About that Mary Queen of Scots Movie…

I’ve noticed – it is hard not to notice thanks to bombardment of silly social media ads – that there is a new Mary Queen of Scots movie that portrays Queen Elizabeth I as a very mean and naughty queen who scowls a lot at Mary the heroine.  Never mind that in actual history Mary was a fool caught plotting against Elizabeth and thereby gave her little choice but to lop off Mary’s regicidal head.  And even then Elizabeth was reluctant to do so.

But during this Christmas season I wish to be full of peace and good will and all that.  So I recommend an older presentation which I find to be more historically accurate.  You’re welcome.

Christmas in England 100 Years Ago

One of my alter egos gave an informal talk this week on Christmas in England 100 years ago just after the end of World War I.

Those interested in the Great War, in J. R. Tolkien, or in the Nine Lessons and Carols Christmas Eve service at King’s College Cambridge may want to listen.

By the way the Tolkien books recommended in the talk are Tolkien: Maker of Middle Earthby Catherine McIlwaine, which is the book for the exhibition in Oxford this year and Tolkien and the Great Warby John Garth.  Both are excellent and reasonably priced.  Much pricier is King’s College Chapel 1515-2015, but it is close to a must have for those interested in that august institution. 

Dante in Paradise – Sublime . . . and Petty

Just a brief note that in my study of Dante’s Divine Comedy, I am struck by how sublime and profound he was . . . and by how petty he could be at the same time, particularly in how he just could not let go of factional politics in his home city of Florence. Of course, he was exiled from Florence so one can hardly blame him.

But just one example from Paradiso, Canto XXXI.  Dante writes of how amazed he was to see Heaven, and he makes a profound statement about time, or the lack of it, there:

I, who had come to things divine from man’s estate,

to eternity from time . . .

This is a brilliant observation on a topic I have begun thinking about: God and the eternal state in which He lives and into which He brings His people is not bound by time, but is instead timeless. (Or at least that is the way many Christians have historically seen it.)  Thus eternity is not so much a very long time or infinite time as it is a departure “from time” and from its bounds.

But then look at the very next line:

...from Florence to a people just and sane,…

The man just could not let go of Florence and its politics that had driven him out!  Even in his magnum opus, as soon as he expounds something so deep and profound as the timelessness of the eternity of God’s kingdom, he just could not resist immediately taking one of his many pot shots at Florence.  It is funny really.

But such humanity is part of the fun, if you will, of Dante and part of why I keep returning to him.

Armistice Centenary: Tolkien and the Great War

With the 100^thanniversary of the end of World War I this Sunday, there are so many heartrending stories about the Great War I’ve come across the past few weeks – mothers who lost all their sons, battalions that lost so many men they were disbanded, soldiers who died just weeks or days before the Armistice, and more – too much more.

But the story that has most drawn my attention is the war experience of J. R. Tolkien.

Orphaned at 12, Tolkien had experienced deep loss years before.  The War would pile loss upon loss.  The recent Tolkien exhibition here in Oxford and John Garth’s book, Tolkien and the Great War, brought that home to me.  Both quoted this from his preface to the second edition of The Lord of the Rings:

By 1918, all but one of my close friends were dead.

When I first read that at the exhibition, I had to stand aside for a moment to regain my composure.

A theme of Tolkien and the Great War is how the war tore apart what was an inseparable society of four friends at King Edward’s School, one of which was Tolkien.  Two died.  The other two drifted apart.  Tolkien survived because he came down with trench fever after front combat in 1916.  As a result, he had chronic bad health the rest of the war and served on the British coast instead of being sent back to the front.

Having just finished that book, I highly recommend Tolkien and the Great War to anyone interested in Tolkien’s experience of the war, including his literary output and evolution during those years. I also highly recommend the Oxford exhibition book, Tolkien: Maker of Middle-earth, part of which deals with the war years and is very reasonably priced given how lavishly it is illustrated.

We can be thankful that J. R. Tolkien, along with his future friend and Inkling, C. S. Lewis, somehow got through the Great War. (Lewis was taken out of combat by a shell shrapnel injury.  Such was rightly considered good luck back then.)  Yet one can hardly imagine what great minds and writers we lost in that cataclysm.  That is all the more reason to remember them this Armistice Centenary.  We shall remember them.  We shall remember them all.

Hillary at Oxford: “You cannot be civil” to Republicans

While studying church history and worshiping the Lord of history here in Oxford, I unexpectedly encountered a bit of modern history after Evensong at Magdalen College – Hillary Clinton. There was quite a commotion during and after said Evensong this past Sunday.  Afterward I found out why when I saw Hillary herself enjoying the adulation of students. She looked well and happy by the way.

