 | | March 6, 2013 |  | By Jonathan V. Last | |  |  |  | | | | COLD OPEN |  |  | Richard John Neuhaus, priest, writer, and founder of the magazine First Things, used to tell a story about the problems of the secular press covering sacred matters. Neuhaus was being interviewed by the "religion reporter" from a big-city newspaper—one of the papers with a national following—on some subject and, in the course of expressing bemused frustration with the fallen nature of man, he said, "But of course, it's been this way since that unfortunate afternoon in the garden."
Father Neuhaus could make even throwaway lines of conversation glisten.
There was a long pause on the other end of the line as the reporter diligently scribbled down the quote. Then the reporter dutifully asked, "And which garden would that have been?"
All of which is to say that if media reporting on religion in general is usually bad, then media reporting on papal conclaves—which are the Super Bowls of religion—is the worst.
Eight years ago, when Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger was selected to be Pope Benedict XVI, I had some fun pointing out how just about every mainstream press account described Ratzinger with the same adjective: "hardliner." This, despite the fact that (1) Most had basically no idea who Ratzinger was and (2) Their definition of "hardliner" seemed to be that Ratzinger believed the central teachings of the Catholic church on abortion, same-sex marriage, and the ordination of female priests—which would make probably 99 percent of all Catholic priests "hardliners."
This time around, the media started covering itself in idiocy even before the pre-conclave meetings. One reporter breathlessly detailed the quest of Italian cardinals to "reclaim the papacy"—as if the Chair of St. Peter was the Olympic gold medal in basketball and the Italian cardinals were the Redeem Team. Another reporter claimed that two American cardinals (Timothy Dolan and Sean O'Malley) were being "talked about" and "seriously considered" for the papacy.
How serious a chance do Cardinals Dolan and O'Malley really have? Let's put it this way, dear reader: I don't know you. I don't know anything about you. Or even what religion you adhere to. But whoever you are and whatever you believe, you have as good a shot at being named pope as do Dolan and O'Malley.
So what should we do if we want to learn about the pope, the Vatican, or what's actually going on in the Catholic Church right now? We can start with George Weigel.
Weigel is many things—a philosopher and theologian par excellence. A gifted reporter. And probably the most formidable Catholic mind in America. But I like to encapsulate his greatness thusly: George Weigel is the only man I know who's written a book that will still be read a century from now. Witness to Hope, his biography of Pope John Paul II, is the kind of literary achievement that goes up on the same shelf with William Manchester's biography of Churchill and Lord Charnwood's biography of Lincoln—it is a great book, about a great man, that belongs to the ages.
If you wanted to understand the conclave that chose that "hardliner" Pope Benedict XVI, you had to read Weigel's book God's Choice.
And if you want to understand the philosophical shift that is taking place in the church now—and which will likely form the foundation of the next pontificate—you have to read his new book, Evangelical Catholicism.
More on Weigel in a minute. |  | | LOOKING BACK |  |  | "This was the tradition that George W. Bush, another successful nineties governor, was supposed to revive in his 2000 campaign, after the Gingrich revolutionaries lost their way. But while Bush's instincts were sound, his insistence on 'compassion' as the appropriate attitude toward the poor struck exactly the wrong note. It spoke to upper-middle class feelings of noblesse oblige, not to the aspirations of poor Americans with a drive to succeed. As Mickey Kaus argued when the Bush campaign theme was first unveiled in 1999, the language of compassion has an inegalitarian and even condescending edge. Worse, it effaces the all-important distinction between those who deserve public assistance and those who do not.
"Giuliani, by contrast, has always been a 'respect' conservative. Delivering safe streets to New Yorkers wasn't an act of magnanimity, but rather an obligation. And, as Giuliani made clear, citizens and public servants were expected to fulfill their obligations as well. Anyone who failed to abide by this basic contract, whether a petty thief or a police commander who failed to meet crime-reduction targets, would be held accountable.
—Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam, "'Respect Conservatism'" from our March 5, 2007, issue.
