Grand Old Man of N American Theology dies

Thomas

So it goes ...
Veteran Member
Messages
14,900
Reaction score
4,620
Points
108
Location
London UK
Avery Cardinal Dulles 1918-2008

"I think of myself as a moderate trying to make peace between (opposing) schools of thought. While doing so, however, I insist on logical consistency. Unlike certain relativists of our time, I abhor mixtures of contradiction."

Four days ago Avery Dulles, one of the greatest thinkers of the modern Roman Catholic church and perhaps its most distinguished representative in the United States, the "grand old man of North American theology", made his transitus to glory.

Born in New York State into a world of privilege, Protestantism, and stern New England duty; of elite boarding schools, Ivy League universities, weekends on sailboats, grand tours of European capitals, the house on Long Island, the summer place upstate, the Navy, the Government. Dulles's great-grandfather, John Watson Foster, had been President Harrison's secretary of state. His great-uncle, Robert Lansing, was President Wilson's. His father, John Foster Dulles, was President Eisenhower's. His uncle, Allen Dulles, led the CIA from 1953 to 1961. His aunt, Eleanor Dulles, was an influential State Department officer and Washington hostess.

Dulles described himself as an agnostic and materialist when he arrived at Harvard as an undergraduate in 1936. Even among the intellectual conversions of his generation, Dulles' own was curiously cerebral. As an undergraduate, he became increasingly convinced that Catholic philosophy offered more complete accounts of the world than other philosophical systems. Philosophy drew him to Theology, which in turn drew him to the Church. Still, intellectual acceptance is not the same as actually accepting faith.

In 1939, "one grey February afternoon" in Harvard’s Widener Library (according to his memoir, A Testimonial to Grace), "I was irresistibly prompted to go out into the open air ... The slush of melting snow formed a deep mud along the banks of the River Charles, which I followed down toward Boston ... As I wandered aimlessly, something impelled me to look contemplatively at a young tree. On its frail, supple branches were young buds ... While my eye rested on them, the thought came to me suddenly, with all the strength and novelty of a revelation, that these little buds in their innocence and meekness followed a rule, a law of which I as yet knew nothing ... That night, for the first time in years, I prayed."

Dulles died from the effects of polio contracted during the war.

Avery Dulles and our MA Course Director, Fr John Redford, were great friends from their student days in Rome. Fr John often regaled us with stories and said his friend used to delight in the fact that people rarely connected him to the famous family of that name. "Hey, cardinal," a journalist asked once, on his arrival at the Washington airport, "how does it feel to have an airport named after you?" He grinned, "It's named after my dad, actually." Fr John's impersonation of Fr Dulles was something of a John Wayne. Both men were tall (I think, Fr John is massive), and both with those carved, craggy features ... they must have made quite a pair in their heyday.

Fr John got the chance last year to go to the US to say goodbye to his friend. He found the cardinal bedbound and unable to speak, although managing to communicate through a nurse who understood the meaning in the movement of his fingers. At the end of his visit, Fr John requested, and received, the Cardinal's blessing. He was scooping his coat off the back of a chair when the nurse interrupted him with a hand on his arm, "Fr. John," she said, "he's asking for yours."

May he rest in peace.

Thomas
 
a quote from first things...
Who, then, can be saved? Catholics can be saved if they believe the Word of God as taught by the Church and if they obey the commandments. Other Christians can be saved if they submit their lives to Christ and join the community where they think he wills to be found. Jews can be saved if they look forward in hope to the Messiah and try to ascertain whether God’s promise has been fulfilled. Adherents of other religions can be saved if, with the help of grace, they sincerely seek God and strive to do his will. Even atheists can be saved if they worship God under some other name and place their lives at the service of truth and justice. God’s saving grace, channeled through Christ the one Mediator, leaves no one unassisted. But that same grace brings obligations to all who receive it. They must not receive the grace of God in vain. Much will be demanded of those to whom much is given.
I find the concept interesting. The where the bar is is determined by where you are.
 
He comes from a family that is seriously dodgy. And his education and military service suggest he was not breaking the mould. You could interpret him as the Jesuit not interested in honours, or someone there to do a job. After all his first visit to Rome was to Fascist Rome, and a Nazi supporting Pope. Was he there to learn of theological matters or representing an American power base? His Family was intricately involved in the financing and the supply of resources to the Nazis in the 1930's, up until Hitler flipped and stopped doing as he was told. Strange that he was in Germany right after his 1945 trip to the Vatican and was there a year. Is it possible he was doing a diplomatic liaison for his family and friends, including the Bush dynasty, Rockefeller, and many prominent bankers and businessmen and politicians. The same group that has run America this past 8 years. Who knows, maybe not, maybe he was just making an easy career out of talking about 1 old book.
 
He comes from a family that is seriously dodgy. And his education and military service suggest he was not breaking the mould. You could interpret him as the Jesuit not interested in honours, or someone there to do a job. After all his first visit to Rome was to Fascist Rome, and a Nazi supporting Pope. Was he there to learn of theological matters or representing an American power base? His Family was intricately involved in the financing and the supply of resources to the Nazis in the 1930's, up until Hitler flipped and stopped doing as he was told. Strange that he was in Germany right after his 1945 trip to the Vatican and was there a year. Is it possible he was doing a diplomatic liaison for his family and friends, including the Bush dynasty, Rockefeller, and many prominent bankers and businessmen and politicians. The same group that has run America this past 8 years. Who knows, maybe not, maybe he was just making an easy career out of talking about 1 old book.

Gosh Tao, why you always got to go around pooping on christian parades? Wait, actually... you poop on all of the big three Abraham-descended parades... although I think you could might need to work on defecating on Judaism a bit more in order to give the impression of not having a bias. Hmmm.

Well, PM me if you need some help.
 
Gosh Tao, why you always got to go around pooping on christian parades? Wait, actually... you poop on all of the big three Abraham-descended parades... although I think you could might need to work on defecating on Judaism a bit more in order to give the impression of not having a bias. Hmmm.

Well, PM me if you need some help.

lol, the name Dulles obviously piqued my curiosity and this guy did go down a typical path for someone being groomed in the family business. Am I cynical about anything and anyone to do with the Catholic Church... well YES! And I believe I have every right to given their track record. The Dulles family may not have produced any leaders but there have been a few generals. I would not trust any of them lightly.

Judaism, not Zionism, has given me little to complain about however I do have great distaste for the aloof, almost supremacist, attitude of Jew only marrying Jew etc. Zionism I do shout against for obvious reasons.

You think I need help? :rolleyes:
 
He comes from a family that is seriously dodgy.

Wikipedia suggests that John Dulles was very much a supporter of the Nazis and the family benefited in the early 1930's from it:
John Foster Dulles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But, Wikipedia also makes the point that his brothers forced the company to stop doing business with Hitler in 1935.

However, it's very unfair to hijack a thread like this with accusations that because someone in the family has a critical political record, rather therefore his Jesuit brother should be tarred with the same brush?

It just seems pretty insensitive and clumsy to use a eulogy as a basis of attack on the basis of relatives - unless you have any references that Avery was actively involved in dubious political activity?

By that I mean John and Allen Dullas have clear public recounts to be held account to - what do you have on Avery to justify your attack in this thread?
 
Eh, that's just Tao...you can dress him up...but you can't take him anywhere. ;)

Thomas, thank you. Yours was a fitting eulogy.
 
Wikipedia suggests that John Dulles was very much a supporter of the Nazis and the family benefited in the early 1930's from it:
John Foster Dulles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But, Wikipedia also makes the point that his brothers forced the company to stop doing business with Hitler in 1935.

However, it's very unfair to hijack a thread like this with accusations that because someone in the family has a critical political record, rather therefore his Jesuit brother should be tarred with the same brush?

It just seems pretty insensitive and clumsy to use a eulogy as a basis of attack on the basis of relatives - unless you have any references that Avery was actively involved in dubious political activity?

By that I mean John and Allen Dullas have clear public recounts to be held account to - what do you have on Avery to justify your attack in this thread?

I do not attack him I only point out that his family were amongst those responsible for financing the Nazi party and semi covertly re-militarising Germany in the 1930s. I also point out that this cardinal followed the standard track in education, (economics), and military service, (a cushy navy job), typical of those being groomed for service in the family business. And it seems curious to me that in 1945/6 he spent so much time in Rome and in Germany. This is only 3 or 4 years after Pope Pious actively colluded with the Nazi Germany by building and operating the Croatian concentration camps that murdered 800,000 people.

As I pointed out he may have been a good man but it is also not beyond ones imagination to wonder if he was the one appointed by his family to do all the liaison between it and the Vatican. Perhaps he chose being a Jesuit because he was no Catholic at all and found being given Catholic honours and titles something that made him squirm. Certainly his epiphany, while studying the swelling buds of a willow tree, is a banal reason to devote ones life to the virgin Mary and the holy trinity. He allegedly had this while still doing his economics degree but he did not stop and go to the seminary, he continued and went into the navy and was doing just as his family would expect. And if you think the Dulles family and their associates, most of the movers and shakers in Republican politics, giant industrialists, bankers, oil magnates and wholesale drug suppliers did not require dedicated staff to deal with Rome then I think you a tad naive. And what better cover story than such a conversion.

I feel I have the right to bring out factual associations, I have no respect for this man's family nor a Catholic church that has never been tried for war crimes and mass exterminations for acts it committed during WW2. Why on earth should I be deferential and respectful to one who chose to be a regular in the corridors of the Vatican and belonged to a family that enabled the loss of so many lives during WW2? I think it absolutely correct that I try to elucidate the KEY role his family and the Vatican played given Avery's chosen path. Real history is available to anyone who really wants to find it despite the conspiracy to have the really important bits omitted.
 
All too easy for humans to judge and condemn, instead of forgiveness and a bit of humility as usual, especially on this forum! I really don't know what it's becoming anymore. My how things are changing and the worm is turning:( People need to look at themselves first, eh?
Whatever, RIP holyman.
Amen.
 
All too easy for humans to judge and condemn......

So how does it go, We are made in gods image? Or god in ours? The pope represents gods will on Earth, did god demand the murder of 800,000 people in Croatia?
 
if this was a kennedy, i would probably have been extremely rude about the family, because they deserve to have people being rude about them. i don't think, however, that this attack makes a great deal of sense in the context. if cardinal o'cormac o'murphy o'connor had died, would you go on about ww2 as well? i mean, really, there's a time and a place.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
if this was a kennedy, i would probably have been extremely rude about the family, because they deserve to have people being rude about them. i don't think, however, that this attack makes a great deal of sense in the context. if cardinal o'cormac o'murphy o'connor had died, would you go on about ww2 as well? i mean, really, there's a time and a place.

b'shalom

bananabrain

If he had been called cardinal o'cormac o'murphy o'connor dulles and was a member of a family that set up fascism in Germany that led to the extermination of 6 million Jews would you then see the relevance?
 
i might. i don't think merely being a member of the family, however, or a member of the RCC, makes him culpable for the shortcomings of pius xii or the shoah. i mean, i'm typing this on an ibm pc and have driven fords in the past, as well as using siemens appliances. i'm simply saying that your somewhat conspiracy theory-driven view of history is perhaps not the best way to engage, although far be it from me to tell you what to be interested in or not, tao, you're not going to change any time soon and i start to think increasingly that i might find it disturbing if you did.

i just think you ought to lay off thomas a bit, he doesn't deserve all this stuff that people are throwing at him.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
if this was a kennedy, i would probably have been extremely rude about the family, because they deserve to have people being rude about them.
I thought of this while driving last night of the Kennedy's and the Fords and who knows how many families supported Hitler. They went in as the guy rose in power and promised such industrialization it was music to the capitalist ears...and then as it went downhill it was hard to pull out, once greed and investment had sunk in...along with the fact that anti semitism was the norm.

The quote I posted with him sounding quite interfaith including all those possible to have heavenly reward in his book, all faiths including Jews. I thought it refreshing, he even included:
atheists can be saved if they worship God under some other name and place their lives at the service of truth and justice.
 
i just think you ought to lay off thomas a bit, he doesn't deserve all this stuff that people are throwing at him.

b'shalom

bananabrain

I find your concern for Thomas touching yet I feel he is well able to handle or avoid anything I say. And I feel confident that he knows that he as an individual commands my respect.

But I ask this, what is any discussion forum really worth if it is going to simply ignore or avoid the uncomfortable truths of what has been done in the name of religion? Are we to wrap it all up in fluffy platitudes? Endlessly agree with each other on the minutiae of scripture yet ignore the often barbaric institution? The Jewish people have the saying "Lest We Forget", yet they never bring to task the role of the Papacy in the holocaust and the CC has been allowed to get away without any examination of its role in supporting fascism. And it is not like it ended at the conclusion of WW2, it continued in their support of Pinnochet, the Argentinian Junta and more.

Thomas is by my estimation a good and upright man but the institution he chooses to represent on this forum is the antithesis of how I describe him. It is not just the history of countless murders, the support of fascism, its slave labour camps, its unethical lies about condoms in Aids riven Africa, its cover up of paedophile priests, its investments in arms manufacturing, its failure to use its inestimable assets to do real good, but the way its doctrine infects people at a young age with fear and its self appointed claim of divine will via the pope. To be honest there is nothing I like about the CC save for the architectural magnificence and workmanship that has gone into some of its cathedrals. But even that is tainted by the suffering and servitude that was employed to pay for them. The CC has a history that is not simply questionable but downright evil. It is not an institution of faith but one of power and wealth. And that is what it was created for all these centuries ago by Constantine. You can call it successful at what it set out to do, but you can never call it good.
 
If I might, brother Tao...

There's a time and a place for everything. I don't think it is appropriate to bring one's soapbox to a funeral.

In my humble (or not) opinion, and in a perfect world, such dissent should out of respect for the poster be taken to another thread perhaps dedicated to that subject, and leave the eulogy to those who wish to remember the good that can yet be found in the person who has passed on. At least, that is how I would have chosen to handle the matter had I had issue with the initial post.
 
There's a time and a place for everything. I don't think it is appropriate to bring one's soapbox to a funeral.
I mean no disrespect for anyone.

But really? Really?

While I am not comparing the life of this man to any other, I am wondering where the line is crossed on this 'don't speak ill of the disceased' Was anyone holding the newspapers or the comments back for Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, or Hitler even? Again I am not comparing these individuals with the recently departed, but I am questioning if we have the same sentiment for all concerned.

Now while this man lived his life I take it believing in original sin, I don't know whether or not he carried a burden for his bloodline before him or mde any statements separating himself from them.

My question is why do we take this personally, and not when it happens that we agree with the take of others? I look at each event that occurs in my life as an opportunity for growth and contemplate what I can learn from this discussion.
 
I mean no disrespect for anyone.

But really? Really?

While I am not comparing the life of this man to any other, I am wondering where the line is crossed on this 'don't speak ill of the disceased' Was anyone holding the newspapers or the comments back for Timothy McVeigh, the Unabomber, or Hitler even? Again I am not comparing these individuals with the recently departed, but I am questioning if we have the same sentiment for all concerned.

Now while this man lived his life I take it believing in original sin, I don't know whether or not he carried a burden for his bloodline before him or mde any statements separating himself from them.

My question is why do we take this personally, and not when it happens that we agree with the take of others? I look at each event that occurs in my life as an opportunity for growth and contemplate what I can learn from this discussion.

Point taken, wil, particularly since I am the one who invoked Timothy McVeigh in the past. But I didn't do so while the memory was fresh in the minds of any who mourned him, nor would I get in their face about it. But that's just me.

And everybody invokes Hitler when it suits their thesis, the scale was such that it is hard not to do so.

Ted Kaczynski, another whom I have invoked, is not yet deceased as far as I know, so the point is moot regarding him as far as I can see.

I am not looking to squelch debate or discussion. And perhaps my sense of social decorum is a bit antiquated. But what I saw here would be akin to chastising Flowperson for his admitted past mistakes in his memorium thread. That's all I'm trying to convey.

I don't know this cardinal that means so much to Thomas, personally that is irrelevent to me. He was important to Thomas, and Thomas is important to me. Out of respect to Thomas, I would hold my piece here in this memorial thread, and take any grievance I had to another thread. That's all I'm trying to say. That is what I would do, I suppose it is unreasonable of me to think others around here would consider the feelings of people here other than themselves. :confused:
 
Back
Top