Trinity Sunday: A Few Traditions and Links | The Homely Hours

The Collect for Trinity Sunday

“Almighty and everlasting God, who hast given unto us thy servants grace, by the confession of a true faith, to acknowledge the glory of the eternal Trinity, and in the power of the Divine Majesty to worship the Unity; We beseech thee that thou wouldest keep us steadfast in this faith, and evermore defend us from all adversities, who livest and reignest, one God, world without end. Amen.”

Source: Trinity Sunday: A Few Traditions and Links | The Homely Hours

Today is the Feast of the Holy Trinity: Trinity Sunday. While arguably the only feast day in the Church’s calendar to celebrate a doctrine, rather than a person or an episode in the life of Christ, in fact Trinity Sunday celebrates three Persons: the Holy Trinity itself, one God in trinity of Persons, but unity of Substance. This doctrine is at root a Holy Mystery, as is the Incarnation itself; yet it is, with the Incarnation, one of the two core doctrines of Christianity.

In an effort to explain its reality and significance, The Homely Hours points us to

“a beautiful post on Celtic Christianity and Trinitarian Theology, specifically how it manifests itself in the Carmina Gadelica, a collection of Gaelic hymns and prayers:

For the Gaelic writers, the Trinity is not an esoteric dogma to be recited and systematized but rather a living and lived reality, for God as Creator is near to us in creation, and all that he has made is a reflection of his power and his goodness. The triune life of the Three is not confined to the gates of heaven but spills overflowing onto earth, where those who call for aid find peace and rest in the divine communion. The Trinity is near to us in every aspect of our lives, and in the love of the Three we are complete and healed from our brokenness:

In nearness to the Trinity farewell to all my pains,
Christ stands before me, and peace is in his mind.

(Carmina Gadelica, 346, p. 312)

“You can also read more on Trinity Sunday at Full Homely Divinity:

As early as the ninth century, the first Sunday after Pentecost was being observed in some places as a day particularly devoted to celebrating our trinitarian faith in one God in three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, the observance was far from universal and one pope even dismissed it as an unnecessary observance since every act of worship is offered in the Name of the Trinity. In 1162, Thomas Becket was ordained to the Priesthood on Ember Saturday in Whitsun week. On the next day, he was consecrated as Archbishop of Canterbury. As Archbishop and Metropolitan, he obtained for all of England the privilege of celebrating the Sunday after Whitsunday as Trinity Sunday. After his martyrdom in 1170, and subsequent canonization, his shrine in Canterbury became one of the most important pilgrimage shrines in all of Europe and the popularity of Trinity Sunday also spread. In the 14th century Pope John XXII added Trinity Sunday to the calendar of the whole Western Church. For many centuries, the Sundays after Paschaltide were counted as “Sundays after Trinity,” and the season was known as “Trinitytide.”

And for those of us of a more traditional bent, of course, it still is.

See also:

While usually associated (understandably) with St. Patrick’s Day, the “Lorica (Breastplate) of St. Patrick” – also known as “The Deer’s Cry,” or simply “I Bind Unto Myself This Day” – is also highly appropriate for Trinity Sunday, being a majestic and inspiring invocation of the Holy Trinity!

“I bind unto myself today
the strong name of the Trinity
by invocation of the same,
the Three in One and One in Three…”

Wishing everyone a holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity Sunday, and season of Trinitytide which follows, and will last until Advent brings us ’round again to the Cycles of Christ’s Nativity, and later His Passion. May God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit – One God in
Trinity of Persons and Unity of Essence – bless all who read this!

Advertisements

Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships | Intellectual Takeout

Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships

Rules are great and necessary, but the fact is, we’re disallowing boys to be boys.

Source: Boys are Growing Frustrated by Living in a Feminized Society… and That’s Showing Up in Their Friendships | Intellectual Takeout

“Let’s face it: Little boys are different from little girls and adults. And unless we allow them to have outlets for natural boy play and ideas, we should not be surprised when they seem frustrated and can’t succeed in modern society. Is it time to stop treating the traditional, rough-and-tumble boy like a dangerous creature who must be toned down to suit feminized society?”

My answer to this question can easily be guessed by my readers, I suspect!

