From karey at charter.net Fri Feb 13 21:21:53 2004 From: karey at charter.net (Karey L. Perkins) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:21:53 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] language theory Message-ID: <006801c3f2a1$4ffe7b00$0301000a@AFAC955012> This is addressed specifically to Mike Frentz, and generally addressed to the vast and superior collective knowledge of the Percy listserv as a group: Several months ago (years?) Mike, you said, that much research/knowledge had been done/gained on language acquisition and language theory since Percy's death. What is this, specifically? I know the list has discussed the FOXP2 gene. Has more been discovered/explored? What were you referring to when you made this comment? I am continuing my exploration of Percy's language theory/radical anthropology. He seems specifically concerned with the "third element" of the triad, the human self, and what is happening there: Among other things, Percy refers to the work of Norman Geschwind: his discovery of a "recently evolved structure, 'the human inferior parietal lobule, which includes the angular and supramarginal gyri, to a rough approximation areas 30 and 40 of Brodmann'" (Message in the Bottle 326). Percy elaborates on Geschwind's findings that this structure is not present in the macque, and only rudimentarily present in higher apes. It seems Percy WAS interested in finding a neuro-physiological/anatomical correlate (as he discusses in this essay in Message in the Bottle). But I would venture to guess that much work has been done since Geschwind. And here's a question to throw out to all: if there is a physical/biological brain location for language (surely dyadic), how is that this dyadic structure creates triadic thought? Aren't we back to Descartes' dilemma of how a mind/body interacts? Karey -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From armstron at ohiou.edu Sat Feb 14 21:08:02 2004 From: armstron at ohiou.edu (Ken Armstrong) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:08:02 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] language theory In-Reply-To: <006801c3f2a1$4ffe7b00$0301000a@AFAC955012> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040214210535.044c0ec0@oak.cats.ohiou.edu> At 09:21 PM 2/13/2004 -0500, you wrote: >And here's a question to throw out to all: if there is a >physical/biological brain location for language (surely dyadic), how is >that this dyadic structure creates triadic thought? Aren't we back to >Descartes' dilemma of how a mind/body interacts? Karey, More like we're already in it when we assume that the dyadic and the triadic happen in totally different contexts. Why not one is subsumed to the other? But can that be explained dyadically? No. Ken Armstrong From chaslow53 at aol.com Sat Feb 14 22:51:07 2004 From: chaslow53 at aol.com (chaslow53 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status Message-ID: <8b.36a56be.2d6046ab@aol.com> Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly called a "general reader." Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in the way that those articles were taught and held. He makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been regarded as common before the Council. The question, then, is this: is there any indication of what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those devotional elements that were widespread at the time of his conversion but which are now much rarer? Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that maybe others on the list could offer insight. Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on the list who are not particularly interested in this type of question. Chuck Lowry Brooklyn, New York -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marcus at loyno.edu Sun Feb 15 07:24:38 2004 From: marcus at loyno.edu (marcus at loyno.edu) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 12:24:38 GMT Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status Message-ID: <402f6506.266.1150c6.28058@loyno.edu> Chuck, That's a good question! You at least deserve to reclassify yourself into semi-pro status! I want to think about it for a couple of days before venturing any thought out answers. Also, I'd like to hear some responses from others with other information. But I do not recall WP ever being scornful about any V2 changes. Also, I'm not sure what a "true" V2 Catholic is, anymore than I am sure what a "true" pre-V2 Catholic was. Percy might have said he was a "bad Catholic" before V2 and remained a "bad Catholic" afterwards, meaning both ironically, of course, as a sidestep into a peculiar act of personal humility, and then, if it happened to be a Friday, head over to a restaurant on the Lake in Mandeville for a Jack Daniel's followed by some salad, good bread, and a plate of Trout Almondine. But this is all speculation. Marcus Smith ----- Original Message Follows ----- From: chaslow53 at aol.com To: percy-l at lists.ibiblio.org Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST > > > > Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker > Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods > in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan > characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a > nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly > called a "general reader." > > Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP > obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, > both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in > the way that those articles were taught and held. He > makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in > the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, > liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after > the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been > regarded as common before the Council. > > The question, then, is this: is there any indication of > what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made > following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin > Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on > Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those > devotional elements that were widespread at the time of > his conversion but which are now much rarer? > > Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific > assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just > haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that > maybe others on the list could offer insight. > > Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to > the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on > the list who are not particularly interested in this type > of question. > > Chuck Lowry > Brooklyn, New York > > > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > From mfrentz_2 at comcast.net Sun Feb 15 23:35:45 2004 From: mfrentz_2 at comcast.net (Mike Frentz) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:35:45 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status In-Reply-To: <402f6506.266.1150c6.28058@loyno.edu> References: <402f6506.266.1150c6.28058@loyno.edu> Message-ID: <960F5CEE-6039-11D8-B933-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> Chuck, Also speaking as an amateur I'd like to make the following comment: I don't know of any changes in *theology*, per se, resulting from V2, only in the practice. V2 has a very bad name in some circles, very good in others -- but both often for the wrong reasons -- primarily due to an overabundance of zeal in carrying out unjustified mandates corresponding to misinterpretations of the spirit and letter of the Council. It was wrongly perceived as a license to do things that were never intended by the magisterium and we've still much cleanup to do as a result (especially among the misguided and woefully catechized apparatchik hangers-oners at the diocesan levels who continue to do more harm than good wrt effective catechesis, in my personal experience). I believe that V2 was very good, timely, and *needed* in bringing the practice of the Church into the 20th century (e.g. the active role of the laity, especially given a high percentage of college-educated congregration compared with all previous generations), but that V2's continuing wide misinterpretation continues to cause problems. EWTN is fixing some of this slowly (but surely among those that bother to watch it). One thing I've seen of late (and it was predicted to me by a priest four or five years ago at the Eucharistic Congress in Washington..) is that the new priests coming out of the seminary are *excellent* (4 for 4, by my personal experience since that prediction). These priests are anachronistically "traditional" (in the warped view of V2 misinterpreters, I would guess), but are actually quite true to the *true* spirit of V2 IMHO -- i.e. they are "post-V2 priests", but well-catechized and quite effective in their apostolate. Not at all allergic to (nor addicted to..) to Latin. We're seeing turnarounds in vocations in our parish already due to this properly nurtured and well-kindled zeal. As for Percy, you've got me on specifics -- I've never seen any indication in any of the things of his that I've read (for better or worse, only his nonfiction I'm ashamed to admit) that would indicate that he had heartburn with the essence of V2. At the essence level, it's hard to object if your beliefs are orthodox. V2 was beautiful. But separating the essence from the artifacts in this area is very problematic (your mileage may vary..). Mike Frentz P.S. Karey, I saw your note. I hope things are going well. I'll try to regroup my thoughts and respond tomorrow. On Feb 15, 2004, at 7:24 AM, marcus at loyno.edu wrote: > > Chuck, > > That's a good question! You at least deserve to reclassify > yourself into semi-pro status! > > I want to think about it for a couple of days before > venturing any thought out answers. Also, I'd like to hear > some responses from others with other information. But I do > not recall WP ever being scornful about any V2 changes. > > Also, I'm not sure what a "true" V2 Catholic is, anymore > than I am sure what a "true" pre-V2 Catholic was. > > Percy might have said he was a "bad Catholic" before V2 and > remained a "bad Catholic" afterwards, meaning both > ironically, of course, as a sidestep into a peculiar act of > personal humility, and then, if it happened to be a Friday, > head over to a restaurant on the Lake in Mandeville for a > Jack Daniel's followed by some salad, good bread, and a > plate of Trout Almondine. > > But this is all speculation. > > Marcus Smith > > ----- Original Message Follows ----- > From: chaslow53 at aol.com > To: percy-l at lists.ibiblio.org > Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST >> >> >> >> Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker >> Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods >> in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan >> characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a >> nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly >> called a "general reader." >> >> Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP >> obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, >> both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in >> the way that those articles were taught and held. He >> makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in >> the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, >> liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after >> the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been >> regarded as common before the Council. >> >> The question, then, is this: is there any indication of >> what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made >> following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin >> Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on >> Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those >> devotional elements that were widespread at the time of >> his conversion but which are now much rarer? >> >> Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific >> assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just >> haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that >> maybe others on the list could offer insight. >> >> Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to >> the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on >> the list who are not particularly interested in this type >> of question. >> >> Chuck Lowry >> Brooklyn, New York >> >> >> -- >> >> An archive of all list discussion is available at >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail >> >> Visit the Walker Percy Project at >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy >> > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > From jdp at scn.org Mon Feb 16 02:44:37 2004 From: jdp at scn.org (Jonathan Potter) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:44:37 -0800 Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status References: <402f6506.266.1150c6.28058@loyno.edu> <960F5CEE-6039-11D8-B933-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001401c3f460$bb4b0700$6500a8c0@attbi.com> Fellow (Semi)Pro/Ams et al: I've enjoyed this thread and would only add a bibliographic note. There is a 1986 interview with Percy from the National Catholic Register in which Percy comments directly on Vatican II, politics, and the state of the Church. The interview is included in More Conversations with Walker Percy, p 113-26. The interviewer asks Percy questions that stray from the usual Percy fare and the results are amazing. (At least I remember being amazed at the time the interview originally appeared.) Percy drops his usual novelist's circumspection and irony to really speak directly about politics and the Church. I'd recommend you get your hands on it and read or reread the whole thing, but here's a sample from p. 116 (starting in the middle of Percy's comments on angry nuns, to give some context to what follows): --------------------------------- Percy: .... This will irritate no end of people, but it occurs to me that it might be a question of maturity. I will be happy when the American Catholic Church grows up. After all, we're still only two generations past an immigrant Church. We're just a few years past Mother Cabrini and the Italians, the Irish, and Germans and so on. And, without denigrating the virtues of feminism, which I certainly defend as a proper cause, we're seeing radical, even bizarre, manifestations of it. .... It may be that some of the women who are the most vocal -- whom I won't name -- some of the signers of the notorious advertisement in the New York Times and the Sister who shook her finger at the Holy Father -- I sometimes wonder if there aren't more psychological than theological reasons for their protest. It seems obvious to me that they are sexists, but not in the way *they* mean sexist. What I mean is the dislike of men. The way they talk about the Holy Father is nothing less than termagant hatred. I can see that nun shaking her finger at John Paul II. Poor fellow. It is more than doctrine and politics. It's almost saying, "Only if I stand up against you and tell you off am I a woman in my own right." Take another nun, Mother Teresa. I don't think that it's even crossed her mind that she is being persecuted by a male, monarchical Church or the Holy Father. She has better things to do. It's a question of maturity, of being more concerned with service, love of God, love of your fellow man, love of the wretched of the earth. Register: Is this turnaround among Religious simply because some were caricatures of virtues like submission and obedience and now all these pent-up things are coming out? Percy: Well, what else? Of course, some people will blame Vatican II. But I don't think there's anything wrong with Vatican II. I'm not a student of Vatican II, but at the same time I don't remember reading in any of the institutes or publications anything I disagreed with. I do remember the openness of John XXII, his ideas, what he wanted to achieve for the Church, what he *did* achieve. That was all to the good. People often forget that John emphasized all through the council that these things are necessary for the life and health of the Church. But don't forget that he insisted on preserving "the sacred deposit of faith," as he called it. I know many old-style Catholics who were scandalized by the Church's giving up Latin. I know Catholics who think that all the trouble started when Latin was dropped. But that's not part of the sacred deposit of the faith. Some very intellectual, high falutin' Catholics talk about the trivialization of the liturgy. Well, that's probably true too.... Beautiful liturgy is all very well. We have a Benedictine abbey here that's very high on liturgy, and that's wonderful. I'm all for it. I love to go out and hear plainsong at Vespers. But that's not integral to the unity and integrity of the faith. ------------------------------ And another sample from p. 125: ------------------------------ Register: And what do you think about Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger? Percy: I haven't read the famous interview yet. I've only read about him. But since he's being reviled by so many people whom I have no use for, I may send off to get the interview and see what he said. I like what he wants the synod to be -- to rescue the Church not from Vatican II but from the excesses which followed Vatican II. Considering some of his enemies, I suspect he's probably on the right track. ------------------------------ Jonathan Potter Spokane WA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Frentz" To: "Percy-L at happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu :Literary and Philosophical Discussion" Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 8:35 PM Subject: Re: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > Chuck, > > Also speaking as an amateur I'd like to make the following comment: I > don't know of any changes in *theology*, per se, resulting from V2, > only in the practice. V2 has a very bad name in some circles, very > good in others -- but both often for the wrong reasons -- primarily due > to an overabundance of zeal in carrying out unjustified mandates > corresponding to misinterpretations of the spirit and letter of the > Council. It was wrongly perceived as a license to do things that were > never intended by the magisterium and we've still much cleanup to do as > a result (especially among the misguided and woefully catechized > apparatchik hangers-oners at the diocesan levels who continue to do > more harm than good wrt effective catechesis, in my personal > experience). > > I believe that V2 was very good, timely, and *needed* in bringing the > practice of the Church into the 20th century (e.g. the active role of > the laity, especially given a high percentage of college-educated > congregration compared with all previous generations), but that V2's > continuing wide misinterpretation continues to cause problems. EWTN is > fixing some of this slowly (but surely among those that bother to watch > it). > > One thing I've seen of late (and it was predicted to me by a priest > four or five