Showing posts with label LITERATURE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LITERATURE. Show all posts

Saturday, July 25, 2026

Adventist Literature Provokes Catholics At Rededicate 250 Event in Washington DC


July 12, 2026 NewsHound




Prior to the 250th anniversary of the United States, thousands came to the National Mall in Washington for "Rededicate 250: A National Jubilee Of Prayer, Praise & Thanksgiving." The eight-hour-long event, created and organized by Freedom 250 in collaboration with the White House, drew throngs of people over the weekend, who waited in line to stand in front of the center Stage. One of the attendees was Emma Cieslik, a queer Catholic religious scholar. Emma is the director for Queer and Catholic, and wrote in the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) how the Great Controversy book that was given away at Rededicate 250 contains anti-Catholic conspiracies, written by Ellen White. In Emma’s own words,

“I attended the event as a Catholic public historian, curious about the materials that attendees, organizers and protestors were distributing.

But the materials that I and other members of the public received revealed deep-seated tension between Catholics and Protestants at an event focused on Christian unity and featuring Catholic speakers. I saw echoes of the same anti-Catholic conspiracies that have existed since the very beginning of the United States, and have affected the way that American Christianity has been constructed. The juxtaposition between the event's anti-Catholic elements and its Catholic speakers emphasized the ongoing fracture between Protestants and Catholics in Trump's MAGA coalition.

I, like everyone who walked up from the Smithsonian metro stop, was handed a bag with the screenprinted logo "Religious Freedom 250" from Amazing Facts International, a multimillion dollar religious nonprofit organization run by Pastor Doug Batchelor.

In it was Ellen Gould White's The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: The Great Controversy Between Good and Evil, along with a glossy magazine titled "Religious Freedom and America in Bible Prophecy: The Future of Earth's Last Superpower Revealed" published by Amazing Facts and other assorted leaflets. While not officially affiliated with the event, the bag and its contents closely mirrored Rededicate 250's design, and they were the only materials that I was handed while walking around the event.

I was already skeptical of the materials because [Ellen]White is well-known for her anti-Catholic views. In fact, her book The Great Controversy, which argues that the Catholic Church misinterprets the Second and Fourth Commandments, is a prominent source of anti-Catholic conspiracies.

But what I encountered inside of the magazine was even more blatant.

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Brooks travels 'The Road to Character'


Gregory Korte, USA TODAY9:36 p.m. EDT May 10, 2015



(Photo: Random House)


One of David Brooks' great virtues as a columnist is his unpredictability. Hired as the token conservative on The New York Times' op-ed page, he's become the liberal's favorite conservative writer, alternately infuriating those on the far right and the far left. His columns often diverge into varied and non-political subjects like the psychology of pitching and the meaning of meaningfulness.

But in many parts of the commentariat, he's seen as also an off-putting egghead moralist — something Brooks acknowledges in the opening pages of The Road to Character (**1/2 out of four), his examination of how human nature has evolved from the classical era to the age of social media and the selfie stick.

"I'm paid to be a narcissistic blowhard, to volley my opinions, to appear more confident about them than I really am," he writes. "I have to work harder than most people to avoid a life of smug superficiality."

That confession is the closest Brooks comes to a first-person confrontation with his own character. The Road to Character is not a memoir, but a series of hagiographic essays extolling virtues of humility, self-sacrifice, discipline and generosity.

The soundbite thesis of the book is this: There are résumé virtues, the kinds of talents and job skills that lead to material success, and there are eulogy virtues, the kinds of things you'd like to be remembered for after you die: kindness, honesty, faithfulness.

Borrowing from Joseph Soloveitchik, an Orthodox Rabbi, Brooks calls these Adam I values and Adam II values. In the first chapter of Genesis, Adam I is created in the image of God, and is told to "fill the earth and subdue it." Adam I is ego-centered, majestic and masterful.

But there's a different creation story in the second chapter, where Adam II is created from dust. Adam II is humble, vulnerable and communal. "It is not good for man to be alone," God says.

Throughout the book, Brooks uses words like sin, vocation, soul and grace — words loaded with religious meaning but which Brooks tries to humanize and secularize. He argues for a new moral vocabulary to help balance out the more self-aggrandizing tendencies of modern society.

