leithart and john paul II

peter leithart is a fine writer. I would characterize his style as terse and aphoristic. insightful would be the way to characterize his written content. in his book 'against christianity', rarely does he elaborate on his views with copious references and counter-referenced footnotes. though insightful and thought-provoking his ideas remain. take as an example this out-take from 'against the sacraments':

Romans normally excluded children from the dinner table until the age of fifteen or sixteen, at which age boys received the /toga virilis/ that marked their entrance to manhood. Family dinner as we know it was a Christian invention, not some "natural" form of family life. The family dinner is a reflection of the eucharistic meal, the meal that welcomed all members of Christ to the table.
Opposition to communion of children is pagan and seeks to reverse the revolutionary table fellowship established by the Church. It is an attempt to return to Egypt.

jenny used this a month or three ago to give her readers a feel for his brilliance. it is hard to know that leithart is outside the church. especially when he holds such pure and unstained views on the church and the sacraments. leithart is must read material: i think even victoria might like reading his sparse and succinct style despite it being non-fiction.

i put seraphim's pope john paul II up because i loved the man and most of what he stood for; he never wavered. indeed, this is incredibly rare to find in our present day rulers. once i took this test and found myself almost identical to john paul II.