-
The Incredible Shrinking Monsieur Hollande
May 7, 2013 | 11 comments
-
Islam and the Closing of the Secular Mind
September 19, 2012 | 97 comments
-
A Book That Changed Reality
August 15, 2012 | 5 comments
-
The Prophet of Europe’s Crisis
July 2, 2012 | 9 comments
-
Why Austerity Isn’t Enough
June 8, 2012 | 26 comments
A Further Perspective
Benedict XVI: Christian Radical
Those accustomed to cartoon-like depictions of Joseph Ratzinger as a “reactionary” might be surprised by this description.
As the condom-wars ignited by Benedict XVI’s Light of the World abate, some attention might finally be paid to the book’s broader themes and what they indicate about Benedict’s pontificate. In this regard, perhaps the interview’s most revealing aspect is the picture that emerges of Pope Benedict as nothing more and nothing less than a Christian radical.
Those accustomed to cartoon-like depictions of Joseph Ratzinger as a “reactionary” might be surprised by this description. But by “radical,” I don’t mean the type of priest or minister who only wears clerical garb when attending left-wing rallies or publically disputing particular church doctrines.
The word “radical” comes from the Latin radix, meaning “root.” It’s in this sense Benedict is radical. His pontificate is about going back to Christianity’s roots to make, as Benedict says, “visible again the center of Christian life” and then shining that light upon the world so that we might see the truth about ourselves.
At Christianity’s center, Benedict states, is the person of Jesus Christ. But this person, the pope insists, is not whoever we want him to be. Christ is not the self-help guru proclaimed by the charlatans of the Prosperity Gospel. Nor is he the proto-Marxist beloved by devotees of the now-defunct liberation theologies. Still less is Christ a “compassionate, super-intelligent gay man,” as once opined by that noted biblical scholar, Elton John.
According to Benedict, Christ is who Christ says he is: the Son of God. Hence, there is no contradiction between what some call “the Christ of faith” and “the Christ of history.” In Light of the World, Benedict confirms that underscoring this point was why he wrote his best-selling Jesus of Nazareth (2007). “The Jesus in whom we believe,” Benedict claims, “is really also the historical Jesus.”
Such observations hardly seem revolutionary for a Christian. But the context of Benedict’s remarks is a world of biblical studies dominated by what’s known as the historical-critical method. Among other things, this involves placing scripture in its historical conditions and exploring the different literary genres used by biblical authors.
In itself, such analysis can help illuminate scripture’s meaning. But from the beginning, many of its practitioners have imposed readings upon biblical texts that explicitly sever the Christian scriptures from the Christian faith from which they emerged. It has also facilitated the piling-up of tenuous-hypotheses upon tenuous-hypotheses about Christ which are then masqueraded as “facts” that, in Benedict’s words, “eventually lead to absurdity”: Christ-the-guru, Christ-the-revolutionary, Christ-the name-your-fashionable-cause.
Yet, Benedict argues, these “alternative portraits” can’t “explain how within such a short time something could suddenly appear that completely transcends ordinary expectations.” In short, Benedict states, “the only real, historical personage is the Christ in whom the Gospels believe, and not the figure who has been reconstituted from numerous exegetical studies.”
Before dismissing this as fundamentalism, let’s note that Benedict maintains that the picture of Jesus as one who was really crucified, really died, and really rose from the dead accords not only with faith, but also with reason. For all their variations, the Gospel accounts are reasonable because they provide the only coherent explanation of what happened. These texts, Benedict notes, provide “direct access to the events.” Some of these writings, he reminds us, “originate literally from the 30s of the first century.”
But why, we might ask, does Benedict belabor the point? One reason is surely the damage done to Christian faith by scholars parading various pet theories as “facts.” Another reason, however, may be Benedict’s sense that even many faithful Christians have forgotten the radical implications of accepting Christ as whom he says he is.
First, such an acceptance rescues Christianity from becoming what the German philosopher Rüdiger Safranski calls “a cold religious project”: a “mix of social ethics, institutional power thinking, psychotherapy, techniques of meditation, museum curation, cultural project management, and social work.” That’s a concise description of the “liberal Christianity” that’s helped empty Western Europe’s churches, particularly in Benedict’s German homeland.
Second, it forces us to take seriously aspects of Christianity that have disappeared from public view over the past forty years.
In recent decades, Benedict claims, Christian preaching has stopped mentioning the Last Things revealed by Christ: i.e., heaven, hell, and the fact that all of us will be judged. Instead, preaching has become “one-sided, in that it is largely directed toward the creation of a better world, while hardly anyone talks any more about the other, truly better world.”
