A Few Points to Note On Elections Special and Otherwise...

I am seeing the usual sorts try to put on the election results whatever spin they feel helps their agenda so let us clear a few things up right now:

1) There is no such thing as a moral victory in elections, only winning and losing. So those who love, hate, or fall somewhere in between on the Trump scale, trying to spin a given election to fit the #narrative you want is what hacks do. A win is a win whether its by 50 votes or 50,000 votes. PERIOD.

2) #Trumpbots, when you crow about a win in a district that favours the party in question, that shows insecurity on your part. Stop it.

3) The party out of power usually wins more seats than not. For that reason, #Resistbots and #NeverTrumpbots need to stop acting as if a win of any given seat or two is necessarily indicative of anything larger on the horizon. Again, the party out of power usually wins more seats than not in midterm environs.

4) Special elections are always unique animals, particularly congressional races. I have seen folks who hate Trump spinning OH-12 as if its a disaster because the GOP candidate did not win by a requisite margin. Likewise, I have seen Trump supporters acting as if winning OH-12 means there is no so-called "Blue Wave" coming and its all #MAGA as far as the eye can see. Its all about feeding a chosen narrative and not seeking to approach these things objectively. I understand there is some elation to get from a win or frustration from a loss but again, special elections are rarely if ever indicative of how the bigger fall elections will go so stop pretending they are on all sides.

Points to Ponder:

Where is it written that one cannot criticize others (even seriously at times) without detesting them as people??? [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 21, 2006)]

On My Resignation From Where Peter Is, General Concerns For The State Of Public Discourse There and Elsewhere, Etc.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)

To begin with, this situation has been on my mind since nearly the very beginning of my involvement at Where Peter Is. And as I sketched some of this out in my introduction column at Where Peter Is (WPI), I will use what I said there to explain why I have decided to with this posting formalize my decision concretely at the present time. To wit:

Many years ago, I was involved in apologetics but I have been distancing myself from that for about fifteen years now. Fundamentally this was due to the limitations involved in mere apologetics. However, there was also the factor of too many involved in that endeavour revealing a disturbing degree of intellectual dependence on the Church’s magisterium to try and navigate complex subject matter. There is also an equally disturbing tendency of not a few folks to try and dogmatically impose an artificial uniformity onto others which creates unnecessary divisions. This is hardly in line with “the common saying, expressed in various ways and attributed to various authors…recalled with approval: in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity” (Pope St. John XXIII: Encyclical Letter Ad Petri Cathedram); ergo, I want nothing to do with that crowd.{1}

What I outlined above are areas that I believe should be well understood by all but indeed they are not. Even among those who can cite the relevant texts, understanding is usually lacking because merely citing a text does not mean its actually understood very well. Much as the Bible is used as a prooftext-fest for not a few of our brethren (separated and otherwise) against one another, the same is the case with magisterial interventions by Catholics. I begin seeing very early on these same problems in the manner whereby WPI was operating. But in keeping with the title of the column{2}, I sought to explain the alternative which is what I intended to focus on after getting my feet wet with a few columns first. I made reference in the inaugural column to both general areas of interest{3} as well as problems I had seen over the years{4} both methodological{5} as well as attitudinal{6} in the various Catholic spheres I had inhabited over the past twenty years. It was hoped that touching on these matters at the get-go could help alert site participants to look for them in their own writings and attitudes but this does not appear to be the case. Therefore, my involvement even as a silent lurker would appear to give a tacit approval to the very same problems I had outlined in the inaugural column.

There is also the issue of the general thrust of the way the site had been operating. Even apart from some of the specific columns that I found profoundly problematical{7} is the general atmosphere as presented on the site and on the message thread. I made my good friend Pete Vere aware of some of these matters very early on in an email communication:

I have been doing a lot of pondering on this writing relationship with the group page Where Peter Is (WPI). When I came aboard, it looked very promising. Since that time, I have only seen things that lessen my motivation for being involved there. I do not like the idea of having to wait for many days for simple columns to post. When I joined that was not an issue but over the past week it has become one. I also do not like basically being told what to write about or when to publish something.

I support Pope Francis but that does not mean I support every sentence that comes unformed from his mouth -particularly when it is in areas that fall outside of his divinely vested competence. However, I also have serious problems with the attitude of so many who take issue in the latter areas in the manner they far too frequently do so. And the free passes folks on all sides give to their chosen comrades to engage in detraction, calumny, and general belittling of chosen "outcasts" while excoriating "the other side" for the same offenses: this too does not meet with my favour.

Also, I am not even remotely interested in the political-themed stuff I am seeing with greater frequency on the group messenger. It is too similar to what I see in virtually every other sphere and as I am reducing significantly my involvement in that stuff in other places, I am hardly going to take on more of it [here]...

It appears that the aim of WPI is to act as a general apologetics site for all things Pope Francis. However, I have no interest in general apologetics whatsoever. It is too simplistic and too divisive. I went over this in the inaugural column so my stance on this should not be surprising. I was also told in a more veiled way that material needs to be shaped for a pro-Francis audience or something like that. I operate under the assumption that the dialogue that Pope Francis and his predecessors have spoke of going back explicitly to the pontificate of Pope Paul VI is one they take seriously and furthermore, that they want Catholics to take part in. I do not see how that can be the case if the goal is just to create an echo chamber of nodding yesfolk who take turns complaining about what the yesfolk of other echo chambers say and vice versa.

This is a serious problem today: too many echo chambers and far too few who try to bridge these chasms in a productive fashion. That is what I saw myself doing as a member of WPI. I am interested in helping build bridges, not helping destroy them. There is a reason I started the inaugural column with that passage from Fr. Taft. I am not interested in creating unnecessary conflict but instead to help find ways to resolve it. It does not seem to me that WPI and I in that respect are on the same page and the goal of members of the former seem to be the antithesis of what I aim to do.{8}

For his own reasons, Pete has decided to part ways with WPI as well as the rest of public social media. Apart from what I thought WPI could be as enunciated in my inaugural column, I got involved in the project to collaborate with an old friend as we used to in the old days when we wrote web content as well as columns for periodical publications. We may be able to resume collaboration in the coming year but obviously that will not be happening at WPI. I therefore for the reasons specified above formally resign from Where Peter Is as of this column's publication and its notation on the messenger thread of its site participants. I thank them for the original opportunity but in the end, it simply is not the right fit for me; therefore, I wish them well and bid them adieu.


“The world is full of people who are bridge destroyers. They want to destroy the bridges that already exist. That’s not me.” [Rt. Rev. Archimandrite Fr. Robert F. Taft, SJ]

Notes:

{1} Excerpt from Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness (circa June 16, 2018)

{2} Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness

{3} Among the ecclesial areas I have done a fair amount of study in are the areas not often familiar to apologists or indeed many theologians. For example, what is involved in the principles of authentic dialogue? (It is one thing to throw the term around and another to actually understand what it involves!) What is and is not involved in a magisterial intervention and what is and is not considered (properly speaking) “magisterial”? What are the general norms of theological interpretation involved in properly understanding the theological qualifications of magisterial interventions? What are the situations where someone can take issue with magisterial interventions and the recognized methodology thereof? And furthermore, what sort of spiritual dispositions should be involved in all such endeavours? These are areas worth delving into... [Excerpt from Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness (circa June 16, 2018)]

{4} I have observed over the years that there is a greater frequency of coarseness in discourse in society generally speaking. What is even more disappointing is that I see it just as prominent among Catholics who should know better. To quote the words of a soon-to-be canonized saint, “[i]t would indeed be a disgrace if our dialogue were marked by arrogance, the use of bared words or offensive bitterness” (Bl. Pope Paul VI: Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam Suam). While I will at times bluntly call out such things when I see them, that is as a rule not how I have preferred over the years to go about these or other matters. [Excerpt from Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness (circa June 16, 2018)]

{5} See the material from footnote one.

