Newman's Gerontius -- The second Demon -- Naturalism

St Benedict saved from the poison

"But, when some child of grace, Angel or Saint, Pure and upright in his integrity Of nature, meets the demons on their raid, They scud away as cowards from the fight. Nay, oft hath holy hermit in his cell, Not yet disburden'd of mortality, Mock'd at their threats and warlike overtures; Or, dying, when they swarm'd, like flies, around, Defied them, and departed."

The second demon to fly at Gerontius represents a form of naturalism -- an ideology that denies the supernatural reality of grace and the unending life of the saints. The scoffing demon first exhibits the spirit of rationalism:

The mind bold And independent,
The purpose free, So we are told,
Must not think To have the ascendant

What's a saint? One whose breath Doth the air taint Before his death;
A bundle of bones, Which fools adore, Ha! ha! When life is o'er;
Which rattle and stink, E'en in the flesh. We cry his pardon!
No flesh hath he; Ha! ha! For it hath died,
'Tis crucified Day by day, Afresh, afresh, Ha! ha! That holy clay, Ha! ha!
This gains guerdon, So priestlings prate, Ha! ha!
Before the Judge, And pleads and atones
For spite and grudge, And bigot mood,
And envy and hate, And greed of blood.

The demon begins by asserting its independence -- like the rationalism displayed in the first demon. The mind fancies itself "bold" because it has no purpose and it can scoff at will.

And this demon hits hard -- what if . . what if  . . . this life is all there is? Then death has the ascendant. There are no saints -- they are foul in life, and nothing but bones after this life is over. Only fools would adore the bones of a "saint" because there is no other life, so scoffs the demon of naturalism. (Ironically when Newman's body was exhumed, there were not even bones. To dust he had returned. But he lives! In God, in heaven at the great banquet.)

And in this life, the saint is a double fool because he dies to his flesh every day -- for nothing. He is but "holy clay" a paltry worthless thing.

And there very prayer is a cover for "spite and grudge." There are no saints and there is no sanctity. All is selfishness and all is vain. All is envy and hate -- such as the demons. There is no other life than the life of self. The world of Sartre -- hell is other people.

But next to the angel the soul exclaims: "How impotent they are! and yet on earth They have repute for wondrous power and skill; And books describe, how that the very face Of the Evil One, if seen, would have a force Even to freeze the blood, and choke the life Of him who saw it."

We so fear the mockery of the bold and independent mind who reduces through his mockery the aspirations to holiness. We are weak, we are flesh -- maybe . . . that  is all there is, we may think in a moment of weakness or doubt. We are frozen and choked by this demon of despair.

But now the angel agrees, on earth, the demons were "nestled close" and could take on a majestic appearance:

In thy trial-state Thou hadst a traitor nestling close at home, Connatural, who with the powers of hell Was leagued, and of thy senses kept the keys, And to that deadliest foe unlock'd thy heart. And therefore is it, in respect of man, Those fallen ones show so majestical. 

But sanctity proves itself in the very witness and deeds, in its very odor of holiness:

But, when some child of grace, Angel or Saint, Pure and upright in his integrity Of nature, meets the demons on their raid, They scud away as cowards from the fight. Nay, oft hath holy hermit in his cell, Not yet disburden'd of mortality, Mock'd at their threats and warlike overtures; Or, dying, when they swarm'd, like flies, around, Defied them, and departed

We need the saints to encourage us on the journey, to give flight to lie of naturalism. Holiness is possible. The life of the soul endures to eternal life. There is more to this life than flesh and bone. Pope John Paul II proclaimed: "love is stronger than death. Love is stronger than sin." The spirit of naturalism would scoff at his message, the good news.

Keep close the medal of holy St Benedict to help ward off those nestling spirits of old:

On the back of the medal, the cross is dominant. On the arms of the cross are the initial letters of a rhythmic Latin prayer: Crux sacra sit mihi lux! Nunquam draco sit mihi dux! (May the holy cross be my light! May the dragon never be my guide!). In the angles of the cross, the letters C S P B stand for Crux Sancti Patris Benedicti (The cross of our holy father Benedict).

Above the cross is the word pax (peace), that has been a Benedictine motto for centuries. Around the margin of the back of the medal, the letters V R S N S M V - S M Q L I V B are the initial letters, as mentioned above, of a Latin prayer of exorcism against Satan: Vade retro Satana! Nunquam suade mihi vana! Sunt mala quae libas. Ipse venena bibas! (Begone Satan! Never tempt me with your vanities! What you offer me is evil. Drink the poison yourself!)

The First Demon in Gerontius - Rationalism

In the Dream of Gerontius (1865) three demons approach the soul of Gerontius. Each demon proclaims an attitude that would gather the souls for hell, but the attitude is identifiable as a position men take on earth. The angel explains to Gerontius:

that sullen howl
Is from the demons who assemble there.
It is the middle region, where of old
Satan appeared among the sons of God,
To cast his jibes and scoffs at holy Job.
So now his legions throng the vestibule,
Hungry and wild, to claim their property,
And gather souls for hell. Hist to their cry.

There are three assaults by the demons. This post we shall examine the first demon. This demon exclaims:


Low-born clods
Of brute earth
They aspire
To become gods,
By a new birth,
And an extra grace,
And a score of merits,


As if aught
Could stand in place
Of the high thought,
And the glance of fire
Of the great spirits,
The powers blest,
The lords by right,
The primal owners,
Of the proud dwelling
And realm of light,—


Dispossess'd,
Aside thrust,
Chuck'd down
By the sheer might
Of a despot's will,
Of a tyrant's frown,
Who after expelling
Their hosts, gave,
Triumphant still,
And still unjust,
Each forfeit crown


To psalm-droners,
And canting groaners,
To every slave,
And pious cheat,
And crawling knave,
Who lick'd the dust
Under his feet.

Rationalism is the attitude opposed to faith. At the beginning and the end of his outburst this demon scoffs at the humility that characterizes the faithful: "the crawling knave, Who licked the dust." They are but  "pious cheats." They are psalm droners, not interesting to the great intellects. The believers are not of the elite, they are "low born clods" who aspire to become gods -- through faith or "new birth." 


Not so the proud men of reason -- the great spirits, the men of high thought. They are the Lords by right of the "proud dwelling" -- academia and the realm of the mind. Their arrogant and contemptuous gaze burns like a "glance of fire." Newman surely knew a few professors who claimed to own "the realm of light."


But their hatred feeds on their envy of the saints. The rivalry is intense. Their entitlement is seen is their charge of the injustice by which they are dispossessed and "chucked down." Our Lord would frequently speak about the kingdom belonging to the child and he would exult over the secrets being hidden from the proud as they were revealed to the "little ones."


The rationalist professor refers to God as a tyrant, not as a Father (see Crossing the Threshold of Hope, in which Pope John paul says the original sin is to deny the fatherhood of God and thus seek to eradicate the "radiation of Fatherhood"). God is acknowledged only as "superior might" not as a superior wisdom.


The "crown" has been forfeit and given over to the pious cheat. So the demons now burn with an envious rage and must squint at life. They are locked in their proud kingdom. The wonder that leads to wisdom, the ability to be surprised by joy, the attitude of humble awe and gratitude for existence have escaped them. Thus, the angel formulates a very apt description of the existential being of the proud rationalist:

It is the restless panting of their being; Like beasts of prey, who, caged within their bars, In a deep hideous purring have their life, And an incessant pacing to and fro.

Newman on rationalism as the source of liberalism

"I have not sinned against the light"

"When I was fifteen, a great change took place in me. I fell under the influences of a definite Creed, and received into my intellect impres­sions of dogma, which, through God's mercy, have never been effaced or obscured." Apologia

Whereas for Newman liberalism is the doctrine he saw as "an error overspreading, as a snare, the whole earth," rationalism is the name of the source of the error. Whereas liberalism stands opposed to the principle of dogma in religion, it denies that there is an actual determinate truth in matters religious, rationalism stands opposed to the attitude of faith itself.

