The Seventh Age

In today's WSJ. Is the good senator trying create a national platform for himself???

This article from www.chiesa breaks down the cultural/religious divide in the Ukraine: A Greek Catholic Church supporting the pro-Western reformer, and an Orthodox Church that supports Putin's man. While JP II is clearly sympathetic to the reformist cause, he deeply desires ecumenical relations with the Moscow Patriarchate. Thus, he is in a pickle, with nothing to contribute but his prayers.

The National Review Online has an excellent article this morning summarizing what is at stake in the Ashcroft v. Raich case that is before the Supreme Court this week.

It is a unique circumstance of the American experiment that many are forced to endorse out of self-interest certain political positions to which they are opposed. Unlike European democracy, which was excruciatingly and incompletely cleaved from autocratic political traditions, our Constitution was the result of an unblinking and (mostly) unencumbered assessment of political power and structures. The greatest American contribution to the advance of Western Civilization is surely the structure of our political institutions and the respect we have for it. Federalism is the cornerstone of this structure, and even those who abhor recreational drug use must shuffle over and line up behind the petitioner in this case in the name of preserving the system that makes the ultimate political triumph of a culture of life possible.

Another excellent feature of our system is the independence of our judiciary, and whether the Rehnquist Court’s rediscovery of federalism has been clear (United States v. Morrison, U.S. v. Lopez) or baffling (Florida v. College Savings Bank), we must applaud the Court’s defense of the Constitution. Steadfast in the face of such popular sentiments as keeping guns out of schools and protecting women from violence, the Court has taken the higher road in many cases. Despite the ridicule Ms. Raich probably deserves, and the possible jubilation of recreational drug users, we can expect the Court, at least in this situation, to serve the greater good.

Yes, I know, the Specter controversy is dead. But I thought our readers might be interested to see the letter I received from Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) on the issue.

The last Tuesday of the month is the monthly meeting of the Twin Cities Chesterton Society at the University Club in St. Paul. Last night we discussed what Twin Cities Chestertonian Steve Miller (no, not that Steve Miller) calls the "trunk" of Chesterton's writings, from which all of his other books and essays find their roots.

The crowd was large, including a number of Evangelical Protestants, some of whom were surprised that even Orthodoxy is viewed by Catholics as a specifically Catholic book, and not just a book of "mere Christianity." Of course, what's remarkable about the book is that it can be read as "mere Christianity," as I did when I read it the first time. But the more one reads it, the more one realizes that Chesterton is already pointing to the Catholic Church, as when he declares in the chapter titled "Authority and the Adventurer":

"Those countries in Europe which are still influenced by priests, are exactly the countries where there is still singing and dancing and coloured dresses and art in the open air. Catholic doctrine and discipline may be walls; but they are the walls of a playground. Christianity is the only frame which has preserved the pleasure of Paganism." (145 in the Doubleday Image Edition)

Notice that "Christianity" is pictured here as synonymous with Catholic Europe and not Anglican England. An older nun tried to argue against the evidence that Chesterton's reference to the Catholic Church was to the Church of England. (She belongs, not surprisingly, to an order of nuns that is fast disappearing.) Chesterton may not say outright that the Authority that regulates the Apostles' Creed is the Roman Catholic Church (and it would be 14 years before he was received into the Church), but his hints are very clear. Christianity is a set of ideas, but it is more than that. It is a body with an authority given by Christ himself.

It's tough for liberal Catholics and Evangelical Protestants to hear, but Orthodoxy has a home, and it's postmaster general is John Paul II.

Language is a fundamental element of culture. When it collapses, meaningful communications are no longer possible. What’s left has been starkly chronicled by Orwell and others.

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” –Orwell

And so it is very revealing to recall certain liberals comparing conservatives to Nazis during the election season. Now that the Dutch are legally murdering “undesirable” babies in hospitals, we find liberals at a loss for words. If American political conservatives are Nazis, what word do you use for the Dutch who have now assumed Nazi values?

Similarly, we have the insipid puerility of Al Fraken casually spitting the slur of “racist” at David Horowitz. If Fraken’s meager intellect were not totally debased, even he would know that “racist” is one of the gravest accusations a civilized man can face. In days of yore, Fraken would publicly apologize or face his adversary on the field of honor. Instead, Horowitz has other plans.

