Bruce Charlton raises an important objection to professedly Traditionalist Christianity in the contemporary world, “Traditionalist” here meaning a faith accepted on the authority of Tradition and its ecclesial representatives rather than accepted as the outcome of individual discernment. The objection is not that such a faith is undesirable but that it is impossible. People in the world today are exposed to multiple live religious options, and even when one picks a particular Church, one finds that it is divided into factions and that its leaders have more-or-less assimilated to the global liberal order and made authoritative proclamations which more-or-less directly contradict their historical teachings. One must choose which Church, which faction and clergy within that Church, which of conflicting Magisterial statements one should credit, and this can only be done by individual discernment.
Impossible Traditionalism
Paper Beats Rescuers
Public Schools Trump First Amendment?
On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe, a President George H. W. Bush appointee, ruled that the district acted reasonably in its decision to prevent parents from protesting.McAuliffe said the parents’ "narrow, plausibly inoffensive" intentions were not as important as the wider context, and that adults attending a high school athletic event do not enjoy a First Amendment-protected right to convey messages that demean, harass or harm students."While plaintiffs may very well have never intended to communicate a demeaning or harassing message directed at Parker Tirrell or any other transgender students, the symbols and posters they displayed were fully capable of conveying such a message," he wrote. "And, that broader messaging is what the school authorities reasonably understood and appropriately tried to prevent."
Public schools are frankly on the same order as prisons in their deleterious effects on America's culture of liberty. They train the young to submit their freedoms to the dictates of authority, and here extend the command of this intelligentsia to control of their parents as well. Even if you didn't mean to engage in wrongthink, comrade, someone might have understood you to be -- so your speech must be prevented before it can occur.
UPDATE: Over in the UK, a ruling that transwomen are not, legally speaking, women.
Prisons are Not the Way
Why Is This Funny?
I don't know why this is funny, but it is. I must have reached the delirious stage of Lent.
The Kamala Harris one ...
Holy Monday
A Joke for Palm Sunday
Fairness and Heritability
The reason why kids from rich families do well isn’t that mom and dad buy their way through life. The reason, rather, is that rich families have genes that cause financial success, and pass these genes on to their kids. (Casual consumers of this literature often get confused by the fact that the effect of IQ is far too small to explain the intergenerational income correlation. The key thing to remember is that there is a lot more to genetics and success than IQ)....Stage 1 was defensive: “Sure, life’s not fair. The children of the rich do better. But the unfairness is pretty small, and almost vanishes after two generations.” Stage 3, in contrast, is offensive: “Life is fair. The children of the rich do better because talent breeds talent, and under capitalism, the cream rises to the top.”
I'm not at all convinced that social networks aren't more important than almost anything else -- if you went to Harvard, you got to know a lot of people who are going to end up on top of leading businesses or government agencies, and thus you will more readily get a job from them. Still, heritability of intelligence isn't the whole story: whole sets of virtues seem to be heritable as well. You still have to do the work of training them and inculcating them in yourself to bring them from potential to actual, but the potential is there for some when it really doesn't seem to be for others.
What, if anything, should be done about that?
Our solar,/lunar/hebdomadalian holiday
Lazarus Saturday
One more week until Pascha, Holy Week.
I'll include the whole passage from John below the fold, but Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead is a prelude to the Passover, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, and it is this miracle that prompts some Jews to decide to kill Jesus. An odd juxtaposition: A resurrection causes some to decide to kill Jesus, which leads to both His resurrection and ours. God indeed causes all things to work together for good.
It is in this passage that we get the shortest verse, "Jesus wept," as he mourns for his friend, and also the passage where Jesus declares "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die." And then he asks, "Do you believe this?"
Isn't it strange that Jesus should weep for the death of a friend when he knows he will raise that friend from the dead? I think human death is always a tragedy; it is the result of the disease of sin and it is something to mourn. We are so allergic to any negative emotions in America that we now have "celebrations of life" at funerals. There is nothing wrong with that; I have friends and family who have had those and I always participate appropriately. That is what they wanted. But, sometimes it is good to weep and to weep openly in public as Jesus did. It is good to acknowledge the tragedy. It is no denial of the resurrection to grieve the death of the beloved.
Passover
Unintended Consequences
Alas Colorado
The [manufacture and sale] restrictions are real enough but as Complete Colorado reported last month, the law's definition effectively covers "almost every centerfire semiautomatic handgun" bigger than a .22. In fact, "There is only one centerfire semiautomatic handgun model that does not fall within the bill’s definitions. That unique item is the Benelli B-80, a collector’s item last manufactured in 1990."...Up next: House Bill 1312 and its obliteration of 1st Amendment protections and parental rights. HB 1312 says, "It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful to, with specific intent to discriminate, publish materials that deadname or misgender an individual.” The law applies to everything from flyers to blogs to newspapers, and if it becomes law, I could find myself in hot water for referring to a dude in a dress as "he."Going even further, according to Ari Armstrong:Part of the bill pertains to child custody. Existing statutes define “coercive control” as “a pattern of threatening, humiliating, or intimidating actions, including assaults or other abuse, that is used to harm, punish, or frighten an individual.” The bill adds deadnaming and misgendering someone as types of “coercive control,” and it directs courts to consider deadnaming and misgendering when deciding matters of child custody.
So, as to the latter, a mother could lose custody of her child for the offense of calling her child by the name that she, the mother, bestowed upon her child at birth.
The state should be forbidden from interfering inside families. I realize that some families are awful. It's still a good rule because governments are reliably awful.
The firearm regulation is quite terrible, although as I understand it the law does not actually ban any guns, it just complicates the process for buying them (and imposes fees). That's still an unconstitutional set of infringements that I hope will be struck down by the courts, as they ought to be. It's still not as bad as, say, Maryland's law.
As I've written before, we've reached the point that literally the only real right the left believes in is the right to abortion. Everything else is subject to restrictions, and as severe a set of restrictions as they want that day.