This is an excellent short essay, perhaps all the more notable in that it is written by a woman, Annie Holmquist. By all means, please follow the link and read it! The voices (both male and female) pushing back against the über-feminization of Western society are growing in number and in volume, and that is all to the good. But there is still a long way to go.

The culutural Marxists who seek to destroy what is left of Western civilization and Western Christendom are powerful, well-entrenched in dominant positions among our academic / educational, political, and media elite, and have learned well how to apply psychological and social jujitsu against a West which, by its nature, is predisposed to compassion, justice, and a laudable (within bounds) tendency to root for the underdog. Convince Westerners that you are oppressed, and they will bend over backwards to do anything they can to “liberate” and assist you – even to their own detriment!

The problem is that the Left, and its favored classes – women, people of color, and anyone who is “different” from what used to be the “norm” of Western (and Christian) society – are no longer the underdogs; in fact, by many if not most measures, they are or are well on their way to being the top dogs (*), even as they continue to complain about being “oppressed.”

I don’t think any fair-minded observer can deny that the major groups which today’s Leftists portray as the bogeyman – whites, males, and Christians – made some serious missteps, and committed some serious abuses, in the past. But neither are we uniquely culpable among the world’s people; far from it! If our sins may at times seem more boldly emblazoned on the fabric of history, it is because there was a time, not so distant, historically, when we were both technologically and socio-politically dominant. Those days, however, are in the past, and falling farther astern with every turn of the screw.

Nor is it justice to continue to visit the sins of the fathers – whether real or imagined – upon the sons, literally as well as figuratively, ad infinitum. Not only is it morally vicious, it is unwise. I am sure there are those on the Left who view the angst being suffered by boys and young men, especially those of European ancestry, through the lens of retributive justice; and who would like to think – or at least, hope – that white males will either somehow disappear altogether, or else at least lapse into a sort of voluntary dhimmitude, in which they accept their new, inferior, status as somehow their due.

Something of the sort has happened in Germany, in the decades since the Second World War, due to feelings of shared national guilt (encouraged and exploited by the victorious Allies); but even there, rumblings of discontent are beginning to be heard. What goes around, comes around, and people can only be kept down for so long before they start to rebel – as Leftists, of all people, should have sense enough to realize from their own experience!

To cite Germany again, one would think we would have learned the lessons of the Versailles Treaty, the Wiemar Republic, and the rise of the Nazis: perhaps the classic example of retributive justice gone awry, coming about as it did largely in reaction to the humiliation imposed upon post-WW I Germany by France, and to the ascendancy of the cultural Marxists’ political forebears in the former. The modern Left, it seems, is taking a page out of France’s book, c. 1918 – hardly a wise model, in my opinion.

But I digress from the topic at hand, which is that boys need to be allowed to be boys. Human nature cannot be changed, on a fundamental level; those who try are doomed to disappointment. It can be educated; it can be refined; it can be channeled into productive, as opposed to unproductive, directions. But it remains human nature. And just as water boiling in a closed container will build steam-pressure until it finds the weakest point to achieve an outlet, if we do not allow boys natural-but-productive outlets for their boyhood – their maleness – they will find unproductive ones, and the situation for society will be worse than if they had simply been allowed to be boys.

Be cautious, O “liberals”! As ye sow, so shall ye reap. But the harvest may not be what you expected!

 


 

* As the article linked in my previous post indicated, the “gender gap” in higher education solidly favors women (41.5% male vs 58.5% female, across all degrees, or 141 degreed females per 100 males); people of color are out-breeding people of European ancestry by a substantial margin, both worldwide and in the Westincluding the U.S., where non-Hispanic whites are projected to become a minority of the population (47%) by 2050; and as to those who are “different,” be it in sexuality, gender, religion (or lack thereof), etc., one has only to be reminded of the dictum often attributed to Voltaire: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” Whether Voltaire said it or not, there is considerable truth in the statement!

Feminization of Everything Fails Boys… and will ultimately fail our society | National Review

Image result for ashamed boy

As our society unlearns masculinity and feminizes every stage of male life, boys pay a steep price.

Source: Higher Education “Gender Gap” Favors Women — Feminization of Everything Fails Boys | National Review

In place of teaching men to channel their aggression and adventurous spirits in productive ways, we ask them to stifle their truest natures.