In the biographies that form the meat of the book, Brooks chooses as subjects religious figures such as St. Augustine of Hippo and Dorothy Day of the Catholic Worker Movement (herself on the road to sainthood); civil rights leaders like A. Philip Randolphand Bayard Rustin; military leaders like Dwight Eisenhower and George Marshall; and writers like George Eliot and Samuel Johnson.

At his best, Brooks is a normative version of Malcolm Gladwell, culling from a wide array of scientists and thinkers to weave an idea bigger than the sum of its parts.

The book grew out of a course Brooks taught at Yale University, and it sometimes reads like a series of undergraduate essays, with great thinkers thrown in haphazardly in an effort to impress the teacher. Like his columns, Brooks' chapters can be original and eye-opening, or inconsistent and hard to follow.

The title of The Road to Character suggests a map to help the reader develop the eulogy virtues. But it's not quite a self-help book, which Brooks sees as a fool's errand anyway. "The existence of more and more self-help books is proof that they rarely work," he writes.

Instead, he says, "I wrote this book not sure I could follow the road to character, but I wanted at least to know what the road looks like and how other people have trodden it."

It's not until the acknowledgements that the reader learns that this book wasn't supposed to be about character at all. What was conceived as a book about "cognition and decision-making" evolved into one about "morality and inner life."

Brooks can be unpredictable, even to himself.

The Road to Character

By David Brooks

Random House, 270 pp.

2½ out of four stars

Gregory Korte is a White House reporter for USA TODAY. Follow @gregorykorte on Twitter.



.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

V.P. Biden's Good Taste in Literature

Posted at: Friday, March 11, 2011 01:44:24 PM
Author: Kevin Clarke

It's no secret that Father Jim Martin and his many literary efforts (I think he constitutes his own book-of-the-month club at this point) have a lot of fans in both high and low places (like my office) and around the world. But we don't often get evidence as pointed as the accompanying photo, which was forwarded to us yesterday. This neat picture was also accompanied by its own thousand words, so we have the tale of the snapshot and a unique perspective on a brush with greatness from one young Jesuit serving in Russia.

Janez Sever, a Jesuit priest from the Russian Province (doing his final stage of Jesuit training, his "tertianship") celebrated Mass in Moscow for Vice President Joe Biden and his team on Ash Wednesday (Biden was in Russia for meetings on trade and foreign policy with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin). Father Sever was asked to prepare an Ash Wednesday service, after which he offered the vice president a copy of Jim's latest book ("The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything"). Biden said he had already had his own copy.

Here's Father Sever's story:

I felt like Forrest Gump today as I did a quick Ash Wednesday service for VP Joe Biden and about 10 others in the hotel where he is staying. It went very well and I had a short conversation with him afterwards. I gave him Jim Martin's book and he said that he already had a copy and had read some of it. He thought it was really well written—easy and delightful to understand. If anyone has Jim Martin's e-mail, you can pass this photo on to him. It was an interesting experience to say the least.

The very first thing which struck me was that the Vice President’s office had requested an Ash Wednesday service this far in advance. It was a real priority of the Vice President! My initial reaction to the idea of getting to give ashes to the Vice President of the United States was one of excitement of getting a “photo opportunity” with him. Then I went into a phase of beginning to become preoccupied with “doing the right thing.” Finally, I “woke up” and took the question to Jesus in prayer. How does God want me to preach the Gospel to this man? By turning to God, I came to realize and accept that I am not there for myself, but that perhaps I am really “being sent” into this opportunity. This was a mission (kind of like the Blues Brothers who were on a “mission for God”). I wondered, how and what am I called to proclaim to this powerful man in order for him to be able to really make this Lent an effective moment in his life. To make a long story short, I went through two very different homilies before realizing that they were “boring” and “burdensome.” I was “led” to remember my 30 day retreat experience and that I could and am called to share from that experience. Jim Martin’s book inspired me to this because Jim’s style is about making our faith and spirituality “accessible.” Jim does it by sharing his own very concrete and humble personal experiences. And these types of experiences are accessible and very key to each and every human being if they are seeking God no matter who they are. We don’t need big words to express how God desires our cooperation and/or friendship. In fact, the “big words” that we usually hear in some homilies in church really don’t help.

Several times before the service it was made known to me that the service should be “short and sweet…” not to last more than fifteen minutes. It was held in the hotel where the Vice President and his staff are staying. It was 8:45 pm, right after the Vice President returned from his meeting with the Russian President Medvedev. Approximately ten other Catholic staff participated in addition to the Vice President. Several of the staff mentioned their ties to Jesuit Universities. Everyone was very tired at the end of their first day in Moscow.

Overall the service was very “light” and informal (I realize today, the day after, that these were signs of spiritual consolation as Ignatius teaches us). I was struck by several things in this whole experience. One is how the first words out of everyone’s mouth were, “Thank you, Father for taking the time!” I felt how these Catholics were genuinely grateful for this opportunity to be connected with the church at the beginning of Lent. As I look back on the event, I sense how it was a “small island, an oasis” of consolation of sorts. The atmosphere was serious, but “light.” Though everyone had had a full day, this service became a moment of God’s presence, God’s consoling presence.

Now one last thing about this whole meeting… I am a person who feels strongly about the pro-life question. This was the man to talk to about this, but how... By taking this concern of mine (and the church) to prayer and consulting some of my fellow Jesuit brothers I believed that this was not to be just about ashes. However, late at night and in Moscow after a long tough day was probably not the time to preach on this specific issue. However, this is a man who has the power to influence. But this issue needs to be addressed somehow. So, in consulting with our Regional Superior, Tony Corcoran (NOR), we decided to draft a letter expressing our deep respect for the man, for the causes to which he has given his life, and suggesting that he relook at his discernment regarding this question, suggesting that this Lent may be the appropriate season for this.


Source

.

Friday, November 12, 2010

Barack Obama's colourful shellacking found its origins in India

By Christopher Howse
Literature
Last updated: November 4th, 2010



78rpm records may have been made of shellack (Photo: Alamy)

President Barack Obama said, “I took a shellacking,” after the bad mid-term election results for the Democrats. It sounds like something from a gangster film, as well it might, since the term is of American origin and became popular in the 1930s.

“These two bums that Lefty shellacked were members of Red Karfola’s gang,” wrote C F Coe in 1930, in his novel Gunman, which was published by Victor Gollancz in what has been called the first modern paperback format, retailing at the fairly steep price of three shillings. That was before quantitative easing.

We think of old 78rpm records as being made of shellack, though I’m not sure they really were. Shellack, a word used in English for 300 years, was originally a varnish (from French laque en écailles, “lac in thin plates”). And what was lac?

Lac was and is a kind of gum or resin exuded by a tree punctured by an insect. It was red in colour, and so in the 1550s it was called “Ye gumme of a tree wherewith silke is colored”. The word is from Hindi lakh, in ancient Sanskrit laksha.

From this gum also come our words lacquer, and, from its properties as a dye, the colour crimson lake.So Mr Obama’s language was more colourful than perhaps he knew.
.
Source
.

Friday, December 28, 2007

THE BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY - MARTIN LUTHER

The Babylonian Captivity surpassed everything which he had written so far against the Roman Church…It was the chief evidence of Luther’s heresy” –Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation, 1483-1521
“On Oct 6, 1520, (Luther’s) Babylonian Captivity emerged from the press of Melchior Lotter in Wittenberg – a forty-four page Latin bomb planted in the midst of the delicate machinery of the Catholic sacramental system.

The publication of the Babylonica, as it came to be known in English, shattered any lingering illusions that Luther was a reformer cast in the mold of Erasmus…His tone and radicalism jarred educated Europe.” –Richard Marius,
Martin Luther: The Christian Between God and Death

Martin Luther’s manifesto of religious individualism,
one of the central documents of the Protestant Reformation
exceedingly scarce 1520 first.

"God does not deal, nor has he ever dealt, with man otherwise than through a word of promise… We in turn cannot deal with God otherwise than through faith in the Word of his promise. He does not desire works, nor has he need of them…There is no doubt, therefore, that in our day all priests and monks, together with their bishops and all their superiors, are idolators, living in a most perilous state by reason of this ignorance, abuse, and mockery of the mass, or sacrament, or promise of God.”
“But you will say: What is this? Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the churches and monasteries, by virtue of which they have flourished all these centuries? For the mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions, applications, communications, etc., that is to say, of their fat income. I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write of the captivity of the church. For it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced into the service of a most impious traffic.”
-Martin Luther, The Babylonian Captivity.

