rclayton reviewed Why I am a Catholic by Garry Wills
Why I am a Catholic
You know that guy? Carl Sagan? That guy who said, “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe”? Garry Wills knows that guy, or at least that quote, because before he can tell you why he’s a Catholic, he has to invent the Church, starting from the debate over which of Peter or Paul should be the foundational rock.
In the Introduction to Why I am a Catholic, Wills discusses his previous book Papal Sin, which I haven’t read. He divides the responses to Papal Sin into two groups. The first, less thoughtful, group wanted to know why he remains a Catholic if he hates the church so much. The second, more thoughtful, group wanted to know how he found the wherewithal to remain a Catholic after Papal Sin. It is mainly the second group to whom Wills responds …
You know that guy? Carl Sagan? That guy who said, “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe”? Garry Wills knows that guy, or at least that quote, because before he can tell you why he’s a Catholic, he has to invent the Church, starting from the debate over which of Peter or Paul should be the foundational rock.
In the Introduction to Why I am a Catholic, Wills discusses his previous book Papal Sin, which I haven’t read. He divides the responses to Papal Sin into two groups. The first, less thoughtful, group wanted to know why he remains a Catholic if he hates the church so much. The second, more thoughtful, group wanted to know how he found the wherewithal to remain a Catholic after Papal Sin. It is mainly the second group to whom Wills responds in Why I am a Catholic. Keeping in mind a more accurate title, such as “Why I Remain a Catholic,” might be helpful in reading Why I am a Catholic, although I didn't find it so.
Why I am a Catholic has a triune structure. The first third covers Wills’ education and early career from St. Mary’s grade school to a National Review staff writer. The second third, roughly three-quarters of the book, is a selective history of the Catholic church from the Peter-Paul debate to Vatican II. The history can also be divided into thirds: before papal primacy, papal primacy and after, and Vatican II. The final third is a close reading and appreciation of the Apostles’ Creed.
The first part can be taken to answer the “why I am” question. And the answer is — to, um, paraphrase Richard Dawkins — religion is hereditary, you get it from your parents (The title of this part is “Born Catholic”). The novelty of Wills’ education may excite some interest in a comparative sense; otherwise occasional nuggets of interest pop up here and there. For example, Wills’ Chesterton-adjacent attempts to stick with his Jesuit training, or the casual mention that Renata Adler wrote for National Review.
The third part answers the “why I remain” question. And the answer is rooted somehow in his appreciation for the Apostles’ Creed. But in the introduction to this part Wills subtly changes the question to “what do I believe in if I remain a Catholic after Papal Sin?” The analysis Wills presents is the kind of thing he does well, but unlike previous efforts, the effort here is specialized and seems aimed at a specific audience.
The second, largest, part of the Why I am a Catholic is a history of the Church with an emphasis on the papacy up to Vatican II. Wills seems to have two objectives in this part. The first is to show the papacy had no primacy in the Church for a long time; in particular, it was not present at the beginning. The point seems to be the elaboration of some concerns that may have been raised in Papal Sin (again, a book I have not read). The other objective is to describe the unfair treatment some liberal Catholics received in matters around Vatican II. The point here seems unclear. On its face, doesn't seem to have much to do with why one is or remains a Catholic, nor does it seem to relate too deeply to the preceding Church history. Nevertheless, Wills’ writing is good enough to carry the skeptical along, assuming a sufficiently high tolerance to substantial diversions, or an interest in the subject.