Restorative Justice

I am not opposed to what it implies (rehabilitation/rehabilitation/re-education) though the name itself is misleading. But restorative justice cannot be exercised in a state that is by its very nature dysfunctional and opposed to true human formation. "Restorative justice" is possible only at a small scale, in true communities.

On the justice system of small tribe in PNG. Hyper local, hyper homogenous, their approach is the opposite of modern Western systems. Human scaled law? https://t.co/leMcwAVzjF

— Wrath Of Gnon (@wrathofgnon) December 16, 2020

"Traditional Christian Teaching"

I doubt it.

Just a reminder that according to justice & traditional Christian teaching, food is a human right to everyone (based on being human, not meeting some criteria for being "deserving") in a society like ours that can easily afford it. https://t.co/wp0erGUwAi https://t.co/VCwRY32Q2o

— Fr Matthew Schneider LC🙏 (@FrMatthewLC) October 24, 2020

Have prisoners grow their own food and pay back the taxpayer for the initial investment into farming supplies and materials. This should be feasible in minimum-security facilities, even if there are concerns about them stealing tools to make weapons. Or theys hould be doing some sort of labor to repay the taxpayer.

It is our duty to respect the humanity and dignity of incarcerated people, even those justly imprisoned for serious, even heinous, crimes. This is the teaching of our religions and it is sound morality. It is no insult to the victims of their crimes to treat them humanely. https://t.co/0ooHcJGjJ0

— Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) October 16, 2020

Dreher Utilizes Girard

But to what degree is he successful? He also refers to Bishop Barron's most recent piece at CWR.

I am reminded of C. R. Hallpike's criticism of Girard. See also his book Ship of Fools, and I do not find Girard's account of scapegoating convincing. (Though I suppose I should read what he has to say about sacrifice as well.) Just because his theory lead to his reversion back to the Catholic faith, it doesn't mean that it is true or correct; it may be that God can nonetheless use error to lead someone back.

See also Death to the Death Penalty? René Girard’s Challenge to Thomas Aquinas by Tyler Graham

Dreher is still Dreher in his concerns:

One immense challenge to Christians is to find a way to fight this scapegoating, and to endure it when it can’t be fought, without returning hatred for hatred. I can imagine that it would be easy for those Covington boys to be tempted by far-right white nationalism, especially given the disgraceful spectacle of some of their own woke Catholic bishops throwing them under the bus. (This is what Girard meant when he talked about churches today being “vulnerable to the ongoing blackmail of contemporary neo-paganism.”) But that would be morally wrong, and even a betrayal of the Gospel. When we lose sight of the fact that we ourselves can be part of the mob, and start to see ourselves as innocent by virtue of our identity (racial, sexual, religious, etc.), then we fall into the same scapegoating mechanism that has captured those who hate us.

Gimme That Old Time Manly Religion

Why I'd Be a Pagan by Scott Locklin

An essay representative of the alt right's attempt to reappropriate pre-Christian religion as being part, if not the basis, of "traditional European" culture.

These aren't the gods of narrow backed poltroons, or dastardly over civilized urbanites; these are the gods of real men who carved a raw living from the earth, and by hacking gobberts of gore from their enemies' living flesh. They were not smarmy urban stock brokers, vegetable fetishists, or grubby cube-dwelling software developers. For that matter, they weren't even soldiers; they were freebooters, farmers, and hunters. I suppose the original gods of the Vedas and of the Greeks were something very similar to the gods of the Norsemen, but, through the mists of time, they have been corrupted. Certainly, the way the gods are spoken of in Homer is much like enormity of the Norse gods. The stories of the Greek gods are transmitted to us and filtered by centuries of perfumed city-dwelling degenerates, so we now think of Jove as a semi comedic fellow who had sex with a duck and a cow in his attempts to get away from his shrew wife, Hera. Alas the urban thunderer. But with Thor, we get the raw, unexpurgated, red-bearded, wild eyed, hammer wielding original item.

