Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts

Sunday, March 17, 2024

Blog Mirror: Missionary to the Whole World

 

Missionary to the Whole World

Wars and Rumors of War, 2024. Part 4. "Maybe I shall find them among the dead."

You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.

Matthew, Chapter 24.

I am tired of fighting. Our chiefs are killed. Looking Glass is dead. Too-hul-hul-sote is dead. The old men are all dead. It is the young men who say yes or no. He who led on the young men is dead. It is cold and we have no blankets. The little children are freezing to death. My people, some of them, have run away to the hills, and have no blankets, no food; no one knows where they are—perhaps freezing to death. I want to have time to look for my children and see how many of them I can find. Maybe I shall find them among the dead. Hear me, my chiefs. I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever.

Chief Joseph upon his surrender, 1877.


March 6, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

The Ukrainians sank the Russian patrol ship Sergey Kotov with a drone strike.

It's clear that Black Sea is not safe for the Russian Navy.

March 8, 2024

Hamas Israeli War

The U.S. is setting up an artificial port on the Gaza Strip to deliver humanitarian aid.

Russo Ukrainian War

As s direct result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Sweden has entered NATO, ending centuries of neutrality.

March 9, 2024

Indian/Chinese Border

Indian is sending an additional 10,000 troops to its border with China.

March 10, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

Pope Francis stated in an interview with a Swiss journalist:

In Ucraina c’è chi chiede il coraggio della resa, della bandiera bianca. Ma altri dicono che così si legittimerebbe il più forte. Cosa pensa?

“È un’interpretazione. Ma credo che è più forte chi vede la situazione, chi pensa al popolo, chi ha il coraggio della bandiera bianca, di negoziare. E oggi si può negoziare con l’aiuto delle potenze internazionali. La parola negoziare è una parola coraggiosa. Quando vedi che sei sconfitto, che le cose non vanno, occorre avere il coraggio di negoziare. Hai vergogna, ma con quante morti finirà? Negoziare in tempo, cercare qualche paese che faccia da mediatore. Oggi, per esempio nella guerra in Ucraina, ci sono tanti che vogliono fare da mediatore. La Turchia, si è offerta per questo. E altri. Non abbiate vergogna di negoziare prima che la cosa sia peggiore”.

Anche lei stesso si è proposto per negoziare?

“Io sono qui, punto. Ho inviato una lettera agli ebrei di Israele, per riflettere su questa situazione. Il negoziato non è mai una resa. È il coraggio per non portare il paese al suicidio. Gli ucraini, con la storia che hanno, poveretti, gli ucraini al tempo di Stalin quanto hanno sofferto….”.

Translated:

In Ukraine there are those who ask for the courage of surrender, of the white flag. But others say that this would legitimize the strongest. What do you think?

“It's an interpretation. But I believe that those who see the situation, those who think about the people, those who have the courage to raise the white flag and to negotiate are stronger. And today it can be negotiated with the help of international powers. The word negotiate is a courageous word. When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you need to have the courage to negotiate. You are ashamed, but with how many deaths will it end? Negotiate in time, look for some country to act as a mediator. Today, for example in the war in Ukraine, there are many who want to act as mediators. Turkey offered itself for this. And other. Don't be ashamed to negotiate before things get worse.

Have you also offered to negotiate?

“I'm here, period. I sent a letter to the Jews of Israel to reflect on this situation. Negotiation is never a surrender. It is the courage not to lead the country to suicide. The Ukrainians, with the history that they have, poor things, the Ukrainians at Stalin's time, how much they suffered...”.

This has been reported, in accurately, as the Pope calling upon the Ukrainians to surrender, which isn't exactly what he said. 

The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church was in the US, calling up Congress to free up support for Ukraine.

Hamas Israeli War

Israel has built a road bisecting Gaza.

March 11, 2024

Haiti

Haiti is in internal turmoil as gangs threaten to topple the government.  The US has sent in additional forces to its embassy.

Russo Ukrainian War

The Pope's comments of yesterday have brought rebuke.

March 12, 2024

Hezbollah v. Israel

Israel struck Hezbollah targets from the air yesterday.

March 13, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

The Pentagon is sending $300,000,000 in weapons to Ukraine, but also revealed its $10B overdrawn in replenishing weapons it has sent already.

Democrats are using the discharge petition process to go around Donald Tump controlled Mike Johnson for funding in the House.

The All-Russian pro-Ukrainian Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK), Freedom of Russia Legion (LSR), and Siberian Battalion a limited cross-border raid into Belgorod and Kursk oblasts yesterday.

Ukraine hit an oil refinery with drones.

Haiti

Haiti's prime minister resigned.  It's largely expected that the gangs that control the capital will play a role in choosing the next government.

Hamas Israeli War

Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh presented Hamas’ delusional demands in ceasefire and hostage negotiations in a speech marking the start of Ramadan on March 10. They included a comprehensive ceasefire, the complete withdrawal of the IDF from the Gaza Strip, the complete return of displaced Gazans, and the resolution of humanitarian issues, and ending restrictions on the movement of people and goods out of the Gaza Strip.

Israel isn't going to agree to that.