For confirmation, just look at the websites of those religious orders which talk endlessly about social justice without relating it to Christian belief in the limits of earthly justice and the reality of divine justice. This diminishes Christianity to either what Benedict calls “political moralism, as happened in liberation theology” or “psychotherapy and wellness.” It also, some might interject, encourages us to conjure up secular messiahs who, not being God, cannot possibly fulfill religious-like expectations of hope and change.
In the end, it results in the same thing: practical atheism, at the heart of which is a teddy-bear Christ who, as Benedict wrote years ago, “demands nothing, never scolds, who accepts everyone and everything, who no longer does anything but affirm us.”
And therein may be the essence of Benedict’s Light of the World. Yes, Christ always offers us forgiveness. Nonetheless, Benedict adds, Christ also “takes us seriously.” Having stated who he is, Christ leaves us free either to accept him as he really is and order our lives accordingly, or to construct what another Christian scholar, Thomas More, called “worldly fantasies” of our own making.
More radically different paths are hard to imagine.
About the Author
Samuel Gregg is Research Director at the Acton Institute. He has authored several books including On Ordered Liberty, his prize-winning The Commercial Society, Wilhelm Röpke’s Political Economy, and, most recently, Becoming Europe: Economic Decline, Culture, and America’s Future.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (54) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Samuel Gregg
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/12/08/benedict-xvi-christian-radical
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Appleby| 12.8.10 @ 7:08AM
Having attended Bible College in the 1960s, I have slugged it out with all kinds of alternative versions of Christianity, many of them surprisingly anti-Israel and particularly anti-Zionist (although my orthodox Jewish relatives argue endlessly about exactly when and by whom the State of Israel should be created). I have maintained faith in the Christ of the Bible because that is the one I have come to know. And to my fretful friends who argue that Christ was in fact a Marxist, I continue to point out that nowhere in his ministry does Jesus say *Force your neighbour to feed My sheep.* Matthew 6 is the best guide to what He really expects, as is James 2 and that verse in Timothy that says Christians who do not take care of their own families first are no better than pagans and infidels.
Every time Christ points toward charity, He does so as an individual mandate, not a collective one.
And as for that bit in Acts about everyone sharing in communal fashion, that is lifeboat stuff clearly a product of the belief that Christ would be coming again within months. Those of us who went through the Situational Ethics nonsense in the 1970s spent a lot of time arguing that one could not base ones life plan on the hypothesis that life was a continual emergency with diminishing resources and a visible end. (I also had this argument with someone whose hypothesis about vanishing resources assumed that Earth was a closed system like a terrarium.)
That being said, the Good Samaritan is your example: he practiced charity one on one, with his own money. This is what Jesus wants. Had He wanted Robin Hood (the fake one, not the one who robbed the tax collector and gave the mony back to its owners), He would have said so.
Dan LaHood LMC| 12.8.10 @ 9:53AM
Thanks, the most frightening statement I heard from Obama pre-election was at his "debate" with McCain on Charity and Social Policy. BO stated explicitly said"All charity should come from the Government." The example of the Good Samaritan lived out is the only counter to that sort of bureaucratization of "virtue."
Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 1:50PM
the Pope is a good guy, too much criticism of the church is based on propaganda; people prejudiced against a Church whose charity and succor is indispensable.
And all the people who admire the formerly 15 year old Justin Bieber's (Justin got rich awful fast, and not for his music) cuteness accusing the Church of being pedophilic; quite a double standard.. Go Figure.
Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 1:50PM
the Pope is a good guy, too much criticism of the church is based on propaganda; people prejudiced against a Church whose charity and succor is indispensable.
And all the people who admire the formerly 15 year old Justin Bieber's (Justin got rich awful fast, and not for his music) cuteness accusing the Church of being pedophilic; quite a double standard.. Go Figure.
Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 5:43PM
Wait a minute! I didn't post the comment above! Tim* stole my cyber ID and made write outlandish things. I hate everything that you guys value, like homeland, military, honor, christianity, truth and stuff like that. But you knew that already.
Clint| 12.8.10 @ 5:45PM
Uh Oh ! An Alan Brooks Posseur And A Chickenhawk Tim* Slanderer In One.
Clint| 12.8.10 @ 6:04PM
Da Chickenhawk Can't Do It's Own Fightin' Here. Gotta Pose As Brooks To Slander Tim*
Carry On Wuz !
Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 6:35PM
Clint, this is me, Alan! I despise Justin Bieber, isn't this a proof of good faith? That rat Tim* stole my cyber ID and is farting all over this site. People are gonna think I'm a troll. Don't know what to do.
