And the second commandment of the Teaching; You shall not commit murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not commit pederasty, you shall not commit fornication, you shall not steal, you shall not practice magic, you shall not practice witchcraft, you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born. You shall not covet the things of your neighbor, you shall not swear, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not speak evil, you shall bear no grudge. You shall not be double-minded nor double-tongued, for to be double-tongued is a snare of death. Your speech shall not be false, nor empty, but fulfilled by deed. You shall not be covetous, nor rapacious, nor a hypocrite, nor evil disposed, nor haughty. You shall not take evil counsel against your neighbor. You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life.
Therefore brothers, you see how perverse they are and hastening wickedness, who are immature, they seek abortion of the conception before the birth; they are those who tell us, "I do not see that which you say must be believed."
Touchstone Magazine's blog Mere Comments today presents two posts worth pondering. Now having said that, I anticipate that some of your rambling host's readers may have strong opinions regarding one of them. Nonetheless, the argument is worth examination and meditation. The post in question is entitled Where Whores Wear Hats. The second is A Challenge From the First Century. Both posts present topics that are relevant for Christians today.
MercatorNet has published an essay by George Friedman, chairman and CEO of Stratfor, a publisher of geopolitical intelligence. The essay originally appeared on the Stratfor website.
The essay, The Russo-Georgian War and the Balance of Power, is a clear and logical analysis of the motives and decisions behind the Russian invasion of Georgia and the US and European response options. It is so worthy of your reading it that I'll not quote it. Go, read!
Today's First ThingsOn the Square features Robert P. Kraynak reflecting on the legacy of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. It accurately notes the ambivalence in the West towards those who critique not only "the other side" but also the West. Solzhenitsyn was truly a conundrum to the West in just that sense. As Mr Kraynak notes:
It is striking to read the many references to the human soul in Solzhenitsyn’s writings. He says, “Beyond upholding rights, mankind must defend its soul, freeing it for reflection and feeling”; and “the greatness of a people is to be sought not in the blare of trumpets . . . but in the level of its inner development, in its breadth of soul . . . in healing its soul.” He also warned modern people that, because of their belief in progress, “we had forgotten the human soul”; and “the destruction of our souls over three-quarters of a century is the most terrifying thing of all.” In a powerful passage, he denounces communist totalitarianism for corrupting the soul: “Our present system is unique because, over and above its physical and economic constraints, it demands total surrender of our souls . . . to the conscious lie. To this putrefaction of the soul, this spiritual enslavement, human beings who wish to be human cannot consent. When Caesar, having exacted what is Caesar’s, demands still more insistently that we render to him what is God’s—that is a sacrifice we dare not make!”
These are words that tend to frighten the West since they point to the essential need to examine the soul, not just political policy.
I am not suggesting that all Western involvement in the affairs of the Near and Middle East over the centuries has been detrimental to the region's Christians. Far from it. However, the fact remains that the West's interaction with the Middle East was always designed to serve primarily the West's interests. This includes the Protestant missionary activities of the nineteenth century, which, after failing to make noticeable headway among Muslims, turned their energies to converting the local Christians to the creeds of Europe's great Reformers. Resulting tensions and mutual misunderstandings between the native churches and the newly transplanted Protestants linger to the present.
Meanwhile, the reputed tolerance of Islam, particularly for the "People of the Book," as Jews and Christians are designated, created in reality the dhimmi system of second-class servitude, which, under the guise of toleration, was actually a system of subtle repression and dehumanization leading to gradual liquidation.
...
Back in the 1970s and '80s it became disgracefully fashionable in Western policy and media circles to put down the Lebanese Christians, particularly the Maronites. These attacks often bordered on outright racism. Similarly today it has become fashionable to lay all the blame for the Bosnian conflict on the shoulders of the Serbs. If the priorities of certain Western governments and their policy planners (Washington included) have dictated that such one-sided obfuscations serve as the basis for ethically dubious policies, the priorities of self-aware and morally critical Christians in these same Western countries ought to be markedly different.
...
Western apathy. In the hard-nosed world of realpolitik, petroleum-free Lebanon does not amount to much either strategically or economically for a country like the United States. Injecting other human and value-oriented parameters and ingredients into the policy calculus of Washington that would elevate Lebanon on the scale of foreign-policy priorities is in itself an awesome and daunting undertaking requiring prayer and patient hard work.
I happened upon both of these stories this morning. They provide an interesting contrast in the one's assertion of the persistence of perception versus reality, and the other's observation of a reality that has historically been minimized or forgotten entirely.
Bucharest, Jul 11, 2008 / 06:03 am (CNA).- The Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church has decided to “forgive” two Orthodox bishops for their participation in religious rites with Eastern Catholics. However, it warned that no Orthodox cleric may celebrate sacraments or blessings with ministers of other religions on pain of excommunication.
Nicolae Corneanu, the Orthodox Metropolitan Bishop of Banat, had provoked controversy after receiving Holy Communion during a Greek Catholic Mass in Timisoara on May 25. The synod’s forgiveness has reportedly settled the controversy, according to the SIR News Agency.
“The Holy Eucharist is not a means and a stage towards the unity of the Christian Church, but the deepest manifestation of the unity of the Church, its highlight,” stated Patriarch Daniel of the Romanian Orthodox Church in a speech to the synod.
Patriarch Daniel reportedly intended to reassert the fundamental principle of Orthodox ecclesiology and ecumenism. He said that such gestures of “so-called inter-communion” in fact “reduce the dogmatic differences between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church and undermine the unity of faith as the foundation of the reconstruction of the communion between the two Churches.”
The Patriarch reiterated that it is forbidden for Orthodox believers to receive the Eucharist in a different Church.
He also said the decision does not intend to treat other Christians “with arrogance or contempt” or to interrupt theological dialogue.
“Through a sincere, deep theological dialogue, the dogmas that separate the Catholic Church from the Orthodox Church can be redefined,” he concluded.
Father Francisc Dobos, spokesman for the Catholic Archdiocese of Bucharest, responded to the decision, saying in a press release, “We believe it is right for every Church to solve its own problems according to its own principles and regulations. We are convinced that the dialogue between the two Churches will move on, towards a communion from the same chalice.”
The Romanian synod also “forgave” Bishop Sofronie of Oradea, another Orthodox prelate, who had celebrated the blessing of holy water with the Greek Catholic Bishop of Oradea, Virgil Bercea, on “Twelfth Night,” the evening of Epiphany.
“The Holy Synod disapproved of the non-canonical gestures made by the two leaders and accepted their change of mind and repentance as a first sign of their correction,” read a press release from the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchate.
Hat Tip to Touchstone's Mere Comments for reference to Amanda Witt's blog featuring a fake ad to help the overactive boy. The "ad" is from Salvo Magazine. In true web-surfing fashion, I followed a link in one of the Salvo article's comments and checked out Dr Helen Smith's blog; which, in turn, led me to a "Top 10: Worst Male Bashing Ads" list over at Ask Men. {Note: I'm not very familiar with Ask Men, so don't assume I endorse the site. For example, some of the side-bar images are a bit too risque for my tastes. However, the commercials in the top ten list are certainly worth viewing.}
Altogether, these references contribute to a disturbing view of societal pressures to follow the materialistic relativism that tries to "do one better" than nature.
De unione ecclesiarum has become one of my must check sites. Professor Gilbert's study of Ecumenical John Bekkos is both enlightening and thought-provoking from many perspectives. For the Catholic westerner, it succintly raises awareness of the roots of the Schism and the political and theological issues at stake. For the eastern Catholic and the Orthodox, it confronts with the vitality and breadth of Eastern theology and spirituality that belies the Palamite-only interpretation that has been in vogue in the last few centuries.
Now joined by "Fr Paul", the blog promises only to become stronger. A must read, is Fr Paul's assessment of the “Timisoara incident” is well worth reflective reading and prayer.
But a few generations ago the basic "darkness" of the middle ages was the complete absence of any knowledge about the Byzantine world. The misconception about the West was whether there really were any "dark ages" as the anti-Catholic Gibbons postulated. In our post-modern "enlightened" times, anything European, Christian, or Catholic is apparently open to any sort of opprobrium available.
For real history and objective analysis, I recommend:
What's So Great About Christianity by Dinesh D'Souza (This book might profitably be read in conjunction with How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization as they are almost parallel projects in many ways.
Three snippets from three thought provoking essays over at MercatorNet.
We live in an age in which the media are scrupulously rigorous in self-censoring when it comes to the terrible social crime of offending women, gays, people of colour and natives. Only one identifiable group – white heterosexual men (if they’re Christian, so much the better) – is considered fair game for overt collective prejudice.
Identifying active misandry is easy. One has only to imagine the same words, image or falsehood or failure to report attached to any other identifiable group, and the imbalance becomes clear.
The state must hold that mothers and fathers are completely interchangeable. Biological parents married to each other become officially equivalent to one parent plus their lover. The state will be indifferent as to whether children have any connection with their biological parents.
While “human dignity” is an idea which certainly requires extensive clarification and precise definition, “respect for persons” and “autonomy” are as squishy as a wet sponge. I would have thought that a Harvard prof would be more discerning. For instance, are dolphins or chimpanzees “persons”, too? Should Japanese fishermen be jailed for violating the person rights of minke whales? And is a sleeping person autonomous? A comatose person? A two-day-old infant?
Sandro Magister reprints an article on a visit to the Holy Mountain. It catches the spirit of a pilgrimage with impressionistic beauty.
A representative paragraph:
There is the scent of the East, of Byzantium, at Megisti Lavra. There is the aroma of cypress and incense, the fragrance of beeswax, of relics, of ancient things mysteriously near. Because the monks of Athos don't suffer the passage of time. They tell you of their saints, of that Saint Athanasius who planted two cypresses at the center of the Megisti Lavra; who with Herculean strength built the catholikon; who shaped the monasticism of Athos; as if he had not died in the year 1000 but just yesterday, as if they had met him personally and not long ago.
An interesting note here is that at least the English translation seems to have transferred Pentecost from Sunday to tomorrow (Saturday).
Witness the following:
After the Patriarch's greeting, the Pope addressed the assembly. Referring to tomorrow's solemnity of Pentecost, Benedict XVI affirmed that, on this day, "we will pray in a particular way for the unity of the Church. (...) If our hearts and minds are open to the Spirit of communion, God can work miracles again in the Church, restoring the bonds of unity. Striving for Christian unity is an act of obedient trust in the work of the Holy Spirit, who leads the Church to the full realization of the Father's plan, in conformity with the will of Christ".
I guess daylight savings time and a smaller environmental (read: GREEN) footprint have a way of working their own magic.
And Finally, hat tips to several websites and bloggers for picking up on the Torn Notebook blog posts by Wei-Hsien Wan. Wan has posted a three part discussion on the Church Fathers and Unity. These are accurate and thought-provoking for any serious Christian pondering the Unity of the Faith. The links are first here, and then here, here and here.
In life, we are most shocked when evil appears in circumstances so unimaginable to moral people that we are dumbfounded when we hear of it. Our outrage, our abhorrence at barbarity causes within us a sorrow that wells up from the depths of our humanity. How could this happen? How could anyone so besmirch their human nature as to commit such atrocities?
This is the topic of a MercatorNet essay on Josef Fritzl. Read it. Ponder it. Pray about it.
During Bright Week, called the Octave of Easter in the West, I try to spend much of my time reflecting on our Lord's great gift in the Crucifixion and Resurrection. Consequently, I typically don't engage in blogging. This follows my Lenten practice of using the blog to post edifying snippets from the wealth of Byzantine hymnody for my own and my readers' spiritual benefit. In both cases, this doesn't mean that I close myself off from the world, I simply exercise restraint in making choices for "blogosphere" comment.
