#Catholic Book Review

[mysticalblizzardcolor]

The US Army recommended this Catholic book - Interior Freedom by Fr. Jac...

[words-writ-in-starlight]

Sometimes I read the books that the internet is going feral over and I'm just like "take my hand babygirl I can show you the world."

We can do better baby. I can get you a better version of this.

[fictionadventurer]

The worst part about reading in a genre where you have low expectations (in this case, Christian historical fiction) is that when a book impresses you, you have no idea if it's actually good or if you're just overly impressed because it was a fraction of a degree better than the usual garbage.

[thereadingchallengechallenge]

Review: The Lesbiana's Guide to Catholic School by Sonora Reyes Rating: 4/5

This was an emotional story. I was expecting something a little more light-hearted but Reyes delves deep into the psyches of their characters. 

The thing I especially loved about the book was Yamilet's relationship with her brother, Cesar, and how they tried to keep each other safe however they could -- even when they weren't getting along. 

The discussions about being a queer woman of colour between Yamilet and Bo were wonderful, too, and I loved watching their relationship develop over the course of the novel. 

I did find the pace of the novel a bit stop-start in places. Yamilet's motivations kept changing in confusing ways and then the story would feel like it was coming to a close only to keep going. It's not enough to put me off Reyes' writing but it did make the book feel slower.

If you liked Starfish by Akemi Dawn Bowman, you'll find something to like with Sonora Reyes' debut. 

[magical-glimpse]

Book Review: Discovering Christian Witchcraft, by Sara Raztresen and Emyle D. Prata

Sara Raztresen is an educator and writer I have been following for a while now, so you bet when i could afford it i pre-ordered her and Mimi's book !

Why did I choose to read this book ? First of all, it is a great introduction to the more mystical side of Christianity, and the more Christian side of Witchcraft. There a a handful of creators who are focused on Christian Witchcraft or Christopaganism, and out of them, Sara is one of my favorite. Her "Where the Gods Left Off" series (which I already read and will comment/review when I have time) is both an incredible insight into different cultures and religions and entities, but also the witness of her personal journey as she explores and meet all of them, and what she learns from it. It's not a sugarcoated exploration, but the experience of a witch who goes out of her comfort zone and deal with the consequences of it, good and bad. This book seems both more in their comfort zone as well as out of it. While focusing on the Christian perspective (with insights from Judaism, different branches of Christianity and cultures that were historically nearby), it also contains an absurd amount of research, references more books and articles than i can count, and present as a final product a fantastic guide, essay and research paper on the different elements that makes Christian Witchcraft today what it is, was and could/should be.

What are the great points of this book? Where should I even start ? 1.The Theory

The Theory is strong in this book. Everything is cross-checked, referenced, sourced, critically analyzed. It is a proper researcher work. (I am not in human sciences, but if i were to compare this book to how STEM scientific theses are built, it is pretty well built, rich, and made understandable for the most part). The book goes deeper than any "beginner-oriented" book I have seen this now. It is, I think, both appropriate for beginners in witchcraft, and anyone who is already pretty well-versed but would like to learn more about the Christian side of it.

2. The passion and analyses

Not just that, but the book also contains beautiful essays, speaking about the role of Christian witches in the modern world, the impact and the wrongs of Christonationalism, the role and goal of Christianity itself. Even for people who are not into witchcraft, I think this book can truly be a mind-opener about how Christians failed their missions, and missed the original meaning of the teachings of Jesus.

You can see as you read how the two writers are attached to the entities they are working with, but also to their cultures and what they learned in their years of practice. The book is nothing short of a labor of love, of passion, and of honest eagerness to share knowledge and passion for the craft ( as well as bit of spite for those refusing to open their eyes to even the most basic logical arguments lol)

3.The Practice

I probably have a harder time being completely objective about this, because i read the book when i had a good handle on most witchcraft basics. I do think though it can add a nice touch to practitioners who already got the basics down and would like to explore a little something new. For brand new beginners, it seems to me that it could be a good book to keep long-term in your practice. it could easily become a staple to come back to regularly to deepen an aspect of your practice, explore a new things, or just relearn older things.

Conclusion: this book is pretty exhaustive for beginners, and a good introductory to medium course for accomplished practitioners who wants to deepen their practice towards Christian Witchcraft. it presents both beginner-friendly and advanced theory, as well as a good beginner exploration of the basics of witchcraft. it is to me now a personal library favorite i will keep and reread for a long time. i would even go as far to say you might consider it a must-have in Christian Witchcraft, but that is of course up to you to decide <3

[runningwithfangs]

Vampire Chronicles Book Review/Rant #5

Memnoch the Devil

Alright, this is gonna be long, this book is dense and Anne had me reading too many Wikipedia articles for context. 

I found a couple of news articles (here and here) discussing Anne’s Christianity, she allegedly became one in 1998 and “quit” in 2010 saying “It's simply impossible for me to 'belong' to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group.” I think it’s safe to say this book was her actively quarreling with her faith and belief system. 