March 14, 2024

Haiti

Florida is deploying 250 law enforcement officers and an air-and-sea fleet to address a potential wave of Haitian immigrants.

March 15, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War

Russian Security Council Deputy Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev called for the total elimination of the Ukrainian state and its absorption into the Russian Federation.

Hamas Israeli War

Hamas killed the head of the Palestinian Dughmush clan, claiming it had stolen humanitarian aid and cooperated with Israel. The armed clan vowed to retaliate.

March 17, 2024

Russo Ukrainian War


Russian rebels in Ukrainian service have been conducting cross border strikes while Russia is conducting an election whose results are basically preordained.  The raids have been fairly successful.

The Ukrainian State Security Service (SBU) conducted a series of successful drone strikes against Russian oil refineries in Samara Oblast.

Last Edition:

Wars and Rumors of War, 2024. Part 3. The Putin's Cheerleaders Edition.

Thursday, March 7, 2024

Wednesday, March 7, 1274. Death of St. Thomas Aquinas.

 


Thomas Aquinus died on this day in 1274.  He was a proponent of the major Catholic school of thought, natural theology, and the father of a school of thought known as Thomism after him.

Sunday, February 11, 2024

Friday, February 11, 1944. The Factory Falls.

The Germans took "The Factory" from the British 1st Division at Anzio.

The Red Army took Shepetovka, Ukraine.


Wah Kau Kong (江華九), the first Chinese American fighter pilot, scored his first victory, showing down a FW190 while piloting a P-51B.  He'd be killed in a dogfight just eleven days later.  On that occasion, his wingman reported:
I was leading squadron in leader position of red flight, providing escort and target support for bombers with targets at Oschersleben and Halberstadt. 2nd Lt. Wau Kau Kong was my wingman. Enroute to target area, Northeim and Wernigerode, at 1350 hours I attacked a ME-410 which was pressing attack on a straggling B-17 at 16,000 feet. I fired a long burst from 300 yds, observing parts flying off the tail assembly and smoke pouring out of the right engine. All my guns stopped except one and I broke off attack to let my wingman finish off E/A. I circled and saw Lt. Kong fire at E/A from close range. The right engine of E/A burst into flames. As Lt. Kong broke off over the E/A the rear gunner must have hit him as his plane exploded and disintegrated in the air.

From Sarah Sundin's blog:

Today in World War II History—February 11, 1944: First mission of the US 357th Fighter Group in P-51 Mustangs from England—this group would produce the most aces (42) in the US Eighth Air Force.

The U-424 was sunk off the Faroe's by a Wellington piloted by the RCAF.

Father Claude H. Heithaus, S. J. delivered a homily in what must have been a week day Mass at Saint Louis University denouncing racism.  It ended up getting him forcibly transferred out of state, but the school started admitting African Americans six months later, the first historically white Southern university to do so.

A photographer visited the USS Saratoga.



Commander Maurice Sheehy, Catholic priest and Chaplain Corps, on board USS Saratoga (CV 3), February 11, 1944.  The highly respected Fr. Sheehy would rise to the rank of Vice Admiral, the highest rank ever obtained by a Navy Chaplain.  He had taught at the Catholic University of America before the war, but after it became a pastor in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.  He passed away in 1972.

Friday, February 9, 2024

Wednesday, February 9, 1944. Vice in Casper Wyoming. Questioning the conduct of the War in Parliament.

Fifty Five slot machines were seized by law enforcement in Casper.

Gambling is theoretically illegal in Wyoming, but old time Wyomingites know that at one time the law was really just winked at. The Wonder Bar, a Casper institution for decades, kept a blackboard up behind the bar with sports teams listed on it and betting information in the 40s and 50s.  The legendary bar finally seems to have escaped its name and somewhat misplaced nostalgia, but in those days that was a major feature of a major Casper bar.

The Wonder Bar



These photographs are of the "World Famous" Wonder Bar. The Wonder Bar has operated on Center Street for decades, although it has had short periods of time in recent years in which it operated under a different name (Tommy Knockers, Dillingers, and very briefly, "Sludge and Eddies"). Still, the bar has been around so long that even efforts to operate it under a different name do not deter the locals from continuing to refer to it as the Wonder Bar.

Downtown Casper once had a vast number of bars. This are of downtown had multiple bars on a single block. Only the Wonder Bar survives as a bar.

At some point in time, decades ago, Lee Riders paid to paint an advertisement on the side of the bar. The sign is still there, although an effort to paint over it was made at some point. This reflects the stockman heritage of central Wyoming, and indeed at one time quite a few cowboys and sheepherders spent time in the Wonder Bar.

Gambling downtown was a major deal in the bars in general.  My father was once a witness to a sheepherder pawning his cowboy boots so he could go back to a game.  This may have been at the Trail Bar, a long gone bar on Second Street at a time when Casper had bars literally everywhere downtown . . . something its oddly returning to actually.

That would also have been in the 40s.

The caption above is now inaccurate. The store has been recreated as a malt shop/soda fountain.  The theater is being converted into an events venue.

