When You Are Sure You're Right

 Last week we attended a different traditional parish for Sunday Mass. All the rubrics were the same, but there were parts where we were used to standing (during the incensing of the Altar, and during the Sanctus while the bells were ringing, for instance) where this congregation was sitting. 

The standing at our parish was new. For almost two years during COVID, we only had low Masses, which is what I attributed it to. One of our friends was insistent the red booklets we had indicated that during High Mass we stand at times we were previously sitting. So he and a handful of others started doing while others were kneeling or sitting. I'm not proficient enough to know what is "right" so I followed his lead for a while.

I think this was something particular to the red missal books we use, which are not the norm. It bothered me that we weren't all doing the same thing, and our pastor hadn't addressed it yet. My friend had even made an announcement at hospitality after Mass one Sunday, to try to get everyone on the same page. I thought we were in the right standing while everyone was sitting, but after being at Mass at this other parish last Sunday, I now had my doubts. Oddly, when we attended Mass this Sunday at our home parish, everyone was kneeling/sitting in the way we used to, and similar to the parish we attended while on vacation.

I think there is a latitude in the Latin Mass with some things--for instance, the pre-1962 missal versus the 1962 Missal may instruct differently on these matters. I don't get bent out of shape with these things. And this is a minor and particular example

But there is kind of self-consciousness when you think you're right about something, and everyone else is doing it wrong. Many people in these situations double-down, unless one has the humility to admit they were wrong and change course. Changing course and accepting instruction is not a weakness, as holy Scripture says, "Hear counsel, and receive instruction, that thou mayest be wise in thy latter end" (Prov 19:20). 

Since it was Trinity Sunday today, I thought about how Arius in the fourth century was leading a large contigent in a not-so-trivial matter: the co-eternal nature of Jesus, whom Arius claimed did not exist from all eternity with the Father. There was a time when everyone started standing while a handful were sitting, so to speak. "Men were impressed by his aura of intellectual superiority, " as one historian noted, and Arius was righteously assured that his theology was sound and that the Church was in error. But, as we know, this was not the case. Thank God for the Holy Spirit, the teacher of all Truth. 

"Lean not on your own understanding," as scripture says (Prov 3:5). And King Solomon asked of God something pleasing to Him: "So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong" (1 Kings3:9). The virtue of meekness comes into play here. I have a real distrust of people who are convinced they are right, except of course when scripture and tradition backs them up. Even then, though, someone like Arius may have been seen as the one needing vindication. But he was wrong in this theology, and the Truth was not in him. 

I think there is an element of docility in meekness, which should not be confused with weakness, and part of that is being able to admit and change course when they are made aware of their error. David displayed this virtue when Nathan confronted him. He did not "double-down" but was laid bare, repented, and begged forgiveness. Though his sin was like scarlet, he was washed white as snow (Is 1:18). 

For many of us sincere Catholics, we just want to know what is right so we can do it. We know the precepts of the Lord are right, and give joy to the heart (Ps 19:8). But living that out we can mis-step and err, even haughtily so. We should give thanks to the Lord when he corrects us, or sends us a Nathan or a St. Nicholas, for He does not discipline those whom He does not love (Heb 12:6; Prov 3:12). Doubling down in error, especially when pride comes into play, may set your trajectory on a misguided course. We see this in sedevacantists, various Christian sects, in Martin Luther and other heretics and those they led astray. Those who lead others astray from Truth will have to give account to the divine Judge when they come before Him. In this life, we would be wise to heed the words of St. Paul, whom himself changed course when shown the error of his ways: 

"Now all these things happened to them in figure: and they are written for our correction, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor 10:11-12).

Make Do Or Do Without

 

I think everyone just about now is feeling the pinch of inflation and the rising price of just about everything. Although we have a handful of well-off friends and family who are generally padded from these monetary increases in the price of goods and services, a large majority are just regular, single income families with more than a few mouths to feed who already may have a tight budget. It can be tough to absorb these incremental hikes, and for some it literally is the difference of which bill to pay this month, or what thing in their house they have to sell to make ends meet. 

I'm generally not a fan of the "10 Money Saving Ideas" fluffy articles out there, but for a changeup I'm offering some of the pragmatic things our family has tried to implement to stay within our means. I'll try to gear it towards ordinary families (so nothing too off the wall, like "Just ride a bike everywhere!" or "Live in a van!" Hopefully you'll find them useful.

Energy

Our electric company just sent out a notice that our rates will be increasing 8% starting June 1st. Just in time for summer, yay! 

I will say, though, it's a bit of a game for me when I get the "how you compare to your neighbors" emails each month. In our state, our electric is 14 cents per kilowatt-hr (before the increase, a pretty average rate for all of the U.S.), and the average monthly bill is $161/mo for an average 1,141 kwh per month usage. In the email I get, "All Neighbors" with a comparable 2,000 sq ft house average 1,021 kwh per month, and the "Efficient Neighbors" average 639 kwh. And then there's us, coming in at 513 kwh per month, which is 20% less than the most efficient neighbors. We have an electric range and an electric hot water heater (no natural gas line), and heat our house with oil. So, there a few things we do to keep our average electric bill around $80/month:

-LED BULBS. When we moved in seven years ago, our electric company had an incentive program for CREE LED bulbs, which at the time were pretty expensive but had a lifespan of 25 years with average use. I think I got them for $4 each with the incentive program, but other manufacturers have brought the price way down (you can get them at the dollar store now for a buck a piece, though the lifespan is not as long). Some people complain they "don't like the harsh light," but that's not a result of incadescent vs CFL vs LED, but the wavelength of the light, measured in kelvin. You want a "soft white," which is generally around 2,700K. If you get the 5,000K or above ("daylight"), it's more like a harsh growlight, and I don't find them very relaxing. But for the 2,700K LED bulbs, it's hard to tell a difference between them and incadenscents of the same wavelength. They use a fraction of the electricity and last easily 20 times as long. I replaced every bulb in the house, and believe me, my kids are not good about turning off lights! This has saved us a lot on electricity.

-CLOTHES DRYING. 20 years ago I found a "butterfly" drying rack out to trash, and we have been using it ever since. They are about $15 or so for this style. We have an older but workhorse top-load washer (so, not an energy-efficient front loader) I bought used on Craigslist for $50 (more on this later), and the rack can handle an entire load of laundry. We actually have two racks now, so if we happen to do two loads we can hang both loads at the same time. In the past, I have used clothes lines, but I found sometimes it would rain, or the birds would poop or whatever, and so we have a lot more control with the racks inside. We do have a dryer, but we almost never use it. Clothes dryers are huge energy hogs (using about 3,000 watts on average), so this takes a big bite out of our electric bill. Generally, we will do a load of laundry a few times a week in the late afternoon, and hang the laundry on the rack (which takes about 5 minutes, and is kind of relaxing). By morning, they are dry (no joke). I know a lot of big families do a lot of laundry, but hanging clothes is still doable if you do a load every evening, hang it, and by morning it is dry. Clothes last longer, you don't have to worry about your dryer wearing out, and I find the clothes don't shrink either. Oh, and we make our own powdered laundry soap with borax, washing soda, and dove soap in the food processor. A penny a load, and no detergents. Works great. Always wash on cold setting--makes no difference for getting clothes cleaner if you use "warm" or "hot" setting. 

