 1:21 pm Carlos, I can almost feel the pain of todays bovver boot remarks myself! This is better. I read today on the Catholic Thing that there have been 1,300,000,000 abortions worldwide since the eighties in spite of all the anathemas and condemnations. The latter might make us feel better but it surely isnt saving enough babies. I must remind myself that the Holy Spirit is rather clever. Things might be scary and there will be plenty guts spilled, but it is good to remember He is in control and we even know the eventual result. Robert Eady September 21, 2013 at 3:16 pm Despite the recent comments of

the Holy Father I think we peons in the pews must always keep abortion and homosexual activity in perspective. Wilful murder and sodomy are at the beginning of the list of sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. (Gods vengeance is what the Church in the past was referring to, not the vengeance of man.) The liberal/left establishment will most certainly use the recent comments of Pope Francis to further marginalize frontline Catholics who are resisting the Culture of Death. What such Catholics have to do is simply resolve to fight on regardless of what ambiguous and misleading nonsense is coming out of Rome. Nicholas Kangas September 21, 2013 at 5:28 pm Mister Speaker, I go back to a previous thread in which you observed that the barque of Peter was sailing into new seas. I suppose were getting a taste of salt spray now. David Cho September 21, 2013 at 7:36 pm Being media-savvy is what we dont need. Playing to the gallery while confusing the flock. If the pope wants to help the poor, why does he confuse us with talk of abortion being emphasized less? He could address the Marxist influence in the Church if he wants to help the poor and condemn abortion unequivocally. Surely the pope can walk and chew gum at the same time? Rope-a-dope strategies should be left to boxing. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 22, 2013 at 7:41 am I read today on the Catholic Thing that there have been 1,300,000,000 abortions worldwide since the eighties in spite of all the anathemas and condemnations.Mick, there is the harsh reality. I hope the Pope is thinking of something that actually works. I remember meeting a lady from somewhere in the West Coast who was very involved in pro-life activities in her Catholic parish. While she was attending a Catholic convention in DC we shared the lunch table with others attending the event. In our conversation she disclosed very casually that she had been away from the confessional for years, she had a son who converted to Islam, her husband was a gambler who died of a heart attack likely brought about by a drug overdose. At the time I remember thinking that the business of saving lives should start in our own homes. What the lady is doing is by all means generous and good, but the Pope is right because Jesus is right: it is hard to get good fruit from a sick tree. If we do not have our basics right: how are we going to enter the thick of the battle? I wonder if we are thus doing a disservice to the cause and to the unborn. While I would never advocate retreating a single inch in the pro-life wars, I do think we have to train the troops better. That is where we have failed. One cannot ask half-a-million priests to form one billion Catholics. We the people in the pews must take responsibility and do the best we can. I

do my best through my websites and writing but I need also to increase prayer and other activities in my community. The work to be done is staggering but with Gods help we can achieve it. I believe humble obedience rooted in a good Catholic formation is the key. Robert Eady September 22, 2013 at 9:28 am Poor outcomes in families are too complex to relegate to parental inattention and incompetence. We have to recall that the culture we live in is so corrupt and polluted that it is almost impossible for parents to function and children to grow up without being influenced by it. All one has to do is watch television for a few nights a week to see that civilization has collapsed. We are in a free fall into the abyss. It isnt just the murder, mayhem, perversion and smut, but the maudlin vacuity that people wallow in. No tragic event can occur without the rootless and aimless hordes trying to suck emotion out of it. Our churchmen are just bad salesmen attempting to conceal the price of a product they have corrupted because they no longer fully believe in it After inner-child therapy, try a little Jesus who came not to atone for your sins, but to deny they ever existed.Im afraid that the notion of the perfect wife, perfect children and shining floors is a Protestant elect kind of thing. Calvin attempted to prove righteousness through property. The wife and kids were always just part of the overall chattels. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 22, 2013 at 3:48 pm Mr Eady, while I agree with you along those lines, we also have to admit responsibility for the outcome of our projects. In my not so short life I have noticed that winners take responsibility and losers blame others. A family is a project first. How many Catholic gents think, I would like her to be the mother of my children? It is just because we have fallen, into free fall, that we learn to decide things in the wrong manner.From the womb of our mother we pass through many circles until we are called by our Creator: our mothers bosom, then our immediate family, then the larger family, the tribe, the race or nation to which we belong, the world of mankind, and the realms beyond when all ends. Each circle gives our soul something physical and/or spiritual. It was decreed that we grow that way. St Paul said that those who provide not for their families are worse than those without faith.Solidarity starts at home. If I see my own son losing his soul to Islam I have the obligation to rescue him somehow. At least I have to focus, and perhaps do a little self-analysis to see where I went wrong before I go outside to the next circle and try to save others. In any case, this is not an absolute procedure to be followed but something to illustrate the fact that we cannot go to fight in the front lines when we are not even ready to

stand properly in the rear guard.This civilization is falling parallel to the failure of individuals to raise strong families. Ideally I might like to be everywhere, but this isnt possible. Those of us who can must fight the culture wars and find a way to do all the other things we need to do, big and small. Robert Eady September 23, 2013 at 2:15 pm Carlos, I agree with most of what you say about the importance of strong families, but I dont think solving ones personal and family problems before becoming a Catholic activist is at all practical. If such a stricture became widespread, the proponents of the Culture of Death would have a free hand to do their worst. Even in the best of family situations, there are plenty of problems considering that human beings are always human beings with all their faults. Im sure that the brave soldiers who went off to put the Nazis below the ground where they belong might have wished to be with their children instead, teaching them their Faith and forming them into good Catholic men and women.Catholics have no choice but to resist as best they can the godless, ferociously anti-life culture that surrounds them. It can only be a good thing when children see their Catholic parents stand up for what is right, no matter how marginalized or ostracized they become. The son or daughter of a pro-lifer who pickets an abortion clinic each week and/or who prepares for mailing a thousand letters to raise money against the abortionists, is obviously setting a good example. The father or mother who concentrates exclusively on raising well-adjusted and pious kids may soon find that the civilization in which they were supposed to live has become a hell on earth. Carlos Caso-Rosendi September 23, 2013 at 5:57 pm I agree, Robert. In times like these we have to be everywhere with all the might we can muster. In fact I believe we are being overwhelmed as it was predicted long ago. We are going to reach a moment when only Gods intervention will stop death from conquering the earth. He promised us He wont leave us alone and we must go forward as cunning as snakes but as innocent as doves. Rob Dewar September 23, 2013 at 8:50 pm I have come late to this party, but just wanted to point out that Mr Eadys characterization of the father or mother who concentrates exclusively on raising pious kids is contradictory. Such a father or mother will of necessity (and I speak from experience, both from my own parents and, I hope, myself) show by example what it is to be pious that it is not a thing of empty words or isolation, but of mercy combined with sacrifice.Of course, I may just be feeling slightly slighted by Mr Eadys sweeping

characterization of a perfect family being a protestant notion, although I shouldnt as perfection is (or should) really be a compliment (although I have some issues with the image of perfection he portrays). To characterize Calvins teaching as righteousness through property does betray a lack of time spent studying either the man or his teachings, but that is easily forgiveable for a Catholic. Again, the stereotype portrayed is one of wrong priorities (and Im sure some protestants have wrongly reinforced it), but the stereotype (and fact, as presented here) of a mother or father working furiously for a pro-life cause while passing by his/her own Muslim son is getting the priorities just as wrong. Culture starts with the family, as Mr Caso-Rosendi has so ably pointed out get that right, and it will be expressed through the Church family as well, and shine on outward into the dark of the world (the tribe, the nation, etc). This is part of first removing the log from your own eye. Robert Eady September 24, 2013 at 9:16 am Mr Speaker, one of the most effective ways for the apathetic to reduce feelings of guilt is to attack at the personal level Catholic activists. The best way to do this is to suggest that those activists are not fixing things at home before going out to fix society. It is important, of course, to bring up pious children but it is also important to throw water on the flames if the house that surrounds one is burning down. Today, for the most part, Catholics are either apostates or the sort that can be counted on to warm pews, raise nice children, and let the liberal/left establishment destroy the world.As for Calvin, he was perhaps the most able of the great heretics. Always clever, he sought to explain to the confused and ignorant why the seemingly righteous like nuns and priests were dying in such great numbers during the plagues. Well, it wasnt because they were living in close proximity with rats and with one another in packed monasteries and convents, as well as assisting the already sick, but because God in his inscrutable wisdom had divided mankind into the elect and the damned. How does one determine then if one is of the elect? Why by appearing favoured by the Almighty. This is where the perfect wife, perfect children and polished floors come in. Of course, such thinking works well in the material sense even when a Protestant inevitably becomes an apostate. Righteousness through property thrives wonderfully in the boardrooms and office towers of the West. (If one wishes to read a great poem regarding Calvins spawn and the America of the Puritan dream I would suggest Wallace Stevens The Blue Buildings in the Summer Air. David Warren September 24, 2013 at 9:57 am I am curious to know where