The Rialto Cigar Store, also a major Casper institution for decades, operated as a bookmaker at one time.  That was in addition to other illegal activities, which included selling sex related materials and pornographic magazines.  Even in the 1990s it sold a lot of pornography, in addition to cigars and newspapers.  It was also a malt shop.

That was Casper.

Casper, my hometown, was really rough from at least the onset of World War One through the end of World War Two.  Just as the war had a major impact on towns and cities that bordered reservations in the southwest, as returning Native veterans wanted to be near their homes, but not return to the reservations, returning veterans ran for local office in Natrona County as they wanted to rebuild their lives in a town that wasn't wide open, and Casper was.

The process actually started during the war.  Not only gambling, but prostitution was widely accepted in Casper until the 1940s.  It was loosely confined to The Sand Bar district of the city, but it was very open.  During the war, the commander of the Army Air Force base that became the Natrona County International Airport after the war asked the city to restrain it as the expanded business opportunities for the "working girls" caused by the war caused a law enforcement problem for the military, as well as a major health problem. The Army threatened to confine soldiers to base unless the city did something about it, and with money to be made, the city started to act.  Following the war, the efforts continued until the 1970s when the Sand Bar was taken down as part of an urban renewal project.

Aprilia, 1944.

The Germans captured Aprilia from the British 1st Infantry Division, which held out at "The Factory".

Bishop of Chichester George Bell started a debate in the House of Lords over the morality of the bombing of European cities.  He openly questioned the practice, which says a lot for him.  In doing so, he stated:

My Lords, the question which I have to ask is beset with difficulties. It deals with an issue which must have [its] own anxieties for the Government, and certainly causes great searchings of heart amongst large numbers of people who are as resolute champions of the Allied cause as any member of your Lordships' House. If long-sustained and public opposition to Hitler and the Nazis since 1933 is any credential, I would humbly claim to be one of the most convinced and consistent Anti-Nazis in Great Britain. But I desire to challenge the Government on the policy which directs the bombing of enemy towns on the present scale, especially with reference to civilians, non-combatants, and non-military and non-industrial objectives. I also desire to make it plain that, in anything I say on this issue of policy, no criticism is intended of the pilots, the gunners, and the air crews who, in circumstances of tremendous danger, with supreme courage and skill, carry out the simple duty of obeying their superiors' orders.

§ Few will deny that there is a distinction in principle between attacks on military and industrial objectives and attacks on objectives which do not possess that character. At the outbreak of the war, in response to an appeal by President Roosevelt, the Governments of the United Kingdom and France issued a joint declaration of their intention to conduct hostilities with a firm desire to spare the civilian population and to preserve in every way possible those monuments of human achievement which are treasured in all civilized countries. At the same time explicit instructions were issued to the Commanders of the Armed Forces prohibiting the bombardment, whether from the air or from the sea or by artillery on land, of any except strictly military objectives in the narrowest sense of the word. Both sides accepted this agreement. It is true that the Government added that, ‘In the event of the enemy not observing any of the restrictions which the Governments of the United Kingdom and France have thus imposed on the operation of their Armed Forces, these Governments reserve the right to take all such action as they may consider appropriate.’ It is true that on May 10, 1940, the Government publicly proclaimed their intention to exercise this right in the event of bombing by the enemy of civilian populations. But the point which I wish to establish at this moment is that in entering the war there was no doubt in the Government's mind that the distinction between military and non-military objectives was real.

§ Further, that this distinction is based on fundamental principles accepted by civilized nations is clear from the authorities in International Law. I give one instance the weight of which will hardly be denied. The Washington Conference on Limitation of Armaments in 1922 appointed a Commission of Jurists to draw up a code of rules about aerial warfare. It did not become an international convention, yet great weight should be attached to that code on account of its authors. Article 22 reads: ‘Aerial bombardment for the purpose of terrorizing the civilian population, of destroying or damaging private property not of military character, or of injuring non-combatants is prohibited.’ Article 24 says: ‘ Aerial bombardment is legitimate only when directed at a military objective—that is to say, an objective of which the destruction or injury would constitute a distinct military advantage to the belligerent.’ Professor A. L. Goodhart, of Oxford, states: ‘Both these Articles are based on the fundamental assumption that direct attack on non-combatants is an unjustifiable act of war.’

§ The noble Viscount, Lord Halifax, at the beginning of this war, in reference to this very thing, described war as bloody and brutal. It is idle to suppose that it can be carried on without fearful injury and violence from which non-combatants as well as combatants suffer. It is still true, nevertheless, that there are recognized limits to what is permissible. The Hague Regulations of 1907 are explicit. "The right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited." M. Bonfils, a famous French jurist, says: ‘If it is permissible to drive inhabitants to desire peace by making them suffer, why not admit pillage, burning, torture, murder, violation? ’ I have recalled the joint declaration and these pronouncements because it is so easy in the process of a long and exhausting war to forget what they were once held without question to imply, and because it is a common experience in the history of warfare that not only war but actions taken in war as military necessities are often supported at the time by a class of arguments which, after the war is over, people find are arguments to which they never should have listened.

§ I turn to the situation in February, 1944, and the terrific devastation by Bomber Command of German towns. I do not forget the Luftwaffe, or its tremendous bombing of Belgrade, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Portsmouth, Coventry, Canterbury and many other places of military, industrial and cultural importance. Hitler is a barbarian. There is no decent person on the Allied side who is likely to suggest that we should make him our pattern or attempt to be competitors in that market. It is clear enough that large-scale bombing of enemy towns was begun by the Nazis. I am not arguing that point at all. The question with which I am concerned is this. Do the Government understand the full force of what area bombardment is doing and is destroying now? Are they alive not only to the vastness of the material damage, much of which is irreparable, but also to the harvest they are laying up for the future relationships of the peoples of Europe as well as to its moral implications? The aim of Allied bombing from the air, said the Secretary of State for Air at Plymouth on January 22, is to paralyze German war industry and transport. I recognize the legitimacy of concentrated attack on industrial and military objectives, on airfields and air bases, in view especially of the coming of the Second Front. I fully realize that in attacks on centres of war industry and transport the killing of civilians when it is the result of bona-fide military activity is inevitable. But there must be a fair balance between the means employed and the purpose achieved. To obliterate a whole town because certain portions contain military and industrial establishments is to reject the balance.

§ Let me take two crucial instances, Hamburg and Berlin. Hamburg has a population of between one and two million people. It contains targets of immense military and industrial importance. It also happens to be the most democratic town in Germany where the Anti-Nazi opposition was strongest. Injuries to civilians resulting from bona-fide attacks on particular objectives are legitimate according to International Law. But owing to the methods used the whole town is now a ruin. Unutterable destruction and devastation were wrought last autumn. On a very conservative estimate, according to the early German statistics, 28,000 persons were killed. Never before in the history of air warfare was an attack of such weight and persistence carried out against a single industrial concentration. Practically all the buildings, cultural, military, residential, industrial, religious—including the famous University Library with its 800,000 volumes, of which three-quarters have perished—were razed to the ground.

§ Berlin, the capital of the Reich, is four times the size of Hamburg. The offices of the Government, the military, industrial, war-making establishments in Berlin are a fair target. Injuries to civilians are inevitable. But up to date half Berlin has been destroyed, area by area, the residential and the industrial portions alike. Through the dropping of thousands of tons of bombs, including fire-phosphorus bombs, of extraordinary power, men and women have been lost, overwhelmed in the colossal tornado of smoke, blast and flame. It is said that 74,000 persons have been killed and that 3,000,000 are already homeless. The policy is obliteration, openly acknowledged. That is not a justifiable act of war. Again, Berlin is one of the great centres of art collections in the world. It has a large collection of Oriental and classical sculpture. It has one of the best picture galleries in Europe, comparable to the National Gallery. It has a gallery of modern art better than the Tate, a museum of ethnology without parallel in this country, one of the biggest and best organized libraries—State and university, containing two and a half million books—in the world. Almost all these non-industrial, non-military buildings are grouped together near the old Palace and in the Street of the Linden. The whole of that street, which has been constantly mentioned in the accounts of the raids, has been demolished. It is possible to replace flat houses by mass production. It is not possible so quickly to rebuild libraries or galleries or churches or museums. It is not very easy to rehouse those works of art which have been spared. Those works of art and those libraries will be wanted for the re-education of the Germans after the war. I wonder whether your Lordships realize the loss involved in that.

§ How is it, then, that this wholesale destruction has come about? The answer is that it is the method used, the method of area bombing. The first outstanding raid of area bombing was, I believe, in the spring of 1942, directed against Lubeck, then against Rostock, followed by the thousand-bomber raid against Cologne at the end of May, 1942. The point I want to bring home, because I doubt whether it is sufficiently realized, is that it is no longer definite military and industrial objectives which are the aim of the bombers, but the whole town, area by area, is plotted carefully out. This area is singled out and plastered on one night; that area is singled out and plastered on another night; a third, a fourth, a fifth area is similarly singled out and plastered night after night, till, to use the language of the Chief of Bomber Command with regard to Berlin, the heart of Nazi Germany ceases to beat. How can there be discrimination in such matters when civilians, monuments, military objectives and industrial objectives all together form the target? How can the bombers aim at anything more than a great space when they see nothing and the bombing is blind?

§ When the Nazis bombed France and Britain in 1940 it was denounced as "indiscriminate bombing." I recall this passage from a leader in The Times after the bombing of Paris on June 4, 1940: ‘No doubt in the case of raids on large cities the targets are always avowedly military or industrial establishments; but, when delivered from the great height which the raiders seem to have been forced to keep by the anti-aircraft defences, the bombing in fact is bound to be indiscriminate.’ And I recall two other more recent articles in The Times on our own policy. On January 10, 1944, the following was published: ‘It is the proclaimed intention of Bomber Command to proceed with the systematic obliteration one by one of the centres of German war production until the enemy's capacity to continue the fight is broken down.’ On January 31 the Aeronautical Correspondent wrote: ‘Some of the most successful attacks of recent times have been made when every inch of the target area was obscured by unbroken cloud, thousands of feet thick, and when the crews have hardly seen the ground from which they took off until they were back at their bases again.’ If your Lordships will weigh the implication, and observe not only the destruction of the war-production factories but the obliteration of the places in which they are and the complete invisibility of the target area, it must surely be admitted that the bombing is comprehensive and what would ordinarily be called indiscriminate.

