Monday, April 27, 2026

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 130th Edition. Narratives

The things they've said.

The attempted assassination at the White House Correspondence Dinner has spawned some interesting events and narratives.

One thing is that apparently Trump called several prominent reporters who were at the event that night, and expressed concern for their well being.  That's outright remarkable given his generally abusive self centered public persona.

He also made a statement about needing to come together.

That's true, but at least one politician interviewed about it had a very difficult time not expressing skepticism.

Already, I'd note, Trump fans have yelled out about how Democratic and left wing rhetoric cased this.  Well, bull.

There is a lot of hostile verbiage directed at Trump, and much of it is due to the horrible things he says all the time.  Just a few weeks ago he noted how he was glad a public figure was dead.

Trump brought American political rhetoric into new territory when he very first started to run for the Oval Office.  Republicans who complain about the language directed at him, and some of it is vile, need to look in the mirror.  

Ballroom fixation

Amongst comments made by Trump were those stating this is proof we need his expensive ballroom, which is tied up in litigation.

The logic of that would be that the ballroom, if built, will have expensive security features.  Where it fails in logic is that the dinner event was a private one, not a state function.  Unless everything a President accepts an invitation to is held in the ballroom, things like this would not be prevented.

But here's another, and frankly radical, thing to consider. 

Maybe Presidents need less protection, not more.

At one time there was a tradition that members of the public could wait in line at the White House to shake the President's hand on New Years. That ended in 1932.  Now it would be unthinkable.

The only thing that's changed since 1932 is us.  If the President's under constant threat, and of course there were three Presidents that were assassinated prior to 1932, that's because of us or some other factor.

One thing that's clearly changed is that the President is treated much more like a king now than he was in '32.  Air Force One is the very symbol of that.

These trappings ought to be stripped away.  If a President needs to fly somewhere, on official business, the Air Force has airplanes.  There doesn't need to be a designated special one.  Nor does there need to be a Marine Corps helicopter dedicated for the President.  If he's just flying to a resort to golf, he can by a commercial airline ticket.

Maybe part of the overall problem is that they're given too much and separated from the people they are supposed to serve.

A big dumb ballroom emphasizes that.

It actually is true that prior Presidents lamented their being a lack of entertainment space. Well, too darned bad.  Rent a hotel room.  

And I'm not in favor of a giant bunker on the White House grounds either. 

Maybe if a  person is more like everyone else, they'll think twice about things that harm people.  I don't want them exposed to violence, but making things so they can inflict it video game style is not a good thing, and elevating the President above the people isn't either. 

And now you know. . .

how thousands of other people live every day.  With one exception, when I listed to interviews of people from the press who had been at the event, things were not too surprisingly focused on themselves.  The one exception was somebody who pointed out that they had excellent security but that most people don't, and that a lot of people live in fear of their family members, including children, being killed every day.

That's an excellent point.

Trump said something about this being just part of the price of holding office, which is easy to say for somebody who has a taxpayer funded security team.  It shouldn't be part of the price of holding office, and exposure to violent death shouldn't be something you have to endure just because you live in this country.

Anti Christian?

When I went to Mass yesterday there was a Sheriff's truck parked in front of the Church. That's not a parking spot.  When I went in, there was a uniformed sheriff's officer in complete kit.  That's unusual.

I wondered if something was going on.  Maybe not.  He went to Communion like everyone else, so maybe he was just on his way to work.

Trump claimed that the shooter had been a Christian than apostatized and that was part of his motivation.  We'll see.  If so, it's ironic, as there's no visible evidence of Trump taking Christianity seriously.

What our enemies must be thinking.

It's been long believed that Iran has sleeper cells in the US.  If they do, they haven't activated them in the current war.   They either don't really have them, or they're holding back as it provides them with an advantage.

I can see where the latter might be the case.  The old joke, dating back to World War Two, was that Hitler was the best general the Allies had, and that same may apply to Trump.  He might be the best general the Iranians had.

That we went into the war with Iran with no clue what we were doing, and what our enemy was actually like, is to plain to excuse away.  We have no idea whatsoever what we're doing and have no way out of the war.  It's going to wreck the global economy.  At this point, and we're at the sixty day mark, Trump legally has to submit the question of continuing the war to Congress, which will have to determine, as a practical matter, if we're going to engage in a full scale ground invasion of the country or surrender and leave Iran stronger than it was.

The Iranians maybe gambling on the latter, and it'd probably be a good gamble.

Anyhow, assuming they have sleeper cells, they've really shown restraint.  Yesterday proved that a dedicated group of men could have breached security and completely decapitated the American government.  We participated in doing that, which is beyond the Pale in war normally, in this war.  On the basis of turnabout is fair play, it's amazing they haven't tried it. Maybe they just didn't think it'd work.

They know now it would have, although presumably the administration won't be dumb enough again to put the complete administration together in one room.

The others who must be looking are Russia and China, China in particular. But not at that, but at the war itself.

We've pretty much burned through our war reserve of missiles.  If war came with China, we couldn't fight it.