-RINSING DISHES, WASHING HANDS, SHOWERS, ETC. We have a dishwasher, that does require hot water, but not a ton. It saves a good amount of water over hand washing; we don't generally pre-rinse dishes, just throw them in, I just make sure to clean the dishwasher filter periodically. I get powdered dish detergent at Walmart pretty cheap (not worth making your own) and it works great. When we do rinse pots and pans, I always use cold water. Same for washing hands, etc. For things like that, the time it takes for hot water to get to the tap, it doens't make sense to run the hot faucet because you're just drawing it away from the water heater before it leaves the tap, wasting electricity. For showers, I did replace one of our showerheads with a low-flow (but very strong) 1.5 gallons per minute showerhead for about $10. This saves hot water, which saves electricity. Well worth it, and for some of the better ones there is no discernable difference between that and a 2.5 gallons per minute showerhead. Personally, I like to take cold showers in the evening to cool off in our master bath (which doesn't have a low-flow showerhead)...I realize it's a matter of a few cents, so not a huge deal, but it does prolongue the life of our water heater too. 

-AIR CONDITIONING. We are fortunate that our home is from 1957, but designed in a way that minimizes energy losses. Part of the first floor is half below grade (split level), so even when it's 90 degrees  outside the downstairs stays around 73 or so. The upstairs three bedrooms are a little warmer, but the tough one is our master bedroom, which is directly below the roof (it was an addition) with skylights that help in winter to warm, but can be brutal in summer since they are south facing. Ideally, I would put 90% UV shadecloth over the exterior of them, which can make a huge difference, but necessitates getting on the roof which is a pain. As a compromise, I put them up with suction cups on the inside, and it still lets a lot of light in but cuts a good bit of heat. We have central air, which we run when it gets really hot mid-summer, but I generally don't turn it on until July, and even then I set the thermostat to 80. Believe it or not, your body does acclimate. We also use a box fan to blow directly on us while we sleep, which helps a lot too. I do have a portable AC unit (window units are much better efficiency wise, and cheaper, but our windows don't raise up enough to allow one, so I had to go the portable AC route). This allows us to just cool our room when we sleep to take the edge off, and since our central AC unit is 20 years old, it keeps us from having to use it too much and cooling the whole house when really it's only our bedroom that gets hot. If you do have central AC, or even window units, be sure to clean the screens at least once before the start of the season, so they don't get clogged and bog down the unit. When we are not running AC, it helps to have a dual-fan window fan and set one to exhaust and one to blow in, with the windows open in the evening when it is cooler. This exhausts the warm air and brings in cooler air. Then during the day, you close the windows to trap the cooler air in, and open them again and run the fan in the evening. Obviously, if it's 80 degrees outside in the evening, it won't help much, but from May-July and late August to end of September in our region, it keeps us from using the AC.

CAST-IRON/INDUCTION COOKTOP. I love cast iron (see why, here), but a cool bonus feature is you can use an induction cooktop with it, which heats by magnetism. It keeps the kitchen much cooler in summer than the range, uses a fraction of the electricity, and heats up food twice as fast. I got a single burner unit for something like $35. Works great and, again, prolongues the life of our electric range.

Food

We have a ten year old boy, a nine year old girl, and a four year old boy, plus my wife and I. I try to hit Aldi once a week, and my bill ranges from $100-$120. My kids do love snack-type stuff, and I find Aldi is very reasonably priced for these things. Milk, sugar, eggs, flour, etc...they are no cheaper than your average super market. We try to eat a healthy, balanced diet, but are not super-health conscious. 

One of the things I picked up years ago is cooking a lot of developing-world recipes. So, Mexican, Vietnamese, Thai, Filipino, African, Indian. I typically get good Basmati or Jasmine rice in at least 10 pound bags. I also buy dried beans, and we have an Instantpot that is great for cooking batches of beans and chickpeas. Lentils are good protein (I prefer red lentils). Also barley, quinoa or millet, and textured vegetable protein (TVP) is a good "bulker" for chilis and stews. I buy bushels of tomatoes at the local orchard that are 2nd quality (can hardly tell, though) for $12 a bushel and freeze them whole. We did inherit a chest freezer from my father in law when he passed, so will probably have more capacity to store them in the future. Same goes for 2nds apples, peaches, potatoes, peppers, zuchini, eggplant, etc. Good to eat seasonally, but when you can't, freezing can help to get you through the winter. 

My garden is an exercise in futility, so I can't brag about massive crops of things, since the deer, woodchucks, and squirrels seem to foil my well-laid plans each season. Every single Asian pear this year got plucked before they had a chance to please me. We did harvest a good amount of asparagus, which comes back each year without planting for 25 years, and grows quickly early in the season. If you have a garden, just consider it a bonus, not something to count on, and then you won't be disappointed like me. 

We eat meat, but not a lot, and not every day. Nothing against it, it's more of an economic decision. I'll get chicken breasts for 99 cents a pound and freeze them; hamburger sometimes, an occasional steak. But if we do have meat, it's not big portions. We try to supplement with potatoes (sweet and white), rice, vegetables, etc. Cook at home. It will save you a ton of money. We do have to reign in the convenience Chik-fil-a and Wawa when my wife is running around with the kids. That can add up. Death by a thousand cuts. Breakfast is probably the cheapest meal--we do oatmeal, pancakes and waffles from scratch, cereal, grits. I make granola sometimes. Eggs have gotten expensive, but we love eggs. Don't raise chickens to save money, do it because you like chickens. Milk has gotten expensive too, so I've been experimenting with making homemade oatmilk using rolled oats and the Vitamix, and it turns out pretty good, but it's a tough sell for the kids. Nobody wants cookies and oatmilk. 

I know this isn't popular opinion, but much of the American diet consists in overeating. We eat out of boredom, for comfort, and larger portions than we probably need to sustain ourselves. Portion control is good, and periodic fasting (Ember days this week W/F/Sat) is spiritually beneficial, but also has the ancillary effect of reducing consumption. Fasting regularly during Lent I think shrunk my stomach, too, so at the very least don't rule it out as an option to grow spiritually and also trim your grocery bill.

Appliances

A lot of people get taken in by the "bells and whistles" of modern appliances. But planned obsolescence is a bitch. They are made to break! Like I said, when our washer went, I found an older Whirlpool top loader on Craigslist for $50 and hooked it up myself (watch a Youtube video if you don't know how, it's not complicated). It's a workhorse! My parents had a Maytag for thirty years and it was still running when they sold their house! Our fridge is newer, but running strong. I did have it repaired once. We don't have an icemaker (I disconnected it after a water line burst years ago, and so I'm paranoid), or a garbage disposal. When our dishwasher went, I did buy one on sale, but my buddy and I installed it ourselves. I mentioned using the induction cooktop instead of the range, and not using the dryer much. Hm, what else is there? Not sure. Buy used if you can--the new stuff will wow you and appeal to your ascetic sensibilities, but the manufacturers know that, and they make them cheap. Go for nice looking functional. 