Clint| 12.8.10 @ 6:44PM
Ya sound More Like An Israel Firster Chickenhawk Than Brooks, Posseur.
victor| 12.9.10 @ 1:00AM
clin(timmy*):
More Like An Israel Firster Chickenhawk Than Brooks, (sic) Posseur. "
More Like An Israel No-ster , Poseur.
Learn how to spell it, poseur.
Or are you dyslexic on purpose?
Clint| 12.9.10 @ 6:35AM
Let's see ya make me Creepy Fanatic Israel Firster LOSSEUR !
Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha !
victor| 12.9.10 @ 10:32AM
clin(timmy*):
"Let's see ya make me"
Make you what, a sane and responsible human being?
As a self-made man, no one but you can take responsibility for who or what you are.
Donna| 12.8.10 @ 7:21AM
I enjoyed this piece and found that what the Pope is saying is very timely to those Christians (including myself) who went off the reservation for a more “glamorous” type of Christianity in order to feel good, be motivated, to seek His giving nature of providing abundance in my life. After several years of this type of Christianity, I was still left with the same old issues that never were resolved by the self-love, you deserve everything that life has to offer and if you believe you shall received preaching.
What opened my eyes to the falsehoods being perpetrated by the feel good Christian Preachers is that I still felt that “Catholic Guilt” that our faith is so famously branded. In accordance to the Beatitudes, The Commandments and the Bible’s teaching (particularly Proverbs), every day I have a lot to be guilty of, but I won’t digress with the details. It wasn’t until returning to the Catholic Church that I actually got the “big picture” about Jesus Christ and what it is I am here for and that is to serve my brothers and sisters to the best of my abilities and quit seeking the so called “abundance” and instead give to those in need. The only abundance I want is people to serve and help. Amen.
Tim| 12.8.10 @ 9:58AM
"The only abundance I want is people to serve and help."
What a beautiful thought. Thank you for making my day.
KyMouse| 12.8.10 @ 7:57PM
If we are truly to follow Jesus, our radical ("root") Christianity must include the awareness that Jews need to seek forgiveness through personal faith in Him just as much as gentiles do. Although previous covenants with God pertained to the Jewish people’s ownership of Israel and their destiny as a great people, the Jewish prophet Jeremiah said that God would some day give His people a new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31) that would be different, because it would provide forgiveness for sin.
Jesus instituted that new covenant in the “Upper Room,” as recorded in Luke 22:20 – “He took the cup [called the Cup of Redemption] after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.’” He revealed this to a room full of Jewish men, at Passover, during a Seder meal.
The New Testament’s references to Passover and to Jesus’ role as the ultimate Lamb resonated with His Jewish followers. They understood that He was “a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19), and that if they chose to paint His blood on the doorposts of their hearts, they would be spared the death that is the wages of sin (Romans 6:23).
In the third chapter of the Gospel of John, Jesus tells His Jewish listeners that, when He dies on the cross, He will fulfill the story of the bronze serpent that Moses raised on a pole in the wilderness (Numbers 21:4-9): After Moses led the Hebrew people out of Egypt, they “spoke against God,” and He sent fiery serpents to bite them with deadly venom. God instructed Moses to raise up a bronze serpent on a pole, so that everyone who looked to it in faith would be healed.
Jesus said – to His Jewish listeners – “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:14-15).
He added – again, to His Jewish listeners – “He who believes in [Me] is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18).
And in John 8:24, He told His Jewish audience, “If you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
Being faithful – radical – to the Gospel means encouraging Jewish people, as well as gentiles, to examine the claims of Jesus and decide whether He was who He claimed to be – God, Savior and Messiah. There are more and more “Jews for Jesus” who are reading the New Testament for themselves, and meeting Him for the first time.
Ryan| 12.8.10 @ 8:22AM
I'm a Reformed Baptist - more or less - and I find myself in complete agreeance with the Pope on this one.
The more I read about him, the more I like ol' Benny. May he last long upon the earth.
PJ| 12.8.10 @ 9:17AM
Unfortunately, throughout the Church's history there have been some persons of authority (theologians, bishops, popes...) who emphasized or de-emphasized various teachings in conjunction with their immoral lifestyles, that almost certainly have confused the common person.
What the current pope is saying is nothing new. He is just reiterating what the Church believes in since the beginning of its existence.
Too Many Tims| 12.8.10 @ 9:21AM
This puts me in mind of what C.S. Lewis said on the subject of people trying to conjure a secular Jesus:
"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would be either a lunatic — on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/C._S._Lewis
PJ| 12.8.10 @ 9:30AM
Samuel Gregg,
Thank you for a truthful essay.
