text:
A "Correction" That Damns Ratzinger Just as Much as Bergoglio
With time at a premium given an unexpected of circumstances yesterday, Sunday, September 24, 2017, the Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost and the Commemoration of Our Lady of Ransom, this commentary, which is the first of several concerning Correctio Filialis da Haeresibus Propagatis, July 16, 2017, the Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, must of necessity be limited to a few initial observations.
First, the "correction" of the heresies contained in Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Amoris Laetitia, March 19, 2016, the Feast of Saint Joseph, that issued by sixty-two "conservative" scholars and others within the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism is based upon the false premise that it is permissible to correct a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter. The fact that there are heresies contained in Amoris Laetitia—and in Bergoglio's subsequent statements of those of others that have received his endorsement ex post facto—proves that he is not and has never been a true a legitimate Successor of Saint Peter. Bergoglio hath not a Catholic mind. Indeed, he abhors the true Catholic Faith that has been handed down to us by the Apostles and protected infallibly in its transmission and explication by the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost.
In this regard, therefore, it is highly ironic that the Correctio contains multiple references to the papal encyclical letters of Pope Pius IX (Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1946, Ineffabilis Deus, December 8, 1854, and The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864), Pope Leo XIII (Libertas Praestantium, June 20, 1888, Providentissimus Deus, November 18, 1893), Saint Pius X (Lamentabili Sane, July 1, 1907, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910), Benedict XV (Spiritus Paraclitus, September 15, 1920), and Pope Pius XII (Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943, Divino Afflante Spiritu, September 30, 1943, Decree of the Holy Office Against Against Situation Ethics, and Humanae Generis, August 12, 1950) as many of the citations against each of the conciliar "popes" themselves and, quite indeed, the whole ethos of the false conciliar religion.
Even more ironically, however, is the fact that Pope Pius XII's Humani Generis, which is cited several times in the Correctio, contains the following passage that proves they are duty-bound to accept Amoris Laetitia or to come to the conclusion that an imposter sits on the Throne of Saint Peter:
20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)
Why does this prove that the authors of the Correction are bound to adhere to Amoris Laetitia or come to the logical conclusion that an imposter sits on the Throne of Saint Peter?
Well, I will let Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton explain how Paragraph 20 of Pope Pius XII's Humani Generis binds all Catholics to accept whatever a pope causes to be inserted into his Acta Apostolicae Sedis:
The text of the Humani generis itself supplies us with a minimum answer. This is found in the sentence we have already quoted: "And if, in their 'Acta,' the Supreme Pontiffs take care to render a decision on a point that has hitherto been controverted, it is obvious to all that this point, according to the mind and will of these same Pontiffs, can no longer be regarded as a question theologians may freely debate among themselves."
Theologians legitimately discuss and dispute among themselves doctrinal questions which the authoritative magisterium of the Catholic Church has not as yet resolved. Once that magisterium has expressed a decision and communicated that decision to the Church universal, the first and the most obvious result of its declaration must be the cessation of debate on the point it has decided. A man definitely is not acting and could not act as a theologian, as a teacher of Catholic truth, by disputing against a decision made by the competent doctrinal authority of the Mystical Body of Christ on earth.
Thus, according to the clear teaching of the Humani generis, it is morally wrong for any individual subject to the Roman Pontiff to defend a thesis contradicting a teaching which the Pope, in his "Acta," has set forth as a part of Catholic doctrine. It is, in other words, wrong to attack a teaching which, in a genuine doctrinal decision, the Sovereign Pontiff has taught officially as the visible head of the universal Church. This holds true always an everywhere, even in those cases in which the Pope, in making his decision, did not exercise the plenitude of his apostolic teaching power by making an infallible doctrinal definition.
The Humani generis must not be taken to imply that a Catholic theologian has completed his obligation with respect to an authoritative doctrinal decision made by the Holy Father and presented in his published "Acta" when he has merely refrained from arguing or debating against it. TheHumani generis reminded its readers that "this sacred magisterium ought to be the immediate and universal norm of truth for any theologian in matters of faith and morals."[9] Furthermore, it insisted that the faithful are obligated to shun errors which more or less approach heresy, and "to follow the constitutions and decrees by which evil opinions of this sort have been proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See."[10] In other words, the Humani generis claimed the same internal assent for declarations of the magisterium on matters of faith and morals which previous documents of the Holy See had stressed.
We may well ask why the Humani generis went to the trouble of mentioning something as fundamental and rudimentary as the duty of abstaining from further debate on a point where the Roman Pontiff has already issued a doctrinal decision, and has communicated that decision to the Church universal by publishing it in his "Acta." The reason is to be found in the context of the encyclical itself. The Holy Father has told us something of the existing situation which called for the issuance of the "Humani generis." This information is contained in the text of that document. The following two sentences show us the sort of condition the Humani generis was written to meet and to remedy:
"And although this sacred magisterium ought to be the immediate and universal norm of truth on matters of faith and morals for any theologian, as the agency to which Christ the Lord has entrusted the entire deposit of faith - that is, the Sacred Scriptures and divine Tradition - to be guarded and defended and explained, still, the duty by which the faithful are obligated also to shun those errors which approach more or less to heresy, and therefore 'to follow the constitutions and decrees by which evil opinions of this sort have been proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See,' is sometimes ignored as if it did not exist. What is said in encyclical letters of the Roman Pontiffs about the nature and constitution of the Church is habitually and deliberately neglected by some with the idea of giving force to a certain vague notion which they claim to have found in the ancient Fathers, especially the Greeks."[11]
Six years ago, then, Pope Pius XII was faced with a situation in which some of the men who were privileged and obligated to teach the truths of sacred theology had perverted their position and their influence and had deliberately flouted the teachings of the Holy See about the nature and the constitution of the Catholic Church. And, when he declared that it is wrong to debate a point already decided by the Holy Father after that decision has been published in his "Acta," he was taking cognizance of and condemning an existent practice. There actually were individuals who were contradicting papal teachings. They were so numerous and influential that they rendered the composition of the Humani generis necessary to counteract their activities. These individuals were continuing to propose teachings repudiated by the Sovereign Pontiff in previous pronouncements. The Holy Father, then, was compelled by these circumstances to call for the cessation of debate among theologians on subjects which had already been decided by pontifical decisions published in the "Acta."
The kind of theological teaching and writing against which the encyclical Humani generis was directed was definitely not remarkable for its scientific excellence. It was, as a matter of fact, exceptionally poor from the scientific point of view. The men who were responsible for it showed very clearly that they did not understand the basic nature and purpose of sacred theology. For the true theologian the magisterium of the Church remains, as the Humani generis says, the immediate and universal norm of truth. And the teaching set forth by Pope Pius IX in his Tuas libenter is as true today as it always has been.
But when we treat of that subjection by which all Catholic students of speculative sciences are obligated in conscience so that they bring new aids to the Church by their writings, the men of this assembly ought to realize that it is not enough for Catholic scholars to receive and venerate the above-mentioned dogmas of the Church, but [they ought also to realize] that they must submit to the doctrinal decisions issued by the Pontifical Congregations and also to those points of doctrine which are held by the common and constant agreement of Catholics as theological truths and conclusions which are so certain that, even though the opinions opposed to them cannot be called heretical, they still deserve some other theological censure.[12]
It is definitely the business of the writer in the field of sacred theology to benefit the Church by what he writes. It is likewise the duty of the teacher of this science to help the Church by his teaching. The man who uses the shoddy tricks of minimism to oppose or to ignore the doctrinal decisions made by the Sovereign Pontiff and set down in his "Acta" is, in the last analysis, stultifying his position as a theologian. (The doctrinal Authority of Papal allocutions.)
Are there any further questions about the binding nature of what a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter places in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis?
Monsignor Fenton provided no wiggle room for the authors of the Correctio as they are engaging in the shoddy tricks of minimalism to justify their open dissent from what they think is papal teaching.
Moreover, as it is impossible for a pope to proclaim heresy, one must come to the conclusion that a "pope" who does so is not a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter. Even a conciliar "cardinal," the late Mario Francesco Pompedda, who was the prefect of the conciliar Signatura between 1996 and 2003, noted the following about the See of Peter being vacant in the case of heresy:
It is true that the canonical doctrine states that the see would be vacant in the case of heresy. ... But in regard to all else, I think what is applicable is what judgment regulates human acts. And the act of will, namely a resignation or capacity to govern or not govern, is a human act. (Cardinal Says Pope Could Govern Even If Unable to Speak, Zenit, February 8, 2005.)
It does not take one with a doctorate in sacred theology to see that Jorge Mario Bergoglio and each of his predecessors have been heretics. It simply takes the courage to recognize the truth of the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal as we are reminded once again by the words of Pope Pius XI, contained in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925, that the Catholic Church can never be the author of any doctrinal errors or heresy that a true pope caused to inserted into the Acta Apostolicae Sedis:
Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)
No one can claim that a person can be considered a Catholic while defecting from even one article of the Faith. This is simply an immutable truth of the Catholic Faith:
With reference to its object, faith cannot be greater for some truths than for others. Nor can it be less with regard to the number of truths to be believed. For we must all believe the very same thing, both as to the object of faith as well as to the number of truths. All are equal in this because everyone must believe all the truths of faith--both those which God Himself has directly revealed, as well as those he has revealed through His Church. Thus, I must believe as much as you and you as much as I, and all other Christians similarly. He who does not believe all these mysteries is not Catholic and therefore will never enter Paradise. (Saint Francis de Sales, The Sermons of Saint Francis de Sales for Lent Given in 1622, republished by TAN Books and Publishers for the Visitation Monastery of Frederick, Maryland, in 1987, pp. 34-37.)
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine:they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
No, "partial credit" does not cut it to retain one's membership in good standing within the maternal bosom of Holy Mother Church:
Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: 'This is the Catholic Faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved' (Athanasian Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim 'Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,' only let him endeavor to be in reality what he calls himself.
Besides, the Church demands from those who have devoted themselves to furthering her interests, something very different from the dwelling upon profitless questions; she demands that they should devote the whole of their energy to preserve the faith intact and unsullied by any breath of error, and follow most closely him whom Christ has appointed to be the guardian and interpreter of the truth. There are to be found today, and in no small numbers, men, of whom the Apostle says that: "having itching ears, they will not endure sound doctrine: but according to their own desires they will heap up to themselves teachers, and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables" (II Tim. iv. 34). Infatuated and carried away by a lofty idea of the human intellect, by which God's good gift has certainly made incredible progress in the study of nature, confident in their own judgment, and contemptuous of the authority of the Church, they have reached such a degree of rashness as not to hesitate to measure by the standard of their own mind even the hidden things of God and all that God has revealed to men. Hence arose the monstrous errors of "Modernism," which Our Predecessor rightly declared to be "the synthesis of all heresies," and solemnly condemned. We hereby renew that condemnation in all its fulness, Venerable Brethren, and as the plague is not yet entirely stamped out, but lurks here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully on their guard against any contagion of the evil, to which we may apply the words Job used in other circumstances: "It is a fire that devoureth even to destruction, and rooteth up all things that spring" (Job xxxi. 12). Nor do We merely desire that Catholics should shrink from the errors of Modernism, but also from the tendencies or what is called the spirit of Modernism. Those who are infected by that spirit develop a keen dislike for all that savours of antiquity and become eager searchers after novelties in everything: in the way in which they carry out religious functions, in the ruling of Catholic institutions, and even in private exercises of piety. Therefore it is Our will that the law of our forefathers should still be held sacred: "Let there be no innovation; keep to what has been handed down." In matters of faith that must be inviolably adhered to as the law; it may however also serve as a guide even in matters subject to change, but even in such cases the rule would hold: "Old things, but in a new way." (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)
While the authors of the Correctio have ably pointed out the heresies and errors contained in Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Amoris Laetitia (heresies and errors, it should be noted, that were identified and critiqued on this site in the following articles last year: Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men: A Brief Overview, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men: Another Brief Overview, Jorge's Exhortaion of Self-Justification Before Men, part three, The Conciliar Chair of Disunity and Division, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part four, Inspector Jorge Wants to See Documents, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part five, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part six, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part seven, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part eight, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part nine, Jorge's Exhortation of Self-Justification Before Men, part ten, THE END!), their scholarly endeavor fails the test of Catholicism as both Pope Leo XIII and Pope Saint Pius X explained that no one can publicly criticize a true Roman Pontiff:
And how must the Pope be loved? Non verbo neque lingua, sed opere et veritate. [Not in word, nor in tongue, but in deed, and in truth - 1 Jn iii, 18] When one loves a person, one tries to adhere in everything to his thoughts, to fulfill his will, to perform his wishes. And if Our Lord Jesus Christ said of Himself, "si quis diligit me, sermonem meum servabit," [if any one love me, he will keep my word - Jn xiv, 23] therefore, in order to demonstrate our love for the Pope, it is necessary to obey him.
Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority; we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope.
This is the cry of a heart filled with pain, that with deep sadness I express, not for your sake, dear brothers, but to deplore, with you, the conduct of so many priests, who not only allow themselves to debate and criticize the wishes of the Pope, but are not embarrassed to reach shameless and blatant disobedience, with so much scandal for the good and with so great damage to souls. (Pope Saint Pius X, Allocution Vi ringrazio to priests on the 50th anniversary of the Apostolic Union, November 18, 1912, as found at: ("Love the Pope!" – no ifs, and no buts: For Bishops, priests, and faithful, Saint Pius X explains what loving the Pope really entails.)
In other words, accept Amoris Laetitia or recognize that the man in white is having himself quite a costume party as imposter of the first order, the sixth in the line of such imposters.
Second, it is rather tiring to have to refute the misrepresentation of the correction that was issued against Pope John XXII, who held that the souls of those in Heaven qwho had bodies could see the Beatific Vision. This belief was erroneous, but the truth of the matter had yet to be formally defined.
Anti-sedevacantist authors, including some of those who composed the Correctio against the Argentine Apostate, assert that Pope John XXII (Jacques D'Euse) was a "heretical pope" because of his teaching about the Beatific Vision. Theologians beseeched him to correct his error on this matter, which had not yet been defined solemnly by the authority of the Catholic Church. Pope John XXII did recant his error before he died. It is important to emphasize, however, that the matter had not been declared solemnly by the authority of the Church. Pope John XXII was not, as Cardinal Manning pointed out at the [First] Vatican Council, a "heretical pope." There is no comparison between the correction issued against Pope John XXII and the Correctio against a known heretic, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
Third, there are three instances—one general and the author two specific—in which the authors of the Correctio cite papal documents that damn Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI just as much as Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
To wit, there are four references in the Correctio to Pope Pius IX's The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864. The authors are to be commended for including these references. As they seem to have forgotten—or perhaps do not want to recall within the text of the Correctio—"Pope Benedict XVI" dismissed the relevance of The Syllabus of Errors as follows in his very misnamed Principles of Catholic Theology:
Does this mean that the Council should be revoked? Certainly not. It means only that the real reception of the Council has not yet even begun. What devastated the Church in the decade after the Council was not the Council but the refusal to accept it. This becomes clear precisely in the history of the influence of Gaudium et spes. What was identified with the Council was, for the most part, the expression of an attitude that did not coincide with the statements to be found in the text itself, although it is recognizable as a tendency in its development and in some of its individual formulations. The task is not, therefore, to suppress the Council but to discover the real Council and to deepen its true intention in the light of the present experience. That means that there can be no return to the Syllabus, which may have marked the first stage in the confrontation with liberalism and a newly conceived Marxism but cannot be the last stage. In the long run, neither embrace nor ghetto can solve for Christians the problem of the modern world. The fact is, as Hans Urs von Balthasar pointed out as early as 1952, that the "demolition of the bastions" is a long-overdue task. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p, 391.)
All that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing at this time is demolishing the bastions that his predecessor, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, could not or would not abolish during his own time as the universal public face of apostasy.
Ah, but the Correctio's two citations concerning the immutable nature of dogmatic truth that do indeed prove Bergoglio's belief in dogmatic evolutionism to be heretical also damn the progenitor of the "hermeneutic of continuity," Ratzinger/Benedict, who has promoted dogmatic evolutionism throughout the entirety of his sixty-six years of priestly and academic lives.
The first of these two citations is from The Oath of Against Modernism, which, just incidentally, you understand, was suppressed by Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI in 1967, and the second comes from Pope Pius XII's Humani Generis:
"I hold with certainty and I sincerely confess that faith is not a blind inclination of religion welling up from the depth of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the inclination of a morally conditioned will, but is the genuine assent of the intellect to a truth that is received from outside by hearing. In this assent, given on the authority of the all-truthful God, we hold to be true what has been said, attested to, and revealed, by the personal God, our creator and Lord." (Pope Saint Pius X, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)
"Some hold that the mysteries of faith are never expressed by truly adequate concepts but only by approximate and ever changeable notions, in which the truth is to some extent expressed, but is necessarily distorted. Wherefore they do not consider it absurd, but altogether necessary, that theology should substitute new concepts in place of the old ones in keeping with the various philosophies which in the course of time it uses as its instruments, so that it should give human expression to divine truths in various ways which are even somewhat opposed, but still equivalent, as they say. […] It is evident from what We have already said, that such efforts not only lead to what they call dogmatic relativism, but that they actually contain it." (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)
Pope Saint Pius XI condemned the Modernist precept of dogmatic evolutionism, and Pope Pius XII condemned the "new theology's" efforts to endorse dogmatic evolutionism in slightly different terms. Is it really necessary to point out that a twenty-three year-old German seminarian had been completely indoctrinated in the falsehoods of the "new theology" by the time that Pope Pius XII issued Humani Generis?
Joseph Alois Ratzinger/"Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI" believes that human language is so imprecise that dogmatic formulae are conditioned by the historical circumstances in which they are pronounced, subjecting them to new interpretations as circumstances and the alleged "needs" of men change. This is, of course, heretical, and it is also blasphemous as it means that the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, did not infallibly guide our true popes and the fathers of Holy Mother Church's true general councils in their dogmatic pronouncements.
Herewith is the contempt that the heretic Ratzinger has shown for the two citations quoted by the authors of the Correctio to use against heretic Bergoglio:
1971: "In theses 10-12, the difficult problem of the relationship between language and thought is debated, which in post-conciliar discussions was the immediate departure point of the dispute.
The identity of the Christian substance as such, the Christian 'thing' was not directly ... censured, but it was pointed out that no formula, no matter how valid and indispensable it may have been in its time, can fully express the thought mentioned in it and declare it unequivocally forever, since language is constantly in movement and the content of its meaning changes." (Fr. Ratzinger: Dogmatic formulas must always change.)
1990: "The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms - perhaps for the first time with this clarity - that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.
In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church's anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time."
(Joseph Ratzinger, "Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation," published with the title "Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia," in L'Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, cited at Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete)
Secondly, it was necessary to give a new definition to the relationship between the Church and the modern State that would make room impartially for citizens of various religions and ideologies, merely assuming responsibility for an orderly and tolerant coexistence among them and for the freedom to practise their own religion.
Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance - a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel.
These are all subjects of great importance - they were the great themes of the second part of the Council - on which it is impossible to reflect more broadly in this context. It is clear that in all these sectors, which all together form a single problem, some kind of discontinuity might emerge. Indeed, a discontinuity had been revealed but in which, after the various distinctions between concrete historical situations and their requirements had been made, the continuity of principles proved not to have been abandoned. It is easy to miss this fact at a first glance.
It is precisely in this combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent, motivating decisions from within.
On the other hand, not so permanent are the practical forms that depend on the historical situation and are therefore subject to change.
Basic decisions, therefore, continue to be well-grounded, whereas the way they are applied to new contexts can change. Thus, for example, if religious freedom were to be considered an expression of the human inability to discover the truth and thus become a canonization of relativism, then this social and historical necessity is raised inappropriately to the metaphysical level and thus stripped of its true meaning. Consequently, it cannot be accepted by those who believe that the human person is capable of knowing the truth about God and, on the basis of the inner dignity of the truth, is bound to this knowledge.
It is quite different, on the other hand, to perceive religious freedom as a need that derives from human coexistence, or indeed, as an intrinsic consequence of the truth that cannot be externally imposed but that the person must adopt only through the process of conviction.
The Second Vatican Council, recognizing and making its own an essential principle of the modern State with the Decree on Religious Freedom, has recovered the deepest patrimony of the Church. By so doing she can be conscious of being in full harmony with the teaching of Jesus himself (cf. Mt 22: 21), as well as with the Church of the martyrs of all time. The ancient Church naturally prayed for the emperors and political leaders out of duty (cf. I Tm 2: 2); but while she prayed for the emperors, she refused to worship them and thereby clearly rejected the religion of the State.
The martyrs of the early Church died for their faith in that God who was revealed in Jesus Christ, and for this very reason they also died for freedom of conscience and the freedom to profess one's own faith - a profession that no State can impose but which, instead, can only be claimed with God's grace in freedom of conscience. A missionary Church known for proclaiming her message to all peoples must necessarily work for the freedom of the faith. She desires to transmit the gift of the truth that exists for one and all. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005.)
What was that Pope Pius XII wrote in Humani Generis about how the "new theologians" deny that the true meaning of doctrines may be known and understood with metaphysical certitude?
Let me remind you:
34. It is not surprising that these new opinions endanger the two philosophical sciences which by their very nature are closely connected with the doctrine of faith, that is, theodicy and ethics; they hold that the function of these two sciences is not to prove with certitude anything about God or any other transcendental being, but rather to show that the truths which faith teaches about a personal God and about His precepts, are perfectly consistent with the necessities of life and are therefore to be accepted by all, in order to avoid despair and to attain eternal salvation. All these opinions and affirmations are openly contrary to the documents of Our Predecessors Leo XIII and Pius X, and cannot be reconciled with the decrees of the Vatican Council. It would indeed be unnecessary to deplore these aberrations from the truth, if all, even in the field of philosophy, directed their attention with the proper reverence to the Teaching Authority of the Church, which by divine institution has the mission not only to guard and interpret the deposit of divinely revealed truth, but also to keep watch over the philosophical sciences themselves, in order that Catholic dogmas may suffer no harm because of erroneous opinions. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.
For the likes of men such as the conciliar revolutionaries to be correct, the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity not only hid the true meaning of doctrines for over nineteen hundred years, He permitted true popes and the Fathers of Holy Mother Church's twenty true general councils to condemn propositions that have, we are supposed to believe, only recently been "discovered" as having been true. Blasphemous and heretical.
Yes, the Correctio does indeed damn Joseph Alois Ratzinger just as much as Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Alas, the authors of the Correctio do not see (or, more perhaps more accurately, do not want to see) that this is what they have done.
Although there is much more to write on the subject of the Correctio, the lateness of the present hour demands that it wait for the next installment of this series.
Keep close to Our Lady during this month devoted to her Dolors, remembering that she has conquered all heresies. We must use her Most Holy Rosary with devotion as a weapon against all heresy and sin, including our own many sins that have worsened the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal and worsened the state of the world at-large, as we beg her to pray for us now, and at the hour of death.
Saint Nicholas of Flue, pray for us.


text:
<?php

namespace Application\Services;

use Doctrine\ORM\EntityManager;

class EntitySerializer
{

    protected $em;

    public function __construct(EntityManager $em)
    {
        $this->em = $em;
    }

    public function serialize($entity)
    {
        $data = array();

        if (is_array($entity)) {
            foreach ($entity as $entityObject) {
                $data[] = $this->serializeObject($entityObject);
            }
        } else {
            $data = $this->serializeObject($entity);
        }
        return $data;
    }

    public function serializeObject($entity)
    {
        $className = get_class($entity);

        $uow = $this->em->getUnitOfWork();
        $entityPersister = $uow->getEntityPersister($className);
        $classMetadata = $entityPersister->getClassMetadata();

        $result = array();
        foreach ($uow->getOriginalEntityData($entity) as $field => $value) {
            if (isset($classMetadata->associationMappings[$field])) {
                $assoc = $classMetadata->associationMappings[$field];

                // Only owning side of x-1 associations can have a FK column.
                if (!$assoc['isOwningSide'] || !($assoc['type'] & \Doctrine\ORM\Mapping\ClassMetadata::TO_ONE)) {
                    continue;
                }

                if ($value !== null) {
                    $newValId = $uow->getEntityIdentifier($value);
                }

                $targetClass = $this->em->getClassMetadata($assoc['targetEntity']);
                $owningTable = $entityPersister->getOwningTable($field);

                foreach ($assoc['joinColumns'] as $joinColumn) {
                    $sourceColumn = $joinColumn['name'];
                    $targetColumn = $joinColumn['referencedColumnName'];

                    if ($value === null) {
                        $result[$sourceColumn] = null;
                    } else if ($targetClass->containsForeignIdentifier) {
                        $result[$sourceColumn] = $newValId[$targetClass->getFieldForColumn($targetColumn)];
                    } else {
                        $result[$sourceColumn] = $newValId[$targetClass->fieldNames[$targetColumn]];
                    }
                }
            } elseif (isset($classMetadata->columnNames[$field])) {
                $columnName = $classMetadata->columnNames[$field];
                $result[$columnName] = $value;
            }
        }

        return $result;
    }

    public function deserialize(Array $data)
    {
        list($class, $result) = $data;

        $uow = $this->em->getUnitOfWork();
        return $uow->createEntity($class, $result);
    }

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Following the success of the Xtreme Pizza Delivery Service campaign last year, Nissan has once again joined forces with PIZZA-LA, Japans largest pizza chain, to re-launch the service, this time catering to winter sports fans.
The Xtreme Pizza Delivery Service ran for the first two weeks of February. Delivering to remote locations in the snowy mountains, over difficult terrain and through tough weather conditions, Nissan proved once more that no location is impossible for an X-Trail.
These stickers were used to promote the park assistance system of the Nissan Micra. With this system you won't be needing somebody to help you park your car like illustrated on these stickers.