 But look what she said while in Oxford.  Her response to the recent uncivil, abusive, threatening, and, yes, violent tactics of Leftists?

 First remember that Bill Clinton, for all his faults, had enough gumption to confront the violent extremists in his party.  His Sister Soulja Moment remains an example of political courage (and of political calculation, too, of course.  We are talking Bill Clinton.)  But instead, Hillary justified the uncivil and violent Left with…

 You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about…

 She thereby endorses the tactics of the Leftist mob.  She endorses the Brown Shirt tactics of totalitarians.  And face it, the way the Leftist base of the Democrat Party has been acting, with the blessing of Hillary, of Eric Holder among others – that is the way totalitarians act.

 It became clear during the Obama years and is becoming clearer now: the Democrat Party has a disturbing totalitarian streak.  Its tactics against Kavanaugh, trying to turn his confirmation into a show trial, its attacks against the free speech of opponents and even against the peace and persons of opponents, reveal it is becoming a totalitarian party if it is not there already.

 And that is further indicated by even the uber-establishment Hillary Clinton being okay with that.

 With the way the Democrats are going, I expect to revisit this subject.  We must revisit this subject.  The 20^thCentury is full of lives destroyed because of slowness to confront totalitarians.  But it suffices for now to say that if the Democrat Party is not politically punished for their totalitarian tactics and soon, namely November, it will be a disaster for the United States.  I know that saying so will seem overwrought to some, but the Democrat Party is already that far gone as Hillary’s statement here in Oxford indicates.

Latin BCP Holy Communion?

Yes, a Latin Book of Common Prayer service may seem a bit of a contradiction, an oxymoron even. Wasn’t the BCP written in English precisely so that it would be “understanded of the people”? Wasn’t it a pointed break from the Latin Sarum Rite?

But remember that in times past, Latin was very well “understanded” by Oxford scholars.  You really could not get into the place without knowing Latin well.  This is reflected even in some 20th Century books in which it is assumed that if you are bothering to read them, you know Latin.  Anyway, in 1560, just one year after the Elizabethan Prayer Book of 1559 was approved, a Latin BCP was promulgated for the use in the universities.

A survivor of those times – because tradition! – is a Latin BCP Holy Communion service at the University Church of St. Mary’s in Oxford at 8am the Thursday before the beginning of the academic year, which service I attended this morning.  Yes, this bit of strange history continues today.

I attended (among only about 15 so to do) because . . . tradition! -- I cannot resist strange history -- and because Oxford could use all the Latin prayer it can get.  But I have to admit it was more stirring than I expected.  As I walked down the High about ten minutes early, the St. Mary’s main bell was calling scholars to the service. Of course, most of even Oxford students on High Street were probably clueless as to why all the gonging.  Partly this is because of ignorance of history, but also because this bit of slightly arcane Oxford is not well publicized at all.  This is typical of Oxford.  As the famous Father Barry of Pusey House one complained, "No one tells you what is going on around here!"

The service itself was quiet and said, only about 35 minutes.  I found hearing and saying (tolerably well) the Latin moving.  There is something about Latin.  And when I crossed my arms for a blessing only (Oddly, the sacrament was brought around to the stalls instead of the congregation going forward.), being quietly blessed in Latin moved me indeed.

I attended this in 2007, missed it in 2011.  I am glad I didn’t miss it this time and recommend it to all visitors to Oxford, at least those not allergic to Latin.

Remembering the East Yorkshire Regiment in World War I

In the past when I visited English churches, I’ve rarely paid much attention to war memorials. I hope that is not because of callousness on my part. My focus has been much more on older, especially medieval aspects of church buildings.  But with this year being the 100^th anniversary of the end of World War I, I am making a point to pay more attention.

So two days ago, I noticed a cenotaph style memorial in a small chapel of Beverly Minster.  Around all sides are the names of those who died in “The Great War” from the East Yorkshire Regiment.  I walked around it and saw all. the. names.  From just one regiment. 

It was overwhelming.  I had to sit down for a few moments to regain my composure.

Us Americans came in late to World War I.  And today we frankly suck at history.  So most of us do not get how devastating WWI was.  But I am at least beginning to get it in recent years.  Being in England certainly assists with that.  I was chatting with some gentlemen in York, and they told me a big reason the term “Lost Generation” came about.  When the English went off to war, they wanted to be together with their buddies and brothers, of course, (And I’ve noticed this desire reflected in some of C. S. Lewis’ letters.) and to a large extent this desire was accommodated. So during some of the worst battles and/or in some of the worst hit regiments, the male youth of whole towns were decimated.

And some of that decimation is documented, name by name, in that memorial in Beverly Minster.

About the Whining of the Press

I notice a number of newspapers are issuing alarming editorials about the supposed threat of President Donald Trump to a free press. 