Sandra| 12.8.10 @ 10:13AM
Thank-you for this piece, published on the same date that the Church celebrates the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
A very Catholic holy day.
Jeremiah| 12.8.10 @ 10:16AM
Not only are last things rarely preached, neither are first things like the Real Presence of Christ.
The faction of church-goers who use 'social justice' as code words for left-wing activism completely miss the point. They think we are called to help the less fortunate. They are right, but not in the way they think. In their minds, they are god-figures and their charity is like feeding pets, a condescension to the poor benighted. It has little to do with helping the poor and everything to do with self-affirmation. Much of the social work network has become a banal, feel-good middle class jobs program for shallow narcissists.
In authentic Christianity, it is not so. Christian charity is not a condescension of the greater to the lesser. In Christianity we are all the less fortunate, burdened by the weight of original sin. We are called to help each other as loving brothers and sisters, as the need arises. Often, the greatest need has little or nothing to do with money.
Pope Benedict seems to be declaring a War on Spiritual Poverty. Win that war, and no other war on poverty would ever be needed.
OldSeabee| 12.8.10 @ 10:26AM
Pope Benedict is completely aware that he is Christ's Emissary to the world, and he is trying very hard to fulfill the duties of his office. Christ is the cornerstone of our faith and must be the only template used to conduct our lives. Those denominations which have replaced Christ as the central focus are like the grafted shoot which did not join to the vine. Until we humans accept Jesus's teachings as being authorized and spoken by God the Father, we are all blinded and deafened by the Adversary. May Pope Benedict continue to speak out for Christ and us.
YeloStalyn| 12.8.10 @ 10:44AM
Beign a devote Baptist, I have many qualms with the Catholic church. I have, however, come to have an emense respect for it too. And Pope Benedict has, from what little I have heard/read about him, increased that in me. I can't be Catholic. There are things that I can not accept. But the teachings of faith, rather than of church, I find myself always in awe of. And this Pope's dedication to the simple and fundemental truths of faith in Christ and what that means is a breath of fresh air in the world today. May God watch over and keep this man.
Perusha| 12.8.10 @ 1:11PM
Ah, let us all get back to our roots.
I remember playing a game in an MYF (Methodist Youth Fellowship) meeting, wherein we all formed a circle. One person whispered something to the person to his left, who passed it on to the one at his left, and so on, until it got back to the original instigator.
The fun of the game was to have the final “saying” compared with the initial one---and, it was ALWAYS way off, and twisted.
As sweet and well-meaning as the current high priest, i.e. “Pope”, may be, in his 2010 attempt to be “radical”, after over 2,000 years (or given one generation is about 30 years, around SEVENTY generations), the “game” of continuing the Christian “whispering” can’t help but be FUNNY---if it weren’t so divorced from what Jesus The Christ truly was, and especially what His Teaching was.
“Believers” in whatever currently chosen unique “whispered” belief system ABOUT Christ are self-convicted, qua---mere BELIEVERS.
Jesus, and all Enlightened Beings, are indeed emanations of God and good, but their message is NOT about “believing” in them!
Say you go to a basketball camp, and the presently best player is Michael Jordan, who deigns to serve as the teacher and mentor for any who choose to attend it.
Do you pay your dues to just BELIEVE in HIM?
Hell, ‘er Heaven’s NO!
You absolutely want to be as much LIKE him as possible.
Just so, Truly Enlightened humans such as Jesus want devotees, NOT believers, who are committed to “being the best they can be”, in the “war” He surely calls one to. Jesus not only wants people to sometimes experience what He experiences, but to transcend even random moments of the Bliss that He is surely ALWAYS in---actually, IS.
Christianity has long been a priestly religion, and the priests are NOT there to enable one to mimic Christ’s Being-One-As-God---just ask Bruno, and many others burned at the stake. Also, these days we are unable to avoid the lesson being offered by the “religion” known as Islam.
Probably its most “do-or-die” demand is that anyone who converts from its BELIEF SYSTEM should be killed! Hello Islamic Brunos!
Priests exist to PREVENT people from getting into the inner sanctum of True Christianity. And, of course, even THEY are far from the madding “whispering” crowd, and as unenlightened as the worst of their “flock”.
People, who dare to BELIEVE that they are Absolute radicals, by truthfully noting that a radical must return to their “roots”, should go all the way. But, the author of this Pope loving argument, of course, can’t do so. This is, after all, a conventional website, full of BELIEVING Christians, and woe to any who offend their customers.
Well, where does the “root” come from?