LUTHER, Martin. De Captivitate Babylonica Ecclesiae. Wittenberg: [Melchior Lotter, 1520]. Quarto, period-style binding of modern three-quarter pigskin over wooden boards. A-L4; 44 leaves. $48,000.

First edition of Martin Luther's revolutionary call to spiritual individualism. The Babylonian Captivity is Luther’s most severe attack on the Roman Church and one of the central documents of the Protestant Reformation. In it Luther articulated a radical theology that reduced the essence of Christianity to just two core elements: God’s promise to man as set forth in Scripture, and man’s faithful acceptance of that promise. The ecclesiastical and cultural implications of this doctrine were momentous, as theologians across Europe recognized immediately. The Babylonian Captivity undermined the bond between Church officials and the laity and set forth a powerful doctrine of spiritual individualism that would change Europe forever
EXTREMELY SCARCE. We can find no record of another copy being offered for sale in the last 30 years.
Condition: Text generally clean with scattered occasional spotting and offsetting; residue on gutter of title page and last leaf; very small (approx. half-inch) repaired tear to lower corner of last leaf (in margin, not affecting text).


Please read below for a detailed description of The Babylonian Captivity.

Martin Luther’s attacks on the medieval Roman Catholic Church’s doctrines and practices initiated perhaps the most momentous revolution of the past two millennia and made him, without question, one of the truly pivotal figures of Western Culture. Few documents played a more central role in the history of the Protestant Reformation than Martin Luther’s Prelude on the Babylonian Captivity of the Church. The Captivity was the second of Luther’s three great treatises of 1520, and marks the peak of Luther’s incendiary theological radicalism. The first of the 1520 treatises, Luther’s Open Letter to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, argued that in times of crisis Scripture allowed for secular powers to act independently of the pope to call a council to bring about Church reform. The immediate political significance of this document was immense, especially among the German peoples. However, while the tone of this letter was bitterly critical of the Roman Church, in it Luther wrote as one who would reform the Church, not lead a revolt against it. Luther’s position changed dramatically with the publication of the Babylonian Captivity, the second of his great treatises of 1520. It was here that Luther took an explicitly insurrectionary position, writing that the pope was the antichrist and arguing that true Christianity had to be rescued from the “Babylonian Captivity” into which the Roman Church had led it. The Captivity marked the crowning moment of Luther’s theological radicalism and represents the point of irreparable fracture between his own writings and the Roman Church.

As a work of theology, the Captivity is primarily an attack on the Roman Church’s sacramental system, the practices and teachings that gave the Church its spiritual and temporal authority. For Luther, a reformed theology of the sacraments was the key to rescuing true Christianity from its “Babylonian Captivity”. The central argument of the Babylonian Captivity was that the essence of a true sacrament is that of a divine promise, and that each Christian had to accept this promise for himself. The incendiary corollary to this was Luther’s argument that there was no role for the Church to play in administering the mass. This amounted to an act of theological sedition for it severed the bond between laymen and the pope, and called for individual Christians to cement their bond with God independently of the Roman Church. In Luther’s view the centuries-old notion that priests were intermediaries who administered the mass was the fraudulent and self-enriching “teaching of godless men”. The radicalism inherent in Luther’s entirely novel re-conceptualization of the sacraments was no minor theoretical matter. Luther himself saw that the practical implications of the Captivity ’s argument were enormous and potentially lethal for the Church. He addressed this question in the Captivity, writing, “But you will say: What is this? Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the churches and monasteries, by virtue of which they have flourished all these centuries? For the mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions, applications, communications, etc., that is to say, of their fat income. I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write of the captivity of the church. For it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced into the service of a most impious traffic…”.

By severing the bond between priests and laymen Luther had set forth an argument that undermined the Roman Church at its most fundamental level. From a broader historical perspective the still greater importance of this argument was that it was the first clear and authoritative expression of the spiritual individualism at the heart of the Protestant Reformation. Luther’s Captivity drove a wedge between Church authority and the individual Christian and effectively reduced the core of a Christian’s bond with God to two simple elements: God’s promise, or sacrament, and man’s faith in that promise. Luther’s reformed notion of the sacraments put each individual’s spiritual fate in his own hands. More than this, Luther’s notion of the sacraments galvanized the distinctly evangelical thrust of Protestantism as he argued that the way to know and accept God’s promise was through Scripture and faith, not the practices and teachings of the Roman Church. This meant that spreading the gospel was the essence of being a ‘priest’ of Christ, not careful observance of Church-sanctioned rituals and practices.

The fact that the Captivity was Luther’s most revolutionary work was immediately apparent to Church officials and theologians all across Europe. Nothing that he wrote was more important in sealing his break with the Catholic Church. Indeed, the outcome of his trial at the Diet of Worms in 1521 was determined by his refusal to publicly disavow authorship of the Babylonian Captivity. The publication of the Captivity and Luther’s refusal to recant it at Worms marks a point at which individual conscience and the forces of empire crashed with astounding and epoch-shaping force, setting off a disruption so great that five centuries later the shock waves are still rippling through the social, cultural, religious and economic fabric of the Western world.

More on the content of the Babylonian Captivity

While the Captivity’s stinging rhetoric, the call for a “priesthood of all believers” and Luther’s characterization of the Pope as the antichrist got the attention of all of Europe, the true importance of this slim pamphlet lies in the fact that in it Luther offers, for the first time, a sustained and comprehensive ecclesiastical attack on Church power and practice. The Babylonian Captivity was Luther’s theological tour de force.

The subject of the Captivity is the Church’s sacramental system, through which the Church exercised spiritual and cultural control over Christians’ lives from birth to death. Luther’s method was to compare the practices of the Church’s centuries-old sacramental system with what was written in the New Testament. For Luther, the true Christian’s bond to God could be secured only through acceptance of God’s testament – i.e., through faith: “Without this faith, whatever else is brought to it by way of prayers, preparations, works, signs, or gestures are incitements to impiety.” Luther’s conclusion was that of the seven sacraments observed by the Catholic Church – baptism, eucharist, penance, confirmation, marriage, ordination and extreme unction – only two, baptism and the eucharist, were true sacraments. Luther wrote, “Only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign and the promise of forgiveness of sins.” For Luther the other so-called sacraments were mere works, as opposed to faith in God’s promise. Luther wrote, “For God does not deal, nor has he ever dealt, with man otherwise than through a word of promise…We in turn cannot deal with God otherwise than through faith in the Word of his promise. He does not desire works, nor has he need of them…There is no doubt, therefore, that in our day all priests and monks, together with their bishops and all their superiors, are idolators, living in a most perilous state by reason of this ignorance, abuse, and mockery of the mass, or sacrament, or promise of God.”

Luther’s discussion of the mass was the central and most incendiary component of the Captivity and posed the greatest practical threat to the Church. Luther’s argument was that there was no role for the Church to play in administering the Mass – effectively this amounted to an act of theological sedition for it severed the bond between laymen and the Pope and called for individual Christians to free themselves from the tyranny of the Roman Church. Sedition was exactly what Luther thought was required to restore Christianity to its true foundation, human faith in God’s promise. Luther wrote in the Captivity, “For where faith dies and the word of faith is silent, there works and the prescribing of works immediately crowd into their place. By then we have been carried away out of our own land, as into Babylonian Captivity, and despoiled of all our precious possessions. This has been the fate of the mass; it has been converted by the teaching of godless men into a good work”. Luther’s attack on the Church’s role in administering the mass went against centuries of Church practice, and Church leaders recognized from the first that this view not only undermined their authority but also the Church’s primary sources of revenue. Luther knew that his critique of the seven sacraments was a threat to the Church’s very existence as an institution. Luther wrote, “But you will say: What is this? Will you not overturn the practice and teaching of all the churches and monestaries, by virtue of which they have flourished all these centuries? For the mass is the foundation of their anniversaries, intercessions, applications, communications, etc., that is to say, of their fat income. I answer: This is the very thing that has constrained me to write of the captivity of the church. For it is in this manner that the sacred testament of God has been forced into the service of a most impious traffic.” In Luther’s Captivity he argues that the whole machinery of the Church along with its carefully proscribed rituals and practices were not just theologically groundless but dangerous diversions from the essence of what it was to be a Christian. While the Captivity is one of Luther’s most theoretical writings, its practical implications were truly momentous.