Transportation

This can be a tricky one. We just got back from vacation, 800 miles round trip in a Prius--all five of us. We packed pretty light, but it also held a lot. The kids were fine, and I thanked my wife for agreeing to it rather than taking the Explorer (she was fine as well). I know not everyone can do this, or even wants to drive a more fuel efficient car, but it can help if you can. I think electric cars are cool but very limited. Hybrids have advantages, as do diesels. I try to ride my electric bike for short trips and commuting (again, not possible for everyone), and it's a very efficient and cheap way to get around. We don't live in an urban area. Combining trips wherever possible is good practice too. Again, if you are in a rural area, you're getting jacked at the pump right now. But choose your cars like you choose a spouse--wisely. Take into account overall cost, reliability, and fuel and maintenance. Buy used, private party, with cash if you can. You save on insurance (because when you are financing you need to have comp and collision, which can double your rates), and if your cars are older just carry high liability and bank the difference if you were financing to account for getting hit by a deer, or if you run into a pole or something and it's your fault. 

Craigslist

I've been doing this less, but occasionally I will flip furniture I find for free for a little side money, or build bikes, or something. My car gets 50mpg, so I don't mind driving a little to pick stuff up if it's within half an hour. Don't do it if it's not worth your time or energy. I keep my garage uncluttered, so when I pick up a dresser or something, I have room for it, and then list it on Craiglist. I also offer to deliver, which some people find helpful. Our entire house is furnished (nicely) with stuff from Craigslist, some bought very cheap, most free, with the execption of our dining room table which was a wedding gift). Never buy new furniture if you are serious about saving money, especially if you have kids. Old stuff was made to last and can be had for pennies on the dollar. Thankfully it fits the decor of our 1950's house. It is wild how much new furniture costs! You can also sell stuff around the house, with the added bonus of reducing clutter and making a more pleasant living environment. We all have too much stuff! After spending the past week in a nice 2 bedroom/1 bath, 500 square foot cottage, we realized we have a ton of stuff we don't need, and it inspired us to pare down a bit! 

Vacations

Vacations can be nice, but can also be a pain. Sometimes you need a vacation after the vacation (especially with kids!). If you're on a tight budget, day trips are great. Pack a lunch, hit a park or the beach (if you are near one). Personally, I am not a fan of pre-packaged experiences like Disnsey World. Camping can be fun and low-budget, but understandably not for everyone. We did get a pool membership this year for $500, which should get us a lot of mileage (we were paying $1,200 a year previously for a Y membership just for the pool, so this saves us a good chunk of change, since I never worked out there and found it unnecessary). While we were away, we went to a local pond (no charge), and the kids swam and played in the sand. We cooked at the cottage (which we booked for pre-peak rates and it was very reasonable). In the past, we had gone to minor-league ball games and just laid out a blanket, which was fun and free. Get creative. Your kids don't care how much money you spend, but making memories is a neat thing to do for them if you can.

Housing 

Buy the smallest house in the nicest neighborhood you can afford, and location is everything, as the saying goes. Keep an eye for hidden gems if you are in the market. It's a tough landscape now, so I feel for you! Don't buy more house than you need, being house poor sucks. Be mindful of resale value. Don't neglect to take property taxes into account. If you homeschool, school districts may not be as much of a consideration, but better school districts tend to have higher cost houses (but also maintain their value). Get a fifteen year mortgage if you can swing it, or if the interest rate isn't much higher a thirty year and pre-pay the mortgage as you are able (makes more sense with 5% interest rates than it did a few years ago when they were hovering around 3%). Think of what you need rather than what you want, and keep things in perspective. And pray to St. Joseph to ask for his help!

Phew, that was more than I expected to write. Maybe you found it helpful? Remember to be grateful for everything God has blessed you with and give thanks and you will always feel rich--even if you aren't. Feel free to comment!

The Principal of Subsidiarity In A Marriage

 

A few months ago I stumbled across a critique of Stephanie Gordon's (wife of Youtuber Tim Gordon, Rules For Retrogrades) book Ask Your Husband: A Catholic Guide To Femininity in Catholic World Report by Dr. Abigail Favale, PhD. I think the crux of the intense disagreement in the combox as to the merits of the article hinged on Gordon-supporters arguing that Catholic feminism is an irredeemable term that should be abandoned in favor of the patrimonial deference implied in the title of Ms. Gordon's book. 

Dr. Favale takes an orthodox but more nuanced approach that sees the value in the roots of authentic Catholic feminism to get at what it means to be a woman (and man). Granted, this approach takes a bit more reflection and thoughtfulness to keep the knee-jerk tendency to dismiss "triggering" words like feminism outright and consider the merits apart from the baggage. 

I have not read Ask Your Husband (apparently TAN pulled it after Timothy Gordon's brother David claimed Stephanie plagiarized sections of his own manuscript), so I can't speak to it's contents apart from the general premise. While I may be biased (I am not a Gordon fanboy, and have just settled on the conclusion that we all have our own particular styles of delivery), I did think Ms. Favale's article offered a balanced and fair critique. 

(I happened to stumble upon her Pints With Aquinas sit-down last night, and found her conversion to Catholicism interesting and authentic, her respect for nuance refreshing, and her recognition of the problems replete with feminism in the culture today honest and thoughtful. She is married to a Catholic convert and has four children).

What does any of this have to do with the Catholic principal of subsidiarity, especially as it pertains to marriage? In reflecting on the Gordons approach, which Ms. Favale claims is "legalistic and ideological," I felt there were some parallels worth exploring. 

In this context, we can see marriage as that social organization in which the human person is the principal, subject, and object. In this one-flesh union, husband and wife lay the building blocks of society through the generation of new life and the raising up of families. Even in the Sacrament of Matrimony this subsidiarity is respected in that the parties consenting to the union (the husband and wife) are themselves the ministers of the Sacrament. 

Subsidiarity is concerned mostly with economic systems and governments. With regards to the "higher orders" participation in that of the lower orders, "governments should not intervene to solve all problems":

"The government has many necessary and indispensable functions to play, roles that cannot be accomplished by individuals acting alone or even by smaller groups in society. Yet states and governments often exceed their legitimate role and infringe upon individuals and groups in society so as to dominate rather than to serve them."

The affairs of marriage are best handled at the lowest possible level, closest to the affected persons. There is a macro scope of vision (leading each other to Christ, how to live out one's vocation, etc), but the majority of marital decisions are those that take place in the day-to-day decisions spouses make. It would be unreasonable for a higher agency is this context to formulate top-down approaches to these kinds of decisions--a "micro-managing" if you will. 