The only threat Trump is to the press is to expose most of the “mainstream media” as propagandists for the Democrat Party that put “the narrative” above the basics of professional journalism.  And Trump and the rest of us have the right to exercise our Constitutional free speech to call out what is really the Democrat News Media for that.  Personally, I am glad we have a President with the backbone to fight back against the lies and distortions of the Democrat News Media, unlike the weak Bushes.

Speaking of free speech, where was the concern of these newspapers when Obama Regime weaponized the IRS, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA etc. etc. against political opponents?  Where is their concern when speakers are driven off campus after campus?  When conservative and even centrist students fear to oppose campus totalitarians?  Where is their concern when masked Antifa black shirts violently attack free speech?  Where is their concern when more and more non-establishment rightist accounts are banned from Facebook and Twitter?

But if a President calls out fake news media for being propagandists and liars for the Democrat Party, oh, that is just TERRIBLE! 

So whiny Leftist, lib and establishment newspapers, you have the right to freedom of the press, and I hope you always will in spite of the anti-freedom forces you support.  But the rest of us to which you are doing a public DISservice have the right to free speech, too.  And we and the President are right to call you out for the frauds and charlatans you are. 

HERE WE GO AGAIN: 588 Mostly Democrat Votes “Found” in Ohio Special Election

What’s a close election (or even not so close. See the 2016 Presidential Election.) without Democrats trying to steal it afterwards?  In the Ohio Special Election for CD 12, 588 “missing” votes were “found” after election night.  And most of them are for the Democrat Danny O’Conner, of course.

This reminds me of the Washington State stolen gubernatorial election in 2004 in which “missing” votes were “found” in heavily Democrat King County.  (Is there any evil Seattle hasn’t inflicted on the rest of that state?) Or, heck, it reminds me of LBJ’s Box 13 back in the 1948 Democrat Primary (which back then was pretty much the election in one party Democrat Texas):

…Box 13 in Duval County provided Lyndon Johnson the victory margin as the gangly congressman from Johnson City won a hotly contested Senate race by 87 votes.

Six days after election, authorities in Alice (now in Jim Wells County) “discovered” 202 additional ballots in precinct #13 that had not been counted.

Johnson received 200 of those votes. His opponent, Coke Stevenson, got two.

Stevenson’s razor-thin lead melted away and “Landslide Lyndon,” who believed that the 1941 Senate race had been stolen from him, was the winner in yet another deeply disputed election.

Later, it was reported that the ballots seemed to be written in the same ink. And the voters allegedly voted in alphabetical order.

Johnson never acknowledged that his allies stole the election. But former Texas Observer editor Ronnie Dugger told a story of visiting LBJ in the White House. The then-president whipped out a photo of five good ol’ boys from Alice with the infamous Box 13 sitting on the hood of their vehicle.

Dugger asked LBJ if he had stolen the election.

Laughter.

It’s not funny.  At least not anymore.

The Pope in the Waterloo Gallery

It is interesting what can stick in one’s mind during travel.  Pope Pius VII sticks in my memory from my visits to Windsor Castle.

That may seem odd given that the focus of Windsor Castle is the history and housing of the British Royal Family.  And the glorious Chapel of St. George certainly stands out as well.  So my focus on a pope may indeed be odd.  

Yet I remember him indeed thanks to a wonderful portrait in the Waterloo Gallery in the State Rooms of the castle.  As one may guess from the name, the Waterloo Gallery displays portraits of worthies who played a role in resisting and defeating Napoleon and in dealing with the aftermath.  Most of the subjects are in idealized stately and/or heroic poses.  But not Pius VII.

With Pius, the genius of the man who painted the portraits of the gallery, Sir Thomas Lawrence, is most evident. Pius VII is painted very honestly, in a remarkably informal sitting posture, and with few obvious trappings of the papacy.  He is elderly yet at the same time with a lot of life and personality.  His expression is almost mischievous as if saying, “Napoleon thought he had me beaten.”

An excellent video on the Waterloo Gallery with some focus on the portrait of Pius VII may be found here.

It is interesting that Pius VII is enshrined in this gallery; for he actually had a mixed record in opposing Napoleon.   His predecessor, Pius VI was dogged in opposing attacks on the church from the French Revolution and from Napoleon.  That did not work out well as he died a prisoner of Napoleon.  The papacy itself was in peril as well.

Pius VII understandably wanted a different result, so he was beyond reasonable in seeking accommodation with Napoleon. That included attending Napoleon’s coronation as Emperor in 1804, against the advice of some of his Cardinals, and enduring petty disrespectful treatment from the tyrant while in Paris for the occasion.  And it also included later agreements that reduced the papacy’s power.

