:: The Lidless Eye Inquisition ::

:: Thursday, April 21, 2005 ::

Pope Benedict XVI Answers My Prayer

I was in tears as I watched Cardinal Ratzinger emerge from the Conclave as Pope Benedict XVI. First, Cardinal Ratzinger's theology was a major help and inspiration to reconciling with the Church. Secondly, it was an answer to a prayer. As many of you know, Cardinal Ratzinger bounced back after failing his doctorate the first time around.

I am in danger of doing the same. In the last month it has become more and more evident that I cannot maintain my status as a full-time writer and canonist, and also pursue a doctorate. My doctorate is suffering big-time as I struggle to keep our family financially afloat. We've been hit with a couple other financial setbacks as well as the university shuts down family housing (thus increasing our monthly rent in what is already Canada's most expensive city) and some emergency medical expenses -- (you would be surprised what socialized health-care doesn't cover.)

Up until Pope Benedict XVI was elected, I was giving serious consideration to dropping out the doctorate at the end of this semester. Since I already have a licentiate, it is pretty easy to find full-time work. Nevertheless, I prayed for a sign from God. This is it. Both my wife and my spiritual director agree, and after speaking my parents I will be biting the bullet and undertaking large student loans (which I have avoided doing up until now). In practical terms, this means I've seriously got to curtail my outside writing, activities, private correspondence....and blogging over the next year.

Thanks for understanding. I may not be in as regular contact with all of you (I get around 400-600 emails a day), but I will keep all of you in prayer. Please pray for our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

:: Pete Vere 2:22 PM [+] | ::

************************************

A Rerum Novarum Link of Possible Interest for Lidless Eye Readers:

Miscellaneous Morning Notes on the Conclave and the Selection of a New Pope

:: Shawn 12:06 PM [+] | ::

************************************

Cardinals Elect a Hairy Seed! Tierney a Sedevacantist?

I kid you not. A certain traditionalist publication has just announced that the College of Cardinals elected a hairy seed to rule the Church! I read it with my own two eyes -- Habemus Papum (as opposed to "Habemus Papam" when the Church elects a new Roman Pontiff). Given that this is a traditionalist publication that seeks the restoration of all things Latin, we cannot simply assume the possibility of sloppy grammar.

In other news, it appears that traditionalist Kevin Tierney has not taken news of the hairy seed's election too well. In fact, it appears that he has followed his friend Mario into sedevacantism. This is another shocking development as Kevin announces on his blog "Habamus Papam". I checked several Latin dictionaries and I cannot find the verb "habo/habare". Therefore, I assume it does not exist. From this I can only derive that Kevin is saying the pope does not exist. After all, if Kevin believed in the new pope to be valid, he would have used the ablative absolute of the verb "habeo/habere" and announced "Habemus Papam".

:: Pete Vere 8:53 AM [+] | ::

************************************

It seems appropriate with the election of a new pope (Benedict XVI) to avoid the impression of Us at Lidless Eye Inquisition in any way pitting the new pope against his predecessors. This is a common approach taken by not a few people who should know better. Therefore, I wish to at this time renew my public Profession of Faith as posted to the Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG and exhort my fellow Inquisitors to likewise give a public acceptance of the Holy See's profession at this time -either in the comments boxes or on the weblog itself.

:: Shawn 3:43 PM [+] | ::

************************************

In my day job I’m a business office manager for a hospital. As such, I can speak for the hospital to certain outsiders about certain topics. For instance, I’m the primary contact with insurers both for negotiation of contracts and when the normal claims process doesn’t work smoothly. However there are both subjects where it isn’t appropriate for me to comment and people to whom I shouldn’t comment. Were I to comment outside the proper circumstances, I could make the hospital’s mission more difficult.

This mandate for a degree of circumscription in speech isn’t at all unique to my job or even to employment in general. Indeed when one holds himself out to the world at large as an expert on the teachings of the Church, his public statements – regardless of what they directly address – have the potential to make the Church’s mission more difficult. To my knowledge, preventing such harm from occurring (or minimizing such harm where it may have already occurred) is the purpose of this site. That would be part of why, contra the desires of at least learned interlocutor to the contrary, this site doesn’t give some sort of seal of approval to “authentic traditionalist” resources.

In most institutions the official positions of the institution regarding issues of concern are issued by appropriately credentialed officials. For the Church these include the creeds, the catechism and a rich patrimony of papal, conciliar and scholarly documents. Historically the Church has dealt with published individual comment by means of the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat. These certifications on the part of the Church assured the reader that the individual perspective was not at odds with the teachings of the Church. No equivalent to the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat exists as regards the internet, where the unwary reader may well assume that anything said by a self-publishing writer is an accurate representation of Church teaching. This imposes a special responsibility on those who publish on the internet to use prudence in what they publish. I personally learned this the hard way as I said some intemperate things in my very first blog site back in 2001. In 2002 I deleted that site in toto so as to reduce the likelihood of any untoward consequences from words I rashly wrote. Self-publishing writers who have a broad audience would do well to consider some form of peer review, particularly when writing on “bombshell” topics. When the words of a given writer could be the only face of the Church seen by a lost soul, that writer bears an awesome responsibility.

That most common breed of internet author, the polemicist, faces serious temptations as to pride and envy. Admission of error, even in a secondary issue, can become difficult especially as disputants become more emotionally charged in the heat of argument. It is not only the writing in question and its potential impact on the reader, but the motivation for writing on a given topic, that should be considered by the sincere Catholic writer in seeking to provide a more effective witness to Christ and His bride, the Church.

Each writer who self-publishes Catholic materials for a primarily non-Catholic audience (apologists and catechists come to mind, although I’m probably missing others) may then benefit from engaging in a examination of conscience –preferably involving a knowledgeable fellow-Catholic - regarding the subjects on which he intends to publish as to: (1) the accuracy of what he has written; (2) the motivation for what he has written; (3) how the intended reader is likely to understand what is written; and (4) whether or not such understanding on the part of the intended reader makes him more or less likely to continue consideration of the Church and her claims.

However we can be sure that, given fallen human nature, some writers will continue to write things that undermine the credibility of their better works. In 2002, I contacted Archbishop Chaput in his capacity as a board member asking that EWTN discontinue features including a particular Catholic writer who had published some writings on the web that seemed likely to bring EWTN and, by extension, the Church, into disrepute were they to be widely disseminated. I did so in order that the overall witness provided by EWTN not be compromised by one individual speaking out of school about a topic secondary to his area of legitimate expertise. That author is no longer featured on EWTN.

Similarly, when we face the difficult situation of a prominent individual who has written some works that are both truthful and useful in communicating Catholic teaching but who has written other works that make effective witness to the Gospel more difficult and who holds to the problematic positions, it seems reasonable that utmost caution is called for in the question of citing any works at all by the writer in question. The chain is no stronger than its weakest link. When a writer writes authoritatively regarding matters on which he lacks unimpeachable competence, this applies all the more as the reader is likely to consider him a mere crackpot and dismiss all of the ideas he mentions – even those that are the immutable teachings of the Church. This applies with special force when the problematic writings are readily available on the internet. There is a grave difference between “hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world” and simply looking foolish while holding one’s self out as an expert on Catholicism and risking that readers conflate the two.

:: Gregg the Obscure 2:26 PM [+] | ::

************************************

Crackpot Apologetics Idol competition

I've just accepted an invitation to judge this year's "Crackpot Apologetics Idol" competition. For those who have never heard of CAIdol, this competition invites aspiring rad-trad apologists to spout shrill polemic on a variety of harmless topics of which they know nothing or little about. The winner of the competition is offered a one-year apprenticeship under Miss. Betsey Mae O'Blivion, editor of the Chapel Veil Gossip.

Please post your entries in the comments' section.