text:
Route Online
Your Order Shopping total £0.00	- 0 items
Authors Our authors and their books
Listen Clinton Heylin talks Blood on the Tracks
Watch Video playlists for books
Home > All Books, Memoir, Music > Carpet Burns
Carpet Burns
Carpet Burns is Tom Hingley's account of his life as lead singer of Inspiral Carpets. 'This is a fascinating and unique book about a unique and fascinating life. Memoirs are made of this.' – David Quantick
Paperback Signed Copy - 9.99
Hardback - 12.99
Order Carpet Burns:
Option: Paperback Signed Copy - £9.99 Hardback - £12.99
Extent: 272pp
Author: Tom Hingley
Paperback Signed Copy £9.99
For Hardback, selected Hardback from option above. £12.99
Carpet Burns is Tom Hingley's account of his life as lead singer of Inspiral Carpets, one of the big three bands of the Manchester movement who, along with The Stone Roses and Happy Mondays, changed music for a generation. Tom's own words provide an account of what it felt like to be in the eye of a pop hurricane and what happens when the hits end and the arguments kick in.
'A must for all Inspirals fans and devotees to popular culture of the time. (Want to know where Noel Gallagher first cut his teeth?) The book could also act as a how-to or how-not-to guide for surviving the music industry, a business not famed for providing soft landings or aftercare.' – Eartwister
'A cool as f**k memoir… a first-hand account of a fascinating era in British pop, conveyed with atmosphere and colour.' – Record Collector
'Entertaining and refreshingly frank.' – The Big Issue
'Oh my God! Every band is the same. I couldn't put it down.' – Peter Hook
Kindle edition: UK : US : FR : ES : IT : DE
Hardback cover. Select Hardback in options above to order.
>>In Conversation – Tom Hingley and Mike Joyce
>>Carpet Burns website
Carpet Burns Trailer
Video trailer for Tom Hingley's book Carpet Burns - My Life With Inspiral Carptets (3:54)
Further Away
Tom Hingley and The Lovers perform 'Further Away' at The Ruby Lounge, Manchester, on The Beast Inside Tour. 21 September 2012.
Noel Gallagher's First Fan
Tom Hingley reads from his book Carpet Burns - My Life With Inspiral Carpets in which the band goad roadie Noel Gallagher to grab a standing fan from the back of a van in moving traffic. (1:08)
Mark E Smith Does Top of the Pops
Tom Hingley reads from his book Carpet Burns. Mark E Smith finds himself in confrontational situations with Elvis Costello, Clint Boon, Anita Doth and Gillian Taylforth at a Top of the Pops recording. (3:08)
Video RSS feed
Carpet Burns Reviews
'This is a fascinating and unique book about a unique and fascinating life. Memoirs are made of this.' – David Quantick
'A cool as f**k memoir. There's no overriding sense of bitterness or regret in [Hingley's] eminently readable memoirs, a first-hand account of a fascinating era in British pop, conveyed with atmosphere and colour.' – Record Collector
'Tom Hingley may no longer be a member of Inspiral Carpets but he's definitely got some tales to tell from when he was! Covering his time as singer with the band, his place in the Manchester music scene and his current career his autobiography is a page-turner full of anecdotes and memories.' – Louder Than War
'The Madchester explosion chased indie kids onto the dancefloor and made stars of The Stone Roses, Happy Mondays and Inspiral Carpets. The dark horse of the slew of tomes inspired by these three acts is arguably ex-Inspiral Carpets vocalist Tom Hingley's Carpet Burns, which contains fascinating insights into the band's relationship with their roadie/future Oasis superstar Noel Gallagher and a side-splittingly funny chapter about their anarchic Top Of The Pops appearance with The Fall's Mark E Smith.' – uDiscoverMusic
'An insight to many things in life and no mistake, this is thoroughly recommended.' – Scootering Magazine
'A superb book. I felt like I was reading a true story, which is not always the case with autobiographies by musicians.' – Jim Bob, Carter USM
'Carpet Burns provides a first-hand look at the Madchester movement from a man at the heart of his adopted city. Anyone interested in tour life and the impact Manchester's music scene had will quickly devour every word.' – Manchester City Official Match Programme
'An excellent memoir.' – Institute for Modern and Contemporary Culture
'Often witty and at times poignant, [Carpet Burns] charts the band's barrelling rise to success during the heady Manchester years of the late 80's and early 90's, before bearing out the adage that what goes up must come down. As the first and only account of the band it's a must for all Inspiral's fans and devotees to popular culture of the time (want to know where Noel Gallagher first cut his teeth). The book could also act in part at least, as a how-to or how-not-to guide for surviving the music industry, a business not famed for providing soft landings or after care.' – Eartwister
'Tom's book about his life as the singer of the Oldham 5 piece is a real eye-opener, and takes you on a real rollercoaster of the ups and downs of being in a band at the heart of the Manchester music scene. A memorable frontmen, a great singer, and now an accomplished author.' – Inspiral Carpets Appreciation Society
'Hingley has an eye for detail that is evidenced by the brevity of his book. He has astutely left more out than he has included, a rare talent in a world over-long with anecdotes.' – Culture Catch
'The autobiography chronicles Hingley's middle-class Oxfordshire childhood, from being the seventh and youngest child of an academically gifted though emotionally distant Oxford Don, through his rise to the heights of Manchester pop royalty and on to the inflated egos, arguments and inevitable split. Hingley is refreshingly articulate and honest, not shying away from recollecting incidents which make him look the spoilt rock star or where he came out second best. The fact that Tom is able to talk about it so frankly, would suggest he is now a man at peace with his past and his present.' – The Press
'A brutally honest and open account of the Inspirals journey through the nineties. It does not just concentrate on the success and the highs, it is also a very candid recollection of the band's fall from stardom. This is what makes this book so very special. Most memoirs or autobiographies written by musicians, often highlight the success and achievements only. This book is different. It takes you on a worded tour of the rise and subsequent fall of the band right from the very beginning to the end. It is a colourful narrative of the good, the bad and the wild times (believe me, eye-opening in parts).' – Kerry Voellner
'This is one of the best of its kind books I've read in a while. Tom Hingley is certainly near the top of the pile when it comes to compiling his memoirs.' – The Crack
'An entertaining and refreshingly frank memoir' – The Big Issue
'While The Stone Roses and The Happy Mondays had the swagger and velocity, of the so-called 'Holy Triumvirate' that rescued British pop, the Inspiral Carpets have somehow been squeezed out of the picture. But part of their charm was the fact they weren't cool and when it comes to music their output far outweighed that of their rivals. Carpet Burns offers an intriguing glimpse into the music business at the time.' – The Yorkshire Post
'Entertaining to read, particularly poignant and interesting reflections on an era which gave young outsiders an outlet for anger and a glimmer of hope.' – The Oxford Times
'Every now and again a book comes along charting a period of music history in such an accessible way, with such a clear and honest voice that when you finish that story you feel slightly lonely for a while.' – Phil Maddocks
'Tom lays down his life in print with a brutal honesty that few would dare to approach, some of the anecdotes will have even the hardest faced reader rolling around on the floor or crying like a baby in a random pattern.' – Simon Holliday
'A well written and above all honest account, you are not going to expose yourself emotionally as Hingley does throughout the book without being sincere. I loved this part of my life and this book was written in a way that took me back with such clarity that I felt I could close my eyes and reach out and touch it.' – Paul Croves
Click here to post your own review and read other readers reviews.
Respond to this review
Tom Hingley
Tom Hingley was born in 1965 in Abingdon, Oxford, the seventh and youngest child of an Oxford Don. Moving to Manchester in the mid 1980s, he took a job as a glass collector at the Hacienda before rising to fame in the early 90s as lead-singer with Inspiral Carpets, with whom he toured the world and sold over a million records before leaving the band in 2011. Carpet Burns is a memoir of his time with Inspiral Carpets.
Sign-up to our newsletter...
and receive the latest news, releases, free downloads, special offers, and book and video reviews through email.
Route Social Networks
Website Design Sheffield - Quba New Media. © Route Publishing