Violations of the principal of subsidiarity decreases economy, efficiency, liberty and the personal character of the social order. This "personal character" of the social order (the marriage) depends upon a degree of liberty and leeway in discernment between the individuals as to the affairs of work, dress, charity, and child rearing at the lowest level. 

So, let's circle back--what does this have to do with the Gordons' book and their particular constitutions of "authentic Catholic femininity" and "the case of patriarchy" in more pragmatic terms? Well, my first reaction (again, based only on my viewing of Tim's channel and not having read the books, so take it for what it's worth) is that it is heavy-handed and a bit "top-down" in their proscriptions of what "real Catholic" men and women have to do and be in their particular roles that does not allow for the liberty and personal character of the social order referenced above. 

A healthy marriage (in my opinion) in the modern age builds from the bottom up on a (hopefully) firm, sacramental foundation. One lives within the vows, which come from above and are consented to. So there is a restriction there, but for the sake of liberty and the respect that comes with it. One pledges to be faithful--in sickness and health, for richer or poorer--but the spouses are not handed a set of blueprints of how to build the house of their marriage from a higher authority. They are not told how many children they are to have, how much to give to the Church in offering, how to school their children, where to live or how to live out their vocation in legalistic dictate. They are given that freedom to build and live in it as they see fit. 

I respect my wife enough not to dictate to her what she can and can't do. I certainly don't expect her to "ask me" for permission to leave the house or for any hundreds of minor decisions we have to make in the course of our days. I do expect her to consult with me for big financial decisions, or with things related to our children (schooling, friends, etc). But we do this in consultation with one another, not me making ultimatums. 

There is a lot of contention about "working women" in Catholic circles, which I choose not to wade into. Part of this is that my wife does work, albeit minimally and not in a way that interferes with family life or her primary vocation as a wife and mother. I have seen the struggles full-time working mothers go through, especially with regards to daycares and balancing everything, and I feel for them. I don't think it's ideal in any sense, though some do seem to pull it off. 

With regards to dress, my wife has common sense and a natural modesty that I don't interfere with much. Veiling is a good example of how one could "command" their wives to veil, citing Scripture or Church teaching. I have left it up to my wife, and she naturally took to it over time. But it wasn't by threats or shaming on my part. I think this is a better (and more respectful) way of approaching matters of modesty. 

When it comes to roles, I don't think my manhood is diminished by doing an occasional load of laundry or loading the dish washer. There was a time when my wife was working full time in which I was doing the majority of housework and daycare pickups, and that didn't work particularly well.  There was a degree of doing it for the sake of getting it done, but that it didn't fit my sense of role in the marriage. But again, this was on the lowest level of subsidiarity in which we lived out this way of delineation of duties and learned what worked and what didn't. It wasn't handed us from a higher authority in which we were mandated our duties. Like the "invisible hand" of capitalism, it worked itself out naturally over time when we brought things more in accord with a traditional model of duties. 

I could go on with other examples, but I think the point I'm trying to make here is that a healthy respect for freedom and dignity of spouses is not "effeminate" but more in line with authentic Catholic social teaching at the fundamental level of society--the family. I will admit it is a social overlay onto an economic and political model, and it may or may not work in this context. We're all trying to figure out how to live authentic Catholic lives in a confusing modern age. But to the degree that the case for patriarchy and authentic femininity is dictated from above by self-proclaimed "Catholic retrogrades" looking to restore the monarchy and abolish feminism in their spare time by writing books and doing podcasts, we may have to ask if the latitude and freedom of discernment the Church provides in these matters to individual couples is perhaps a better model to adopt. A principal of subsidiarity in marriage, if you will.  

The Grace Of Being Pruned

 

I have eight fruit trees in my backyard that I have planted over the last several years, all in various states of development. I don't spray, but I do fertilize with grass clippings and other organic matter. I'm currently in a losing battle with a pernicious squirrel that has plucked every piece of fruit from my seven year old Asian pear tree, so I can't speak much to abundant harvests at this point. But there is an often-overlooked act of tree maintenance, and that is pruning.

Until you get comfortable with it, it can be intimidating and counter-intuitive to snip and lob off branch after branch from something you raised from a small sapling. The idea is to focus all the energy of the tree into producing fruit, rather than vegetation, since fruit trees are both ornamental and productive. When you have too many branches, it can crowd the canopy, impede air flow, encourage disease, and reduce the size and quality of fruit. Even when fruit is forming, a skilled arborist will pinch off maybe every other fruit that is developing so that the ones left will a produce bigger and more bountiful crop. "But doesn't that cut your production in half?" one might ask. You really have to trust those who know what they are doing to go in on pruning. But the results are almost always beneficial.

"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit," our Lord says in John 15:2. Notice that it is the Lord who is the Master Gardener who does the pruning. 

I think back to the period in my life about ten years ago when the company I kept was not edifying my faith. I very strongly felt that hesitancy to cut away branches of friends, even though the fruit that was being produced in my faith life was smaller and not very sweet. Just as I had prayed at points for Catholic community ("Lord, send me some brothers," in the spirit of St. Francis), I also prayed that he might clear out the canopy to make room for people of faith when I couldn't do the pruning myself. As I found myself growing in my faith and questioning the efficacy of my fence-straddling between Christ and the world, trying to appease both, this prayer was being answered. First it was my friend J, the story of which I recounted in "The Day That Cost Me My Friend." Overnight a big branch of friendship was cut off, and it hurt, the way you kind of wince when you prune a tree. 

Then there were my secular friends from Philly, when I noticed more distance and less invitations to things the closer I got to my faith. One by one, they stopped calling, we hung out less, and now there's only really one guy I stay in touch with. Again, it hurt and was confusing, but was for the purpose of producing the fruit of faith which was being impeded when all my energy was going to maintaining the cognitive dissonance of being a "man of two minds," as St. James writes. 

Even in the faith, though, there are people we need to have pruned from our lives, or do the pruning ourselves. A lot of auxiliary Catholic friends through social media were one example of these kinds of "suckers"--vigorous vertical growth originating from the root system or lower main stem of a plant. Plant suckers are usually undesirable—you want the plant, but you don’t want its suckers because they sap the plant’s energy. Some I kept, and they have become friends, but others it was just as well because they really weren't contributing anything to growth. Then there were some of the diseased or toxic Catholics that weren't really adding anything of value to my life, but were bringing it down by their negativity or combativeness. 

One thing I noticed was that while I have a healthy tolerance for diverse opinion and differences, my life has gotten much more peaceful the more I have been pruned of people from my life that sucked energy or were simply contrarians or antagonists, which ultimately distracted me from my family or distracted me from my ultimate responsibilities. I almost took pride in how many "little fruits" I could count on the buds of the branches. But any experienced gardener knows five hundred plumb, healthy stonefruit are better than a thousand crabapples.