The shockingly caustic tone of Luther’s attack on the Church and his revolutionary insistence on understanding the Mass strictly according to Scripture are enough to make the Captivity a central document of the Reformation. However the Captivity’s importance is greater still, for this document integrates Luther’s attack on existing Church practice with his notion of the “priesthood of all believers.” Luther’s notion of the “priesthood of all believers,” a slogan which spread like wildfire from Luther’s pen to the lips of dissenters all across Europe, was one of his great contributions to the Protestant movement, initiating a groundswell of spiritual egalitarianism and underwriting the distinctly evangelical cast of early Protestantism. As with his notion of the Mass, for Luther the essence of Christian priesthood was to be discovered and understood only through Scripture. The account of Christian priesthood that Luther found there – i.e., that all Christians are Christ’s priests by virtue of having been baptized – was, again, very much at odds with Church practice. Luther writes: “If they (the papists) were forced to grant that as many of us as have been baptised are all priests without distinction, as indeed we are, and that to them was committed the ministry only, yet with our consent, they would presently learn that they have no right to rule over us except in so far as we freely concede it. For thus it is written in 1 Peter 2:9, "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, and a priestly kingdom." Therefore we are all priests, as many of us as are Christians…And the priesthood is nothing but a ministry, as we learn from 1 Corinthians 4:1, "Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." In arguing that all Christians are priests through baptism, as opposed to select individuals being made into priests through ordination by the Church, Luther was denying that the Church played any essential role in selecting and bestowing upon priests any so-called “indelible character” that guaranteed their spiritual authority over laymen. For Luther the notion of a Church-bestowed “indelible character” was, as he wrote, “a laughing-stock.” Elaborating on this, Luther wrote, “I admit that the pope imparts this character, but Christ knows nothing of it; and a priest who is consecrated with it becomes thereby the life-long servant and captive, not of Christ, but of the pope; as it is in our day. Moreover, unless I am greatly mistaken, if this sacrament and this lie fall, the papacy itself with its characters will scarcely survive; our joyous liberty will be restored to us; we shall realize that we are all equal by every right, and having cast off the yoke of tyranny, shall know that he who is a Christian has Christ, and that he who has Christ has all things that are Christ's and is able to do all things (Philippians 4:13).” Luther’s doctrine of the “priesthood” of all Christians galvanized a movement of religious individualism and spiritual egalitarianism that continues to reverberate through Western Culture to this day.

The radicalism of Luther’s reasoning and rhetoric in the Babylonian Captivity was the focus of his trial at the Diet of Worms in 1521. His refusal to disavow authorship of this pamphlet led to his being branded a heretic and an outlaw – he would have been executed were it not for the protection of Frederick the Wise. It is worth noting that if Luther had recanted his Captivity, a reconciliation with the Church would almost certainly have been negotiated – indeed, by 1521 gradual reform of Church practice was already underway under the impetus of moderate thinkers such as Erasmus and even the Luther of 1517, whose famous 95 Theses were controversial but still within the bounds of what Church leaders could and would tolerate. Not so for the Luther who wrote the Babylonian Captivity of 1520, for unlike the 95 Theses, the Captivity struck a direct and piercing blow to the Church’s ecclesiastical and economic core and threatened to completely discredit the authority of church officials from the pope all the way down to parish priests. As the Church immediately recognized, Luther’s Captivity was an act of revolution, a revolution they sought to avoid by trying to persuade its author, under threat of execution, to publicly deny that he ever wrote it. There can be no question that Luther’s Babylonian Captivity is a document of surpassing importance in the history of the Protestant Reformation and indeed Western Culture.

Highlights added for emphasis. Blogman.


Wednesday, September 26, 2007

THE GRAND INQUISITOR

The Grand Inquisitor

'Standalone

The Grand Inquisitor is a parable told by Ivan to Alyosha in Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel, The Brothers Karamazov (1879-1880). Ivan and Alyosha are brothers; Ivan is a committed atheist, but Alyosha is a novice monk.