Tone Deaf

Once a week now we get identical sized flyers from Chuck Gray and Reid Rasner promising to support the demented octogenarian that put us a war that's going to completely wreck the economy, and whose wrecking a lot of other things.

Maybe that still works in Wyoming.  Trump has a lot of fans here.  But as prices get higher and higher, and we sluff into a summer that's going to be hot and dry, with a tourist industry that's going to fall flat on its face, I wonder.

For the first time, actually, I got a sort of nervous "what do you make of the assassination" from somebody whose a huge Trump supporter and knows I'm not.  I think he was looking for reassurance of some sort.  I gave analysis. That probably isn't what he was looking for.

Proof of Devine Providence?

Franklin Graham was quick to come out with what I was sure would occur.  Trump's survived three assassination attempts and that is, he suggested, proof that God wants him in power.

Adolf Hitler survived over 40 assassination attempts. There are five known plots on Stalin's life.

A person should never dismiss something being the Hand of God, but we shouldn't presume to know the mind of God either.  Nor should we ignore, as the examples above show, the Problem of Evil.

On that, we can presume that God allows an evil to occur, but does not cause it, in order to bring a greater good out of it.  While foreseeing the future is always risking, I could see that being the case here.

In spite of what Trump/Gray/Hageman/Barrasso/Rasner and others believe, or claim to believe, the ongoing use of fossil fuels is harming the world. This may actually accelerate their end.  

Let me restate that, it is accelerating their end.

Countries all around the globe, including China, are rapidly phasing out fossil fuels for power generation.  China is leaping into electric vehicles big time.  Europe has, I believe, 2030 as the date for the end of the import of Russian oil.

The war is freeing the globe of US influence, something we'll regret and with it our steadfast refusal to look at reality.  We're being put in our place, and the era of fossil fuels is coming to a rapid end.

The other thing, it seems to me, that Trump is brining about is the discrediting of American Evangelicalism.  I.e., people like Graham.  

Evangelical churches are particularly an American thing.  They're strong in the US in a way they aren't anywhere else.  Where they evangelize outside the US its nearly always where Catholics have made it safe for them to go.  The latching on to Trump by them in a very public manner is hurting Christianity in general, but them in particular.  Catholicism is already growing world wide and, while the story is only now being noticed, it's growing in the US.  I suspect Trump is accidentally helping bring hte latter about.

On firearms.

On assassinations, one thing worth noting, although I won't detail it, is that so far the only assassin/would be assassin who seems to have had a clue what he was doing was the guy who shot Charlie Kirk, although even there it's clear that the shot being lethal was essentially accidental.  There's very free access to firearms in the US, although I suspect that this will start being curbed back due to Trump, but that free access doesn't mean competence.  

People who are really familiar with firearms are unlikely to go out and try to kill somebody.  This is true of "military style" firearms.  There's a group of firearms aficionados who like military style firearms, but aren't very likely to use them in any lethal fashion.

This may simply be because people know and like firearms know what they'll do, and are unlikely to be people who use them in that fashion.  It's the people who buy them just because they're worked up about politics, on the right or the left, or who have an exaggerated fear of being attacked, who are the problem here.  Fortunately, they're not all that likely to actually know how to use them.

Last edition:

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 129th Edition. An unfortunate observation of our times.

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 129th Edition. An unfortunate observation of our times.

Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 128th Edition. Attem...: The 127th edition of this was teed up to go before last night's White House Correspondence Dinner, or this would be that edition.  Havin...

I tend to over empathetic.

That might be an easy thing to claim, but it's true.  I'm often tortured in litigation by how little Plaintiff's lawyers care about their clients.  Indeed, I think it's a hallmark of being a Plaintiff's lawyer, which I'm not, to not really give a rat's ass about them.  Most of them are callous to it.  I'm also tortured, however, by the extent to which litigation is regarded as a mere business transaction while it wrecks the lives an livelihoods of real people.

I'm bothered by the personal plights of people I don't know.  In movies with sad situations I'll find myself tearing up.  The killing of the Iranian schoolgirls in the current war bothers me so much that I couldn't tell my wife about it without starting to tear up and saying "think about their poor parents".  I can hardly stand to think about it now and it fills me with rage that we killed them, even if it was a targeting accident.  We have excuses, but we have no sympathy.

I note all of this as I'm bothered today by the extent to which the horrible human being and his acolytes in the White House have actually made me so fatigued that I'm having a hard time caring about what occurred at the Press Dinner.

Intellectually, I know it was awful.  I don't support killing people.  I'm opposed to abortion.  I'm opposed to the death penalty.  I'm opposed to wars save in the case of absolute need, a part of which his self defense.  I'm realistic enough to know that people can take the lives of others in self defense, but murder of a person is never justified.

But day after day of Trump's assault on human dignity has worn me down so much that I'm not empathetic about yesterdays events.  I know that they were wrong, but it's just an intellectual acknowledgement of it.

