Briefly on the Recent CDW Liturgical Document:

Frank Jerry just reminded me about the recent CDWDS Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum which is subtitled On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist. The document is solemnly confirmed by the Supreme Pontiff and can be found HERE. As this weblog's Sovereign Thane, it is contingent upon me in fidelity to my conscience to exhort all of you who have written to me about liturgical abuses over the years to print this up, make at least three copies of it (one for your own records and to reproduce later on), and to give copies of it to your parish's pastor and parochial vicar. But first a couple of pastoral suggestions on my part if you do not mind.

As this is not a short document, a degree of probation of sorts would seem to be needed to allow them to digest and implement what the Holy See expects. I recommend a three to four month period after which time the document should be duplicated again and sent to the local ordinary.{1} You have your orders now people. The time to take action is now.

Note:

{1} Those who want to send this to their local ordinary when sending it to their pastors and parochial vicars are of course not to be discouraged from doing this.

Archives Reconstruction Update:

I spent some time today working on the archives and have them completed through January 4, 2003. The completed portions are at a private weblog and will be added to bit by bit over the coming week or two until they are all completed. At that time, the entire sequence will be pasted to this template, the weblog will be republished, and the fixing of the template from the disaster earlier this week will be completed. I apologize again for this inconvenience but time constraints make doing these corrections very difficult at this time.

In the absence of your humble servant stirring up one of the so-called "traditionalist" hornet nests, he will relegate that to Sherry Wedell courtesy of Mark Shea's BLOG.

Update on Weblog Template Fixes and Upcoming Blogging Intentions:

There has not been much time for blogging as of late. I am though working in my spare time on the archives to complete the weblog fixes as the result of last week's template disapperance. I also hope to respond over the weekend to at least one of the other three posts mentioned earlier in the month that I intended to address "in the coming weeks and months." I am also at the moment pricing laptops for business as well as personal usage but that is all I will note on my computer situation at this time.

On Adoption in the Spirit:
(With Apolonio Latar III)

Hey all,

Hi Apolonio:

I'm working on Redemptor Hominis. JPII said: "All of us who are Christ's followers must therefore meet and unite around him. This unity in the various fields of the life, tradition, structures and discipline of the individual Christian Churches and ecclesial Communities cannot be brought about without effective work aimed at getting to know each other and removing the obstacles blocking the way to perfect unity. However, we can and must immediately reach and display to the world our unity in proclaiming the mystery of Christ, in revealing the divine dimension and also the human dimension of the Redemption, and in struggling with unwearying perseverance for the dignity that each human being has reached and can continually reach in Christ, namely the dignity of both the grace of divine adoption and the inner truth of humanity, a truth which-if in the common awareness of the modern world it has been given such fundamental importance-for us is still clearer in the light of the reality that is Jesus Christ." (14)

The statement "each human being has reached and can continually reach in Christ, namely the dignity of both the grace of divine adoption" bothers rad-trads.

Heck, merely rolling out of bed bothers some of those sorts Apolonio ;-)

How would you guys interpret this?

The "radtrads" who are bothered by that statement are manifestly ignorant of the Bible. St. Paul speaks of the theme of adoptive sonship in different epistles. It is arguably among his primary themes pertaining to the subject of the salvation of mankind through Christ. Here are a few examples:

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together. (Romans viii,15-17)

Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace... (Ephesians i,3-7)

[W]hen the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. (Galatians iv,4-7)

As far as the reference you make above as well as the part about struggling with unwearying perseverance for the dignity that each human being has reached and can continually reach in Christ, I refer you to the words of St. Peter in his second epistle on those subjects:

Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make [you that ye shall] neither [be] barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. (2 Peter i,1-11)

And of course on this subject St. Paul is also not without something to say:

[U]nto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, [even] Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians iv,7-16)

I'm trying to look for Church Fathers and theologians' work on grace to give a better answer.

Well, I think you will concur that the two most pre-eminent of the Apostles speaking on these matters is more than adequate. However, do not be so sure that even they will be able to convince some of the obstinate sorts you are trying to reach. The principle behind Our Lord's injunction in the parable about the rich man and Lazarus{1} applies in the case of those sorts unfortunately.

Note:

{1} "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." (Luke xvi,31)

"Return Us to Defcom 5" Dept.

Okay...the red alert status is over now and the template is now about 70% completed in being properly restored. There are more links to add to various categories but most of the old links are up now. The reader will notice that most of the proposed template reconstructed categories have been utilized. Eventually the other categories not used here will be added -possibly tomorrow or so as time affords. With Rerum Novarum almost three months overdue for an update, that will take place in the coming week or so as well but not until the template is completely corrected.

There are still weblog additions/subtractions,{1} restoring the archives, and a few other areas to tend to before this is completed.{2} However, in the meantime, I redirect the readers to my response posted earlier today to Kevin Tierney and apologize for any problems accessing Rerum Novarum earlier on. After two hours taken off from work to fix this problem, I have to again focus on business matters so no more weblog fixes will take place today.

Notes

{1} Except for the weblog of a certain person who apparently is "more Ecumenical than thou" - that weblog was removed from the year old template before it was fixed to the extent that it has been thus far and republished.

{2} However, those areas are for possibly tomorrow or Sunday if I can get around to them by that time.

Red is the state of emergency. And for those who find this weblog's template looking a lot less developed than it did as of earlier today, the reason for this is that somehow the template for Rerum Novarum got lost. I had not begin updating it yet and all the material for doing a proper update is at lycos. In the meantime, I will work on this template for the next hour to get it reading reasonably coherently and start the updating process. I am afraid I cannot do anything about the archives until later on though -as that is a project in and of itself to reconstitute over eighty weeks of stuff.

In the meantime, please accept my apologies for not having the time to deal with any additional stuff at this time. I did complete the first of the four responses that I noted earlier would be posted in the coming weeks.{1}The others will have to wait until I get this template properly reconstituted. I hope to spent three hours on it today in the evening and maybe some time tomorrow.

At this point, there is no reason to delay the restructuring of the template but it is too much to do at once and will have to be phased in. Again, on behalf of this humble weblog, I apologize to the readers and exhort other bloggers to keep a duplicate template somewhere. If not for the fact that I have a roughly twelve month old replacement for my old template (sans the archives), this reconstruction would take even longer and be more difficult than it would be. In short: back up your work my friends.

Note:

{1} That would be the response to Kevin Tierney which can be read HERE.

Society's Ills, the Function of Law in a Just Society, Etc.:
(Dialogue With Kevin Tierney)

This is a continuation of the dialogue thread located HERE. Kevin's words will be in shale font. My previous words will be in blue font and any sources referenced will be in darkgreen.

I think we were talking past each other. Either that, or I'm completely misreading you, after reading your post three times. It could be either one, so I'm going to try and help out here.

Ok.

"The redefinition of the institution of marriage is not a mere symptom of a larger issue as I see it; instead it is the root and matrix of every culture if you will. For the institution of marriage is the cornerstone of all civilization. Furthermore, marriage embodies explicitly within itself all fundamental rights of man. And history unambiguously bears witness to the fact that the existence of the civilization that succeeds in undermining that central societal structure will be extinguished. Without a shadow of doubt."

I think you are seperating the two where they need not be separated. Traditional marriage as a man and a woman is the root and matrix of every culture. Yet the liberals are attacking it by usurping the rule of law. I'll go a little more in-depth later in the post about the law.

By referring to "traditional marriage", you allow your adversaries to define the terms of debate. My references to marriage -for practical and tactical reasons- are only to "the institution of marriage" understood as heterosexual unions. It is my view that by not taking such a precise distinction, you are allowing yourself to be taken in by propagandistic semantics.

Years of dialogue with people of every conceivable outlook have emphasized to me that precision in the absence of workable definitions is needed. And this issue needs to be approached anthropologically more than anything if it is to be decisively confuted.

As far as terminology goes, the moment you use phrases such as "traditional marriage" you immediately imply that there are other forms of marriage.{1} Furthermore, you open yourself up to the charge that marriage has undergone many manifestations throughout history.{2}

The notion of marriage as between a man and a woman implies monogamy which is but one of the forms involved. This gives your opponents an opportunity to use the polygamy red herring and distract.{3} Obviously the Constitutional amendment as proposed by President Bush would define marriage as monogomously. And that would be fine if that can be achieved. But in the trenches, we cannot allow our opponents so much latitude. Furthermore, we have to approach this non-religiously -something that I see you are striving to do. My approach does this because it is grounded in anthropology and not in appeals to religion.

"Life is but *one* of the fundamental God-given rights of man. In a nutshell the three are life, faculties, and production. These three rights precede all legislation and all properly formed legislation must safeguard these three rights. Futhermore, these rights cannot stand independent of one another. Indeed when one is trampled upon, the others are as well -like breaking one leg off of a three-legged stool. The subject of marriage directly involves not one of these fundamental rights but definitely two of them and arguably all three. It is also the bedrock of all civilizations and history shows us that as it goes, so goes civilization."

I agree that any true legislation must safegaurd all rights of man, not just the primary ones. (Though any rights outside of those 3 primary rights logically flow from those three.)

Yes. As I noted in my defenses of Terry Schiavo and Jeff Culbreath,{4} the defense of one requires a defense of all three.

Therefore, when liberals are defying the rule of law that is currently in place, pushing their agenda through the courts when the courts don't have that power, they are using their disrespect for the rule of law to push upon society changes society would never accept. In all honesty, if anything I'm writing a "concurring opinion" to the decision. I agree with what you're saying, just tackling it from a different angle.

Here is the reason why I view your approach as problematical: there is a premise common to human sensibilities -due in large part because of the relationship that law is supposed to have with morality- that something is moral simply because it is legal. Claude Frederic Bastiat explained this presupposition in the following way:

No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because law makes them so. [The Law (c. 1850)]

This is what those who are trying to destroy our culture are using the courts to take advantage of the tendency most people have towards viewing what is legal as what is moral. This is why even arguing from the standpoint of respect for law is not the solid foundation in and of itself that you presume. Because what happens if the majority tomorrow want to sanction legally so-called "homosexual marriages"??? You are then stuck backtracking from the premise that law is to be respected to striving to argue from moral premises. If your foundation upfront recognizes this crucial link, there is no need for backtracking at all.{5}

"No civilization can continue to exist without (i) preservation and promotion of the institution of marriage which is the bedrock foundation of all civilization and (ii) a proper understanding of the role of law in society in its protection of the three fundamental rights of man. "

Yet a society that does not properly understand the rule of law in protecting the rights of man will not be a stable society, would be a society where might makes right, and a society of constant revolution.

I do not disagree with this position. However, I refer you back to what I noted above about taking the more integrated approach. To use a syllabus style format, it involves these ingredients:

---Recognition of the three fundamental God-given rights of man and their defense as a unit.

---Recognition of the proper role of law in a just society to maintain justice.

---Recognition that all asserted rights to be legitimate must conform themselves to the criteria of the "public order" and the "common good": namely (i) they must not disrupt the public order of a society and (ii) they must be in conformity with the common good.

---Recognition that the law cannot create morality but can only defend morality.{6}

Obviously, the rule of law when these criterion are met requires obedience. It is at this point of the continuum that your defenses of the rule of law can be tthe most effective. It appears to me that you are seeking to get to this point without recognizing the other above principles.{7} Obviously appearances can be deceiving; ergo I will allow you to clarify this and (if you desire) to correct my perceptions viz. your presuppositions and approach.

I believe we can extend some leeway to Justice Moore if he is a non-Catholic (as I believe he is) since the principle of "the end does not justify the means" is usually not common to the religious traditions of non-Catholics. He violated that maxim as much as the mayors of these cities who are violating the rule of law in issuing pseudo "marriages" are doing. Those mayors should at the very least be treated as Justice Moore has been but of course that will not happen. (Due to an obvious double-standard employed by the media elites.)"

I would say Catholic teaching on these manners applies to Non-Catholics as well, since it's rather universal that the ends do not justify the means. As one who combats judicial activism, and is a strict constructionalist of the Constitution (as Moore claims he is) he should've known better.

I do not disagree that it should apply. It is the foundation of logical thinking and embodies one of the two rules required for any meaningful discourse.{8} However, if you are familiar with my discussions with Tim Enloe on the papacy and also on historical issues, the issue of universals is at the center of the entire exchange. That is why I will be responding to his response a few weeks ago -made to two requests for dialogues on universals and foundational presuppositions that I made to him- and that will be the subject of discussion.

Reference to universals existing in reality and our being able to discern them is but one philosophical outlook. I happen to concur with it but there are many who do not. We cannot therefore impose on our opponents principles that they do not hold and expect to get anywhere in dialogue with them. This is why I noted that I do not hold Justice Moore to the Catholic maxim that "the end does not justify the means" in the sense of him professing that belief himself. We can argue for the veracity of that maxim -indeed I do it often{9}- but that is about as far as we can go with it in the absence of someone who does not accept that principle.

"[C]onservatives are losing the battle because they are not viewing the three fundamental rights of man as the seamless garment issues that they are -if they even recognize them explicitly at all. Nor for that matter do they place enough of an emphasis on the notions of public order and common good which must accompany any legitimate approach to issues. (And must trump any individuals opinions in the event of a contradiction.)"

Yet an accurate understanding of the rights of man in society, ENTAIL an accurate understanding of how those laws go towards protecting them, and protecting society. You're straining at a gnat here I think.

I am making a distinction here between the rights themselves and how they are properly applied for the greatest possible effect congruent with the law fulfilling the function that it always should in a just society. The area of application is where the respective roles of the criteria of public order and common good are involved. I emphasize both of them because they too must be viewed together.

In the past, there were persecutions of people even in Catholic states because the criteria of the "common good" was not recognized to be limited by what is properly called "just public order."{10} In order to be consistent in one's approach, they must be emphasized together. Otherwise, dire consequences can result.

The Catholic Church since the promulgation of the Declaration Dignitatis Humanae has recognized the connexion between these two factors. However, I do not defend the notion of public order in the matrix of a just societal government because of DH.{11} However, to avoid opening another tangent of potentially reams of exposition,{12} I will to conserve space (and my reader's sanity), relegate my reason for this to the aforementioned footnotes.

"I think we are in general agreement but not in particulars. As I see it, your premise is that it all rests on respect for authority viz. the rule of law. I see this as only part of the equation...I take the subject beyond this to the most fundamental of human rights given to us by God: rights which precede all man made laws and to which all laws were originally framed to protect.

Indeed if anything I have not blogged on these themes enough...but my reasons for refraining to the extent I have (time constraints excepted of course) is to avoid appearing to try and ram an agenda down people's throats. I get annoyed when others do that to me so I have to be careful and strive to persuade without being too overbearing. It is not an easy balancing act by any stretch I assure you."

I would say we're a lot closer on the particulars than you think, it's just we're looking at it from two different angles. Gets us back to the entire "Leo XIII, JPII" thing, both the same on social issues, just approaching it from different aspects.

