The eighth annual Napa Valley Catholic Men's Conference will be taken place on April 20. It is sponsored in part by Ignatius Press, which is unfortunately promoting the movie Courageous in the flier for the conference. (The movie of course is listed in recent IP catalogs as well.)
Does this indicate the direction of the thinking behind the conference? Since I've never been to one, I do not know, but someone should say something to IP about it. Dalrock's critique of the movie should be cause for rethinking whether such a movie should be promoted and sold. Then again, the infiltration of "conservative" Catholicism by feminism is rather complete. Will someone clue in Bishop Vasa, who will be present at the conference, on the problems of Catholic feminism?
In previous years, I believe Jesse Romero has spoken at the conference. This year the speakers include Patrick Coffin and Charlie Aeschliiman, "a former Navy SEAL and trick basketball handling champion." Being in the military is no guarantee that one understands, much less is able to advocate, patriarchy. Relating properly to other man and the community and the Church - one must also relate properly to one's wife and other women. What well-known Catholic laymen/apologist can give such a robust defense of patriarchy? Dalrock has a post on something germane to this point: What we need is more chivalry!
Here is an example of the cultural wisdom that has been lost with the latest revolution in culture and mores: Advice on love and physical attraction, 1920s-style.
Related:
Oz Conservative: Left-wing woman criticises feminism
Vox: Societal Devolution
CBS is broadcasting another NYPD cop drama - Golden Boy. I think it was Vox who wrote something recently about LEOs and the popularity of cop shows in light of the alleged corruption of LAPD. CBS alone has Blue Bloods and the cancelled NYC 22, both located in NYC. Why is NYC such a popular setting for cop shows? Third Watch (which also had FD paramedics), Brooklyn South, there are many others as well.
I may watch the first episode, but since it's on CBS it will be PC. I am surprised that no major female characters have been put on display in the promos so far, but the series wlll probably have a feminsit bent.
Do we look up to law enforcement officers too much? It may be understandable for boys to do so, but what of adult men? Some may live vicariously through cop shows, but how many of us have a rather suspicious attitude, or worse, towards police officers? While the sheep of the megapolis have no understanding of what it is to defend themselves and their loved ones, those who believe that being a warrior is part of the obligation of a citizen can appreciate the work that is done by police officers while not giving them some sort of special social or moral status.
A trailer for a movie from Magpul:
Breslau Rallye
BBC Choral Evensong: King's College, London (expires in 7 days)
NLM: The Great Fast
(mp3)
Posts
Drumbeat: May 25, 2013
2 hours ago
2 comments:
I mentioned this briefly on Vox' AG.
Last things first: Police:
Soldiers, Firefighters, and Police in ages past risked their lives and were to help and keep the peace. Soldiers fought just war justly (and weren't merely mercenaries). The Police were the Sheriff or Constable that helped lost children, old ladies, drunks get home, and only as a last resort used violence. Honor - a potential sacrifice - is something to look up to.
I describe "Police" today as an updated version of the occupying army of Red-Coats our (USA) founding fathers fought against, using the term "Blue-Coats" They are militarized and fight for the federal government, not to keep the peace and help their fellow citizens. They get lots of nasty toys. They love to taser or pepper-spray. They are simply thugs who deserve contempt, not respect.
As to Catholic Masculinity, Dalrock has pointed out several instances, but I've also noted Women want to be feminists when it suits them, but also want to be traditional ladies when that is to their advantage. That cannot work, a husband cannot be two contradictory things. A or Not A. This is one case where Catholicism isn't "both-and".
You cannot be a head if the wife has a veto - in any form. She can counsel, but if reason fails to convince and she tries tears, threats, or worse, she is sinning, and the man is doing so if he gives in to such manipulation.
In earlier times, this manipulation might be annoying or uncomfortable but had no teeth. Now she can accuse him of verbal abuse.
No-fault divorce redefines marriage as badly as "gay marriage", which is a stupid pantomime. Why not legalize the Catholic understanding of marriage (don't discriminate based on definition, allow Catholics to sign a no-divorce pre-nup that the state couldn't override). Henry VIII married a woman each time. Why did Saint Thomas More literally lose his head over it?
Thanks for your comment, tz!
Post a Comment