Since we’re “rooting” out etymologically crucial words, allow me to whisper about the elephant in every Christian’s “room”---SIN.
“Sin” comes from the Greek, and means, “to miss the mark”.
Yes, we appearing humans are Absolutely “thrown up”, or shot, like ever-flying arrows of CONSIOUS BEING, and to the extent we continue to deny our Very inherence in, and identification with, THAT, we miss the mark---we are sinners.
When Jesus confessed that “I and God are One”, He didn’t only mean that HE (alone) was just the “Son” of God---which implies that in the past He ONLY was born from God---but that He is ALWAYS in unity with, and AS, God.
And, the real Gospel, or Good News, His Divine birth exhibits, is that the same Enlightened state is the case for even putatively sinning “others”.
By the way, dead Guru’s can’t kick ass---and Jesus has long been gone, physically.
A present day God Realized human once let the cat out of the Awakened bag by saying, “This is the other world”.
Rich in freeing implications is that sentence!
Christians “hope” for the “change” to the other world, heaven, and Moslems for the afterlife with myriad virgins---but THIS is the other world, ALREADY!
Also, paradoxically, THIS is the “other” world, in apparent basic SIN.
That is, as pinched Beings, contracted within a bag of skin, humans essentially take THEMSELVES to be a separated self, confronted with countless---OTHERS!
Hello OTHER world---goodbye cruel world: for NOW.
PJ| 12.8.10 @ 2:10PM
Relax! Take a chill pill.
OtterMommy| 12.9.10 @ 9:29AM
Perusha,
Okay, the obvious fact you miss here is that belief is active, not passive. You can't believe and just sit back. Paul makes that quite clear. True belief inspires action. So, I think the rest of us who know and live that can pretty much ignore your rantings that follow--almost the entire entry you made!
John II| 12.8.10 @ 2:24PM
The keynote in Mr. Gregg's splendidly pointed reflection has been sounding throughout the history of the Church, beginning most explicitly with the short first-century Letter of Jude antecedent to Revelation, in which the inspired author bemoans the many falsehoods and false prophets already infecting the faith.
Heresy has been with the Church from the beginning, partly (according to Paul and, later, Augustine) to spur the faithful toward a clearer perception of hat they really believe.
By the fifth century, the Church was able to catalogue no fewer than 250 distinct heresies by name, but in a deeper sense we are all heretics in the root sense of the word: prone to "pick and choose for ourselves" (from the middle voice of the Greek verb HAEREO) what we will or will not (willfully) believe.
Some heresies wind up with historical names (e.g., Arianism) because they attract a large following under the residual dazzle of a "charismatic" heresiarch; some are so violently insistent that they eventually come to be thought of by forgetful historians as religions distinct from Christianity (Islam).
But all heresies have this one distinctive mark in common: "MY way, Lord, not Yours!" Which is to say, all heresies--big and small, personal and public--are driven by the primordial NO which is the Fall, and from the consequences of which none of us is spared.
Except for one: the Jewish teenager chosen 2,000 years ago to be the Mother of God and the Exemplar of the blessed humanity intended for all of us. Born into the world without the mark of the Fall, Mary said YES to the messenger, with no more than a vague intellectual struggle over what she took to be the improbability of it all.
Happy Immaculate Conception Day to all you TAS dudes, not just to my Roman Catholic confreres.
[Okay, Marge: your turn. And now back to the "Song of Bernadette" (1943), in which, at the head of a sterling cast, a very young Jennifer Jones takes on an infinitely more elevated role than many other roles she was later assigned. Boy, those were the good ol' days, when Hollywood still accorded a grudging respect to the Church.]
John II| 12.8.10 @ 2:29PM
I mean, "what they really believe." Whoa, these arthritic fingers just don't type the way they used to.
Sorry.
SF_Exile| 12.8.10 @ 5:10PM
As I have gotten older and more focused in my faith (sometimes we cradle Catholics take so much for granted!) I have come to see just what a miraculous thing it was for that Jewish teenager 2,000 years ago to say "Yes", and how much of a challenge it is for us humans to relinquish 'control' over our lives and give it to the One who only wants the best for us. The hard part is that the road is narrow and stone-strewn and we are apt to trip and fall until our hands and knees are scraped raw with sin. The Blessed Mother remains at our side, patient, encouraging, praying for us and with us for grace.
Nick| 12.8.10 @ 5:26PM
Excellent post, JohnII, just excellent.
(I love Vincent Price in "Song of Burnadette." His character, Prosecutor Vital Dutour, epitomizes the typical liberal of our time.)
Our Lady pray for us. God Bless.
