an explanatory aside

For those who have read this journal for some time, can see i am fiercely both a democrat, and a catholic. My catholicism is of an ancient peasant sort, not appreciative towards innovation and usurpation from bishop-tyrants. My theology teachers are Francis of Assisi, Oscar Romero, and Thomas Aquinas; not Milton Friedman, Herbert Spencer and Thomas Hobbes.

I did not intend these posts to have a majority topic. It has turned out that they have.

Accidentally, i came across an individual's musings in this journal form of photographs and essays. She, in her journal, touched me poignantly. Such personal public self revelation, i am most uncomfortable with. In a few posts, i felt i knew more about her than any of my current acquaintances. She is a good person of excellent humour. Some of what she confessed, i would feel uncomfortable saying in the confessional. No great sins or crimes, but painful episodes of life visible to anyone with internet access—my, my; no, no.

Some sweet posts about companion animals had no threshold of too much privacy sacrificed, but they were safe. Some family, and personal life anecdotes i could only share with the closest of friends. She did so with the on-line world, the veil of anonymity was sheer, indeed.

She only alludes to religion and politics, well, i go way far. Those topics, i believe, are proper for public exposition; and especially necessary, when the powers that be are successful and wrong (or worse).

The logic of the rebel is to want to serve justice so as not to add to the injustice of the human condition, to insist on plain language so as not to increase the universal falsehood, and to wager, in spite of human misery, for happiness. — Albert Camus, The Rebel

With Aquinas, i see Truth as part of a triad, that is reflective of the Trinity; with Solzhenitsyn*, i see falsehood as violence. Well, those who support the status quo, and the comfortable, are not happy with such comments; as Plato is quoted,"They deem him their worst enemy who tells them the truth.".

Years ago, i was upset with the inanities, falsities, and arrogance of George Will. Well, the cartoonish dolts that speak for the repukes now, well I have not shifted. I could not call myself a 'liberal' then, in part of certain social causes I can not support, and the classical anglo liberal was a capitalist; and capitalism is against God. The lunacy of those that call themselves 'conservatives' and more rightly are 'fascists', make me, now, comfortable with the designation of 'liberal'.

But these on-line journals, that are too often called 'blogs', a word that grates on the ear, are oftentimes on lighter issues. Sometimes, i speak on the images painted on glass, or on the meaning of a folkie lyric. I have presented many photographs, especially on this, a voice from the rustbelt, from my small camera. I would have liked to do more on flora and fauna. Well, i have spent way too many hours typing, and have not gotten the joy my unknown friend did on hers. God bless her, and ease her issues. I am still fervent and quizzical, but not at ease.
____________________
* Near the end of Solzhenitsyn's Nobel speech: Let us not forget that violence does not and cannot flourish by itself; it is inevitably intertwined with LYING. ...Whoever has once announced violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose lying as his PRINCIPLE. ...usually it demands of its victims only allegiance to the lie, only complicity in the lie.