When the Lord prunes people from our lives, it can hurt but is ultimately for our good, and there is a reason He does it. It's good to pray, when we are honest and humble, "Lord, if this is not good for me, take it away," as much as we pray for God to send good things into our lives. Even now, I have to spend time in discernment as to what relationships to invest energy into, and which ones to ultimately let the Lord prune. It's not always active--sometimes it just happens that people come into your life for a season and leave. That always hurts a little too, but it's just a natural cycle. I think Divine Providence knows who and what is best for us, and grace is the best way of allowing the Holy Spirit to lead people into our lives or out of it. 

Pruning is not an exact science--it is more an art that is carried out effectively when the pruner has the gifts of observation, intuition, and vision. Social relationships are like that. We do it imperfectly in this life, but when left to God to do the pruning for us, He produces more in us than we ever could on our own apart from the vine, which is Christ.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you." (Jn 15:16)

The Church Is Hierarchical For A Reason

The other night we watched a movie called The Whale, which was historical fiction of the account told by a cabin boy of the Essex in 1820 which Herman Melville based Moby Dick on. A theme within the film was that of the order of command--even though there were tense disputes between the captain and his second in command on decisions, the second in command always deferred to the captain. Ultimately, the captain is responsible for the ship and the welfare of the crew.  He calls the shots. He carries the burden.

When we think about our institutions--our government, military, law enforcement, and the Catholic Church herself--they are often able to weather crises because of this hierarchy of rank and chain of command. Ultimately, one man is responsible at the top, and those under him exercise their authority and are responsible for others under him.

When I moved to a Catholic Worker to help run a House of Hospitality in my twenties, this model of 'natural hierarchy' was eschewed. No one was really 'in charge,' but a democratization of decisions was adopted by the community. In reality, nothing really got done, and I found myself chaffing at this de-centralized model. It was similar to the commune-type model of the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone in Seattle a few years ago, which was predictably doomed to failure and disbandment when no one is ultimately responsible. 

The natural order here on earth is reflected in the angelic hierarchy in Heaven, which St. Thomas enumerates as follows in rank order:

Seraphim 

Cherubim

Thrones

Dominions

Virtues

Powers

Principalities

Archangels

Angels

The model of the Church--Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, etc--lends itself to order (hopefully!) The Church is not a democracy, thank goodness. It has endured for two thousand odd years, and will continue to endure--but not because of democratic rule. Maybe that's why the Church in America is a bit at odds and in tension with our Protestant-roots in its founding; democracy (even in a democratic republic) is a different kind of model that the Church was not founded on.

And there was a reason Christ founded His Church with men; men are disposed to this natural order, this hierarchical structuring, which they respect and understand. Women are more disposed to democratic discussion and working things out through conversation and compromise. But women are not permitted to Holy Orders and do not comprise the hierarchy. Like it or not, this is what Christ ordained, and not without reason.

We may chaff under bad popes and insolent bishops, but we have to admit that this chain of command, and it must be respected. This is why in monasteries, obedience is a virtue to be extoled. Obviously our conscience must be followed and respected, but always in light of maintaining order in our souls and in our corporate environments. 

 "Order and virtue are synonymous terms," St. Francis de Sales wrote in The Secret of Sanctity, "Order is the guide of virtue, and virtue is the guide of order. Whatever good you do, if you do it not in order, you do it not well. If your life is marked by order, you will be happy; if your life is one of disorder, you will be miserable." (Advantages of a Rule)

Not Your Truth

 Some truths need to be stated unequivocally. When you teach your children tolerance, that tolerance should not extend to undermine the truths we hold to be self-evident. 

Truth must be believed and stated unequivocally in the face of opposition. On the topic of abortion, one should never start off with "I believe life begins at conception."

Life beginning at conception is not a matter of faith--it is a matter of science and common sense. We do not "believe" that life begins at conception--Life Begins At Conception. Period. You need to stand behind that hard fact, in an uncompromising posture, to have any pro-life standing in the lion's arena. Anything less than that is not only intellectually dishonest, but morally compromising, and undermines any argument one with pro-life sensibilities may have. 

The "that's your truth" argument is pervasive today. The pro-abortion advocates are 100% wrong on this issue, and their "truth" is not a truth at all but a fallacy. 

If a Roe overturn comes down the pipeline, dig your heels in, because you will be accosted from all sides. Remember the words of the Lord during those times, "He who stands firm to the end will be saved" (Mt 24:13).

"Be Who You Are And Be That Well"

 

The other day I was chatting with a buddy in the Air Force as he was at the mechanic; I asked him what kind of car he had taken in--it was a 2009 Toyota Prius with 220,000 miles. Thankfully, he said, it was just some loose wires that had caused the "triangle of death" error, and a few hundred dollars later he was back on the road. I asked him if he ever got crap from other servicemen about driving a Prius, and he said yeah, but he's laughing all the way to the bank now with gas prices what they are. 

I'm slightly self conscious about driving my own Prius because of what it represents in the mind of most of the people I associate with, but thankfully not enough not to drive one. It is really the best, most reliable car I have ever owned, and I would buy another one hands down. When it first came out twenty years ago, it was probably the most over-engineered car on the market (in a good way). 

I have never bought a new car, and bought this one used with 50k miles on the clock for $9k. Seven years and almost 100k miles later, I have had to do nothing to it beyond regular oil and filter changes, some spark plugs, and a coolant flush (I also sprung for an AC freon recharge recently). I bought it because I cannot afford a new car, and I needed something with minimal operating and maintenance costs (it consistently ranks as the car with the lowest cost-of-ownership in Consumer Reports). I have hauled countless tons of furniture, as it's a hatchback and the seats go flat with a lot of usable cargo room. We even took it up for vacation this week, all five of us and all our stuff (I realize if we had more than 3 kids we would be out of luck here, and feel for the big families with vans getting hit at the pump). We got 49 miles per gallon on the way up. I plan to take it to 300k miles (I have seen people selling similar models on Craigslist with 230k+ miles on it, many with the original traction battery).

Because the engine only runs half the time (it's a hybrid), engine wear is minimal. As a result, the continuously variable transmission is never strained and rarely experiences failure (which can be costly for most cars), which my mechanic attests to. If you get 200k out of your traction battery (the main hybrid battery) and it goes for some reason, it can typically be swapped out for around $1,500 and run for another 150k miles at least. There have been Prius taxis that have over 300k, and one with over 620k miles on the original battery.

Driving it is an extremely pleasant experience. It cuts through the air and coasts effortlessly, due to the aerodynamic design. In traffic, the engine cuts off and it operates in EV mode, so the engine is not idling and it is quiet. I find an unexpected effect of this is I'm not as pissed off in traffic. 

We also have a Ford Explorer, but we've been driving it less because of $5/gal gas prices and driving the Prius more. Overall, I'm completely happy with the car and find my overall costs minimal. The only problem is, I'm "that guy that drives a Prius."

Most of my decisions (car purchases, housing, clothes, etc) are pragmatic. Thankfully my dad has a tendency not to care what people think and raised me the same, which sometimes bites me but overall I'm thankfully for. Part of the reason I don't get published much is my writing doesn't fit neatly into a pre-defined box. Which is fine, and why I mostly blog here, where I can think what I think and write what I want. 

