|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 20, 2020 18:55:37 GMT
Review of a new collection of Flannery O'Connor letters, placing them in the context of post-1945 US Catholic intellectual revival and belief in "the apostolate of the pen". One question which might come to mind is whether the intellectuals' critique of popular pietism (which indeed had a good deal wrong with it) unintentionally helped to cut off the branch on which they were sitting. www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/flannery-oconnors-good-things/
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 11, 2020 21:25:13 GMT
I recently came across a blog by a historian of classical and mediaeval warfare who comments on depictions of warfare in popular culture (especially science fiction and fantasy). This multi-part discussion of the depiction of the attack on Gondor in RETURN OF THE KING (he discusses both book and film versions, the latter being changed quite a bit by the film-makers for dramatic effect) really gives me new respect for Tolkien's artistry. Two points particularly worth noting (a) Tolkien's deep knowledge of the mediaeval sources and his own experiences in the First World War gave him a deep understanding of how such warfare worked - he has an instinctive sense, for example, of how far soldiers can be got to march in a day and the constraints of horse transport. In contrast, GAME OF THRONES, especially the TV version, is often downright ridiculous on such matters. (b) I used to think of Denethor's despair as a contrast with Theoden's redemption, and both as related to Tolkien's own temptations to despair. (Anyone who has only seen the films, in which Denethor is contemptible, should realise that in the books he is a deeply tragic figure. As the blogger notes, he and Faramir are also shown as skilled commanders mounting an effective defence against much greater numbers - something completely lost in the film.) What the blogger brings out is that the theme of despair is much more far-reaching in the book, because mediaeval warfare is to a considerable extent about getting your opponent to panic and lose heart, to break and run. In the novel the supernatural dread cast by Sauron's servants intensifies this, and it is offset by Gandalf's presence among the defenders - which as the blogger points out, is as if a mediaeval army had St Michael the Archangel visibly walking among them, talking with them, and leading them in combat - Gandalf as a version of St Michael actually makes a lot of sense. What this means for the symbolic weight of the book is that the tragedy of Denethor's damnation is offset by the triumph of the city as a whole over the attacks of despair, and this in turn suggests more strongly Tolkien's success in handling his own melancholia. Religious writers often imagine the human soul assailed by the devil as a city under siege,holding out till the Reliever comes. acoup.blog/2019/05/10/collections-the-siege-of-gondor/acoup.blog/2019/05/17/collections-the-siege-of-gondor-part-ii-these-beacons-are-liiiiiiit/acoup.blog/2019/05/24/collections-the-siege-of-gondor-part-iii-having-fun-storming-the-city/acoup.blog/2019/05/31/collections-the-siege-of-gondor-part-iv-the-cavalry-arrives/acoup.blog/2019/06/07/collections-the-siege-of-gondor-part-v-just-flailing-about-flails/acoup.blog/2019/06/14/collections-the-siege-of-gondor-part-vi-black-sails-and-gleaming-banners/
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 7, 2020 22:50:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 1, 2020 0:29:41 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 26, 2020 18:46:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Oct 26, 2020 19:40:46 GMT
I love that website and have spent untold hours on it.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Nov 17, 2020 21:20:00 GMT
I began this thread years ago with an overambitious and insufficiently comprehensive post on JF Powers' novel MORT D'URBAN, about a well-meaning but rather worldly and ambitious priest who is suddenly sidelined after having been the chief spokesman/fundraiser/recruiter for his religious order. All I can say is that recent events in the US Church, notably but not exclusively the McCarrick Report, makes the novel's emphasis on the spiritual dangers of a clerical career of schmoozing the rich and powerful sting very sharply.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Nov 30, 2020 1:39:03 GMT
Rod Dreher offers some thoughts on Sigrid Undset's novel of mediaeval Norway, KRISTIN LAVRANSDATTER. Three points that come to mind: (1) This is very far indeed from a certain type of facile romanticisation of the Middle Ages. (2) Dreher quotes a critic who points out that Undset writes about a conflict between a strong woman (whose life is partly modelled on her own) and the community around her without assuming that the community is necessarily wrong. (Undset BTW was well-known as a feminist, so she was no doormat.) (3) Where many people assume people in the past were just like us with a bit less knowledge and a lot more superstition, Undset conveys a sense of a life lived through a distinct set of beliefs and conditions. roddreher.substack.com/p/kristin-lavransdatteren.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigrid_Undset
