Guess Who Came To Dinner?

Although I have seen howls of indignation from certain right-fringe corners of the Catholic cyberspace, personally I was tickled to see that Pope Benedict XVI met at Castel Gandolfo last week with his onetime colleague and friend, Fr. Hans Küng:

"[W]hy did Benedict, 78, open his doors to Küng? The first answer may be as simple as the desire to catch up with an old friend and colleague: the two men had taught together at the University of Tübingen, and both had served as theological advisers during the Second Vatican Council. Küng , 77, was quoted in the Italian daily Corriere della Sera on Tuesday as saying the Saturday dinner meeting at the papal summer residence in Castel Gondolfo was ‘a reciprocal joy to see each other after so many years.’ A Vatican statement said that the pair’s standing doctrinal disputes were not broached. Among the topics reportedly covered were the relationship between faith and science, and interfaith dialogue.

"But if this was simply a personal catching-up or theological rap session, Ratzinger might have invited Küng for dinner during his two decades as a Rome-based cardinal. Instead, it appears that the new pope wants to establish an ongoing open dialogue with those who may have different views. The Küng dinner is, in fact, Benedict’s third potentially controversial encounter in the past month. In late August, the pope met with the Italian writer Oriana Fallaci, who has penned fiercely anti-Muslim books since 9/11, and then two days later he welcomed Bishop Bernard Fellay, the excommunicated head of an ultraconservative movement founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

"It’s hard to know the specific motivation behind Benedict’s desire to meet with each of these surprise visitors. But it is by now clear that the new Pope is conscious that his job description has radically changed. As Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for 20 years, Cardinal Ratzinger had been responsible for keeping certain arguments on theological lock-down. But when you become father to a flock of 1 billion, your dining-room door must be kept as open as possible."

GET THE STORY.

GET MORE OF THE STORY HERE.

I think in these stories of Pope Benedict’s meetings with various individuals, representative of different movements of concern to the Church, we can see one difference in pastoral approach between John Paul II and Benedict. John Paul was a master at connecting to crowds of people and, by doing so, showing them how they were united; Benedict is proving himself to be a connector with individuals, and perhaps, by his approach, will show individuals — and possibly their representative movements — how they can connect themselves to the wider human family and ultimately to Christ.

Duck Soup

Duck_soup16_1I really like the Marx Brothers brand of zany humor.

Recently I re-watched their movie Duck Soup and it reminded me of just how funny the brothers can be.

Duck Soup is my favorite of all the Marx Brothers films–at least of all the ones I’ve seen thus far (there are still some I have yet to watch). It’s also widely considered the best of their films by film critics.

One note for readers who aren’t native English-speakers: The title of the movie is not to be taken literally. Americans almost never eat duck soup. Instead, the phrase "duck soup" is a metaphor that refers to something that is very easy. If you say, "That’s just duck soup," you mean "That’s very easy" (not that many folks use this phrase much any more; presumably it dates to an era when more Americans went duck hunting).

The film was made in 1933, in the midst of the Great Depression. It shows the Marx Brothers at the peak of their form. (In fact, this was the last Marx Brothers film to feature Zeppo–the Marx Brother who served as "romantic interest" in their early films. After this, Zeppo stayed behind the scenes and let Groucho, Chico, and Harpo completely take over the spotlight.)

Duck_soup50Among other classic bits, Duck Soup contains the famous "mirror gag."

In this scene, Groucho is confronted with Harpo (and later Chico) dressed exactly as he is.

They mimmic his behavior to an impossibly exact degree, creating the illusion that he is looking into a mirror when he is really looking at someone mimmicing him.

This was not the first or the last time the mirror gag would be used. It was previously used in a couple of silent films and was later used by Lucille Ball (with Harpo Marx) and on The X-Files.

In addition to physical comedy involving Harpo, there’s also a lot of wordplay involving Groucho and Chico. Recently here on the blog we were talking about the nature of comedy and the subject of wordplay came up as a form of (frequently) unhurtful humor that doesn’t presuppose that anyone is unfortunate. It can just be a game where we see how cleverly words can be bounced off each other.