:: Pete Vere 9:34 AM [+] | ::

************************************

8 Things You Can Do to Stop the Judaizers

It seems that Judaizing has returned as the hot topic among rad trads. The usual tinfoil-hatted-tinpot-prophets increasingly fear that well-known Jewish converts to Catholicism may be secret infiltrators. I personally don't believe this to be the case; nor do I find it problematical that Hebrew Catholics wish to retain some of their customs, provided these customs are in good taste, not imposed upon other Catholics, and not contrary to the Divine Law and the Natural Law or offensive to pious sensibilities. That being said, in a spirit of ecumenism toward my traditionalist brethren of a more radical pursuasion, here are eight things you can do to uproot all Jewish influence from your practice of the Catholic faith:

1) Stop Receiving the Holy Eucharist. Everytime you receive a consecrated Host you consume the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of a Jew. (Not to mention, in the West, the bread is unleavened -- another Jewish practice.)

2) Don't pray the Rosary. When you pray the Rosary you pay homage to the archtype Jewish mother.

3) Do not join any traditional branch of the Franciscans. They wear beards. Gentiles should be clean shaven.

4) No supporting the Carmelites either. They are the one Catholic order that predates the Catholic Church, going back to the Jewish prophet Elijah.

5) No wearing of the Brown Scapular. It is a Carmelite devotion.

6) No praying "Alleluia". This is a Hebrew word if I am not mistaken. From now on, say a nice, short, crisp, "Amen".

7) Remove the Gospel of Matthew from the Bible, since he was a Jew writing to other Jews.

8) Remove the papacy from the Church because, as is clear from history, the papacy began with a Jew named Simon who subsequently changed his name to Peter before claiming world-wide jurisdiction. Thus the papacy is clearly a secret Jewish plot to take over the world.

:: Pete Vere 1:33 PM [+] | ::

************************************

As the funeral for JP II will be late tonight-early tomorrow morning,{1} it seems appropriate to point readers to some of the very few words I have noted on the matter publicly.{2} It is true that this is not much: if anything for your humble servant it is akin to taking a vow of silence.{3} But sometimes events have a way of silencing someone: particularly events which are profound in as many dimensions as this one happens to be.

Nonetheless, at this time it bears noting that the traditional nine days of mourning (starting after the funeral) does not exclude reflection after all and some of that will take place by yours truly as time allows for it. As Rerum Novarum is my primary weblog, they will take place there -though I will try to remember to link them here as well. But that is neither here nor there.

In the meantime, it seems appropriate to reiterate significant support on my part for the most recent public musings of Kevin Tierney pertaining to the passing of John Paul II. I highly doubt a more balanced assessment of the man will be forthcoming from the keyboard of anyone who calls themselves a "traditionalist"; ergo it bears reference at this time.{4}

Again, more will be noted after the funeral. Right now though, it seems to me to be better to focus on prayer and on savouring this great gift that many either did not realize was there or whom -like yours truly- came to the party pretty late in recognizing it. And with that note, I close this post with a liturgical prayer:

[Lord] remember Karol Wojtyla (Pope John Paul II). In baptism he died with Christ: may he also share his resurrection, when Christ will raise our mortal bodies and make them like his own in glory. [Eucharistic Prayer III: From The Roman Missal under Masses for the Dead]

Notes:

{1} For which I will be rescheduleing my evening as well as my workday tomorrow to watch.

{2} Points to Ponder from Pope John Paul II (circa April 2, 2005)

Another Rerum Novarum post (circa April 05, 2005)

{3} I have said much more privately and some of that will probably be made available in the days to come. Frankly, it will depend on my mood for blogging which at the moment is at the lowest ebb it has been in years.

{4} And no, I do not say this simply because I happen to concur with what Kevin says to a large degree.

:: Shawn 12:00 PM [+] | ::

************************************

Tonight we are all sedevacantist.

Let us pray for the repose of the soul of Pope John Paul II. I am both happy that he faced death so bravely, providing us of a true Christian example of death with dignity -- a sign of contradiction to the euthenasia movement which won a major victory with Terri Schiavo this past week. On the other hand, I am sad about what Pope John Paul II's passing may mean for schismatic traditionalists. Reconciliation of Lefebvre's schism to the Church was a priority for Pope John Paul II; it may not be for the next Pope.

:: Pete Vere 8:47 PM [+] | ::

************************************