Viscount Eady found that opinion of Calvins, the more because I was once surprised by the mans compassion, in reading his reaction when the plague struck Strasbourg. In a letter to a friend, he said that he was overwhelmed & heartbroken. His own followers were among the victims. Too, I had once heard a similar opinion attributed (falsely, it turned out) to Wycliffe, then to John Knox. I could almost believe it of Knox.Having read only passages from Calvin, myself could not get through the Institutes when I tried I resolved to leave him to the theologians. What Lord Eady & I perhaps share, is an acquaintance with the vulgar Calvinists of the provinces (from whom I am descended on my mamas side). Few of them much read Calvin, either. Often, in their notions & behaviour their excruciating worldliness they were as bad as some of the Catholics Ive known. I would certainly say the notion, that the righteous flourish in this world, & that failure is the mark of damnation, was alive & well in the North America of my childhood. Indeed, one of the things that attracted me to Catholics is that, quite apart from whether they were good or bad, they seemed always to be doled the short rations. Robert Eady September 24, 2013 at 4:03 pm Mr Speaker, John Calvin was not a kind man. He had a habit in his theocratic dictatorship in Geneva of whacking womens ankles with his staff if he saw them display any flesh under their skirts. When the plague swept through Geneva in 1545 he blamed over two dozen women for practising witchcraft and had them burned at the stake. He ordered his henchmen to use green wood when burning the Spanish heretic Servetus so the man would suffer more as the fire would be slower. Calvin watched the execution from his window. His extreme bitterness of character and loathing of the Catholic Church seems to have originated with his father who was also a bitter man who was excommunicated for having been an embezzler of a bishopric (described as a financial embarrassment).The plague had a large effect on the Protestant reformers as it did on all the people of Europe. No one could explain why it took out the righteous with the unrighteous. Calvin claimed that calamities, poverty and failures in life were signs that someone lacked confidence in the Almighty and was therefore among those predestined to damnation. Those who were confident in God, however, would succeed and go on to be among the elect in heaven. If one has a stomach for it, Calvins Institutes of the Christian Religion can be ploughed through as well as Webers The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism . The former is a bit like anything by Karl Marx or Immanuel Kant (i.e. eating sawdust). I first heard Calvin explained by a Marxist professor I had at university.

He was a bit of a crackpot, but still managed to make a lot of sense. David Warren September 24, 2013 at 6:28 pm I was more curious for the source of the original charge against John Calvin, than eager to see more of the like. Gentle reader is referred to standard Catholic encyclopaedic sources for a more generous treatment of our old adversary. I fear Mr Eadys Marxist professor was more crackpot than he realized.On one fine point: my understanding is that Michael Servetus had already been condemned to death by slow burning, by the Catholic authorities in France. He jumped prison there, & was on the lam. Protestants & Catholics were more or less competing to get their hands on him, for Servetus was a heretic by any conceivable Christian standard. (He denied the Trinity, for starters.) He probably thought Geneva his least bad option, when he washed up there (incognito, until he was recognized & ratted out). Calvin wanted him beheaded; the Geneva town council, after asking the advice of other municipalities, settled on burning him over a pyre of his own books.I could raise fine points on the other allegations. For instance, there is some fairly bright light between the doctrinal positions Weber attributed to Calvin, & those which Calvin attributed to himself. It should also be borne in mind that much of the deprecation of Calvins character emerged from the propaganda pamphlets of the Reformation era. These were lurid, but by & large untruthful, on all sides. I have often written against the lies flung at Catholics, dating back to the pamphlets of those times; but we did our share in the exchanges. It is time we made a pyre of them all, Catholic & Protestant pamphlets alike, to burn off all the straw men from controversies long over.As Calvin himself insisted, there can be only one true Church.