As I read this essay – with which I agree 100%, it should go without saying, and which I strongly recommend to your attention – I could not help but be reminded of C.S. Lewis’ famous warning (in The Abolition of Man, 1934):

“In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”

Lewis had it right, more than 80 years ago (!) now. We have for decades scoffed at, and even actively attempted to suppress, traditional masculine traits like virtue, honour, and enterprise, and are then surprised that they are largely absent in our society. Elon Musk – of SpaceX and Tesla fame – is somewhat of an exception where “enterprise” is concerned, but I wonder how much of that is because he is an immigrant with an exotic-sounding name. If he was an American-born WASP named Kevin Smith, would he be as popular? I do wonder…

We condemn the masculine inclination to aggression which, properly directed, can and should be focused on protecting the weak and helpless – and particularly one’s family, people, and nation – and are surprised and shocked at the many examples of misguided, disordered aggression we see around us: drug and gang-related violence, school shootings (which are blessedly less common that the mainstream media makes them appear, but nonetheless tragic), violence committed by immigrants on indigenous populations, etc.

The argument, of course, is that we all need to sit around the fire singing “Kumbaya,” and then all the world’s problems will be solved. Well, maybe… if we could magically cause that outcome to occur. But in that, we are up against human nature, and the chance of radical changes in that – short of the Second Coming – are slim to vanishing. In this as in much else, Christianity has a far more clear-eyed view of reality than does the secular Left. Worse yet, elements of the secular Left would like to force everyone to sit around the fire and sing “Kumbaya,” and history has shown time and again that trying to bring about social change by coercion is a recipe for tyranny and disaster.

What we need to do is stop the play-acting – the LARPing, as it’s called these days – and admit to ourselves that while yes, there does exist a very small handful of truly intersexed persons, and yes, it’s a bad idea to try to hammer square pegs into round holes, nonetheless for the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time, boys are boys and girls are girls; men are men and women are women; and it’s precisely our complementary and dynamic differences that make us interesting.

And furthermore, that these differences are built into us by Nature and by Nature’s God, for the benefit of our society and our species. As David French accurately points out in the linked article,

In place of teaching men to channel their aggression and adventurous spirits in productive ways, we ask them to stifle their truest natures. In place of teaching them to protect others, we lie and declare all violence to be bad. Instead of telling the truth that men and women are different, we try to transform men into women. We privilege the stories of those who found traditional gender norms oppressive (like gay men and their metrosexual cousins) and celebrate the demise of traditional masculinity that better served the vast majority of men and boys. Is it not possible to preserve masculinity while demonstrating compassion for those who don’t conform? Must we burn it all down?

“There are few sights more profoundly meaningful than watching a son grow up with a good father, to see him take on his dad’s best characteristics, while at the same time forging his own path. It is important to see and know that throughout that young man’s life, his dad wasn’t just nurturing him, he was also challenging him — pushing him to be stronger mentally, physically, and emotionally. To that end, it’s time to remember that strength is a virtue, rightly channeled aggression creates and preserves civilization itself, and there is nothing at all inherently toxic about masculinity. The feminization of everything doesn’t just fail our boys; over the long run it will fail our nation.”

Amen.

“This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.” | Architectural Revival

“This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.”

– William Shakespeare.

Architectural Revival. ✠ In an age of ugliness, a work of beauty is an act of defiance. ✠ Tradition, not Modernism, is the future. ✠

Source: “This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.” | Architectural Revival

 

The Queen is to make Harry & Meghan the Duke and Duchess of Sussex | Royal Central

It has been confirmed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are to become the Duke and Duchess of Sussex upon their marriage later today.

Source: The Queen is to make Harry & Meghan the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – Royal Central

I like Prince Harry, and I wish him well – him, and his new bride.

But I have to confess, I do wish he could have found a nice British girl.

I know he’s not in the direct line to the throne. Nonetheless – it doesn’t make it any easier for those of us who would like to see Britain stay British, when the detractors can now say, “but look at the example of Prince Harry!”

And that’s all I’m going to say on the subject.

“Honour all Men, Love the Brotherhood, Fear God, Honour the King!”

Honour the King

Not sure exactly where this is located, but given that it’s the motto of this blog, I wanted to share it!

