All Your Stars Are Belong To Us

I’ve been doing most of my blog-reading via RSS feeds and Google Reader for several months now; it’s extremely cool, if you’ve not given it a try. And one of Google Reader’s features is the ability to tag particularly interesting posts with a “star”. I’ve been using this feature quite a lot, but to date I’ve done almost nothing with the star’d posts. So tonight I thought I’d be a follower and do a round-up post, just like everybody else. Who knows, maybe this will become a regular feature.

The Story of a Friendship: I dunno what’s in the water out Jennifer’s way, but I’d like to get me some of it. Or, what do you do about those kids who keep ringing your doorbell and running away?

The clue in the church bookstore: Or, what the folks at Jeremiah Wright’s church have been reading.

Ipods are Woobies: Or, have you noticed that none of the folks walking around with iPods are dancing like the silhouettes in the ads?

House of Formation: In which Sherry Weddell recalls saying to a flock of Dominican priests,

When you entered the Order, you spent years being educated and formed for your vocation. But I, too, am a preacher of the gospel in my own right – and where is my house of formation? Your parish is my St. Albert’s, the only house of formation I may ever have to prepare me for my vocation as an evangelizing change agent in the world.

I’d like some of the water from Colorado Springs, too.

On Being Catholic, by Thomas Howard

This book is one of the best I’ve read all year, and maybe longer. I can already tell that it’s one I’ll come back to, time and again–it’s that good. The author, a cradle fundamentalist, converted to Roman Catholicism as an adult, and wrote a book about it entitled Evangelical is Not Enough. Ten years later, he wrote this book, an extended meditation on what it means to be a Christian of the Catholic variety.

Any religion has three components: a moral code, a set of beliefs, and the day-to-day practices. Howard skips over the moral code, which Catholics and other Christians largely agree about it; and he discusses doctrine only to the extent that Catholics and other Christians disagree about it. By far the largest chunk of the book is about the day-to-day Catholic practices that give serious non-Catholics the heebie-jeebies: praying with the saints, for example, but most especially and beautifully the Sacrifice of the Mass. He goes into great and beautiful detail about the Mass, and what it means, and why we Catholics do what we do.

This is not a dry, technical book, I hasten to add. What this is, really, is a love-letter to the Roman Catholic Church, and to Christ its Head, in thanksgiving for all of His many and great blessings. I learned a lot from it, not so much in terms of specific facts, but in terms of how everything in Catholic practice works together. He didn’t just show me the landmarks; he revealed all of the terrain between them.

If you’re a Catholic, and you want to get more out of your faith, I’d suggest reading this book; and if you’re a Protestant who’s worried that his Catholic friends might not be saved, I’d definitely suggest reading this book. And if you’re no kind of Christian at all, you might find it interesting to see what all the noise is about. Highly recommended.

Memorial Day

Memorial Day is stretching at our house. The morning of Memorial Day we went off to the local Memorial Day parade, which was an odd aggregation of JROTC, marching bands, local firms, and pre-schools. Lots and lots of pre-schools. I had no idea we had so many pre-schools in the area. Oh, and a handful of local politicians. We even had a fly-over to begin the parade: a C5 Galaxy and a couple of helicopters. There was a fellow in a Navy uniform in the back of one convertible. Someone said, “Hey, there’s a sailor!” and my four-year-old daughter started calling, “Hi, Sailor! Hi, Sailor!” My wife passed on a remark of her father’s: “Little boys play with soldiers and little girls play with dolls. When they grow, up, though….”

Then, that evening, we sat the kids down and put The Longest Day on the DVD player. We watched from the beginning of the movie to the first glider landings, and then had to stop. Tonight we continued from there through the assault on the beaches and “Der Fuhrer”‘s refusal to release the reserve panzers. Tomorrow we’ll wind it up.

We thought our boys should see what courage looks like, and why these men are worth remembering.

Validation and Vanity

Jen at Et Tu has just written a timely post on the dangers of looking for validation in the comments on your blog posts. I link to it because it speaks to some things I’ve been thinking about, and indirectly to one of the reasons why I’ve not been posting much recently: intellectual vanity.

As I noted a while back, I’m currently fascinated by the Dominicans, the “Order of Preachers”. One of the Dominican mottos is to contemplate, and then share the fruits of your contemplation. I’ve been doing a lot of contemplating over the last year, and there are many things I’ve thought might be worthy of sharing. I’ve posted a few of them. But every time I do that, I start waiting and hoping that someone will notice how brilliant I am—that I’ll get buckets of links, and tons of positive comments, and that generally I’ll be regarded as the neatest thing since sliced bread. And while not every such link gets noticed, I’ve gotten just enough encouragement to keep looking for it.

And that means that my goal hasn’t been to teach, or to help others, or to give glory to God, but rather to accumulate glory for myself—which, as I realized some months ago, is intellectual vanity. Consequently, I more or less put myself on a blogging diet whilst pondering this. And I’ve come to a number of conclusions. First is that I need to spend more time with real flesh-and-blood people and less time with pixels (i.e., with people at our parish, with friends, and with family). Second is that blogging about the things I’m thinking about is OK, but I need to watch my attitude.

So, if you liked this post, feel free not to tell me. 🙂

Most Attempted, Least Read

Jaq has a post on a meme that originated with LibraryThing. They had folks mark the books that they owned and meant to read but hadn’t gotten around to yet. Here’s the top list. Following Jaq’s lead, I’ve marked those I’ve read, those I’ve read for school, those I’ve started but not finished, and those I own and really expect to read some day. I found his typographical conventions a pain to read, so I’m going to use my own. Titles I’ve never read and don’t own will be printed as is. Those I’ve read all the way through will be bolded. And I’ll added annotations–in English–for everything else. Jaq also marked the ones he never expects to read; I decided to accentuate the positive and not do that. Here they are.

  • Anna Karenina
  • Crime and Punishment
  • Catch-22
  • One Hundred Years of Solitude
  • Wuthering Heights
  • The Silmarillion. More than once.
  • Life of Pi: a novel
  • The Name of the Rose. More than once.
  • Don Quixote. Started a couple of times, but that was
    many, many years ago. Ought to try again.
  • Moby Dick. Started. Liked it until they got on board
    the Pequod.
  • Ulysses
  • Madame Bovary
  • The Odyssey. I’ve read parts of this; I’m not sure I’ve
    ever read the whole thing.
  • Pride and Prejudice. A personal favorite.
  • Jane Eyre
  • A Tale of Two Cities
  • The Brothers Karamazov
  • Guns, Germs, and Steel: the fates of human
    societies
    . This one was interesting.
  • War and Peace
  • Vanity Fair
  • The Time Traveler’s Wife
  • The Iliad. I’ve read portions of this, in several
    translations, but I’ve never it made the whole way.
  • Emma
  • The Blind Assassin. ???
  • The Kite Runner. ???
  • Mrs. Dalloway. ???
  • Great Expectations. High school.
  • American Gods
  • A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius. ???
  • Atlas Shrugged. Multiple times; I was in High
    School. I think some of her diagnosis is right, but her
    prescription is not.
  • Reading Lolita in Tehran: a memoir in books. ???
  • Memoirs of a Geisha
  • Middlesex
  • Quicksilver. ???
  • Wicked: the life and times of the wicked witch of the
    West
    . Not badly written, and an amusing conceit, but on
    reflection I think it’s subverting something that didn’t need to be subverted.
  • The Canterbury Tales. Portions.
  • The Historian: a novel. ???
  • A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man
  • Love in the Time of Cholera
  • Brave New World. OK, I’ve read this; no need to
    read it again.
  • The Fountainhead
  • Foucault’s Pendulum. Multiple times.
  • Middlemarch
  • Frankenstein
  • The Count of Monte Cristo. Multiple times.
  • Dracula
  • A Clockwork Orange
  • Anansi Boys
  • The Once and Future King. Multiple times, but not
    in over ten years.
  • The Grapes of Wrath. High school. Probably
    should try it again.
  • The Poisonwood Bible : a novel
  • 1984. Multiple times, including for school.
  • Angels & Demons. Not likely.
  • The Inferno (and Purgatory and Paradise). Read
    the Inferno for school; haven’t read the others.
  • The Satanic Verses
  • Sense and Sensibility. A favorite.
  • The Picture of Dorian Gray. Started.
  • Mansfield Park. Wanted to like it; didn’t, much.
  • One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Multiple times.
  • To the Lighthouse. ???
  • Tess of the D’Urbervilles
  • Oliver Twist
  • Gulliver’s Travels. Started, never finished.
  • Les Misérables. Neat book.
  • The Corrections. ???
  • The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay
  • The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time
  • Dune. Multiple times. Have never been able to
    get through the sequel.
  • The Prince
  • The Sound and the Fury
  • Angela’s Ashes: a memoir
  • The God of Small Things. ???
  • A People’s History of the United States: 1492-present
  • Cryptonomicon
  • Neverwhere
  • A Confederacy of Dunces. Sticks in my mind, but
    I’ve no real desire to re-read it.
  • A Short History of Nearly Everything. ???
  • Dubliners
  • The Unbearable Lightness of Being
  • Beloved. ???
  • Slaughterhouse-Five
  • The Scarlet Letter
  • Eats, Shoots & Leaves
  • The Mists of Avalon
  • Oryx and Crake: a novel. ???
  • Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. ???
  • Cloud Atlas. ???
  • The Confusion. ???
  • Lolita
  • Persuasion. Another favorite. The retired
    captain reminds of Jack Aubrey.
  • Northanger Abbey.
  • The Catcher in the Rye. I am so not a boomer.
  • On the Road. Ditto.
  • The Hunchback of Notre Dame
  • Freakonomics: a rogue economist explores the hidden side of everything
  • Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
    College class, originally, but I re-read it a number of times.
    Probably won’t ever again.
  • The Aeneid. College.
  • Watership Down. A favorite.
  • Gravity’s Rainbow
  • The Hobbit. A favorite
  • In Cold Blood
  • White Teeth. ???
  • Treasure Island. Read it aloud to the boys last
    year; was the first time.
  • David Copperfield
  • The Three Musketeers. Multiple times; fun book.