The Marx Brothers were great at that. (Though some of their wordplay does contain barbs–particularly toward their regular leading lady Margaret Dumont–as well as occasional politically incorrect remarks since these films were made in the 1930s.)

I don’t remember when but I apparently saw this films as a boy.

How do I know that if I don’t remember it?

Because the film messed me up with respect to American history. We Americanistas all know of "the midnight ride of Paul Revere"–a famous event in our history in which the silversmith Paul Revere made a . . . uh . . . midnight ride and warned the countryside that British troops were coming in from Boston.

This occurred in 1775, the year before we threw off the shackles of Our British Oppressors (now Our British Best Buddies).

According to the story, Paul Revere was supposed to watch the tower of the Old North Church, where he would see one lantern if the British troops were coming by land and two lanterns if they were coming by sea. In HISTORY, he saw two lanters and rode off telling people that the British Redcoats were coming by sea, but in Duck Soup‘s re-enactment of the scene there’s a joke where Groucho sees three lanterns, and he declares that "They’re coming by land and sea!"

I saw that as a boy and that one image sank into my brain. The image of those three lanterns being lit stuck with me, and I thought I’d seen it in one of those stiff, formal "you are there" history reenactment films they’d show us in school.

I was in my twenties or thirties before I realized that this was A JOKE and not what really happened.

The film makes fun of all kinds of history–including the contemporary European history of when it was made. It features the fortunes of an imaginary European country named Fredonia, which is locked in conflict with the neighboring country, Sylvania. It deals with the problems of taxes and economics and national pride and self-defense that plagued the nations of Europe between the two World Wars.

Evil dictator Benito Mussolini thought it so closely reflected the events of the day in Italy that he BANNED the film, much to the delight of the Marx Brothers.

Duck_soup48The movie is a regular history-slaw, which must have used just about every historical costume that Paramount Pictures had in their wardrobe department.

Despite the fact that Duck Soup is commonly regarded as the greatest of the Marx Brothers films (by me and others), it was for many years unavailable on DVD.

It was apparently released on DVD early on, but went out of print and was only available at insanely expensive prices (like $300 a disk!).

But it has recently been re-released and is now available again at HUMAN prices!

GET THE FILM ALONE.

GET IT AS PART OF A 5-DISK MARX BROTHERS SET FROM PARAMOUNT.

“Hypothetical” Marriage Case

A reader writes:

Hypothetical;

A non-catholic couple, married in a civil ceremony.

Wife of couple expresses  an interest in the Catholic Faith.  However, she is concerned that while her husband would not be unecessarily difficult, he would want as little to do with the matter as possible.

What would need to take place in terms of convalidation?

Nothing. At least, nothing given the fact pattern you have mentioned. If two non-Catholics get married, they are not bound to observe the Catholic form of marriage and thus are presumed to be validly married unless there is something else affecting the situation (like one of them having been previously married to someone else, in which case they need an annulment but probably even then they don’t need a convalidation). I’m just not hearing anything that would trigger a need for a convalidation.

Would this take place privately at the parish (not during a Mass, for example)

Convalidations are typically private, with just a few people (witnesses) present.

What role would the husband be expected to play

Be the husband.

(other than being the husband! )?

Oh, uh . . . nothing then.

Would the husband be expected to go to private discussions with the parish priest in preparation for the event. etc (this couple have been married for a looooong time 🙂

Okay, this ain’t sounding so hypothetical any more. Not that that makes any difference. The answers are still of general educational value, one way or ‘tuther.

The answer, though, will probably vary from place to place. When my wife and I had our marriage convalidated, there was no pre-marriage prep as we’d already been living as man and wife for several years, but that might be different in other places. I couldn’t say.

how soon after a convalidation would the wifes reception into the church take place….

Thus far I haven’t heard that a convalidation is even necessary, but if one were then there would not need to be any waiting period before reception into the Church, assuming that the wife had already taken whatever instruction in the Catholic faith her situation would require.

oh, I’ve just thought of something else….what if the husband was baptised in an emergency situation as a baby and has no certificate…but also no desire to be Catholic?

