REVIEW: The Lighthouse by Michael D. O’Brien

I was, I believe, on Prince Edward Island when the news that Mother Theresa had died. When I heard of that the Princess of Wales had died I was in bar having something to eat in, I believe, Glace Bay of Cape Breton Island.  Little did I know that I would be involved with Ham Radio 20 years later.

In 1997 I helped to move a large boat from Halifax to Lake Superior, going around Cape Breton, to PEI, around the Gaspé Peninsula and down the St. Lawrence Seaway.  Of the group, I spoke some French so there were a couple times when, putting in for the night somewhere along those rugged coasts I bargained with some fisherman for fresh catches or we found the places that handled incoming sea critters, and we had great meals on the boat.   A couple times I shocked priests but stopping at their rectories and asking to say Mass.  They looked at me, bemused, as if I had three heads. There was one day of particularly dangerous water and wind and we had to find a cove or bay fast.  I learned additional respect for those who work on those waters.  For more than one reason, has Eternal Father Strong To Save long been one of those hymns that closes my throat.

Yesterday I read Michael D. O’Brien’s newest book, The Lighthouse.

US HERE – UK HERE

Once again, O’Brien explores the theme of fathers and sons, in our contemporary time of fragmented families.  The main character comes from a broken family and, due to the timely influence of a few good men in his childhood, manages to make it into adulthood as a good, upright man.  By fate he winds up working at a lighthouse off the coast of Cape Breton for the old keeper, whom he eventually replaces, thus beginning physically a his interiorly solitary life.

The theme of solitude, and the eventual opening up of his world through seemingly random contacts with people who come to his tiny rock island, is especially poignant right now, in this time of COVID-1984.  O’Brien has a mystical streak.  Perhaps he sensed it coming and wrote a book to help people with their isolation.

O’Brien’s books are profoundly Catholic, though Catholic stuff is often not obviously at play.  There are constant leitmotifs of grace, sacrifice, and redemption throughout, taking more or less subtle turns.  In The Lighthouse you sense early on the inexorable end, but he also throws you some curves.

Also, I sense that O’Brien may have found an editor!  Some of his earlier works were really long, very much in need of trimming.  This work was compact, selective, without being hasty.  O’Brien carefully tied up all his loose ends by the time we arrive at the finish. Even seemingly minor characters are revealed to have played part that loom with significance before the last page is turned.

I read it in one go.  I didn’t want to stop.  And I was content at the conclusion, as the main character would be content with the ending of a season, or the carving of a wood figure, and the beginning of something else.

This is a peaceful book even though it works through inner turmoils.

Reading The Lighthouse drove me to look at some maps online, and photos, of Cape Breton.  I tried to spot some things from that excursion in 1997.  I found a few.  O’Brien says that his lighthouse and the nearby port are fictional.  I wonder, however, if perhaps he wasn’t a little influenced by the fact of Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine with its tiny town of Fatima.

Oh yes… my Kindle died in the last chapter.

Posted in REVIEWS | Tagged
6 Comments

An introduction to #FratelliTutti by @DrSamuelGregg

To all the people who are asking me to comment on Tutti FruttiFrutti FratelliFratelli Tutti… I suggest my friend Sam Gregg’s solid introduction to the document at Catholic World Report.

A few of his comments follow.  And, while Gregg is rightly critical of some of the clearly goofy stuff in the encyclical – goofy and, I think, dangerous in one point – he also states that there are good elements.

Thus, Gregg…

[…]

Despite its length, there’s little in this text that we have not heard Francis say before in one form or another.

[…]

Gregg is an expert on economics.

Economic strawmen

Also insufficient—and, alas, this has characterized Francis’s pontificate from its very beginning—is Fratelli Tutti’s treatment of economic questions. It seems that, no matter how many people (not all of whom can be characterized as fiscal conservatives) highlight the economic caricatures that roam throughout Francis’s documents, a pontificate which prides itself on its commitment to dialogue just isn’t interested in a serious conversation about economic issues outside a very limited circle.