The Grand Inquisitor is an important part of the novel and one of the best-known passages in modern literature because of its ideas about human nature and freedom, and because of its fundamental ambiguity. It was recently published as an independent text by Continuum Books.

The parable

The tale is told by Ivan with brief interruptive questions by Alyosha. In the tale, Christ comes back to earth in Seville at the time of the Inquisition. Jesus performs a number of miracles (echoing miracles from the Gospels). The people recognize him and adore him, but he is arrested by Inquisition leaders and sentenced to be burnt to death the next day. The Grand Inquisitor visits him in his cell to tell him that the Church no longer needs him. The main portion of the text is the Inquisitor explaining to Jesus why his return would interfere with the mission of the church.

The Inquisitor frames his denunciation of Jesus around the three questions Satan asked Jesus during the temptation of Christ in the desert. These three are the temptation to turn stones into bread, the temptation to cast Himself from the Temple and be saved by the angels, and the temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the world. The Inquisitor states that Jesus rejected these three temptations in favor of freedom. The Inquisitor thinks that Jesus has misjudged human nature, though. He does not believe that the vast majority of humanity can handle the freedom which Jesus has given them. Thus, he implies that Jesus, in giving humans freedom to choose, has excluded the majority of humanity from redemption and doomed humanity to suffer.

Ivan indicates that the Inquisitor is an atheist. After a lifetime of pursuing God, he has given up in frustration. He is nevertheless left with his love of humanity and desire to see humanity not suffer. Despite declaring the Inquisitor to be an atheist, Ivan also implies that the Inquisitor and the Church follow "the wise spirit, the dread spirit of death and destruction," i.e. the Devil, Satan, for he, through compulsion, provided the tools to end all human suffering and unite under the banner of the Church. The multitude then is guided through the Church by the few who are strong enough to take on the burden of freedom. The Inquisitor says that under him, all mankind will live and die happily in ignorance. Though he leads them only to "death and destruction," they will be happy along the way. The Inquisitor will be a self-martyr, spending his life to keep choice from humanity. He states that "Anyone who can appease a man's conscience can take his freedom away from him."

The segment ends when Christ, who has been silent throughout, kisses the Inquisitor on his "bloodless, aged lips" (22) instead of answering him. On this, the Inquisitor releases Christ but tells him never to return. Christ, still silent, leaves into "the dark alleys of the city." Not only is the kiss ambiguous, but its effect on the Inquisitor is as well. Ivan concludes, "The kiss glows in his heart, but the old man adheres to his ideas." The kiss that Christ plants on the lips of the Grand Inquisitor is the equal of Christ's whispered words to Judas (John 13.27) "that thou doest, do quickly." Just as Jesus in no way condones Judas' betrayal, so Christ's kiss does not excuse the Grand Inquisitor.

Not only does the parable function as a philosophical and religious work in its own right, but it also furthers the character development of the larger novel. Clearly, Ivan identifies himself with the Inquisitor. After relating the tale, Ivan asks Alyosha if he "renounces" Ivan for his views. Alyosha responds by giving Ivan a soft kiss on the lips, to which the delighted Ivan replies, "Literary theft!" The brothers part soon afterwards.

According to Dostoevsky's own letters, even the author struggled with the questions posed in the Grand Inquisitor and wondered and worried how they might affect even the faith of the reader. Dostoevsky himself could not come up with a straight answer, but rather put forth the life of the Elder Zossima, which follows almost immediately this chapter, as his "answer" to Ivan's questions. Therefore the Grand Inquisitor cannot be fully understood without reading it with the chapters on the life of the Elder Zossima and subsequent chapters.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Inquisitor

Friday, September 21, 2007

ATLAS SHRUGGED BY AYN RAND

Ayn Rand’s Literature of Capitalism

By HARRIET RUBIN
Published: September 15, 2007

One of the most influential business books ever written is a 1,200-page novel published 50 years ago, on Oct. 12, 1957. It is still drawing readers; it ranks 388th on Amazon.com’s best-seller list. (“Winning,” by John F. Welch Jr., at a breezy 384 pages, is No. 1,431.)