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 31, 2021 22:39:24 GMT
Havev recently been rereading Ronald Knox's A SPRITUAL AENEID, his narrative of conversion to Catholicism, which I read for the first time when I was 14. A few impressions: (1) Of course I was oblivious to a lot of the passing references which I get now, such as the mention of Atherley Jones, a wealthy layman who devoted his life to promoting Ritualism, or the allusions to Newman which pop up towards the end. (2) Similarly, the reference to disputes about the authorship and composition of the Old Testament Books passed completely over my head back then. (Similarly, when I read Knox's spoof essay on debates over the authorship of the Sherlock Holmes stories, I never got the significance of the reference to "deutero-Watson" [second Watson] which is a reference to the now dominant view that the book of Isaiah combines the writings of two different prophets, the latter for convenience's sake being known as "deutero-Isaiah". (3) A comparison between Newman and Knox's apologias brings out Newman's originality. Knox in comparison is much more impressionistic, and seems to assume his readers know the arguments already and can concentrate on the personal idiosyncracies of what was by then a well-trodden path. (One thing that struck me is that the officially-tolerated rationalisations he cites for believers in Sacramentalism subscribing to the 39 Articles on ordination to the Anglican ministry are straight out of Tract 90, the Anglican Newman's attempt to reinterpret the Articles in a Catholic sense.) I confess I should like to read the memoir of his father, Bishop Knox, who was a well-known Evangelical, to see how matters appeared from his side. (4) I was completely unaware when I read it first what an eccentric fringe of the Church of England Anglo-Papalists like pre-conversion Knox were. Similarly, I never realised the scale of the differences between the pre-1914 England Knox was describing and England of the late 1970s - partly because the state of unbelief Knox described seemed to me so bad it could not possibly be any worse. If only... (5) I must say that though they were both beautiful stylists Newman is somuch greater than Knox because he is always grappling with truth and he has the pastoral instinct in a way Knox doesn't. This is not to say Knox had none, but that his mission was much more strongly to the upper crust than Newman's. (6) Speaking of the pastoral instinct, one sad touch is the universal conviction of Knox's Anglo-Papalist friends that Catholic ritual and devotional practices were to be preferred because they had shown an ability to appeal to the common man and keep the poor religiously observant as standard Anglicanism had not. Well, that has certainly changed. Nowadays you might say the same thing of the pentecostalists. The description of Anglo-Catholic clergy as an embattled clique maintaining their ritual practises in uneasy relations with their bishops and with pressure-groups from rival strains of Anglicanism, whereas Catholics can take their beliefs and practices for granted, also strikes an unhappy note these days - the situation of trads nowadays is much more ike that of the Anglo-Catholics than is altogether comfortable to read. BTW, if any of you read it youmay like to know that the Knox protege whom he calls C, and who considered converting to Rome before going out to the Western Front but decided against, was the future Prime Minister Harold Macmillan.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Jan 31, 2021 22:54:32 GMT
Havev recently been rereading Ronald Knox's A SPRITUAL AENEID, his narrative of conversion to Catholicism, which I read for the first time when I was 14. A few impressions: (1) Of course I was oblivious to a lot of the passing references which I get now, such as the mention of Atherley Jones, a wealthy layman who devoted his life to promoting Ritualism, or the allusions to Newman which pop up towards the end. (2) Similarly, the reference to disputes about the authorship and composition of the Old Testament Books passed completely over my head back then. (Similarly, when I read Knox's spoof essay on debates over the authorship of the Sherlock Holmes stories, I never got the significance of the reference to "deutero-Watson" [second Watson] which is a reference to the now dominant view that the book of Isaiah combines the writings of two different prophets, the latter for convenience's sake being known as "deutero-Isaiah". (3) A comparison between Newman and Knox's apologias brings out Newman's originality. Knox in comparison is much more impressionistic, and seems to assume his readers know the arguments already and can concentrate on the personal idiosyncracies of what was by then a well-trodden path. (One