years ago at the Eucharistic Congress in Washington..) is > that the new priests coming out of the seminary are *excellent* (4 for > 4, by my personal experience since that prediction). These priests are > anachronistically "traditional" (in the warped view of V2 > misinterpreters, I would guess), but are actually quite true to the > *true* spirit of V2 IMHO -- i.e. they are "post-V2 priests", but > well-catechized and quite effective in their apostolate. Not at all > allergic to (nor addicted to..) to Latin. We're seeing turnarounds in > vocations in our parish already due to this properly nurtured and > well-kindled zeal. > > As for Percy, you've got me on specifics -- I've never seen any > indication in any of the things of his that I've read (for better or > worse, only his nonfiction I'm ashamed to admit) that would indicate > that he had heartburn with the essence of V2. At the essence level, > it's hard to object if your beliefs are orthodox. V2 was beautiful. > But separating the essence from the artifacts in this area is very > problematic (your mileage may vary..). > > > Mike Frentz > > P.S. Karey, I saw your note. I hope things are going well. I'll try > to regroup my thoughts and respond tomorrow. > > > > On Feb 15, 2004, at 7:24 AM, marcus at loyno.edu wrote: > > > > > Chuck, > > > > That's a good question! You at least deserve to reclassify > > yourself into semi-pro status! > > > > I want to think about it for a couple of days before > > venturing any thought out answers. Also, I'd like to hear > > some responses from others with other information. But I do > > not recall WP ever being scornful about any V2 changes. > > > > Also, I'm not sure what a "true" V2 Catholic is, anymore > > than I am sure what a "true" pre-V2 Catholic was. > > > > Percy might have said he was a "bad Catholic" before V2 and > > remained a "bad Catholic" afterwards, meaning both > > ironically, of course, as a sidestep into a peculiar act of > > personal humility, and then, if it happened to be a Friday, > > head over to a restaurant on the Lake in Mandeville for a > > Jack Daniel's followed by some salad, good bread, and a > > plate of Trout Almondine. > > > > But this is all speculation. > > > > Marcus Smith > > > > ----- Original Message Follows ----- > > From: chaslow53 at aol.com > > To: percy-l at lists.ibiblio.org > > Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST > >> > >> > >> > >> Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker > >> Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods > >> in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan > >> characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a > >> nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly > >> called a "general reader." > >> > >> Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP > >> obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, > >> both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in > >> the way that those articles were taught and held. He > >> makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in > >> the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, > >> liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after > >> the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been > >> regarded as common before the Council. > >> > >> The question, then, is this: is there any indication of > >> what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made > >> following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin > >> Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on > >> Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those > >> devotional elements that were widespread at the time of > >> his conversion but which are now much rarer? > >> > >> Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific > >> assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just > >> haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that > >> maybe others on the list could offer insight. > >> > >> Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to > >> the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on > >> the list who are not particularly interested in this type > >> of question. > >> > >> Chuck Lowry > >> Brooklyn, New York > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> An archive of all list discussion is available at > >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > >> > >> Visit the Walker Percy Project at > >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > >> > > -- > > > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > > > > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > From BMclaughlin at nazarene.org Mon Feb 16 10:55:34 2004 From: BMclaughlin at nazarene.org (Bryon McLaughlin) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:55:34 -0600 Subject: [percy-l] Vatican II--changes in form or substance? Message-ID: <4133E594CA60F949AF3A60D247852614BB9AFA@nazhq015.nazarene.org> Percy Listserv: It is my understanding is that Vatican II resulted in a number of theological changes, not just changes in practices. According to a central tent of Catholic thought, however, "theological change" must always be understood as a development within the Church's doctrine, not as a new departure from it. The operative principle for theological change can be understood as change that is "creative but faithful." There is no doubt-the great overwhelming majority of Roman Catholics in the U.S. and in the world are not anti-Vatican II but quite supportive. On the other hand, among conservative priests, there is a belief that it went too far. When you push them to what "too far" means, though, it often gets back to the notion that too much influence was given to the laity. I'm not sure if Percy would share this belief of laity influence or not. Bryon McLaughlin -----Original Message----- From: percy-l-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:percy-l-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Mike Frentz Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 10:36 PM To: Literary and Philosophical Discussion Subject: Re: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status Chuck, Also speaking as an amateur I'd like to make the following comment: I don't know of any changes in *theology*, per se, resulting from V2, only in the practice. V2 has a very bad name in some circles, very good in others -- but both often for the wrong reasons -- primarily due to an overabundance of zeal in carrying out unjustified mandates corresponding to misinterpretations of the spirit and letter of the Council. It was wrongly perceived as a license to do things that were never intended by the magisterium and we've still much cleanup to do as a result (especially among the misguided and woefully catechized apparatchik hangers-oners at the diocesan levels who continue to do more harm than good wrt effective catechesis, in my personal experience). I believe that V2 was very good, timely, and *needed* in bringing the practice of the Church into the 20th century (e.g. the active role of the laity, especially given a high percentage of college-educated congregration compared with all previous generations), but that V2's continuing wide misinterpretation continues to cause problems. EWTN is fixing some of this slowly (but surely among those that bother to watch it). One thing I've seen of late (and it was predicted to me by a priest four or five years ago at the Eucharistic Congress in Washington..) is that the new priests coming out of the seminary are *excellent* (4 for 4, by my personal experience since that prediction). These priests are anachronistically "traditional" (in the warped view of V2 misinterpreters, I would guess), but are actually quite true to the *true* spirit of V2 IMHO -- i.e. they are "post-V2 priests", but well-catechized and quite effective in their apostolate. Not at all allergic to (nor addicted to..) to Latin. We're seeing turnarounds in vocations in our parish already due to this properly nurtured and well-kindled zeal. As for Percy, you've got me on specifics -- I've never seen any indication in any of the things of his that I've read (for better or worse, only his nonfiction I'm ashamed to admit) that would indicate that he had heartburn with the essence of V2. At the essence level, it's hard to object if your beliefs are orthodox. V2 was beautiful. But separating the essence from the artifacts in this area is very problematic (your mileage may vary..). Mike Frentz P.S. Karey, I saw your note. I hope things are going well. I'll try to regroup my thoughts and respond tomorrow. On Feb 15, 2004, at 7:24 AM, marcus at loyno.edu wrote: > > Chuck, > > That's a good question! You at least deserve to reclassify > yourself into semi-pro status! > > I want to think about it for a couple of days before > venturing any thought out answers. Also, I'd like to hear > some responses from others with other information. But I do > not recall WP ever being scornful about any V2 changes. > > Also, I'm not sure what a "true" V2 Catholic is, anymore > than I am sure what a "true" pre-V2 Catholic was. > > Percy might have said he was a "bad Catholic" before V2 and > remained a "bad Catholic" afterwards, meaning both > ironically, of course, as a sidestep into a peculiar act of > personal humility, and then, if it happened to be a Friday, > head over to a restaurant on the Lake in Mandeville for a > Jack Daniel's followed by some salad, good bread, and a > plate of Trout Almondine. > > But this is all speculation. > > Marcus Smith > > ----- Original Message Follows ----- > From: chaslow53 at aol.com > To: percy-l at