Masculine Monday- #2

Today the series returns. The topic is discipline and self-control.

In my opinion, and I know that doesn’t count for much, self-control is one of the quintessential qualities that makes a man a man. Without it a man will be hard pressed to achieve anything, whether in this life or the next.

Part of this development of self-control relies on self-denial: to deny yourself things you might otherwise have, for some good cause. Sometimes it is because putting it off will yield greater rewards in the future. Other times it is because a more fulfilling path is available by giving something up. And yet other times denial can help one build mental fortitude- the will to resist, the will to say no.

This final reason (of those listed, others exist) is what drives me to post today. Today marks the beginning of the Great Lent in the Eastern Church, at least according to the Gregorian Calendar. The Byzantine fasting tradition is considerably more… serious than that of the West, at least nowadays. Whereas in the West one is to lightly eat on Fridays, and not eat meat at all, in the East (or at least the Eparchy where I live) fasting is done on Wednesdays and Fridays, and no meat, dairy or egg products are allowed.

This is the first time that I’ve attempted the Eastern fast. Giving up meat is something I have practiced for a long time, but giving up those others will be a new experience. Especially for two days every week. But all the same, I think it is an important effort on my part. I have had to deny myself a number of things over the years, some of which are known to my readers. I can look back now and see where that helped me build discipline, discipline that has helped me in numerous areas of my life.

So if this post is to have any lesson, it is this: men, consider fasting. While not easy- especially when you take it all the way, it pays off in the end. It helps put *you* in control of your life, and not your Appetites and instincts.

You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, ² and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. ³ Take your share of suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. ⁴ No soldier on service gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to satisfy the one who enlisted him. ⁵ An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules. ⁶ It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops. ⁷ Think over what I say, for the Lord will grant you understanding in everything.

(2 Timothy 2:1-7)

Saturday Saints- #103

The letter “V” is featured in today’s post. Thus, our saint is Saint Venatius Fortunatus:

Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatus (c. 530–c. 600/609) was a Latin poet and hymnodist in the Merovingian Court, and a Bishop of the early Catholic Church. He was never canonised—no saint was canonised till Saint Ulrich of Augsburg in 993—but he was venerated as Saint Venantius Fortunatus during the Middle Ages.

His is not the life of your average saint, assuming there is such a thing. So I would encourage my readers to learn more about him at his wiki, located here.

Masculine Monday- #1

I’m going to give a new series a try- one on Mondays that concerns itself with masculinity. Whether or not I keep the series running remains to be seen, of course. But I expect it to be somewhat irregular. While the overall focus will be Christian, it won’t be exclusively so. This first post will be one such example.

I came across this article recently, which is titled 10 Life Rules that Separate the Men from the Boys. Here is how it bills itself:

Being a male is a matter of birth, being a man is a matter of age, but being a gentleman is a matter of choice. Not a choice made once or twice during one’s life, but a series of choices made every single day when navigating the world, and life.

So – what then – are these choices that separate the gentlemen from the rest of the pack? The men who hold themselves to higher standards. Let’s explore.

I would encourage my readers to go through the whole article before continuing.

The author is apparently a self-described secular humanist, and unsurprisingly, it shows. Mind you, not everything on the list is bad. I agree with a few of the points. But there are several I disagree with, and will address them in turn.

I found the first point interesting. The basic premise is sound, but not as a matter of “being a Gentleman.” Rather, it is basic Christian living. Of course, being a SH, the author has to find some excuse for it. More interesting to me was his justification:

A man of quality is never afraid of equality.

“Equality” is not a necessary predicate to treating someone with dignity. Certainly not the “liberal” notion of equality he is referring towards. Rather, a recognition of their dignity as a human being is sufficient. Furthermore, part of being a gentleman, historically, was about recognizing that not everyone was equal. A gentleman treated others kindly out of mercy- he had power over them but didn’t abuse it.

The second point was a lovely materialistic/consumerist point. Essentially the author was stating that a “Real Man” always pays his way. Frankly, I suspect more than a little feminine influence in the thinking here- “the burden of performance” and all that.

While secular in nature, the overall thrust of the third point was sound.

The fourth point is another one that is true for everyone, not just a “gentleman.” If anything, this seems to put a burden on men that others won’t be expected to live up to.  And my readers can guess who “others” happens to be.

The fifth point is, in an act of poetic justice, wrong. Rather than being afraid of “being wrong”, we should be afraid of trying. Of giving it our best. Sometimes that means risking failure, of risking being wrong.

Only when you are wrong do you absorb new information, change your stance, and subsequently become “right.”

Again, this is wrong. You can learn plenty without necessarily being wrong. Furthermore, the ability to admit mistakes is not the same thing as being afraid of being wrong. This is pop philosophy, at best.

The sixth point is a stereotype that lives up to its reputation. Without delving into it too much, the obvious flaw with this is that it makes the woman in any relationship the one who decides just how “gentlemanly” a man is. The absurdity of this is staggering, and yet also pitiable.

I agree with the seventh point. Honest is an essential part of being a man. Leave deception to others.

The eight point is just pop philosophy. It lacks substance, which I would think would be the hallmark of any “real man.”

I happen to agree with the ninth point. Sexy and beautiful are not necessarily the same thing. In fact, I am pretty sure I wrote a post about that at some point.

The tenth and final point is wrong on several levels. Partly it is foundational- it comes from a secular viewpoint which fails to recognize that charity is a universal virtue. But here is a concrete error:

A gentleman will respect other men, women, children, and animals – and treat them with kindness. There is no need for a confident man to hurt another being in any way, as he gains nothing from it.

On the contrary, I can think of plenty of reasons why a confident man would need to hurt another being. Protecting other men, women, children and animals (yes, even them) can be justification enough.

So a few good points to be found, but overall not a good guide towards being a Gentleman or “Real Man.” Mayhaps the next post in this series will be devoted to examining that issue. Until then, I leave my readers with some of the final words of King David:

When David’s time to die drew near, he charged Solomon his son, saying, ² “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man, ³ and keep the charge of the Lord your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his ordinances, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn; ⁴ that the Lord may establish his word which he spoke concerning me, saying, ‘If your sons take heed to their way, to walk before me in faithfulness with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail you a man on the throne of Israel.’

(1 Kings 2:1-4)

Saturday Saints- #101

Our saint for today is one with some measure of controversy around him, St. Tarasios of Constantinople:

Saint Tarasios (or Saint Tarasius) (Greek: Άγιος Ταράσιος) (c. 730 – 25 February 806) was Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople from 25 December 784 until his death on 25 February 806.

A few key facts about him:

• He played an important role in fighting against iconoclasm. During the Second Nicean Council he served as acting chairman.
• He was a layman before he became Patriarch.
• Church unity was important to him, and he insisted on overtures of unity before accepting his post.
• He was greatly deferential to the Byzantine Monarchy. This lead him to condoning Emperor Constantine VI’s divorce and “remarriage,” at least for a short time.

More can be found out about him at his wiki, located here.

Yet More Random Musings And Links

It has been a while since I wrote one of these posts, so here goes.

Deep Strength has a good post up examining how men approach marriage and responsibility. His focus is on Incentives. I introduced a comment where I suggested that there is another way to look at why men are apprehensive (to say the least) about marriage. The basic idea I was grasping at is this:

We, each of us, have the natural law instilled in us. This is an echo of the divine law. This sense of the natural law is offended by things which are against the Order of Things- against what God intended. Many men (especially Christian men) are wary of marriage, and even shunning it, because this sense of the natural law in them realizes that marriage has become something unnatural. It has deviated from what God intended, and that echo of the Divine Law within us is repulsed by this. Society has to actively work to overcome this sense of revulsion, hence all of the “Man Up and Marry” efforts.

Over at Dalrock’s, a commenter calling himself The Question wrote the following comment, which I am posting in its entirety:

I want to be angry at Walsh for his foolishness, but when I look at him I can’t help but see myself – had things turned out differently. He is exactly what I wanted to be in my early twenties; married, a couple kids, good writing gig, a house. Just another good middle class WASP.

Instead, I like so many others went through something similar to that of Rollo Tomassi as he described in his post “That Was Then.”

The biggest unspoken lie perpetuated in the man up movement by inference is that women want to get married young, so if a man can’t get a wife in college it’s his fault because he’s immature and that’s why the women flock in droves to ride the carousal with Harley McBadboy. Go to any university and ask the typical 21-year-old coed if they want to get married. Chances are, they’ll say yes. Then ask them what age. It’ll be 28-30. There will be a handful that want to get married then and they will easily find a man. The rest want to earn their feminist merit badges and then when they enter the epiphany phase they’ll find that nice guy beta provider who has been dutifully working in the meantime and conveniently hears he needs to “man up” and marry her.

What makes columns like Walsh’s so infuriating is that these writers think that they were able to marry because, unlike us, they are wise-beyond-their-years. In reality, much of it is a matter of meeting the right person at the right time in the right place. I know men just like him who got married young and it’s no different with them in terms of their attitude toward bachelors. Anything I say about what is discussed here or other manosphere sites is dismissed with “Stop complaining. Look at me; I got married, so you should be more like me if you want to get married.” It makes them feel superior. They don’t realize they only married because they met a girl who wanted to as well (just pray she doesn’t decided to make up for missing out).

I’m sure Rollo would say the same thing as what I’m about to say, but Walsh’s problem is the same as Mark Driscoll’s when it comes to his views on sex, marriage, women, what not; they got married young and don’t know anything else beyond their own unique life experience and are oblivious to the world of dating since they got off the market. He is also unable to define masculinity and manhood outside of the feminine. You’re not a complete man until you have made a lifetime commitment to a woman.

Having gone a separate route has been tough at times, no doubt, but had I married before taking the Red Pill it would have been a disaster. Among other things, I would have read Walsh’s article and said “Amen!” instead of posting a link to it here with indignation.

I could have, and probably have at some point, written a comment that was almost exactly the same. Certainly I completely understand where he is coming from. There is a massive disconnect between most Christian men who are married, and those who aren’t. Fortunately, not all married Christian men are like that. There are several married men at my parish who are far more aware than men like this Walsh character.

I remember being in a conversation with one of them a few weeks back where he acknowledged how lucky he was to have found his wife. She wanted to marry young and have a lot of kids- which has since happened. He recognizes now how rare that was back then, and how much rarer it is today. His is a sympathetic ear.

One thing I haven’t experienced at that parish, and don’t expect to, is to hear a “Man Up and Marry” homily (sermon). My current priest is not a type who seems inclined to do anything of the sort (very traditional/Traditional fellow). Nor have any visiting priests done anything of the sort (benefits of attending an Eastern Catholic parish, I suppose). In fact, one visiting priest gave me the opposite as advice. He told me not to marry unless I could find a good woman to do so with. If I couldn’t, I should continue on doing what I was doing.

Zippy had a post up recently addressing the concept of “the same God.” Worth a read.

I disagree with several of Rollo’s conclusions, but I agree with the main point in the post Women Improving Men:

“[W]omen, Red Pill or otherwise will never be honest arbiter of ‘improving’ men’s states of masculinity.”

Masculinity, and men improving themselves, is a purely male endeavor. We must keep that in mind, otherwise we will keep repeating Adam’s error in the Garden.

I think this post over at Finer Femininity should be required reading for all married women.

Over at AlphaGame there is an interesting series on “Gamma” Protaganists by someone calling himself Delta Man. While I don’t necessarily agree with Vox’s supposed hierarchy, I think that the series does expose some of the absurdity in Sci-Fi literature. Here is part 1, part 2 and part 3. I don’t read nearly as many books these days for a variety of reasons, but one of them is because I can now recognize a lot of “Blue Pill” nonsense that puts me off from enjoying the work.

 

That is all for now.

 

It’s The Little Things

There are times when I question why I continue to blog. It has only really benefited me spiritually (not to say that this is a minor thing). Rather, most of the benefit to be gained there has already accumulated. Otherwise it hasn’t really been of great help to me. Certainly not in terms of my major goals. Not to mention that I am second-guessing myself more often than not these days. Sometimes I wonder if I should just shut it down.

Sentiments such as these are why I appreciate hearing from those who have been helped by my blog. The other day someone contacted me, thanking me for the effort I put into my work. It wasn’t someone I expected to reach out to me, and the message wasn’t what I was expecting, but sometimes it is a good thing when your expectations are defied. Stories like what I was told are what keep me blogging. Even if I can’t help myself, I can still help others. And that is worth the effort this blog requires. As the title says, sometimes its the little things in life that make it worth continuing on.