John II| 12.8.10 @ 7:17PM
Thanks. Yes, I think it was his best role ever, before he trailed away into B-horror flicks and art-collector pretensions. Heck, it may have been his only good role, not counting his hilarious send-up of Poe's "Cask of Amontillado" opposite Peter Lorre.
Nick| 12.8.10 @ 8:02PM
JohnII,
I also liked Mr. Price as the playboy Shelby Carpenter in "Laura." I think Bubba 'the pervert' Clinton modeled his lifestyle on that creep Shelby. He played that snake perfectly.
Mr. Price was also great on the three part episode of "The Brady Bunch" as the looney professor who's friend was an idol, and as Egghead on "Batman."
I grew up on those horror flicks on Saturday afternoons in the '70s, back when there were only 7 TV stations. They were scary, if you were a child. "House of Wax," "The Fly," and "House on Haunted Hill" still creep me out when I think about them!
Gretchen| 12.9.10 @ 3:23PM
Price was also a VERY good cook!
RCV| 12.9.10 @ 1:49AM
Beautifully written and very moving, John. Thanks for that lovely post. Benedict is a true intellectual, in the best sense of that word, and well-prepared for his work. All people of good will wis him well.
Tony in Central PA| 12.8.10 @ 8:43PM
I have read some of Pope Benedict's publications from both before and after he became Pope. There is an astonishing subtlety and complexity to his thinking more obvious in his writings as a cardinal. I think he is largely uncomprehended by intellectuals in this day and age, but I think as Pope he is managing to reach a great many Catholic and nonCatholic Christians.
Liberal Reader| 12.8.10 @ 10:12PM
You might mention the Holy Father's unwavering support of labor unions, his insistence on the importance of protecting the environment, his warnings about the crass materialism that pervades modern society, the evil of seeking profits over social good -- in short, all the things that make him sound quite a lot like a moderate American Democrat.
Ryan| 12.9.10 @ 8:15AM
Except I don't see much of him trying to proscribe that governments force those things; he is pushing them as matters of conscience, not force.
Liberal Reader| 12.9.10 @ 9:26AM
Not true. This came in an essay -- last fall -- whose topic was government and good citizenship.
Now he did NOT advocate for any specific party. This was an essay addressed to the whole world. And nothing in his letter made it sound like he would be some kind of raving leftist. Nevertheless, I think his refusal to become an apostle of Rush Limbaugh is worth pointing out.
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 1:01PM
Marxist Reader,
How in the world could the Holy Father be a member of the democrat party?
He is against killing unborn babies (fetus in Latin,) he knows homosexual acts are "disordered," he knows that the death penalty is justified in certain circumstances, and knows that pornagraphy is a scourge on society.
On the other hand, the democrat party is for killing unborn babies (they even promote it with tax dollars,) wants homos to live together as man and wife, wants all muderers to spend as little time in jail as possible, and, thanks to Bubba the pervert, IS the party of pornagraphy and perversion.
How do you reconcile these diametrically opposed world views?
p.s. What was your Military Occupational STRATEGY again? Ha-ha!
Liberal Reader| 12.9.10 @ 6:20PM
They're not FOR "killing unborn babies" you dipshit. Are you incapable of thought?
And I didn't say the pope was a Democrat. I said he was in some ways a lot LIKE moderate Democrats.
A few months I go away and come back to find you're just as much of a jackass as you were before. Don't you ever learn anything?
Nick| 12.9.10 @ 6:46PM
Marxist Reader,
Yes, members of the democrat party are most definitely in favor of killing unborn babies. It is in their party platform. Try reading it sometime.
I didn't claim that you claimed the Holy Father was a democrat.
I just listed a few fundamental beliefs that, as a Catholic, makes Pope Benedict XVI anathema to all democrats, even the "moderate" ones.
And you are still an ignorant, profane twit.
victor| 12.9.10 @ 12:55AM
Liberal reader:
"all the things that make him sound quite a lot like a moderate American Democrat."
You forgot to mention birth control, homosexuality, open borders, aiding illegal aliens and helping them and pedophile priests to evade the law.
Yes indeed, he would make a fine mayor of Chicago or San Francisco, eh?
Probably more liberal than you think and maybe more liberal than you.
Clint| 12.9.10 @ 6:39AM
Uh Oh ! Victor-Margie The LOSSEUR Creepy Israel Firster Anti-Catholic Fanatic Is Back.