In his Essays Critical and Historical, Newman defines rationalism in religion as “the use of it [reason] for purposes for which it never was intended, and is unfitted…[rationalism] is the antagonist of Faith; for faith is, in its very nature, the acceptance of what our reason cannot reach, simply and absolutely upon testimony.”

The attitude of the rationalist is closed to any truth that proceeds from a source beyond his own intellect; and such an attitude regards all revealed truth merely in the context of his own subjective capacity to know. A student, Peter vonRooyen, once formulated it this way: The rationalist will only accept doctrine so far as it is ‘relevant’ to him, i.e. only to the extent that he can totally understand it or that holding it has some positive effect on his character.

In the Apologia he says that it is "the mistake of subjecting to human judgment those revealed doctrines which are in their nature beyond and independent of it, and of claiming to determine on intrinsic grounds the truth and value of propositions which rest for their reception simply on the external authority of the Divine Word."

Here is a clear contrast he makes between a mind properly disposed towards higher truth and the rationalist:

For the former:

To believe in Objective Truth is to throw ourselves forward upon that which we have but partially mastered or made subjective; to embrace, maintain, and use general propositions which are larger than our own capacity, of which we cannot see the bottom, which we cannot follow out into their multiform details; to come before and bow before the import of such propositions, as if we were contemplating what is real and independent of human judgment.

For the latter:

Such a belief, implicit, and symbolized as it is in the use of creeds, seems to the Rationalist superstitious and unmeaning, and he consequently confines Faith to the province of Subjective Truth, or to the reception of doctrine, as, and so far as, it is met and apprehended by the mind, which will be differently, as he considers, in different persons, in the shape of orthodoxy in one, heterodoxy in another.

The root is issue concerning proper disposition towards higher truth is that of pride versus humility. Newman famously said that he had not sinner against the light. The rationalist sins against the light. Will one be humble (and grateful) before the truth, or will one posit one’s own ‘truth’ over what is true, that is, over God. The rationalist insists that the truths of God must conform to his own mind, to his own pet truths. Newman said:

The Rationalist makes himself his own center, not his Maker; he does not go to God, but he implies that God must come to him. And this, it is to be feared, is the spirit in which multitudes of us act at the present day. Instead of looking out of ourselves, and trying to catch glimpses of God's workings, from any quarter,—throwing ourselves forward upon Him and waiting on Him, we sit at home bringing everything to ourselves, enthroning ourselves in our own views, and refusing to believe anything that does not force itself upon us as true.

From rationalism arises the "spreading error" of liberalism in religion, the denial of truth, the subjectivizing of truth, which leads ultimately to the softness of mind and hardness of heart that utterly reverses the attitude needed for search and dialogue. Liberalism proposes "that it is enough if we sincerely hold what we profess . . . that we may take up and lay down opinions at pleasure; that belief belongs to the mere intel­lect, not to the heart also; that we may safely trust to ourselves in matters of Faith; and need no other guide."

I wish to acknowledge the assistance of Peter vanRooyen, student at Sacred Heart Seminary, 2006, who worked with me on this topic in a directed studies course.

Newman's essential truth and his life long battle

Simply to His grace and wholly

Light and life and strength belong,

And I love, supremely, solely,

Him the holy, Him the strong --   Dream of Gerontius Such is Newman's expression of the essential truth as put in the mouth of Gerontius on his death bed. It is an acknowledgment of total dependence upon God for the light of his mind, for life itself, and for any strength that constitute the activities daily life. He utters this remarkable, beautiful, statement of faith and love as he becomes aware of his impending death. Here is Newman's description of the awareness of death: As though my very being had given way,      As though I was no more a substance now, And could fall back on nought to be my stay,      (Help, loving Lord! Thou my sole Refuge,      Thou,) And turn no whither, but must needs decay      And drop from out the universal frame Into that shapeless, scopeless, blank abyss,      That utter nothingness, of which I came: This is it that has come to pass in me;      Oh, horror! this it is, my dearest, this; So pray for me, my friends, who have not strength      to pray. The Dream of Gerontius charts the ascent of the soul to God after death. As he ascends with his angel to the throne of God, the judgment seat, the angelic song is heard: Praise to the Holiest in the height And in the depth be praise; In all his words most wonderful, Most sure in all his ways! - The Dream of Gerontius Pope Benedict XVI used this hymn for the beatification ceremony. Near the end of his life Newman that explain his life long battle was to defend this truth, a truth subverted by "liberalism" in religion. As he received the Cardinal's hat he gave a speech (Biglietto Speech 1879): And, I rejoice to say, to one great mischief I have from the first opposed myself. For thirty, forty, fifty years I have resisted to the best of my powers the spirit of liberalism in religion. Never did Holy Church need champions against it more sorely than now, when, alas! it is an error overspreading, as a snare, the whole earth; and on this great occasion, when it is natural for one who is in my place to look out upon the world, and upon Holy Church as in it, and upon her future, it will not, I hope, be considered out of place, if I renew the protest against it which I have made so often. Liberalism in religion is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another, and this is the teaching which is gaining substance and force daily. It is inconsistent with any recognition of any religion, as true. It teaches that all are to be tolerated, for all are matters of opinion. Revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective fact, not miraculous; and it is the right of each individual to make it say just what strikes his fancy. Devotion is not necessarily founded on faith. On the eve of his conversion (really, the year preceding) he wrote the Development of Doctrine; he put the truth this way: Now there was this cardinal distinction between Christianity and the religions and philosophies by which it was surrounded, nay even the Judaism of the day, that it referred all truth and revelation to one source, and that the Supreme and Only God. Pagan rites which honored one or other out of ten thousand deities; philosophies which scarcely taught any source of revelation at all; Gnostic heresies which were based on Dualism, adored angels, or ascribed the two Testaments to distinct authors, could not regard truth as one, unalterable, consistent, imperative, and saving. But Christianity started with the principle that there was but "one God and one Mediator," and that He, "who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the Prophets, had in these last days spoken unto us by His Son." He had never left Himself without witness, and now He had come, not to undo the past, but to fulfill and perfect it. His Apostles, and they alone, possessed, venerated, and protected a Divine Message, as both sacred and sanctifying; and, in the collision and conflict of opinions, in ancient times or modern, it was that Message, and not any vague or antagonist teaching, that was to succeed in purifying, assimilating, transmuting, and taking into itself the many-colored beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought, through which it was ever moving. It was Grace, and it was Truth. Blessed John Henry Newman  is truly a prophetic voice. His clarity, his confidence, his peace is a gift to us all. He ended his speech with these words: I have no fear at all that it really can do aught of serious harm to the Word of God, to Holy Church, to our Almighty King, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, Faithful and True, or to His Vicar on earth. . . . . Commonly the Church has nothing more to do than to go on in her own proper duties, in confidence and peace; to stand still and to see the salvation of God.

Chemists as Cooks: Newman on limits of proof

If we commence with scientific knowledge and argumentative proof, or lay any great stress upon it as the basis of personal Christianity, or attempt to make man moral and religious by Libraries and Museums, let us in consistency take chemists for our cooks, and mineralogists for our masons. -Newman, The Tamworth Reading Room

In response to the question of the existence of God, John Paul II ranged with some finesse through various philosophical schools and then lands down on the fact of Christ, the image of the Father, who has gone “way too far” in revealing God. The existence of God as a philosophical question, and the logical issues concerning proof pale before the cross. For most people will either reject the cross for its scandal or mock the folly of the cross – a few will believe. In other words, when the question of the existence of God is raised – will proof overcome the depth of scandal or scorn? Probably not. Indeed, the realm of proof and philosophy can be one large holding area for interminable debate, while the crisis of culture and the business of personal renovation (ascent) or degradation (descent) are left untouched, but left untouched, culture must openly become decadent and the person must secretly decline.

Remarkably Newman answered a very similar set of issues in an essay entitled “The Tamworth Reading Room,” published in the Times in 1841 and gathered in his Discussions and Arguments in 1872.It is so difficult to summarize Newman -- and their is no substitute for reading his marvelous prose.

Sir Robert Peel dedicated a reading room in a library in London. His dedicatory speech was full of high hopes for the impact of knowledge and learning on society at large. Education, the cultivation of head and heart, would be the “nurse of religion and parent of virtue.” The study of physical science and moral science will rouse the mind and and show us our duty. Education in the sciences will provide a meeting place for men of diverse creeds and political persuasions and allow them to shed their prejudice and join in common tasks of the day. Newman compares his speech to one by a Mr. Brougham who spoke similarly at the University of Glasgow and London. They both agree that in becoming more learned, in becoming wiser, we will become better. Reading the physics of Newton or the work of LaPlace we feel exalted in our human dignity. They are true  benefactors of mankind. We can leave behind ignorance of belief and rise above partisan debate. No works of divinity will be part of the project because they are too controversial.

Newman retorts – does knowledge make us better? Will secular knowledge, not in any way tinged by religion or belief, actually lead the mind to exalted thought and ultimately to “divinity”? Newman mounts a brilliant rebuttal covering 30 or more pages. I will leave out the refutation that knowledge makes us better (perhaps a theme to which we must return) and proceed to his rebuttal that secular knowledge simply leads to wisdom and reverence for God.

Newman argues that an approach to education and culture must place something first. All cannot be first.  The Tamworth Reading Room shall place science and poetry first, secular learning; they will bank on such studies leading to a true notion of God and morals. They expect such studies to purify and exalt the person. As mentioned, Newman explains why knowledge will not make people better -- [fallen] human nature is too strong to combat. There will be a gap between the knowledge and the act.

If in education we begin with nature before grace, with evidences before faith, with science before conscience, with poetry before practice, we shall be doing much the same as if we were to indulge the appetites and passions, and turn a deaf ear to the reason. In each case we misplace what in its place is a divine gift. If we attempt to effect a moral improvement by means of poetry, we shall but mature into a mawkish, frivolous, and fastidious sentimentalism; —if by means of argument, into a dry, unamiable long-headedness;—if by good society, into a polished outside, with hollowness within, in which vice has lost its grossness, and perhaps increased its malignity;—if by experimental science, into an uppish, supercilious temper, much inclined to scepticism. But reverse the order of things: put Faith first and Knowledge second; let the University minister to the Church, and then classical poetry becomes the type of Gospel truth, and physical science a comment on Genesis or Job, and Aristotle changes into Butler.

Newman digs deeper. He explains that secular knowledge is unable to provide a principle of action. Who could act on an inference; who could live suspended in a syllogism? Science in the context of faith can indeed provide evidence for God; and in strict logic the proofs work. But in the head and heart of a given person -- proof will no doubt fizzle out. Here is Newman's dynamic explanation:

First, it is the whole man who reasons and thinks. The head must be convinced, but the heart must reached in a persuasive account.

The heart is commonly reached, not through the reason, but through the imagination, by means of direct impressions, by the testimony of facts and events, by history, by description. Persons influence us, voices melt us, looks subdue us, deeds inflame us. Many a man will live and die upon a dogma: no man will be a martyr for a conclusion. §6

So to ask if proof is still relevant -- if that means, would sheer logical proof ever establish religious belief in the mind and heart of man? Newman thinks not.

Life is not long enough for a religion of inferences; we shall never have done beginning, if we determine to begin with proof. We shall ever be laying our foundations; we shall turn theology into evidences, and divines into textuaries. We shall never get at our first principles. Resolve to believe nothing, and you must prove your proofs and analyze your elements, sinking further and further, and finding "in the lowest depth a lower deep," till you come to the broad bosom of scepticism.

 How are we educating our youth today? What is the first principle? How will they come to knowledge they need to live well, and to know, love, and serve God? The educational system from bottom to top, across secular schools to most if not all Catholic schools -- put secular knowledge first. Faith is an after- thought. As Newman asked, would we take a chemist for cook? Why then do we take the scientist, the poet, and the standards of secular academy for the foundation and principle of our education? Is that not so?

John Paul II on the question of God

In Crossing the Threshold of Hope John Paul II continues his discussion of the question of God by examining whether "proof is still valid" and whether "God is hiding." We find his distinctive concerns in each case. He notes that positivism, the extreme form of scientism born in Vienna at the turn of the twentieth century, has become passe. It is one of the schools of suspicion that distances itself from the certitudes of common sense or from everyday experience. John Paul finds a more congenial approach in hermeneutics and/or a philosophy of dialogue. Ricouer, Levinas, Buber are the philosophers John Paul thinks start out from a position that is open to rediscovery of soul and God. Co-existence is more fundamental than an isolated cogito or an abstract "thinker."

In Fides et ratio he said: "it must not be forgotten that reason too needs to be sustained in all its searching by trusting dialogue and sincere friendship. A climate of suspicion and distrust, which can beset speculative research, ignores the teaching of the ancient philosophers who proposed friendship as one of the most appropriate contexts for sound philosophical enquiry." §33


So yes, proof is still valid, if we mean an expanded notion of "proof," capable of honest interpretation, open to the range of human experience, and situated in the context of a community of inquiry and love of the truth. The positivists used their reduced notion of proof as a club with which to beat their interlocuters and with which they mangled the tradition of philosophy. Even Richard Rorty admits the embarassment of positivism as an episode in philosophy: "Most of us philosophy professors now look back on logical positivism with some embarrassment, as one looks back on one’s own loutishness as a teenager." I am not sure that Rorty would measure up to a Buber or Levinas -- but few would.


The next question he entertains is this -- why is God hiding? I anticipated that John Paul II would seize upon this lead and engage in a Pascalian discourse on the problem of presumption -- but he does not quite do this. In fact he says the charge that God is hiding is due in part to the very Cartesian rationalism that spawned positivism. It is as if we expect to "overcome the entire distance that separates creature from Creator." We approach "He who is, an absolute uncreated mystery." If he were not mystery, there would be no need for God to reveal Himself. But let us go right to John Paul II thundering point in this chapter -- is God hiding? JP2 retorts -- "he has gone as far as possible! He could not go further! In a certain sense God has gone too far." How so? "The Father and I are one," says the Lord. And he mounts the cross. -- "A stumbling block to the Jews and folly to the Gentiles." It was too much, John Paul II says -- and so the protests began.


What is the Pope saying in these chapters? Does God exist? Certainly - by faith and by reason, certainly. Is proof still relevant? After a fashion -- in context. Who really wants to know? Who would rather deny? Protest? After the cross, or in front of the cross, the certitude is greatest, the relevance of proof the least. Leon Bloy said something to the effect that what we need today is not men who go to conferences and demonstrate the existence of God, but those who follow the Lord Jesus Christ in love. It is an unfair comparison, but true.

Crossing the Threshold of Hope: John Paul II on Thomas' Five Ways

Pope John Paul II considers some questions from journalist Vittorio Messori -- Does God really exist? Is Proof still relevant?, and Is God Hiding? John Paul II considers Aquinas' proofs to be decisive - he said that Thomas "celebrates all the richness and complexity of each created being."  He laments tat fact that his thought has been set aside in the post-conciliar period because he is the master of "philosophical and theological universalism." He provides a context for reading the proofs.