Sooner or later, most likely sooner given his advanced age, Donald Trump is going to pass on and go to his reward.  He's publicly wondered if he's damned.  As a Catholic, I hold to the belief that we should hope and pray for his salvation and that we do not know who is amongst the damned.  Hans Von Baltazar posed the question if we might dare to hope that all men are saved, and while we might dare to hope it, I very much doubt that is the case.  Still, we have no idea who is amongst the damned and who is amongst the saved, but just by objective Christian criteria, there's not a single member of Trump's administration that I hear about often whom I would not regard as having their souls in jeopardy.

I hate fact that Trump is so vile that he's made it so that I'm having a hard time being empathetic about a horrible event.  If Trump was to choke on a Big Mac today I'd say a prayer for his salvation, but it wouldn't be one of those things were I consciously morn a death, as I usually do.  I'm not wishing for his death, but I'm so burnt out about all things Trump I'd say a prayer for the dead and then probably move on to other things.

Trump has made many things that way.  He's done such violence to our society and its norms that its reached the state where it's almost impossible to care about them. At this point, if the next President had to tear out the Reflecting Pool, I wouldn't care.

When Trump is gone the nation is going to have a monumental time repairing itself.  I guess we have the example of the post Civil War era, in which the country manage to come back together in spite of actually fighting itself.  How it managed that isn't really clear.  It seems like it just decided it would.

Here's to hoping that the Better Angels of Our Mercy might return.

Last edition:


150 years later, the Brinton Museum examines the Battle of the Little Bighorn through Indigenous eyes

 

150 years later, the Brinton Museum examines the Battle of the Little Bighorn through Indigenous eyes

Thursday, April 27, 1876. Shrinking White Mountain.

April 27, 1876

Executive Mansion

It is hereby ordered that all that portion of the White Mountain Indian Reservation in Arizona Territory lying west of the following- described line, viz: Commencing at the northwest corner of the present reserve, a point at the southern edge of the Black Mesas, due north of Sombrero or Plumoso Butte; thence due south to said Sombrero or Plumoso Butte; thence southeastwardly to Chromo Peak; thence in a southerly direction to the mouth of the San Pedro River; thence due south to the southern boundary of the reservation, be, and the same hereby is, restored to the public domain.

U. S. Grant

Last edition:

Saturday. April 22, 1876. The first National League baseball game.

Labels: 

Sunday, April 26, 2026

Churches of the West: What happened to St. Anthony's Alter Rail (and others) and where is it (and they) today?

Churches of the West: What happened to St. Anthony's Alter Rail (and oth...: I want the alter rail from St. Anthony's Church in Casper Wyoming put back in. I'm not part of any movement, or organization, or any...

What happened to St. Anthony's Alter Rail (and others) and where is it (and they) today?

I want the alter rail from St. Anthony's Church in Casper Wyoming put back in.

I'm not part of any movement, or organization, or anything.  I'm just a parishioner, albeit one who normally goes to Our Lady of Fatima, who remembers it.

And, frankly, the fact that the beautiful marble alter rail came out for no real reason angers me.

I have an older post on this topic here:
Churches of the West: Stop! Don't change that Church!: A theme, if not always an obvious one, of this blog is architecture. And  nothing does more violence to traditional, serviceable, and b...

Here's part of it:

Stop! Don't change that Church!

A theme, if not always an obvious one, of this blog is architecture.

And  nothing does more violence to traditional, serviceable, and beautiful architecture, than "updating" it for any reason.

Just don't.

A case in point.


The photograph above, unfortunately not entirely in focus and in black and white, dates from November 1958.  It depicts St. Anthony's of Padua Church in Casper Wyoming on the occasion of my parents wedding.

Now, St. Anthony's remains a beautiful church today, but if we had a picture of the interior (which I don't from this angle) and if we had this picture in sharper focus (which it isn't) and in color (which it is not), we'd notice some changes right away.

And they aren't good ones.

The altarpiece and the altar are all still there.  The cross painted on the wall behind the altarpiece is also still there.  But many other things have changed.

Most obvious, the beautiful marble altar rail in this photograph, a gift of the Schulte family when the church was built, is gone.  I was told that a part of it can be found now in a local restaurant, which I hope is not true.  If it is true, I've never seen it, so it must be some place I don't go to.  It's not clear here, but the gate for the altar rail was marble with heavy brass hinges.  A true work of art in every sense.

The heavy brass lanterns hanging from the ceiling are also gone.

What appears to be a marble ambo is gone as well, replaced by a very nice wooden (walnut?) one.

The statute of St. Patrick moved across town to St. Patrick's, which sort of makes sense. The funds to build St. Patrick's came from St. Anthony's donors, many of whom were Irish, to that we'd ultimately send the statute of the Patron Saint of Ireland over there, which we did only fairly recently, does square with the general them there.. The statute of St. Anthony has been moved to a different spot, but it looks good where it is.

I'm not certain what sort of floor covering we're looking at here, probably carpet, and of course we have new carpet.  But what would strike anyone looking at this photo about what is next to the carpet, the pews, is that the pews are now cantered to face towards the center of the alter.

Okay, what's up with all of that, and was it an improvement?

Well, I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder, as all such things are, but in my view, the answer is a very distinct "no".

It's funny how these things work.  I can remember all of the features depicted here, including the altar rail, even though I was very young when at least that feature came out.  But, at the time, I don't think I thought much about it, if I thought about it all.  I don't remember the Mass being in Latin at all, although when I was very, very young, it must have been.  Anyhow, while these things didn't bother me at the time, or the one change that I recall from when I was a bit older, the cantering of the pews, didn't bother me much, now they do.

That may be because I now have a greater appreciation for history and tradition than I did when I was just a boy, although I had a sense of that at the time.

The cocked angle of the pews, remnants of a decision made by a Priest in the 1970s or perhaps early 80s,  has been something I've never liked, even if I understand the intent behind it.  Not visible in this photograph, a row of pews that were in the middle of the church were taken out to facilitate twice as many Communion servers.  It's awkward and always has been and should not have been done.  Indeed, as this was the only Catholic Church in town with it was built, it was probably jam packed nearly every Mass and they seemed to manage to get by just fine. For that matter, I've been in plenty of packed Catholic churches where everyone came up to the front of the church and it always worked just fine as well.  Having said that, changing the angle of the pews didn't do a great disservice to the church even if it didn't really help it any.

Another matter, however, is the altar rail.

Now altar rails turn out to be a surprisingly hot button item to people not familiar with them.

All Latin Rite Catholic Churches and Anglican Churches had altar rails. Chances are very high that other churches close in form to the Catholic Church also had them, I just don't know. Their purposes was to provide a place for communicants to kneel when receiving communion.  Prior to Vatican II (1962 to 1965) all Latin Catholic in modern times received communion on the tongue.  Communicants would kneel at the altar rail and receive communion.

You'd think that finding a public domain photograph of communicants receiving communion at an altar rail would b easy, but it isn't.  This almost illustrates it in a better fashion, however.  British solders lined up, as if there is an altar rail, and receiving communion in teh field in North Africa.  Off hand, I suspect that this is an Anglican service.

Now, before we get too far down this road it should be noted that people can get really up in arms about this in all sorts of ways and some traditionalist will insist that communion can only properly be received kneeling and on the tongue.  This doesn't seem to be true and certainly wasn't universally the case.  Indeed, originally, the very first Christians, received communion in the hand and you can find very early writings that effect.  However, traditionalist will hotly dispute what those writings and the other evidence actually means. Given as I'm not getting into that debate, I'm not going there and that isn't the point of this entry.

What is the point is that altar rails were an integral part of the design of churches for an extremely long time. Take anything out of a well designed building and you risk subtracting from its design. That's exactly what I think occurred here.

Which isn't to say that I feel that St. Anthony's is a bad looking Church now, far from it. It's still a beautiful church. But it was more beautiful before the marble altar rail was taken out.

Indeed, the problem with making alterations to these well designed structures is that any time that this is done it risks giving into a temporary view in favor of a more traditional element that was integral in the design of the structure while doing damage to its appearance.  All Catholic churches up until the id 1960s were designed to have altar rails.  Taking them out may have served what was, and perhaps is, the view of the day in regards to worship, but it also means that a major feature of the interior of the building, to which careful consideration had been given, was now missing.

And it turns out that, contrary to widely held belief, they did not have to be removed.

Most people believe that the altar rails were taken out as it was somehow required post Vatican II.  It wasn't.  Rather, for whatever reason changes in the Mass now allowed them to be.  They didn't have to be.  Theoretically it was apparently up to individual Pastors on whether they thought an altar rail should be removed, but given as in Wyoming they are nearly all missing, it might have been the case that the decision to remove them was made at the Diocesan level.  The motivating thought here was that the altar rail served to act as a sort of barrier to connection between the people and the Offering of the Mass, and those who supported altar rail removal often felt fairly strongly about that (as we'll see below).  This was, I think, part of an overall change in the Mass at that time, when it went from Latin to the local vernacular, as the Celebrant had faced Ad Oreintum while offering the Mass.  That is, the Priest faced his altar, as a rule, with his back to the Congregation.  

Now all of this gets into some fairly complicated symbolic matters.  There's some truth to the view held by those who argued for the new position and removing the altar rails, in at he "we're all one together sense". There a counter point, however, that maybe the Ad Oreintum orientation actually served that better, as the Priest was facing the same direction for significant portions of the Mass that the parishioners were.   That is, by way of a poor example, if somebody faced you in a large group they're more likely to have some elevated authority over you than if somebody has their back to you, in which case they can be argued to be working with you.  Interestingly in recent years there's been a slow return in some areas to the Ad Oreintum orientation, particularly following Cardinal Sarah's suggestion that this was a better form. The Cardinal occupies a high position at the Vatican and therefore his views cannot be easily discounted.  As has been noted in regards to this there's actually never been an official position on which orientation is better, and in some ancient and modern churches the Ad Orientum position is actually impossible.