But there's this curious thing in delineated "liberal vs. conservative" camps. If you're either, you wear your stripes in ways people can see. I have no issues with people in construction or rural areas who drive trucks and 4x4s where it's a necessary item. A lot of trucks can go high mileage too, but you pay a premium for it. I wouldn't want to be towing a flatbed or pulling someone out of a ditch with a Prius. They serve their purpose. 

But for many people, the truck is an image thing. Same for the Prius and other "environmental-type" cars. Leonardo DiCaprio was virtual signaling years ago with his Prius in Hollywood when it came out, trying to get everyone to drive one. South Park did a great spoof on this tendency for liberals to pollute with their "smug" while driving their Toyota "Pious." People do this with their Trump and Biden/Co-Exist bumper stickers too. It's human nature. I do have an American flag on the front of my car, maybe in a futile effort to keep trucks from running me off the road when they see me from behind. I still suffer from the "image problem," but it's a dumb problem to have, to be honest. Like I said, I can't afford to drive a truck anyway, and my choice to buy this car was based not on the image, but the practicalities. 

We do this with the faith as well. There's an unconscious tendency to fit in, and so new trads will see veiling and wearing home made dresses as pre-requisites for worship, while liberal Catholics will find no shortage of opportunities to extol the virtues of tolerance and ecumenism. All fine, if that's what you feel drawn to. I guess I'm a free-thinking "liberal" in the classical sense, with a "conservative" foundation for moral truths and absolutes. What I don't like is "you should drive/wear/support x, y, z because you are this-or-that." Social mores are strong forces, but they are not absolutes.

Bill Maher (a non-religious liberal, in the classic sense) had a great monologue being tired of the gay/trans insanity. This is a guy who *should* support these things as a "progressive," but what I appreciated in his bit was he didn't feel the need to--he's going to think for himself and say what he wants, whether people like it or not. Dave Chappelle did the same. Joe Rogan is the opposite on the gay/trans stuff (he fully supports it), but is pro 2A and a full-blooded American in other ways (I wish he wasn't so religiously ignorant, but we all have to start somewhere).

This is what I found so moving in the Desire of the Everlasting Hills video (which my friend Paul Darrow was featured in)--those with SSA who came to the realization that they did not want to be defined by the uni-lateral label of being "gay." They realized their essence as a man or woman went beyond a one-dimensional sexuality that was boxed up by other people, and that God had made them for more. They came to accept "who they were," but not in the defined narrative that the LGBT lobby expects of those who "come out." They came out as people who desired wholeness, not sexual platitudes, and embraced chastity as a viable option that did not diminish their personhood and was accordance with God's plan for human sexuality. It's not always an easy thing to navigate--becoming whole--because of these social pressures we have to conform. Being put in a box make it easier for people to either side with a person or dismiss them, and it doesn't require much thought or consideration (which is why we prefer to box people up). 

I don't like being told what I can and can't do, what I can wear or drive or think or believe. If I believe or assent to doctrine, it's because I have deferred to that authority willingly. If I worship in a traditional manner, it's because it is fitting, not because I'm trying to fit in. I'm not trying to score points with anyone, even while 95% of my friends are conservatives (they still love me despite my car). I find tiresome conservative and liberal talking points alike, if that's all you have in your conversation repertoire and lack the confidence to consider other points of view. 

It's ok to have these points of view, but you should own them. If you love trucks, then drive a truck. If you want to save the planet or whatever and you feel that would impede that mission, drive something else. If you want to veil and pray from a missal, do it. If you don't, can't, or prefer some other way, do that. It's okay. It's a false, external dichotomy, these window dressings. What's important for Catholics is that we follow Christ, assent to the Church (his Bride), and live in charity. Big stones first....then you can fill the jar in with the pebbles. Or as St. Francis de Sales said, "be who you are, and be that well."

Vigil of Pentecost And The Poverty Of Man

 We left the house at 5am, trying to time our 7 hour drive to hit a First Saturday Mass halfway. A friend let me know the Institute (of Christ the King Sovereign Priest) had a TLM at 10:15am in Bridgeport, which was also to commemorate the Vigil of Pentecost. Having been to the ICKSP in St. Louis, I knew they take liturgy very seriously, and so I knew we would be in for a reverent but challenging haul running on four hours of sleep and empty stomachs, and with the kids. I wasn't disappointed.

Making our way up the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway at sunrise was pleasant and uneventful, and we pulled in to the church parking lot at 8:45am, earlier than expected. My wife and kids were able to go to Confession with one of the canons (I went earlier in the week), we collectively prayed the rosary, and I had time to meditate on the Descent of the Holy Spirit to fulfill the devotion. When the chanting of the Prophesies began, the kids were starting to struggle with hunger and exhaustion, and I was conscious that I had a ticking family time bomb on my hand. After an hour of liturgical build up followed by the blessing of the water, and two hours now in the pews, my hypoglycemic 10 year old almost fainted when I told him Mass hadn't, um, begun yet. 

My wife and the kids unfortunately had to bail and head out to the car to eat, while I stayed for the duration of the Mass. The ICKSP are exacting liturgists par-excellence, and the Mass as Heaven on Earth and God's gift to man was on full display. It is something I actually wished I appreciated more than I am worthy of. 

I prayed intently for the fire of the Holy Spirit to set me ablaze, the same Spirit that was poured out on the Apostles at Pentecost. But I felt impotent; though my spirit was willing, my flesh was especially weak in this particular moment and my carnal appetites for food and rest was overpowering. Rather than relishing in the reverence and power of the ritual passed down to us in the Mass of the Ages, I was grumbling like the Israelites against Moses in the desert, annoyed at the intricacies of the prayers, the prostrations and the length of the antiphons, which was compounded by my consciousness of my kids and wife in the car waiting, waiting (patiently, I should add) and wondering if I had made a mistake and should have just gone myself to the NOM on the Cape later that evening instead. "How long must I bear with this generation?" I recalled the Lord's words in the Gospel. "Could you not stay awake with me even one hour?" And this on one of the holiest vigils in the Church.  

At the consecration, I prayed, "Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man." When it came time to receive our Lord, I knelt at the altar rail and felt great compunction at the hold of my flesh over me, and my ingratitude at having at my fingertips something our forefathers in the faith suffered and died to experience. All I could muster as the paten was placed under my chin was "I'm sorry, Lord. I'm so sorry." 

In my few moments of recollection in the pew afterwards, I recalled the poverty of those hungry masses that had followed our Lord into the desolate place to hear his teaching, and found themselves suddenly too weak and hungry to make it out of there. In modern times, it may have been a bit of a crisis...5,000+ souls physically spent and at risk of expiration, in the middle of nowhere with no provisions, following an itinerant preacher who may or may not be the Messiah. Our Lord, however, feeds them--with spiritual bread in his Word, yes, but also sating them with physical bread with basketfulls leftover. Man cannot exist for more than a few weeks without bread; but without God, he would cease to exist almost instantaneously. 