(Side note, the last book left us with Louis, Lestat, and David going off to the jungles for adventures, and I was foolish enough to think we’d see that. Why does Anne hate Louis? He was your firstborn Anne! Lestat is the new favorite and David is becoming the second favorite)

So I think Lestat is Anne in this story, going through the journey from non-belief to belief. Lestat like Anne, was never religious, and he didn’t like his family’s fake/superficial faith. His atheism was further confirmed by Marius, who said he’s been around since before Jesus and saw Christianity as one of many cults over time. But now something has happened that forces Anne/Lestat to reconsider. 

At first, when Lestat talks to The Ordinary Man he doesn’t believe he’s Satan, but probably some supernatural being like himself. But then he also says doesn’t love God but hates him, like a lot of people do, because he allows atrocities to happen. (This reminded me of God’s Not Dead honestly, where the premise is that Tarzan is not an atheist at all but is actually mad at God).

Ok, let’s go. So, I like the sympathetic view of the devil, emphasizing his falling. He is a victim of God, hates evil, and doesn’t want to be evil. Memnoch is also behind so much of Christian and Hebrew lore, he’s the one who taught humans metallurgy and weaving (Book of Enoch), he’s the reason humans can get into Heaven, and he’s the reason God took the form of a human in Jesus. This story is both fun in a fanfic sort of way and satisfying in hitting these memorable beats in the Bible (like the temptation in the desert).

The book has a clever take on how God created the universe and set evolution into motion. I know some Christians do subscribe to this interpretation, including my own Catholic mother. It brings physics into Creation too, how energy becomes matter (we all know e=mc^2) because God willed it. Memnoch does a quick course on human evolution 101, from organic molecules on warm soupy ponds to fish stepping on land to warm-blooded mammals to humans as we know them now, and according to him, gaining souls, which is treated here as another step in evolution. This last part is something I haven’t heard from Christians before.

We have a crafty reconning of vampire lore and Christian lore, human souls are spirits, they explain ghosts, poltergeists, apparitions, possession, and most importantly, the spirits that witches can control and the spirit that went into Akasha and created vampires. Just when I think Anne is losing the plot, she brings it all together. I enjoyed this take that brings science, faith, and the paranormal together in a clean little explanation.

Now back to Memnoch, his whole reason for falling is that he thinks humans are special, they have souls and that makes us unique and separate from nature, which makes us holy and thus deserving of special treatment. It seems like many religions also see it that way, that humans are special and apart from the natural world, granting us both privileges and responsibilities. I can see that reasoning, and many humans over all of history have tried to prove that more scientifically, only humans use tools (wrong),  only humans prepare for the future (also wrong), or only humans love and grieve and plot revenge, that’s what sets us apart! But the more we study animals it seems like that’s also wrong. So why are we so determined to set ourselves apart? Lots to think about there. 

Now we get to Jesus, who has decided to die and be resurrected not because that’s what he thinks is cool and good, but because that will fit with the preexisting myths humans have about The Dying God (learn more at Crash Course: World Mythology). That sounds so blasphemous to me, but it’s a pretty juicy take.  

When Memnoch is tasked to find souls that are worthy of Heaven, he finds souls who are at peace with God. These souls aren’t mad at God for the pain and suffering in the world but are grateful to have had the chance to live at all. That’s pretty different from what I was taught would get you into heaven, the rules and beliefs that have to be followed. This feels blasphemous to me too, it seems too chill for Catholics to accept! 

Anyway, Memnoch gets a small percentage of souls up to Heaven, God accepts, everyone is happy, but NOT Memnoch, he wants every soul in Heaven! Even after Jesus’s sacrifice that allows more souls in, it’s not good enough. That’s when Memnoch is dammed to become Satan and rule Hell, his new job is to work on every soul, “tutor them for the Light” so that they can go to Heaven. That’s the job he’s so tired of. He’s also sick of God letting humans slaughter each other in his name and God not doing anything about it, which yeah, I’ve had that though and I’m sure many others have too.

God is painted as clumsy, and arrogant, doing things sporadically, sometimes even for reasons he doesn’t even know or understand, but Memonch argues that even with these “flaws” he’s still God and should be worshipped and glorified for the very fact of his creation. Lestat doesn’t buy it though, and that’s why he refuses to help Memnoch, that and the dying part. I wonder if that’s a struggle Anne was having.

And in the end, it’s left ambiguous as to whether that was really God and Satan or some other preternatural being that made illusions happen. Armand seemed pretty fucking convinced though. I’m not upset about this ambiguity, it’s more fun that way.

TLRD - The mixing of christian mythos with vampire mythos worked out better than expected and I had a fun time reading this! I never thought these vampire chronicles would lead to meating actual!Jesus and actual!Satan but it was a good romp.

Bonus: Chekhov's period blood. Chekhov’s popped-out eyeball. 

Favorites:

Lestat “I’ve been dumped in the swamps myself.” DEAD

Again: Mojo 💗 Kept by a random woman but Lestat visits to play 🥹

The description of heaven, a beautiful chaos of souls, natural elements, and architectural elements all sprouting from one another. It made me think of some of the visuals in Dr. Strange, the mirror dimension, with the city and buildings folding and sprouting from each other. 

Lestat drinking Jesus’s blood!!! WILD. But also not wild if you believe in transubstantiation, right? Christians all over the world drink Jesus’s blood and eat this flesh every Sunday.

Least Favorites:

OMFG all of Roger’s life story. I get that Lestat is making up games to make hunting more interesting, him seeing a victim’s ghost is novel and compelling. Between that, David’s story of the Paris cafe, and the Stalker, we got a good spooky start! But Roger collecting freaky books, wanting to start a cult, becoming a drug dealer, killing his baby momma, his televangelist daughter. . .it just went on and on. We already got his deal in the last chapter! I get the religious themes, but Anne, not everyone needs a 50-page background story.

I have to put the menstrual blood scene here. Just. . .Anne, I have questions. But also no I don’t. I wish to scrub my brain of it. 

Excuse me, Armand just decides to burn himself at dawn?!? 

Smutt:

Memnoch having sex with a stone age woman and cumming so hard that God Himself had to come down to Earth to yell at him about it. Absolutely bonkers. I loved it, no notes. 

I am NOT counting the menstrual blood scene. 

Nonsense Meter:

It’s gotta be a 10/10, but I have a feeling this scale will need to be reevaluated because things somehow get even more bonkers later. A vampire being solicited by Satan himself to help him out in Hell, that’s already a lot, you throw in angel sex, eye-ball mail, and time travel, it’s a lot. *Slaps book,* this baby can fit so much nonsense in it.

Misc:

Lestat (Ch. 9) “I don’t like myself, you know. I love myself, of course, I’m committed to myself till my dying day. But I don’t like myself.” My babygirl 😢

I’ve accepted that Louis is barely going to be around, but when he showed up at the end it was nice. ☺️

I read this book at the same time as I was watching Good Omens S2 and let me tell you these two bible fan fics were getting all scrambled in my brain and sometimes I couldn’t remember what was cannon for either. But also now I can name the choirs of angels, in case of emergency Christian trivia!

[yuga2000]

A Head Full of Ghost by Paul G. Tremblay Review

I just finished this book I checked out from the library and I wanted to share it with you guys because I thought it had a very interesting and very realistic take on mental illness. Without giving away too many spoilers the book follows the story of our doomed protagonist and antagonist, Marjorie, through the eyes of her younger sister, Merry. We basically know from the very beginning that Marjorie isn't going to live to tell her tale as it's told from 15 years later in the form of Merry being interviewed by a writer named Rachel who wants to share what really happened all those years ago in book form. Marjorie, at the age of 14, has started showing acute signs of schizophrenia and she talks about the ghost in her head driving her crazy, how she'll listen to them tell her things or sometimes how they sound like they're speaking to her in English, but she can't understand what they're saying, which often leads to her spirling and turning to her music to calm her down.

Now, I personally do not have schizophrenia nor do I have the knowledge of it to say if this is an accurate representation of it, but in a way I feel like I can relate to Marjorie Barrett in the sense that she's mentally ill and desperately wants to get better, but also felling as though she's at a loss and there's nothing she can do.

Whether it's the schizophrenia or her teenage need to act out is a little unclear when she starts acting out and pretending as if she's possessed and the only one who knows she's lying is her sister, Merry. John Barrett, her father, is an avid church going man who automatically assumes that instead of taking her to her psychiatrist, Dr.Hamilton, that his daughter needs to find God instead. He takes her to their local church to meet with the priest, Father Wanderly, who thinks that exorcism is the best way to go.

The mother, Sarah Barrett, is an atheist and insist that her daughter keeps going to see Dr.Hamilton, much to the deaf ears of John. Him and Father Wanderly come up with this plan to shoot the whole thing and air it on TV, as the family is in financial ruin with John being unemployed and paying for Marjorie's treatment. The show will become their main source of income. Poor Marjorie, of course, plays along with it all, at the expense of her sister's well-being, as well as her own.

This book follows the themes of religious trauma, dysfunctional families, and mental illness. It's terrifying in the way of we see how mental disease not only tears Marjorie apart, but her entire family, including her traumatized younger sister who is telling the story that Marjorie Barrett never get to tell herself.

I highly recommend this book if you're a fan psychological horror. I know that I throughly enjoyed it. It took me 5 days to read, but that's just because I was hyperfixated on it and read it while I was at work during times when we weren't so busy. It has roughly 304 pages, but the number changes depending on the edition and publication date that you pick up. I hope you enjoyed my review and will pick up the book yourself and find out how Majorie's life came to a terrifying and unexpected end.

[period-dramallama]

The King's Mind by Christopher Rae: review.

"How curious men are, how much is hidden, how much left unsaid."

A very late post for @fideidefenswhore sorry for the wait xx

TLDR: Solid, but I have some Notes. Rae is knowledgeable but he falls into some common pitfalls. Not as good as Rae's The Concubine. The pacing is weaker, and unlike The Concubine there is a Whiggish streak that gives the book a preachy taint.

Long post below.

Henry: I'm not easily persuaded

*a few moments later*

Henry: you know what? I've been deceived.

The book starts in media res and even I am a little lost and confused. The book hops between first and third person without warning which gets easier but at first takes some getting used to. Was it always necessary? We go from third person "a sky streaked with red and gold" to Henry saying the sky is streaked with red and gold.

The presence of Weston and Norris in this book is good. It was a good choice to emphasise the presence of Weston and Norris at the coronation. I think a lot of writers tend to forget they existed before 1536. They're Henry's Great and Loyal Friends yet they pop into existence ex nihilo solely so they can be beheaded. Obviously their presence also makes good foreshadowing. They're natural portents of doom.

Sometimes, as is often the way with first person POVs, Henry gets too self aware: “He knows how easily I can be mollified by a good cash offer”. But Rae's is probably the most interesting and nuanced of the Henries. Rae captures his ego: "Mark, who plays the lute so prettily, almost as well as myself." Cromwell “is now better informed than any man alive, with the exception of myself." After a whole book of his ego, Duchess Mary roasting Henry at the end was remarkably cathartic. Girl's got a point.

Henry has a serious case of doublethink. "My sweet Anne, so mild and sensible. I know that they are all constantly working upon her to have their way in this, but she is the true friend of my heart and her counsel will always be in my best interest. Of course, she is right."

On the very next page: "Anne’s eyes gleam with triumph, she believes she has influenced me to align myself with her purposes, and has won the field."

"Anne is naive sometimes and behaves as if matters of grotesque complexity can be reduced to simple solutions, simply because she wills it so."

Pot calling the kettle black, Your Majesty.

"More does not learn from the world, he merely seeks to impress himself upon it."

POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK, YOUR MAJESTY.

"I am glad of it, your majesty, for I am certain of what is true. This strikes me as an odd thing to say at first, but upon reflection I decide that I rather like it, and might profitably adopt it for my own use."

I don't have much to say about this moment, it's just funny and feels very Henrician.

“The king is like a man who sets fire to his own house, and then goes crying in the street for help.” Wolsey decides to ignore this while privately acknowledging the truth of it."

Wolsey:

“The honour of my betrothed must be preserved, and passion must bow before patience.” There's some nice moments of Tudor-style courtship, and Rae does a better job than most of giving Henry a distinct voice: “Diana, flushed with the exertion of emptying her quiver. By the mass, she is pretty when she is roused.” "Ah, my sweet, but I will never allow it. For that would kill me, and I cannot let you become a regicide." “return to the palace where there is precious little pleasaunce now.” PUN! Henry described himself as the king of disappointment, I liked that moment.

Many Henries are pretty gullible, but this Henry has a certain low cunning and I like the interpretation that while he's swayed by Anne he is quite manipulative himself: “I play the innocent most cruelly deceived, and I know that she finds me plausible.”

In terms of pacing, there is a tendency towards repetitiveness. PARTLY but not wholly because, let’s be real, the KGM has a repetitive nature. Like we get it already, Wolsey's fat, he's gotten fat, he's big, he's bulky, he's plus-size, he's chubby, he's out of breath WE KNOW. Anne is impatient and worrying about her age, WE KNOW. Henry is impatient and wants to marry Anne. Wolsey thinks it can’t be done. Wolsey thinks Henry is like a kid who has to be told he can't just have whatever he wants because he wants it, WE KNOW. Henry is fickle and people hope he will tire of Anne. WE KNOOOOOOOOOOW. The book also goes back in time to 1528 less smoothly than in the concubine. (Also, this book again calls Katherine 'Aragon' instead of Princess Dowager, sometimes the Spaniard, which works better.) You could probably cut out Latimer’s recantation to Warham as it repeats what we got from other scenes.

I must give this book some leeway and acknowledge that I'm just not as interested in the political dimensions of the KGM as I am the intellectual and theological dimension: partly because I find it boring and frustrating the way it constantly goes around in circles and there's this document and this document. But personal preferences aside, I still think the book could have been less repetitive.

“she contains within her a deep strand of idealism…But if Anne lacks anything, it is an understanding of the pragmatism that accompanies power.” Anne overall is better characterised in The Concubine. Here it is Anne's insistence that keeps Mary from her mother while Henry is willing to let them meet. Hmm. Disagree, but it's not too bad.

“Thomas More, Bishop Fisher, and of course the great red whale- Wolsey.”

I choose to interpret 'great red whale' as a reference to the 'white whale' in Moby Dick. Wolsey is Anne's equivalent of the white whale.

Ambiguity just how corrupt Wolsey is. "The fate of his grace the Duke of Buckingham, brought down by Wolsey and sent to the block, is not forgotten"- Buckingham's fall was Henry's doing. Wolsey actually warned Buckingham to be more careful.

"And Norfolk? His grace has all the diplomatic ability of a culverin." "Norfolk has nothing to do with things that are broken." Norfolk is slightly softer in here than he was in The Concubine, and not angry all the time.

Unlike The Concubine in this novel Cromwell seems to have a hint of being an evangelical, being motivated by religion.

"Today he will truly make or mar."

"As ever, in the shape he shows to the world, Cromwell is quiet, unassuming, and affable. Not blessed with a great deal of the outward glamour which tracks the interest of women, he relies instead on comporting himself in a manner which causes men to desire his presence."

Men desire his presence, you say? *Eyes emoji*

Also speak for yourself Cromwell is dummy thicc

Rae gives us a witty and remarkably sympathetic Gardiner. He's not usually given this much attention, or depth to his motives and thought process. We have him admiring Cranmer's intelligence.

More has more energy than usual which I like. He's usually depicted as soft-spoken for some reason when there's no indication in the primary sources that he had a quiet voice. We'll get to the problems with him later in the review.

"Fisher... the sympathy he drips with is not of a personal nature. For him Catherine is nothing more than a simple minded, weak, creature, as all women are, and he thinks that she has failed England and the one office which should have justified her feeble existence- to provide the king with the heirs he needed."

I'm not a fan of Fisher but DAMN that's an unusually unsympathetic portrayal. What a meanie. But it's refreshing to see Katherine of Aragon's supporters as less than noble or admiring for a change, at least in their heart of hearts.

Like The Concubine, there are some great turns of phrase.

"For some time he sits there, like some Saint of the early church undergoing a particularly unpleasant and imaginative martyrdom at the command of a Pagan emperor."

"And for the first time he begins to despair, because for the first time he sees clearly that he does not have the power to truly open their eyes. The terrible, inescapable conclusion begins to oppress him; There is actually nothing he can do to prevent disaster."

^^I like this moment because it encapsulates the feelings of many people in the Reformation, on both sides.

“I was nothing more than an empty vessel, like unto A goblet made in the most glorious and rich fashion, but empty nonetheless, a vain, dry thing. Here is the wine which was lacking, it comes now brimming, overflowing, and sweetest tasting anything upon the earth.”

^^ A particularly evocative and authentic conversion narrative.

This book also had some good analogies, like this one: "Master Christopher, think of the king as like a man who has inherited a battery of cannons."

Rae did a good job in this book with foreshadowing and instilling a sense of doom:

“There is a heaven for Anne Boleyn, in which she ascends uncontested to the throne as Queen of England, and a hell also, in which she is confined to being seen as nothing more than the king’s mistress, until he tires of her and moves onto the next one.”

^^It really drives home that Anne's fate is beyond her wildest nightmares. HILLARYYYYYYYYYYYY

"The shadows that have claimed the last of the sunlight are gone from the garden, and the Cardinal's face is now in shade, the whole of his vast bulk entirely consumed by the dusk."

^^A nice bit of pathetic fallacy and foreshadowing of Wolsey's downfall.

"Norfolk, so fond of sending people to the tower. Perhaps he will get the chance to see what is like one day himself?" “As she listens Anne’s eye is drawn upwards; she senses black shapes moving in the air, and she sees two ravens alighting upon the crenelated rampart high above. A sudden chill descends upon her, and she shivers.”

There are some good details in this book. Wolsey in the garden in the evening- Cavendish mentions that he takes evening walks. "He smells of cabbage, cabbage and wet horse dung!" A reference to Gardiner's skill at salads? “but the heat will recede, as it does when the sun progresses around the world and the hours of darkness begin.”

"But as I recall, when Hercules cleaned the stables he also slew the man who owned them. Because Augeas would not pay him for his work, Thomas. I think the king preferred to leave them as they were."

^^ a nice classical analogy. I wish Rae paid more attention to humanism and the classical learning of the characters. He tends to forget about the existence of humanism and the fact that the Reformation isn't binary, especially at this moment in time.

Not all the details are correct: The great seal of England sits inside a white linen bag when it was actually a white leather bag.

Rae continues to have good moments of levity:

“His single word expires, friendless and alone. He looks down at the floor as if he has lost its companions and thinks they might be down there somewhere.” “Ah yes, but there are only so many wives a man may take, before things start to become complicated. I think Henry has discovered this already, no?"

"By the mass I would have her now, hereupon the sweet earthen floor of the forest, with the sound of the rain hissing down upon the leaves around us."

Someone's watched The Tudors.

"His face, when he sees who has come uninvited and unannounced, is a picture, and his people begin at once to scurry to and fro like frightened chickens."

Someone's watched A Man For All Seasons.

"Thomas Howard. And Charles.... Charles..." he pretends to struggle to remember Suffolk's name. "Brandon? My Lords, you are welcome, though your message is not. Let me explain something to you."

Norfolk’s face contorts into an ecstasy of fury and hatred, and his hand reaches for his belt before he remembers he is unarmed. ‘You are ended, Wolsey. By the mass I will kill you myself, with my bare hands. "

Wolsey stares at him,  unmoved . "my Lord is intemperate."

He (Suffolk) gropes for a suitably devastating parting shot, but his invention fails him, as it often does."

Hilarious, I love it, 5 stars, 10/10. Wolsey is delightfully bitchy and it's infinitely better than the meh equivalent scene in Wolf Hall.

Now for my Notes.

"The story is that he fell ill on the journey from the north, and died of it, conveniently. I do not believe it. Either he ended his own life, or someone helped him to do it".

While I love the intrigue, this novel has gone to SUCH lengths to stress that Wolsey is stressed, out of shape and in poor health. If there's one thing we know about Wolsey from this novel it is that he is F-A-T. He's also 57. He's no spring chicken. It makes total sense that he'd fall ill and die, especially after a long journey, drinking and eating from a variety of different sources, some of which may well be contaminated. But the characters speak as though Wolsey was a svelte Olympic gymnast who was spinning around on the crossbars until he suddenly died from eating some dodgy kale.

"Then he tosses what remains over his shoulder, and wipes his hands upon the silken cloth." I get that Francis I is the worst but people took etiquette seriously in this time period.

"Mary discovered a taste for them [kings] in Paris, and says that it was the recommendation of king Francis that brought her to the King's attention."

I'm pretty sure historians are questioning the old story that Mary slept with Francis?

Elizabeth Boleyn suggested Anne play hard to get (which I like) but later in the book Rae has Norfolk suggest it to TB years before. Yet Thomas B reacts to Elizabeth as if it was the first time he heard it. So what gives?

And like in the Concubine, Rae puts in things he's read uncritically from historians, and the result is something that makes no sense.

"His [Norfolk] affection for More is undiminished" yet the scene clearly shows that they have nothing in common, they see the world in starkly different ways, Norfolk sees More as vain and stubborn and More sees Norfolk as a crude toady. Norfolk even has a "menacing look" when he looks at More. So what is this nonsense about them having any affection? Well, like Jane Boleyn's nonsensical motives in the Concubine, Rae has read a historian, unquestioningly, and feels the urge to insert it into the story like a square peg in a round hole even though as a writer he can probably tell it doesn't fit.

There are some anachronisms- the phrase 'like a good Catholic'. 'Catholic' means united- Anglicans believe in "one holy catholic and apostolic Church". Protestant and Catholic are divisions that show up in the 1550s. "More is a fanatic"- fanatic is a very modern criticism. People at the time wouldn't object to religious obsession- the problem was if your doctrine was incorrect.

(Also Henry should be happier at the birth of Elizabeth.)

Now for the misconceptions.

While Wolsey did get his BA at 15, university students then were younger than they are now.

“Henry has been taught to stick to what the bishops tell him in matters of religion, and he derives his idea of faith his elders, who have made him think that orthodox observance matters more than a deep personal sense of a world imbued with the Holy Spirit. He is often reluctant to talk about such things, but she has formed the opinion that he is genuinely in motion, attracted by the scent of reform and willing to alter his thinking to accommodate change.”

Henry was given a (renaissance) humanist education. And the humanists like Erasmus were influenced by the late medieval devotio moderna that placed great emphasis on interior faith. Erasmus absolutely believed that inner faith was more important than outward show: that rituals like the Mass mattered, but that empty ritual was bad. But Rae falls into the false binary of Catholic: Rituals Good and Protestants: Rituals Bad.

Gardiner says: “Your majesty must know that the Pope holds the keys to heaven, there is no higher authority. If clarification or exegesis is required concerning the interpretation of scripture, then the final word must always rest with His Holiness.”

There IS a higher authority! Gardiner and More would tell you that the highest authority in the Church is a Church Council. Basically all the bishops across Christendom come together in a General Council and the Holy Spirit descends upon them invisibly, blessing the proceedings and giving authority to the decisions. If the Pope, say, tried to get rid of the Nicene Creed, Gardiner and More would say the Pope is wrong. Because the Creed comes from the Council of Nicaea, and a General Council >>>>the Pope. Papal infallibility doesn't show up until the nineteenth century.

"How can I help you, when I do not believe it is the right course for a Christian king to abandon his lawful wife? I make no secret of it, as you know. I am not one of those who will say anything in the hope of pleasing you."

More's stance was actually closer to: "I'm not qualified to speak on this issue so I stay well out of it". Fiction tends to portray him as more outspoken in Katherine's support (though he did like her as a person) than he actually was. Fisher was the one loudly objecting to the divorce. It was the Supremacy that More took issue with: he was willing to accept the new succession.

"Attend to your Scripture, and tell me where it says that our Redeemer left any vicar to succeed him upon this earth."

More and Fisher don't give a rebuttal to this in the book- because Rae can't think of one. But they actually could: a Catholic would say that Jesus said exactly that in Scripture. Jesus says to Saint Peter in the gospels "you are the rock on which I build my church." Then in the book of Acts, (the sequel) Peter is the leader of the early Christians in the years after Jesus zooms up to heaven. For Catholics, St Peter is the first pope. All the later popes follow him because of something called the Apostolic Succession.

(Also Catholics believe that 2 Maccabees supports Purgatory. Problem is, both 1 and 2 Maccabees are deuterocanonical and therefore less authoritative than the gospels.)

“Going to Wittenberg, I believe, where he intends to continue his work. A new testament in English, what do you think of that, Thomas?” He looks at me and I see the sorrow in his eyes. He thinks very little of it indeed.

“And how will things be then? When the plough boy reads Scripture in his own rude tongue? Without guidance, or education, without knowledge? Without the interpretation of the church placed upon it? He will say, ah, now I understand it, here is the meaning of this, or that. But when he meets his fellow they will not agree upon it, for this man will say, no- you have it wrong, it means this. They will not be of a like mind, and will fall into endless disputation strife. and the heretics will go about amongst them, stirring up whatever abominations they wish. There will be no order in what men think, no agreement. There will be no unity. That is what the church gives to men, unity, and it is our only hope of it.” “And if men throw off the authority of the church, whose authority will they look to throw off next?”

“If the church is corrupted, then it must be reformed, from within, by honest men of faith. Who has appointed master Tynedale to translate scripture into English? Who is there to supervise and approve the work? No one, because it is forbidden, and with good reason.”

This is a mixture of accurate and inaccurate. Yes, More did see the authority of church and state as connected. He argued that the church had every reason to support the king- because when anarchy breaks out, vulnerable priests and monks and their churches are attacked and looted. So it was in the best interests of priests to support, not subvert, secular authority and the rule of law. Yes, More wanted reform from within the church. He wanted political reform of the church not theological reform. He didn't want fewer priests, he wanted well-educated and well-behaving priests.

But More was a humanist. The ploughboy singing psalms as he worked? Exactly what Erasmus wanted. Even when the Reformation was underway, More still wanted an authorised English Bible, as he thought it would do some harm, but on balance, more good than harm.

So why did he have such beef with Tyndale? Because of how Tyndale translated the Bible. Tyndale's word choice in More's eyes undermined Catholic doctrine and made it look like Catholic doctrine didn't have Scriptural support- especially dangerous given that Tyndale was also saying Sola Scriptura. Tyndale pointed out that some of his word choices were the same as Erasmus' word choices. But More argued that Erasmus was translating honestly while Tyndale was being subversive.

And while More's Confutation Against Tyndale's Answer is a fierce criticism, More does quote Tyndale saying something he agreed with: More replies to this quote "this is well and holily spoken". So I wouldn't say More is blind with hatred for Tyndale, any more than Tyndale is blind with hatred for More. If More was blind with hatred, he wouldn't say anything positive about a single word of Tyndale.

“Like many wise men, Thomas More understands astrology and can read what is written in the heavens.” More knew astronomy. Astrology More thought was BS. But that doesn't fit the binary of Rational Protestants versus Superstitious Catholics, even though Rational Tolerant Elizabeth I believed in astrology while UberCatholic Pope Fan More was sceptical.

Rae’s analysis is Whiggish, and like most Whigs, it gets really preachy really quickly.

“His mind is the prototype of the totalitarian. One who has invested in a static system of thought, which cannot easily accommodate change or development. More thinks only in terms of certainty, and cannot bear the presence of doubt, which may undermine the fortress.”

Anachronism aside, historians actually debate whether More's opinions changed over time: if he became more religiously conservative as the Reformation progressed, having started as a humanist Catholic reformer. Personally, I'm on the side of consistency. More was never opposed to burnings and his last letter to Erasmus explicitly supports Erasmus and his work and calls Erasmus' critics jealous people. His debate with Tyndale is a Catholic Humanist versus a Protestant Humanist. And in classic humanist fashion they're arguing about language.

As for doubt: his patron saint was Doubting Thomas. So I wouldn't say doubt is the enemy to him, but that you must overcome your doubts by choosing to believe.

Also More did not see the Church as static. Catholics believed in progressive revelation: ie. you can add to the faith (things like purgatory) if the Church has a revelation that is authorised by a General Council. You just can't contradict the Bible. The Protestants want to go back to the OG Christianity: the faith of late antiquity, and cut out things like Purgatory that are seen as medieval accretions. They want the Church to go back to the old and keep it that way. They are not changing- they are undoing change, in their eyes.

“He [More] thinks himself to be a compassionate man, but is untroubled by the grotesque cruelty he has inflicted on those who have dared to oppose the orthodoxy which he deems essential to peace and salvation. They are given every opportunity to see their errors and recant, and if they will not then they must burn, so that the infection of heresy may be cauterised, and other vulnerable souls may be saved from it. This is a man of the highest intellectual capacity, who has earned his place among the most exalted thinkers of the new century.”

You could say this about literally anyone in the Tudor period. Cranmer is also considered to be compassionate, and his writing shaped the English language, but that didn't help Joan Bocher, did it?

"Now there is nowhere for men like More to turn, except back to persecution and mediaeval barbarity."

I haaaaaaaaaate this line. It’s so Whig history. As someone interested in ancient history and also the Tudor and early modern period in particular, I can confidently say that barbarity is absolutely not the preserve of the mediaeval period. On the contrary, the early modern period gives us more holy wars and witch hunts. Back to persecution? Persecution was ongoing. Protestants in heartlands like Zurich were drowning Anabaptists in the Rhine at the same time as Catholics were burning them!

(Also Protestants believed in the Trinity and infant baptism even though there's actually no explicit mention of those things in the Bible...)

[non-conventionnel]

In this book, we will try to answer other questions like: How did monotheism originate? Who was Yahweh? Who was Moses? Is it true that the biblical Hebrews started to believe in one God hundreds of years after Moses? What really was the Ark of the Covenant and from where did the Ten Commandments originate exactly? Was the story of David and his son Solomon historically accurate? In reality, who was Yeheshuah, better known as Jesus Christ? What do the other gospels that were left out of the New Testament say? Who was St Paul in actual fact; and most of all, which was the first Church before the Roman Catholic one? How did the papal pontificate originate, and what were the repercussions of the false document which was supposedly left to the Church by Emperor Constantine the Great, in order to retain her power?

These are some of the questions which we are going to tackle throughout this book. Discoveries which have occurred over the last centuries will help us to shed light on some answers and unearth even more speculation in the process.

The author: Anton Sammut

Review 1

“In this book, author Anton Sammut undertakes a challenging task in a race to uncover various aspects affecting the development of religion in relation to culture. This task is considered delicate and for some even dangerous. Delicate because it requires meticulous research and gathering of information; dangerous because it ventures far beyond the borders of religion which we normally restrict ourselves to because they offer security and certainty. In this respect, this book will appeal hugely to those who are not satisfied with what they have been instructed but are interested in exploring how the information arrived to them.”

- Rev. Dr René Camilleri

Review 2

“The laborious and careful exercise carried out by Mr. Sammut, both on the Bible as well as on the History of the Church, is intended to assist the reader to view both of them from an angle which we are not accustomed to. This type of mental exercise is always useful, especially when the thoroughly researched and examined subject is not easy, not necessarily understood in one way, and is more complex than the human brain can handle.”

- Rev. Prof. Peter Serracino Inglott

[beauzos]

thinks about publishing SOBR and realizes if i do i'll definitely get some 1 star reviews because there's gay people in it

[ya-world-challenge]

Book Review - The Sun and the Void (🇻🇪 Venezuela)

[image 1: book cover: the title is topped with antlers and framed by two jaguars, and surrounded by decorative illustrations, including ferns, flowers, and comets; image 2: a map showing Venezuela in northern South America; image 3: the páramo of the Andes - a shrubland landscape with mountains and flowers; source: wikimedia]

The Sun and the Void

Author: Gabriela Romero Lacruz

World Challenge read for 🇻🇪 Venezuela

Review

It took me around 3 months to listen to this in entirety, since I only listen to audiobooks in the car lately. Being able to slowly absorb a story in small chunks and listen to it in the background vs. actively reading, I think makes it easier for me to simply enjoy a story.

This fantasy has a unique S. American-inspired world and a history of colonialism. There are animal-people - ones with antlers and ones with jaguar-like features and tails - and though this themes of biracial/bicultural experience with mixed characters caught between the human culture and who they are.

I'm not a reader to say 'this personality shouldn't exist because I don't like it'. I can imagine the reviews that say Celeste is too stuck-up or Eva is too impertinent or Reina too naïve or whatever they want to make up, reviewers that read too much fantasy and are overly picky about it. I tend to just be excited to find an interesting world. I enjoyed that Reina was a muscular, trousers-wearing lesbian, and I liked the unconventional development of Eva and Javier toward the end.

There wasn't much development in the sapphic romance department*, but hopefully that will pick up in the next book (which doesn't seem to be announced yet).

I recommend it for a slow-burn magic adventure with a Latin setting!

★  ★  ★ ★    4 stars

Other reps: #wlw #lesbian #m/f #biracial (well, bispecies) #plus size love interest #catholic (fantasy version, one character)

Genres: #fantasy world #magic #adventure #family

*spoiler footnote

Except I do love Evil Old Lesbians, yay

[mejomonster]

THE CATHOLIC HORROR OF IT ALL

NOW THIS IS WHAT I WANT OF A FUCKING VAMPIRE STORY

The blood the horror the god the devil the unknown the romance the sensuality

And dear fuck I unfortunately get it Louis. "To be your beautiful self, for all eternity" Oh to be promised the freedom to embrace who you are and be Seen for who you are when you feel trapped and that yourself is your torment and that your life has been wearing masks for other people and desperately trying to please them all only to fail in tje worst of ways to the point you hate yourself, reject yourself, don't even dare to face yourself and acknowledge it

Alright alright ALRIGHT

[wearetheweirdosmisterblog]

Pope's Exorcist (2023)

Just released from theatres to stream today!

⭐️⭐️⭐️.85/5

😱😱😱.5/5

The Vasquez family moved into the diocese that was inherited by their family through the father, who had recently passed away about a year ago. The mother Julia fixes up old homes for a living and so seems to be relishing in these tasks , but not so much her kids. It is an older building that you can tell has been in the family for many generations, and probably has many stories inside its walls. However, as the film goes on you soon find out that that’s not the only thing that is inside these walls.

Russell Crowe’s take on the chief exorcist of the Vatican, Father Amorth is honestly so riveting throughout this picture. You can tell he really gets into the character and loses himself in the process. Which really shows how great of an actor he is. This is the first time I’ve seen him play such a powerful character and to see his range of emotions is definitely something that no one should miss.

I would also like to commend Zoë Gibney and the entire makeup team under her which I do not do often. The make up work in this film is honestly one of the best I’ve seen of 2023, a close second to Evil Dead Rise. (Look for this review soon) you can tell they really took their time with the cosmetics to make it as realistic as possible to what they were trying to portray.

The history of the Catholic Church, and how they deal with exorcisms in this feature to my knowledge, was done very well. The only criticism I would give this film would be the ending, which I will not give away. Thus this was the only thing that stopped it from being a four out of five stars. Nonetheless, this film was a nonstop great watch that really kept you on the edge of your seat.

Director: Julius Avery

Cinematographer: Khalid Mohtaseb

Streaming on: Netflix

Tw: emetophobia, blood, needles, possession

[imsorryimlate]

one of my teachers recently asked me “why do you know so much about dutch bible translations?” and i was like uhhh

[famousblueraincoatmp3]

I just discovered that the news letter for the catholic church reviews movies and rates them im having a riot y’all this almost makes up for the ✨trauma✨

[protagonistspub]

I Am Margaret by Corrina Turner

I Am Margaret by Corrina Turner is the first novel in the I Am Margaret series. This was my first book from the author. This is a young adult, dystopian novel and is also Catholic fiction. I read this on Kindle. What happens when the world is familiar and yet so alien it is frightening? That very easily summarizes my reading experience with this novel. An undescribed environmental disaster has…