lists.ibiblio.org > Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST >> >> >> >> Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker >> Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods >> in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan >> characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a >> nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly >> called a "general reader." >> >> Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP >> obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, >> both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in >> the way that those articles were taught and held. He >> makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in >> the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, >> liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after >> the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been >> regarded as common before the Council. >> >> The question, then, is this: is there any indication of >> what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made >> following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin >> Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on >> Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those >> devotional elements that were widespread at the time of >> his conversion but which are now much rarer? >> >> Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific >> assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just >> haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that >> maybe others on the list could offer insight. >> >> Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to >> the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on >> the list who are not particularly interested in this type >> of question. >> >> Chuck Lowry >> Brooklyn, New York >> >> >> -- >> >> An archive of all list discussion is available at >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail >> >> Visit the Walker Percy Project at >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy >> > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > -- An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jude at somnopolis.org Mon Feb 16 11:27:17 2004 From: jude at somnopolis.org (Jude Bloom) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:27:17 -0600 Subject: [percy-l] Vatican II--changes in form or substance? In-Reply-To: <4133E594CA60F949AF3A60D247852614BB9AFA@nazhq015.nazarene.org> Message-ID: Hello Friends Let me emphasize a point from outside of the church -- Vatican II is regarded by every Jewish thinker I have known as a seminal turning point for Jews as well -- in the sense of the Catholic Church's relations with and regarding of Jews, and the effects this had on the rest of the Christian world. I've just found a document on the web which speaks to this, although I can't vouch for anything about the document or the writer -- a paper by John T. Pawlikowski presented to a Catholic Theological Society in 1999. http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:HCUY4ap0R14J:www.actjewish.org.au/ Pawlikowski.pdf+jews+vatican+II&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 In an address to the CTSA meeting in Chicago in 1986 Gregory Baum argued that "the Church's recognition of the spiritual status of the Jewish religion is the most dramatic example of doctrinal turn-about in the age-old magisterium ordinaritun." (1) Christine Athans has ably demonstrated how profoundly and how centrally Christian theology, beginning with the second century, was infected with a viewpoint which saw the Church as replacing "old" Israel in the covenantal relationship with God, leaving the Jews to a marginal and miserable status which could be overcome only through conversion to Christianity. NOSTRA AETATE changed all that in one brief chapter (#4). Jews were now to be seen as integral to the ongoing divine covenant. Jesus and early Christianity were portrayed as deeply rooted in a constructive sense in the religiosity of Second Temple Judaism (particularly its Pharisaic branch). Jews were not be held collectively accountable for the death of Jesus. Vatican II did not "forgive" Jews of the so-called crime of deicide as some newspapers claimed; it totally exonerated them of this historic charge. In so doing, it completely undercut the basis of the classical Christian theology of Jewish covenantal displacement which was rooted in this deicide charge. This would seem to argue that Vatican II did introduce significant theological "changes" or "clarifications." Regardless, I know that in the Jewish world it is widely regarded as having done so. ~ Jude -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2366 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rlbecker at loyno.edu Fri Feb 20 16:58:04 2004 From: rlbecker at loyno.edu (rachel becker) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:58:04 -0600 Subject: [percy-l] Percy and The Moviegoer Discussion @ Loyno Message-ID: <403682ec.6.11d02c.7701@loyno.edu> This is taken from a website on The Moviegoer, http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-med-db/webdocs/webdescrips/percy1092-des-.html. "This novel explores the modern disease characterized by alienation and ennui. The movies in which Binx immerses himself suggest the superficiality and lack of "substance" in his own life. Percy presents a dialectic between two "cures." The first is stiff-upper-lip devotion to duty and traditional Southern values, as exemplified by Aunt Emily. The second is the mystery and irrationality of Catholicism, as embodied by Binx's mother and the Ash Wednesday service. It is clear that something happens to Binx during the week or so of this narrative. At the end he is on the move--to medical school, to marriage. Although his motivation is not made explicit, Binx seems to be embracing his mother's mystery a bit more than his aunt's stoicism." At the end of MG Binx has given up his search and settled for a grounded life with a wife and medical school. Kate seems essential to Binx?s future acceptance of everyday life, however, it is impossible to predict how long the union between Binx and Kate will endure. What I want to know, is whether he remains dedicated to movie going. I do not see Binx as embracing his mother?s mystery and religion any more than he is accepting Aunt Emily?s traditions. His marriage to Kate frees him in the presence of Aunt Emily; it does not bind him to her society. The death of Uncle Jules and Lonnie parallel the death of social tradition and Catholicism in Binx?s life. Lonnie found his closure with the church by ?conquering his habitual disposition.? Uncle Jules died at the Boston Club on Fat Tuesday of a heart attack (no doubt brought about by a New Orleans diet) and Aunt Emily is left with the choice to either hate Binx or accept him. Binx and Percy have similar experiences and choices. However, Percy is less able to let go of Catholic dogma. This website on Walker Percy and the Christian Scandal http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9304/articles/montgomery.html attacks Percy?s illogical liberal platform and his misguided convictions. I just thought it would give some insight into Percy?s perspective. I have pasted a portion of it here: "In Washington, where he was to give the eighteenth Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities on May 3, 1989, Walker Percy also gave an interview to Scott Walter for Crisis. This is almost exactly a year before his death, and both the interview and his lecture, "The Fateful Rift: The San Andreas Fault in the Modern Mind," reflect not only his journey up to that point, but a continuing concern for the meaning of the journey and to a degree a continuing ambiguity in his understanding of intellectual experience. He still shares with Binx Bolling an amused wonder in the presence of experience, still somewhat divided of mind as to the dependability of immediate experience, a condition suited to the novelist. Perhaps the point can best be presented by noticing the divided sense in which Percy uses the term liberal in his interview. A problem arises in his discomfort with the liberal mind, with which he nevertheless shares causes. "I agree with them on almost everything: their political and social causes, and the ACLU, God knows, the right to freedom of speech, to help the homeless, the poor, the minorities." But the liberal position on abortion and euthanasia is "a mystery, a bafflement to me." Their "hearts are in the right place," but "they cannot see the paradox of being in favor of these good things and yet not batting an eyelash when it comes to destroying unborn life." First of all, there is a question here as to whether we are dealing with a paradox or with a contradiction. But a more troubling question is whether the "liberal" whom Percy has in mind addresses the causes he accepts enthusiastically in the same manner of intellectual deportment to those causes as Percy does. For this "liberal" may in actuality deport himself to good causes and bad without discrimination, so that his attitude toward abortion or euthanasia is neither paradoxical nor contradictory. In other words, it is possible that one may deport oneself, even to good causes, without one's heart being "in the right place." That is the climactic recognition of T. S. Eliot's Thomas Becket at the edge of martyrdom, who in horror steps back from the most subtle treason to the soul, that is, doing "the right thing for the wrong reason." From mfrentz_2 at comcast.net Sun Feb 22 23:40:46 2004 From: mfrentz_2 at comcast.net (Mike