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
inside the Labour Party the left
Labour Representation Committee: Reduced to a think tank?
February 15, 2018 February 15, 2018 Jewish Voice for Labour, John McDonnell, Jon Lansmann, Labour Representation Committee, LRC, Marc Wadsworth, Maria Exall, Momentum
An existential crisis continues to haunt the dwindling forces of the Labour Representation Committee, reports Stan Keable
Around 120 Labour Representation Committee members gathered in London's Conway Hall on February 10 for yet another angst-ridden 'special' general meeting (SGM), in which a bewildered leadership shared with its rank and file its own failure – like most of the left – to draw into membership or engage with the 'radicalised' mass intake of Corbyn supporters into the Labour Party.
The exception to this failure is, of course, Momentum. The LRC executive's statement jealously admits that Momentum "has successfully organised many of their number" into 150 local groups, which have "formidable electoral achievements under their belt" and are "feared by the Tory enemy". By contrast, the statement repeats the LRC's own longstanding wish to "rebuild" its "network of local groups". Before this meeting it had called on "experts on particular subjects" to develop an imagined "comprehensive and impressive bank of educational material" on the "new LRC website" – the "formation of local LRCs may hopefully follow as a result".
This pious wish, however, bears no relation to the reality. As political secretary Mick Brooks accurately declared, "The LRC has stagnated" in this "most favourable situation for socialists": the Labour leadership is "probably the most leftwing ever", the Tories are in disarray and the 2008 economic crisis showed that "capitalism has failed".
Founded in 2004 in the dark days of New Labour – when clause four 'socialism' had been destroyed and Blairism seemed permanently victorious – the LRC was based on the belief that Labour had to be rebuilt from scratch, just as the original LRC had created the party in 1900. Hence the organisation's cumbersome, unwieldy structure, designed as a replica of the party: the rights of individual members were to be trumped by affiliated trade unions and socialist groups, and – ironically, keeping up with New Labour – bureaucratic 'equality' rules were to guarantee the election at all levels of women, LGBT, BAME and disability representatives, instead of assessing candidates on the basis of their politics. But news of the death of Labour was exaggerated, and as a result the LRC has always been plagued by uncertainty of purpose.
Now, with John and Jeremy heading the party – backed by Momentum's mass membership and those 150 local groups – the project of refounding old Labour is superfluous. So what is the point of the LRC? Back in February 2016, at a previous SGM in the early days of Momentum, the NEC statement opted for "maintaining the existence of our own organisation – for the time being", but foresaw the possibility that it may soon have "outlived its usefulness". And John McDonnell mused that "maybe in the future" there will be "just one organisation" (Weekly Worker February 25 2016).
However, Jon Lansman's January 10 2017 bureaucratic coup put paid to that happy prospect, and at this SGM Momentum's shortcomings became the raison d'être of the LRC. "We are not a fan club for the Corbynite movement," claimed comrade Brooks. "Momentum does not have conferences, elections, policies. It has a democratic deficit." And chairperson Matt Wrack, general secretary of the Fire Brigades Union, stated: "The key role of the LRC is to ensure discussion and debate takes place." As the NEC statement declared,
The LRC is pluralist internally. We can develop independent-minded supporters of the Corbynist movement, which neither Momentum nor the [Campaign for Labour Party Democracy] are designed to do …. We regard democratic discussion and debate within our ranks as the essential oxygen of our organisation.
Then why, we must ask, does it convene 'special' general meetings, in which amendments to the rambling NEC statement are not allowed? Take it or leave it. And why were Labour Party Marxists and a few other political groups quietly 'disaffiliated' by the leadership in 2016, if not to curtail discussion in order to avoid embarrassing criticisms of Corbyn and McDonnell? This is more or less confessed in the NEC statement, where it shamefacedly attempts to set out the limits of legitimate discussion: "Debate within the LRC is not concerned to score points or make sectarian contributions against others." So no polemics. "As long as we see ourselves contributing in a positive light to a movement going forward rather than carping at its inadequacies we can't go too far wrong." So no real criticism.
Class politics was emphasised by NEC member Maria Exall of the Communication Workers Union:
Working class empowerment should not be simply put in a list alongside the empowerment of women, people of colour, LGBT people, etc – we prioritise working class women, working class coloureds, working class gays and lesbians. Working class representation is what we are about.
And she spoke about the problem of the trade union bureaucracies and the "ongoing project" of "how to democratise the trade union link".
The LRC leadership seems, at last, to be overcoming its reluctance to take sides in political struggles within trade unions. The NEC statement asserts:
Unlike CLPD and Momentum, we actively support workers' struggles and do not confine our attentions to the Labour Party. We are in the process of organising a Unite LRC caucus … the first of trade union caucuses for all major unions. … We need to organise within the unions … for trade union democracy and socialist policies.
All very positive – but why not adopt Labour Party Marxists' aim to win all trade unions to affiliate to Labour?
LRC president John McDonnell turned up in the afternoon, fresh from Labour's 'alternative models of ownership' conference, which, he said, was shaping policies "almost like those of the LRC 10 years ago". Since the 2017 general election, the Labour leadership has been "consolidating". Unintentionally exposing the LRC's overblown claim that the election had been fought on a fully socialist manifesto, he stated that For the many, not the few was "just for that election". So now "we need to radicalise those policies" and "develop an implementation manual", together with "draft legislation ready for office".
And, worryingly, he claimed: "The Parliamentary Labour Party are signed up to this exercise." Wrong, wrong, wrong, John. The LRC NEC statement takes the opposite view – not that anyone bothered to tell him. Perhaps that would be seen as negative or "carping". Or maybe the NEC statement itself is "carping"? Here is what it says:
The Parliamentary Labour Party and the party bureaucracy remain firmly in the hands of the right wing. They seemed determined to rule or ruin. Corbyn's role as leader is untouchable for the time being on account of his 2017 electoral success, [but] his position, and that of his supporters, remains precarious.
Spot on, NEC. But comrade McDonnell is already on a different page. "When the LRC was set up on Tony Benn's advice, we were within a Labour Party we could not recognise. We are on the edge of government now." So the LRC's role now should be as a "think-tank, to develop ideas into policies" – and he saw Mike Phipps's book For the many: preparing Labour for power as making a start.
'Centre-left' slate
A revealing episode at the SGM was an emergency motion moved by Marc Wadsworth of Grassroots Black Left. This criticised the way in which the "centre-left slate" had been selected for the forthcoming elections for Constituency Labour Party seats on Labour's NEC:
This SGM notes with grave concern that the 'centre-left' slate for Labour's next NEC elections appears to have been chosen unilaterally by Momentum without consulting its members and before the Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance had completed its discussions on the slate. We consider that this could split the left and divide supporters of Jeremy Corbyn's progressive agenda for government. Irrespective of the outcome and content of the slate, we believe this is not a democratic and transparent process in line with Jeremy's 'new politics'. We call on the incoming LRC NEC to formulate a response to challenge the democratic deficit in deciding the slate.
In my years as an LRC member, I confess I have never discovered exactly how candidates for the slate were selected – it always seemed to be done behind closed doors, and I do not remember ever being asked to vote on the matter. The LRC leadership was supposedly consulted, though it had sometimes complained about not being invited or about their views being ignored, especially with respect to their longstanding wish to remove Ann Black. The CLPD, under Pete Willsman's leadership, always defended Ann Black and always got its way.
But the left is evolving new forms, so the cosy, behind-the-scenes process has to be made transparent, and the members of the participating groups have to have their say. This time, not only was Momentum involved, but also Jewish Voice for Labour (and perhaps other groups). The newly formed Grassroots Black Left, however, was excluded.
What happened, we are told, was that all parties except the CLPD wanted a slate without Ann Black, because of her role in the anti-Corbyn shenanigans of general secretary Iain McNicol's apparatchiks. They had excluded masses of new Labour members from voting in leadership elections, suspended left-led CLPs and waved through the automatic suspension and even expulsion of leftwing members on trumped-up charges.
However, the CLPD would only accept a slate which included Ann Black. But when the 80-strong CLPD executive (in reality, volunteers who are voted in as a block at the AGM) took the unheard of step of actually voting to resolve a disputed issue, CLPD secretary Pete Willsman and his co-thinkers lost the vote narrowly. Then, when Willsman and co refused to accept the vote, Jon Lansman jumped in to impose a Momentum slate – without consulting the Momentum membership, of course.
LRC secretary Michael Calderbank, in asking for Marc Wadsworth's motion to be remitted, said:
The slate-making process is broken. It is opaque, carried on behind closed doors. Not only were Momentum members not adequately consulted: neither were LRC members, nor the LRC itself.
Graham Bash, supporting the motion – which, after all, only commits the LRC to fight for a democratic slate-making process, confirmed that the present system is broken, but insisted, quite rightly, that "fielding an alternative left slate would be a disaster". The motion was carried overwhelmingly.
← Clause 4: Why revive a stinking corpse?
Witch-hunts: When chickens come home… →
Freedom of discussion is the safest place
Wales: Blairite right clings on
May 4, 2018 Comments Off on Wales: Blairite right clings on
Humpty Dumpty and 'anti-Semitism'
September 21, 2017 Comments Off on Humpty Dumpty and 'anti-Semitism'