First he considers the objection of Pascal who separates the God of the philosophers from the God of the Patriarchs. But Romans and Wisdom indicate a path from the created visible world to the invisible God. Dei verbum confirms the way of reason. Early Christians did not pay much attention to this way, even found it to have little meaning. But Thomas did not abandon the way of philosophy. The question, Deus - an sit, whether God is, "reverberates throughout a highly developed western civilization." Thomas' work remains important.

John Paul II finds a context for reading Thomas in Vatican II, Gaudium et spes. He quotes a long passage from GS §10

The truth is that the imbalances under which the modern world labors are linked with that more basic imbalance which is rooted in the heart of man. For in man himself many elements wrestle with one another. Thus, on the one hand, as a creature he experiences his limitations in a multitude of ways; on the other he feels himself to be boundless in his desires and summoned to a higher life. Pulled by manifold attractions he is constantly forced to choose among them and renounce some. Indeed, as a weak and sinful being, he often does what he would not, and fails to do what he would. Hence he suffers from internal divisions, and from these flow so many and such great discords in society. . . .

Nevertheless, in the face of the modern development of the world, the number constantly swells of the people who raise the most basic questions or recognize them with a new sharpness: what is man? What is this sense of sorrow, of evil, of death, which continues to exist despite so much progress? What purpose have these victories purchased at so high a cost? What can man offer to society, what can he expect from it? What follows this earthly life? The Church firmly believes that Christ, who died and was raised up for all, can through His Spirit offer man the light and the strength to measure up to his supreme destiny. Nor has any other name under the heaven been given to man by which it is fitting for him to be saved. She likewise holds that in her most benign Lord and Master can be found the key, the focal point and the goal of man, as well as of all human history.

  John Paul II provides this passage as a context in order to explain why the significance of the proofs for God must strike us beyond a purely academic or intellectual register. The question, an sit Deus, whether God is, involves our whole being, imbalanced and limited as it is, in head, heart, and will. The meaning and significance of human existence, the very purpose of human life -- these things are intertwined with the question about God's existence. But this means both the purported proof and the denial of proof, or the indifference to the proof (many years ago MacIntyre said most people now just shrug their shoulders at such a question), all approaches or counter-approaches reveal who man is as much as they reveal whether God is. There is the grain of truth, I say, in Feuerbach's claim that conceptions of God unveil conceptions of man.

In the subsequent two chapters John Paul II shows why the question of the relevance of proof and the concern or despair over the hidden God must be engaged on the level of philosophical anthropology.

Secret of Newman as a spiritual writer

I have compared the reading of Newman to the appreciation of a large church with multiple stained-glass windows. There is an immediacy of light, dancing color, a warmth combined with an upward pull and a sense of the other worldly. Each part of the Church, each window, conveys a new world. The windows are like sacramentals. So too Newman's spiritual writing. The prose somehow effects the very thing it signifies. Father Louis Bouyer expresses extremely well the achievement of Newman in his style of spiritual writing:


"Newman was endowed with a sort of second-sight which enable him to see the invisible in and beyond the visible, things the most transcendental as well as those most deeply immanent in the human heart.  Moreover, this visionary power was accompanied by a gift for acting on the minds of others which, though partly to be explained by his consummate command of language, derived also from some mysterious power he possessed of entering into their hearts and reading their sentiments.  This latter trait, we must understand, was not merely passive, but active.  Newman understands our experiences as well as—nay, better than—we do ourselves.  He deciphers them for us, so to speak and, so doing, reveals to us the most intimate secrets of his own.  We recognize ourselves in what he tells us and discover what he alone had been able to discern.  But, let us hasten to add, how strict was the control Newman exercised over this faculty, so that it might always remain subservient to the message which it was his mission to deliver.  Sermons such as that entitle The Invisible World, or that other, no less remarkable, on The Individuality of the Soul, bring a new universe to our vision, only to leave us in the immediate presence of Him who fills it, and who seemed to have been absent from the world we knew.  In the exercise of this, perhaps his greatest gift, there is no trace of self-satisfaction.  Newman continually brings before us celestial scenes, just as constantly forbidding us to linger over them.  He reveals them to us only to guide us to the Cross, to which they point the way, and to which it is his purpose to brings us." Cardinal Newman, his life and Spirituality (1960, p. 181).

To become a student of Newman, one must get a copy of the Parochial and Plain Sermons and enter  the  mansion with many rooms. You will be a constant visitor. Ignatius Press has a very nice hardback edition containing the entire series. As I checked out the Ignatius website I found this endorsement by Fr Bouyer: "These sermons are given here, for the first time in a single volume, as the most lasting expression of Newman's own gradual discovery of all the fullness of the appeal and the challenge addressed to all men by Catholic truth and Catholic life, inseparable as they are within genuine Christianity. There, above all, he himself will be found, with his intellectual power, his poetical vision, as well as his moral and spiritual integrity. Nothing can constitute for us, still today, and maybe today more than ever, such a powerful introduction to what Christianity may give to and expect from our surrender to its call in the midst of a world no longer pretending to be Christian." The sermons are available on-line at the www.Newmanreader.org The highlighted titles above will take you to the Newman Reader -- click on The Invisible World and you will fall under the Newman sway.


No doubt everyone has their favorites. Here are my top ten:

1. The Ventures of Faith
2. The Greatness and Littleness of Human Life
3. The Cross of Christ the Measure of the World
4. Unreal Words
5. The World's Benefactors
6. The Immortality of the Soul
7. The Religion of the Day
8. The invisible world
9. The Humiliation of the Eternal Son
10. The Mysteriousness of our present Being

Peter Hodgson, A Testimony of Faith

Peter Hodgson 1926-2008, Fellow Corpus Christi

Peter Hodgson graduated in Physics from Imperial College in London in 1948. He got his PhD in 1951. In 1958, he was invited to Oxford where he become the head of the Nuclear Physics Theoretical Group and Fellow of Corpus Christi College, staying there until his retirement. He encouraged Catholic scientists and priest-scientists to integrate their studies and belief and to publicise their work effectively, emphasising the need for the Church to be thorough and professional with regard to the use of scientific advice and comment. He worked closely with the Templeton Foundation, the Newman Association and many other organisations to promote the integration of science and religion.

Here is a Testimony he presented to cadets at the United States Air Force Academy:

A Personal Testimony of Faith-- Talk given in the Chapel of the United States Air Force Academy. Colorado Springs, on 12 October 2000

It is a great pleasure and privilege for me to talk to you this evening, and to join you in praising Our Lord Jesus Christ, and also to think about how we can best serve Him, and through that service our country and all mankind. Christ was a historical person. He was born in Bethlehem about 2000 years ago in the reign of Tiberius Caesar in a small outlying province of the Roman Empire. He went around with his disciples teaching the truth, and for that He was persecuted, condemned and executed as a common criminal. By all human standards His life was a failure. And yet after three days He rose from the dead and inspired his disciples to preach His truths to the whole world, and His teaching has inspired the lives of countless millions since His time.

 I have been asked to make a personal testimony to my Faith. I must admit that this is not a very congenial activity; Englishmen prefer to just get on with things quietly without a lot of talk. I will approach my task historically. As you know, I am a nuclear physicist, and indeed gave a lecture on my fifty years in nuclear physics research to your Physics Department this afternoon. In this capacity I often attend Conferences, and some years ago I was at one in Caen near the coast of Normandy. For the Conference outing we were taken to see the mementos of two invasions. First we were taken to the beach at Arromanches, where the British troops landed. We saw the huge concrete jetties that were towed across the Channel to make a port where the ships could unload military supplies. To the south of Arromanches was the Omaha beach where the American forces landed.  Then we were taken to Bayeux, where we saw the long tapestry recording the invasion of England by the Normans in 1066. Some of my Polish friends remarked to me: 'Aha, Peter, that was an invasion you lost'. 'No', I replied, 'my own ancestors were Normans'.  Probably, of course, I have many Anglo-Saxon ancestors as well, but we keep the Norman connection through my mother's maiden name, Bulbeck. There is a town called Bolbeck in Normandy, near the famous abbey of Bee. That is a far back as I can trace my Catholic Faith. 

 The Catholic faith was first brought to England by the Romans, and Christian symbols have been found in the Roman villa at Lullingstone in Kent. The faith was carried on by the Anglo-Saxons, who built many of our parish churches. The Faith was further strengthened by the arrival of the Normans, who enlarged the parish churches and built great cathedrals. In the subsequent centuries the Faith flourished. The churches were painted inside with biblical scenes and the windows filled with stained glass, also with Biblical scenes and pictures of saints. Then came the reign of Henry VIII. He was married to Catherine of Aragon, but he was attracted to Anne Boleyn and wanted to divorce Catherine so that he could marry Anne. He asked the Pope for a dispensation, but the Pope told him that divorce is against the moral law, and that he had no power to change it.  So Henry told the Pope that he would go ahead anyway. He broke away from the Church and started his own Church. Everyone was required to swear an oath of loyalty, recognizing his new marriage. He took over the parish churches and cathedrals, smashed the statues and stained glass windows and burnt the priests' vestments (1). The monks and nuns were thrown out of hundreds of abbeys and priories, and the buildings given to his henchmen, to convert into their country houses Those who held to the Faith were heavily fined if they did not attend the state services and were thus reduced to poverty. It was high treason, punishable by death, to say Mass. Young Englishmen who were called to be priests went to seminaries on the continent at Rome Douai, Rheims and Vallodolid. When ordained they returned to England in disguise and went about the country saying Mass secretly until they were captured and executed. Sir Thomas More, Lord Chancellor of England, refused to take the oath and was imprisoned in the Tower of London and then executed. When he had mounted the scaffold, he turned to the crowd and said 'I die the King's good servant, but God's first'. After he had forgiven his executioner humorous to the end, he raised his head and pulled his beard to one side, remarking that his beard had not committed high treason (2). John Fisher, Chancellor of the University of Cambridge and Bishop of Rochester, also refused to take the oath and, though an old man near death, was executed and his head put on a pike on London Bridge. In such ways the Catholics loyal to Rome were reduced to a small remnant, and among them were my own ancestors.

After a few centuries there were so few Catholics left that conditions gradually improved, and eventually they were allowed to build churches again and worship freely. They were joined by Catholics from many other countries, fleeing from persecution and famine, and now Catholics are about 10% of the population. Initially most of them were poor but gradually they improved their position, like the immigrants to the USA, built schools and sent their children to universities.

I attended a school run by the de La Salle Christian Brothers, an order of men dedicated to teaching. I lived in London before and during the war. They taught me the laws of nature and the moral law. Both are objective facts. If you ignore the law of gravity you get hurt. Similarly with the moral law. The moral law in unchangeable. The Pope did not have the power to dissolve Henry's marriage, whatever the consequences of his refusal. Life is not easy, but our duty is to persevere. One day on the playground at school a boy was hurt. One of the Brothers came up and told him, kindly but firmly: 'You cannot stop the pain, so just ignore it and carry on’.

During the war, it was Hitler's plan to break our morale by bombing, so that we would panic and surrender. So every evening he sent his bombers over London, and the next morning Londoners would sweep up the wreckage, bury the dead and carry on. Over sixty thousand Londoners were killed. For most of us, life went on much as usual. We would go to sleep to the drone of the bombers, hear a few bombs explode, and next morning find that some houses were burnt to the ground. We went to school wondering if it was still there but the Brothers spent the night on the roofs, with sandbags ready to drop on burning incendiary bombs. I was still at school at the end of the war, and so too young to fight. Three of my closest friends had elder brothers in the Royal Air Force, and they were all killed. There was~ a battery of about a hundred anti-aircraft rocket launchers in the park just in front of the house where we lived. It was quite an impressive sight when they were all fired together. Apart from such entertainments, we lived quite normally. However one Sunday morning al about seven-forty we were just getting ready to go to Church.  Suddenly there was a hug~ explosion, followed soon after by the scream of the incoming supersonic V2 missile. The heavy front door flew open, the windows shattered and soot bellowed out into the living~ room. What do we do now!, my father exclaimed. ‘We’re just off to Mass, dear’, replied my mother in her usual matter-of-fact voice, as if nothing  whatever had happened. And off we went.

I have already spoken here today and yesterday about the relation  between faith and science, and now I will say a few words about my life as a  physicist in the context of my faith. I believe that religion is not something that is practiced  only on Sundays, but should permeate our whole lives. Work is a form of prayer, so all we do  should be done as well as possible for the glory of God. You recall the parable of the  talents. You are all very talented people, so your responsibility is correspondingly great.  Much is  required of you and eventually you will be asked to give an account of your  stewardship.

I spent most of my life at Oxford teaching physics and  mathematics, and doing research in nuclear physics. In academic life, we have duties to  our students and to scholarship. We must prepare our lectures carefully, and be ever  ready to spend time helping students. In our research, we must make our experiments and  calculations as carefully as possible. If the results disagree with our theories, we have to  abandon or modify them. We share our results freely with colleagues worldwide, and give them  all the help we can.

As scientists, we have knowledge that is of great importance for  mankind. This brings with it further responsibilities that were keenly felt by nuclear  physicists after the end of the war. Those in Los Alamos founded the Federation of the Atomic  Scientists and gave public lectures and wrote books and articles to inform the public about  the potentialities of atomic energy for good and evil. In Britain, scientists founded the  Atomic Scientists' Association for the same purpose, and as a young graduate student I edited the  Atomic Scientists' Journal from 1953 to 1955. Since then I have written several books and  numerous articles on the effects of nuclear physics on our society, in particular the  energy crisis, nuclear power the environment and global warming (3).

This evening we join in praising the Lord, and often we pray to  Him for our needs. Prayer is always answered, and the answer is usually NO. When we  look back, months or years later, we can usually see that it would have been a  disaster if we had been given what we had asked for. Our lives are in safer and surer hands than our  own.

Jesus Christ no longer walks on the earth in person. He can act  only through us, as our hands become His, and as our voice echoes His voice.

1. See 'The Stripping of the Altars' by Eamon Duffy. Yale  University Press, 1992.

2. See 'The Life of Thomas More' by Peter Ackroyd. London: Chatto  and Windus, 1998.

3. Nuclear Physics in Peace and War. London: Burns and Oates, 1961. Our Nuclear Future? Christian Journals Ltd, 1983. Energy and Environment. London: Bowerdean, 1997. Nuclear Power, Energy and the Environment. London; Imperial College Press, 1999.

A Newman Pilgrimage, 2001

Peter Hodgson, Sister Brigette, FSO, John Hittinger: Newman's Study, Littlemore 2001

[Newman's]  insights into the relationship between faith and reason, into the vital place of revealed religion in civilized society, and into the need for a broadly-based and wide-ranging approach to education were not only of profound importance for Victorian England, but continue today to inspire and enlighten many all over the world.

---  Pope Benedict XVI

MASS FOR THE BEATIFICATION OF BLESSED JOHN HENRY NEWMAN, COFTON PARK, BIRMINGHAM 19 SEPTEMBER 2010

We are grateful for the life and work of Blessed John Henry Newman (1801-1890) and for Pope Benedict's visit to Great Britain. Newman is justly celebrated as one of the greatest witnesses to the truth of the Gospel and Catholic faith in the modern world. Fr Bouyer compares him to Augustine and Aquinas for understanding his importance to our age. Father Dessain, whose book John Henry Newman (1966) remains a useful study, mentions three aspects to the appeal of Newman: i. the strictness and holiness of his life; ii. his "earnest" practical advice in living the Christian life; and iii. his balanced exposition of Christian dogma (p. 16). All of these features are especially apparent in his Parochial and Plain Sermons, but intensify as he crosses the Tiber and becomes a Catholic priest, Oratorian, and Cardinal of the Church. 