This is quite possibly so. From what I have read of your Culture of Christ BLOG, there is I believe a lot of common ground between us on the ends whereby we strive to achieve. The means vary a bit but hopefully I explained adequately why my approach in light of today's contemporary problems is a more integral approach to take.

If the rule of law were upheld(in it's current form) there would be absolutely none of this mess. (That rule of law extending to when the courts started to take over this country, inventing the "right to privacy")

Again I ask, what happens if the rule of law as you outline it is followed and such perversities are instituted in the legal code??? My theory disqualifies them in advance but I do not see how your approach does this. At least not explicitly so anyway. Due to the seriousness of this issue -and the degree of brainwashing that is going on viz. this issue- I do not believe we can trust ordinary casual observer types to pick up on these kinds of nuances. That is why they need inculcation because there are a lot of faulty presuppositions out there that need to be rooted out and destroyed.

"It is not just the Democrats who are guilty of perverting the concept of law in a just society Kevin. For the Republicans are also guilty though not to the same extent. Nonetheless, we cannot let them have a "get out of jail" card since they give credence to a lot of the foundational premises from which the Democrats illogically posit their rhetorical trajectories from: foundational premises which are themselves grounded in a perverse understanding of the proper role of law in a just society."

Of course, but the issue was primarily focused on the Democrats, and abortion. Now I would agree the Republican party is not "pro-life" per se, but generally score better than the Dems do. I tend to refer to the Republicans as "socialism lite."

Indeed.

The Democrats will turn us into a Soviet State in 5 years, the Republicans say "We'll do it in ten." That's the sad state I think we're in today. This is also why I say such books as "A Choice not an Echo" by Dr. Phyllis Schafaly (can't remember spelling off the top of my head) should be required reading for conservatives, as she outlines the same problem, but she did this decades ago. This happens with "Conservatives" from time to time they lose base, and need to be shaken up. Her book caused such a shakeup, if one knows the history of the conservative movement of the past 50 years in America.

I have not read her book but she and I have many of the same influences in our thinking on these matters. I am not sure if you read Senator Barry Goldwater's essential dissertation The Conscience of a Conservative or not but Senator Goldwater was noting this problem in the 1950's. In short, the problem goes back further than fifty years. The so-called "New Deal" is the backdrop of a lot of this error: indeed there was nothing "new" about it. Ironically, President Roosevelt was a fan of Pope Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum and Pope Pius XI's Quadragisimo Annos - indeed using the latter as a way of justifying some of his New Deal platforms.{13}

"I have reiterated for years -either through implication or explication- that an integrated approach is needed that seeks to uphold the three fundamental rights of man as well as recognizing (i) the importance of the concept of public order of society (ii) the concept of the common good of society, and also (iii) the importance of obedience to one's superiors -be they ecclesiastical or temporal- will truly get to the heart of the problems of our society. I suppose that (iv) proper definitions of terms such as "right" and "freespeech" are also of assistance...Indeed, We at Rerum Novarum have gone over all of these aspects in sundry times and in divers manners. "

And I would argue a properly functioning rule of law entails all of these things. Therefore, one should strive to take a truly Catholic look at the rule of law, and in this country, part of it can be done, since the Framers did get many things right, for all their flaws.

Between you and I we can do this with a great degree of common ground. The same is not the case with non-Catholics though. It is true that the Framers got a lot of things right in setting forth the Constitution of the United States.{14} However, our approach must be based much more in reason and logic than an appeal to the teachings of our religion.

"It could also be noted that religious morality has a role here too but more obliquely than is commonly recognized...In a nutshell: that is how I see approaching these issues. I do not believe that the end that I have differs from what you and Pete have, only the means."

I don't even know if the means neccessarily differ between me and you, because we really haven't gotten into the means yet. As I said, either we're talking past each other, or I'm misreading you, either one is possible, and we've been guilty of both in [our] almost year of dialogue with each other.

True enough. Hopefully this response will enable a greater discernment between us.

"I will note in closing that it is not a mere coincidence that my approach to ecclesiastical matters parallel very closely with how I approach political and social issues. By contrast, I am not sure the same is the case for most others who strive to commentate on both of these spheres of subject matter. Nonetheless, I am hardly above being persuaded otherwise if someone feels inclined to want to do this. "

Well of course. I myself take the same approach, most the time since I view my politics as my religion in action. Therefore, the same principles I use for religion, I should also use in the political sphere, and vice versa.

In light of the often dichotomistic approach taken by people of various viewpoints, that you strive for consistency here is something that does you credit. Hopefully this response will supply a kind of addition to your approach.

Based on what I am discerning, our views on law are quite similar. And if problems such as what Pete outlines here are to be effectively dealt with, I submit that what I have outlined above is the best approach to take since it is an integrated one that deals with many core paradigmatic points of reference at once. (Including the subject of the rule of law of which I believe we are a like mind on.)

Notes:

{1} As if to say that homosexual unions could somehow constitute another form of marriage which they cannot both morally as well as anthropologically.

{2} Indeed I have already seen in print some examples of trying to argue for homosexual so-called "marriages" on the basis of the diversity of forms which marriage has undergone throughout history.

{3} Partisans of various stripes use these kinds of tactics. For an example of this fallacious methodology from the side of self-styled "traditionalists", please go HERE. For an example of the same fallacies on the part of self-styled "progressivists", please go HERE.

{4} See the respective weblog links in the side margin of Rerum Novarum. The first post in the thread I posted defending Jeff is titled "Traditional Moral Principles" if memory serves.

{5} At that point, the entire approach is on that argues for the necessity of morality to ensure just governing in society. And of course there are not a few such declarations to be found in the writings of the Framers of the US Coinstitution.

{6} Or another way of looking at it: a law that seeks to legitimize what is contrary to the public order of society and/or society's common good is ipso facto invalid since it is contrary to the very purpose of the role of law in society.

{7} This is not to say that *you* do not recognize them. However, the faulty paradigms of most people do not look at these matters properly and therefore, they have presuppositions which work against your hypothesis on law. By nipping those presuppositions in the bud, it enables those people to be better persuaded by your arguments without a subconscious rejection in advance based on faulty presuppositions.

{8} I refer here to the "Law of Non-Contradiction" which is implied in the maxim "the end does not justify the means." The second law of course is the one which is the bane of nominalist outlooks: the "Law of Identity."

{9} Indeed this is one of the arguments I make with regards to the approaches taken by renegade so-called "traditionalists" who disregard the approved Indult and strive to do things their own way. (And of course this argument when applied to them is not just a little trenchant if you know what I mean.)

{10} As a Catholic, I accept it of course as pertaining to divine revelation. (As this is what the Declaration quite clearly taught on the matter.) However, when discussing the subject with non-Catholics, I appeal to the principle only as a logically sound principle. (Because it is.)

{11} Indeed it was inconsistency on this subject which was the problem with the original curial schema on religious liberty which was defended at the Council by Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani. His reasoning was faulty but Fr. John Courtney Murray's opposing view was not without its problems too. See footnote twelve where this will be addressed via the magic of weblog links.

{12} See the following weblog thread from 2003 for more information on this subject:

A Few Notes on Dignitatis Humanae

{13} In light of how supposedly "perspicuous" the pre-Vatican II magisterial documents were, this attempted "allegience" is mildly amusing to me. (For Pius XI's encyclical did not countenance the New Deal philosophy at all: if anything it directly confuted it by reiterating the ancient subsidiary teaching which is anathema to the socialist approach to government.) Neither Pope Pius XI in his Magisterium (nor Pope Leo XIII in his) advocated socialist methodology. (Indeed they were quite adamantly against it.) But I digress.

{14} The Framers were not unfamiliar with such documents as the Magna Carta or even Catholic writers such as Robert Cardinal Bellarmine whose writings also exerted some influence on the intellectual formation of the Founding Fathers.