Found on the Society of King Charles the Martyr’s Facebook feed.

The Blowback Against Facebook, Google and Amazon Is Just Beginning | Charles Hugh Smith: Of Two Minds

Related image

“The theory of the happy union of capitalism and democracy rests on capitalism creating secure middle-class employment for millions of citizens. Once capitalism only creates a peon-debt-serf class and a 5% technocrat / manager / financier / entrepreneur / speculator class that harvests 70% of the wealth and income, then democracy dies by the slow poison of rising inequality and ever greater asymmetries of wealth and political power.”

Source: Charles Hugh Smith: The Blowback Against Facebook, Google and Amazon Is Just Beginning

Politics, my late grandfather used to say, makes for some mighty strange bed-fellows.

Capitalism was a logical ally for our American (and more generally, Western) representative democratic-republican system during the Cold War, when our enemies were based on a vicious combination of totalitarian political systems and state-controlled economies – and when capitalism was indeed creating secure middle-class employment for millions of citizens.

But this is no longer happening; indeed, quite the reverse. What we are seeing is increasing polarization into “haves” and “have-nots,” into wage-slaves and wealthy overseers. Which leads to the question, is today’s capitalism an ally of freedom, (representative) democracy, and self-determination, or yet another – and apparently voracious and implacable – adversary? At the least, as the above quote makes clear, democracy (or, as in the U.S., a Constitutional Republic) and capitalism are not always or necessarily allies.

This is true in part because of a difference in philosophy and ethos.

Capitalism is, at base, about competition and dominance: various companies, corporations, entrepreneurs, etc., are are in competition to attract consumers, acquire customers, and in the process, accrue wealth and the power that comes with it. Those entities that are most successful eventually dominate the marketplace, at least until a more successful competitor comes along and knocks them off their hill. People are viewed basically as units of production, consumers of goods and services – sources of either labour or money – or both.

Democracy, on the other hand – or again, more properly, representative republics (because a true popular democracy is perpetually dancing on the edge of demagoguery and dictatorship) – is about power-sharing, checks and balances, and the common good. While competition is not absent (particularly during campaign season!), a properly-functioning representative republic is more about cooperation than competition and dominance. People are viewed as citizens and members of society, with a common stake in the success of the enterprise.

Thus, both the methods and the aims of representative democratic–republicanism and those of capitalism – at least, in its current dominant form – are actually quite distinct. But it is also the case that not all forms of capitalism are created equal.

There is a great deal of difference between the kind of extreme crony capitalism, economic oligarchy, or corporate plutocracy in which neo-robber-barons like the aforementioned Google, Facebook, and Amazon are able, by their extreme wealth and the power that wealth purchases for them, to manipulate the machinery of democracy itself, and the capitalism of the Jeffersonian ideal, in which a nation of yeoman farmers, shopkeepers, craftsmen and artisans, merchants and tradesmen, working largely for themselves, own pieces of a widely distributed network of capital and means of production.

I have commented previously on the fact that the present, voraciously predatory form of capitalism is a relative latecomer to humankind, and even within the American experience: the massive shift that took place from the Antebellum (pre-War Between the States) period to the Gilded Age (from c. 11850 to just before the First World War) was a cataclysmic course-change, here in the U.S., from a culture and society in which most Americans worked for themselves (most of those on farms, the rest in the kind of Jeffersonian businesses I mentioned above) to one in which the vast majority of Americans worked for others, for wages.

The modern form of plutocratic capitalism is not the default form, for America – and furthermore, it is not, I think, healthy for any society.

The question, of course, is what can be done about the present crisis; and although the linked article points out – accurately, I think – that blowback is beginning, what form it will take, and what effect, it will have, remains to be seen. But that something needs to be done is, I think, an unavoidable conclusion; lest we end up governed by “Avatar”-style quasi-governmental administrative entities (QGAEs) that are accountable to no one – except, perhaps, their stockholders!

A full return to the Jeffersonian ideal is (sadly, in my opinion) probably pretty unrealistic, in today’s world. But something like Chestertonian distributism may be, as I have posited on more than one occasion, the only route to a system of economics which is human both in scale and in ethos. Every alternative I can think of is frightening.