|
Post by maolsheachlann on May 8, 2015 21:00:01 GMT
I don't know if the writer John D. Sheridan counts as an intellectual, but his book 'The Hungry Sheep' is a fantastic example of orthodox post-Vatican II apologetics. I recommend it to you all. I bought my copy on Amazon very cheaply.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger on May 9, 2015 12:09:42 GMT
Sorry, Hibernicus, you're right about Denmark, I think perhaps I was thinking of the other Benelux countries. I think I had Denmark in my head because there have been some fairly negative stories about the Catholic hierarchy there recently.
I think your comment about lay Catholics in Ireland looking for somebody to give them orders is very apt.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger on May 9, 2015 12:59:00 GMT
I googled that book Maolsheachlann, and the first thing that came up was your review! Allow me to link to it here, I think it's good: irishpapist.blogspot.ie/2012/06/review-of-hungry-sheep-by-john-d.htmlOne or two notes: I think that the argument from laughter goes back to Aquinas, if not before him. If I recall correctly, he said that laughter is an attribute proper to man, as man alone laughs from humour. It was an aspect separating man from animals. Also, I agree with your call for steel as well as fire. I, too, feel that there is a problem of either not grasping the nettle and standing straight up for what we believe in (content to land only glacing blows or fight only skirmishes, as you so aptly put it); unfortunately, in the few instances in which people do do this, they often go too far, at least in my opinion, like say Michael Voris does (I know that not everybody agrees with me there, but that's my honest take). This is perhaps like indiscriminate slashing with one's steel that hurts the person, rather than seeking to land solid blows on the false ideas themselves. I think I may have stretched your metaphor beyond breaking point, but there you go.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 9, 2015 14:36:17 GMT
Sheridan's essays (they were tremendous bestsellers in Ireland of the 40s and 50s, and to a lesser extent the 60s) are very heavily influenced by Chesterton's "wonder of everyday life" approach, so that may help to account for the similarity. Even Gay Byrne was/is a fan! There are about a dozen collections of his INDEPENDENT columns, as well as six novels (PARADISE ALLEY was recently republished by a community group in the East Wall, who were interested in its portrayal of the life of a slum-school teacher in the area in between the wars). I read most of them when I was young, and have often thought of going back to look over them again and see how they strike me now; in hindsight I think the novels may have been a bit sentimental, but I must give them another look. Sheridan polemicised a good deal in the letters columns of the papers, and someone with access to online newspaper articles and enough time should look them up at some stage. I have also heard of (but not read) an exchange between him and the late Michael Adams in the WORD on the literary censorship, with Sheridan defending it and Adams arguing for some relaxation. I suspect Sheridan was painting himself into a corner on that one (as he certainly was by Adam and Eve literalism; I'd forgotten that feature of THE HUNGRY SHEEP) but the fact that Adams subsequently thought the relaxation of censorship had gone too far suggests that Sheridan may have had something to say. (I would say BTW that the old system had broken down; quite apart from everything else, the Censorship Board were unpaid part-timers and there were just too many books being brought out for such a board to examine them adequately.) There was a time when Sheridan might reasonably have been described as the Voice of Ireland, or at least of a particular Ireland. It's really striking how completely he has been forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on May 9, 2015 14:36:36 GMT
Well, when I spoke about steel rather than fire, I really meant rational arguments against 'inspirational' arguments for God's existence and religious faith. I was taking up Sheridan's metaphor. In which case Voris wouldn't qualify at all, because he never seems to argue anything except on the basis of Magisterial teaching.
Since then, I've rather rethought my own attitude. I don't know how important philosophical argument is to evangelisation. Maybe it's not very important at all.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on May 9, 2015 14:42:56 GMT
Hibernicus, I haven't read Paradise Alley (I started it), but I did read another novel he wrote called The Magnificent McDarney which concerns a ne'er-do-well father and former actor. The conclusion might be called sentimental, but the novel itself is surprisingly gritty and dark.