Oh, lest I forget to mention it, I will be blogging a response to Kevin Tierney tomorrow on his last email to me in our dialogue. The previously posted link from Pete Vere may or may not factor into my response at that time. It certainly is a real-life example of why I approach social issues and the subject of law as I do but that is all I will say on the matter at this time.

"Abomination of Desolation" Dept:

Pete Vere sent me this link earlier today. Pray for Canada my friends, they desperately need it.

I have the new template schemata about fifty percent of the way completed. Even when completed, it will not categorize all of the various subjects covered as would be ideal. I hope in the next few days when I have time apart from work related activities to get it in somewhat decent shape for promulgating later in the week. The whole process has had me thinking that sometimes I am my own worst enemy viz. the breadth of subjects that I discuss here at Rerum Novarum my friends. I guess it is a small price to pay to make the weblog categories easier to access and follow in a systematical fashion.

Admittedly it will not remotely cause me to change my oft-reiterated position on this subject. However, it will give me food for pondering in the days and weeks to come when thinking about this weblog's format...

Weblog Restructuring Ideas Currently Under Consideration:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)

Though Rerum Novarum has gone through many permutations in its twenty months of existence, major structural adjustments have been rare.{1} Indeed, it is usually only when the previous format no longer succeeds in coping with the expansion of this weblog into various kinds of subject matter that adjustments of this kind are undertaken. Even then though, they are usually indistinguishable except (perhaps) to the eyes most attuned to minor matters.{2} Nonetheless, it became acutely perceptible to this writer last year that the categorizing format of Rerum Novarum was no longer capable of sustaining the growth in which this weblog sustained throughout 2003. To note a couple of those areas in brief:

---New subjects had been treated on which defied or stretched beyond all reasonable limits the current classification of weblinks.

---Older projects or weblog categorizations became either obsolete or needed tending to in other ways. (Either by different categorization or removal thereof.)

With regards to the first point, whatever structure was constructed to replace it had to be more proactive to possible future subjects of discussion -and less reactive- than the format still in use. With regards to the second point, those aspects needed tending to for the sake of pruning the list of links at Rerum Novarum.

After musing on how to best approach this subject matter -particularly since the much needed weblog update of March-April of 2004 will only make more obsolete the format currently in use- this writer has come up with a schemata for grouping the links already in the weblog margin. (As the archives and everything preceding it will remain untouched, they will not be noted here.)

My Writings and Reviews:


Return of the Inquisition:


Weblog Retrospectives:


My Political/Social Musings:

---On Political Subjects in General

---On Social Subjects in General

---On the US Constitution and the Fundamental Rights of Man{3}

---On Political Election Topics

---On the Recent War and War in General

---On Miscellaneous Political/Social Matters


My Theological/Philosophical Musings:

---On General Theological Subjects

---On the Mystery of the Church

---On Church Authority Topics

---On Particular Theological Subjects

---On Particular Philosophical Subjects

---On Church History Topics

---On the Second Vatican Council

---On the Counter-Reformation Period

---On 'Traditionalism' (Falsely So-Called)

---On 'Traditionalism' (Properly So-Called)

---On 'Progressivism' (Falsely So-Called)

---On Certain Controverted "Hotpoint" Subjects Pertaining to Doctrine

---On Ressourcement Methodology

---On Other Controverted Subjects


Semper Fi{4}


Other Recommended* Web-Sites:


Shawn Tested, Shawn Approved* Catholic Weblogs:{5}

---Most Frequently Read

---Less Frequently Read But Still Highly Recommended

---The Occasional Indulgence


Ecumenical Jihad:


Approved* Weblogs of a Predominantly Political/Social Nature


Inactive But Still Reader-Worthy BLOG's{6}


Shawn's Eastern Catholic Corner Approved* Links:


Spiritual Instruction:


Other Approved* Sites or Links of Interest:

After this categorization would be the disclaimer and it will remain as it is now without adjustments. In short, this is the proposed outline of Rerum Novarum to be implemented in the coming weeks. (Probably concurrent with the next link update if not prior to it.) Anyway, it seemed appropriate to note this to you all.

Notes:

{1} Though in the first couple of weeks they were frequent but that is to be expected when a weblog is "finding its feet" so to speak. (And the author of said weblog does not intend to limit themselves on particular subject matters of discussion.)

{2} To note a few examples in recent months:

---The disclaimer was revised in April of 2003 in its first paragraph making what was once an ironclad policy into a more general one admitting of exceptions. (And of course the current disclaimer is applicable retroactively in case anyone wondered.)

---The disclaimer was expanded around October of 2003 account for the addition and promotion (within certain parameters) of non-Catholic websites. As the desire to be more authentically ecumenical called for some adjustments in how certain weblog links were to be viewed viz. their endorsement at Rerum Novarum, and as such additions would require additional clarifications to avoid misunderstandings, the disclaimer received its most thorough overhauling since this weblog's inception. (Essentially, the parts of the disclaimer after the first sentence of the third paragraph were all added at that time.)

---At various times searching the archives for particular subject matter (usually to link to a post being written), this writer will find a post in the past where the paragraphs are cluttered or too long. In cases like that, the post will be spread out a bit by making more paragraphs of the original material. (Sometimes moving original material from the body of the text to footnotes.)

---Back in early February of this year, the author of this weblog sought to make the footnoting procedures in the post archives more uniform. This was done by going backwards through the archives and checking for inconsistencies in this area which were corrected. (Usually by moving original material to footnotes to unclutter a post text or making longer paragraphs easier to read by dividing them into smaller ones.)

---A major paradigm shift took place roughly around March of last year when the weblog writer moved to numbers in footnoting and away from astrisk markings. In uniformizing the weblog, this meant changing those notations to the number format that had evolved over the course of time and working backward until everything but roughly the first month or so was altered. (Time constraints preventing that from being tended to at the time.)

---The occasional misspelling being corrected or the occasional phrasing where either (i) a word was found missing or (ii) which read a bit convoluted -usually due to being typed in haste- have of course been corrected as they have been discovered either by this writer or by others. (Unlike some weblog personages, this writer never sees a reason to revise previous texts from the archives viz. the arguments advanced. For this reason, Our occasional warts and blemishes -and even occasional errors or the occasional posts (in retrospect) imprudently made remain in the archives. However, because there are some who latch onto the kind of glitches as noted above as excuses for avoiding the arguments advanced, the above kinds of adjustments are made to force such people to interact with actual arguments and stop straining the gnat to swallow the camel (cf. Matthew xxiii,24).

---And it bears noting that this writer is considering deleting from the archives all post links which referenced sources no longer active -such as many of the references to materials written by this writer or others at Steve Ray's Catholic Convert message board from when We were participants there. (Our involvement at which to varying degrees spanned from March 1999-December 2002 when Our password was revoked and they moved to the awful Novus Boardo format.)

{3} Your humble servant is still debating whether to make the lengthy series on Claude Frederic Bastiat's magnum opus The Law into a category of its own or to categorize it under this subheading.

{4} This writer is considering dropping this categorization completely and changing that weblog into a weblog of "Inactive But Still Worth Perusing BLOGS."

{5} The manner of categorizing weblogs that this writer reads is also being reconsidered. However, that is not likely to be changed with the upcoming restructuring except (perhaps) some of the categorizations of particular weblogs and the possible addition of some new ones.

{6} See footnote four.

