A Note on Renewing SSPX/Rome Talks

Some people have asked me what I think about the recent news concerning Cardinal Gerhard Mueller’s invitation to the Society of St. Pius X’s Superior General, Bishop Bernard Fellay, for “an informal meeting to review the relations between the SSPX and Rome.” Mueller’s chilly attitude toward the Society is a matter of public record, and certain members of the SSPX have been less-than-thrilled with some of Mueller’s more exotic theological speculations. (There is a brief overview of the dustup which occurred in some traditional circles over Mueller’s appointment to head the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) at the  Sancrucensis web-log here.) However, events can change attitudes pretty quickly. While some traditional Catholics fretted over the possibility that Mueller would import his private theological views into the CDF, the reality is that he has become the frontline defender of the Church’s traditional teaching on marriage. On the need to put down Cardinal Walter Kasper’s mad proposal to split doctrine from praxis with respect to civilly divorced-and-remarried Catholics is one area where Mueller and Fellay undoubtedly agree.

Answering Ochlophobic Questions

For those curious, my answers to the Owen White’s deceptively difficult “Ochlophobic Questions” is up on his web-log here. While I know he would say no thanks is necessary, I also want to extend gratitude for Owen’s thoughtful words on our sometimes rocky, but almost always enjoyable, friendship. Make sure you read the other entries in the series as well.

Consistent Legal Scholarship?

Eric Posner has called attention to his occasional coauthor Adrian Vermeule’s forthcoming article-length critique of Philip Hamburger’s most recent book, Is Administrative Law Unlawful? (If you don’t want to wait for the review to appear in the pages of the Texas Law Review you can access a copy at SSRN here.) Over at The Originalism Blog, Michael Ramsey opines that Vermeule’s critique of Hamburger is inconsistent with Vermeule’s defense of the imperial Presidency in the last book he coauthored with Posner, The Executive Unbound. Vermeule has since shot back that there is no inconsistency between Executive and his current critique of Hamburger (though without explaining why). Interestingly, Vermeule has “den[ied] that consistency is a virtue for academics.” Does he mean all academics or just legal academics? And regardless, why?

Ochlophobic Questions

Owen White has opened the next chapter in his fascinating, engaging, and provocative web-logging career with a series of form Q&As with a number of other bloggers, writers, intellectuals, etc. who have influenced him over the years. You can find out more about the series here. Some of the people “profiled” so far include Pater Edmund Waldstein (Sancrucensis), Adam DeVille (professor and author of Eastern Catholic Books Blog), and John Medaille (a leading Distributist thinker). For reasons unbeknownst to me, I was asked to contribute to the project as well, though given all of the balls Owen has in the air at any given moment, it may be a bit before my answers show up on his blog.

As some of you already know, Owen and I first crossed paths (swords) many moons ago over his rightly infamous überfromm posts — the first comprehensive takedown of (American) Orthodoxy’s dominant pathologies that I had ever encountered. In fact, I can’t say that I have ever encountered a better one since. Whether people want to admit it or not, those posts, along with many subsequent reflections on being Orthodox in America and its attendant politics, changed the way many Orthodox bloggers approached their confessional haunt. Sure, there are far more pseudo-pious Orthodox blogs out there than not, but the fact there is even a contingent which are willing to take a hard look at the glories and miseries of the Eastern Church in the West is because of Owen White.

I can’t say that I agreed with him much at the time, though Owen’s observations have a way of rattling around in the heart and mind. Finally the noise gets irritating enough that you have to open yourself up to remove it and that is when you have to take a fresh look at what was driving you mad. I am sure if one drew up a list of every topic Owen and I have a shared interest in, no matter how remote, we’d wind up on opposite sides more often than not — and that’s a good thing. Even though we have never met in person, I have no qualms about calling him my friend; and should we find ourselves once again bloodying our knuckles over some matter political, theological, or ecclesial, we’ll both come out the better for it.