Frentz) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:40:46 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] language theory In-Reply-To: <006801c3f2a1$4ffe7b00$0301000a@AFAC955012> References: <006801c3f2a1$4ffe7b00$0301000a@AFAC955012> Message-ID: <7223BACA-65BA-11D8-B62E-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> Karey, I'm sorry I really haven't gotten a chance to go back a re-look at our earlier discussion. One of the key things that I had been impressed with was Terrence Deacon's book, the Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain (1997). That is an excellent starting point for the state of the art from one scientist's perspective a half dozen years after Percy's death. Bonus is that Deacon is Peirce literate, as you'll see in his description of icon, index, and symbol. Googling Deacon's name I just came across this link on a book on Language Evolution. http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-924483-9 I haven't seen this book but it looks interesting at first glance. A PDF sample was available which seemed small enough that I attached it (I got it from the linked website of the softcover edition [reposted without attachment]). Deacon has been saying for several years now that he has a follow-on to Symbolic Species, called Homunculus, in preparation, but I don't think it is yet out. I also recall that there was some interesting material on genetic-based language research about a year ago -- someplace in England I believe, but I'd have to track it down. From my perspective, Percy seems to have come to grips with the importance of the cognizance of self in forming judgments, which is a critical last step in the understanding of knowledge (per Bernard Lonergan's approach in "Insight"). Lonergan seems to have independently developed a "Percy-like" perspective in this area, by my read (though there is no apparent connection/citing by either to the other). Tekippe makes a comment in his commentary on Lonergan ("What is Lonergan up to in INSIGHT?: A Primer") that in order "to find an adequate stress on judgement, one must go back to the medieval philosphers. Thomas Aquinas, in particular, places a strong emphasis on judgment as the single criterion of truth." (p 122). Percy, and a very small minority of only partially connected or disconnected others (e.g. Peirce, Lonergan, Aquinas), seem to be adding something in coming from a humanistic perspective that a purely scientic perspective (e.g. Deacon, Minsky, Chomsky) seem to be oblivious of (which I attribute to the lack of moorings and underlying, but apparently totally blind, agenda which appears to be prevalent in current postmodern-polluted academia (not to mention mass media). I think there is probably much in current scientific advances that could add to the track that Percy was pursuing. Just my blathering.. Best, Mike On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Karey L. Perkins wrote: > This is addressed specifically to Mike Frentz, and generally > addressed?to the vast and superior?collective knowledge of the Percy > listserv as a group: > ? > Several months ago (years?) Mike, you said, that much > research/knowledge had been done/gained on language acquisition > and?language theory since Percy's death.? What is this, specifically?? > I know the list has discussed the FOXP2 gene.? Has more been > discovered/explored?? What were you referring to when you made this > comment? > ? > I am continuing my exploration of?Percy's language theory/radical > anthropology.? He seems specifically concerned with the "third > element" of the triad, the human self, and what is happening > there:?Among other things, Percy? refers to the work of Norman > Geschwind:? his discovery of a ?recently evolved structure, ?the > human inferior parietal lobule, which includes the angular and > supramarginal gyri, to a rough approximation areas 30 and 40 of > Brodmann?? (Message in the Bottle?326).? Percy elaborates > on?Geschwind?s findings that this structure is not present in the > macque, and only rudimentarily present in higher apes.? It seems Percy > WAS interested in finding a neuro-physiological/anatomical correlate > (as he discusses in this essay in Message in the Bottle).? But I would > venture to guess that much work has been done since Geschwind. > ? > And here's a question to throw out to all:? if there is a > physical/biological brain location for language (surely dyadic), how > is that this dyadic structure creates triadic thought? Aren't we back > to Descartes' dilemma of how a mind/body interacts? > ? > Karey > ? > ? > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 4740 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mfrentz_2 at comcast.net Sun Feb 22 23:48:14 2004 From: mfrentz_2 at comcast.net (Mike Frentz) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:48:14 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] Percy and The Moviegoer Discussion @ Loyno In-Reply-To: <403682ec.6.11d02c.7701@loyno.edu> References: <403682ec.6.11d02c.7701@loyno.edu> Message-ID: <7D71094E-65BB-11D8-B62E-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> Rachel, It is interesting in that this article is over ten years old, and with the term "liberal" being frayed around the edges even back then, I believe it is totally worthless now. Given its common contemporary usage either as a label or an epithet, I think it has lost all of its usefulness as a descriptor -- it has bifurcated, with the descriptive part and the labelling part gone their separate ways. I'm not sure I understand your comment. I wouldn't have read the First Things article as "an attack" -- at least not on Percy or his views of the world (if that is what you are implying). The criticism is in the illogicality of those who bear "the standard" of modern liberalism (so to speak), not of Percy, the way I read it. Mike P.S. Apologies in advance for any non-responsiveness, I'll be out of email range for the next few days.. On Feb 20, 2004, at 4:58 PM, rachel becker wrote: > This is taken from a website on The Moviegoer, > http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-med-db/webdocs/webdescrips/ > percy1092-des-.html. > > "This novel explores the modern disease characterized by > alienation and ennui. The movies in which Binx immerses > himself suggest the superficiality and lack of "substance" > in his own life. Percy presents a dialectic between two > "cures." The first is stiff-upper-lip devotion to duty and > traditional Southern values, as exemplified by Aunt Emily. > The second is the mystery and irrationality of Catholicism, > as embodied by Binx's mother and the Ash Wednesday service. > It is clear that something happens to Binx during the week > or so of this narrative. At the end he is on the move--to > medical school, to marriage. Although his motivation is not > made explicit, Binx seems to be embracing his mother's > mystery a bit more than his aunt's stoicism." > > At the end of MG Binx has given up his search and settled > for a grounded life with a wife and medical school. Kate > seems essential to Binx?s future acceptance of everyday > life, however, it is impossible to predict how long the > union between Binx and Kate will endure. What I want to > know, is whether he remains dedicated to movie going. > I do not see Binx as embracing his mother?s mystery and > religion any more than he is accepting Aunt Emily?s > traditions. His marriage to Kate frees him in the presence > of Aunt Emily; it does not bind him to her society. > The death of Uncle Jules and Lonnie parallel the death of > social tradition and Catholicism in Binx?s life. Lonnie > found his closure with the church by ?conquering his > habitual disposition.? Uncle Jules died at the Boston Club > on Fat Tuesday of a heart attack (no doubt brought about by > a New Orleans diet) and Aunt Emily is left with the choice > to either hate Binx or accept him. > > Binx and Percy have similar experiences and choices. > However, Percy is less able to let go of Catholic dogma. > This website on Walker Percy and the Christian Scandal > http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9304/articles/montgomery.html > attacks Percy?s illogical liberal platform and his > misguided convictions. I just thought it would give some > insight into Percy?s perspective. > > I have pasted a portion of it here: > > "In Washington, where he was to give the eighteenth > Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities on May 3, 1989, Walker > Percy also gave an interview to Scott Walter for Crisis. > This is almost exactly a year before his death, and both the > interview and his lecture, "The Fateful Rift: The San > Andreas Fault in the Modern Mind," reflect not only his > journey up to that point, but a continuing concern for the > meaning of the journey and to a degree a continuing > ambiguity in his understanding of intellectual experience. > He still shares with Binx Bolling an amused wonder in the > presence of experience, still somewhat divided of mind as to > the dependability of immediate experience, a condition > suited to the novelist. Perhaps the point can best be > presented by noticing the divided sense in which Percy uses > the term liberal in his interview. > A problem arises in his discomfort with the liberal mind, > with which he nevertheless shares causes. "I agree with them > on almost everything: their political and social causes, and > the ACLU, God knows, the right to freedom of speech, to help > the homeless, the poor, the minorities." But the liberal > position on abortion and euthanasia is "a mystery, a > bafflement to me." Their "hearts are in the right