But Napoleon was not nearly as flexible as the Pope.  When Pius was pushed to the point where he felt he had to say no – the appointment of bishops in the Papal States was a presenting issue, but who knows if Napoleon could have been appeased even if Pius VII gave in on that – then the furious Napoleon had him arrested on the night of June 9^th, 1812 with the intention of confronting him at Fontainebleau.

In poor health, Pius barely survived the trip.  But it turned out the health of Napoleon’s regime was even more precarious.  By the time the Pope made it to Fontainebleau, Napoleon was off to fight Russia where he would eventually lose most of his army.

But Pius VII did not know this, and when Napoleon returned, he was able to badger the isolated pope into an agreement that would have greatly weakened the papacy.  After deep regret, Pius later repudiated that.  And at that point there was little Napoleon could do about it.  He abdicated on April 14^th, 1814 (temporarily it turned out -- Waterloo was in June 1815). Pius VI triumphantly returned to Rome on May 24^th.

Thus for all Pius’ human frailty, miscalculations, and concessions, his imprisonment and twice saying no to Napoleon rightly turned Pope Pius VII into a symbol of resistance to Napoleon’s tyranny.

And Thomas Lawrence’s portrait captures well both the human frailty and the resilient strength of character of Pius VII. It captures the little old pope who outlasted Napoleon.

C. S. Lewis and Getting Ideas in Church

Ever get an idea while sitting in church (other than muzzling annoying children, perpetual conversationalists . . . or the preacher)?  C. S. Lewis did once. In July 1940, he wrote to his brother, Warnie:

Before the service was over – one cd. wish these things came more seasonably – I was struck by an idea for a book wh. I think might be both useful and entertaining.  It wd. be called As one Devil to Another and would consist of letters from an elderly retired devil to a young devil who has just started work on his first ‘patient’. The idea wd. be to give all the psychology of temptation from the other point of view.  

Many of you can already surmise that this was the beginning of The Screwtape Letters.  Lewis wrote that he had returned to church after a “many weeks” absence due to illness.  I am glad he felt up to going to church that day!

I note this now because I just had a similar experience this past Sunday.  (And I beg your forbearance as I depart a bit from the subject of history now.) I don’t recall it being prompted by anything in the service of Holy Communion itself.  Nor was it as momentous as Lewis’ idea to be sure. Perhaps it was just my mind wandering as it is prone to do when it should be fixed on the Lord? Nonetheless I got an idea how better to put my history studies to use.  And I already consider it so much better than what I previously had in mind that I am very thankful.  (More on the guidance perhaps in due time.  But don’t worry; I intend to keep blogging here.)

So, yes, I do think God sometimes rewards attending to him in worship by very personally giving us good ideas as to how better serve him out in the world. 

Or at least that’s my excuse for my mind wandering in church.

“Lazy” C. S. Lewis

I’m continuing to read/skim The Collected Letters of C. S. Lewis.  And last night I came across something I had to reread.  In July 1940, he wrote to Dom Bede Griffiths, “In fact I have recently come to the conclusion that a besetting sin of mine all my life has been one which I never suspected – laziness….”

I certainly would have never suspected that either.  When I read his letters and look at all the work he did then and throughout his life, about the last thing I would call C. S. Lewis is “lazy.”  When I look at his academic work only, as an Oxford student then Fellow, I sometimes wonder how he found the stamina and doubt I could have handled his schedule even in my younger days.  But he wasn’t just an academic, of course.  People often forget his work included maintaining a household which included the often difficult Janie Moore, the mother of his fallen friend from World War I, Paddy Moore, from a young age.  Lazy?

My opinion is that what we see here is that Lewis could be hard on people, including himself.  Some of his private comments on people he met and dealt with were less than charitable. He seems a snob at times. But he was perhaps hardest on himself.  He took self-examination and confession very seriously.  Some of his introspection even comes across as obsessive on occasion.  Perhaps that trait is one reason he wrote The Screwtape Letters so well.

In any case, if C. S. Lewis was the least bit lazy, I hate to think what that makes me! 

Democrats, Political Prisoners, and Double Jeopardy

If there was ever a case that cried out for a pardon it was Dinesh D’Souza’s.  Imprisoned for a relatively trivial campaign contribution violation that normally receives a fine, it is obvious that his real crime was his 2012 anti-Obama movie, 2016: Obama's America.  In short, he was a political prisoner sent up by Clinton appointee Judge Richard Berman and one Democrat U. S. Attorney Preet Bharara.  

Yet instead of praising Trump’s pardon of D’Souza or at least having enough shame to be quiet, some Democrats are doubling down, vociferously opposing the pardon and even advocating putting D’Souza in double jeopardy and trying him again, even though he has already served his time!  Imprison political opponents!  Then imprison them again!

