Great piece Father. Yes, most of the chapters in the book appeared as stand alone essays in The European Conservative mainly throughout 2022 and 2023.
I share your views overall. Morello is really astute in his diagnosis of the problem. 'Hex' is a great word, and that's what it is. That's what modernity is in a nutshell. We absolutely need to recover the pre-modern worldview that's open to the Mysteries in ways that we've forgotten or lost these past few centuries.
Your reservations are mine as well though, and I say that as a Roman Catholic and an avid listener of Morello's Gnostalgia podcast. The Roman Church doesn't hold all the aces here in either it's Tridentine or post-conciliar forms. This is where Anglo Catholicism can make a really valuable contribution, I feel. It's style of worship, at it's best, can feel both grounded in the particular and universal in its range and scope. Its aesthetic and overall ambience connect us back to a deep, fertile spirituality that predates the iconoclasm and standardisation of the Reformation and Counter Reformation eras.
A good springboard then for the shift in mindset required to break the hex!
Great review. I’m midway through the book and am finding it inspiring and frustrating in equal measure. Thanks for pinning some of these concerns down in such a clear way.
I realise I'm very late to this party, but I have just discovered your work, Fr. Thomas (and purchased King Oswald's Heirs), and was wondering what specifically you think of the 1662 BCP Holy Communion liturgy? I know of some Anglican priests on the more catholic/Oxford wing who won't touch it, so I was intrigued to read, in this post, that "it is in such liturgies as the Book of Common Prayer that pre-modern Christian tradition specific to the English-speaking peoples is best preserved." Apologies if you've answered this elsewhere. For context, I am a revert to the Church of England after an unhappy stint in the Roman Catholic Church, and have recently reprised the 1662 BCP for the Daily Office. Kind regards - Oscar.
Bless you and thank you. Given the choice, I use the 1662 rite exclusively, but re-ordered according to the “interim” provisions which followed the deposed Prayer Book of 1928 - i.e. the Gloria goes back to its 1549 position and the Prayer of Oblation leads on directly from the canon, with reception of Communion in its historic place after the Lord’s Prayer (and the addition of an Agnus Dei). Some would say that this is no longer the 1662 rite at all! However, outside the Church of England, this constituted the majority Anglican use until the very recent liturgical developments which have pulled us in all sorts of directions. Even in its by-the-book 1662 form, as long as the Prayer of Oblation is not omitted (!), I maintain that the rite holds the Catholic integrity, even if the Reformers did not intend it to do so. The omission of invocation of the saints, especially Our Blessed Lady, is regrettable but not damning (and can be quietly inserted into the Prayers for the Church Militant at the commemoration of the departed). So, while I favour a very slightly spiced up variant of 1662 in public worship, even the bare bones are sufficient. Were it not so, as some of my A-C brethren opine, we are led to the unfortunate conclusion that for several hundred years, the Church of England did not really celebrate the Eucharist at all, or at best did so in a highly deficient manner. This contradicts the many examples of sanctity and occasionally even miracle which our rite has engendered. Perhaps it is better to speak of Books of Common Prayer in the plural, and of the Prayer Book tradition more widely rather than just the 1662, since the various approaches throughout the Communion have offered different liturgical emphases which, together, constitute a singular and admirable Anglican way of worship (see, e.g., the old Scottish BCP for a rite with Eastern influences). To this, I heartily subscribe.
I find much in harmony with your thought, as a Roman Catholic who attends a parish of the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter from the heartland of America with deep deep ties to the Missouri-Synod Lutherans on my mother's side and Irish Catholicism on my Fathers I have found an odd home with my family in the Ordinariate. There is much to be gained from many of the points you shared. I enjoyed Morello's book (and much of his broader writings) despite being a certain flavor of the traditionally minded, I safely could shelve his snipes at Hans Urs von Balthasar who I view as a boon to the Church, not a red herring, or worse, a co-heresiarch with Rahner and de Chardin. Morello does seem to be aware of the broader platonic points you make, as evident in his previous work The World as God's Iconic. Ironically, I think Morello will find further justification of many of his predispositions with thorough rationale (that is also aesthetically pleasing) in a more Balthasar-adjacent direction, particularly the thought of Ferdinand Ulrich (this is wonderfully conveyed in Rachel Coleman's recent book Matter as an Image of the Good). I can't wait to see what else Sebastian does. He is a creative and courageous thinker and seems to have conversations with many outside his own circles, which bodes well.
This is excellent, Father. Thank you for this. The broader reawakening of Neoplatonism is not only a Christian phenomenon but, in figures such as John Vervaeke, also a non-Christian one. Vervaeke, Professor of Psychology, Cognitive Science, and Buddhist Psychology at the University of Toronto, is interesting in that he explicitly states he has encountered Hermes, although I imagine he would describe this in Imaginal terms (through the lens of Henry Corbin). Regarding modernism as an egregore, that could be true of any philosophical or religious tradition. As C. S. Lewis alludes to in The Abolition of Man, we should pair religion and science against magic and technology: the first two seek reality, while the latter seek to conform reality to man’s will. Great stuff.
Thank you. I have had the pleasure of dining with John Vervaeke and giving him a copy of my book in preparation for his Japan tour, so I hope that he might make some use of it! I must admit that I had not picked up that sense in the Abolition of Man. I am perhaps less willing to make the binary between science and magic quite so firm.
That must have been awesome to chat with Vervaeke. As for the Grail, I will do so! However, in wishing to reject Abdal Hakim Murad’s suggestion, based on Eschenbach’s Parzival, that the Grail is the al-Ḥajar al-Aswad, the Black Stone in the Kaaba, I choose instead to believe that I receive it every Sunday at Mass. The Eucharist is the medicine of immortality; it transforms men into gods, right?
Great piece Father. Yes, most of the chapters in the book appeared as stand alone essays in The European Conservative mainly throughout 2022 and 2023.
I share your views overall. Morello is really astute in his diagnosis of the problem. 'Hex' is a great word, and that's what it is. That's what modernity is in a nutshell. We absolutely need to recover the pre-modern worldview that's open to the Mysteries in ways that we've forgotten or lost these past few centuries.
Your reservations are mine as well though, and I say that as a Roman Catholic and an avid listener of Morello's Gnostalgia podcast. The Roman Church doesn't hold all the aces here in either it's Tridentine or post-conciliar forms. This is where Anglo Catholicism can make a really valuable contribution, I feel. It's style of worship, at it's best, can feel both grounded in the particular and universal in its range and scope. Its aesthetic and overall ambience connect us back to a deep, fertile spirituality that predates the iconoclasm and standardisation of the Reformation and Counter Reformation eras.
A good springboard then for the shift in mindset required to break the hex!
Great review. I’m midway through the book and am finding it inspiring and frustrating in equal measure. Thanks for pinning some of these concerns down in such a clear way.
Glad to provide clarity.
I realise I'm very late to this party, but I have just discovered your work, Fr. Thomas (and purchased King Oswald's Heirs), and was wondering what specifically you think of the 1662 BCP Holy Communion liturgy? I know of some Anglican priests on the more catholic/Oxford wing who won't touch it, so I was intrigued to read, in this post, that "it is in such liturgies as the Book of Common Prayer that pre-modern Christian tradition specific to the English-speaking peoples is best preserved." Apologies if you've answered this elsewhere. For context, I am a revert to the Church of England after an unhappy stint in the Roman Catholic Church, and have recently reprised the 1662 BCP for the Daily Office. Kind regards - Oscar.
Bless you and thank you. Given the choice, I use the 1662 rite exclusively, but re-ordered according to the “interim” provisions which followed the deposed Prayer Book of 1928 - i.e. the Gloria goes back to its 1549 position and the Prayer of Oblation leads on directly from the canon, with reception of Communion in its historic place after the Lord’s Prayer (and the addition of an Agnus Dei). Some would say that this is no longer the 1662 rite at all! However, outside the Church of England, this constituted the majority Anglican use until the very recent liturgical developments which have pulled us in all sorts of directions. Even in its by-the-book 1662 form, as long as the Prayer of Oblation is not omitted (!), I maintain that the rite holds the Catholic integrity, even if the Reformers did not intend it to do so. The omission of invocation of the saints, especially Our Blessed Lady, is regrettable but not damning (and can be quietly inserted into the Prayers for the Church Militant at the commemoration of the departed). So, while I favour a very slightly spiced up variant of 1662 in public worship, even the bare bones are sufficient. Were it not so, as some of my A-C brethren opine, we are led to the unfortunate conclusion that for several hundred years, the Church of England did not really celebrate the Eucharist at all, or at best did so in a highly deficient manner. This contradicts the many examples of sanctity and occasionally even miracle which our rite has engendered. Perhaps it is better to speak of Books of Common Prayer in the plural, and of the Prayer Book tradition more widely rather than just the 1662, since the various approaches throughout the Communion have offered different liturgical emphases which, together, constitute a singular and admirable Anglican way of worship (see, e.g., the old Scottish BCP for a rite with Eastern influences). To this, I heartily subscribe.
I find much in harmony with your thought, as a Roman Catholic who attends a parish of the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter from the heartland of America with deep deep ties to the Missouri-Synod Lutherans on my mother's side and Irish Catholicism on my Fathers I have found an odd home with my family in the Ordinariate. There is much to be gained from many of the points you shared. I enjoyed Morello's book (and much of his broader writings) despite being a certain flavor of the traditionally minded, I safely could shelve his snipes at Hans Urs von Balthasar who I view as a boon to the Church, not a red herring, or worse, a co-heresiarch with Rahner and de Chardin. Morello does seem to be aware of the broader platonic points you make, as evident in his previous work The World as God's Iconic. Ironically, I think Morello will find further justification of many of his predispositions with thorough rationale (that is also aesthetically pleasing) in a more Balthasar-adjacent direction, particularly the thought of Ferdinand Ulrich (this is wonderfully conveyed in Rachel Coleman's recent book Matter as an Image of the Good). I can't wait to see what else Sebastian does. He is a creative and courageous thinker and seems to have conversations with many outside his own circles, which bodes well.
Easily one of the best books of read in years
This is excellent, Father. Thank you for this. The broader reawakening of Neoplatonism is not only a Christian phenomenon but, in figures such as John Vervaeke, also a non-Christian one. Vervaeke, Professor of Psychology, Cognitive Science, and Buddhist Psychology at the University of Toronto, is interesting in that he explicitly states he has encountered Hermes, although I imagine he would describe this in Imaginal terms (through the lens of Henry Corbin). Regarding modernism as an egregore, that could be true of any philosophical or religious tradition. As C. S. Lewis alludes to in The Abolition of Man, we should pair religion and science against magic and technology: the first two seek reality, while the latter seek to conform reality to man’s will. Great stuff.
Thank you. I have had the pleasure of dining with John Vervaeke and giving him a copy of my book in preparation for his Japan tour, so I hope that he might make some use of it! I must admit that I had not picked up that sense in the Abolition of Man. I am perhaps less willing to make the binary between science and magic quite so firm.
PS Let me know when you find the Grail.
That must have been awesome to chat with Vervaeke. As for the Grail, I will do so! However, in wishing to reject Abdal Hakim Murad’s suggestion, based on Eschenbach’s Parzival, that the Grail is the al-Ḥajar al-Aswad, the Black Stone in the Kaaba, I choose instead to believe that I receive it every Sunday at Mass. The Eucharist is the medicine of immortality; it transforms men into gods, right?