In any event, what that did was in part to remove an item that was closely connected to the church and hence the parish and the parishioners.  In this case, the altar rail itself had been a gift from a family early in the parish's history.  In Catholic parishes the pastor is usually there for about seven years and bishops can be in office for long or short periods. However, as the parishioners are often there for decades, that means the traditional in which they participated was removed by individuals who were there on a more temporary basis.  It was certainly "legal", if you will, but it might not have been well advised.

The same is true of most, but not all, of the interior changes to the church. A person can debate the aesthetics of the heavy brass lighting, but the church was built with it in mind and the features that once decorated where it attached to the building remain there to this day.  The removal of one confessional, the relocation, in an awkward fashion, of a place for "music ministers" to stand that resulted, and all of that, were done in a heartfelt fashion, but often to the ascetic detriment of the church which was not built with remodels in mind.

This touches, moreover, on the larger topic of church architecture itself, which as been addressed in another one of our rare commentary threads here.  These older churches are better looking as the architecture and design that came in during the 1970s was not as good as earlier architecture, and according to some focused more on the congregation than on the Divine.  This blog was at one time going to avoid all such churches in general, but as time has gone on its put up posts of quite a few.  Many of these churches are just not good looking. By the same token, many alterations to older churches are not good looking either.

As I noted when I started off, a lot of this stuff did not bother me when I was a child and experiencing it, but it does now.  Indeed, the removal of the altar rail in this church frankly makes me mad when I think of it.  I wish it could go back in.  It won't, of course, but the whole thing upsets me.  I'm not alone, I think, on this sort of thinking and I think it reflects a generational befuddlement with the generations immediately preceding us which seems to have had, in many instances, low respect for tradition in general.  In civil society, in terms of structures, this is probably why we now see all sorts of effort to restore the appearance of old buildings whose owners in the 50s, 60s, and 70s didn't give a second thought about making them ugly through renovation. A prime example of that is the Wyoming National Bank building in Casper Wyoming which was made to look hideous by the additional of a weird steel grating in the 1950s to its exterior which was supposed to make it look modern.  It mostly served to house pigeons and was removed in the 2000s when the building was redone and converted to apartments.

Now, not every one feels this way, I should note.  Particularly in regards to churches.  When I posted this same photograph on Facebook, a friend of mine with a few years on me posted this reply (I hadn't commented on the altar rails in my original post):
So happy that the railings have come down and the hats came off! The church is still so beautiful.
I agree that the church remains beautiful, and I agree that the women wearing head coverings is a tradition that I don't miss, but I don't feel that way about the altar rail at all.

I suspect my friends comment goes to a "spirit of Vatican II" feeling that she's old enough to have experienced and which I not only am not, but which I don't really share enthusiasm for.  It's important to note that Vatican II and "the spirit of Vatican II" are not the same thing.  "The spirit" thing was a zeitgeist of the times which took a decidedly more liberal and less traditional view of things, no doubt an "open the windows and doors and let some fresh air in". Some of that was likely needed but as is often the case with people who are in a "let in the fresh air" movement the realization that cold winds high winds can come in through the same windows and doors and do damage is rarely appreciated. 

And its all too easy when traditions which are simply traditions are tossed to begin to toss out with them things that are more than tradition.  I'm not saying that occurred here with altar rails but I will be frankly that the 1970s saw a lot of innovations, some of them very local poorly thought out that were, in some cases, quite problematic. The generation that thought removing the altar rails was a good idea proved willing to entertain a lot of things in this area that turned out to be big problems for everyone else.

Part of that is because traditions are anchors in a way; moorings to the the past.  People of a "fresh air" bent will claim that a person shouldn't be bound by the past. That's true, but tradition is also in some cases the vote, or the expression of experience, of the dead and should not be lightly discounted.  Not only does casting out traditions tend to sever anchors, but all too often the severing simply puts people adrift in seas that they're not well prepared to handle. At its worst, the severing of traditions is a rejection of the long and carefully thought out in favor of the temporarily current and the poorly thought out.

Which is why, for many people of the post Vatican II generation the "Spirit of Vatican II" generation, when moored in their own changes, can seem now old fashioned.  Ironically younger generations have been busy for some time "reforming the reform", which means in the mainstream keeping the reforms that proved worthwhile and reversing those that did not.  Tradition has, in some instances, come back in the opened door after having been swept out it, but with a younger generation.

All of which is well off point on what this thread started out being about.  And I'm not going to start a "restore the altar rail" movement, locally or on the internet.  But I feel it was a shame that it was taken out, and to the extent that alterations that should not have taken place for ascetic reasons in regards to older structures can be repaired, they ought to be.

Okay, why am I reviving that post?

It's because I want the alter rail back.

Contrary to widespread popular belief, there were never any Vatican II directive that alter rails be removed.  It was a "spirit of Vatican II" type of thing.

