People Should Use Their Titles

I've just been watching an interview with a bishop (on a Catholic TV show). The host was addressing him in quite a familiar way. Which is fine, but I did find myself once again thinking: "I prefer it when people use their titles, and other people's titles."

There's no self-interest in this belief, since I have no title, unless it's "Mister".

It seems more suitable, and interesting, to address a Bishop as "Your Grace" rather than "Bishop", as the host was doing. (Although I've just seen that American bishops are generally addressed as "Your Excellency", and "Your Grace" is reserved for Archbishops-- which is interesting in itself.)

My job involves emailing academics a lot, and I greatly enjoy addressing them as Dr Such-and-Such or Professor What's-His-Face. They worked hard to get that title. (Even if they're a doctor of Media Studies or a Professor of Women's Studies or something.)

It's only a small thing, but I think it adds a little bit of colour to life.

Congratulations To Me

I'm awarding myself the Basil Fawlty Award for not mentioning the war-- I mean the thing-- you know, the thing that every other Catholic blog on the face of the earth is talking about. (Well, not blogs per se. There aren't any blogs anymore-- this is the last Catholic blog, except its sister blog across the Irish Channel. I mean Catholic YouTube channels and Substack columns and the like.)

On the one hand, why can't the Vatican duh duh duh. What about the German bishops duh duh duh. On the other hand you can't openly defy duh duh duh.  Faults on both sides duh duh duh let's pray for reason to prevail duh duh duh. Large families duh duh duh homeschooling duh duh duh accusations of Pharisaism duh duh duh go back to the actual documents duh duh duh.

I almost mentioned it there but I think I got away with it.

Leftists Talk About Bread-and-Butter Issues for Public Consumption...

...but, when it comes down to it, what they really seem to care about is identity politics and political correctness.

This fact was borne upon me for the thousandth time recently when I got an election flyer for a left-wing candidate. Everything in the flyer was about local amenities, public transport, and the like. Not a single mention of the liberal social agenda, globalism, or anything like that.

It always seems to be what they lead with in ordinary, everyday debates as well. I'm constantly asked, by my leftist friends and colleagues, why the rich should dominate society like they do-- or some such question. I rarely have the courage (or the appetite) to reply: "But this doesn't really seem to be what you care about, or the threat I think you represent. What you really seem to care about is changing all the immemorial traditions of mankind."

More of the Same

The BBC posting another highly newsworthy and socially relevant story-- some women (enough to make a news feature, apparently) are wearing "divorce rings" to celebrate the destruction of their marriages.

For a long time now, the media and entertainment industries seem to have gone full blast to sow hatred and resentment between men and women.

Every time I see a couple walking hand-in-hand or arm-in-arm along the street-- especially an old couple-- it feels like a little victory against this agenda of hatred and separation.

The Protestant Champion

I never talk to myself, and until I heard other people doing it, I believed that talking to oneself was a merely literary of dramatic convention-- that people didn't really do it. But I do have a habit which seems even more eccentric-- that is, suddenly laughing at something I've remembered at random. I don't see why one shouldn't do this, but I don't notice other people doing it.

Today I was laughing at the memory of a passage from GK Chesterton's autobiography, which I think might be his best book. I'm sure I've posted this passage before, in some form or other, but here it is again. I think it's very funny.

For scene-setting, all you have to know is that Chesterton's grandfather and father were estate agents. The family were Unitarian, but not particularly religious.

I cannot help having a dim suspicion that dignity has something to do with style; but anyhow the gestures, like the songs, of my grandfather's time and type had a good deal to do with dignity. But, used as he was to ceremonial manners, he must have been a good deal mystified by a strange gentleman who entered the office and, having conferred with my father briefly on business, asked in a hushed voice if he might have the high privilege of being presented to the more ancient or ancestral head of the firm. He then approached my grandfather as if the old gentleman had been a sort of shrine, with profound bows and reverential apostrophes.

"You are a Monument," said the strange gentleman, "Sir, you are a Landmark."

My grandfather, slightly flattered, murmured politely that they had certainly been in Kensington for some little time.

"You are an Historical Character," said the admiring stranger. "You have changed the whole destiny of Church and State."

My grandfather still assumed airily that this might be a poetical manner of describing a successful house-agency. But a light began to break on my father, who had thought his way through all the High Church and Broad Church movements and was well-read in such things. He suddenly remembered the case of "Westerton versus Liddell" in which a Protestant churchwarden prosecuted a parson for one of the darker crimes of Popery, possibly wearing a surplice.

"And I only hope," went on the stranger firmly, still addressing the Protestant Champion, "that the services at the Parish Church are now conducted in a manner of which you approve."

My grandfather observed in a genial manner that he didn't care how they were conducted. These remarkable words of the Protestant Champion caused his worshipper to gaze upon him with a new dawn of wonder, when my father intervened and explained the error pointing out the fine shade that divides Westerton and Chesterton. I may add that my grandfather, when the story was told, always used to insist that he had added to the phrase "I don't care how they are conducted," the qualifying words (repeated with a grave motion of the hand) "provided it is with reverence and sincerity." But I grieve to say that sceptics in the younger generation believed this to have been an afterthought.

Honestly, This Sort of Thing Makes Me Sick

I idly wondered if CNN would actually summon some patriotism for America's 250th birthday. But their top story, at the time I accessed their website, had this headline: The World Cup's unexpected gift to America: A game the rest of the world knows as football is teaching America something about itself on its 250th birthday. (If you click on the article itself, the headline changes to: "America held a big birthday party — and a soccer extravaganza broke out.")

Here's a passage from the story: "The game the rest of the world knows as football is teaching America something about itself on its 250th birthday and reminding international visitors that the nation is far more welcoming and complex than its bitter political caricature. The World Cup’s gift of joy is a unifying distraction after tough years marked by ideological divides and a pandemic’s economic fallout. And its blend of European and South American superstars and rising African and Asian teams is also holding up a mirror to the country’s own diversity and its enduring political experiment, enriched by immigration."

Seriously, can they get off the hobby-horse for even one day?

But it's more than that. This sort of rhetoric seems so self-defeating to me.

Liberalism wants to celebrate America for its diversity. It also wants to celebrate Ireland, America, Spain, etc. etc. for their diversity. Everything is diversity, all the time. But if everything is diversity, doesn't diversity itself become...monotony?

And what is diversity composed of? What are the ingredients of diversity? Well, they are national and ethnic and religious traditions, that's what. Diversity is like artificial intelligence-- it can't create anything. (Although immigrant ethnic communities do create their own traditions, like the Italian-American Feast of the Twelve Fishes. But that's still national and ethnic and religious cultures, even if they happen to be displaced.)

As for "tough years marked by ideological divides"-- why is ideological diversity a bad thing, while cultural and ethnic diversity is seen as a good thing?

It's all so tiresome.

Happy 250th Birthday, America!

I won't be online tomorrow so I'm taking this opportunity to turn red, white and blue in honour of America's 250th birthday!

I firmly believe that 1776 was a turning point in world history, and I'm increasingly of the opinion that the principles of the American Revolution should be exported worldwide-- and that this would protect, rather than harm, the unique and organic traditions of each people and nation.

And I love America, aside from politics. True, I haven't spent more'n a few weeks there-- but people who have lived their entire lives in the USA have drastically differing views of it, just as people who grew up in Dev's Ireland had (and have) drastically differing views of it. So, I'll boldly insist that I love America.

God bless the USA!