Diversity is conformity…tolerance is dominion…choice is requirement…

Planning to make the phrase “Merry Christmas” illegal on state property, the great city of Denver is definitely protected from the immoral, damnable scourge of state established religion. Non-Christians are now safer from being victimized by reality as they go about their utterly ludicrous irony. In a city forged from rough land in part by French Catholic bishops (who built its first high school and hospital), under the protection of a rule of law founded on Christian values, they celebrate a state-recognized holiday named for the Christian savior, but they will not tolerate the inclusion of that savior’s followers.

This week the US Federal Court in D.C heard a habeas corpus petition from several detainees held as “enemy combatants” at Guantanamo Bay. These petitions are consolidated in Boumediene v. Bush. In the aftermath of Rasul v. Bush and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, courts are filling with such petitions. There are sixty cases pending at this court alone, and several more across the nation.

Boumediene was a Red Crescent worker taken into custody during the routing of Taliban forces and held for three months at a base in Bosnia. A Bosnia court ordered him released for lack of any good reason to hold him. However, upon his release he was immediately picked up again and handed over to the US military who removed him to Guantanamo Bay. After almost three years, he and several other detainees have gained access to an attorney, and the government is left making absurd remarks when forced to account for their actions.

The exact legal position of these detainees is under dispute, and certainly the War on Terror must be prosecuted vigorously, but the Bush administration needs to reassess its detentions of these individuals. Charge them, or release them immediately. Their status is a festering lesion on our body politic. Habeas corpus was such a vital element of the rule of law that the Founders saw fit to write it directly into the original Constitution. It was the only individual right so enshrined before the Bill of Rights. Though the Guantanamo Bay detainees are clearly not citizens, this kind of detention is anathema to the American ethos. Detaining alleged enemies without formal accusation for years. Denying them a trial. Affording no access to family or counsel. Holding them incommunicado indefinitely. Isn’t this (among other things) what the bad guys do? Isn’t that how we know they are bad guys?

Despite the fact that our nation is bathed now in a constant white noise of liberal contempt for American policies and values, it is not villainous to question the government’s actions in this situation. Indeed, it might be the most patriotic position to take. The cost of detaining these people in this way is simply too high.

"As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy" -Dawson

Peggy Noonan had a long piece on opinionjournal.com yesterday recounting her time working for Dan Rather and assessing the man. Her view is that simple Texas boy Dan wanted to ascend the world of establishment media and gave in to the pressure to become an establishment liberal clone to do it. What he didn't realize was that the world had changed and success in 2004 no longer means sucking up to the establishment liberal world at all costs. It's a sad story that Rather's later treachery will outshadow a fairly good career. How different from the feel of the Tom Brokaw send-off.

My spiritual reading of the last few days has been from the collected journals of Blessed Pope John XXIII, titled Journal of a Soul. The irony of his reputation is that both "progressive" and "traditionalist" Catholics seem to think he was a wild-eyed liberal caught up in the falsely so-called "Spirit of Vatican II." The reality is that he was a very conservative man, in love with the entire tradition. His own youth was spent, as evidenced by his journals, in a search for holiness that sounds, well, very pre-Vatican II. In his "Meditation" that precedes the text of the journals, Pope John's old friend Giulio Bevilacqua attempts a pre-emptive strike on those who would disdain the journals:

This spirituality might seem to be reduced to interminable examinations of conscience, which arouse in the minds of our contemporaries distrust or even revolt; it is a method which apparently sees God not as love and fatherhood, from whom all fatherhood derives, but only as the Judge who pronounces eternal judgments on the frailty of the creature, a breath of wind that passes and comes no more. . . .
Yet this kind of spirituality produced Pope John: the tree is to be judged by its fruit. This rigorously constructed spirituality is technique, the letter of the law; yes, but it is not only technique and the letter of the law, for within it lives and from it soars a great conception.

The "great conception" Bevilacqua goes on to mention is "a powerful and exalted evangelical impulse which dominates his whole existence, and preserves this constant examination of his own life from any puritanical or pharisaical contamination."