{6} I have also seen a growing coarseness in discourse among Catholics with the proliferation of labels intended to stigmatize others. [Excerpt from Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness (circa June 16, 2018)]

I unfortunately in following the private messaging thread of WPI seen this sort of thing proliferate there as well as some of it creep onto the site itself.

{7} It is not my interest to go into this matter in any depth. Suffice to say, I hope bringing this matter to the attention of others on the site will make them more attuned to what they write and the manner in which it is presented in the future.

{8} Excerpts from an Email Correspondence (circa June 24, 2018)

Points to Ponder:
(This is the conclusion of the series started HERE. Without further ado...)

Love your dad because he’s your father, because he made you, because he thinks for himself, and most of all because he is a person. Have the strength to doubt and question what you believe as easily as you’re so quick to doubt his beliefs. Live with a truly open mind — the kind of open mind that even questions the idea of an open mind. Don’t feel the need to always pick a side. And if you do pick a side, pick the side of love. It remains our only real hope for survival and has more power to save us than any other belief we could ever cling to. [Andrew W.K. (circa August 6, 2014)]

Points to Ponder:

I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value. [Alexander Hamilton]

Briefly...

Though this website resumed activity last year, nothing was done about the state of the site template in a significant manner.{1} As a result, there was a lot of fat in the side margins from years past of projects previously involved in, old webrolls which were no longer active, duplicate prior post postings, and more or less other general and assorted stuff that was expired or otherwise simply not germane anymore. I have now trimmed things down a lot so the side margin is far less encumbering and much easier to read.

Note:

{1} I did make some changes to the template last year but nothing that affected the side margin and addressed the lingering issues there.

Points to Ponder:
(This is a continuation of the series started HERE. Without further ado...)

But the truth is, the world has always been and always will be on the brink of destruction. And what keeps it from actually imploding is our love for life and our deep-seeded desire not to die. Our love for our own life is inextricably connected to our love of all life and the miracle of this phenomenon we call “the world.” We must give all of ourselves credit every day for keeping things going. It’s an incredible achievement to exist at all.

So we must protect and respect each other, no matter how hard it feels. No matter how wrong someone else may seem to us, they are still human. No matter how bad someone may appear, they are truly no worse than us. Our beliefs and behavior don’t make us fundamentally better than others, no matter how satisfying it is to believe otherwise. We must be tireless in our efforts to see things from the point of view we most disagree with. We must make endless efforts to try and understand the people we least relate to. And we must at all times force ourselves to love the people we dislike the most. Not because it’s nice or because they deserve it, but because our own sanity and survival depends on it. And if we do find ourselves pushed into a corner where we must kill others in order to survive, we must fully accept that we are killing people just as fully human as ourselves, and not some evil abstract creatures. [Andrew W.K. (circa August 6, 2014)]

To be continued...

Briefly...

Today concluded the fiftieth anniversary of a trilogy of cartoons that involved Franklin's first appearances in the comic strip Peanuts. That this sort of thing would have ever been controversial shows us how far we have come. A Twitter comment on the third strip saying "this wounds my heart with its care, its love, its gentle sadness, and the fact that it feels just as important today as it did fifty years ago" tells us how far we still have to go...

Briefly...

Tomorrow starts August and the time of year where not a few Catholic sorts who live in a fantasyland rather than reality will publicly engage in a masturbatory ritual of anachronistically virtue signalling their ignorance about certain long ago war events as a way of trying to appear More Virtuous Than Thou.

Hopefully we see less of it this year for a change...

Points to Ponder:
(This is a continuation of the series started HERE. Without further ado...)

At its best, politics is able to organize extremely complex world views into manageable and communicable systems so they can be grappled with and studied abstractly. But even the most noble efforts to organize the world are essentially futile. The best we can usually achieve is a crude and messy map of life from one particular vantage point, featuring a few grids, bullet points, and sketches of its various aspects and landmarks. Anything as infinitely complex as life, reality, and the human experience can never be summed up or organized in a definitive system, especially one based on “left or right,” “A or B,” “us or them.” This is the fatal flaw of binary thinking in general. However, this flaw isn’t just ignored, it’s also embraced, amplified, and deliberately used as a weapon on the very people who think it’s benefiting their way of thinking.

Human beings crave order and simplicity. We cling to the hope that some day, if we really refine our world view and beliefs, we can actually find the fully correct way to think — the absolute truth and final side to stand on. People and systems craving power take advantage of this desire and pit us against each other using a “this or that” mentality. The point is to create unrest, disagreement, resentment, and anger — a population constantly at war with itself, each side deeply believing that the other is not just wrong, but also a sincere threat to their very way of life and survival. This creates constant anxiety and distraction — the perfect conditions for oppression. The goal of this sort of politics is to keep people held down and mesmerized by a persistent parade of seemingly life-or-death debates, each one worth all of our emotional energy and primal passion...[Andrew W.K. (circa August 6, 2014)]

To be continued...

RBe
@RBPundit

Protip: Anyone arguing in support of "Medicare for All" is telling you, in no uncertain terms, that they have no idea how the real world works.
9:42 AM · Jul 30, 2018

Some take issue with the claim that no one who thinks there is universal health care anywhere knows how the real world works so to clarify...

Where America is not subsidizing the defense of other nations, the answer is no.

There are some nations which who are skimping on their nations defense budgets as well as their NATO obligations who do but even in those glorified welfare cases, their systems are either in financial dire straits or are going bankrupt.


Hopefully this clarification helps...

Points to Ponder:
(This is a continuation of the series started HERE. Without further ado...)

When we lump people into groups, quickly label them, and assume we know everything about them and their life based on a perceived world view, how they look, where they come from, etc., we are not behaving as full human beings. When we truly believe that some people are monsters, that they fundamentally are less human than we are, and that they deserve to have less than we do, we ourselves become the monsters. When we allow our emotions to be hypnotized by the excitement of petty bickering about seemingly important topics, we drift further and further away from the fragile and crucial human bond holding everything together. When we anticipate with ferocious glee the next chance we have to prove someone “wrong” and ourselves “right,” all the while disregarding the vast complexity of almost every subject — not to mention the universe as a whole — we are reducing the beauty and magic of life to a “side” or a “type,” or worst of all, an “answer.” This is the power of politics at it’s most sinister... [Andrew W.K. (circa August 6, 2014)]

To be continued...

EDITORIAL: Oh, the irony: Democrats in deep blue states sue to protect the rich

In defense of Trump’s foreign policy

Briefly...

I am starting to think that between #AlwaysTrump and #NeverTrump that I am becoming more annoyed with the latter than the former these days.

Trump's Art Of The (Trade) Deal: U.S.-EU Trade War Averted — For Now

I discovered last night that an old friend had passed away a few years back and I was unaware of it. Rest in Peace F. John Loughnan and thank you for your help with project editing and other matters in years gone by.

You will be remembered often in prayer.

Points to Ponder:
(This is a continuation of the series started HERE. Without further ado...)