place," > but "they cannot see the paradox of being in favor of these > good things and yet not batting an eyelash when it comes to > destroying unborn life." > First of all, there is a question here as to whether we are > dealing with a paradox or with a contradiction. But a more > troubling question is whether the "liberal" whom Percy has > in mind addresses the causes he accepts enthusiastically in > the same manner of intellectual deportment to those causes > as Percy does. For this "liberal" may in actuality deport > himself to good causes and bad without discrimination, so > that his attitude toward abortion or euthanasia is neither > paradoxical nor contradictory. In other words, it is > possible that one may deport oneself, even to good causes, > without one's heart being "in the right place." That is the > climactic recognition of T. S. Eliot's Thomas Becket at the > edge of martyrdom, who in horror steps back from the most > subtle treason to the soul, that is, doing "the right thing > for the wrong reason." > > > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > From padraig at well.com Mon Feb 23 02:43:23 2004 From: padraig at well.com (Patrick P. Lynch) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:43:23 -0800 Subject: [percy-l] non-Percy help on liminal space Message-ID: Hi; I am working on a paper for a conference and was wondering if any of you wise souls could recommend any seminal works on "liminal space"? thanks, Patrick -- Patrick Lynch (padraig at well.com and padrai6 at comcast.net) "Is it the water or the wave?" John Fowles, -The Magus- From marcus at loyno.edu Mon Feb 23 14:09:57 2004 From: marcus at loyno.edu (marcus at loyno.edu) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:09:57 GMT Subject: [percy-l] Percy and The Moviegoer Discussion @ Loyno Message-ID: <403a5005.3a9.4ad076.17939@loyno.edu> I think Mike is on the right track--or one rail of it--when he says that the term "liberal" is tattered. But so, too, is the term "conservative." The neat thing is that Percy foresaw this disarray as far back as 1973 when he published Love in the Ruins and satirized an America divided into nutcase liberals and rightwing Knotheads. Marcus Smith ----- Original Message Follows ----- From: Mike Frentz To: "Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion" , rlbecker at loyno.edu Subject: Re: [percy-l] Percy and The Moviegoer Discussion @ Loyno Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 23:48:14 -0500 > > Rachel, > > It is interesting in that this article is over ten years > old, and with the term "liberal" being frayed around the > edges even back then, I believe it is totally worthless > now. Given its common contemporary usage either as a > label or an epithet, I think it has lost all of its > usefulness as a descriptor -- it has bifurcated, with the > descriptive part and the labelling part gone their > separate ways. > > I'm not sure I understand your comment. I wouldn't have > read the First Things article as "an attack" -- at least > not on Percy or his views of the world (if that is what > you are implying). The criticism is in the > illogicality of those who bear "the standard" of modern > liberalism (so to speak), not of Percy, the way I read > it. > > > Mike > > P.S. Apologies in advance for any non-responsiveness, I'll > be out of email range for the next few days.. > > > On Feb 20, 2004, at 4:58 PM, rachel becker wrote: > > > This is taken from a website on The Moviegoer, > > > http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/lit-med/lit-med-db/webdocs/webdescrips/ > > percy1092-des-.html. > > > > "This novel explores the modern disease characterized by > > alienation and ennui. The movies in which Binx immerses > > himself suggest the superficiality and lack of > > "substance" in his own life. Percy presents a dialectic > > between two "cures." The first is stiff-upper-lip > > devotion to duty and traditional Southern values, as > > exemplified by Aunt Emily. The second is the mystery and > > irrationality of Catholicism, as embodied by Binx's > > mother and the Ash Wednesday service. It is clear that > > something happens to Binx during the week or so of this > > narrative. At the end he is on the move--to medical > > school, to marriage. Although his motivation is not made > > explicit, Binx seems to be embracing his mother's > mystery a bit more than his aunt's stoicism." > > > At the end of MG Binx has given up his search and > > settled for a grounded life with a wife and medical > > school. Kate seems essential to Binx?s future > > acceptance of everyday life, however, it is impossible > > to predict how long the union between Binx and Kate will > > endure. What I want to know, is whether he remains > > dedicated to movie going. I do not see Binx as > > embracing his mother?s mystery and religion any more > > than he is accepting Aunt Emily?s traditions. His > > marriage to Kate frees him in the presence of Aunt Emily > > ; it does not bind him to her society. The death of > > Uncle Jules and Lonnie parallel the death of social > > tradition and Catholicism in Binx?s life. Lonnie found > > his closure with the church by ?conquering his habitual > > disposition.? Uncle Jules died at the Boston Club on Fat > > Tuesday of a heart attack (no doubt brought about by a > > New Orleans diet) and Aunt Emily is left with the choice > to either hate Binx or accept him. > > > Binx and Percy have similar experiences and choices. > > However, Percy is less able to let go of Catholic dogma. > > This website on Walker Percy and the Christian Scandal > > > http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9304/articles/montgomery.html > > attacks Percy?s illogical liberal platform and his > > misguided convictions. I just thought it would give > > some insight into Percy?s perspective. > > > > I have pasted a portion of it here: > > > > "In Washington, where he was to give the eighteenth > > Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities on May 3, 1989, > > Walker Percy also gave an interview to Scott Walter for > > Crisis. This is almost exactly a year before his death, > > and both the interview and his lecture, "The Fateful > > Rift: The San Andreas Fault in the Modern Mind," reflect > > not only his journey up to that point, but a continuing > > concern for the meaning of the journey and to a degree a > > continuing ambiguity in his understanding of > > intellectual experience. He still shares with Binx > > Bolling an amused wonder in the presence of experience, > > still somewhat divided of mind as to the dependability > > of immediate experience, a condition suited to the > > novelist. Perhaps the point can best be presented by > > noticing the divided sense in which Percy uses the term > > liberal in his interview. A problem arises in his > > discomfort with the liberal mind, with which he > > nevertheless shares causes. "I agree with them on almost > > everything: their political and social causes, and the > > ACLU, God knows, the right to freedom of speech, to help > > the homeless, the poor, the minorities." But the liberal > > position on abortion and euthanasia is "a mystery, a > > bafflement to me." Their "hearts are in the right place > ," but "they cannot see the paradox of being in favor of > > these good things and yet not batting an eyelash when it > > comes to destroying unborn life." > > First of all, there is a question here as to whether we > > are dealing with a paradox or with a contradiction. But > > a more troubling question is whether the "liberal" whom > > Percy has in mind addresses the causes he accepts > > enthusiastically in the same manner of intellectual > > deportment to those causes as Percy does. For this > > "liberal" may in actuality deport himself to good causes > > and bad without discrimination, so that his attitude > > toward abortion or euthanasia is neither paradoxical nor > > contradictory. In other words, it is possible that one > > may deport oneself, even to good causes, without one's > > heart being "in the right place." That is the climactic > > recognition of T. S. Eliot's Thomas Becket at the edge > > of martyrdom, who in horror steps back from the most > subtle treason to the soul, that is, doing "the right > > thing for the wrong reason." > > > > > > -- > > > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > > > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy From sldye at bluegrass.org Mon Feb 23 14:52:07 2004 From: sldye at bluegrass.org (Steve Dye) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:52:07 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status References: <402f6506.266.1150c6.28058@loyno.edu><960F5CEE-6039-11D8-B933-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> <001401c3f460$bb4b0700$6500a8c0@attbi.com> Message-ID: <00c501c3fa46$850ecbe0$e512a8c0@bluegrass.board> >From an amateur Percy reader who just loves his books - Thanks for the interview fragments. They are fascinating. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Potter" To: "Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion" Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 2:44 AM Subject: Re: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > Fellow (Semi)Pro/Ams et al: > > I've enjoyed this thread and would only add a bibliographic note. There is > a 1986 interview with Percy from the National Catholic Register in which > Percy comments directly on Vatican II, politics, and the state of the > Church. The interview is included in More Conversations with Walker Percy, > p 113-26. > > The interviewer asks Percy questions that stray from the usual Percy fare > and the results are amazing. (At least I remember being amazed at the time > the interview originally appeared.) Percy drops his usual novelist's > circumspection and irony to really speak directly about politics and the > Church. I'd recommend you get your hands on it and read or reread the whole > thing, but here's a sample from p. 116 (starting in the middle of Percy's > comments on angry nuns, to give some context to what follows): > > --------------------------------- > Percy: .... This will irritate no end of people, but it occurs to me > that it might be a question of maturity. I will be happy when the American > Catholic Church grows up. After all, we're still only two generations past > an immigrant Church. We're just a few years past Mother Cabrini and the > Italians, the Irish, and Germans and so on. And, without denigrating the > virtues of feminism, which I certainly defend as a proper cause, we're > seeing radical, even bizarre, manifestations of it. > .... It may be that some of the women who are the most vocal -- whom I > won't name -- some of the signers of the notorious advertisement in the New > York Times and the Sister who shook her finger at the Holy Father -- I > sometimes wonder if there aren't more psychological than theological reasons > for their protest. It seems obvious to me that they are sexists, but not in > the way *they* mean sexist. What I mean is the dislike of men. The way > they talk about the Holy Father is nothing less than termagant hatred. I > can see that nun shaking her finger at John Paul II. Poor fellow. It is > more than doctrine and politics. > It's almost saying, "Only if I stand up against you and tell you off am > I a woman in my own right." > Take another nun, Mother Teresa. I don't think that it's even crossed > her mind that she is being persecuted by a male, monarchical Church or the > Holy Father. She has better things to do. > It's a question of maturity, of being more concerned with service, love > of God, love of your fellow man, love of the wretched of the earth. > Register: Is this turnaround among Religious simply because some were > caricatures of virtues like submission and obedience and now all these > pent-up things are coming out? > Percy: Well, what else? Of course, some people will blame Vatican > II. But I don't think there's anything wrong with Vatican II. I'm not a > student of Vatican II, but at the same time I don't remember reading in any > of the institutes or publications anything I disagreed with. I do remember > the openness of John XXII, his ideas, what he wanted to achieve for the > Church, what he *did* achieve. That was all to the good. People often > forget that John emphasized all through the council that these things are > necessary for the life and health of the Church. But don't forget that he > insisted on preserving "the sacred deposit of faith," as he called it. > I know many old-style Catholics who were scandalized by the Church's > giving up Latin. I know Catholics who think that all the trouble started > when Latin was dropped. But that's not part of the sacred deposit of the > faith. Some very intellectual, high falutin' Catholics talk about the > trivialization of the liturgy. Well, that's probably true too.... > Beautiful liturgy is all very well. We have a Benedictine abbey here > that's very high on liturgy, and that's wonderful. I'm all for it. I love > to go out and hear plainsong at Vespers. But that's not integral to the > unity and integrity of the faith. > ------------------------------ > > And another sample from p. 125: > ------------------------------ > Register: And what do you think about Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger? > Percy: I haven't read the famous interview yet. I've only read about > him. But since he's being reviled by so many people whom I have no use for, > I may send off to get the interview and see what he said. I like what he > wants the synod to be -- to rescue the Church not from Vatican II but from > the excesses which followed Vatican II. Considering some of his enemies, I > suspect he's probably on the right track. > ------------------------------ > > Jonathan Potter > Spokane WA > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Frentz" > To: "Percy-L at happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu :Literary and Philosophical > Discussion" > Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 8:35 PM > Subject: Re: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > > > > Chuck, > > > > Also speaking as an amateur I'd like to make the following comment: I > > don't know of any changes in *theology*, per se, resulting from V2, > > only in the practice. V2 has a very bad name in some circles, very > > good in others -- but both often for the wrong reasons -- primarily due > > to an overabundance of zeal in carrying out unjustified mandates > > corresponding to misinterpretations of the spirit and letter of the > > Council. It was wrongly perceived as a license to do things that were > > never intended by the magisterium and we've still much cleanup to do as > > a result (especially among the misguided and woefully catechized > > apparatchik hangers-oners at the diocesan levels who continue to do > > more harm than good wrt effective catechesis, in my personal > > experience). > > > > I believe that V2 was very good, timely, and *needed* in bringing the > > practice of the Church into the 20th century (e.g. the active role of > > the laity, especially given a high percentage of college-educated > > congregration compared with all previous generations), but that V2's > > continuing wide misinterpretation continues to cause problems. EWTN is > > fixing some of this slowly (but surely among those that bother to watch > > it). > > > > One thing I've seen of late (and it was predicted to me by a priest > > four or five years ago at the Eucharistic Congress in Washington..) is > > that the new priests coming out of the seminary are *excellent* (4 for > > 4, by my personal experience since that prediction). These priests are > > anachronistically "traditional" (in the warped view of V2 > > misinterpreters, I would guess), but are actually quite true to the > > *true* spirit of V2 IMHO -- i.e. they are "post-V2 priests", but > > well-catechized and quite effective in their apostolate. Not at all > > allergic to (nor addicted to..) to Latin. We're seeing turnarounds in > > vocations in our parish already due to this properly nurtured and > > well-kindled zeal. > > > > As for Percy, you've got me on specifics -- I've never seen any > > indication in any of the things of his that I've read (for better or > > worse, only his nonfiction I'm ashamed to admit) that would indicate > > that he had heartburn with the essence of V2. At the essence level, > > it's hard to object if your beliefs are orthodox. V2 was beautiful. > > But separating the essence from the artifacts in this area is very > > problematic (your mileage may vary..). > > > > > > Mike Frentz > > > > P.S. Karey, I saw your note. I hope things are going well. I'll try > > to regroup my thoughts and respond tomorrow. > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 2004, at 7:24 AM, marcus at loyno.edu wrote: > > > > > > > > Chuck, > > > > > > That's a good question! You at least deserve to reclassify > > > yourself into semi-pro status! > > > > > > I want to think about it for a couple of days before > > > venturing any thought out answers. Also, I'd like to hear > > > some responses from others with other information. But I do > > > not recall WP ever being scornful about any V2 changes. > > > > > > Also, I'm not sure what a "true" V2 Catholic is, anymore > > > than I am sure what a "true" pre-V2 Catholic was. > > > > > > Percy might have said he was a "bad Catholic" before V2 and > > > remained a "bad Catholic" afterwards, meaning both > > > ironically, of course, as a sidestep into a peculiar act of > > > personal humility, and then, if it happened to be a Friday, > > > head over to a restaurant on the Lake in Mandeville for a > > > Jack Daniel's followed by some salad, good bread, and a > > > plate of Trout Almondine. > > > > > > But this is all speculation. > > > > > > Marcus Smith > > > > > > ----- Original Message Follows ----- > > > From: chaslow53 at aol.com > > > To: percy-l at lists.ibiblio.org > > > Subject: [percy-l] Retaining My Amateur Status > > > Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:51:07 EST > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Unlike many of you on this list, I neither knew Walker > > >> Percy nor am able to study his work for extended periods > > >> in an academic setting. I am what Kieran Quinlan > > >> characterized in The Last Catholic Novelist as a > > >> nettlesome amateur, or what the Victorians more kindly > > >> called a "general reader." > > >> > > >> Here is my observation, which leads to a question: WP > > >> obviously was an advocate of a pre-Vatican II theology, > > >> both in terms of the articles of belief themselves and in > > >> the way that those articles were taught and held. He > > >> makes that clear in essay after essay directly, and in > > >> the novels indirectly. His views on dissenting clergy, > > >> liberation theology, etc., expressed in the decades after > > >> the Vatican Council, could just as easily have been > > >> regarded as common before the Council. > > >> > > >> The question, then, is this: is there any indication of > > >> what he thought of some of the day-to-day changes made > > >> following the Council? Was he sorry to see the Latin > > >> Mass go? Did he rush to trade fish for