I felt acutely my poverty and unworthiness of the gift of the Mass, the gift of the flesh of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Spirit today. I experienced not only the grumbling of my stomach, but the grumbling of the spirit; the weakness of my body, but also the weakness of my moral character. My valiant "I will die for you Lord!" followed by the embarrassing recognition, "I can't spend two hours in church and fast for half a day in your honor." I took some small consolation that it happens to the best of them (St. Peter, for one). I left not on fire with the power of the Holy Ghost, but in a scurry, like the weakling apostate Kichijiro in Shusaku Endo's novel Silence. 

One thing I will say--in the magnificence of such a liturgy, a shadow is cast and we find ourselves--weak, sinful men--with nothing to offer the Lord but the weakness of our flesh. He knows, and nothing is unknown to Him. And still He permits us to approach him at the resplendent altar, receive Him into ourselves, and not die. If that doesn't help lay the groundwork for a bit of humility, I'm not sure what will.

Detachment In The Spiritual Life

 

Last night my daughter heard heard a giant crack in the backyard during a thunderstorm. A few seconds later, the familiar engulfment in darkness ensued.

We lost power for a total of about five hours. We were all together, and though it was a hot day it wasn't life-threatening sweltering. We had some lanterns and some summer sausage, crackers and cheese, and some carrots. All in all, we were fine, and it was a minor inconvenience.

I still found myself on edge, irritable, hot and annoyed, mostly because we didn't know how long before our power would be restored. It's funny the things you take for granted until they are violently in a swoop, taken away. We couldn't cook, couldn't do laundry, couldn't run even fans, and didn't want to open the fridge or freezer. 

I quickly realized I, like most people, talk a good game. We are confident when the lights are on and our stomach is full. But you really don't know yourself or your attachments until someone takes them away.

St. Claude de la Colobiere said, "If you ever have a fit of sadness or trouble, remember that is is because you are still attached to life, or health, or some comfort, or person, or thing that you ought  to forget or despise that you may desire Jesus Christ only."

That attachment of the heart extends beyond just creature comforts. I find one of my defects is my attachment to people as well. I tend to expect too much of people--friends and those in my community--and find myself often experiencing that sadness St. Claude speaks about when my expectations are met with disappointment. This is a form of attachment as well. 

In addition to the advise I received in spiritual direction recently of not being able to advance in the spiritual life without mental prayer, we cannot advance while we are still attached to "creatures," as Thomas a Kempis notes. Want to know your level of attachment? Have whatever it is you suspect yourself attached to taken away. God will often do this with our health, our family, our finances, and often violently so in a way that hurts, to get our attention. 

This is why we mortify the senses and do penance in this life, so that we suffer less the pains of hell in purgatory in the next. It's much easier to do so now than later. 

But even then, it's painful, and we find ways to maintain our attachments. But God is a just Judge, and restitution must be made one way or another. I think we overestimate the severity and frequency of our penances and virtue, and underestimate our level of attachment to the things of this world until the object of our desire is no longer there and we realize how much we cling to. Last night was just a minor wake up call for me--embarrassing, but a good lesson as well. 

There is a truthful, somewhat comical saying I heard once that seems to hold true: "If you think you are enlightened, spend a week with your parents." We often have a noble idea of our spiritual piety in our minds, but moments of crisis reveal the true nature of a man's character. I find myself guilty as charged. 

When the power came back on around midnight, all was right in the world again. If I was a more spiritual man, I may have met that with an indifferent shrug, but instead it was a sense of relief and "now we can get on with things." But it may not be long until God takes out the big stick for us as a collective and violently rips the blankie off us to reveal our true dependence on the world, rather than Christ. Then we will see ourselves as we really are, with no comfort to turn to. It may very well be the best thing for us in the end. But it won't come without the pain, proportionate to our attachment in this world.

'Tames' In Clerical Life

A few years ago I stumbled across an article by way of an acquaintance that was published in Latin Mass magazine in 1996 (and reprinted in The Traditionalist in 2016). The author is an American cleric, published as Anonymous. I could not find the article anywhere online, and had it sent to me via scanned pdf, so I had until now been unable to post it due to formatting. 

The reason I am took the time to transcribe it (and cramped up my hands doing so) was that when I read it, a lightbulb went off; it offers a incisive psychological insight into certain, we’ll say, priest-personalities (I will leave it to your deductive reasoning to ascertain who might fit the description). I have abridged portions for the sake of brevity. 

Read it carefully, and feel free comment.

-------

TAMES IN CLERICAL LIFE

The profound problems that beset priestly life today have been discussed for the most part by means of categories that reflect the preoccupations of our time and the way in which the problems have come to our attention. Because sexual scandal has figured so largely in the contemporary crisis, the now conventional division of male populations into gays and straights has, not surprisingly, played a large part in these discussions. But the reality is considerably more complex than the standard vocabulary of “sexual orientation” would suggest. Though it seems contradictory, even the battles over issues of sexuality among priests may have their basis in personal factors in which sexuality itself plays a relatively minor role.

What is here proposed is that the contemporary priesthood exhibits a disturbingly high number of one particular sociopsychological type, to be designated by the neologism “tame,” and what follows is a first attempt to sketch a profile of the tame priest. The author is innocent of training in psychology and the data have been neither collected nor analyzed systematically; they are simply the result of twenty years of observing the subject at close hand. The description is addressed to the experience of those familiar with the current condition of clerical life, and to the common-sense intuitions of others. 

Perhaps the most universal and distinctive characteristic of tames is their paradoxical combination of great sociability with an incapacity for true friendship. Tames are great mixers at parties and all social functions, and they have the ability to join in almost all conversations and project friendly interest. In the jargon of the MBA they are abundantly endowed with “people skills.” Yet their friendliness itself makes them unfit for friendship. They exist on the level of superficial companionability, and lack the depth of personality and character necessary to make and keep a friend. Whereas most men in their late twenties unconsciously begin to narrow the number and deepen the quality of their friendships, tames preserve a kind of adolescent gregariousness and live on in the world of the fraternity or freshman dorm. While they tend to be cheerful on social occasions, the mask occasionally slips to show a characteristic expression of apprehension, hunger, and puzzlement. Strong friendships draw one apart from the crowd, and being out of the mainstream and on the margins is something a tame cannot tolerate. Tames prefer instead to exercise their talent in the public arena, where they can flit from buddy to buddy, chatting, telling jokes, fetching drinks and collecting from as many as possible external tokens of friendship. 

Being tame is not itself a sexual orientation, yet within the clerical life tames tend to behave politically, socially, and morally in a manner as uniform as that of gays. It is part of the syndrome that tames are not conscious of themselves as tames: there is no question of their forming a caucus as do gays. Yet because their responses to concrete crises and problems are so uniform tame comprise a black de factor, and have an influence in the Church disproportionate ot their number. In fact the defeats and frustrations visited upon straights in the clergy are primarily due not to gays but to tames. 

