He walked alone across the empty piazza of St Peter’s, wearing the simple “house cassock” that he favors, through the rain. He did not carry an umbrella. That image alone hit me with the seriousness of the prayer that Pope Francis was about to begin. To pray for the world as he invited the world to pray, on that spot where he says mass and speaks to tens of thousands, alone except for a single aid to help him up the steps. It is an image of these days we share, apart. But Pope Francis was not entirely alone in the rain. To the right, at the foot of one of the great columns of the facade, the icon of “Our Lady, Help of the Roman People,” protected from the rain in a plain plexiglass shrine. It almost never leaves the church of St Mary Major, dedicated in AD 434. Except for the time when Pope St Gregory the Great carried her through the streets of Rome in 593, praying for the end of a great plague, an event that earned the icon the title she has born for almost 1500 years since. To the left, a crucifix at the foot of the other column flanking the entrance. It survived a fire at the church of St Marcello on the Corso in 1519. Three years later, during a great plague it was carried from the rebuilt church through the streets of Rome to St Peter’s. The 600-year-old wooden figure of the crucified stood in the rain, unprotected.

It was between these two ancient images that Francis led the world in a simple prayer. The reading of the account of the Stilling of the Storm in Mark 4:36-41 (read by a lay person), words of reflection from the pope, walking through the rain again to pray before each of the two ancient images, kissing the feet of the crucified Christ.

And then into the portico, the “front porch” of St Peter’s, where the Eucharist was brought to a temporary altar, while the choir inside the church sang Parce, Domine, “Spare Lord, spare your people.” There Francis was joined in silent prayer by just a few of the residents of the Vatican.

And then, while St Peter’s rang every bell it had to let the people of Rome know what was happening, Francis took the monstrance containing the Eucharist in his hands, walked out to the steps, and blessed “Urbi et Orbi.” That blessing, of “The City and The World,” is reserved for two occasions, Christmas Day and Easter Day. It is normally delivered from the pope’s window in the Vatican apartments, using his raised hand. Francis chose this Friday of Lent to bless the world with the True Presence of Christ, from the steps of St Peter’s, in the rain.

There is an ancient tradition of the popes to visit a different church in Rome each day of Lent and the Easter Octave. They are known as Station Churches. Today’s designated church is San Eusebio, the church of the Roman martyr Eusebius. But I noticed on the papal calendar the designation today was changed to “Statio Orbi.” Today, the pope’s church was not San Eusebio, nor even San Pietro where he stood, it was the world. [Fr. Lou Meiman]

Comfortably Smug compiles ‘Don’t worry about coronavirus, worry about the flu’ greatest hits

Points to Ponder:

I think we need to seriously question whether as long as there are not serious limits on what government at every level can make someone do or not do with their own property if we actually have private ownership or not.

I mean yes some degree of regulation is necessary but we need to ask ourselves if we have not moved in some respects to the point to where the idea that there is really private property or not is not a mirage. If government can tell you that you cannot say build an addition to your property, what you can or cannot have on your property (within reason of course), if they can find creative ways to bilk more money out of you courtesy of various taxes, fees, etc., then is our property really owned and are we really free?

The whole issue needs to be revisited and serious curbs need to be put on what government at all levels can ask of you where your private property is concerned. [Circa January 20, 2020]

Guy Benson
@guypbenson

Via senior GOP aide, Schumer/Pelosi now pushing these demands amid pandemic-fueled economic collapse: 1) Unprecedented collective bargaining powers for unions 2) Increased fuel emissions standards for airlines 3) Expansion of wind and solar tax credits

10:18 AM · Mar 23, 2020

Seriously, this is how they treat a pandemic? As far as I am concerned, #DemocratsDelendaEst

On Rash Judgments:
(A Lenten Reflection -Part IV)

It helps in the Lenten season for folks to reflect more on themselves and their particular tendencies to better get a grasp of where improvement is needed spiritually as well as otherwise. The purpose of this reflection is to consider the subject of rash judgment. It was very briefly handled in a reflection from last year but this year, I want to go into the matter in more depth. For this is a problem not infrequent among people in general but it has particular currency among folks who consider themselves More Faithful Than Thou. Often these sorts of folks can be just as bad in this area (if not worse!) than many of those they would presume to lecture on matters of ethics and morality. This is the fourth and final part of the series. To start at the beginning, please go HERE. Without further ado...

We do not necessarily judge because we see or are conscious of something wrong. Rash judgment always presupposes something that is not clear, in spite of which we condemn another. It is not wrong to have doubts concerning a neighbour, but we ought to be very watchful lest even our doubts or suspicions be rash and hasty.

A malicious person seeing Jacob kiss Rachel at the well-side, {Gen xxix,11} or Rebecca accepting jewels from Eleazer, {Gen xxiv,22} a stranger, might have suspected them of levity, though falsely and unreasonably. If an action is in itself indifferent, it is a rash suspicion to imagine that it means evil, unless there is strong circumstantial evidence to prove such to be the case. And it is a rash judgment when we draw condemnatory inferences from an action which may be blameless.

Those who keep careful watch over their conscience are not often liable to form rash judgments, for just as when the clouds lower the bees make for the shelter of their hive, so really good people shrink back into themselves, and refuse to be mixed up with the clouds and fogs of their neighbour's questionable doings, and rather than meddle with others, they consecrate their energies on their own improvement and good resolutions.

No surer sign of an unprofitable life than when people give way to censoriousness and inquisitiveness into the lives of other men. Of course exception must be made as to those who are responsible for others, whether in family or public life;--to all such it becomes a matter of conscience to watch over the conduct of their fellows. Let them fulfil their duty lovingly, and let them also give heed to restrain themselves within the bounds of that duty.

"One From the Vault" Dept.

The following is a flashback to the archives of this website{1} from 2004...

[W]e need to start respecting the Constitution in reality and not just the abstract. I have a few quick proposals for going a significant way towards doing this:

---Abolish permanently the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.

---Abolish permanently the modern rider option in congressional legislation methodology and replace it with the approach I will go over next.

---Enact a law that inserts into every budget proposal and program a sunset provision. The points of sunset can be staggered to some extent so the entire wheel is not reinvented at once. However, in every presidential cycle all budget items or federal programs should have to come up for renewal at least once. My proposed point for this is of course the midterm elections. (That way, turnout will be higher and of course it will keep our officials honest.)

And if the representatives do not do the latter, then we the people need to start the Constitutional Amendment process. In fact, maybe we need to start it from the ground up here. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa January 20, 2004)]

Note:

{1} It bears noting in brief that there are a couple of viewpoint in the above flashback thread where I have changed my position in the sixteen odd years since that thread was published. (They are not however in the excerpted material above.)

Pradheep J. Shanker
@Neoavatara

1. I hate this in theory. 

2. I don't see any other option.

Quote Tweet

CNBC Now
@CNBCnow

Mnuchin says Trump administration is looking to get cash to Americans 'immediately' https://cnbc.com/2020/03/17/mnuchin-says-trump-administration-is-looking-to-get-cash-to-americans-immediately.html…

12:11 PM · Mar 17, 2020

On Rash Judgments:
(A Lenten Reflection -Part III)

It helps in the Lenten season for folks to reflect more on themselves and their particular tendencies to better get a grasp of where improvement is needed spiritually as well as otherwise. The purpose of this reflection is to consider the subject of rash judgment. It was very briefly handled in a reflection from last year but this year, I want to go into the matter in more depth. For this is a problem not infrequent among people in general but it has particular currency among folks who consider themselves More Faithful Than Thou. Often these sorts of folks can be just as bad in this area (if not worse!) than many of those they would presume to lecture on matters of ethics and morality. This is the third of a four part series. To start at the beginning, please go HERE. Without further ado...