Indeed Pope John looked back on these earlier journals with approval and approved their publication because they might help others learn from him.

So far, I am, and will continue to pass on nuggets.

Clint Eastwood's Million Dollar Baby, due out in a few days, looks like a cross between Whale Rider and Rocky with a unique twist, a daily mass attendee on the big screen.

The trailer even sports a scene with a priest giving counsel rather than sexual favors, a refreshing change in this post-scandal era.

While Hollywood may be down on the Church, they just can't escape the fact that they need her sacramentality to convey faith in this visual medium.

I've always been struck by the fact that almost all churchs in the movies have traditional layouts with ornate facades, imposing stone arches, stained-glass windows, statues, candles, the whole works.

If only our modern day "worship space" architects would follow the films!

My blogging has been a bit light (okay, non-existant) of late as I enter into the real estate fray in hot pursuit of the American dream, my very own deficit. Isn't home ownership wonderful?

So the purchase agreement is signed, the home inspected, and the mortgage almost worked out (if you thought telemarketers were bad, wait until a mortgage broker finds out you are in the market. It gives new meaning to the word relentless.).

I am also encountering the 200% markup that accompanies anything that has to do with buying a house, from inspection services to photocopying documents, to appraisals. Makes me want to consider a career change.

Anyway, here is the new mansion:

Who said debt was such a bad thing? Now I understand why the federal governement has such a hard time balancing the budget. It's so much more enjoyable to buy with someone else's money!

An article in today's Star Tribune on Archbishop Flynn's ad limina visit to Rome notes that his excellency is pondering retirement.

A beautiful discourse from papal household preacher Raniero Cantalamessa, OFM Cap. Go to the ZENIT main page for the full text.

New essay by Fr. James Schall, SJ, which begins with a quote from our man Dawson:

"It has been the fault of both pacifism and liberalism in the past that they have ignored the immense burden of inherited evil under which society and civilization labour and have planned an imaginary world for an impossible humanity. We must recognize that we are living in an imperfect world in which human and superhuman forces of evil are at work and so long as those forces affect the political behaviour of mankind there can be no hope of abiding peace."

— Christopher Dawson, “The Catholic Attitude to War,” 1937

Mary Eberstadt chronicles the "music of abandonment" created by Eminem and other pop-stars that describes the legacy of "fatherless America." Once again, Dan Quayle was right.

While we are bemoaning the removal of the Ten Commandments from the public square, Christians in Azerbaijan have a different problem, the removal of Christian names from the public square.

Apparently some predominately Muslim localities are denying birth certificates to families who want to give Christian names to their children. Luke and Moses have recently been found quite problematic.

"Luka is not an Azerbaijani name," Mehman Soltanov of the Justice Ministry's civil registration department told Forum 18 from Baku on 1 December. "Why did they choose a religious name?" Soltanov, who wrote to tell Luka's father Novruz Eyvazov on 5 April that he had issued "appropriate instructions" to Kalashova's office, speculated to Forum 18 that it was not the parents who had chosen this name but "some religious sect".

Indeed, in her 1 May response to Novruz Eyvazov, which Forum 18 has seen, Kalashova complained that "during the chaos and anarchy in the country in 1989-90, foreign missionaries came to the village of Aliabad and tried to conduct subversive activity, spreading the Christian faith of the Baptist sect among the population, and tried to change surnames and first names, changing them into Georgian and Christian names, strengthening separatist sentiment and setting friend against friend". She claimed local villagers had protested against such activity. She asked Eyvazov to "respect and honour the desire and wish of the inhabitants of Aliabad".

Glasgow University handed a doctorate to Richard Yuill the other day for his dissertation in defense of pedophilia.

Richard Yuill said his research, based on interviews with paedophiles and their victims, "challenged the assumption" that sexual relations between adults and under-16s were inherently abusive.

"The conclusions are that in such relationships I think you've got the good, the bad and the ugly, and that's where I stand on that," he said in the Times Higher Education Supplement.

I just came across an interesting piece by Frances Kissling, the infamous leader of "Catholics" for a Free Choice," the "Catholic" voice of the abortion industry.

