Tuesday, March 03, 2020
Zombie Devil Mouse
A bunch of clips from The Last Skywalker were uploaded today -- "greatest hits" of the movie? Devil Mouse desperate to keep the buzz alive and make some blu ray sales. So stupid -- these clips are just reminders of what garbage the movie was.
Monday, March 02, 2020
Dreher Interviews Douthat
about his new book: The Decadent Society: How We Became The Victims Of Our Own Success
No mention of cultural Marxism, feminism, or Christian leaders watering down the Gospel and failing to respond properly to the state and its elites.
Decadence has enabled female vice and narcissism. Have many men in the West become soft? Sure. But how much power did they have to begin with, either to correct the state, the elites, rebellious women, or revolutionaries? 0.
link
No mention of cultural Marxism, feminism, or Christian leaders watering down the Gospel and failing to respond properly to the state and its elites.
Decadence has enabled female vice and narcissism. Have many men in the West become soft? Sure. But how much power did they have to begin with, either to correct the state, the elites, rebellious women, or revolutionaries? 0.
link
What a Joke
Two female constables to initially handle some sort of altercation?
When you call for police back up and they send a lunatic 😂 pic.twitter.com/Mnml6FsGxz
— Trevor Coult MC (@TrevorCoultMC) February 29, 2020
"Mom (or Grandmom) in Black Robes"
'Judge Judy' will end after its blockbuster run after 25 seasons, host Judy Sheindlin says. https://t.co/d1XFvdulgR
— NBC News (@NBCNews) March 2, 2020
“Judge Judy” Sheindlin tells @TheEllenShow that she will retire at the end of next season, the show’s 25th year. Over the last 17 years, she has made $644 million in salary & rights fees combined. Prior to her first season, she served for 24 years as a NYC Family Court judge. pic.twitter.com/WAMUdJqNiX
— Darren Rovell (@darrenrovell) March 2, 2020
Judge Judy may be entertaining and some of her behavior made be exaggerated in the name of theatrics but that shouldn't be tolerated in a real judge. Undoubtedly there is a lot of nannying going on in the courtrooms in the name of state paternalism or something.
Doctor Who Is Finished
🚨SPOILER ALERT 🚨 The Timeless Child is revealed... and for the Doctor, nothing will ever be the same again. #DoctorWho pic.twitter.com/xzW1BdsIAc
— Doctor Who Official (@bbcdoctorwho) March 2, 2020
Sunday, March 01, 2020
One Peter Five
I rarely have time for 1P5 podcasts, but the last one, on the LCs, was good.
In general I find the articles at 1P5 and the commentariat participating in the combox to be reactionary, showing ignorance of other ecclesial traditions, and a presumption that the Latin ecclesial tradition is normative for the Church. A Latin triumphalist view of salvation history is still operative in the minds of Latin traditionalists. Steve Skojec seems like he might be more open-minded and willing to learn more about alternatives to the Latin view, but then his associates on his website seem like they are strict Latin traditionalists.
I was somewhat of a Latin traditionalist for a while, but exposure to the Church Fathers, other ecclesial traditions and other viewpoints on Church history in order to be more ecumenical towards other Apostolic Christians helped me grow beyond that. Are Latin traditionalists willing to take the same step?
In general I find the articles at 1P5 and the commentariat participating in the combox to be reactionary, showing ignorance of other ecclesial traditions, and a presumption that the Latin ecclesial tradition is normative for the Church. A Latin triumphalist view of salvation history is still operative in the minds of Latin traditionalists. Steve Skojec seems like he might be more open-minded and willing to learn more about alternatives to the Latin view, but then his associates on his website seem like they are strict Latin traditionalists.
I was somewhat of a Latin traditionalist for a while, but exposure to the Church Fathers, other ecclesial traditions and other viewpoints on Church history in order to be more ecumenical towards other Apostolic Christians helped me grow beyond that. Are Latin traditionalists willing to take the same step?
March 1, 1781
FPR: Liberty or Empire? Reconsidering the Articles of Confederation by Alexander Salter
Family went to see Hamilton last night.
History on the Net: #100: Alexander Hamilton’s Broadway Musical is Great, but Brion McClanahan Thinks He Screwed Up America
In general, the pro-centralization party was dismayed at the democratic and egalitarian consequences of the Revolution. Too many plebeians were getting elected to state legislatures. Instead of a decentralized, democratic federation, the centralizers wanted a quasi-aristocratic “empire of liberty,” led by wealthy men of leisure, authorized to build a state that would rival the empires of Europe. The Constitution, in comparison to the Articles, grants the central government extensive powers to impose taxes, micromanage trade, raise an army and a navy, and otherwise undertake the activities expected of a late-18th century nation aspiring to international greatness.
Viewed this way, the Constitution was an attempt by conservatives to create a fiscal-military state. Our civic religion trumpets the Constitution as a triumph of freedom. In reality, as historian Sheldon Richman argues, “it was a counter-revolution, in many ways a reversal of the radical achievement represented by America’s break with the British Empire.”
Family went to see Hamilton last night.
History on the Net: #100: Alexander Hamilton’s Broadway Musical is Great, but Brion McClanahan Thinks He Screwed Up America
Yellow Check Proposers Respond to Critics
See this previous post for the link to the original proposal.
If they weren't affiliated with Catholic institutions and thus had some credibility as Catholic leaders, would their opinions really matter? They can claim their arguments are reasoned from moral theology and canon law, but who would be paying attention to them if they were unknown bloggers just making this proposal?
How Much Dreck Would a Yellow Check Check? by Gladden Pappin & Gregory Caridi
I'll focus on the critical point:
They can say this, but do the bishops realize this? Do they acknowledge that much of what the USCCB publishes on its website is not dogma? (Their statements on gun control, health insurance, immigration...) And other opinions, like those positive statements about Judaism or Islam, even if they appeal to Vatican II or papal statements, are not dogma either, since they do not pertain to Tradition but are the private judgments of bishops about ideas or religions or other particulars?
Until the bishops themselves clarify and show that they are familiar with the difference between Tradition and theological opinion, the fundamental objection remains.
If they weren't affiliated with Catholic institutions and thus had some credibility as Catholic leaders, would their opinions really matter? They can claim their arguments are reasoned from moral theology and canon law, but who would be paying attention to them if they were unknown bloggers just making this proposal?
How Much Dreck Would a Yellow Check Check? by Gladden Pappin & Gregory Caridi
I'll focus on the critical point:
Claim 7: The bishops will favor certain viewpoints and disfavor others
This objection fails to distinguish between levels of theological discussion and thus highlights a situation that is not in itself problematic. A yellow check would not imply, any more than a mandatum does, that those who have it are not permitted disagreement over matters that are open to discussion. The task of determining what matters are open and closed is already undertaken by bishops as an essential part of their authority. Consider canon 216: “No undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.” This canon permits the bishops to solemnize certain associations and organizations as “Catholic” while denying others.
Among associations deemed Catholic, there can be a divergence of viewpoints on nonessential matters, as well as different emphases. A yellow check system would foster better intra-ecclesiastical discourse by forbidding those with the yellow check from criticizing each other as non-Catholic or the like. At the same time, the yellow check would promote unity around the essential matters of the Church’s magisterium.
They can say this, but do the bishops realize this? Do they acknowledge that much of what the USCCB publishes on its website is not dogma? (Their statements on gun control, health insurance, immigration...) And other opinions, like those positive statements about Judaism or Islam, even if they appeal to Vatican II or papal statements, are not dogma either, since they do not pertain to Tradition but are the private judgments of bishops about ideas or religions or other particulars?
Until the bishops themselves clarify and show that they are familiar with the difference between Tradition and theological opinion, the fundamental objection remains.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)