So, George Weigel displays his ignorance early in this article. As a matter of fact, I'm not entirely sure what a 'rubrical traditionalist' is. As for the rest of the opening paragraph, it's a matter of perspective I suppose - to his abbot, Merton was a complex pain in the ass. For evidence, you might consult Merton's journals, but if you don't have time for that, this article by Patrick Henry Reardon is a fine place to start. Still, as Reardon will show you, one can be a complex pain in the ass, while remaining a faithful Catholic.
Take this for example: 'it is a documented fact that Merton, unto the day he died, cultivated standard and traditional disciplines of Christian piety: the observance of the Canonical Hours, the daily recitation of the Rosary, the habit of regular Eucharistic adoration, the constant recitation of the Jesus Prayer, and so forth.' Make of those practices what you will, Reardon's conclusion is apt: 'These were not the practices of a Buddhist.'
Now Reardon is not uncritical of Merton, nor should he be. That's not really my point. Weigel got on my nerves, my friends, because he simply wants to use Merton as a foil. I'd say his column amounts to a longish version of 'Even a liberal like Merton wouldn't like X', which is just stupid. In fact, it makes me suspect that Weigel is something less than a 'rubrical conservative', whatever that is.
Peace out.
No comments:
Post a Comment