It is usually very hard to know whether a particular tame priest is heterosexual or homosexual. THey are seldom obviously effeminate; most laymen will assume, in default of indications ot the contrary, that they are straight. But they wear their masculinity as a businessman might wear a baseball cap at a picnic; his support for his team is not necessarily insincere, but you get the feeling that it is displayed as an emblem of good will--”I’m an easy-to-get-along-with kind of guy”--and not as a constitutive part of who he is. Tames never seem entirely at peace with this aspect of their lives and, in situations where gays and straights are clearly at dds, live in a kind of emotional No Man’s Land. This is not because tames waver between competing appetites like bisexuals, but because any definitive involvement risks isolation, and isolation terrifies them.

One external indication of the tame seminarian or priest is the changes of dress to which he will subject himself. Sometimes he will change clothes four of five times a day, depending on the activity planned and (more importantly) on who will be in the company. Tames will own the full array of clerical gear, but are also outfitted as laymen for a wide range of formal and informal occasions. Tames live in the present, in the “now”; they are extraordinarily sensitive to the people in the same room with them, they intuitively grasp the balance of power, the divisions of opinion, the dominant party or ethos. Their overadaptability in clothing is symptomatic of their overadaptability generally. Tames are capable of astonishing changes of opinion depending on the composition of their company-at-the-moment; it is not quite accurate ot say they are chameleons, because in a sharply contrasted environment they will not adapt themselves to the majority if the minority clearly has greater power and prestige. Always and everywhere, tames will go with a winner.

…

Tame priests are without exception worldly. Their worldliness, however, is always a nervous worldliness, and they never allow themselves to wallow in pleasures as do gays or simple hedonists. Tames dress better, dine better, drink better Scotch, take more expensive vacations, and generally entertain themselves at a higher level than their fellows, but their enjoyment is poisoned by constant reference to what others may think of their acquisitions and recreations. They are always on guard against equal and opposite dangers: censure for unbecoming profligacy or for unbecoming rusticity. Even at his favorite restaurant a tame is seldom at ease, not knowing who may walk through the door and see him: is the wine too common or too extravagant, his dress too clerical or too casual?

A ‘giveaway’ characteristic of a tame is panic. Tames live in terror of being caught out--of being discovered on the wrong side of an argument, backing the wrong horse, having committed too deeply to reverse course with grace. As a consequence a tame will often register a momentary flash of panic when something occurs to make him unsure of his surroundings--for example, the entrance of an unknown party into a conversation in which he has prematurely taken a stand, or the friendly approach of a pariah at a public function. Tames see failure and unpopularity as contagious, and will oil their way out of contact with either as soon as possible. In their dealings with equals tames often make them feel used--not because they deliberately and cynically set out to manipulate, but because they are virtually incapable of exchanging a human (or supernatural) good with another person.

Tames have a morbid lack of curiosity about the first principles of things: metaphysics, the grounding of moral arguments, dogma. This does not come from any lack of brainpower but is simply a reflex of their concern for the here-and-now. The functional/pragmatic/political is supreme. A tame may hold an office that obliges him to defend some moral or dogmatic principal as inviolable and he may do it competently, but always with an eye to the occasion; even defense of principle, for a tame, is itself not principled but simply a means to realize some practical good. In general, tames have a distaste for confrontation and avoid situations where they are forced into conflict. In most controversial situations tames hedge their bets by showing mild support for both sides as long as possible, only declaring allegiance when it is clearly to their advantage to do so. Tames are capable of professing directly contrary opinions within a matter of hours, and frequently shock others by their apostasies. Because they adapt so spontaneously to the environment they are sometimes unconscious of inconsistency and puzzled when it is brought to their attention. Tames are rarely capable of loyalty in the strict sense, but only the kind of loyalty salesmen show to their products of lawyers to their clients-of-the-moment; they are Company Men, spirited defenders of the institution in which they wish to advance.

Tames tend to be dutiful in the same way that they are loyal. They are “responsible citizens” in the places where they live and work. They are team players and willing to work long hours; they are eager not to give others cause for complaint, and they tend to make themselves--if not indispensable--important worker bees in the machinery of the chancery or seminary or office of religious education. In addition to the energy that comes with ambition, tames have the sort of managerial affability that attracts favorable notice in any bureaucracy. They are relatively unlikely to leave the priesthood; thus, if tames make up only 30% of a seminary entrance, they may well compose 70% of those still working as priests ten years after ordination.

…

In the contemporary Church tames serve the agenda or gays in the long run, even though they sometimes find themselves forced to take a contrary stance. Tames are extremely susceptible to emotional blackmail of all kinds, and gays are adept at putting a thumb on the emotional windpipe of weak men in order to manipulate them. Of course this takes many forms; one of the simplest (playing on the tame avoidance of conflict) is to engender a stormy atmosphere in a room in which the gay agenda is under discussion, with the threat of outrage and vengeance if the correct conclusion is not reached. Tames will often sell the pass to avoid the risk of having ot fight for it before a wider public.

Gays have also pulled tames into their service by the gambit of discussing chastity and sexuality in terms of “affective maturity.” This is how it works: first, one wins the admission that “affective maturity” is the principal gauge of authentic celibacy. Once this is conceded, it is stipulated that the condition sine qua non of affective maturity is “comfort” with one’s own sexuality (mature men are comfortable being themselves), and this in turn is seen to preclude disgust or moral censure directed at a “sexuality other than one’s own.” ...The paradoxical truth is that tames are more effective agents of the gay agenda than gays themselves; on one hand they are more presentable advocates (uneffeminate, good at reassurance, good at string-pulling), on the other they are motivated by a terror of the either and of being thrust to the margins of the institution--a terror stronger even than the hopes and anxieties of gays. The tame commitment to be noncommittal is the engine that powers progress in the Church.

…

The public arena brings forth from tames another side of their personality. Tames lack the resources of character to remain indifferent to hostile news media; moreover, the techniques of evasion and equivocation refined earlier in their lives are largely useless as bishops, when the media (and general public) reflexively attribute to them as their own the positions of the Catholic Church. A few tames are able to charm the media into a kind of truce: good ink in exchange for a blind eye toward heterodoxy; several others can be seen to engage in a disastrous cycle of appeasement and recrimination. They sue for the favor of the press by taking pains to portray themselves as moderates and by lashing out at more aggressive conservatives, causing dismay to many of the Church’s friends and giving delight to her enemies. 

…

From this provisional attempt at description it will be clear that the distinguishing characters of tames are for the most part destructive of what they Church needs to accomplish through her clergy. The U.S. Church may be especially instructive in this regard. Seventeen years into the pontificate of a “conservative” Pope, concerned to appoint dutiful and orthodox bishops, the problems of clerical homosexuality and pedophilia, doctrinal dissent of the professorate, liturgical abuses, acceptance of contraception, etc. have improved in no respect and worsened in many. It is reasonable to assume that there is not a single cause for this strange paralysis, but it is worth asking whether the prevalence of the tame priest does not go far to explain the combination of outward managerial competence and personal moral cowardice that has examined these problems so often, so “professionally,” and never lit on the obvious steps toward their solution.