Among these is the New York State Attorney General Barbara Underwood.  I will let you read some of the legal details of that here.  But it is alarming how Democrats, even prosecutors who should know better, are openly eager to abuse their political power and to tear up basic Constitutional protections such as the prohibition of double jeopardy in order to attack and even imprison political opponents. 

Do you like having political prisoners?  Vote Democrat.

---

NOTE: Yes, I am aware that the Supreme Court has ruled that one may be tried for the same crime in both state and federal courts.  It is a very questionable ruling that decent prosecutors should not use except in extreme cases, such as when one court is clearly a kangaroo court rigged to free the perp. (Courts in some Southern states before the 1960s come to mind.)  And I doubt it is right to do so even then as it goes so much against the intent of the Fifth Amendment.

This is one of many instances in which prosecutors have been given too much power in this country.  I fear for our freedoms if too many Democrats like Barbara Underwood get ahold of that power.

Young C. S. Lewis Near the Beginning of WWI

I have begun to read/skim The Collected Letters of C. S. Lewis, edited by Walter Hooper (And be sure to get his edition.  Other collections may short-change you.).  And I am glad I have.  I am still in Lewis’ teen years.  But he was a pleasure to read even back then.

I also appreciate getting slices of life from the early 20^th Century, particularly during World War One.

Among the passages of his youthful letters that stand out is one from a letter to his closest friend Arthur Greeves.  He steps outside himself and observes himself remarkably well at age 15.  After some negative boarding school experiences, he is happy under the tutelage of W. T. Kirkpatrick even as The Great War begins:

So great is the selfishness of human nature, that I can look out from my snug nest with the same equanimity on the horrid desolation of the war, and the well known sorrows of my old school.  I feel that this ought not to be so: but I can no more alter my disposition that I can change the height of my stature or the colour of my hair.  It would be mere affectation to pretend that sympathy with those whose lot is not so happy as mine, seriously disturbs the tenour of my complacence.  Whether this is egotism of youth, some blemish in my personal character, or the common inheritance of humanity, I do not know.  What is your opinion?

So he asks Greeves in November 1914. 

How would you answer young C. S. Lewis?

R. W. Southern and Two Little Known Tidbits about Robert Grosseteste

I’ve been reading R. W. Southern’s Robert Grosseteste: The Growth of an English Mind in Medieval Europe.  And I have to ask, is there anything Southern wrote that is not excellent?  The vast scholarship of this late great historian combined with his ability to write very readable books from his storehouse of scholarship amazes me.

Having said that, two tidbits about Robert Grosseteste in this book stand out to me, one for its amusement, the second for its encouragement.

The first is a Royal Mandate of June 23^rd, 1234 that directed Grosseteste and two other Oxford worthies “to supervise the arrest of all prostitutes in Oxford who had disobeyed a royal order to leave the town.” As Southern put it, the king regarded the three men “as peculiarly qualified for this hopeless task.” (p. 71, 1986 edition)

The second is that Grosseteste’s career was obscure and is not very well documented until he reached about age 55 when he suddenly rose to prominence.  Southern thinks this might have occurred because he was among those who assisted the 15 year old Henry III in getting a papal declaration that he was old enough to rule on his own in 1223.  Henry immediately rewarded those who assisted him. (p. 80, 81)

In any case, being around 55 and still somewhat obscure, I find this aspect of Robert Grosseteste’s career encouraging, although I will never be as brilliant as the man . . . or as R. W. Southern. 

Recommended Books Before a Trip to Oxford

Having reviewed Rowse’s Oxford in the History of the Nation, being familiar with the place and plotting a return later this year, I thought it might be good and helpful to recommend three books to possess for a trip to Oxford.

If I had to recommend one book, it would be the Blue Guide: Oxford and Cambridge by Geoffrey Tyack.  It is a very practical and portable tour guide.  But it does not focus on the touristy or the trivial but on the architectural history of the place and of Cambridge.  It has been a great help to me in knowing what to see and what I am seeing.  Get the 2004 edition and do take it with you to Oxford (or Cambridge).  Yes, I think 2004 is the most recent edition.  Don’t let that worry you; Oxford tends to change very slowly.

I also recommend another book by Tyack, Oxford, An Architectural Guide.  It is not a tour guide per se; it is organized chronologically.  So one may find it mentions a college in several chapters as it builds, tears down, and builds through the years.  Also, it is not as portable.  I know I am not taking this one with me.  But it is the best architectural history of Oxford I’ve come across.  It is very helpful in seeing how Oxford grew and developed through the centuries.  And it is very readable.  But its size and format is not as practical for touring as the Blue Guide.  I recommend reading it before you go.  And perhaps take notes of items you want to remember when in Oxford.

