Stephen Schmalhofer

Here is the video of our delightful talk with Stephen Schmalhofer on his new book from cohost ⁦@ClunyMedia⁩. Other cohosts are ⁦@firstthingsmag⁩ ⁦@newcriterion⁩ and ⁦@KirkCenter⁩ https://t.co/5y5d3OTZvQ

— University Bookman (@ubookman) December 17, 2020

Missing Something, and It's not Small

This piece is correct on the importance of a common culture for a community. But this recommendation is naive and more akin to liberalism than any sort of moral realism. "Instead of either self isolation or a live and let live attitude which hides the deep divides in our communities, we must meet this moral division head on and seek to convince each other to reject the immoral and live together in unity."

Building a Common Life https://t.co/2aOQChOsX6

— The Josias (@josias_rex) November 2, 2020

Charles Péguy

"Everything begins in mysticism and ends in politics," the French Catholic poet said. What can that mean for an Age of Disenchantment? https://t.co/tgligSZQGw

— The American Conservative (@amconmag) August 7, 2020

AmConMag

Creating Culture Deliberately - Benedict and Talia-Maria Sheehan

Western Culture

CWR Dispatch: Ratzinger’s Western Culture delves deeply into the foundations of European life
This collection offers reflections on many of the fundamental underpinnings of the life of society, applicable to both European and non-European countries.

Ignatius Press

Edit. 5/12
A review: What Will Become of Europe? by Carson Halloway

David Clayton on the Transfiguration Icon

What of Inculturation?

Latin Religious Orders and the Question of Identity

What if SJWs were to attack Jesuits and their educational institutions for the crime of destroying (or failing to respect) native cultures in their missionary efforts. After all, inculturation was still a means to bringing Christianity to other peoples -- the SJWs could claim that Christianity was nonetheless forced upon them, and thus their original non-Christian culture was destroyed. The Jesuits should have instead recognized that truth is to be found in every culture. Would the Jesuits surrender to the SJWs? I was thinking of the recent controversy surrounding Providence College as well -- couldn't SJWs object to the Dominicans being in charge because of their association with the Inquisition and the suppression of the Albigensians, who should have been free to believe whatever they wanted. Perhaps capitulation on the question of the use of the "Western" canon in a liberal education would not be enough for them.

The Jesuits are already doing whatever they can to accomodate multiculturalism; the Dominicans have shown some resistance at Providence College but it is not clear that the administration will be able to defend their preference for the Western intellectual tradition. Can Dominicans be "nation-less" while at the same time upholding the Western intellectual tradition as being an important part of Roman Catholicism? How can they do so if Roman Catholicism is not Western but aspires to some sort of univeralism? What relation do American Jesuits and Dominicans have to Western/European identity? And how can they take a stand on the question without alienating one group (Anglo-Americans and those identify with them) or the other (those who reject that identity)? Would they understand that any sort of compromise solution (in the direction of multiculturalism) is nonetheless a failure at the political level? Can they pretend to remain above ethnonationalism even if they believe they must be so for the sake of preaching the Gospel? (And if that were their ultimate justification, is it the case that their educational endeavors are a necessary part of that?)

In Christendom it could be possible for members of international religious orders to identify as being part of a united Christendom with a common language (Latin) and culture (even if the Holy Roman Empire never achieved political unification). They could still be attentive to the differences of local cultures and peoples. (Did they or the Church in general do anything to resist the homogenization of language and culture that accompanied nationalism and the rise of the modern nation-state?)

If peoples are determined to separate, should they stand in the way or preach a (non-existent) duty for them to stay together? It is proper for missionaries to assimilate to whatever people they wish to evangelize (in so far as it is morally possible for them to do so), but religious orders cannot have a multicultural university without destroying the university as such. They must either create an alternative institution or acquiesce to the fact that the university cannot serve those who reject its mission of passing on a particular intellectual tradition and culture.

Pick and Choose

Not your usual post about "cafeteria Catholicism."

Is it possible for a Latin to identify exclusively with certain parts of his ecclesial tradition and not with others. For example, stained-glassed windows may have a place as a form of sacred art but Gothic architecture, while grandiose and conveying the scene of God's transcendent glory, may nonetheless be lacking in other ways, especially with respect to being a fitting place for the celebration of the Eucharist if the building is too big. In that case the problem may be more of scale than of architecture. But Gothic even on a small scale, even wooden neo-gothic temples, may still be less than ideal, especially if coupled with sculpture or carvings done in the Gothic style.

Perhaps I could be convinced otherwise.

But back to my original query: if I were my Latin, what is my ecclesial heritage? Is it an all or nothing affair? Do I need to acknowledge all styles of sacred architecture as being part of my heritage, or can I pick and choose? What if I identify more with classical, mediterranean Christianity of the early Church and the Church Fathers and less with medieval Latin Christianity (or Baroque and beyond)?

Because of the papacy, Latin Catholics are used to seeing Western Christendom as having a single ecclesial culture or tradition. Let's identify two components to this (there are others, such as liturgical customs and rites, other practices, saints that receive special honor):
1. artistic expressions of that tradition (architecture, painting, sculpture, music)
2. theological expressions of the tradition

I wouldn't consider the Latin Fathers peculiar to a specific ecclesial tradition; all of the Fathers of the Church constitute a common patrimony for the Church Universal, even if certain Fathers are emphasized by some traditions more than others. (Though some Latin Fathers may be favored over others in a theological tradition or school.)

It seems to me that it is legitimate for a Latin Christian to identify with certain styles of artistic expression more than others, specially if we take into consideration the national origins of those styles. Latin theological traditions may seem to be more "international" in character since historically they were expressed in Latin. But it was legitimate even back then for Latins to favor one theological tradition over another. No one could truly claim that a medieval Latin monk was less "Latin" (much less Catholic) than a mendicant for preferring monastic theology to scholastic theology. Rather than a Latin monoculture, should we instead think of there being a legitimate diversity within Latin (or Western) [Catholic] Christianity? If there can be not only a legitimate pluralism in theological expressions and schools but a legitimate preference, why not with respect to artistic expressions?

One need not pretend that other artistic styles or traditions do not exist, but I think one can properly maintain that they don't have as central a place in one's received ecclesial tradition or identity than those that are preferred. But is it possible for a Latin Christian to have an ecclesial tradition or identity alone, or whether a Latin ecclesial tradition is specific to a community or local Church, and not to individuals. If the latter is true, then only a community or local Church could have an ecclesial tradition, while an individual believer can have only a preference. Moreover, since the Latin Churches have become more centralized around Rome and the number of liturgical rites in use has been reduced to one, the Roman (for the most part), can any local Church really claim that it continues to bear an ecclesial tradition, one that is historically proper to it?

Anamnesis Journal: Science and the Restoration of Culture by Wolfgang Smith

MoJ: "Pragmatic Eudaimonism"

Les fondamentaux de la culture chrétienne

Also from KTOTV: La liturgie des heures

Medievalists.net: Ordering the medieval past : England and the continent compared

I was going through old mail and found a solicitation for Spiritual Life: A Journal of Contemporary Spirituality. Apparently the magazine is still in existence. Is the mass media format of the magazine or journal amenable to teaching about the spiritual life? Or shouldn't it deserve more of an extended treatment? (Or even better, a living guide?) Not everything can be disseminated through the mass media well.

An article by Sandra Miesel on Maria Lactans: Mothering God.