Jan | 12.9.10 @ 6:21AM
Fantastic article. You seem to interpret the good Pope Benedict XVI well! Thrilled to hear somebody out there still gets it. Check out this ludicrous rant from the new head of the USCCB, Archbishop Timothy Dolan on thanking God (“Him/Her”, or “Whatever you want.”) http://video.foxnews.com/v/443.....-catholic/
Alan Brooks| 12.9.10 @ 6:35AM
Quote from Victor: " helping them and pedophile priests to evade the law"
You should be thankful.
victor| 12.9.10 @ 10:27AM
Hello Timmy*,
See Below
victor| 12.9.10 @ 10:27AM
Hello Timmy*,
See Below
victor| 12.9.10 @ 12:31PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.....y_country
Vasu Murti | 12.10.10 @ 2:31AM
Reverend Janet Regina Hyland (1933 - 2007), a real Christian radical:
Many of the early American feminists —including Lucy Stone, Amelia Bloomer, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton saw animal rights as social progress in the tradition of women’s rights and civil rights.
Count Leo Tolstoy similarly described ethical vegetarianism as social progress:
“And there are ideas of the future, of which some are already approaching realization and are obliging people to change their way of life and to struggle against the former ways: such ideas in our world as those of freeing the laborers, of giving equality to women, of ceasing to use flesh-food, and so on.”
Sara VanScoy writes in SojoNet:
"I have both an MD (psychiatrist) and master’s degree in divinity; I grew up in a Southern Baptist church in Jonesboro, Arkansas...But we don’t ordain women, we don’t have women deacons, and we will never call a woman 'pastor.'...When churches regard women as second-class citizens, they are espousing an ideology that is less than God’s ideal!"
The impact of the secular women’s movement upon organized religion is being heralded as a Second Reformation. Women are now being ordained as priests, pastors and ministers, while patriarchal references to the Almighty as "Father" are replaced with the gender-neutral "Parent." Jesus Christ is designated the "Child of God."
The words of the apostle Paul are seen today not as a divine revelation, but rather as an embarrassment from centuries past:
"Let the women keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak. Instead, they must, as the Law says, be in subordination. If they wish to learn something, let them inquire of their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church...let a woman learn quietly with complete submission. I do not allow a woman to teach, neither to domineer over a man; instead she is to keep still. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman, since she was deceived, experienced the transgression. She will, however, be kept safe through the child-bearing, if with self-control she continues in faith and love and consecration."
(I Corinthians 14:34-35; I Timothy 2:11-15)
Professor Henry Bigelow similarly observed: "There will come a time when the world will look back to modern vivisection in the name of science as they do now to burning at the stake in the name of religion."
Animal rights, as a secular, moral philosophy, may appear to be at odds with traditional religious thinking (e.g., human "dominion" over other animals), but this is equally true of democracy and representative government in place of the divine right of kings, the separation of church and state, the abolition of human slavery, the emancipation of women, birth control, the sexual revolution, LGBT rights, and all social progress since the end of the Dark Ages and the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment.
Reverend Janet Regina Hyland was raised Irish Catholic and attended Catholic school as a youth, but went over to the Protestants to become an evangelical minister, since the Catholics don't (yet) ordain women. She reverently referred to Jesus as "my guru." Regina had been vegetarian since the 1970s, but found it odd that some religious vegetarians also consider mind-altering substances like alcohol to be "unspiritual." Regina admitted that having been raised Irish Catholic, she enjoyed an occasional drink, and believed (like most Christians) that the Bible permits alcohol in moderation.
She said she religiously read a copy of Bhagavad-gita As It Is, which I sent her years ago. She obtained a copy of A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's book,The Path of Perfection when living in Texas a few decades ago, and says that while she was attracted to Srila Prabhupada's teachings on yoga and meditation, she was put off by his (apparently) sexist comments about women.
Regina was the author of Sexism is a Sin: A Biblical Basis for Female Equality, and God's Covenant with Animals (which is available through People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA). She was involved with the plight of migrant farm workers, women's rights, and animal rights.
When I visited Regina in Sarasota, FL, in August 2003, I gave her a set of japa (prayer) beads (a "Hindu rosary"), but couldn't show her how to properly use them in the bead bag, since she was left-handed. Regina was familiar with Western astrology, but not Hindu astrology, and said she believed in reincarnation.
Regina said she was never close to her father, an idealistic journalist in New York City, who cared for no one and did nothing for anyone except watch TV. He died in the early '70s. Regina said she was close to her stepmother Mildred, even though Mildred was self-centered and narcissistic; Regina said she loved her dearly. Mildred passed away in the early '60s. On the other hand, Regina's birth mother passed away in the late '80s.