thing that struck me is that the officially-tolerated rationalisations he cites for believers in Sacramentalism subscribing to the 39 Articles on ordination to the Anglican ministry are straight out of Tract 90, the Anglican Newman's attempt to reinterpret the Articles in a Catholic sense.) I confess I should like to read the memoir of his father, Bishop Knox, who was a well-known Evangelical, to see how matters appeared from his side. (4) I was completely unaware when I read it first what an eccentric fringe of the Church of England Anglo-Papalists like pre-conversion Knox were. Similarly, I never realised the scale of the differences between the pre-1914 England Knox was describing and England of the late 1970s - partly because the state of unbelief Knox described seemed to me so bad it could not possibly be any worse. If only... (5) I must say that though they were both beautiful stylists Newman is somuch greater than Knox because he is always grappling with truth and he has the pastoral instinct in a way Knox doesn't. This is not to say Knox had none, but that his mission was much more strongly to the upper crust than Newman's. (6) Speaking of the pastoral instinct, one sad touch is the universal conviction of Knox's Anglo-Papalist friends that Catholic ritual and devotional practices were to be preferred because they had shown an ability to appeal to the common man and keep the poor religiously observant as standard Anglicanism had not. Well, that has certainly changed. Nowadays you might say the same thing of the pentecostalists. The description of Anglo-Catholic clergy as an embattled clique maintaining their ritual practises in uneasy relations with their bishops and with pressure-groups from rival strains of Anglicanism, whereas Catholics can take their beliefs and practices for granted, also strikes an unhappy note these days - the situation of trads nowadays is much more ike that of the Anglo-Catholics than is altogether comfortable to read. BTW, if any of you read it youmay like to know that the Knox protege whom he calls C, and who considered converting to Rome before going out to the Western Front but decided against, was the future Prime Minister Harold Macmillan. I have actually read this book twice but have hazy memories of it and don't remember most of the things you mention.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 6, 2021 21:45:00 GMT
I'm talking about the things Knox doesn't explain because he expects his contemporary readers to know them already. I didn't know these things when I read the book in my teens, so to that extent I didn't understand what I was reading. This is a big problem with going to older books -we don't know what was common knowledge then, just as I find younger people now have no memories of the USSR (which fell 30 years ago), see Thatcher, Reagan and Gorbachev as figures from ancient history, etc.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 29, 2023 16:55:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jun 1, 2023 21:32:47 GMT
JUDITH'S MARRIAGE by Fr Bryan Houghton. Fr Houghton was an English convert priest who, having private means, took early retirement when the NO Mass came in and moved to France, where he acquired a congregation and said public TLMs under the indult. The central character is a bright young woman who converts at Oxford and marries into an old recusant family, suffering various vicissitudes including health problems which endanger her life when she has children, the post-Vatican II changes and their impact on her husband's faith, etc. Note also that the novel climaxes, and virtually ends, on the day HUMANAE VITAE was published in 1968 - that is, the various liturgical freaks described take place before the formal introduction of the Novus Ordo in 1969. A few more observations: (1) The "wealthy recusant family" background may seem a bit snobbish but it does have its use, since the characters have the social position, education and money to articulate their discontent and not to be simply brushed aside and gaslighted as effectively as many humbler laity were. (2) The long discussions of the issues at stake have a good deal of sockpuppetry, but these are characters used to ideas - note Houghton's comments in more than one place on the difference between the cradle Catholic who absorbs the faith through upbringing and the convert who learns to articulate it. For example, the disturbing effect of attending a TLM for the first time as an adult is very clearly described. There are also some interesting observations on how Jesuit spirituality, in trying to make unspoken beliefs articulate, can lead to reductionism and syncretism. Remind you of anything? (3) He is lethally sharp on the contradictions between post-Vatican II proclamations of church democratisation and the simultaneous repression of any criticism of the party line - for example, when a convent is to be "reformed" the nuns are allowed to elect their own superiors, but the previous superiors are sent to the back of beyond to keep them