On the 9-11 Commission:
(An Ultrashort Dialogue With Greg Mockeridge)

Shawn:

In keeping with the new McCain-Feingold campaign laws and truth-in-advertising laws, John Kerry needs to begin his ads with the disclaimer " 'Dis is Osama bin Laden and I approve of 'dis message." Since Mr. Kerry is as about as exciting as watching paint dry, he can mix it up by subsituting OBL with Jacques Chirac, Kim Jong (Mentally) Il, Momar Qadafy, and Saddam Hussien.

Agreed.

Speaking of undermining the War on Terror, those 9/11 committee hearings are, as Tony Snow correctly pointed out, another example of the Democrats, ala the schizophrenic Richard Clarke, being able to sandbag the Bush Administration , who should have stuck their guns and told them to pound sand.

I think these hearings may well backfire on them. Clark has already been thoroughly discredited and Condi Rice pimpslapped her interrogators (including Senator Bob Kerry) quite nicely. One of her interrogators actually said explicitly that it would be "game, set, match" if Condi simply admitted that the Bush Administration was wrong in their handling of security before 9/11. Of course since the Bush Administration was basically following the pattern of the Clinton Administration in many respects at that time, this could very well bring the eight years of the Clintons under scrutiny.

A significant question is this: will Clinton and Gore testify under oath and on TV too??? And of course how do we know that even if they do that they can be believed??? (Particularly the ex-Purjurer in Chief.)

These hearings, besides being a waste of time, eat up much resources needed to fight this war.

This is one area where the government actually has constitutional grounds for operating. What is spent on this commission is but a drop in the bucket of what is being spent on the war so that part of it does not concern me. It would be good though to suspend this commission until 2005 to remove the appearance of political grandstanding by either political party. (Particularly the party of Lenin Democrats.)

Now I do think we need to get to the bottom of finding out why we weren't able to prevent 9/11 viz. government dropping the ball, but not while we are still in the thick of fighting the war on terror. The congressional hearings on Pearl Harbor didn't begin until November 1945, after the war was over.

True. However, since (i) there is no discernable timetable for this war unlike WW II -where it was reasonably clear in late 1943-early 1944 that the tide had definitively turned and (ii) the short attention span and questionable lack of fortitide of most Americans to endure a long war effort,{1} I am not sure we can wait for an indefinite period of time on this subject. However, removing this commission from the election year would be a reasonable thing to do for obvious reasons.

Note:

{1} And need I mention that though the Republicans savaged fdr prior to Pearl Harbour that afterwards they suspended all polemics -recognizing that the danger the nation faced was to take precedence over partisan squabblings??? The unwillingness of the Democrats to act in the same way after 9/11 -if anything they have gotten more shrill and polemical- is a testament to their true concern about this nation when it is at war: in short, they have none if there is not a political advantage to it. (In the opinion of this Independent voter.)

Though We still have a purple colour, that is in appearances only. (As the Sovereign Thane and Lord High Executioner of Rerum Novarum has a holiday from juridical decisions today and cannot change them from his main blogging computer.) May all of you have a blessed Easter or (if you are Evangelicals) a blessed "Resurrection Sunday." Either way, celebrate the Lord's love for you today.

Meditations on The Dark Night of the Soul:
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")

The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.

CHAPTER XIV

Expounds this last line of the first stanza.

WHEN this house of sensuality was now at rest--that is, was mortified--its passions being quenched and its desires put to rest and lulled to sleep by means of this blessed night of the purgation of sense, the soul went forth, to set out upon the road and way of the spirit, which is that of progressives and proficients, and which, by another name, is called the way of illumination or of infused contemplation, wherein God Himself feeds and refreshes the soul, without meditation, or the soul's active help. Such, as we have said, is the night and purgation of sense in the soul.

In those who have afterwards to enter the other and more formidable night of the spirit, in order to pass to the Divine union of love of God (for not all pass habitually thereto, but only the smallest number), it is wont to be accompanied by formidable trials and temptations of sense, which last for a long time, albeit longer in some than in others.

For to some the angel of Satan presents himself- namely, the spirit of fornication--that he may buffet their senses with abominable and violent temptations, and trouble their spirits with vile considerations and representations which are most visible to the imagination, which things at times are a greater affliction to them than death.

At other times in this night there is added to these things the spirit of blasphemy, which roams abroad, setting in the path of all the conceptions and thoughts of the soul intolerable blasphemies. These it sometimes suggests to the imagination with such violence that the soul almost utters them, which is a grave torment to it.

At other times another abominable spirit, which Isaias calls Spiritus vertiginis,[Isaias xix, 14.] is allowed to molest them, not in order that they may fall, but that it may try them. This spirit darkens their senses in such a way that it fills them with numerous scruples and perplexities, so confusing that, as they judge, they can never, by any means, be satisfied concerning them, neither can they find any help for their judgment in counsel or thought. This is one of the severest goads and horrors of this night, very closely akin to that which passes in the night of the spirit.

As a rule these storms and trials are sent by God in this night and purgation of sense to those whom afterwards He purposes to lead into the other night (though not all reach it), to the end that, when they have been chastened and buffeted, they may in this way continually exercise and prepare themselves, and continually accustom their senses and faculties to the union of wisdom which is to be bestowed upon them in that other night.

For, if the soul be not tempted, exercised and proved with trials and temptations, it cannot quicken its sense of Wisdom. For this reason it is said in Ecclesiasticus: 'He that has not been tempted, what does he know? And he that has not been proved, what are the things that he recognizes?'[Ecclesiasticus xxxiv, 9-10.]

To this truth Jeremias bears good witness, saying: 'Thou didst chastise me, Lord, and I was instructed.'[Jeremias xxxi, 18.] And the most proper form of this chastisement, for one who will enter into Wisdom, is that of the interior trials which we are here describing, inasmuch as it is these which most effectively purge sense of all favours and consolations to which it was affected, with natural weakness, and by which the soul is truly humiliated in preparation for the exaltation which it is to experience.

For how long a time the soul will be held in this fasting and penance of sense, cannot be said with any certainty; for all do not experience it after one manner, neither do all encounter the same temptations. For this is meted out by the will of God, in conformity with the greater or the smaller degree of imperfection which each soul has to purge away. In conformity, likewise, with the degree of love of union to which God is pleased to raise it, He will humble it with greater or less intensity or in greater or less time.

Those who have the disposition and greater strength to suffer, He purges with greater intensity and more quickly. But those who are very weak are kept for a long time in this night, and these He purges very gently and with slight temptations. Habitually, too, He gives them refreshments of sense so that they may not fall away, and only after a long time do they attain to purity of perfection in this life, some of them never attaining to it at all.

Such are neither properly in the night nor properly out of it; for, although they make no progress, yet, in order that they may continue in humility and self-knowledge, God exercises them for certain periods and at certain times in those temptations and aridities; and at other times and seasons He assists them with consolations, lest they should grow faint and return to seek the consolations of the world.

Other souls, which are weaker, God Himself accompanies, now appearing to them, now moving farther away, that He may exercise them in His love; for without such turnings away they would not learn to reach God.

But the souls which are to pass on to that happy and high estate, the union of love, are wont as a rule to remain for a long time in these aridities and temptations, however quickly God may lead them, as has been seen by experience. It is time, then, to begin to treat of the second night.

Prayer Request:

[P]lease pray for the repose of the soul of Patricia O Rourke, my best friends grandma passed away earlier this week.

We at Rerum Novarum exhort the readers of this weblog to please join Us in honouring this prayer request.

Meditations on The Dark Night of the Soul:
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")

The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.

CHAPTER XIII

Of other benefits which this night of sense causes in the soul.

WITH respect to the soul's imperfections of spiritual avarice, because of which it coveted this and that spiritual thing and found no satisfaction in this and that exercise by reason of its covetousness for the desire and pleasure which it found therein, this arid and dark night has now greatly reformed it.