Remember you get full access to THE WEEKLY STANDARD archive when you subscribe. | | | | | | | | THE READING LIST |  |  | Message to President Obama: Even the climate change science community thinks you're overselling the global warming stuff.
* * *
The Story of Debbie Heald: Remembering when a 16-year-old girl shocked the running world. (And don't miss the actual race footage—the final lap is one of the greatest sports moments you'll ever see.)
* * *
The Rubber Room: Where New York City's worst teachers go to "earn" their living. | | | | INSTANT CLASSIC | | |  | "At one stage late in our interview, after I have switched off the video camera and Ishiguro is standing behind Geminoid F, I ask him if I can see beneath her skin. He fiddles with the seam at the back of her skull before saying no. But his hand lingers, and I notice he is tenderly stroking her hair.
"I ask Ishiguro whether he's started having feelings for the robot?
"'Maybe. confusing. We are working so many years together. I'm very sure my students, some of them are loving this humanoid,' he says. 'The relationship is very human.'
"One day, Ishiguro says, when the parts of one of their geminoids wear out, it will be time to dispose of it. When that happens, he and his students will hold a memorial service."
—Aubrey Belford on Japan's robot culture, The Global Mail, February 23, 2013 |  | | LOOKING AHEAD |  | | | | We'll have articles on Ireland, women in combat, and Medicaid in upcoming issues of THE WEEKLY STANDARD. |  | | THE LAST WORD |  |  | George Weigel's Evangelical Catholicism is, undoubtedly, a book for Catholics—the central thrust of it being to chart a new course for the Church as it engages the world. In it, he argues that the Church can only confront modernity by moving beyond its "Counter-Reformation" period. Here's Weigel:
Counter-Reformation Catholicism created Catholic cultures (or microcultures) that transmitted the faith as if by osmosis. But when the acids of modernity hit those Catholic cultures with full force—especially in the turbulence of the 1960s—those Catholic microcultures crumbled: in the urban-ethnic Catholic centers of the United States, in Quebec, in Ireland, in Spain, in Portugal, in the Netherlands, in Bavaria, in France, and indeed throughout the North Atlantic Catholic world.…
Modernity breaks down traditional cultures through a process of pluralization. Under the conditions of modernity … competing explanations of the world and the human prospect inevitably emerge. As Berger wrote, "modernity … relativizes all worldviews and value systems, including religious ones. …" In these circumstances, religious certainty is not, and cannot be, transmitted through osmosis by the ambient culture (or microculture). Religious faith, commitment to a religious community, and a religiously informed morality can no longer be taken for granted.
This is stern stuff, especially for people like me who carry the secret hope of being able to construct something like the Catholic ghetto of old for their families. Weigel argues—convincingly—that even if you could recreate that experience, it's no longer enough.
And what he proposes is an "Evangelical Catholicism," not as a change to the faith but as a mode of expressing the faith and engaging it with the world.
But what makes Evangelical Catholicism (the book, not the mode of expression) of interest to non-Catholics is that what Weigel has done is create a new foundation for the Church that is likely to undergird the next pontificate.
In many ways, Evangelical Catholicism may do for this conclave what The Ratzinger Report did, in 1985, for the Church's understanding of the Second Vatican Council.
If you want to understand what's happening in Rome in the coming days, start with Weigel's important book.
Well, that's enough Vatican talk for one newsletter. I'll see you next week. As always, keep calm and carry on. And remember, you can follow me on Twitter @JVLast or email me with tips, thoughts, etc., at editor@weeklystandard.com.
Best,
Jonathan V. Last
 Share
P.S. To unsubscribe, click here. I won't take it personally. |  | |  |  |  | MORE FROM THE WEEKLY STANDARD | | |  |  |  |  | | | Online Store |  | | Squeeze the head to the left to relieve stress. Yes you can! Only at our store. | | |  | | |  | |  | | |  | | | Subscribe Today | | | | Get the magazine that The Economist has called "a wry observer of the American scene." |  |  | | |  | | | | | | | | Read probing editorials and unconventional analysis from political writers with a
dose of political humor at weeklystandard.com. |  | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment