Volume > Issue > Letters to the Editor: May 1986

Letters to the Editor: May 1986

Somewhat Irrelevant

The well-known changes since Pius XII in the Vatican’s at­titude toward scriptural scholar­ship described by James Hege in his March 1986 letter to the ed­itor are somewhat irrelevant to the question of the limits of the historical-critical method used by Fr. Raymond Brown and ques­tioned by me in my March 1985 letter to the editor entitled “The Little Ones.”

Hege is confused in recalling that I told him in conversation that “Brown ‘comes close to be­ing a Neo-Modernist’ on the Laurentin issue.” I could not have done so, since I do not know what either Brown or Laurentin has said or what the issue is.

Hege is also very confused in saying that I think a century and a half of biblical criticism has accomplished little. Textual criticism and hermeneutics have indeed accomplished a great deal. My point in “The Little Ones” had to do with the historical-crit­ical method. If, I said, “the ob­ject of the historical-critical method is to confirm or modify or discard the articles of faith…what, in fact has been established — proved or disproved — by it?” That is, what article of faith has been proved or disproved by that method? This is quite different to saying that all biblical scholar­ship has accomplished nothing.

Although Hege thus inaccu­rately cites what he thinks are my views, he does not touch on the great question I put to Fr. Brown: “What of the little ones?” Hege’s generous enthusi­asm for Brown gives point, to me, to the question. Still, Hege concludes by quoting my words, even to the emphasis, as his own: “Christianity is a faith.” Precise­ly.

Sheldon Vanauken

Lynchburg, Virginia

No Exception

Regarding the Rev. Brian W. Harrison’s letter (March): In pri­vate correspondence, Harrison did indeed challenge me on cer­tain points relevant to the moral question of nuclear deterrence; and he is certainly not defective in his moral theology or in his fi­delity to the full Catholic tradi­tion.

But his challenge was direct­ed against two positions that were never my own! They are:

(A) “It is rigorously proved or provable that the ‘conditional intention’ to use nuclear weap­ons genocidally is genuine — in some quarters at least — and not merely simulated for purposes of deterrence-by-pure-bluff.” In order to prove that, one would need to search countless hearts; and only God can do that. (Har­rison appears to agree that if and where that “conditional inten­tion” is real, the formal guilt of murder is already incurred, with various consequences for “formal and material cooperation.”)

(B) “From the moral theol­ogy of this matter, one can reach firm conclusions of the political kind, about what nations and governments ‘should’ do, or about how individuals should vote.” I am far too much of a po­litical agnostic to reach such con­clusions in any matter!

If I have ever appeared to endorse either of those two posi­tions, it was by pure inadver­tence, for which I now apologize. But I don’t think I ever have.

I therefore regard Harrison as no sort of real exception to my claim (Nov.) that no compe­tent Catholic has yet challenged the positions I have taken up in this matter.

Christopher Derrick

Surrey

England

Is It too Late?

I was greatly moved by Robert Coles’s March column, “Don’t Worry, Dad.” As a col­lege professor researcher, I too felt over the years that teaching/research was the sine qua non of living. I was quick to anger when my oldest son sought to inter­rupt and hoped to be noticed. His response to my typical pro­fessorial lecture was, “Don’t worry, Dad.”

How I long to hear those very special words, “Don’t wor­ry, Dad”! My son Michael died (age 20) after a brave fight against cancer just a year ago. In only the past year did I realize and admit how much he taught me. Is it too late to say, “I’m sorry, Mike”?

Sam Houston

Department of Math & Applied Statistics, University of Northern Colorado

Greeley, Colorado

You May Also Enjoy

In Memoriam 1685-1750

“Bach is my best friend.

He is the God of music.”

Welcome to the Relativism Factory

Insidious purposes underlie Dewey's methodology: destruction of character, morality, authority, tradition, virtue, and truth, and the steady inculcation of automatic doubt.

The Passion of the 'Mothers of the Disappeared' in Argentina

Feminists remain skeptical about political evocations of Motherhood. Too often representations of “the mother” buttress…