Go back and read the opening sentences of your letter. Read them again. Then read the rest of your letter. Then read it again. Try to find a single instance where you referred to your dad as a human being, a person, or a man. There isn’t one. You’ve reduced your father — the person who created you — to a set of beliefs and political views and how it relates to you. And you don’t consider your dad a person of his own standing — he’s just “your dad.” You’ve also reduced yourself to a set of opposing views, and reduced your relationship with him to a fight between the two. The humanity has been reduced to nothingness and all that’s left in its place is an argument that can never really be won. And even if one side did win, it probably wouldn’t satisfy the deeper desire to be in a state of inflamed passionate conflict.

The world isn’t being destroyed by democrats or republicans, red or blue, liberal or conservative, religious or atheist — the world is being destroyed by one side believing the other side is destroying the world. The world is being hurt and damaged by one group of people believing they’re truly better people than the others who think differently. The world officially ends when we let our beliefs conquer love. We must not let this happen... [Andrew W.K. (circa August 6, 2014)]

To be continued...

I await the usual "its not real socialism/communism" claims from the usual gang of idiots on this kind of stuff...

Ortega’s Reign of Terror

'Welcome to hell.' Former Venezuelan political prisoner says he was tortured in jail

Briefly...

Just as Finkle is Einhorn (and Einhorn is Finkle), Podesta is Manafort. Ergo, the idea of giving immunity to Tony Podesta of all people fundamentally undermines the idea that the Muller investigation is anything resembling an honest and impartial investigation as opposed to a partisan fishing expedition and witch hunt.

"One From the Vault" Dept.

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

Most who call themselves "traditionalists" make the mistake of not handling problematical issues with a proper Catholic way. Hence, they gripe about Assisi and incidents like that forgetting that it is contrary to the dogma of the papal supremacy to refuse assent to the Apostolic See not only in matters of faith and morals but also in matters which concern the Church's general good as well as her rights and discipline.

Catholic dogma is clear that the pope has full authority in the areas of "feeding" (teaching), ruling (directives or disciplines), but also in "guiding" the Church. These distinctions were spelled out by Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura: an encyclical that "trads" like to prooftext but obviously have not read very carefully...

That same pope condemned those who would appeal to the press or media outlets against a judgment or directive of the Holy See...

Returning to the subject of Quanta Cura and the threefold division it makes (feeding, ruling, and guiding), the trads usually toe the line with the first one and sometimes with the second one. But even people...appear to me to be falling short of the third one which deals with the Pope's ability to set the agenda for how the Church is to handle issues in a given epoch of time...

In closing, I agree with you that the concern that animates their positions is important. However, a lot of it is simply a lack of spiritual maturity on their side -something I made note of in many of my writings... [Excerpts from Rerum Novarum (circa May 7, 2004)]

Briefly...

I pointed out to some folks on Twitter that if the standard is no president can appoint a SCOTUS nominee when under federal investigation that Stephen Breyer (appointed after Attorney General Janet Reno opened an investigation into Whitewater in 1994) needs to resign.

Somehow I doubt these "principled" folks are going to demand that now which tells us all we need to know about them!

Briefly on an Upcoming Points to Ponder Series:

I came across a Q and A from The Village Voice that I contemplated posting in its entirety as a Points to Ponder installment but then realized if I did that, so much of what it would contain would be lost due to the volume of the text. For that reason, I will over the next month or so at various intervals post a small part of the piece for reflection by both you the reader as well as for your humble servant at Rerum Novarum for we can all use some material for pondering from time to time to both stimulate the mind's activation as well as exhort us to be better people. I will start the process in this posting by quoting in full the letter that served as the impetus for the response to follow in the series. Without further ado...

Hi Andrew,

I’m writing because I just can’t deal with my father anymore. He’s a 65-year-old super right-wing conservative who has basically turned into a total asshole intent on ruining our relationship and our planet with his politics. I’m more or less a liberal democrat with very progressive values and I know that people like my dad are going to destroy us all. I don’t have any good times with him anymore. All we do is argue. When I try to spend time with him without talking politics or discussing any current events, there’s still an underlying tension that makes it really uncomfortable. Don’t get me wrong, I love him no matter what, but how do I explain to him that his politics are turning him into a monster, destroying the environment, and pushing away the people who care about him?


Thanks for your help,
Son of A Right-Winger

Stay tuned for more as the answer to the above letter is unfolded piece by piece in the upcoming Points to Ponder series.

Senate Resistance To Judge Kavanaugh Is Collapsing

If you are a socialist at 20, you are still a clueless ahistorical dumbass.


Michelle Ray
@GaltsGirl

Replying to @instapundit

"If you're not a socialist at 20... "

3:32 PM · Jul 3, 2018

How Do You Spell “Hypocrite?:” O-C-A-S-I-O-C-O-R-T-E-Z

Baasically, there is no socialist out there who is not a hypocrite but some (like Cortez) are worse than others.

SCOTUS pick Brett Kavanaugh used credit cards to buy baseball tickets and Shannon Watts is suspicious

"One From the Vault" Dept.

The following is a flashback to the archives of this website{1} from 2007...

The fact that your host does not plan to discuss this issue again until it is relevant aside for a moment[...], [Name Omitted] makes the same presumptions that theologically radical so-called "traditionalist Catholics" do on their pet issues. Much as they take an elastic application of Pope Pius X's encyclical Pascendi and try to apply its condemnations wholesale to the Second Vatican Council and the subsequent popes, [Name Omitted] does the same here with [their] own pet subjects.

Anyone even remotely familiar with general norms of theological interpretation[...] knows that condemnations are by their very nature very precise and are intended only in the sense intended, not every sense that a casual reader of a text applies to them. This is why none of the condemnations in Pascendi apply to Vatican II or to the popes since Pope Pius XII. A casual and careless reading of Pascendi or Pius XII's Humani Generis presents no small degree of problems. Those texts as indeed any text have to be read carefully and in accordance with general norms of theological interpretation if the reader is to avoid the kinds of misinterpretations which are sadly not uncommon...

Furthermore, your host has never said that anything short of a dogmatic definition is up for grabs -indeed in years past he wrote more on the authority of the ordinary magisterium and the proper sense of magisterial infallibility than any Catholic in cyberspace. But he is not now nor will he ever ascribe more to a statement of the pope or a council authority-wise than it actually contains. That is not 'minimalist' however much [Name Omitted] may want to misrepresent it but instead is a proper recognition of where the Church has spoken and where she has not...

[D]efinitions are essential for rational discourse. They are the tools of thought and those who refuse to provide them should never be taken seriously when they deign to pontificate on issues where there is a greater complexity than the conventional wisdom Readers Digest Condensed Books accounts often convey. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa April 27, 2007)]

Haunted By Waters: A River Runs Through It 25 Years Later

Charles Krauthammer, conservative commentator and Pulitzer Prize winner, dead at 68

Charles Krauthammer was a huge influence on me in a number of ways. I pray he enjoys eternal rest now!

Points to Ponder:
(On Legitimate Differences of Opinion)

The Catholic Church, of course, leaves many questions open to the discussion of theologians. She does this to the extent that matters are not absolutely certain. Far from jeopardizing the Church's unity, controversies, as a noted English author, John Henry Cardinal Newman, has remarked, can actually pave the way for its attainment. For discussion can lead to fuller and deeper understanding of religious truths; when one idea strikes against another, there may be a spark. [Pope John XXIII: Ad Petri Cathedram §71 (circa 1959)]

Briefly on Lay Ecclesial Hypocrisy

My second column for Where Peter Is was posted earlier today and consists of material previously posted to Rerum Novarum. I am also taking this moment to create a new subtag for Where Peter Is which will be retroactively added to my debut column posting to this humble website from Saturday.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.

