2018-04-01T22:29:34-04:00

When I was in grad­u­ate school (this was in the 1990s), I wrote every­thing long­hand, keyed my rough drafts into an Apple IIGS using Apple­works Word Pro­cess­ing (I know; I’m 45), and revised, by hand, on the hard copy. Then I would repeat over a series of maybe 8–10 more drafts. Then, along about 2001, with the sud­den abil­ity to do a great amount of research directly from the Inter­net, I began to write entirely on the com­puter, in Microsoft Word. That was not a good idea: Inevitably, my com­puter crashed. [...] Read more

2018-04-01T22:54:19-04:00

Of all things in lit­er­a­ture, the one most futile to gen­er­al­ize about is the novel. No one can even agree on when the novel began; the stan­dard nar­ra­tive is that the first was Robin­son Cru­soe, but that’s more a myth of convenience than otherwise. Much of the prob­lem has to do with how you define it the novel. But how? To do so in the most obvi­ous way—“long prose fic­tion narrative”—is imme­di­ately to bump up against nov­els that don’t fit. Pale Fire (1962) is not prose. The Executioner’s Song (1979) is not fic­tion. [...] Read more

2018-04-01T23:20:16-04:00

Steve "Purple" Haze, in a recent post at Failablogue is once more trying to pit those wicked "lay Catholic pop apologists" against their superiors in the USCCB. The subject this time is Revelation 12:1. Those dubious "pop apologists" say the woman clothed with the sun is Mary. But Mr. Haze finds the textual notes for at the USCCB Web site, which say that she is the Church. Sorry! says Mr. Haze to the apologists. I'll side with the bishops! I am glad to know that Mr. Haze now sides with the bishops. Perhaps he will side with the bishop of Rome. [...] Read more

2018-04-04T21:03:37-04:00

Not sat­is­fied with his effort to co-opt St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Dr.* James White of Alpha & Omega Sophistries, who still has not exegeted Ephesians chapter 4, goes on to abuse Theodoret by quot­ing him out of con­text too. The quo­ta­tion he pro­vides us is this one: “The doc­trine of the Church should be proven, not announced. There­fore show that the Scrip­tures teach these things.” One glaring problem: These words are spoken in the Dialogues by the heretic Eranistes, rather than by Orthodoxos, who speaks for Theodoret. [...] Read more

2018-04-04T21:32:05-04:00

PFDS, on the left, has reached a critical mass where more and more are report­ing them­selves shocked, shocked to find that the pope is Catholic. There were trick­les of this kind of thing before, but now it seems to be more fre­quent. Just this week­end there were two melt­downs in the lib­eral press: the first at Mar­ket­Watch, over the shock­ing dis­cov­ery that the pope is not in favor of con­tra­cep­tion; the sec­ond at the Daily Screech, over the shock­ing dis­cov­ery that the pope is not in favor of gen­der the­ory. How could such things be? [...] Read more

2018-04-07T12:47:21-04:00

Earlier this month, Politicus USA, some named Hrafnkell Haraldsson had a wild fit of pique about three supposed outrages of Catholic history. These include the Crusades (during which, we are told, people were up to their ankles in blood), the Inquisition (during which, we are told, the Church burned Giordano Bruno at the stake), and slavery (which the Church permitted, we are told, against Muslims and heretics). As usual, claims like these con­tain much myth, as well as a lot of half-​truth, while they also lack any mean­ing­ful con­text. [...] Read more

2018-04-07T12:55:51-04:00

Some, on blogs and in social media, have been urg­ing that the out­rage over President Obama's remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, comparing ISIS to the Crusades, has some­how been made up by the right wing. It’s noth­ing but “noise." Obama, they say, did not com­pare the Cru­sades and ISIS, and vio­lence has been done in the name of Christ. Why, John Paul II even apol­o­gized for evil acts done dur­ing the Cru­sades! Which he did. And yet all this misses the mark. For one, the pope never apol­o­gized for the Cru­sades them­selves. [...] Read more

2018-04-07T13:09:31-04:00

At the National Prayer Breakfast this morning, President Obama said: "Lest we get on our high horse and think [ISIS] is unique to some other place, remem­ber that dur­ing the Cru­sades and the Inqui­si­tion, peo­ple com­mit­ted ter­ri­ble deeds in the name of Christ." And yes, peo­ple have “com­mit­ted ter­ri­ble deeds” in the name of Christ. But to say that that is no dif­fer­ent than cut­ting the heads off of babies? To say that that is no dif­fer­ent than torch­ing pris­on­ers alive in a caged inferno? No. That is wrong, igno­rant, false, and vile. [...] Read more

2017-03-09T01:04:30-04:00

Go Set a Watch­man may not exactly make Harper Lee look like a “fool.” That may be the self-doubt of a reclu­sive author talk­ing, or the jad­ed­ness of a pub­lic that has learned to take a low view of sequels. I sus­pect that Lee was unwill­ing to pub­lish any­thing after Mock­ing­bird for two rea­sons: (1) she was, as she once said, more like Boo Radley than Scout Finch, and pub­lic atten­tion did not suit her; (2) she knew that noth­ing else she ever wrote, how­ever good, would be Mock­ing­bird. She was publicity-shy and wrote a book that is impossible to match. But one does ask: Why a sequel? Would that not all the more invite unfair com­par­i­son? And isn’t Mock­ing­bird so good that it stands on its own? [...] Read more

2018-04-07T00:01:28-04:00

Dr. Can­dida Moss—who is still per­mit­ted to teach at Notre Dame, to no one’s great sur­prise, least of all mine—is all wrought up over the LDS “half-​hearted shuf­fle toward LGBT equal­ity.” (I think she left out Q and A.) Dr. Moss prefers the mad dash over the cliff: When she says “LGBT equal­ity,” what she means is “mar­riage equal­ity,” in spite of the fact that no one, not even Dr. Moss, believes in any such thing. Would she advo­cate mar­ry­ing your dog? a three-​year-​old child? the exhumed body of King Tut? So let us get this myth of “mar­riage equal­ity” out of our heads from the start. To define mar­riage is to limit it, and the real goal is not mar­riage “equal­ity” but mar­riage plas­tic­ity. [...] Read more


Browse Our Archives