Skip to next paragraph
Lester Kraus

Related

Atlas Shrugged Book Review: "A Parable of Buried Talents" By Granville Hicks (Oct. 13, 1957) (pdf)

Letters to the Editor: 'Atlas Shrugged,' By Alan Greenspan (Nov. 3, 1957) (pdf)

Times Topics:

Ayn Rand

Alan Greenspan

The 1957 novel was harshly reviewed and widely read.

The book is “Atlas Shrugged,” Ayn Rand’s glorification of the right of individuals to live entirely for their own interest.

For years, Rand’s message was attacked by intellectuals whom her circle labeled “do-gooders,” who argued that individuals should also work in the service of others. Her book was dismissed as an homage to greed. Gore Vidal described its philosophy as “nearly perfect in its immorality.”

But the book attracted a coterie of fans, some of them top corporate executives, who dared not speak of its impact except in private. When they read the book, often as college students, they now say, it gave form and substance to their inchoate thoughts, showing there is no conflict between private ambition and public benefit.

“I know from talking to a lot of Fortune 500 C.E.O.’s that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ has had a significant effect on their business decisions, even if they don’t agree with all of Ayn Rand’s ideas,” said John A. Allison, the chief executive of BB&T, one of the largest banks in the United States.

“It offers something other books don’t: the principles that apply to business and to life in general. I would call it complete,” he said.

One of Rand’s most famous devotees is Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, whose memoir, “The Age of Turbulence,” will be officially released Monday.

Mr. Greenspan met Rand when he was 25 and working as an economic forecaster. She was already renowned as the author of “The Fountainhead,” a novel about an architect true to his principles. Mr. Greenspan had married a member of Rand’s inner circle, known as the Collective, that met every Saturday night in her New York apartment. Rand did not pay much attention to Mr. Greenspan until he began praising drafts of “Atlas,” which she read aloud to her disciples, according to Jeff Britting, the archivist of Ayn Rand’s papers. He was attracted, Mr. Britting said, to “her moral defense of capitalism.”

Rand’s free-market philosophy was hard won. She was born in 1905 in Russia. Her life changed overnight when the Bolsheviks broke into her father’s pharmacy and declared his livelihood the property of the state. She fled the Soviet Union in 1926 and arrived later that year in Hollywood, where she peered through a gate at the set where the director Cecil B. DeMille was filming a silent movie, “King of Kings.”

He offered her a ride to the set, then a job as an extra on the film and later a position as a junior screenwriter. She sold several screenplays and intermittently wrote novels that were commercial failures, until 1943, when fans of “The Fountainhead” began a word-of-mouth campaign that helped sales immensely.

Shortly after “Atlas Shrugged” was published in 1957, Mr. Greenspan wrote a letter to The New York Times to counter a critic’s comment that “the book was written out of hate.” Mr. Greenspan wrote: “ ‘Atlas Shrugged’ is a celebration of life and happiness. Justice is unrelenting. Creative individuals and undeviating purpose and rationality achieve joy and fulfillment. Parasites who persistently avoid either purpose or reason perish as they should.”

Rand’s magazine, The Objectivist, later published several essays by Mr. Greenspan, including one on the gold standard in 1966.

Rand called “Atlas” a mystery, “not about the murder of man’s body, but about the murder — and rebirth — of man’s spirit.” It begins in a time of recession. To save the economy, the hero, John Galt, calls for a strike against government interference. Factories, farms and shops shut down. Riots break out as food becomes scarce.

Rand said she “set out to show how desperately the world needs prime movers and how viciously it treats them” and to portray “what happens to a world without them.”

The book was released to terrible reviews. Critics faulted its length, its philosophy and its literary ambitions. Both conservatives and liberals were unstinting in disparaging the book; the right saw promotion of godlessness, and the left saw a message of “greed is good.” Rand is said to have cried every day as the reviews came out.

Rand had a reputation for living for her own interest. She is said to have seduced her most serious reader, Nathaniel Branden, when he was 24 or 25 and she was at least 50. Each was married to someone else. In fact, Mr. Britting confirmed, they called their spouses to a meeting at which the pair announced their intention to make the mentor-protégé relationship a sexual one.

“She wasn’t a nice person, ” said Darla Moore, vice president of the private investment firm Rainwater Inc. “But what a gift she’s given us.”


Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/15/business/15atlas.html?em&ex=1190520000&en=d9d55a947a11e072&ei=5087%0A