¿Quién es más macho?
Hunter S. Thompson? o Juan Paulo II?
They both dealt with suffering in different ways.
HERE’S AN INTERESTING PIECE ON THAT.
(Cowboy hat tip to the reader who sent it.)
Month: March 2005
Mel's Next Film
What do you do for an encore if you’ve made The Passion of the Christ?
I read one interview where Mel Gibson talked about making a film version of the books of Maccabees. (Lotsa blood n’ gut in that saga.)
But now a British magazine is reporting that Mel’s next film is slated to be about
Specifically: It is reported to be an adaption of the novel Stealing from Angels, which came out late last year. The novel is a fictionalized account of a man from New York who gets swept up in European intrigue and comes into contact with the Third Secret and the assassination attempt on John Paul II’s life back in 1981 (presumably the novel is set back then).
In-teresting. Could be a good movie. Mel might still changes his plans, though, (or the report might be wrong) but this sounds like it could be both right up his alley and a commercial success (though not on the same level as TPOTC).
GET THE STORY. (Cowboy hat tip to the reader who sent this.)
Want spoilers for the movie?
GET THE BOOK. (Caveat emptor: I haven’t read it.)
Mel’s Next Film
What do you do for an encore if you’ve made The Passion of the Christ?
I read one interview where Mel Gibson talked about making a film version of the books of Maccabees. (Lotsa blood n’ gut in that saga.)
But now a British magazine is reporting that Mel’s next film is slated to be about
Specifically: It is reported to be an adaption of the novel Stealing from Angels, which came out late last year. The novel is a fictionalized account of a man from New York who gets swept up in European intrigue and comes into contact with the Third Secret and the assassination attempt on John Paul II’s life back in 1981 (presumably the novel is set back then).
In-teresting. Could be a good movie. Mel might still changes his plans, though, (or the report might be wrong) but this sounds like it could be both right up his alley and a commercial success (though not on the same level as TPOTC).
GET THE STORY. (Cowboy hat tip to the reader who sent this.)
Want spoilers for the movie?
GET THE BOOK. (Caveat emptor: I haven’t read it.)
Texas Independence Day!!!
YEEEEEEE-HAW!!!
This here is Texas Independence Day!
On March 2, 1836, the Republic of Texas declared its indepencence from Mexico at Washington-on-the-Brazos! (The Brazos is a river, y’all.)
Just over two months later, Mexico recognized Texas’ independence in the Treaty of Velasco.
The original flag of Texas was the Bonnie Blue Flag (left). It was later replaced with the current flag (right). The presence of a single star on these flags is why Texas is known as "the Lone Star state."
The Texas Declaration of Independence was signed 169 years ago today by both Anglo-Texicans and Tejanos to end their perceived oppression by the Mexican central government of the day.
READ THE TEXAS DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
BTW, note that one of the charges against the Mexican government was that it wished to inflict upon Texans that scourge of all mankind: gun control!
It [the Mexican government] has demanded us to deliver up our arms, which are essential to our defence, the rightful property of freemen, and formidable only to tyrannical governments.
Asking Texans to give up their guns? What did they expect to happen?
(No dissin’ Texas in the comments box: DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS!)
How Good *AIN'T* Your State Government?
(Click to enlarge.)
My state-of-residence (California) got a C-, tied for worst in the nation!
YEE-HAW!!!
More a-that good ol’ Californazi governmental inefficiency!
It gets even better when you break it down by the categories that are averaged to get the overall figure:
- California’s ability to manage it’s money? A BIG, FAT D! (Shoulda been a F!)
- California’s ability to manage its state employees? C-.
- California’s infrastructure? C. (Yeah, okay. CalTrans does keep the roads in good order compared to other states. Hear me, Pennsylvania? Yeah, New Jersey, I see you hanging your head in shame.)
- California’s use of information? C. (They have poor strategic planning, but what info there is can be easily downloaded by a citizen from the Internet.)
It all adds up to a C-, and that’s being generous to my mind.
Take that, California!
These grades, incidentally, are produced by some folks who call themselves the Government Performance Project. I don’t know much about them, but as long as they’re pointing out the problems with California’s state government, they gotta be on the side of the angels.
FIND OUT YOUR STATE’S RANKINGS.
(Cowboy hat tip: Southern Appeal.)
How Good *AIN’T* Your State Government?
(Click to enlarge.)
My state-of-residence (California) got a C-, tied for worst in the nation!
YEE-HAW!!!
More a-that good ol’ Californazi governmental inefficiency!
It gets even better when you break it down by the categories that are averaged to get the overall figure:
- California’s ability to manage it’s money? A BIG, FAT D! (Shoulda been a F!)
- California’s ability to manage its state employees? C-.
- California’s infrastructure? C. (Yeah, okay. CalTrans does keep the roads in good order compared to other states. Hear me, Pennsylvania? Yeah, New Jersey, I see you hanging your head in shame.)
- California’s use of information? C. (They have poor strategic planning, but what info there is can be easily downloaded by a citizen from the Internet.)
It all adds up to a C-, and that’s being generous to my mind.
Take that, California!
These grades, incidentally, are produced by some folks who call themselves the Government Performance Project. I don’t know much about them, but as long as they’re pointing out the problems with California’s state government, they gotta be on the side of the angels.
FIND OUT YOUR STATE’S RANKINGS.
(Cowboy hat tip: Southern Appeal.)
The Broken Household Fallacy: Parte Dieux
Recently I blogged about the Broken Household Fallacy–the idea that the economy and families are automatically benefitted if both parents work outside the home.
Other folks have been talking about the same thing, and I’ve begun to run across references to them. For example, there is a book by Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi called The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke.
I haven’t read the book, but it’s getting positive reviews from some prestitious places.
Such as . . . ?
How about THE HARVARD JOURNAL OF LAW AND GENDER (formerly the Harvard Women’s Law Journal).
Excerpt:
They offer a well-researched, three-part explanation for the growing financial troubles of the middle-class family: the rising cost of being middle-class, the increased risk faced by families without a stay-at-home parent, and the emergence of a deregulated credit industry have combined to dramatically increase the financial danger faced by the American family.
A number of factors explain the problem of rising costs, including a bidding war in the housing market, a marked rise in the cost of education, and the additional burden of providing a second vehicle for the working mother. With more money earmarked for the necessities of middle-class existence—house and car payments, insurance costs, educational expenses—there is less flexibility and freedom and a greater chance that expenses will outstrip resources and compel bankruptcy if disaster strikes.
“And so the Two-Income Trap has been neatly sprung. Mothers now work two jobs, at home and at the office. And yet they have less cash on hand. Mom’s paycheck has been pumped directly into the basic costs of keeping the children in the middle class.”
That means we need to make things easier by having federally-subsidized daycare, right?
Well, Warren & Tyagi say:
"[S]uch subsidies would make financial life more difficult for these families [with stay-at-home mothers], because they would create yet another comparative disadvantage for single-income families trying to compete in the marketplace. Every dollar spent to subsidize the price of day care frees up a dollar for the two-income family to spend in the bidding wars for housing, tuition, and everything else that families are competing for . . . . In effect, government-subsidized day care would add one more indirect pressure on mothers to join the workforce."
GET THE STORY.
GET THE BOOK.
"Teaching" Masses
A reader writes:
Help Jimmy! In this Sunday’s bulletin was a splashy announcement, "At next Saturday’s 11:30 am Mass Fr.——- will be conducting a teaching Mass, stopping throughout to explain the history and significance of each part." Is this allowed? Where do I find data or info to back up a complaint letter that is soon to be written by moi. When will this maddness end!!
Probably not by this weekend.
Let’s take this piece by piece:
First, there is no such thing as a "teaching Mass" in the Church’s liturgical books. The category does not exist.
Second, it would be perfectly legitimate to do something that is not a Mass but otherwise looks like one for teaching the significance of the various parts of the Mass. This would be like having a stage-play of a Mass with detailed commentary. Such things should not, however, be advertised as Masses, and it does not appear that this is what is going to happen in your parish.
Third, the Church’s liturgical law does provide a role for the priest to make certain explanatory comments about the Mass, but they may or may not be as extensive as what is being envisioned in your parish’s case. Here is what the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) says about the priest’s commenting role:
31. It is also up to the priest, in the exercise of his office of presiding over the gathered assembly, to offer certain explanations that are foreseen in the rite itself. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt them [i.e., the explanations] somewhat in order that they respond to the understanding of those participating. However, he should always take care to keep to the sense of the text given in the Missal and to express them succinctly. The presiding priest is also to direct the word of God and to impart the final blessing. In addition, he may give the faithful a very brief introduction to the Mass of the day (after the initial Greeting and before the Act of Penitence), to the Liturgy of the Word (before the readings), and to the Eucharistic Prayer (before the Preface), though never during the Eucharistic Prayer itself; he may also make concluding comments to the entire sacred action before the dismissal [GIRM 31].
If Fr.——- (Thanks for the dashes! Saves me having to put them in!) confines himself to these things, he’s home free. If he does more than this, he starts to exceed wha the law provides.
“Teaching” Masses
A reader writes:
Help Jimmy! In this Sunday’s bulletin was a splashy announcement, "At next Saturday’s 11:30 am Mass Fr.——- will be conducting a teaching Mass, stopping throughout to explain the history and significance of each part." Is this allowed? Where do I find data or info to back up a complaint letter that is soon to be written by moi. When will this maddness end!!
Probably not by this weekend.
Let’s take this piece by piece:
First, there is no such thing as a "teaching Mass" in the Church’s liturgical books. The category does not exist.
Second, it would be perfectly legitimate to do something that is not a Mass but otherwise looks like one for teaching the significance of the various parts of the Mass. This would be like having a stage-play of a Mass with detailed commentary. Such things should not, however, be advertised as Masses, and it does not appear that this is what is going to happen in your parish.
Third, the Church’s liturgical law does provide a role for the priest to make certain explanatory comments about the Mass, but they may or may not be as extensive as what is being envisioned in your parish’s case. Here is what the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) says about the priest’s commenting role:
31. It is also up to the priest, in the exercise of his office of presiding over the gathered assembly, to offer certain explanations that are foreseen in the rite itself. Where it is indicated in the rubrics, the celebrant is permitted to adapt them [i.e., the explanations] somewhat in order that they respond to the understanding of those participating. However, he should always take care to keep to the sense of the text given in the Missal and to express them succinctly. The presiding priest is also to direct the word of God and to impart the final blessing. In addition, he may give the faithful a very brief introduction to the Mass of the day (after the initial Greeting and before the Act of Penitence), to the Liturgy of the Word (before the readings), and to the Eucharistic Prayer (before the Preface), though never during the Eucharistic Prayer itself; he may also make concluding comments to the entire sacred action before the dismissal [GIRM 31].
If Fr.——- (Thanks for the dashes! Saves me having to put them in!) confines himself to these things, he’s home free. If he does more than this, he starts to exceed wha the law provides.
More Gummi Roadkill
Over yonder, Fr. Bryce Sibley makes a good point about the roadkill candy and those protesting it:
But what really gets me is that the activists aren’t complaining that any sort of food whatsoever is made in the shape of animals! C’mon what kid does not take pleasure in eating the heads then legs of his chocolate Easter Bunny? Or smiles as he performs a "head transplant" on his gummy bears? Or delights in ripping the limbs off of his animal crackers? How come this does not promote cruelty to animals?
So, I called the NJSCPA and brought up this point and suggested they start a campaign to stop the production of chocolate Easter Bunnies. The guy I spoke with did not think it was the same thing. I told him that I thought this type of thing encouraged much more cruelty to animals than road-kill candy. He said I was entitled to my opinion then said good-bye.
(Cowboy hat tip: Small But Disorganized.)
Indeed, it’s true. Kids love savagely biting the heads off chocolate Easter bunnies. I sure did, and I wasn’t alone. In fact, on MST3K the Mads once invited a chocolate bunny guillotine to facilitate the process.
I notice several comments made similar points in the comments box down yonder.
(No plagiarism of Fr. Sibley, a’course. JimmyAkin.Org readers are all to ethical for that. 😉