If your affections are warm and tender, your judgment will not be harsh; if they are loving, your judgment will be the same. Holy Scripture offers us three striking illustrations. Isaac, when in the Land of Gerar, gave out that Rebecca was his sister, but when Abimelech saw their familiarity, he at once concluded that she was his wife. {Gen xxvi} A malicious mind would rather have supposed that there was some unlawful connection between them, but Abimelech took the most charitable view of the case that was possible. And so ought we always to judge our neighbour as charitably as may be; and if his actions are many-sided, we should accept the best.

Again, when S. Joseph found that the Blessed Virgin was with child, {S. Matthew i} knowing her to be pure and holy, he could not believe that there was any sin in her, and he left all judgment to God, although there was strong presumptive evidence on which to condemn her. And the Holy Spirit speaks of S. Joseph as "a just man." When a just man cannot see any excuse for what is done by a person in whose general worth he believes, he still refrains from judging him, and leaves all to God's Judgment.

Again, our Crucified Saviour, while He could not wholly ignore the sin of those who Crucified Him, yet made what excuse He might for them, pleading their ignorance. (8) And so when we cannot find any excuse for sin, let us at least claim what compassion we may for it, and impute it to the least damaging motives we can find, as ignorance or infirmity.

Are we never, then, to judge our neighbour? you ask. Never, my child. It is God Who judges criminals brought before a court of law. He uses magistrates to convey His sentence to us; they are His interpreters, and have only to proclaim His law. If they go beyond this, and are led by their own passions, then they do themselves judge, and for so doing they will be judged. It is forbidden to all men alike, as men, to judge one another.

To Be Continued...

On Rash Judgments:
(A Lenten Reflection -Part II)

It helps in the Lenten season for folks to reflect more on themselves and their particular tendencies to better get a grasp of where improvement is needed spiritually as well as otherwise. The purpose of this reflection is to consider the subject of rash judgment. It was very briefly handled in a reflection from last year but this year, I want to go into the matter in more depth. For this is a problem not infrequent among people in general but it has particular currency among folks who consider themselves More Faithful Than Thou. Often these sorts of folks can be just as bad in this area (if not worse!) than many of those they would presume to lecture on matters of ethics and morality. This is the second of a four part series. To start at the beginning, please go HERE. Without further ado...

[Some hearts] there are who are guilty of rash judgments less out of a bitter spirit than from pride, supposing to exalt their own credit by disparaging that of others. These are self-sufficient, presumptuous people, who stand so high in their own conceit that they despise all else as mean and worthless. It was the foolish Pharisee who said, "I am not as other men are." {S. Luke xviii,11}

Others, again, have not quite such overt pride, but rather a lurking little satisfaction in beholding what is wrong in others, in order to appreciate more fully what they believe to be their own superiority. This satisfaction is so well concealed, so nearly imperceptible, that it requires a clear sight to discover it, and those who experience it need that it be pointed out to them.

Some there are who seek to excuse and justify themselves to their own conscience, by assuming readily that others are guilty of the same faults, or as great ones, vainly imagining that the sin becomes less culpable when shared by many.

Others, again, give way to rash judgments merely because they take pleasure in a philosophic analysis and dissection of their neighbours' characters; and if by ill luck they chance now and then to be right, their presumption and love of criticism strengthens almost incurably.

Then there are people whose judgment is solely formed by inclination; who always think well of those they like, and ill of those they dislike. To this, however, there is one rare exception, which nevertheless we do sometimes meet, when an excessive love provokes a false judgment concerning its object; the hideous result of a diseased, faulty, restless affection, which is in fact jealousy; an evil passion capable, as everybody knows, of condemning others of perfidy and adultery upon the most trivial and fanciful ground. In like manner, fear, ambition, and other moral infirmities often tend largely to produce suspicion and rash judgments.

What remedy can we apply? They who drink the juice of the Ethiopian herb Ophiusa imagine that they see serpents and horrors everywhere; and those who drink deep of pride, envy, ambition, hatred, will see harm and shame in every one they look upon. The first can only be cured by drinking palm wine, and so I say of these latter,--Drink freely of the sacred wine of love, and it will cure you of the evil tempers which lead you to these perverse judgments. So far from seeking out that which is evil, Love dreads meeting with it, and when such meeting is unavoidable, she shuts her eyes at the first symptom, and then in her holy simplicity she questions whether it were not merely a fantastic shadow which crossed her path rather than sin itself.

Or if Love is forced to recognise the fact, she turns aside hastily, and strives to forget what she has seen. Of a truth, Love is the great healer of all ills, and of this above the rest. Everything looks yellow to a man that has the jaundice; and it is said that the only cure is through the soles of the feet. Most assuredly the sin of rash judgments is a spiritual jaundice, which makes everything look amiss to those who have it; and he who would be cured of this malady must not be content with applying remedies to his eyes or his intellect, he must attack it through the affections, which are as the soul's feet.

To Be Continued...

Points to Ponder:

Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping tom to install your window blinds. [John Perry Barlow]

On Rash Judgments:
(A Lenten Reflection -Part I)

It helps in the Lenten season for folks to reflect more on themselves and their particular tendencies to better get a grasp of where improvement is needed spiritually as well as otherwise. The purpose of this reflection is to consider the subject of rash judgment. It was very briefly handled in a reflection from last year but this year, I want to go into the matter in more depth. For this is a problem not infrequent among people in general but it has particular currency among folks who consider themselves More Faithful Than Thou. Often these sorts of folks can be just as bad in this area (if not worse!) than many of those they would presume to lecture on matters of ethics and morality. This is the first of a four part series. Without further ado...

Judge not, and ye shall not be judged," said the Saviour of our souls; "condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:" {S. Luke vi,37} and the Apostle S. Paul, "Judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, Who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts." {1 Cor. iv,5}

Of a truth, hasty judgments are most displeasing to God, and men's judgments are hasty, because we are not judges one of another, and by judging we usurp our Lord's own office. Man's judgment is hasty, because the chief malice of sin lies in the intention and counsel of the heart, which is shrouded in darkness to us.

Moreover, man's judgments are hasty, because each one has enough to do in judging himself, without undertaking to judge his neighbour. If we would not be judged, it behoves us alike not to judge others, and to judge ourselves. Our Lord forbids the one, His Apostle enjoins the other, saying, "If we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged." {1 Cor. xi,31} But alas! for the most part we precisely reverse these precepts, judging our neighbour, which is forbidden on all sides, while rarely judging ourselves, as we are told to do.

We must proceed to rectify rash judgments, according to their cause. Some hearts there are so bitter and harsh by nature, that everything turns bitter under their touch; men who, in the Prophet's words, "turn judgment to wormwood, and leave off righteousness in the earth." {Amos v,7} Such as these greatly need to be dealt with by some wise spiritual physician, for this bitterness being natural to them, it is hard to conquer; and although it be rather an imperfection than a sin, still it is very dangerous, because it gives rise to and fosters rash judgments and slander within the heart.

To Be Continued...

Briefly...

With the next post being one of Lenten Reflections, I have decided to debut at that time a Lenten Reflections seasonal subtag and apply it to both future as well as past posts specifically designated as such on this site.

Miscellaneous Musings on Defining "Normalcy":

This was posted to social media yesterday and reposted here except for some material that was moved to footnotes. Without further ado...

So Clarence Oveur...err...Joe Biden is going to run on a campaign of "returning to normalcy." It is not an original idea as Warren G. Harding ran a "return to normalcy" campaign in 1920 after eight years of Woodrow Wilson and the drama and fatigue of The Great War. Harding won big that year actually. But what is "normalcy" in the modern environment?

For example, oil prices are falling big, gas prices continue to fall as a result, Trump's policies{1} played a definite role in that, and the US is more energy independent than at any time since the mid twentieth century. Is "normalcy" a return to Obamas policies here and once again due to overregulation, a returning of the US to being under the thumb of OPEC and the other Middle East cartels?

Also, for all the talk about Trump being a dangerous trigger happy and unstable warmonger, he has turned out to be the most anti-interventionist president since Coolidge militarily. Is a "return to normalcy" a return to regular military interventions around the globe?

Consider as well that the economy is overall doing the best it has been in about twenty years and wages on the lower end are rising for the first time since Monica was under Bill's desk. Is a "return to normalcy" a return to a sinking or tepid at best economy which flattens those trying to rise from the bottom?

For a variety of reasons, the problems with unchecked or lax enforcement of immigration laws in this country have declined and we have other countries{2} policing our mutual borders better which has fixed some of the prior problems of recent decades in this area. It would be foolish to pretend that no Trump policies has a role in this. So, is a "return to normalcy" a reversal of Trump's policies here and a return to the Obama/Bush 43/Clinton failures in this area?

Finally, there is as a result of Trump's tremendous originalist judicial appointments a greater judicial restraint at all levels of the legal system than we have seen in decades. Is a "return to normalcy" a return to the days of judicial activism and the appointment of activist justices who invent rather than apply the law?

Joe Biden plans to campaign on "a return to normalcy." It therefore is only appropriate that he be pressed on this point to explain what he means by that and if the supposed "national nightmare" we are supposedly living through right now includes any of the examples noted above.

Notes:

{1} Including reversing a number of Obama's executive actions that hampered exploration, drilling, and development, etc.

{2} Such as Mexico.

Points to Ponder:

Obedience has a wet nurse, true humility, and the soul is as obedient as she is humble, and as humble as she is obedient. This humility is also charity’s governess and wet nurse, and she nurtures the virtue of obedience with the very same milk. The garment this nurse gives the soul is self-abasement, the clothing of disgrace and mockery and abuse, the choice of my (God the Father’s) pleasure over her own. In whom will you find all this? In the gentle Christ Jesus, my only-begotten Son. [St. Catherine of Siena: From Her Dialogues]

On Clarifying and Retracting Some Prior Statements on the Magisterium:

(From My Essays and Other Web Writings)

I originally planned to write an expository musing consisting of clarifications and retractions of prior statements on the magisterium. The problem is, the time it would take to sift every piece I have written over the past twenty odd years in various mediums would make such an effort both tedious and counterproductive. I can think of more productive things to do with my time.

However, it seems appropriate to still say something about the fact that there will be some undeniable divergences from time to time from things I have written in the past on this subject. (With what was covered in the detailed exposition on the magisterium which was published on Ash Wednesday of this year.{1}) The nature of development is one reason as greater understanding of a subject inexorably involves a greater precision in explication. Another is a convergence of events and circumstances as well as a perceived need that was more real today than in years past. Certainly the need for a different direction on these matters is one that I explained in an email circular to many folks involved in Catholic apologetics many moons ago{2} in the following words:

Considering that religious submission to all non-definitive teaching of the ordinary magisterium is required under the new Profession of Faith, it is high time that Catholic apologists rethink how they approach the subject of potential "errors" in the magisterium at any level. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 11, 2003) as originally published in an Email Correspondence (circa October 2002)]

That is a position I hold in substance to this day. One difference perhaps in my view now versus my view then is I have become aware of greater shadings in statements by the pope and others who participate in his authority than I possessed at that time. And while I apparently planned for some time on writing on the subject of the ordinary magisterium{3}; at the same time, I cannot remember having that intention firmly in mind until recently.{4} But the value of site archives is they can remind one of what they may have forgotten.{5} The reasons this endeavour likely got derailed are undoubtedly many but truthfully, I am sure some degree of Providence was involved. I had studied this matter a lot in years past. However, it is clear to these eyes as I perused some older writings on this subject{6} that I was not ready then to handle it with the degree of completeness and nuance that a subject such as this would require.

Nonetheless, the project which has been to varying degrees in my conscious mind to do since I returned to publishing material on this website{7} is now completed. I have decided against attempting a St. Augustine style list of Retractions on all magisterium related subject matter in this archive and elsewhere from years past. Instead, I have decided to publish this brief entry and stipulate that with the recent publication of the magisterium project, any past statements I have made on that subject on this site or anywhere else that in any way contradicts what was recently published can be considered to the extent there is a genuine contradiction thereby obrogated.

Let this posting suffice to deal with any clarifications or retractions necessary on this subject from any past writing of mine in any medium whatsoever in perpetuity.


Notes:

{1} Which in a certain sense distills the subject down and covers it in a detail and with a systemization that I never remotely approached before.

{2} Yes, much as I am loathe to admit it nowadays, there was a time I was really involved in apologetics and actually had a positive outlook on that endeavour. To say that my view is nearly 180 degrees different now than it was back in the late 1990s-early 2000s is no exaggeration as I have long had a far more jaded view of apologetics and those who spend an inordinate amount of time in that realm than I once did.

{3} "The part about the 'next planned essay' is no longer true - as the long planned essay on the ordinary magisterium has again been shelved in favour of working on another long-planned essay first." [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 1, 2003) as Originally Published to a Discussion Forum (circa April 15, 2003)]

{4} Pinpointing the precise moment that my interest in this subject was rekindled is difficult. I remember discussing it privately during my time with WherePeterIs which formally spanned June 16, 2018 to August 6, 2018. But the genesis of the aforementioned rekindling was spawned by two events of 2017: the drafting of three lengthy responses to the Correctio which though published in April of 2019 were first composed in first draft form during the month of October in 2017. (As well as a revisiting of the subject of the death penalty published in late October of 2017.)

{5} This is another reason why preserving one's archives is a good idea -even if on occasion some of the material can make one wince when reading it later on. Another is writing helps the memory and for reasons I have explained before, my memory of things in the mid 2001-late 2003 period is less reliable than of the time periods prior to and subsequent to that time range.

{6} With the idea of utilizing where feasible past writings on this subject to avoid completely reinventing the wheel.

{7} See footnote four.

On the Liturgy:
(A Lenten Reflection)

What you get out of the liturgy is the privilege of glorifying almighty God. If you think it's about you, stay at home. It's not about you. It is for you, but it's not about you.

One of the great problems today, especially among some of the younger generations, is that they think that salvation history is their own autobiography. They think they're the center of the universe. In John 3, when John the Baptist is asked whether Jesus is the Messiah, John says quite clearly that Jesus is the important one: 'He must increase, I must decrease.'

He must increase, I must decrease. Everybody needs to hear that. It's not about me, it's not about you. It's about something infinitely more important than us. [Fr. Robert Taft SJ]

Though I published it in early January as an intended project linked to the detailed expository musing finally published on Ash Wednesday{1}, it seems appropriate now to recall in a followup posting a companion piece of sorts on the subject of magisterial interpretation. So without further ado...

On Magisterial Interpretation (circa January 4, 2020)

Also, there are now a few undeniable incongruities between some statements I have made in the past{2} on the subject matter published on Ash Wednesday.{3} I will tend to that matter soon with a posting to clarify and/or retract certain previous statements where applicable.

Notes:

{1} On the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, Obedience, and the Requirements of Faithful Catholics (circa February 26, 2020)

{2} Either in site postings to Rerum Novarum or other projects, web essays in the past, or stuff posted to social media or message board forums in years past.

{3} See footnote one.

Briefly...

Delegate Count as of 10:55am 3/6/20:

Biden: 637
Sanders: 559
Warren: 64
Bloomberg: 60
Buttigieg: 26
Klobuchar: 7
Gabbard: 2

Though I have done eight candidate updates so far in 2020, because of the Super Tuesday results, this feature will be discontinued. It is clear now that there are only two horses left in the Democratic primary race and they are Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders. So henceforth, the others will not be mentioned on this site except in delegate counts unless one of them by some miracle is the nominee in Milwaukee.

Today would have been the 79th birthday of my father Richard Dunn McElhinney. If readers could offer some prayers for the eternal repose of his soul, I would appreciate it. For those who do not believe in this ancient custom, then prayers for my mother (who still has difficulties on anniversaries such as this) and the rest of the family would be appreciated.



Eternal rest grant unto his soul oh Lord and may thy perpetual light shine upon him...May his soul and all the souls of the faithfully departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Apmen.