A Blessed Aunnciation to All!

One of the things I love about the Liturgical year and about the liturgy itself, is the feasts in the midst of fasts, the reminder of sorrowful matters in the midst of joy, the already-but-not-yetedness of it all, the way the Church is all about Both/And.

When your days are ended and you must go to your ancestors, I will preserve your offspring after you, a son of your own, and make his sovereignty secure. It is he who shall build a house for me and I will make his throne firm for ever. I will be a father to him and he a son to me.

You want scandalous? I'll give you scandalous

I have always been a little ambivalent about the subject of scandal, in the way the word is understood by the Church.
And I know that repeating news of scandalous doings may increase the scandal.
But after consideration, I think that the better known this kind of thing is, the better for the Church.
Damian Thomson reports on a truly ugly exchange on Facebook, by someone who seems to be a columnist in a Catholic newspaper, a name I recognize as someone who is one of the go-top "Catholics" for any television project looking for a bad word about a pope.
If this is not he, or a hoax, the Tablet will surely make an announcement to that defect, and I shall surely remove this post.
On the occasion of Bishop Loris Francesco Capovilla elevation to cardinal:

The Matrimony Minefield

Talking about a minefield, and the knowledge that many of the parents o our CCD class are in irregular situations, the combox at Fr Z's is roiling on the topic of Extraordinary Ministers in similar straits.

Putting aside the question of scandal, (and we never can put it aside for very long,) absent a declaration from one of the parties that they think such a solution is hooey, how can we presume that a couple is not living as brother and sister in a "Josephite" mariage?

"One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic?" Little triumphs...

All the CCD teachers received the same Letter last week, reminding us that we were there to teach the truth, and that we had resources to know that truth, and that we were not to pass on ideas that were contrary to the truth, REGARDLESS of how we had done things for the last forty years.
And finally, that parents were coming in for, "Ya know what that religious ed teacher of yourse told my kid?" conversations.
The parents were given a variation on that blog post at NYTimes the other day, something to the effect that if parents promise not to believe every word they hear about what went on at school, we promise not to believe every word we hear about what goes on at home.

(The Letter made me very happy, actually, once I just bit the bullet and asked the boss point blank, Is it I?
It is something that NEEDS TO BE SAID.
But I had to be sure it wasn't obliquely addressed to our class specifically.
The only reason I was concerned was that in the sacraments we had just finished the minefield that is the discussion of marriage nowadays, and I had been at great pains to reiterate and express in every way I could think of, what the Church teaches about Holy Matrimony without getting, to quote one girl, "all judgey," and to hammer home that we spoke of principles, not persons.
From the questions we fielded, to my surprise it did not seem as if any of them have friends or realities in same-sex relationships, whihc was my initial fear, but we already knew that a good third of the class has more than two parents a piece.
Anyway, I needed to know if any concerns had been expressed about that session of that class, to determine if we needed to revisit the subject, but phew!  I digress.)

Anyway, yesterday, we talked about the four marks of the Church, the difference between big c and little c "catholic," and unity without false ecumenism.
As all the classes gathered for prayer at the end, the Head, as she often does, asked if anyone had learned anything that day they wanted to share.
Only 1st or 2nd graders ever raise their hands, but there was one of our girls, a girl who never asks questions, never contributes to discussions, and seems to resent being there, waving her hand in the air

I learned that the Church is meant for EVERYBODY, anywhere, everyone who wants to can be a Catholic.

Joycean, no? (And I should admit, no, I've never really read Finnegan's Wake.)

It's a Great Day to Be Irish

Somehow, links regarding the English slave trade and their abuse of the Irish kept popping up as I followed links on quite other matters.
My pastor said the Our Father in Irish this morning at Mass, and at least three people seated near me spoke it along with him.

Anyway, from Wikipedia, so believe it or don't:

Goodwife Ann "Goody" Glover (died November 16, 1688) was the last person to be hanged in Boston as a witch.... Ann Glover was born in Ireland as a Roman Catholic. During Cromwell's invasion of Ireland, Ann Glover and fifty thousand other indigenous Irish people were forcibly removed from Ireland and sold to plantations in Barbados as indentured laborers. By 1680 Ann and her daughter were living in Boston, Massachusetts where they worked as housekeepers for John Goodwin. In the summer of 1688 four or five of the Goodwin children became ill after an argument with Glover's daughter and the doctor that was called suggested it was caused by witchcraft.... At trial it was demanded of her to say the Lord's Prayer, she recited it in Gaelic and broken Latin, but since she had never learned it in English, she could not say it in English. On November 16, 1688, Glover was hanged in Boston amid mocking shouts from the crowd.[7] A Boston merchant who knew her, Robert Calef, said that "Goody Glover was a despised, crazy, poor old woman, an Irish Catholic who was tried for afflicting the Goodwin children. Her behavior at her trial was like that of one distracted. They did her cruel. The proof against her was wholly deficient. The jury brought her guilty. She was hung. She died a Catholic."... A contemporary writer recorded that, "Before her executioners she was bold and impudent, making to forgive her accusers and those who put her off."

I feel I may be making this suggestion too often lately, but doesn't that bid fair for a cause for sainthood?

How Does This Happen?

A fashionable New Yorker "pairs a red antique Catholic priest’s chasuble with a red vintage hat from Tibet."



Have people stopped caring about disposing of items designed for, or set aside for sacred use properly?

In settling an estate I am spending a great deal of time and cutting a great number of fingertips just now, prying backs off, and taking photos out of frames before the latter are donated to thrift stores --  because I hate the notion of my great great uncle's face looking up at me from the bottom of a bin at Goodwill.

Blessed items, (of which there are quite a number, and I haven't even started with the boxes and boxes of no longer useful sacred music,) require even more care. Yes?

I suppose people dies without heirs, or with heirs who don't care, about them or what they hold dear, but it upsets me...

I feel as if reparations need to be made and I don't know how to do that.

Mah bad, mah bad, mah mos' grievous bad....

A priest came into the sanctuary after Communion this morning and talked and sang for a bit, told a few jokes, sold a few tickets.

When he had left the celebrant said, "He's always a hard act to follow."

Someone in the congregation rolled her eyes and said louder than she intended, "Not for Jesus...."

" What had been a great deal of work for many years, was now a path to God and a channel for His voice — no longer something dry but full of life!"

An absolutely luminous description of how chant works on the soul.

The blog, from an ecumenical Benedictine community is new to me, (and this post is a few weeks old,)  but I shall surely return to it.

I felt that I needed to be praying for my friend, but I found my words faltering. I had had a thought flash through my mind to take my 1934 Antiphonale Monasticum to the hospital with me....I chanted the office of Sext. Because I was in the hospital setting, I needed to do it quietly so as not to be a disturbance. What I discovered and experienced defies my descriptions. It was as though 26 years of chanting these psalms came calmly but hurriedly to my side. What had been a great deal of work for many years, was now a path to God and a channel for His voice — no longer something dry but full of life!It showed me again, quite personally, the real purpose of chant — the communication of God’s love.

"A channel for His voice"... lovely!

"I don' thin' that word means what you thin' it means..."

Inigo Montoya, of course, was speaking of "incontheevable."

I am speaking of the word "secret."
Yahoo News tells us that there are people who "hate" Pope Francis "secretly.
Their evidence of this is quotes from.... erm, public statements and blog posts.
Not only is none of it "secret", but I must ask, why should this surprise anyone?
The Vicar of Christ, whoever takes up that task, has always been hated by some...

In fact, toeing the new party line instilled by Francis is proving to be the greatest challenge for conservative Catholics who are quite used to a prudent and predictable Pope.

Um... did you really mean to imply that the Holy Father is not just unpredictable, but imprudent? And that any Catholic would be okay with imprudence in high places?

The CBS Evening News had a similar story yesterday evening, although they mucked up their point with politics, and they had the usual conflation of "conservative" with "traditional."
And in the "casting" of their talking heads they managed, with a very sweet elderly woman with an agenda, to imply that reactions to Pope Francis are split along generational lines, as if the juice in the movement toward a more faithful Church is not from those tyring to clean up the boomers' mess.

One last thing, the Yahoo piece quoted laicized priest, (didn't identify him as such, of course,) Thomas Groome in an NBC piece:

Boston College theology professor Thomas Groome said it's easy to see why reactionaries would be on edge. While the pope hasn't messed with doctrine, a shift in priorities and pitch is clearly underway, he said"I think it will be a real test for conservative Catholics," he said. "They have always pointed the finger, quoting the pope for the last 35 years. Suddenly, will they stop quoting the pope. It'll be a good test of whether or not they're really Catholics.".

Isn't it awful the way the dissidents in the Church wants to require some sort of litmus test for who's "really" Catholic?

Blood and Leather

Why have most popes, (although not our present Holy Father,) over the past five centuries worn red shoes?

It represents the Blood of the Martyrs, on which we all, but especially those who dedicate their entire lives to following Christ, and indeed, function for us liturgically as alter Christus, stand.

Many people who should know better, and many people whose job it is to go to the trouble of knowing it somehow miss this fact.

Or pretend to miss it so that they can snark dishonestly.

BenedictGal, whose posts on MusicaSacra I have enjoyed immensely, but whose own blog was unknown to me until now has an excellent post
.

"Best" practices for worship?

USCatholic never disappoints.

Note that the word "universal" never rears its Catholic head.

It’s important that people believe in what is happening, that people want to draw from the texts and truly want to connect with God, with creation, and with people in the community... “It should be very lively and active because everyone is engaged,” says Ruff; everyone should be participating in the dialogue and participating in song. “It should not be hokey or gimmicky or silly. It should be beautiful, classy, and elegant.”

Okay, no argument - although I think "lively" is a poor choice of words because of what most people will think it means.

“We tried so hard after Vatican II for active participation that we veered to gimmicks and silliness.” As a result, some Catholics went in the opposite direction and called for a return to the pre-Vatican II Mass. “That’s the wrong solution,” says Ruff. “We need to find out how to deepen the liturgy in a way that is more engaging.”

Why? Why is it "wrong"? Why can't it be part of the solution? The Church says it can.Also, it's dishonest to pretend that most of those who asked and continue to ask for the old Rite did so as a reaction to "gimmicks and silliness" rather than as a reaction, misplaced or not, to the new Rite.

Make beautiful music That’s what Father Michael White and his pastoral associate, Tom Corcoran, do at Church of the Nativity in Baltimore, Maryland. In their book Rebuilt: Awakening the Faithful, Reaching the Lost, and Making Church Matter (Ave Maria Press), they describe the use of Gregorian chant in their otherwise “contemporary approach to the weekend experience.” Gregorian chant during the acclamations of the Eucharistic prayers, they say, “seems to very effectively summon our congregation into the very heart of the mystery we celebrate.”

Pretty sure what they are talking about is NOT "Gregorian" chant. But when you are studiously avoiding any hint that universality, such as one would find in the use of one liturgical language for all, has value, you might want that obfuscation

making music too central to the Mass can also cause a problem. Music must serve the liturgy, he says, not the other way around. In one case, Wagner had to move the choir from their place in the sanctuary to the side of the church because they had begun taking up too much of the focus.

Ya think? I wonder if the problem was not that music was "too central to the Mass." I wonder if it was that the music chosen WAS NOT THE MASS. I wonder if the music was peripheral or added on, in which case ANY focus on it is going to detract from the actual Mass. If what they meant  by "good gospel music" was the Propers and the Odinary, I apologize.

“Boring preaching is a real problem,”

Can't argue. I admit, I have been fortunate in my faith live, lots of dreadful homilists, but also lots of superb preachers, and many whose message was strong enough to compensate for lack of rhetorical gifts.

“If the homilies don’t connect, if the music is not engaging,” all is lost,

That is just sad. The problem, if I may suggest, is that the Truth of the Eucharist, and the centrality of the Eucharist has been masked by so many people for so many years that many catholic have grown up and grown old without recognizing the consolation of the Eucharist in the face of lousy preaching, inappropriate music, etc.

Does one size fit all age groups, interests, or backgrounds?...Should parishes offer specialized liturgies like a Mass for teens or a children’s Mass to best engage those segments of the parish? Zsupan-Jerome sees a real drawback in this approach, as she believes these types of liturgies detract from our unity as the one body of Christ...Having a specialized liturgy that is just for teens or those who like a certain style of music will in some sense hinder this all-inclusiveness. The very style of the liturgy cannot be overemphasized at the expense of its basic reality as the gathering of the body.”

Yes, very good!

“We make sure we have every group represented,” Villaverde says, “whether in song, reading, or some way that allows them to participate in a way that expresses their culture.”

No, very bad!

See, here's where if you recognized the catholicity of the actual "best worship practices" you could so so much more for unity.

"Let's let everyone, or rather, every group do something that is specific to them and their preferences when they get together a couple times a year," make unity a kind of tourism, a sight-seeing day-trip to Liturgical Epcot, peeking over the railing at The Other.

And that is what comes of ignoring the principle of Universality, and promoting a mindset that can only approach the idea of Latin as a return to the Olden Days.

Desecration is Not "Performance Art"

Look.
I am anti-Putin.
I am against violence perpetrated on women, (and men, for that matter.)
I am against religious leaders' complicity in state-sponsored oppression.

But will you please, New York Times, will you PLEASE stop referring to what the Pussy Girls do as "protest taking the form of a “punk prayer” performed in a Moscow cathedral"?


 Os as "provocative performances in public spaces, culminating in a 'punk prayer service' on the altar"?

Because it's a lie, NYTimes.

It is a falsehood.

It is untrue.

It is dishonest journalism.

When the Grrrls were jailed last year, my knowledge of it came from new outlets such as yourself, so it was presented as political protest. Even so, it was clear that something deeply and deliberately offensive to anyone with any respect for faith had happened. Your, and television networks' characterizations of it may have skirted the truth of their act, but the bald facts in your descriptions couldn't hide it.

Now, I know that editorially you have very little sympathy with organized religion. 

So asking how you feel  if your place of worship were subjected to that sort of "performance" would be silly.

So let's use places we can all agree should be accorded respect.

Suppose such a punk prayer were "prayed" in Auschwitz?

Suppose it were prayed at the Tomb of the Unknowns?


Suppose it were prayed at the Martin Luther King Memorial?



Would those still be "acceptable provocative performances in public spaces"?

Everyone will want one....

I have occasionally joked, (lovingly!) of the Thom Browne vibe one of the sartorially splendid leading lights of the Reform of the Reform movement gives off.

But he, like the majority of us in the CMAA, is at the aesthetic disadvantage of belonging to the laity - not for us the rose colored cope embroidered with gold, the collapsible travel biretta, or the blindingly beautiful silk damask humeral veil.

But it seems we can all have our own mozetta! it would not impede keyboard work in the least, and be no obstacle to most chant masters' chironomy. Oh yes, there are some with sweeping thetic gestures, but for the most part...
God bless Thom Browne. (Now, where to find the three thousand dollars or so...)

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant"

...as Blessed John Henry Newman so famously said.

Swedish mega-church founder Ulf Ekman has announced his intent to enter, along with his wife, into communion with the Catholic Church.

(Actually, translations of reports, and I most certainly do not speak a single word of any Scandinavian language, differ on whether his announcement at Sunday service was that they "would" or that they "had.")

"First Loft" Problems

There's an expression some people, including myself, use to remind themselves, or others, that we fortunate folks like to whinge about minor problems that only exist because on the whole our situations are so great.

First World Problems.

"The cable is out" sounds pretty petty to someone who has no cable, who seems to be livin' large to someone with no TV, who might as well be royalty to someone with no electricity in his house, which is a problem someone struggling to reach a refugee camp alive would be grateful to take on.

There is a thread going on at the CMAA forum, a poster asking for advice on how to deal with a priest reluctant to implement the musical reforms which would bring their parish's liturgy closer to the ideal as he envisions it, (when did the chattering class begin dropping the "en" from that word? I digress...)

As the thread grew, I realized that I would have been thrilled to have had that problem at my old parish.
And frankly, the music situation at my current parish, (for which I am in no way responsible, and in which I am involved only as a PIP,) makes me aware that I didn't know how good I had it.
Another poster has mentioned this, "Many would love to be in that position instead of where they are not allowed to sing chant at all. Is your goal singing beautiful sacred music, or just the restoration of Latin? They are not the same thing," and it set me to musing on the priorities we set, or fail to set as church musicians.

A manifesto, of sorts, would not be out of order, giving a hierarchy of aims, the first of which must surely be the salvation of souls, our own included. The worship of God and the sanctification of mankind are the end to which all else, including music that is "beautiful, sacred and universal," or "the active participation of the Faithful" are directed. Fcap is not an end in itself, nor is the "right" music.

Of course, one of the reasons most of us became liturgical musicians was because we believe offering the appropriate music, even when it is resisted or or even disliked by celebrant or congregants, is one of the surest paths to that worship and that sanctification.

But we need to put that aim of ours in perspective.

We need to love our choirs more than the music. We need to love our pastors more than chant. We need to love the people of our parishes more than Latin.

And this, from a recent homily by Archbishop Sample of Portland, seems apt, although he is speaking about a different aspect of the liturgy than music.

‘I’m a bishop of the Church, I must know [the Extraordinary Form of the Mass]’  And I encourage my priests and my seminarians to learn and to know this rite.  Even if you never have a chance to celebrate it, knowing it, experiencing it – I guarantee you – will affect the way you celebrate the Ordinary Form.

It seems to me, that we can take the same approach to working on music that is truly beautiful, sacred and universal, rather than the trite, parochial, more suited to devotion things we often find ourselves forced by circumstances to sing or play.
Working on, studying, singing, teaching, practicing music we will never have a chance to use in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will inform, will transform how we render some lesser music.

And it will transform us.

Gerhard Kretschmar, ora pro nobis

I don't know exactly how one goes about asking for the intercession of the as yet uncanonized, my understanding is that as long as the cult is not given what seems to be "official status" by inclusion in liturgical celebrations, the Faithful are free to pray to whom they choose?

Otherwise, how would one have sought the intercession of a dead person, subsequently been granted a miraculous favor by God, and subsequent to that, had your (and your doctor's) word accepted and be invited to the beatification ceremony of the dead person?

I cannot but think this soul is in heaven, and while taking joy in the Beatific Vision, will be a powerful advocate for the spreading of the Gospel of Life.

the Holocaust didn’t just happen. The Nazi’s had a beta-test version called T4.  T4 was an outgrowth of public health measures for healthy babies taken to a macabre logical end: if its healthy babies that are desired, then let’s kill the unhealthy babies. And, that’s precisely what the Nazi’s did. The methods used to kill these innocents would then be instituted on a mass scale in the genocidal campaign against the Jews. As the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum describes it:

The “euthanasia” program represented in many ways a rehearsal for Nazi Germany’s subsequent genocidal policies.

German researchers, in 2003, identified the first child victim of T4. His name was Gerhard Kretschmar. The boy’s father had written to Hitler asking that the parents be allowed to kill their son. Hitler sent his own doctor to examine the 5-month old, who he described as:

 The child had been born blind, seemed to be idiotic, and a leg and parts of the arm were missing.

Gerhard was killed and so began the euthanasia program against those with disabilities in Germany.

Well, only if they ASK for it....

Oh my God, I am heartily sorry.
What sort of reparations can humanity possibly make?
The King of the Belgians has signed into law the measure permitting parents to slay their children.

Worship of the Lord is the Primary End of the Liturgy

The Vivace Newsletter contained this article today, I don't think Mr Mawby, an admirable contemporary composer of liturgical and other sacred music, will mind its reproduction here

Vivace! 124 March 2014
God-Centred or Man-Centred?

I was recently employed as the Editor of a Hymn Book published by Kevin Mayhew Ltd. The meetings of the Editorial Committee were extremely interesting and there was much discussion on whether contemporary hymns had been too man-centred.

This question not only applies to hymns, it is basic to a consideration of liturgy and its purpose. Pope Benedict - when he was still a Cardinal - stated that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of liturgy. He wrote that the worship of God is its prime end, all else is secondary. This is a profound statement that should help shape contemporary views on liturgical worship.

It throws into perspective some contemporary hymns that have been written since Vatican 2. So many have concentrated on the condition of men, women and their needs. There is undoubtedly a place for this but there is a far greater demand for hymns centred upon our Creator. The texts of hymns should be primarily concentrated on God and not on mankind. Scientific discovery has given us a far greater knowledge of the wonder of our Creator: this should inspire us to write hymns of worship and not those of supplication – please God give me what I want, preferably today!

Pope Benedict’s remarks also apply to the composition of liturgical music. Much of it is written in a style unsuited to worship: it sets out to appeal to congregations using styles that have no place in liturgy. I have no doubt that Gregorian chant is the ideal liturgical music. It has a sense of prayer that transcends time and space. The best polyphony is also suited to worship but music that is written in a catchy pop style clearly isn’t. Much contemporary hymnody is fine but a lot of it is banal, lowest common denominator, junk. There is a wide difference between sacred and pop and, however hard you try, it is not really possible to adapt the latter to worship. Church music should appeal to the spirituality of people and not to their baser instincts.

Pope Benedict’s statement also affects the ritual of worship and the posture of the priest. One is regularly left with the impression that the Celebrant of a Mass is performing rather than praying; so intent upon making the message attractive that he manages to obliterate any sense of worship. [Amen.(This is Scelata talking). Monday the celebrant at the Mass I heard could not resist a libellous joke about St Katherine Drexel's religious colleagues. And he couldn't wait until his homily to share it with us, it appeared in his 'introductory remarks'] [An item allowed in the Order of Mass with which I am growing increasingly impatient.].

The editorial committee of the Mayhew Hymn Book posed a most important question: its implications are vast and these need to be considered with great care. I pray that a balance will be struck and that the worship of God will be placed in its correct perspective. Praising our Creator is of far greater importance than praying for the needs of mankind.


Colin Mawby KSG

Let us hope that his (and the Pope Emeritus's [sp?punc?]) opinion prevailed at that editorial board meeting. (I am assuming that any topic which provoked "much discussion" did not find the participants in that discussion enjoying ...unanimity.

The proprietary feelings Catholic have for "their" pews has always amused me.
 I had to save one half, that is, four seats, of a front side pew once so that some psalmists would be able to reach the ambo easily, and then slip out to join the rest of the musicians in the loft.
Maybe 20 minutes before time to begin, a man arrived and stood glaring at us.
I explained the situation, and standing in a three quarters empty church which would never fill to much more than half, he gestured widely and wildly, and hissed "and where in the world do ya think I'm gonna sit?"

 And yet I now have "my" seat. I inherited the Rose's seat at weekday Mass, and on Sunday, Himself and I, after two years of jockeying with an older couple who may be snowbirds, seem to "own" our seats.
Raised protestant, he likes the front.... me, I was always a behind-pillars, or leaning-against-a-back-wall kind of congregant.... the things one does for love, huh?

There is a lovely little old lady we sit next to -- Himself tells me that on days when I have had to attend another Mass, she cold-shoulders him, but she is certainly friendly enough to me AND HIM when I am there. I'll take his word for it, but he is very sensitive.

She had pointed out a listing in the bulletin, the intentions for one Mass to me, and several days before, I made a point to ask the lay reader scheduled for that Mass, whom I know slightly from daily Mass, if she knew how to pronounce The Rose's last name, and I'm afraid I drilled he on it.

The on the day, before Mass I went back to the sacristy to see what visiting priest we had and I told him, truthfully, that I would never have been forgiven if I hadn't schooled him on on the pronunciation of the Rose's surname.

Lovely man, he understood, (not sure how, because I choked up and became utterly inarticulate, how after so long can I miss her and weep for her every day? well, no matter,) he understood and he nailed it.

(The lay reader did not fare so well, but gamely gave it a real try and then ended up stumbling over the next intention, a name which came out perilously close to a Irish obscenity.)

But all in all, she would have been very pleased. (And I am serious, she would have been furious had the most common mispronunciation been sounded - she would have haunted me. She roused herself from near coma states to correct doctors toward the end.)

Anyway, the little old lady stayed to the very end of Mass.
This is significant, because she is a nicotine addict who idgents fom about the Offertory onward, and rushes out othe cloister to have a ciagarette immediately after she recieves at every other Mass.

I saw her forbearance as a lovely tribute.

Yes, The Rose would have been pleased.

The Meek Warrior

Sandro Magister can be a bit overwrought (or do I just think that because of reading him in translation from the Italian?) and he can be a bit too Look-At-What-I-The-Insider-Knows, but this is an interesting take on the contradictory manner in which the media, at least in this country, treat of Benedict, compared to the treatment given both his predecessor and his replacement:

[W]orldly cunning could not have been used against ... Benedict XVI. He, the meek one, preferred conflict in the open field, with the courage of the yes that means yes and the no that means no, "in season and out of season," as in Regensburg, when he lifted the curtain on the theological roots of the connection between faith and violence in Islam, and yet again on the "non-negotiable" questions. This is why the world was so ferocious with him.