The third book I recommend is very different.  Written by Jan Morris, it is entitled simply Oxford.  Very well written and often lightly humorous, it is a pleasure to read.  It does contain some little known corners of Oxford to find and explore.  But what I find most outstanding about Morris’ book is how it captures the atmosphere of Oxford.  For example, when in the Autumn of 2007 I drifted into a malaise as gloomy as the cold, damp and shortening days, I thought, “Morris told me it would be like this!”

The 2001 edition is small and very portable, so you can take it with you if you like, perhaps to read on the plane.  I won’t be taking it with me this time, but intend to read it once again, for the third time I think, before I leave.

Do you have must-read books about Oxford?  Feel free to let us know in the comments.

On Opinionated Books and Book Titles

I finished A. L. Rowse’s Oxford in the History of the Nation.  And it proved to be a good overview of the subject.  I can recommend it with qualifications to be mentioned.

One of the stronger passages of the book looked at the impact of World War I on the students of Oxford.  It was certainly the most poignant.  As he wrote:

…There was no conscription until 1916, and all the finest young men volunteered for service.  There followed the massacre of a generation . . .: hundreds of names of the dead are inscribed on the walls of the bigger colleges. . . . at Christ Church, New College, Balliol and Magdalen . . . .

He includes poetry from young Oxford men who served.

In a previous post I mentioned this is an opinionated book.  Rowse went a bit far in his opinions in his chapter on the 19^th century.  He descended into unedifying catty speculations about the sexuality of this and that important figure.

But as a whole, I found his openness about his opinions refreshing.  I’ve long thought that if one has strong opinions and agendas, it is usually best to be open about it.  That is one reason I and so many have contempt for the “mainstream” “news” media and for academia – instead of taking pains either to be balanced or to be honest that they are not being balanced, they push slanted propaganda as scholarly or as “news”.  It can get downright fraudulent.  I much prefer, even enjoy as I did Rowse’s book, openness in expressing well one’s opinions.

Many of the older books have such honesty even in the titles, which can be quite fun.  Anyone recognize An Universal History of Christian Martyrdom, Being a Complete And Authentic Account of the Lives, Sufferings, and Triumphant Deaths of the Primitive as Well as Protestant Martyrs, in All Parts of the World from the Birth of The Blessed Saviour to the Latest Periods of Pagan and Catholic Persecution, Together With a Summary of the Doctrines, Prejudices, Blasphemies and Superstitions of the MODERN CHURCH OF ROME?  That is the title of the 1837 edition of the work originally written by . . . John Fox.

A prized book in my library is a 1713 edition of The Indictment, Arraignment, Tryal, and Judgement, at large, of Twenty-Nine REGICIDES, the Murtherers of His Most Sacred Majesty King Charles the First, of Glorious Memory . . . .  I enjoy reading that title, with appropriate emotion, to visitors.

After Sunday Mass at Pusey House (You do go there when in Oxford, don't you?), take a look at the books on the shelves in the reception room as you drink your sherry.  The vehemence of the titles from opposing sides of the Tractarian controversy may amuse.

Certainly there is an important place for balanced dispassionate books.  But if one decides to promulgate opinions and agendas instead, one might as well be honest about it.  That is more fun anyway.

Reality Check: The FBI Spied on the Trump Campaign

For any who may think my concerns about the revival of totalitarianism may be overwrought or paranoid, I present a reality check: the FBI under Obama and Comey spied on the Trump campaign.  There’s really no denying that anymore.

Let me put it a different way.  The FBI under Obama and Comey spied on political opponents in the midst of a presidential election campaign.

I thought this was the U. S. A., not the U. S. S. R.

A. L. Rowse on Georgian Oxford

Lately, I’ve been reading A. L. Rowse’s Oxford in the History of the Nation.  It is an openly opinionated book, and I may remark more on that aspect at a later time.  And Rowse’s opinions rub me the wrong way here and there.  But I was glad to see we agree on 18^th century Oxford:

…of course the ‘torpor’ of Georgian Oxford was greatly exaggerated by nineteenth-century reformers. . . .

The fact was that the facilities for work and cultivation of the mind were there for anyone to make use of who wished – and remarkable men always learn more on their own than from dons, except for occasional tutors of exceptional gifts….

And his chapter on the period goes on to praise other aspects of 18^th century Oxford, particularly the new buildings such as the Radcliffe Camera.

Back to how best to learn, my issue is not so much with tutors as my Oxford tutor in 2007 is one of the best, and in hindsight a good tutor in 2011 would have kept me from becoming stagnant as I instead studied independently.  But the pressure to write, write, write to prove, prove, prove one’s learning is my main complaint.  And we can blame the 19^th century reforms for the proliferation of written examinations in Oxford.  I am unsure of the origin of weekly essays in the tutorial system.