However, I have concluded that I must comment on the recent unpleasantness regarding a fifteen minute film by the Dutch politician Geert Wilders entitled "Fitna". Fitna is an Arabic term roughly meaning "upheaval" and carries the connotation of social madness like "Bedlam" in the classical sense. The film warns of the dangers of Islamic extremism and the hatred of Western values, including democracy, shared by many Muslims. It has garnered near universal opprobrium in the world media and in political circles. It was denied access to Dutch television, banned from Dutch web services, condemned by everyone from European Muslim leaders to United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Now, it is vanishing from the web altogether.
Not being one who closely follows all things Dutch, I first heard about the film two days ago. Curiosity led me to google it and watch it. Consequently, I find it fascinating that the film is being so universally vilified. It does have more than a few images of mutilated corpses that are not for delicate temperaments.
However, the criticisms do not seem to focus on the film per se. Rather, the film is characterized as "hate speech"; it offends Muslims; it represents a far right xenophobia; it stereotypes Muslims; and it is propaganda that did not even get the permission of several news outlets for the quotations used in the film.
But what I have not found is many refutations or actual dialogue on the film's assertions. While a local radio commentator in our area yesterday proclaimed that Muslim hatred for the United States and Great Britain solely originates in Western interventionism and has nothing to do with Islamic antithetism towards democracy, the film features Imams and Muslim laity adamantly proclaiming their hatred for democracy.
In the musical 1776, one of the Continental Congress delegates voting on whether to debate the question of American independence notes, "I never heard of an idea so dangerous that people can't talk about it. Hell, yes, I'm for debating it." It would seem that Fitna features ideas that many believe must not be spoken out loud. The questions people should be asking is "What ideas?" and "Who benefits from them not being discussed?"
Let me note: I have lived with Muslims and witnessed Muslim culture up close. I have been privileged to account many Muslims as friends. There are many very fine people who follow Islam. There is also an undercurrent within Islam that is most troubling from a Christian perspective and from a classical Western perspective. There is a vast difference between Muslim fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism of whatever stripe.
Fitna addresses issues that should concern Muslims and Christians alike. Arguments against Crusades should equally apply to Jihad. No one benefits from refusing to acknowledge or discuss the issue. Modern Western Relativism exposes itself to its own corrupt decay in the silence it enforces on too many issues. Fitna deals with one.
This link will take you the liveleak website where the film was available. God willing, the film may return. If so, remember there are several graphic images.
PS You will note various links in this post. I do not endorse views expressed in the linked sites; they are provided as examples and to expand options for interested readers to find the film.
PPS Thanks to Byzantine, Texas, a different video, guaranteed to make you smile!
CHICAGO (AFP) — One in four teenaged girls in the United Sates has been infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease, according to a study released Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The first study to examine the combined national prevalence of common STDs among adolescent women in the United States estimates that at least 3.2 million teens aged 14 to 19 are currently infected.
Since the study only tested for the four most common sexually transmitted diseases, it is possible that the total prevalence among US teens is greater than the study's rate of 26 percent, the authors warned.
"Today's data demonstrate the significant health risk STDs pose to millions of young women in this country every year," said Kevin Fenton, director of the CDC's National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.
"Given that the health effects of STDs for women -- from infertility to cervical cancer -- are particularly severe, STD screening, vaccination and other prevention strategies for sexually active women are among our highest public health priorities."
First Things' On the Square today features a thought-provoking essay by R. R. Reno entitled The Offense of Piety. One paragraph follows to entice you to read the entire essay, which itself will certainly stimulate cogent reflection.
Christians should seek to enlist as many as possible in the cause of humanity. It is one of the central principles of Catholic theology that grace perfects rather than destroys nature. Faith fulfills rather than subverts reason. For this reason, the Catholic tradition (like most other Christian traditions) has never formulated sharp antagonisms between Christ and culture, between church and world, between revealed truths and the truths accessible by natural reason, or between men and women of goodwill and believers in Christ. As the Second Vatican Council made clear, we don’t all need to be believers in order to share and support a humane social order.