Alter rails weren't in the very first churches, as they were houses.  They evolved over a period of time.  They came to demarcate three distinct worship spaces, the nave, the sanctuary and the altar.  Vatican II emphasized the laity coming into the celebration of the Mass and from there Church officials determined that the rails separated the Priest from the people, as did the ad orientum worship of the Mass.

I'll try to be gentle in my criticism here, but I'd suggest that the directive of laity participation wsa somewhat misunderstood in the US in general.  Indeed, Fr. Joseph Krupp maintains that much of Vatican II was as translation of the official documents was not a priority for the Church, as most Catholics do not use English as their primary language.

Be that as it may, the Church of the 1970s in the US really went to town with such changes.  Parishioners, who had grown up in an era when they largely did not question their Priests, simply endured it.  The clergy thought it was doing something that would really make everyone come closer together, but for the most part, their parishioners simply silently endured it, and the flood of other changes that came in at the same time.

Many of the changes were good one, most particularly the new form of the Mass in the vernacular.  But changes simply went to far.  Architectural changes were really a bad thing in structures that were built before Vatican II.  And frankly, the Baby Boom generation aside, most people actually like some formal distinctions in society, something pretty clear when you see the post Baby Boom generations at Mass.

The alter rail at St. Anthony's was made of marble, with brass hinges, and beautiful.  Even now, the church looks like it is missing something.  

This is less the case with the other two Catholic churches in Casper, Our Lady of Fatima and St. Patrick's.  St. Patrick's is the newest of the three, having been built in the 1960s.  It's an expansive church and the absence of an alter rail does not seem to hinder its appearance.  Our Lady of Fatima was  built as an Air Base chapel during World War Two and no doubt was built without an alter rail originally.  Having said that, perhaps because of reconstruction, which has happened more than once, it looks like it should have one.

St. Anthony's has been substantially restored in recent years.  Not 100%, but substantially.  Restoring the alter rail would go a long ways towards restoring the full original beauty of the church.

When it was taken out, something happened to it. But what?  Is it stored somewhere on the grounds?  If it was, I've never seen it.  I've heard rumors that part of it is in a Casper restaurant.

And what about the alter rails from the other churches?

Much of what was in St. Anthony's before the post Vatican II changes was provided for by way of donations from parishioners.  I've thought that the alter rail was, but I don't really know that.  Donations are a funny thing in that sometimes they bind the recipient, and other times they do not.  This probably did not.

Well, at any rate, taking the alter rail(s) out was a mistake.  The alter rail, indeed the alter rails, should be put back in.  Somebody has the St. Anthony's one, perhaps more than one somebody. They should give it back.

Put the alter rail back in.

Fr Joe homily: War on Lust, War on Gluttony | March 15, 2026


 

Moday, April 26, 1926. Caroline Lockhart sued.

Caroline Lockhart was sued for liable in Cody.


Still a well known figure in Cody, it strikes me that Ms. Lockhart is probably hardly known anywhere else.  The eclectic Lockhart was a rancher and journalist.  She died in 1962 at age 91.

Last edition:

Wednesday, April 21, 1926. The Day of Sorrow.

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 128th Edition. Attempted assassination at a pointless event.

The 127th edition of this was teed up to go before last night's White House Correspondence Dinner, or this would be that edition.  Having the other one ready to go, I went ahead and ran it. 

I didn't realize anything had happened right away until I went upstairs and my wife was watching a little of the news feed.  It was fairly typical with the press doing the usual "oh gosh, who could the target have been" routine.  We all know who the target was, Donald Trump.

This is a tragedy, even though nobody was hurt, thankfully, for a variety of reasons, one being that while there are now questions about how the assailant "got so close" (in a country armed to the hilt, Trump probably comes surprisingly close to armed people every single day), what this accomplishes once again will be to help rally people around Trump.  I know that's not supposed to be the first observation, but it's quite true.

Trump has been sinking like a rock in popularity but people rally around somebody who is attacked.  And in the MAGA camp, where quite a few people believe that Trump is on some sort of Devine mission, it'll be seen as proof of that.

That this occurred is not a surprise at all.  Trump is an illegitimate President who vomits hatred on a nearly daily basis.  He inspires hatred of him and is likely the most hated American President since Abraham Lincoln.  He is a horrible human being.  

None of that justifies an attempt at murder, but it's not surprising the attempt was made.  What's additionally interesting, fwiw, is the far right of this country effectively adopted the concept of tyrannicide during both Biden's and Obama's terms in office, so in a way, that set the table for something like this to occur in a way that didn't exist when there were attempts on prior Presidents.

With this attempt, depending on how you look at it, Trump holds the record for the most attempts on a Presidents life.  Having said that, if you limit that to while a figure is in office, he's tied with Ford if you regard him as being presently in office.

I probably would have skipped mentioning the dinner as its shameful that it even occurs anymore.  

Some outside commentary on it:

Inside the Ballroom: Chaos and Confusion

One wonders if the surreal events of Saturday night might make it hard to return to the familiar conception of the White House Correspondents Dinner.

