Saturday, August 18, 2012

My reply to a post over at Front Porch Republic

(please note, I am much better at, and prefer classical style architecture. And whereas there are many architects who are better than me at the more modern styles, there are none that I know of who are better than me at the classical. A classical which is invariably post modern since no one is actually designing straight forward classical.

And during the short time I was in architecture school I too caught hell over my preference for the classical. A preference which was seen as stilted, when it was very much the opposite, I have always had the muse. My preference played a significant role in my conflict with my design teacher leading to his demanding I leave his class which in turn forced me to leave the school when the dean of students would not defend me, but instead suggested I transfer.)

I mention the above to so as to help eliminate any thought that my argument in defense of modern architecture is a defense of myself.

robert m peters writes: "Just down the road from me is a school, built in the 1960's, quite utilitarian, and I am sure, very practical with symmetry and balance, or tripartite separation, or rhythmic diminution. It is now abandoned and exudes no beauty."

On the other hand, the California missions were built using those same principles in an abstracted modern style, using utilitarian materials. But yet they are typically not abandoned, nor have I ever known of someone to describe them as not beautiful.

Monday, August 6, 2012

My Other solution to the annulment scandal

If a marriage is found to be null, i.e. a marriage is found to not exist, and there are also children, simply make the parents retake their marriage vows.

Or better yet, Simply make anyone applying for an annulment retake their marriage vows so that he or she is certain they are married.

And if the second time taking the vows doesn't work out any better than the first, make them do it again until they get it right.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Never trust a priest to help you solve your marriage problems

Because the only advice you are likely to receive is permission to cause irreparable harm to your children, i.e. receive permission to separate.

Children are severely harmed by separation but don't expect a priest to take that into account, because they virtually never will.

The solution to the annulment scandal :

There needs to be a class action lawsuit filed against the U.S. bishops and their marriage tribunals.

The visible Church in the US practices Catholic divorce, even going so far as to require Catholics to obtain an immoral no fault divorce as a required first step before even granting a hearing to a petitioner seeking an annulment.

It's a required first step that makes a fait accompli the destruction of every marriage a tribunal even looks at. It's a required first step that makes the visible Church in the U.S. no better than the immoral civil court system that treats marriage as unilaterally dissoluble.

"Divorce is immoral also because it intorduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents, and often torn between them and, because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society," but yet the U.S. marriage tribunals require a divorce as a required first step.

It's a required first step that in and of itself proves the visible Church in the U.S. is not in keeping with the letter or the spirit of canon law.

Because the visible Church in the U.S. refuses to act in accordance with the Catholic Faith there is only one viable solution left, the visible Church must be forced to act Catholic.

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops", *

and of those who serve on their marriage tribunals because they are recklessly scandalizing our children, driving a wedge between our children and the Faith.

How many children will fall away from the Faith because of the destruction of their homes caused by marriage tribunals ignoring clear Catholic teaching that marriage is indissoluble?

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Stressing the unitive aspect of marriage only makes the problem worse.

The entire movement inside the visible Church to stress the unitive aspect of marriage in hope of counteracting modern social ills is not only doomed to failure, it's making the problem worse.

When I read modern theological comments on marriage what is striking is the supernaturalization of the natural. Marriage is described as some kind of mystical bond of man and woman. When in reality marriage is an act of justice, it's a contract grounded in man's nature as corporeal living creature where all living creatures eat, grow and reproduce. Which is in turn what marriage is ordered toward, i.e. eating, growing and reproducing in society because man is by nature social.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Well that didn't take too much to get banned from The American Catholic

One post is all it took.

The American Catholic blog is nothing more than a bunch of dumb libs. who think they're conservative and think they're defenders of the Faith.

But at least they were smart enough to know that it was at them I was directing my comment, and not at D. N..

Libs. come in different flavors, so to speak, and The American Catholic blog flavor is an all too predictable one.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Reduce snail-mail service to once a week.

And if you want to receive the mail more often. Get a post office box.

The Post Office will no longer be delivering mail on Saturday. It's a good start, now they just need to finish it by taking off the rest of the week as well, sans one day per week.

Mailmen for the most part have become nothing more than couriers for commercial advertising or on occasion couriers for bill collectors such as the local electrical company or credit card company.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Better advice than Fr. Z.s on what to do about bad homilies :

Ignore them from the get go. And expect the priest to do his duty.

btw 'bad' is rather weak. Horrid, as in depressingly drawn out while saying nothing, is a more accurate description.

Is it alright for mothers to prepare horrid meals for their children? Of course Not. And if some mother does, do we do penance and fast in slim hope that she might figure it out that she's being negligent? Or should we perhaps take the situation seriously and charitably intervene because sometimes prayer is not sufficient?

The difference between negligent mothers and negligent priests is that priests all too commonly don't take their duty seriously. As more than evidenced by the annulment scandal where priests commonly give a stone to those with marriage difficulty when they've been asked for bread.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Hand to mouth survival / working 3 times as hard for a third of the money.

With the economy now gone to hell and life an extreme struggle trying to support a family, is there anything more annoying during these difficult times than the academia types who think of themselves as economic guiding lights when all they have to offer is the most inane and horrific advice possible?