Resuming Broadcasting

Now that I finally have a little free time, I am going to try and start blogging again. I would like to thank those who submitted guest posts while I was taking my leave of absence, it was good to keep some discussion going on this blog. For the moment, expect some shorter posts on my part, until I can work out what major projects I want to undertake.

Selected Sunday Scriptures- #59

Today’s post is going to focus on the New Testament. First, a passage from the Gospel of Matthew:

15 Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, ² “Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” ³ He answered them, “And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? ⁴ For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die.’ ⁵ But you say, ‘If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father.’ ⁶ So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. ⁷ You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

⁸ ‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
⁹ in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”

(Mathew 15:1-9)

This is an interesting passage in light of some of St. Paul’s letters. Here is the Second Letter to the Thessalonians:

¹³ But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. ¹⁴ To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. ¹⁵ So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

(2 Thessalonians 2:13-15)

Here are a few selections from  Second Timothy:

¹³ Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; ¹⁴ guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.

(2 Timothy 1:13-14)

and

You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, ² and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

(2 Timothy 2:1-2)

Jesus tells his followers to be wary of tradition, and effectively dismisses the tradition of the elders. Yet if tradition is to be disregarded, why does St. Paul then command the Thessalonians to hold onto the traditions he gave them? Why does he also tell Timothy to guard it? Or even more than that, why does he tell Timothy to pass it along to others?

Unbelievers would point to this as a contradiction. Believers would naturally disagree. But if there is no contradiction, why is that so? It can only mean that something changed between those two points in time. So what changed? The Holy Spirit is the natural answer. The descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles after Jesus returned to heaven changed everything. The elders, from whom the tradition of Israel came, did not have the Paraclete to aid them. The Church did. The Holy Spirit directed and guided the Church, and thus changed the nature of tradition. It was no longer merely human tradition from the elders, but Sacred Tradition from God.

Saturday Saints- #32

For today’s saint we have Saint Eulogius:

Saint Eulogius of Alexandria (Greek: Εὐλόγιος) was Greek Patriarch of that see (Eulogius I) from 580 to 608. He is regarded as a saint, with a feast day of September 13.

He was a successful combatant of the heretical errors then current in Egypt, notably the various phases of Monophysitism. He was a warm friend of Pope St. Gregory the Great, who corresponded with him, and received from that pope many flattering expressions of esteem and admiration.

St. Eulogius refuted the Novatians, some communities of which ancient sect still existed in his diocese, and vindicated the hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ, against both Nestorius and Eutyches. Cardinal Baronius says that Gregory wished Eulogius to survive him, recognizing in him the voice of truth.

It has been said that he restored for a brief period to the Church of Alexandria life and youthful vigour.

Besides the above works and a commentary against various sects of Monophysites (Severians, Theodosians, Cainites and Acephali) he left eleven discourses in defence of Pope Leo I and the Council of Chalcedon, also a work against the Agnoetae, submitted by him before publication to Pope Gregory I, who after some observations authorized it unchanged. With exception of one sermon and a few fragments, all the writings of St. Eulogius have perished.

(All quoted from the wiki on him)

St. Eulogius

Random Musings and Links- #4

For this post I’m going to begin with the links and then carry one to various musings and random thoughts.

I would direct my male readers, especially the unmarried ones, towards this post by Feminine But Not Feminist. Therein she has asked Men what they really think of young women who have had premarital sex. She hopes to use that post, and the comments by men that follow, to clue young women in to the consequences of engaging in premarital sex. Here are the four questions she is asking men:

1) What would you tell a young woman that wants to get married “someday”, but thinks it’s okay if she sleeps around for a while first?

2) Would you rather marry a girl that is a virgin, or one who has a lot of sexual experience, and why?

3) Does a woman’s prior sexual experience make her bad wife material, and why?

4) If a woman is willing to have sex with you pretty early on, what do you think of her (even if you do decide to have sex with her), as opposed to a woman that isn’t willing to give it up right away?

So stop by her blog and give your thoughts (please direct any towards her blog, not the comments here, thank you).

Free Northerner talks about his experiences courting a young woman in Courtship and Young Men. While we can never truly know the reasons why it didn’t work out for him, FN’s tale is far from unique. I’ve had many men comment on this blog and e-mail me about similar experiences. His post reminded me that parental madness during the courtship process is another explanation for why men aren’t courting Traditional women in, which I examined in my post Whither Thy Sons? [Update: Free Northerner has followed up with another post- More on Courtship.]

A Northern Observer has a post up about a woman who decided not to stop at accusing her husband of abuse. Some poetic justice appears to be on the way, and is well deserved.

Ballista has an excellent post up about how Marriage Doesn’t Wait for True Love. It is a superb take-down of the madness that the “Purity Movement” has become. Personally, I think that the problem started when the focus started to be on virginity as compared to chastity. One can be a virgin and not chaste (think a young woman addicted to 50 Shades of Grey and the ilk), and one can be a non-virgin and chaste (such as a young woman who was a virgin until her wedding night). Fortunately Catholic teaching on this is better, and this phenomenon is mostly restricted to Protestant sects. [Update: Or perhaps it is more common in Catholic circles than I thought, as Ballista alludes to with his comment here. Personally I haven’t ever seen that kind of stuff in anywhere in any of the Catholic circles I’ve traveled in, so I wonder if this is new, or just something I missed.] Unfortunately (and the reason why Catholics shouldn’t crow), this teaching is hardly ever actually, you know, taught.

Elspeth asks What If It Doesn’t Work Out? Like many of her posts, its a must-read, whether you are married or not.

Chad has been writing a story of power. You can find Part 1 here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 here.

Zippy talks about how people are Blaming the Prophets.

Margery responds to a feminist.

April over at Peaceful Single Girl examines Disney Weddings. The idolization (which is what this is) of weddings and the honeymoon period is not a new phenomenon, believe it or not. St. John Crysostomom  addressed similar problems a millennium and  half ago in one of his homilies. It is going to be the subject of a future post, one that will probably come in about 2 weeks or so.

Lovelyleblanc warns men that foreign women are no panacea to the problems in Western women.

That ends the link part of this post. Now to a few things bouncing about in my head.

Female Empowerment

First off, Elspeth has been taking exception to the traditional notions of “Team Woman” in the manosphere in my post Power To The People. She made a number of convincing arguments that the level of solidarity among women is heavily dependent on the environment, and went a long way towards convincing me of her point of view. I recommend that readers head over to the post and read them, starting with the first one here. With that in mind, here is a graphic which sets about illustrating how “Team Woman” would work under that particular model. As you can see, the level of female solidarity is directly connected to the overall prosperity and security of the social structure. Furthermore, the relationship is geometric.

Nothing to be Done

Something that has come up quite often, both in the comments of this blog and others, and in my e-mail correspondence, is the relative lack of opportunities available for young people looking to marry to connect with like-minded individuals. One young woman in particular has explained to me that she would love the opportunity to meet more people to see if anyone would be interested in her, but hasn’t figured out how. In her present situation she just doesn’t have a whole lot of options for meeting eligible young men. “Going out” means going to places where there won’t be any devout Christians, or to places lacking in eligible, single men. She is not alone in voicing this concern, I’ve heard it from men and women alike.

The best place to look for such candidates is other churches, assuming that yours doesn’t have any men or women who will work for you. The problem is that visiting churches to looking for marriage partners is a time limited window activity. Depending on when various churches hold services, you might not be able to visit more than one a week. And to really scope out a church and determine if it has anyone who will work for you takes several weeks, as people might not be there on any given week. For men this is even more difficult, as single men are basically outsiders at Church and are distrusted. All of which means that a lot of time and effort is required to search various churches for potential spouses. Of course, doesn’t even take into consideration theological concerns. Or the fact that some parts of the country might not have many active churches. And the list goes on….

Unfortunately there is no easy solution to this problem. Online dating solves some issues, and brings up a whole different set. Matchmaking through personal connections is great, if you have the connections, and if your connections are of a mind to help, and if your connections know potential candidates. The whole thing is very depressing, and I recommend that anyone caught in this trap to read their Bibles often. I find some of the Psalms to be especially comforting.