Points to Ponder:
(On War, God's Judgments, and Lasting Peace)

It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has his own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! For it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope--fervently do we pray--that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether." With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right--as God gives us to see the right--let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations. [President Abraham Lincoln: Second Inaugural Address (circa March 4, 1865)]

Briefly...

I have accepted the invitation of Pete Vere and others at the group webpage Where Peter Is to be a contributor there. With that noted, my debut column there can be read in its entirety here:
 

Lighting Candles Instead of Cursing the Darkness

Points to Ponder:
(On Grieving)

When it comes to grieving, it is difficult no matter which side you are on. When you are the one who has gone through loss, oftentimes those who reach out are very awkward in how they do it and can at times unintentionally offend in how they do it. It helps those who are hurting to remember that.

For those on the other side of the fence who are reaching out to someone grieving, remember that no two people grieve in the same way. As much as possible do not take rebuffs personally (if they happen) and patiently try to find different ways to reach out until something works.

Greater patience and love on all sides is something we all should strive for. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa May 30, 2017)]

In Remembrance...
(A Vault Flashback)

Despite it being a longstanding tradition of this website in years past, I somehow forgot last year to resume the practice when I begin publishing it again. While I did not exactly fail to make reference on the day in question, I was nonetheless very indirect about it -posting instead the lyrics to a song I had heard on the radio that day which is very hard for me to listen to.

I customarily have asked readers to remember my father in prayer on special days such as his birthday, the day he passed on, my parents' wedding anniversary, etc. But last year as well as earlier this year, I had forgotten to do this. I do not want to forget anymore so with this website posting, I combine two features in one with an archive flashback to 2009...

There have been a number of deaths in the family and among friends in this millennium. But out of all of them, there is one which stands out from the pack as being the most difficult for me to deal with. Today is the eighth anniversary of the passing of my late father Richard Dunn McElhinney. All I will say about it at the present time is what I say every year at this time; namely, that prayers for the eternal repose of his soul would be most appreciated.



Eternal rest grant unto his soul oh Lord and may thy perpetual light shine upon him. May he rest in peace with all the souls of the faithfully departed. Amen. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa June 12, 2009)]

Charles Krauthammer Goes Out Like Gehrig

Points to Ponder:

"In American religious culture - very much including Catholic culture - we are accustomed to gravitating to actual consolations or the merely inverted consolation of melodramatized, egoistic desolations; what we strain to avoid is dryness, not realizing that the dryness of the desert is quite normal experience of the maturing soul on its journey. We crave Heroes (or, failing that, Antagonists; in any event, a melodramatized agonism). Dryness - like the desert - scares us. Dryness can come in the form of detachment from our liturgical desiderata. Really hard for people who *do* liturgical professionally, to avoid turning that into the inverted consolation mentioned above." ["Liam"]

"One From the Vault" Dept.
(On Mike Mentzer)

As today is the seventeenth anniversary of his passing, I will post at this time a link to a lengthier thread written in years past on this subject. Without further ado...

On Mike Mentzer's Passing and His Influence (circa June 12, 2008)

"One From the Vault" Dept.

The following is a flashback to the archives of this website from 2008...

"...To really take this to brass tacks, faith is something that we give assent to that we cannot prove. I am referring in those words to how we have no way to verify emperically that the rules required to utilize reason and logic actually exist but we must presuppose them in order to reason at all. And even that statement itself embodies an often unrealized element so I will briefly note it at this time.

All presuppositions to some extent require a degree of faith when they are not grounded on proven or otherwise provable tenets. And those who lionize empiricism as the be-all and end-all of verification are involving themselves in a double standard on the laws of utilizing logic and reason that they would never accept in other contexts. Ergo, they inexorably deny the law of non-contradiction by failing to require empirical evidences for the laws of logic and reason the way they would other empirically unverifiable presuppositions. (Such as the existence of God.)

So at bottom, as the existence of the rules required to utilize logic cannot be proven in a fashion that does not presuppose them, they cannot be proven logically. They have to be taken as presuppositions and thus they are taken on a kind of faith. And for this reason, the atheists who mock religious people for believing in something they cannot empirically verify are hypocritical for doing the exact same thing themselves..." [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa October 23, 2008)]

Points to Ponder:

"Washington [DC] is not a place to live in. The rents are high, the food is bad, the dust is disgusting and the morals are deplorable." [Horace Greeley (circa 1865)]

How to spin an NFL offseason “grade” into anything you want it to be

Points to Ponder:

The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just. [Abraham Lincoln]

What are your memories of the 2008 Seahawks season?

I remember the 2008 and 2009 seasons as being downright awful. 2008 was the last year of the Holmgren regime and much as I loved the way Mike Holmgren brought the Seahawks back to respectability again for the first time since the Chuck Knox days; at the same time, there was a need for massive sweeping change and 2009 continued the same rot under Jim Mora before the Seahawks ownership cleaned house and hired Pete Carroll who along with John Schneider ushered in the third and greatest period of Seahawks football history.

We are now in a similar state as we were in 2007 except I do not foresee any more fall. Pete and John are reloading now and the Seahawks should be primed for another playoffs trip and a return to respectability next year after a disappointing injury plagued 2017 season.

Seahawks offensive line will instantly improve under Mike Solari

The news of Kate Spade's suicide is so sad.

For people feeling like they have no one, remember you're not alone. People do care. And people will listen.

The National Suicide Prevention Hotline can be reached by calling 1-800-273-8255.

Parkland Students To Announce Nationwide Gun Control Tour

Perhaps they can title said tour the "Ensuring Republicans Keep the House in 2018 Tour" because this little stunt has backfire written all over it.

OPCW: Call Us Crazy, But Maybe Syria Didn’t Give Up Their Chemical Weapons After All

On the Popes, Heresy, Etc:

This material was occasioned on another media source from my words as quoted in purple font below. My interlocuters words will be in dark green font. Without further ado...

If we go by the long established understanding of the term heresy, neither Honorius nor John XXII were heretics.

The Holy Spirit prevents popes from being heretics, schismatics, or apostates and to claim otherwise is to deny the doctrine of indefectibility of the Church of which the pope is the visible head as well as the guarantor of ecclesial communion.

False.

Actually, everything I said above is true.

There is a difference between objective material heresy... And the sin of formal heresy. of which we've had several popes

We are talking about the promulgation of heresy. While there are a lot of material heretics about (and I can guarantee that you are a material heretic!), the Holy Spirit even protects the pope from promulgating material heresy. Its part of the whole "I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail" prayer of Jesus to Peter. Or at least that is how the Popes themselves have seen it:

"Peter, and like him all his successors and heads of the Church, has the mission of encouraging the faithful to put all their trust in Christ and the power of his grace, which Peter personally experienced. This is what Innocent III wrote in the Letter Apostolicae Sedis Primatus (November 12, 1199), citing the text of Luke 22:32 and commenting on it as follows: ‘The Lord clearly intimates that Peter’s successors will never at any time deviate from the Catholic faith, but will instead recall the others and strengthen the hesitant’ (DS 775). That medieval Pope felt that Jesus’ statement to Simon Peter was confirmed by the experience of 1,000 years." [Pope John Paul II] 

But hey, what do they know right?

The inability to distinguish this difference is the error common to both papolitors and sedevacantists.

And now we have the smart aleck so-called "traditionalist" engaging in calumny. To take the position that the pope cannot be a heretic, schismatic, or apostate is to take seriously the doctrines of Church indefectibility, the promise of Jesus Christ, the belief that his prayer for Peter's unfailing faith would be granted, etc. But why listen to me when Vatican I is so clear on this:

“Indeed, their Apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers, and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: ‘I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren’ [Lk 22:32].

This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. [First Vatican Council: Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus]

You either believe this or you do not. And how the gift of truth and never-failing faith could possibly be conferred on Peter and his successors where they either apostasize{1}, are a schismatic{2}, or are heretical{3} is something you will twist yourself into pretzels trying to excuse it away in the sort of disingenuous fashion not uncommon to many who call themselves "traditionalists."

There is a reason why you will not find any Saints or Doctors who have publicly proclaimed any popes were heretics with even eminent Doctors like Francisco Suarez who though they argued hypotheses of popes possibly being heretical, personally believed that God's "sweet providence" would not allow the pope to either teach or fall into error. (Based again on Luke 22:32.) The same position was espoused by St. Alphonsus Ligouri who said "We ought rightly to presume as Cardinal Bellarmine declares, that God will never let it happen that a Roman Pontiff, even as a private person, becomes a public heretic or an occult heretic.’ ” 

Now we cannot read souls so whether there is private material heresy in anyone is not something we can determine. However, public actions and statements are another matter. If at any point in history a pope was a public heretic in any manner whatsoever (formal or material), a schismatic, or an apostate then they have deviated from the faith and there is no coherent way around this.

What would such an event mean? Simply, this would mean that the prayer of Jesus failed, the promise of Matthew 16:18 was false, the 519 Formula of Hormisdas{4} was a lie, St. Agatho I, Innocent III, St. John Paul II and other popes who spoke of the See of Peter being always preserved from blemish were all to a man delusional liars. This does not mean the popes are impeccable of course or that they cannot make limited errors.{5} However, it does mean that they cannot in any respect deny the faith (heresy), deviate from ecclesial communion (schism), or renounce the faith (apostasy). If they could do any of these things then this whole notion of the Holy Spirit protecting Peter and his successors is a giant farce. And that is the bottom line really.

Notes:

{1} Read: renounce the faith.

{2} Read: are separated from the communion of the Church.

{3} Read: denying dogmas of the faith or doctrines proximate to them.

{4} Required for reunion in the sixth century and promulgated to the whole church by the Fourth General Council of Contantinople IV in 869 and the First General Council of the Vatican in 1870.

{5} Or that they will always make the best decisions in a given situation involving matters of discipline, church government, etc.

Briefly...

As this is the 3100th posting to Rerum Novarum since its inception, I thought at least a brief mention of it in passing was in order. There is a lot in the archives and I inaugurated the vault flashback feature last year as a vehicle to re-present some of it for those who missed it the first time around.

In the process of tying up some loose ends format-wise, I finally tended to a post tag revision process that was more than a decade overdue. The results of that endeavour can be viewed HERE.

I will also take this moment to publicly note that I have a fairly detailed three part series that will be posted starting about five weeks from now on matters of a theological nature. The latter along with apologetics themed stuff was a far more prevalent feature of this humble website in its earliest years than it either was later on{1} or in the period since I revoked the previous indefinite suspension of this website{2} last year.{3} While hardly the first time I have delved into controversial material, I suspect that this may be the most controversial subject matter in some circles{4} that I have undertaken in over a decade. Anyway, that is all I will say as any kind of telegraphing of what is to come on that front at this time.

Notes:

{1} That is why I as a rule am tired of the apologetical dance and have been for quite a while. That is not to say that I do not do it still on occasion of course but I get tired of seeing people talk past one another and generally evincing no interest in actually listening to what their perceived "adversaries" actually say. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa July 9, 2005)]

{2} Notification of An Intended Return to Web Publishing (circa April 4, 2017)

{3} Of the 272 posts of an apologetics nature, 172 of them predate September 15, 2003 and there are there are only 22 from the period spanning April 30, 2007 through the December 19, 2009 website suspension with only 5 published since this website's relaunch on April 4, 2017. (One of which addressed a controversy and has been consigned to draft status as long as it is viewed as prudent for me to do so.) Suffice to say, I have had minimal interest in apologetics for more than fourteen years to put it mildly. The theological postings have seen a similar decrease in frequency; however, I still maintain some interest in this area having published eighteen such threads since the resumption of this website last year. I will also be releasing a good half dozen additional theological themed threads within the coming month or so.

{4} Commemorating A Controversial Anniversary (circa August 17. 2017)

On Spring Cleaning For 2018...
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)

I have in recent days undertaken a long needed spring cleaning of this site's archives. The delineation of different postings by primary category tags is one that was quite a chore to do initially but once it was completed in initial form, it eliminated the old update format once and for all. However, there were sometimes duplicate primary tags used and some postings were miscategorized. There is also the problem of some of the posts where there were multiple fonts used to differentiate different people's words becoming skewed when the software this site was built from did some updates. And the old audiopostings back in the days of audblog no longer work and have not for a long time so I needed to tend to that as well.

After some thought on these things and because I knew it would not be possible to tend to these matters again for the indefinite future beyond this time, I went through and reclassified primary tags on many postings. The main tags are now as follows -new additions marked with an astrisk:

Expository Musings
Dialogues
Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings
Interesting Links
Points to Ponder
Lyrics/Poetry
Lyrics/Poetry/Musings
Guest Editorials
Excerpts From Literature/Writings
Humour/Parody/Satire
Humour/Parody/Satire/Plus Musings
Vault Flashback
Audio Musings*
Quizzes
Quizzes/Musings*
Spiritual Instruction
Archivally Obsolete/Duplicate Post/Minutiae

The most regular tag of the primary ones is the Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings one. If I do not know how else to categorize something, it will go there. The Expository Musings tag originally had far too many posts in it that did not fit or because of changes no longer did. As I plan to try audio blogging again if I find the right format, that called for a primary tag for that endeavour but then pondering the subject of audioblogging made me wonder what I would do with prior audio posts that no longer work. I started deleting them but then realized after I scrapped a half dozen of them that it would be more work than I wanted to undertake and besides, if somehow I figure out how to use them again, then I am purging my own archives in ways I have resolutely criticized others for doing. So to stay true to my nature of not throwing anything out{1}, I decided to create a separate primary tag titled Audio Musings and all remaining audio blogs were reclassified there.

I also found Dialogues which had been misclassifed as Expository Musings, Points to Ponder threads that had more than one primary tag on them, etc. After making these adjustments, basically nearly 200 postings previously tagged as expository musings were reclassified.{2} The original descriptions for the pertinent primary tags were covered in a 2007 expository musing and were explained as follows:

[Y]our host informed the readers of the arduous task of tagging the posts in our massive archive late last month.[...] The good news is that we figured out a couple more short cuts since writing on that matter last -mainly through finding some natural categorizations in the archives in the process. So while the weblog probably will not be close to fully and thoroughly archived until summertime but as it is, the entire weblog has been given a preliminary go-through. While still far from complete, it can now be said that nearly 100% of the posts to this weblog can be broken down into eighteen non-overlapping primary categories. These categories are as follows -with a brief explanation of each:

--Points to Ponder: Posted tidbits from various sources (including sometimes tidbits written by your host) intended to cultivate the reader's pondering capacities...