It should come as no suprise to anyone that I am a great fan of First Things. The journal is outstanding for its crisp analysis and challenging engagement on issues crucial in our wayard era. Today's On the Square feature will challenge the assumptions of many, and, God willing, open the eyes of many, too.
Robert Spencer examines the facts on Slavery, Christianity, and Islam. It is an article that needs to be run in every newspaper in the West, and covered by as many truth seeking blogs as possible. It's not politics, it's history and fact.
It has become a feature of today’s atheist chic to shy bricks at Christianity for its record on slavery. This is part of a larger assault on Western history and society, which, by accident or design, plays into the hands of those who are today mounting on a global scale a sweeping and explicit cultural challenge to Judeo-Christian as well as post-Christian values. The fundamentally most misunderstood and overlooked aspect of today’s defense against the global jihad is this challenge that Jihadists make to Western values, which are in large part Judeo-Christian. Combine this with a historical critique that relentlessly portrays the West as the aggressors against the rest of the world, and as uniquely responsible for its evils, and Westerners’ will to defend something as rotten as Western civilization begins to ebb away.
A hat tip to Amy Wellborn for referencing the On the Square article by Edward T. Oakes, S.J. over at First Things. The article is entitled, "Atheism and Violence." Here are a couple of excerpts to whet your whistle. Then go read the article.
One would think that, given their insistence that faith and violence are inextricably linked, these authors would be a bit more circumspect about their own rhetoric. As it happens, one does not have to read too far into these books to see an underlying advocacy of violence animating their venom, an advocacy made most explicit in Sam Harris’s The End of Faith, which openly avows: “Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. . . . There is, in fact, no talking to some people. … We will continue to spill blood in what is, at bottom, a war of ideas.” To which I can only respond with one of Blaise Pascal’s more mordant observations, “Thinking too little about things or thinking too much both make us obstinate and fanatical.” Pascal called civil war the worst of all evils and openly admitted that no evil is greater than that committed under the guise of religion. If he were living today, I am sure his response to Harris would be: yes, Mr. Harris, you’re right, and the reason atheism brings so much violence in its wake is because it is its own kind of religion—and that’s your problem: your atheism is too religious. ... Such are the contradictions of atheism. With hope in progress gone, with the lessons of the twentieth century still unlearned in the twenty-first, with technology progressing, in Adorno’s words, from the slingshot to the atom bomb (a remark cited in Spe Salvi), with a resurgence of religiously motivated violence filling the headlines, all that the new atheists can manage is to hearken back to an Enlightenment-based critique of religion. But they find their way blocked, not so much by Nietzsche (whom, as we saw, they largely ignore) but by the ineluctable realities he so ruthlessly exposed. Not Nietzsche, but the history of the twentieth century has shown that godless culture is incapable of making men happier. All Nietzsche did was to point out that no civilization, however “progressive,” can dispel the terrifying character of nature; and once progress is called into question, the human condition appears in all its forsaken nakedness.
In the meantime, here's just one paragraph from Ajami's essay:
In Huntington’s unsparing view, culture is underpinned and defined by power. The West had once been pre-eminent and militarily dominant, and the first generation of third-world nationalists had sought to fashion their world in the image of the West. But Western dominion had cracked, Huntington said. Demography best told the story: where more than 40 percent of the world population was “under the political control” of Western civilization in the year 1900, that share had declined to about 15 percent in 1990, and is set to come down to 10 percent by the year 2025. Conversely, Islam’s share had risen from 4 percent in 1900 to 13 percent in 1990, and could be as high as 19 percent by 2025.
Piotr Ilyich Kamenev: This is you. Political prisoner 103592R, Kiril Pavlovich Lakota. All of you is here, from the day you were born until now. Except for the answer to one question. What have you learned in twenty years of confinement?
Kiril Lakota: That is a big question, Piotr Ilyich.