§ The Government have announced their determination to continue this policy city by city. I give quotations. The Prime Minister, after the thousand-bomber raid on Cologne in 1942, said: ‘Proof of the growing power of the British bomber force is also the herald of what Germany will receive city by city from now on.’ Air Marshal Sir Arthur Harris, on July 28, 1942, said: ‘We are going to scourge the Third Reich from end to end. We are bombing Germany city by city and ever more terribly in order to make it impossible for her to go on with the war. That is our object; we shall pursue it relentlessly.’ A few days ago, as reported in the Sunday Express of January 23, an Air Marshal said: "One by one we shall pull out every town in Germany like teeth."

§ I shall offer reasons for questioning this policy as a whole, but what I wish immediately to urge is this. There are old German towns, away from the great centres, which may be subjected—which almost certainly will be subjected—to the raids of Bomber Command. Almost certainly they are on the long list. Dresden, Augsburg, Munich are among the larger towns, Regensburg, Hildesheim and Marburg are a few among the smaller beautiful cities. In all these towns the old centres, the historic and beautiful things, are well preserved, and the industrial establishments are on the outskirts. After the destruction of the ancient town centres of Cologne, with its unique Romanesque churches, and Lubeck, with its brick cathedral, and Mainz, with one of the most famous German cathedrals, and of the old Gothic towns, the inner towns, Nuremburg, Hamburg and others, it would seem to be indicated that an effort, a great effort should be made to try to save the remaining inner towns. In the fifth year of the war it must surely be apparent to any but the most complacent and reckless how far the destruction of European culture has already gone. We ought to think once, twice, and three times before destroying the rest. Something can still be saved if it is realized by the authorities that the industrial centres, generally speaking, lie outside the old inner parts where are the historical monuments.

§ I would especially stress the danger—outside Germany—to Rome. The principle is the same, but the destruction of the main Roman monuments would create such hatred that the misery would survive when all the military and political advantages that may have accrued may have long worn off. The history of Rome is our own history. Rome taught us, through the example of Christ, to abolish human sacrifice and taught us the Christian faith. The destruction would rankle in the memory of every good European as Rome's destruction by the Goths or the sack of Rome rankled. The blame simply must not fall on those who are professing to create a better world. The resentment which would, inevitably, follow would be too deep-seated to be forgotten. It would be the sort of crime which one day, even in the political field, would turn against the perpetrators.

§ I wish to offer a few concluding remarks on the policy as a whole. It will be said that this area bombing—for it is this area bombing which is the issue to-day—is definitely designed to diminish the sacrifice of British lives and to shorten the war. We all wish with all our hearts that these two objects could be achieved, but to justify methods inhumane in themselves by arguments of expediency smacks of the Nazi philosophy that Might is Right. In any case the idea that it will reduce the sacrifice is speculation. The Prime Minister, as far back as August, 1940, before either Russia or America entered the war, justified the continued bombardment of German industries and communications as one of the surest, if not the shortest, of all the roads to victory. We are still fighting. It is generally admitted that German aircraft and military production, though it has slowed down, is going forward; and your Lordships may have noticed signs in certain military quarters of a tendency to question the value of this area bombing policy on military grounds. The cost in sacrifice of human life when the Second Front begins has never been disguised either from the American or from the British public by our leaders.

§ It is also urged that area bombing will break down morale and the will to fight. On November 5, in a speech at Cheltenham, the Secretary of State for Air said that bombing in this way would continue until we had paralysed German war industries, disrupted their transport system and broken their will to war. Again leaving the ethical issue aside, it is pure speculation. Up to now the evidence received from neutral countries is to the opposite effect. It is said that the Berliners are taking it well. Let me quote from two Swedish papers. On November 30 last, the Svenska Dagbladet—this was during the first stage of our raids on Berlin—said: ‘Through their gigantic air raids the British have achieved what Hitler failed to achieve by means of decrees and regulations; they have put the majority of the German people on a war footing.’ On January 9 of this year, the Sydsvenska Dagbladet said: ‘The relative German strength on the home front is undoubtedly based on desperation, which increases and gets worse the longer the mass bombing lasts. It is understandable that the fewer the survivors and the more they lose the more the idea spreads 'We have everything to gain and nothing to lose, and we can only regain what is ours if Germany wins the final victory, so let us do everything in our power.'’ If there is one thing absolutely sure, it is that a combination of the policy of obliteration with a policy of complete negation as to the future of a Germany which has got free from Hitler is bound to prolong the war and make the period after the war more miserable.

§ I am not extenuating the crimes of the Nazis or the responsibility of Germany as a whole in tolerating them for so long, but I should like to add this. I do not believe that His Majesty's Government desire the annihilation of Germany. They have accepted the distinction between Germany and the Hitlerite State.

[Bell is interrupted here by shouts of "no" from several members.]