hamburgers on > > >> Friday? Did he abandon the Rosary or any other of those > > >> devotional elements that were widespread at the time of > > >> his conversion but which are now much rarer? > > >> > > >> Father Samway, in his biography, makes the very specific > > >> assertion that WP was a true Vatican II Catholic. I just > > >> haven't seen much evidence of it, and I thought that > > >> maybe others on the list could offer insight. > > >> > > >> Thanks. I would be grateful for any insight forwarded to > > >> the list or any private responses. Apologies to any on > > >> the list who are not particularly interested in this type > > >> of question. > > >> > > >> Chuck Lowry > > >> Brooklyn, New York > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> An archive of all list discussion is available at > > >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > >> > > >> Visit the Walker Percy Project at > > >> http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > > >> > > > -- > > > > > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > > > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > > > > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > > > > > > > -- > > > > An archive of all list discussion is available at > http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy > > > > -- > > An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail > > Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy From karey at charter.net Thu Feb 26 10:21:47 2004 From: karey at charter.net (Karey L. Perkins) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:21:47 -0500 Subject: [percy-l] language theory References: <006801c3f2a1$4ffe7b00$0301000a@AFAC955012> <7223BACA-65BA-11D8-B62E-000A9593AB24@comcast.net> Message-ID: <002a01c3fc7c$405df6f0$0301000a@AFAC955012> Mike, et al -- Thanks so much for this, Mike. I've ordered Deacon's and Deledalle's books (you've mentioned Deledalle in the past), as well as several other ones on language evolution/origin of language, mostly collections of essays that would provide a diversity of perspectives, that seemed like they might provide a good background for what's happening in this area now: --Approaches to the Evolution of Language: Social and Cognitive Bases (James Hurford, ed.) --The Transition to Language (Oxford Linguistics) [conference proceedings] --Language Evolution [Christiansen, ed.] (This is the one you refer to below, I believe) --Human Language and Our Reptilian Brain: The Subcortical Bases of Speech, Syntax and Thought (Perspectives in Cognitive Neuroscience) (I'm assuming this will be above my head, but Percy would probably have read it and understood it) --The Evolutionary Emergence of Language: Social Functions and the Origins of Linguistic Form (Chris Knight, ed.) --The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language (Pinker -- I ordered this only because it seems that he should be read, he's so big in the field) --Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution (Jackendoff) What do you think? Some of these were mentioned in the July 15 2003 Nicholas Wade New York Times article, "Early Voices: The Leap to Language" that I had forwarded to the list a while back, that sort of reviewed new developments/books in the area. If you know of any of these, or would recommend one over another, let me know. It's a great area, new developments seem to abound, and it does relate to what Percy was doing -- not all of what he was doing, but some of what he had mentioned. I too joined the Peirce list in search of more enlightenment on Peirce, as well as symbol/sign, and those guys are really good -- too good for me!! I'm not following all of it -- Peirce is very wide and deep -- but as I read more of him/about him, I hope it will help. I did print out some of the papers at the Peirce site as well as the "Memes as Signs" one you had mentioned so long ago... I do not know "Lonergan" or "Minsky" but I hope I'll come across their names in the process of this reading. I couldn't agree more about "postmodern-polluted academia"!! Percy and Peirce both mention Duns Scotus (scholastic guy) in terms of sign/symbol and realism, and I'm reading about him now. Again, thanks for the input on this -- from my research on it, it seems not many people are as interested in pursuing the language theory side of Percy as the other sides. Only 3 or so dissertations devoted peripherally to that topic, only one devoted directly to it, and it seems the linguists and semioticians and philosophers completely ignore him altogether (Why? Because he's a novelist, so perceived as an amateur, not a professional, in semiotics? I don't know). So I feel kind of like I'm shooting in the dark sometimes. Still struggling with the other question I had mentioned last time ("If there is a physical/biological brain location for language (surely dyadic), how is that this dyadic structure creates triadic thought? Aren't we back to Descartes' dilemma of how a mind/body interacts?"). I didn't quite understand Ken's answer: ("More like we're already in it when we assume that the dyadic and the triadic happen in totally different contexts. Why not one is subsumed to the other? But can that be explained dyadically? No.") Karey ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Frentz To: Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 11:40 PM Subject: Re: [percy-l] language theory Karey, I'm sorry I really haven't gotten a chance to go back a re-look at our earlier discussion. One of the key things that I had been impressed with was Terrence Deacon's book, the Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain (1997). That is an excellent starting point for the state of the art from one scientist's perspective a half dozen years after Percy's death. Bonus is that Deacon is Peirce literate, as you'll see in his description of icon, index, and symbol. Googling Deacon's name I just came across this link on a book on Language Evolution. http://www.oup.co.uk/isbn/0-19-924483-9 I haven't seen this book but it looks interesting at first glance. A PDF sample was available which seemed small enough that I attached it (I got it from the linked website of the softcover edition [reposted without attachment]). Deacon has been saying for several years now that he has a follow-on to Symbolic Species, called Homunculus, in preparation, but I don't think it is yet out. I also recall that there was some interesting material on genetic-based language research about a year ago -- someplace in England I believe, but I'd have to track it down. >From my perspective, Percy seems to have come to grips with the importance of the cognizance of self in forming judgments, which is a critical last step in the understanding of knowledge (per Bernard Lonergan's approach in "Insight"). Lonergan seems to have independently developed a "Percy-like" perspective in this area, by my read (though there is no apparent connection/citing by either to the other). Tekippe makes a comment in his commentary on Lonergan ("What is Lonergan up to in INSIGHT?: A Primer") that in order "to find an adequate stress on judgement, one must go back to the medieval philosphers. Thomas Aquinas, in particular, places a strong emphasis on judgment as the single criterion of truth." (p 122). Percy, and a very small minority of only partially connected or disconnected others (e.g. Peirce, Lonergan, Aquinas), seem to be adding something in coming from a humanistic perspective that a purely scientic perspective (e.g. Deacon, Minsky, Chomsky) seem to be oblivious of (which I attribute to the lack of moorings and underlying, but apparently totally blind, agenda which appears to be prevalent in current postmodern-polluted academia (not to mention mass media). I think there is probably much in current scientific advances that could add to the track that Percy was pursuing. Just my blathering.. Best, Mike On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Karey L. Perkins wrote: This is addressed specifically to Mike Frentz, and generally addressed to the vast and superior collective knowledge of the Percy listserv as a group: Several months ago (years?) Mike, you said, that much research/knowledge had been done/gained on language acquisition and language theory since Percy's death. What is this, specifically? I know the list has discussed the FOXP2 gene. Has more been discovered/explored? What were you referring to when you made this comment? I am continuing my exploration of Percy's language theory/radical anthropology. He seems specifically concerned with the "third element" of the triad, the human self, and what is happening there: Among other things, Percy refers to the work of Norman Geschwind: his discovery of a ?recently evolved structure, ?the human inferior parietal lobule, which includes the angular and supramarginal gyri, to a rough approximation areas 30 and 40 of Brodmann?? (Message in the Bottle 326). Percy elaborates on Geschwind?s findings that this structure is not present in the macque, and only rudimentarily present in higher apes. It seems Percy WAS interested in finding a neuro-physiological/anatomical correlate (as he discusses in this essay in Message in the Bottle). But I would venture to guess that much work has been done since Geschwind. And here's a question to throw out to all: if there is a physical/biological brain location for language (surely dyadic), how is that this dyadic structure creates triadic thought? Aren't we back to Descartes' dilemma of how a mind/body interacts? Karey -- An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- -- An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: