Wednesday, June 29, 2005

SS. Peter and Paul
This one’s making the rounds of the blogs. Alvin Kimel writes on...

The undeniable, offensive, glorious fact of Rome
Of course some of us set our compasses to the ‘eternal Rome’ described by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre of blessed memory, not to the current well-meant but misguided modern cult of personality that John Paul II’s fans go in for (and which might be on the way out anyway if Benedict XVI follows through and reassigns Piero Marini, junking the rock-concert-tour services for something at least quasi-traditional).

As I’ve written before, the Catholic world always assumes a Rome. Constantinople for example was Rome in a technical sense like Taipei is the capital of the still-existing Republic of China today. (A typical Greek-speaking subject didn’t call himself ‘Byzantine’, which is what 19th-century British historians renamed him, but Rhomaios, Roman!) When it fell, rising star Moscow claimed to be Rome. Different factions historically have argued not if there is a Rome or not in their worldview but rather which Rome?

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment