Skip to main content

"Intemperate" Thoughts Related To Yesterday's Post

I'll start by saying I read Anthony Esolen on bad poetry. He's right, of course. And despite my healthy dislike for some of his other pieces, I got through it all right. I did snarkily wonder when they were going to start putting "Trump 2020" banners on all of his essays. [You flat-out consider voting for Trump a moral failing, don't you?--ed.] Yes.

Anyway, I got to thinking about it--there was a funny moment in my grandmother's funeral Mass, of all places--when we sang "On Eagles' Wings". I get it, it's a terrible song, that no faithful Catholic should ever love. Yet I do. I really do, and I'll tell you why: I've experienced some really tough things in this life. I'm not trolling for sympathy, I'm just letting you know. I got pretty emotional just typing that out, honestly. Anyway, every time I hear that song, I understand God is here, and He loves you. That's what it means to me.

I understand people hate it, and I understand that many people associate it with liberalism in the Church in the '70s. What is that to me? I wasn't here. I would even agree that we shouldn't sing it in Mass, if we have a choice. I'm still glad somebody wrote the song.

Which brings us to the funny moment: Father hates it as well. He processed out in his beautiful, reverent vestments, heard the song, and rolled his eyes. Then, in a great act of virtue, humility, and service, he began singing loudly, with great gusto. Think of what that says: I hate this song, but I'm the priest. We're thankful to God, and we're going to act like it.

Finally, I have a vague distrust of people who don't like popular things. Even if I become a total snob, I'll never lose this. I'll probably dislike myself, if I turn my nose up at Bette Midler, or Barry Manilow. Yes, mock if you must. I've obviously overcome this vague distrust, in several instances. Ahem.

Perhaps I could learn to regret that I know more pop songs than sacred songs. Then again, I am The Man Of A Thousand Friends, and such people know the words to "Don't Stop Believin'".

Another thought on this "moral failing" discussed above: It's not that I don't understand the difficulty of making a binary choice, especially if you think you ought to. But I don't see the cause for celebrating, cheerleading, that kind of a thing. If I know that you see what I see, and can articulate it, I can see voting against transgenderism, homosexuality, abortion, etc. but somebody ought to be able to say that the daily denigration of the office that's occurring now is really happening. I don't fear "The Left". I am who I am; I don't need a champion or a "fighter". I expect my presidents to behave with a modicum of dignity, and good sense, and despite my own radicalism, I don't favor blowing up "the system" just to make a point. I'm happy for President Jimmy for being the oldest living president ever. It's common and decent to wish your opponents well, even to think of them well, and so I do. We can't even get the current guy to lay off a dead guy! Don't dare ask me why I don't like Trump. If you don't know, I can't help you.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

Just Sayin.' Again.

One interesting objection to this chart has been to say that one gets stuck in a "loop" that doesn't resolve. This is a thinly-veiled way of putting forward the argument that we don't need absolute certainty in religious dogma. But Fred Noltie already dealt with this in the comments on another post. And to the specific objector, no less. I'll be blunt: The only principled thing to do is put down your Bible, resign your pulpit, and lead tours in Europe. Because a man must be able to distinguish dogma from human opinion, and this epistemology doesn't allow us to do that. One of dogma's distinguishing characteristics is infallibility; another is certainty. Without this, essential characteristics of God Himself are put into question. If we say that the most important Person any person could know is God, and the content of that knowledge (doctrine) is the means by which we know Him, it must be certain. This Reformed argument that certainty is a dangerous or un