As I would like to make some posts about Newman in the coming days, I wish to share a few memories from a Newman pilgrimage I made during Holy Week, 2001 when I was on Sabbatical in St. Andrew's Scotland. I started reading Newman's Sermons during many a long evening in a little flat on North Street across from St Salvator College in the heart of St Andrews. For the very reasons mentioned by Father Dessain I was drawn to them. I would enter each sermon as a secret room with exquisite stained glass whose colors and warmth brought a sense of beauty and joy. Hawthorne's description of stained glass in a Roman church does seem apt as a description of Newman's sermons:

the light, which falls merely on the outside of other pictures, is here interfused throughout the work; it illuminates the design, and invests it with a living radiance; and in requital the unfading colors transmute the common daylight into a miracle of richness and glory in its passage through the heavenly substance of the blessed and angelic shapes which throng the high-arched window. .  .  . [they]  glow like a million of rubies, sapphires, emeralds, and topazes. . . . The pictures are most brilliant in themselves, yet dim with tenderness and reverence because God himself is shining through them. (The Marble Faun, c. 33)

I was more than happy to visit Oxford to visit Peter Hodgson, professor emeritus at Corpus Christi College, former chief of theoretical physics. He promised to show me the Newman places. The previous semester Professor Hodgson had visited the U.S. Air Force Academy where he spoke to cadets about science and faith. I shall share his testimony to the cadets in a subsequent post.

We began the pilgrimage at St Mary the Virgin Church at Oxford where Newman delivered his great Parochial and Plain Sermons. The sexton of the church, a former RAF pilot, decided to help out the visiting professor from the Air Force Academy. He gave us a special tour of the chapel. One could still feel the presence of Newman; a contemporary, William Lockhart, said the year after Newman died: "Newman's sermons came down like a new revelation. He had the wondrous, the supernatural power of raising the mind to God, and rooting deeply in us a personal conviction of God, and a sense of His presence." (1891)

The sexton called his friend, the curate at the Anglican church at Littlemore, built by Newman and his mother.  He would give Dr Hodgson and I a tour. Newman and his mother wished to do something for the poor parishioners in Littlemore, and they designed a beautiful Church with a stone altar, contrary to the regulations of the Anglican community. His mother died before it was completed; Tract 91 was condemned by the leading Bishops, thus dashing the hopes of the Oxford movement for a more Catholic view of the Anglican faith. Newman in conscience knew that he must resign as a curate. He gave the "parting of friends" sermon and went across the street to start a phase of contemplation and writing. Later in life, Newman would lean of this gate and recall with some sadness this "parting of friends."

From the outside Newman's new residence is quite unremarkable; inside its sparse rooms Newman and his friends were devoted to prayer and study. As he wrote the Development of Doctrine he came to understand that the Roman Catholic Church stood in true continuity with the orthodoxy of Athanasius, the other Church fathers, and the gospel.

On the wall in the Littlemore study, in the room where the event occurred,  one can find this plaque. Blessed Dominic Barberi visited Newman on a rainy evening in October 1845. Newman asked to be received into the "one true fold of Christ." He eventually parted for Rome and after becoming a Roman Catholic priest he returned to England and resided in Birmingham, where Benedict XVI recently visited for the beatification. The Oxford years, his happiest he said, were behind him.

Our pilgrimage ended with an afternoon tea and conversation with Sister Brigette, a member of a remarkable order "The Spiritual Family: The Work," based in Austria who are entrusted withe care of the Littlemore residence. Afterward we made a visit to the oratory for hymns, prayers and a rosary (using one of Newman's rosaries). Ever since that visit to Oxford and Littlemore have I felt the presence of Cardinal Newman, especially upon reading those Sermons.

I left the Air Force Academy to pursue Newman's vision of Catholic education. Only later did I come appreciate a deeper understanding of Newman's life which was characterized by much failure only matched by his deep faith and pure hope.

Pope Benedict, in his homily at the beatification, finds the heart of the matter:

Newman helps us to understand what this means for our daily lives: he tells us that our divine Master has assigned a specific task to each one of us, a "definite service", committed uniquely to every single person: "I have my mission", he wrote, "I am a link in a chain, a bond of connexion between persons. He has not created me for naught. I shall do good, I shall do his work; I shall be an angel of peace, a preacher of truth in my own place … if I do but keep his commandments and serve him in my calling" (Meditations and Devotions, 301-2).

Additional images:

From the Tower on the University Chapel

Anglican curate, Littlemore

Front of Littlemore Church

Desk used by Newman to write Development of Doctrine

Archishop Chaput on the years since Kennedy's election

Archbishop Chaput and Dr Bonicelli at HBU March 2010

The conclusion of an essay by Archbishop Chaput in First Things:

In the years since Kennedy’s election, Vatican II and the cultural upheavals of the 1960s, two generations of citizens have grown to maturity. The world is a different place. America is a different place—and in some ways, a far more troubling one. We can’t change history, though we need to remember and understand it. But we can only blame outside factors for our present realities up to a point. As Catholics, like so many other American Christians, we have too often made our country what it is through our appetite for success, our self-delusion, our eagerness to fit in, our vanity, our compromises, our self-absorption and our tepid faith.

If government now pressures religious entities out of the public square, or promotes same-sex “marriage,” or acts in ways that undermine the integrity of the family, or compromises the sanctity of human life, or overrides the will of voters, or discourages certain forms of religious teaching as “hate speech,” or interferes with individual and communal rights of conscience—well, why not? In the name of tolerance and pluralism, we have forgotten why and how we began as nation; and we have undermined our ability to ground our arguments in anything higher than our own sectarian opinions.

The “next America” has been in its chrysalis a long time. Whether people will be happy when it fully emerges remains to be seen. But the future is not predestined. We create it with our choices. And the most important choice we can make is both terribly simple and terribly hard: to actually live what the Church teaches, to win the hearts of others by our witness, and to renew the soul of our country with the courage of our own Christian faith and integrity. There is no more revolutionary act.

See this website

Benedict XVI on education and evangelization

St Mary's University College

Pope Benedict XVI, selections from his talks in England  on education and evangelization

As you know, the task of a teacher is not simply to impart information or to provide training in skills intended to deliver some economic benefit to society; education is not and must never be considered as purely utilitarian. It is about forming the human person, equipping him or her to live life to the full – in short it is about imparting wisdom. And true wisdom is inseparable from knowledge of the Creator, for “both we and our words are in his hand, as are all understanding and skill in crafts” (Wis 7:16).

This transcendent dimension of study and teaching was clearly grasped by the monks who contributed so much to the evangelization of these islands. I am thinking of the Benedictines who accompanied Saint Augustine on his mission to England, of the disciples of Saint Columba who spread the faith across Scotland and Northern England, of Saint David and his companions in Wales. Since the search for God, which lies at the heart of the monastic vocation, requires active engagement with the means by which he makes himself known – his creation and his revealed word – it was only natural that the monastery should have a library and a school . It was the monks’ dedication to learning as the path on which to encounter the Incarnate Word of God that was to lay the foundations of our Western culture and civilization.

