progressive involvement

Ten Guidelines for Biblical Interpretation

Internet Monk has ten good ones.  Item number one on his list is not to try to harmonize the gospels.  Don't worry about making the four gospels "come out right" in terms of historical factoids or chronology.  For example, don't try to make the four crucifixion accounts "mesh" in terms of timing or the events described.  (You couldn't even if you tried.) 

Likewise, the Christmas accounts in Matthew and Luke really should not be combined.  In the first place, you can't really make it work very well, and secondly, neither narrative is really about historical facticity anyway.   

Similarly, one should avoid interpreting, say, Luke, by citing something in John.  Luke has his own point of view.  John has his.  They are not the same.  Don't think that by "mooshing" everything together that you're somehow getting a more complete or whole story.  Tatian tried doing that back in the second century, but the church never really took to the product he produced.

Each of the four gospels has its own integrity and its own point of view.  The problem with harmonizing is that such an endeavor undermines that integrity and creates, in effect, another gospel account distinct from the four we already have.  It says that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were wrong.  They have been replaced by the Gospel according to St. Cuisinart.

Don’t harmonize the Gospels. That’s like taking four paintings and combining them into one. You come up with something no one painted and no one intended to paint. Let each Gospel author be an artist in his own right. However, a Gospel synopsis, such as those available from UBS, are very useful and important in comparing Gospel texts to one another WITHOUT harmonizing them. 

I second Internet Monk's mention of the synopsis as well, especially keeping in mind Markan priority, and that Matthew and Luke basically reinterpreted Mark.  It's always interesting to see how Matthew, for example, subtly changes Mark here and there.  In Mark, James and John want to be next to Jesus in his glory.  Matthew changes this slightly so that it is James and John's mother who asks Jesus for this special favor.  You have to wonder why.  Questions are good things.  One even wonders:  Could fundamentalists spend even one hour with a synopsis and remain fundamentalists?

 

Someone to watch

Higher profile names were circulated for the post of Ambassador to the Vatican, such as Caroline Kennedy's, for example, but the nod ultimately fell to Professor Miguel Diaz. 

Diaz, 45, is a professor of theology at the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University, both in Collegeville, Minn. He is a board member of the Catholic Theological Society of America and former president of the Academy of Catholic Hispanic Theologians of the United States.  Professor Diaz served on President Obama's "Catholic advisory team" during the campaign, and often spoke on behalf of the candidate, particularly with the Spanish-language press.

John Allen, foremost reporter on things Vatican, says that the early reaction in the Vatican is "positive," and noted that Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the pope’s ambassador to the United States, called the Diaz appointment “an excellent choice of a representative who knows both the United States and the Catholic Church very well.”  If the Vatican reaction had been cool, it's doubtful that Archbishop Sambi's remarks would have been that glowing. 

Diaz has never publicly challenged the bishops, and is, according to Allen, "broadly pro-life."  He also has an affinity for Latin American liberation theology, which has raised eyebrows in conservative circles.

References to figures such as Gustavo Gutíerrez and Ignacio Ellacuría run through Diaz’s writings, and one news outlet referred to Diaz as a “Cuban liberation theologian” in its headline. For the record, that’s not really accurate. In his writings, Diaz distinguishes between the “preferential option for the poor” in Latin America and the “preferential option for culture” in Hispanic theology in the United States, focused on the survival of Latino/a identity.

Diaz brings some interesting connections to the job.  As Cuba enters into a period of leadership transition, Diaz, a Cuban, may have special entre.  (The Vatican has been interested in new initiatives in Cuba for twenty years.)  More broadly, nearly half of the Catholics in the world are in Latin America.  The Spanish-speaking Diaz, well-read in liberation theology, may find himself at the center of some lively discussions in the coming weeks and months. 

Diaz has also worked on issues related to immigration, a major priority of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in the United States.  His approach has been a "theology of community" in the context of a broader society that often responds to immigrants with fear and rejection.

The appointment rightly acknowledges that America is changing.  The face of Roman Catholicism in the United States will be, increasingly, brown.  Noting that hispanics constitute about one-third of American Catholics, a percentage which is growing, Allen notes:  "Diaz may be positioned to help the Vatican interpret what these trajectories portend, and to become a bridge between this segment of the American Catholic population and Rome."