Now there has to be a good amount in writing in a well-rounded education, and the process of organizing and writing down one’s thoughts itself teaches.  And learning is of limited use if one does not also learn to express and apply it.  But at some point, the effort and time put into writing can devour reading, listening, and learning.  I admit this becomes more of an issue for older students with limited energy.  (Sometimes, I wonder how I did all I did as an undergraduate!)

But enough whinging.  I am thankful that, God willing, I will get learn on my own later this year at Oxford in 18^th century fashion, often in monumental 18^th century buildings, without pressure to write or to please a don.  With Rowse, I see the advantages of that.

John Fenwick on When Church Unity Efforts Fail

(I ask readers’ forbearance that both John Fenwick’s paper and my response come from an orthodox Anglican perspective.)

A number of papers from the Anglican Patrimony Conference held last week in Oxford have been posted.  The one most intriguing to me is by John Fenwick, Primus of the Free Church of England and a key player in attempting to coordinate orthodox Anglican efforts in the U. K.

He reveals some very interesting history from the inside of the Canterbury-Rome unity push in the 70’s:

It was in the heady days of ARCIC 1. The Final Report had been sent around the Provinces of the Anglican Communion. Most of the responses were positive. It was expected to be officially endorsed at the forthcoming Lambeth Conference. The Vatican response was expected imminently. There was a feeling that something momentous was about to happen.

Prior to my appointment to Lambeth I had been lecturer in Christian worship at Trinity College, Bristol. Shortly after my arrival in the Ecumenical Affairs office, Christopher asked me to do some preliminary thinking about a liturgical project. (As Christopher put it, there’s no point in having a dog and barking yourself.) The project was what liturgical form the restoration of communion between the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church might take. That was a heady request for a junior staff member! The most recent unity scheme around was the Covenant for Unity based on the Ten Propositions. That had proposed a day of liturgical events including the consecration of bishops. I remember working with that model and envisaging a service where the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury might jointly consecrate the first of a new generation of bishops whose Orders would be recognised by both Churches.

We were that close! Or at least so it seemed to some of those closely involved.

In retrospect that moment was a high water mark. The tide has been going out ever since.

The Vatican’s response not only did not come before the next Lambeth Conference as hoped; it did not come until 1991.  And not only the timing, but also its content was disappointing.  It made it all the more clear that the hoped-for unity between the Church of England and Rome was not going to happen.

Even more disillusioning has been the Church of England’s liberal drift since then.  That leads Bishop Fenwick to make an interesting hypothesis:

I want to suggest that the Vatican’s 1991 response fits a pattern that has characterised ecumenical endeavour in the past half century – namely that unity initiatives have been halted by the refusal of what one might call the more conservative partner to act, and that as a result, the other partner has felt itself free to move further away from the historic Christian consensus.

I do not claim that what I am going to say has been rigorously historically tested, nor am I able to do so here, but I think the possibility of a pattern is worth considering.

And that pattern is simply that there seem to have been several occasions when the more conservative partner in a dialogue, by failing to take bold action, allowed the less conservative partner to move further away from traditional faith and practice.

And he gives other examples of this occurring, including failed efforts between Old Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.

This pattern indeed merits consideration.  When jurisdictions are in the midst of unity efforts, their focus is often on how would merger/intercommunion affect us.  And that is certainly important.  But how it would affect the other party and the whole church, the Body of Christ, should not be overlooked.  And Fenwick does not let us ignore that, often for the disappointed party, a “move further away from traditional faith and practice” occurs after unity efforts fail.

Of course, in such cases we do not know what would have happened if unity efforts succeed.  For example, in the case of the Church of England and Roman Catholics, would Rome had been importing more liberalism to its harm? Would more Protestant-minded Anglicans feel pushed out of the Church of England?  I personally suspect the failure of ARCIC did more harm that what might have happened if it succeeded, and Fenwick seems to think that as well.  But we do not know.  And, yes, jurisdictions have to consider the stresses and pressures greater organizational unity may cause.  I sometimes wonder if the Anglican Church in North America, in its well meaning haste to bring Anglicans together, has not given such issues enough consideration.  If not done right, organizational unity can beget more disunity.

Nonetheless, Bishop Fenwick well reminds us that the good of the other party should be considered.  (And the bishops of the Reformed Episcopal Church in the U. S. have done just that in joining and remaining in ACNA.)  We should avoid causing sister churches to stumble by turning them away without very good reason.

Care should also be taken in missionary efforts where there are existing Anglican jurisdictions.  Accordingly, Fenwick, in his conclusion, let it be known he still has mixed feelings about the consecration of orthodox bishops in the U. K. outside of existing jurisdictions.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Fenwick’s paper (I agree, at least for the most part.), it contains most interesting insight not often presented.  Read it all.

On Millennial Ignorance of Totalitarianism

I will not go over the details of a recent poll revealing ignorance about the Holocaust among Millennials.  By now most of my above average readers are well aware of the poll, and it is readily available.

I will point out that this ignorance is surely one reason for the revival of totalitarianism amongst Millennials.  That those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it is a partial truth and something of a cliché, but there is truth to it.  Knowledge of past evil can make current evil less likely. When we are tempted to do evil, it helps to have a learned reminder not to be like past evildoers.

To be more specific, when a young man is tempted to put on an arm band and raise his arm against Constitutional rights and to viciously attack and slander opponents and attempt to disarm and silence them, it helps for his education to whisper in his ear, “Hey bud, that would be acting a bit too much like a Nazi, don’tcha think?”  When youth are instead ignorant of the basics of historic totalitarianism, we are more likely to get . . .  well, to get David Hogg.

And given the bias towards the Left in public and secondary education, ignorance of Communism and its atrocities must surely be even greater, likely much greater.  So the little Communists running amuck are blissfully unaware that they are acting a bit too much like the 20^th Century Communists who murdered tens upon tens of millions.  I see how some of the youth act and am reminded of the Cultural Revolution.  Meanwhile most of them have no idea what the Cultural Revolution was, thanks to their failed education. . . .  Or maybe their education was intended to create Leftists with little memory of Leftist atrocities and little respect for democratic values.

So, yes, I have little doubt that ignorance of 20^th Century totalitarianism is assisting a revival of totalitarianism in the 21^st. Poor education and ignorance has consequences.

“Never Again” or Here We Go Again?

First, my apologies that this post will be somewhat stream of consciousness.  But something has been on my mind, and it’s certainly important enough that I should not be silent about it.  Holocaust Remembrance Day yesterday has goaded me to say something even if my thoughts are not that well organized yet.

Yesterday is a reminder of how deadly totalitarianism is.  The totalitarian mindset cares not a wit for the freedom and lives of political opponents and of others who are hated for other reasons, such as class, religion, and ethnicity.  Totalitarianism is why the 20^th Century was such a deadly one.  And do not forgot that the Communist brand of totalitarianism killed tens of millions more than Hitler’s did.  Of course, thankfully, Hitler’s time was shorter.

Another lesson of the 20^th Century is that often it is hard to see just how dangerous times are when you are in the middle of them.  As a child, I wondered why all the Jews did not flee what was to come.  Well, although they knew times were not good, most did not know the horrors to come although there was much warning.  Us humans are prone to denial of coming horrors until it is too late.

I understand that denial more now.  I see the totalitarian mindset on the march today in the conduct of the Left and of the Deep State, of their contempt for freedom of speech, for freedom of religion, and of democracy in general. I also see it in the vilification of others under the guise of “White Privilege” and now and soon “Christian Privilege.” I do not know what scares me more, the little totalitarians taking over college campuses or the conduct of Mueller and Company in attempting to overturn a presidential election.  Their method of practically inventing the crimes of political opponents reminds me of the old Soviet Union and of today’s Russian under Putin.  Instead of investigating a crime and finding the man behind it, they investigate the man and search for or invent a supposed crime to bring him down.  The raid of Trump’s lawyer’s offices has made that modus operandi that much more clear.

And yet part of me thinks this too will pass.  But I don’t know whether that part is realistic or in denial.

Under totalitarianism, the people are not allowed to choose their leaders (except for the correct “The People,” of course).  And it seems electing Trump was not permissible and must be overturned.  I’ve said it before and will say it again, the Left and others with a totalitarian mindset only respect democracy when they win.  And very early on, my alter ego smelled an attempted coup against Trump, and that attempted coup continues.

I know I may seem overwrought.  I know that totalitarianism in the U. S. may seem a conspiratorial fever dream.  But how many saw the coming ravages of Nazism and Communism before it was too late?  For that matter, how many ten or twenty years ago foresaw how mad the college campuses have become?  And with the attacks on free speech and on Constitutional and democratic values in general, I see warning signs too similar to warning signs of totalitarianism in the past.  More and more, I feel like I am living in a pre-totalitarian time and place.  I certainly understand more what so many Europeans experienced in the 20^th Century.

Yes, I told you this would be somewhat stream of consciousness.  But because it is so important that “Never again” triumphs over “Here we go again,” I may try to do my part and address the revival of totalitarian and of the totalitarian mindset from time to time as unpleasant as the subject may be.  For once, let us keep history from repeating itself.