--Expository Musings: These are threads which are as a rule of a longer and/or more detailed nature generally. However, sometimes there are threads so categorized which are not per se that long but may have taken more time to refine into the shape in which they were blogged than other postings of a similar length or for some other reason were categorized in this format...Among the audio posts, the longer and/or more detailed of them are tagged with this label though some of the others will have to be listened to as time allows for it to see if they should be classified here or not.

--Dialogues/Mailbag Discussions: These are threads posted in a dialogual format which could be derived from various sources...

--Miscellaneous Threads/Briefer Musings: These are generally threads which contain various forms of briefer musings. Among the posts so labeled are various "miscellaneous threads" postings, the shorter or briefer audio posts[...], etc. This is basically the defacto primary category for any posting...

--Stray Links of Interest: Exactly what it says...

--Guest Editorials: These are editorials submitted by others which were posted to this weblog...

--Spiritual Instruction: These are postings dealing with facets of spirituality...

Taken together, one of the above seven categories is tagged on almost 90% of all postings to this weblog. But those are not the only primary categories we have utilized -indeed the next nine comprise roughly the remaining 10% of the weblog's postings:

--Lyrics/Poetry/Haikus: These are postings which chiefly involve one or more of the subjects in the tagline...

--Lyrics/Poetry/Haikus/Plus Musings: These are postings which involve either lyrics, poetry, or haikus but also have some brief musings by your weblog host...

--Humour/Parody/Satire: Self explanatory...

--Humour/Parody/Satire/Plus Musings: Also self-explanatory as these contain the same as the previous category but also some brief musings by your weblog host...

-- Excerpts from Literature/Writings: These are postings which contain excerpts from either literature or from various writings...

--Quizzes: Basically as a temporary diversion the occasional online "quiz" has been taken...

--Archivally Obsolete/Duplicate Post/Minutiae: Basically postings which fit one or more of the criteria noted in the tagline for some reason or another. As of today, there are 32 of them though in a testament to this weblog's focus on perennial relevance as well as quality over time, 26 of those postings were in 2002 and 5 were in the first couple months of 2003. As this latter category may appear to be an odd one to include, your host wants to explain briefly the reasons why before wrapping up this posting.

Essentially, we would be less than fully honest if we did not admit that there are some postings in the archive which we do not find to be of value anymore for a variety of reasons which we are not going to delve into at the moment[...] except to note one significant reason which went into this determination.

For you see, your host has refused to purge his archives of stuff which in retrospect he regrets posting. Part of the reason for this is principles as we have been critical of others for trying to airbrush the historical record at their own sites to avoid telling the truth about their past actions or statements in a given point of time. But another reason is that life itself is a process of growth and development across a broad continuum. This includes weblog writing and interests.

We have no problem admitting that it took a bit of time before this weblog really started to take a discernible shape and some of the features and/or principles which have become standard or typical over time were in the "finding their feet" stage early on. The posts noted in the "archivally obsolete/duplicate posting/minutiae" category may also have been a localized kind of project which either was left incomplete due to time or interest factors or which was of a limited applicability back before your host sought to as much as possible make this weblog's contents have both a timeless and general applicability and also a particular circumstantial one.[...] But that is all that this writer intends to say on the matter at the present time except to say that yes, we have even categorized the obsolete or otherwise no-longer-of-any-real-value chaff from the archives.

Taken together, the eighteen categories above comprise by our count 100% of all posts to this weblog as primary categorizations. [Excerpts from Rerum Novarum (circa May 15, 2007)]

I was originally going to post an excerpt in full which contained material later changed but decided to just omit the former and only use the pertinent excerpts above. Because of tag character limits, some of those original tags had to be shortened a bit and others were changed or merged into other primary categories over time. (After experience showed that the schema I first went with was too complicated.) As of this moment, there are 3099 postings to this website since its inception which can be broken down after some recent reclassifyings as follows:

Expository Musings: 300
Dialogues: 365
Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings: 1355
Points to Ponder: 486
Interesting Links: 235
---
Excerpts from Literature/Writings: 19
Guest Editorials: 28
Humour/Parody/Satire: 22
Humour/Parody/Satire/Plus Musings: 19
Lyrics/Poetry: 62
Lyrics/Poetry/Musings: 30
Quizzes: 11
Quizzes/Musings: 35
Spiritual Instruction: 39
Vault Flashback: 10
Audio Musings: 61
Archivally Obsolete/Duplicate Post/Minutiae: 31

It is possible the above totals may tally a bit higher than 3098 because some are postings that are completed and tagged already but have not yet been published. In giving the primary tags a thorough go-through, I also in delineating with greater precision which postings were properly classified as Expository Musings took the nearly unprecedented{3} step of revising archive postings by appending nearly all of those classified as Expository Musings with the subtitle Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum.{4} In situations where those postings had other subtitles, I retitled them incorporating the prior subtitles into a new descriptive title. On others where I used either no title or some variation of Miscellaneous Musings, I retitled them On Miscellaneous Matters. That is the extent to which anything in those postings was revised except in a few cases where there were spelling, grammar, or colour formatting issues. And while I may make colour formatting adjustments on additional postings under the Dialogues category where warranted in the coming weeks{5}, what is noted here is the extent to which I foresee anything being further revised in the archives of this humble website in perpetuity.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.

Notes:

{1} And with the exception of seven posts (six of which were currently defunct audio postings), I have stayed true to this principle. (The seventh posting was a two sentence gibberish post from early 2005 that was in the archivally obsolete category. It was originally slated as a placeholder to highlight a planned series I never remotely got around to working on and now never will so it got the axe when the aforementioned six audios were similarly deleted.) I have no plans to deviate from this longstanding principle anymore -indeed I do not even like to make changes to past postings apart from fixing spelling, grammar, or colour formatting schemes when warranted: a far cry from how not a few folks handle these matters.

{2} Including 88 as Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings and 61 as Audio Musings. I also reclassified prior quizzes which were under the miscellaneous threads/brief musings tag with a new category titled Quizzes/Musings. There were also 7 or 8 Interesting Links entries that contained musings in them beyond an ultra brief description and they were reclassified as Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings. I also in nearly all cases with postings that involved updates in the old format classified them either as Miscellaneous Threads/Brief Musings or Expository Musings where applicable and abrogated the prior tags used for that material.

{3} I say "nearly unprecedented" because back in 2013 when this website was still suspended, I took the opportunity in an attempt to both let bygones be bygones as well as heal a long simmering rift which had perpetuated at that point for more than eight years. See last year's posting titled Commemorating a Controversial Anniversary for more details on this if interested.

{4} This tagline serves as a kind of marker to indicate the character of the post in question. Most expository musings had been adorned with that subtitle since roughly May of 2003 but the uniformity on this matter was one that took time to develop to the way things are currently.

{5} I realized when perusing the archives for prior dialogue material for use in other publishing mediums that software formatting changes has messed up the formatting of some of those postings from their original colour schemes. As a result, they will have to be fixed. I will however only correct these issues in piecemeal fashion as I have the time or inclination to do so.

On this Memorial Day I do not have the time to post anything new so I will re-post at this time as a vault flashback the link to an expository musing I wrote on the subject ten years ago. Without further ado...