Entitled "Is There Life After Roe?" Kissling spends a substantial part of the piece conceding ground to pro-lifers. Everything from parental notification to partial birth abortion is handed to the pro-lifers on a silver platter. Not only that, she laments the "hardening of heart" of pro-aborts:

For me, a more troubling question is whether or not regular exposure to the taking of life in abortion or the defense of a right to choose abortion would, if not addressed, lead to a coarsening of attitude toward fetal life. The inability of prochoice leaders to give any specific examples of ways in which respect for fetal life can be demonstrated or to express any doubt about any aspect of abortion suggests that such a hardening of the heart is possible.

I think a close reading of the article could make the case she admits the above is forgone conclusion, though she never comes out and says as much.

Obviously, Kissling seems to be reading the signs of the times well, (this was published before the election) striving to make peace with her enemies on the way to court, and while she still maintains her support of abortion, she does a really good job of undercutting such a position. Not only that she levels what I think is a reasonable criticism for all of us to take to heart:

I would expect that if bishops really believed that abortion was murder, they would individually and collectively make far more sacrifices to ensure that abortions did not happen. While the bishops provide very little detailed information about their expenditures, it is clear that the amount of money spent on preventing abortions is very little. The bishops claim that abortion is the greatest moral issue of our time, that Catholics cannot vote for candidates who are prochoice and that prochoice Catholic legislators are committing a grave sin by supporting legal abortion. This is a weak rhetorical response to “murder.” How can any bishop or parish priest justify spending one penny on anything discretionary rather than on helping the many women who would continue their pregnancies if they had the resources to bear and raise a child? No dinners, no business class plane tickets, no vacations, no flowers on the altar as long as one penny is needed to prevent abortions.

We'd love to have you join us in living this Frances!

An article in today's Seattle Times asserts that Boston's closure of several parishes was not due so much to declining attendance and a shortage of priests, as it was an opportunity to sell off the property and generate some additional income to pay off abuse settlements.

The article notes:

O'Malley at first insisted that the church closings had nothing to do with the clerical sex-abuse scandal that began here almost three years ago. The Boston archdiocese agreed last year to pay $85 million to abuse victims, a record until last week's $100 million settlement in Orange County, Calif.

In announcing the church closings in May, O'Malley blamed declining attendance, decaying buildings and diminishing bank accounts in the targeted parishes. But authorities now concede that the parishes were closed because the church needed money.

"The commitment of the parishioners at St. Albert is obvious to all of us. We continue to seek ways to help them understand that the reasons for reconfiguration are related to the financial health of the diocese as a whole and not each individual parish," said Kelly Lynch, a spokeswoman for the archbishop.

O'Malley said the archdiocese does not plan to take civil or criminal action at this time.

Even more ominous, I can't help but wonder if such a move will lend creedance to the argument that individual parish property should be counted toward a(n) (arch)diocese'a total assets in bankruptcy proceedings. With Boston's behavior, it doesn't look good.

With our focus on Iraq, Afghanistan and the allegedly nascent Palestinian state, it is easy to forget just how rare the rule of law is. The Bush Administration’s ardent hope that democracy can be cultivated in a reasonable time in regions with long histories of despotic rule seems to ignore the simple fact that there are very few functioning democracies in the world. The vast majority of these evolved clustered together in old Europe over centuries and out of a common Christian religious tradition and Greek/Roman political heritage.

Recent events in Ukraine bring into focus the contours of a society, indeed an entire region, only clinging to republican ideals. While the Parliament, Supreme Court and negotiators for both sides have functioned ably during Ukraine’s election crisis, it cannot be forgotten that the current headlines are the result of a clearly rigged election in a notoriously corrupt nation. Add to this the recent allegation that Yushchenko has been poisoned by his enemies and today’s revelation that the Ukraine government planned to stage a terror attack and lay the blame on the opposition. Meanwhile, an undemocratic Russia casts a disquieting shadow over the entire drama.

With sympathetic Western supervision, it is possible that Yushchenko will prevail in a new election. However, that is no guarantee that a true republic will have been born. Democratic fervor swept Eastern Europe almost a generation ago, but the results are mixed. In places with an authentic political culture, such as the Czech Republic and Poland, democracy flourished. In many places where the rule of law was more a fond wish than a concerted reclamation, such as Romania and Bulgaria, the result has been discouraging. Indeed, this fault line ran directly across the former Czechoslovakia, leading Slovaks to follow a nationalist ideologue away from the Czech lands and into replacement autocracy.

Ukraine’s proximity to Western ideals may help democracy to take root, but that region is littered with revolutions that, so far, have failed. It is sobering to think of Middle Eastern people grappling with republican government without any relevant history.

This will be the new slogan in the culture wars. Steve Sailer adds credibility to the claim that "demography is destiny." In the new edition of The American Conservative, he describes why white birth rates are shaping the nation's political future.

David Brooks adds his take on Sailer's findings in an article entitled "The New Red-Diaper Babies". His conclusions would be crisper if he could get his head around that one group that fits no neat categories: Catholics.

Ben Stein has concluded his "Monday Night at Morton's Column." He ends his gossip column in a very touching way. Take some time out and read this piece. Here is a selection:

"We are not responsible for the operation of the universe, and what happens to us is not terribly important. God is real, not a fiction, and when we turn over our lives to Him, he takes far better care of us than we could ever do for ourselves.

In a word, we make ourselves sane when we fire ourselves as the directors of the movie of our lives and turn the power over to Him.

I can put it another way. Years ago, I realized I could never be as great an actor as Olivier or as good a comic as Steve Martin--or Martin Mull or Fred Willard--or as good an economist as Samuelson or Friedman or as good a writer as Fitzgerald. Or even remotely close to any of them.

But I could be a devoted father to my son, husband to my wife and, above all, a good son to the parents who had done so much for me. This came to be my main task in life."

We live in an era of remakes, so it's not surprising that the New York Times is running their Pentagon Papers remake. Now if only they would publish the documents again this time around.

The United Church of Christ has launched a new advertising/branding campaign to combat homosexual "intolerance" that has supposedly crept into Christian churchs.

In the spot, which is running on Discovery, Fox, Hallmark, History, Nick@Nite, TBS, TNT, and several other outlets, two nasty looking bouncers stand outside a Church bouncing a "gay couple" and several minorities, while granting admitance to WASP families.

The text that follows notes, "Jesus didn't turn people away. / Neither do we."

And then the voice over, "The United Church of Christ. No matter who you are, or where you are on life's journey, you're welcome here."

Welcome to the global syncretism of 21st century religion, where we don't put up dogmatic walls, but rather tear down creeds, replacing them with shallow religious sentiments that are carefully crafted not to offend. Never mind the fact that Jesus excluded many a scribe and Pharisee. In the new Church of Christ, ALL are welcome.

The usually consequential Powerline today carries an unfortunate apotheosis on this the twenty-fourth anniversary of John Lennon’s murder. Why do we still so lament the extinguishing of such a dim lodestar so low on the horizon?

The strange currency of this age is slippery emotions and sentiments fundamentally averse to critical reckoning. That is what made Lennon first a king, then a saint and finally a martyr. What other qualification does he have to receive the reverent tones and dirges offered every year? An entire generation mistook his angst for a zeitgeist. The error is forgivable, since the generation was itself adolescent. The crime is the continued elevation of idle, ephemeral melancholia from the background noise of adolescent respites to cultural critique and personal fulfillment by a baby boom generation that should finally know better. Angst in fact became zeitgeist. Eidolon eructations couched in witty poesy, said with momentary conviction amid enchantingly incessant melodies. Mind candy served with ear candy. In no other pursuit has the medium so perfectly become the message.

No accumulation of witty turns of phrase and pleasing harmonies can mask Lennon’s role in the general cultural decline. Though he personally bears no more (and perhaps less) culpability, a quick trip down the radio dial on any given day reveals the tradition Lennon represents. There is very little besides remarkably similar, simple instrumentation. And what themes are out there but the beauty of fornication, adulatory devotion to personal gratification over traditions and personal commitments and a general, unreflective, irrational discontent? If this sounds familiar, it’s because it was your adolescence and mine.

It’s not immoral to listen to Beatles songs, but what is the point? It’s the Cap’n Crunch of the soul. Once we all lacked a certain depth and perspective, and had incongruous freedom that allowed us to indulge in shallow pursuits. But adolescence, mercifully, ends eventually. At least, it’s supposed to.

Woman who buries abandoned babies wins lottery.

The ironically named “Arts” section of the New York Times today carries a philippic by Frank Rich equating conservative moral sensibilities with, among other things, epidemics of deadly diseases, mass teen pregnancy and McCarthyism. This week’s totalitarian crime of the century is the decision by a few New York broadcasters to avoid running ads for the new film “Kinsey.” It seems that not every blue state citizen was happy to support the content of a film celebrating a hero of the sexual revolution. It logically follows, of course, that the entire media infrastructure is either utterly ignorant and afraid of sex, or part of a vast right-wing conspiracy that is afraid of sex. Or perhaps just afraid of sex, like everyone in the sexual dark ages before Kinsey. It’s amazing to think that humans actually managed to reproduce before Kinsey’s book.

Quoth he: "’Kinsey’" is an almost uncannily helpful guide to how these old cultural fault lines have re-emerged from their tomb, virtually unchanged. Among Kinsey's on-screen antagonists is a university hygiene instructor who states with absolute certitude that abstinence is the only cure needed to stop syphilis. Sound familiar?”

Um…yeah. Abistience. That does ring a bell, Frank. Volitional restraint from potentially harmful pleasures for a greater good. Subordinating baser appetites to higher faculties. Conforming one’s will to revealed truth in order to be truly free…oh never mind.

Isn’t it just possible that the open cinematic discussion or depiction of sex (or violence, or profanity, or blasphemy) is a matter of taste and reflection on which reasonable minds can disagree? But then, to disagree with the Times’ crusade for sexual rights is to proclaim one’s lack of reason.

So says Hugh Hewitt in today's Weekly Standard.

That would be a fun predicament for Catholic conservatives. We'd really see how committed folks are to denying communion to pro-abortion politicians. Some would become quick apologists for Rudy, the former seminarian, saying that he doesn't advocate abortion like Kerry did, and thus should be treated differently. I tend to think the old-line DNA Democrat bishops might all of a sudden become courageous in their role as pastor's and begin to take eucharistic integriy seriously.

Giuliani will most likely soften his position on abortion, come out in favor of overturning Roe, and declare the matter should be left to the states. Similarly, as Hewitt notes, he will probably favor leaving the marriage issue up to the states. If he sound convincing on judicial appointments during the upcoming battles, he is the clear frontrunner. Bill Frist is trying to shore up his conservative bona fides, but he is a weenie in my humble opinion, and people know it.

So what does this mean for the GOP? I tend to think Giuliani is a tough, results-oriented leader. In other words, a guy you want running a big city, the Justice Department, or a cabinet position. But do I want this guy as president? Career politician, three wives, dysfunctional kids. Does personal character matter anymore, or will the GOP put anyone up there to win. Rudy in 2008 and Arnold in 2012? The dirty little secret is that there is a big chunk of the GOP establishment that wishes social conservatism would just go away, and we could get back to the business of protecting our money and security (and whatever lifestyle we choose).

If things continue to play themselves out this way, I might be going third-party in 2008. I'd probably vote from Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) if in the unlikely event he got the Democratic nomination. But given that he looks like a used-car salesman and he is pro-life, I am not expecting this scenario.

More on birth rates and their effect on politics, particularly abortion.

A new course in satanism and exorcisms for aspiring priests at the Pontifical University Regina Apostolorum run by the Legionaries of Christ is a welcome happening. We are finally beginning to move away from the era that "psychologized" sin and Satan. No, really, they are real.

Famous atheist now believes in God. Although, Anthony Flew is quick to point out he is a Jeffersonian deist, who couldn't believe in a God like that of Christianity or Islam, an oriental despot like "a divine Saddam Hussein."

Obviously, he needs to do a little more homework on religions, or just plaint get out of the box he's been living in.

A nice overview for those interested.

Our Daily Litter Box Liner carries a Washington Post story this morning revealing that the well-documented tough questions received by Rumsfeld this week from a National Guardsman in Iraq were in fact scripted by a member of the press corps. He snooped around until he found willing accomplices, scripted the questions and then brow beat the soldiers with the microphones into picking his guys. Then he crafted a front page article on low moral that clearly did not represent the general feeling (as recounted here). Just for good measure, he suggested that the Bush Administration’s corruption or incompetence was putting Americans in harm’s way without proper equipment.

Leaving aside the validity of the original question, where does this media subterfuge end? As far as equipment goes, it would seem the US military has the right gear. No one is in Iraq who didn’t sign up for military duty voluntarily. If treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, how much farther do the mainstream media have to go before they cross the line? There has got to be a limit.

Bill Moyers, journalist-extraordinaire, is retiring. He laments the rise of the right-wing media that suppresses free thought because of the bottom line. Perhaps he'd have a tougher time himself if he wasn't subsidized by tax dollars.

They barely made it past the honeymoon!

Only six months after a flurry of gay marriages, couples in Massachusetts are untying the knot, and the knoty issue of who gets to keep the cats.

The first gay divorce case in Suffolk County, which includes Boston, was filed Wednesday by a male couple who exchanged vows on May 22, five days after same-sex marriage was legalized.

One partner was a 33-year-old religious educator from Boston, the other a 39-year-old professor based in Washington. Since then, the couple said in their divorce filing, "our interests have grown in different directions." Each man signed a settlement attesting that the marriage had "irretrievably broken down."

The most difficult part of the settlement appeared to be custody of their three cats, who will live exclusively with the professor.

But "in recognition of the emotional hardship of such relinquishment," the settlement reads, the professor agreed to provide his ex "with periodic updates, photographs, and any health-rel

This fawning report of a Toni Morrison lecture offers frightening insight into the decay of the study of literature at the hands of liberals. Morrison felt inspired to discuss the epic Beowulf. According to Morrison, Beowulf kills the monster Grendel out of revenge, just as Grendel’s mother comes after Beowulf in revenge. She preaches a moral equivalence, naturally. She suggests we ask ourselves today, "Who or what is the monster? Is it them or is it us? Where do we belong?" Her derision for Beowulf’s unambiguous answer is apparent.

This is a Pulitzer Prize winner? Morrison has, in Dante’s phrase, lost the good of intellect. There is no other explanation for such a moronic misreading of Beowulf and its import.

A quick perusal of the actual story (Raffel translation, 1963) puts the jack boot of reality to Morrison’s revisionist reading. The seething, blind vengeance in the epic belongs to the beast, not the hero. Ridding the world of evil is not an act of mere revenge. Just war is the necessary vocation of the hero. Grendel is roused to murder by the songs sung in Hrothgar’s hall that celebrate the good and the beautiful. Enraged by the good, he sets out to destroy it, coming up from where he had “made his home in a hell not hell but earth.” Beowulf does what a man must do in the face of bestial violence destroying God’s creation. Grendel is a scourge, a malignancy born of the Fall that mankind must face. How they face it goes a long way toward their ultimate redemption. Hrothgar turns to the “stone gods” of old, reverts to heathen incantations and sacrifices in his despair on his way to irrelevance. Beowulf accepts the challenge and faces the demon with conviction.

The bitter irony is that there are in fact significant parallels between Beowulf and our time. But those who habitually defile our collective literary heritage to cheap propaganda are lost to its salvific power.

The other day I was lamenting the growing commercialization of the internet that is slowing rendering all search engines worthless.

You would think shopping for insurance on the web would make life easier, but the reality is most of those supposed rate comparison sites are bankrolled by a handful of companies, and the "best rate" tends to be pretty lousy.

Unfortunately, this commericalization isn't limited to the far flung reaches of cyber insurance land. Apparently The Seventh Age has grown so popular, Texas Holdem and Online Casion had to offer about 50 comments on recent entries to try and lure you, our thousands of faithful readers, to gamble your life away.

Being an authoritarian right-wing first ammendment desecrating radical, I promptly removed these comments. I expect the ACLU to threaten a lawsuit over this protected commerical speech in a public forum in the near future. Your contributions to our legal fund to defend our right to can SPAM are appreciated!