from being candidates and the qualifications for election are so tightly defined that the only eligible candidate is the resident malcontent. Indeed, a recurring theme is depiction of clerics who actually hate the laity, despise popular piety, and think the lapsation of all but a select few would be a great improvement. Similarly, the imposition of heterodox new catechesis and the suppression of the old method is justified on the grounds that to allow more than one catechesis would be "divisive". Again, this has contemporary resonance. (4) Fr Houghton rather overdoes his emphasis on the role of marxism and anti-capitalism among the liberals. Admittedly Marxism was flavour of the month to a considerable extent in the 1960s, but secular liberalism could be just as poisonous. (An interesting detail is that a Chancellor of the Exchequer appears as a minor character, but although he is quite a decent fellow he is clearly a Labour chancellor, though at the time depicted the Conservatives were in office, and other characters' complaints about his taxing the wealthy are clearly meant to be taken at face value.) Something of a period piece, but still worth a read for certain observations - alas.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Jun 1, 2023 21:39:04 GMT
JUDITH'S MARRIAGE by Fr Bryan Houghton. Fr Houghton was an English convert priest who, having private means, took early retirement when the NO Mass came in and moved to France, where he acquired a congregation and said public TLMs under the indult. The central character is a bright young woman who converts at Oxford and marries into an old recusant family, suffering various vicissitudes including health problems which endanger her life when she has children, the post-Vatican II changes and their impact on her husband's faith, etc. Note also that the novel climaxes, and virtually ends, on the day HUMANAE VITAE was published in 1968 - that is, the various liturgical freaks described take place before the formal introduction of the Novus Ordo in 1969. A few more observations: (1) The "wealthy recusant family" background may seem a bit snobbish but it does have its use, since the characters have the social position, education and money to articulate their discontent and not to be simply brushed aside and gaslighted as effectively as many humbler laity were. (2) The long discussions of the issues at stake have a good deal of sockpuppetry, but these are characters used to ideas - note Houghton's comments in more than one place on the difference between the cradle Catholic who absorbs the faith through upbringing and the convert who learns to articulate it. For example, the disturbing effect of attending a TLM for the first time as an adult is very clearly described. There are also some interesting observations on how Jesuit spirituality, in trying to make unspoken beliefs articulate, can lead to reductionism and syncretism. Remind you of anything? (3) He is lethally sharp on the contradictions between post-Vatican II proclamations of church democratisation and the simultaneous repression of any criticism of the party line - for example, when a convent is to be "reformed" the nuns are allowed to elect their own superiors, but the previous superiors are sent to the back of beyond to keep them from being candidates and the qualifications for election are so tightly defined that the only eligible candidate is the resident malcontent. Indeed, a recurring theme is depiction of clerics who actually hate the laity, despise popular piety, and think the lapsation of all but a select few would be a great improvement. Similarly, the imposition of heterodox new catechesis and the suppression of the old method is justified on the grounds that to allow more than one catechesis would be "divisive". Again, this has contemporary resonance. (4) Fr Houghton rather overdoes his emphasis on the role of marxism and anti-capitalism among the liberals. Admittedly Marxism was flavour of the month to a considerable extent in the 1960s, but secular liberalism could be just as poisonous. (An interesting detail is that a Chancellor of the Exchequer appears as a minor character, but although he is quite a decent fellow he is clearly a Labour chancellor, though at the time depicted the Conservatives were in office, and other characters' complaints about his taxing the wealthy are clearly meant to be taken at face value.) Something of a period piece, but still worth a read for certain observations - alas. Wouldn't Harold Wilson have been PM during the period the novel is set?
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jun 1, 2023 21:50:10 GMT
No, the novel takes place 1956-68. The Conservatives were in government 1956-64, and by my calculation the scene where the Chancellor of the Exchequer appears takes place around 1962. The Chancellor's personality seems mildly reminiscent of Jim Callaghan, who was Wilson's first Chancellor, but he is a northcountryman where Callaghan came from one of the southern port cities and represented a Welsh seat.
|
|