Obama's deft pick

Maybe he knew that the reaction would be inane.  She's not too smart, says someone anonymous in a poorly-researched article, so they run with that, which everybody can see is itself nutso because you don't get to be where Sonia Sotomayor is without being plenty smart. 

"She's affirmative action!" they say next, eliding the obvious hypocrisy that most of the people saying this supported Clarence Thomas, whose creds, incidentally, were thin, to put it charitably, compared to Sotomayor's.  Then, some party heavies even--people who should know better, but never seem to--start throwing the word "racist" into the mix, and, right then, you know for sure that you're in Bizarro-World.

The opposition is flailing about, and increasingly off-point, which means that Sotomayor will be confirmed easily.  One of the oldest dictums in politics is to be fortunate in your enemies.  The more absurd they are, the better. 

Whether or not she'd be a good judge is almost beside the point.  Most of the commentators say that, going by her record, she'd likely be a "moderate."  Since she's replacing David Souter, also a "moderate," the result is a wash in terms of the politics of the court itself.  Then again, they said John Roberts was a moderate too. 

So who knows?  It's not clear to me that Sotomayor would be a particularly liberal voice on the Court.  In fact, some lefties may well be surprised at how this pans out long-term.  The opposition is going to have to do a whole lot better, though, if it wants to have a chance at derailing her nomination.

Big Game

First Quarter:  Nuggets miss shots, weak on defense.  Lakers:  Kinda lucky.

Second Quarter:  Nuggets shooting ranges from air-ball to Clang!  Defense ranges from Valium to comatose.

Third Quarter:  Collective team wakefulness goes up with Carmelo off the court, but still can't hit broad side of barn.

Fourth Quarter:  More of the same.  Flipping to HGTV.

Irish government pledges reform, no word yet on reformation in the Irish church

In the wake of the recent devastating report on child abuse at church-run schools, the Irish government has pledged to reform its social services for children.  The government apologized to victims for its "failure to intervene" in the widespread abuse of poor children.

"It is deeply shameful for all Irish people that this happened in our country and that for so long it was not confronted," (Prime Minister Brian Cowen) told a news conference.

In 2002, the 18 orders who were responsible for industrial schools and child care made an agreement with the government that their liability would be limited to 127 million euros.  The expected compensation costs are expected to be at least ten times that amount.  (The agreement also forbid the public disclosure of the names of both perpetrators and victims.) 

These orders have said, not surprisingly, that they do not want to re-negotiate that agreement, but did say they might voluntarily contribute more money, and the Irish government is pressuring them to do so.  "We are adamant that they will meet their obligations," (Minister for Defense Willie) O'Dea told public broadcaster RTE.

The Christians Brothers, heavily implicated in the scandal, have said they will "search their finances and assets for 'surplus' funds," and are thinking about offering more money for support services for victims. 

Not near good enough, said the Prime Minister, who expects the Christian Brothers and other "secretive orders" to make public declaration of their finances and extensive property assets. The public had a right, he said, "to assess the significance of these contributions by reference to the resources available to these congregations." 

In other words, the Irish government has said that the financial mechanisms of "secretive orders" are going to be in the public eye, and these orders might well take that into account as they deliberate amongst themselves on how to proceed.  

  

So much for progressive taxation

In the State of California, which is about to go bankrupt, the wealthiest one percent (1%) pay just 7.4% of their income in state taxes.  The poorest Californians pay 10.2%.

Not surprising

Father "Oprah" has left the Catholic Church and become an Episcopalian.  Father Alberto Cutie, who has a significant media presence in south Florida, was seen "pitching and wooing" with his honey on a Florida beach, pictures of which promptly hit the tabloids.  He was then relieved of his duties as a priest at St. Francis de Sales Church in Miami Beach.  Now, he has converted to the Episcopal Church and was received into the church yesterday.

Cutié spoke briefly at a news conference and read a statement in English and Spanish. He quoted from the book of Psalms and said, "More than ever, I'm assured that God is love."

Good ending

Game 5 Commentary: Even when we were ahead, it felt like we were behind.

That's it.

Who started all the hugging?

The New York Times has an article up today on the pressure to hug in high school.  Some high schools are banning the practice, and hurray for them.  It's about time somebody paid some attention to this grievous plague of fake intimacy that is afflicting our nation.  Perfect strangers, meeting for the first time, nuzzle up against each other for "the hug."  So we're best friends now?

Please.  The embrace should be reserved for people in a special relationship category--family, old friends--not something you dish out to everybody walking down the dang street.