Natural Ordermage, by L.E. Modesitt, Jr.

This is the latest in Modesitt’s Recluce series, and though the pattern is well-worn it’s an interesting outing nevertheless. As so many times before, a young mage, not fully in control of his skills, is ejected from Recluce to make his way in the world. As such, he’s following in the footsteps of Dorrin, Justen, and Lerris, and possibly others I’m forgetting. The tale is set in the time between the founding of the city of Nylan, in Dorrin’s day, and that of Justen. It’s an interesting period of time, when the balance of power in Recluce is shifting from the Council, founded by Creslin, to the Brotherhood which is emerging in the engineers’ city of Nylan.

The book differs from its predecessors in some interesting ways. First, the typical hero in this series is a good-hearted, generally virtuous, though callow, youth. While not understanding everything he should, he usually tries his best, and works for the greater good. Rahl, by contrast, is generally out for himself. He uses his order-skills to charm girls to their detriment, he lies to his parents when he can get away with it, and is hardworking and obedient mostly because it’s the easiest way to get what he wants. On top of that, his order skills are of a sort that the training techniques that have been developed on Recluce don’t work for him, and yet he has to be trained if he’s not to be a loose cannon. Away from Recluce he goes! (There’s some skullduggery involved, to, though it’s not entirely clear why.)

Next, instead of being sent to Candar, like Dorrin, Justen, and Lerris, Rahl is sent off to the Empire of Hamor, a milieu we’ve seen almost nothing of in the series to date. The Empire is devoted to the judicious use of power—if society is stable and prosperous, so is the throne. Order, in the social sense, is maintained by the mage-guards, a police-force of order and chaos mages who work solely for the empire. Any Hamorian citizen who shows any degree of mage skills is immediately co-opted into the guard—or put to hard labor. In fact, any Hamorian citizen who steps out of line is likely to be sentenced to hard labor. Hamor is a pragmatic, strict, and not very forgiving place.

