Percy-L: Literary, Religious, Scientific, and Philosophical Discussion of Walker Percy

["Steve Dye" <sldye AT bluegrass.org>]

>From an amateur Percy reader who just loves his books - Thanks for the
interview fragments. They are fascinating.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Potter" <jdp AT scn.org>
To: "Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion"
<percy-l AT lists.ibiblio.org>
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" <mfrentz_2 AT comcast.net>
> To: "Percy-L AT happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu :Literary and Philosophical
> Discussion" <percy-l AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> 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