text:
BLOOM, HAROLD
The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages
Harcourt, October 1994. Trade Paperback. Used - Good. Item #279132
Harold Bloom explores our Western literary tradition by concentrating on the works of twenty-six authors central to the Canon. He argues against ideology in literary criticism; he laments the loss of intellectual and aesthetic standards; he deplores multiculturalism, Marxism, feminism, neoconservatism, Afrocentrism, and the New Historicism. Insisting instead upon "the autonomy of the aesthetic, " Bloom places Shakespeare at the center of the Western Canon. Shakespeare has become the touchstone for all writers who come before and after him, whether playwrights poets or storytellers. In the creation of character, Bloom maintains, Shakespeare has no true precursor and has left no one after him untouched. Milton, Samuel Johnson, Goethe, Ibsen, Joyce, and Beckett were all indebted to him; Tolstoy and Freud rebelled against him; and Dante, Wordsworth, Austen, Dickens, Whitman, Dickinson, Proust, the modern Hispanic and Portuguese writers Borges, Neruda, and Pessoa are exquisite examples of how canonical writing is born of an originality fused with tradition. Bloom concludes this provocative, trenchant work with a complete list of essential writers and books - his vision of the Canon.
Previous owner's name. Pencilled notes on front free endpaper.
See all items in Fiction & Literature
See all items by HAROLD BLOOM


The show started with Montreal local's Distoriam, who have been going a bit more strong on the bigger shows that have been coming our way. They started things off with a bang; their musicianship has gotten much more superior since I last saw them. I was generally impressed by their set.
Next up we had Valfreya. Previous times I have seen them, they weren't my favorite, but this performance caught my attention! They had a lot of energy and stage presence, more than usual. I do not know if it was due to a lineup change, but it was really fun to watch them play.
Next up was Striker, who I was really excited for. I was like a little kid on Christmas morning, jumping up and down, knowing I was finally going to see the band that everyone at the station was talking about. Man, did it ever meet my expectations. The sheer amount of energy these guys put on stage is incredible; never have I seen such young musicians going in with their full potential.
Starting off with Phoenix Lights, they ripped the stage and caused the crowd to go wild. The song is so much better live, more in your face and punchy. Born to Lose was very energetic, and the lights they had were synced to the music, adding flare and contrast to their set. I was mainly looking forward to hearing some new stuff off of Play to Win, their upcoming album. They played Heart of Lies, and that was a treat.
So what is the verdict of Striker's performance?
Unbelievable, energetic, incredible musicianship, great stage presence, pure Canadian goodness.
So we finally come to the headliner, Unleash the Archers. I was a bit concerned that Striker might have stolen the show, but much to my dismay, I was floored by their stunning performance. Brittney Haye's vocal performance was stellar, and the band themselves were very tight. They played classic songs such as Tonight We Ride and Time Stands Still. The songs they showcased were mainly from their new album Apex, opening up the set with Awakening. I felt like a elf going on a quest into battle, as the band has a fantasy vibe going on throughout the whole night. I'm very proud of them for putting on such a great show.


Book your fishing holiday at Bengts today Read more.
Great fishing waters in Hedesunda Read more.
Go hiking, biking or canoeing Read more.
Welcome to visit Nedre Dalälven in central Sweden. Just 1,5 hour north of Stockholm we are proud to invite you to our region's exceptional and unique natural qualities that is created by the river. So high values that UNESCO declared us to be a Biosphere Reserve.
Nedre Dalälvens development Ltd is the head of Biological mosquito control that is co-funded by the European Commissions Agricultural and rural develeopment fund. More information about the project Biological mosquito control can be found at www.mygg.se/EN/about-us.


text:
Michael Britt Quotations
Michael Britt
Michael Antonio Brittis an American former professional basketball player who was selected by the Washington Bullets in the 2nd roundof the 1983 NBA Draft. A 6'6" forward from the University of District of Columbia... (wikipedia)
Baritone Quotes
I think if you don't put as many tracks on it, you can get better tone on all the tracks you do have. It lets the vocals stand out, especially on the song like 'I Never Needed You' with Sara Evans, who sings that with Richie. That track is so sparse, there's just so much room for their voices to take up the speakers. I even play baritone guitar on that just so I don't play a lot of frequencies that are even in the vocal range. To me it's just, that song opens up everything for the vocals to do what they do.
Bills Quotes
We probably work off of fear, ... We have bills to pay, and we have to split (profits) four ways.
Album Quotes
We always walk around with kind of a chip on our shoulders and I feel like we've been making good music for a long time, but sometimes we're a little easier to overlook and maybe this album will make it a little harder to overlook us.
Change Quotes
it made us think. Any time you change your whole philosophy, it makes you want to change the things that weren't working that you'd (otherwise) just live with.
Approach Quotes
Dann tends to approach things more from a pop standpoint. We don't try to be a pop band. Justin made a record that was a little more raw, not as 'produced-sounding.' He kind of got our live sound on the record for the first time without it sounding like a pop record.
In hindsight, it's the best thing that ever happened to us. When you go in with the same producer so many times you get a little lazy.
The devastation was awful. It just didn't look like the same town.
Michael Britt Fans Also Likes Quotations from
Ronnie Oldham
Satchel Paige