For, as it finds not the pleasure and sweetness which it was wont to find, but rather finds affliction and lack of sweetness, it has such moderate recourse to them that it might possibly now lose, through defective use, what aforetime it lost through excess; although as a rule God gives to those whom He leads into this night humility and readiness, albeit with lack of sweetness, so that what is commanded them they may do for God's sake alone; and thus they no longer seek profit in many things because they find no pleasure in them.

With respect to spiritual luxury, it is likewise clearly seen that, through this aridity and lack of sensible sweetness which the soul finds in spiritual things, it is freed from those impurities which we there noted; for we said that, as a rule, they proceeded from the pleasure which overflowed from spirit into sense.

But with regard to the imperfections from which the soul frees itself in this dark night with respect to the fourth sin, which is spiritual gluttony, they may be found above, though they have not all been described there, because they are innumerable; and thus I will not detail them here, for I would fain make an end of this night in order to pass to the next, concerning which we shall have to pronounce grave words and instructions.

Let it suffice for the understanding of the innumerable benefits which, over and above those mentioned, the soul gains in this night with respect to this sin of spiritual gluttony, to say that it frees itself from all those imperfections which have there been described, and from many other and greater evils, and vile abominations which are not written above, into which fell many of whom we have had experience, because they had not reformed their desire as concerning this inordinate love of spiritual sweetness.

For in this arid and dark night wherein He sets the soul, God has restrained its concupiscence and curbed its desire so that the soul cannot feed upon any pleasure or sweetness of sense, whether from above or from below; and this He continues to do after such manner that the soul is subjected, reformed and repressed with respect to concupiscence and desire. It loses the strength of its passions and concupiscence and it becomes sterile, because it no longer consults its likings.

Just as, when none is accustomed to take milk from the breast, the courses of the milk are dried up, so the desires of the soul are dried up. And besides these things there follow admirable benefits from this spiritual sobriety, for, when desire and concupiscence are quenched, the soul lives in spiritual tranquillity and peace; for, where desire and concupiscence reign not, there is no disturbance, but peace and consolation of God.

From this there arises another and a second benefit, which is that the soul habitually has remembrance of God, with fear and dread of backsliding upon the spiritual road, as has been said. This is a great benefit, and not one of the least that results from this aridity and purgation of the desire, for the soul is purified and cleansed of the imperfections that were clinging to it because of the desires and affections, which of their own accord deaden and darken the soul.

There is another very great benefit for the soul in this night, which is that it practices several virtues together, as, for example, patience and longsuffering, which are often called upon in these times of emptiness and aridity, when the soul endures and perseveres in its spiritual exercises without consolation and without pleasure.

It practises the charity of God, since it is not now moved by the pleasure of attraction and sweetness which it finds in its work, but only by God. It likewise practises here the virtue of fortitude, because, in these difficulties and insipidities which it finds in its work, it brings strength out of weakness and thus becomes strong. All the virtues, in short--the theological and also the cardinal and moral--both in body and in spirit, are practised by the soul in these times of aridity.

And that in this night the soul obtains these four benefits which we have here described (namely, delight of peace, habitual remembrance and thought of God, cleanness and purity of soul and the practice of the virtues which we have just described), David tells us, having experienced it himself when he was in this night, in these words: 'My soul refused consolations, I had remembrance of God, I found consolation and was exercised and my spirit failed.'[Psalm lxxvi,4 (KJV lxxvii,3-4)] And he then says: 'And I meditated by night with my heart and was exercised, and I swept and purified my spirit'--that is to say, from all the affections.[Psalm lxxvi,7 (KJV lxxvii,6)]

With respect to the imperfections of the other three spiritual sins which we have described above, which are wrath, envy and sloth, the soul is purged hereof likewise in this aridity of the desire and acquires the virtues opposed to them; for, softened and humbled by these aridities and hardships and other temptations and trials wherein God exercises it during this night, it becomes meek with respect to God, and to itself, and likewise with respect to its neighbour.

So that it is no longer disturbed and angry with itself because of its own faults, nor with its neighbour because of his, neither is it displeased with God, nor does it utter unseemly complaints because He does not quickly make it holy.

Then, as to envy, the soul has charity toward others in this respect also; for, if it has any envy, this is no longer a vice as it was before, when it was grieved because others were preferred to it and given greater advantage. Its grief now comes from seeing how great is its own misery, and its envy (if it has any) is a virtuous envy, since it desires to imitate others, which is great virtue.

Neither are the sloth and the irksomeness which it now experiences concerning spiritual things vicious as they were before. For in the past these sins proceeded from the spiritual pleasures which the soul sometimes experienced and sought after when it found them not. But this new weariness proceeds not from this insufficiency of pleasure, because God has taken from the soul pleasure in all things in this purgation of the desire.

Besides these benefits which have been mentioned, the soul attains innumerable others by means of this arid contemplation. For often, in the midst of these times of aridity and hardship, God communicates to the soul, when it is least expecting it, the purest spiritual sweetness and love, together with a spiritual knowledge which is sometimes very delicate, each manifestation of which is of greater benefit and worth than those which the soul enjoyed aforetime; although in its beginnings the soul thinks that this is not so, for the spiritual influence now granted to it is very delicate and cannot be perceived by sense.

Finally, inasmuch as the soul is now purged from the affections and desires of sense, it obtains liberty of spirit, whereby in ever greater degree it gains the twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit. Here, too, it is wondrously delivered from the hands of its three enemies--devil, world and flesh; for, its pleasure and delight of sense being quenched with respect to all things, neither the devil nor the world nor sensuality has any arms or any strength wherewi th to make war upon the spirit.

These times of aridity, then, cause the soul to journey in all purity in the love of God, since it is no longer influenced in its actions by the pleasure and sweetness of the actions themselves, as perchance it was when it experienced sweetness, but only by a desire to please God. It becomes neither presumptuous nor self-satisfied, as perchance it was wont to become in the time of its prosperity, but fearful and timid with regard to itself, finding in itself no satisfaction whatsoever; and herein consists that holy fear which preserves and increases the virtues.

This aridity, too, quenches natural energy and concupiscence, as has also been said. Save for the pleasure, indeed, which at certain times God Himself infuses into it, it is a wonder if it finds pleasure and consolation of sense, through its own diligence, in any spiritual exercise or action, as has already been said.

There grows within souls that experience this arid night concern for God and yearnings to serve Him, for in proportion as the breasts of sensuality, wherewith it sustained and nourished the desires that it pursued, are drying up, there remains nothing in that aridity and detachment save the yearning to serve God, which is a thing very pleasing to God. For, as David says, an afflicted spirit is a sacrifice to God.[Psalm l,19 (KJV li, 17)]

When the soul, then, knows that, in this arid purgation through which it has passed, it has derived and attained so many and such precious benefits as those which have here been described, it tarries not in crying, as in the stanza of which we are expounding the lines, 'Oh, happy chance!--I went forth without being observed.' That is, 'I went forth' from the bonds and subjection of the desires of sense and the affections, 'without being observed'--that is to say, without the three enemies aforementioned being able to keep me from it.

These enemies, as we have said, bind the soul as with bonds, in its desires and pleasures, and prevent it from going forth from itself to the liberty of the love of God; and without these desires and pleasures they cannot give battle to the soul, as has been said.

When, therefore, the four passions of the soul- which are joy, grief, hope and fear--are calmed through continual mortification; when the natural desires have been lulled to sleep, in the sensual nature of the soul, by means of habitual times of aridity; and when the harmony of the senses and the interior faculties causes a suspension of labour and a cessation from the work of meditation, as we have said (which is the dwelling and the household of the lower part of the soul), these enemies cannot obstruct this spiritual liberty, and the house remains at rest and quiet, as says the following line:

My house being now at rest.