On Memorial Day (circa May 28, 2008)

Senators To Trump: It’s Do-Or-Die Time On DACA

Seahawks mailbag: Germain Ifedi’s future, the offensive line, and more!

Springtime having come
A season with promises
Of old lives reborn
[Written 6/3/17]

"One From the Vault" Dept.

As today would have been Chris DiSomma's 46th birthday, it seems appropriate to mark it with the following flashback to the archives of this website from 2008...

Chris was a special case for me though due to a variety of reasons -the closeness of our tie for one and the way in which our lives played out for another. I could say more but will instead note the previous threads below for your perusal if interested. And while each has some different material in it than the others, the thread from 2005 is the most complete of the threads -encapsulating some of my remembrances of him when he was alive and also though the passing of time has helped somewhat with regrets that in some form or another I will probably always have. Without further ado...

Let these threads serve as a cautionary tale for those who put off tomorrow what they could do today so far as reconciliations go with others. Oh and rest in peace amigo until we (hopefully) meet again in a much better place!!! [Excerpts from Rerum Novarum (circa May 25, 2008)]

Points to Ponder:

"Seattle is losing its reputation as a progressive city with a strong entrepreneurial spirit. Instead, we are increasingly being viewed as a city with a heavy regulatory hand that is run by narrow-minded activists and a hypocritical and out of touch ruling bureaucratic city government." [Former Starbucks Executive Howard Behar (circa June 12, 2016)]

Starbucks Is About To Woke Their Way Out Of Business

Its time for me to set up a craps table at my local Starbucks!

Instead of a jobs tax, credit business for helping the homeless

This is an Op-Ed written by three Seattle area business owners/operators. What do they know about job creation? :::rolls eyes:::

On Twitter, Website Formatting, and A New Subtag:

Twitter first launched to the public if my sources are right in the summer of 2006. I became aware of the phenomenon in 2007 but only launched my own twitter account in December of 2009 roughly around the time that this website was suspended in perpetuity.{1} Upon my return to publishing last year{2}, I on occasion made use of material from Twitter{3} or referenced the latter in postings but have never specified any tags for such occasions be they primary{4} or secondary{5} in nature.

For better or worse, Twitter has become a pervasive force for communication and with a president who makes particular use of it{6}, it seems appropriate to me to subtag Twitter themed threads. So with my prior posting, I created just such a subtag for that posting as well as for use on any material posted subsequent{7} to it where applicable.

All things to the contrary notwithstanding.

Notes:

{1} Notification of Suspension (circa December 19, 2009)

{2} Notification of An Intended Return to Website Publishing (circa April 4, 2017)

{3} The only examples I am offhand aware of besides the present thread are the ones located HERE, HERE, and most recently HERE. Thus far, I have not posted any Twitter material from my own account.

{4} Basically, every posting has some kind of primary post tag on it and the purpose of this is to insure that posts can be categorized without overlapping when it comes to primary descriptive tags. The secondary tags are simply a further notation of particular features to the post itself and in this area, overlap is basically a given. This format makes it so I do not have to do the sorts of arduous weblog updates anymore that were standard on this weblog from its founding through the last day of 2006: both lack of time as well as a desire to not do that anymore contributed to the post tagging approach we undertook last year even if it has been tweaked in minor ways since then. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa April 4, 2008)]

{5} I remember when the tagging feature was first made available on this platform roughly ten years ago and I set out in piecemeal fashion creating various tags for this website to better categorize posts for easier access and perusal by pertinent subject matter. As is my wont with rough drafts be they in writing or otherwise, the tags initially were longer and I ran into space limits. I noted this not long after posting the first thread on these matters with an expository musing detailing an even further expansion on the tagging method including the distinction between major[...] and minor tags. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa September 21, 2017)]

{6} This factor as well as the thought that I may use more Twitter material here over time are two notable factors that drove the present formatting decision. Even though I used the Facebook medium far more between the suspension of this website to the present day than I have Twitter, I have no intentions of making a similar subtag for Facebook material. This is in part because material here has often been duplicated there or material there near-duplicated here. I also simply have no interest in doing so at this time.

{7} I then did a few searches and retroactively sub-tagged the applicable postings I could find going back to April of 2017.

Area Man‏ 

@lheal

Q: What do you think of MS-13 [gang with the motto "Kill, Rape, Control]?
Trump: They aren't people. They are animals!
Journolisters: Trump says immigrants aren't people!
So Journolisters think all immigrants are here to kill, rape, and control. Got it.

3:52 AM - 17 May 2018

Trump says enough batcrap on his own, go there if you want something rather than this kind of flat out lie.

Mark my words: this sort of msm blatant misrepresentation will get Trump re-elected if they keep it up.

Hillary Clinton takes bitterness on world tour

I was going to comment on this article myself but this paragraph from the article says it all really...

Like a boxer who doesn’t know when to leave the ring, Hillary Clinton is a two-time political loser who hasn’t gotten the message she is unlikeable and unelectable. She would do herself and the country (not to mention the Democratic Party) a favor by retiring and leaving the scene of her political accident.

Seattle’s Mayor And City Council May Have Reached An Agreement On A Slightly Lower ‘Head Tax’

"I will take 'things to drive more businesses out of Seattle' for $1000, Alex!"

ISIS terror chief who burned Jordanian pilot to death in chilling 2015 execution video is captured in Iraq

Hope he has plenty of sunblock.

North Korea expands threat to cancel Trump-Kim summit, saying it won’t be pushed to abandon its nukes

This is why its never wise to spike the ball when you are nowhere near the endzone.

On Good Apologists:
(Aka "Rare As Hen's Teeth" Dept.)

[Prefatory Note: I was cleaning out the draft folder a bit and ran across this material which was prepared as a post back in December of 2007 but from what I can discern was never actually blogged. I am not sure why that is offhand but as the person I was corresponding with at the time was both my favourite Catholic apologist and has since passed on from this earth, posting it at this time gives me the opportunity to remember an old friend. The material here is posted substantially as prepared more than a decade ago except for the final words in purple font below. -SM 5/14/18]

The following was taken from a discussion list thread.

Someone asked me if Bob Klaus left Catholic Legate and I said I didn't know. Bob? Bueller?

I hope not. Much as apologists in general have ticked me off as of late, Bueller...I mean Bob is one of those I believe does it right and the Legate would be dimished if he left it.

That is kind of you to say, Shawn. I appreciate it.

No problemo amigo.

Unfortunately, unless I won the Powerball tonight I still need to earn a living -- which means I have a limited amount of time to work "my hobby" -- and hence I cannot work the Legate and Christian Forums at the same time.

Frankly Bob, that is probably a good thing that it is not your job the way it is with not a few whom I shall not mention. But for those who do make $$$ off of it, there is the at least implicit need to stir the pot and create controversy because that is what people react to. Well, that and the "if you do not send what you can, my kids and wife will starve" kind of letters. When there is no financial concern, the problem of being compromised is a lot less as is the temptation to put oneself in that position.

At Christian Forums I can directly and indirectly impact thousands of people at any given moment...and I enjoy the personal give and take with the people I deal with daily.

Give and take is fine. The problem I have with a lot of the apologists is that they are illogical. They base the veracity of a particular argument or position not on its intrinsic merits or lack thereof but instead on who says it as if that is the determining factor.

I see real-live conversions on a regular basis...this ministry is totally unlike any other I have experienced. We actually have a large area set aside for Catholics and seekers...no Prots allowed. And they have their set-aside areas too...safe havens for all people of good will. It is "message boards" done right...and it's about time. As of today the board has had over 30 million posts since its inception a few years ago.

Sounds like the kind of message board I could actually participate in perhaps -at least on occasion. What is the address of the place out of curiosity?

#############################################


Frankly Bob, that is probably a good thing that it is not your job the way it is with not a few whom I shall not mention. But for those who do make $$$ off of it, there is the at least implicit need to stir the pot and create controversy because that is what people react to. Well, that and the "if you do not send what you can, my kids and wife will starve" kind of letters. When there is no financial concern, the problem of being compromised is a lot less as is the temptation to put oneself in that position.

That is why I said "win the powerball" - if I was independently wealthy and didn't depend on speaking fees and selling books (and gaining donations) for a living...then I could devote myself to my hobby full time instead of only part-time.

I have ZERO interest in becoming a "professional" apologist...for all the reasons you and I have discussed many times.

Give and take is fine. The problem I have with a lot of the apologists is that they are illogical. They base the veracity of a particular argument or position not on its intrinsic merits or lack thereof but instead on who says it as if that is the determining factor.

That's very true...and it is no different on our board in the apologetical forums. The thing about our board is that there are a few hundred individual forums (like rooms) each with its own purposes. And some of them are apologetical in nature -- most of them are not. Some are for Christians only - others are for anyone to post in.

There are plenty of bad apologists in the apologetical forums. However, there are many rooms within the website that allows for Christian and/or Catholic fellowship and catechesis, etc...

What I like is the large number of seekers who come into our area (called OBOB - which means One Bread One Body). There are several RCIA candidates and catechumens who participate and ask questions...which can be scary once you learn some of the poor catechesis many of them are receiving in their parishes.

Sounds like the kind of message board I could actually participate in perhaps. What is the address of the place out of curiosity?

www.christianforums.com

Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine. Et lux perpetua luceat eis.
Fidelium animae, per misericordiam Dei, requiescant in pace. Amen.

Met What?

Points to Ponder:

"The Pope is the guardian of dogma and of morals; he is the custodian of the principles that make families sound, nations great, souls holy; he is the counsellor of princes and of peoples; he is the head under whom no one feels tyrannized because he represents God Himself; he is the supreme father who unites in himself all that may exist that is loving, tender, divine...

When one loves a person, one tries to adhere in everything to his thoughts, to fulfill his will, to perform his wishes. And if Our Lord Jesus Christ said of Himself, 'si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit,' [if any one love me, he will keep my word - Jn xiv, 23] therefore, in order to demonstrate our love for the Pope, it is necessary to obey him.

Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents; we do not place his orders in doubt...

[I] deplore...the conduct of so many...who not only allow themselves to debate and criticize the wishes of the Pope, but are not embarrassed to reach shameless and blatant disobedience, with so much scandal for the good and with so great damage to souls." [Pope Saint Pius X: Allocution (circa November 18, 1912)]

To Protect Free Speech We Must Demand This Professor Be Fired

To quote the most salient passages from this article:

"...I believe in free speech. I also believe in reciprocity. If conservatives are being shut down by de facto university actions–when the Federalist Society’s Josh Blackman lecture on, oddly enough, free speech was shut down, the dean of the CUNY law school said that demonstrations to stop a lecture were protected speech–then it is suicidal to go along with this lemming-like devotion to free speech. If free speech is transactional, I don’t have a problem playing that game...

We are not engaged in a war of ideas where we debate over a glass of chilled pinot grigio. We are engaged in a fight for freedom of speech and freedom of conscience with people who openly admit they are trying to deprive us of those rights. How is me supporting the right of this bloated bolshevik to say whatever she wants going to help guys like Josh Blackman, and Ben Shapiro, talk about conservative ideas? It won’t. In fact, it will just make the job harder as we’re fighting for get-out-of-jail-free cards for these 'people' while they are classifying us as Nazis. Why in the name of heaven would I line up to march silently into the gas chambers based on some abstract principle that, apparently, only my side is bound by? Not. Going. To. Happen.

No. I want this noxious troll fired. No. I will not support her right to say whatever she wants to. And no, none of this means that I don’t support free speech, it just means that I believe in social compacts and my support of your rights is directly linked to your support of mine." 

If you had asked me back during this site's original run, I would have taken the classic stance of conservatives to stand up for free speech even if I do not like said speech. I still in principle have that view but the political and social realities have changed so dramatically the last decade or so{1} that I have come to the same view as the above writer at least in a macro sense.  I can no longer however stand for the right of those who quite evidently would try and take the same rights from me. While not a complete left field development insofar as I have long recognized this principle in other areas{2}, it is the first to my knowledge explicit application of it to the principle of free speech in general.

And while I may write more on this in the future, at the moment, that is all I plan to say on the present issue in question.

Notes:

{1} And while the degree of concurrence of my current views with past views across the general spectrum of outlooks has remained remarkably consistent; I would be remiss in not noting there have been a few changes: the most significant of which can be read here in a recent posting on the subject of immigration.

{2} For example, my stance on the Israeli-Palestinian discussion. I am no huge booster of Israel but I have long said I do not accept the validity of dialogue on their part with Palestinians because you cannot dialogue legitimately with those who operate from the presupposition that you should not exist and they would exterminate you if given the opportunity. In essence, I have expanded my principled  stance on this matter to the subject of free speech in general out of logistical survival one might say. Now, I will not only not support the right of such persons to speak but I will actively advocate for their silencing until such time as they can reciprocate in the area of free speech where I am concerned. Bottom line: if you stand for free speech, do not think this only works one way.

Obama Killed His Own Iran Deal

On Cobra Kai -My Thoughts Through Seven Episodes...

Cobra Kai is a homage in part to the original movies but the characters themselves are grown up and facing new challenges. Johnny's life has spiraled down since the pivotal crane kick while Daniel's has dramatically improved. There are all kinds of callbacks to the series either directly or in a sense of irony. At times I have seen through the first seven episodes thus far Daniel reflecting various characters of the first movies perhaps unconsciously (i.e. Kreese and Johnny from the first movie, Myagi's rival Sato from the second movie, etc) albeit in ways not perceivable to him. (He also comes off like Myagi in other contexts.) Meanwhile, Johnny is in the role of the underdog in this one and you see sides to him that you did not see previously including some back story that rounds out the character in ways you did not realize previously. Someone once did a video series on how Daniel was the real bully of the original movie and while I think that hypothesis is a stretch, its not entirely without merit and it seems the writers of this series went into this with that series hypothesis in mind at least in part.

Cobra Kai is not one of those later series specials they do of so many hit shows or movies which absolutely misses the point or does not have the magic of the original. This series echoes the magic of the original in spots, has flashbacks at key points, new character information one was not aware of which fleshes things out a bit. There are also new characters who have prominent roles in the series such as the bullied kid Johnny mentors, Daniel's family, Johnny's estranged son, etc. And of course the return of Cobra Kai and there is karate but like the Rocky films and boxing, the karate in the Karate Kid series has always been in a certain sense a secondary vehicle of sorts that teaches more valuable lessons than it would appear on the surface. I look forward to watching the last three episodes of the season tonight and hope they film a season two.

While waiting for the Jaded Politics publication of my latest article on the Alfie Evans situation, he tragically died due to the NHS starving him to death. I went back and made revisions to the piece slated for publication to reflect that and also made the same changes to the duplicate text already at the Musings From Exile page. The revised version can be read HERE.

Rest in Peace Alfie!