The USTA and United States Davis Cup Captain Jim Courier announced that world No. 11 Jack Sock, No. 14 Sam Querrey, No. 17 John Isner, No. 53 Ryan Harrison, and No. 54 Steve Johnson will represent the U.S. in the 2018 Davis Cup by BNP Paribas World Group Quarterfinal against Belgium. The best-of-five match series will be played on a hard court at Belmont University's Curb Event Center in Nashville, Tenn., April 6-8.
The U.S. holds a 4-0 record over Belgium in Davis Cup play. The U.S. last faced Belgium in the 2005 World Group Playoff in Leuven, Belgium. The U.S. won the tie, 4-1, with a team led by Andy Roddick, James Blake, and Bob and Mike Bryan. The U.S. also squared off against Belgium in the 1998 World Group Quarterfinal in Indianapolis, as well as in 1957 and 1953.
Belmont University alumnus and Nashville native Brian Baker, 32, will also be accompanying the U.S. Davis Cup Team for the week. Baker will serve as an "unofficial coach" to assist the team in practice and will then be a sideline reporter for Tennis Channel during its broadcast. Baker, 32, peaked at a career-high of No. 52 in the world in singles in October 2012 and No. 29 in the world in doubles in May 2017. He was also a member of the 2016 U.S. Olympic Team in Rio. While recovering from injuries and surgeries throughout his career, Baker studied and coached tennis at Belmont, graduating with a business administration degree in May 2015.


text:
American Institute of Chemical Engineers External Awarding Organization
Allan P. Colburn Award for Excellence in Publications by a Young Member of the Institute (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Andreas Acrivos Award for Professional Progress in Chemical Engineering (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Charles M.A. Stine Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Excellence in Process Development Research Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Fellow (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Fluidized Processes Recognition Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Food, Pharmaceutical and Bioengineering Division Award in Chemical Engineering (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
George Klinzing Best PhD Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Lectureship Award in Fluidization (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Nanoscale Science and Engineering Forum Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Particle Technology Forum Award (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
R.H. Wilhelm Award in Chemical Reaction Engineering (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
Thomas Baron Award in Fluid-Particle Systems (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)


Some hazardous toys that have been recalled over the past year are still being sold online, a consumer watchdog group warns in a new report as many families are beginning their holiday shopping.
On Tuesday, the Seattle-based WashPIRG Public Interest Research Group Foundation released its 31st annual Trouble in Toyland report, which lists potentially dangerous toys that the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recalled between January 2015 and October 2016. Unlike car recalls, wherein companies may alert owners based on VIN numbers, toy companies do not notify customers when their products are recalled, according to WashPIRG. Many of the toys listed in this year´s report were recalled for lead, powerful magnets or other hazards.
"We should be able to trust that the toys we buy are safe," Bruce Speight, WashPIRG director, said in a news release. "However, until that´s the case, consumers should understand two things: first, not all recalls may be well-publicized so you should check your house for previously recalled toys and second, some toys that are recalled may still be available online."
According to the release, recalled toys still available online include a toy glockenspiel that was recalled in February 2016 due to high levels of lead in the paint, a remote-controlled flying toy recalled in June 2016 that contains a USB charging cord that can overheat, and a pencil case with magnetized lid that may pose a health threat when the magnets detach. If swallowed, the magnets can link in a child´s intestines, resulting in serious internal injuries, according to WashPIRG.
"Parents are the last line of defense against toy related injury," Dr. Brian Johnston, chief of pediatrics at Seattle´s Harborview Medical Center, said in the release. "To prevent problems with holiday toys, read the labels, follow age-limits, and check for recalls. Above all, use common sense: The most serious injuries come from riding toys, toys with small parts that pose a choking hazard, toys that include small magnets and toys that use button batteries."
To review other recalled toys that may still be sold online, check out the full Trouble in Toyland report at www.washpirgfoundation.org.


According to the Houston Chronicle, "Gov. Rick Perry proposed a $1.6 billion cut in the state business tax Monday."
Well, isn't that nice. This is the business revenue tax that was pushed by Perry and other Republicans (and Democrats) in 2006 as a way of generating more tax income for the state of Texas. At the time, it was claimed that it would reduce people's property taxes. Of course, property taxes are now higher than ever.
As usual, the tax cut isn't matched by any particular spending cuts. So it looks like a typical effort to score some votes by "taxing the future" instead of the present.
Wouldn't it be nice if politicians like Rick Perry spent more time coming up with spending cuts? But no, that might be unpopular.
Libertarians have proven to be brave about spending cuts, whether they're popular or not. Let's get some Libertarians elected to office.


rather than patching a file in place.
problem space to see if an even more generic solution doesn't arise.
Thanks for your time and effort in writing this document.
Previous message: Lisa Dusseault: "Re: PATCH vs PUT w/Content-Range"
Reply: Jamie Lokier: "Re: PATCH thoughts..."
Maybe reply: Lisa Dusseault: "Re: PATCH thoughts..."


"Grace is God's deliverance, his transforming initiative and not our human-effort, high-ideal, hard-striving achievement. It is a gift from God that we do not deserve; it is not self-righteousness that we achieve by our own good works" (Stassen & Gushee p. 36). Grace is God's unmerited favor toward us. It is "unmerited" because there is nothing we can do to earn it. It is free, a gift from God to man. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God" (Ephesians 2:8, NIV). This familiar verse says a mouthful. With all that man has in his possession, the power to save himself is the one thing lacking and is much needed in this world. The only way man can be saved is through faith in Jesus Christ and this too is an act of God's grace. Jesus tells us in John 6:44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them" (NIV). So what is it that man can and/or should do in order to be saved? The answer is respond in faith. When we respond in faith to God's redemption, we allow Jesus to be Lord of our lives. When Jesus becomes Lord of our lives, he gives us the Holy Spirit of God to reside in us, leading us and guiding us in our daily lives. Psalm 37:23 says "The steps of a good man are ordered by the LORD" (KJV). This is our faithful participation—we allow ourselves to be led by God by responding in obedience to His Holy Spirit. We see Jesus expounding this idea in the Beatitudes. "The Beatitudes are not about high ideals, but about God's gracious deliverance and our joyous participation" (Stassen & Gushee p. 35).
Stassen, Glen Harold, and David P. Gushee. Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2003. Print.