To be Continued...

Notification of At Least Four Upcoming Weblog Responses:

I readily admit that my blogging has been very sparse as of late. The more informed readers of this humble weblog already know some of the reason why so I will not reiterate it here. Another element has been the season of Lent which I wanted to be dominated by the Lenten spiritual meditations on St. John of the Cross' Dark Night of the Soul. So there has been sparse blogging and on more selective subject matter. The coming month will see a variety of subjects covered as time allows but I want to give advance note of four responses in particular.

For there are some emails I intend to respond to here at Rerum Novarum in the coming weeks. In the period of the Triduum I doubt there will be any responses other than the final two installments of the Dark Night meditation which will be blogged before Easter.{1} However, in the weeks after Easter, I do want to tackle some of the topics either raised as a result of private emails or previous weblog postings. And among those there are four in particular which will have my attention in the days and weeks to come.

---The first of them is a response to Kevin Tierney's recent email response to my March 31 response on the subject of remedies for society's ills. I will be reading and responding to it sometime after Easter -right now I do not have much time for blogging anything.

My good friend Albert Cipriani sent me an email a while back which I intend to read after Easter and respond to the substance of it on this humble weblog.{2} Hence the second response which will be as follows:

---A response to Albert Cipriani on the subject of so-called "traditionalism" and St. John of the Cross.

I look forward to adding another chapter in the long saga of discussions that I have had with Albert on this weblog and on other venues. And since I ran the series on St. John of the Cross and his Dark Night this Lent -and added some commentary that I am sure sparked the note from Albert- a clarification of my stance will undoubtedly be needed here. (Along with responding to Albert's observations on this subject matter.)

Though I am not unaware of Tim Enloe's response a while back to my February request{3} for a dialogue on the subject of the foundational presuppositions that undergird philosophical paradigms of thought, I have admittedly not read his response to me yet.

My intention all along has been to wait until after Easter to read and respond to Tim's response because (i) it is a rather complex subject to discuss and (ii) I want time to muse on the matter a bit. Nonetheless, at some point after Easter, I will take up the threads of that discussion anew and thus a third planned weblog post:

---A response to Tim Enloe on the foundational presuppositions that undergird our respective philosophical paradigms of thought.

Hopefully at that point we will be off and running on that subject. At the moment though, my focus when I have blogged anything -the Dark Night series excluded- has been for the most part on political-social material. And in noting that, it brings me to the fourth of the planned responses.

In quite an unexpected scenario, I found in my email box this evening a note from an individual who shall remain nameless at this time. Charles de Nunzio. Though we have never corresponded before, I am familiar with a bit of his stuff and presumably he is familiar with some of mine as well.{4} For those who are curious about this individual, I would classify him as kind of an intellectual iconoclast among those of the self-identified "traditionalists" on several issues.{5} And thus what is also planned is a fourth response as follows:

---A response to Charles de Nunzio on the political context of our society's perversion of marriage.

The fourth one ties into the subjects of my dialogues with Kevin -which Charles refers to in his email to me. However, I note this to Charles in advance that since my response to his email will be public, if he wants any of the parts kept in confidentiality to please notify me and list the points and the reasons why.

So that is a brief notification of some subjects and responses that will be posted as time allows for such things. And as I do not anticipate blogging again until after Easter, the close here on behalf of those of Us here at Rerum Novarum is to wish all of you a blessed Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and Resurrection Sunday.

IC XC

Notes:

{1} And those were already blogged earlier this week and will appear on the dates scheduled: only the second time in the history of this weblog that I have completed a series ahead of time in that fashion. (The early to mid February Points to Ponder weeklong series of quotes from His Beatitude Melkite Patriarch Maximos IV Saigh (Cardinal of the Roman Church) being the only other example of this approach taken thus far.)

{2} Which reminds me: Albert, I wrote to you on another subject matter shortly after my last contribution to your list. Normally I save a copy of such emails for a few months so I can keep track of whom I have responded to and whom I have not -as my memory alone for such recollections is not reliable. I cannot therefore recall if I sent it to you or not. Please notify me one way or the other via email so that I can stop worrying that I lost it. (As I hate losing material that I spend time working on -particularly on that kind of delicate subject matter.)

{3} Which was also reiterated and slightly refined in mid March weblog posting.

{4} Particularly since I am typecast in some minds as "that guy who writes on 'traditionalism'" a categorization which -like virtually all forms of categorization I admittedly have no small degree of loathing for.

{5} I use the term iconoclast here in its modern sense, not the sense that was proscribed at Nicaea II. If it helps in clarifying matters a bit, I consider myself rather iconoclastic as well. (And those who have followed my dialogues with Albert, Tim, and Kevin know that they could be said to have their areas of classification in this way as well.)

Points to Ponder:

[Vladimir] Soloviev was one day a guest at a monastary and had talked very late with a pious monk. Wishing to return to his cell, he went into the corridor onto which opened cell doors all exactly similar, and all shut. In the dark, he could not identify the door of his own cell. Impossible, on the other hand, in this dark, to return to the cell of the monk he had just left. Nor did he wish to disturb anyone at night during the strict monastic silence.

So the philosopher resigned himself to spending the night walking slowly, absorbed in his thoughts, up and down the corridor of the monastery suddenly become inhospitable, mysterious.

The night was long and tiring. But finally, it was over. And the first rays of dawn allowed the philosopher to identify without difficulty the door to his cell, in front of which he had passed so many times without recognition. And Soloviev commented "It is often like this for those who seek truth. They pass quite close to her during their vigils without seeing her until a ray of sunlight..."

Had I a single critical remar to make, I would say that the philosopherswho I have known believe they opened the door in their youth, and by no means resign themselves to waith for the light. [Pope Paul VI to Jean Guitton: Taken From Dialogues of Paul VI with Jean Guitton by Jean Guitton (c. 1966)]

Meditations on The Dark Night of the Soul:
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")

The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.

CHAPTER XII

Of the benefits which this night causes in the soul.

THIS night and purgation of the desire, a happy one for the soul, works in it so many blessings and benefits (although to the soul, as we have said, it rather seems that blessings are being taken away from it) that, even as Abraham made a great feast when he weaned his son Isaac,[Genesis xxi, 8.] even so is there joy in Heaven because God is now taking this soul from its swaddling clothes, setting it down from His arms, making it to walk upon its feet, and likewise taking from it the milk of the breast and the soft and sweet food proper to children, and making it to eat bread with crust, and to begin to enjoy the food of robust persons.

This food, in these aridities and this darkness of sense, is now given to the spirit, which is dry and emptied of all the sweetness of sense. And this food is the infused contemplation whereof we have spoken.

This is the first and principal benefit caused by this arid and dark night of contemplation: the knowledge of oneself and of one's misery. For, besides the fact that all the favours which God grants to the soul are habitually granted to them enwrapped in this knowledge, these aridities and this emptiness of the faculties, compared with the abundance which the soul experienced aforetime and the difficulty which it finds in good works, make it recognize its own lowliness and misery, which in the time of its prosperity it was unable to see.

Of this there is a good illustration in the Book of Exodus, where God, wishing to humble the children of Israel and desiring that they should know themselves, commanded them to take away and strip off the festal garments and adornments wherewith they were accustomed to adorn themselves in the Wilderness, saying: 'Now from henceforth strip yourselves of festal ornaments and put on everyday working dress, that ye may know what treatment ye deserve.'[Exodus xxxiii, 5.]

This is as though He had said: Inasmuch as the attire that ye wear, being proper to festival and rejoicing, causes you to feel less humble concerning yourselves than ye should, put off from you this attire, in order that henceforth, seeing yourselves clothed with vileness, ye may know that ye merit no more, and may know who ye are.

Wherefore the soul knows the truth that it knew not at first, concerning its own misery; for, at the time when it was clad as for a festival and found in God much pleasure, consolation and support, it was somewhat more satisfied and contented, since it thought itself to some extent to be serving God.

It is true that such souls may not have this idea explicitly in their minds; but some suggestion of it at least is implanted in them by the satisfaction which they find in their pleasant experiences. But, now that the soul has put on its other and working attire--that of aridity and abandonment--and now that its first lights have turned into darkness, it possesses these lights more truly in this virtue of self-knowledge, which is so excellent and so necessary, considering itself now as nothing and experiencing no satisfaction in itself; for it sees that it does nothing of itself neither can do anything.

And the smallness of this self-satisfaction, together with the soul's affliction at not serving God, is considered and esteemed by God as greater than all the consolations which the soul formerly experienced and the works which it wrought, however great they were, inasmuch as they were the occasion of many imperfections and ignorances.

And from this attire of aridity proceed, as from their fount and source of self-knowledge, not only the things which we have described already, but also the benefits which we shall now describe and many more which will have to be omitted.

In the first place, the soul learns to commune with God with more respect and more courtesy, such as a soul must ever observe in converse with the Most High. These it knew not in its prosperous times of comfort and consolation, for that comforting favour which it experienced made its craving for God somewhat bolder than was fitting, and discourteous and ill-considered.

Even so did it happen to Moses, when he perceived that God was speaking to him; blinded by that pleasure and desire, without further consideration, he would have made bold to go to Him if God had not commanded him to stay and put off his shoes. By this incident we are shown the respect and discretion in detachment of desire wherewith a man is to commune with God.

When Moses had obeyed in this matter, he became so discreet and so attentive that the Scripture says that not only did he not make bold to draw near to God, but that he dared not even look at Him. For, having taken off the shoes of his desires and pleasures, he became very conscious of his wretchedness in the sight of God, as befitted one about to hear the word of God.

Even so likewise the preparation which God granted to Job in order that he might speak with Him consisted not in those delights and glories which Job himself reports that he was wont to have in his God, but in leaving him naked upon a dung-hill,[Job ii, 7-8.] abandoned and even persecuted by his friends, filled with anguish and bitterness, and the earth covered with worms.

And then the Most High God, He that lifts up the poor man from the dunghill, was pleased to come down and speak with him there face to face, revealing to him the depths and heights of His wisdom, in a way that He had never done in the time of his prosperity.

And here we must note another excellent benefit which there is in this night and aridity of the desire of sense, since we have had occasion to speak of it. It is that, in this dark night of the desire (to the end that the words of the Prophet may be fulfilled, namely: 'Thy light shall shine in the darkness'[Isaias lviii, 10.]), God will enlighten the soul, giving it knowledge, not only of its lowliness and wretchedness, as we have said, but likewise of the greatness and excellence of God.

For, as well as quenching the desires and pleasures and attachments of sense, He cleanses and frees the understanding that it may understand the truth; for pleasure of sense and desire, even though it be for spiritual things, darkens and obstructs the spirit, and furthermore that straitness and aridity of sense enlightens and quickens the understanding, as says Isaias.[Isaias xxviii, 19.][1]

Vexation makes us to understand how the soul that is empty and disencumbered, as is necessary for His Divine influence, is instructed supernaturally by God in His Divine wisdom, through this dark and arid night of contemplation, as we have said; and this instruction God gave not in those first sweetnesses and joys.

This is very well explained by the same prophet Isaias, where he says: 'Whom shall God teach His knowledge, and whom shall He make to understand the hearing?' To those, He says, that are weaned from the milk and drawn away from the breasts.[Isaias xxviii, 9.] Here it is shown that the first milk of spiritual sweetness is no preparation for this Divine influence, neither is there preparation in attachment to the breast of delectable meditations, belonging to the faculties of sense, which gave the soul pleasure; such preparation consists rather in the lack of the one and withdrawal from the other.

Inasmuch as, in order to listen to God, the soul needs to stand upright and to be detached, with regard to affection and sense, even as the Prophet says concerning himself, in these words: I will stand upon my watch (this is that detachment of desire) and I will make firm my step (that is, I will not meditate with sense), in order to contemplate (that is, in order to understand that which may come to me from God).[Habacuc ii, 1.]

So we have now arrived at this, that from this arid night there first of all comes self-knowledge, whence, as from a foundation, rises this other knowledge of God. For which cause Saint Augustine said to God: 'Let me know myself, Lord, and I shall know Thee.'[St. Augustine: Soliloq., Cap. ii.] For, as the philosophers say, one extreme can be well known by another.

And in order to prove more completely how efficacious is this night of sense, with its aridity and its desolation, in bringing the soul that light which, as we say, it receives there from God, we shall quote that passage of David, wherein he clearly describes the great power which is in this night for bringing the soul this lofty knowledge of God. He says, then, thus: 'In the desert land, waterless, dry and pathless, I appeared before Thee, that I might see Thy virtue and Thy glory.'[Psalm lxii,3 (KJV lxiii,1- 2).]

It is a wondrous thing that David should say here that the means and the preparation for his knowledge of the glory of God were not the spiritual delights and the many pleasures which he had experienced, but the aridities and detachments of his sensual nature, which is here to be understood by the dry and desert land. No less wondrous is it that he should describe as the road to his perception and vision of the virtue of God, not the Divine meditations and conceptions of which he had often made use, but his being unable to form any conception of God or to walk by meditation produced by imaginary consideration, which is here to be understood by the pathless land.

So that the means to a knowledge of God and of oneself is this dark night with its aridities and voids, although it leads not to a knowledge of Him of the same plenitude and abundance that comes from the other night of the spirit, since this is only, as it were, the beginning of that other.

Likewise, from the aridities and voids of this night of the desire, the soul draws spiritual humility, which is the contrary virtue to the first capital sin, which, as we said, is spiritual pride. Through this humility, which is acquired by the said knowledge of self, the soul is purged from all those imperfections whereinto it fell with respect to that sin of pride, in the time of its prosperity.

For it sees itself so dry and miserable that the idea never even occurs to it that it is making better progress than others, or outstripping them, as it believed itself to be doing before. On the contrary, it recognizes that others are making better progress than itself.

And hence arises the love of its neighbours, for it esteems them, and judges them not as it was wont to do aforetime, when it saw that itself had great fervour and others not so. It is aware only of its own wretchedness, which it keeps before its eyes to such an extent that it never forgets it, nor takes occasion to set its eyes on anyone else.

This was described wonderfully by David, when he was in this night, in these words: 'I was dumb and was humbled and kept silence from good things and my sorrow was renewed.'[Psalm xxxviii,3 (KJV xxxix,2)] This he says because it seemed to him that the good that was in his soul had so completely departed that not only did he neither speak nor find any language concerning it, but with respect to the good of others he was likewise dumb because of his grief at the knowledge of his misery.

In this condition, again, souls become submissive and obedient upon the spiritual road, for, when they see their own misery, not only do they hear what is taught them, but they even desire that anyone soever may set them on the way and tell them what they ought to do. The affective presumption which they sometimes had in their prosperity is taken from them; and finally, there are swept away from them on this road all the other imperfections which we noted above with respect to this first sin, which is spiritual pride.

To be Continued...

Note:

[1] The author omits the actual text.