On March 10 of last year the Lord Chancellor, speaking officially for the Government, accepted that distinction quite clearly and precisely. Is it a matter for wonder that Anti-Nazis who long for help to overthrow Hitler are driven to despair? I have here a telegram, which I have communicated to the Foreign Office, sent to me on December 27 last by a well-known Anti-Nazi Christian leader who had to flee from Germany for his life long before the war. It was sent from Zurich, and puts what millions inside Germany must feel. He says: ‘Is it understood that present situation gives us no sincere opportunity for appeal to people because one cannot but suspect effect of promising words on practically powerless population convinced by bombs and phosphor that their annihilation is resolved?’ If we wish to shorten the war, as we must, then let the Government speak a word of hope and encouragement both to the tortured millions of Europe and to those enemies of Hitler to whom in 1939 Mr. Churchill referred as "millions who stand aloof from the seething mass of criminality and corruption constituted by the Nazi Party machine."

Why is there this blindness to the psychological side? Why is there this inability to reckon with the moral and spiritual facts? Why is there this forget-fulness of the ideals by which our cause is inspired? How can the War Cabinet fail to see that this progressive devastation of cities is threatening the roots of civilization? How can they be blind to the harvest of even fiercer warring and desolation, even in this country, to which the present destruction will inevitably lead when the members of the War Cabinet have long passed to their rest? How can they fail to realize that this is not the way to curb military aggression and end war? This is an extraordinarily solemn moment. What we do in war—which, after all, lasts a comparatively short time—affects the whole character of peace, which covers a much longer period. The sufferings of Europe, brought about by the demoniac cruelty of Hitler and his Nazis, and hardly imaginable to those in this country who for the last five years have not been out of this island or had intimate association with Hitler's victims, are not to be healed by the use of power only, power exclusive and unlimited. The Allies stand for something greater than power. The chief name inscribed on our banner is "Law." It is of supreme importance that we who, with our Allies, are the liberators of Europe should so use power that it is always under the control of law. It is because the bombing of enemy towns—this area bombing—raises this issue of power unlimited and exclusive that such immense importance is bound to attach to the policy and action of His Majesty's Government. I beg to move.

[Three more speakers, including Cosmo Lang, former Archbishop of Canterbury, and Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, intervene before Bell, exercising his right of reply, makes a concluding statement.]

My Lords, I should like to express my gratitude for the courtesy of the noble Viscount's reply.[2] I will not disguise the fact that the end of his speech was not exactly unexpected but was nevertheless a disappointment. I, of course, wish—no one more—for the liberation of the unfortunate peoples of Europe, and I know it is only by the conquest of Hitler and his associates that that can be achieved. I would very strongly press the noble Viscount to take great pains about the definition of legitimate objectives of a military and industrial kind and to avoid to the utmost extent possible any confusion of them with non-military and non-industrial objectives. I do not wish to trouble your Lordships further, but we have to think of the future as well as the present. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.

"I recognize the legitimacy of concentrated attack on industrial and military objectives, on airfields and air bases, in view especially of the coming of the Second Front "I fully realize that in attacks on centres of war industry and transport the killing of civilians when it is the result of bona-fide military activity is inevitable. But there must be a fair balance between the means employed and the purpose achieved. To obliterate a whole town because certain portions contain military and industrial establishments is to reject the balance ... How can there be discrimination in such matters when civilians, monuments, military objectives and industrial objectives all together form the target? How can the bombers aim at anything more than a great space when they see nothing and the bombing is blind?"

Bishop Bell, an Anglican (of course) had been considered to be in the running for Archbishop of Canterbury and some feel that the speech cost him is chance.  Bell did not have the support of his superiors in making the speech, one of whom questioned it during it, stating; it is a lesser evil to bomb the war-loving Germans than to sacrifice the lives of our fellow countrymen..., or to delay the delivery of many now held in slavery"?

Bishop Bell is considered by some to be a Saint.

Bishop Bell was absolutely correct, in my view, which is something those in the West have never faced.  Much of the bombing of Axis targets evolved to a species of mass civilian killing, which was never moral.

Bishop Bell opposed the war crime trials after the war on nuanced grounds, which likely also didn't help those wanting him to become the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury.  He opposed nuclear arms following the war.  He died in 1958.  In 1995, long after his death, he was accused of having a sexual relationship with a minor in the 1940s and the Anglican Church paid a settlement which it later found embarrassing as it was concluded that there had been a rush to judgement, and that in fact the evidence was not credible.  It apologized to his relatives.

The Luftwaffe made renewed efforst to supply the Korsun Pocket from the air, and also evacuated some of the wounded after delivirng large quantities of materials.

Water carrying detail, February 9, 1944.  Bougainville.

Alice Walker, author of The Color Purple, was born in Georgia.

Wednesday, February 7, 2024

A Mid Week At Work Blog Mirror: Catholic Stuff You Should Know. Sunday Best.

Bar scene from The Best Years Of Our Lives.  Yes, they are supposed to be at a bar, and at sort of a blue collar bar at that.

This is an interesting podcast, by two priests, on dress at Mass on Sunday:

SUNDAY BEST

We've covered this topic before, and in other context, we note.  Consider:

Declined Sartorial Standards. Have we gone too informal?


A Nation of Slobs


Let alone the plethora of related posts below:

So what of this?