Doesn’t make any difference as far as the need for a convalidation. As long as he wasn’t formally a member of the Catholic Church at the time of the ceremony, he wasn’t bound by form. If a convalidation were needed, though, he would need to be informed of the wife’s obligation to do her best to see that any kids that result from the union get raised Catholic.

Also, the conjugal relations stuff (sorry but I have to ask)… would the wife, if she were received into the faith,need to confess having sexual relations with her husband if the marriage has been convalidated

If a convalidation is not needed then there is no need to confess prior sexual relations (unless they occurred after the wife’s baptism, if she’s already baptized, and before the marriage ceremony).

If a convalidation is needed (for some reason I can’t fathom given the fact pattern as described) then the wife would need to confess prior sexual relations with the husband IF she believed them to be gravely sinful at the time and did them with deliberate consent of the will. Otherwise, they weren’t mortal sins and don’t need to be confessed.

Hope this helps! . . . er, hypothetically speaking, that is. 🙂

So Where’s MY Serenity Screening???

Serenitythumb_1

I’m very jealous that the publicists for the upcoming movie Serenity (based on the cult sci-fi show Firefly) have invited the guys over at Powerline to have a screening of the movie for themselves and 120 or so of their readers.

I mean, John Hinderaker, who does their review, spends half of the piece talking about the fact that he isn’t a sci-fi fan, doesn’t watch TV, and hasn’t seen a sci-fi movie since Star Wars (the ORIGINAL one).

What pearls before swine! I mean, that’s just fahng-tzong fung-kwong duh jeh.

On the other hand, I’m very pleased to note what this represents. As Hinderaker explains:

These folks have figured out that the major bloggers have audiences that exceed those of most newspaper and magazine movie reviewers, and that we can help generate word of mouth traffic and, better yet, controversy [SOURCE].

Yet another indication of life in the fourth age of human communications.

And I’m not really bitter about not getting a Serenity screening.

After all, they can’t take the sky from me.

PRE-UPDATE: STEVEN D. GREYDANUS’S REVIEW OF SERENITY IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. (And it’s insightful.)

New Public School Bible Textbook?

A reader writes:

Jimmy –

I know you get quite a bit of e-mail during the day but I found this article & thought you’d find it interesting.  It’s about a new book called  "The Bible and Its Influence" that’s intended to teach how literature, society, politics, etc, have been influenced by the Bible & it’s meant to be used in public schools.  I found it a very interesting piece.

So did I.

GET THE STORY.

SWEET! HIV Getting Weaker?

Virushivlaevo150_1There’s a new report out that the HIV virus may be getting weaker.

EXCERPTS:

A team at the Institute of Tropical Medicine, in Antwerp, compared HIV-1 samples from 1986-89 and 2002-03.


They found the newer samples appeared not to multiply as well, and were more sensitive to drugs


Researcher Dr Eric Artz said: "This was a very preliminary study, but we did find a pretty striking observation in that the viruses from the 2000s are much weaker than the viruses from the eighties.


"Obviously this virus is still causing death, although it may be causing death at a slower rate of progression now. Maybe in another 50 to 60 years we might see this virus not causing death."


Keith Alcorn, senior editor at the HIV information charity NAM, said it had been thought that HIV would increase in virulence as it passed through more and more human hosts.


But the latest study suggested the opposite is actually true.

Now why would that be? The article goes on to speculate about possible reasons (and they’re only possible; the study might be wrong and the virus might actually be increasing in strength), but it’s important to remember something:

Viruses don’t want to kill you.

In fact, viruses don’t want anything. They have no minds. To the extent they can be said to analogically "want" anything, they "want" only to reproduce themselves. You dying is just a side-effect of their reproductive process. If they can find a way to reproduce without killing you, it’s all the same to them.

In fact, it may even be better, as they can reproduce more if the host stays alive. That’s why the most successful viruses either don’t kill, don’t kill often, or kill really slowly. For viruses, like for people at parties, it’s bad form to kill the host. Tends to bring the party to a halt.

That’s one reason why really destructive pathogens like Ebola only occur in small outbreaks: They kill off the hosts before they can spread far and wide.

Allowing extra life to the host allows extra reproductive potential to the virus, and HIV may be in the process of figuring this out (in a mindless sort of way).

Unfortunately, it’s too slow a process to do anybody today any good.

I just hope HIV weakens enough that we can finally figure out how to give it a knockout punch and eliminate its threat entirely!

In the meantime,

GET THE STORY.

Brain Death?

A reader writes:

A national Catholic paper recently referred to the Church’s teaching on "brain death." I haven’t seen this in the Catechism. What is the Church’s teaching on "brain death"?

I haven’t seen the paper you refer to (so I deleted the name of it), but it would be misleading to state in a blunt fashion that the Church has a "teaching" on the concept of brain death. This term is not used in magisterial documents, and the key document that delves into this area contain important qualifications that make it possible to say that there is a "teaching" here only in the most tenuous sense.

The situation is analagous to the question of evolution. The Church doesn’t have a "teaching" on evolution per se. Evolution is a scientific hypothesis, and the Church is not in the business of teaching scientific hypotheses. What the Church does teach on is Scripture and the deposit of faith, and in the 1950s Pope Pius XII issued a preliminary finding that certain versions of biological evolution do not appear to conflict with what is found in the sources of revelation. A Catholic is thus morally permitted to believe in those forms of evolution.

Whether any of them are true or not, though, is a matter of science, not of faith, and thus the Church does not teach evolution. It teaches only that certain forms of evolution would not contradict the sources of faith and that a Catholic may accept these forms of evolutionary belief if he feels that the evidence warrantes them.

A similar situation pertains to the subject of "brain death." The Church does not teach, as some individuals hold, that an individual is dead when he is "brain dead." Instead, in the year 2000 Pope John Paul II issued a preliminary finding that certain versions of "brain death" criteria do not appear to conflict with what is found in the sources of faith regarding the human person and that a Catholic is thus morally permitted to act on those versions of brain death criteria.

Here’s what the pope said:

Continue reading “Brain Death?”

Blog Day Off

Sorry, folks!

It was one thing after another yesterday, and I didn’t stop having meetings with people (in person or by phone) until late in the evening.

Was therefore unable to do my usual blogging.

Blogging should resume tomorrow.

In the meantime, enjoy the archives!

Stories Of Terri

To coincide with the first anniversary of her death this coming March, the Schindler family will be releasing a book on their struggle to save her life:

"Terri Schiavo’s parents and siblings are writing a book about their struggle in the epic end-of-life case that divided the country and captured the attention of everyone from the Pope John Paul II to President Bush, their publisher said Tuesday.

"The yet untitled memoir by parents Bob and Mary Schindler, brother Bobby Schindler and sister Suzanne Vitadamo will be published in March to coincide with the first anniversary of the death of the brain-damaged woman, whose feeding tube was removed after her husband won a court order to do so.

"’This book is the moving story of an ordinary family caught up in extraordinary circumstances, and it will set the record straight for the first time,’ said Jamie Raab, senior vice president and publisher at Warner Books in New York."

Apparently unwilling to miss out on the action, Terri’s husband and murderer Michael Schiavo also plans to release his own memoir, to be titled Terri: The Truth, in which it is likely that he will tell everything but that:

"The Schindlers’ book is likely to compete for space on the shelves with a memoir by Terri Schiavo’s husband, Michael, who fought his in-laws in court for eight years to end her life, arguing she would not have wanted to be kept alive in what doctors called a persistent vegetative state.

"Michael Schiavo said he is collaborating on the book with author Michael Hirsh. The 280-page book is titled Terri: [T]he Truth, and is planned for release in March by Dutton Publishing."

GET THE STORY.

The Schindlers will not profit from their book on Terri, instead planning to "donate profits from the book to a foundation they established when they were fighting to save Terri’s life, Warner Books said. The foundation now is dedicated to protecting severely disabled people."

No word yet on Michael Schiavo’s plans for the money he will make from his book.