That article by a reporter who was there.  

Surreal?  Maybe, but by this point in Trump's illegitimate reign I suspect a lot of people are like me.  We know that this was a horrible event but it hardly even registered on the attention meter.  Trump so dominates the news with his horrible behavior that even when its directed at him, it's hard to really get too worked up about it.

Again, I don't condone this, and the effect will aid Trump, who needs to be removed via the 25th Amendment.  

About the dinner itself, a lot of people, myself included, flatly feel that it should have been cancelled, or at least Trump should not have been invited.  He treats the Press horribly, and yet there they are, worshipping him.

Aid and Comfort to the Enemy

The recklessness of the White House Correspondents’ Association’s self-own

A cartoon:

The WH Correspondents' Dinner

Unethical and tone deaf

Apparently J.D. Vance and sycophantic today Mike "Toady" Johnson were at the event.  Of interest, the Secret Service rushed Vance off first.

That's interesting.

If that comes up again, I'm sure there will be some solid explanation, but I wonder if its just not a combination of fatigue on the part of security as well.  Vance and Trump probably have separate security details and Trump's is probably numb from having to be around such a horrible person constantly.

On clearing the room, the excessive number of iPhone cameras anymore means everything is photographed to the hilt and then over analyzed.  That's already happening, but as horrible as something like this is, it can lead to some semi assuming photographs, none of which would be the slightest bit amusing if you were there.

One is that Kennedy Jr. appeared to leave his wife behind as he was escorted out to safety. His wife, actress Cheryl Hines, later explained that her formal dress hindered her ability to get out and she had to be carried.

Stephen Miller basically shoved his wife out, which is understandable, but photographically unfortunate too, as he was leading her while behind her and his hand was unfortunately placed for control on her upper torso, um, well anyhow.

On the post scene photographs, one security figure is clearly carrying a SIG M17 in the same photograph as a female security officer carrying a Glock 19.  The M17 is way larger.  It had the conventional iron sights.

The man carrying it was way larger than the female officers as well.  I know that in 2025 a person isn't supposed to feel these things but in at least two of the Trump attempts a female secret service officer has been present and just the photographs don't inspire confident in me.  That's probably just me.  Anyhow, well. . . 

Well, a slight addition.

Since the decline in sartorial standards, Secret Service officers are absurdly easy to pick out. They're always wearing dark suits.  I have a photograph of Theodore Roosevelt from 1903 or so in which a Secret Service officer is wearing tweed and a newsboy cap.  Much harder to pick out.  The women are even easier to pick out as women don't normally wear dark business suits.

Glocks leave me unimpressed as well.  M'eh.

Trump promised to reschedule the event, which of course, wasn't his to schedule in the first place.

Trump offered some comments from the White House.  Included in those were that the military is demanding the ballroom.

The military probably doesn't normally provide any sort of security to the President at all, although the man with the M17 is interesting as he was clearly in some security role, and was not in the Secret Service, and probably in the military.  That aside, the military probably doesn't give a rats ass about the ballroom in this context.  Trump just makes crap up.

What does seem to be the case is that there's a giant bunker being built under where the ballroom is supposed to go, but won't.  We only know the details of that which we know as Trump can't stop his verbal diarrhea. 

It is an interesting aspect of this however is how much of the White House destruction was motivated by a military request, and then taken advantage of by the White House, if it was.

I'll add that building giant bunkers leads to an inflated sense of self worth on the part of everyone involved.  That part of this project ought to be halted as well.

One final note.  Most people who attempt to assassinate Presidents are nuts.  This is notable as by an large, their efforts are incredibly poorly done.  This is true of nearly every historical assassination attempt.  Of all of them, Lee Harvey Oswald's was by far the most competent attempt, which is probably why people insist it must have been a conspiracy.

Not that this isn't already happening here.  I've already read claims that this attempt, and all the prior ones, on Trump's life were staged.  They weren't, but something remarkable here is that Trump, Vance and Johnson were all present, which is stupid.  The argument would be that you know they were staged, as the government would never be so dim as to put the first three people in line for power in the same public room.

Oh yes it would.

Rubio was there too.

Given the line of succession, if a competent attacker was president, Chuck Grassley might now be President.  That would assume a lot of skill that most attempted assassins really lack, which is a good thing for everyone.  Indeed, even well trained assassins tend not to pull regime change off, as the repeated German Army failures on Hitler demonstrate.

It does demonstrated a lot of hubris, however.  We are presently at war with a country whose entire leadership was assassinated early on.  Murdering the leadership of opposing combatants is generally regarded as beyond the Pale in war.  We did not do it in World War Two, and our opponents didn't attempt it either.  The targeting of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in Operation Vengeance during World War Two is still controversial.  It was well known that Trump would be at this event and it was likely known that members of his cabinet would be too.  That Iran did not regard the event as a target of opportunity says a lot about their restraint, and frankly, their intelligence.   They could literally have decapitated the administration and left a person so old in charge that he would have had to resign.  I don't know how many members of Trump's cabinet were in fact there.  Maybe all of them.