POPE BENEDICT XVI, TO TEACHERS, ST MARY'S UNIVERSITY COLLEGE,  TWICKENHAM, 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

In your Catholic schools, there is always a bigger picture over and above the individual subjects you study, the different skills you learn. All the work you do is placed in the context of growing in friendship with God, and all that flows from that friendship. So you learn not just to be good students, but good citizens, good people. As you move higher up the school, you have to make choices regarding the subjects you study, you begin to specialize with a view to what you are going to do later on in life. That is right and proper. But always remember that every subject you study is part of a bigger picture. Never allow yourselves to become narrow. The world needs good scientists, but a scientific outlook becomes dangerously narrow if it ignores the religious or ethical dimension of life, just as religion becomes narrow if it rejects the legitimate contribution of science to our understanding of the world. We need good historians and philosophers and economists, but if the account they give of human life within their particular field is too narrowly focused, they can lead us seriously astray.

A good school provides a rounded education for the whole person. And a good Catholic school, over and above this, should help all its students to become saints.

POPE BENEDICT XVI, TO SCHOOL PUPILS, ST MARY'S UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, TWICKENHAM, 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

On the spiritual level, all of us, in our different ways, are personally engaged in a journey that grants an answer to the most important question of all – the question concerning the ultimate meaning of our human existence. The quest for the sacred is the search for the one thing necessary, which alone satisfies the longings of the human heart. In the fifth century, Saint Augustine described that search in these terms: “Lord, you have created us for yourself and our hearts are restless until they rest in you” (Confessions, Book I, 1). As we embark on this adventure we come to realize more and more that the initiative lies not with us, but with the Lord: it is not so much we who are seeking him, but rather he who is seeking us, indeed it was he who placed that longing for him deep within our hearts.

Your presence and witness in the world points towards the fundamental importance for human life of this spiritual quest in which we are engaged. Within their own spheres of competence, the human and natural sciences provide us with an invaluable understanding of aspects of our existence and they deepen our grasp of the workings of the physical universe, which can then be harnessed in order to bring great benefit to the human family. Yet these disciplines do not and cannot answer the fundamental question, because they operate on another level altogether. They cannot satisfy the deepest longings of the human heart, they cannot fully explain to us our origin and our destiny, why and for what purpose we exist, nor indeed can they provide us with an exhaustive answer to the question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”

The quest for the sacred does not devalue other fields of human enquiry. On the contrary, it places them in a context which magnifies their importance, as ways of responsibly exercising our stewardship over creation.

TO THE REPRESENTATIVES OF OTHER RELIGIONS, ST MARY'S UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, TWICKENHAM 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

This "corrective" role of religion vis-à-vis reason is not always welcomed, though, partly because distorted forms of religion, such as sectarianism and fundamentalism, can be seen to create serious social problems themselves. And in their turn, these distortions of religion arise when insufficient attention is given to the purifying and structuring role of reason within religion. It is a two-way process. Without the corrective supplied by religion, though, reason too can fall prey to distortions, as when it is manipulated by ideology, or applied in a partial way that fails to take full account of the dignity of the human person. Such misuse of reason, after all, was what gave rise to the slave trade in the first place and to many other social evils, not least the totalitarian ideologies of the twentieth century. This is why I would suggest that the world of reason and the world of faith – the world of secular rationality and the world of religious belief – need one another and should not be afraid to enter into a profound and ongoing dialogue, for the good of our civilization.

WESTMINSTER HALL, THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT LONDON, 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

Gathered in this ancient monastic church, we can recall the example of a great Englishman and churchman whom we honour in common: Saint Bede the Venerable. At the dawn of a new age in the life of society and of the Church, Bede understood both the importance of fidelity to the word of God as transmitted by the apostolic tradition, and the need for creative openness to new developments and to the demands of a sound implantation of the Gospel in contemporary language and culture.

POPE BENEDICT XVI, EVENSONG, WESTMINSTER ABBEY  LONDON, 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

The Council’s appeal to the lay faithful to take up their baptismal sharing in Christ’s mission echoed the insights and teachings of John Henry Newman. May the profound ideas of this great Englishman continue to inspire all Christ’s followers in this land to conform their every thought, word and action to Christ, and to work strenuously to defend those unchanging moral truths which, taken up, illuminated and confirmed by the Gospel, stand at the foundation of a truly humane, just and free society.

How much contemporary society needs this witness! How much we need, in the Church and in society, witnesses of the beauty of holiness, witnesses of the splendour of truth, witnesses of the joy and freedom born of a living relationship with Christ! One of the greatest challenges facing us today is how to speak convincingly of the wisdom and liberating power of God’s word to a world which all too often sees the Gospel as a constriction of human freedom, instead of the truth which liberates our minds and enlightens our efforts to live wisely and well, both as individuals and as members of society.

POPE BENEDICT XVI, CATHEDRAL OF THE MOST PRECIOUS BLOOD, WESTMINSTER 18 SEPTEMBER 2010

Benedict XVI on role of religion in public life

Pope Benedict XVI admires "Scotland the Brave"

Words of wisdom from Benedict XVI on a theme of recent postings (presented without comment, or perhaps with a simple "Amen")

The name of Holyroodhouse, Your Majesty’s official residence in Scotland, recalls the "Holy Cross" and points to the deep Christian roots that are still present in every layer of British life. The monarchs of England and Scotland have been Christians from very early times and include outstanding saints like Edward the Confessor and Margaret of Scotland. As you know, many of them consciously exercised their sovereign duty in the light of the Gospel, and in this way shaped the nation for good at the deepest level. As a result, the Christian message has been an integral part of the language, thought and culture of the peoples of these islands for more than a thousand years. Your forefathers’ respect for truth and justice, for mercy and charity come to you from a faith that remains a mighty force for good in your kingdom, to the great benefit of Christians and non-Christians alike.

As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the twentieth century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a "reductive vision of the person and his destiny" (Caritas in Veritate, 29).

STATE WELCOME TO THE UNITED KINGDOM
PALACE OF HOLYROODHOUSE, EDINBURGH
16 SEPTEMBER 2010

The evangelization of culture is all the more important in our times, when a “dictatorship of relativism” threatens to obscure the unchanging truth about man’s nature, his destiny and his ultimate good. There are some who now seek to exclude religious belief from public discourse, to privatize it or even to paint it as a threat to equality and liberty. Yet religion is in fact a guarantee of authentic liberty and respect, leading us to look upon every person as a brother or sister.

For this reason I appeal in particular to you, the lay faithful, in accordance with your baptismal calling and mission, not only to be examples of faith in public, but also to put the case for the promotion of faith’s wisdom and vision in the public forum. Society today needs clear voices which propose our right to live, not in a jungle of self-destructive and arbitrary freedoms, but in a society which works for the true welfare of its citizens and offers them guidance and protection in the face of their weakness and fragility. Do not be afraid to take up this service to your brothers and sisters, and to the future of your beloved nation.

MASS OF ST NINIAN, APOSTLE OF SCOTLAND
BELLAHOUSTON PARK
GLASGOW 16 SEPTEMBER 2010

Religion, in other words, is not a problem for legislators to solve, but a vital contributor to the national conversation. In this light, I cannot but voice my concern at the increasing marginalization of religion, particularly of Christianity, that is taking place in some quarters, even in nations which place a great emphasis on tolerance. There are those who would advocate that the voice of religion be silenced, or at least relegated to the purely private sphere. There are those who argue that the public celebration of festivals such as Christmas should be discouraged, in the questionable belief that it might somehow offend those of other religions or none. And there are those who argue – paradoxically with the intention of eliminating discrimination – that Christians in public roles should be required at times to act against their conscience. These are worrying signs of a failure to appreciate not only the rights of believers to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, but also the legitimate role of religion in the public square. I would invite all of you, therefore, within your respective spheres of influence, to seek ways of promoting and encouraging dialogue between faith and reason at every level of national life.

TO BRITISH SOCIETY
WESTMINSTER HALL, THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT
LONDON 17 SEPTEMBER 2010

Fr Sturzo on the "Laic state"

Fr Don Luigi Sturzo (1871-1959)

Fr. Luigi Sturzo was a giant in the renewal of modern Catholicism in the face of the secularist state (he called the laic state). He was one of the founders of the Christian democrats in Italy; a critic of fascism, he was exiled and he spent time in England and the United States; after the war he returned to Italy where he continued to write. Theologian and philosopher, sociologist and politician, Fr. Sturzo wrote much on the challenges to the Church in the modern world. One of his classic books is entitled Church and State (Notre Dame, 1962). His description of the aggressive posture of the secularist state towards the Church is prescient:

The struggle between the Church and state today is carried on in the moral field in the fundamental conflict between the morality of Christianity and that of the State. . . .  Christianity is menaced by a powerful antagonist which without being either a religion or a divinity assumes the character of both, to cancel them, were it possible in itself, and certainly to absorb or dominate them. . . . The State today claims human personality for itself and suppresses all liberty in order to transfer the course of liberty to the group it represents. It leaves freedom of worship but seeks to render it barren by separating morality from worship and emancipating state morality from any heteronomous bond. . . . The morality of the Church either coincides with that of the State or should be eliminated. The State not only takes no account of it in its laws (e.g., divorce, abortion, eugenics, compulsory laic education) but it sets its authority above the Church, forcing the Church to give public support to the acts of political power . . . hence its character as a personal religion is stricken at the roots. . . . The laic state in proclaiming a morality of its own, created an irremediable dualism with Christian morality, but so long as the State left the individual citizen free to profess, propagate and defend their moral and political ideals, there was no danger of an ethical schism between the faithful of a particular State and the Church. When, however, the laic state claimed to impose its own morality on all, in the name of the will of the people or the will of the nation  . . . then apostasy, initially confined to the central power becomes the apostasy of the masses. (pp. 530-532)

 I left out some passages and phrases in order to capture the general drift of Sturzo's observations and predictions; he had in mind first and foremost the totalitarian state, as you may have gathered. It is not exactly what is occurring in western democracies, but it is close; Pope John Paul II did not hesitate to identify certain trends as pointing towards a "tyrant state" particularly in its laws and ideologies concerning life and death. We do not face one all powerful "State" entity; we face a more diffuse complex entity of state power, bureaucratic agencies, media and entertainment industries, cultural and educational programs and, yes, industries. But the cumulative effect is trending towards the totalitarian hostility noted by Sturzo in the fascist and communist states.

If we back up to the beginning of the chapter from I quoted he lays down this general principle:

In all the varied and chaotic experiences of the new State a kind of "laic confessionalism" (I would translate as "public secularist commitment") instead of "State conformism" for the laic state (secularist state) sought to obtain from its citizens not merely formal and outward assent (which would suffice for conformism) but a convinced and entire support, which is best expressed by the word "confessionalism." Instead of a confession of faith in God and in the Church, there was a kind of confession of faith in the laic state. And little by little this was extending its sway over individual activities, with control and monopoly in culture and education, and subsequently in economic and political life, liberties were restricted or falsified or suppressed. This reversal of the positions has reached its climax today with what are known as totalitarian States. (pp 526-27)

 The shocking conclusion is only so because the climax did not fade with the collapse of the Wall in 1989; Pope John Paul II saw the menace in the west in the juggernaut of abortion and all that follows in its wake. There are many ironies here, perhaps the greatest being that many Catholic leaders have led the way in promoting the secularist confession, the Kennedy brothers being prime examples, but they fan out now throughout Congress, the media, and academia. It is certainly not too late to resist this tyrant state in its political/cultural complex  -- but we must wake up, name names, and rally to our true home and the most noble standards which still flutter in the breeze at many "camps and havens" throughout the land.

Blogging from Camp Chesterton, half way up Peak Parmenides,

JPH

The Houston Chronicle -- Anti-Catholicism Redux

Zola accuses the French Republic of anti-Semitism

The Houston Chronicle published a chirpy little piece on the Kennedy speech by a professor Brian Kaylor, "Kennedy speech eloquently balanced religion, politics." Kennedy achieved a "pitch perfect" balance, he opines. He proceeds with a hackneyed account of a few parts of the speech. Now why would the Chronicle choose to publish a trite piece by an academic at a college in the orbit of the beltway, and completely ignore a significant, creative speech in their own backyard? The Chronicle knew about the Santorum speech. But why not one word, why not even a peep from the Houston Chronicle about a major event at Houston's only Catholic University? It is painfully clear -- the Chronicle is vehemently anti-Catholic. They lead the charge in support of Planned Parenthood, gay rights, and Church bashing. So why would they possibly give a pro-life, national figure with a persuasive speech, "who happens to be a Catholic," the time of day? They can do what they please and no one calls them out.

J'accuse. I say it is anti-Catholicism redux. Kennedy expelled the demon of bigotry and it came back seven-fold. The Kennedy myth assures the American liberals that Catholics can really be alright and reasonable after all (i.e., pro-abortion). Any threat to that myth must be squashed. And they do it just the way Tocqueville and Solzhenitsyn have noted -- turn them into nobodies, deprive them of voice. Thank God for the internet; the monopolies of the liberal Chronicle type news outlets are quickly being out flanked by the new journalism. Readers of blogs all over the country now know more than the avergae reader of the Chronicle.

But I must turn one more time to Pope John Paul II to get to the root of the problem. The liberal dealers of death and their conspiracy of silence hide behind the cloak of majority rule and legalism. Here is  John Paul II's incisive analysis identifying the contradiction at the heart of liberal society:

We have what appear to be two diametrically opposed tendencies. On the one hand, individuals claim for themselves in the moral sphere the most complete freedom of choice and demand that the State should not adopt or impose any ethical position but limit itself to guaranteeing maximum space for the freedom of each individual, with the sole limitation of not infringing on the freedom and rights of any other citizen. On the other hand, it is held that, in the exercise of public and professional duties, respect for other people's freedom of choice requires that each one should set aside his or her own convictions in order to satisfy every demand of the citizens which is recognized and guaranteed by law; in carrying out one's duties the only moral criterion should be what is laid down by the law itself. Individual responsibility is thus turned over to the civil law, with a renouncing of personal conscience, at least in the public sphere. (Gospel of Life §69)

Here is Kennedy's hidden legacy -- a forgetfulness of what makes for conscience -- and to forget is to have renounced already. As the Psalmist said: "If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither!" (137:5) Need I remind the reader that for a Catholic, the Church is the new Jerusalem. Hence, if I forget thee . . . I have renounced thee.

A culture which renounces true conscience has become totalitarian. True conscience requires a struggle with God. At the heart of every culture is the question about man’s relation to God. §24  Some try to eliminate the very question. Best of all just ignore those who speak about faith in the public square; if one must acknowledge them, just call them "theocrats" and "move on" quickly.

Man is above all “a being who seeks for truth and to live in that truth” (§50). The open search for truth is precisely what defines a culture. Faith and reason are two wings by which man ascends to the truth about God. Sen Santorum quips "the movement in our country to fly on “one wing,” reason alone will ultimately undermine the very foundation of our country – freedom."

The Church will serve as the sign and safeguard of the transcendence of the human person through its commitment to truth. The “source and synthesis” of all rights is the right to religious freedom, which entails the “right to live in the truth of one’s faith and in conformity with the transcendent dignity of the human person.” (§47) That means politicians, doctors, nurses, teachers, -- a right to live in the truth of one's faith, and to speak it.

By the suppression of conscience, the approval of the killing of the innocent (it is legal), the endorsement of gay marriage (it is a constitutional right), the liberal state shows that it is not a neutral body, but a secularist state. Kennedy opened the way for Catholics to build the secularist state; the Houston Chronicle sings its praises every day. It is not a neutral source of news, but an organ of the secularist state.  

Pravda brooks no rivals. Sorry, Senator Santorum.