So there’s a lot about this book to like, despite the familiar premise, and I’m quite curious to read the the forthcoming sequel. (In The Magic of Recluce, Lerris is told that the current Emperor of Hamor is the descendant of a Reclucan exile; one has to wonder if Rahl is him.) But it isn’t perfect. In particular, no sooner does Rahl end up in Hamor than he turns into a stock Modesitt hero. He’s given a job at a trading firm operated by Recluce, and almost immediately realizes that his superiors have their hands seriously in the till. The first thing I’d have expected that Rahl to do is figure out how to get in on the deal, but our hero never even considers it. In part, this can be put down to growth; and in part it can be put down to Rahl’s well-honed survival instinct; but neither of these go quite far enough to explain the change in his character. (Later events, on the other hand, do; I’ve no quarrel with where he ends up, only with how rapidly he gets there.)

Anyway, I enjoyed it.

Morality and Non-Machines

Last year, when I was studying up on the Catholic Church, I reflected that Theology and Moral Philosophy should be more like Physics. That is to say, knowledge should accumulate. A beginning student of hysics isn’t told to go back to first principles, conduct his own experiments, re-derive all of the necessary math, and in general rebuild modern physics from scratch. If this were necessary, nobody would ever learn modern physics. Instead, our student is guided rapidly through the basics of physics, doing proofs and experiments for enrichment, and then on in like manner until the subject is grasped and the student can make use of his new knowledge. If God is objectively true, there should be a similar system of knowledge for theology and moral philosophy that has been built up over the years. Scripture is foundational and essential, but its implications (and the implications of human nature in general) are not always obvious, and yet everyone seemed to start from scripture and build their own superstructure on top it. Not surprisingly, different authorities often disagree.

I found the body of knowledge I was looking for in the Catholic Church and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC). The moral principles in the CCC are rooted in scripture and in human nature, and represent a treasury of knowledge built up over thousands years that extends back to Aristotle and the ancient Greeks as well as to the ancient Hebrews. It’s massive, all encompassing, and consistent, and I was delighted to discover it.

Great! Theology and Moral Philosophy are like Physics!

In one sense, that is, but not in every sense, as Pope Benedict explains in section 24 of Spe Salvi:

First of all, we must acknowledge that incremental progress is possible only in the material sphere…in the field of ethical awareness and moral decision-making, there is no similar possibility of accumulation for the simple reason that man’s freedom is always new and he must always make his decisions anew. These decisions cannot simply be made for us in advance by others—if that were the case, we would no longer be free.

In other words, physical matter has no free will, and so always follows the rules. We can build machines, in line with the laws of physics and chemistry, and they do what we expect them to do. And we can hand them over to others who don’t understanding a thing about physics and chemistry, and they still work! I live at the apex of a pyramid of technology with my laptop and my cell phone and my video games and air conditioning and refrigeration and central heating and all manner of things, some of which I have a good understanding, some of which I have a marginal understanding, and some to which I’m completely oblivious. But even if I had no understanding, all of these gadgets would still work for me! I can stand on top of this pyramid of knowledge without possessing even the capstone.

Moral knowledge is different. There’s no such thing as a gadget of virtue. I can’t go to Target and buy some Fortitude for my kids, and maybe a little Wisdom on the side. I can’t say to my oldest son, “Hey Dave! Come over here, I need to upgrade your Prudence!” People aren’t machines; you can’t program them to be good. If you want to stand at the apex of the pyramid of moral knowledge, you need to acquire the whole pyramid. And you need to do it yourself; no one can do it for you. And you need to acquire it not with your head, your intellect, but with your heart, your will. Understanding moral teaching intellectually is useful, but if it doesn’t enter your will, you don’t possess it. And if it has entered your will, understanding it intellectually isn’t strictly necessary. Reading about another country isn’t the same as living there; and if you live there, you know what it’s like without reading about it.

Acquiring that pyramid of virtue is difficult, and very few ever stand at the apex (we call them “saints”). And we need help to ascend it, which, fortunately, God is delighted to give us.