Last edition:

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 127th Edition. The Dipshit Edition. The Wyoming Freedom Caucus decides the a General officer of the U.S. Army is too "woke" to be the President of UW.

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 127th Edition. The Dipshit Edition. The Wyoming Freedom Caucus decides the a General officer of the U.S. Army is too "woke" to be the President of UW.

Typical member of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus . . in their relaxed clothing, not their Confederate dress uniforms.  Ready to spear any thinking that might arise in an educational system.

What a bunch of flaming dipshits.  The Wyoming Freedom Caucus decides that the new UW President is too "woke" to serve in that role:

Who is UW's New President?

UW's newest leader criticized for bringing woke academics to West Point

I'll admit, I criticized this choice as well, but not for this reason.

But then I would not have guessed that there would be some people who would try to include in the GOP platform that Wyoming is a "Christian State".

Seriously, this hillbilly dipshitery has got to stop.

Last edition:

CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 126th Edition. The “Go to church. Find Jesus. Why is everyone so horny around here?”

$300,000,000

That's how much it will cost to replace the granite in the reflecting pool so that the water isn't Tid-Y-Bowl Blue.

It'll happen. When the demented octogenarian is out of office the damage will have to be repaired.

Trump has some of the worst taste imaginable  He just pegs out on the gaudy meter, and on absolutely everything.  It's amazing in that he inherited his wealth so he shouldn't have the gaudy sense of nouveau riche, but he does.  It extends to absolutely everything.

The Best. The Best Posts of the Week of April 19, 2026, as well as the Feral Week, the Agrarian Week, and the Week in Aviation.

 The best posts of the week of April 18, on Lex Anteinternet.

The End Point.


Let's hope so on that one.


And here's a hope to the end of the political careers on the anti public lands side of this list.

SELLOUTS vs. CHAMPIONS

Protect Wyoming's list of legislators and their record on public lands:

SELLOUTS vs. CHAMPIONS

This is really worth knowing. While this is directly copying most of the page, here's what they founds:

top SELLOUTS

Note: While Senators Tim French and Laura Pearson are not up currently for re-election, they are the legislators most actively trying to privatize and sell off our wildlife. So we want folks to take note, even though they’re not on the ballot this year.


top CHAMPIONS

Note: Senator Nethercott is not up for re-election in 2026, but has been one of the most vocal defenders of sportsmen and women on the Senate floor, and deserves a spot in the Top Defenders.

all legislator scores

 I don't know all the legislators by any means, but the antis I know are no surprise. The pros I know aren't a surprise either.  Unfortunately a couple of them are leaving the legislature.

Anyone on the anti list here should be voted out of office.

The 25th Amendment Watch List. A Fourteenth and Special edition. Attacking the Catholic Church.




A question for our era:






A warning:











Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 125th Edition, part three. The Ty D Bol Presidency.


Of course! 

Lex Anteinternet: Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 12...: Lex Anteinternet: CliffsNotes of the Zeitgeist, 125th Edition. Monum... :   Geez, this is stupid. Harrison Design, you should be ashamed of ...
Where have I seen that shade of water before?

Well now, that is appropriate.

King Donald's War, Part 5. After 13/15 U.S. deaths, Hundreds of Iranian deaths, $50B spent fighting it, and a massive increase in the price of oil, King Donny surrenders to the Iranians. The "If any question why we died, Tell them, because our fathers lied" edition.

The post of the week from Going Feral.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 9th Edition. Protect Wyoming and a negative endorsement.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 9th Edition. The Sic Semper Ty...: Confederate prisoners at Five Forks. April 23, 2026 Republicans are basically freaking out after Virginia's voters sent redistricting to...

April 25, 2026

Protect Wyoming is directly going after some of the bad state legislators, and Bob Ide pretty meg tops the list there:


Doug Burgum’s Big Week Interior Secretary throws park rangers under the bus, and other important developments on public land


Big-buck hunters convince Wyoming to keep antler restrictions. Their advocacy may backfire, data shows.

The Agrarian Week:

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 9th Edition. Protect Wyoming and a negative endorsement

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 9th Edition. The Sic Semper Ty...: Confederate prisoners at Five Forks. April 23, 2026 Republicans are basically freaking out after Virginia's voters sent redistricting to...

April 25, 2026

Protect Wyoming is directly going after some of the bad state legislators, and Bob Ide pretty meg tops the list there:


I'vc never understood how his district elected him.  They had an experienced conservative, Drew Perkins, who now works for the Governor.  In his place they got a guy who was actually in D.C. at the time of the Insurrection and holds every single extreme right wing view.

The week in aviation:

Wednesday, April 24 1946. Firsts.

The Blue Angels, flying F6F Hellcats, were formed.

The first Blue Angels.

The MiG-9 and the Yak-15 flew for the first time.

Last edition:

The Best Posts of the Week of April 12, 2026. Rises, falls, fights.