Jack Donovan writes that this essay had a great influence on his own thinking.

Well, something could be said about the decay of human religions since the Fall of Adam and Eve, and the result of creating gods in the image of fallen man. We hear the echoes (from Nietzsche?) of the criticism that Christianity is for the weak. In actuality, Latin Christianity teaches us that grace perfects nature and enables men to become great men in and through Christ, full of strength and virtue, even though their works may seem small and humble to the world. But what sort of convincing defense can we muster at this time, when the Roman Catholic churches of the West are in such poor shape and the needs of men are neglected?

Leon Podles has written his genealogy attempting to explain the emasculation of Christian culture. Why not blame excessive Marian devotion, as represented by the Western Christianity's adoption of the Rosary? (In contrast to the importance of the Jesus Prayer in Orthodoxy.) This is one cause, if at all, and not sufficient to explain the phenomenon in question. What factors were at work, and when did the problem first arise? There are doubtless many factors that are older - the lack of a vernacular liturgy leading to the replacement of a proper liturgical spirituality (dependent upon the intelligibility of the prayers and texts) with something else, the rise of the nation-state and the erosion of community, further exacerbated by industrialization and the centralization of political and economic power, turning men into wage slaves with very little political identity. The full exercise of citizenship may not be necessary for the Christian vocation, but one needs to be able to live the order of charity with one's family, neighbors and fellow men (his brothers in the community) and this has gradually been lost to many of us.

Still, I am reminded of this interview with the Orthodox monk Gabriel Bunge:

There are two types of mysticism in the Catholic Church: restrained (inner work) and ecstatic. Both schools are rooted in the monastic tradition. The first school that originated in Sts. Macarius, Anthony, and Evagrius is the inner mysticism, “inner work.” But St. Macarius’ Homilies contain the other school too, more affective mysticism. Therefore he is traditionally considered to belong to the softened or semi- Messalianism, that is a kind of ecstatic monasticism. I think, that here we could see just two different spiritual temperaments that confront one another. That’s why it’s difficult to find a common language. The follower of the inner work could say to his opponent, “You are too sensual,” and the latter could reply, “You are too reasonable. You don’t have any inner experience.” And both these opinions would be wrong.

However, I have to admit that in the Middle Ages there were purely women’s mystical movements on the West that seem strange to me and are beyond my comprehension. I belong to a different school. I don’t have anything that could help me to understand or feel deeply that affective, ecstatic mysticism. The main rule of any spiritual life for me is restriction and lack of exaltation because exaltation itself is a ground for demonic prelest. This experience we can find today in charismatics. To avoid mistakes that Evagrius calls imitation of spiritual and mystic states, we have to be very careful, wise, and to possess simplicity and purity. Today it is called a self-suggested condition, that is, an imaginative mystic (spiritual) condition.

St. Theophan the Recluse, who is very popular in the West, by the way, understood the matter of western mystics very subtly. Once he exclaimed: “Oh, these Western people, they cannot distinguish between psychic and spiritual!” And really, when I talk to people who come for confession, I see how often they mix these things. One has to teach and help people to see the difference between their feelings and true spirituality from God. People quite often feel something deep inside and think “Here it is, here is that true spirituality.”

I want to focus primarily on liturgy in this post, and not on living the order of charity towards a man's neighbors.

The Pauline reform of the Roman rite is not without problems, but at present I am concerned with the texts of the ordinary form, but with the style of worship that accompanied the reform, the '60s sensibility that plagues our parishes. One noticeable aspect of this is contemporary "Catholic worship music," but we can also consider the introduction of women as lectors, cantors, servers, and extraordinary eucharistic ministers. Women should be allowed to sing in the choir or schola, but when they speak as lectors, their vocal performance of the text distracts and is annoyingly artificial. (The same can be said of males, but women are worse because their voices do not naturally command attention.) The readings for the liturgy should be sung, but having a woman sing would not solve this latter problem.

