I have been reading the “dubia” – the five questions posed
by Cardinal Burke, together with the texts it cites. There’s not really all
that much to read, but I’m slow, and I’m not finished. Still, I think my
initial reaction was right.
Pope Benedict XVI wrote about the “splendor of truth.” Pope
Francis wrote about the “joy of love.” It is a little odd that the latter
encyclical doesn’t cite the former – unless they comprise a single text with
two parts. The splendor of truth and the joy of love are obviously a matching
set, no?
Kindness and truth are often in tension. Justice and peace
are often in tension. It is always easy – in theory – to solve this tension by
obliterating one side or the other; but we would all prefer not do that. To me,
the sweetest of the messianic prophecies is that “kindness and truth shall
meet, justice and peace shall kiss.”
Tone. Suppose Francis writes about marriage for 300 pages or
some such ridiculous length, and says nothing that is substantively new. That
would be unforgivably prolix if he just wanted to alter some disciplines and
procedures! But I think his intention was to change the tone. 300 pages to
change the tone.
Regarding substance: when splendor and joy collide, can we
leave it to the responsible parties closest to the collision to sort it out?
Why do the advocates of splendor talk about subsidiarity so much until it comes
to a relationship between two people – count them! TWO! – and then suddenly we
have to refer cases up through several levels of bureaucracy to get an
acceptable solution?
Tone matters.
I remember going to court on many occasions, with a noble
intention and a silly question. The silly question before the court: should
people who saved a child’s life by trespassing go to jail for it? This is way
beyond silly; it’s citron-speckled fruitcake. I have next to no interest in the
answer to that question. Yeah, yeah – precedent and necessity defense and jury
nullification and Roe. But go free for a good deed? Cool! Go to jail for saving
a life? Even better! What a joy! Should we cross-examine their second witness
and show that he’s lying? Sure, if you want to. But what matters to me is, what
shall we sing? Christmas carols? Easter bursts? Latin booms? Charismatic paradoxes?
All of the above? Law, schmaw; let’s do something real! Let me teach you to
sing the Magnificat as a round!
Once upon a time, there was a significant pro-life case
before a significant Federal Circuit Court Very Most Highness Be-robed Be-spectacled
(albeit un-be-wigged and unpowdered) Justice surrounded by pomp and sitting on
an expensive polished hardwood throne mounting up and up and surrounded by
armed guards. The Very Most Honorable Justice instructed me not to say the word
“baby,” because it is an emotional word. That’s true and factual; the Lord upon
the Golden Throne did so instruct. But I recall this very most honorable day
with great joy, because a few of us tested the acoustics inside that
courthouse, with its atrium reaching up 40-50 honorable feet with gleaming
walls. We sang, “Non nobis, Domine,” and made the gleams vibrate. Now, that was
a gift fit for a heavenly king!
Tone. Stay strong!