Let me start off by noting that this is't the first time I've heard Catholic clerics address this (I've never heard Protestant ones address this, but as we've noted many times before, Protestants tend to dress up for Church, at least by way of my limited observation.  Catholics, well, it's mixed.

And let me say that I"m one who is pretty bad about not doing so.

For years and years, I tend not to shave on the weekends.  I probably ought to just grow a beard, as I don't like shaving, but at this point, it'd be too much of a shock and I'd look like a short, not too fat, Santa Claus.  When I was young, my beard was a bunch of different colors, brown, blond, red, etc., reflecting no doubt my wild Hibernian heritage.  People don't think of humans having hair coloration like a Calico cat, but I used to.


I've had a heavy mustache since my 20s.  It was brown with red and blond streaks, but not enough to notice unless you looked really close up.  

Now it's gray.

That is no doubt what my beard would also be.  The hair on my head isn't yet.

Anyhow, when I was a college student, I'd rarely shave every day.  In retrospect, I probably should have as looking like Yassir Arafat, in the pre stubble as fashionable days, isn't a cool look.  I had to start shaving at age 13, and I've just never cared for it much.

I've started to shave on most Sundays, however, recently. And before listening to this podcast.

The one time I've heard a priest orally reference this before was at Mass, during the summer.  A visiting Priest made a pointed comment about people showing up in shorts, and indeed, people did, and do.  One extremely devout young man down at the downtown parish seems to only own shorts, and a large collection of religiously themed t-shirts.  I'm sure that his dress should not be of concern.

And in a slight way, I think this topic may have a jump the shark aspect to it.  It was really in the 80s when dress went too far, and you'd see t-shirts with rude comments and the like.  There was a popular "Big Johnson" line of t-shirts that I can distinctly recall somebody showing up to Mass at.

I don't see that anymore.  Indeed, the younger people at Mass are almost never dressed t-shirt fashion.  They are often dressed informally, but pretty nicely.

In fact, they dress nicer than I do.

I started really noticing that the Sunday before last, which was also before I heard this podcast.  I wasn't feeling great, quite frankly, and didn't shave.  I don't recall what shirt I was wearing, but I've been getting a bit self-conscious about my dress at Mass in general and so took note, at some point, of what I was wearing.  I'm not sure why I took note, but in part it's because the men I see sitting at the back of the Church are all dressed better than me, save for one guy who is retired and who shared my profession, whose always super casually dressed, and a few genuine quite old men who are probably well past the point where they care much about dress in general.  One of those guys wears a BDU M65 Field Jacket to every Mass in the winter, which now really stands out.

I've worn M64s to Mass lots of time, when I was younger, as that was the coat I had.  When I was a National Guardsman and living in Laramie, it was often my go-to coat.  I'm sure it wasn't supposed to be, but it was.

Anyhow, soon after Mass started I noticed that my Carhartt coat, which I was wearing, is really a mess.  The sleeves are fraying, and it has a blood stain on the front I hadn't previously noticed.  It's so bad, in general, that I really need to replace it or retire it exclusively to working cows or hunting. For that matter, even if I do restrict its use, I need a new one.

The clerical podcasters in this podcast urge people to basically up their game at Mass on the basis that clothing matters.  And indeed, as I've noted before, it does.  They urge people to dress one step up from what they do at work.

They're centered in Denver, which has retained a higher dress standard than Central Wyoming.  It always had one.  Even now, when I go into Denver for work, I'll walk up 16th Street and notice men headed to their offices in suits and ties, or sports coats and ties, with overcoats and occasionally the odd Fedora.  In Houston, recently, I noticed that male lawyers really turn out.

Oddly, however, I've also noticed that on Teams/Zoom, even at official functions, this is less so.  I was in an administrative hearing the other day where I was the only one in jacket and tie.  And I've been in court proceedings, on Teams, where I'm the only one with a tie. 

Frankly, if I were the judge, which I will never be, I'd make a point of that to a lawyer without a tie.  As in "Mr. X, before you address the court, it appears that you failed to finish dressing. Do you want me to pause for a couple of minutes while you put on your tie?".  If the answer came back that he didn't have one with him, the next line would be; "Well, rules of courtroom decorum apply even here.  We'll note your failure and decline to accept any statement to the Court. Please pay the Court $50.00 for being in contempt and make sure you are properly dressed next time."

Anyhow, advice of the clerical gentlemen notwithstanding, I'm not going to up my game from work.  I am going to up my game at work, however, as recently I've been really lazy about it unless I know I have an official function to go to.  I've been back in my office with Levi 501s.

Slacking pretty heavily there.

And I do need to up my game a bit on Sunday, while remembering where I live.

The podcast mentions that a bit, but only a bit.  You do have to remember where you are.

As I've noted quite a few times, in my region of the Rocky Mountain West, really dressing up for Mass was always a Protestant thing.  It's probably because there were so many Irish Catholic Sheep Ranchers, Mexican Sheep Herders, and oilfield workers that this was the reason.  People came clean, but as they were, consistent with their status, and that's continued.

And that's why in part I disagree a bit with the pod's advice.  We are the publicans and the sinners, and we're there.  I don't think a person should dress in appropriately, but they can come as they are, in my view.