[…]

There is plenty of room for constructive debate among Catholics about the role of the government, law, central banks, and other state institutions in the economy. Indeed, it’s never been my impression that Francis is hell-bent on a massive increase in state intervention to address any number of economic challenges. But the endless invocation of economic strawmen in papal documents and by prominent figures associated with Francis’s pontificate isn’t likely to create any confidence that most of those who have guided this pontificate’s reflections on economic matters have a genuine interest in any real dialogue with anyone who doesn’t fit on the spectrum between left-wing populists and your run-of-the-mill neo-Keynesian.

[…]

The dangerous point (my words):

Saint Francis and the Sultan

[…]

Fratelli Tutti begins by invoking Saint Francis’s famous encounter with Sultan Malik-el-Kamil in Egypt in the midst of the Fifth Crusade. It states that the saint told his followers that “if they found themselves ‘among the Saracens and other nonbelievers,’ without renouncing their own identity they were not to ‘engage in arguments or disputes, but to be subject to every human creature for God’s sake’.” Pope Francis then adds: “We are impressed that some eight hundred years ago Saint Francis urged that all forms of hostility or conflict be avoided and that a humble and fraternal ‘subjection’ be shown to those who did not share his faith”

[…]

Francis of Assisi is portrayed as engaging in some sort of interfaith prayer breakfast.  In fact, Francis went to the Sultan to covert him… knowing full well that he could be martyred.  The saint engaged in exactly what his namesake says we must not do.  Read frequent commentator here Fr. Thompson’s book on Francis.   Francis of Assisi: A New Biography US HERE – UK HERE  I have a post HERE about the meeting between Francis and the Sultan.  HERE

When a figure who has huge megaphone, world-wide attention, and who claims a super high moral ground and authority completely distorts the facts of an historical event he risks not only his own authority but respect for the office he holds.  That’s dangerous.

Finally, Gregg observes…

The more, however, that I read through Fratelli Tutti, the more I had the sense that this encyclical wasn’t just an elongated summation and elaboration of the pope’s thought. It also impressed me as a type of valediction for his papacy—one that may well have said all that it has to say. This doesn’t mean that Francis’s pontificate is drawing to a close. But Fratelli Tutti does bear all the marks of a capstone document. Whether it leaves a lasting impression on the Catholic Church is anyone’s guess.

I take you now back to the opening of Gregg’s piece:

One of the first things that will strike readers of Pope Francis’s new social encyclical Fratelli Tutti is its sheer length. At about 43,000 words in English (including footnotes), that’s more than the Book of Genesis (32,046) and three times the size of the Gospel of John (15,635).

Will Fratelli leave a lasting impression?   It is possible that it will on the tens of people who are patient enough to read all of it.   The sheer length of this document lessens the likelihood that it will make a big impact.    Alas, this is part and parcel of the age of word processors and writing in the vernacular.  Once upon a time, encyclicals were tight and focused and people read them.  Then things changed and they got longer and longer and longer.  Furthermore, the desire to say everything often results in saying everything inadequately.

Earlier today, I posted a serious misuse of St. Augustine in a footnote in Francis’ denial of the possibility of “just war”.  Frankly, Francis’ language in Tutti is so hedged that he does NOT in fact make any sort of definitive statement against “just war”.  For my part, his credibility is lessened with using Augustine that way.

One of the people who asked me if I would comment on Fratelli added with a twist of wry humor, “I hope you read it so I don’t have to.”

Posted in Francis, The Drill | Tagged
23 Comments

#ASonnetADay – 55. “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments…”

Posted in Poetry, Sonnet A Day |
Comments Off on #ASonnetADay – 55. “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments…”

9 October – Feast of St. John Henry Newman. We can celebrate him using the Traditional Latin Mass: his LATIN Collect

The other day Fr. Hunwicke reminded me at his fine blog that 9 October is the Feast of St. John Henry Newman.

Keep in mind that legislation came from the newest incarnation of the old Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“, now absorbed into the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, that we can celebrate liturgically in the Traditional Latin Mass the saints who were canonized after 1962, provided that something on the calendar doesn’t outweigh it.  That document is called Cum sanctissima.

9 October will be in the regular calendar the Feast of St. John Leonardi.  But we can opt to celebrate St. John Henry Newman.

For you priests out there who may to do same, here is my post about the LATIN Collect for St. John Henry Newman: HERE

Note the reference to “kindly light”!

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
1 Comment

Becciu accused of bribing witnesses against Card. Pell using $1.14m of Vatican funds

This is important. BTW… the Cardinal’s name is pronounced like “bétchoo”.

Posted in The Drill | Tagged ,
23 Comments

St. Augustine of Hippo in “Tutti” – #fratellitutti

I was asked in email what I thought of the use of St. Augustine’s Letter 229 in the section on war in the new encyclical, risibly entitled in Italian Fratelli tutti.

The encyclical says that wars are bad.   I think we can agree.  He therefore concludes that nothing justifies any way.  I don’t think we can agree.  Let’s see some of this.  My emphases:

258. War can easily be chosen by invoking all sorts of allegedly humanitarian, defensive or precautionary excuses, and even resorting to the manipulation of information. In recent decades, every single war has been ostensibly “justified”. The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the possibility of legitimate defence by means of military force, which involves demonstrating that certain “rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy”[239] have been met. Yet it is easy to fall into an overly broad interpretation of this potential right. In this way, some would also wrongly justify even “preventive” attacks or acts of war that can hardly avoid entailing “evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated”.[240] At issue is whether the development of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the enormous and growing possibilities offered by new technologies, have granted war an uncontrollable destructive power over great numbers of innocent civilians. The truth is that “never has humanity had such power over itself, yet nothing ensures that it will be used wisely”.[241] We can no longer think of war as a solution, because its risks will probably always be greater than its supposed benefits. In view of this, it is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a “just war”. Never again war![242]

“… allegedly…” 

Firstly, I don’t think war is “easily chosen”.  And the point about manipulation of information is probably a shot at these USA for Iraq.

“In recent decades…”

How many decades?  Sorry, but the history of war goes back more that “recent decades”.

“The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the possibility of legitimate defence by means of military force” … 

In other words… war?

“… new technologies…” 

There is a good point here.  New technologies do change the impact of war.  The Roman pike, English longbow, repeating rifle each in their turn changed the impact of war.   But then came airplanes and bombs, nuclear weapons, etc.  Biological weapons were used in ancient times, but with today’s open and swift travel, and the possibility of engineering weapons, the impact is quantitatively so much greater now that it is a qualitative shift.  However, the fact that, for example, the Chinese might be ready to unleash some biological weapon on the rest of the world could be argued as a darn good reason to act so as to prevent the attack.

“…never has humanity had such power over itself…”

Now that we live in a time when the Gospel has, in fact, been in some way brought to the whole world and we have the ability to communicate to the entire globe instantly, and we have the ability to destroy life as we know it on this planet… when will the Restrainer stop restraining?

We can no longer think of war as a solution, because its risks will probably always be greater than its supposed benefits. In view of this, it is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a “just war”. Never again war![242]

This is not good.  “… probably… very difficult…”   As clear as mud.  This hedging within the statement leaves the door open to the possibility of “just war”.

Footnote 242… this is where we find the quote of Augustine of Hippo.

[242] Saint Augustine, who forged a concept of “just war” that we no longer uphold in our own day, also said that “it is a higher glory still to stay war itself with a word, than to slay men with the sword, and to procure or maintain peace by peace, not by war” (Epistola 229, 2: PL 33, 1020)

The quote says that we “no longer uphold” the concept of the “just war”.  That’s patently false.  This note is added to a patently hedged sentence (“… probably… very difficult…”) and it contradicts what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches in that same paragraph!

By the way, if Francis thinks that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is wrong, he should change it, like he did with the bit about capital punishment.  But THAT was a train wreck as well.   Things are not true because they are included in the Catechism.  Things are true because they can be demonstrated to be true by the force of the argument and the foundations on which they rest.  I digress.

Back to Augustine.

What Francis did NOT quote from Augustine’s ep. 229 is the very NEXT SENTENCE:

“it is a higher glory still to stay war itself with a word, than to slay men with the sword, and to procure or maintain peace by peace, not by war.  After all, even those who fight, if they are good, undoubtedly seek peace, but they still do so by means of bloodshed.

Augustine’s fuller thought about war and seeking peace was perhaps more complex than Francis wanted it to be.  So, … just leave that last part out!

 

Posted in Patristiblogging, The Drill | Tagged ,
25 Comments

#ASonnetADay – 54. “O! how much more doth beauty beauteous seem…” (and turkeys)

Posted in Poetry, Sonnet A Day |
1 Comment

Your Sunday Sermon Notes – 18th after Pentecost (NO: 27th Ordinary) 2020

Was there a GOOD point made in the sermon you heard at the Mass for your Sunday, either live or on the internet? Let us know what it was.

Also, are you churches opening up? What was attendance like?

For my part,

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
3 Comments

Of the SSPX and Schism and The Bitter Pill

I look less and less often at the simply dreadful catholic media, such as Fishwrap and Amerika, Commonwelt and Crickey (Croix of Bobby Micky).  I also try to avoid RU-486 (aka The Bitter Pill aka The Tablet).   However, a tweet from the estimable Joseph Shaw of the LMS made me look at the latter.

I responded that this was another example of people who don’t know what they don’t know. That’s what happens when libs try to write about these complicated issues.

Mind you, I haven’t seen the whole piece at RU-486.

Note that RU-486 said that the SSPX is NOT now in schism.

They are right.

What they are wrong about is that they write implied that they WERE in schism.  Let’s see with my emphases and comments.

“The SSPX, whose four bishops were excommunicated in 1988 and readmitted to the Church [wrong] by Benedict XVI in 2009, …. Benedict’s controversial concession ended the schism [no] the bishop’s ordinations had created [no] but left the society with no Vatican-approved mission.”

People who are excommunicated are still members of the Church.  They are members who are not permitted to receive the sacraments until they have – in general – repaired whatever it was they did that was wrong.   They have to have the censure lifted by the proper authority.  When Benedict lifted the censures, the bishops were able to receive the sacraments again.  They were members of the Church before and after.

The 1988 consecrations of bishops (without papal mandate, which incurred the excommunications) constituted a “schismatic act”.   However, it takes more than one act to cause a schism.   The SSPX was not in schism before or after the episcopal consecrations.  The SSPX is not NOW is schism.

It is sort of true that the Society has “no Vatican-approved mission”.   Francis gave the SSPX the faculties to receive sacramental confessions.  That’s a mission.  Moreover, in a way, they have a wider faculty than diocesan priests!  Dioceses grant faculties to diocesan priests.  If they travel outside the diocese, they are still able to absolve sins when asked for confession.  If a priest travels to another diocese for an extended period of time, he should get faculties from that diocese, too.   But the SSPX guys are, ironically, with the faculty to hear confessions but they are not incardinated anywhere.  So, they can forgive sins … anywhere.

It amuses me to compare them to the Anglican “flying bishops”.  They are bishops with a loose connect to a place but who move around to minister to people who won’t (rightly) accept the ministry of women priests and bishops.

“Flying priests!”

Anyway, I wrote about the SSPX HERE.

Theirs is a complicated situation.  And the issue of incardination is one of the most complicated elements in who the SSPX are.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, SSPX | Tagged ,
11 Comments

#ASonnetADay – 53. “What is your substance, whereof are you made…”

Meanwhile, Sir Patrick Stewart has MADE AN END of the Sonnets of the Bard!  #154

He has just a few more views than I have.

Posted in Poetry, Sonnet A Day |
Comments Off on #ASonnetADay – 53. “What is your substance, whereof are you made…”