Sheridan was no great talent-- some of his light articles are so light, and so inconsequential, that they could float-- but he's readable and Catholics who read him will probably enjoy a warm glow of nostalgia for an Ireland that was, in some ways, a gentler place. It is indeed surprising that he's been so totally forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger on May 9, 2015 18:11:16 GMT
Since then, I've rather rethought my own attitude. I don't know how important philosophical argument is to evangelisation. Maybe it's not very important at all. I think all legitimate types of argument are important, as everybody's different and everybody comes to the faith by different means. For John C. Wright it was philosophical argument which backed him into a corner, followed by a miraculous cure. For Leah Libresco, it was the philosophy of morality. For Rod Dreher, it was being struck by the beauty of Chartres Cathedral. For Newman it was theological argument and the role of conscience. For Alec Guinness it was the faith and trust of a little boy who saw him dressed as a priest for a film. I know a lecturer in economics who came back to his faith through Papal encyclicals on economics and social justice, and others through trips to Medjugorge (much as I'm uncomfortable with the place myself). Still others hit rock bottom in various vices and addictions and reached out for God in their distress. So I think that all the kinds of evangelisation are important. Some of the above (like Medj and economics) don't touch my heart the way others do (like beauty and philosophy). I guess we each have to make the arguments that we're good at, and rely on others to make the others.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on May 9, 2015 19:05:00 GMT
Very true Ranger.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger on May 11, 2015 12:49:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on May 11, 2015 13:05:14 GMT
The most depressing thing is that the Gweedore priest looks relatively young.
I'm really not surprised by Sr. Stan.
|
|
|
Post by pugio on May 11, 2015 13:10:22 GMT
No, but neither are surprising. At evening Mass in St. Mary's on Haddington Rd. this weekend the priest - who is a quite cultured man I think - was strongly hinting in favour of a Yes vote and used the reading of the day from the book of Acts to support him (grace of the Holy Ghost poured out on both Jews and Gentiles; therefore... you know, equality... )
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 24, 2015 19:08:50 GMT
The current PHOENIX has examples of what is good and bad about Goldvulture. The good is a really uncompromising piece spelling out in great detail how various American foundations have been pumping money into the gay rights campaigners in Ireland for the last few years (I might add that this hasn't stopped them raising all sorts of scaremongering about American money going to NO campaigners - see the link below for more on this particular exercise of swallowing camels and straining at gnats): www.crisismagazine.com/2015/ireland-will-surprise-everyone-on-gay-marriage-but-not-meThe bad is a savage attack on the SDLP leader Alasdair MacDonnell, which claims the SDLP's performance was disastrous, jeers at him for taking a pro-life stance and claims that he and the SDLP are antagonising secular nationalists by appealling to conservative Catholics on abortion and allowing some MLAs to abstain on pseudogamy. (I might add that it claims McDonnell is clinging on to the dual mandate as MP and MLA, whereas he had announced some days before the piece appeared that he would resign his Assembly seat. Nothing like being up to date, is there?) The explanation of this hatchet job is that Goldvulture has long been a cheerleader for Sinn Fein, which saw its vote go down in the election and, unlike the SDLP, actually lost a Westminster seat. Sour grapes.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on May 25, 2015 8:00:33 GMT
Noticed the Phoenix piece on the funding, it was good; and there was another good piece on the manner Labour picked this proposal out from the many other recommendations of the Constitutional Convention (itself a bit of a joke). But Hibernicus is right about the snarky piece on Alastair McDonnell, and I know this is due to the SF preference of Goldvulture. There is a deeper question as to what type of nationalism SF embraces these days, other than the right of the Irish people as a nation to mess up as much as everybody else.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 25, 2015 22:52:54 GMT
What is significant is that SF and Goldvulture both think there is political mileage to be gained from attacking the SDLP for not being pro-abortion. I remember the day when politicians who favoured abortion (under limited circumstances) would cry "smear" when they were attacked on the issue, even when the "smear" consisted of drawing attention to their own publicly stated position.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on May 26, 2015 7:53:25 GMT
I thought there is some irony in SF profit from the pioneering work in the social welfare depending world which was trailblazed by their separated brethern the stickies. I remember the "smear" pieces alright, eg when the FF Wexford TD John Browne said that then presidential candidate Mary Robinson would open an abortion referral clinic in Aras an Uachtarán (which was a smear, but as Hibernicus pointed out, calling politicians' public statements out were also regarded as smears.
|
|