When to flee like Lot

In response to my post on traditional conservatism, Jeff Culbreath offers some reflections of his own: Tradition and Community. He brings up some good points, and I'm a bit too tired to add much now. I'll just say that the Catholic Church(es) in the United States are handicapped for various reasons - a Church that has a mostly immigrant heritage and whose life is shaped by the host cultures: excessive mobility and insufficient economic freedom, which contribute to the inability of lay people to cultivate strong parish communities. (Many are to blame for their own choice of lifestyle/priorities as well.)

One should attend to one's duties to one's clan, neighbors, community as long as one can without his salvation (and that of his family) being threatened. But if he is surrounded by those who refuse to give up grave sin, what can he do but separate himself from them? He must leave not only to save himself, but for the sake of giving some measure of protest.

Responses to Joe Carter about federalism

Daniel Larison and Rick Garnett. Mr. Carter has criticized Ron Paul's stance on abortion -- Dr. Paul would like to see the regulation of abortion returned to the states. I think he serves as an example of a "conservative" who is a Nationalist (rather than a Federalist).

Related:
Jeff Culbreath asks about the relationship between conservatives and the Constitution - Post-Constitutional America.

A good post on humility by Jeff Culbreath: "I do not concern myself with great matters, or things too wonderful for me."

Discussion initiated by Jeff Culbreath of Donald Livingston's article on Hume and Human Scale at WWWTW.

Jeff Culbreath, Co-Ed America

Jeff Culbreath reviews The Church and the Libertarian

WWWTW

Catholic Imperialism?

Jeff Culbreath, Catholic Imperialism: The Bulls of Donation

I don't think I'll even try to tackle this; the extent of papal authority must be determined first, and then whether it can legitimate conquest (the replacement of a native government by a government by outsiders).

Edit. Could it be that the pope is not acting as the highest secular authority, but merely as the superior of Christian princes, and acting in order to prevent a dispute between them (or something worse happening)?

(See also Mr. Culbreath's post on empire and secession.)

Literature

Jeff Culbreath, Catholics and English Literature. Mr. Culbreath posts something from Dr. John Senior which deals with the apparent difficulty Catholics may have with the reading of English literature since it "is substantially Protestant."

The difficult contrarian part of me wants to say, "Who needs literature in the first place." Societies have survivied, even flourished, without literacy. Appreciation of literature in the past was limited to the elites, and those aspiring to be among them -- I might argue that the more important components of intellectual culture would be song and music and poetry, not as something to be read but something to be learned and recited.

I shouldn't say the valuing of written stories for their own sake is relatively new, but the novel certainly is, in comparison to older literary forms. Did anyone study Shakespeare's plays before the 19th century? I believe that during the Renaissance poetry and rhetorical texts were studied, not just for their own sakes but also for the practical goal of teaching students style. Students were to imitate what was best. I'll have to take a look at the Jesuit Ratio Studiorum to see what study was done of written stories and for what purpose.

(The printing press with movable type facilitated the publishing of books and facilitated the development of the novel as a literary form. The pasttime of reading novels must have been popular with the educated -- how else would the continued publication of novels be explained? While the power of the novel to shape the moral imagination has probably always been recognized, when did the reading of novels become a required component of schools? Were novels ever used as a model of style?)

I could also refer us to the fact that poetry, when memorized, can be readily enjoyed by not only the individual but also with others. Novels are more limited, though not as much as movies, as one can more easily share words with others; however, one cannot transmit images, from one imagination to another. Memorizing passages from a novel is not so easy, though one can memorize lines of dialogue. (Plays can fall somewhere in between the two, depending upon how the play is written?) One must have a book handy in order to read to others, and its presence is almost a requirement for facilitating its discussion, for example in a book club. It is difficult to appropriate a novel as something that is part of one's self; it is much easier to do this with a poem or song, or with a musical composition.

It is unfortunate that modern Westerners do not have the art of creating epic poetry.

Reading a book is usually a solitary activity. There isn't anything wrong with that as a form of leisure, and not all leisure must be social and used in sharing culture with others. I would ask whether the production of books requires more resources than what is required for other forms of leisure (including the making of music). I would also ask how much of a treasury of good poetry, music, stories, and so on do we need? The desire for novelty exacerbates the danger of overconsumption, especially in these times when we may be putting too much stress on the environment. What does the publishing industry, in particular, do to entice us to increase our consumption of books?

With that said... one cannot fetter the human soul and prevent it from being creative -- new works of art will be produced even if resources are limited. Also, a people should probably value the great works that have been produced and seek to pass these on to the next generation. Even if a culture that has both oral and written components may be better than a culture that relies almost exclusively on the written word, the retort might be given, what can we, who are literate and do not have a living oral culture, do but continue to nourish our souls with good books?

Check out the NYT Bestsellers List -- most of the Uhmericans who read for leisure have poor taste, at least with respect to what they purchase. Educated families should have a library, but they need to discern carefully what to buy and keep.

Still, I wonder: should we dedicate so much of our non-religious leisure time to the reading of novels and similar literary forms? Or might we achieve more if we spent more time on reciting and memorizing poetry, learning to sing and play music, and acquiring the art of story-telling?

Jeff Culbreath, America's British Culture

Mr. Culbreath introduces me to Russell Kirk's America's British Culture. (Google Books)