OF worship can thus be said to be more "feminine," with contemporary music that has origins in the Romantic Era and is characterized by sentimentalism. What we should have is liturgy that engages men as men, rather than pandering to exaggerated female sensibilities; both reason and the senses should be involved, but reason is acknowledged as having priority. Truth and intelligible beauty cannot be replaced by emotion without severe consequences. A more "traditional" form of liturgy would appeal to women as well, since they seek order and truth as well. Appealing to their senses and emotions does nothing to foster an authentic Christian spirituality for them.

Can you think of any examples of contemporary Catholic worship songs that are consonant with manly singing? (Even Gregorian chant may not be enough, or certain interpretations of it!) Men do want to glorify God in song, not sing superficial, narcissistic, sappy or stupid songs that end up drawing attention to the self rather than God.

Despite the open-mindedness of Benedict XVI and John Paul II and the apparent numbers of its members, I think for the reasons given above that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal is a dead end - it is just the NO cult or worship style taken to another level (understandable, as it promotes a form of spirituality that generally relies too much upon sensible manifestations).

And now a comment about the implications of a feminist-dominated Church on the "real world"...

An older seminarian recounts that one of his teachers, an American nun, harshly and repeatedly rebuked him in class (i.e. in the presence of his classmates, then). He didn't say it was emasculating but I have no doubt that it was. St. Paul's stricture on women teaching or being in authority seems to apply outside of the temple, as this is one negative consequence. That sort of dynamic also is probably not a good one for men and women in general. A woman may be acceptable as a teacher of those who are young; she is just a mommy figure. But after puberty, having another mommy figure is not appropriate. This seminarian probably can't even talk back, since she has a position of authority and there could be negative consequences. How many women respond well to criticism of abuse of authority? In this case, it really would be personal. If men were to abuse authority in such a manner, they would lose respect and standing among men, both their peers and those who are subordinate to them. But a woman? She can get away with this without any consequences.

Even if a man is reasonably rebuked by a woman, it smacks of being scolded by mommy. If a man is reasonably rebuked by a man that he respects, it is different. He hopes to earn his respect one day, perhaps even be treated as an equal by him. But a man cannot be an equal to a woman because of their sex differences. A female may try to ape male leadership, don't she doesn't know the nuances and the principle that one must lead by example, first of all - how can you really be an example to men if you are a woman?

Feminism is not about equality, it's about women usurping men.

Appended:

Should students be more like apprentices, not just learning a specific skill or techne, but learning from moral exemplars and mentors as well? We are used to over-specialization and the compartmentalization of life. Still, a teacher is not a spiritual father to one's students, despite the age difference, but more of a brother or fellow citizen. He can offer fraternal correction, but it seems out of place for him to act like a father figure, unless that is what the student seeks. (Even then, that may be a rather perilous position to assume.) As a teacher he is not a supervisor of the entirety of a student's life, though he will supervise the limited good of the proper functioning of the classroom setting as well as a student's study habits, though indirectly. (Should corporal punishment be limited only to those who exercise a role with respect to moral training? If a teacher acts in loco parentis or in place of the community, then they may have the right to punish in that manner. But if a teacher is only safeguarding the good of the learning environment, then the most he can do is to expel a disruptive student.)




*I missed this when I read the interview with Fr. Gabriel the first couple of times: " He has been living in the Skete of the Holy Cross in Swiss canton Tichino since 1980 following the ancient typicon of Saint Benedict." I do not doubt that the Rule of St. Benedict can be harmonized with being in the Byzantine rite; after all, isn't this what some of the monks at Chevetogne do? (Fr. Bunge was originally from that community.) But can one be a hermit and still be said to be following the Rule of St. Benedict? I would like to see Chevetogne one day, to see how one can be an Eastern Benedictine.

Items of Interest, 12 April 2012

Daniel Larison, Subsidiarity and Rerum Novarum

Mary Ann Glendon, What's Wrong With Rights

Peter Hitchens, An Argument for Punishment

Paul Gottfried, Derb's National Rebuke

PJB, Obama's Zimmerman Problem

Juan Cole, The Iran Conundrum
Gary Leupp, The Irrationality of the Case against Iran’s Nuclear Program
Philip Giraldi, The Babylonian Captivity of Washington

Judge Napolitan, What If the Government Rejects the Constitution?

Liberty Classroom

Matthew Feeney, A New Grassroots Currency Hits the Market in Greece

John Michael Greer, America: The Gasoline War



Farming:
How to design more resilient, food producing systems (without money and fossil fuels)

Why Don't Farmers Just Do It?

Diet and Health:
On 'Exercising Like a Caveman': Commentary by Erwan Le Corre

Catholic:
Something on Cardinal Manning.

Brian O'Neel, author of 39 New Saints You Should Know on Morning Air, talking about depression. (mp3)
A Priest Who Had Depression

Bishops Issue Statement on Religious Liberty
Our First Most Cherished Liberty

Is SSPX homecoming imminent?

History:
Skeletons found at mass burial site in Oxford could be ’10th-century Viking raiders’

Feminism:
Women’s Unrealistic Online Standards Are Like Ice Cream
The Feminism Sh*t Test


More footage of the Mike Wallace interview of Margaret Sanger.

Author sees sexual revolution at root of women’s discontent
Feminism was the problem, the sexual revolution was just one moment in its history.

Minimalist Shoes:
Vibram FiveFingers Trek Flip Preview

Music:
Mark O'Connor, The Violin is So Cool It Has Two Names
Dec. 2010: Rachel Podger: Between baroque and a hard place

Misc:
Best Ranger TV
MALAYSIAN PARANGS
Brazilian Special Ops

Chris Costa: First Spear Tubes, 6/12 spotted in the wild…

Chronicles Unbound

The new weekly podcast from Chronicles, which is actually the Friday episode of the Paul Youngblood Show on WNTA - the first podcast, from March 2 - the first and second hours, which include an introduction to the Rockford Institute and an announcement of an official partnership between the Rockford Institute, Chronicles Magazine, and WNTA.

Dr. Fleming's latest: Afghan Justice:

Here in the enlightened West, we know that the purpose of a criminal justice system is two-fold: to rehabilitate the criminal and protect the public. It was not always so. The ancients believed that a criminal act--murder, assault, robbery, rape--put the universe out of joint. The purpose of punishment was to put it right again. Killers are killed, robbers robbed, beaters beaten.

It was not always so simple as "an eye for an eye," and Roman and Christian law made allowances for motives, circumstances, and appropriateness of punishment, but they never forgot the primary purpose of punishment was retribution or, to use a simpler word, vengeance.

Leftist Christians will howl in protest, citing, "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord," little understanding that the same Lord, according to St. Paul, delegates the power to punish evil to the rulers of the world. Not in vain, Paul declared in an authoritative chapter of Romans, does the ruler hold the sword, nor is it a terror to the good but only to the wicked. It follows that a ruler who casts away the sword on a humanitarian whim is no longer a legitimate ruler. The Church always begged for mercy in specific cases, but never disputed the right and duty of kings and parliaments to execute criminals.

Even Imanuel Kant, who got most things wrong, saw through the lies of all the liberal theories of punishment:
"Judicial punishment can never be used solely as a means to promote some other good for the criminal himself or for society, but instead must in all cases be imposed on a person solely on the ground that he has committed a crime....woe to him who rummages around in the winding paths of a theory of happiness looking for some advantage to be gained by releasing the criminal from punishment or by reducing the amount of it....Even if civil society were to dissolve itself by common agreement of all its members...the last murderer remaining in prison must be executed, so that everyone will duly receive what his actions are worth and so that the bloodguilt thereof will not be fixed on the people because they failed to insist on carrying out the punishment; for if they fail to do so, they may be regarded as accomplices in this public violation of legal justice.”

Peter Moskos on Flogging

Flogging Debate
Peter Moskos: Flogging versus prison

An interview with Peter Moskos

I first blogged about his book here.