Regina and her half-sister Jean shared a common birth mother, but different fathers. Jean was born in 1942. Regina and Jean had lived together since 1970, and from 1985 to 2007 lived near to one another, but Regina said they were never really close until 1995. Regina's brother Don was born on May 18, 1935, and died of meningitis in June 1943.
Regina was married on July 2, 1954 to Glen Edward. Glen was struck by a drunk driver on August 9, 1954. He was in a coma for a year, and then in a persistent vegetative state for seven years after that. He eventually died. Regina became a widow at an early age, enjoying only a month of marriage.
Regina herself had suffered numerous afflictions. She faced an ovarian tumor in 1957 and described herself as having been "on the ropes," i.e., in and out of hospitals from 1961-63.
Regina began seminary studies in biblical theology in 1955-58, but didn't complete a Masters in Theology until the late '70s through early '80s. She studied with the Assembly of God Home Missions beginning in 1982, and was ordained on November 24, 1984.
Shortly before she passed away, I spoke to Regina Hyland over the phone. Among her last words to me were: "The Christian God cares (for animals)." Regina cared deeply for animals and was in the forefront of social change: religion and animal rights. Long before SERV (the Society for Ethical and Religious Vegetarians) was started, she published Humane Religion, a bi-monthly Christian vegetarian periodical.
Regina was the author (in 1988) of The Slaughter of Terrified Beasts, which was revised and expanded in 2000 by Martin Rowe of Lantern Books as God's Covenant with Animals. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) once described the book as a must-read for anyone tired of hearing the Bible misused to justify animal cruelty. Regina wrote the foreword to my own book,They Shall Not Hurt or Destroy, and endorsed the book before it was published, calling it "a valuable resource," and "a must for every humane library."
Regina was an ardent feminist and described herself as a "dyed-in-the-wool Democrat." When I first contacted Regina in 1996, she was convinced the entire pro-life movement was a vast, right-wing conspiracy. Since then, I turned her on to Feminists For Life, Democrats For Life and Consistent Life (a coalition of peace and justice groups on the religious Left that takes a stand against war, abortion, poverty, the arms race, racism, capital punishment, and euthanasia—the Dalai Lama has signed their Mission Statement)...and before she passed away, she was hoping that as an alternative to abortion, science would come up with a form of contraception that even the Pope would approve of!
On April 14, 2007, she wrote me:
"...I want to take this opportunity to tell you how very much I appreciate your friendship, both in a personal sense and also as colleagues / activists. You are a blessing in my life..."
Regina told me she once attended a conservative Christian religious conference, but her reputation as a Democrat, a feminist and an animal advocate involved with the plight of migrant farm workers had preceded her. She said when she arrived, they didn't recognize her. They were expecting a Gloria Steinem type, and instead saw (in her words) "an aging Debbie Reynolds."
Frances Arnetta (founder of Christians Helping Animals and People) condemns factory farming as "diabolical," and endorses vegetarianism as "God's Best for All Concerned," but refuses to say one must be a vegetarian in order to be a good Christian.
Regina, on the other hand, told me plainly about meat-eating: "It's a sin."
On July 21, 2007, she wrote me:
"I also received your paper on Krishna Consciousness and Christianity. Being familiar with Christian monasticism, I always saw many similarities between the two. When Catholics say the rosary beads, they are repeating the same prayers, over and over...
"When I was at the Assembly of God Seminary, we would attend revival meetings at local and rural churches...ecstatic behavior pretty much defined the services."
Regina was planning to attend the World Vegetarian Weekend festival in San Francisco at the end of September 2007, when she suddenly fell ill. I live in Oakland, and was looking forward to seeing her and selling her books with her. She was pleased when I told her that I not only distributed her pamphlets and sold her books at World Vegetarian Weekend, but that I managed to sell a copy of God's Covenant with Animals to a group of Catholic high school students who had formed an animal rights club on campus. She had faith in the next generation.
Regina died of breast cancer October 9th, 2007—one day after a "Day of Fasting," designated by the Network of Spiritual Progressives in protest against the Iraq War. Her Hindu astrological chart has Jupiter in the 12th house, indicating a fortunate next birth.
She is missed by everyone who knew her. I know I miss her dearly.
Nick| 12.10.10 @ 1:26PM
Give it up VM.
No one reads your neo-pagan tripe.
In fact, in honor of you, tomorrow, I'm going to find a place that serves venison burgers and eat two or three.
On Sunday, I think I'll make a huge pot roast. I won't be able to finish the whole thing. I will have some good roast beef sandwiches, but I'm sure some will go to waste. And, it will all be your fault.
Every time you post here, I'm going to be sure to eat something that had parents, VM.