In terms of coming as they are, there have been some interesting trends.  One is the rise of the Trads and the Rad Trads, which I've mentioned quite a few times before.  The Mantila Girls have a certain look to them, and its very conservative.  It's charming also, and I'm not criticizing them.  I'm glad their doing that.

Some jacket and ties, or at least ties, are appearing, and in some cases I don't know what to make of that, in part because I've long known some of the so clad, and their dress has really evolved.  Most of them are Trads,and that explains it, but they were pretty Trady 20 years ago.  Their dress has evolved to more conservative as the young Church itself has become more conservative.  They're not young, however, and taking up that sort of dress, if you didn't naturally affect it earlier, looks a bit odd.  They don't really look like they know where they are, or what their station is.

So I guess there's a middle ground.

At any rate, the pod is correct for certain that clothes do matter. They do send a message.  I've been dressing outside of my vocation for months and need to address it.  Why a person would do that is a topic for some other time.

Related Threads:






































Sunday, February 4, 2024

Churches of the West: Churches of the West: Our Lady of Fatima Catholic Church, Casper Wyoming

Churches of the West: Churches of the West: Our Lady of Fatima Catholic ...

Churches of the West: Our Lady of Fatima Catholic Church, Casper Wyoming

Churches of the West: Our Lady of Fatima Catholic Church, Casper Wyoming: This Church was put in place in the early 1950s due to the expansion of the City of Casper, and has an unusual history. The church it...

Our prior entry, done quite some time ago, lacked an interior shot.  I could have simply added it to the old post, and I likely will, but here it is as a separate entry. More detail on the Church appears in the original entry.


 

Saturday, February 3, 2024

Two random items. Andy Griffith and Taylor Swift

Taylor Swift

On "X", fka "Twitter" a man who was the father to a large family of daughters (it was either 7 or 9), and who is very conservative, posted an item expressing relief for Taylor Swift.

His points were really good.

Populist right commentators are all up in arms about Swift right now, for reasons that are darned near impossible to discern.  It seems to stem from her expressing support for Democratic candidates in the past, including Joe Biden in 2016.  Well, guess what, she has a right to do that.  You have a right to ignore it. 

She also expressed support for abortion being legal.  I feel it should be illegal.  That doesn't mean she's part of a double secret left wing conspiracy.

But, and here's the thing, there are real reasons to admire her, or at least her presentation, and the father in question pointed it out.  He'd endured taking his daughters to Miley Cyrus, Ariana Grande, "Lady Gaga" etc., and found them disturbing.

Indeed, they are.

Miley Cyrus went from a child actress to being a freakish figure posed nude on a ball, looking like she was a meth addict who was working in a strip club.  Ariana Grande has at least one song that's out right graphic about illicit sex.  Lady Gaga has made a career out of being freakish, until she couldn't any longer, and like Madonna is another woman who was the product of Catholic Schools who took to songs that are abhorrent in terms of Christian, let alone Catholic, morals.

Swift, in contrast, can only be criticized a bit for dressing semi provocatively on stage, but only somewhat so. Off-stage, she's always very modestly dressed.  Indeed, she's a throwback, with her ruby red lipstick and classic nearly 1940s appearance.

And in terms of relationships, it's noted that she's dating a football player.

Now, we don't know what their private lives are like, but they're admirably keeping them private.  It's hard to know what Swift's views are on most issues.  And we really don't need to.  But in their visible relationship, made visible to us only because of media fascination, they're quite proper.  As the poster noted, the football star is "courting" her.

It's not that there's nothing to see here.  There's nothing to see here which any conservative in their right mind wouldn't have an absolute freak out about.  They're behaving exactly the way in public that supposedly Christian conservatives want dating couples to do.  No piercings, no weird tattoos, no scanty clothing.

Which would all suggest all the angst is about something else, and what that is probably about is the secret knowledge that huge numbers of real conservatives can't stand Donald Trump and won't vote for him.

The Andy Griffith Show

I was at lunch two days ago at a local Chinese restaurant, and across the way an all adult family was discussing the plot of the prior night's Andy Griffith Show rerun.  It struck me that that may not have happened since the 1960s.

It's interesting. 

The Andy Griffith Show went off the air before the Great Rural Purge in Television, but not my much.  It ran from 1960 to 1968.  It was consistently focused on the rural South, and it felt like it depicted the 1950s, which it never did, save for the fact that what we think of as the 60s really started in about 1955 and ran to about 1964.  Indeed, while the show was in tune with the times in 1960, it really wasn't in 1968.

But that in tune with the times is what strikes me here.  The family was speaking of it as if it was a currently running show, not like it was something from 60 years ago.  That suggests that in some ways people have groped their way back in the dark to idealizing the world as it was depicted then, rural, lower middle class, devoid of an obsession with sex (although it does show up subtly in the show from time to time), and divorce a rarity.

Now, the world wasn't prefect in 1960 by any means.  But the show didn't pretend to depict a perfect world, only one that was sort of a mirror on the world view of its watchers.  To some degree, that world view had returned.

Epilog

The Taylor Swift story also appears on the most recent entries for City Father and Uncle Mike's Musings, both of which are linked in on this site.