All of this has implications for society, to wit: utopia is impossible. We cannot build the Kingdom of Heaven here on Earth. We cannot design the perfect society, with perfect rules, in which everyone will always automatically have everything they need and there will be no want, and everyone will be happy, precisely because people are not machines. Society is not a machine. No matter what rules and institutions you devise, people are free to subvert them, and (without that moral grounding) they will. Or, if your system is designed specifically so that people are not free to subvert it, cannot prevent it from working, then you have taken away their freedom, and your system is not the Kingdom of Heaven, is not truly utopia.

So what are our responsibilities with regard to Society? We must strive, with God’s help, to acquire all virtue. A society is only as good as its members. We must strive to provide just rules and institutions. We can’t build utopia, but there’s no reason to settle for less than the best we can do. And we must strive—as individuals—to serve those in need, because they are in need right now. Ignoring the needs of those around us in favor of trying to build the Perfect Society in which they will no longer be in need is a cop-out. It merely inflates us with pride while failing to accomplish the goal…and meanwhile, those around us are still in need.

A True Friend

So yesterday we were praying as a family at bedtime, and my four-year-old daughter was praying for her friends. She said,

God, please help my friends to run fast, so the monsters won’t get them.

Which monsters, I’m not certain.

The Sharing Knife: Passage, by Lois McMaster Bujold

This is the third in Bujold’s recent series, and I like it a lot better than either of its predecessors.

For those who came in late, Bujold’s The Sharing Knife series involves a place and time where human society is divided into two groups: the Farmers and the Lakewalkers. The division between the two has its roots in a cataclysm in the remote past, a cataclysm which spawned the blight bogles, creatures of malice which, upon hatching, begin to suck the very life out of the land and creatures around them. The land is ultimately completely and utterly dead, and incapable of supporting life.

Lakewalkers, it seems, are the descendants of those responsible for the cataclysm, and they have the self-imposed responsibility of patrolling the land and slaying blight bogles where ever they find them. This is no easy feat, but they are assisted by their possession of the “ground sense”: they can directly perceive and manipulate the field of life carried by all living things. It is this field, this “ground”, that the blight bogles consume. All of Lakewalker life is organized around this mission.

Farmers, on the other hand, are ordinary folks more or less like us. They live in villages and on farms, they grow, they build, they trade. A very few Farmer folk have the merest touch of ground sense. In general, Farmers have a deep and abiding distrust and fear of Lakewalkers, who are thought to “beguile” young women, among other unsavory habits. For their part, Lakewalkers tend to look down on the Farmers, who they regard as undisciplined louts who simply won’t stop building villages and homes in the areas where blight bogles are likely to hatch, no matter how often they are told of the danger.

Enter Fawn and Dag. Fawn’s a young Farmer woman; Dag’s a veteran Lakewalker patroller. In the first book they are thrown together, and slay a blight bogle, and fall in love (natch). Ultimately they marry, following both Farmer and Lakewalker customs, but Fawn’s people are uncomfortable with Dag, and Dag’s people reject Fawn almost completely. Meanwhile, it’s clear to Dag that the Farmers are going to continue to expand into dangerous territory, and that the only way to keep entire towns from being destroyed by the blight bogles is if Farmers and Lakewalkers learn more of each others ways, and learn to work together. And that’s really the topic of this present volume.

The book has an energy that reminds of Bujold’s first book about Miles Vorkosigan, The Warrior’s Apprentice, in which Miles mounts a tiger and isn’t able to dismount through a considerable series of ever larger adventures. Passage is more gentle, but the story builds in the same way. At the outset, Fawn and Dag set off down the river to the sea, partially as a honeymoon trip, and partially for something to do while they figure out just what they ought to do. And as they go, they collect an odd and unlikely collection of people around them, and begin to learn not only the course they should take but the dangers that lie therein.

The whole series has an odd feel of the early American frontier, and that’s especially pronounced here; the details of life along the river owe a great deal to a number of books (listed in the afterword) written by those who sailed the Mississippi in the days before the steamboat…including one Davy Crockett. I might have to look some of them up, as Bujold’s use of them has piqued my curiosity.

Anyway, Passage is a neat book; and for the first time in this particular series, I’m rather looking forward to the sequel.